I appreciate these videos as a self- teaching philosophy student. The internet should be used for self improvement, healthy communication, and for gaining knowledge. It is awesome to read about these philosophers and supplement learning with these videos.
Interesting how Hobbes and Rousseau had opposite understandings of the primordial state of nature.
4 ปีที่แล้ว +50
Yeah definitely! And one of the most interesting and commun fact between these two phylosophy is that you can basically use both to justify the same situation: they will both make sens. It was the main subject in one of our final phylosophy exam! I also writted a 5 pages these on the book "Lord of the Flies" (In french, of course, because I'm a french canadian) in which I analysed evolution of the human nature with Hobbes and Rousseau theories. If you haven't read this book, I definitely recommand you to do so! There's an interesting story context! 😄
He did, he talks about it frequently in the confessions and it's interesting. He gets that it's ridiculous that its him of all people writing a book about child-rearing for example. But I got the impression that he very much felt himself not up for the task of fatherhood. Too bad their wasn't vasectomies back then.
Because he considered himself to be a shitty father figure to have. One could say he was hypocrite and cowardly, but maybe he wanted the best for those kids
@@felixracine3994 he knowingly sent them to the worst orphanage in France, where most, if not all, of them died. What you said even if it were true is stupid. One of the “greatest” thinking men of his time is not allowed to do what he did and get a pass. He was a garbage human being. His ideas were not based in the real world and he lived his life selfishly in the worst definition of the word.
@@jimmiferfreddette8583 This teaches us that, something good can come out from the most disgusting person and we don't always act as we speak or think.
@@jerryquiros You’ve got it backwards. How we act is the only thing that matters. I don’t care what someone says or thinks. You can speak or think terrible acts of violence toward me but until you act on your words it means nothing. Only a good father can teach someone how to be a good father. Intellectuals and theorists are worthless until they put their ideas into practice. And who said Rousseau did any great work?? Lol
I wanted to show this video to my students regarding the General Will... and much to my surprise, it isn't mentioned. The rise of the General Will is really the turning point from Early Modern Europe to Modern Europe. It is essential to understanding the French Revolution. Why categorize this video under political theory and not include "the General Will?" Thank you for excellent videos, I return to you with increasing frequency.
I keep playing these videos over and over again and listen to em as I work. It's an attempt to burn the knowledge into my brain but I just can't seem to remember as much as I want..
I often feel that these political theorist's, philosophers, and artists are just projecting their deepest insecurities as humans when they create their work. It's as though culture and art are just biological defense mechanisms for cooping with our harsh foreboding reality.
Eloquently put Alex! It is really difficult to grasp the true nature of our realities. Especially since we are creatures of circumstance like you said.
***** It's strange that no society ever tried to start a scientific approach to solve the problems of philosophy, which are the fundamental problems of life, in a tradition that could come close to the dimensions of organised religion. But then there was the Wiener Kreis and Popper's critizism. - In a way the open, democratic society could be seen as some kind of a social experiment by millions of people to find livable, falsifiable truth. Somehow it keeps ending up in the same old struggle for vanities, influence, money and power. ...but maybe that is the eternal truth of homo sapiens.
Joe P. these are quite simplified conclusions, you guys. Don't you think people have known over history of their weaknesses and limits. That's why they believed in God, considered themselves children of god, or whatever. And just because of that, don't you think their achievements in the field of thoughts, just like in science or elsewhere, have passed through a system of checks and selection and verification. It's not as easy as you might perceive of them just because today you live in the third millennium. These are very simplified videos for the purpose of making philosophy education available to common people, bringing it closer to us.
+lirard I'm quite aware of the beneficial nature of these videos and I appreciate them greatly. I was simply trying to start a conversation on the logical reasons great thinkers come to the conclusions that they do. That's all. if you have any insight that would be great. Critisism only really works when it is constructive so if you have any relevant ideas please share.
Joe P. Frankly, i wasn't trying to argue with you. What i said was not criticism, because i think this discussion should not happen at all. It is wrong in its principle. However, i'm sorry for intruding.
One thing people always wonder about Rousseau is how come he wrote the most successful book on education, but abandoned his own children to an orphanage. I am also horrified by this, but I don't think it is that surprising. There are many thinkers who didn't or couldn't live up to the great ideas they brought to the world. Indeed those who "embodied" the wisdom they did spread are a real small minority. I don't mean this as an excuse, but it is like the case of a brilliant composer who can create the most beautiful piece of music, but who himself does not have the virtuosity to play it. ( He should have practised more! ) That gap between their work and their life certainly says something about them as a person, but it doesn't lessen the value of their work. May be the following quote by Nietzsche explains it better: “Some cannot loosen their own chains and can nonetheless redeem their friends.” Thank you very much for this great lesson as always!
I had no idea that in the 18th century, the aristocracy and maybe the middle class were so distanced from "warmth" in their lifestyle (I had no idea that it was common for rich moms not to breastfeed their babies)! His ideas were great, because it is true that technology and urban life can distract people from the simple beauty of life.
Very interesting that he himself had five children who were given up for adoption from birth and yet he knew how raise children the best and understand them exceptionally. Currently reading second discourse and very much enjoying it. Cool video
_Emile_ "the most successful book ever written about how to raise children" features such gems: - First 15 years of life the child must be isolated from all social forces & other children. - The child's only link to the outside world is their "Master"/teacher. _Robison Crusoe_ is the only appropriate book-- ever. - The Master manipulates all of Emile's decisions to make it seem like he's freely choosing the "right" decisions-- every bit of education must be so controlled. It's a full-time devotion from the abnormally brilliant and scheming Master. Seems like a great plan if you want to start a cult, raise a kid in a Skinner box, or start your own dystopia!
Paul Keefer It doesn't take a wise man to nitpick. Like a child who is too busy complaining about his food, a nitpicker throws out much before he can find the nutrition he is truly lacking. Both are left ingesting the same old familiars. Both are left, in body and mind, starving.
HotSkull It's not so much nitpicking as it is critical thinking-- as to some extent, everything deserves consideration. Only after reading up on Rousseau did I find I don't like his ideas. As this video nicely illustrates, he may not be wise, but it's helpful weigh his counterpoint ideas anyway. Rousseau's questioning of institutions thought to be "natural" should always be part of any philosophical curriculum.
Paul Keefer It isn't about whether a person "like" his ideas. "Liking" something takes out the impartiality of the critical thinking process. It's about how, and how much, when, of a person's ideas are useful. And, If not now, when? Aligning your _self_ with any "idea" is the death of thinking, freedom, and autonomy and the birth of ideology.
'The most useful and least developed of all the sciences seems to be that of man.' - Rousseau, Discourse on Inequality What I love most about Rousseau is how concerned he is with understanding human nature. The guy is some kind of philosophical anthropologist, with a keen grasp of political science and lots of good old romanticism to share too. Whilst so many look to the future to augur what our path ought to be, he delved into a shadowy prehistory and came up with some brilliant concepts. Definitely one of my favourite philosophers; I highly recommend you investigate him further if you haven't.
i am looking to test darwinism against the writings of rousseau. is rousseau a good contrast? is rousseau's writings romanticism or can it be put to practice? i'd like to know if i should put in time reading him to supplement my research any insight will be appreciated
it's worth noting that Rousseau didn't think the State of Nature was better than any possible modern society, in other words, he didn't think it was the best. From "On the Social Contract": Although in [the civil state] he deprives himself of several advantages belonging to him in the state of nature, he regains such great ones. His faculties are exercised and developed, his ideas are broadened, his feelings are ennobled [...] which transformed him from a stupid, limited animal into an intelligent being and a man." -The Broadview Anthology of Social and Political Thought pg. 472.
