Analysis Of The Social Contract By Jean Jacques Rousseau

Improved Essays
“Man is born free; and everywhere he is in chains” (Rousseau). This apparent paradox was the first sentence in The Social Contract, and shares Jean Jacques Rousseau’s thoughts on the balance between freedom and confinement, which we will see as an ongoing theme throughout the book. In other words, Rousseau theorizes about the best way to establish a political community while addressing the flaws of a government that implements natural authority and force. Rousseau’s political views can be best described as the natural goodness of humanity. From reading a few excerpts from The Social Contract, it is clear that Rousseau is trying to establish how freedom can be attained in a civil society. To do this, he traces back freedom to the state of …show more content…
When Rousseau was writing The Social Contract, the term “liberty” was not new. In fact, Hobbes and Locke already used and had their own definitions of these terms (another similarity between the three philosophers). He used this term to introduce to us the current problem of “What would it take to bring a man out of the state of nature into an organized society?” Some people, liberals, would say that the incentive of protection would cause them to move toward this type of lifestyle. However, Rousseau’s definition of liberty was a little different. He believed that dropping the state of nature into an organized society should allow more than just protection. He defined liberty as having a voice and participation within this organized society. This led me to think about why Rousseau was advocating an organized society if he was so fond of the state of nature. Upon further reading, it is understood that although Rousseau describes the state of nature as good, he does not mention that they are essentially capable of living on their own. Earlier on, he proposes the situation of a father and a son as a key example of the exchange of liberty for protection. While trying to understand the question of why Rousseau promotes an organized society, I referred back to the father and son example. Rousseau stated that the state of nature is all good, but at the same time those in this state are no more than a child who is ignorant and undeveloped. This allowed me make the connection that to grow out of the state of nature, one must enter a society. And to prevent corruption and to preserve the good that came from the state of nature, our society must not have flaws in

Related Documents

  • Superior Essays

    Rousseau inspired the phrase “We the people…”2 at the beginning of the Declaration of Independence because of his belief in the wisdom of the people to decide in their own affairs. However, I believe that Locke is more correct in his account of human beings and the ideal form of government. He inspired the foundation of our branches of government and ultimately his argument over civil society is more just than Rousseau. Rousseau’s…

    • 1297 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This section focuses on Rousseau’s ideas of the state of nature and freedom. Rousseau argued that human beings are ‘born free’ meaning that they are morally autonomous agents. In regimes of private property, they became un-free as the imperatives of rational accumulation increasingly governed what they did (Levine, 2002). He began his exploration into the human condition with the isolated individual in the state of nature. However, he believed that they could be a difficulty in using the idea of a state of nature because those who employ it project characteristics found only in society upon men in their original condition.…

    • 1059 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    In order to do so, it is critical to examine historical political writings on freedom, specifically the teachings of Rousseau and Mill. The specific thoughts of Rousseau and Mill on freedom, the significance of social contracts, individual versus social freedom, and government’s role…

    • 1838 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Both theorists believe in natural rights and freedoms and how men establish governments in order to secure peace however they differ on the purpose of government. Hobbes believed the purpose of government is to impose law and order to prevent the state of war. Locke believed the purpose of government is to secure natural rights, namely man’s property and liberty. Both refer to a “state of nature” in which man exists without government, and both speak of risks in this state. However, while both speak of the dangers of a state of nature, Hobbes is more pessimistic, whereas Locke speaks of the potential benefits.…

    • 908 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    He also reckons we need freedom to create an enlightened society and achieve happiness. However, how difficult is it to uphold the moral law? To answer this question from a Kantian point of view, any action performed must be done from a duty to the highest moral law in order to have any moral worth. What determines whether an action has moral worth or not is the maxim. Freedom ends when your choices begin to affect other people and morality is universal.…

    • 1793 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Human life has long been shaped and susceptible to civil society. John Locke theorizes that man, by nature, is a social animal. Mankind is more apt to gain freedoms, identities, and interests through a civil society, rather than nature. However, another philosopher and writer believed differently; Thomas Hobbes was of the idea that man was not of a societal nature and that society could and would not exist except for the power of a state. Hobbes, in his writings, took on more of a philosophical absolutism approach for his theories on government and men, whereas Locke took a philosophical and biblical constitutionalism approach towards government and human life.…

    • 1322 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    s intuitive as the ideals of political freedom and equality have become in many parts of the world, these ideas were revolutionary when first pondered by philosophers. Thinkers Jean Jacques Rousseau and John Locke both pioneered these concepts in their works, and though their theories of a legitimate state mirrored each other in certain regards, their ideas also differed about what freedom and equality should look like. While both agree that a legitimate state must eliminate societal inequality, Rousseau believes that it should increase the freedom of men, and Locke argued for the necessity of men giving up their natural freedoms in order to be protected by the state. Rousseau distinguishes between two kinds of inequality, which he identifies as “natural” and “moral or political” (Rousseau, A Discourse on Inequality 77). In discussing his theory of state, the latter type is more important, as it refers to inequalities among men established by “some sort of convention” and relies on men to perpetuate these inequalities (Rousseau, A Discourse on Inequality 77).…

    • 1240 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Argument #2 Social Contract Social contracts are an individual 's moral and ethical political obligations, which are dependent upon a contract or agreement. It addresses questions of the origin of the society, and the legitimacy of the authority the state holds over an individual. For Locke, since the state of nature is a state of liberty where people recognize the presence of the Law of Nature and, therefore, do not harm one another, the state of war differs from the state of nature. Property is essential in Locke 's argument for civil government and the contract that establishes it. This is because the reason human beings abandon the state of nature is to ensure greater protection of their property, not only concerning material goods, but also their bodies.…

    • 1081 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Hobbes considers the government as a means to counter human nature. The beliefs of these two thinkers are irreconcilable, but they are aware that the form of government proposed in conclusion is pre-social. The present world has apparently adopted a more Hobbesian position, with a more educational state and that judges…

    • 923 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    For Rousseau, modern civilization took away the good parts of the early societies and replaced it with a society revolved around the state. The ‘general will’ would now govern the states, taking away one’s natural rights, but gaining them civil liberties. According to Rousseau, the ‘general will’ was when man gave power to the majority and essentially hoped that they would govern correctly. By following the guidelines set out than one would essentially be governing themselves because the guidelines of society are set up with consideration for the ‘general will’. Rousseau valued the idea of people’s sovereignty and for him the state, ‘general will’, laws, and guidelines were…

    • 1070 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays