Rousseau's Discourse On The Origin Of Human Inequality

Improved Essays
In the “Discourse on the origin of human inequality”, Rousseau argues that social inequality is caused by the competitions that originated from individualism, through which people only pursue self-interest and put equality in danger. Rousseau believes that the state of nature does not have much inequality, which is worsened along with the development of human civilization and political institutions and leaves a greater gap between the rich and the poor. According to Rousseau, when human faculties are not fully developed in the state of nature, they are able to preserve some natural equality.

“There is hardly any inequality in the state of nature, all the inequality which now prevails owes its strength and growth to the development of our faculties and the advance of the human mind, and becomes at last permanent and legitimate by the
…show more content…
“But bodies politic, remaining thus in a state of nature among themselves, presently experienced the inconveniences which had obliged individuals to forsake it; for this state became still more fatal to these great bodies than it had been to the individuals of whom they were composed” (429). As seen from the quote, Rousseau argues that it is the political system that caused inequalities and do more harm than the usurpations of the rich. Political institutions divide people into different communities. As people are driven by self-interest, conflicts are created among those communities. The interests of a specific political institution often force people to act in ways that harm others; for example, wars. They need to fight those in another institution in order to gain power to preserve themselves. As what Rousseau states, the conflicts caused by bodies politics shed human blood through wars and murders, which cause bloody troubles to destruct the peaceful nature and therefore diminish

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Rousseau argues that in nature, “a savage man’s body is the only instrument he knows, he employs it for a variety of purposes that, for lack of practice, ours are incapable of serving.” Rousseau immediately shows how society and civilization have decreased the nature of man because modern advancements have kept man from following natural physical improvements necessary for survival. Rousseau then explains how extreme inequality in our lifestyle exists when you look at distribution of labor and resources in society such as the excessive idleness among some, the excessive labor among others, the overly refined foods for the wealthy, and the lack of food for the poor. Humans are neither monogamous nor romantic and Rousseau states that “it is incontestable love itself, like all other passions, had acquired only in society that impetuous ardor which so often makes it lethal to men.” Finally, Rousseau asserts that society and civilization have removed mankind from its natural habitat with the introduction of language and abstract thought, both of which would not exist in…

    • 784 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Because it is believed natural man is to be like this by Rousseau, inequality isn’t prominent in nature. In the other half, Rousseau criticizes the inequality of property -- how work and oppression divides people into property. He also describes the development of technology and how it influences people’s virtues. The property class and the struggle of poor vs. rich led to the idea of a contract to solve the inequality issue. “But according to Rousseau, it is a liability: “Man is born free and everywhere he is in chains.””…

    • 387 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    One of his best known quotes states that, “Man is born free, and he is everywhere in chains” (The Social Contract). In his Discourse on the Sciences and the Arts, Rousseau answers the question “Has the restoration of the sciences and the arts contributed to the purification of mores or to their corruption?” (Discourse on the Sciences and the Arts). He goes on to argue that the pursuit of science desensitized people to their natural, good state, and instead caused them to become slaves to meaningless burdens. Rousseau believed man was born inherently good, but by being introduced into society and the sciences, people become greedy and prideful.…

    • 1257 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Sigmund Freud’s quote meant that a civilization is unable to survive if the people in that civilization are mistreated, done wrong, abandoned etc. That also, that a law once made cannot be broken by individuals wrong doings, and the law should not be treated with violent force. Which, can stand for any society, nation, and/or country; must have equally for every person living in that civilization, and that one person should not get treated either better or worse than the next: fairness for all. The people of that society/nation/country will stand up and fight for their rights and freedom, and rebel against any government, king, dictators, and pretty much anyone that’s leading that civilization. The quote is saying this also: that justice will be…

    • 974 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    INTRODUCTION Underlying Adams’ quote is the important question as to whether society is progressive and has positive implications for humans, or whether its implications are negative and corrupting. Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Émile Durkheim are two political theorists who battle in their writing to determine what is bad and what is good about society. This essay will consider how progressive or corrupting society is and in what ways, according to Rousseau and Durkheim. The essay will explore Rousseau’s argument about the ‘chains’ of society, and look at Durkheim’s contrasting view of the value of community in society.…

    • 2119 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    (Rousseau, Chapter 1). Moreover, Rousseau imagined that humans turned rational and selfish once the vices of civilization and their interactions with…

