Rousseau's Reconciliation Of The General Will

The Reconciliation of the General Will: A Naturalistic Fallacy In the Social Contract, Rousseau introduces two seemingly contrasting conceptions of the general will. He advances that the under certain conditions, the general will is the will of the assembled people and advances that the general will “is always right and always tends toward the public utility.”(172) In three parts, this paper will illustrate how these two conceptions of the general will are irreconcilable. In the first part, I will present a common but mistaken reconciliation of these two conception. This reconciliation is founded upon the “derived from all in order to be applied to all” principle. In the second part, I will demonstrate how the reconciliation of the two conceptions

Essentially, for the two concepts to be reconciled, all individuals of the assembled people should agree upon one general will, and ultimately one common good. Rousseau argues that if the majority opinion of the general will differs from and minority opinion of the general will, it is because the minority opinion was mistaken as to what the general will was. (215) However, it is irrational to assume that all individuals should have the same opinion about the general will and the common good. Secondly, even if the first assumption was satisfied and all people had the same opinion of the common good, this argument is highly dependant upon virtue. Rousseau assumes that all people will actually to suppress their personal interests for the general interests. Again, it is highly irrational to assume that all men will carry this virtue. Nevertheless, Rousseau may refute this criticism by arguing that when man enters a civil society, he replaces his natural freedom with civil freedom. (167) In doing so, man is no longer a slave to his passions, and attains a moral freedom of self-mastery. (167) Rousseau declares that man is then “forced to act upon other principles and consult to reason before listening to his inclinations.” (167) As a result, Rousseau can confer that man should be more inclined to suppress his personal interest for the general will. Lastly, it is assumed that communication between people is the only element that inclines man to similar interests. As a result, Rousseau assumes that without communication, man should never fear a tyranny of the majority. In actuality, people will naturally have aligned interests, making partial associations