Analysis of Differnt Forms of Liberty

1716 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The social contract by rousseau thesis

The concept of liberty is important to this very day. Liberty initially means to be fundamentally free within ones society from any types of oppression, either from higher authority or from having different form ideologies that can be political or social. Liberty is a form of power that lets one act on their sets and values. In this paper, concept of liberty will be discussed on behalf of two philosophers, John Locke and Jean- Jacques Rousseau. Although liberty provides one to act as they please, there can be different forms of liberty, which are developed naturally by the state of nature and socially through development of human reasoning; state of nature is based on absolute freedom, while socially liberty is restricted. Firstly, John Locke states, liberty can be expressed as a right that allows people to be free and equal, where no one has the power over another and the person chooses what he or she should do on their own accord. Secondly, Jean-Jacques Rousseau states, in his social contract an essay depicting of liberty and freedom, stating men are born free but in a society they inherit freedom in which based on the place they are born in. If a child is born in to a family that has more power on basis on being richer, that child has more freedom. While if the child is born in a lesser power family (being poor) he has some restricted freedom. The freedom of individuals is locked in chains in a civil society, where different forms of governments give their own way of freedoms to their people. Thirdly, both John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau believe in state of nature, freedom is ultimately there, through complex ideologies and reasoning, laws and rights are created, leading liberty to slowly disappear where these laws and r...

... middle of paper ...

...e that is like him share the same characteristics and understanding. (Rousseau, 1712-1778, p. 71). In order to preserve themselves they make a community that goes out to hunt together because they know working as a group they will get their prey faster and more easily. In their community no one has power over another but they share their skills with their partners to maintain their community. Thus, in a savage community liberty is demonstrated in a manner that no one has power over the other where one can do as he or she pleases, in order to self preserve, everyone shares their skills equally without demonstrating they are superior in that specific way.

Works Cited

Locke, J. (1690). Second Treatise of Government. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company Inc.

Rousseau, J.-J. (1712-1778). The Basic Political Writing. Indiana: Hackett Publishing Company Inc.

Show More
Related

  • Analysis Of We Should Relinquish Some Liberty In Exchange For Security

    872 Words  | 2 Pages

    In her essay “We should relinquish some liberty in exchange for security,” Mona Charen, a columnist and political analyst, speaks on the issue of security in the United States of America. She uses many significant techniques in her essay to persuade her readers of her argument. However, I feel that her essay fails to make a great argument because she relies heavily on assumptions, misses opportunities to appeal to pathos and ethos, and overall uses a degrading tone.

    Read More

  • Rousseau's Views Reflected in "The Oath of the Horatii"

    310 Words  | 1 Pages

    Rousseau believes its possible to have both complete freedom and yet also legitimate authority. The essential outline Rousseau paints an equal relation between freedom and the authority of state. He argues that we as naturally free people, if it doesn't detract from our freedom. `If one must obey because of force, one need not do so out of duty; and if one is no longer forced to obey one is no longer obliged' (Rousseau: Cress (ed.), 1987, bk1, ch.3, p.143). Therefore Rousseau has shown that superior power, naked force or power through tradition is not the source of any legitimate authority the state has over us. Rousseau's fundamental problem is to find a solution of structuring the state so that we can live in a state and yet remain as free as possible. Hence, by sacrificing our particular will on major social or national matters in favour of the general will we are ennobled and freed .

    Read More

  • Locke, Hobbes, Aquinas, and Machiavell Theory on Self-Defense and Governance

    1533 Words  | 4 Pages

    At the very foundation of Locke’s political theory is a conflict theory based on equality and reciprocity. Locke begins his argument by making the claim that all men exist in a state of nature, which includes liberty and equality, “wherein all the power and jurisdiction is reciprocal, no one having more than another” (Locke, 8). In this, Locke asserts the idea of liberty and equality as mutually associative. Humans are all equal, and they have the liberty to pursue their interests, but Locke warns that liberty is not a synonym for license. By stating that society is based on the pillars of liberty, equality, and recip...

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Locke And Napoleon

    1289 Words  | 3 Pages

    Rousseau, however, believed, “the general will by definition is always right and always works to the community’s advantage. True freedom consists of obedience to laws that coincide with the general will.”(72) So in this aspect Rousseau almost goes to the far extreme dictatorship as the way to make a happy society which he shows in saying he, “..rejects entirely the Lockean principle that citizens possess rights independently of and against the state.”(72)

    Read More

  • Locke and Rousseau

    1787 Words  | 4 Pages

    Locke and Rousseau present themselves as two very distinct thinkers. They both use similar terms, but conceptualize them differently to fulfill very different purposes. As such, one ought not be surprised that the two theorists do not understand liberty in the same way. Locke discusses liberty on an individual scale, with personal freedom being guaranteed by laws and institutions created in civil society. By comparison, Rousseau’s conception portrays liberty as an affair of the entire political community, and is best captured by the notion of self-rule. The distinctions, but also the similarities between Locke and Rousseau’s conceptions can be clarified by examining the role of liberty in each theorist’s proposed state of nature and civil society, the concepts with which each theorist associates liberty, and the means of ensuring and safeguarding liberty that each theorist devises.

