THIS IS MY POST ON THE J.J.ROUSSEAU , A GREAT POLITICAL PHILOSOPHER, THINKER WHO IS KNOWN FOR HIS THEORY OF SOCIAL CONTRACT AND HIS CONTRIBUTION TO LAW. You can subscribe my channel- STUDYLECTURES BY DEV DUBEY on You tube to learn more and can follow me on Facebook. Now we begin with our topic and discuss the topic and learn about Rousseau contribution in the field of knowledge.
The Social Contract – Rousseau
“Man was born free – yet everywhere he is in chains”
AUTHOR - DEV DUBEY
ROUSSEAU:
Jean-Jacques Rousseau was born to Suzanne Bernard and Isaac Rousseau on June 28, 1712, in Geneva, Switzerland. Nine days later his mother died. At the age of three, he was reading French novels with his father, and Jean-Jacques acquired his passion for music from his aunt. His father fled Geneva to avoid imprisonment when Jean-Jacques was ten. By the time he was thirteen, his formal education had ended and he was sent to work for a notary public (someone legally empowered to certify documents), but he was soon dismissed as fit only for watchmaking. Afterwards Rousseau spent three miserable years serving as a watchmaker, which he abandoned when he found himself unexpectedly locked out of the city by its closed gates. He faced the world with no money or belongings and no obvious talents.
Rousseau found himself on Palm Sunday, 1728, in Annecy, France, at the house of Louise Eleonore, Baronne de Warens. Rousseau lived under her roof off and on for thirteen years and was dominated by her influence. Charming and clever, a natural businesswoman, Madame de Warens was a woman who lived by her wits. She supported him and found him jobs, most of which he disliked. Still Rousseau read, studied, and thought. He pursued music and gave lessons, and for a time he worked as a tutor.
In 1742, Rousseau entered an essay competition sponsored by the Academie de Dijon. The question asked whether the development of the arts and sciences had a positive effect on morals. Rousseau answered that the arts and sciences had corrupted human morality because they were not human needs, but were rather the result of pride and vanity. He concluded in his essay by saying that the man should live innocent, ignorant and poor and contempt life in place of having progress of science and art because this progress has destroyed his morality. Rousseau won the competition, and his essay, "Discourse on the Arts and Sciences," garnered him significant respect and fame.
After spending three years in the southeast, Rousseau returned to Paris in 1770 and copied music for a living. It was during this time that he wrote Rousseau: Judge of Jean-Jacques and the Reveries of the Solitary Walker, which would turn out to be his final works. He died on July 3, 1778. His Confessions were published several years after his death; and his later political writings, in the nineteenth century
Major works
v Dissertation sur la musique moderne, 1736
v Discourse on the Arts and Sciences (Discours sur les sciences et les arts), 1750
v Narcissus, or The Self-Admirer: A Comedy, 1752
v Le devin du village: an opera, 1752, "score" (PDF). (21.7 MB)
v Discourse on the Origin and Basis of Inequality Among Men (Discours sur l'origine et les fondements de l'inégalité parmi les hommes), 1754
v Discourse on Political Economy, 1755
v Letter to M. D'Alembert on Spectacles, 1758 (Lettre à d'Alembert sur les spectacles)
v Julie, or the New Heloise (Julie, ou la nouvelle Héloïse), 1761
v Emile, or On Education (Émile, ou de l'éducation), 1762
v The Creed of a Savoyard Priest, 1762 (in Émile)
v The Social Contract, or Principles of Political Right (Du contrat social), 1762
v Pygmalion: a Lyric Scene, 1762
v Letters Written from the Mountain, 1764 (Lettres de la montagne)
v Confessions of Jean-Jacques Rousseau (Les Confessions), 1770, published 1782
v Essay on the Origin of Languages, published 1781 (Essai sur l'origine des langues)
v Dialogues: Rousseau, Judge of Jean-Jacques, published 1782
v Reveries of a Solitary Walker, incomplete, published 1782 (Rêveries du promeneur solitaire)
v Out of these major works, the most important books are:
v Discourse on the Arts and Sciences (Discours sur les sciences et les arts), 1750
v Discourse on Political Economy, 1755
v The Social Contract, or Principles of Political Right (Du contrat social), 1762
📷 📷 📷
Political theory
Rousseau's most important work is ‘The Social Contract’, which outlines the basis for a legitimate political order within a framework of classical republicanism. Published in 1762, it became one of the most influential works of political philosophy in the Western tradition. It developed some of the ideas mentioned in an earlier work, the article Economie Politique (Discourse on Political Economy). The treatise begins with the dramatic opening lines, "Man was born free, and he is everywhere in chains” Those who think themselves the masters of others are indeed greater slaves than they.
