Open Library - an open library of educational information. Rousseau: biography life ideas philosophy: jean jacques rousseau

Jean Jacques Rousseau(1712-1778) - French thinker of the Enlightenment, philosopher, reformer of pedagogy, writer, composer, art theorist. Rousseau gained immense popularity during his lifetime; he was the acknowledged ruler of the minds of the majority of the French in the second half of the 18th century. He was born of a certain historical epoch, but to the same extent he himself contributed to its formation with his brilliant and original writings. Rousseau was born in Geneva in 1712 in the family of an artisan watchmaker. After a restless youth, he moved to Paris, where he earned his livelihood either as a teacher, or as a secretary, or as a correspondent of notes. Rousseau did not receive a systematic education; he owed everything he achieved to himself. In the middle of the XVIII century. Diderot, who published the Encyclopedia, attracted Rousseau to the editorial office and introduced encyclopedists into the circle.

Rousseau's fame began with the publication of the treatise "Has the revival of the sciences and arts contributed to the improvement of morals?" The difference between Rousseau and other enlighteners is that he contrasts the knowledge of things with enlightened (reasonable) morality. Rousseau believed that all people initially, by nature, have moral motives, and that evil exists is the fault of civilization. Thus, the problem of the alienation of man from man, from nature, from the state was posed, which Hegel, Feuerbach, Marx, existentialists, Freudists would later deal with. Hence Rousseau's call to "return to the origins" sounds, to run away from everything social, rational to natural, sentimentally sincere, to strive from culture to nature. Rousseau idealized the past, but he did not call back to the primitive state. Rousseau's ideal is in the future. This future was supposed, according to his plan, to revive a number of features of the past "state of nature."

The main theme of Rousseau's philosophical reflections is the fate of the individual, the fate of a person who is in modern society with its complex culture, with its contradictions. The basis of the famous treatise "On the Social Contract" (1762) is the idea that violence cannot be a source of law. The essence of the social contract is that each individual renounces all his rights and transfers them to the benefit of society. At the same time, a person remains an integral member of society. Thus, Rousseau transforms the very concept of personal right and turns it into political right. Rousseau's world fame was created by his famous works - the novel "Julia, or New Eloise" (1761) and "Emil, or On Education" (1762).

The boldness of Rousseau's thoughts caused persecution by the authorities. "Emile" was publicly burned in Paris, the authorities did not want to tolerate the presence of Rousseau either in Paris or in Geneva. He was doomed to wander. In the last years of his life, he worked on an autobiographical work - "Confession", a merciless analysis of his own personality. Rousseau managed to bring the history of his life to 1765. "Confession" was published after the death of Rousseau in 1778. The influence of Rousseau's ideas on subsequent generations is great. Madame de Stael, L. Feuerbach, R. Rolland, L. N. Tolstoy dedicated their pen to him.

J.J. Rousseau creates his own "concept of anti-culture". In the era when he lived, everything that he expressed was perceived as absolute folly. But he raises a global issue: nature and culture. Rousseau appears in grotesque forms. In his treatise "Reasoning. Has the revival of science and arts contributed to the improvement of morals?" He says that everything beautiful in a person comes out of the bosom of nature and deteriorates in him when he enters society. "Bodily needs are the basis of society, the spirit is its decoration." Rousseau highlights the ethical position: "I do not offend science, but I defend virtue before virtuous people."

According to Rousseau, art and culture are garlands of flowers wrapped around iron chains, fettering the natural freedom of man and forcing him to love his slavery. Art is a cutesy language, earlier manners were rude, but natural. The perfidious mask of politeness is born of enlightenment. "Our souls have been corrupted as our sciences and arts have improved." Moreover, in all this Rousseau sees a vulgar monotony. The meaning of progress lies in the disappearance of virtue at all times and in all countries. Egypt is the first school of the universe. The strongest state, but the discovery of sciences and philosophy, the pursuit of fine arts deprives him of his strength.

Greece - twice conquers Asia (the Achaeans defeat Troy, the Athenians defeat the Persians), but turning to the fine arts, Greece itself becomes enslaved by Rome.

The history of Rome is also an example of this: Rome was founded by shepherds, there was an early virtue of Rome. But since the era of Ovid Catullus, Maecenas, Rome has become an arena for the game of passions.

The same fate befell the Byzantine civilization. Hence the conclusion: art relaxes morals and personality.

But Rousseau also turns to the East. If science taught virtue, taught to shed blood for the motherland, then the Chinese would be invincible. He turns to the wisdom of Chinese philosophy (and education has always been valued not only in China, but also in Russia).

But the sciences of the Persians, Scythians, ancient Germans, Romans in the era of poverty, American savages, according to Rousseau, taught virtue, they lived in harmony with nature.

"Happy ignorance of the citizens of Sparta!". "Peoples, know once and for all that nature wanted to keep you out of the sciences, just as a mother snatches a dangerous weapon from the hands of her child!" All the secrets hidden by nature are evil, from which it protects us. People are not virtuous, but they would be even worse if they were born scientists.

Rousseau concludes that astronomy is generated by superstitions, eloquence by hatred and lies, geometry by greed, physics by idle curiosity. In general, all sciences and even morality are generated by human pride. The arts, sciences, civilizations are based on vices. Luxury is incompatible with morality, and everything that benefits the arts is vicious.

The concept of education, according to Rousseau, is associated with the idea of ​​a possible return to the bosom of the earth. Therefore, Rousseau believes that up to 12 years of age, children do not need to be taught anything, but a philosopher should educate them in the bosom of nature.

In a letter to Voltaire, he gives the following definition of culture: "Culture is a sword that is stuck in a living tree; if you take it out, the tree will die, but it would be better not to stick it there at all." He also has the idea of ​​the difficulty of studying the sciences, he singles out an elite category: scientists who should do science, writers who should write, but it is better for ordinary people not to touch culture.

Speaking of theaters, Rousseau recalls Protestant Geneva, where theaters were banned as hotbeds of depravity.

Nevertheless, Rousseau is ranked among the enlighteners, because. he gives his advice on upbringing, education, although he does not fit into the concept of "French education".

