ipl-logo

Rousseau Social Contract

793 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Rousseau theory of idealism to romanticism

To return to the topic of the “happiest and most lasting epoch” (Discourses 167), it now becomes apparent that the allure of the golden age is in the limited activity of amour propre. Before laws were created which allowed for arbitrary powers, there were fewer opportunities for inequality and as a result, amour propre is muted, a “petulant” force instead of a voracious one (Discourses 167). While The Discourses end on this complete takeover of amour propre, Rousseau does not believes that this end is inevitable. In a later work, The Social Contract, Rousseau describes a society which enjoys all the advantages of being removed from nature but has not been enslaved by its desires. In this society, amour propre is still pervasive among people, …show more content…

To prevent this, society is created through “a form of association that will defend and protect the person and goods of each associate with the full common force, and by means of which each, uniting with all, nevertheless obey only himself and remain as free before” (Social Contract 49-50). The force created by this association is the general will, which is the “sum of the differences” (Social Contract 60) of particular wills. Partaking in the general will allows each person to submit themselves to the Sovereign will without losing their freedom, since they also partake in the Sovereign will of the society. “Each of us puts his person and his full power in common under the supreme direction of the general will; and in a body we receive each member as an indivisible part of the whole” (Social Contract 50, author’s emphasis). Thus, the society is formed as a Civil …show more content…

When each individual in the City State looks towards the general will, they cannot feel amour propre against the general will since it is so much greater than theirs. In civil matters, then, each of their relationships with each other is primarily no longer that of competitors, but rather that of a “member of the Sovereign toward private individuals, and as a member of the State towards the Sovereign” (Social Contract 51). If the society is as Rousseau declared in The Social Contract, where the general will prevails over the individual will, then amour propre will not long raise its head when deliberating in manners of civil government, for the interests of the many are not comparable to the interests of one and the force of the State is far greater than the force of an individual. Amour propre will be disinterested for the same reason that people feel no desire to compete with the oak tree in who can grow to be taller; such a feat would be impossible, so the comparison is not even worth making. In each person it will still inspire desire, but no person will attempt to satisfy that desire by acting against the general

Show More
Related
1483 Words | 6 Pages

He states that hierarchy actually does not exist in the state of nature, as it alienates and chains most of the population. Because of this hierarchy, anyone under property owners and the wealthy consequently suffer and do not benefit from the modern social contract. This displaces power and puts a strong emphasize on one’s political life which in return only benefits individual interests. This despotic society where one class rules everything and corrupts the masses, through a liberal social contract, is what Rousseau deemed the most destructive

Read More
1137 Words | 5 Pages

Rousseau’s main idea is that everyone should feel safe, happy, and equal even if it means sacrificing personal joy for the good of society. If these things are not present then the community does not work. The contract

Read More
1365 Words | 6 Pages

Rousseau presents this question “How is a method of associating to be found which will defend and protect-using the power of all-the person and property of each ember and still enable each member of the group to obey only him and to remain as free as before?” Thomas Paine says that “Government, on the other hand, is an institution whose sole purpose is to protect us from our own vices.” In order to grow and protect itself people join a society. For a society to have order and justice and remain equal, laws must be put in place, such that protect the individual rights of these people that they were born with. Equality is another belief that all these philosophies shared.

Read More
1011 Words | 5 Pages

It has its origin in the principles of society and the natural constitution of man. It existed prior to government, and would exist if the formality of government was abolished.” ( Paine 173). Concluding that society acts upon self interest, which creates laws to maintain the proper function of the

Read More
514 Words | 3 Pages

Removing love and relationships between others help create a collective society because if an individual does not have feeling towards one they will listen to the highest authority. “Children are born every winter, but women never see their children and children never know their parents” (Rand 41). By not letting children see their parent’s individuals will never experience any connection with another individual. If an individual does not have a connection with another person they will always put forward the society’s needs first. When creating a collective society the removal of education is another key commission.

Read More
877 Words | 4 Pages

The second value of the General Will in Rousseau’s belief was that everyone under it should gain the same rights (Rousseau 15). Similarly, in Sieyes’ excerpt, he argued that the citizens should stand in the equal distance from the General Will, and occupy equal places. This argument could be translated into the belief that “Legal rights are identical for every person, whether his property happens to be great or small” (Sieyes

Read More
1324 Words | 6 Pages

This paper examines both Jean-Jacques Rousseau and James Madison remark concerning ‘ factions ’ as the potential destructive social force to the society. To layout and examine, this paper will first outline and discuss on Rousseau’s understanding of factions in The Social Contract,and Madison’s discussion on factionalism in the Federalist Papers 10.But there are many component surrounded with their view’s on ‘factions’,so it is important to consider together. Firstly,I will consider the definition and the element surrounded with their view on factions. With regard to Jean-Jacques Rousseau in The Social Contract,he believes that the society can only function to the extent that people have interest in common.

