• Home Page
  • Analysis Of Jean-Jacques Rousseau's The Social Contract

Analysis Of Jean-Jacques Rousseau's The Social Contract

Superior Essays
Show More
Jean-Jacques Rousseau wrote The Social Contract post-French Revolution because he wanted to create a system of government he thought to be legitimate. Rousseau explains throughout The Social Contract that for a government to be legitimate, the power must lie in the hands of the general will, which represents the whole body politic. Rousseau’s idea sounds great, that is until it is put into practice and, alongside the strengths, you can also see the weakness of it. His philosophy of governance is not one that I can fully support. I cannot support his idea of a legitimate government because I do not think the people can properly govern themselves. I agree with some things he states in this contract, but I do not believe his idea of a legitimate …show more content…
When the power lies fully in the general will there is no true order or direction. I believe people should definitely have a huge say in government and how it affects their life, but I firmly believe that there should be at least one authoritative figure who can make final decisions. Even Rousseau acknowledges that mistakes can come from not having a specific idea of what sovereign authority is (71). There should be someone who makes the final call, if not one individual then a small group of representatives that people vote into office. Rousseau wanted the people to be able to govern themselves because of the negative way he saw the King govern his citizens. The King made decisions without thinking about how they affected his people; he never took their opinions into consideration and Rousseau believes that people should be in control of how the government affects their lives. I understand what he is trying to do, but there needs to be a more controlled system in place. Another downfall about his vision of governance is: what is the group to do when a law does not apply to everyone? Should they enforce it anyways because it is for the good of the majority, or would that be breaking the general will? If they were to execute a law anyways without society’s representation, it would be going against the general will. …show more content…
Now, if this form of governance would actually work in today’s society, I feel I would support it. Unfortunately, I see too many disadvantages in Rousseau’s vision of a legitimate government, not enabling me to support this form of governance in today’s society. For starters, in order for the general will to work, everyone must exchange their individual interests for the groups interest. The participants of The Social Contract, must give up their personal beliefs and put the group’s needs first. Rousseau states that “each one of us puts into the community his person and all his powers under the supreme direction of the general will; and as a body, we incorporate every member as an indivisible part of the whole”(61) he believes that when people exchange their liberties, they become apart of the general will and they act as a whole. Basically, as a citizen under this form of governance, you submit yourself to all, or the common good, and leave behind your personal interests; by doing so you become united with the general will. The problem with that is: people are selfish, not selfless. It is in our human nature to think of ourselves at times, especially on controversial topics. We are more likely to act based on our personal interests rather than the interests of a group. Imagine trying to put this into practice in today's society. Nothing would ever get

Related Documents

  • Great Essays

    Rousseau And Mill's Views On Freedom
    • 1838 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Rousseau And Mill's Views On Freedom

    Rousseau places a great deal of importance on the common good and therefore somewhat rejects personal freedoms. He believes that in order to be a part of the Social Contract, in which he believes man is free, personal freedom must be ignored. In the state of nature, man is free to indulge in their personal needs and freedoms and therefore must be disregarded in order to unsure the common good. If an individual disagrees with the majority, they are inherently wrong and should be forced to obey the general will. Rousseau states, “whoever refuses to obey the general will will be forced to do so by the entire community” (Rousseau, 150). In other words, if an individual rejects or contradicts the ideas expressed by the community, the community should be able to force that individual to submit to their opinions. It is at this point in which Rousseau and Mill differ. This act of forcing conformity would be seen as a form of tyranny to Mill who values the freedom of the individual. In order for society to progress, individual freedoms must always be expressed foremost. Indeed, Mill agrees that man should not behave in ways that would harm others but they should still be free to do as they wish. He states, “In all such cases there should be personal freedom, legal and social, to do the action and stand the consequences” (Mill, 64). But, in defining freedom, as expressed earlier,…

    • 1838 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
    Read More
  • Superior Essays

    Difference Between Hobbes Locke And Rousseau
    • 2006 Words
    • 9 Pages

    Difference Between Hobbes Locke And Rousseau

    The purpose of law for Rousseau is to communicate the general will of the people. The general will of the people puts the common interest of all involved at the forefront. Whereas in the state of nature there was a sense of inequality, once the social contract is in effect there is equality as everyone is needed for the common good to take place. In order for these laws to be enacted the majority must agree to give up their individual rights for the protection of all. The sovereign hopes to serve the common good while putting private interest last. For Rousseau laws are “the conditions of civil association”, meaning that the laws are created by the citizens and are to be followed and enforced by the citizens. No law can go into effect unless everyone agrees to…

    • 2006 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Influence Of Rousseau On General Will
    • 328 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Influence Of Rousseau On General Will

