Africa was once an unmoulded, pure land- untouched by the ever-growing modern day beliefs of the western world. The people of Africa have been physically and psychologically sculpted by the western world-. The African man is therefore no longer purely African and neither is he completely Western, he is both.
Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) was an English philosopher. The English Civil War was the backdrop for all his writings. “Hobbes also infers from his mechanistic theory of human nature that humans are necessarily and exclusively self-interested,” (Friend, C). Hobbes State of Nature is where the Hobbesian man is only concerned with his desires to better his own situation and acquiring power, but is also reasonable. Hobbes beliefs were arguably
…show more content…
Rousseau’s theory on the State of Nature shows how man, from behaving like animals, “progress” over time into civil society. The State of Nature was a peaceful time. People lived solitary and uncomplicated lives. They had few needs which were easily satisfied by nature. Competition was non-existent and thus less reason for conflict or fear. This civil society with its discoveries and inventions made life easier. This gave rise to leisure time leading men to compare which resulted in envy and pride. Rousseau’s view differs from Hobbes and Locke who believed in the transformation of men from the state of nature to a more civil society. Rousseau in his theory favours men in the state of nature in which they only have natural differences rather than having political, social or economic …show more content…
However, there is no moral liberty. To solve this problem, man enters into a social contract.
The African man came from a state of nature, one like the Lockean man. The state of nature was a state of peace, mutual assistance and morally pure. People lived simple lives in small communities or tribes. The tribes had leaders who they sought advice and wisdom from. Locke believed the purpose of government was to secure the rights of the people. Hobbes purpose of government was to impose law and order, while Rousseau believed its purpose was to unite people under the general will. The African man’s tribal rulers encompassed all three.
The African man believed as Rousseau did, that civilisation corrupted man. European men in the beginning of the modern period began to identify themselves as ‘white ’and therefore fully human and the African man as ‘other’ or non-white and therefore
Rousseau’s beliefs coincided with the beliefs of other Enlightenment thinkers. This is shown when he writes, “Duty and interest thus equally require the two contracting parties [the people and the government] to aid each other mutually” (Document 3). In that period of history, it was typical for people to be ruled by a monarch and they had very little say, if any, in the laws and policies that impacted their day to day life. Rousseau felt that the system was outdated and it made citizens feel as if they were living in someone else’s home rather than their own, so he theorized that by fabricating a system in which the government and the people are forced to work together, it creates a sense of unity and equality. This works because “ … an offense against one of its members is an offense against the body politic.
On the other hand, Werther takes an extremely Romantic approach, with his life and experiences demonstrating the limitations of a rational society. In Discourse on the Origin of Moral Inequality, Rousseau rationally determines that the emergence of society and the invention of property directly cause moral inequality between people, specifically, the rich and the poor. First, he establishes the state of nature as a basic system, with no complex morality or rationality involved, unlike the states of nature described by Hobbes and Locke. At the most fundamental degree, Rousseau places mankind at the same level as other animals.
Rousseau’s beliefs coincided with the beliefs of other Enlightenment thinkers. This is shown when he writes, “Duty and interest thus equally require the two contracting parties [the people and the government] to aid each other mutually” (Document 3). In that period of history, it was typical for people to be ruled by a monarch and they had very little say, if any, in the laws and policies that impacted their day to day life. Rousseau felt that the system was outdated and it made citizens feel as if they were living in someone else’s home rather than their own, so he theorized that by fabricating a system in which the government and the people are forced to work together, it creates a sense of unity and equality. This works because “ … an offense against one of its members is an offense against the body politic.
He believed people act selfishly, so they could not be trusted to make their own decisions. Hobbes said that the only purpose of a government was to protect people from their own evil and
All of these attributes that made the Africans different from the Europeans, were used as tools to justify their mistreatment. If someone is looked at as ugly or inhuman, they do not deserve to be treated as human. If someone doesn’t deserve to be treated as human, it does not rest on the conscience of the oppressors when they are unjust toward
Another effects of sharing autonomy in Rousseau’s state of Nature is the rise of gender roles. Rousseau doesn’t believe that gender roles are formed naturally. For where there is gender roles and a society, there is division of property. What you have really isn’t yours or valuable until; you have a society around it. Men began to look into the future as they realized that they had plenty of goods to lose “for from property one is recognized” in the society (Rousseau 400).
The African continent was not unaccustomed to the idea of warfare, trading, and the keeping of slaves. In fact, these aspects of African life typically intertwined; as Equiano tells, the “stout mahogany-coloured men” would bring them “fire-arms, gunpowder…they always carry slaves through our land”, typically prisoners of war or criminals (Equiano, 30). The author himself was raised
The idea that anything Africans could do would be “disgraceful” to Europeans conflicts with the ideology set forth by Early’s
Adam Smith is obviously interested in what markets, people, and nations do naturally in order to accumulate wealth; hence the word ‘nature’ being in the long title of the book. Jean-Jacques Rousseau, as any decent political philosopher, is also interested in nature and human nature. However, both authors seem to take for granted that their readers would intuitively know what they mean when they use iterations and phrases using the word ‘nature.’ This word is used frequently enough, especially in philosophical texts, that the actual meaning of the word and of phrases containing the word have often been obscured or lost their meaning.
In Basil Davidson’s video, “Different but Equal”, Davidson examines ancient Africa, and how Africans were perceived in ancient and modern times. Davidson discusses pre-colonized Africa and its history, and how racism prevailed in the past and in modern day. By discussing early civilizations, as well as modern day perspectives, Davidson allows the viewer to have expansive information on how individuals view Africans and their culture. In Davidson’s video, he discusses how people in the past have viewed Africa and African culture, and how that relates to our perception of Africa in modern times.
Addressing the Inner Workings of Both Society and the Minds Affected By It The eighteenth century occurred after both the Industrial Revolution and Enlightenment and many different progressions, both good and bad, happened during this time. These include the growing questions on gender roles and the role of a person in society as a whole. In all kinds of societies, people are treated and raised in different ways according to certain traits they own and how society perceives these traits. Jean-Jacques Rousseau's philosophy on the affect of society on an individual addresses these situations and explains why and how people are influenced by society.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau was one of the most influential thinkers during the Enlightenment in eighteenth century Europe. His first major philosophical work, A Discourse on the Sciences and Arts, was the winning response to an essay contest conducted by the Academy of Dijon in 1750. In this work, Rousseau argues that the progression of the sciences and arts has caused the corruption of virtue and morality. This discourse won Rousseau fame and recognition, and it laid much of the philosophical groundwork for a second, longer work, The Discourse on the Origin of Inequality. The second discourse did not win the Academy’s prize, but like the first, it was widely read and further solidified Rousseau’s place as a significant intellectual figure.
INTRODUCTION Jean Jacque Rousseau was born in the city state of Geneva, Switzerland in 1772. Rousseau is primarily known for major works like- The Social Contract, Emile, Discourse on the origin of Inequality, the Constitutional Project for Corsica, and Consideration on the Government of Poland. What makes Rousseau such an important figure in the history of philosophy is because of his contribution to both political and moral philosophies and his concept of ‘general will’, which also gained him a lot of criticism. Apart from his philosophical and political contribution, he was also a novelist, an autobiographer, botanist, composer and also a music theorist.
1. Rousseau’s political theory definitely could lead to totalitarianism because he is suggesting that a government control practically all aspects of its citizens’ lives in order to save them from themselves and their corrupt nature. Because Rousseau claims that people are “spoiled” by civil society, and that civil society does nothing to protect the equality or individual freedoms of man, he believes that it is government who has the duty and the power to force people to act moral in order to achieve Rousseau’s idea of a virtuous society. It is Rousseau’s goal to use the power of the state to suppress selfishness and to force people into social harmony. Rousseau desires a governmental system of direct democracy in order to prevent a government
“This right does not come from nature, it is therefore founded upon convention”. Rousseau does not view society in the same light as Durkheim. He does not believe that society is the savior of humans and that there is no real self without it. Unlike Durkheim, Rousseau believes that the only natural society is the traditional family and that any other form is forged out of convention. Rousseau mentions that when parents are done raising their child and that child is no longer dependent, but chooses to stay then the family is together out if convention and is then unnatural.