Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
Jean-Jacques Rousseau, a prominent figure of the Enlightenment, profoundly impacted political philosophy with his exploration of human nature and society. In his *Discourse on the Origin of Inequality* (1755), Rousseau meticulously distinguishes between ‘natural’ and ‘artificial’ inequality, arguing that the latter is not inherent but a product of societal structures. Natural inequality refers to the physical and mental differences among individuals, while artificial inequality stems from social conventions, property ownership, and the pursuit of self-interest within a civilized society. Understanding this distinction is crucial to grasping Rousseau’s critique of modern civilization and his vision for a just social order.
Natural Inequality
Rousseau posits that in the ‘state of nature,’ humans are guided by two primary principles: self-preservation (amour de soi) and pity (compassion). Natural inequality exists in the form of differences in physical strength, agility, and intellectual capacity. However, these differences do not necessarily translate into dominance or social hierarchy. Individuals are largely self-sufficient, meeting their basic needs through hunting and gathering, and their interactions are minimal. This state is characterized by a primitive freedom and equality, as individuals lack the capacity or desire to exploit others. There is no concept of property, and needs are met directly from nature.
Artificial Inequality
Artificial inequality, according to Rousseau, emerges with the development of society, particularly with the introduction of private property. He argues that the first person who enclosed a piece of land and declared “This is mine!” laid the foundation for inequality and conflict. This act, though seemingly simple, initiates a chain reaction:
- Division of Labor: The development of agriculture and crafts leads to specialization and interdependence.
- Social Hierarchy: Unequal distribution of resources creates distinctions between the wealthy landowners and the landless laborers.
- Political Power: Wealth translates into political influence, allowing the rich to control the state and perpetuate their advantages.
- Amour-Propre: The natural self-love (amour de soi) transforms into vanity and the desire for recognition (amour-propre), fueling competition and social comparison.
Rousseau believed that civilization, while offering certain comforts, ultimately corrupts human nature and creates a society riddled with injustice and oppression. He argued that artificial inequalities are not based on natural differences but on arbitrary social constructs.
The Transition and Rousseau’s Argument
Rousseau doesn’t claim artificial inequality *replaces* natural inequality, but rather exacerbates it. Natural differences are relatively benign in the state of nature. However, society amplifies these differences, turning them into sources of power and domination. For example, a naturally stronger individual in the state of nature might be better at hunting, but this doesn’t give them control over others. In society, that strength, combined with wealth and political influence, can be used to exploit and oppress.
| Feature | Natural Inequality | Artificial Inequality |
|---|---|---|
| Basis | Physical & Mental Differences | Social Conventions, Property |
| State of Existence | State of Nature | Civilized Society |
| Impact | Minimal Social Hierarchy | Significant Social Hierarchy & Conflict |
| Motivation | Self-Preservation, Pity | Self-Interest, Vanity (Amour-Propre) |
Conclusion
Rousseau’s distinction between natural and artificial inequality serves as a powerful critique of the social and political structures of his time, and remains relevant today. He argues that the pursuit of wealth and power, inherent in civilized society, leads to corruption and injustice. While acknowledging natural differences, Rousseau emphasizes that the vast inequalities we observe are not inevitable but are products of human choices and social arrangements. His work challenges us to reconsider the foundations of our societies and strive for a more equitable and just order.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.