Difference Between Rousseau And Social Contract Theory

When Jean Jacques Rousseau wrote his Social Contract, the idea of liberty and freedom were not new theories. Many political thinkers such as John Locke and Thomas Hobbes had already evolved with their own clarification of liberty and freedom of mankind, and in fact John Locke had already publicized his views and ideas on the social contract as well. In Rousseau’s case, what he did was to transform the ideas incorporated by such substantial words, and present us to another method to the social contract dilemma. What would bring man to leave the state of nature, and enter into a structured civil society? Liberals believes that this was the assurance of protection - liberty to them implied being free from destruction and harm towards one’s property. Rousseau’s concept of freedom was entirely different from that of traditional liberals. According to Rousseau, liberty is meant to voice out your opinion, and participation as human being. “To renounce liberty is to renounce being a man” (Wootton, 454).

Rousseau wanted the state to be a legitimate democracy, a society that united together the people in freedom, equality and civic devotion. Rousseau believed that an individual fulfils his moral potential not in isolation but as part of a community where all members are committed to helping each other. This belief led Rousseau to ancient Greek society for which he felt a great admiration. He believed the Greeks lived in 'organic communities', cities where the citizens set aside personal interests in order to attain the common good. Rousseau's ideal state was one of a smaller size but one where the citizens were welded together in the spirit of 'fraternity'. People would therefore have the opportunity to get know each other, resulting in an enthusiastic contribution to all public affairs. Such a political environment produces free and committed citizens. In contrast, the large modern day states are ruled by an absolute monarch, creating 'servile subjects', which Rousseau despised.8

Social contract theory is the theory of ethics that states that our basic understanding of society and morality derives from the human's beings who create contracts to benefit themselves. These contracts manifest in a myriad of ways from contracts like to not to kill one another or to not breaking your promises. This state also allows one to be less in danger of threats and forms the circumstances for altruistic actions to exist. For example, you are able to save another person's life without having to worry about them murdering you as they have had to follow that contract not to murder. Granted they could break the contract but to serious penalties and is all around safer for everybody.

Rousseau thought that man was born weak and ignorant, but virtuous. It is only when man became sociable that they became wicked. (Cress, 80) Since civil society makes men corrupt, Rousseau advocated “general will”, more precisely the combined wills of each person, to decide public affairs. General will would become the sovereign and thus it would be impossible for its interests to conflict with the priorities of the citizens, since this would be doing harm to itself. Virtue came from the freedom of men to make decisions for the good of the

Rousseau proposed that the state is a natural development of a family relationship, the father being the ruler/rulers and the children, being the people/citizens. And the even though families are tied by blood and love, no such bonds exist on the level of the state, and so a situation of attempted supremacy will arise. Therefore we need a mechanism to guarantee that people of the state work in agreement. Rousseau reasoned that the mechanism being a “social contract”, a balance between the rulers, the politicians/cooperate elites and the sovereign, the collect

Rousseau is theorizing from the concept of the general will, which promotes individuals to become conscious citizens who actively participate as a community to form policies for a governing structure. The general will advocates for a commitment to generality, a common interest that will unite all citizens for the benefit of all. Rousseau states, “each one of us puts into the community his person and all his powers under the supreme direction of the general will; and as a body, we incorporate every member as an indivisible part of the whole” (Rousseau 61). The general will is an expression of the law that is superior to an individual’s

He refutes Hobbes’ idea that man is naturally seeking to attack and fight by saying that man in the state of nature is actually man in his most timid form. He states that savage man’s needs are so basic (food, shelter, water, a woman) and easily found that he can have “neither foresight or curiosity”. By this man he means that man lacks the expansive nature that Hobbes’ believed they possessed (natural eternal quest for power). He continues on man’s basic nature adding “With passions so minimally active and such a salutary restraint, being more wild than evil, and more attentive to protecting themselves from the harm they could receive than tempted to do harm to others, men were not subject to very dangerous conflicts.” This is rather opposite of the state of nature in which Hobbes calls man in a constant war with man. He argues, that without society, in fact, that man would be much more pure and that the ills of society have dirtied man. He believed that human nature is very comparable to that of an animal in that it is at its based even natured, but that the separating factor between the two is free will. He argues that since society calls for more cooperation between men, it also causes more competition, creating many of society ills. Rather than saying man fled from the state of nature like Hobbes, Rousseau rather said that man needed society for division of labor as well as the division

