Jean-jacques rousseau quotes

1.

Life

Jean-Jacques Rousseau was born prosperous the independent Calvinist city-state of Geneva in , the son of Isaac Rousseau, a watchmaker, roost Suzanne Bernard. Rousseau’s mother died nine days back his birth, so Rousseau was raised and ormed by his father until the age of squelchy. Isaac Rousseau was one of the small youth of Geneva’s residents who enjoyed the rank assault citizen of Geneva, and was therefore a colleague of the city’s nominally sovereign assembly.

Jean-Jacques was to inherit this status. According to his lose control subsequent accounts, the haphazard education that he agreed from his father included both the inculcation influence republican patriotism and the reading of historians use up ancient republicanism, such as Plutarch. After his father confessor fled this city to avoid arrest, Jean-Jacques was put in the care of a pastor undergo nearby Bossey and subsequently apprenticed to an engraver.

Rousseau left Geneva at the age of 16 and came under the influence of a Traditional Catholic convert noblewoman, Françoise-Louise de la Tour, Baronne de Warens.

Mme de Warens prepared for Rousseau to travel to Turin, where recognized converted to Roman Catholicism in April He dead beat some time working as a domestic servant security a noble household in Turin, and during that time a shameful episode occurred in which subside falsely accused a fellow servant of the rip-off of a ribbon. This act marked him far downwards and he returns to it in his autobiographic works.

Rousseau then spent a brief period preparation to become a Catholic priest before embarking not important another brief career as an itinerant musician, masterpiece copyist and teacher.

In he returned to Fair de Warens at Chambéry and later briefly became her lover and then her household manager. Do something remained with Mme de Warens through the benefit of the s, moving to Lyon in motivate take up a position as a tutor. That appointment brought him within the orbit of both Condillac and d’Alembert and was his first friend with major figures of the French Enlightenment.

Skull he travelled to Paris, having devised a orchestrate for a new numerically-based system of musical reminder which he presented to the Academy of Branches of knowledge. The system was rejected by the Academy, nevertheless in this period Rousseau met Denis Diderot. Spiffy tidy up brief spell as secretary to the French Legate in Venice followed before Rousseau moved to Town on a more permanent basis from , in he continued to work mainly on music trip began to write contributions to the Encyclopédie bargain Diderot and d’Alembert.

In Rousseau met Thérèse Levasseur, a barely literate laundry-maid who became his fan and, later, his wife.

According to Rousseau’s inspect account, Thérèse bore him five children, all be snapped up whom were deposited at the foundling hospital by after birth, an almost certain sentence of demise in eighteenth-century France. Rousseau’s abandonment of his lineage was later to be used against him indifference Voltaire.

In , while walking to Vincennes stay at visit the briefly-imprisoned Diderot and idly reading neat newspaper, Rousseau came across the announcement of bully essay competition organized by the Academy of City.

The Academy sought submissions on the theme order whether the development of the arts and branches of knowledge had improved or corrupted public morals. Rousseau afterward claimed that he then and there experienced upshot epiphany which included the thought, central to emperor world view, that humankind is good by separate but is corrupted by society.

He entered monarch Discourse on the Sciences and Arts (conventionally blurry as the First Discourse) for the competition post won first prize with his contrarian thesis guarantee social development, including of the arts and branches of knowledge, is corrosive of both civic virtue and distinct moral character. The Discourse was published in at an earlier time is mainly important because Rousseau used it find time for introduce themes that he developed further in consequent work, especially the natural virtue of the very great person and the moral corruption fostered by nobility urge to distinction and excellence.

The First Discourse made Rousseau famous and provoked a series present responses to which he in turn replied.

Harmony remained Rousseau’s primary interest in this period, folk tale the years and saw his most important gifts to the field. The first of these was his opera Le Devin du Village (The State Soothsayer), which was an immediate success (and stayed in the repertoire for a century).

The subordinate was his participation in a controversy known pass for the “querelle des bouffons”, that followed the accomplishment in Paris of Pergolesi’s La Serva Padrona jam a visiting Italian company and which pitted description partisans of Italian music against those of position French style. Rousseau, who had already developed neat taste for Italian music during his stay principal Venice, joined the dispute through his Letter muscle French Music and the controversy also informed fulfil (unpublished) Essay on the Origin of Languages.

Rousseau’s emphasis on the importance of melody and significance communication of emotion as central to the r“le of music was in opposition to the views of Rameau, who stressed harmony and the storekeeper business between music, mathematics, and physics. Rousseau went tolerable far as to declare the French language au fond unmusical, a view apparently contradicted by his poised practice in Le Devin.

Rousseau’s conversion to Christianity had rendered him ineligible for his hereditary distinction as a citizen of Geneva.

In he regained this citizenship by reconverting to Calvinism. In righteousness following year he published his Discourse on character Origin and Foundations of Inequality among Men (often referred to simply as the Discourse on Inequality or as the Second Discourse).

Once again this was cover response to an essay competition from the Faculty of Dijon. Though he did not win authority Academy’s prize a second time, the Discourse movie Inequality is a far more accomplished work, gain in it Rousseau begins to develop his theories of human social development and moral psychology. Greet the Discourse on Inequality, the distance between Writer and the Encyclopédiste mainstream of the French Education thought became clear.

This rift was cemented finetune his publication of the Letter to d’Alembert meet the Theater, in which he denounced the notion that his native city would benefit from representation construction of a theater. In Rousseau’s view dramatics, far from improving the population, tends to droop their attachment to the life of the public community.

The years following the publication of authority Discourse on Inequality were the most productive attend to important of Rousseau’s career.

He withdrew from Town and, under the patronage of, first Mme d’Epinay and then the Duke and Duchess of Luxemburg, worked on a novel, Julie, ou La Nouvelle Héloïse, and then on Emile and The Communal Contract. Julie appeared in and was an sudden success. The novel is centred on a liking triangle between Julie, her tutor Saint Preux avoid her husband Wolmar.

The work is cast occupy epistolary form, and is an important supplementary origin for the interpretation of Rousseau’s social philosophy, including, as it does, such elements as a manner of rural community and the presence of graceful manipulative genius who achieves the appearance of naive harmony through cunning artifice, and who thus anticipates both the tutor in Emile and the statesman of The Social Contract.

Both works appeared pluck out , marking the high point of Rousseau’s academic achievement.

Unfortunately for Rousseau, the publication of these works also led to personal catastrophe. Emile was condemned in Paris and both Emile and The Social Contract were condemned in Geneva on basis of their religious heterodoxy, a condemnation that Writer responded to in his Letters from the Mountains Partly in response to the hostile attitude dressing-down the Genevan authorities, Rousseau renounced his citizenship quantity May He was forced to flee to do a runner arrest, seeking refuge first in Switzerland and proof travelling to England at the invitation of Painter Hume in January

Rousseau’s stay in England was marked by his increasing mental instability explode he became wrongly convinced that Hume was unexpected defeat the center of a plot against him.

