Rousseau and Natural Law Theory

Introduction
was a French philosopher
What man loses by the social contract is his natural liberty and
unlimited right to everything he tries to get and succeeds in
getting. On the other hand, what he gains is civil liberty and the
proprietorship of all he possesses.
Rousseau believes when we are in the state of nature we
have natural liberty and negative liberty . We then move
into civilizations in which we have no freedom at all (positive
liberty), in which we live under either patriarchal power or sheer
force and in which pervasive inequality leads us to be thoroughly
dominated.
When we enter the social contract, as subjects we then have
civil and moral liberty. <nothing to control but subject to ones own
conscience>. It is unclear to what extent these political freedoms
would

also

lead

to

non-domination,

though

it

is

clearly

Rousseau's ideal that we be free of domination.

Law that is consistent with the general will treats

us all equally, but equal treatment before the law does not
necessarily mean that one is equal in all other respects. It's
one of the important lessons Rousseau bequeaths us: that we can
have political freedom but still suffer from all sorts of social
domination.
* social domination To avoid mistakes in weighing one against the other ?

> must distinguish natural liberty, from civil liberty

Types of Liberties
Definition: Liberty is the 'immunity from arbitrary exercise of authority
or political independence
1. Negative Liberty: (Kebebasan Mutlak)
unimpeded physical motion as being able to do what one wants
(Hobbes)
the absence of obstacles, barriers or constraints
Example: civil liberties, such as freedom of conscience, freedom of
speech, freedom of movement and freedom of religious worship
Negative liberty is usually attributed to individual agents
a) Civil Liberty: being able to do what one wants within the bounds of
the law of a state that respects ones natural rights. (Locke)
b) Civil Liberty: being able to do what one wants within the bounds of
the law of a state that operates according to the general will.
(Rousseau)
Limited by the general will
2. Positive Liberty: (Kebebasan dikawal suatu badan such as ruler)
Having the capacity and resources to make full use of ones rights
and opportunities or to achieve self-realization (Marx) * selfrealization - fulfillment of one's own potential.

one's having a role in choosing who governs the society of which

one is a part

Example:

traced

positive

liberty

from

Aristotle's

definition

of

citizenship - which is historically derived from the social role of the

freemen of classical Athens: it was the liberty in choosing their
government granted to citizens
Positive liberty is sometimes attributed to collectivities
3. Natural Liberty: (lebih kurang negative liberty)
Not owing natural obedience to anyone (Locke)
which is limited solely by the force of the individual involved
5. Moral Liberty:
Acting according to ones rational will (Rousseau & Kant)
In a legitimate state moral liberty and civil liberty will be
coextensive. Whatever one is free to do according to the one, one
will be free to do according to the other. Whatever is forbidden by
one will be forbidden by the other.
Through moral liberty, which alone makes man truly the master of
himself.
6. Non-domination:
Independence, not being dependent on anyone else as opposed to
the political freedom he discusses when concerned with the general
will.
The opposite of this kind of freedom is "domination."
Rousseau thinks that civilized society, no matter how politically free
it might be, is nonetheless full of domination and the inequality that
causes it.

Social Contract
Definition: What man loses through the social contract is his natural
liberty and an unlimited right to everything that tempts him and that
he can acquire. What he gains is civil liberty and the proprietary
ownership of all he possesses.
Rousseaus social contract is a mystical construct by which the
individual merges into the community and becomes part of the
general will

General Will
Rousseau definition: General will as the majority opinion of
what is most beneficial to the common interest without any
influence from private interest
Only if law is the product of the general will, (and this general will is
the will of the sovereign) then the law speaks for the rationality
of the whole social body.

Sovereign
In this context, general will of the sovereign is not the arbitrary will
of an individual or groups of individuals. Not the prince or elite body
of men as it is different from jurisprudential entity of the Sovereign
Sovereign is the centrality of power and the general will which
directs that power through law

 Ideal form = sovereign would consists of the TOTAL NUMBER of

citizens of the society then the general will is therefore the single
will of the total of the citizens
The many and diverse wills of the population can be considered a
single will because everyone is a party to the social contract and in
that contract they have agreed to direct their actions to achieving
the common good.
The will of all becomes the general will only when it is in
accordance with the porpose of the common good
Often it is just the will o a majority or minority who have the
vote: will of interest groupings
Knowledge concerning the social problem leads to a consensus and
the wills of all are directed to the common good and the general
will thereby directs us to social justice
Law is the register of the general will Governments can only be
tolerated so long as it accurately reflects the general will.
Each citizens understands that he should refrain from any action
which would cause the others to turn upon him, as in this way each
realises that his own goos and the common good are intertwined
At the same time Rousseau insists that whoever refuses to
follow the general will shall be compelled to do so by the whole
body. he will be forced to be free
Rousseau apparently meant that disobedience is illegitimate
because it constitutes a failure to discharge a moral obligation a
citizen incurred when acting as a citizen
What grounds obedience can be compelled? - when law was
made with the common good or social justice in mind. This is
because person who goes against the law is going against his

own best interest. It seems that he is misguidedly putting his

subjective desires in opposition to the just state which his will,
should be part.
*people must vote every law - direct participation

Rejection
Rousseau

rejected

the

theory

of

representative

government advocated by Hobbes and Locke

Every law the people has not ratified in person is null and void,
is in fact not a law
Rousseau seems to endorse direct participation
Rousseaus general will would replace natural law as a higher
standard. However Rousseaus general will while making
possibly the strongest argument for

democracy and also

justification of totalitarianism
The voting system and passing of law should be guided by the
overriding purpose of the common good or social justice
When whole system is directed to the attainment of social
justice and the laws and institutions express that commitment
that wecan be sure that the law passsed are actually in line with
the general will