Jean- Jacques Rousseau’s “The Social Contract” was published in 1762 and caused much controversy in France during the French Revolution. Rousseau was a famous philosophical thinker during the Enlightenment in the eighteenth century. Due to his time period it is said the Rousseau is an Enlightenment Thinker; however, some of his ideas do not align with that of an Enlightenment Thinker. Rousseau was the kind of philosopher who applied philosophical reasoning to ethics and politics, and one approach to that was describing human beings when they are in a natural state. Rousseau was influenced by the modern natural law tradition which wanted to answer the challenge of skepticism, but through a systematic approach to human nature. The main purpose …show more content…
The French Revolution was a time where French citizens redesigned their country’s political landscape and escaped century old traditions, such as absolute monarchy and the feudal system. It was influenced by many Enlightenment ideas like the ones presented in Rousseau’s Social Contract and mainly focused on concepts like popular sovereignty and inalienable rights. Due to France’s involvement in The American Revolution and King Louis XVI excessive spending the country was left in bankruptcy. This started a depression among citizens and resentment toward rulers who imposed heavy taxes. The people wanted equal representation and voting by head and not by status. The debate over the voting process had caused aggression between the three orders. A popular rebellion occurred when rioters stormed the Bastille fortress in order to secure gunpowder and weapons, and this event is known as the spark of the French Revolution. Peasants were burning down the homes of tax collectors, landlords, and seigniorial elite. The assembly adopted the Declaration of the Rights of Man ad of the Citizen, which was a statement of democratic principles based on the philosophical and political ideas of Enlightenment Thinkers like Rousseau. The document declared the Assembly’s pledge to have a system based on equal opportunity, freedom of speech, popular sovereignty, and …show more content…
Rousseau is trying to identify that even though as human beings we are born free the way that the government controls us it is as if people are in chains. Which is the primary focus of Rousseau creating this work to display a society where people be free. This book is aimed to determine whether or not a state can exist that upholds citizens rather than constrain liberty. He rejects the idea that political authority is found in nature and that the only natural form of authority is that between a father and a child. He compares the authority of a father and a child to a ruler and the people or subjects, which in his opinion is the only natural form of authority. Legitimate political authority rests on a Social Contract that is forged between members of society meaning that each person must surrender themselves to each other as a whole community in order to acquire freedom. This is what the main idea of the Social Contract and is how the perfect Utopian society can be achieved. He also goes on to speak about Nature versus Civil Society and how although we would lose the physical ability of being able to follow our instincts freely and do what we please with natural society. With civil society we gain the civil liberty that places the limits of reason and the general will on our behavior, which will render us moral. Which
Second Treatise of Government by John Locke and Discourse on the Origin of Inequality by Jean-Jacques Rousseau are books written to try and explain the origin of society. Both try to explain the evils and inequalities of society, and to a certain degree to discuss whether man in his natural state is better than man in society. These political science based theories do not appear, at first, to have anything in common with J. Hector St. John De Crèvecoeur’s Letters from an American Farmer, which are letters written by Crèvecoeur during the settling of America and the beginning of the American Revolution, however with examination we can see reflection of both Locke’s and Rousseau’s ideas about things such as human nature, government, and inequality.
“Man is born free and everywhere he is in chains”. Prominent, influential, relevant and most important of all as human as they come, Jean Jacques Rousseau was truthfully, brilliant. Rousseau was born in Geneva Switzerland to a watchmaker in 1712, lacking of a formal education his father taught him to read, exposed him to literature and he managed to educate himself while living with Madame Louise de Warens,in the kingdom of Sardinia, modern Italy. Jeans childhood was far from easy “His autobiographical Les Confessions (1783) offers a thorough account of his turbulent life in her household, where he spent eight years studying nature and music, and reading English, German, and French philosophers. He also pursued the study of mathematics and Latin and enjoyed the theater and opera” (Hager 1). After leaving de Warrens in 1744, Rousseau eventually made his way to Paris, where he befriended French philosopher Denis Diderot who actually invited him to contribute to the Encyclopedie a major work of the enlightenment period, which he did, Rousseau wrote articles on music and political theories. Then in 1750 he wrote A Discourse on the Sciences and the Arts. Where he claimed Human beings were naturally good, he argued; it was only the corrupt institutions of civilization that led them to do evil. Rousseau continuously returned to that theme in his subsequent writings in fact he stated A new-born he thought was intrinsically perfect: all society could do was to limit his views and maim his mind. Hence, the more civilized, the worse. A savage was nearer perfection than a philosopher. Yet he was a philosopher but Rousseau's own view of philosophy and philosophers was firmly negati...