In the 19th and 20th centuries Rousseau's conclusions influenced several conceptions of culture:

1) in ethnography and cultural anthropology - ethnology (thanks to the discovery of Rousseau, mankind began to look at the barbarians differently);

2) Z. Freud "Dissatisfaction with culture": culture protects us from nature, but the very position of nature as the beginning of man belongs to Rousseau;

3) LN Tolstoy - denial of art, moral imperative;

4) O. Spengler, A. Toynbee: they develop the idea of ​​the death of culture, civilization, the crisis of the individual;

5) F. Nietzsche - criticism of culture and a weak person and the creation of a cult of a strong personality;

6) the structuralist concept of Levi-Strauss with a certain element of praising primitive tribes;

7) in Marxism: "If culture develops spontaneously, and is not directed by reason, then after itself it leaves a scorched steppe!" Engels said: "We should not delude ourselves with victories over nature. For each such victory, she cruelly takes revenge on us." The idea of ​​a planned economy partly confirms the thesis of a reasonable direction of development;

8) Pierre Teilhard de Chardin and the concept of the noosphere. Since the appearance of man on Earth, she acquires a soul, so all good and evil go into space. The noosphere is a shell that protects or punishes us.

To this we can add a number of other ideas that have been developed in recent times, but based precisely on the thought of Rousseau. Aurelio Peccei and the "Club of Rome" - a club that brought together businessmen, humanitarians and many others. others to search for further ways of survival and development. The idea of ​​the ecology of culture, of which D.S. Likhachev is a supporter, is also a peculiar version of Russoism. It is based on the convergence of cultural ties, the preservation of the genetic memory of the Earth.

Seneca

Lucius Annaeus Seneca (4 BC - 65 AD) is rightfully considered one of the most prominent representatives of the Stoic philosophical school.

Seneca came from the family of a noble horseman, a Roman of the old school - pious, believing in the mercy of the gods, putting the interests of the state above all, convinced that Rome itself was destined to rule over the world. The true passion of Father Seneca, who bore the same name as younger son(he was called Seneca the Elder) was rhetoric.

In his youth, he heard the speeches of the famous rhetoricians of his time and was imbued with the deepest respect for people who are able to speak beautifully and convincingly. Possessing a unique memory, he memorized many of these speeches and subsequently wrote them down, accompanied by comments for his heirs and distant descendants. He also prepared his sons for the oratorical field, of whom, indeed, the eldest and the youngest became well-known political figures of their time. The middle son remained a private person until the end of his days and never regretted it. The life of the brothers, full of vicissitudes, rich in anxieties and worries, never attracted him. Moreover, he was secretly proud of the fact that he was able to achieve honor and wealth without currying favor with the plebs and not pandering to the powers that be.

Seneca Jr. from his youth was fond of philosophy and initially sought to devote himself to this kind of activity, but under the influence of his father, who managed to arouse ambition and a thirst for power in him, he soon begins to engage in rhetoric and politics. His natural inclinations were so great that he was immediately noticed, and a brilliant future was predicted from the first steps, but a cruel and prolonged illness interrupted his ascent to the heights of glory. Seneca's star rises much later, when he finds himself at the court of Emperor Caligula. At first, the princeps favors him (he receives a court position and the title of senator), but soon Seneca's success in the rhetorical field causes envy of Caligula and he orders him to be killed. Chance saves him from death, but soon a thunderstorm breaks over his head again. Messalina, whose name has become a household name, accuses him of violating the oath of allegiance to the emperor and of treason. However, senators stand up for the defense of Seneca, and the princeps replaces the already pronounced death sentence with exile.

The years of exile became a period for Seneca to develop his own system of philosophical views. Critically comprehending the works of Greek authors, in particular Zeno, Panetius, Posidonius, followers of Epicurus, reading the treatises of Cicero, he poses the problems of the world and man, personality and society, individual and state in a new way.

In 48, Seneca returned from exile and, thanks to the efforts of Agrippina (the wife of Emperor Claudius), became the tutor of her son, the future Emperor Nero. After the accession of the latter to the throne, which was accompanied by a series of bloody events (according to the historical chronicles of that time, Nero killed his mother and brother in order to seize power), he was a mentor and close adviser to the princeps for a number of years, but soon there was a cooling between him, which quickly escalated into a violent conflict. The emperor could not help but be disgusted by Seneca's reasoning about conscience as the highest judge, his desire to at least to some extent limit the arbitrariness and violence perpetrated by the direct orders of Nero. Painfully, he reacted to the growth of Seneca's authority among the senators and the Roman nobility, suggesting that it was in their midst that a conspiracy against him was brewing. The cup of patience of the princeps was filled with the gesture of Seneca, who, after the murder of Senator Aphranius Burra, close to him in spirit, who was also the mentor of the young Nero, sent him a letter of resignation and all those gifts that Nero presented him for long years. The emperor did not accept either the resignation or gifts, pretending that the relationship between him and the former educator remains the same. But when another conspiracy of the aristocratic opposition was revealed, in which Seneca was indirectly involved, he sent an order to his elderly teacher to die. Seneca obeyed the order and opened his veins. According to Tacitus, contained in the fifteenth book of the Annals, until the moment when consciousness left him, he dictated to the scribes his thoughts about life, death, and ways to achieve eudaimonia. A significant part of Seneca's dying thoughts was subsequently published. The body of Seneca was burned without solemn rites, fearing that during the official funeral ceremony, popular unrest could arise.

Seneca wrote many works that were read by contemporaries. However, only a few of their works have come down to us, including the treatises On Mercy, On Good Deeds, Studies on Nature, and others. The most famous work of Seneca is the famous Moral Letters to Lucilius, where the quintessence of his philosophical and ethical teachings is presented in a vivid, figurative form, and an outline of his ideas about the ideal of man and the goals of education is given. In fact, this is the main work of Seneca, where, from the point of view of his time, he solves in a new way the problem that has been at the center of attention of Roman thinkers since the time of Cicero - the problem of the civic duty of the individual and its relationship with the duty to the family, close, finally, to oneself.

