Rousseau’s Notion of Human Nature and Theory of State: A Critique

Abstract

This paper critically examines Rousseau’s concept of human nature and its underlying influence on his theory of State. Rousseau, unlike Hobbes, sees human nature as being inherently good, unselfish, and non-violent. He maintains that man in the state of nature was free, happy and amoral since, according to him, the concept of morality is coeval with civilization. He blames socialization and civilization for being responsible for man’s fallennes, depravity and loss of freedom. Rousseau formulates a collectivistic theory of State based on the notion of General Will, which can properly legitimize the already bastardized social order. The problem that this paper confronts is that of reconciling an inherently free, good and happy man with an inherently enslaving, bad and oppressive social system as presented by Rousseau. The paper also ignites the age long controversy between proponents of atomistic individualism and totalitarian collectivistic communitarianism. Our method of study is basically textual exposition and analysis. In conclusion, the paper finds that Rousseau started abinitio as an individualist and ended as a harbinger of a totalitarian collectivistic society. Apart from highlighting the inherent complexities and contradictions in Rousseau’s theory vis-a-vis contemporary realities, this paper also proposes a selective synthesis of both philosophies as the way forward.