Rousseau claimed that the state of nature was a primitive condition without law or morality, which human beings left for the benefits and necessity of cooperation. As society developed, division of labor and private property required the human race to adopt institutions of law. In the degenerate phase of society, man is prone to be in frequent competition with his fellow men while also becoming increasingly dependent on them. This double pressure threatens both his survival and his freedom.
According to Rousseau, by joining together into civil society through the social contract and abandoning their claims of natural right, individuals can both preserve themselves and remain free. This is because submission to the authority of the general will of the people as a whole guarantees individuals against being subordinated to the wills of others and also ensures that they obey themselves because they are, collectively, the authors of the law.
Although Rousseau argues that sovereignty (or the power to make the laws) should be in the hands of the people, he also makes a sharp distinction between the sovereign and the government. The government is composed of magistrates, charged with implementing and enforcing the general will. The "sovereign" is the rule of law, ideally decided on by direct democracy in an assembly. Under a monarchy, however, the real sovereign is still the law. Rousseau was opposed to the idea that the people should exercise sovereignty via a representative assembly (Book III, Chapter XV). The kind of republican government of which Rousseau approved was that of the city state, of which Geneva was a model, or would have been, if renewed on Rousseau's principles. France could not meet Rousseau's criterion of an ideal state because it was too big. Much subsequent controversy about Rousseau's work has hinged on disagreements concerning his claims that citizens constrained to obey the general will are thereby rendered free:
“The notion of the general will is wholly central to Rousseau's theory of political legitimacy. ... It is, however, an unfortunately obscure and controversial notion. Some commentators see it as no more than the dictatorship of the proletariat or the tyranny of the urban poor (such as may perhaps be seen in the French Revolution). Such was not Rousseau's meaning. This is clear from the Discourse on Political Economy, where Rousseau emphasizes that the general will exists to protect individuals against the mass, not to require them to be sacrificed to it. He is, of course, sharply aware that men have selfish and sectional interests which will lead them to try to oppress others. It is for this reason that loyalty to the good of all alike must be a supreme (although not exclusive) commitment by everyone, not only if a truly general will is to be heeded but also if it is to be formulated successfully in the first place”.
The Social Contract:
With the famous phrase, "man is born free, but he is everywhere in chains," Rousseau asserts that modern states repress the physical freedom that is our birthright, and do nothing to secure the civil freedom for the sake of which we enter into civil society. Legitimate political authority, he suggests, comes only from a social contract agreed upon by all citizens for their mutual preservation.
Rousseau calls the collective grouping of all citizens the "sovereign," and claims that it should be considered in many ways to be like an individual person. While each individual has a particular will that aims for his own best interest, the sovereign expresses the general will that aims for the common good. The sovereign only has authority over matters that are of public concern, but in this domain its authority is absolute: Rousseau recommends the death penalty for those who violate the social contract.
The general will find its clearest expression in the general and abstract laws of the state, which are created early in that state's life by an impartial, non-citizen lawgiver. All laws must ensure liberty and equality: beyond that, they may vary depending on local circumstances.
While the sovereign exercises legislative power by means of the laws, states also need a government to exercise executive power, carrying out day-to-day business. There are many different forms of government, but they can roughly be divided into democracy, aristocracy, and monarchy, depending on their size. Monarchy is the strongest form of government, and is best suited to large populations and hot climates. While different states are suited to different forms of government, Rousseau maintains that aristocracies tend to be the most stable.
The government is distinct from the sovereign, and the two are almost always in friction. This friction will ultimately destroy the state, but healthy states can last many centuries before they dissolve.
The people exercise their sovereignty by meeting in regular, periodic assemblies. It is often difficult to persuade all citizens to attend these assemblies, but attendance is essential to the well-being of the state. When citizens elect representatives or try to buy their way out of public service, the general will shall not be heard and the state will become endangered. When voting in assemblies, people should not vote for what they want personally, but for what they believe is the general will. In a healthy state, the results of these votes should approach unanimity. To prove that even large states can assemble all their citizens, Rousseau takes the example of the Roman republic and its comitia.
Rousseau recommends the establishment of a tribunate to mediate between government and sovereign and government and people. In cases of emergency, brief dictatorships may be necessary. The role of the censor's office is to voice public opinion. While everyone should be free to observe their personal beliefs in private, Rousseau suggests that the state also require all citizens to observe a public religion that encourages good citizenship.
