Knowledge may corrupt – Rousseau
Jean Jacques Rousseau was born in Geneva, Switzerland, in 1712. (died 1778). Rousseau wasn’t simply a philosopher, he was also a writer, a novelist, and a musician. However, despite the fact that he never concentrated whole-heartedly on philosophy, his writings had a profound philosophical and political impact.
Rousseau belongs to the broad cultural movement known as romanticism. This is essentially a reaction against the enlightenment view that reason can be extended into all spheres of human activity, not just into science and technology, but also into politics, government, and the arts. According to the enlightenment view knowledge is essentially ennobling. Knowledge necessarily makes us better people. But according to Rousseau not only is knowledge not necessarily ennobling, it is in fact a corrupting influence. The view that knowledge is not the solution to all human problems, doesn’t help us solve all our problems, and doesn’t necessarily lead us to happiness, which marks Rousseau out as a romantic thinker. Romanticism always includes an element of pessimism: a melancholy acceptance of human limitations.
Essential reading an extract from:
Rousseau ‘Discourse on the Moral Effects of the Arts And Sciences’ in the Everyman edition of The Social Contract (J.M. Dent: London, 1913)
An online version (ie not that particular edition) can be found here:
http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=638&Itemid=27
and you need to read part of the 'Second Part' starting at its beginning and going as far as "I well know that children ought to be kept employed..."
Whilst you read it first try to work out what arguments Rousseau advances. Whilst it is all rather breathless and cross, there are arguments so work out first what they are on the most charitable interpretation. Then see whether they are any good. Does Rousseau have an argument against whatever it is he's against?
Think also what the model of knowledge is that he seems suspicious of. What sort of knowledge? Is it a narrow view or a wide one? What's included?
Finally, what does he take for granted about the value of knowledge, of how that's to be assessed.
Other texts
Grimsley, R. The Philosophy of Rousseau (Oxford University Press, 1973)
Grimsley, R. Rousseau: A Study in Self-Awareness (University of Wales Press, 1969)
Cranston, M. Jean Jacques: The Early Life and Work of Jean Jacques Rousseau 1712-1754 (Allen lane, 1983)
Babbitt, I. Rousseau and Romanticism (World Publishing Co. 1955)
Dobinson, C. Jean Jacques Rousseau: His Thought and its Relevance Today (Methuen, 1969)
Roche, K. Rousseau: Stoic and Romantic (Methuen, 1974)
The...