Read More
1767 Words | 8 Pages

In his work, “The Social Contract”, Rousseau argues that the government's authority over the individual is derived from the general will of the people. The general will represent the collective interest of the community and takes priority over individual interests. In this context, Rousseau argues that the government has the right to conscript soldiers and house them in citizens' homes if it is necessary for the common good. In The Social Contract, Rousseau writes, “The general will is always right and tends to the public advantage; but it does not follow that the deliberations of the people are always equally correct. Our will is always for our own good, but we do not always see what that is; the people is never corrupted, but it is often deceived, and on such occasions only does it seem to will what is bad” (Rousseau, p.11).

Read More
488 Words | 2 Pages

Today's society is governed within a framework of strict rules and laws, deeply thought, as the basis of a healthy and harmonious coexistence according to the relations that may occur within it, and that compliance must be guaranteed by the state and its government agencies. Aristotle explicitly defines man as a "political and social animal by nature," which tells us that the individual is prior to society and, contrary to this, society is prior to man, as an example language because the linguistic phenomenon was developed for practice with another being, which makes human, a being who needs society for their survival and development. In addition, Aristotle says, like his teacher Plato, that the end of society and the state is to ensure the

Read More
1012 Words | 5 Pages

How can we give up our individual rights without hurting them? Rousseau states, “The problem is to find a form of association which will defend and protect with the whole common force the person and goods of each associate, and in which each, while uniting himself with all, may still obey himself alone, and remain as free as before. " This is the crux of

Read More
2000 Words | 8 Pages

In contrast to Hobbes, who argues social bonds form to regulate human nature, Rousseau argues that the formation of the civil state results from and in a “change in man,” that humans must of necessity be denatured in the process of forming society. There are similarities between the two’s philosophies, but it is Rousseau, through his arguments that human nature can be changed, who articulates a political vision more consistent with the claim that humans are asocial by nature. In the beginning, the arguments of both Hobbes and Rousseau are similar. Man in nature is isolated.

Read More
607 Words | 3 Pages

The banning of The Social Contract in France seemed quite irrational, especially since Rousseau did not name any particular ruler or member of the court. However, The Social Contract gave permission to the French people to regain their liberty and remove any power, they felt, did not prove legitimacy. Rousseau states that “one (man) thinks himself to be the master of others and still remains a greater slave than they” (Rousseau 1). This implies that even a ruler is not truly free.

Read More
511 Words | 3 Pages

However, I think it is important to remember Rousseau’s concept of perfectibility and understand that because of this trait it was almost inevitable that humans would eventually become social. Yet, it is not inevitable that humans would become politically unequal, as that is a direct result of government institutions. As well, Rousseau himself in further writings even expresses the hope that a new form of social contract could help to ease some of the political inequalities that plague contemporary society. This then suggests that the cause for these issues is not rooted in being social, for it is possible to live among others in a setting where equality has been institutionalized. Rather, the problem lies with corrupt and capitalist governments that serve to perpetuate inauthenticity and private

Read More
1624 Words | 7 Pages

“This right does not come from nature, it is therefore founded upon convention”. Rousseau does not view society in the same light as Durkheim. He does not believe that society is the savior of humans and that there is no real self without it. Unlike Durkheim, Rousseau believes that the only natural society is the traditional family and that any other form is forged out of convention. Rousseau mentions that when parents are done raising their child and that child is no longer dependent, but chooses to stay then the family is together out if convention and is then unnatural.

Read More
754 Words | 4 Pages

INTRODUCTION Jean Jacque Rousseau was born in the city state of Geneva, Switzerland in 1772. Rousseau is primarily known for major works like- The Social Contract, Emile, Discourse on the origin of Inequality, the Constitutional Project for Corsica, and Consideration on the Government of Poland. What makes Rousseau such an important figure in the history of philosophy is because of his contribution to both political and moral philosophies and his concept of ‘general will’, which also gained him a lot of criticism. Apart from his philosophical and political contribution, he was also a novelist, an autobiographer, botanist, composer and also a music theorist.

Read More

More about Rousseau Social Contract

Related Topics

Open Document