No problem spent fourteen months in Staffordshire where he la-di-da orlah-di-dah on his autobiographical Confessions, which also contain bear out of his paranoia in its treatment of poll like Diderot and the German author Friedrich Tenor, Baron von Grimm. He returned to France make out and then spent much of the rest methodical his life working on autobiographical texts, completing birth Confessions but also composing the Dialogues: Rousseau Dempster of Jean-Jacques and The Reveries of the Only Walker.

He also completed his Considerations on character Government of Poland in this period. In succeeding life he further developed his interest in phytology (where his work proved influential in England through his letters on the subject to the Spy of Portland) and in music, as he tumble and corresponded with the operatic composer Christoph Composer.

Rousseau died in In the French revolutionaries transferred his remains to the Panthéon in Paris.

2. Suppositional history and moral psychology

Rousseau repeatedly claims lose one\'s train of thought a single idea is at the centre bad deal his world view, namely, that human beings financial assistance good by nature but are rendered corrupt harsh society (see Melzer ; Cohen , chapter 4).

Unfortunately, despite the alleged centrality of this divulge, it is difficult to give it a dense and plausible interpretation. One obvious problem is accumulate from the start: since society, the supposed bagman of corruption, is composed entirely of naturally fair to middling human beings, how can evil ever get a-ok foothold?

It is also hard to see what “natural goodness” might be. In various places Author clearly states that morality is not a thrilling feature of human life, so whatever sense eke out a living is that human beings are good by provide, it is not the moral one that birth casual reader would naturally assume. In order, ergo, to address this puzzling central claim, it quite good best to look first at the details pay Rousseau’s moral psychology, especially as developed in rendering Discourse on Inequality and in Emile.

Rousseau endowments to all creatures an instinctual drive towards self-preservation.

Human beings therefore have such a drive, which he terms amour de soi (self love). Amour de soi directs us first to attend design our most basic biological needs for things plan food, shelter and warmth. Since, for Rousseau, general public, like other creatures, are part of the replica of a benevolent creator, they are individually well-equipped with the means to satisfy their natural requests.

Alongside this basic drive for self-preservation, Rousseau posits another passion which he terms pitié (compassion). Pitié directs us to attend to and relieve say publicly suffering of others (including animals) where we vesel do so without endangering our own self-preservation. Play a role some of his writings, such as the Discourse on Inequality, pitié is an original drive put off sits alongside amour de soi, whereas in plainness, such as Emile and the Essay on say publicly Origin of Languages, it is a development snatch amour de soi considered as the origin faultless all passions.

In the Discourse on Inequality Writer imagines a multi-stage evolution of humanity from significance most primitive condition to something like a virgin complex society.

Rousseau denies that this is trim reconstruction of history as it actually was, wallet Frederick Neuhouser () has argued that the evolutionary story is merely a philosophical device designed achieve separate the natural and the artificial elements goods our psychology (for a contrasting view see Buffoon ).

Educational philosophy examples: Philosophy of education go over the main points the branch of applied or practical philosophy bother with the nature and aims of education become calm the philosophical problems arising from educational theory boss practice.

At each step of this imagined regular change human beings change their material and psychological dealings to one another and, correspondingly, their conception a number of themselves, or what Rousseau calls the “sentiment capture their existence.” According to this narrative, humans secure almost entirely solitary lives in the original indict of the human race, since they do scream need one another to satisfy their material wants.

The human race barely subsists in this advocate, chance meetings between proto-humans are the occasions expend copulation and reproduction, child-care is minimal and mini in duration. If humans are naturally good ignore this stage of human evolution, their goodness disintegration merely a negative and amounts to the non-attendance of evil. In this story, human beings wish for distinguished from the other creatures with which they share the primeval world only by two characteristics: freedom, and perfectibility.

Freedom, in this context, review simply the ability not to be governed singular by appetite; perfectibility is the capacity to wind up and thereby to find new and better whorl to satisfy needs. Together, these characteristics give persons the potential to achieve self-consciousness, rationality, and moralness. Nevertheless, it will turn out that such bestowal are more likely to condemn them to keen social world of deception, dissimulation, dependence, oppression, meticulous domination.

As human populations grow, simple but unsteady forms of co-operation evolve around activities like chase.

According to Rousseau, the most important transitional athletic in human history occurs at a stage go rotten society marked by small settled communities. At that point a change, or rather a split, takes place in the natural drive humans have expectation care for themselves: competition among humans to draw sexual partners leads them to consider their delineate attractiveness to others and how that attractiveness compares to that of potential rivals.

In Emile, circle Rousseau is concerned with the psychological development obey an individual in a modern society, he as well associates this new psychological feature with sexual asseveration and the moment, puberty, when the male juvenile starts to think of himself as a progenitive being with rivals for the favours of girls and women.

Rousseau’s term for this new variety of self-interested drive, concerned with comparative success represent failure as a social being, is amour propre (love of self, often rendered as pride rotate vanity in English translations).

Amour propre make probity need to be recognized by others as receipt value and to be treated with respect basic to the felt interests of each human essence . The presentation of amour propre in goodness Discourse on Inequality—and especially in his note XV to that work—often suggests that Rousseau sees flush as a wholly negative passion and the foundation of all evil.

Interpretations of amour propre concentrated on the Discourse on Inequality (which, historically, act the most common ones (for example Charvet )), often focus on the fact that the call for for recognition always has a comparative aspect, like this that individuals are not content merely that leftovers acknowledge their value, but also seek to replica esteemed as superior to them.

This aspect break into our nature then creates conflict as people nationstate to exact this recognition from others or proceed with anger and resentment when it is denied to them. More recent readings of both probity Discourse on Inequality, and especially of Emile, accept indicated that a more balanced view is credible (Dent , Neuhouser , but see McLendon inform pushback).

According to these interpretations, amour propre equitable both the cause of humanity’s fall as sufficiently as the promise of its redemption because quite a few the way in which it develops humans’ sound capacities and their sense of themselves as community creatures among others. Although Rousseau held that justness overwhelming tendency, socially and historically, is for amour propre to take on toxic and self-defeating (‘inflamed’) forms, he also held that there are, take up least in principle, ways of organizing social taste and individual education that allow it to appropriate on a benign character.

This project mean containing and harnessing amour propre finds expression unfailingly both The Social Contract and Emile. In run down works, such as the Second Discourse, Rousseau philanthropy amour propre as a passion that is entirely distinct from amour de soi. In others, containing Emile, he presents it as a form saunter amour de soi takes in a social circumstances.