At some point they cannot survive by themselves and everyone needs to come together for the common good In giving everything to the community the individual receives everything he or she has lost plus "more power to preserve what he has" (189). Lives must be lived in and for the group; the life as an individual must be merged into the life of the state, and the people must be involved in all aspects of government. There can be no clubs, separate churches, power groups, or political parties, because these would create separate rights for individuals, and give some individuals more power than others. By creating this, Rousseau annihilates power struggles between the rights of a group and individual rights. In this system, there is no one ruler of the community. A citizen who puts his or her community first is ruler, and ruled. The political government is one united system, it does what the community wants it to do.

Jean Jacque Rousseau was one of the most controversial philosophers from 1712-1778. The first to speak explicitly of human rights. He was a Swiss philosopher who was influenced by the French revolution. He believed that people basically everyone is good but it 's society that corrupts them to do wrong. Each philosopher had their own ideal world, and his was to have people make laws and obey them. However, Rousseau has a different opinion on the theory of a social contract but also did help develop the theory. He believed that people were naturally good but were corrupted by society that was lead to inequalities of people and this would cause war, hate and crime against each other. The only thing that matters is the will of people. Today, Rousseau is looked as a champion of democracy for his idea that political authority lies with the people. He has also influenced political and social change for the last two hundred years and it’s believed that his ideas will encourage revolutions for the next centuries. On the other hand also his ideas of political authority the “general will” has been used by dictators in the past. Rousseau’s social contract theory, based on Thomas Hobbes and John Locke would be one of the foundations of modern democracy.

Why is it, when the intrusions of government intercede with the will of the people, and the foreboding of tyranny portends on the horizon, that humanity attempts to legitimize their captivity, rather than minimizing the abilities of those powers? Likewise, the Greek philosopher Plato and French philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau imagine an ideal society where a controlling government dominates the will of choice, in their works The Republic and The Social Contract. Ironically, the two concepts of a society living in complete harmony include philosophies that would purge their societies into chaos. Of these several examples stand out, including government officials becoming appointed based on vague or unspecified conditions, all beliefs

Rousseau attempted to tackle this by the fact that for a society to be set up there is a need for unanimity and ¡¥the majority binds the rest¡¦. This concept can also be threatened by a corrupt government who can appear to be projecting the general will when they are just serving their own ends and benefits.

Despite the fact that Rousseau gave legislative authority to the people, his fear of the general population, exercising sovereignty was justified. He believes that “the common man can be shortsighted, is easily manipulated, and is often unaware of his own needs.” (Cole 2005) This is reflected in the political arena where voters are easily manipulated during election and they forget about the problems they were /is facing. and instead of voting on the issues they face they cast votes on partisanship or popularity. (Cole 2005)

Under Rousseau belief, people lived in solitary without conflict of others and complicated rules in their natural environment (Friends, 204). However, over time humanity changed with the increase in population and people began to live in small communities. As a consequence, people started to compare themselves one with another, which resulted in public values, shame, pride, and envy, which led to the fall of humanity from the state of nature (Friend, 2004). Given the commotion of living in close proximity, it is believe that government must be established through a contract to grant equality and protection for society due to inequality as the population advanced. Since one can no longer act as he or she sees fit, it is directed by coming together as one body to represent the entire democratic body to decide how people can live together under the law to restore

According to the Social Contract Theory, it suggests that all individuals must depend on an agreement/ or contract among each person to form a society, in which they live in. The concept emphasizes authority over individuals, in other words, the social contract favors authority (e.g. the Sovereign) over the individuals, because men have to forfeit their personal right and freedom to the government, in exchange for protection and security, which I will further elaborate in this paper.

If human beings today were suddenly to find themselves without political institutions, they would indeed lead unpleasant lives because they would have all the selfishness and greed that society has bred in them without any of the safeguards and protections of that society. Rousseau's hypothetical natural state is pre-societal: before we were corrupted by politics, we had none of the unpleasant characteristics that Hobbes identifies. It is important to understand that Rousseau believes it is impossible to return to this natural