French deistic philosopher and author; b. at Geneva June 28, 1712; d. at Ermenonville (28 m. n.e. of Paris) July 2, 1778. His mother died at his birth, and his father, a dissipated and violent-tempered man, paid little attention to the son's training, and finally deserted him. The latter developed a passion for reading, with a special fondness for Plutarch's Lives. Apprenticed first to a notary and then to a coppersmith, he ran away (1728) to escape the rigid discipline, and, after wandering for several days, he fell in with Roman Catholic priests at Consignon in Savoy, who turned him over to Madame de Warens at Annecy, and she sent him to an educational institution at Turin. Here he duly abjured Protestantism, and next served in various households, in one of which he was charged with theft. After more wanderings he was at Chambery (1730), from which Madame de Warens had removed. In her household he spent eight years diverting himself in the enjoyment of nature, the study of music, the reading of the English, German, and French philosophers and chemistry, pursuing the study of mathematics and Latin, and enjoying the playhouse and opera. He next spent eighteen months at Venice as secretary of the French ambassador, Comte de Montaignu (1744-45). Up to this time, when he was thirty-nine, his life, the details of which he publishes in his Confessions (Geneva, 1782), may be described as subterranean. He now returned to Paris, where his opera Les Muses galantes failed, copied music, and was secretary of Madame Dupin. Here he came into association with Diderot, Grimm, D'Alembert, Holbach, and Madame d'Epinay, and was admitted as a contributor to the Encyclopedie; and his gifts of entertainment, reckless manner, and boundless vanity attracted attention. With the Discours sur les sciences et les arts (Paris, 1750), a prize essay in which he set forth the paradox of the superiority of the savage state, he proclaimed his gospel of "back to nature." His operetta Devin du village (1752) met with great success. His second sensational writing appeared: Discours sur l'origine et les fondements de l'inégalité parmi les hommes (1753), against the inequalities of society. His fame was then assured. In 1754 he revisited Geneva, was received with great acclamation, and called himself henceforth " citizen of Geneva." In 1756, upon invitation of Madame d'Epinay, he retired to a cottage (afterward " The
The authors of the Virginia Declaration of Rights, the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Paine’s Common Sense and the United States Constitution pulled from many different sources during the infancy of these invaluable documents. They used pieces such as Hobbes’ Leviathan, Locke’s Second Treatise on Government, Rousseau’s Of The Social Contract, and Montesquieu’s The Spirit of the Laws as inspiration for America’s fundamental government. Each of these influential political philosophers were instrumental in making our government what it is today. Hobbes brought the ideas of natural equality, a strong, powerful government, and the principle that governments must be able to protect the people to American political philosophy. Locke added that
Things in the Middle East, Syria and Iran are in some complex situations right now, Mr. President, with the outcome of the Arab Spring and the issues the United States has with its allies and enemies. The United States needs to repair its alliances, make peace with its enemies and cautiously tread into understanding and gathering knowledge with the situation in the Middle East before declaring any actions to be taken.
In 1798, his grandfather died, which gave him his title and his estate. He later attended Trinity College at Cambridge University and earned his master’s degree in July of 1808 (“Lord”). Aside from his schooling he was an excellent marksman, horseman, and swimmer (Gurney 72). Many thought he was “mad- bad- and dangerous to know” (Napierkowski 38). His personality was very out of the realm of normal for the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries in which he lived. He isolated himself from others’ opinions about his cruel, sexual eccentric...
The Freedom of Individual Citizens in Rousseau’s State “While uniting himself with all, [each associate] may still obey himself alone, and remain as free as before."[1 ] While Rousseau would claim that citizens in his state are free, much of the criticism levelled against him is precisely because his state is seen as authoritarian and against individual diversity. Rousseau’s state is one created by all citizens in their own interests and therefore guided by the ‘general will’, whereby laws are made to promote the public rather than the private good. All citizens take an active part in decision-making and are required to adhere to the ‘general will’. Sovereignty is a key word in examining Rousseau’s state as it is held by the inalienable and indivisible body politic that acts in accordance with the ‘general will’.
all others. The way we started, grew as a society, and live now, are totally
Pico was born into a noble family close to Modena on February 24, 1463. He was the son of Giovan Francesco I and Guila Boiardo. He was born with an extraordinary gift for learning. He studied Canon Law in Bologna, but then he moved to Ferrara, earned more education, and then to Padua (“Pico della Mirandola, Giovanni (1463-1494)), there, he met one of his most important teachers, Elia del Midigo (“Giovanni Pico della Mirandola” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). By now he was studying philosophy. He moved to Florence in 1484, while there, he became one of the most active members of Lorenzo de Medici's Platonic Academy, and he also became chief exponent of Neoplatonism. While in Florence, he increased his knowledge on Platonism (“Pico della Mirandola, Giovanni (1463-1494)). In 1485, he moved from Florence to Paris where the citadel of Aristotelian scholasticism was. He also studied Hebrew, Arabic, and Aramaic as well as Latin and Greek (Rebhorn 57) At the age of 22, right before he left Paris, he had made his first important contribution to philosophy-He defended the ...