He did not even consider that the state of nature existed. It was a working hypothesis to study the social state. It's like asking a mathematician to draw us a "real mathematical circle" without thickness, perfectly circular etc. There is no such thing as a circle, a sphere or any pure mathematical object in real life. The state of nature is the same. It's an abstract concept.
I can see that here is an overview of Rousseau's work. Personally Rousseau's work on Political Philosophy, state of nature and so on is most fascinating. Overall, he seems to be one very clever thinker in his times; after all he opposed the enlightenment era thinking, that we are progressing. I like that he acknowledged that.
Thanks! I've been waiting for this one. I've always liked Rousseau in general, more than any particular point he made. He's just so human. Reveries of a Solitary Walker is one of my favorite chill out books.
Objectified and demeaned women, sexually harassed and abused many women, bred irresponsibly, abandoned all five of his own children, fabricated human history, created theories to justify theft and murder… what a wonderful human being, your personal fondness of him says a lot about you than him.
@TeruTeru Bozu You learn to separate people from their work, or you end up with nothing. Most people are shit if you look close enough. Famous people are just easier to look close at.
@@ernststravoblofeld you said yourself that you like him in general, more than his ideas, "I've always liked Rousseau in general, more than any particular point he made." So what are the qualities you like or admire about him as a person?
@TeruTeru Bozu I think there's enough living people to get pissed off about, without trying to legislate the morality of dead people, who cannot change their behavior. I very much enjoy Rousseau's writing, particularly stylistically. There are certainly aspects of his life I would find horrible today. It would be very interesting to see how Rousseau would have behaved if he was born in this century, but unfortunately, that's not an experiment that can be done. If you cannot take any interest in historical people who behave badly by modern standards, or even oddly by the standards of the time, you cut yourself off from a huge portion of history. If you don't like Rousseau, you are more than welcome to read something else.
@@lilypadkayaker that is why he is so human (Objectified and demeaned women, sexually harassed and abused many women, bred irresponsibly, abandoned all five of his own children, fabricated human history, created theories to justify theft and murder…). well , I am more interested in how he justifies theft and murder. lots of theories are coming to my mind. Is there any reference?
@@seanmoran6510 Sean I do not think chimps are dangerous, if you know about Dr. Jane Goodall the famous anthropologist who has studied Chimpanzees from close quarters at Gombe National park in Congo you will realize that she speaks lovely of them she has studied their behaviour & found that their DNA is 99.9% similar to humans, only they can be rude or rough sometimes. Please go through her articles either in National Geography or on Google.
"This transition from the state of nature to the civil register produces in man a very remarkable change, substituting in his conduct justice for instinct, and giving his actions the morality that they previously lacked. Only then, with the voice of duty succeeding the physical impulse and the right to appetite, man, who until then had only looked at himself, is forced to act on other principles, and to consult his reason before listening to his inclinations. Although he deprives himself in this state of several advantages that he holds of nature, he regains so great ones, his faculties are exercised and developed, his ideas extend, his feelings are ennobled, his whole soul rises to such an extent that, if the abuses of this new condition do not often degrade him below the one from which he came out, he should constantly bless the happy moment that tore him away for ever and which , of a stupid and bounded animal, made an intelligent being and a man." From the Social Contract, Rousseau
Bounsingonbongos1 Hell yes! Using Twilight to represent a movement which had the highest ideal of finding a unified, universal and humane approach to understanding by uniting science, religion and culture. Which praised the overwhelming creative and intellectual power of the genius as an inventor of better worlds. And aimed to lead a wise life according to nature. It's very *fitting* to use the dilletant work of a bigott, sexually frustrated, boring and mediocre housewive, a reactionary religious nut to represent romanticism. Also: fuck Twilight.
Something I am missing in this summary is what Rousseau actually did for political theory.. And I feel like there is a strong connection between his work and John Locke's. A quick link would have been helpful. Still a great video, as always!
It’s a shame Rousseau was not accurately introduced to the lives of the American Indians. Had he seen the incredible cruelty and vicious nature of tribes like the Comanche he would’ve realized this warlike attitude predated Europeans by centuries and was well-established behavior among tribes long before they had been “corrupted “ as he imagined.
My thoughts exactly. Society brings wealth. Scarcity brings fear, hate, death, and anger. It's a simple equation that is so hard for too many to comprehend.
Romanticism does not always mean low tech. Look at that iconic picture taken by the Apollo 8 crew of the Earth rising above the surface of the moon. No romantic painter ever came close to it's power, but it's origin is very technological.
I couldn't help myself not notice that you didn't mention his greatest work ''the social contract'', if you did this video could contribute more to the political theory and would present Rousseau in the brightest light. I still admire and support your work and i think that this is the noblest way to use the internet. I would like to ask you to make videos on John Locke, Jacques Lacan and Immanuel Kant, but i think you already have it planned.
His greatest work is the book Emile, in which he moralises how an ideal parenting should look like. Yet he fathered 5 children and left all of them in an orphanage.
Great video, and perfect timing. I recently picked up a used copy of this tiny little book by Rousseau called "Meditations of a Solitary Walker" and I'm really looking forward to reading it. This video provided some good background about an author/philosopher from history that I know nothing about, so thank you! Also, I know that one day, SoL will release a video on Hume, and one on Emerson, and each of those days will be glorious.
Oh, he's provocative all right. Rousseau's probably the philosopher I dislike the most. While I value some of his contributions, and would never downplay the impact he made in the minds of men, I find a lot of his ideas "unnatural" ironically. He idealizes our primitive ancestors for he believes them to be "purer" and more "innocent", while I am more of the opinion that the reason we're so messed up now...is because we've always been messed up. Forget the "noble savage", we're STILL savages. Our ancestors were no less inclined to commit shitty behavior than we are, and in many ways, more so.
Gracielo Barteza The difference back then is that we were animals basically so we were basically innocent, because we didn't know any better. I don't know if this was what he was trying to get at or not, since he seemed to be a christen, and you know my idea has to do with evolution.
Gracielo Barteza Neurologically, we are more or less the same (although a tennis ball sized chunk of brain mass has shrunk away over the past 10,000 years) and the same plastic behaviours are possible within humans but environment has a large part in determining which ones are expressed. Since the introduction of modern agriculture a few thousand years ago, large social hierarchies with the ability to oppress people have been able to form which negatively change people's social relationships depending on the extent of their pervasiveness and force.
Gracielo Barteza Comments of criticism towards Rousseau having more likes than the video has dislikes shows how good the community on this channel is :D. I agree with you and liked the video because it informed me and didn´t evaluate unneccessarily, good job !
Is there a reason to why both Rousseau and Thomas Hobbes talk about a "State of Nature" ("Etat de Nature" in french)? They are both a way to show people a contrast to how we are living today, but other than that, I find it quite surprising they both used the same term.
Am I the only one who thought about Elizabeth Bennet when Julie's love life was described? It would interesting to contrast both authors' (Austen and Rousseau) ideals of love and whether or not it is correct to let ourselves be influenced by society and gender roles...
It's important to note that "savage" didn't carry the same connotations in the 18th century as it does today. It simply meant "of the woods" and referred to living outside of a city, which is only what "civilized" indicates despite our belief that attribute confers a greater sense of humanity and refinement.
Does anyone know which one of Rousseau's books contain the quote "A watchmaker from Geneva can be introduced to anyone, but a watchmaker from Paris can only talk about watches"?
4:20, what the narrator forgot to mention is that he abandoned all five of his children by dropping them off at a foundling hospital. The narrator also left out his most known work "the social contract" which promotes a totalitarian hell as being the solution to society's problems. Read about him in "Intellectuals" if you want to know the man, not the myth.
