The 1700s saw the waxing and waning of Enlightenment philosophies and a greater fascination in reason and logic. The individual became supremely important and the idea of selfhood was much debated by philosophers such as Jean-Jacques Rousseau. The idea of the individual also led to greater fascination with culture in many areas in Western Europe, leading to an increase in nationalism. This increase on the emphasis of individual and that individual’s relation to the state led many to begin traveling widely across Europe and record their travels. Though stories of vampires began trickling from Eastern Europe to Western Europe as early as the 1690s, vampires did not gain true traction in Western Europe until the 1700s (Nelson). For less …show more content…
The Romantic era ascribed to the idea of the sublime - an idea that human emotions, all human emotions including horror, fear, and pain, produced an exhilarating thrill. In order to experience the full gamut of human emotion and the resultant high, the Romantics believed people should embrace all emotions, including the dark ones. However, experiencing horror and pain first hand were clearly detrimental, as witnessed with the mass executions of the French Revolution, but viewing these emotions from a removed setting, such as in art, poetry, and literature, allowed people to experience the thrill and complete exhilaration offered by the human experience. Often art and literature of the Romantic era depicted both horror and delight to offer a complete thrill and exploration of the human psyche. Henry Fuseli’s 1781 painting The Nightmare nicely embodies the idea of exploring both horror and sensuality. The subject of the painting is a young woman sleeping. On her chest sits a demon, gazing searchingly at the viewer as a ghostly horse looks on the scene in the background. Fuseli offers a bizarre image that so captivated his contemporaries that he painted several variations on the theme and the imagery continues to fascinate viewers 200 years later. Instead of cringing in horror at the demon on her chest, the woman’s back is arched sensuously, her arms hanging from her sleeping couch in complete surrender, yet
Jean-Jacques Rousseau was an Enlightenment thinker during the eighteenth century and is most noted for his work The Social Contract. The Social Contract published in 1762 and is a philosophical document that expresses the ideas of popular sovereignty. Popular Sovereignty is a form of government in which “the doctrine that sovereign power is vested in the people and that those chosen to govern, as trustees of such power, must exercise it in conformity with the general will.” This is basically a fancy way of saying that the people have the power of authority of their government and the people should decide how they are governed. Like The Social Contract, the Declaration of Independence is a document that sets out to explain the relationship between a government and its people based on an an understanding of that relationship. The Declaration of Independence was composed by Thomas Jefferson in 1766, and shares many of the same ideals as The Social Contract. The Social Contract and the Declaration of Independence are more similar than different because Jean-Jacques Rousseau influenced John Locke, whose Social Contract Theories directly influenced Thomas Jefferson during the writing of the Declaration of Independence.
The ideas of Enlightenment philosophers rippled throughout the globe, however, they seemed to have the most interesting effect on France. Jean-Jacques Rousseau was a major contributor to Frances political and social structure post-French revolution. These ideas weren’t the only triggers for the French Revolution. A combination of strangling taxes, economic disparity, and an impotent ruler led to the development of an intense need for reform in France. “France spent an enormous amount of money during the American war which put them on the verge of bankruptcy” (McKay et al., pg. 662). To make up for this immense national debt, taxes were raised which put more pressure on the already struggling working class in France. The privileged classes
When Jean Jacques Rousseau wrote his Social Contract, the idea of liberty and freedom were not new theories. Many political thinkers such as John Locke and Thomas Hobbes had already evolved with their own clarification of liberty and freedom of mankind, and in fact John Locke had already publicized his views and ideas on the social contract as well. In Rousseau’s case, what he did was to transform the ideas incorporated by such substantial words, and present us to another method to the social contract dilemma. What would bring man to leave the state of nature, and enter into a structured civil society? Liberals believes that this was the assurance of protection - liberty to them implied being free from destruction and harm towards one’s property. Rousseau’s concept of freedom was entirely different from that of traditional liberals. According to Rousseau, liberty is meant to voice out your opinion, and participation as human being. “To renounce liberty is to renounce being a man” (Wootton, 454).
Thomas Jefferson considers himself a contributor to the Age of Enlightenment. Through many of his writings he expands on the philosophies of the great European writers of that era - Rousseau, Locke, Hume, and Leibniz. In “The Declaration of Independence,” Jefferson directly adopts several themes found in the work of French writer Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Rousseau’s “The Origin of Civil Society,” provides a foundation for most of Jefferson’s ideas in “The Declaration of Independence.”
Jean-Jacques Rousseau was a Swiss-born French Enlightenment thinker most famous for the 1762, “The Social Contract.” “The Social Contract” is Rousseau’s most valued work due to its ties within the French Revolution.
