Sartre Vs Rousseau

Sartre and Rousseau define freedom differently but both think that humans have no choice but to live in freedom although for separate reasons. Rousseau believes freedom means being able to be oneself and not be restrained or forced to conform. Sartre freedom thinks freedom is being able to shape one’s self through their decisions. Rousseau thinks one should be “forced to be free”. Because he believes without freedom one cannot trust another and form mutual alliances because one does not know the other, without this ability Rousseau believes humans would perish. Additionally Rousseau thinks there should be a democratic government such as the social contract that still allows people their freedom while leaving them feel secure. Whereas Sartre
To not be placed under restraints and be forced to conform to the “same mould” (Rousseau 189). Rousseau believes that people must be forced to be free. This means that people are forced to live in the state of freedom. He thinks that people have to be forced to do so because otherwise the human race will perish. Rousseau has come to this conclusion based on his observations of the French Enlightenment, which he sees as a movement in which people lost their freedom. During the French Enlightenment humans no longer were themselves but instead liars under “perpetual restraint” who could not be trusted (Rousseau 190). The only time when a person could see who a person truly was during a “critical and pressing occasion; that is, til it's too late” (Rousseau 190). It is because one cannot trust one another and subsequently build mutually beneficial relationships that Rousseau thinks humans would perish if they did not live in
Because it would provide people with a sense of security. Rousseau believes that it is possible to maintain full freedom and have a democratic government. Rousseau believes that democracy allows people to still live in freedom as it is run by the people for the people. One form of a democratic government Rousseau came up with is the social contract. Under the social contract to gain security and create allies one gives up their rights up to others, and as everyone gives up their rights one loses nothing and gains more power to protect their self (Rousseau 191). It must be noted that if anyone were to violate the social contract it would be voided and people would be awarded their original rights. The social contract is considered a democracy because “in its passive role it called the state [and] when it plays an active role it is called a sovereign” (Rousseau