*Çؼ³: ±Í½Å µé¸° Rousseau
Rousseau´Â ±âÁ¸ »çȸ¸¦ ¿ÏÀüÈ÷ ÆòµîÇÑ »çȸ·Î ±³Ã¼ÇÏ´Â °ÍÀÌ ÇÊ¿äÇÒ »Ó ¾Æ´Ï¶ó °¡´ÉÇÏ´Ù°í »ý°¢ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¿ø½Ã Àΰ£»çȸ´Â °ÅÀÇ ¿ÏÀüÈ÷ ÆòµîÇÏ¿´´Âµ¥, ±×·¡¼ ¿ø½Ã°øµ¿»çȸ´Â Ž¿åÀ» ¸ð¸£´Â °í±ÍÇÑ ¾ß¸¸ÀÎ(noble savage)ÀÇ »çȸ¿´´Âµ¥, »çÀ¯Àç»êÁ¦µµ°¡ »ý±ä ÀÌÈÄ·Î °è±ÞÀÌ »ý±â°í ÂøÃë¿Í Ž¿å°ú ±Ç·Â¿åÀ¸·Î Àΰ£ÀÌ Ãß¾ÇÇÏ°Ô Å¸¶ôÇÏ°Ô µÇ¾ú´Ù°í ´ÜÁ¤ÇÏ¿´´Ù. Àΰ£»çȸ°¡ ¿¡µ§¿¡¼ Áö¿ÁÀ¸·Î Àü¶ôÇÏ°Ô µÇ¾ú´Ù°í ÁÖÀåÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±×·¡¼ °è±Þ»çȸ¸¦ ŸÆÄÇÏ°í ÀÚ¿¬À¸·Î µ¹¾Æ°¡¸é, Áï ¿ø½Ã °øµ¿»çȸ·Î ȸ±ÍÇÏ¸é ¿ÏÀüÆòµîÀÌ ÀÌ·ç¾îÁö°í Àΰ£Àº ´Ù½Ã °í±ÍÇÑ ¾ß¸¸ÀÎÀÇ ¼ø¼ö¸¦ ȸº¹ÇÒ °ÍÀ̶ó°í »ý°¢ÇÏ¿´´Ù.
±×´Â ºÎÀÚ¸¦ ¾ø¾Ö°í ÀιÎÀÇ ¶æÀ» ´ëÇ¥ÇÏ´Â ±¹°¡°¡ ±¹¹ÎÀ» Áö¹èÇØ¾ß µÈ´Ù°í ÁÖÀåÇÑ´Ù. ±¹°¡°¡ Á¶Á÷ÀûÀÎ ¹®È°øÀÛ(social engineering)¿¡ ÀÇÇØ ±¹¹Î¿¡°Ô ¿ÏÀüÇÑ µµ´ö¼ºÀ» ÁÖÀÔÇϱ⠶§¹®¿¡ ±¹¹ÎÀÇ ¶æÀº Áï ÃÑÀÇ(General Will)´Â º»´ÉÀûÀÌ°í ÀÚ¹ßÀûÀÌ µÉ °ÍÀÌ´Ù. ±¹¹ÎÀº ÀÚ¹ßÀûÀÎ Áý´ÜÀÇÁö¿¡ ÀÇÇØ ±¹°¡¸¦ ±¸¼ºÇÏ¿´±â ¶§¹®¿¡ ±¹°¡¿¡ º¹Á¾ÇØ¾ß µÇ°í, ±¹°¡¸¦ »ç¶ûÇØ¾ß µÇ°í, ±¹°¡¿¡ ÀÇÇØ °Á¦´çÇÏ°í ÀÖ´Ù°í »ý°¢ÇÒ ±Ç¸®°¡ ¾ø´Ù´Â °ÍÀÌ´Ù. ±¹¹ÎÀº ÃÑÀǸ¦ ´ëÇ¥ÇÏ´Â ±¹°¡¿¡ ¹«Á¶°Ç º¹Á¾ÇØ¾ß µÈ´Ù´Â °ÍÀÌ´Ù. ±×·¡¼ ±¹¹ÎÀº ÃÑÀǸ¦ ÁýÇàÇÏ´Â ÁöµµÀÚ¿¡°Ô Àý´ëº¹Á¾ÇØ¾ß ÇÑ´Ù´Â °ÍÀÌ´Ù.
±×·¯¹Ç·Î ±¹°¡´Â ½Ã¹ÎµéÀ» ¾ÆÀÌ·Î Ãë±ÞÇÏ°í ±×µéÀÇ ÈÆÀ°°ú »ç»óÀ» ÅëÁ¦ÇÏ¿©¾ß ÇÑ´Ù. ±×·¯¸é ±×µéÀº ¡®º»¼º¡¯(±¹°¡ÀÇ ÅëÁ¦¿¡ ÀÇÇØ ¹Ù²î¾î¹ö¸° º»¼º)¿¡ ÀÇÇØ »çȸÀû »ç¶÷ÀÌ µÇ°í °øµ¿Ã¼¸¦ ±¸¼ºÇÏ´Â ½Ã¹ÎÀÌ µÈ´Ù. ãæÀΰ£À¸·Î »õ·Ó°Ô žÙ. Àüü ±¹¹ÎÀÌ ¶È°°Àº Çϳª°¡ µÉ °ÍÀÌ°í ±×µéÀº ÇູÇÒ °ÍÀÌ°í ±×µéÀÇ ÇູÀº °øȱ¹ÀÇ ÇູÀÌ µÉ °ÍÀÌ´Ù.
Rousseau´Â ÀÌ·¸°Ô Çؼ 20¼¼±âÀÇ Áß¿äÇÑ ¸Á»ó°ú ¾î¸®¼®Àº ÁþµéÀÇ Ã»»çÁøÀ» ÁغñÇß¾ú´Ù. »çȸ°øÇп¡ ÀÇÇØ Àΰ£À» °³Á¶ÇÏ¿© ±¹°¡ÀÇ ¸í·É¿¡ Àý´ëº¹Á¾ÇÏ´Â ½ÅÀΰ£À» ¸¸µå´Â °úÁ¤¿¡¼ 1¾ï ÀÌ»óÀÇ »ç¶÷µéÀ» ÇлìÇÑ °ø»êÁÖÀÇÀÚµéÀº ¸ðµÎ RousseauÀÇ »ç»óÀû ÀڽĵéÀ̶ó°í ÇÏ°Ú´Ù. 20¼¼±âÀÇ °ø»êÁÖÀÇ »ìÀ趵éÀÎ ·¹´Ñµµ ½ºÅ»¸°µµ ¸ðÅõ¿µµ ±èÀϼºµµ Æú Æ÷Æ®µµ, ¸ðµÎ RousseauÀÇ ÀÚ¼ÕµéÀÌ´Ù. ±¹°¡Æı«¿¡ ¹ÌÃÄ ³¯¶Ù°í ÀÖ´Â Çѱ¹ÀÇ ÁÖ»çÆĵ鵵 RousseauÀÇ »ç»ý¾ÆµéÀÌ´Ù.
µµ½ºÅ俹ÇÁ½ºÅ°´Â ±×ÀÇ À§´ëÇÑ Úã»çȸÁÖÀÇ ¼Ò¼³ ¡°¾Ç·É¡±¿¡¼ »çȸÇõ¸íÀÇ À̸§À¸·Î »ìÀΰú ¹æÈ¿Í °ÅÁþ¸»À» ¾Æ¹«·± ÁËÀǽĵµ ¾øÀÌ ÀÚÇàÇÏ´Â ÇÑ ¹«¸®ÀÇ °ø»êÁÖÀÇÀÚµéÀ» ¡®±Í½Å µé¸° »ç¶÷µé¡¯À̶ó°í ÇÏ¿´´Ù. »çȸÁÖÀÇ ¾Ç·ÉÀÌ ¸Ó¸®¿¡ µé¾î°¡¼ »ç¶÷À» ÁËÀǽÄÀÌ ÀüÇô ¾ø´Â ¾Ç¸¶·Î º¯Çü½ÃÄ×´Ù´Â °ÍÀÌ´Ù. ÀÌ·± Àǹ̿¡¼ ¿ì¸®´Â °ø»êÁÖÀÇ ¿øÁ¶ÀÎ Rousseau¸¦ ¡°±Í½Å µé¸° Rousseau¡±¶ó°í ºÒ·¯¾ß ÇÒ °Í °°´Ù.
34. "Intellectuals": Rousseau
Jean-Jacques Rousseau: 'An Interesting Madman' by Paul Johnson
34-1-282
p.1
Over the past two hundred years the influence of intellectuals has grown steadily. Indeed, the rise of the secular intellectual has been a key factor in shaping the modern world. Seen against the long perspective of history it is in many ways a new phenomenon. It is true that in their earlier incarnations as priests, scribes and soothsayers, intellectuals have laid claim to guide society from the very beginning. But as guardians of hieratic cultures, whether primitive or sophisticated, their moral and ideological innovations were limited by the canons of external authority and by the inheritance of tradition. They were not, and could not be, free spirits, adventurers of the mind.