Analysis of the Social Contract by Rousseau
The Social Contract by Rousseau, whose full title is The Social Contract or Principles of Political Right (1762) is an analysis of the contractual relationship to any legitimate government, so that are articulated principles of justice and utility to to reconcile the desire for happiness with the submission to the general interest. This is the major work of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, in the heart of his philosophy.
Rousseau expresses his republican ideals into four parts:
– Waiver of our natural rights in favor of the state, which by its protection, reconcile equality and freedom
– The people almighty backup through a legislature, the general well-being against the interest groups
– Democracy should maintain its purity by legislatures
– Creation of a state religion, or civil religion.
Rousseau and justice
According to Rousseau, justice can not be defined as “the right of the stronger.” If justice were so, the most powerful individuals will always be more accurate. Rousseau justice consists in individual acts harmony with the civil authority. But individuals are forced to act as if the authority is legitimate.
In order to protect themselves and their property, people agree on a contract by which individuals agree to accept various functions and obligations in exchange for the benefits of social cooperation.
Social contract
The agreement with which a person enters into civil society. The contract essentially binds people into a community that exists for mutual preservation. In entering into civil society, people sacrifice the physical freedom of being able to do whatever they please, but they gain the civil freedom of being able to think and act rationally and morally. Rousseau believes that only by entering into the social contract can we become fully human.
Freedom or Liberty
The problem of freedom is the motivating force behind The Social Contract. In the state of nature people have physical freedom, meaning that their actions are not restrained in any way, but they are little more than animals, slaves to their own instincts and impulses. In most contemporary societies, however, people lack even this physical freedom. They are bound to obey an absolutist king or government that is not accountable to them in any way. By proposing a social contract, Rousseau hopes to secure the civil freedom that should accompany life in society. This freedom is tempered by an agreement not to harm one's fellow citizens, but this restraint leads people to be moral and rational. In this sense, civil freedom is superior to physical freedom, since people are not even slaves to their impulses.
Sovereign
Strictly defined, a sovereign is the voice of the law and the absolute authority within a given state. In Rousseau's time, the sovereign was usually an absolute monarch. In The Social Contract, however, this word is given a new meaning. In a healthy republic, Rousseau defines the sovereign as all the citizens acting collectively. Together, they voice the general will and the laws of the state. The sovereign cannot be represented, divided, or broken up in any way: only all the people speaking collectively can be sovereign.
Government
This is the executive power of a state, which takes care of particular matters and day-to-day business. There are as many different kinds of government as there are states, though they can be roughly divided into democracy (the rule of the many), aristocracy (the rule of the few), and monarchy (the rule of a single individual). The government represents the people: it is not sovereign, and it cannot speak for the general will. It has its own corporate will that is often at odds with the general will. For this reason, there is often friction between the government and the sovereign that can bring about the downfall of the state.
Law
An abstract expression of the general will that is universally applicable. Laws deal only with the people collectively, and cannot deal with any particulars. They are essentially a record of what the people collectively desire. Laws exist to ensure that people remain loyal to the sovereign in all cases.
Will of all
The sum total of each individual's particular will. In a healthy state, the will of all is the same thing as the general will, since each citizen wills the common good. However, in a state where people value their personal interests over the interests of the state, the will of all may differ significantly from the general will.
State of Nature
When Rousseau talks about the state of nature, he is talking about what human life would be like without the shaping influence of society. So much of what we are is what society makes us, so he suggests that before society existed, we must have been very different. In a different book, Discourse on Inequality, he speaks very highly of this prehistoric state, but in The Social Contract he is more ambivalent. In the state of nature, we are free to do whatever we want, but our desires and impulses are not tempered by reason. We have physical freedom but we lack morality and rationality. Still, Rousseau believed that this state of nature was better than the slavery of his contemporary society.
Civil society
Civil society is the opposite of the state of nature: it is what we enter into when we agree to live in a community. With civil society come civil freedom and the social contract. By agreeing to live together and look out for one another, we learn to be rational and moral, and to temper our brute instincts.
Common good
The common good is what is in the best interests of society as a whole. This is what the social contract is meant to achieve, and it is what the general will aims at.
Rousseau and the Sovereignty of the General Will
The will of the sovereign that aim at the common good. Each individual has his own particular will that expresses what is best for him. The general will expresses what is best for the state as a whole.
Each individual may have a particular will differ from the general will, but as part of the contract, the individual will be compelled to submit to the general will. The general will is not equivalent to the desire of all people, because it is not the sum of all interests. The general will can indeed be a sum of individual wills insofar as their purpose is opposite, the first being inspired by the common good.