Seneca, who experienced the deepest disappointment from his unsuccessful pedagogical experiment (the young man brought up by him became not an ideal ruler, as he hoped, but one of the bloodiest tyrants in the history of the ancient world), comes to the conclusion that the main duty of a person is not a duty to a state that has degenerated into a monstrous organization where customs and laws do not apply. And the life of anyone - from an artisan to a senator - depends on the whim of one person who has tasted blood and enjoys the torment of his victims. From his point of view, the fulfillment of duty to the state, which personifies the tyrant, brings nothing but anxiety and unrest. A person who puts the interests of such a state at the forefront is deprived of the opportunity to take an unbiased look at himself, to understand the meaning of his individual existence. In addition, the performance of duty by an individual who is a subject of the empire, and not a citizen of the republic, is often accompanied by a violation of morality, which means that there is no moral legitimation in the actions and deeds of the vast majority of people who boast of their civic virtues. In the process of reasoning, Seneca comes to the conclusion that the main task that every person faces is not to live, but to live with dignity, i.e. in accordance with moral imperatives.

From here, there was only one step left to an unconventional understanding of "paideia" and a new interpretation of the ideal of a person who, in accordance with the ideas of Seneca, is cultural to the extent that he is a moral person.

Seneca introduces the concept of conscience into his philosophical teaching, meaning by the latter a moral norm realized by the mind and experienced by feeling. It is the moral norm that allows a person to avoid the temptations of unprincipled pragmatism, the vulgar desire for power, wealth, sensual pleasures, achieved at any cost.

In other words, Seneca substantiates the idea that only morality turns culture into supreme value. The way to achieve this morality is in the self-improvement of a person, in the education of unshakable fidelity to the developed life principles, insensitivity to losses, disregard for external blessings and death itself, which inevitably comes to every person, whether he is an emperor who commands the fate of millions or a representative of the mob, hourly caring for their daily bread.

It is not difficult to see that the above idea echoes the thought of Kant, who many centuries later proclaimed: the last goal of nature in relation to the human race is culture, while the ultimate goal of culture is morality.

But the role of Seneca in building the foundation of cultural knowledge is not limited to this. In his works, there are statements, extremely rare in antiquity, about the limitlessness of human abilities, about the absence of a limit in the accumulation of knowledge, about the existence of progress, which he considered primarily as spiritual progress. It would not be an exaggeration to say that Seneca comes close to the idea that makes up the semantic core of a number of modern concepts of culture, based on the postulate, which states that man is the only living being in the universe, constantly going beyond the boundaries of his own existence in the process of creating the world, created by him in his own image. and likeness.

Seneca did a lot to understand the crisis of ancient culture. He not only states the fact that ancient civilization has entered the decline stage, not only laments and groans about the greatness of Rome that has sunk into oblivion, as many authors did before and after him, but also finds out the reasons that led to the progressive disintegration of Roman society and the decline of the cultural potential of the once the most advanced in all respects, the powers of the Ancient World, which managed to create spiritual and material values the highest standard.

From his point of view, the source of the tragedy experienced by Rome should be sought in the oblivion of the institutions of the ancestors, in the degeneration of democratic institutions, in the destruction of the old system of values ​​on which the worldview and worldview of the Romans of the republic period was based, the transformation of the majority of free citizens into a corrupt plebs, thirsting only for bread. and spectacle. However, Seneca believes that it is not culture in general that is dying, but the culture of his contemporary society, and you should not regret it, because it has completely exhausted itself and even the almighty gods are not capable of giving it an impetus for development.

This conclusion of Seneca, which is of fundamental importance, will become the starting point for many representatives of the culturological thought of subsequent centuries, who, analyzing the crises of culture, will emphasize that the death of culture is the beginning of the birth of a new culture that has absorbed all the best from the culture of the society that existed in the previous historical period. stages of development.

Speaking about the contribution of Seneca to cultural theory, one more point should be noted. Many of the researchers involved in ancient philosophy pay attention to the fact that Seneca was one of the few ancient Roman thinkers of the decline of the Roman Empire, who substantiates the idea of ​​equality of all people. From his point of view, a slave and a free citizen, a representative of the nobility and a freedman, a colon and a princeps, a Roman and a barbarian - they are all members of the "community of people and gods." Everyone born a woman, in his opinion, is rewarded from the moment of birth with reason, emotions, the ability to set goals and achieve them, i.e. a set of identical qualities, and it depends only on a person who he will become in the future.

Moreover, as Seneca teaches, nobility and wealth are not the basis for exalting a person above his own kind, because you can eat on gold, command thousands of people below you on the social ladder, but be a slave to your own passions and obey base desires. From this follows the idea of ​​self-education as the main means of “cultivating the soul” of a person, an idea for which Seneca will be extremely appreciated by the thinkers of the New Age and the Enlightenment, in particular the same Kant, for whom the problem of education is essentially the problem of self-education. In other words, Seneca proposes a new strategy for "culturing" the individual, according to which the main subject and object of educational influence is the person himself.

Seneca, like Cicero, did not leave any integral cultural theory. Everything that he says about culture is just some fragments arranged in the fabric of works written on completely different topics. However, what he said about the nature of cultural crises, about the connection between culture and morality, culture and personality, was by no means wasted. His ideas were in demand, and today, when analyzing certain concepts of culture, we do not even think about the fact that a number of their basic provisions were first formulated by Anneus Lucius Seneca in the 1st century AD.

Rousseau, as a conductor of new social and political ideals, especially in three main his writings: in the "New Eloise", "Emile" and "The Social Contract".

The sovereign general assembly of citizens (le Grand Conseil) established the state, established a government for it, and even gave it a religion, declaring the teachings of Calvin the state religion. This democratic spirit, full of Old Testament theocratic traditions, revived in Rousseau, a descendant of the Huguenots. True, since the XVI century. this spirit waned in Geneva: the government (le Petit Conseil) actually became the decisive force. But it was with this city government that Rousseau was at odds; to its predominance, he attributed everything that he did not like in contemporary Geneva - its falling away from the original ideal, as he imagined it. And this ideal hovered before him when he began to write his Social Contract. Ten years after Rousseau's death, France entered a crisis similar to that experienced in Russia in 1998 and the world in 2009-2010.