With the decline of clerical power in the eighteenth century, a new kind of mentor emerged to fill the vacuum and capture the ear of society. The secular intellectual might be deist, sceptic or atheist. But he was just as ready as any pontiff or presbyter to tell mankind how to conduct its affairs. He proclaimed, from the start, a special devotion to the interests of humanity and an evangelical duty to advance them by his teaching. He brought to this self¡©appointed task a far more radical approach than his clerical predecessors. He felt himself bound by no corpus of revealed religion. The collective wisdom of the past, the legacy of tradition, the prescriptive codes of ancestral experience existed to be selectively followed or wholly rejected entirely as his own good sense might decide. For the first time in human history, and with growing confidence and audacity, men arose to assert that they could diagnose the ills of society and cure them with their own unaided intellects: more, that they could devise formulae whereby not merely the structure of society but the fundamental habits of human beings could be transformed for the better. Unlike their sacerdotal predecessors, they were not servants and interpreters of the gods but substitutes. Their hero was Prometheus, who stole the celestial fire and brought it to earth.*
34. ¡°Áö½ÄÀΡ±
Jean-Jacques Rousseau: Èï¹Ì ÀÖ´Â ÎÊìÑ(±¤ÀÎ) by Æú Á¸½¼
Áö³ 200³â µ¿¾È Áö½ÄÀÎÀÇ ¿µÇâ·ÂÀº Áö¼ÓÀûÀ¸·Î ¼ºÀåÇØ ¿Ô´Ù. Áø½Ç·Î, ¼¼¼Ó Áö½ÄÀÎÀÇ ýéÑÃ(Èï±â)´Â Çö´ë¼¼°èÀÇ Çü¼º¿¡ ÀÖ¾î¼ ÇÙ½ÉÀû ¿äÀÎÀÌ µÇ¾î ¿Ô´Ù. ¿ª»çÀÇ ÀüüÀû ½Ã°¢(perspective)¿¡¼ º¸¸é ±×°ÍÀº ¸¹Àº ¸é¿¡¼ »õ·Î¿î Çö»óÀÌ´Ù. »çÁ¦·Î¼, ¼±â·Î¼ Á¡¼ú°¡·Î¼ÀÇ ¿¹Àü(earlier)ÀÇ ¸ð½À[incarnations: ûùãó(ȽÅ)]¿¡¼ ±×µéÀº ¹Ù·Î ã·ôø(½ÃÃÊ)ºÎÅÍ »çȸ¸¦ ÁöµµÇÒ ±Ç¸®¸¦ ºÎ¿©¹Þ¾Ò´Ù°í ÁÖÀåÇÏ´Â °ÍÀº »ç½ÇÀÌ´Ù. ¿ø½ÃÀûÀÌµç ¼¼·ÃµÇ¾ú´ø ¼ºÁ÷ÀÚ °è±Þ ¹®ÈÀÇ º¸È£Àڷμ ±×µéÀÇ µµ´öÀû »ç»óÀû Çõ½Å È°µ¿Àº ¿ÜÀû ±ÇÀ§ÀÇ ±Ô¹ü°ú ÀüÅëÀÇ À¯»ê¿¡ ÀÇÇؼ Á¦ÇѵǾú¾ú´Ù. ±×µéÀº Á¤½ÅÀÇ ¸ðÇè°¡µéÀÎ ÀÚÀ¯·Î¿î Á¤½ÅÀÇ ¼ÒÀ¯ÀÚ´Â ¾Æ´Ï¾ú°í µÉ ¼öµµ ¾ø¾ú´Ù.
