Introduction
This essay explores the central problems that Jean-Jacques Rousseau identifies with modern, civilized society, focusing on his critique as articulated in key works such as *Discourse on the Origin and Basis of Inequality Among Men* (1755) and *The Social Contract* (1762). Rousseau, a prominent Enlightenment philosopher, argues that the development of civilization has corrupted human nature, leading to inequality, dependency, and a loss of authentic freedom. The essay will first outline Rousseau’s diagnosis of these societal issues, examining his concepts of the ‘state of nature,’ inequality, and the corrupting influence of private property and social structures. Following this, it will critically assess Rousseau’s arguments, offering a balanced perspective on the extent to which his views remain relevant or problematic in contemporary contexts. Ultimately, this analysis will argue that while Rousseau’s critique provides valuable insights into the origins of inequality and social discontent, his romanticised view of human nature and rejection of societal progress are difficult to fully endorse in light of modern understandings of human development and social organisation.
Rousseau’s Critique of Modern Society: The Loss of Natural Freedom
Rousseau’s primary contention is that modern, civilized society has deviated from the natural state of human beings, resulting in a profound loss of freedom and authenticity. In his *Discourse on Inequality*, Rousseau posits the concept of the ‘state of nature,’ a hypothetical condition where humans lived as solitary, independent beings, guided by natural instincts and self-sufficiency (Rousseau, 1755). In this state, humans were equal, as there were no artificial hierarchies or social structures to impose dominance or subjugation. Rousseau argues that the emergence of civilization, marked by the development of agriculture, private property, and social institutions, disrupted this natural harmony. The moment one person enclosed a piece of land and claimed ownership, asserting ‘this is mine,’ inequality was born (Rousseau, 1755). This act, according to Rousseau, laid the foundation for societal divisions, as property ownership created disparities in wealth and power, fundamentally altering human relationships from mutual independence to dependency and competition.
Moreover, Rousseau contends that modern society fosters amour-propre, a form of self-love tied to social recognition and comparison with others, as opposed to the natural amour-de-soi, which is a healthy self-concern for survival and well-being in the state of nature (Rousseau, 1755). Amour-propre drives individuals to seek status, wealth, and superiority, perpetuating envy, rivalry, and discontent. For Rousseau, this transformation is a key problem, as it corrupts the innate goodness of human beings and replaces natural compassion with artificial desires and conflicts. This perspective highlights Rousseau’s belief that societal structures, rather than enhancing human life, have degraded it by alienating individuals from their authentic selves.
The Problem of Inequality and Social Dependency
A further issue Rousseau identifies is the institutionalisation of inequality through social and political systems. In *The Social Contract*, he critiques the way modern societies create dependencies that undermine individual autonomy (Rousseau, 1762). He argues that as societies grew more complex, individuals surrendered their natural freedom to the state or ruling authorities under the guise of a social contract. However, this contract often benefits the powerful, perpetuating inequality and exploitation. Rousseau famously states, “Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains” (Rousseau, 1762, p. 1), encapsulating his view that societal structures—while ostensibly designed for order and protection—actually enslave individuals to arbitrary authority and economic disparity.
Indeed, Rousseau points to the role of economic systems in entrenching dependency. The division of labour, for instance, means that individuals no longer possess the self-reliance of the natural state but must depend on others for basic needs. A farmer relies on a blacksmith, a merchant on a labourer, and so on, creating a web of interdependence that, in Rousseau’s view, erodes personal freedom and fosters exploitation (Rousseau, 1755). This systemic inequality, coupled with the loss of natural equality, is a central problem for Rousseau, as it distorts human relationships and undermines the possibility of genuine community.
Evaluation: Strengths and Limitations of Rousseau’s Argument
Rousseau’s critique of modern society offers valuable insights, particularly in highlighting how structural inequalities and social norms can alienate individuals and perpetuate injustice. His emphasis on the origins of inequality through private property resonates with contemporary discussions on wealth disparities and social stratification. For instance, modern studies on income inequality, such as those by Piketty (2014), demonstrate how capital accumulation exacerbates social divides, echoing Rousseau’s concerns about property as a source of division. Furthermore, Rousseau’s concept of amour-propre is arguably relevant in today’s consumerist culture, where social media and societal pressures often drive individuals to seek validation through material success or external approval, rather than intrinsic satisfaction. In this regard, I agree with Rousseau’s observation that civilization can foster artificial desires and discontent.
However, there are significant limitations to Rousseau’s argument that prevent full agreement with his perspective. Firstly, his idealisation of the state of nature is problematic, as it lacks empirical grounding. Anthropological and historical evidence suggests that early human societies were not necessarily solitary or peaceful but often communal and marked by conflict over resources (Keeley, 1996). Rousseau’s romanticised view of human nature as inherently good and uncorrupted by society overlooks the complexity of human instincts, including tendencies toward aggression or self-interest, as discussed in evolutionary psychology (Pinker, 2002). Therefore, while Rousseau’s critique of societal corruption is compelling, his premise about an idyllic pre-social state is difficult to sustain.
Secondly, Rousseau’s apparent rejection of societal progress is contentious. Modern society, despite its flaws, has facilitated advancements in medicine, education, and technology that have improved quality of life and human rights. For example, the development of democratic institutions—albeit imperfect—has provided mechanisms for addressing inequality and protecting individual freedoms, countering Rousseau’s view of societal structures as inherently oppressive (Pinker, 2011). While I acknowledge Rousseau’s concern about dependency and loss of autonomy, I argue that civilization also offers opportunities for collaboration and collective betterment that would be unattainable in a solitary state of nature.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Jean-Jacques Rousseau identifies several profound problems with modern, civilized society, including the loss of natural freedom, the rise of inequality through private property, and the creation of social dependencies that undermine autonomy. His critique remains relevant in highlighting how societal structures can alienate individuals and perpetuate injustice, as evidenced by ongoing issues of wealth disparity and social comparison in contemporary life. However, while I agree with aspects of Rousseau’s diagnosis, particularly his insights into inequality, I find his romanticised view of the state of nature unconvincing and his dismissal of societal progress overly pessimistic. Modern society, despite its imperfections, has achieved significant advancements that cannot be overlooked. Rousseau’s ideas thus serve as a critical lens for examining societal flaws, but they require careful consideration alongside evidence of human development and the benefits of civilization. Ultimately, a balanced approach—one that acknowledges both the challenges and achievements of modern society—is necessary to address the issues Rousseau raises.
References
- Keeley, L. H. (1996) War Before Civilization: The Myth of the Peaceful Savage. Oxford University Press.
- Piketty, T. (2014) Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Harvard University Press.
- Pinker, S. (2002) The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature. Viking.
- Pinker, S. (2011) The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined. Viking.
- Rousseau, J.-J. (1755) Discourse on the Origin and Basis of Inequality Among Men. Translated by G. D. H. Cole. Penguin Classics.
- Rousseau, J.-J. (1762) The Social Contract. Translated by G. D. H. Cole. Penguin Classics.
