Jean Jacques Rousseau Presentation: Social Contract, Freedom and the Natural State

Jean Jacques Rousseau Presentation: Social Contract, Freedom and the Natural State

Category:

Education

[arzadi11]

what about the food that i just gulped down in my stomach? is it mine? is it my private property? true, the fruits of earth belongs to all, but every fruit has a private owner. at some point every common property must branch out into private properties, otherwise individuals cannot survive. private property is necessary for the private survival. what makes private property evil is GREED(most for me but little for the rest).

[OnlinePhilosophy]

@arzadi11 Those are legitimate questions!

[OnlinePhilosophy]

Times were very different. The notion of a well-intentioned society was greatly needed, and encouraging society to be well-intentioned was not necessarily naive in itself because actions of kindness were likely to be reciprocated. For instance, if 2 people go hunting and only one is successful, sharing is beneficial because next time, things might work out differently; today you have a little more, while tomorrow you may have nothing.

[OnlinePhilosophy]

Stated this way, the idea of a social contract, and the idea what we *all* come together in agreement, seems naive. The idea that there is a *general will* seems naive. And I admit that this term is vague, at best. But try to see things through Rousseau's eyes. Put yourself in the historical context in which Rousseau was writing. At the time, humanity needed compelling arguments just to be convinced that it was OK to extend a helping hand to other nations in times of peril.

[resesmilk2]

you can understand why rousseau, from a historical perspective, would be so bent on "fixing" society as he so tried. but his theory on what he calls "general will" is simply naive and unrealistic because it is based on the premise that every single person in that society has to exhibit a complete and true loyalty to the collective good.

furthermore and contrary to what rousseau claims, a person cannot be free if he is constrained by general will.

[OnlinePhilosophy]

@resesmilk2 I would rather be confined by the general will than live in fear that I can be shot by my neighbor so that she might take my house. So in a sense, the social contract, while taking freedoms away from me, makes me more free.

[japaneselizard]

HELL YEAHHHH

[gergywergy123]

so does man obey themselves and remain free in the social contract?

[milzz100]

Can someone give me some important distinctions? I am comparing Rousseau and Mill on their arguments regarding Freedom.

[arzadi11]

@OnlinePhilosophy i still can't deny that in a society there are less violence when we're using public or common properties. private property surly makes us more aggressive and indifference to our fellow human beings, but up to a degree private property is necessary for the survival of the individual. one should not all dedicate himself to his society, he should care for himself too. so a combination of private and common properties are necessary for the survival of individual & society.

[RonGOdenJr]

"The social pact is achieved by collectively renouncing our individual rights and freedom in the state of nature (in which there is no government)." Wait: did you say "no government"? If a group puts aside it's individual rights in servitude of an idea, doesn't the idea act as a law? If there's a law in place to conform the people, then haven't you just defined the basis of government? Or are you describing anarchy as a transitional state preceding the birth of a new order?

[Ematched]

@CWSmith1982 (cont.) btw, It's "sacrifice." Do they teach proofreading in the Marines?

[Ematched]

@CWSmith1982 I probably can't lecture you on "sacrafice," but I offered a wonderful explanation of how you can break through your semper fi-induced self-absorbtion. You don't have any authority whatsoever. My brother, father, both grandfathers served in the Navy. Does that mean I owe them any latitude on matters of philosophy and social anthropology? Absolutely not.

Maybe your decade of duty has eliminated all means of persuasion, save "the use of force." Some of us have free minds.

[CWSmith1982]

@Ematched After 10 years of service in the United States Marine Corps I dont beleive you to be the authority on lecturing me about sacrafice.

[Ematched]

@CWSmith1982 "It is impossible to have people to act against the benefit of themselves and for the benefit of others without the use of force."

Apparently, you've never heard of compromise and self-sacrifice. They're pretty popular ideas, though not followed often enough.

I'm sad you've gone so long cocooned and solipsistic. A world exists outside the self: plants, animals, planets, star systems...We use the word "empathy" to place our ability to feel outside ourselves. Take the red pill.