Most of his thinking is applicable to people living in the cities, especially where I live in the Bay Area. People aren’t living anymore they simply compare and compete with one another. Children are blossomed in the hands of others (day cares) and deprived of natural love that comes from Parents. Education is forced, creativity discouraged, and progress is rarely applauded. Children grow to corrupt adults as a result Of this. Humanity and human element is extracted from an early age and you have an empty shell that goes about and boasts of its emptiness.
My biggest problem with Rousseau, as well as most Romantics, is the idea of the 'noble savage'. There is no such thing. The 'idyllic native americans' described in the video never existed to begin with. They were stories told to Europeans to fit into the Christian ideals at the time. I don't fault the video at all for bringing it up, that was the belief at the time and was believed to be very true then. However archeology and anthropology have both quite clearly shown that, although it was simpler, life in pre-civilization tribes was not this noble, perfectly equal world described by Romantics.
FiggyCal The idea of the Noble Savage states that before civilization (not just industrialization) man was this idyllic, pure, and utopian society. This is not true in any way. Native Americans had their conflicts, they had their hierarchies, and they were no less humanly flawed than we are. Romanticism is a major believer in that idea.
Alex Xavier Steel As it happens, neither side is right. Some pre-agriculture societies were extremely peaceful, and some were extremely violent. It all boils down to resources really; there's a reason the most warlike societies tended to come from places where there was barely enough to survive.
No mention of The Social Contract? For a video purporting to represent Rousseau's political theory, it seems like the most explicitly and obvious political work of his to include. Its exclusion is a mistake.
6:52 You talked about french revolution but you put the painting Liberty leading the people which is actually about the July revolution, it’s a common mistake but i just wanted to point that out
Really appreciate your work. As part of your eastern philosophy series can you please make a video on the bhagavad gita's philosophy. the book called the difficulty of being good is a really good guide to it's philosophy.
Good Christian certainly all religious texts have problematic passages which have undoubtedly led to a lot of conflict, I myself am bit of a religious sceptic. But to dismiss the whole book is itself an act of criticism without understanding. What is fascinating is the ethical questions which are discussed in the text. These have been discussed wonderfully in the book 'The difficulty of being good' which I must recommend as a primer on Indian philosophy.
Vaishnavi Suresh Most ethical questions discussed in the Gita are basic. Things that pop up to even the most humble cobbler. And since you seem to be a reasonable person wouldn't you agree the works of western philosophy not only cover questions far greater than the ones put forth by the Gita, but also answer them reasonably in a meticulous fashion. I really don't see the reason why we should latch on to such ancient ideas. The only way I see the Gita in a philosophical debate is while discussing ancient and out dated ideas of a bygone era. Personally I feel the Panchatantra by Vishnu Sharma is a better bet. The philosophy of the book is deep and applicable in the modern world.
I hope you have at least read the gita to understand it's concepts. It's words certainly fascinated many people such as Henry David Thoreau, Aurobindo, Aldous Huxley and many others. It's discourse on Dharma karma etc are truly enlightening. Btw what is wrong with a cobbler finding philosophy accessible. Do read it before coming to conclusions on its contents.
Honestly I really want to live in the state of nature I've always been fascinated by life in Native American tribes before colonies formed. The thought of freely traveling the American country sides from the East Coast to West Coast through mountain ranges and great plains with close knit families is amazing to me
Riley Johnson As bound as you may feel, the fact of the matter is that if you decided to drop everything and just go, you'd be much more free and capable than any nomad.
Riley Johnson Yes, it was truly wonderful. Dying by the most simple of illnesses, relying on hunter gathering, warring with neighboring tribes over the most petty of things and the most basic of things, like food, because they were unable to gather enough, being uneducated and technologically backwards... so if you like all those things and so much more, then yes, what a wonderful society to live in.
If I might ask do you at The School of Life have a list or a link to a list of the art you show in your videos? I love the art you show and would love to see it all! Thank you!
How do you make a Political Theory video on Jean-Jacques Rousseau and NOT mention The Social Contract and only passingly mention Discourse on Inequality? I'm sorry, but this is another video of yours which has missed the mark. Sigh, now I regret referring School of Life videos to my family. As for mentioning Rousseau's claims regarding progress, the contemporary cognitive-scientist and linguist Steven Pinker has been able to factually blow most of Rousseau's claims into non-concerns. It's getting better all the time.
The abandonment of his five children is conspicuously missing in this video. That is a very relevant piece of information about someone who so much dared to theorize about education.
@@rgpnovo Disagreement is not censorship. Do you even know what the word censorship means? Have I deleted your comment or threatened you? Grow up. When you attack his character like this without saying a single word about his beliefs or arguments, all you are doing is making a fool of yourself. You must show that a man is wrong, before you can start talking about how he went wrong. His failures as a parent is not an argument against his theories on education, it is just throwing poison. Go look up bulverism. I'm sure Mr Ezekiel would be extremely proud of you
@@ghanphol You sure haven't censored me, but you can't, can you? You can't delete a message for no reason or make any believable threat in TH-cam. I suppose you mean that if TH-cam were yours you wouldn't censor me. OK, that's good. I would not censor you either. Grow up? Do you think you can advice people to grow up when you get as offended as a teenager when someone tells you what your hero does when not on stage?
@@rgpnovo You're just proving my point. You're either completely unable to or just unwilling to actually reason, substituting argument with insults. It wouldnt surprise me if you post similar comments on every video about every thinker or celebrity you find. Grow up.
The fundamental fault with his thesis was that the 'noble savages' were living idyllic lives - they were not AT ALL living as the pure of mind, perfect cherubines of nature, but rather they lived severe, harsh, brutal, simple, primal lives.
I am not a philosopher or scholar of any stripe. If I am accused of being a grad student of anything, it would have to be in the school of life (no relation). That said, I found this video tremendously helpful, and I've referred back to it from time to time when coming across a reference to Rousseau in my readings, as for example when I was struggling through a chapter of "Of Grammatology" dealing with Rousseau's use of the term "supplement". Recently, however, I was disconcerted to read that Rousseau never used the term "noble savage" in his work. Rather, the term was supposedly coined by English playwright John Dryden, and only associated with Rousseau by his critics. Moreover, Rousseau supposedly never endorsed the romantic primitivism that was the intellectual vogue of the latter 18th century, though he adverted to the absence of the pernicious effects of pride, vanity and jealousy in the State of Nature (in contrast with what he saw as prevailing influences on society at the time). The video is, of course, in keeping with all of this. It suggests only that Rousseau was forever "associated with" the term "noble savage", and that he only indicated a "contrast" been such societies and the societies of his time, and not that he advocated such primitive societies as prescriptive models. However, I think a viewer of the video would be forgiven in concluding that Rousseau was perhaps more romantic than he appears in his work. (Or at least I was originally of that conclusion, and wish to be thusly forgiven.) Or was Rousseau misquoted in my more recent readings (primarily the A.O. Lovejoy stuff)? Did he ever directly mention the "noble savage" in his work? Did he think societies in a State of Nature were pure, and moral and good, or did he just think they weren't as vain and prone to jealously as we are now? What did he think we should do about it? Surely he didn't imagine 19th century Europe as being comprised predominately of nomadic tribes... (At this point I should probably just try to find a translation of the Discourse on the Sciences and Arts and just try to read it for myself...)