In a letter to Grimm, he even exclaims: “It is not so much the peoples whose laws are bad that are really corrupted, but those who despise them.” For the same reasons, Rousseau, when he had to deal, albeit with purely theoretical arguments about political reforms in France, treated them with extreme caution. Analyzing the project of the Abbé de Saint-Pierre, who proposed to the king to surround himself with elected advisers, Rousseau wrote: “for this it would be necessary to start with the destruction of everything that exists, and who knows how dangerous in a large state is the moment of anarchy and crisis, which must precede the establishment of a new system. The mere introduction of an elective principle into the matter should entail a terrible shock and rather produce a convulsive and uninterrupted oscillation of each particle than give strength to the whole body ... Even if all the advantages of the new plan were indisputable, then what sane person would dare to destroy the ancient customs, eliminate old principles and change the form of the state, which was gradually created by a long series of thirteen centuries? ... ”And this most timid person and suspicious citizen became Archimedes, knocking France out of its age-old rut. The "Social Contract" and the principle of inalienable, indivisible and infallible democracy, derived from it, served as a lever. The outcome of the fatal dilemma that came to France in the spring of 1789 - "reform or revolution" - was determined by the decision of the question whether the constituent power of the government would be preserved or unconditionally transferred to the national assembly. This question was predetermined by Rousseau's treatise - by that deep conviction in the sanctity of the dogma of democracy, which he instilled in everyone. The conviction was all the more profound because it was rooted in yet another principle pursued by Rousseau, the principle of abstract equality.

The "social contract" knows the ruling people only in the form of a homogeneous mass, estranged from any differences. And Rousseau not only formulated the principles of 1789, he also gave the very formula for the transition from the "old order" to the new, from the estates general to the "national assembly." The famous pamphlet of Sieys, which prepared this coup, is all in following words Rousseau: “What in a certain country they dare to call the third estate (tiersétat), this is the people. This nickname reveals that the private interest of the first two classes is placed in the foreground and in the background, while the public interest is placed in third place. Among the principles of 1789 is liberty, which the National Assembly has long and sincerely endeavored to establish; but it became incompatible with the further irresistible course of the revolution. Rousseau gave the slogan for the transition to the second phase of the revolution - the Jacobin one - recognizing coercion as lawful, that is, violence for the purposes of freedom. This fatal sophism is all Jacobinism. It would be in vain for anyone to note the sayings with which Rousseau condemned in advance certain features of the Jacobin policy and terror. “There is no,” says, for example, Rousseau, “a common will, where a separate party is so great that it takes precedence over others.” From this point of view, the Jacobin dictatorship proclaimed in 1793 is contrary to the principle of democracy. Rousseau contemptuously turns away from that part of the people who were later the instrument of the Jacobin domination - from "the mob, stupid, stupid, incited by troublemakers, capable only of selling themselves, preferring bread to freedom." He indignantly rejects the very principle of terror, exclaiming that sacrificing an innocent to save the crowd is one of the most repulsive principles of tyranny. Such anti-Jacobin antics of Rousseau gave one of the most ardent adherents of the policy of "public salvation" a good reason to proclaim Rousseau an "aristocrat" worthy of the guillotine. Despite this, Rousseau was the main forerunner of that coup, which at the end of the 18th century. happened in France. It has rightly been said that Rousseau's revolutionary character is manifested chiefly in his feelings. He created the mood that ensured the success of the social contract theory. The stream of revolutionary feelings coming from Rousseau is found in two directions - in the denunciation of "society" and in the idealization of "the people". Contrasting nature with the brilliance of poetry and idyllic feeling to the society of his time, Rousseau confuses society with his accusations of artificiality and instills in him self-doubt. His philosophy of history, denouncing the origin of society from deceit and violence, becomes for him a living reproach of conscience, deprives him of the desire to stand up for himself. Finally, the malicious feeling that Rousseau has for the noble and rich, and which he skillfully puts into the mouth of an aristocratic hero (The New Eloise), prompts him to attribute vices to them and deny their ability to virtue. The spoiled upper stratum of society is opposed to "the people". The pale rationalistic idea of ​​the sovereign people gets - thanks to the idealization of the mass, living by instinct and unspoiled by culture - flesh and blood, excites feelings and passions. Rousseau's concept of the people becomes all-encompassing: he identifies it with humanity (c'est le peuple qui fait le genre humain) or declares: "what is not part of the people is so insignificant that it is not worth the trouble to count it." Sometimes the people means that part of the nation that lives in communion with nature, in a state close to it: "the rural people (le peuple de la campagne) make up the nation." Even more often, Rousseau narrows the concept of the people to the proletariat: by the people he then understands the "wretched" or "unfortunate" part of the people. He himself counts himself among it, sometimes touching the poetry of poverty, sometimes grieving for it and acting as a “sad” about the people. He argues that the real state law has not yet been developed, because none of the publicists took into account the interests of the people. Rousseau, with sharp irony, reproaches his famous predecessors for such neglect of the people: “the people do not distribute chairs, pensions, or academic positions, and therefore the scribes (faiseurs de livres) do not care about them.” The sad share of the people endows him in the eyes of Rousseau with a new sympathetic feature: in poverty he sees the source of virtue. The constant thought of his own poverty, that he was a victim of social tyranny, merged in Rousseau with the consciousness of his moral superiority over others. He transferred this idea of ​​a kind, sensitive and oppressed person to the people - and created the ideal type of a virtuous poor man (le pauvre vertueux), who is in fact the legitimate son of nature and the true master of all the treasures of the earth. From this point of view, there can be no charity: charity is only the return of a debt. Emil's tutor, who gave alms, explains to his student: "My friend, I do this because when the poor deigned to have the rich in the world, the latter promised to feed those who could not support themselves either with their property or with the help of labor." It was this combination of political rationalism and social sensitivity that Rousseau became the spiritual leader of the revolution of 1789-94.

French writer and philosopher. representative of sentimentalism. From the position of deism condemned the official church and religious intolerance. He put forward the slogan "Back to nature!". Rousseau had a huge impact on the modern spiritual history of Europe in terms of state law, education and criticism of culture. Major works: "Julia, or New Eloise" (1761), "Emil, or On Education" (1762), "On the Social Contract" (1762), "Confession" (1781-1788).

Illustration for "Confession"

Maurice Leloir

Jean-Jacques Rousseau was born on June 28, 1712 in Geneva, the son of a watchmaker. His mother, Suzanne Bernard, came from a wealthy bourgeois family, was a gifted and cheerful woman. She died nine days after the birth of her son. Father, Isaac Rousseau, who barely survived his craft, was distinguished by a fickle, irritable character. Once he started a quarrel with the French captain Gauthier and wounded him with a sword. The court sentenced Isaac Rousseau to three months in prison, a fine and church repentance. Not wanting to submit to the decision of the court, he fled to Nyon, the nearest town to Geneva, leaving his 10-year-old son in the care of his late wife's brother. Isaac Rousseau died on March 9, 1747.