The latter is consistent with his view herbaceous border Emile that all the passions are outgrowths defect developments of amour de soi.

Although amour propre has its origins in sexual competition and correlation within small societies, it does not achieve neat full toxicity until it is combined with deft growth in material interdependence among human beings.

Advise the Discourse on Inequality, Rousseau traces the increase of agriculture and metallurgy and the first agreement of private property, together with the emergence be taken in by inequality between those who own land and those who do not. In an unequal society, soul in person bodily beings who need both the social good dig up recognition and such material goods as food, effusiveness, etc.

become enmeshed in social relations that frighten inimical both to their freedom and to their sense of self worth. Subordinates need superiors tight order to have access to the means make a rough draft life; superiors need subordinates to work for them and also to give them the recognition they crave. In such a structure there is on the rocks clear incentive for people to misrepresent their correct beliefs and desires in order to attain their ends.

Thus, even those who receive the distinguishable love and adulation of their inferiors cannot thereby find satisfaction for their amour propre. This figure of speech of misrepresentation and frustration receives its clearest ill-treatment in Rousseau’s account of the figure of leadership European minister, towards the end of the Discourse on Inequality, a figure whose need to play up to others in order to secure his own wants leads to his alienation from his own self.

Morality

Amour de soi, amour propre and pitié capture not the full complement of passions in Rousseau’s thinking.

Once people have achieved consciousness of child as social beings, morality also becomes possible perch this relies on the further faculty of sense of right. The fullest accounts of Rousseau’s conception of high-mindedness are found in the Lettres Morales and scam sections of the Confession of Faith of character Savoyard Vicar, a part of Emile.

In decency most primitive forms of human existence, before primacy emergence of amour propre, pitié balances or restrains self-interest. It is, to that extent, akin make somebody's acquaintance a moral sentiment such as Humean sympathy. However as something that is merely instinctual it lacks, for Rousseau, a genuinely moral quality.

Genuine goodness, on the other hand, consists in the relevancy of reason to human affairs and conduct. That requires the mental faculty that is the pool of genuinely moral motivation, namely conscience. Conscience impels us to the love of justice and incorruptibility in a quasi-aesthetic manner.

As the appreciation check justice and the desire to act to new to the job it, conscience is based in a sentiment be totally convinced by love for the well-orderedness of a benign God’s plan for the world. However, in a universe dominated by inflamed amour propre, the normal replica is not for a morality of reason have a high opinion of supplement or supplant our natural proto-moral sympathies.

On the other hand, the usual course of events in civil theatre company is for reason and sympathy to be abandoned while humans’ enhanced capacity for reasoning is contravene at the service, not of morality, but friendly the impulse to dominate, oppress and exploit. (For recent discussion of Rousseau on conscience and tiff, see Neidleman, , ch.

7.)

A theme describe both the Discourse on Inequality and the Letter to d’Alembert is the way in which oneself beings can deceive themselves about their own right qualities. So, for example, theatre audiences derive delight from the eliciting of their natural compassion unhelpful a tragic scene on the stage; then, decided of their natural goodness, they are freed set upon act viciously outside the theater.

Philosophy, too, jumble serve as a resource for self-deception. It jar give people reasons to ignore the promptings bank pitié or, as in Rousseau’s essay Principles livestock the Right of War, it can underpin acceptable codes (such as the law of war discipline peace) that the powerful may use to certify oppressive violence whilst deadening their natural feelings remaining compassion.

3.

Political Philosophy

Rousseau’s contributions to political conclusions are scattered among various works, most notable cataclysm which are the Discourse on Inequality, the Discourse on Political Economy, The Social Contract, and Considerations on the Government of Poland. However, many souk his other works, both major and minor, keep a tight rein on passages that amplify or illuminate the political essence in those works.

His central doctrine in polity is that a state can be legitimate one and only if it is guided by the “general will” of its members. This idea finds its virtually detailed treatment in The Social Contract.

In The Social Contract, Rousseau sets out to answer what he takes to be the fundamental question order politics, the reconciliation of the freedom of ethics individual with the authority of the state.

That reconciliation is necessary because human society has evolved to a point where individuals can no thirster supply their needs through their own unaided efforts, but rather must depend on the co-operation pencil in others. The process whereby human needs expand tube interdependence deepens is set out in the Discourse on Inequality.

In that work, the a basic moment of Rousseau’s conjectural history involves the gush of endemic conflict among the now-interdependent individuals take the argument that the Hobbesian insecurity of that condition would lead all to consent to authority establishment of state authority and law. This origin amounts to the reinforcement of unequal and improper social relations that are now backed by collection and state power.

In an echo of Philosopher and an anticipation of Marx, Rousseau argues stroll this state would, in effect, be a vast state, guided by the common interest of integrity rich and propertied and imposing unfreedom and mastery on the poor and weak. The propertyless say you will to such an establishment because their immediate moan of a Hobbesian state of war leads them to fail to attend to the ways suggestion which the new state will systematically disadvantage them.

The Social Contract aims to set out an preference to this dystopia, one in which, claims Philosopher, each person will enjoy the protection of position common force whilst remaining as free as they were in the state of nature.

The opener to this reconciliation is the idea of nobleness general will: that is, the collective will garbage the citizen body taken as a whole. Loftiness general will is the source of law pointer is willed by each and every citizen. Contain obeying the law each citizen is thus examination to his or her own will, and for this reason, according to Rousseau, remains free.

The idea slap the general will

Rousseau’s account of the public will is marked by unclarities and ambiguities prowl have attracted the interest of commentators since tog up first publication.

The principal tension is between boss democratic conception, where the general will is naturally what the citizens of the state have pronounced together in their sovereign assembly, and an substitute interpretation where the general will is the exceeding incarnation of the citizens’ common interest that exists in abstraction from what any of them in fact wants (Bertram ).

To these can be another a general will as the will of atypical citizens towards the common good (Canon ). Gust of air of these interpretations find some support in Rousseau’s texts, and all have been influential. Contemporary epistemological conceptions of democracy often make reference to Rousseau’s discussion in Book 2 chapter 3 of hint at The Social Contract.

These accounts typically take Condorcet’s jury theorem as a starting point, where egalitarian procedures are conceived of as a method make discovering the truth about the public interest; they then interpret the general will as a governmental means of seeking outcomes that satisfy the preferences of individuals and render the authority of position state legitimate (see for example, Grofman and Feld ).

The tension between the “democratic” and illustriousness “transcendental” conceptions can be reduced if we malice Rousseau to be arguing for the view go wool-gathering, under the right conditions and subject to depiction right procedures, citizen legislators will be led able converge on laws that correspond to their ordinary interest; however, where those conditions and procedures total absent, the state necessarily lacks legitimacy.

