From "Discourse On The Origin And Foundations Of Inequality Among Men" To "the Social Contract"

This paper taking freedom as clue of the analysis, grasps the inherent ideas ofRousseau in which two unified interpretation of “Discourse on the Origin andFoundations of Inequality among Men” and “The Social Contract”, and then re-elucidates Rousseau’s idea of freedom. In order to remedy the inequality of modernpolitical society, Rousseau has gone through the arduous process of exploration, andat last he took the natural state as a logical starting point, the general will as practicalpath, and took free as the logical end point to realize human nature. Rousseau’sunderstanding of freedom is that human on the one hand has the original naturalfreedom, on the other hand has the moral freedom of human dignity.This paper can be divided into three parts:The first part analyzes the theoretical background of Rousseau’s freedom ofthought. First, in “On Science and Art”, Rousseau criticized on the topic ofEnlightenment, which can be understood as a critique of modern politics.Independence of the natural and social confrontation determined the best solution forthe general nature of political issues: one as much as possible to maintain people in afree society. Only in line with the human nature of civil society can hope to bringhappiness to people. This idea guided Rousseau to replace the classical definitionthat the man is a rational animal with the definition that man is of freedom to act.Secondly, Hobbes’ theory of human nature and its theory of the natural state alsoshow Rousseau’s awareness of the problem. Hobbes’ theory of human nature gavethe freedom and equal rights, but for the absolute position of self-preservation,freedom and equality can only be decreased to achieve the means ofself-preservation. The theory of social contract based on self-protect is aimed toprotect the natural right of individuals, specifically to protect the right of individual pursuing; it is hardly to avoid the repression from the country as a free individual.Although Hobbes selected the latter between freedom and authority, it is undeniablethat Hobbes created a form of free natural state doctrine argument and freedom, forthe first preserved and determined as the form of power.The second part interprets the “Discourse on the Origin and Foundations ofInequality among Men” in detail. On this basis to discuss Rousseau’s understand ofnatural liberty as well as the retrospective of the deep roots of inequality. Rousseauhad the sensitivity insight into the danger implicit in the modern political system. Heresorted to the true nature of thinking in the natural state. To re-examine the state ofnature, he found that the state of nature is not all that Hobbes described as the stateof war of all people, but the relative peace and live in peace with the state. Thenatural state of human liberty is not a means of self-preservation, but the most sacredof human attributes, is human nature. The establishment of equal freedom, the firstthing is to establish equality. While the reality of social inequality is growing,through the review of mankind from the natural state of over-process to the state ofsociety, Rousseau found that the emergence of private property and the establishmentof civil society is the crucial element to cause of sin state in this inequality. Theprinciple of freedom is the core principles implicated in Rousseau’s whole text. Bystudying natural state,Rousseau glimpsed into the freedom and equality nature ofhuman being, with the establishment of the civil society, however, further deepenand expansion of inequality, freedom disappeared in the hide command andobedience. Rousseau’s analysis led to strictly adhere to freedom and equality withinthe civil society.The third part takes “The Social Contract" as subject for analysis, undertake theideas of “Discourse on the Origin and Foundations of Inequality among Men” andpoint out how Rousseau made the transition on the basis of natural freedom to themoral freedom. Since the person in accordance with nature is free, then for Rousseau,the only solution based on nature can only be themselves, govern themselves.Complying with the general will is free, where human dignity is. The essence offreedom is self-legislation. True freedom or moral freedom is obedience to their own legislation. Rousseau’s “the social contract” contains the inevitable logic oftheory which is popular sovereignty. The will of the people is the only law. Thereality that the only source of legality is sovereignty contains series of results. First,sovereignty is inalienable. Second, sovereignty is also inseparable from its verynature. In order to build a truly civil society, legislators are necessary. Rousseau’sconcept of freedom requires a regular basis all the established institutions to resort tothe sovereign will of the people, or to resort past generations’ will into thisgeneration will. Thus the most basic functions of the legislators must be entrusted toa civil religion. However, even if it is the best religion of all religions, it is also facedwith the dangerous truth. If, t on the surface, those who doubt the fundamentaldoctrines of the civil religion of the people do not obey it, a free society can not besustained.The problems encountered by Rousseau’s general will doctrine is not ultimatelybe resolved once and for all. General will or the will of the people is absolutely notallowed to make mistakes, it must always be the wishes of the people’s interests, butpeople do not always see their interests lie. Although those who are going throughEnlightenment able to see where social interests lie, we can not guarantee that, whenit conflicts with their individual interests, they will still support it. Natural order hasbeen made as a design of political invention in order to achieve the freedom andequality of civil society. Whatever the result is, once these principles becomeself-understand the requirement for larger freedom and equality will come alongwith. They will challenge every careful baffling step, or question every balancepower which oriented from alternative principles and tradition.