|
Spencer Ross
Student #0026660
Political Theory 160-231A
Prof. Alan Patten
TA: Christine Straehle
Grader: Csilla Kiss
Conference Time: Friday, 2:30-3:30
Essay: Rousseau's "A Discourse on the Origin of
Inequality" and the Corruption of Modern Man
One of the leading
political philosophers of his time, Jean-Jacques Rousseau
presents in
his work, "A Discourse on the Origin of Inequality,"
concepts that are innovative not only in
terms of political theory, but economical and socially-Darwinist
theories as well. Through
deriving a fictitious state of nature, Rousseau's Second
Discourse leads to the implication that
man is inevitably corrupt as a result of both natural (or
physical) inequalities and moral (or
political) inequalities. The dissertation is broken down into two
parts: the first part is a
description of man in the natural state; the second part assumes
the creation of "civilized" man
from this natural state. As Rousseau goes on to explain, the
inequalities that contribute to
"civilized" man's creation are also the inequalities
that contribute to the corruption of the
"civilized" man.
The first part starts out with Rousseau's explanation of natural
inequality as being just
that- natural. Therefore, traits such as strength and stamina
would allow man to survive in nature
easier. Also crucial to man's survival is his instinct, another
trait that we not only naturally
embody, but also naturally try to hone:
"Men, dispersed up and down among the rest, would
imitate [animal's] industry and thus attain even the instinct
of the beasts, with the advantage that, whereas every
species of brutes was confined to one particular instinct,
man, who perhaps has not any one peculiar to himself,
would appropriate them all, and live upon most of those
different foots, which other animals shared among them-
selves; and thus would find his subsistence much more
easily than any of the rest" (p. 53).
Here, Rousseau appeals to the nature of humans as what we are-
animals- and that, in a
state of nature, we would survive by watching other animals and
repeating their actions, much
the way a young girl might try to apply makeup to her face like
her mother or a young boy would
pretend to shave his face like his father. Thus, while Rousseau
points out that we are indirectly
dependent on others, he also tries to show that man is an
independent being when it comes to the
actual carrying out of personal affairs. The spread of sickness
and the minimalist medical
approach are all conducive in a savage environment.
Having described man's physical inequalities, an explanation of
man's moral inequalities
follows. In a state of nature, "[the savage man's] desires
never go beyond his physical wants" (p.
61). However, as Rousseau will explain later in the discourse,
"civilized" man's desires go well
beyond his physical wants. In his independence, the savage man
knows no speech, for he does
not need to communicate with others. In addition, man's
independence means he is not
subservient to any one person and without having an authority
over him, does not know the
slave/dominator relationship. As a result of this, Rousseau
includes the idea of amour-propre
(self-love) (p. 73). Amour-propre is the self-pride that
stimulates us to accomplish more, better,
but more specifically, in competition with others. This concept
is probably most indicative of
the concepts Charles Darwin offered later on in his 1859 book,,
On the Origin of Species. As a
result of man's physical and moral inequalities, Darwinist theory
of "the survival of the fittest" is
almost mirrored in Rousseau's notion of amour-propre. However,
the increase of competition
and amour-propre leads to the desire for "riches, nobility
or rank, power and personal merit
being the principal distinctions by which men form an estimate of
each other in society" (p. 111).
Thus, we are led into the second part of the discourse, in which
Rousseau contrasts man's "real
nature" to man in a state of nature by using the model world
from the first part and deriving-
using amour-propre- the implication that modern man is inevitably
corrupt.
Ownership of personal property, Rousseau assumes, primarily
drives corruption. "The
first man who, having enclosed a piece of ground, bethought
himself of saying "This is mine",
and found people simple enough to believe him, was the real
founder of civil society" (p. 84). In
essence, Rousseau starts to lay out the early groundwork for
economist Adam Smith's work, The
Wealth of Nations. Adam Smith, also using social-Darwinist
concepts, writes about the concept
of capitalism and man's desire to get ahead in financial
competition. Like Darwin, Smith's ideas
of competition among men and nations on the free market echoed
with amour-propre. As greed
and our own self-interest starts to dominate our lives, we become
more corrupt individuals. Corruption occurs for two reasons: The first is the creation of
industry and the creation of
family. Rousseau believes that cohabitation in a confined space
such as a hut leads to argument,
disagreement, and conflict. The sexes started to live together
and people "became accustomed to
looking more closely at the different objects of their desires
and to making comparisons;
imperceptibly they acquired ideas of beauty and merit which led
to feelings of preference" (p.
89). With these feelings of preference came feelings such as
jealousy, which in modern man, has
often caused the start of wars. Man's covetous nature was tabooed
in the Judeo-Christian
creation of the Ten Commandments, a set of laws intended to tame
man under the supreme
power of G-d.
Secondly, Rousseau implies that modern man creates laws for
governing so that there may be some rules of justice and peace. "Let us, in a word,
instead of turning our forces against
ourselves, collect them in a supreme power which may govern us by
wise laws, protect and
defend all the members of the association, repulse their common
enemies, and maintain eternal
harmony among us" (p. 98). This hints at the origins of
nationalism, where a group of people
with common ideologies, common passions, and common amour-propre
collectively group
together. With the creation of nation-societies and laws in
opposition to those of other nation-
societies, comes the prospect of war- a conflict in which both
participants believe that their
national interest is the "right" national interest. In
learning to rationalize what would be deemed
as wrongful actions, man has thus proven his corruption, for
anything that must be rationalized is
not natural since natural man acts entirely off of instinct.
It is thus conclusive that the discourse on inequality proves
modern man's inevitability to
become corrupt. While man could exist in a state of nature, it
stands to reason that evolution
would take course and as Rousseau demonstrates, amour-propre
would serve to cause man to elevate his own status over another man. Man may be in a state of
nature, but the nature of man
and his inequalities will eventually dominate his actions. If,
for example, we look at William
Golding's novel, Lord of the Flies, we could see how a group of
young boys with no adult
guidance, use their inequalities to create laws, power, and class
struggle. Corruption among the
powers eventually creates tense conflict in the end of the book,
but proves, just as Rousseau
does, that regardless of how independent man is, man's ultimate
dependence on each other is
where corruption is derived from.
|
