Rousseau and Lord of the Flies by William Golding

Jean- Jacques Rousseau was born on June 28, 1712, in Switzerland. The European philosopher wrote a book called A Discourse on the Arts and Sciences. His belief is that society is corrupted by evil and that man is good in his “state of nature” (Notes). He believed that man are naturally good and if we let them act on their own instinct, that they will act their true nature. He claims that politics are evil and corrupt the society with their systems.

William Golding and Jean Jacques Rousseau had very different points of view on society. Golding thought what all humans are born evil and that is what makes society horrible. Rousseau things the complete difference he thinks that all humans are born pure, nice, and innocent and that society is what corrupts humans. I agree with Rousseau because I don’t believe that all humans are born evil. This topic about these different views on society is what the book Lord of the Flies is about. The book written by Golding shows a bit of Rousseau’s view and a lot of his view on society.

Lord of the Flies by William Golding was influenced strongly by his experiences as a naval officer during World War II. Golding’s wartime service gave him a darker and more realistic look on life, and contributed to the novel’s imagery. As Golding described, World War II woke him up from his falsified beliefs about human nature by showing him the true human condition (“Lord of the Flies,” Novels 175). Lord of the Flies, as Golding explained, is “an attempt to trace the defects of society back to the defects of human nature” (qtd. in “Lord of the Flies,” Novels 189). William Golding based much of Lord of the Flies on his World War II experiences, which provided for a more realistic and accurate

Throughout Lord of the Flies, Golding shows his views of the inherent evil of humans. He shows how humans can be in such a savage state, practically mimicking the way of life of their prehistoric ancestors. He exemplifies this with acts of carnage carried on by the young stranded children. It all started with a slight urge to hunt down a pig and then continued on to murdering another human being. Golding shows his views best at the end of the book with the boys being rescued by a Navy crew, which would go on to war it self.

William Golding utilizes Lord of the Flies to prove that the inherent nature of man is truly savage and cannot be contained by any form of civil government. Characters, setting, atmosphere, and other elements are all used by Golding in the novel as metaphors and symbols to ultimately reveal the natural intention of man. In Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan, John Locke’s Concerning Civil Government , and Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s The Social Contract, they share their own personal interpretations on man’s inherent nature, with the closest to Golding being Hobbes. Although both Golding and Hobbes state that man’s true nature is evil and selfish, Hobbes advocates for an absolutist government as capable of controlling man through fear of punishment, as opposed to Golding’s belief that no form of government is sufficient to control man. Conversely, Rousseau argues that men are born with morality and inalienable freedom, and John Locke believes that man is free but is neither inherently reputable nor immoral but a blank slate. Both want the people to be in control to prevent corruption from changing man, although Rousseau insists that a direct democracy to completely give power to the people would be more effective rather than only a representative democracy where the people would have individuals represent them which Locke suggests.

Born in Geneva in 1712, Rousseau was shaped by the death of his mother and loss of his father at an early age. Sent to live with the Baroness de Warens, he gained a formal education that enabled him to write his later famous works. He loathed the Baroness’ values even when they eventually became lovers, but growing up in her educational environment allowed Rousseau to be exposed to different opinions that would eventually shape his Enlightened ideas, (Historyguide.org, www.historyguide.org/europe/rousseau.html.). This also exposed Rousseau to different religious ideas eventually forming his views that the church was corrupt, (Nardo, Don. “The Onrush of Modern Ideas.” The French Revolution, Cengage Learning, 2008, pp. 21–21.) Then in 1741, Rousseau fled to Paris where he wrote, “Les Muses Galantes.” This work allowed for Rousseau to meet Voltaire and exchange Enlightenment ideas. Being exposed to the “popular crowd” abled Rousseau in 1750 to write, “A Discourse on the Sciences and the Arts” based off of a prison he visited holding Denis Diderot. Diderot was one of the people Rousseau was able to meet due to Les Muses galantes, it was there Rousseau got the inspiration to form an opinion on the following essay question, “Have arts and sciences improved or corrupted the morals of mankind?”( Historyguide.org, www.historyguide.org/europe/rousseau.html.). Rousseau believed the arts and sciences had not corrupted man just simply decreased their freedoms. Being around Diderot in prison abled Rousseau to write, “Discourse on the Origin of Inequality” which stressed his ideals of man’s natural goodness and the corruption of regularized life, which connects back to Rousseau’s visit to Diderot in an institutionalized prison. These events and works all lead up to Rousseau’s most famous and popular work, “The Social Contract.”

Rousseau’s assumptions and beliefs of his era are society and the growth of social interdependence. He was from 1700, (1712-78) it was very different compared to our beliefs.

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

Two philosophers of different eras tackle the same topic, human nature, and a great argument breaks out. Is man inherently evil, like William Golding believes? Or is man good at heart but inevitably becomes corrupted by the society he lives in, as said by Jean Jacques Rousseau? Both philosophers have very strong opinions and well reasoning for what they believe. Golding’s views are displayed well throughout his novel, Lord of the Flies; a tale about strong minded, young boys stranded on an island who must find a way to survive on their own. After reading this novel, I found myself agreeing much with Rousseau’s views on human nature.

      In the novel, Lord of the Flies, William Golding tells the story of a group of boys on an island left out to self survive. The time was World War II when the plane the boys were in was shot down leaving young survivals on a deserted island without any adults. The whole story is about what happens during their stay on the island representing metaphoric ideas of humanity in each incident as Golding describes. Golding has reportedly said that he wrote the novel in response to his personal war experiences. “ (The war)… taught us not fighting, politics or the follies of nationalism, but about the given nature of man.” (Golding) By looking at Lord of the Flies, it is clear that Golding’s view of

In the Lord of the Flies by William Golding, he uses the idea of good and evil throughout

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

‘Lord of the Flies’ is based almost entirely on Golding’s view that evil is an inherent force in every man, “man produces evil as a bee produces honey”. Golding acquired this belief while he was a soldier in the Second World War. From that point on, he became extremely pessimistic about human nature, calling it “the disease of being human”. This belief is shown very clearly, as he puts ‘innocent’ children on a deserted island, free of all corruption; free of an external threat, therefore with no need of an army; abundant in food and supplies, therefore with no need to steal. Therefore, what evil was left could only come from the

In contrast, Rousseau had a generally positive view on human nature though a rather negative view on modern society. He proposed that humans had once been solitary beings and had learned to be political. He believed that human nature was not fixed and was subject to changed. Likewise, he believed that man was good when in a state of nature, but was corrupted by society as shown in his quotation, "Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains.” Also differentiating himself from other humanists, Rousseau taught that the sciences and the arts were not beneficial to man. Rousseau believed the general will must always be right and to obey the general will is to be free.

On the other hand, Rousseau is of the idea that human beings are good in nature but they are latter to be vitiated by the political societies which are not part of the man’s natural state. Men need to live in collaboration and help each other to face life challenges. However, with the establishment of political and social institutions, men begin to experience inequalities as a result of greed. Rousseau claims that, in man’s natural state, they only strive for the basic needs and once those needs are satisfied they are contented in that state (Hobbes & Malcolm, 2012). Additionally, Rousseau points out that after the inception of social and political institutions, humans began to be self-centered