He never directly used the term "noble savage" in his works, but many times that's essentially what he was talking about. "did he just think they weren't as vain and prone to jealously as we are now" Pretty much this. Also, there were no "societies". This video is spreading misinformation, Rousseau views the humans in a state of nature (which is what he actual refers to the "noble savages" as) as actually rather solitary and simple. This is man before any type of social contract, extremely primitive. Even philosophy would be viewed as corrupting this state of nature. Yes, you should just read it. Don't be afraid of just picking up a philosopher's actual work, some are excessively complicated and may need complimentary works to be understood, but actually reading it can help you get there a lot.
I love this videos specially red ones, i loop them 5 to 7 times till i memorize every word, i would love to translate them to spanish, they are well edited well pased, just great!. i wonder if there are transcripts of the videos? and the voice is lovelly
As always really great job. As part of your political theory section, could you make a video on anarcho syndicalism (communism) and Peter Kropotkin? Thanks
+Mike Pence Mike there's no need to be disrespectful, if you think this person is wrong you should try to educate them rather than put them down. Either way, I'm afraid you have misunderstood what Communism is. Communism is where Marx believed society would progress to, which is basically Anarcho-Syndicalism. First from Capitalism the state will take control of the economy bringing about a Socialist state. Once society has arranged itself to be able to live by the Communist mantra - "from each according to his ability, from each according to his need" - without the state being necessary, the state will dissolve, leaving a Communist society. What you describe is Socialism, what Tom described is Communism.
Great! exactly what I was looking for. You do an outstanding job explaining it all with simple words, it is perfect to get an overview in just a couple of minutes.
Rich how the philosopher who wrote about how to raise children gave each of his children away to an orphanage and hated being around children in general.
I came to learn about the political philosophy of Rousseau and found nothing to learn about in this video. This video provides no information about Rousseau's views on different forms of government, no info about his political ideas whatsoever. Why is this even titled "Political theory"?
Yes, archaeology displays evidence of violence and savagery. However, there is no evidence that Rousseau was unaware of this. Archeology also displays evidence of co-operation and human progress hence society. Rousseau does point to this to indicate human potential for civility. Rousseau's focus on the 'goodness' of humans was a conscious choice for the purpose of refuting Hobbes' argument that humans without society are naturally evil. “Whatsoever therefore is consequent to a time of war, where every man is enemy to every man, the same consequent to the time wherein men live without other security than what their own strength and their own invention shall furnish them withal. In such condition there is no place for industry... no knowledge of the face of the earth; no account of time; no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” ― Thomas Hobbes Rousseau's argument is that Hobbes misses that he is looking at society through a limited perspective. The vices Hobbes refers to result from living with people. Jealousy, murderous intent, greed, only happen when we compare ourselves to others and interact with them. Rousseau talks about 'natural goodness' not as people being naturally good (which is the biggest misconception) but that individual people cannot commit crime, sin or arouse violent urges if they are by themselves. There is no reason for them to be jealous, want to murder someone or be greedy unless there is someone else they measure themselves to. In regards to Herp's point, violence and savagery is not the only thing uncovered by archaeology. The OP has overlooked of evidence of villages, city-states etc... that eventually developed into the society we have today. Rousseau very clearly uses this evidence to base his argument against Hobbes, that the natural disposition of humans is not all evil.
I appreciate these videos as a self- teaching philosophy student. The internet should be used for self improvement, healthy communication, and for gaining knowledge. It is awesome to read about these philosophers and supplement learning with these videos.
My friend, read books. You'll gain calmness on the top
The videos are a supplement
Yes!
@@europeanfootballbetting8659 Internet can be used to understand books better
Although if you follow Rousseau's theory, watching this video is rotting our brains... I love the irony
Interesting how Hobbes and Rousseau had opposite understandings of the primordial state of nature.
Yeah definitely! And one of the most interesting and commun fact between these two phylosophy is that you can basically use both to justify the same situation: they will both make sens. It was the main subject in one of our final phylosophy exam! I also writted a 5 pages these on the book "Lord of the Flies" (In french, of course, because I'm a french canadian) in which I analysed evolution of the human nature with Hobbes and Rousseau theories. If you haven't read this book, I definitely recommand you to do so! There's an interesting story context! 😄
Interestingly you need a Leviathan State to impose Rousseau’s general will.
As the modern followers of the DIE Religion well know !
Is there an idea more discredited than the noble savage?
And they are both right
@@seanmoran6510 would you say that you create your own religion?
I am quiet dispointed as you didn't mentioned the social contract one of his major concept!!
Because Rousseau is anti social blahlablhblahblah when it is quite the reverse !
this why I am so enrage at 1:30....
If you know so much about Rousseau, why are you here? Stop spreading hate. So what if he forgot a tiny detail?!
That’s because the General will is an absurd idea.
And Authoritarian as proven by Robespierre onwards!
It wasn't his idea, it's just the name comes from his book "social contract"
@@seanmoran6510 Says the illiterate Conservative
I wonder if he put "leave your five kids in an orphanage to die" in his book.
For real.
He did, he talks about it frequently in the confessions and it's interesting. He gets that it's ridiculous that its him of all people writing a book about child-rearing for example. But I got the impression that he very much felt himself not up for the task of fatherhood. Too bad their wasn't vasectomies back then.
Ya he’s human trash
@@LaraJean23 could u pls analysis what is Rousseau plan for children I m a student and want some clarification ..
@@LaraJean23 in this vdo he said about Rousseaus concern for child by feeding ..than how could he siad to leave children in orphanage
This is one of the best video series on the web and I'm thankful for you existing.
I could not agree more
Writes a book about how to raise children, gives away his own 5 children from birth
He is a legendary piece of shit.
Because he considered himself to be a shitty father figure to have. One could say he was hypocrite and cowardly, but maybe he wanted the best for those kids
@@felixracine3994 he knowingly sent them to the worst orphanage in France, where most, if not all, of them died.
What you said even if it were true is stupid. One of the “greatest” thinking men of his time is not allowed to do what he did and get a pass. He was a garbage human being. His ideas were not based in the real world and he lived his life selfishly in the worst definition of the word.
@@jimmiferfreddette8583 This teaches us that, something good can come out from the most disgusting person and we don't always act as we speak or think.
@@jerryquiros You’ve got it backwards. How we act is the only thing that matters. I don’t care what someone says or thinks. You can speak or think terrible acts of violence toward me but until you act on your words it means nothing. Only a good father can teach someone how to be a good father. Intellectuals and theorists are worthless until they put their ideas into practice.
And who said Rousseau did any great work?? Lol
I wanted to show this video to my students regarding the General Will... and much to my surprise, it isn't mentioned. The rise of the General Will is really the turning point from Early Modern Europe to Modern Europe. It is essential to understanding the French Revolution. Why categorize this video under political theory and not include "the General Will?" Thank you for excellent videos, I return to you with increasing frequency.
So true. I'm writing a paper and I'm mentioning the general will and I was hoping one of my favorite channels would comment on it
Right. I feel like most TH-cam videos that cover philosophers completely forget to speak about their principle theory or so on... Sad
I keep playing these videos over and over again and listen to em as I work. It's an attempt to burn the knowledge into my brain but I just can't seem to remember as much as I want..
I often feel that these political theorist's, philosophers, and artists are just projecting their deepest insecurities as humans when they create their work. It's as though culture and art are just biological defense mechanisms for cooping with our harsh foreboding reality.
Eloquently put Alex! It is really difficult to grasp the true nature of our realities. Especially since we are creatures of circumstance like you said.
***** It's strange that no society ever tried to start a scientific approach to solve the problems of philosophy, which are the fundamental problems of life, in a tradition that could come close to the dimensions of organised religion.
But then there was the Wiener Kreis and Popper's critizism. - In a way the open, democratic society could be seen as some kind of a social experiment by millions of people to find livable, falsifiable truth. Somehow it keeps ending up in the same old struggle for vanities, influence, money and power. ...but maybe that is the eternal truth of homo sapiens.