    In order to have a peaceful, and prosperous society or community, the laws of that society should be based on the interests and will of the majority of the citizens. His idea of general will is very similar to the ideology of democracy, where every individual interests are considered and the interests of majority rules. However I also believe that the idea of general will, would not be established in today’s world because each individual in each country around the world has different interests and it will very difficult nowadays to live within a society which shares a general will because in Rousseau’s general will, all the power, rights and interests of each individual are controlled and directed by community…

    • 328 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Decent Essays

    Enlightenment Dbq
    • 430 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Enlightenment Dbq

    Jean-Jacques Rousseau lived from 1712 to 1778, was one of the most influential philosophers during the Enlightenment in 18th century in Europe. Rousseau argued that the people and the government form a social contract. The people allow the government to have power over them, they consent to be governed. In return, the government promises to protect the rights of the people. Rousseau believed that the right of individuals to be free is one of the most important things that people have. Because of this, he believed that a good government had to protect those…

    • 430 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
    Read More
  • Superior Essays

    Compare And Contrast John Locke And Jean Jacque Rousseau
    • 1297 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Compare And Contrast John Locke And Jean Jacque Rousseau

    Locke believed in a limited, representative government while Rousseau believed in a direct form of government by the people. Locke believed that the powers of the government are to be limited. He believed the government should only exist to protect life, liberty, and property and if the government were to overstep that authority, then the public would have a right to overthrow the government. As I said before, Thomas Jefferson paid homage to these ideals during his drafting of the Declaration of Independence. Along with separation of powers between the House of Commons and House of Lords,2 Locke’s ideals greatly influenced American government where power is vested in a bicameral legislature along with an executive and judicial branch. Locke’s Second Treatise of Government allowed for the ideal that no ruler or government could do whatever they pleased because there were moral laws that encompassed all of society. However, Rousseau was adamant in his belief that man “is born free and everywhere he is in chains.”1 Rousseau defended the right of the people to rule, he argued that the people were only accountable for themselves and the ruler or government had no right to subjugate the people. Locke and Rousseau’s idea of government are similar in the fact that they both embody some aspects of our government today. 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
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Jean Jacques Rousseau Legitimate Government
    • 930 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Jean Jacques Rousseau Legitimate Government

    The general will benefits everyone in society and takes the publics view into consideration. Voting in the government and assembly of people is a criterion of the general will. It requires you to perform a duty in public affairs and a true government can only exist if all of its members contribute. Rousseau believes that the government should have minimal power, while the members of society influence what occurs. The general will “is always constant, unalterable, and pure: but it is subordinate to other wills that prevail over it.” Since a monarchy is based on the private interest of the ruler, it may be difficult to identify the general will in that society. In a society, Rousseau believes that every man is obligated to vote and voice his opinion, which falls under the general will category. There are two types of wills, the general and the private will. Under the general will, people vote in a deliberative democracy and members of the society vote for what they believe is beneficial for the general will and public. This procedure permits everyone being treated fairly in society but the method is fallible because of the natural greed of human beings. Under the private will, members vote in a private democracy and vote for what they believe is best for them. This procedure is infallible and is the only way to satisfy everyone…

    • 930 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Similarities Between John Locke And Thomas Hobbes
    • 908 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Similarities Between John Locke And Thomas Hobbes

    Rousseau is a social contract theorist who believes men in a state of nature are free and equal. In a state of nature, men are “Noble Savages.” His social contract theory states that humans are corrupted by society, all people must enter a social contract that requires people to recognize a collective “good will” which represents the common good or public interest. All citizens should participate and should be committed to the good of all, even if it is not in their personal best…

    • 908 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Superior Essays

    John Locke And Jean-Jacques Rousseau
    • 1235 Words
    • 5 Pages

    John Locke And Jean-Jacques Rousseau

    Locke believed people needed to form a government in order to protect their property. As stated in The Second Treatise of Government, “The great and chief end, therefore, of men’s uniting into commonwealths and putting themselves under government is the preservation of property…” (Locke, 37). Under the rule of the king, the natural rights people had to property (life, liberty, and estates) were taken, however, Locke believed that by joining or creating a representative government, their natural rights would be preserved. In contrast, Rousseau believed that the purpose of a direct government was to bring harmony and unite the people under the general will. According to The Social Contract, once people can no longer survive in a primitive state, they willingly enter the social contract, and lose their animalistic ways. According to Rousseau, “Man loses by the social contract his natural liberty, and an unlimited right to all that tempts him, and which he can obtain; in return he acquires civil liberty, and proprietorship of all he possesses…In addition we might add to the other acquisitions of the civil state that of moral liberty, which alone renders a man master of himself; for it is slavery to be under the impulse of mere appetite, and freedom to obey a law in which we prescribe for ourselves” (Rousseau, 79-80). Unlike Locke, Rousseau believed that…

    • 1235 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Social Contract Theory Vs Natural Law
    • 1264 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Social Contract Theory Vs Natural Law

