Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Allan Bloom - Philosophy & The Founding (1986)
Allan Bloom - Philosophy & The Founding (1986)
Allan Bloom - Philosophy & The Founding (1986)
taught that the purpoSl' of till' legislator is til Irnlke humails goo."
and doers of noble deeds. Locke said that people institute govcrn-
ments for themselves in order to protect their property. Llll'ke
taught that humans were first in a state of nature with concerns
only for self-preservalion. This means in effect thai an indivi<.h ... 1
seeks property for Ihe sake of that self-preservation. Whatlllllvcs it
pefSlll1 to give up nalural independence is till' thn'at from nllll'rs 10
the ptlsSl'ssion illld usc of thai pt'rson's prop,,·rly. Thus, Ill(' sl'olw of
government is narrowed and its functions simplifil'll. I.(K'ke litill
the gruundwork, if nul fur an independenl Sl'it'lll'e (If l'nmumil's, ,11
least for one that could count on the Iibendion of human acquWtive
impulses. For the ancients, economica WM IUbpoIitica1 and Itridly
subordinate to politics. In Locke, for the lint time, it comes to the
center of the political stage, although, as I have said, it is stillsubor-
dinate to political science.
Rousseau's criticism does not in any sense mean that he dis-,
agreed fundamentally with Locke about natural freedom, equality,
and concern with self-preservation. Rousseau did not long for the
ancient city in which virtue was the end. What he claimed was that
the so-called economic motives do not suffice for the establishment
of a decent civil society or one that adequately protects natural
freedom and equality. Virtue must again become central to political
science, not, however, as the end of politics but as a means,.o civil
freedom. Locke tried to ensure an almost automatic transition from
the natural to the civil state, but Rousseau argued that natural
indinations do not suffice to make citizens out of individuals.
Whether or not the state of nature is believed in anymore, all p0-
litical thought after Locke has taken humans to be naturally un-
l'ivil, and it has more or less assumed what Locke taught by the
means of the state of nature~this is true of Smith, Bentham. Kant,
'lilCqueville, Hegel, Marx, Mill, Nietzsche, and Freud. And prac-
tically all of them felt constrained to address the problems raised
by Rousseau concerning the s(lCiality of humans in Locke's scheme.
l{uusse,1lI formulah·d the problem in this way: