Welcome to Module 2! (1.5 – 2 hours)
Here’s what you need to do this week:
- If you haven’t done so yet, read the Syllabus and Schedule (main menu). If you have any questions, please let me know!
- Browse through the Anthology and start to think about a text you may be interested in focusing on for your class project (doesn’t have to be featured in our schedule, but can be). Then, click on Assignments (main menu) and read about the three different options (essay, podcast, or video) to see which one you would prefer to do.
- Read from the Anthology:
– Vol. 5: “Unit 1: Romanticism” (pp. 1110-1114) and “Jean-Jacques Rousseau” (p. 1115)
– Confessions, Book 1, by Jean-Jacques Rousseau, 1712-1723 (pp. 1116-1143), also available here (Book I only)
*mild sexual references* - Watch the lecture below.
- Come up with one question about the readings and write it in the comments below: Has anything confused you? Struck you? Awed you? Revolted you? Interested you, in any way? We will use your questions for discussion in class.
NB: you can’t write the same question as anyone else that has already commented before you. - Fill out the exit ticket for this lecture so I can count your participation.
Below is a downloadable transcript of the lecture:
Below are the downloadable slides:
Wanna do more?
- The School of Life on Rousseau and his view on politics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81KfDXTTtXE&ab_channel=TheSchoolofLife
- A podcast by Writ Large on Confessions: https://podtail.com/da/podcast/writ-large/confessions/
Feel free to write a second comment or reply to any of your classmates’ comments if you feel like saying anything else about the module content 🙂
We all experience life differently wether having different upbringing our being brought up in different environments. While the way and where we are brought up effects who we are and can cause oneself to be a certain way, there are some who stand out. Your reaction to the experience define you as well and no matter the situation or situations you had to go through you can our own self and no let things define who we are
I found Rousseau’s writing to be daft if not childish, a text that aims to justify uncouth actions and make his own character look sympathetic through his own admissions to acts rarely spoken of in society at the time. With regards to his own hypocrisy concerning his belief in individualism yet professing support for public programs as apposed to private ones, I find this thinking fascinating. There is, I think, an argument to be made here that (in Rousseau’s eyes) ideally society should not exist, but seeing as that it does and humanity has set forth on that course, it is favorable for an even playing field for all rather than certain individuals being higher up than others. In a system rife with privatization, those on top would be able to take advantage of the lower classes, as the Capitalist economic system is known for. The opposing publicly held government/economic system would be able to more equally distribute wealth, goods, etc. His line of thought must include to some degree that despite his own desire for individualism in an ideal world with no society, the present societal system would not allow for the majority of individuals to be able to live as they please. Rather, they will constantly be serving those above whose private enterprises hold a domineering presence.
I believe that Rosseau wrote his autobiography, “Confessions,” to express his philosophy that despite his wrongdoings, he’s still “human”— a good man that made some poor decisions in the past. Personally, I feel like this relates to today’s society, how people have their flaws yet are considered to be morally good. So my question is: To what extent, can we truly define ourselves and our actions as “good” or “bad”?
In life, there are those who choose to lead with their feelings, and those who choose to accept things for what they are. People go through certain life experiences that can play a hand in how they are today. How you handle the obstacles you have been through does say a lot about you. But doesn’t exactly define you. But all in all, we have full control of how we choose to live our lives.
The things we go through will have some impact on the choices we make, I do believe we are a product of our environment and experiences. But it does not always have to correlate because we can make a conscious effort to make better choices based on morality. I think that is what Rousseau was trying to show when he wrote this autobiography, that we can still be tender and passionate even through misfortunes.
Thank you all for your wonderful questions! Lots about reason vs. feeling, individualism vs. society, and story vs. history. These are all important distinctions to help us make sense of literature as applied to almost any text.
A word of caution: when dealing with binaries, it’s easy to fall into “black-and-white analysis.” Is it one or the other? Most of the times, it’s shades of grey. A bit of both. Binaries help us find a third, more nuanced interpretation to transcend the “A vs. B” first stage of analysis. We’ll try to answer these questions in class. Well done, everyone!
In writing confessions Rousseau, is able to paint a picture of his life and give insight into all of the decisions that he makes. He is able to reanalyze and recount his life from a very early stage and use reason to tell his story. What lessons do you think can be learned and applied to your own life from Rousseau’s logical analysis of his life?
When reading about Rousseau’s life I was able to see how important logical thinking and analysis are in one’s life. I feel that if Rousseau had used logic when he was younger, he would not have made some of the hasty decisions that he made that ended up landing him in trouble. A valuable lesson I took from this text is that decisions should be made in the present with logical reasoning and less impulsive or emotional reasoning. It is only later in life that Rousseau is able to look back on his younger days to analyze his life, but I think if he had tried to do this when he was in the present, he might have better considered the consequences to his actions. I want to use more logic in my own life to analyze my past decisions and inform my future decisions, so I don’t make some of the mistakes that Rousseau made.
Although Rousseau is opposed to society and the idea of people hanging out together, he still have ideas on what it means to have a society that works with people being individualistic. In the reading, he expressed how his feelings led him to his stories and demonstrate that despite all of his flaws, he is a honest person. Why is it crucial that Rousseau includes every experience from his childhood?
Excellent question, Maggie! The role of childhood content in the text might be helpful to consider while trying to understand Rousseau’s position on his time’s conflict between reason and feeling.
His mother passed away while he was young, therefore his childhood was not the greatest. The significance was to see his development. He was such a naughty kid that he peed in the pot neighbor’s pot. He first experienced the delights of desire while getting spanked by his nanny. He learned to crave receiving female spankings as he got older. Sometimes as one grows older, desires arise from anything that seems to symbolize the events from our youth. According to Rousseau, emotion comes before thought. We lack logical knowledge in our brains when we are young and act according to how we are feeling. The sensation is similar to how people perceive the world in nature. Therefore, the emotion is closer to reality than the thought.
Reply by Eliana Rocha:
Rousseau included every experience from his childhood because it a crucial stage of development. According to Rousseau, we are born innocent and he wanted to emphasize how, because of the influence/actions of the people around him, he lost his innocence, and how that shaped him as a man later in life.
I believe it was crucial that Rousseau includes every experience from his childhood as it gives us a look as to what led him to develop his philosophy. His childhood experience as well as the many embarrassing tales he gives about himself allows us to see the environment he was raised in. In turn, we are able to notice how his childhood experiences shaped his ideals/beliefs as well as personal interests. For instance, because of his Mother dying so early on, he yearns for an older woman or takes interest in them more than let’s say someone his own age or even younger.
Hey Anna, I agree with that in that it was crucial for us as readers to get the extra details about his childhood. I feel that without these extra experiences we wouldnt have gotten as good of an idea on his perspective that led him to this philosophy. The environment in which he was brought up in, along with his experiences shaped his beliefs and it was great to get this added detail.
In Confessions, Rousseau not only describes his experiences but also discusses what effect those experiences had on his personal and educational development. Some of those experiences were growing up with his father, uncle, his time at boarding school, and his apprenticeships. The relationship he had with each was different – some were loving and respectful, others not so much. How much impact do you believe our environment has on us?
The environment can affect people, can influence people, and can also change a person subtly. It can directly or indirectly affect children’s growth and development from many aspects and dominate children’s ideological and moral behavior. For example, Rousseau’s father’s attitude towards Rousseau as a result of his mother’s death at birth is different from that of an ordinary father. Rousseau was a sensitive man. He knew how his father felt when he faced him. This led him to feel guilty that his birth had caused his mother’s death and to think that his birth was unfortunate.
I believe our environment has a massive impact on us and how we view the world around us. Rousseau starts off the autobiography by describing his family and more importantly his mother’s death and later on when his father left him. These events alone can affect the way someone views their future relationships and encourage a fear of abandonment. With such independence at such a young age due to unfortunate circumstances, I could see why he was so keen on being independent and encouraging everyone else to do the same. Our environment and the way we are raised does have an impact on us as it shapes our reality and how we view others based on how we were treated when we were younger.
Our environment definitely has an impact on us. ‘How much’- I believe it is up to every individual and everyone perceives their experiences differently. For some, it might have little to no impact on their upbringing. Some might choose to acknowledge the environment and if its not a good one, might try to ignore it or will try not to let it impact them. While for others, it can drastically change their life. They might acknowledge it, but at the same time feel helpless that this is something they are not able to control.