Joe P. these are quite simplified conclusions, you guys. Don't you think people have known over history of their weaknesses and limits. That's why they believed in God, considered themselves children of god, or whatever. And just because of that, don't you think their achievements in the field of thoughts, just like in science or elsewhere, have passed through a system of checks and selection and verification. It's not as easy as you might perceive of them just because today you live in the third millennium. These are very simplified videos for the purpose of making philosophy education available to common people, bringing it closer to us.
+lirard I'm quite aware of the beneficial nature of these videos and I appreciate them greatly. I was simply trying to start a conversation on the logical reasons great thinkers come to the conclusions that they do. That's all. if you have any insight that would be great. Critisism only really works when it is constructive so if you have any relevant ideas please share.
Joe P. Frankly, i wasn't trying to argue with you. What i said was not criticism, because i think this discussion should not happen at all. It is wrong in its principle. However, i'm sorry for intruding.
One thing people always wonder about Rousseau is how come he wrote the most successful book on education, but abandoned his own children to an orphanage. I am also horrified by this, but I don't think it is that surprising.
There are many thinkers who didn't or couldn't live up to the great ideas they brought to the world. Indeed those who "embodied" the wisdom they did spread are a real small minority. I don't mean this as an excuse, but it is like the case of a brilliant composer who can create the most beautiful piece of music, but who himself does not have the virtuosity to play it. ( He should have practised more! )
That gap between their work and their life certainly says something about them as a person, but it doesn't lessen the value of their work.
May be the following quote by Nietzsche explains it better:
“Some cannot loosen their own chains and can nonetheless redeem their friends.”
Thank you very much for this great lesson as always!
***** haha yeah this was pointed out to me during theology classes as well
He became mentally ill. He once became suspicious of getting assassinated
Well, he wrote a lot about freedom 😅
I had no idea that in the 18th century, the aristocracy and maybe the middle class were so distanced from "warmth" in their lifestyle (I had no idea that it was common for rich moms not to breastfeed their babies)! His ideas were great, because it is true that technology and urban life can distract people from the simple beauty of life.
pov: your teacher is making you watch this for class
Yeah man, there's a positive point though, I discovered this channel because of this
Yup
they are forcing us to learn things that we will forget i lile reading stuff like this but not staying 1 hr to memorize this info
Sorry, I came here out of my interest
no young man
Very interesting that he himself had five children who were given up for adoption from birth and yet he knew how raise children the best and understand them exceptionally. Currently reading second discourse and very much enjoying it. Cool video
How can he talk about how to raise children when he adopted all of his own out? It doesn't define the love of a parent.
@@margueritearavena2256 exactly, I’m confused.
@@margueritearavena2256 It's even worse. He didn't adopt them out. He left them at an orphanage.
He was also a misogynistic
He doesnt know. His pedagogical teachings are a useless fiction and can't be put in practice in real life.
_Emile_ "the most successful book ever written about how to raise children" features such gems:
- First 15 years of life the child must be isolated from all social forces & other children.
- The child's only link to the outside world is their "Master"/teacher. _Robison Crusoe_ is the only appropriate book-- ever.
- The Master manipulates all of Emile's decisions to make it seem like he's freely choosing the "right" decisions-- every bit of education must be so controlled. It's a full-time devotion from the abnormally brilliant and scheming Master.
Seems like a great plan if you want to start a cult, raise a kid in a Skinner box, or start your own dystopia!
Paul Keefer It doesn't take a wise man to nitpick. Like a child who is too busy complaining about his food, a nitpicker throws out much before he can find the nutrition he is truly lacking. Both are left ingesting the same old familiars. Both are left, in body and mind, starving.
HotSkull It's not so much nitpicking as it is critical thinking-- as to some extent, everything deserves consideration. Only after reading up on Rousseau did I find I don't like his ideas. As this video nicely illustrates, he may not be wise, but it's helpful weigh his counterpoint ideas anyway. Rousseau's questioning of institutions thought to be "natural" should always be part of any philosophical curriculum.
Paul Keefer It isn't about whether a person "like" his ideas. "Liking" something takes out the impartiality of the critical thinking process. It's about how, and how much, when, of a person's ideas are useful. And, If not now, when? Aligning your _self_ with any "idea" is the death of thinking, freedom, and autonomy and the birth of ideology.
Paul Keefer A few crazy ideas, but a successful book, nonetheless.
HotSkull Don't you think it's a little ironic to nitpick about nitpicking?
'The most useful and least developed of all the sciences seems to be that of man.'
- Rousseau, Discourse on Inequality
What I love most about Rousseau is how concerned he is with understanding human nature. The guy is some kind of philosophical anthropologist, with a keen grasp of political science and lots of good old romanticism to share too. Whilst so many look to the future to augur what our path ought to be, he delved into a shadowy prehistory and came up with some brilliant concepts. Definitely one of my favourite philosophers; I highly recommend you investigate him further if you haven't.
i am looking to test darwinism against the writings of rousseau. is rousseau a good contrast? is rousseau's writings romanticism or can it be put to practice? i'd like to know if i should put in time reading him to supplement my research
any insight will be appreciated
don't you think he is gorgeous too ... I've only came here because I'm in love with him but he is no more :(
it's worth noting that Rousseau didn't think the State of Nature was better than any possible modern society, in other words, he didn't think it was the best. From "On the Social Contract": Although in [the civil state] he deprives himself of several advantages belonging to him in the state of nature, he regains such great ones. His faculties are exercised and developed, his ideas are broadened, his feelings are ennobled [...] which transformed him from a stupid, limited animal into an intelligent being and a man." -The Broadview Anthology of Social and Political Thought pg. 472.
He did not even consider that the state of nature existed. It was a working hypothesis to study the social state. It's like asking a mathematician to draw us a "real mathematical circle" without thickness, perfectly circular etc. There is no such thing as a circle, a sphere or any pure mathematical object in real life. The state of nature is the same. It's an abstract concept.
I can see that here is an overview of Rousseau's work. Personally Rousseau's work on Political Philosophy, state of nature and so on is most fascinating. Overall, he seems to be one very clever thinker in his times; after all he opposed the enlightenment era thinking, that we are progressing. I like that he acknowledged that.
What a guy.
Rousseau was an autist.
How could you place that assumption upon a man whom you've never met, heard, or interacted with ?
He had his significant imperfections but at least he contributed to good.
Thanks! I've been waiting for this one. I've always liked Rousseau in general, more than any particular point he made. He's just so human. Reveries of a Solitary Walker is one of my favorite chill out books.
Objectified and demeaned women, sexually harassed and abused many women, bred irresponsibly, abandoned all five of his own children, fabricated human history, created theories to justify theft and murder… what a wonderful human being, your personal fondness of him says a lot about you than him.
@TeruTeru Bozu You learn to separate people from their work, or you end up with nothing. Most people are shit if you look close enough. Famous people are just easier to look close at.
@@ernststravoblofeld you said yourself that you like him in general, more than his ideas, "I've always liked Rousseau in general, more than any particular point he made." So what are the qualities you like or admire about him as a person?
@TeruTeru Bozu I think there's enough living people to get pissed off about, without trying to legislate the morality of dead people, who cannot change their behavior. I very much enjoy Rousseau's writing, particularly stylistically. There are certainly aspects of his life I would find horrible today. It would be very interesting to see how Rousseau would have behaved if he was born in this century, but unfortunately, that's not an experiment that can be done. If you cannot take any interest in historical people who behave badly by modern standards, or even oddly by the standards of the time, you cut yourself off from a huge portion of history.
If you don't like Rousseau, you are more than welcome to read something else.