18¼¼±â¿¡ ¼ºÁ÷ÀÚ °è±ÞÀÇ ¼èÅð¿Í ÇÔ²², »õ·Î¿î Á¾·ùÀÇ ½º½ÂÀÌ ÃâÇöÇÏ¿© ±× °ø¹éÀ» ä¿ì°í »çȸÀÇ ±Í¸¦ »ç·ÎÀâ¾Ò´Ù. ±× ¼¼¼ÓÀû Áö½ÄÀÎÀº ìµãêÖåíº(À̽ŷÐÀÚ: deist)°Å³ª ȸÀÇ·ÐÀڰųª ¹«½Å·ÐÀÚ¿´À» °ÍÀÌ´Ù. ±×·¯³ª ±×´Â ¾î´À Á¦»çÀåÀ̳ª Àå·Î¿Í ¸¶Âù°¡Áö·Î Àΰ£µé¿¡°Ô Àΰ£»ç¸¦ ÇàÇÏ´Â ¹æ¹ýÀ» Áö½ÃÇÒ Áغñ°¡ µÇ¾î ÀÖ¾ú´Ù. ±×´Â óÀ½ºÎÅÍ ÀηùÀÇ ÀÌÀÍÀ» À§ÇÑ Æ¯º°ÇÑ Çå½Å°ú ±×ÀÇ °¡¸£Ä§¿¡ ÀÇÇؼ ±× ÀÍÀ» ÁõÁø½Ãų º¹À½ÁÖÀÇÀû Àǹ«°¡ ÀÖ´Ù°í ¼±Æ÷Çß¾ú´Ù. ±×´Â ½º½º·Î ÃßõÇÑ ÀÌ °ú¾÷¿¡ ¼ºÁ÷ÀÚ ÀüÀÓÀڵ麸´Ùµµ ÈξÀ ´õ °ú°ÝÇÑ ¹æ¹ýÀ» µµÀÔÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±×´Â °è½ÃÁ¾±³ÀÇ ±³¸®(corpus: ½Åü, ÀüÁý, ÀÚ·á)¿¡ ±¸¼ÓµÇÁö ¾Ê´Â´Ù°í ´À³¤´Ù. °ú°ÅÀÇ Áý´Ü ÁöÇý, ÀüÅëÀÇ À¯»ê, Á¶»óÀü·¡ÀÇ ±Ô¹üÀû ±ÔÁ¤Àº ÀüüÀûÀ¸·Î ±× ÀÚ½ÅÀÇ ÈǸ¢ÇÑ Áö°¢ÀÌ °áÁ¤ÇÏ´Â ¹Ù¿¡ µû¶ó ¼±º°ÀûÀ¸·Î ÁؼöÇϰųª ¾Æ´Ï¸é ÀüÀûÀ¸·Î °ÅºÎµÇ±â À§Çؼ Á¸ÀçÇÏ¿´´Ù. Àΰ£µéÀº Àηù ¿ª»ç»ó óÀ½À¸·Î, ±×¸®°í ïÂñò(Á¡Áõ)ÇÏ´Â Àڽۨ°ú ´ë´ãÇÔÀ» °¡Áö°í ±×µéÀÌ »çȸÀÇ º´µéÀ» Áø´ÜÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ°í ±×µé ÀÚ½ÅÀÇ µ¶ÀÚÀûÀÎ(unaided) ò±Õô(Áö·Â)À» °¡Áö°í ±× º´µéÀ» Ä¡À¯ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Ù°í ºÐ±âÇÏ¿© ÁÖÀåÇÏ¿´´Ù: »Ó¸¸ ¾Æ´Ï¶ó, ±×°Í¿¡ ÀÇÇؼ(whereby) »çȸ±¸Á¶»Ó ¾Æ´Ï¶ó Àΰ£ÀÇ ±Ùº»Àû ½À¼º±îÁöµµ º¸´Ù ´õ ÁÁ°Ô º¯Çü½Ãų ¼ö ÀÖ´Â °ø½ÄÀ» °í¾ÈÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Ù°í (ÁÖÀåÇÑ´Ù). ±×µéÀÇ ¼ºÁ÷ÀÚ ÀüÀÓÀÚµé°ú´Â ´Þ¸®, ±×µéÀº ½ÅµéÀÇ ÇÏÀÎÀ̳ª Çؼ®ÀÚ°¡ ¾Æ´Ï°í ÓÛæµ(´ë¿ª)À̾ú´Ù. ±×µéÀÇ ¿µ¿õÀº ÇÏ´ÃÀÇ ºÒÀ» ÈÉÃļ Àΰ£ ¼¼»ó¿¡ °¡Á®¿Â Prometheus¿´´Ù.
34-2-283
p.2
I want to focus on the moral and judgemental credentials of intellectuals to tell mankind how to conduct itself. How did they run their own lives? With what degree of rectitude did they behave to family, friends and associates? Were they just in their sexual and financial dealings? Did they tell, and write, the truth? And how their own systems stood up to the time and praxis?