Isaac Russo

Jean-Jacques from an early age was surrounded by his kind and loving aunts, Goseryu and Lambercier, who took care of and raised the boy with extraordinary zeal. remembering early years life, Rousseau wrote in Confessions that "the king's children could not have been looked after with more diligence than they looked after me in the first years of my life." Impressive, gentle and kind by nature, Jean-Jacques read a lot as a child. Often, together with his father, he sat up for a long time at French novels, reading the works of Plutarch, Ovid, Bossuet and many others.

Jean-Jacques started early independent life full of hardships and hardships. He tried the most various professions: was a scribe with a notary, studied with an engraver, served as a footman. Then, having found no use for his strengths and abilities, he set off to wander. Sixteen-year-old Rousseau, wandering around eastern France, Switzerland, Savoy, which was then part of the Kingdom of Sardinia, met with the Catholic priest Ponverre and, under his influence, abandoned Calvinism, the religion of his grandfathers and fathers. On the recommendation of Ponverre, Jean-Jacques met in Annecy, the main city of Haute-Savoie, 28-year-old Swiss noblewoman Louise de Varane, who “lived by the graces of the Sardinian king” and was engaged, among other things, in recruiting young people into Catholicism. Stately, gifted by nature, Jean-Jacques made a favorable impression on Madame de Varane and was soon sent to Turin, to a shelter for converts, where he was instructed and accepted into the bosom of catholic church(at a more mature age, Rousseau returned to Calvinism).

Angelique Briceau

Rousseau left Turin four months later. Soon he spent the money and was forced to act as a lackey to an old, sick aristocrat. Three months later, she died, and Rousseau again found himself out of work. This time, the job search was short-lived. He found a place as a footman in an aristocratic house. Later in the same house he worked as a house secretary. Here he was given Latin lessons, taught to speak Italian impeccably. And yet Rousseau did not stay long with his benevolent masters. He was still drawn to wander, besides, he dreamed of seeing Madame de Varane again. And this meeting soon took place. Madame de Varane forgave Rousseau's reckless youthful wanderings and took him into her house, which became his haven for a long time. Here between Rousseau and Madame de Varane established close, cordial relations. But Rousseau's affection and love for his patroness, apparently, did not bring him peace and tranquility for a long time. Madame de Varane also had another lover, the Swiss Claude Anet. Rousseau left his refuge more than once with chagrin, and after new ordeals he again returned to de Varane. Only after the death of Claude Anet between Jean-Jacques and Louise de Varane, a complete idyll of love and happiness was established.

De Varane rented a house in a mountain valley, surrounded by wonderful greenery, vineyards and flowers. “In this magical corner,” Rousseau recalled in his Confession, “I spent two or three of the best summer months trying to determine their mental interests. I enjoyed the joys of life, the price of which I knew so well, a society as easy as it was pleasant - if only our close union can be called a society - and that wonderful knowledge that I aspired to acquire ... "

Rousseau continued to read a lot, thoroughly studied philosophical and scientific works Descartes, Locke, Leibniz, Malebranche, Newton, Montaigne, studied physics, chemistry, astronomy, Latin, took music lessons. And it must be said that over the years that have passed in the house of de Varane, he achieved serious results in philosophy, natural science, pedagogy and other sciences. In one of his letters to his father, he expressed the essence of his scientific studies in this way: “I strive not only to enlighten the mind, but also to educate the heart for virtue and wisdom.”

Jean-Baptiste Farochon

In 1740, the relationship between Rousseau and de Varane deteriorated, and he was forced to leave his long-term refuge. Having moved to Lyon, Rousseau found a place here as a teacher of children in the house of Mr. Mably, the chief judge of the city. But the work of a home caregiver did not bring him moral satisfaction or material benefits. A year later, Rousseau again returned to de Varane, but no longer met his former location. According to him, he felt superfluous "near the one for whom he was once everything." After breaking up with de Varane, in the autumn of 1741 Rousseau moved to Paris. At first, he seriously counted on the success of his invention - a new musical system. But reality dashed his hopes. The musical notation invented by him in numbers, presented to the Paris Academy of Sciences, did not meet with approval, and he again had to rely on odd jobs. For two years, Rousseau survived by copying notes, music lessons, and small literary work. Staying in Paris expanded his connections and acquaintances in the literary world, opened up opportunities for spiritual communication with the progressive people of France. Rousseau met Diderot, Marivaux, Fontenelle, Grimm, Holbach, D'Alembert and others.

Jean Leron d'Alamber

The warmest friendly relations were established between him and Diderot. A brilliant philosopher, just like Rousseau, was fond of music, literature, passionately strove for freedom. But their outlook was different. Diderot was a materialist philosopher, an atheist, who was mainly engaged in the development of a natural-scientific worldview. Rousseau was dominated by idealistic views, transferring all his attention to socio-political issues. But at the end of the 1760s, on the basis of ideological and personal differences between Rousseau and Diderot, a conflict arose that led them to break. In the “Letter to D'Alembert about spectacles”, referring to that conflict, Rousseau wrote: “I had a strict and fair Aristarchus; I don’t have him anymore, and I don’t want another; but I will never stop regretting him, and it is even more lacking in my heart than in my writings.”

Denis Diderot

Being in extremely cramped material conditions, Rousseau tried to find a way to a more prosperous life. He was advised to get acquainted with the ladies of high society and use their influence. Rousseau received several recommendations from an acquaintance of the Jesuit father: to Madame de Bezenval and her daughter, the Marquise de Broglie, to Madame Dupont, the wife of a wealthy farmer, and other ladies.

Louise Dupont

Jean-Marc Nathier

In 1743, through the agency of Madame de Broglie, he received the post of secretary of the French envoy in Venice. Rousseau conscientiously fulfilled his duties for about a year. In his free time, he got acquainted with Italian music and collected material for a book about public administration. The arrogant and rude treatment of the envoy of the Comte de Montagu forced Rousseau to leave the diplomatic service and return to Paris. In Paris, Rousseau became friends with a young seamstress Teresa Levasseur, who, according to him, had a simple and kind disposition. Rousseau lived with her for 34 years, until the end of his days. He tried to develop her, teach her to read and write, but all his efforts in this direction remained fruitless.

