Name Class Professor Date Word count excluding title and reference: 845 John Locke versus Jean-Jacques Rousseau If John Locke (1632-1704) and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778) will run for President in the 2012 Presidential election, people, most especially students like me will have a better understanding about the underlying principles why government are formed and appreciate governance better…
Download file to see previous pages...
The differences of these two great political thinkers stems on how they assessed the evolution of society. Locke’s perspective begins with man’s natural state of being free but this freedom does not mean imposing itself over another (Chapter V). Eventually, people form society and to best protect them and their property, they have to submit to a government that will enforce a certain standard of behavior that will benefit everybody. For Locke government is good for everybody. Rousseau differed from Locke as he likened the natural state of man to that of a beast and differs only with his perfectibility or capacity to improve himself. Rousseau theory of man’s formation of society is unhealthy because it induces the people to have a new need that will make them compare to others eventually leading to a dominance of certain people over another. To avoid conflict, the prevailing class proposed to have some sort of body politic. Those who are powerless accept this believing that this will provide them freedom and safety when in fact will only make inequality more permanent by the establishment of laws. In a way, Rousseau can be said to be a precursor of Karl Marx’s socialist idea of class conflict that is precipitated by inequality in society. Locke on the other hand is the precursor of the modern idea of democracy because his theory of government in his Second Treatise of the Government that puts forth the sovereignty of the people who chose to establish it to serve them is the same concept that we have now about democracy. His other ideas about government that it derives its sovereignty from the people that government by itself has no sovereignty and the people has the right to abolish it if it no longer serves its purpose and replace it with one that serves its purpose is the same idea that we have about democracy. Just like Rousseau, Locke also anticipated that the acquisition of property will lead into conflict. They only differ in perspective as Locke thought that the establishment of body politic would best protect them by enforcing laws for certain standard of behavior while Rousseau thought that it will make inequality more permanent. If their treatises will be translated into platform of government, Locke would likely be more appropriate to America’s neo-liberal political orientation that man is basically free and only agreed to establish a strong government for everybody’s good. This is consistent with American’s value system and being such, it is very likely that Locke will win if he will run against Rousseau in America. With regard to policy direction, Locke is likely to oppose Obama’s Health Care Program as it infringes on the property of other who have to subsidize those who cannot afford it. Locke’s puts a primacy on private property and the idea of subsidizing others might not sit well with him. Locke would also likely to strengthen business by introducing laws that would protect it and its property. Rousseau treatise on the other hand would be incompatible with America’s value system but he would make an interesting case. As he is oppose to inequality, Rousseau will likely introduce government programs that will bridge his perceive inequality in American
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
Cite this document
(“John Locke vs. Jean-Jacques Rousseau Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.org/history/1442814-john-locke-versus-jean-jacques-rousseau
(John Locke Vs. Jean-Jacques Rousseau Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 Words)
“John Locke Vs. Jean-Jacques Rousseau Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.org/history/1442814-john-locke-versus-jean-jacques-rousseau.
The study will start with a discussion of the political theory of Locke, followed by a discussion of Rousseau’s political theory, and then end with how their thinking fits into the period of enlightenment. The political theory of John Locke John Locke can be regarded as one of the founding fathers of liberal philosophy
Although it is oftentimes understood and believed by American historians that this particular movement of independence was somehow native and special to the American experience, the fact of the matter was that many of the influences that contributed to thought within the colonies were heavily influenced by the writings, teachings, and philosophy of a broad range of historians, Greek thinkers, and or European sociologist/political scientists.
Moreover, in the book it is clear men never perceive things as they are, but as they desire them to be; hence, this ruins men. In politics, Machiavelli shows that there are no ideal, safe courses hence prudence chooses the least dangerous one like the alliance that links the people to the ruler, which helps a leader stay in power.
Indeed, it would hardly be an exaggeration were one to claim that the one's theory is the antithesis of the other's. The aforementioned is evidenced in the fact that both had very different notions of human nature and, accordingly, of the rationale behind the entry of citizens into a social contract, the implications of the said contracts and the rights of the populace versus the limits of government.
mile, ou l'education, along with The Educational Theory presented by him were two of the most significant accomplishments by the fellow in the field of education.
Discours sur les Sciences et les Arts (Discourse on the Sciences and the Arts), an essay written by Rousseau in 1750 became his source to fame as it became a prize winning essay.
However, Locke, Rousseau and Kant changed our political perspectives, our understanding of the rights and duties of citizens and states and emphasized man’s right and responsibility to take political action, even revolution, when needed.
Such an attitude is understandable in an 'outsider', but what is more questionable, is the insistence that this misleading and disconcerting urbanity is largely the product of letters, art and science (Gourevitch, 2001). Refusing to consider the opposite point of view, Rousseau now puts this idea forward as his major thesis.
His legacy as a radical and revolutionary is perhaps best demonstrated by his most famous line, from his most important work, The Social Contract: "Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains."
Jean Jacques Rousseau's Discourse on Inequality, written for the Academy of Dijon in 1754, is an attempt to answer the question "What is the origin of inequality among men, and is it authorized by natural law" Rousseau discusses two types of inequality, natural or physical and moral or political.