PO201: Week 8: Rousseau on Social Inequality
Lecture:
Jean-Jacques Rousseau was born in the city state of Geneva in 1712, and was the son of
Isaac Rousseau who was a citizen of Geneva. Isaac had to leave Geneva after a fight, leaving
Rousseau (at age 16) working as a domestic servant, before taking up a position in the army
as a tutor. This brought him into contact with major Enlightenment figures, and soon moved
to Paris (the centre of the Enlightenment). In Paris, he was surrounded by poverty and vast
wealth. Here, he experienced an epiphany; humans are good by nature, but corrupted by
society. He was forced to leave Paris after a publication was thought to have condemned
religion. He travelled to England and sought refuge with David Hume. His mental health got
seriously bad, and he became paranoid that Hume was plotting against him.
Rousseau’s ‘Second Discourse on Inequality’ was written as an entry to an essay competition
in 1754 for the Academy of Dijon. The question prompt was ‘What is the origin of inequality
among people, and it is authorised by natural law?’. The text was published in 1755. Let’s
break down the question:
Explanatory Question: What is the origin of inequality among people?
When Rousseau answered this question he did it by asking about the persistence of
inequality, not its historical roots. Therefore, the question really being answered was: What
accounts for the fact that nearly all human societies are characterised by significant
inequalities amongst their members.
Normative Question: Is the inequality among people justifiable?
Rousseau’s reasoning is as follows:
If the inequalities among humans persist because of facts about human nature, then they
are likely to be unavoidable so we cannot condemn them as unjust. By contrast, if inequality
persists for other reasons then they are avoidable, so it makes sense to inquire into their
justifiability. From this, Rousseau put together three theses:
Negative Thesis: Inequalities do not persist because of facts about human nature.
Positive Thesis: Inequalities persist because of contingent facts about human psychology.
Normative Thesis: Most inequalities are unjustifiable, because they produce bas
consequences. The badness of inequality is instrumental not intrinsic.
Rousseau was largely concerned with social inequalities (power, wealth, prestige and
authority). These are comparative properties, such that what matters is whether an
individual possesses more of less of it than others. These are the inequalities which most
people are concerned with in modern societies.
There are natural inequalities such as health, strength and talent. These natural inequalities,
according to Rousseau play an imperfect role in determining who enjoys the advantages of
power, wealth, prestige and authority. The role these inequalities play is contingent on the
design of our social institutions. For example, the institution of the patriarchy keeps women
Lecture:
Jean-Jacques Rousseau was born in the city state of Geneva in 1712, and was the son of
Isaac Rousseau who was a citizen of Geneva. Isaac had to leave Geneva after a fight, leaving
Rousseau (at age 16) working as a domestic servant, before taking up a position in the army
as a tutor. This brought him into contact with major Enlightenment figures, and soon moved
to Paris (the centre of the Enlightenment). In Paris, he was surrounded by poverty and vast
wealth. Here, he experienced an epiphany; humans are good by nature, but corrupted by
society. He was forced to leave Paris after a publication was thought to have condemned
religion. He travelled to England and sought refuge with David Hume. His mental health got
seriously bad, and he became paranoid that Hume was plotting against him.
Rousseau’s ‘Second Discourse on Inequality’ was written as an entry to an essay competition
in 1754 for the Academy of Dijon. The question prompt was ‘What is the origin of inequality
among people, and it is authorised by natural law?’. The text was published in 1755. Let’s
break down the question:
Explanatory Question: What is the origin of inequality among people?
When Rousseau answered this question he did it by asking about the persistence of
inequality, not its historical roots. Therefore, the question really being answered was: What
accounts for the fact that nearly all human societies are characterised by significant
inequalities amongst their members.
Normative Question: Is the inequality among people justifiable?
Rousseau’s reasoning is as follows:
If the inequalities among humans persist because of facts about human nature, then they
are likely to be unavoidable so we cannot condemn them as unjust. By contrast, if inequality
persists for other reasons then they are avoidable, so it makes sense to inquire into their
justifiability. From this, Rousseau put together three theses:
Negative Thesis: Inequalities do not persist because of facts about human nature.
Positive Thesis: Inequalities persist because of contingent facts about human psychology.
Normative Thesis: Most inequalities are unjustifiable, because they produce bas
consequences. The badness of inequality is instrumental not intrinsic.
Rousseau was largely concerned with social inequalities (power, wealth, prestige and
authority). These are comparative properties, such that what matters is whether an
individual possesses more of less of it than others. These are the inequalities which most
people are concerned with in modern societies.
There are natural inequalities such as health, strength and talent. These natural inequalities,
according to Rousseau play an imperfect role in determining who enjoys the advantages of
power, wealth, prestige and authority. The role these inequalities play is contingent on the
design of our social institutions. For example, the institution of the patriarchy keeps women