    Read More

  • Exploring Karl Marx and Jean-Jacque Rousseau's Views on Freedom

    1544 Words  | 4 Pages

    While the writings of Karl Marx and Jean-Jacque Rousseau occasionally seem at odds with one another both philosophers needs to be read as an extension of each other to completely understand what human freedom is. The fundamental difference between the two philosophers lies within the way which they determine why humans are not free creatures in modern society but once were. Rousseau draws on the genealogical as well as the societal aspects of human nature that, in its development, has stripped humankind of its intrinsic freedom. Conversely, Marx posits that humankind is doomed to subjugation in modern society due to economic factors (i.e. capitalism) that, in turn, affect human beings in a multitude of other ways that, ultimately, negates freedom. How each philosopher interprets this manifestation of servitude in civil society reveals the intrinsic problems of liberty in civil society. Marx and Rousseau come to a similar conclusion on what is to be done to undo the fetters that society has brought upon humankind but their methods differ when deciding how the shackles should be broken. To understand how these two men’s views vary and fit together it must first be established what they mean by “freedom”.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Human Rights

    1391 Words  | 3 Pages

    The original rights are freedom rights that serve to shield the citizens from the overrun of the state. Which are weak rights that surround the civil political rights, emerged from American and French Revolutions.2 Since the eighteenth and nineteenth century, living instruments of positive law and not just idealistic ideas are concerned, perceived just first generation rights. The 1776 Virginia Declaration of rights contained rights to free elections, trial by jury, regard for property, and opportunity of press, yet excluded social rights identified with welfare capacity of the state. Similarly the initial twelve alterations of the US Constitution ensures just physical security and a working legal framework. The same thoughts won in France where the 1789 Declaration des Droits de l ' Homme eet du Citoyen just make a working arrangement of administration that does not load the state with powerful requests. The civil liberties have likewise cornered the entire nineteenth century, the simple rights became a vital component of advanced constitution where absolutely bound to established freedoms. Until the mid-twentieth century, various social and monetary rights have been recognized at a sacred level, especially the 1917 Soviet Constitution and the German Weimar Constitution. Moreover, the 1937 Irish Constitution interestingly incorporated a procurement on 'Mandate standards of social approach '.3 In spite of these varieties, first generation rights are major to the constitution and have never been discarded. It gives an applied stage to recognize different rights and recognize two particular confined classes. Socio-economic rights are excluded but rather named second generation rights. The historical growth of both rights into ears made rights be dealt with in an unexpected way. As Justice Albie argue, this structure will suggest that second generation is less critical than first. It has a tendency outline a first concern

    Read More

  • Analysis: We Can Force People To Be Free

    2204 Words  | 5 Pages

    First, I outlined my arguments about why being forced to be free is necessary. My arguments supporting Rousseau’s ideas included; generally accepted ideas, government responsibility, and responsibility to the government. Second, I entertained the strongest possible counterargument against forced freedom, which is the idea that the general will contradicts itself by forcing freedom upon those who gain no freedom from the general will. Lastly, I rebutted the counterargument by providing evidence that the general will is always in favor of the common good. In this paper I argued in agreement Rousseau that we can force people to be

    Read More

  • Jean-Jacques Rousseau's The Social Contract

    1773 Words  | 4 Pages

    The opening line of Jean-Jacques Rousseau's influential work 'The Social Contract' (1762), is 'man is born free, and he is everywhere in chains. Those who think themselves masters of others are indeed greater slaves than they'. These are not physical chains, but psychological and means that all men are constraints of the laws they are subjected to, and that they are forced into a false liberty, irrespective of class. This goes against Rousseau's theory of general will which is at the heart of his philosophy. In his Social Contract, Rousseau describes the transition from a state of of nature, where men are naturally free, to a state where they have to relinquish their naturalistic freedom. In this state, and by giving up their natural rights, individuals communise their rights to a state or body politic. Rousseau thinks by entering this social contract, where individuals unite their power and freedom, they can then gain civic freedom which enables them to remain free as the were before. In this essay, I will endeavour to provide arguments and examples to conclude if Rousseau provides a viable solution to what he calls the 'fundamental problem' posed in the essay title.

