Rousseau

Liberalism vs Democracy

liberalism:

• individualism and rationalism

• limits to political authority

• religious freedom

• property rights

• free market

democracy:

• about the collective, social ties

• mutual respect

• minimal inequalities

• general good over personal interests

3 things to know about Rousseau

• one of the first modern democratic theorists

• questions rationality and how useful it is for building society

• importance of social bonds

  • one of the first people to recognise that individualism can be as problematic as it is good

  • social bonds give life meaning

What’s wrong with modernity for Rousseau?

• self-interest loosens social bonds

• rationalism as a divisive force (common opinions disparaged by one side, hatred of elites on the other)

• time spent working on development of newfangled things leads to withdrawal from political engagement

• rewarding talents leads to inequalities between individuals

• people lead “inauthentic” lives

  • Smith thought that people act virtuously because they want to be seen as acting virtuously, and he didn’t have a problem with this

  • Rousseau has a problem with this

why does modern society fail, in a nutshell?

it accepts the alienated, corrupted individual as the fundamental building block of society

natural beings vs civilised beings

once we are civilised we cannot go back to a state of innocence

state of nature

• opposite of Hobbes: state of nature is a calm, placid place

• social order makes us nasty and self-interested

• we have no “natural” capacity to determine what “natural” law says

  • we can’t logically deduce the obligation to enter into a political contract, like what Hobbes thought

  • we can’t reason like philosophers because we don’t have capacity for speech

  • so we don’t have reason but we have capacity for reason

natural man

• perfectability: our capacity to repond to our historical experience and change ourselves accordingly

  • we are the product of our consciousness

  • we have a consciousness that animals don’t have

• amour de soi: emotion self-reliance

  • you know who you are and don’t rely on others for approval

• pitie: empathy

  • balances amour de soi, so that we don’t become too inward-looking

  • sense that you care or recognise how other people are feeling

• independence

  • leads to independence and malleability

what society develops in us

• perfectability —> reason

• amour de soi —> amour propre: a sense of self based on other’s opinions

  • as society builds over time, we become increasingly dependent

• pitie —> insensitivity

  • Rousseau thought that a truly functioning department would have to be quite small so that we could see each other face to face and see what they are feeling

• independence —> dependence

how does Rousseau see our capacity for reason vs our capacity for empathy?

our capacity for reason is not as good a basis for morality as our capacity for empathy

Rousseau’s 3 stages

• leaving the state of nature

• pre-moral political association

  • this is the last stage for Hobbes

  • for Rousseau, people are miserable in this stage

• moral civil society

  • here, a heavy handed authority is not necessary to ensure people’s morality

why was slavery never justified for Rousseau?

to renounce your freedom is to renounce being human

how does Rousseau rethink the question of political authority?

he says the approach is wrong, the question shouldn’t how can we find the right system, given nature, it should be how can we change human nature according to the system. human nature is very malleable.

what happens in the state of nature

• development of powers of reasoning

• development of self-consciousness

• development of human industriousness

• development of temporary, and then permanent, human associations

pre-moral political association

• one receives the esteem of others

  • therefore becomes vain and contemptuous

• one receives no esteem from others

  • therefore becomes bitter and resentful

• at this stage, what Hobbes and Locke see as state of nature, Rousseau sees as civil society, which is bad

how does civil society come to be for Rousseau?

through the “fatal accident” of private property rights

3 relations of freedom

• for Hobbes, freedom meant freedom from other people in the state of nature

• for Locke, certain amount of freedom from state’s authority

• for Rousseau, freedom from the inner conflict in each individual

positive liberty

3 types of society, 3 types of liberty

• state of nature, natural liberty: liberty to do anything you want

  • but still unfree because you’re enslaved by impulse, your behaviour is determined entirely by impulses

• civil society, legal liberties: state protects you from being attacked, etc

  • but still unfree because subject to other people’s laws

• moral civil society, positive or “moral” liberties

  • not enslaved at all

  • moral freedoms are based in “rational commpassion”

  • must be willing to support what is good for society as a whole

  • this is based in classical republicanism: you are part of a whole, if you want to protect your state from domination, you have to be an active member of society

moral law

• that each person act compatibly with the promotion of the good of every person affected by his action

• found in moral civil society

• not laws in the liberal sense of the word

  • mechanisms that assist us and enable us to do what we know we should be doing anyway

  • not a constraint but an instrument

the fundamental political problem for Rousseau

• to form associations which will defend and protect with the whole force of the community each member

• institutions that will support and nurture everyone

• answer: form an association such that each person subject to its laws has a voice equal to every other person in determining what these laws will be

  • this is Rousseau’s social contract

• no person should be subject to laws that they did not agree to

social contract

• starts with the idea that we are in a free for all, then each person agrees to alienate all their rights

• each person becomes a member of a new association

• in this way, each person’s rights are given back to the whole association, not to any single individual

• no individual is subject to any other individual

positive liberty

• imposing the moral law on ourselves and acting accordingly willingly

• we have the ability to understand what this law is in civil society, but we only become morally free once we impose it on ourselves