Rousseau, on the other hand, influenced by Calvinism, places high esteem on the idea of duty to the accepted norms; a Calvinist maxim states: According to Rousseau, those who do not consent to the general will, a will he felt inherently grounded in the absolute general good, are rejecting a civilized political and social structure grounded in morality, rationality, and duty.
Even Rousseau is not so dogmatic as to assert that his principles are universal. Rousseau appears to think we have an intrinsic freedom that exists in the state of nature, and he wants to merge the individual liberty one supposedly has in the state of nature with civil society.
The simple fact must be illuminated that, the size of a political institution is inversely proportional to the influence each of its constituent members wields within the formation of its public policy.
Forget philosophy, close your books, take up the sword and punish the imposters.
The problem with the general will is that it seems to reject individual diversity. This friction will ultimately destroy the state, but healthy states can last many centuries before they dissolve.
German philosopher Ludwig Feuerbach sums up this argument against universal theological doctrines, and for individual acceptance of Truth by stating: Rousseau says that if anyone refuses to obey the general will he will be compelled to do so by the whole body; which means nothing else than that he will be forced to be free 6.
The general will is an idea that signifies the wishes or welfares of society as a whole. Objections to Mill what actually constitutes harm?
Rousseau himself, however, acknowledged that general will is not a pragmatic goal and therefore is difficult to obtain, so he conceded that most often simple majority rule will suffice. Simply the process of listening to alternative opinions and ideas is going to be beneficial to society.
The second aspect of Mill s conditions society must follow is that of tastes and pursuits. The ancient world, embedded within Roman tradition, defined liberty not as individual freedom to pursue individual desires, but as subservience to a government which the individual had power to influence.
Rousseau s social contract theory, especially his notion of the general will, makes it seem impossible to avoid a tyranny of the majority that Mill talks about. Conclusion All of mankind desires to be free. A place with no rules or restrictions to tell people what they can or cannot do, but even if this was the case, Rousseau would argue that we are still constrained because we re still in an adversarial position to our desires, we would be still in chains.
By equating the formation of society with the development of rationality and morality, Rousseau concludes that duty to the state, involved with both morality and reason, supersedes the duty to oneself, which is based only around impulse.
The government is distinct from the sovereign, and the two are almost always in friction. From this relatively bare philosophical framework, a confused argument is oft-made in response to the neo-Roman claim that freedom can only be obtained through representative government: The bare philosophical framework behind liberalism, the strict idea of individualism, provides no instruction for governmental institutions, so long as no restriction on individual liberty is imposed.
From these two philosophical values, group cohesion verses individual liberty, two fundamentally different concepts of freedom have emerged: Each of these concepts of liberty, though based on similar principles of republicanism and democracy, can translate into intrinsically unique political institutions.Comparing Rousseau And Mill On Liberty Essay Words | 8 Pages The term “civil or social liberties” is one that garners a lot of attention and focus from both Rousseau and Mill, although they tackle the subject from slightly different angles.
Nov 21, · Philosopher Faceoff: Rousseau vs. Mill When reading “On Liberty” by John Stuart Mill this week, I couldn’t help but think how much the text directly contradicted one of our other favorite political thinkers – Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
1. Compare Rousseau and Mill on liberty. In what way can Mill s argument be read as a critique of the conception of freedom at the heart of Rousseau s argument in On the Social Contract (especially.
This essay discusses and compares Rousseau's Social Contract and John Stuart Mill's On Liberty, with a view to assessing their points of congruence and departure, in regards to the concept of liberty.
Rousseau vs Mill - Comparing Rousseau And Mill On Liberty.Download