Analysis Of Jean-Jacques Rousseau's State Of Inequality

If men are equal, as Jean-Jacques Rousseau claims in the preface to his discourse on inequality (40), why do some men live in large lavish houses, while others struggle on the street, unsure of their next meal? The distance between the rich and the poor has been increasing steadily over the last decade, but in reality it has been expanding ever since man separated from Rousseau’s original state of nature. The state of nature is different than that which is natural, and within Rousseau’s state of nature, physical inequality is the only thing separating a man from another. Therefore, disregarding physical inequality, nature for man was equal and the state of nature provided an equal playing ground. As early as the preface, Rousseau realizes that in order for one to understand inequality, one must first attempt to understand man (39). This man that we are understanding could be classified into two different groups, man in society and man in the state of nature. It is tough to understand the way that man in the state of nature lived and conducted himself, since “little care [was] taken by nature to bring men together through mutual needs and to facilitate their use of speech” (60). If nothing was written down or spoken concerning …show more content…
(104). As discussed by Rousseau, once the state of nature has been departed from, returning is a very tough job. “[People] will respect the sacred bonds of the societies of which they are members; they will love their fellowmen and will serve them with all their power” (105). This being the case, departure becomes impossible and man will not have the chance to return to the state of nature, no matter how bad inequality has