John Locke and Jacques Rousseau were two of the foremost intellectuals of the seventeenth century that help ingrain the enduring theories of how man should govern themselves in their writings, “The Second Treatise of Civil Government” by John Locke, and “On the Social Contract” by Rousseau. Deriving out of these writings, we are capable to differentiate the two contradistinction philosophical thoughts that separates the two authors according to the way the citizens are contrived. Locke, who aligns with the contemporary version of “Classical Liberalism,” which is the modern-day political right, establishes a good citizen by entering into civil society based on a consent form of government and majority rule. This understanding of political
…show more content…
It is from these that rises the idea of entering a social contract that is based on the general will and the common good all of that willing enter it. That when someone enters this social contract that its purpose is for the existent of all that are of part of it. That though this social contract people sacrifice their physical freedom to do what they live for more civil freedom that is controlled by the will of all that are in this. Rousseau talks about how one can become “human” only by joining this social contract and that society can only best exist by entering the social contract that he lays out. In this social contract no one person has more power of control of the government then does another man in fact it is only by will of every single person that the government can exist under the social contract. That the common good is what guides everyone under this contract and no one will act in their own selfness or own interested, but in the interested of the whole. One of the biggest issue that this social contract tries to overcome his the idea of economic equality which Rousseau does not believe should exist in the social contract because property and rights are given out equality. Part of this idea of equality comes from his quote when he says “men is born free but everyone is in chains.” What he is talking about is part of the social contract whereby no one has more power than anyone else and that each induvial right is the same for
It is from these that rises the idea of entering a social contract that is based on the general will and the common good all of that willing enter it. That when someone enters this social contract that its purpose is for the existent of all that are of part of it. That though this social contract people sacrifice their physical freedom to do what they live for more civil freedom that is controlled by the will of all that are in this. Rousseau talks about how one can become “human” only by joining this social contract and that society can only best exist by entering the social contract that he lays out. In this social contract no one person has more power of control of the government then does another man in fact it is only by will of every single person that the government can exist under the social contract. That the common good is what guides everyone under this contract and no one will act in their own selfness or own interested, but in the interested of the whole. One of the biggest issue that this social contract tries to overcome his the idea of economic equality which Rousseau does not believe should exist in the social contract because property and rights are given out equality. Part of this idea of equality comes from his quote when he says “men is born free but everyone is in chains.” What he is talking about is part of the social contract whereby no one has more power than anyone else and that each induvial right is the same for