Quote by Rousseau on man being good by nature

[Led Zeppelin]

I remember reading a quote by Rousseau where he says that man is good by nature, but society corrupts. I'm not sure from where it was, maybe one of his books, but I can't find it anywhere now.

Anyone know about it and where I can find it?

Oh, and I'm not referring to the "man is born free yet everywhere he is in chains" one.

[BobKKKindle$]

It probably comes from his Discourse on the Origins of Inequality, which, along with Discourse on the Arts of Sciences, was written in response to an essay competition, although for the former Rousseau didn't win anything despite receiving widespread acclaim, if I remember correctly. There are probably quite a few quotes which meet the description you offered but this seems to sum it up quite nicely, taken from the introduction to the DOI, where Rousseau is discussing how other philosophers and political theorists have analyzed human behaviour, and whether they have seen negative traits as inherent in mankind, or products of society:

"Every one of them, in short, constantly dwelling on wants, avidity, oppression, desires and pride, has transferred to the state of nature ideas which were acquired in society; so that, in speaking of the savage, they described the social man"

source (http://www.constitution.org/jjr/ineq_03.htm)

Personally though I don't think that Rousseau believes that men living together will always lead to mankind becoming corrupt - rather the entire point of the social contract is to create a form of society that will combat the destructive impacts of amour-propre, thereby making men genuinely free.

[Led Zeppelin]

Hmm, I remember the quote being something like "man is born free, society corrupts man" though.

I believe it was in a piece discussing the concept of original sin. Rousseau was counterposing that concept to his own view by saying that.

Actually I think it was in his book Emile or On Education.

[Decolonize The Left]

Do you mean the famous Rousseau phrase:
"Man was born free, and everywhere he is in chains." (Social Contract, Book 1, Chapter 1)?

- August

[Il Medico]

Do you mean the famous Rousseau phrase:
"Man was born free, and everywhere he is in chains." (Social Contract, Book 1, Chapter 1)?

- August
Maybe you miss this part of his post:


Oh, and I'm not referring to the "man is born free yet everywhere he is in chains" one.

Love,
Captain Jack.
(that's right, bringing the sig back)

[RevolverNo9]

Well I'm not sure what precise quote you're after but such ideas are at the heart of both the Discourse and The Social Contract. However I don't think he's being quite as simple as to say that man is 'by nature good' - Rousseau's great and substantial insight is rather to recognise that the character and provenance of obstacles to human development are intrinsically social and their solutions are to be located at the level of society rather than at the level of ideas or religious transcendence.

Rousseau's 'state of nature' was almost certainly a construction to bring this fact into relief. This intellectua model rejected the universally-held notion that human problems were rooted in 'nature', and were a question of theodicy (which would certainly tie into a consideration of 'original sin'). Rousseau turned this all on its head - human emancipation was a social question, whose solution demanded the reoganisation of
social relations.

Really I think Rousseau's innovation and contribution is seriously under-acknowledged by the left, going right back to Marx whose rare and utterly dismissive reference to the man was I think quite disingenuous.

[Led Zeppelin]

I'm almost 100% sure it was in Emile or On Education. I'm going to get it from my library again to make sure.

As for Marx's remarks on Rousseau, I'm not so sure about them being all dismissive? Plekhanov mentions the importance of Rousseau in his work on historical materialism, so I think Marx also acknowledged it.

Do you have some quotes on it?

[RevolverNo9]

I'm sorry I can't recall exactly where Marx does reference Rousseau and I don't have the energy now to sift through! There's a couple of passing remarks in the Early Works, maybe someone can remember where. The striking thing however is how extremely sparse any mention of Rousseau is in Marx, when the actual debt owed, whether directly or indirectly, must have been considerable. And the few references that do exist, again I'm sorry I haven no quotes at hand, are disparaging.

This is a shame as not only did Rousseau express sharply and clearly that human progress must be located at the level of social relations (an obvious necessary building-block for Marxism!) but also Rousseau's consideration of inequality, distinguishing between 'natural inequality' and the 'moral inequalitiy' that arises from society, prefigures (if not informs) Marx's own grappling with the problem, particularly in the Critique of the Gotha Programme.

I've never read Plekhanov (and am not particularly inclined to to be honest!) but if he does emphasise the significance of Rousseau it's not as a consequence of echoing Marx. The only Maxists who have really seriously engaged with the importance of Rousseau and his relation to Marx and Marxism were the Italian school represented by della Volpe and Lucio Colletti. Neither are particularly fashionable these days, which I personally think is a shame but that's just me!

[red_rich]

perhaps it was...

"the philosophers, who have inquired into the foundations of society, have all felt the necessity of going back to a state of nature; but not one of them has got there.... every one of them, in short, constantly dwelling on wants, avidity, opression, desires and pride, has transferred to the state of nature ideas that were aquired in society."

(rousseau, discourse on the origins of inequality p50)