Teresa Levasseur

E. Charriere

Rousseau had five children. Unfavorable family and living conditions forced the children to be placed in an orphanage. “I shuddered at the need to entrust them to this ill-bred family,” he wrote of Teresa Levasseur’s family, “because they would have been brought up by her even worse. Staying in an orphanage was much less dangerous for them. Here is the basis of my decision…”

Thomas-Charles Naudet

Many biographers and historians of philosophy considered the connection with Teresa a great misfortune for Rousseau. However, the evidence of Rousseau himself refutes this. In Confessions, he claimed that Teresa was his only real consolation. In it, “I found the fulfillment I needed. I lived with my Teresa as well as with the greatest genius in the world."

By the way, this long-term relationship did not prevent Rousseau from dating other women, which, of course, upset Teresa. The love of Jean Jacques for Sophie D "Udeto could have seemed especially ridiculous and offensive to her. This passionate love of his and moving to the Hermitage, closer to the subject of his deep passion, could not be forgiven by Rousseau and his friends for a long time.

Sophie d'Udeto

From the biography of Rousseau it is hardly possible to conclude his poise or asceticism. On the contrary, obviously, he was a very emotional, restless, unbalanced person. But at the same time, Rousseau was an unusually gifted person, ready to sacrifice absolutely everything in the name of goodness and truth.

Jean Antoine Houdon

In the years 1752-1762, Rousseau introduced a fresh spirit into the ideological innovation and literary and artistic creativity of his time.

Rousseau wrote his first composition in connection with a competition announced by the Dijon Academy. In this work, which was entitled “Did the revival of the sciences and arts contribute to the improvement of morals” (1750), Rousseau, for the first time in the history of social thought, speaks quite definitely about the discrepancy between what is today called scientific and technological progress and the state of human morality. Rousseau notes a number of contradictions in the historical process, as well as the fact that culture is opposed to nature. Subsequently, these ideas will be at the center of disputes about the contradictions of the social process.

Another important thought of Rousseau, which he developed in his Discourse on the Origin and Grounds of Inequality between Men (1755) and in his main work, On the Social Contract, or Principles of Political Right (1762), is related to the concept of alienation. According to Rousseau, the basis of the alienation of man from man is private property. Rousseau did not conceive of justice without the equality of all people.

But just as important for justice, in his opinion, freedom. Freedom is closely related to property. Property corrupts society, Rousseau argued, it gives rise to inequality, violence and leads to the enslavement of man by man. "The first one to attack the idea by enclosing a piece of land, saying 'this is mine' and finding people innocent enough to believe it, was the true founder of civil society How many crimes, wars and murders, how many disasters and horrors would the human race be saved from by someone who, pulling out the stakes and filling up the ditch, would shout to his neighbors: “Better not listen to this deceiver, you perished if they are able to forget that the fruits of the earth belong to everyone, and the earth belongs to no one!

And the same Rousseau, who is capable of such revolutionary anger, argues that property can guarantee independence and freedom to a person, only it can bring peace and self-confidence into his life. Rousseau sees a way out of this contradiction in the equalization of property. In a society of equal owners, he sees the ideal of a fair system. public life. In his Social Contract, Rousseau develops the idea that people agreed among themselves to establish a state to ensure public safety and protect the freedom of citizens, realizing that the state, from an institution that ensures the freedom and security of citizens, eventually turns into an organ of suppression and oppression of people.

This transition “into one's otherness” takes place most openly in a monarchical absolutist state. Before the state and, accordingly, the civil state, people lived, according to Rousseau, in the "state of nature." With the help of the idea of ​​"natural law" he substantiated the inalienability of such human rights as the right to life, liberty and property. Talk of the "state of nature" becomes commonplace of the entire Enlightenment. As for Rousseau, unlike other enlighteners, he, firstly, does not consider the right of property to be a “natural” human right, but sees in it a product of historical development, and, secondly, Rousseau does not associate the social ideal with private property and civil status of a person.

Maurice Quentin de Latour

Rousseau idealizes the "savage" as a being who does not yet know private property and other cultural achievements. The “savage”, according to Rousseau, is a good-natured, trusting and friendly creature, and all the damage comes from culture and historical development. Only the state, according to Rousseau, can realize the ideals of the "state of nature", as he considers the ideals of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. But Rousseau can only have a republic capable of realizing these ideals.

(1812 - 1878)

Jean Jacques Rousseau occupies a special place not only in the history of philosophy, but also among the philosophers of the Enlightenment. Unlike other philosophers of the Enlightenment, Rousseau believes that the development of culture leads to the degradation of man and society, science and art are the cause of the decline of morality, and the cult of reason replaces cordiality. Criticizing civilization, he calls: "Back to nature!".

Rousseau criticizes not only the official religion, but also atheism. Being a deist, unlike Voltaire, he finds the basis of faith in God not so much in reason as in direct feeling, personal experience.

The only one among the enlighteners, Rousseau defends the interests and dignity of the poorest segments of the population. Fighting for freedom and equality, he puts forward a hypothesis about the cause of the origin of inequality, and also offers his own program for the transformation of society based on democracy. His treatise "The Social Contract" had a huge impact on the leaders of the French Revolution.

Rousseau became famous not only for the originality of ideas, but also for the form of their presentation, not only as a philosopher, but also as a brilliant writer. His views were big influence on subsequent philosophy, sociology, psychology, pedagogy, aesthetics.

In 1750, the Dijon Academy announced a competition on the topic: “Has the revival of the sciences and arts contributed to the improvement of morals? Rousseau submitted a treatise to the competition and was awarded a prize. To the question posed, he gave a negative answer: the successes of the sciences and arts led not to an improvement, but to a deterioration in morals. What was the rationale for this unexpected response?

1. The sciences and arts take the place of morality, replace and displace it. This leads to alienation of a person from his nature: instead of truth - visibility, instead of morality - etiquette, instead of personal - general, instead of cordiality - rationality, instead of deeds - words, instead of practice - theory, instead of good deeds - useless knowledge. Rousseau opposes the conventions of culture - manifestations of hypocrisy, falsehood, hypocrisy: “There is neither sincere friendship, nor real respect, nor complete trust, and under the monotonous and perfidious mask of politeness, under this vaunted courtesy, which we owe to the enlightenment of our age, suspicions are hidden, fears, distrust, coldness, ulterior motives, hatred and betrayal.

