It is generally agreed that the great philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau and the artist Jacques-Louis David had played a great role in serving and supporting the French Revolution, in addition to, showing their devotion to their state and explore the notion of duty to the state each one by his own special way.
The great philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau had inspired the revolution by his argument and ideas that was based on Reason. He played a great role in exploring the notion of duty to the state by providing the public with his argument in the social contract,which was frequently quoted and referred to during the early stages of the Revolution.
The social contract was concerned to establish whether or not the authority of the state is legitimate. His fundamental problem is to find a way in which we can live in a state and yet remain as free as before. He explained that, this only could be achieved if the general will of the individual always coincide with the will of the state. Therefore, he had recourse to the concept of the general will, which is defined as "the general will of a group taken as a whole rather than as a collection of individuals."
He tried to convince us of this by describing the difference between the state of nature and the civil state, and in effect, asking which we think is better. To be in the state of nature, would be to act on appetite and so be slavish and bad. To be in the civil state, is to act according to reason and so be noble and good. We ought constantly to bless the moment that we moved in to the civil state because this gives us the chance to be noble and good .So,says Rousseau it is in each of our interests to choose the general will .Therefore, if we think according t...
... middle of paper ...
... and dimmed color of Brutus giving a broad tonal range,this tends to sharpen the impact of dramatic contrast.
It seems that the formal elements of this painting are conspiring to focus our attention toward the grieved women,and to show us how brave is Brutus' decision,that he even neglect his family's sorrow and even turn his back away from his sons' bodies .He commit his decision unhesitatingly,raising the voice of duty to the state over everything else even his own flesh and blood .
Finally, we can conclude and detect a lots of similarities between the ways in which Rousseau and David did explore the notion of duty to the state .Both of them believed in the great role of philosophy and art in educating the public, therefore,they used their profession successfully to express their devotion to state and serve their country,each one by his own way .
The French revolution was a significantly dangerous time period because of the chaos and conflict that took place in the streets of France, resulting in the mass slaughter of thousands of innocent people. Within the revolution, there were many characters who took part in resolving the conflicts that had arisen. One thing that sparked the revolution was the shortage of food caused by a drought which lead to the bread prices going up since most were too poor to afford food at the new price people started revolting against their government in hopes to be heard and treated fairly while many were still dying of hunger. Within the revolution, there were figures such as George Danton, Jean Bailly and Reine Audu who contributed in the development and the recognition of the 3rd estate.
Jacques Louis David began his career as a patriot championing the start of a new Revolution and urging others to devote their lives unto death for their cause. His own friend gave his life for the Revolution and David memorialized him on canvas. However when the time came for David to commit his own life for the cause he desired peace. David when released from prison wished he never had left his studio. Because of David we have visualize and sympathize with the French Revolution from the viewpoint of patriots, martyrs, and conciliators.
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...
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)
Machiavelli and Rousseau, both significant philosophers, had distinctive views on human nature and the relationship between the government and the governed. Their ideas were radical at the time and remain influential in government today. Their views on human nature and government had some common points and some ideas that differed.
...eing mandated for protection. Rousseau’s conception of liberty is more dynamic. Starting from all humans being free, Rousseau conceives of the transition to civil society as the thorough enslavement of humans, with society acting as a corrupting force on Rousseau’s strong and independent natural man. Subsequently, Rousseau tries to reacquaint the individual with its lost freedom. The trajectory of Rousseau’s freedom is more compelling in that it challenges the static notion of freedom as a fixed concept. It perceives that inadvertently freedom can be transformed from perfectly available to largely unnoticeably deprived, and as something that changes and requires active attention to preserve. In this, Rousseau’s conception of liberty emerges as more compelling and interesting than Locke’s despite the Lockean interpretation dominating contemporary civil society.
Rousseau is firstly justified in his claim that perfectibility led to the abolishment of the gentleness of natural man and resulted in a competition
...y as Jean-Louis David and his paintings. Both these influential people helped to ignite a passion amongst the French general public and change French politics. Looking at Rousseau's idea for government seems unacceptable or impossible to us, however, his idea, which was prominent in the revolution, that sovereignty resides with the people, that "man is born free". Both Rousseau and democracy preserve the idea that government is legitimate only if it emerges from us.
Art allows us to communicate more than just mere logic; it allows us to move people emotionally, and influence change throughout the world. Jacques-Louis David was a 19th century painter who is considered to be the father of neoclassicism, the movement of art away from the old rococo style. David was a strong supporter of the French Revolution, and a close friend to Maximilien Robespierre, the leader of the Jacobins, a revolutionary group, of which he too was a member. The French Revolution was the overthrowing of the absolute monarchy led by King Louis XVI from the years 1789 to 1799. The revolution came to an end in late 1799, when Napoleon Bonaparte took power. Jacques-Louis David used his artwork as political propaganda, to reflect the
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.
Firstly, each individual should give themselves up unconditionally to the general cause of the state. Secondly, by doing so, all individuals and their possessions are protected, to the greatest extent possible by the republic or body politic. Lastly, all individuals should then act freely and of their own free will. Rousseau thinks th...
...ons on what kind of government should prevail within a society in order for it to function properly. Each dismissed the divine right theory and needed to start from a clean slate. The two authors agree that before men came to govern themselves, they all existed in a state of nature, which lacked society and structure. In addition, the two political philosophers developed differing versions of the social contract. In Hobbes’ system, the people did little more than choose who would have absolute rule over them. This is a system that can only be derived from a place where no system exists at all. It is the lesser of two evils. People under this state have no participation in the decision making process, only to obey what is decided. While not perfect, the Rousseau state allows for the people under the state to participate in the decision making process. Rousseau’s idea of government is more of a utopian idea and not really executable in the real world. Neither state, however, describes what a government or sovereign should expect from its citizens or members, but both agree on the notion that certain freedoms must be surrendered in order to improve the way of life for all humankind.
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.
This nullifies any freedoms or rights individuals are said to have because they are subject to the whims and fancy of the state. All three beliefs regarding the nature of man and the purpose of the state are bound to their respective views regarding freedom, because one position perpetuates and demands a conclusion regarding another. Bibliography:.. Works Cited Cress, Donald A. Jean-Jacques Rousseau “The Basic Political Writing”.
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, and Donald A. Cress. The "On Democracy" - "The 'Republican'" Basic Political Writings. Indianapolis: Hackett Pub., 1987. 179-80.