    • 1051 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    In Rousseau’s argument, men cannot be as free as they are in the state of nature in modern society and asserts that that institutions and structures in modern society contradict the freedom and natural goodness of man. Yet, a specific government may be able to provide its members with a certain amount of freedom that somewhat amounts to that present in the state of nature. He writes, in regards to the role of government, “Find a form of association which defends and protects with all common forces the person and goods of each associate, and by means of which each one, while uniting with all, nevertheless obeys only himself and remains as free as before” (Rousseau, 148). The ultimate goal of the government is to ensure the natural freedom of its societal members. The law put forth from the government should be a reflection of the general will of the community.…

    • 1838 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    John Locke and Jean-Jacque Rousseau present themselves as very distinct philosophers. They both use similar terms, such as, the State of Nature, but conceptualize them differently. In my paper, I will argue that Locke’s argument on his proposed state of nature and civil society is more realistic in our working society than Rousseau’s theory. At the core of their theories, Locke and Rousseau both agree that we all begin in a State of Nature in that everyone should be “equal one amongst another without subordination or subjection,” in which we are free with no government or laws to guide one’s behavior.…

    • 1297 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    When examining the question of whether John Rawls would consider Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s ideal society in the Social Contract fair, it is important to not only understand Rousseau’s ideal society more closely, but also understand what Rawls defines as being fair. First, the society that Rousseau proposes as the ideal one is based off of his concept of the nature of men. Men are born free and it is society that enslaves them, therefore, the goal of his ideal society is one that protects the people while also maintaining them as free as they were in nature. While to many philosophers maintaining security means renouncing some of an individual’s freedom, Rousseau believes that society can have one without the expense of the other. This only happens…

    • 1251 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Although Rousseau states that the development of private property occurred by mere chance, he explains the role that these revolutions played in influencing the social and political structures of modern society. The division of labor, for example, reinforced the social inequalities of men as an equal distribution of property could not be rewarded to each man. In an effort to prevent a war between the wealthy and the poor, a political society was formed with the poor believing that their freedom would be…

    • 1622 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Both Alexis de Tocqueville and Karl Marx examine the social change that nations go through either as a result of democracy diminishing Aristocratic ages or because of the wide spread of industrial capitalism. However, Marx and Tocqueville observe the impact of these social changes on the community differently. Marx writings are about how the European world was changing during his lifespan. He observes how the beginning of the Industrial Revolution creates an increase in the level of economic production, but also an immense increase of inequality in a society. On the contrary, Tocqueville analyzes the relationship between equality and liberty during the democratic ages vs. the aristocratic ages.…

    • 926 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Rousseau believes that humans are born innocent but are later corrupted by society. “Although, in this state, he deprives himself of some advantages which he got from nature, he gains in return others so great” (Rousseau). Rousseau believes that men are born equal but through the influence of society men “deprives himself of some advantages” that they are born with. Rousseau uses the words such as “advantages” to inform the reader about the features that mankind is born with but society removes it. The tone Rousseau uses is pro mankind but only to an extent.…

    • 1567 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Rousseau observes human nature as innately good when it’s extracted from all social attachments and the immensely corrupting overall influence of society itself. Society, for Rousseau in his eyes is a grand impulse where the decencies of human beings are displayed. Rousseau 's political theories are derived from the seemingly simple idea of arranging humans into a social setting that’s bare of corrupting elements of society. Rousseau 's leap toward a social and political order of amour propre over amour de soi is evidence of this. Rousseau derives a substantial amount of his beliefs from morals such as equality.…

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Great Essays

    The people understood that they are the power and centerpiece holding everything together. He also truly enjoyed how the people would come together as a whole to discuss the issues face to face that were happening on all levels from the government to the people. Hobbes was quite the opposite of this however which led Rousseau to maintain such a firm stance with him as well as Grotius. Rousseau’s legacy is based mainly on two concepts found in his work with the idea of the Social Contract Theory. However, the purpose of Rousseau 's philosophy and his approved government is essentially the idea that if all problems are met with the unity of the people and dealt with accordingly using his Social Contract Theory.…

    • 1840 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Again, this seems to be a critique of the law of nature, where the strongest are the ones fit to survive, which would follow Natural Law, but not the rules of the Social Contract. Obeying because one is forced to due to the “might” of a ruler is not the same as one obeying because of their moral obligation. Furthermore, he rejects the notion of “might makes right” for the reasoning that God chose the “mighty” to rule and therefore the ruler should be obeyed, as God is the source of the Natural Law, and that goes against the notions of the Social Contract. Natural Law is a point of contention for Rousseau, as he seems to change his opinion of believing it or not depending on which idea will better support his argument. However, he does establish that there was definitely something present for us in our state of nature that we found an equal in with the Social…

    • 1264 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays