Rousseau's Perception Of The Human Condition

Rousseau aimed to correct previous philosophic knowledge by changing the perception of the human condition. Comparing morality and ethics of the barbarous man to that of the civilized citizen. While most philosophers before him believed that the negative aspects of humanity predated civil society, Rousseau argued that primal man, in a state of nature is not malicious and rapacious, but intrinsically good. The creation of industry, private property, and large cities have corrupted the intrinsic virtues of man. Achieving the correct understanding of the human condition, and how it was polluted, will allow society to have the ability to fix the obstacle in the way of the betterment of civilization. Creating a just government through a strong and

Rousseau elaborates on the “two kinds of inequality among the human species; one, which I call natural or physical, because it is established by nature, and consists in a difference of age, health, bodily strength, and the qualities of the mind or of the soul” (101 Rousseau). The origin of this inequality is irrelevant because “one cannot ask what the source of natural inequality is, because the answer would be found enunciated in the simple definition of the word” (Rousseau 101). This breed of inequality is unavoidable and unimportant because the inequality in civil society isn’t caused by these natural variables but by unnatural ones. While he concedes that in certain circumstances the natural inequalities can create the unnatural ones, they are not usually dependent on each other. The amount of wealth in which an individual amasses or even can be born into, the social status granted, and the uneven availability of education are all factors that create the socio-economic inequality of society. All of this is a product of man, his own creation, used by the few to control the many.

During the time of enlightenment and industrialization of Europe, it was unheard of to take a stance against what most thinkers believed to be progress. Rousseau did exactly that, stating that “the human race would have perished long ago if its preservation had depended only on the reasonings of its members”

Rousseau and Hobbes both understood that the only possible method for creating a stable and effective government was through this contract. Rousseau, an obvious optimist, envisioned a small government focused on maintaining the liberty of its citizens, allowing leisure, and promoting the cooperation of work between men. The needs of the many will always outweigh the needs of the individual. He explains that there is a line that must be drawn between the duty to the sovereign and one’s personal inclinations. Since those leading only receive their power from the majority, the common people, it is important to the maintenance of the natural equilibrium of society to overthrow leaders who aim to abuse power for oneself, instead of the public good. The contract is always dependent on both bodies maintaining the goal of the greater