The inquiry begins with Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712=78), who was the first of the modern intellectuals, their archetype and in many ways the most influential of them all. Older men like Voltaire had started the work of demolishing the altars and enthroning reason. But Rousseau was the first to combine all the salient characteristics of the modern Prometheus: the assertion of his right to reject the existing order in its entirety; confidence in his capacity to refashion it from the bottom in accordance with principles of his own devising; belief that this could be achieved by the political process; and, not least, recognition of the huge part instinct, intuition and impulse play in human conduct. He believed he had a unique love for humanity and had been endowed with unprecedented gifts and insights to increase its felicity. An astonishing number of people, in his own day and since, have taken him at his own valuation.
In both the long and short term his influence was enormous. In the generation after his death, it attained the status of myth. He died a decade before the French Revolution of 1789 but many contemporaries held him responsible for it, and so for the demolition of the ancient regime in Europe.*
³ª´Â Àηù¿¡°Ô ¿Ã¹Ù¸£°Ô ó½ÅÇÏ´Â ¹ýÀ» ¸»ÇØÁÖ´Â Áö½ÄÀο¡ ´ëÇÑ µµ´öÀû ¹× ÆÇ´Ü·ÂÀÇ ±âÁØ¿¡ ÃÊÁ¡À» ¸ÂÃ߱⸦ ¿øÇÑ´Ù. ±×µéÀº ±×µé ÀÚ½ÅÀÇ »îÀº ¾î¶»°Ô »ì¾Ò´Â°¡? ¾î´À Á¤µµ·Î Á¤Á÷ÇÏ°Ô ±×µéÀº ±×µéÀÇ °¡Á·°ú Ä£±¸¿Í µ¿·á(associates)¿¡°Ô ó½ÅÇÏ¿´´Â°¡? ±×µéÀº àõ°ú ÀçÁ¤ÀÇ Ã³¸®¿¡ ÀÖ¾î¼ Á¤´çÇÏ¿´´Â°¡? ±×µéÀº Áø½ÇÀ» ¸»ÇÏ°í ±Û·Î ½è´Â°¡? ±×µé ÀÚ½ÅÀÇ »ç»óÀû ü°è´Â ½Ã°£°ú ½À¼ÓÀ» °ßµ®³Â´Â°¡?
À̵é Áú¹®Àº Jean-Jacques Rousseau¿Í ÇÔ²² ½ÃÀÛÇϴµ¥ ±×´Â Çö´ëÀû Áö½ÄÀεé Áß¿¡ ù ¹ø°ÀÌ°í Áö½ÄÀεéÀÇ ¿øÇüÀÌ°í ¸¹Àº ¸é¿¡¼ ±×µé Áß¿¡¼ ¿µÇâ·ÂÀÌ °¡Àå ÄDZ⠶§¹®ÀÌ´Ù. Voltaire¿Í °°Àº ´õ ´ÄÀº »ç¶÷µéÀÌ ð®Ó¦(Á¦´Ü)À» Æı«ÇÏ°í ìµàõ(À̼º)¿¡°Ô ¿Õ°üÀ» ¾º¿ü¾ú´Ù. ±×·¯³ª Rousseau°¡ Çö´ëÀÇ Prometheus¿¡ ´ëÇÑ °¡Àå µÎµå·¯Áø ¸ðµç Ư¼ºµéÀ» °áÇÕÇÑ Ã¹ ¹ø° Àι°ÀÌ´Ù: ÇöÁ¸ Áú¼¸¦ ÀüÀûÀ¸·Î °ÅºÎÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â ±Ç¸®ÀÇ ÁÖÀå; ±× ÀÚ½ÅÀÌ °í¾ÈÇÑ(devising) ¿øÄ¢¿¡ µû¶ó ¹Ø¹Ù´Ú¿¡¼ºÎÅÍ ±× Áú¼¸¦ °³Á¶ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â ÀÚ½ÅÀÇ ´É·Â¿¡ ´ëÇÑ Àڽۨ; Á¤Ä¡Àû ¹æ¹ý(process: ó¸®, Á¶ÀÛ)¿¡ ÀÇÇؼ ÀÌ°ÍÀÌ ¼ºÃëµÉ ¼ö ÀÖ´Ù´Â ¹ÏÀ½; ±×¸®°í ÀÌ¿Í ¸øÁö¾Ê°Ô(not least), º»´É°ú òÁκ(Á÷°ü)°ú Ã浿ÀÌ Àΰ£ÀÇ Çൿ¿¡ ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â °Å´ëÇÑ ¿ªÇÒ(part)¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ÀνÄ. ±×´Â ±×°¡ Àηù¿¡ ´ëÇÑ Æ¯º°ÇÑ ¾ÖÁ¤À» °¡Áö°í ÀÖ°í ÀηùÀÇ ò¸ÜØ(Áöº¹)À» Áõ°¡½Ãų ¼ö ÀÖ´Â îñÖÇ(Àü·Ê)°¡ ¾ø´Â Àç´É°ú ÅëÂû·ÂÀ» ºÎ¿©¹Þ¾Ò´Ù(Çϴ÷κÎÅÍ)°í ¹Ï¾ú´Ù. ±× ÀÚ½ÅÀÇ ½Ã´ë¿Í ±× ÀÌÈÄ·Î ³î¶ó¿î ¼öÀÇ »ç¶÷µéÀÌ RousseauÀÇ ´É·ÂÆò°¡¸¦ º»ÀÎÀÌ ¸»ÇÑ ±×´ë·Î ¹Þ¾Æµé¿´´Ù (take a person at his own valuation:ÀÇ ´É·ÂÆò°¡¸¦ º»ÀÎÀÌ ¸»ÇÏ´Â ±×´ë·Î ¹Þ¾ÆµéÀÌ´Ù).
´Ü±â ¹× Àå±â ¾çÀÚ¿¡ °ÉÃÄ ±×ÀÇ ¿µÇâ·ÂÀº °Å´ëÇÏ¿´¾ú´Ù. ±×°¡ Á×Àº ÈÄÀÇ ¼¼´ë¿¡¼ ±×ÀÇ ±×°Í(influence)Àº ½ÅÈÀÇ ÁöÀ§¸¦ ȹµæÇÏ¿´¾ú´Ù. ±×´Â 1789³â ÇÁ¶û½º ´ëÇõ¸í 10³â Àü¿¡ Á×¾úÁö¸¸ ¸¹Àº µ¿½Ã´ëÀεéÀº ±×°¡ Çõ¸í¿¡ ´ëÇÑ Ã¥ÀÓ(±â¿©ÇÑ ¹Ù°¡ ¸¹´Ù)ÀÌ ÀÖ¾ú°í À¯·´ÀÇ ÏÁô÷ð¤(±¸Ã¼Á¦)ŸÆÄ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ Ã¥ÀÓµµ ÀÖ´Ù°í ÁÖÀåÇÏ¿´´Ù.
34-3-284
p.3-4
At a much deeper level, however, and over far longer span of time, Rousseau altered some of the basic assumptions of civilized man and shifted around the furniture of human mind. The span of his influence is dramatically wide but it can be grouped under five main headings. First, all our modern ideas of education are affected to some degree by Rousseau's doctrine, especially by his treatise Emile (1762). He popularized and to some extent invented the cult of nature, the taste for the open air, the quest for freshness, spontaneity, the invigorating and the natural. He introduced the critique of urban sophistication. He identified and branded the artificialities of civilization. He is the father of the cold bath, systematic exercise, sport as character-forming, the weekend cottage.
Second, and linked to his revaluation of nature, Rousseau taught distrust of the progressive, gradual improvements brought about by the slow march of materialist culture; in this sense he rejected the Enlightenment, of which he was part, and looked for a far more radical solution. He insisted that reason itself had severe limitations as the means to cure society. That did not mean, however, that the human mind was inadequate to bring about the necessary change, because it has hidden, untapped resources of poetic insight and intuition which must be used to overrule the sterilizing dictates of reason. In pursuit of this line of thought, Rousseau wrote his Confessions, finished in 1770, though not published until after his death. This third process was the beginning both of the Romantic movement and of modern introspective literature, for in it he took the discovery of the individual, the prime achievement of the Renaissance, a giant stage further, delving into the inner self and producing it for public inspection.
