Aram Masoumi Philosophy 230 Professor Fleischacker Rousseau Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains (18). It is evident that Rousseau was displeased with the inequalities and oppressions in his current society in the 18th century Europe and his discourses were results of them. Rousseau believed that human beings have the most freedom in the state of nature. He also believed that man is usually a peaceful creature who wants to get along with other humans and avoid conflict. At the same time, there is always going to be that one bad person that has bad intentions. Subsequently, as a result of a possible betrayal, all man’s thinking is that the betrayal can be anyone since no one knows who he is. Therefore, man will be in the state of war and wouldn’t have the most freedom in the state of nature anymore. Rousseau explains freedom in two forms; personal freedom and …show more content…
He doesn 't even talk about how the sovereign is exactly elected. If we assume that this would be happening in a democracy then, the sovereign is going to be elected by the majority vote and not the general will since the general will of all is not the majority but the will of everyone. In this case, how can we guarantee that people are going to agree with each other on the general will one hundred percent? Most likely, people are going to disagree with each other on some matters, but since they have to come up with a general will to represent all, they have to do some compromising. If individuals don’t agree with other’s general wills, they’ll be forced to agree or compromise. This goes against Rousseau’s claim that the general will can never harm? anyone. How’s being forced to agree with something you don’t agree with is not harmful? (Assuming that you know what’s best for
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)
Jean-Jacques Rousseau was a French philosopher in the 18th century that believed that humans are inherently good and that if humans went back to their natural state they would still be compassionate. Rousseau believes that society creates corruption and that if people are left alone they can do much greater things then what society wants. Rousseau believes that society makes you desire things that aren’t necessary and he also believes that the reason man turns savage is because it is only concerned about self-preservation, "let us conclude that, being self-sufficient and subject to so few passions, he could have no feelings or knowledge but such as befitted his situation". (Rousseau) Rousseau believes society causes people to make rules to judge themselves to the point were it ruins and confuses and makes them hide their true nature, "man frequently deviate...
This idea was adopted into the US Declaration of Independence created in congress. Rousseau agreed with John Locke’s statement of the fact, that no man shall have to give up his rights to a higher authority. Some of Rousseau’s ideas were also embodied within the US Constitution, it starts with “We the people” which was Rousseau’s will that people would come together as one and create a general will according to crf-usa.org. Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s idea of how a government should be ran, has been incorporated into not only the US Constitution, which is a big part of how America is run. His ideas have also been incorporated into the US Declaration of Independence, which has created America’s freedom from the English. The ideas of Rousseau have a big impact to how the government in the US operates the way it does today. In closing of this idea to how The Enlightenment impacted the US government, every man is entitled to the pursuit of happiness as long as it does not harm anyone as stated by Rousseau, the US Constitution, and the US Declaration of
...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.
According to Jean Jacques Rousseau, human beings are bestowed with the blessings of freedom during their individual genesis on this fruitful planet, but this natural freedom is immensely circumscribed as it’s exchanged for the civil liberties of the State. He indicated that the supplanting of natural freedom is necessary for the obtainment of greater power for the greater collective community, but the prospect of obtaining superlative capabilities comes with the price of constraints. Yet this notion of natural freedom conflicts with Thomas Hobbes rendition on the state of nature because he illustrates that nature, interface through savagery. According to Hobbes, mankind has endorsed and embraced natures temperament, because this system of truculency and servility that nature orbits adversely affects the nature of mankind, resulting in mankinds affinity for greed, and brutal ambition. Inspite of their conflicting perspectives on the state of nature, both support and explicate on the idea that the preservation and proliferation of mankind as a whole is best achieved through their belief, and withholding the policies of a social contract. The intention of Leviathan is to create this perfect government, which people eagerly aspires to become apart of, at the behest of individual relinquishing their born rights. This commonwealth, the aggregation of people for the purposes of preventing unrest and war, is predicated upon laws that prohibit injustice through the implementation of punishment. Essentially in the mind of both Rousseau and Hobbes, constraints are necessary for human beings to be truly free under the covenants and contracts applied to the civil state at which mankind interface through.
...ion with the general will. This may sound like a contradiction but, to Rousseau, the only way the body politic can function is by pursuing maximum cohesion of peoples while seeking maximum individuation. For Rousseau, like Marx, the solution to servitude is, in essence, the community itself.
To make this argument I will first outline this thought with regard to this issue. Second, I will address an argument in support of Rousseau’s view. Third, I will entertain the strongest possible counterargument to my view; namely, the idea that the general will contradicts itself by forcing freedom upon those who gain no freedom from the general will. Fourth, I will rebut that counter argument by providing evidence that the general will is always in favor of the common good. Finally, I will conclude my paper by summarizing the main lines of the argument of my paper and reiterate my thesis that we can force people to be free.
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...
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...
Jean-Jacques Rousseau was a great philosopher who lived in the Enlightenment. He was a very influential philosopher and “Thinker” he has written many books including The Discourse on the Origin of Inequality. Rousseau’s theory was in essence that humans were created naturally pure and innocent but over time and new technologies become more evil. He had thought that in the very first light of man he was completely innocent, a being who had no intention to harm anyone else. However as time progressed and the growing capacity for man increased and the
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”.
In his Discourse on Inequality, Rousseau hypothesizes the natural state of man to understand where inequality commenced. To analyze the nature of man, Rousseau “strip[ped] that being, thus constituted, of all the supernatural gifts he could have received, and of all the artificial faculties he could have acquired only through a lengthy process,” so that all that was left was man without any knowledge or understanding of society or the precursors that led to it (Rousseau 47). In doing so, Rousseau saw that man was not cunning and devious as he is in society today, but rather an “animal less strong than some, less agile than others, but all in all, the most advantageously organized of all” (47). Rousseau finds that man leads a simple life in the sense that “the only goods he knows in the un...
...gainst the state and the general will. Rousseau contends that, “every offender who attacks the social right becomes through his crimes a rebel and traitor to his homeland” (Rousseau 65). Once this offense has been undertaken, the criminal is longer a member of society and is now viewed as an enemy. The state’s preservation is at odds with the preservation of the offender and therefore the offender must be put to death. Also, Rousseau feels that the danger of members trying to enjoy the benefits of civil society without performing their required duties is a serious threat to civil society. Such actions must be constrained by all other citizens and offenders to this agreement must be “forced to be free” (Rousseau 55). This is a rather paradoxical argument as the idea of forcing someone to be free hardly works in most people’s definition of freedom. What is essential to remember here is that Rousseau believes that the true form of freedom can only come about once an individual enters civil society and accept the terms of the social contract. Therefore by forcing someone to adhere to society’s order, you are really granting them with civil freedom, the most important freedom of all.
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
Along with these basic premises in Rousseau’s democracy, four basic conditions must exist to allow for democracy to flourish: a small state, a “g...