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 number of pre-Enlightenment collectives, such as the Germanic tribes, that, he believes, were able to function in a more harmonious state as a root of their proximity to natural human instincts. German philosopher Immanuel Kant considered many of the same aspects of human nature and Enlightenment similar to Rousseau. There ar varying degrees to which Kants exultation of the Enlightenment is inconsistent with Rousseaus view of the perversity of earthly concern. Kants celebration of the Enlightenment is, perhaps, most inconsistent with Rousseaus views on the perversity of humanity in terms of the beneficial social gain achieved in the move from the Medieval Ages to the Renaissance. It has been demonstrated that Rousseau rejects covering fire assertions of this move as being an indictor or social mature as to an extent he believes that it perverts the natural state of huma nity. This is contrasted with Kants perspective 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. Immaturity 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 ostensible social progress to be a perversion of humanitys natural... This essay has examined Jean-Jacques Rousseaus conception 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 understanding , its argued that the of import 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 categorical 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.