CTI 302 · Nov 6 · Rousseau on Human Nature and Perfectibility

Corrected for Dempsey’s Nov 4 announcement: Friday continues pp. 65–77 (top), notes pp. 120–145. Cards 1–4 are predicted practice questions. Cards 5–20 review the reading and the remaining Canvas prompts.

Prediction 1 · Which two capacities distinguish humans from animals?

• Free agency means you can resist an instinct. It explains a choice you make right now.

• Perfectibility means experience can change your abilities. It explains change over a lifetime and across generations.

Prediction 2 · Does natural man fear death?

He fears pain and hunger. He flees immediate danger.

To fear death itself, he would have to think, “Someday I’ll die.” Rousseau says that understanding comes later.

Prediction 3 · Is natural man moral? (Note IX)

He is innocent. He has few reasons to hurt anyone.

Acting virtuously means recognizing a duty and choosing to follow it. Rousseau says that develops in society.

Prediction 4 · What experiment does Rousseau hint at in Note X?

The implied test is whether humans and the beings travelers called orangutans could have fertile offspring.

Rousseau only hints at this. He questions whether anyone could ethically attempt it.

Why offer two explanations of human distinctiveness?

• Free choice is a claim about the will. A skeptic could dispute it.

• Perfectibility is easier to observe. People learn new skills and pass them on.

Does perfectibility guarantee improvement?

Change can go either way. People can gain knowledge or pick up errors. They can develop virtues or vices.

They can also lose a skill they once learned.

What does Rousseau’s pigeon example illustrate?

Instinct guides the pigeon. In Rousseau’s example, it refuses meat even when hungry.

A human can go against an impulse, even when that choice causes harm.

Why does intelligence alone fail to distinguish humans?

Animals also perceive, remember, and connect ideas.

Rousseau draws the distinction at choice. Can the creature recognize an impulse and resist it?

How would Hobbes and Rousseau explain fear of death differently?

• Hobbes says fear of violent death gives people a reason to seek peace.

• Rousseau asks how someone could fear death before they can picture their own future.

What relationships does Rousseau imagine in the pure state of nature?

Most encounters are brief. Adults usually provide for themselves and meet by chance.

One exception: a child depends on its mother for a time. Adults have little need for lasting partnerships or recognition.

In what sense is natural man happy?

Happiness means contentment. His needs are few. Once he meets them, he feels satisfied.

He lives in the present without comparing himself to others.

Why would natural man feel little pressure to change?

His needs are easy to meet. If he can find food and rest nearby, why plan far ahead?

He has little reason to invent tools or seek new knowledge.

How do passions and reason develop together?

• Desire sparks thought. A need gives you a reason to figure something out.

• Thought sparks desire. What you learn can reveal something new to want or fear.

What is a major ill of modern society in Note IX?

One person can gain from another’s loss.

Example: A coffin seller can earn more when more people die. Society can reward an interest in someone else’s suffering.

Why does satisfying social wants fail to bring peace? (Note IX)

• Hunger has a stopping point. A meal can satisfy it.

• Competition can keep growing. Getting more wealth or power can make you want even more.

Does Rousseau tell civilized readers to abandon society? (Note IX)

Stay and practice virtue. People shaped by society already have obligations to others.

They can meet those obligations by working for other people’s good.

What kinds of evidence appear in Rousseau’s notes?

Rousseau draws on three kinds of evidence:

• Comparisons of animals and anatomy

• Reports from naturalists and travelers

• Accounts of children raised in isolation

He uses them to test assumptions about human nature.

How should a philosopher study human beings? (Note X)

Observe and compare different societies.

The risk: a European traveler may mistake a familiar local custom for something all humans do naturally.

Why discuss a child who initially could not speak? (Note X)

The child later learned some words. An observer who saw only the initial silence could draw the wrong conclusion.

Rousseau asks what someone can develop over time.

What makes the proposed test in Note X circular?

• To judge whether the test is ethical, you would already need to know what kind of beings are involved.

• The test itself is supposed to answer that very question.