04.02.2013 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

SOCIETY. ITS NATURE AND ORIGIN 503<br />

Will is to be disentangled from a multitude of different,<br />

though disinterested, individual willings.<br />

(4) THAT A WILL MUST BE <strong>THE</strong> WILL OF A<br />

PERSON. If we overlook these difficulties and incon-<br />

sistencies and ask wh<strong>at</strong> Rousseau's meaning really was,<br />

the answer is, I think, th<strong>at</strong> he probably meant wh<strong>at</strong> the<br />

utilitarians meant, namely, th<strong>at</strong> the object of St<strong>at</strong>e action<br />

should be to promote the gre<strong>at</strong>est happiness of the gre<strong>at</strong>est<br />

number of people; th<strong>at</strong> everybody has an equal interest in<br />

promoting this gre<strong>at</strong>est happiness; th<strong>at</strong> people do on occasion<br />

wish to promote it; th<strong>at</strong> when they do so wish, their<br />

wishings and consequent willings manifest the General<br />

Will; and th<strong>at</strong> the General Will may, therefore, be identified<br />

with the sum total of the wills of all people when they<br />

are all willing for the common good, th<strong>at</strong> is, for the gre<strong>at</strong>est<br />

number. It is some such doctrine<br />

happiness of the gre<strong>at</strong>est<br />

as this th<strong>at</strong> we are, I think, entitled to suppose th<strong>at</strong> Rousseau<br />

was advoc<strong>at</strong>ing. But, if this is in fact his doctrine, his<br />

st<strong>at</strong>ement of it seems to be exposed to two serious difficulties.<br />

First, why should it be supposed, as Rousseau<br />

certainly does suppose, th<strong>at</strong> it is possible to discover by<br />

voting wh<strong>at</strong> course of action embodies the General Will,<br />

and wh<strong>at</strong> course of action, therefore, promotes the gre<strong>at</strong>est<br />

happiness of the gre<strong>at</strong>est number? The suggestion th<strong>at</strong> a<br />

decision reached by voting wilt embody the General Will<br />

reveals itself on examin<strong>at</strong>ion as being tantamount to the<br />

assertion th<strong>at</strong> the majority is always public-spirited and is<br />

always right. Secondly, it may well be asked whether there<br />

is any sense <strong>at</strong> all in postul<strong>at</strong>ing a will which is not the<br />

will of a person. Willing implies th<strong>at</strong> there is a mind which<br />

is th<strong>at</strong> of the person who wills. Rousseau's General Will,<br />

is not the will of any single mind belonging to any single<br />

person. We can only, therefore, make sense of the doctrine<br />

by supposing th<strong>at</strong> society has a communal mind, or th<strong>at</strong><br />

society has a personality or being of its own. Rousseau, as<br />

we have seen, does in fact suggest th<strong>at</strong> it has. The doctrine,<br />

th<strong>at</strong> society has a being or personality of its own, was l<strong>at</strong>er

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!