The French Revolution: The Profession of Faith by Rousseau - Assignment Example

Part The Profession of Faith is Rousseau’s attempt at analyzing God and Religion. This passage is part of the Priest’s (the narrator) introspection of what his duties are as a human being. The passage under discussion is the Priest’s attempt to learn what mode of conduct God prescribes him. To decipher the “rules I ought to prescribe myself in order to fulfil my destiny on earth according to the intention of Him who put me there”. Consistent with the rest of the text, Rousseau emphasizes the significance of honest sentiment and its interpretation to draw out theological truths. The Priest explores four stages of theological enquiry. The first stage talks about our sense organs and their function. The next stage discusses God and his properties, while the third analyses our position in the universe and society. Finally, the fourth stage talks about how we should conduct our lives. The passage in discussion is part of the narrative about the last stage. Rousseau is constructing an analysis to find out his purpose and destiny. He is trying to read God’s motive in placing him on earth. He wants to find out what his moral duties are. He turns to the feeling of his heart and the sentiment expressed by it, to deduce his duties. Rousseau argues that, while reason and evidence are appropriate tools for discovering truths, they are capable of misleading too. But, paying close attention to the voice of one’s heart, the conscience, will reveal nothing but the truth. The priest infers, “Conscience is the voice of the soul; the passions are the voice of the body”. Our senses are linked to our bodies and ultimately to passions, which don’t necessarily correspond to morality. The priest cites examples of passionate feelings that had misled mankind in the past. He infers that while bodily instincts and feelings arising out of our passions can hold different values on the moral scale, the conscience, which acts as the instinct in the soul, assumes a flawless moral conviction. One does not have to look beyond his own inner voice to understand what is moral. He alludes that external sources of knowledge, which includes professions by other philosophers as well as judgments formed via our senses are not trust worthy. Rousseau places strong faith in what his conscience conveys to him. He believes that there is no need for any external tool of moral inquiry than the voice of the soul. According to him, all that is required of the individual is the willingness to heed to its message, which is invariably sincere and honest. To support his claim, Rousseau investigates the efficacy of our sense organs. For example, our senses tell us that selfishness is virtue. But selfish acts that would disadvantage others cannot be accepted as correct. While rationale that is formed from the sensory input can lead down the wrong path, a belief in one’s conscience and acceptance of its message will lead only to morally correct actions and consequences. Given the topic under discussion - proper moral conduct – the lines in this passage are less controversial than the rest of the book. Rousseau’s line of thinking with respect to human morality was congruent with eminent philosophers of the time, including David Hume. There is no doubt that Rousseau is carried away by emotion. Personally, while I appreciate Rousseau’s earnestness of effort to uncover meaning, I do not subscribe to his emphasis on sentiment and feeling, as they are experiences at an individual level and this technique of enquiry does not allow experimental verification of the hypothesis by any means. Rousseau does not put forth a convincing rational argument to consolidate his claim. To the contrary, he makes a general appeal to the readers to trust their inner feelings, as he believes that they cannot be wrong. It begs the question: But how can universal moral principles accepted without recourse to just reasoning? Giving precedence to the sentiment of the heart ahead of rational analysis was not the method of inquiry of the Enlightenment period. Criticisms of him and disapproval of major parts of the book by his intellectual peers seem just. I agree with Rousseau that our outer senses are poor equipment for unraveling moral truths. Yet, while emphasizing on the validity of feelings that arise from the heart, he fails to distinguish between those feelings which comprise conscience and the rest which are mere prejudice. This weakens his argument and leaves it incomplete. Part - 2 a) The direction, intent and the spirit of the revolution are amply evident in Robespierre’s address to the members of the National Assembly in 1794. The speech reveals many aspects of the revolution and it is not difficult to trace the ideas contained in it to the reformist literature of the Enlightenment period. The most striking aspect of the French revolution was its bloodiness. Tens of thousands of people who tried to resist the changes were brutally guillotined. The majority of the victims belonged to the aristocratic and noble families as they are the ruling class. People loyal to the monarchy and sympathetic to counter-revolutionary forces were also not spared this fate. In what is regarded as an act of retribution, the victims were condemned to death without a fair chance to present their case. The following words by Robespierre would incite the members of the National Assembly towards implementing the Great Terror: “the mainspring of popular government in time of revolution is at the same time virtue and terror”. The fundamental change that the revolution brought about was the overthrow of the French Monarchy and the installation of a Republican form of government in its place. The inclination to radically break with this tradition was so strong that even place names were changed. The traditional Christianity based calendar was replaced by a more universal and secular one. At the time, the streets of France reverberated to the cries of slogans like “Liberty, equality and fraternity”, which served as potent revolutionary symbols. Robespierre attributes a whole array of negative qualities to the traditional form of society and anticipates what the revolution would bring in their place. The following words capture that spirit: “all the virtues and all the miracles of the republic for all the vices and all the absurdities of the monarchy.” The revolution overthrew the elitist rule and handed power to the majority of the masses for the first time in the history of mankind. The notion of liberty for all people in an egalitarian society was eventually implemented. The unraveling of the hold of fanaticism and religious superstition was another important aspect of change that the revolution brought on. The influence of the Catholic Church on the affairs of government had been profound until then. This condition was challenged and eventually the separation of state and church was achieved. Freedom of religion and common allegiance in a secular state culminated in the Festival of the Supreme Being, which served as a symbolic celebration. The separation of State and Church was officially decreed in 1795. The allusion to the principles behind those developments that would replace the monarchy and the Catholic Church are found in the following words from the source: “…enjoyment of liberty and equality, the reign of that eternal justice from which the laws have been engraved not on marble and stone but in the hearts of all men.” Here, ‘marble and stone’ is a reference to the Judeo-Christian belief in religious revelation to Moses in tablets of stone. b) One core concept of the Enlightenment thought is putting an end to “fanaticism” in all its forms. This included religious dogmas and superstitions. Robespierre’s sympathy to this concept is clearly manifest in his speech. Another such indication of the influence of Enlightenment is found in his emphasis of equality and natural rights to all the members of the republic. Everyone was entitled to be treated in a way fitting their dignity as a human being. Accordingly, everyone had the right to equal justice before the law and a right not to be exploited by those enjoying power and privilege. And such sentiment is also evident in the source under discussion. There is further proof in the source to trace the principles of the Revolution to the ideas of Enlightenment. The central themes of the Enlightenment culture were humanitarianism and rights for all human beings and such sentiments were expressed by Robespierre as well. In fact, the immorality of slave trade was discussed by most of the reformist thinkers of the period leading up to the Revolution. The principle had the support of such influential intellectuals as Voltaire, Rousseau and Hume among others. Consistently, he implicitly attacks the inhumane practices of religious oppression and slavery. Thus, the passage under discussion adds more weight to the theory that the Enlightenment prepared a climate of opinion which eventually ushered in the Revolution. Read More