Rousseau fourth lecture
A. What destroys the golden epoch: division of labor (pp. 115-120). Compare Plato's remarks about the origin of society. Two differences:
1. Plato explains the origin of society in terms of differences of aptitude, so he pictures societies as forming already differentiated. In Rousseau simple societies are already in place before there is specialization of the kind Plato considers.
2. In Plato division of labor is good for everyone. In Rousseau it has bad consequences: centrally economic inequality; but also more scope for amour-propre (p. 118); hypocrisy (p. 119); lack of freedom (p. 119); aggressive competition (p. 119).
B. By this point we have something reminiscent of Hobbes' state of nature ("horrible state of war," p. 120). Differences:
1. In Rousseau it isn't the natural state: the circumstances are institutional and the motivations are socially generated.
2. In Hobbes the war of each against all is explained as the outcome of natural equality (chap. XIII). In Rousseau it's the result of socially generated inequality.
C. The next stage is also reminiscent of Hobbes: the "horrible state of war" is brought to an end by a contract, setting up "rules of justice and peace" (p. 121) and collecting individual forces into a sovereign power. But in Hobbes the terms of the contract are requirements of reason. Each individual is supposed to be able to see that self-preservation and the pursuit of happiness require everyone to abide by these rules (on condition everyone else does). The contract is advantageous to everyone. In Rousseau the contract is a fraud, imposed on the poor by the rich on the basis of "specious reasons" (p. 121). The pretext is freedom, but the result (and the unavowed purpose) is enslavement. Note p. 131, suggesting a three-stage deterioration:
1. Economic inequality: rich against poor.
2. Political inequality: strong against weak. (After political institutions have been set up, in the move that ends the "horrible state of war.")
3. Degeneration of political inequality into despotism: masters against slaves. (See also p. 134, with the suggestion that the result of this third stage will be violent revolution and a return to the "horrible state of war.")
D. At the second of these stages, we get new modes of behavior and feeling: political skills, and much more scope for amour-propre (see p. 133 on "desire for reputation" and "burning desire to be talked about").