The readings focused primarily on the idea of oneself and how everyone has their own viewpoints as well as the change of an individual through their experiences. Rousseau talks about his early days in the Confessions. There is also the idea of individualism. Romanticism is one’s true portrayal of themselves, or even one’s true self as they choose emotions rather than reasoning. It revolves around individualistic ideas rather than simply accepting something. The readings were very philosophical. How was freedom portrayed in the Confessions?
I believe that for Rousseau freedom meant being able to be himself. It meant having equality, respect, and trust with those around him. As we see from his writing, when he is in a structured environment, expected to observe the norms of the time, he becomes less motivated to learn and turns to petty theft. I believe Rousseau would say that the more freedom someone has, the more their good nature will shine.
Rousseau did not hold back on telling his truth whether it was good or bad. He opens up about his childhood’s scandal, religion, theory of human nature and emotions. He was not ashamed of what he thought and did in the pass. I wonder how did the public take it once it was published, since the book is nonfiction.
Hi Yetsy! That’s an interesting question: why would the book’s nature as a non-fiction book result in a different public reception? For example, does the autobiography genre, which is pioneering at the time, have people approach the text in a different way than they would if the events recalled were fictionalized? Autobiography also raises a lot of questions about memory, nostalgia, idealization, etc.
I think “Confession” is Rousseau’s own answer to “What is a human being?”. It is written by describing a wandering that started by abandoning everything in an instant, his desire to prefer quiet contemplation to a social party, his life that was not tamed, and moments of “coincidence” that Rousseau himself could not expect. In an era when human reason and rationality were regarded as the highest values, he breaks through the events that were pushed into him by using his mind as a criterion for judgment. And this make me wonder if human reason and civilization can free humans?
Pretty big question, Sumin! I suppose you can try to answer that through the book itself. What does reason mean for Rousseau, here? Does it help him free himself from social pressure?
I think what reason means for Rousseau was the standard for “people should be like this” that could define “universal human forms” such as social customs. Rousseau missed the expectations of those who always thought he knew him well, and was not identified as a “universal human type.”
Only those who doubt their beliefs can possess the truth, and only those who imagine the “outside” of reason can freely use their reason. I think this is also what Rousseau wanted to “confess” to readers, and most of all to himself. So I think Rousseau’s “Confession” is that asking about the “human truth” between enlightenment and romanticism.
From my understanding of the reading, Rousseau wanted to give this notion men can always be of good nature, innocent and tender, even after many misfortunes. In some way, I think he was trying to persuade his readers by using pathos to invoke emotion, as to convince us in his truths that society does not have to influence us in our individualism. Was the purpose of him writing this autobiography to show future societies that we can be inherently good without being governed by the state?
I like how you raised the possibility of basing his dystopian civilization on this writing. Although it might possibly be read that way, I believe he wrote Confessions to describe his philosophy and his thought process. It served as a means for him to connect his own experiences to the way his personality and worldview developed. However, someone may use his experiences and his philosophy as proof that society can be inherently good without governed ruled by the state.
I think future societies (for example, modern society) gain a lot less than those in society during Rousseau’s time from the publishing of his Confessions. I don’t mean to say that we can learn nothing from Confessions, but that exposing the gritty detail of his life in a way that hadn’t been done before could bring societal advancement or acceptance of matters which were previously concealed from the public eye. I’m not sure how much society did gain from his publishing of Confessions due to the censure he endured during his lifetime. I think we can extrapolate from the existence of the work that there was a movement to public acceptance of his ideas, but perhaps not the size of the movement.
Rousseau spent so much of his time running from authority to find safety, I’m shocked that he didn’t lose his life much earlier than he did. I doubt we’ll ever really know, but I’m curious to what extent Rousseau’s Confessions are filled with inaccuracies. The amount of detail Rousseau goes into with respect to his courting of women, and especially the quantity of women and his insatiability when it comes to women, makes the impression there isn’t much inaccuracy. He is very forthcoming about the potentiality of, “embellishments,” and I’m not sure if that makes one want to believe him more or less. The only reprieve the reader gets from the wonder of whether they’re reading fiction or non-fiction is in Book 7, which Rousseau makes clear only covers ends around 1760.