In the book The Basic Political Writings written by Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Rousseau in the beginning of the book states a very important question that he hopes to answer in parts throughout the book, the question being: What is the origin of inequality among men, and is it authorized by the natural law? Rousseau takes a different approach than all the other philosophers on trying to figure out the origin of man and their so-called inequality. Rousseau’s point of view on the state of nature differs from other philosophers such as Locke and Hobbes. How do you find the origin of man? Where can the origin of civil society be traced back too? How are men perceived in the state of nature? Does inequality exist in the state of nature? In what
In this essay, I will compare the contrasting views between Thomas Hobbes and Jean Jacques Rousseau based on the state of nature and civilization. Rousseau was seen as an optimist who viewed human nature as good (“Noble Savage”) and believed that civilization corrupted us; While, Hobbes thought the complete opposite believing that humans in their natural state were selfish creatures purely interested in themselves and that government is imperative in keeping us in check. Throughout this essay, I will further explain their differing ideas and I will show how I view and interpret them as well.
The last paragraph of the prelude to the Second Discourse is an impassioned appeal whose scope transcends the boundaries of time and space alike, calling for readers to pay attention to the history of man and society that Rousseau is on the verge of putting forth. Beginning with this authorial intrusion—a form of literary apostrophe—the essay adopts historical writing as its primary narrative mode. This method stands in direct contrast with the approach Thomas Hobbes takes in his Leviathan, in which the Englishman sets out to prove propositions as one might do geometrically, by preceding from valid arguments and sound premises. Rousseau’s rejection of philosophy, at least as he understands it in the Second Discourse, embodies the emphasis
Rousseau and Jefferson are two very compelling philosophers, that both have had a great influence on the revolution. The two authors share several key concepts with one another, such as their views about human right, the freedom and protection of them, the strengths of man himself, and the difference between where their style of writing came from, considering Rousseau came from Switzerland and Jefferson the United States.
John Steinbeck was clear in saying that “ideas are like rabbits. You get a couple and learn how to handle them, and pretty soon you have a dozen,” especially in how it applies to the formation of the American government. There is no argument that the documents that formed the basis of our nation such as “Common Sense,” “The Declaration of Independence,” and the “Virginia Declaration of Rights” were heavily influenced in the composition of their works by the ideas and writings of great thinkers that came before them such as the Baron de Montesquieu, Jean Jacques Rousseau, and John Locke. All of these works are not only united on a thematic level of the type of government they all speak of, but they also carry very similar conceptual ideas throughout
This person is Jean-Jacques Rousseau. He is a famous philosopher, composer, and writer from the time period called the Age of Reason or the Enlightenment. He influenced many later philosophers and educators such as Maria Montessori and Jacques Derrida.
In 1782, a painting debuted that shocked a lot of people and critics. This painting was The Nightmare, created by Henry Fuseli the year before. The painting is of a woman lying down, slightly hanging off a sofa, in a deep sleep. On her chest is what appears to be an imp, and behind the curtains, a demonic horse. Due to these things, many people found this painting to be dreary and frightening. Three of the things helping even more to contribute to the thoughts people had about the painting are the mix of dark and light, the morbidity, and drama.
Over the course of history this idea of freedom has been developed and defined by many famous political and philosophical thinkers. Many of Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s ideas are acknowledged in the “Discourse on the Origin of Inequality” and more notably the “The Social Contract”. John Stuart Mill’s major points originate from a book called “On Liberty”. All of these works are still read today and taught in schools around the world. In particular, their ideas on freedom and liberty have drawn a considerable amount of attention. For instance, Rousseau is well known for his idea of “forcing citizens to be free”, while Mill claims that freedom can be found in “pursing our own good in our own way”. Therefore, it is evident that fundamental differences occur between Rousseau’s and Mill’s ideas on liberty and freedom. Rousseau’s rejects this classical liberal idea of freedom of the individual, and instead argues that the highest quality of freedom is achieved through a social contract where collective decisions represent the law and people have a duty to the state, while Mill sees freedom as not being constrained by the government (freedom from laws) and pursuing one’s own good as long as it does no harm to others.
Eighteenth-century philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau influenced many French revolutionaries with his ideas. In the time of the Enlightenment, people believed that humankind could progress and improve through the use of reason and science. One of them was French artist Jacques-Louis David, who was official artist to the French revolution (p158, Blk 3). Just as Rousseau had used his publications to reflect on his ideas, David had used art as a media to reflect the ideas and values of the society in the eighteenth century. In this essay, we will be examining the influence of Rousseau’s views on the relationship between the state and the individual in David’s painting “The Oath of the Horatii”.
Rousseau starts his discourse with the quote, “What is natural has to be investigated not in beings that are depraved, but in those that are good according to nature” (Aristotle. Politics. II). It is this idea that Rousseau uses to define his second discourse. Rousseau begins his story of human nature by “setting aside all the facts” (132). Rousseau believes the facts of the natural state of humanity are not necessary to determine the natural essence of human nature, and adding facts based on man’s condition in society does not show man’s natural condition. The facts don’t matter for Rousseau because to understand the essence of human nature requires looking to how man is in a completely natural state. Since man is no longer in this state,