Sovereignty is the general will. This is embodied in the sovereign body politic. Sovereignty, according to Rousseau, is inalienable and indivisible, in the sense that a republic divided sovereignty is no longer a republic and can no longer represent the public interest. To fight against groups of individuals wishing to monopolize the general will and divert it to their advantage, Rousseau imagined only to create an institution oriented towards the common good: it is the legislator.
Rousseau uses the term “republic” to refer to any society governed by law or which is governed by the general will of the people. A civil right is an act of the general will, according to Rousseau and the general will must be obeyed by all. Thus, obedience to civil law is required for all individuals by the terms of the social contract. However, the institution of government is not a contract, but an act of the general will.
As a result of the social contract, civil laws are decided by a majority vote of the judges who are elected to represent the people. The minority that opposes the will of the majority must accept all acts of the general will, and it cannot refuse to submit to the general will, without violating the terms of the contract.
The social contract implies total and unconditional surrender by each individual of his own natural rights in order to obtain the rights associated with citizenship. It is not necessary for the sovereign power to ensure civil liberties and legal rights of his subjects, because their interests are identical to those of the people. If someone refuses to comply with the general will, the citizen may then be forced to comply by the body politic is the meaning of the famous passage in which Rousseau claims that citizens can be “forced to be free “.
Nevertheless, Rousseau was aware that the perfection of the democratic regime was part of a political ideal: “If there were a people of gods, he govern democratically. So perfect a government is not for men […] there has never been a real democracy and it does not exist. ”
It is clear that the social contract is the best work influence the political philosophy of the Enlightenment.
Analytical Overview
Rousseau's principal aim in writing The Social Contract is to determine how freedom may be possible in civil society, and we might do well to pause briefly and understand what he means by "freedom." In the state of nature we enjoy the physical freedom of having no restraints on our behavior. By entering into the social contract, we place restraints on our behavior, which make it possible to live in a community. By giving up our physical freedom, however, we gain the civil freedom of being able to think rationally. We can put a check on our impulses and desires, and thus learn to think morally. The term "morality" only has significance within the confines of civil society, according to Rousseau. Not just freedom, then, but also rationality and morality, are only possible within civil society. And civil society, says Rousseau, is only possible if we agree to the social contract. Thus, we do not only have to thank society for the mutual protection and peace it affords us; we also owe our rationality and morality to civil society. In short, we would not be human if we were not active participants in society. This last step determines the heavily communitarian perspective that Rousseau adopts. If we can only be fully human under the auspices of the social contract, then that contract is more important than the individuals that agree to it. After all, those individuals only have value because they agree to that contract. The contract is not affirmed by each individual separately so much as it is affirmed by the group collectively. Thus, the group collectively is more important than each individual that makes it up. The sovereign and the general will are more important than its subjects and their particular wills. Rousseau goes so far as to speak of the sovereign as a distinct individual that can act of its own accord. We might react to these arguments with serious reservations, and indeed, Rousseau has been accused of endorsing totalitarianism. We live in an age where individual rights are considered vitally important, and it is insulting to think that we are just small parts of a greater whole. Rather than make freedom possible, it would seem to us that Rousseau's system revokes freedom. Rousseau would not take these charges lying down, however. Looking at us in the new millennium, he might suggest that we are not free at all. On the whole, we may lack any kind of personal agency or initiative. We often have difficulty interacting with one another in any meaningful way, and it could be argued that our decisions and behavior are largely dictated to us by a consumer culture that discourages individual thought. His system, he might claim, only seems unattractive to us because we have totally lost the community spirit that makes people want to be together. Citizens in his ideal republic are not forced into a community: they agree to it for their mutual benefit. He might argue that the citizens of ancient Greece and Rome were very active and capable of achievements that we have not come close to emulating since. The community spirit that united them did not intrude upon their individuality; rather, it gave individuality an outlet for its fullest expression. The best response to Rousseau (aside from pointing out that those societies relied on slavery and exploitation) might be to say that the world has changed since then. We could borrow from social theorist Jurgen Habermas the distinction between the public sphere and the private sphere, and suggest that Rousseau does not give careful enough attention to the latter. Though Rousseau does permit citizens to do whatever they please so long as it does not interfere with public interests, he still seems to assume that human personality is in some way public. He doesn't seem to perceive a distinction between who we are in public and what we are in private. By demanding such active citizenship, he is demanding that our public persona take precedence over our private self.