Great point, Nicholas! With the autobiography, there is always a question of what is actual memory and what is “filling in the blanks”, with idealization of memories, embellishments, or straight-up inventions. I would say that finding out the truth is perhaps less important than questioning the ethics of the genre itself. What does it mean, ethically to write one’s autobiography for the reading public? What does it mean to read about someone’s life? And what can we draw from the experience?
In the reading there was a big focus on the fact that people re born with rights that are not able to be taken away from a human ruler. It was mentioned many times that a human ruler has no right to take away rights that were given to us by god. “the Declaration of Independence (1776) asserts that human
beings have rights from God and the laws of nature that cannot be taken away by an
earthly ruler.”. I really liked that it was stressed that there are certain aspects of life that cannot be controlled by man. This makes me wonder why there are cultures where things like love are controlled. I would like to know what these philosophers take would be on traditions like those?
This reading made me understand how much Rousseau was influenced by his childhood education and experience. He did not experience systematic education when he was young, but he could develop his thinking by virtue of his interests. When he is Father Left Home, his life in the Village became freer and no one limits him. I think that’s one of the reasons why he thinks “Man is born free”. I think the reason Rousseau didn’t get into bad habits with this liberal education was that he was accompanied by his cousin. His cousin’s company made his childhood not lonely, and their relationship became better and better after going through many things. This also makes me wonder why, at the end of Book I, his cousin’s mother would prevent them from meeting due to their different social status, thus causing Rousseau to lose his cousin.
I found it interesting how Rousseau’s philosophy revolved around the idea of how Man is free. In addition to how society has an influence on how we as individuals evolve and develop. I enjoyed how his own writing in Confessions was more of an autobiography and how he stated that he would hide nothing in this book and reveal everything that essentially happened in his life. I enjoyed how he made an effort to be true to the events as they actually transpire, meanwhile highlighting the importance of experiencing the world around us through our senses. John Locke popularized the term “natural rights,” which refers to our God-given freedoms that no man, regardless of their position, has the right to violate. I wonder if the American Revolution and the Declaration of Independence had any influence on Rousseau’s ideas. He makes allusions that might be connected to natural rights during this. If not, what other type of philosophy or ideology might he identify with? I also wonder how Rousseau’s version of an autobiography (one of the first in his time) shapes what we view as an autobiography today. Can we draw any similarities or differences?
Excellent question, Anna!
Hi Anna
I don’t think there is much difference between his autobiography to today’s time. Mostly the autobiography would tell you about the person life but I do think sometimes today’s autobiography wouldn’t tell the real story of the life and would add more of the positive aspects of life. I think the reason can be because we want to portray ourselves perfect in-front of other people nowadays so I do think recent autobiography might not include all the good and bad things the person have done in their life.
I agree with Shazeen that there is not much difference between the style of an autobiography from today to the one written by Rousseau. Both are in chronological order and describes their life experiences., how these experiences shaped them as a person. However, I think today autobiography is mostly focused on the person’s achievements or a particular moments that changed their life.
Rousseau believed that society is a great influence on human development and behavior. His includes strong imagery and details to address most of his childhood due to his openness. Rousseau uses his experience as a way of understanding the choices he made in life. This is not to say that everyone would agree on his view of philosophy. My wonder is to what extent does one’s experience impact the understanding of the choices made in their life? Does it always correlate?
This is a really important question, Shirley! It can apply to any text:how does the small story (with the text’s characters and events) relate to the big story (history itself)? In other words, can we tell hisotry through people’s stories? Is literature historicism?
I think most people could say one’s experience could impact the understanding of the choices they choose to make to a certain extent only and that it does not always correlate. This can be due to environment as well, not just by one’s actions. Relating this question to today’s world, we see that most children have similar traits to their parents as they were a part of their upbringing. However, we also see how out of character and obnoxious some can be despite having generous parents. Rousseau does make an important point with his view on philosophy. Another point that can relate to his idea is the act of violence and use of guns. Most of these individuals experienced loneliness, bullying, and depression during their younger age. These choices and interference does play a big role in the way they feel about life. Although Rousseau’s thinking may not always correlate with experience impacting choices, it can be said that they do to a certain extent.
The things we go through will have some impact on the choices we make, I do believe we are a product of our environment and experiences. But it does not always have to correlate because we can make a conscious effort to make better choices based on morality. I think that is what Rousseau was trying to show when he wrote this autobiography, that we can still be tender and passionate even through misfortunes.
Reply ↓