OVERVIEW and IDEAS as you RESPOND TO ROUSSEAU

​

Jean Jacques Rousseau The Social Contract

 

AT THE HEART OF ROUSSEAU is an INQUIRY INTO WHAT MAKES A SOCIETY JUST or FAIR

Rousseau and other philosophers, like Aristotle [think Allegory of the Cave] try to explain why things are the way they are and/or why that should change or remain as is. Rousseau's "The Social Contract" is commenting on the way we function in society. He points to the family as the microcosm [tiny version] of a society and the father as a version of the government/ruler. Rousseau sees this as the appropriate social order with children obeying the father until they become independent and then they become the ruler for their own family. Rousseau then suggests that rulers should be fair, that slavery is not natural [it's against human nature], and that war is the fault of a government--not the people [that people of different states are not naturally enemies, their governments makes them enemies]. 

​

CONFESSION #1: I am not a professional philosopher nor an expert on philosophy. But, I realize that the ideas at the heart of philosophical discussions matter because they explore what it means to be [to be as humans? to be a learners? to be as part of society? to be as mothers? to promote public health issues like breast feeding?] and the way things are [why things are the way they are? how or why they should be different?]. 

​

GRAB A DICTIONARY or OPEN A TAB TO SEARCH THE DEFINITION OF TERMS

Rousseau is writing in a very dense, florid way. For me, it helps if I print something like "The Social Contract" and find a quite place to read--which usually means reading after the kids go to bed or before they wake up. I also write all over the margins to try to connect ideas and make sense of things.

 

CONFESSION #2: I looked up florid to make sure it was the word I wanted to use to describe Rousseau's writing. It was. According to Oxford's language dictionary, Florid = "elaborately or excessively intricate or complicated." Using a dictionary is something most of us do as we're reading and learning new things--using a tool like a dictionary to track down things you don't know yet is a vital part of learning and growing. It can be humbling to admit when I don't know a term, but it's better to learn it than to skip the opportunity to grow. 

 

Rousseau is a challenging read; even professional philosophers disagree about what he says and what it means for society. And, we can get in on those arguments by taking time to read Rousseau. It also reinforces our learning and retention of what we're learning if we take the time to contemplate and write a response. This is metacognition in action [think back at Session 2] when we're reflecting on and writing a response to what he's trying to say about the way societies function, and helps us grapple with ideas as he questions what is just and unjust [natural or unnatural] about those systems.

 

Below, in PART 2, I provide an example of how you might flex your philosophical muscles in response to a quote from Rousseau. 

 

WE ARE ALREADY HAVING DISCUSSIONS THAT PHILOSOPHERS HAVE

Whether we realize it or not, we flex our philosophical muscles when we talk about the way things are, what is or is not fair, and the way things ought to be. In fact, your philosophy of a just society might be at the heart of your work as a grassroots leader--your hope is to help people get equal opportunity, access, and benefits to form a more fair and just society.

So thinking about the way things are and why they are that way as well as questioning "how can I help make things better?" is part of being a grassroots leader: many of us are already novice philosophers whether we realize it or not.

For this reason, it is beneficial to take time to read and understand other philosophers to get a window into what is at the foundation of what we believe to be just and the implications of this idea of justice for a society. 

 

PART 2: AN EXAMPLE OF HOW YOU MIGHT SHAPE YOUR HOMEWORK RESPONSE

​

FIRST, PICK A QUOTE

On page 5, line 15-20 of Rousseau's "The Social Contract" state:

 

​

NEXT, SHARE/QUOTE THAT QUOTE

QUOTE: "War then is a relation, not between man and man, but between State and State, and individuals are enemies only accidentally, not as men, nor even as citizens, but as soldiers; not as members of their country, but as its defenders. Finally, each State can have for enemies only other States, and not men; for between things disparate in nature there can be no real relations." 

​

THEN, WRITE YOUR THOUGHTS/RESPONSES TO THAT QUOTE

MY RESPONSE TO THE QUOTE: We see Rousseau's idea play out as our government is at odds with China, but we--as individuals--purchase products made in China, know/care about people we meet from China, and may [in business endeavors] do business with people who live in China. Our personal lives and engagement with the personal lives of people who live in China are not full of political strife because we aren't focused on governments and seats of power, we're focused on personal exchanges (ie friendships) and mutually beneficial business exchanges.

So, if we are not at odds with the people of China, why are we at odds politically with China and what does this mean for the people who serve in our military and China's military? Rousseau's argument here suggests that soldiers are not natural enemies of other soldiers--they are enemies because their governments tell them they are enemies and order them to be defensive or wage war. The next step logically for Rousseau would suggest that, for this reason, people must put pressure on governments to fight only just wars [wars to protect the rights of people] rather than selfish wars for power or wealth--because the people of one country are not natural enemies of the people of other countries. Meanwhile, to show dominance or gain power, the governments may tell their people [convince them] they are enemies--they pit them against one another. Therefore, I might argue that Rousseau suggest that to protect all people of all nations, the people of each nation should put pressure on governments to avoid war for the sake of each nation's citizens to protect all citizens of our planet. In this model, people are important to the success of a government and the state that government manages/controls.

*You might notice that this  response is well over 100 words. Your response doesn't need to be this long or it could be longer. If it is, then only respond to one quote rather than to two quotes.

 

I hope this helps as you think about how you might respond to a sentence or single section in Rousseau.

​

[END]

​

______________________________________________________________________________

​

​

​

​