Discourse on the Origin of Inequality and Kants Perpetual Peace - Research Paper Example

Rousseau The origin of the current society can be traced to some years back. The early man began in a of nature where he was not in competition with anyone or anything for resources. In the past, the world had very few people who lived. This made man live a life free of stress and that was not complicated because their needs were satisfied by nature. Since there were few people and a lot of resources, people rarely saw one another and therefore conflicts could not arise. There was also not fear because no one could steal from the other. In addition, these people who lived stress less life had good morals and they were filled with pity, and thus they could not hurt one another (Kant et al 3). As time progressed, man began to change. As the number of people increased, the ways in which people could satisfy meet their daily needs changed. Because of the difficulties that people began experiencing, they started seeing each other and also began living together. They called these places communities because many people created large areas and made them settlements. They also continued working but they did so by dividing work between themselves. This they called it division of labour and it happened between small units of people which were known as families. Division of labour lead to invention of tools and other practices such as farming that made life easier. The fact that they worked and become tired led to the need for rest (Kant et al 4). They thus recognized the need to rest and work the following day, which they called leisure after sometime doing that. During leisure people began to talk about comparison between one community and another and also between themselves. This comparison brought about public values that led to shame and pride when one was told to be more superior to others. In addition a certain community was considered more powerful than others if they had more resources. This started to make people envy property and pride and contempt. The desire for one to be recognized as superior or powerful, lead to some people isolating themselves from others. Isolation made these people accumulate property of their own. Soon the society leant of private property as important resources that brought pride and fame. The discovery of private property is associated with all social evils that exist today because it brought a lot of competition on resources and immoral behavior. Such immoral behaviors include greed, stealing, robbery, and murder. People in society began to be divided and distinguished by wealth because private property was what everybody desired. The society by this time had stopped from depending on nature and began competing for natural resources that were begging to diminish. The continued evolution of private property brought a lot of inequality in society such that those who did not have private property had to work for those who had to earn a living (Kant et al 5). This led to the development of social classes such as the poor class, middle class and upper class. Those who had private property noted their property needed more protection and, therefore, they formed a government. The government chief role was to protect the rich’s property from the poor. The rich foresaw that one day the poor would take their property by force. The government is thus established with the false intention of guaranteeing equality and protection of all people. The true role of this government is however hidden because its purpose is to harden the very inequality that private ownership has brought. Therefore, the government which claims to be in the place of everyone is actually in place of the few rich and who have become stronger as a result of private property (Kant et al 9). This is the reason why the current society is in competition and a lot of suffering. Evolution of the current man’s problems is meant to teach us how we ought to live with one another by understanding the sources of our problem. The quote “Man was born free, and he is everywhere in chains” (49). Helps clearly explain the origin of the current problems. It means that man was free when the world began because nature could provide everything. However as time progresses, problems increased and thus he had to make chains with everybody to solve these problems. Kant et al draws his theory from the early man who depended on nature (55). It is at this point that one can discover the nature of justice and what it requires of us as individuals and the social places through which we can live together in harmony. In the past and before people became ignorant of the socially accepted morals, people were not denied any information that related to them, for example on their gender, abilities, social status, age sex, and disabilities. This is the information that is required by anybody to live a good life. In addition, Information on the kind of society that one live in, was also given freely. When ignorance came to the current man, people became disinterested in one another and others wellbeing. These are the conditions that once existed and were fair but were later ignored. The problem arises because the current generation is born and meets an unfair society and thus children assume that originally the world was made to be unfair. If one finds the truth that the world was not unfair from the origin, that particular person will notice that “justice is fairness” this is because the path through which justice is discovered is just and that justice comes out of being treated fairly. If ignorance is put aside everybody is said to be fair. Thus, the whole society would be fair because everyone would make choices that are fair and just to everybody. This is true because man has not changed biologically but only morally to become unjust. Given any situation in society, and assuming that people are not ignorant and that their desire is to treat everybody with just, everybody would reach a similar conclusion to that situation. For example, given a society and assuming the original nature of man who was just, fair and not ignorant, a rational man would choose to regulate a society of people at minimum, but this is not the case. This would mean that people in a society would be equal. People in society would be having freedom to do anything because they are assumed to be just. In this case resources would be equally distributed. In a similar manner if it is inequality it would be distributed equally to all members of a society. This theory helps us appreciate the importance of justice that puts everyone in a level ground and does not distinguish between the rich and the poor (Kant et al 61). In his consideration of contemporary society and the state of nature, what elements or ideas does Kant borrow from Rousseau? The writer Kant borrows some ideas from Rousseau in that he says every man has pity and mercy just like the early man who depended on nature. The only difference between the early man and the current generation of people is that we have become more ignorant and this is the reason why we hurt each other. The writer modifies the facts by adding that the spirit of ignorance has changed how we act towards one another. He further says that if we are also just to one another, suffering would reduce ((Kant et al 11). Here, you should focus on the same elements that you considered in Part One. How does Kant modify these elements or ideas? Kant et al advocates that everybody is rational in making choices and that if the pity that the early man had were to be in the current man, the distribution of resources would be equal since everybody would mind the welfare of others (37). Also, people would be given all the freedom they deserve because it is a norm that they will not hurt one another. The writer emphasizes of the need for social networks as opposed to economic benefits. The current society is said to be money oriented and forgets the important of human value to live a dignified life How does Kant’s evaluation of the move from nature to society differ from the one that Rousseau advocates? The difference between these two writers on the move from nature to society is that Rousseau explains how we can solve the problems of inequality by considering it beginning. Kant tries to explain how the society should be. He explains the importance of justice in a society. In particular, how does Kant’s view of humanity’s future shape his evaluation of current society? Is Kant’s evaluation plausible? Kant view of the current society is that it is unjust and only institutions of justice can help to deliver justice. This is true because the current society has inequalities in several ways such as access to resources and institutions of justice. Work Cited Kant, Immanuel, Ted Humphrey, and Immanuel Kant. Perpetual Peace, And Other Essays On Politics, History, And Morals. Indianapolis: Hackett Pub. Co: Hackett Pub Co, 1983. Print. Read More