@@lilypadkayaker that is why he is so human (Objectified and demeaned women, sexually harassed and abused many women, bred irresponsibly, abandoned all five of his own children, fabricated human history, created theories to justify theft and murder…).
well , I am more interested in how he justifies theft and murder. lots of theories are coming to my mind. Is there any reference?
"not always wise but one of intriguing and provocative thinkers" what a description.
I've also heard him described as "an interesting madman".
This is missing a mention of his well known works: The Social Contract!
The political treatise " The social contact " is really missed been mentioned.
Its so unfortunate that this channel doesn't make videos like this anymore, there's so much more content to cover
And his social contract completely ignored evolutionary behaviour !
We are dangerous chimps
@@seanmoran6510 Sean I do not think chimps are dangerous, if you know about Dr. Jane Goodall the famous anthropologist who has studied Chimpanzees from close quarters at Gombe National park in Congo you will realize that she speaks lovely of them she has studied their behaviour & found that their DNA is 99.9% similar to humans, only they can be rude or rough sometimes. Please go through her articles either in National Geography or on Google.
"This transition from the state of nature to the civil register produces in man a very remarkable change, substituting in his conduct justice for instinct, and giving his actions the morality that they previously lacked. Only then, with the voice of duty succeeding the physical impulse and the right to appetite, man, who until then had only looked at himself, is forced to act on other principles, and to consult his reason before listening to his inclinations. Although he deprives himself in this state of several advantages that he holds of nature, he regains so great ones, his faculties are exercised and developed, his ideas extend, his feelings are ennobled, his whole soul rises to such an extent that, if the abuses of this new condition do not often degrade him below the one from which he came out, he should constantly bless the happy moment that tore him away for ever and which , of a stupid and bounded animal, made an intelligent being and a man."
From the Social Contract, Rousseau
Lol, SOL knows how to troll, by putting Twilight in t represent romanticism
Bounsingonbongos1 Hell yes! Using Twilight to represent a movement which had the highest ideal of finding a unified, universal and humane approach to understanding by uniting science, religion and culture. Which praised the overwhelming creative and intellectual power of the genius as an inventor of better worlds. And aimed to lead a wise life according to nature.
It's very *fitting* to use the dilletant work of a bigott, sexually frustrated, boring and mediocre housewive, a reactionary religious nut to represent romanticism.
Also: fuck Twilight.
Something I am missing in this summary is what Rousseau actually did for political theory.. And I feel like there is a strong connection between his work and John Locke's. A quick link would have been helpful. Still a great video, as always!
I am deeply satisfied with this video, thanks SoL.
TomHasVideo me2m8
TomHasVideo but it was not about what its title says
He missed the social contract tho..
Great video as always. Can you add subtiltles to them please ?
Press the 3 dots, caption and chose the languge
@@noahuet8957 kinda late reply there don't u think? lmao
It’s a shame Rousseau was not accurately introduced to the lives of the American Indians. Had he seen the incredible cruelty and vicious nature of tribes like the Comanche he would’ve realized this warlike attitude predated Europeans by centuries and was well-established behavior among tribes long before they had been “corrupted “ as he imagined.
My thoughts exactly. Society brings wealth. Scarcity brings fear, hate, death, and anger. It's a simple equation that is so hard for too many to comprehend.
Romanticism does not always mean low tech. Look at that iconic picture taken by the Apollo 8 crew of the Earth rising above the surface of the moon. No romantic painter ever came close to it's power, but it's origin is very technological.
Sniti ghosh
I couldn't help myself not notice that you didn't mention his greatest work ''the social contract'', if you did this video could contribute more to the political theory and would present Rousseau in the brightest light.
I still admire and support your work and i think that this is the noblest way to use the internet.
I would like to ask you to make videos on John Locke, Jacques Lacan and Immanuel Kant, but i think you already have it planned.
His greatest work is the book Emile, in which he moralises how an ideal parenting should look like. Yet he fathered 5 children and left all of them in an orphanage.
Great video, and perfect timing. I recently picked up a used copy of this tiny little book by Rousseau called "Meditations of a Solitary Walker" and I'm really looking forward to reading it. This video provided some good background about an author/philosopher from history that I know nothing about, so thank you!
Also, I know that one day, SoL will release a video on Hume, and one on Emerson, and each of those days will be glorious.
I have a written exam in 15 hours about Rousseau and 2 other philosophers I have very little knowledge about… thank God for TH-cam
Oh, he's provocative all right. Rousseau's probably the philosopher I dislike the most. While I value some of his contributions, and would never downplay the impact he made in the minds of men, I find a lot of his ideas "unnatural" ironically. He idealizes our primitive ancestors for he believes them to be "purer" and more "innocent", while I am more of the opinion that the reason we're so messed up now...is because we've always been messed up. Forget the "noble savage", we're STILL savages. Our ancestors were no less inclined to commit shitty behavior than we are, and in many ways, more so.
Gracielo Barteza The difference back then is that we were animals basically so we were basically innocent, because we didn't know any better. I don't know if this was what he was trying to get at or not, since he seemed to be a christen, and you know my idea has to do with evolution.
two words. thomas Aquinas
Gracielo Barteza Neurologically, we are more or less the same (although a tennis ball sized chunk of brain mass has shrunk away over the past 10,000 years) and the same plastic behaviours are possible within humans but environment has a large part in determining which ones are expressed. Since the introduction of modern agriculture a few thousand years ago, large social hierarchies with the ability to oppress people have been able to form which negatively change people's social relationships depending on the extent of their pervasiveness and force.
I completely agree with you
Gracielo Barteza Comments of criticism towards Rousseau having more likes than the video has dislikes shows how good the community on this channel is :D. I agree with you and liked the video because it informed me and didn´t evaluate unneccessarily, good job !
Is there a reason to why both Rousseau and Thomas Hobbes talk about a "State of Nature" ("Etat de Nature" in french)? They are both a way to show people a contrast to how we are living today, but other than that, I find it quite surprising they both used the same term.
Your videos are amazing !
They help me so much at my university exams :D
Thank you !
2024 and I agree
Am I the only one who thought about Elizabeth Bennet when Julie's love life was described? It would interesting to contrast both authors' (Austen and Rousseau) ideals of love and whether or not it is correct to let ourselves be influenced by society and gender roles...
Love of family in the state of nature? Curiosity about others? A taste for music? Did you guys even read the thing?
It's important to note that "savage" didn't carry the same connotations in the 18th century as it does today. It simply meant "of the woods" and referred to living outside of a city, which is only what "civilized" indicates despite our belief that attribute confers a greater sense of humanity and refinement.
Pov: u didnt care about it in class but now a year after graduating and failing the class suddenly you care
Does anyone know which one of Rousseau's books contain the quote "A watchmaker from Geneva can be introduced to anyone, but a watchmaker from Paris can only talk about watches"?
Rousseau is given far more credit than he deserves.
4:20, what the narrator forgot to mention is that he abandoned all five of his children by dropping them off at a foundling hospital. The narrator also left out his most known work "the social contract" which promotes a totalitarian hell as being the solution to society's problems. Read about him in "Intellectuals" if you want to know the man, not the myth.
Most of his thinking is applicable to people living in the cities, especially where I live in the Bay Area. People aren’t living anymore they simply compare and compete with one another. Children are blossomed in the hands of others (day cares) and deprived of natural love that comes from
Parents. Education is forced, creativity discouraged, and progress is rarely applauded. Children grow to corrupt adults as a result
Of this. Humanity and human element is extracted from an early age and you have an empty shell that goes about and boasts of its emptiness.
You should definitely do a video on Montesquieu for your political theory playlist. Keep up the good work !
