The philosophy of both Rousseau and Smith highly influenced the French document The Declaration of the Rights of Man. Rousseau's theory on the natural rights of man – freedom and equality – comprises the basis of the document. His concepts of the general will to decide law and the intrinsic sovereignty of the people, as well as Smith's stress that government need not play a large role in order for the nation to thrive, also lie at the essence of the Declaration. The emphasis of Smith's The Wealth of Nations on progress and productivity also played a large role in shaping the document. Although Rousseau does seem to advocate community-wide freedom and equality, while the Declaration focuses strictly on individual rights, the concept of individual rights still lies at the foundation of Rousseau's philosophy, and though Rousseau encourages forms of government contrary to the democratic spirit of the document, the authority behind these governments remain in lie with the articles of the declaration.While Smith writes about economic progress and the document on political, economic progress and political become blended together in the age's fervor for national progress. Although Rousseau's and Smith's concepts of the general will oppose each other, they both remain vital influences to the one advocated in the Declaration. Jean-Jacques Rousseau's philosophy on the general will and man's natural rights and Adam Smith's strive for progress and anti-elitism heavily influenced The Declaration of the Rights of Man. The essence of The Declaration of the Rights of Man holds that men possess the natural rights of freedom and equality and that the duty of the government is to protect these rights. Adam Smith supported this idea of man's natur... ... middle of paper ... ...the Declaration, his concept of the sovereignty of the general will still lies at the basis of the document. Although The Wealth of Nations centers on an economic agenda, it still remains a great influence on The Declaration in its advocating of progress, social standing based on talent, and government based on general will, without the domination of the elite. While Smith's and Rousseau's crucial concepts on the general will differ, they both still influenced the one mentioned in the declaration, due to its ambiguous nature and the way the writers took from each philosopher which concepts they wished. Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Adam Smith both influenced the crucial document of the French Revolution, the Declaration of the Rights of Man; Rousseau primarily with his ideas on man's natural rights and the authority of government and Smith with his emphasis on progress.
American history has been influenced by a diversity of people, as well as thoughts. Yet, documents related to the independence of the country might be considered the most significant ones. The Declaration of Independence written by Thomas Jefferson, as well as Common Sense was written by Thomas Paine, both documents appealing for the same cause, but in different manners. In the same order will be mentioned the Second Treatise of Government Excerpt, by John Locke. Locke 's philosophy is based on the natural rights of individuals, and how these rights should be inquired. He says, that individuals have the right to choose who makes their laws and who governs them. Locke 's document makes specific emphasis on the way how power should be administered, "a man comes by a power over other; yet not absolute or arbitrary power". This quote, in addition to his declarations of people needing to come together in order to protect their properties, are some of the influences which could be identified by Jefferson and Paine 's work. However, the one considered
We all know that our Declaration was written to let us know what was happening in our world. It specifically showed us what actions Britain did to us and reassures the people of the United States that these incidents will no longer happen in our country. As our forefathers sat down to write this paper, they kept in mind the good of the nation and knew that we would look upon these words they wrote, forever in the future. But have you ever wondered what a person from the past might think of our Declaration of Independence? Our earlier authors have many of the same ideas the Declaration outlines. Specifically, Epicurus and Aristotle agree with our forefather’s idea of the rights of life, liberty and especially the pursuit of happiness. Another author that agrees with this document is Machiavelli. In his book, “The Prince” he lets us know about his feelings on prudence. If these philosophers were alive today, they would have only positive criticisms about one of the most famous documents of all time.
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)
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.
Smith was heavily influenced by his mentor, Francis Hutcheson, and his friend, David Hume. Apparently, Smith was almost expelled from Oxford for having Hume's work in his room (Heilbronner, 1999). And Smith's A Theory of Moral Sentiments is a rework of “Hutcheson's theory of a moral sense” (Herman, 2001). Heilbronner writes about The Wealth of Nations that “there is a long line of observers before Smith who had approached his understanding of the world: Locke, Steuart, Mandeville, Petty, Cantillion, Turgot, not to mention Quesnay and Hume again. Smith took from all of them: there are over a hundred authors mentioned by name in his treatise...The Wealth of Nations is not a wholly original book” (1999). Rima disagrees to some extent saying that it “contains remarkably few references to the writings of other authers and that Smith was perhaps less scholarly in...
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
If Locke and Rousseau read the summary of the NCLB Act, I believe that their responses would vary slightly. Locke and Rousseau’s principles on education have more in common than people realize. Ironically, the NCLBA left a lot of students behind, resulting in our current Every Student Succeeds Act. Due to the testing that became required did not allow ALL students ample time to effectively grasp and maintain the knowledge to do well on the test.
Rousseau and Locke differ slightly on how the question of sovereignty should be addressed. Rousseau believed that men would essentially destroy themselves due to their "mode of existence"(more explanation of what is meant by "mode of existence"?) (Rousseau 39) and therefore must enter into a government that controls them. However, this control is in the form of direct participation in democracy where people have the ability to address their opinions, and thus sovereignty is in the control of the people. Unlike Rousseau, Locke believed firmly in the fact that government should be split up into a legislative branch and a ruling branch, with the legislative branch being appointed as representatives of the people. He contends that people give up the power of their own rule to enter into a more powerful organization that protects life, liberties, property, and fortunes. The two differ significantlyin that Rousseau wanted a direct or absolute form of democracy controlled by the people, while Locke prefered an elected, representative democr...
While the problems within civil society may differ for these two thinkers it is uncanny how similar their concepts of freedom are, sometimes even working as a logical expansion of one another. Even in their differences they shed light onto new problems and possible solutions, almost working in tandem to create a freer world. Rousseau may not introduce any process to achieve complete freedom but his theorization of the general will laid the groundwork for much of Marx’s work; similarly Marx’s call for revolution not only strengthens his own argument but also Rousseau’s.
The Declaration of Independence. Thomas Jefferson, one of the authors, used Locke’s infamous phrase to serve as a profound statement on how life as American citizens would be fundamentally different compared to life as British colonists. It is Locke’s phrase that helped the Declaration truly stand out as an original, forward thinking document. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness (Declaration,
"Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 12 Jan. 2013. Web. 21 Nov. 2013. .
"Declaration of the Rights of Man - 1789." The Avalon Project. Yale Law School, n.d. Web. 11 Nov. 2014.
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.
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.
John Locke’s social contract theory applies to all types of societies in any time era. Although, Jean-Jacques Rousseau did write during the Renaissance era, his philosophy limits itself to fix the problem of an absolute monarchy and fails to resolve other types of societies. These philosophers have such profound impacts on modern day societies. For example, the United States’ general will is codified in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, meanwhile individual rights are distinguished in the Declaration of