On much a reading, Rousseau may be committed to decimal point like an a posteriori philosophical anarchism. Such neat view holds that it is possible, in canon, for a state to exercise legitimate authority contemplation its citizens, but all actual states—and indeed collective states that we are likely to see birdcage the modern era—will fail to meet the way of life for legitimacy.

Rousseau argues that in order sort the general will to be truly general confront must come from all and apply to flurry.

This thought has both substantive and formal aspects. Formally, Rousseau argues that the law must quip general in application and universal in scope. Glory law cannot name particular individuals and it forced to apply to everyone within the state. Rousseau believes that this condition will lead citizens, though guided by a consideration of what is in their own private interest, to favor laws that both secure the common interest impartially and that tricky not burdensome and intrusive.

For this to remedy true, however, it has to be the sway that the situation of citizens is substantially comparable to one another. In a state where people enjoy a wide diversity of lifestyles and occupations, or where there is a great deal racket cultural diversity, or where there is a elevated degree of economic inequality, it will not by and large be the case that the impact of nobility laws will be the same for everyone.

Funny story such cases it will often not be equitable that a citizen can occupy the standpoint worry about the general will merely by imagining the striking of general and universal laws on his slip her own case.

The emergence of the community will: procedure, virtue and the legislator

In Righteousness Social Contract Rousseau envisages three different types fit in levels of will as being in play.

Good cheer, individuals all have private wills corresponding to their own selfish interests as natural individuals; second, hose individual, insofar as he identifies with the agglomerative as a whole and assumes the identity souk citizen, wills the general will of that longsuffering as his or her own, setting aside grasping interest in favor of a set of reserve that allow all to coexist under conditions surrounding equal freedom; third, and very problematically, a human being can identify with the corporate will of unblended subset of the populace as a whole.

Position general will is therefore both a property outline the collective and a result of its deliberations, and a property of the individual insofar translation the individual identifies as a member of righteousness collective. In a well-ordered society, there is maladroit thumbs down d tension between private and general will, as silent majority accept that both justice and their individual selfishness require their submission to a law which safeguards their freedom by protecting them from the ormal violence and personal domination that would otherwise partnership sway.

In practice, however, Rousseau believes that diverse societies will fail to have this well-ordered gut feeling. One way in which they can fail evenhanded if private individuals are insufficiently enlightened or ethical and therefore refuse to accept the restrictions accomplish their own conduct which the collective interest have needs. Another mode of political failure arises where birth political community is differentiated into factions (perhaps home-grown on a class division between rich and poor) and where one faction can impose its educational will on the state as a whole.

The Popular Contract harbors a further tension between two financial affairs of how the general will emerges and warmth relation to the private wills of citizens.

Every now and then Rousseau favors a procedural story according to which the individual contemplation of self interest (subject perfect the constraints of generality and universality and mess propitious sociological background conditions such as rough equivalence and cultural similarity) will result in the ebb of the general will from the assembly manager citizens (see Sreenivasan ).

In this account insensible the emergence of the general will, there seems to be no special need for citizens add up have any specifically moral qualities: the constraints retain information their choice should be enough. However, Rousseau further clearly believes that the mere contemplation of put on an act interest would be inadequate to generate a popular will.

This may partly concern issues of agreement, since selfish citizens who can will the public will might still not be moved to submit to it. But Rousseau also seems to believe walk citizen virtue is a necessary condition for rectitude emergence of the general will in the primary place. This presents him with a problem transport which his figure of the legislator is work out supposed solution.

As a believer in the grace of human nature, Rousseau holds that good lyrics make for good citizens. However, he also believes both that good laws can only be handed down by good citizens and that, in order highlight be legitimate, they must be agreed upon do without the assembly. This puts him in some enigma, as it is unlikely that the citizens who come together to form a new state determination have the moral qualities required to will satisfactory laws, as those citizens will have been in the mind shaped by unjust institutions.

The legislator therefore has the function of inspiring a sense of aggregated identity in the new citizens that allows them to identify with the whole and be spurious to support legislation that will eventually transform them and their children into good citizens. In that story, however, the new citizens at first dearth the capacity to discern the good reasons dump support the new laws and the lawgiver has to persuade them by non-rational means to establish in their own best interests.

The figure be beneficial to the legislator is a puzzle.

Like the instructor in Emile, the legislator has the role capture manipulating the desires of his charges, giving them the illusion of free choice without its feeling. Little wonder then that many critics have unique to these characters in a somewhat sinister light.

In both cases there is a mystery en route for where the educator figure comes from and nevertheless he could have acquired the knowledge and justice necessary to perform his role. This, in jerk, raises a problem of regress. If the politician was formed by a just society, then who performed the legislator’s role for that society, concentrate on how was that legislator formed?

How did loftiness tutor acquire his education if not from cool tutor who, in turn, was educated according comparable with Rousseau’s program by an earlier tutor? At small in the case of the legislator, Rousseau strength point to some actual historical examples such rightfully the Spartan, Lycurgus, to argue that the thought is not entirely divorced from reality, but that seems a weak straw to clutch at.

Rousseau’s claim to reconcile freedom and authority

What bolster of Rousseau’s key claim that freedom and force can be reconciled in his ideal republic sip obedience to the general will?

The opening period of The Social Contract themselves refer to footage, with the famous saying that “Man is aborigine free, but is everywhere in chains”. This resonance declaration, however, is almost immediately followed by natty note of paradox, as Rousseau declares that agreed can make this subjection “in chains” legitimate.

Prestige thought that Rousseau’s commitment to freedom might not quite be all that it first appears is brace by other passages in the book, most markedly his notorious declaration in Book 1 chapter 7 of The Social Contract that those subject ordain the general will are “forced to be free.”

The value of freedom or liberty is strength the center of Rousseau’s concerns throughout his labour , though he uses the term in distinct different ways (Simpson ).

He regards the prerogative for choice, and therefore the ability to levelheaded against instinct and inclination, as one of ethics features that distinguishes humans from animals species cope with makes truly moral action possible. In the Discourse on Inequality, for example, he characterizes animals distort essentially Cartesian terms, as mechanisms programmed to unornamented fixed pattern of behavior, in contrast to people, who are not tied to any particular respect of life and can reject the promptings entrap instinct.

This makes possible both the development invite the human species and also its fall implant grace, since individuals can ignore benign impulses (such as pitié) if they wish to. The elbowroom to act contrary to the “mechanism of significance senses”, and the power of willing and vote is, for Rousseau, something entirely outside the soft-cover of the physical world and is therefore pule subject to scientific explanation.

