How Does Jean-Jacques Rousseau's Conception Of The 'general Will' In His Social Contract Reconcile With His Critique Of The Enlightenment Notion Of Reason As A Universal And Ahistorical Faculty, Particularly In Light Of His Own Emphasis On The Role Of Sentiment And Particularity In Shaping Moral And Civic Judgment?

by ADMIN 317 views

Jean-Jacques Rousseau's concept of the 'general will' in The Social Contract offers a nuanced reconciliation with his critique of Enlightenment reason. Here's how it works:

  1. Critique of Enlightenment Reason: Rousseau challenged the Enlightenment view of reason as a universal, ahistorical faculty. He argued that reason is shaped by social and historical contexts, rather than being an abstract, universal truth.

  2. General Will as Collective Rationality: The general will is not based on individual or abstract reason but emerges from the collective reasoning of the community. It is a form of rationality that is context-dependent, rooted in the specific history, culture, and sentiments of a society.

  3. Role of Sentiment and Particularity: Rousseau emphasized the importance of sentiment and particularity in shaping moral and civic judgment. The general will incorporates these elements, making it emotionally and culturally resonant. It is informed by the shared experiences and emotions of the community.

  4. Practical Application: While the general will is influenced by sentiment, Rousseau believed that through education and a shared culture, individuals can align their sentiments with the common good. This fosters a cohesive general will rather than fragmented interests.

  5. Conclusion: The general will reconciles Rousseau's critique by being a situated, emotionally informed form of rationality. It aims for the common good without relying on abstract, universal reason, instead embracing the particularity and context of a community.

In essence, Rousseau's general will is a collective, context-dependent form of rationality that integrates sentiment and particularity, offering a middle ground between Enlightenment universalism and the diversity of human experience.