2. The sciences and arts serve an unjust society built on the oppression of the poor by the rich, the slaves by the masters, the simple by the nobles, the weak by the strong.: “While the government and the law protect public safety and the well-being of fellow citizens, science, literature and art - less despotic, but perhaps more powerful - wrap garlands of flowers around the iron chains that bind people, drown out in them the natural feeling of freedom for which they seem to be born, make them love their slavery and create so-called civilized peoples.

3. "The sciences and arts owe their origin to our vices." One of them is luxury. It gives rise to sciences and arts, and they, in turn, increase luxury, and “luxury is incompatible with good morals”, “addiction to luxury never gets along with honesty ... And what will virtue turn into if people are faced with the need to enrich themselves in what no matter what? Ancient politicians impartially spoke about morals and virtues, ours speak only about trade and money ... They regard people as a herd of cattle. In their opinion, each person is of a certain value for the state only as a consumer ... ".

In the second treatise, Rousseau explores the question of the origin of inequality between people. To answer this question, Rousseau uses the concept of the original "state of nature." Hobbes believed that in the "state of nature" "man is a wolf to man" and "the war of all against all" is waged. Rousseau puts forward his point of view: a natural (natural) man - a savage - is neither evil nor kind, but inclined to compassion.

In the future, the development of the mind takes place, a number of revolutions in technology are made, production is improved. And the result of all this is private property. The founder of civil society, says Rousseau, was the one who “first ... attacked the idea, by enclosing a piece of land, to say: “This is mine.”

Hobbes believed that in order to stop wars, a transition from the “natural” state to the “civilian” is necessary, Rousseau, on the contrary, proves that the “fiertest war” began precisely after humanity left the “state of nature”.

The wealthy took advantage of the misfortunes of the masses. They suggested that people recognize a supreme power over themselves, which, on the basis of laws, should protect all members of society. The laws "further increased the power of the rich, irrevocably destroyed freedom, forever consolidated property and inequality, turned a cunning seizure into an inviolable right, and doomed - to the benefit of a few ambitious people - the whole human race to work, poverty and slavery."

The emergence of property and developing inequality is accompanied by moral degradation. From a free man turns into a slave (including the master). Selfishness, ambition, greed, envy, cruelty and other vices - these are the features of a civilized or sociable person. Rousseau opposes to him the primitive, natural man, or savage. The savage thinks "only of tranquility and freedom", he "lives in himself." On the contrary, a "communal" person is always outside himself; he can only live in the opinion of others. In the "social" state, everything becomes made and feigned and is only a deceptive and empty appearance: honor without virtue, reason without wisdom, and pleasure without happiness.

Jean Jacques Rousseau "The Social Contract"

In 1762, Rousseau wrote The Social Contract. It is based on the idea that government can only be based on a social contract that meets the will of the people. Its goal should be freedom and equality. Violence cannot be a source of law.

Rousseau tries to solve in the treatise the problem of overcoming the contradiction between the general and the personal, to find such a form of state that “guards and protects the personality and property of each of its members and in which everyone, uniting with everyone, still obeys only himself and remains just as free. , as before".

To solve this problem, Rousseau introduces the concepts of "general will" and "will for all". The “general will” is that in which all private wills coincide. "Will for all" is a set of private wills, each of which pursues its own special interest. If we discard all existing disagreements from the "will of all", then some average opinion will remain. It will be the “general will”.

The expression "general will" is possible only on the condition that each citizen casts his vote separately from the others (plebiscite). The presence of parties is contrary to the "general will".

In his "Social Contract" Rousseau puts forward the demand for the unity of politics and morality.

Some time later, in 1762, the following essay by Rousseau "Emil, or On Education" was published. The basis of Rousseau's pedagogy is the philosophy of feelings. Rousseau insists on the primacy of feelings and the secondary nature of reason. Therefore, first you need to develop feelings: "... our first teachers of philosophy are our legs, our hands, our eyes." Sensations are infallible, delusion begins with judgment.

According to Rousseau, the criterion for selecting objects of knowledge and the time when they need to be studied is utility.

Rousseau insists that the main thing in a person is not thoughts and knowledge, but feelings and passions. The feelings that nature has endowed us with are innate. These are feelings that contribute to our self-preservation: self-love, fear of suffering, aversion to death, striving for well-being. The innate feeling, thanks to which a person can become a social being, is the principle of justice and virtue, which Rousseau calls conscience. Conscience is "an infallible judge of good and evil, making a person like a god."

“Everything is good, leaving the hands of the creator of things, everything degenerates in the hands of man.” These words could be put as an epigraph to all the writings of Rousseau.

Rousseau's visions turned out to be prophetic. In the 20th century they took on the character global problems modernity. The development of the contradiction between civilization and nature has reached such a level that it can cause the death of all mankind. The unity of science and morality is the problem of the survival of mankind. The contradiction between art and morality manifested itself in monstrous forms. The contradiction between wealth and poverty, luxury and poverty, domination and slavery, not only has not lost its significance, but has acquired grandiose proportions. Cold rationality replaces the warmth of immediate human feelings. The psychology of a "consumer" society is conquering the world, in which the place of moral relations has been taken by the cult of trade, profit, money and things.

Rousseau's passionate call for the revival of morality is more than relevant today!

The era of enlightenment became famous for a great breakthrough in the development of scientific, philosophical and social thought, with an emphasis on free thinking. The philosophy of Jean-Jacques Rousseau was humane and sought to make a person happier.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau in the face of the future French philosopher and the most prominent representative of sentimentalism, writer and musicologist, composer and botanist was born in the Swiss city of Geneva in 1712. Growing up without a mother, Rousseau from childhood became a Calvinist for his own religious convictions and was apprenticed, but few people loved him there, because instead of working, he read books “excitedly”.

Deciding to flee for frequent orders, Rousseau finds salvation in the Catholic Savoy - historical area in the south-east of France at the foot of the Alps, where, with the help of Madame de Varane, he first accepts Catholicism, which will later mark the beginning of the ordeal of the young philosopher. Serving a noble family and not taking root there, the philosopher again goes to Madame de Varane. Helping him again, she arranges him for a seminary, leaving which she wanders the streets of France for two years, spending the night in the open.