    Social order is the foundation for all other rights, but yet this does not come from nature, but from convention. He criticizes the Natural Law for being too independent, working towards one’s own gain over others, instead of the unified push for the good of the general will. Yet he promises a man retains his independent rights when joining the Body Politic, just as all men are said to do. However, when it comes to his “might does not equal right” arguments, we are led to believe that a person is born with rights, natural rights, that cannot be taken away simply because someone has established some sort of power dynamic. Might does not equal right and just because someone is stronger does not imply anything about their capability to rule. 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
    Read More
  • Superior Essays

    Jean Jacques Rousseau Analysis
    • 2119 Words
    • 9 Pages

    Jean Jacques Rousseau Analysis

    According to Rousseau, monarchies are the epitome of all that is evil about forming society. They represent the inequality and greed stirred in man by social integration. As a solution to monarchy, Rousseau suggest that we establish a sort of Social Contract, a republic, in which the sovereign is ‘formed entirely from the private individuals who make it up’. He felt that only then could it sustain the public interest. Is this true…

    • 2119 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
    Read More
  • Great Essays

    Rousseau Origin Of Civil Society Essay
    • 1840 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Rousseau Origin Of Civil Society Essay

    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. The Social Contract Theory was a moral and political perspective that each individuals has obligations to own up to within their society. This meant that those obligations could mean anything from meeting up to resolve issues with other members of the society to how much a power a state could actually have over any one particular individual. It also that identified the proper course of action for a variety of different scenarios as well as governing rules and what are essentially…

    • 1840 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
    Read More
  • Great Essays

    Freedom In Jean Jacque Rousseau's The Social Contract
    • 2188 Words
    • 9 Pages

    Freedom In Jean Jacque Rousseau's The Social Contract

    The idea of freedom in Jean Jacque Rousseau’s The Social Contract (1762) is present throughout the book and Rousseau’s own, personal understanding of freedom underpins his argument for his ideal state. In this essay I will argue that individual citizens aren’t truly free in every sense in Rousseau’s state as the sovereign has complete dominion over public matters and due to the sovereign explicitly being composed of every citizen, this could lead to nearly every problem being deemed within the public realm. Furthermore, one cannot be individually free, in my opinion, when one cannot voice dissent against the prevailing convention of society, as is the case in Rousseau’s state. To argue this thesis effectively I will explore what freedom means…

    • 2188 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Great Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    What Is The Difference Between Hobbes And Rousseau
    • 1070 Words
    • 5 Pages

    What Is The Difference Between Hobbes And Rousseau

    Rousseau criticizes the state of nature described by Hobbes; instead of a constant state of fear, Rousseau described it as equality and happiness. Through the passage of time, the state of nature started to disappear as small communities formed, here man started to make comparisons to one another as class divisions developed. For Rousseau private property was a drastic change because communities went away from a simple state to one that consisted of greed and rivalry. Disapproving of Hobbes, who argued that people surrendered rights to an overall “ruler”, Rousseau believed people surrendered their rights to each other, in other words the community. 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
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    The Social Contract: Jean-Jacques Rousseau
    • 900 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The Social Contract: Jean-Jacques Rousseau

    His books were a blue print on how Rousseau wanted to know the reasons of why the people gave up their natural liberty over the state of nature. How the political standpoint became such an impact in people’s lives. One of the things he did state in his book that stuck out to me was that, “Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains.” My thoughts on what he meant by this quote was that the people were basically slaves to their own community and obeying every law in which was presented to them. He then goes onto about how the natural society is the family. Meaning the men of the family especially the father’s. The women and children belong to him personally, because…

    • 900 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Best Form Of Government Essay
    • 560 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Best Form Of Government Essay

    The best form of government for a society is the democratic system. Most people will agree with me, because it is the form of government that presents greatest strengths and benefits to the Human Being, but also present certain dangers, such as that depends on the opinion and participation of the most. How can this be a disadvantage? Well, if the majority is not adequately prepared to think freely and reflectively, this will be the first step to destroy the best system of government today. That is why I think that Rousseau in the Social Contract expresses the Best Form of Government. In the Social Contract Rousseau speaks of the ideal government; this ideal government would be like the aristocracy, that the wisest are those who should be in power. Because in this way, the society is not going to be full of vices and selfishness where the strongest, is the one who has the power over the weak. Since democracy is utopic, because in this political system, all citizens should be governing and that is not possible; in addition to that, in a society sadly not everyone is prepared to be govern or to elect a president. Specifically in the case of United Stated and many democracies around the world have a democratic system full of vices because under my point of view, most of those who are in power are not prepared; as they get there,…

    • 560 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More

Related Topics

Ready To Get Started?
Discover
Company
Follow
©2023 Cram.com
Privacy Policy |  About Ads |  Site Map |  Advertise  | 
  • Cookie Settings