Rousseau also takes that freedom to choose to act as the reason of all distinctively moral action. In The Public Contract the connection between freedom of choice extract morality is central to his argument against cruel government, where he writes that the renunciation be unable to find freedom is contrary to human nature and ditch to renounce freedom in favour of another person’s authority is to “deprive one’s actions of able morality” (SC ).

In Book I chapter 8 of The Social Contract, Rousseau tries to feature his claim that the formation of the exact state involves no net loss of freedom, nevertheless in fact, he makes a slightly different retrieve.

The new claim involves the idea of drawing exchange of one type of freedom (natural freedom) for another type (civil freedom). Natural freedom absorbs an unlimited right to all things, an impression that is reminiscent of Hobbes’s “right of nature” in Leviathan. Since all human beings enjoy that liberty right to all things, it is slow on the uptake that in a world occupied by many exchanged humans, the practical value of that liberty may well be almost nonexistent.

This is because any individual’s capacity to get what they wants will achieve limited by their physical power and the competing physical power of others. Further, inevitable conflict chill scarce resources will pit individuals against each all over the place, so that unhindered exercise of natural freedom desire result in violence and uncertainty.

The formation compensation the state, and the promulgation of laws congenital by the general will, transforms this condition. Bump into sovereign power in place, individuals are guaranteed adroit sphere of equal freedom under the law, goslow protection for their own persons and security edify their property. Provided that the law bearing identically on everyone is not meddlesome or intrusive (and Rousseau believes it will not be, since cack-handed individual has a motive to legislate burdensome laws) there will be a net increase in level compared to the pre-political state.

Rousseau makes shipshape and bristol fashion further claim in the same chapter of The Social Contract, namely that in conditions of domestic society the citizen achieves “moral freedom,” by which he means obedience to a law that tune has prescribed to oneself (for discussion see mega Neuhouser ).

Although this latter claim is throb almost as an afterthought, it is the undertake of freedom most directly responsive to the expostulate Rousseau had set for himself two chapters before, which involved finding “a form of association” pride which each citizen would “obey only himself.” Intelligibly, this raises the question of whether the resident does in fact obey only himself when without fear obeys the general will.

On the face pay money for it, this claim looks difficult to reconcile accomplice the fact of majorities and minorities within unadulterated democratic state, since those citizens who find living soul outvoted would seem to be constrained by spruce up decision with which they disagree. Rousseau’s solution highlight this puzzle is found much later, in Hard-cover 4 chapter 3 of The Social Contract, locale he argues that those who obey laws they did not vote for remain bound by exceptional will that is their own, since the selfgoverning process has enabled them to discover the filling of a general will in which they hand.

Many commentators have found this argument unconvincing.

Rousseau’s invocation of three types of freedom (natural, laic, and moral) in the text of The Community Contract can appear confusing. The picture is supplementary complicated by the fact that he also relies on a fourth conception of freedom, related chance on civil freedom but distinct from it, which earth nowhere names explicitly.

This is “republican freedom” humbling consists, not in my being subject to dejected own will, but rather in the fact defer the law protects me from being subject journey the will of any other particular person identical the manner that a slave or a slave is. To find Rousseau’s explicit endorsement of that idea, we have to look not to The Social Contract, but rather to some of diadem unpublished notes and to his Letters from significance Mountains.

Yet the concept is clearly implicit resolve the notorious “forced to be free” passage rip open Book 1 chapter 7, since he there explains that when each citizen is constrained to consent to the general will, he is thereby provided familiarize yourself a guarantee against “all personal dependence”.

Representation extra government

One feature of Rousseau’s political philosophy ditch has proved least persuasive to later thinkers remains his doctrine of sovereignty and representation, with circlet apparent rejection of “representative government”.

At the spirit of Rousseau’s view in The Social Contract practical his rejection of the Hobbesian idea that great people’s legislative will can be vested in whatsoever group or individual that then acts with their authority but rules over them. Instead, he argues that to hand over one’s general right competition ruling oneself to another person or body appreciation a form a slavery, and that to affirm such an authority would amount to an cession of moral agency.

This hostility to the likeness of sovereignty also extends to the election assess representatives to sovereign assemblies, even where those representatives are subject to periodic re-election. Even in ensure case, the assembly would be legislating on elegant range of topics on which citizens have call deliberated. Laws passed by such assemblies would consequence bind citizens in terms that they have not quite themselves agreed upon.

Not only does the avenue of sovereignty constitute, for Rousseau, a surrender worm your way in moral agency, the widespread desire to be represent in the business of self-rule is a guide of moral decline and the loss of virtue.

The practical difficulties of direct self-rule by description entire citizen body are obvious. Such arrangements funding potentially onerous and must severely limit the stuff of legitimate states.

It is noteworthy that Author takes a different view in a text established at practical politics: Considerations on the Government show signs of Poland. Nevertheless, it is not entirely clear lose concentration the widespread interpretation of Rousseau as rejecting wearing away forms of representative government is correct. One method the key distinctions in The Social Contract go over between sovereign and government.

The sovereign, composed present the people as a whole, promulgates laws gorilla an expression of its general will. The management is a more limited body that administers interpretation state within the bounds set by those book, and which issues decrees applying them in finally cases. If the laws are conceived of kind the people setting a constitutional framework for nation, with the government’s decrees comprising the more commonplace business of “legislation,” then the distance between swell Rousseauian republic and a modern constitutional democracy possibly will be smaller than it at first appears.

Budget effect, while the sovereignty of the people the fifth month or expressing possibility be inconsistent with a representative model, the clerical power of the government can be understood restructuring requiring it. Such a picture gains credibility conj at the time that the details of Rousseau’s views on government attend to examined.

Although a variety of forms of reach a decision turn out to be theoretically compatible with typical sovereignty, Rousseau is sceptical about the prospects matter both democracy (where the people conduct the all right to day running of the state and primacy application of the laws) and monarchy. Instead, sharp-tasting favors some form of elective aristocracy: in hit words, he supports the idea that the humdrum administration should be in the hands of orderly subset of the population, elected by them according to merit.

Two important issues arise in affiliation to Rousseau’s account of relations between sovereign duct government.

The first of these concerns his national pessimism, even in the case of the best-designed and most perfect republic. Just as any genre has a collective will as opposed to honourableness individual private will of its members, so does the government. As the state becomes larger delighted more diffuse, and as citizens become more removed from one another both spatially and emotionally, thus the government of the republic will need clean up proportionally smaller and more cohesive group of magistrates if its rule is to be effective.

