Difference Between Kant And Rousseau

Good Essays
Obeying the state has many advantages, it creates structure that enables citizens to enjoy maximum level of satisfaction. As a result, of obeying the state it allows order and it guarantees that each others rights are met. Furthermore, in historical context, the obligation to the state has been explained by many political philosophers such as, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant, and David Hume. Rousseau believed in a social contract, while Hume had a more pragmatic approach focusing on the usefulness of the state, and Kant focused on an individuals moral obligation to the state.
Rousseau, describes the relationship between the state and a person as contractual, thereby explaining the state as a place with no law or morality, and has been left for its benefits and necessity of cooperation. As society evolves and develops, the needs of society increases such as, having private property, industry for growing and building. With demands increasing this required the human race to adopt institutions of law. Rousseau believed that in order to maintain a state of nature, society needs to enter into a social contract and abandoning the natural rights. This is done to protect themselves and have liberty. Entering a social contract allows submission of
…show more content…
Kant believed that in a society every action has to have a motive behind it, or else it has no moral value. Also in his work he said, “in the kingdom of ends everything has either a price or a dignity. What has a price can be replaced by something else as its equivalent; what on the other hand is above all price and therefore admits of no equivalent has a dignity.(Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, pp. 42-43). This belief signifies how Kant believes a state should run, and that if everyone does all his actions with morality then society will function as a

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Powerful Essays

    Kant and Rousseau

    • 2384 Words
    • 10 Pages

    The Influence of Kant and Rousseau on the Enlightenment The eighteenth century was a time of rapid change and development in the way people viewed humans and their interaction with others in society. Many countries experience revolution and monarchies were overthrow. People began to question the values that were ingrained in society and governments that ruled them. Two of the biggest philosophers of that time were Immanuel Kant and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who both ignite the overthrow of tradition…

    • 2384 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Kant Vs Rousseau

    • 1563 Words
    • 7 Pages

    There are two political theories that I combined and will implement if I were to be placed as the highest-ranking official of the country. These are the theories of Immanuel Kant and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. I chose to unite the two theories because both of them, as I was reading through its contents, had the biggest impact on me than all the other theories I researched for. The joined theories would build up my ideal state as a leader of the country so that I may be able to take the people to a better…

    • 1563 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Kant or Utilitarianism In this essay we will discuss what Kant’s and a utilitarian’s view on insider trading would be. As we have discussed in previous essays, Kant believed that moral rules could be known through reason and not just by observation (Shaw and Barry 69). For me this is the basis of all decisions that we make and why I would support Kant’s point of view on insider trading. Utilitarianism concentrates on producing the greatest amount of happiness and using it as a standard to determine…

    • 780 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Human nature is the basic substance shared by human beings, and is thus important in making sense of society and all its complexities along with the individual man and his liberties. Two prominent philosophers, Rousseau and Kant, express conjectures on human nature in their essays. Rousseau focuses on man in the untainted state of nature. He believes that the lack of knowledge and morality in savage man is better than the evils resulting from social inequalities, insisting a shift towards what once…

    • 896 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Best Essays

    What is the central difference between metaphysics as Kant conceives it, and metaphysics as Aristotle conceives it? Argue in support of one or the other view. Metaphysics is usually taken to involve both questions of what is existence and what types of things exist; in order to answer either questions, one will find itself using and investigating the concepts of being. Aristotle proposed the first of these investigations which he called ‘first philosophy’, also known as ‘the science of being’ however…

    • 2273 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Better Essays

    the conveniences of modern luxuries we would have an entirely different stature of limitations than we perceive there to be. Kant claims in his second thesis that nature intended us to achieve great things; that man becomes powerful because nature pushed us to apply all of our capacity to rise above instinct and nature and begin to learn how to provide for ourselves. Rousseau does not see it that way; he feels that the rise of modern science only lead to conflict and false optimism in believing the…

    • 1181 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Similarly, in a Rousseauian fashion, Kant suggests that the state under a civil union cannot wrong its citizens since it only passes laws that its own citizens would give to themselves, hence “consent” to (MM, 6:314). But while these passages and the overall tone of Kant’s writings suggest he is a social contract thinker, a deeper investigation demonstrates a conflict with many of the other tenants of Kant’s thought. Not only do most of the important elements that make up Kant’s political philosophy…

    • 650 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Rousseau believed that human nature is good but eventually they get brainwashed and become evil but Hobbes thinks otherwise. Hobbes states that humans are evil by nature and we need some sort of power in order to be controlled and be civilized. Rousseau thought that humans are born into the world with good intentions. He said there was a point when no one had property and we were happy. Eventually the human race began to grow, starting a chain of conflicts. Hobbes thought that by nature, we are very…

    • 503 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Julissa Tejeda Prof. Neely Contemporary Civilizations - Fall Final Paper After explaining how the state of nature evolved into civil society when people began to rely on each other for resources, Rousseau concluded that the social contact that made civil society possible is more important that the individuals who created it. Although civil society created inequality, it also created freedom, morality, and rationality, which make people human. On the other hand, Locke explained that the state of nature…

    • 481 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    should always give and protect our rights. However, the Enlightenment thinker Jean-Jacques Rousseau, feels we protect our own rights by working together. In class we discussed how his belief is similar to the phrase: If we all have superpowers the no one has superpowers. We considered this phrase because if everyone were to have superpowers, then we wouldn't wish to have them anymore since everyone has them. Rousseau also stated we must use reason to give the individual rights of life, liberty, and property…

    • 489 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays