Introduction
Philosophy plays a crucial role in answering questions that concern many people and understanding what is best for society. For instance, among the acute issues that are a constant reason for debate is human freedom, which constitutes this matter. The well-known philosophers and theorists who contributed to understanding the concept and theories regarding freedom were John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
John Locke’s Theories
Popular philosopher Locke’s theories significantly impacted the growth of contemporary liberal philosophy. He was an Enlightenment-era author renowned for his political writings, particularly Two Treatises of Government, his most well-known book (Angier et al., 2022). A significant component of Locke’s political thought was his conception of freedom and minimal state regulation.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Theories
Another philosopher, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, was well-recognized for his theories on political philosophy, education, and human nature in the 18th century (McCormick, 2019). One of Rousseau’s numerous philosophical theories is his concept of freedom. Both philosophers, Rousseau and Locke, defined freedom as people’s natural rights. Yet, they differ in their visions regarding the government’s level of control and the extent to which people could use violence.
Similarities
Concepts of Freedom in the State of Nature
The first element on which the concepts of Locke and Rousseau are based is the state of freedom. According to John Locke, every person has natural rights, including life, liberty, and property from birth (Stearns, 2022). People could follow their interests in the natural world, but this freedom had restrictions (Stearns, 2022). Therefore, Locke emphasized the natural conditions in which people are free, and it is a community that imposes certain limitations. Similarly to this point of view, Rousseau said that freedom is a condition of being that occurs in the state of nature (Wistow, 2022).
In addition, while Locke claimed that people are forced to live within certain boundaries, Rousseau claimed that people are liberated from societal and governmental restraints while they are in nature. Without interference from outside influences, people can follow their interests under this condition (McCormick, 2019). Therefore, Locke’s and Rousseau’s visions are similar in terms of the natural occurrence of freedom but differ in the extent to which these freedoms can be experienced, with Rousseau emphasizing that liberty can be enjoyed outside of the community.
The Social Contract: Trade-Offs Between Liberty and Government
Rousseau understood, nevertheless, that a state of nature is neither desirable nor practical for humans to exist in. Humans began to establish communities and governments, sacrificing some of their liberties in exchange for the advantages of communal existence (McCormick, 2019). Rousseau’s social contract theory is based on this trade-off between individual freedom and group welfare (Newell, 2022).
According to Rousseau, the social contract is an agreement between people to create a government that would uphold their shared interests and promote the common good (Franco, 2021). Yet, this governance must be founded on the general desire of the populace, not on the interests of a particular group or person (Spector, 2019). Therefore, the social contract aspect of Rousseau’s vision involves the majority’s interests.
Similarly, John Locke developed the notion of the social contract as a solution to the constraints of the natural state. He thought people needed to unite to create a government that would defend their inalienable rights (Wohlgelernter, 2021). In exchange for this safety, people would consent to forfeit some of their freedom and submit to the rule of the government (Wohlgelernter, 2021).This would result in a peaceful and safe society where people might prosper (Wohlgelernter, 2021).
Similarly to his counterpart, the philosopher underlined the need for restraints on governmental authority. However, unlike Rousseau, Locke supported the right to rebellion if the majority’s interests were unsatisfied. The people possessed the right to rebel and overthrow the authority if it failed to uphold the natural liberties that its residents possessed. This guaranteed that the government remained subject to public scrutiny and offered a balance of its authority. Therefore, this position emphasizes the extent to which rebellion is acceptable.
The Role of Collective Will and Political Participation
Finally, both philosophers accentuated the role of collective will in politics and daily life. For instance, Rousseau stated that society’s fundamental source of freedom is the collective will (Spector, 2019). The general will is the collective will of the populace, and it stands for the shared goals and ideals of the neighborhood (Spector, 2019).
In Rousseau’s view, a person is exercising their freedom when they engage in political activity and help shape public opinion (Spector, 2019). This freedom is not the same as personal autonomy in a state of nature, but it is a type of autonomy that is acceptable in social settings. As a result, the philosopher showed that politics should always consider the public’s views and hold responsibility for all actions.
Locke believed in the accountability of the government as well. However, his definition of freedom was additionally founded on the concept of limited government, in which the scope of the state’s authority was constrained to prevent it from invading the rights and liberties of people. This is based on Locke’s idea that “the natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man” (Dickinson College, n.d., para. 1). He believed that maintaining law and order, defending property rights, and advancing social welfare were the essential responsibilities of the government (Giacomini, 2022).
As a result, people would be free to follow their interests and lead whole lives in society. Furthermore, Locke promoted the idea of public accountability for the government (Giacomini, 2022). He thought that the public had the right to hold their representatives accountable for their acts and to participate in the decision-making processes of the government (Giacomini, 2022). Therefore, it could be possible that the people’s needs were met, and the government was able to act in their best interests.
Conclusion
Hence, both Rousseau and Locke described freedom as a person’s inalienable rights, but they had quite different ideas about public violence and how much control the government should have. John Locke’s views on the social compact, natural rights, and limited government offer a foundation for developing safe and secure communities where people can prosper. Locke focuses on government accountability and using checks and balances to limit governmental authority.
Similarly, the notion of freedom envisioned by Rousseau is intricate and multifaceted, considering both the unique and communal parts of human nature. He realized the value of individual liberty and the need for societal order and general well-being. Rousseau’s conviction that freedom comes from the common will serves as a potent reminder that liberty is not only an individual privilege but also a shared duty that necessitates active engagement in the political process.
References
Angier, T., Benson, I. T., & Retter, M. D. (2022). The Cambridge handbook of natural law and human rights. Cambridge University Press.
Dickinson College. (n.d.). John Locke, Second Treatise on Government (1689). Web.
Franco, P. (2021). Rousseau, Nietzsche, and the image of the human. University of Chicago Press.
Giacomini, G. (2022). The arduous road to revolution: Resisting authoritarian regimes in the digital communication age. Mimesis.
McCormick, P. J. (2019). Social contract and political obligation: A critique and reappraisal. Routledge.
Newell, W. R. (2022). Tyranny and revolution: Rousseau to Heidegger. Cambridge University Press.
Spector, C. (2019). Rousseau. John Wiley & Sons.
Stearns, P. N. (2022). Human rights in world history. Taylor & Francis.
Wistow, J. (2022). Social policy, political economy and the social contract. Policy Press.
Wohlgelernter, M. (2021). History, religion, and American democracy. Routledge.