Many scholars have tried to argue from the theory of social contract and provided empirical examples for proving its pragmatic importance. We have used a range of concepts and examined them on the bases of three criteria: accuracy of philosophical presumption, applying to the real time situation and testing on a rational falsification test.This thesis criticizes on the constitute parts of social contract like "human nature" and "state of nature" and tries to prove that they were wrongly conceptualized by the later scholars and theory of social contract was a useless effort in terms of its pragmatic importance.