±×·¯³ª º¸´Ù ´õ ±íÀº ¼öÁØ¿¡¼ ±×¸®°í º¸´Ù ´õ ±ä ±â°£(span)¿¡ °ÉÃļ Rousseau´Â ¹®¸íÀÎÀÇ ±Ùº»Àû »ý°¢(assumption: °¡Á¤, »ç½ÇÀ̶ó°í »ý°¢ÇÏ´Â °Í)ÀÇ ÀϺθ¦ º¯°æÇÏ¿´°í Àΰ£Á¤½ÅÀÇ ±³¾ç(furniture:¸¶À½¿¡ °®Ãß¾îÁø °Í, Áö½Ä)À» ¹Ù²Ù¾î ³õ¾Ò´Ù. ±×ÀÇ ¿µÇâ·ÂÀÇ ÆøÀº ´ë´ÜÈ÷ ³ÐÁö¸¸ ´Ù¼¸ °³ÀÇ Áß¿äÇÑ Ç¥Á¦·Î ºÐ·ù(group)ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Ù. ù°, Çö´ëÀÇ ¸ðµç ±³À°»ç»óÀº RousseauÀÇ ±³¸®(doctrine)¿¡ ÀÇÇØ, ƯÈ÷ ±×ÀÇ ³í¹® Emile¿¡ ÀÇÇØ ¾î´À Á¤µµ ¿µÇâÀ» ¹Þ°í ÀÖ´Ù. ±×´Â ÀÚ¿¬ ¼þ¹è, ¾ß¿Ü¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ÃëÇâ, ½Å¼±ÇÔ, Àڹ߼º, ±â¿î ³ª°Ô ÇÏ´Â °Í, Ÿ°í³ °Í(the natural)À» ´ëÁßÈÇÏ°í ¾î´À Á¤µµ±îÁö â¾ÈÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±×´Â µµ½ÃÀÇ ¼¼·Ã¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ºñÆÇÀ» µµÀÔÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±×´Â ¹®¸íÀÇ ÀÎÀ§ÀûÀÎ °ÍµéÀ» ã¾Æ È®ÀÎÇÏ°í ³«ÀÎÀ» Âï¾ú´Ù. ±×´Â ³Ã¼ö¿å, ü°èÀû ¿îµ¿, ÀΰÝÇü¼ºÀ¸·Î¼ÀÇ ¿îµ¿, ÁÖ¸» ½Ã°ñÁý(½Ã°ñº°Àå)ÀÇ ¾Æ¹öÁöÀÌ´Ù.
µÑ°, ÀÚ¿¬¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ÀçÆò°¡¿Í °ü·ÃµÈ °ÍÀε¥, Rousseau´Â ¹°ÁúÁÖÀÇ ¹®ÈÀÇ ´À¸° ¹ßÀü(march)¿¡ ÀÇÇØ ÀϾ´Â Á¡ÁøÀûÀÌ°í ´Ü°èÀûÀÎ(gradual) Áøº¸¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ºÒ½ÅÀ» °¡¸£ÃÆ´Ù: ÀÌ·± Àǹ̿¡¼ ±×´Â ±× ÀÚ½ÅÀÌ ¼ÓÇß´ø(part of) °è¸ù»ç»óÀ» ¹èôÇÏ°í ÈξÀ ´õ ±ÞÁøÀûÀÎ ÇØ°áÃ¥À» Ãß±¸ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±×´Â ìµàõ(À̼º) ÀÚü°¡ »çȸ¸¦ Ä¡À¯Çϱâ À§ÇÑ ¼ö´ÜÀ¸·Î¼ ½ÉÇÑ ÇѰ踦 °¡Áö°í ÀÖ´Ù°í ÁÖÀåÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±×·¯³ª ±×°ÍÀÌ Àΰ£Á¤½ÅÀÌ ÇÊ¿äÇÑ º¯È¸¦ ÀÏÀ¸Å°´Â µ¥ ºÎÁ·ÇÏ´Ù´Â °ÍÀ» ÀǹÌÇÏÁö´Â ¾Ê´Â´Ù. ¿Ö³ÄÇÏ¸é ±×°Í(Àΰ£Á¤½Å)Àº À̼ºÀÇ Üôìõ(ºÒÀÓ)½ÃÅ°´Â Áö½Ã¸¦ Á¦¾ÐÇϱâ À§ÇÏ¿© »ç¿ëµÇ¾î¾ß ÇÏ´Â ¹Ì°³¹ßÀÇ ¼û°ÜÁø ãÌîÜ(½ÃÀû) ÅëÂû·Â°ú òÁκ(Á÷°ü)À» °¡Áö°í Àֱ⠶§¹®ÀÌ´Ù. ÀÌ·± ÒÊàÊ(³ë¼±)ÀÇ »ç»óÀ» Ãß±¸Çϱâ À§ÇÏ¿©, ºñ·Ï ±×ÀÇ ÞÝý(»çÈÄ)±îÁö ÃâÆǵÇÁö´Â ¾Ê¾ÒÁö¸¸, Rousseau´Â 1770³â¿¡ ¿Ï¼ºµÈ ±×ÀÇ ¡°Âüȸ·Ï¡±À» ½è´Ù. ÀÌ ¼¼ ¹ø° ¹æ¹ý(process)Àº ³¶¸¸ÁÖÀÇ ¿îµ¿°ú ҮκîÜ(³»°üÀû) ¹®ÇÐÀÇ ½ÃÃÊ°¡ µÇ¾ú´Ù. ¿Ö³ÄÇÏ¸é ±× °úÁ¤(process)¿¡¼ ±×´Â ¸£³×»ó½ºÀÇ Áß¿äÇÑ(prime) ¼ºÃëÀÎ °³ÀÎÀÇ ¹ß°ßÀ» ÃëÇÏ¿´°í ÀÌ°ÍÀº ³»ÀûÀھƸ¦ ±íÀÌ ÆÄ°íµé°í °øÀûÀÎ °ËÁõÀ» °ÅÄ¡´Â, ÇÑ °ÉÀ½ ´õ ³ª¾Æ°£ °Å´ëÇÑ ´Ü°è¿´±â ¶§¹®ÀÌ´Ù.
