ipl-logo

Social Contract Theory Of Jean-Jacques Rousseau

1333 Words6 Pages
For Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778), men in a state of nature are free and equal. I already mentioned in Chapter one that for Rousseau in a state of nature , men are noble savages. Also, he has two social contract theories which are Discourse on the Origin and Foundation of Inequality Among Men mostly called as the Second Discourse and the other one is Social Contract which is this papers topic. Rousseau begins the Social Contract with the most famous words he ever wrote: "People are born free, but everywhere in chains." From this provocative discovery, Rousseau talks about countless ways to suppress the "chains" of civil society The natural human right to physical freedom. He argues that civil society does nothing to ensure the equality and freedom of the individual that was promised to a person when he joined this society. Moreover, for Rousseau, the only legitimate political authority is the power that all people who have agreed to such a government agree on by entering into a social contract for the sake of their mutual preservation. The social contract is Rousseau 's answer to the problem of natural freedom, because Rousseau 's nature does not provide standards or guidelines for determining who should rule. According to Rousseau, a social contract in common will is the basis of all legal power, in other words, that all standards of justice and law originate in the will of this unique human property of will or free agency. All in all, the differences between
Show More
Related
511 Words | 3 Pages

John Locke, a 17th century philosopher from England, was a man who contained many ideas and theories on how particular civilizations should operate. John Locke philosophized “that there was an unspoken law amongst men known as “The Law of Nature” (“state of nature” Locke). The “law of nature” depicts a community in which there was only moral law. Thus the “law of nature” portrays a “state of perfect freedom where all men share their equality” (“state of nature”4). This statement basically states that “no one has power over another and are free (Locke 4)” to govern themselves accordingly.

Read More
877 Words | 4 Pages

Rousseau, one of the most leading philosophers during the Enlightenment, had indeed left many of legendries behind. Not only his writings had caused many of the reactions at that time, but also influenced many writers’ aspects of the French Revolution and the overall understanding of inequality and the General Will. As one of the chief political theorists during the French Revolution who was also influenced by Rousseau’s ideas, Abbe Sieyes, published the pamphlet, “What is the Third Estate?” in 1789. This pamphlet was one of the documents that changed the world and lit the flame toward the French Revolution, as characterized by Joe Janes, a University of Washington professor (Janes).

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
927 Words | 4 Pages

Throughout the past month, we have read and discussed both The Social Contract by Jean-Jaques Rousseau and The Racial Contract by Charles Mills’. As I said before, the two philosophers derive from very opposing backgrounds, their literary works theorize vital agreements between the members of a society that unite them for the overall benefit of its citizens. Each philosopher addresses the elements and ideas, but Charles Mills’ tackles the elephant in the room involving the issue of race. Because of his ability to see the need for this unspoken issue to be incorporated, I believe that Mills' Racial Contract is more persuasive. Both Rousseau's Social Contract and Mills' Racial Contract are inferred agreements that are existent throughout

Read More
1631 Words | 7 Pages

In any other system, the people give up their freedom without any reason; it should be created only if all agree to it. The social contract would exist for the purpose of self-preservation, pushing the common will of the Sovereign. To convince his audience of these complex ideas, Rousseau must stay organized and be intentional in his rhetorical

Read More
1012 Words | 5 Pages

Book One of The Social Contract by Jean-Jacques Rousseau focuses on the reasons that people give up their natural liberty in order to achieve protection from threats to themselves and their property. This results in the formation of a legitimate sovereign where all members are equal. Rousseau believes that no human has authority over another individual because force cannot be established. He argues that no individual will give up his or her freedom without receiving something in return. I will focus my analysis on how the social contract states that we must give up our individual rights in order to obtain equality and security.

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
1253 Words | 6 Pages

The questions of the whether social inequality is justified and the extent of government to address said inequality are some of the foundations upon which societies and economies are built. Two key philosophers on this issue – John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau – differ on this subject. In Two Treatises on Government, Locke holds that individuals have a right to property derived from their labor, citizens consent to the existence of inequality in society, and governments are instituted among men to protect said property. In contrast, Rousseau writes in Discourse on the Origin of Inequality and The Social Contract that inequality should be strictly limited and that governments have a duty to act in the best interest of its citizens by maintaining

Read More
650 Words | 3 Pages

The main philosophy of John Locke, a famous and well-known Enlightenment philosopher, involves his theory of natural law and natural rights given to mankind. In this particular article, entitled “The Consent of the Governed”, part of his work Two Treatises of Government, Locke addresses importance of man’s natural state and its main characteristics, the forming of a government and what it offers and the relationship between a government and its subjects. According to Locke, man’s natural state is a state of equality, with no man being of higher power than another and all are welcome to have complete control over their own lives. He states that, by nature, men are “all free, equal, and independent, no one can be put out of this estate,

Read More
1648 Words | 7 Pages

On the other hand, Werther takes an extremely Romantic approach, with his life and experiences demonstrating the limitations of a rational society. In Discourse on the Origin of Moral Inequality, Rousseau rationally determines that the emergence of society and the invention of property directly cause moral inequality between people, specifically, the rich and the poor. First, he establishes the state of nature as a basic system, with no complex morality or rationality involved, unlike the states of nature described by Hobbes and Locke. At the most fundamental degree, Rousseau places mankind at the same level as other animals.

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
1238 Words | 5 Pages

In the 18th century, Genevan philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau influenced the French Revolution through his ideas and principals. In his book, The Social Contract, Rousseau said that every man is born good until corrupted by society. Rousseau was correct in saying that people were born good, people were naturally born with a pure heart because God made us that way. However, one could argue that man is born evil based off of the perspective of society’s moral laws, which Rousseau may not have considered. Man is born evil because every human being is born with a desire for possession and a hunger for power.

Read More
748 Words | 3 Pages

The interest intensified during the Age of Enlightenment in the following century. Several 17th and 18th century European philosophers, especially John Locke, Thomas Paine, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, developed the concept of natural rights, the notion that people are naturally free and equal. . The Enlightenment philosophers suggested a secular social contract between the rulers and the ruled, who deprive themselves of some rights to gain security and serenity at the cost of some of their liberties. In the same time some ‘Natural rights’ preexisting the authority must be respected by the authority, i.e. the government and the State, in order to keep its legitimacy.

Read More
1740 Words | 7 Pages

Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau have become known as three of the most prominent political theorists in the world today. Their philosophies and innovative thinking is known worldwide and it has influenced the creation of numerous new governments. All three thinkers agree on the idea of a social contract but their opinions differ on how the social contract is established and implemented within each society. These philosophers state, that in order for the social contract to be successful people need to give up certain freedoms in order to secure fundamental protections from the state, henceforth the state then has certain responsibilities to their citizens. Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau all believe that before men were governed we all lived in a state of nature.

Read More
1071 Words | 5 Pages

In Rousseau’s political thoughts general will is at the heart of social contract. General will is the most fundamental principle in Rousseau’s social contract. Social contract gets its legitimacy through only the application of general will. But what this “general will” actually is? To Rousseau general will is not simply the sum total of all individual wills, rather it is the collective will of the people of a community.

Read More

More about Social Contract Theory Of Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Related Topics

Open Document