Report on “a Discourse on Inequality” by Jean Jacques Rousseau

Report On “A Discourse On Inequality”, By Jean Jacques Rousseau

In Rousseau’s book “A Discourse On Inequality”, he looks into the question of where the general inequality amongst men came from. Inequality exists economically, structurally, amongst different generations, genders, races, and in almost all other areas of society. However, Rousseau considers that there are really two categories of inequality. The first is called Natural/Physical, it occurs as an affect of nature. It includes inequalities of age,, health, bodily strength, and the qualities of the mind and soul. The second may be called Moral/Political inequality, this basically occurs through the consent of men. This consists of the privileges one group may have over another, such as the rich over the poor.

Rousseau came to the conclusion that the best way to examine the inequality in society is to examine the beginning of mankind itself. He tried to imagine the early state of man assuming there was ever actually a state where man existed only with the nature, in a solitary, and primitive lifestyle. He did not however revert as far back to the idea of the Neanderthal man to examine the ideas man held and where they came from. Instead, he looked at a state where man looked, and seemed to have the same physical abilities as he does today. Rousseau also concedes that a time where the ideas of government, ownership, justice, and injustice did not exist may not have ever existed. If what many religions tell us is true, then, in mans beginning, he was from the start, handed down laws from god which would influence his thinking and decisions. Through this, the only way such a period could come about would have to be through some catastrophic event, which would not only be impossible to explain, but consequently, impossible to prove. Therefore, imagining this state could prove not only embarrassing, but would be a contradiction to the Holy Scriptures.

In the “natural state”, Rousseau suggests that we should strip man of all the “supernatural gifts” he may have been given over the course of time. He says we should “consider him, in a word, just as he must have come from the hands of nature, we behold in him an animal weaker than some, and less agile than others; but, taking him all around, the most advantageously organized of any.” He presumes that man’s needs would be easily satisfied. His food was easily gained, as was his rest, and he was without need of shelter. Basically, all his needs were easily supplied and obtained. So, where then, can a society come about in which there can be social minorities and majorities? Essentially, this is what Rousseau wanted to know. Man must have begun with only purely animal functions. His sight and his touch must have been his primary condition. This condition is common amongst animals. What then differentiated man from the animals was “to will, and not to will, to desire, and to fear.” Those would be the first, and likely the only operations of his soul. This would remain so until an occasion arrived where these ideas would need to be expanded, and new ideas created. Rousseau poses an interesting question when he asks: ”why a person who has neither fears nor desires should give

himself the trouble of reasoning.” He says it is by the activity of our passions that our reason is improved. We desire knowledge only because we wish to enjoy. We would conclude then that vanity is the source of our “evolution,” but it is not necessarily so according to Rousseau. Man still had nothing but basic desires, he did not know of the pleasure he might experience outside of the act of satisfying his primary needs: Food, Sleep, and Intercourse. Man learns only what nature shows it, and nature to him becomes more indifferent, he has no deep metaphysical type inquiries, no foresight or curiosity. Therefore, although in the future, the idea of vanity is likely to be an aid, which would cause an exponential increase in the reasoning, hence growth of the mind and imagination, it could not be the beginning. Oddly enough, the recognition of death would be one of the first steps made by man in departing from the animal state. It may have come about through the association of pain with death. Pain being the only negative idea/feeling the primitive man had, the pain associated with it could inspire thought, and learning/reasoning. The same way man learns to hunt and not to be caught is the same way he could learn he does not want to die, not because of the aftermath but because of the agony in dying.

Rousseau then compares the ideas of language leading to society, or society leading to language. Language would be a necessity for passing along ideas and knowledge from one to another, if there was only a simple society composed of family (mother-child) they might have developed their own language,