    Read More

  • Marx (The Communist Manifesto) and Rousseau

    2059 Words  | 5 Pages

    The political philosophy of Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Karl Marx examined the role that the state played and its relationship to its citizen’s participation and access to the political economy during different struggles and tumultuous times. Rousseau was a believer of the concept of social contract with limits established by the good will and community participation of citizens while government receives its powers given to it. Karl Marx believed that power was to be taken by the people through the elimination of the upper class bourgeois’ personal property and capital. While both philosophers created a different approach to establishing the governing principles of their beliefs they do share a similar concept of eliminating ownership of capital and distributions from the government. Studying the different approaches will let us show the similarities of principles that eliminate abuse of power and concentration of wealth by few, and allow access for all. To further evaluate these similarities, we must first understand the primary principles of each of the philosophers’ concepts.

    Read More

  • Individual Liberty: Thomas Hobbes and John Rawls

    2100 Words  | 5 Pages

    Individual liberty is the freedom to act and believe as one pleases. It is a widely controversial issue when it comes to the power of the government policing over individual�s freedoms. In this paper, I am going to compare two well known philosophers, Thomas Hobbes and John Rawls. In part one, I will explain the political and social positions taken by each philosopher. I will explain how Thomas Hobbes is associated with the �social contract theory,� and how John Rawls� theory of government is a �theory of justice.� In doing so, I will describe their different viewpoints on the government and its power over the people. In Part two, I will describe the differences between Hobbes and Rawls. I will argue that Rawls position on the government is the most reasonable, and I will explain why I believe so. In part three, I will explain my own theory and viewpoint with the example of sex laws, including prostitution. With this example, I will tell how and why I believe individual liberty is important. In part four, I will explain how someone might disagree with my position. I will explain how conservative individuals would argue that the government should regulate sexual activity to protect the greater good of society. Finally, I will conclude with discussing the power of the government and individual liberties in today�s society.

    Read More

  • Comparing John Locke, John Stuart Mill, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau

    2030 Words  | 5 Pages

    Compare John Locke, John Stuart Mill, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. John Locke, John Stuart Mill, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau all dealt with the issue of political freedom within a society. John Locke's “The Second Treatise of Government”, Mill's “On Liberty”, and Rousseau’s “Discourse On The Origins of Inequality” are influential and compelling literary works which, while outlining the conceptual framework of each thinker’s ideal state, present divergent visions of the very nature of man and his freedom. The three have somewhat different views regarding how much freedom man ought to have in political society because they have different views regarding man's basic potential for inherently good or evil behavior, as well as the ends or purpose of political societies. In order to examine how each thinker views man and the freedom he should have in a political society, it is necessary to define freedom or liberty from each philosopher’s perspective.

    Read More

  • Locke's Impatibilist Argument Of Free Will

    1157 Words  | 3 Pages

    The topic of free will has been greatly debated by philosophers. It is important to understand freedom especially in terms of responsibility. Whether our actions come from our complete free will or our actions are caused by external factors is vital to our judiciary systems. In this essay, I will firstly discuss Locke’s compatibilist argument as well as his analysis that we are free if we do what we will. Secondly, Hume’s analysis that with better definitions of freedom we will all conclude that the world is necessary. Thirdly, Kant’s argument that freedom cannot exist in the empirical world, but can coexist with necessity if we consider it as in the world of things-in-themselves. Finally, I will compare then analyze their arguments of freedom

    Read More

  • Difference Between John Locke And Rousseau

    1750 Words  | 4 Pages

    In The Social Contract philosophers John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau discuss their differences on human beings’ place of freedom in political societies. Locke’s theory is when human beings enter society we tend to give up our natural freedom, whereas Rousseau believes we gain civil freedom when entering society. Even in modern times we must give up our natural freedom in order to enforce protection from those who are immoral and unjust.

    Read More

  • Similarities Between Hobbes Locke And Rousseau

    560 Words  | 2 Pages

    This indicates that the community will only be peaceful when the people are in the state of nature. However, this questions why a government is created if the result will only cause the government to be corrupt. He also believes that there are interest groups that will try to influence the government into supporting what they believe in. Rousseau sees that the people will only be involved in the government is they choose to participate in the voting. He also says that when the people are together as a collective, they work and are viewed differently compared to when they are as individuals. Although Rousseau does understand both Hobbes and Locke’s theories, it makes the audience wonder why he didn’t fully support the theory of leaving people in the state of nature. By doing so, it would allow the people to continue having individual freedom without causing a state of

    Read More

More about Analysis of Differnt Forms of Liberty

Open Document