Windows LiveWindows Live™
 
 
個人檔案♧ Rovephoenix相片部落格清單 工具 說明

部落格
    14/3/2006

    ☞.A comment of Rousseau

    Freedom is one of permanent motivations of humans’ revolution.  Rousseau shows a very persuasive opinion of freedom, according to which, freedom is defined as a natural feature of human beings, and as it has existed once when people are born, it cannot be alienated.  Rousseau considers that freedom is not allowed to be deprived, no one can be the master of others and these points should be made legitimate.  This essay aims to firstly display a personal understanding of Rousseau’s ideas of freedom and then show certain queries.
     
    Above all, I can feel the deeply influence of The Social Contract to the whole capitalist legislative system.  Just as what is suggested by it, “man is born free” and “he shall be forced to be free”, that Rousseau makes a principle of freedom being fully understood and accepted by the public.  By refuting the theory of “man is not naturally equal”, equality and freedom is redefined and given to everyone without distinguished.  I believe this idea makes people who are oppressed and unequally treated realize that they should fight for the right which is naturally given, and they have the right to gain freedom.  Personally, this is the first time for me to hear a claim of freedom as strong as this.  I prefer to investigate more about this point rather than only be taught about Rousseau’s theory of the nation and society to prove ideal communism when I was in China.  Historically, his voice could be concerned as the “Gospel” of the French Revolution and an important attempt to pursue the real freedom.
     
    However, as far as I concern, when Rousseau try to make his concept of freedom legitimate, there are some doubtful points in some extent.  Obviously, Rousseau use the freedom in primitive society to prove his theory could not be completely convinced.  Firstly, history can not go backwards.  Secondly, there are not enough evidences about whether people could really enjoy freedom in primitive society or not.  Furthermore, if I turn to discuss general will and moral freedom, more problems may be occurred.  The use of general will as a sovereign may be achieved in small communities, in other word, in tribes, but not the current ones.  Meanwhile, how can I only focus on general will and ignore the value of individual characters?  In addition, the freedom defined by Rousseau is “limited by the general will”, which sounds more limited than “if it is not violating law, it is freedom”.  Do you agree with me and think Rousseau’s “freedom” is a little confined?  Any way, I think if I were “forced” to do something that means I am not “free”.  Even I am “forced” to be “free”.
     
    In conclusion, a comment of Rousseau’s ideas of freedom has been made and generally speaking the positive influence should be admitted.  Basically, it had a significant effect to the development of social philosophy and it awakens people’s natural requirements, in spite of being ideal.  In any case, problems should be investigated in their own historical background, and even though the comprehension of freedom is different in different periods, the pursuance of freedom would be the same.
    22:15:08 | 發佈至您的部落格 | ☼ [焦点访谈]

    回應 (14)

    請稍候...
    很抱歉，您輸入的回應過長。請縮短您的回應。
    您尚未輸入內容，請再試一次。
    很抱歉，目前無法新增您的回應，請稍後再試。
    若要新增回應，您的父母必須先給您權限。要求權限
    您的家長已關閉回應功能。
    很抱歉，目前無法刪除您的回應，請稍後再試。
    您已超過每日回應上限次數，請於 24 小時後再試一次。
    由於系統顯示您可能傳送垃圾郵件給其他使用者，因此您帳號中的回應功能已遭停用。 如果您認為自己帳號遭錯誤停用，請連絡 Windows Live 支援。
    請完成下列安全檢查，以完成回應。
    您輸入的安全檢查字元必須與圖片或音訊中的字元相符。

    若要新增回應，請以您的 Windows Live ID 登入 (若您使用 Hotmail、Messenger 或 Xbox LIVE，則您已擁有 Windows Live ID)。登入


    沒有 Windows Live ID？註冊
    ZhangGraci​e撰寫：
    亲~我可能你暑假的时候回去，但是还没定，所以也不敢说死
    不管怎样我回去的话肯定是要找你的哦^^
    3 月 26 日
    Serena撰寫：
    感动ing~姐你啥时候回来啊？？？
    3 月 25 日
    张楷浠撰寫：
    受打击了。。走了走了。。
    3 月 19 日
    无卡卡撰寫：
    好不容易读完了
    回来缓考上学期的课，总算考完了
    开始准备考研
    还是羡慕你的生活啊 呵呵
    3 月 17 日
    Serena撰寫：
    是啊，张皓老师，教听力的~
    3 月 17 日
    Serena撰寫：
    姐~Grace是你么？那天听皓哥说起，说是广院的，还认识我~我就在猜是不是你了
    3 月 17 日
    songjuntao撰寫：
    要自由作什么呀，只要有爱就好了啦。
    3 月 17 日
    ZhangGraci​e撰寫：
    ft...
    3 月 16 日
    HouAlex撰寫：
    呵呵，谁说评论文就不能评论？评论评论文，不就是讨论么？呵呵。
    再者，我好像也没有不“接受他人的意见”啊？我只不过引申发展了一下哦。我虽然很爱挑小凤凰的毛病，但是这一回可是一句挑毛病的话也没有说哦。
    3 月 16 日
    匿名 的圖片
    mini 撰寫：

       英语加哲学~~呵呵,常常看看你的文章,也许英语6级不是难题@_@,对我这种工科学生来说，英文还好,套上哲学就头疼啦-_-!还是回归英语加化学吧....

      澳洲永远在我们季节相反的地方,但幸好时差不是很厉害,虽不能一起BBQ,但还是能在同一个夜晚欣赏同一轮明月!:)

    3 月 15 日
    GaoBing撰寫：
    楼下这位兄弟真是知识渊博阿，只是此文章是一篇评论文。评论评论文，似乎有点画蛇添足。应该多接受他人的意见才对吧。
    3 月 15 日
    HouAlex撰寫：
    补充一句，尼采和马克思尽管在许多根本看法上相互轩轾，但也有许多相似之处。明白这些或许可以帮助我们理解鲁迅从赞赏尼采到认同马克思的转化过程。
    3 月 15 日
    HouAlex撰寫：
    第一，我没有读过卢梭，不知道他的“自由”是否限制在“公共意志”的范围内。不过有一点我是认同的，就是公共意志吞噬了个人意志是不能容忍的。参见我在我的space上推荐过的一篇文章：
    第二，我是不相信有所谓“绝对自由”或是“绝对平等”的。在这一点的认识上，尼采和马克思是有相似之处的。当然，要说明这一点，需要我另撰一篇来说明。
    第三，是从第二点的相反的角度来说，我认为尼采和马克思在这个问题上走向了另一个极端，就是过分强调斗争和对立，而忽视了“相对自由”和“相对平等”的地位。尼采的“超人”就是这种极端的表现，或者说不过是他的一种理想而已。至于马克思，他虽然肯定了劳动阶级之间的平等和劳动阶级的自由，却明显地忽视了“非劳动阶级”（这个词是否确切暂且不论）的自由和不同阶级之间的平等。这种分界法，在建国后又向更偏激的方向发展，以致于把知识分子也排除在“劳动阶级”之外。这是后话。
    3 月 15 日
    赵苏南撰寫：
    受不了，眼睛都看花了。
    3 月 15 日

    引用通告

    此內容的引用通告是：
    http://rovephoenix.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!289A3C767D8CBA22!775.trak
    引述這則內容的部落格
    • 無