Date: 14 Aug 2014 22:37
Topic: Scrap Notes on Rousseau
Modified: 26 Jan 2015 23:26



in my examination of this work, is three things:

	* First, that Rousseau fails at his own stated goals, which are as follows:
		* To prove “if, in the civil order, there can be any sure and 
			legitimate rule of administration, men being taken as they are and 
			laws as they might be.”
		* “to find a form of association which will defend and 
			protect with the whole common force the person and goods of each associate, 
			and in which each, while uniting himself with all, may still obey himself alone, 
			and remain as free as before."

	* Second, that he could not possibly have succeeded, because of:
		* the internal inconsistencies in his own thinking, and
		* the excusable ignorance of his day. 

	* Third, that the any attempt at such a project (a “social contract”) is doomed to failure, because:
		* It is superfluous
		* It presumes, and requires, perfect knowledge
		* It is undefinable (Rousseau’s own construction points to what is actually present in his day,
			and asserts “This is a form of social contract” no matter what the constitution, 
			and then self-servingly asserts “They’re doin’ it wrong”, in order to invalidate it in favor
			of his ideal. He can’t have it both ways.)

----