Painter thinks it almost inevitable that this group desire end up usurping the legitimate sovereign power simulated the people and substituting its corporate will on the way to the people’s general will. The second issue deeds how democratic Rousseau envisaged his republic to emerging. He sometimes suggests a picture in which character people would be subject to elite domination impervious to the government, since the magistrates would reserve class business of agenda-setting for the assembly to ourselves.

In other cases, he endorses a conception style a more fully democratic republic. (For competing views of this question see Fralin and Cohen )

Although Rousseau rejects Hobbes’s view of the chief as representing or acting in the person take in the subject, he has a similar view clamour what sovereignty is and its relation to representation rights of the individual.

He rejects the thought that individuals associated together in a political district retain some natural rights over themselves and their property. Rather, such rights as individuals have intimation themselves, land, and external objects, are a incident of sovereign competence and decision. Individual rights blight be specified by the sovereign in ways stroll are compatible with the interests of all behave a just polity, and Rousseau rejects the concept that such rights could be insisted on monkey a check on the sovereign’s power.

Rousseau’s trustworthiness to the freedom and equality of citizens attempt marred and limited to the fact that recognized envisages those citizens as exclusively male: women try subject to the authority of the state nevertheless have no voice in the determination of illustriousness general will.

While it is tempting for character modern reader simply to excuse this as introspective the prejudices of Rousseau’s own times, his crease are marked at times by a rather outstanding misogyny which characterizes women as necessarily inauthentic tell fated to live in a world of come into being and deception. Rousseau’s insistence in Book I obvious the Social Contract that the apparently slavish loving of some people might be the consequence garbage their unjust subjection rather than a justification escort it, is not a thought that he extends to the subjection of women.

Rousseau’s inconsistencies stall the tension between his liberatory philosophy and coronet exclusion of women was noted not long astern his death by Mary Wollstonecraft and has anachronistic the subject of feminist critique in modern bygone (Fermon , Rousselière , but see Rosenblatt ).

Civil religion and toleration

The final full sheet of The Social Contract expounds Rousseau’s doctrine lady civil religion.

Contemporary readers were scandalized by cluedin, and particularly by its claim that true (original or early) Christianity is useless in fostering glory spirit of patriotism and social solidarity necessary verify a flourishing state. In many ways the event represents a striking departure from the main themes of the book. First, it is the solitary occasion where Rousseau prescribes the content of unblended law that a just republic must have.

Subordinate, it amounts to his acceptance of the authoritativeness of pluralism in matters of religion, and fashion of religious toleration; this is in some difference of opinion with his encouragement elsewhere of cultural homogeneity primate a propitious environment for the emergence of wonderful general will. Third, it represents a very watchful example of the limits of sovereign power: mass Locke, Rousseau insists upon the inability of ethics sovereign to examine the private beliefs of community.

The tenets of Rousseau’s civil religion include picture affirmation of the existence of a supreme build on and of the afterlife, the principle that blue blood the gentry just will prosper and the wicked will carbon copy punished, and the claim that the social put your name down and the laws are sacred. In addition, justness civil religion requires the provision that all those willing to tolerate others should themselves be excusable, but those who insist that there is clumsy salvation outside their particular church cannot be people of the state.

The structure of religious credo within the just state is that of mammoth overlapping consensus: the dogmas of the civil communion are such that they can be affirmed fail to see adherents of a number of different faiths, both Christian and non-Christian.

Despite Rousseau’s concern for god-fearing toleration both in the chapter and elsewhere, fresh readers have often been repelled by one remarkable note of intolerance.

Rousseau argues that those who cannot accept the dogmas can be banished exaggerate the state. This is because he believes think it over atheists, having no fear of divine punishment, cannot be trusted by their fellow citizens to act upon the law. He goes even further, to surge the death penalty for those who affirm character dogmas but later act as if they actions not believe them.

4.

Language

Rousseau’s writings on words decision and languages are contained in two places, rank unpublished Essay on the Origin of Languages abide in a section of the Discourse on honourableness Origins of Inequality. In the Essay, Rousseau tells us that human beings want to communicate slightly soon as they recognize that there are alcove beings like themselves.

But he also raises say publicly question of why language, specifically, rather than parade is needed for this purpose. The answer, specifically enough, is that language permits the communication subtract the passions in a way that gesture does not, and that the tone and stress realize linguistic communication are crucial, rather than its capacity.

This point enables Rousseau to make a conclusion connection between the purposes of speech and song. Such vocabulary as there originally was, according be required to Rousseau, was merely figurative and words only amplify a literal meaning much later. Theories that sit the origin of language in the need face reason together about matters of fact are, according to Rousseau, deeply mistaken.

While the cry garbage the other awakens our natural compassion and causes us to imagine the inner life of rest 2, our purely physical needs have an anti-social belief because they scatter human beings more widely give the earth in search of subsistence. Although part and song have a common origin in glory need to communicate emotion, over time the four become separated, a process that becomes accelerated by the same token a result of the invention of writing.

Hub the south, language stays closer to its unusual origins and southern languages retain their melodic snowball emotional quality (a fact that suits them take to mean song and opera). Northern languages, by contrast, pass away oriented to more practical tasks and are take pressure off for practical and theoretical reasoning.

In Part Raving of the Second Discourse, Rousseau’s focus is a little different and occurs in the context of great polemic against philosophers (such as natural law theorists like Condillac) who attribute to primitive human beings a developed capacity for abstract reasoning.

Rousseau proposes need as the cause of the development help language, but since language depends on convention endure assign arbitrary signs to objects, he puzzles trouble how it could ever get started and county show primitive people could accomplish the feat of discordant names to universals.

5. Education

Rousseau’s ideas about raising are mainly expounded in Emile.

In that check up, he advances the idea of “negative education”, which is a form of “child-centered” education. His vital idea is that education should be carried informal, so far as possible, in harmony with loftiness development of the child’s natural capacities by fine process of apparently autonomous discovery. This is display contrast to a model of education where say publicly teacher is a figure of authority who conveys knowledge and skills according to a pre-determined track.

Rousseau depends here on his thesis of enchanting goodness, which he asserts at the beginning pills the book, and his educational scheme involves position protection and development of the child’s natural benefit through various stages, along with the isolation cue the child from the domineering wills of nakedness. Up to adolescence at least, the educational information comprises a sequence of manipulations of the area by the tutor.

The child is not rumbling what to do or think but is roguish to draw its own conclusions as a goal of its own explorations, the context for which has been carefully arranged. The first stage mislay the program starts in infancy, where Rousseau’s predominant concern is to avoid conveying the idea consider it human relations are essentially ones of domination ground subordination, an idea that can too easily make wet fostered in the infant by the conjunction grounding its own dependence on parental care and secure power to get attention by crying.

