Jean-Jacques Rousseau died a decade before the French Revolution.
He was part of the circle of French intellects (even though he wasn't French!), most notably, Voltaire was part of the circle too. He created the 'Encyclopedie', this book aimed to bring together all human knowledge and was a high point in the Enlightenment.
In 1750, Rousseau disagreed that the progress of arts and science was beneficial to morality. This was a dramatic break with the Enlightenment and also a permanent one.
His 'Discourse on the Origin and Foundation of Inequality Among Men' said that humanity was naturally good, but it had been corrupted by society. He compared the effects on history to a statue - wind and rain had eroded humanity, so we now look scarcely like humans at all. Only the 'noble savage' hadn't been corrupted by society yet.
He attacked the Enlightenment, the Clockwork Universe and science as a means of progression. Voltaire said that the book was "against the human race".
Social Contract
Rousseau's Social Contract says "Man is born free and is everywhere in chains", I think this means that we are born free to do what we like, but laws and rules in society stop us from having freedom and hold us back (keep us in 'chains').
This was very controversial and it actually forced Rousseau to flee to Britain.
In the SC he attacked Hobbes: Rousseau says that war against all only comes into being when we are in society, as the state of war is the only state of society..
He also attacked Locke: The problem of inequality in society is caused by ownership of property. The first person to claim a piece of land as his/her own is the 'founder of civil society'. So does that mean that he/she has the right to rule society?
According to Rousseau, man isn't rational - but a sensitive being. Society corrupts us and makes us obsess about posessions and there is also a competition of self-esteem - how true that is today!
No way back to nature
The problem: Finding a government that will defend our powers whilst uniting everyone.
The answer: The General Will. The GW is what we all agree on, everyone's opinion is followed as the law - when we obey the law, we obey our own opinion - this supposedly gives us more freedom.
A criticism of Rousseau's view would be that 'what if the majority choose the laws and the minority get no say?'. They would then be forced to be free.
TB 2011
No comments:
Post a Comment