GUIDE TO THE PHILOSOPHY 1938 - 1947.pdf - Rare Books at ...

5OO ,
POLITICS
all the members of the State, in their relation to one another
and to it, the rule of what is just or unjust
Criticism of the Concept
of the General Will
(1) THAT IT is INCONSISTENT WITH ROUSSEAU'S
EGOISM. Rousseau's doctrine is, it is obvious, exceed*
ingly confusing. Moreover, in whatever form we choose to
state it, it is open to serious objections. One of the most
important of these has already* been urged in various forms
in criticism of subjectivist theories of ethics. Briefly,,
it is
to the effect that, if the nature of man is fundamentally
egoistical, and if his desires are exclusively hedonistic
and Rousseau, as we have seen, has recourse to the ex-
planation of human nature in terms of its origins, 1
insisting
that in a state of nature man is both egoistic and hedonistic
it is impossible to account for the existence of man's
altruistic emotions and sentiments in general, and for his
capacity for willing disinterestedly in particular. Yet the
distinction between the Will of All and the General Will
presupposes that he can will disinterestedly, for it presupposes
that human beings can be actuated by motives other
than that of personal or Sectional advantage and dis-
interestedly desire the common good. I have already
pointed out, both in this chapter and in Chapter I,* that
it is impossible to explain the formation of society, if the
egoistical account of human nature in the state of nature
is true. I now add that on this assumption it would be
equally impossible to account for the continuance of
society, for the continued functioning of society implies
that people can sometimes will disinterestedly and do
sometimes care for the common good.
(2) THAT IT is INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE
THEORY OP THE SOCIAL CONTRACT. A further
question which arises in this connection is the relation of
'See Chapter I 9 pp. 08-30.
See pp. 478, 479 above mod Chapter I, p. 36.