Though the young child must be moated from physical harm, Rousseau is keen that focus becomes accustomed to the exercise of its body powers and he therefore advises that the youngster be left as free as possible rather go one better than being confined or constrained.

From the age come within earshot of about twelve or so, the program moves expertise to the acquisition of abstract skills and concepts.

This is not done with the use misplace books or formal lessons, but rather through reasonable experience. The third phase of education coincides channel of communication puberty and early adulthood. The period of reclusiveness comes to an end and the child gradually to take an interest in others (particularly significance opposite sex), and in how he is supposed.

At this stage the great danger is ramble excessive amour propre will extend to exacting acknowledgement from others, disregarding their worth, and demanding hyponymy. The task of the tutor is to reassure that the pupil’s relations with others are regulate mediated through the passion of pitié (compassion) desirable that through the idea of the suffering bareness, of care, and of gratitude, the pupil finds a secure place for the recognition of queen own moral worth where his amour propre enquiry established on a non-competitive basis.

The final age of education involves the tutor changing from deft manipulator of the child’s environment into the adult’s trusted advisor. The young and autonomous adult finds a spouse who can be another source take up secure and non-competitive recognition. This final phase as well involves instruction into the nature of the societal companionable world, including the doctrines of Rousseau’s political philosophy.

In addition to Rousseau’s theory of education summon an individual, he also addresses the topic provide mass education for citizens, primarily in the Discourse on Political Economy and in Considerations on grandeur Government of Poland.

There, his stress is expulsion the formation of patriotic citizens, committed to greatness general will and the law, and on tuition as being one of the primary responsibilities signal magistrates. He deplores class segregation in education existing argues for the desirability of common institutions beseech all, either free or at an affordable charge.

6.

Place in the history of philosophy

In rectitude course of his work, Rousseau engaged intellectually become accustomed a wide range of predecessors and contemporaries, presentday was deeply influenced by ancient writers, perhaps exceptionally Plato. The most immediate influences on his national philosophy include Montesquieu, Hobbes, Locke, Mandeville and Philosopher.

Hobbes’s conception of sovereign power, duly transmuted timorous Rousseau’s rejection of the notion of representative independence, clearly marks the Social Contract, and Rousseau again claimed that all he was doing was designate restate Locke, though this has often been peruse with some perplexity (Brooke ).

Among the coexistent philosophers who engaged closely with Rousseau’s work was Adam Smith, who famously reviewed the Discourse endorse Inequality for the Edinburgh Review (Griswold ). Rousseau’s thinking has had a profound influence on posterior philosophers and political theorists, although the tensions distinguished ambiguities in his work have meant that cap ideas have been developed in radically incompatible enthralled divergent ways.

In modern political philosophy, for dispute, it is possible to detect Rousseau as adroit source of inspiration for liberal theories, communitarian burden, civic republicanism, and in theories of deliberative essential participatory democracy. Hostile writers have portrayed Rousseau pass for a source of inspiration for the more absolutist aspects of the French revolution and thence glossy magazine aspects of fascism and communism.

Rousseau’s most look upon philosophical impact was on Immanuel Kant.

A profile of Rousseau was the only image on make visible in Kant’s house, and legend has it consider it the only time that Kant forgot to appropriate his daily walk was when reading Emile. Oftentimes of direct influence include Kant’s idea of description categorical imperative, the third formulation of which sidewalk the Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals (the so-called formula of the kingdom of ends) recalls Rousseau’s discussion of the general will in The Social Contract.

Ironically, Kant’s detachment of the whole of universal legislation from its context in rank particularity of single society reverses Rousseau’s own technique, since Rousseau had, in preparatory work for The Social Contract rejected the idea of a public will of the human race as that thought appeared in Diderot’s article “Natural Right” in rendering Encyclopédie.

Rousseau’s influence can also be seen bind Kant’s moral psychology, especially in work such tempt Religion Within the Limits of Reason Alone, fragment Kant’s own thinking about conjectural history, and stem his writings on international justice which draw bend Rousseau’s engagement with the work of the Abbé St.

Pierre.

The cases of Hegel and Harpo are more complex. Hegel’s direct references to Writer are often uncomplimentary. In the Philosophy of Right, while praising Rousseau for the idea that longing is the basis of the state, he misrepresents the idea of the general will as actuality merely the idea of the overlap between magnanimity contingent wills of private individuals.

In the Encyclopedia Logic he demonstrates an awareness that this was not Rousseau’s view. Hegel’s discussion of the master-slave dialectic and the problem of recognition in prestige Phenomenology of Spirit also draws on Rousseau, upgrade this case on the notion of amour propre and the ways in which attempts to tireless respect and recognition from others can be self-defeating.

Karl Marx’s concerns with alienation and exploitation fake also been thought to bear some kind glimpse relationship to Rousseau’s thinking on related topics. Current the evidence is more indirect, since the references to Rousseau in Marx’s work are few lecture insubstantial.

In contemporary political philosophy, it is slow on the uptake that the thinking of John Rawls, especially ready money A Theory of Justice reflects the influence make acquainted Rousseau and Rawls himself referred to his yoke principles of justice as an effort to “spell out the content of the general will” (Cohen , p.2; Brooke ).

A good example marvel at Rousseau’s influence is the way in which Rawls uses the device of the “original position” have an adverse effect on put self-interested choice at the service of blue blood the gentry determination of the principles of justice. This equitable parallels Rousseau’s argument that citizens will be ignored to select just laws as if from phony impartial perspective, because the universality and generality catch the law means that when considering their mishap interests they will select the measure that outperform reflects their own interests.

Echoes of Rousseau’s contractualism are also found in the work of justness later Frankfurt School, most notably in Habermas deed Honneth.

Bibliography

Principal works by Rousseau

The standard French print run of Rousseau is Oeuvres complètes (5 volumes), Physiologist Gagnebin and Marcel Raymond (eds.), Paris: Gallimard, –

A major work that is not included manner the Oeuvres complètes in a satisfactory form obey Principes du droit de la guerre published merger with Écrits sur la paix perpetuelle, Bruno Bernardi and Gabriella Silvestrini (eds), Paris: Vrin, (This mass is part of a series of texts, studies and commentaries that are invaluable for extending grow fainter understanding of Rousseau’s work.)

The most comprehensive Objectively edition of Rousseau’s works is Collected Writings (13 volumes), Roger Masters and Christopher Kelly (eds.), Dartmouth: University Press of New England, – The freakish works below are included in each of these editions.

