In What Way, According to Rousseau, is Humanity Perverse Essay

In What Way, According to Rousseau, is Humanity Perverse - Essay ExampleIn these regards, Rousseau points to a hail of pre- learning collectives, such as the Germanic tribes, that, he believes, were able to function in a more harmonic state as a result of their proximity to natural human being instincts. German philosopher Immanuel Kant considered many of the corresponding aspects of human nature and Enlightenment similar to Rousseau. There are varying degrees to which Kants celebration of the Enlightenment is inconsistent with Rousseaus view of the perversity of humanity. Kants celebration of the Enlightenment is, perhaps, most inconsistent with Rousseaus views on the perversity of humanity in terms of the beneficial friendly gain achieved in the light upon from the Medieval Ages to the Renaissance. It has been demonstrated that Rousseau rejects blanket assertions of this move as being an indictor or social progress as to an extent he believes that it perverts the natural stat e of humanity. This is contrasted with Kants post on Enlightenment as a clear and direct means of humanity absolving itself from its immaturity. Consider Kants writing, Enlightenment is mans emergence from his self-imposed immaturity. immatureness is the inability to use ones understanding without guidance from another (Kant, p. 45). To a large extent, the inconsistency between Kant and Rousseaus perspective here can be linked to notions of intellectual modernism. While Kant has embraced the idea that intellectual and social progress operate on a linear path of enlightenment, Rousseau has resisted this concept, contending instead that it is oftentimes possible for superficial social progress to be a perversion of humanitys natural... This essay has examined Jean-Jacques Rousseaus existence of human perversity. It has further considered the extent that Rousseaus perspective on human perversity is inconsistent with Kants celebration of the Enlightenment. In these contexts of under standing, its argued that the main inconsistency between the perspectives is in terms of micro and macro-scales of thought. On an individual scale, Rousseau rejects the Enlightenment as pure progress, while Kant embraces it as an escape for immaturity. Conversely, on a large-scale, both theorists recognize that in rejecting divine sovereignty, society can be entrusted with achieving self-governance through the social contract and matt imperative. While Rousseau and Kant disagree on the blanket nature of social progress as achieved through the Enlightenment, to a degree its clear that Rousseaus perspective on the social contract and Kants perspective on social mores are consistent. The divergence in understanding between Kant and Rousseaus perspectives on human perversion and social progress are evident when considered from a larger scale.