|
|
|
|
Discourse on Inequality
|
| |
|
| |
Discourse on the Origin and Basis of Inequality Among Men (Discours sur l'origine et les fondements de l'inégalité parmi les hommes) also commonly known as the Second Discourse is a work by the philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau. This text was written in 1754 in response to a prize competition of the Academy of Dijon answering the prompt: What is the origin of inequality among men, and is it authorized by natural law? Though he was not recognized by the prize committee for this piece (as he had been for the Discourse on the Arts and Sciences) he nevertheless published the text in 1755.
seau discusses two types of inequality, natural or physical and moral or political.
Discussion
Ask a question about 'Discourse on Inequality' Start a new discussion about 'Discourse on Inequality' Answer questions from other users |
Encyclopedia
Discourse on the Origin and Basis of Inequality Among Men (Discours sur l'origine et les fondements de l'inégalité parmi les hommes) also commonly known as the Second Discourse is a work by the philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau. This text was written in 1754 in response to a prize competition of the Academy of Dijon answering the prompt: What is the origin of inequality among men, and is it authorized by natural law? Though he was not recognized by the prize committee for this piece (as he had been for the Discourse on the Arts and Sciences) he nevertheless published the text in 1755.
Content
Rousseau discusses two types of inequality, natural or physical and moral or political. Natural inequality involves differences between one man's strength or intelligence and that of another – it is a product of nature. Rousseau is not concerned with this type of inequality and wishes to investigate moral inequality. He argues moral inequality is endemic to a civil society and relates and causes differences in power and wealth. This type of inequality is established by convention. Rousseau appears to take a cynical view of civil society, and refers to times before the current state of civil society, when man was closer to his natural state, as happier times for man. To Rousseau, civil society is a trick perpetrated by the powerful on the weak in order to maintain their power or wealth. But this is Rousseau's final conclusion; he begins his discussion with an analysis of a natural man who has not yet acquired language or abstract thought.
Rousseau's natural man is much different from that of Hobbes. In fact, Rousseau explicitly points this out at various points throughout his work. This is because Rousseau does not see Hobbes as having taken his understanding of natural man far enough back in time. For Rousseau seeks a deeper, richer understanding of natural man. To Rousseau, natural man is a savage man, "living dispersed among the animals." Unlike Hobbes's natural man, Rousseau's is not motivated by fear of death because he cannot conceive of that end, thus fear of death already suggests a movement out of the state of nature. To Rousseau, natural man is more or less like any other animal, where "self-preservation being his chief and almost sole concern" and "the only goods he recognizes in the universe are food, a female, and sleep..." This natural man, unlike Hobbes's, is not in constant state of fear and anxiety.
Rousseau's natural man possesses a few qualities that allow him to distinguish himself from the animals over a long period of time. Of extreme importance is man's ability to choose, what Rousseau refers to as the "free-agency" that differentiates him from other animals. Man's ability to refuse instinct pushes him along the path out of his natural state. In addition, Rousseau argues that "another principle which has escaped Hobbes" is man's compassion. This quality of man also motivates him to interact. And finally, man possesses the quality of "perfectibility" which allows him to improve his own physical condition and environmental situation, and to develop ever more sophisticated survival tactics. The increasing regularity and convention of man's contact with other men transfigures his basic capacity for reason and reflection, his natural or naive love of self (amour de soi) into a corrupting dependency on the perceptions and favor of others. Natural, non-destructive love of self advances gradually yet qualitatively into a state of amour propre, a love of self now driven by prideful and jealous rather than merely elemental self-preservative concerns. This accession to amour propre has four consequences: (1) competition, (2) self-comparison with others, (3) hatred, and (4) urge for power. These all lead to Rousseau's cynical civil society. But amour de soi already suggests a significant step out of the state of nature.
Dedication
The work is dedicated to the state of Geneva, Rousseau's birthplace. In the dedication, he praises Geneva as a good, if not perfect, republic. The qualities he picks out for praise include the stability of its laws and institutions, the community spirit of its inhabitants, and its good relations with neighbouring states, neither threatening them nor threatened by them.
Citations
External links
|
| |
|
|