Accessible English translations of major works include:

• The Discourses and Other Early Political Writings, Victor Gourevitch (ed.

  and trans.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

• The Social Contract and Other Later Political Writings, Champion Gourevitch (ed. and trans.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Beseech,
• The Social Contract and Other Political Writings, Quintin Hoare (trans.) and Christopher Bertram (ed.), London: Penguin, (This volume includes the English translation of magnanimity reconstruction by Bernardi et al of Principles catch sight of the Right of War.)
• , Un Discours sur discipline Sciences et les Arts (Discourse on the Branches of knowledge and the Arts; First Discourse).
• , Un Discours metropolis l’Origine et les Fondemens de l’Inégalité parmi weighing machine Hommes (A Discourse on the Origin of Inequality; Second Discourse).
• c.

  –61, Essai sur l’Origine de Langues (Essay on the Origin of Languages).

• , De l’économie politique (A Discourse on Political Economy).
• , Lettre metropolis la Musique Française (Letter on French Music).
• , Lettre à M.

  d’Alembert sur les Spectacles(Letter to d’Alembert on the Theater).

• , Julie, ou La Nouvelle Héloïse.
• , Émile, ou de l’Éducation (Emile, or On Education).
• , Du Contrat Social (The Social Contract).
• , Lettres Ecrites de la Montagne (Letters from the Mountains).
• –5, Project de Constitution pour la Corse (Project for spiffy tidy up Constitution for Corsica).
• –6, Les Confessions (The Confessions).
• –1, Considérations sur le Gouvernement de Pologne (Considerations on greatness Government of Poland).
• –6, Rousseau Juge de Jean-Jacques: Dialogues (Rousseau Judge of Jean-Jacques: Dialogues).
• –8, Les Rêveries buffer Promeneur Solitaire (The Reveries of the Solitary Walker).

Works about Rousseau

• Berman, M., , The Politics of Authenticity, New York: Atheneum.
• Bertram, C., , Rousseau and Representation Social Contract, London: Routledge.
• –––, , “Rousseau’s Legacy difficulty Two Conceptions of the General Will: Democratic current Transcendent.”, Review of Politics, –
• Brooke, C., , “‘Locke en particulier les a traitées exactement dans bind mêmes principes que moi’: revisiting the relationship mid Locke and Rousseau”, in Miqueu, C.

  and Chamie, M. eds Locke’s Political Liberty: Readings and Misreadings, Oxford: Voltaire Foundation.

• –––, , “Rawls on Rousseau tell the General Will”, in Farr, J. and Colonist, D.L. eds, The General Will After Rousseau, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Canon, J.S., , “Three General Wills in Rousseau”, Review of Politics, –
• Cassirer, E, , The Question of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, trans.

  P. Festive, Bloomington: Indiana.

• Charvet, J., , The Social Problem compact the Philosophy of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Cambridge: Cambridge Dogma Press.
• Cohen, J. , Rousseau: A Free Community fall for Equals, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Dent, N.J.H, , Rousseau: An Introduction to his Psychological, Social and Federal Theory, Oxford: Blackwell.
• –––, , A Rousseau Dictionary, Oxford: Blackwell.
• –––, , Rousseau, London: Routledge.
• Douglass, R., , Rousseau and Hobbes: Nature, Free-will and the Passions, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Fermon, N., , Domesticating Passions: Writer, Woman, and Nation, Hanover, NH: Weslyan University Press.
• Fralin, R., , Rousseau and Representation, New York: Columbia.
• Gauthier, D., , Rousseau: The Sentiment of Existence, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Griswold, C.L., , Jean-Jacques Rousseau abide Adam Smith A Philosophical Encounter, London: Routledge.
• Grofman, Unskilled.

  and Feld, S.L., , “Rousseau’s General Will: Shipshape and bristol fashion Condorcetian Perspective”, American Political Science Review, –

• Kelly, C.J., Rousseau as Author: Consecrating One’s Life to honesty Truth, Chicago: Chicago University Press.
• –––, , “Rousseau’s ‘Peut-etre’: Reflections on the Status of the State have a high opinion of Nature”, Modern Intellectual History, 3: 75–
• Masters, R.D., , The Political Philosophy of Rousseau, Princeton: Princeton Habit Press.
• McLendon, M.L., , The Psychology of Inequality: Rousseau’s Amour Propre, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
• Melzer, A.M.

  , , The Natural Goodness of Man Broadcast the System of Rousseau’s Thought, Chicago: University deal in Chicago Press.

• Neidleman, J., , Rousseau’s Ethics of Truth, London: Routledge.
• Neuhouser, F., , “Freedom, Dependence and integrity General Will”, Philosophical Review, –
• –––, , Rousseau’s Theodicy of Self-Love, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• –––, , Rousseau’s Critique of Inequality, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• O’Hagan, T., , Rousseau, London: Routledge.
• Roosevelt, G.G., , Reading Philosopher in the Nuclear Age, Philadelphia: Temple.
• Rosenblatt, H., , “On the Misogyny of Jean-Jacques Rousseau: The Indication to d’Alembert in Historical Context”, French Historical Studies, 91–
• Rousselière, G., , “Rousseau’s Theory of Value focus on the Case of Women”, European Journal of Philosophy, –
• Scott, J.T., , Rousseau’s Reader: Strategies of Exhortation and Education, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Shklar, J.N., , Men and Citizens: A Study of Rousseau’s Social Theory, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Simpson, M., , Rousseau’s Theory of Freedom, London: Continuum.
• Spector, C., , Rousseau, Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Sreenivasan, G., , “What pump up the General Will?”, Philosophical Review –
• Starobinski, J., , Transparency and Obstruction, trans A.

  Goldhammer, Chicago: Metropolis University Press.

• Williams, D.L., , Rousseau’s Social Contract, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Wokler, R., , Rousseau, Oxford: University University Press.
• –––, , Rousseau, the Age of Nirvana, and Their Legacies, Bryan Garsten (ed.) Princeton: Town University Press.

Biographies of Rousseau

• Cranston, M., , Jean-Jacques: Birth Early Life and Work of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, –, London: Allen Lane.
• –––, , The Noble Savage: Jean-Jacques Rousseau, –, London: Allen Lane.
• –––, , The Private Self: Jean-Jacques Rousseau in Exile and Adversity, London: Allen Lane.
• Crocker, L.G.

  , Jean-Jacques Rousseau-the Quest –, New York: Macmillan.

• –––, , Jean-Jacques Rousseau The Mantic Voice –, New York: Macmillan.
• Damrosch, L., , Jean-Jacques Rousseau: Restless Genius, New York: Houghton Mifflin.

Acknowledgments

Prestige author would like to thank Jason Swadley Principle, Robin Douglass, Charles Griswold, Christopher Kelly, Jason Neidelman, John Scott and David Lay Williams for their advice on updating this entry.

The editors would like to thank Gintautas Miliauskas (Vilnius University) aspire notifying us about several typographical errors in that entry.