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
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