Before the Revolution, France experienced a period of time called the Enlightenment. Traditional concepts, such as religion and style of government, were debated upon by scholars, philosopher, and ordinary people. One of the most famous writers of the Enlightenment was philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau. He introduced the concept that the people should be in charge instead of an individual ruler. This idea became known as the general will. In his “Ths Social Contract” Rousseau states, “Each of us puts his person and all his power in common under the supreme direction of the general will, and, in our corporate capacity, we receive each member as an indivisible part of the whole” (Rousseau). Throughout the future French Revolution, Rousseau’s writings became a cornerstone to the French people. His ideas gave the French people a definition on why the position of the King should be abolished. What was even better, Rousseau even described why the people be placed in charge. At the time of the Revolution an enormous amount of France’s power was allocated to the King and very little was left for the people. In order to achieve more power for themselves, the citizens of France lobbied against a monarchy and instead for Rousseau’s philosophy that the collective whole should rule. Under the ideas of Rousseau, all French citizens would receive power because the collective whole was the governing power. However, obtaining such intentions required that the people abuse the traditional powers of France as Furet
The French Revolution effectively began on 20 June 1789, when the people of the Third Estate decided that they would not stop fighting until a new, fair and just constitution had been put in place in France. By the August of that same year, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen had been authored to serve as a basis for that constitution. This was a document that established the natural rights of all men. It describes to us the complete ideology of the French revolutionaries as well as their aims for the future France.
In the writings of Jean-Jacques Rousseau he describes what he believes is the state of nature and the social contract that humans form in civilizations. This discussion mostly takes place in his book called the “Social Contract”. The first area that will be covered is what Rousseau thinks is the state of nature. This will then be followed by what he believes is the social contract that humans enter to live in normal society or civilization. The last portion will be to critic and summarize his findings.
Rousseau’s political theory revolves around a central idea that in order to deal with moral or political inequality (“social” inequality), man must move out of the state of nature and establish a social contract, “a form of association which defends and protects… the person and goods of each associate, and by the means of which each one, while uniting with all, nevertheless obeys only himself and remains as free as before” (Rousseau 432). Although Rousseau’s plan pledges to protect individual liberty, the plan rests on the legislation of the “general will” and the successful unity of a “body politic,” both of which are vaguely defined and become too concerned with state interest.
Rousseau came to the conclusion that the best way to examine the inequality in society is to examine the beginning of mankind itself. He tried to imagine the early state of man assuming there was ever actually a state where man existed only with the nature, in a solitary, and primitive lifestyle. He did not however revert as far back to the idea of the Neanderthal man to examine the ideas man held and where they came from. Instead, he looked at a state where man looked, and seemed to have the same physical abilities as he does today. Rousseau also concedes that a time where the ideas of government, ownership, justice, and injustice did not exist may not have ever existed. If what many religions tell us is true, then, in mans beginning, he was from the start, handed down laws from god which would influence his thinking and decisions. Through this, the only way such a period could come about would have to be through some catastrophic event, which would not only be impossible to explain, but consequently, impossible to prove. Therefore, imagining this state could prove not only embarrassing, but would be a contradiction to the Holy Scriptures.