My biggest problem with Rousseau, as well as most Romantics, is the idea of the 'noble savage'. There is no such thing. The 'idyllic native americans' described in the video never existed to begin with. They were stories told to Europeans to fit into the Christian ideals at the time. I don't fault the video at all for bringing it up, that was the belief at the time and was believed to be very true then. However archeology and anthropology have both quite clearly shown that, although it was simpler, life in pre-civilization tribes was not this noble, perfectly equal world described by Romantics.
Alex Xavier Steel Really? That's surprising all the Africa tribes you see know a days seem to be like that.
'seem'
Well Rousseau also wrote that even the Indigenous people had been corrupted by civilization. He wasn't saying they were the ideal.
FiggyCal The idea of the Noble Savage states that before civilization (not just industrialization) man was this idyllic, pure, and utopian society. This is not true in any way. Native Americans had their conflicts, they had their hierarchies, and they were no less humanly flawed than we are. Romanticism is a major believer in that idea.
Alex Xavier Steel As it happens, neither side is right. Some pre-agriculture societies were extremely peaceful, and some were extremely violent. It all boils down to resources really; there's a reason the most warlike societies tended to come from places where there was barely enough to survive.
I can't get over the fact that he's giving moral lessons to others while he himself abandoned 5 of his children
This.
These videos are excellent--really contributed to me getting an A on my last PHIL essay
As others have mentioned, more could be said about the influence Rousseau had on political theory. A second video about this perhaps?
No mention of The Social Contract? For a video purporting to represent Rousseau's political theory, it seems like the most explicitly and obvious political work of his to include. Its exclusion is a mistake.
6:52 You talked about french revolution but you put the painting Liberty leading the people which is actually about the July revolution, it’s a common mistake but i just wanted to point that out
You guys have Hobbes and Rousseau but not Locke or Mill?
They did Locke idk about Mill
absolutely love the editing
Really appreciate your work. As part of your eastern philosophy series can you please make a video on the bhagavad gita's philosophy. the book called the difficulty of being good is a really good guide to it's philosophy.
+Vaishnavi Suresh No, it's extremely sadistic, just like the bible and the quran. Please don't bring your religious shit here.
Good Christian certainly all religious texts have problematic passages which have undoubtedly led to a lot of conflict, I myself am bit of a religious sceptic. But to dismiss the whole book is itself an act of criticism without understanding. What is fascinating is the ethical questions which are discussed in the text. These have been discussed wonderfully in the book 'The difficulty of being good' which I must recommend as a primer on Indian philosophy.
Vaishnavi Suresh Most ethical questions discussed in the Gita are basic. Things that pop up to even the most humble cobbler. And since you seem to be a reasonable person wouldn't you agree the works of western philosophy not only cover questions far greater than the ones put forth by the Gita, but also answer them reasonably in a meticulous fashion. I really don't see the reason why we should latch on to such ancient ideas. The only way I see the Gita in a philosophical debate is while discussing ancient and out dated ideas of a bygone era.
Personally I feel the Panchatantra by Vishnu Sharma is a better bet. The philosophy of the book is deep and applicable in the modern world.
I hope you have at least read the gita to understand it's concepts. It's words certainly fascinated many people such as Henry David Thoreau, Aurobindo, Aldous Huxley and many others. It's discourse on Dharma karma etc are truly enlightening. Btw what is wrong with a cobbler finding philosophy accessible. Do read it before coming to conclusions on its contents.
Good Christian Thnx for the book recommendation certainly will read.
What is a 'black slate' (4:52)? Is it like a blank slate but predisposed to vice?
Karna Upadhyay He said "blank," but his accent made it sound like "black."
He says Blank and it sounds like Blank.
Honestly I really want to live in the state of nature I've always been fascinated by life in Native American tribes before colonies formed. The thought of freely traveling the American country sides from the East Coast to West Coast through mountain ranges and great plains with close knit families is amazing to me
Riley Johnson Stop romanticising.
Coxy002605 Why should he?
Worldmasterchatter Because it's not reality.
Riley Johnson As bound as you may feel, the fact of the matter is that if you decided to drop everything and just go, you'd be much more free and capable than any nomad.
Riley Johnson Yes, it was truly wonderful. Dying by the most simple of illnesses, relying on hunter gathering, warring with neighboring tribes over the most petty of things and the most basic of things, like food, because they were unable to gather enough, being uneducated and technologically backwards... so if you like all those things and so much more, then yes, what a wonderful society to live in.
Not always wise but always intriguing.
If you wrote this line, kudos to you.
If I might ask do you at The School of Life have a list or a link to a list of the art you show in your videos? I love the art you show and would love to see it all! Thank you!
How do you make a Political Theory video on Jean-Jacques Rousseau and NOT mention The Social Contract and only passingly mention Discourse on Inequality? I'm sorry, but this is another video of yours which has missed the mark. Sigh, now I regret referring School of Life videos to my family.
As for mentioning Rousseau's claims regarding progress, the contemporary cognitive-scientist and linguist Steven Pinker has been able to factually blow most of Rousseau's claims into non-concerns. It's getting better all the time.
Moncef Gridda y
Once again, beautifully made. Thank you!
Charles C. I like Portugal the Man too :D
I came here to learn my family history and I wrote at least 15 paragraphs. Thank you
The abandonment of his five children is conspicuously missing in this video. That is a very relevant piece of information about someone who so much dared to theorize about education.
nope, not relevant. his thoughts and ideas are independent of that.
stop trying to poison things.
@@ghanphol "stop trying to posion things" The censorship that you are trying to impose, that's poison
@@rgpnovo Disagreement is not censorship. Do you even know what the word censorship means? Have I deleted your comment or threatened you? Grow up.
When you attack his character like this without saying a single word about his beliefs or arguments, all you are doing is making a fool of yourself.
You must show that a man is wrong, before you can start talking about how he went wrong.
His failures as a parent is not an argument against his theories on education, it is just throwing poison.
Go look up bulverism. I'm sure Mr Ezekiel would be extremely proud of you
@@ghanphol You sure haven't censored me, but you can't, can you? You can't delete a message for no reason or make any believable threat in TH-cam. I suppose you mean that if TH-cam were yours you wouldn't censor me. OK, that's good. I would not censor you either.
Grow up? Do you think you can advice people to grow up when you get as offended as a teenager when someone tells you what your hero does when not on stage?
@@rgpnovo You're just proving my point.
You're either completely unable to or just unwilling to actually reason, substituting argument with insults.
It wouldnt surprise me if you post similar comments on every video about every thinker or celebrity you find.
Grow up.
The fundamental fault with his thesis was that the 'noble savages' were living idyllic lives - they were not AT ALL living as the pure of mind, perfect cherubines of nature, but rather they lived severe, harsh, brutal, simple, primal lives.
Damn, why is this so accurate in today's modern era.
Lol he’s not and was an absolute piece of shit. He had 5 children and gave them all up to the worse orphanage in France.
Congratulions! Parabéns pelo Canal
This is excellent!
Rousseau is one of my favorite philosophers
Good overview of one of the most greatest critics of social inequality. 👍
Is Marxism and state control your thing?
Esse vídeo é maravilhoso! ❤😊
Rousseau: *talks about his feelings*
Artists: Fuck Yeah, I like that shit
I am not a philosopher or scholar of any stripe. If I am accused of being a grad student of anything, it would have to be in the school of life (no relation).
That said, I found this video tremendously helpful, and I've referred back to it from time to time when coming across a reference to Rousseau in my readings, as for example when I was struggling through a chapter of "Of Grammatology" dealing with Rousseau's use of the term "supplement".
