Rousseau
Touré Strong 11/22/13
@02663399
The Source of Inequality
Rousseau introduces a valid concept in his “Discourse on the Origin of Inequality”, “for how shall we know the source of inequality between men, if we do not begin by knowing mankind?” Rousseau attempts to shed light on the subject by begging the question “what is natural?” and simplifies the question of inequality to its proper form.
Rousseau acknowledges that in the past it was said that man is constituted by natural law and natural right, but he delves deeper into the definitions of the concepts. Before one can assign man to be governed by natural law, one would have to first define the words “natural” and “law”. Law is defined as a rule prescribed to a moral being. Natural man though in his state pre-socialization cannot be defined by adhering to a “law”, albeit a natural one, because he would have to be cognizant of the concept of law, which is an assumption. Law has to stem from reason, that is why man is the only creature said top operate by natural law, but Rousseau is looking towards man’s state prior to the development of reason. Natural means to “speak with the voice of nature”, that gives wind to the concept of natural right. Rousseau claims that he perceives two basic principles that exist “prior to reason”, these are self-preservation and pity, and he believes these qualities construct natural right. Neither principle requires sociability, which is what natural law relies on. He states that a man will not harm another man unless his own self-preservation is at risk. That characteristic stems not from rationality but from sentience. According to Rousseau this also answers the question of whether or not animals participate in natural law; he believes they do not because they are not rational, but they do participate in natural right because they are sentient beings. Rousseau harps on the fact that natural rights and natural laws are meaningless if one does not fully understand the nature of man. There must though be a relationship between the two for natural laws to mean anything. Consequently to thoroughly understand nature one must forsake reason entirely, as originally man may not have been a rational creature.
The Term Paper on Jurisprudence – Natural Law
Introduction Natural law theory is not a single theory of law, but the application of ethical or political theories to the questions of how legal orders can acquire, or have legitimacy, and is often presented as a history of such ethical and political ideas. These theories would explained the nature of morality, thus making natural law theory a general moral theory. The basic idea was that man ...
Context of the theories of natural right and natural law is essential to the comprehension of Rousseau’s agenda. The two concepts are in fact related. A natural right is the right to have, or do something merely by being human, and is not instituted by society but by nature, or God. Natural laws however are rational regulations that impel all people the act in a certain way and are typically looked to as the commands of God also known as the commandments. These were set by God to be obeyed by man; though some look to these natural laws as just “the way of the world”. Natural right and natural law cannot be transposed but often are. In societies a combination of both are used to create basic frameworks, such as constitutions. No one though can agree on which set of principles are actually natural, whether our true nature comes from those laws set by God, (natural laws) or those given to us by nature(natural rights).
Rousseau believes though that we are more governed by nature than God. Because either natural laws or natural rights ultimately create inequality, Rousseau is attempting to answer the question of whether God or Nature determines Inequality among men.