Views of Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Rousseau, as the spokesman for the first wave of French Enlightenment philosophers, did not want to allow the enslavement of humanity, free by nature. But enslavement happened and is still happening, due to the illiteracy of society, through its deception and pressure. Seeing the root of the inequality of people in the structure of the state and private property, Rousseau instructs people to return to nature and a solitary rural lifestyle. Jean-Jacques put forward impracticable advice aimed at isolating children from society and raising them in natural environment taking into account the natural abilities of the student and his interests.

Prejudice and malice are the fruits of the civilization of the social development of mankind, but criticism of progress did not mean a return to the initial natural position. Rousseau's aspirations to determine the conditions of the state, where the law would rule, and people would be equal and free, turned into futility.

Keeping own interest about the happy future of people, Rousseau declares society independent. The independence of the society is inalienable and indivisible, and the legislative dominion must apply to the society. The political demands made by Rousseau seem clear and common today.

Rousseauism is the belief system of the French writer and philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau. The doctrine, which was a reaction against the dominance of reason and proclaimed the rights of feeling, is based on the principle of sentimentalism, together with individualism and naturalism, briefly defined by the basis - feelings, personality and nature, on which philosophical, religious and moral, socio-political and historical, pedagogical and literary considerations set forth in the writings: "The New Eloise", "Emil" and "The Social Contract".

A supporter of the theory of Deism, Jean-Jacques Rousseau occupied a special position among the thinkers of the Enlightenment period and in the history of philosophy itself. Considering the degradation of society as a consequence of the development of culture and the cause of the fall of moral values, he called on people to return to their roots, namely: “Back to nature!”.

Rousseau, adhering to deism, negatively regarded religion and unbelief, but at the same time, concluded feelings and subjective emotions as the basis of belief in God. Defending the dignity and interests of the lower, insolvent and needy citizens, led Rousseau to the foundation of a transformative program of the population - democracy. Deism is a general philosophical course, the adherents of which accepted God as the root cause of creation, but rejected the influence of the Creator on people, the world around and the historical course of events. Adherents were designated as opponents of the personification of God and His comparison with nature.

The main argument of the philosopher's considerations was to bring society out of a state of complete immorality, and true moral awareness is the principle right society. Rousseau said: "Every man is virtuous when his private will in everything corresponds to the general will." Morality for Jean-Jacques was the most important condition, since there is no will without perfection. But his own life was contrary to his own philosophy.

Escapism is an individualistic-conciliatory desire of a person to get away from reality into the world of illusions and fantasies. Rousseau's writings are in the form of novels and essays. Philosophizing about art, science and the origin of inequality were the very first works of the philosopher.

“A natural continuation is found in the ideas of exposing civilization and culture, and one should run from them,” said the young Jean-Jacques. Fundamental in a person according to Rousseau - feelings, unlike the mind, they are unmistakable and unconscious. The basic instincts of a moral being are conscience and genius.

Jean-Jacques expressed a great influence on the whole world, close in depth to the promptings of Christ. Rousseau, as a philosopher, made the harsh repressive Western culture more forgiving and humanitarian without reasoning. The original Christianity, in its own way, was Rousseauism, and Christianity was escapism. Rousseau, as a Protestant, famous for his severity, changed his religion many times, for some time he was a dean of a Catholic. His great achievement was the humanization and humanization of Calvinist Puritanism - love for man and nature.

By nature, a person is merciful, but it is culture and history, society and people that make him cruel and evil. A free-born person, getting into society, is shackled by "shackles", enslaving himself to property. A person of unconstrained kindness is an abstraction, which is a guideline for building an assessment of culture. The spiritual and creative achievements of a person, and directly culture, both raises humanity up the evolutionary ladder, and enslaves it with a series of taboos. Having discovered the fact of the separation of the individual in culture, Rousseau promulgated the conclusion much earlier than Karl Marx. At times stronger than nature, culture enslaves humanity, it is worth mentioning the world wars and the use of atomic weapons.

Jean-Jacques' knowledge of a happy and unconstrained person was to be embodied in the future as the crown of creation, but suffered the fate of isolated insubstantiality. The French Revolution was inspired by the ideas of Rousseau, but did not carry them out. The result of the revolution was the collapse of the beautiful-hearted utopia about natural man. The secret impulse of the revolution is a return to true nature creatures. Nature in man, as the experience of the revolution has shown, spoils him no less than culture.

Virtue is the basis of everything

Morality, which plays a significant role in the works of Rousseau, in reality did not correspond to the life of a philosopher. The first foundations of virtue, Rousseau believed, are emotions and sympathy inherent in a person.

Virtue and faith must obey nature, and only then will society be perfect. Harmony will be achieved inner world a person and his moral, emotional and rational components with the interests of society. Therefore, the individual must overcome his own moral separation, not becoming like others and politicians. But judgments were taken by romantics and seekers of unity as a basis in defending the best social order and public rights, but not applied to the masses.

Enlightenment and education

The views of the philosopher are filled with contradictions. Objecting to culture and science, Rousseau always used their fruits and in the upbringing of the individual was aware of their indispensability and indisputable merits. Believing, like most of his contemporaries, that if the rulers listen to the philosophers, then society will become absolute. But this is not an unequivocal refutation characteristic of Rousseau. The pedagogical judgments of the philosopher place their hopes on the enlightenment that he criticized. It is it that can make it possible to educate worthy citizens, and without this, rulers and subjects will be just slaves and deceivers. It must be remembered that human childhood is a share of memories of the lost Eden and try to take as much as possible from nature.

Rousseau is challenged on all counts. But he was not so much a great philosopher as a great dreamer. And his dreams - about the happy and inseparable unity of mankind - do not die. This is one of the conditions of human existence. A person is not able to exist in a cruel and clear understanding of the impossibility of his primordial desires - to which Freud tried to persuade him. And real world, as we have seen hundreds of times, accepts Rousseau's position. Freud gets over in the concepts of non-repressive culture. Restraint of the initial instincts makes an animal out of a person. Animals are ours too smaller brothers. All kinds of beat poets, sexual experimenters, hippies and others are the distant followers of Jean-Jacques.