Recently, however, I was disconcerted to read that Rousseau never used the term "noble savage" in his work. Rather, the term was supposedly coined by English playwright John Dryden, and only associated with Rousseau by his critics. Moreover, Rousseau supposedly never endorsed the romantic primitivism that was the intellectual vogue of the latter 18th century, though he adverted to the absence of the pernicious effects of pride, vanity and jealousy in the State of Nature (in contrast with what he saw as prevailing influences on society at the time).
The video is, of course, in keeping with all of this. It suggests only that Rousseau was forever "associated with" the term "noble savage", and that he only indicated a "contrast" been such societies and the societies of his time, and not that he advocated such primitive societies as prescriptive models. However, I think a viewer of the video would be forgiven in concluding that Rousseau was perhaps more romantic than he appears in his work. (Or at least I was originally of that conclusion, and wish to be thusly forgiven.)
Or was Rousseau misquoted in my more recent readings (primarily the A.O. Lovejoy stuff)? Did he ever directly mention the "noble savage" in his work? Did he think societies in a State of Nature were pure, and moral and good, or did he just think they weren't as vain and prone to jealously as we are now? What did he think we should do about it? Surely he didn't imagine 19th century Europe as being comprised predominately of nomadic tribes...
(At this point I should probably just try to find a translation of the Discourse on the Sciences and Arts and just try to read it for myself...)
He never directly used the term "noble savage" in his works, but many times that's essentially what he was talking about.
"did he just think they weren't as vain and prone to jealously as we are now"
Pretty much this. Also, there were no "societies". This video is spreading misinformation, Rousseau views the humans in a state of nature (which is what he actual refers to the "noble savages" as) as actually rather solitary and simple. This is man before any type of social contract, extremely primitive. Even philosophy would be viewed as corrupting this state of nature.
Yes, you should just read it. Don't be afraid of just picking up a philosopher's actual work, some are excessively complicated and may need complimentary works to be understood, but actually reading it can help you get there a lot.
I love this videos specially red ones, i loop them 5 to 7 times till i memorize every word, i would love to translate them to spanish, they are well edited well pased, just great!. i wonder if there are transcripts of the videos? and the voice is lovelly
Hi, I super love your videos. May you also make a video about Thomas Paine, John Stuart Mill & Baron de Montesquieu? Thank you so much. :)
"More thought of myself" ROFLMAO
Didn't know anything about Rousseau before this, and this video makes him sound amazing!
As always really great job. As part of your political theory section, could you make a video on anarcho syndicalism (communism) and Peter Kropotkin? Thanks
TomikuZz I second this
+TomikuZz And explaining the differences between all the libertarian socialist ideologies.
That would be great!
+Mike Pence Mike there's no need to be disrespectful, if you think this person is wrong you should try to educate them rather than put them down. Either way, I'm afraid you have misunderstood what Communism is. Communism is where Marx believed society would progress to, which is basically Anarcho-Syndicalism. First from Capitalism the state will take control of the economy bringing about a Socialist state. Once society has arranged itself to be able to live by the Communist mantra - "from each according to his ability, from each according to his need" - without the state being necessary, the state will dissolve, leaving a Communist society. What you describe is Socialism, what Tom described is Communism.
Thanks teacher, general will is very difficult to implement
Where's the piano and the hands at?
Great! exactly what I was looking for.
You do an outstanding job explaining it all with simple words, it is perfect to get an overview in just a couple of minutes.
Rich how the philosopher who wrote about how to raise children gave each of his children away to an orphanage and hated being around children in general.
I'm surprised this video didn't mention that.
@@CyborgNinja7 I'm not
He also, despite preaching how pure the children are, and how important it is to give them the best childhood, left 5 of his children to an orphanage.
Isn't the "noble savage" wrongly attributed to Rousseau?
English- Cow, sheep, hen etc pig
French- mutton,chicken, beef etc pork.
Social contract,and transactions.
TH-cam: "This video may be inappropriate for some users."
I guess the AI filters don't much care for political philosophy?
Eh, they did ignore some of the more “dangerous” and “radical” of his thoughts to focus on the mild, so maybe a broader view would help?
What about his argument on the social contract??? He argued against it as a form of and (if I remember correctly) foundation for slavery.
6:13 Hmm, that’s a bit funny...
Thank you so much. Wonderful work. Many thanks
When you say the word Indian, make sure you rather say "Native American" instead. South Asian Indians are called Indians.
Try not to gate keep.. It's also a western phrase 😅
Telling other people what to say isn't thought-provoking on any behalf. It leads to a narrow mindset of who's right and who’s wrong. Have a nice day ❤
Am I the only one watching these videos high as fuck and feels like he’s back in time?
I came to learn about the political philosophy of Rousseau and found nothing to learn about in this video. This video provides no information about Rousseau's views on different forms of government, no info about his political ideas whatsoever. Why is this even titled "Political theory"?
Something tells me you’re a leftist...
Parece que su gran obra la acaba de escribir en esta época...cuanto parecido tiene con la actualidad...!!
Rousseau clearly never studied archaeology. Through archaeology we know how violent, conscienceless and savage our ancestors have been.
This poster never clearly studied Rousseau. He totally misunderstood and therefore misinterpreted Rousseau's state of nature.
@@satiemacgreggor7974 herp got a point. Care to explain?
Yes, archaeology displays evidence of violence and savagery. However, there is no evidence that Rousseau was unaware of this. Archeology also displays evidence of co-operation and human progress hence society. Rousseau does point to this to indicate human potential for civility. Rousseau's focus on the 'goodness' of humans was a conscious choice for the purpose of refuting Hobbes' argument that humans without society are naturally evil.
“Whatsoever therefore is consequent to a time of war, where every man is enemy to every man, the same consequent to the time wherein men live without other security than what their own strength and their own invention shall furnish them withal. In such condition there is no place for industry... no knowledge of the face of the earth; no account of time; no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”
― Thomas Hobbes
Rousseau's argument is that Hobbes misses that he is looking at society through a limited perspective. The vices Hobbes refers to result from living with people. Jealousy, murderous intent, greed, only happen when we compare ourselves to others and interact with them. Rousseau talks about 'natural goodness' not as people being naturally good (which is the biggest misconception) but that individual people cannot commit crime, sin or arouse violent urges if they are by themselves. There is no reason for them to be jealous, want to murder someone or be greedy unless there is someone else they measure themselves to.
In regards to Herp's point, violence and savagery is not the only thing uncovered by archaeology. The OP has overlooked of evidence of villages, city-states etc... that eventually developed into the society we have today. Rousseau very clearly uses this evidence to base his argument against Hobbes, that the natural disposition of humans is not all evil.
Have been and still are. Just wearing a different color of war paint.
There has never been a group of people living in a pure state of nature without any culture.
God, I LOVE these videos. So informative, so interesting.
"children are born naturally good"... Says the guy who has clearly never been around children.
Everything was so good and then suddenly Kanye pops up
and things became even better
If Rousseau's "Confessions" (AD 1782) is one of the first autobiographies, then what is Augustine's "Confessions" (AD 400).
Is there anyone watching this for “Fun” ?
I wonder how many views this video will have if we didn’t had this in our study course .
Yeah, I'm here
This is the most clear explanation about Rousseau’s political thoughts than how my political 10 professor explains it...
No mention of his abandonment of several of his children to a foundling hospital in this narrative...#feetofclay.
I feel like they said John Locke was the father of childhood education in their locke video
Voltaire
No thanks
F.W. M. Why not?
@@kingnevermore25 He was born gay and had two lesbian sisters.
5:57 🐈 meowing ❤️
What about use some closed captions ?
thanks! that's why we should follow Rousseau's advice!