The service to Catherine's noble family took him to La Rochelle, ultimately then to Paris. In 1573, he came under the eye of King Charles IX. He appointed him as counselor to the parliament of Brittany at Rennes. Then he remained in this post untill 1580 when he returned to Paris to take up offices of the Maitre de Requetes, also as a royal privy counselor. Form 1584 to 1589, political intrigue resulted both in free time, and then for the continuation of his mathematical studies, especially when they were evolving ideas on algebra (Parshall 1).
Locke and Rousseau present themselves as two very distinct thinkers. They both use similar terms, but conceptualize them differently to fulfill very different purposes. As such, one ought not be surprised that the two theorists do not understand liberty in the same way. Locke discusses liberty on an individual scale, with personal freedom being guaranteed by laws and institutions created in civil society. By comparison, Rousseau’s conception portrays liberty as an affair of the entire political community, and is best captured by the notion of self-rule. The distinctions, but also the similarities between Locke and Rousseau’s conceptions can be clarified by examining the role of liberty in each theorist’s proposed state of nature and civil society, the concepts with which each theorist associates liberty, and the means of ensuring and safeguarding liberty that each theorist devises.
From that point on, he successfully founded modern French opera. “His involvement was not limited to musical composition. He collaborated with his poets in the production of libretti, and even took an interest in the acting and declamation of the performers. His insistence on discipline and high artistic standards in the opera orchestra was legendary” (Straughan (a))
Jean Jacques Rousseau in On Education writes about how to properly raise and educate a child. Rousseau's opinion is based on his own upbringing and lack of formal education at a young age. Rousseau depicts humanity as naturally good and becomes evil because humans tamper with nature, their greatest deficiency, but also possess the ability to transform into self-reliant individuals. Because of the context of the time, it can be seen that Rousseau was influenced by the idea of self-preservation, individual freedom, and the Enlightenment, which concerned the operation of reason, and the idea of human progress. Rousseau was unaware of psychology and the study of human development. This paper will argue that Rousseau theorizes that humanity is naturally good by birth, but can become evil through tampering and interfering with nature.
recognized as a writer. He became one of the most famous and well paid French
Both Aristotle's “Politics” and Jean Jacques Rousseau's Discourse on Inequality address the natural right and superiority of man and his subsets. In his piece, Aristotle discusses the emotional feeling of superiority, while Rousseau discusses the more logistic aspects. Together, their writing begs the question of the morality of slavery. Aristotle seems more willing to accept slavery as a natural creation by humans, however, in the end both of their pieces show the immorality and abnormality of slavery.
Political philosophers Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Karl Marx dreamt up and developed unique theories of total revolution. Although similar in their intention to dissolve dividing institutions such as religion and class structure, as well as their shared reluctance to accept the rather less hopeful conclusions of government and man that had been drawn by their predecessors Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, the blueprints Rousseau and Marx had printed were cited to two very different sources. Rousseau approached the problem of oppression from a political standpoint, focusing on the flawed foundation of liberal individualism that has been continually adopted by democracies. Marx on the other hand took an unconventional route of concentrating on economics. By completely eliminating the economic class system, Marx believed there could be a society of which would transcend the realm of politics. Despite their different approaches, both theories conclude in universal equality, a real equality between humans that has never before been observed in any lasting civilization. While both theories operate on reason and seem to be sound, they remain unproven due to their contingency on various factors of time and place, but mainly on their prerequisite of incorruptibility. Now, while both theories may very well have the odds dramatically stacked against their favor, I believe they must be thoroughly dissected for their content before attempting to condemn them to utopianism.
Rene Descartes was born on March 31, 1956, in Touraine, France. Although frail in health throughout his entire life, he studied fervently his entire life. He entered into Jesuit College at the age of eight, in which he studied the classics, logic, and philosophy. Descartes used a few more years in Paris contemplating mathematics with companions, for example, Mersenne. By then in time, a man that held that sort of training either joined the armed force or the congregation. Descartes decided to join the armed force of an aristocrat in 1617. While serving, Descartes went over a certain geometrical issue that had been acted like a test to the whole world to understand. After tackling the issue in just a couple of hours, he had met a man named Isaac Beeckman, a Dutch researcher. This would end up being a long fellowship. Since getting mindful of his scientific capabilities, the life of the armed force was inadmissible to Descartes. Notwithstanding, he remained a warrior upon the impact of his family and convention. In 1621, Descartes surrendered from the armed force and voyaged broadly for five years. Throughout this period, he ke...
Rousseau describes democracy as a form of government that “has never existed and never will” ; yet twenty-six countries in the world are considered to be full democracies. How can this be possible? Rousseau’s concept of democracy supports the most fundamental and basic premise of democracy – one in which all citizens directly participate. While his idea of democracy cannot be considered an effective indictment of what passes for democracy today, it is not Rousseau’s account which is flawed but that in modern society is would be practically impossible to achieve this idea of democracy.