The French revolution occurred from 1789 – 1795 but some argue that it went up till 1799. King Louis XVI was crowned after the 7 years’ war which plunged France into economical debt and led to rise of corruption. The king’s ignorance led to increase of privileges grasped by nobles and the rich. Years of bad or no harvest led to unrest in France as the rich enjoyed their position in society while the poor suffered. The people were divided into three different classes known as estates, namely third estate – the proletariat, second estate – the clergy and the first estate – the aristocrats or monarchs. All this lead to an uproar in 1789 which begun peacefully but the real revolution started with “The storming of Bastille” where revolutionist seized control of a prison fort in Paris. This was a start to a struggle which the led to the break off of third estate to form the National assembly. This was instrumental to bring together the Declaration of rights of citizen which brought together the idea that all classes were equal. External threats also shaped the revolution with France having to face off with Austria and Prussia and beat them in the battle of Flerus which uncovered the king had been in coalition with the enemy the whole time. This led to him facing trial along with the queen and as a result their execution. The outcome was the rise of another dictatorship – Napoleon Bonaparte. He plunged the country into war again with economy dropping to lows soon after the revolution
The right of revolution was provided to those in Locke’s society as he did not believe in giving the government absolute power. He was against this because an absolute monarch does not provide separate powers to file grievances in the event that an appeal of injury was needed. Locke believed in the rule of the majority. If the majority felt that the government was not protecting their natural rights or acting in their best interest they had a right and a duty to engage in revolution. Rousseau believes in republicanism where they are ruled by the will of the people. Once everyone in this society agrees to the contract, the general will is made and agreed upon by all in the society, and everyone must abide by said will. Rousseau believed the more active we are in society, the
On August 26, 1789, the assembly issued the “Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen.” Through judicial matters, this document was written in order to secure due process and to create self-government among the French citizens. This document offered to the world and especially to the French citizens a summary of the morals and values of the Revolution, while in turn justifying the destruction of a government; especially in this case the French government, based upon autocracy of the ruler and advantage. The formation of a new government based upon the indisputable rights of the individuals of France through liberty and political uniformity.
Social contract adheres to the concept that in pre-societal terms man relied on the state of nature: life with no government and no regulation. Interpretations of state of nature from English Philosopher Thomas Hobbes and that of French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau differ on the basis of development and operation of the social contract. Hobbes proposed that man lived in fear and self-interest to the point that it was in human nature to seek security and self-protection to which he [man] enters a social contract. While Rousseau argues that man’s individualism, freedom, and equality is diluted through the formation of modern civilization and is “forced to be free” (p.46). How social contract operates from perspective of Hobbes and Rousseau
In his essay, Discourse on the Origin of Inequality, Rousseau attempts to explain the relationship between the formation of political and social institutions and the state of human nature. Before going into depth regarding the state of human nature, Rousseau starts by first demonstrating the first crucial steps in human evolution and the effects these steps had on the development of inequality. Rousseau believes that the combination of these concepts are important to understanding where we came from, who we are now as a society and what our society will resemble in the future.
To understand the Rousseau stance on claims to why the free republic is doomed we must understand the fundamentals of Rousseau and the Social Contract. Like Locke and Hobbes, the first order of Rousseau’s principles is for the right to an individual’s owns preservation. He does however believe that some are born into slavery. His most famous quote of the book is “Man is born free; and everywhere he is in chains” (Rousseau pg 5). Some men are born as slaves, and others will be put into chains because of the political structures they will establish. He will later develop a method of individuals living free, while giving up some of their rights to...
Essentially, for the two concepts to be reconciled, all individuals of the assembled people should agree upon one general will, and ultimately one common good. Rousseau argues that if the majority opinion of the general will differs from and minority opinion of the general will, it is because the minority opinion was mistaken as to what the general will was. (215) However, it is irrational to assume that all individuals should have the same opinion about the general will and the common good. Secondly, even if the first assumption was satisfied and all people had the same opinion of the common good, this argument is highly dependant upon virtue. Rousseau assumes that all people will actually to suppress their personal interests for the general interests. Again, it is highly irrational to assume that all men will carry this virtue. Nevertheless, Rousseau may refute this criticism by arguing that when man enters a civil society, he replaces his natural freedom with civil freedom. (167) In doing so, man is no longer a slave to his passions, and attains a moral freedom of self-mastery. (167) Rousseau declares that man is then “forced to act upon other principles and consult to reason before listening to his inclinations.” (167) As a result, Rousseau can confer that man should be more inclined to suppress his personal interest for the general will. Lastly, it is assumed that communication between people is the only element that inclines man to similar interests. As a result, Rousseau assumes that without communication, man should never fear a tyranny of the majority. In actuality, people will naturally have aligned interests, making partial associations
Rousseau argues that the citizens should be the ones who create the law when living in that particular society. He says “Laws are, properly speaking, only the conditions of civil association. The people, being subject to the laws, ought to be their author: the conditions of the society ought to be regulated solely by those who come together to form it.” Since the law is aimed at the citizens and punishments would oblige if not obeying to the law, it would simply be more accurate if the citizens themselves would create the law to make obedience simpler.