34-4-285
For the first time readers were shown the inside of a heart, though¡ªand this too was to be a characteristic of modern literature¡ªthe vision was deceptive, the heart thus exhibited misleading, outwardly frank, inwardly full of guile.
The fourth concept Rousseau popularized was in some ways the most pervasive of all. When society evolves from its primitive state of nature to urban sophistication, he argued, man is corrupted: his natural selfishness, which he calls amour de soi, is transformed into a far more pernicious instinct, amour-propre, which combines vanity and self-esteem, each man rating himself by what others think of him and thus seeking to impress them by his money, strength, brains and moral superiority. His natural selfishness becomes competitive and acquisitive, and so he becomes alienated not only from other men, whom he sees as competitors and not brothers, but from himself. Alienation induces a psychological sickness in man, characterized by a tragic divergence between appearance and reality.
The evil of competition, as he saw it, which destroys man's inborn communal sense and encourages all his evil traits, including his desire to exploit others, led Rousseau to distrust private property, as the source of social crime. His fifth innovation, then, on the very eve of the Industrial Revolution, was to develop the elements of a critique of capitalism, both in the preface to his play Narcisse and his Discours sur l'inegalite, by identifying property and the competition to acquire it as the primary cause of alienation. This was a thought-deposit Marx and others were to mine ruthlessly, together with Rousseau's related idea of cultural evolution. To him, 'natural' meant 'original' or pre-cultural. All culture brings problems since it is man's association with others which brings out his evil propensities: as he puts it in Emile, 'Man's breath is fatal to his fellow men.' Thus the culture in which man lived, itself an evolving, artificial construct, dictated man's behaviour, and you could improve, indeed totally transform, his behaviour by changing the culture and the competitive forces which produced it¡ªthat is, by social engineering.*
ºñ·Ï ÀÌ·¸°Ô ³ëÃâµÈ ¸¶À½Àº ¿Ü°ßÀ¸·Î´Â ¼ÖÁ÷ÇÏ¿´Áö¸¸ ³»ÀûÀ¸·Î´Â ¾ûÅÇÔÀ¸·Î °¡µæ Â÷ ÀÖ¾ú±â ¶§¹®¿¡ ±× ºñÀü(³»¸éÀÇ ¸ð½À)Àº ±â¸¸ÀûÀ̾úÁö¸¸ ¡ªÀÌ°ÍÀº Çö´ë¹®ÇÐÀÇ Æ¯Â¡ÀÌ µÉ ¿¹Á¤À̾ú´Ù¡ªÃ³À½À¸·Î µ¶Àڵ鿡°Ô ¸¶À½ÀÇ ³»¸éÀÌ ³ëÃâµÇ¾ú´Ù.
Rousseau°¡ ´ëÁßÈÇÑ ³× ¹ø° °³³äÀº ¾î¶² ¸é¿¡¼´Â 5°³ Ç¥Á¦ Áß¿¡¼ °¡Àå ½º¸çµé±â ½¬¿î °ÍÀ̾ú´Ù. »çȸ°¡ ÀÚ¿¬ÀÇ ¿ø½Ã»óÅ·κÎÅÍ µµ½ÃÀû º¹ÀâÇÔ(sophistication: Á¤±³ÇÔ, ¼¼·Ã, ±³¾ç)À¸·Î ÁøÈÇÒ ¶§, Àΰ£Àº Ÿ¶ôÇÏ°Ô µÈ´Ù°í ±×´Â ÁÖÀåÇÏ¿´´Ù: ±×°¡ amour de soi(í»Ðùäñ)¶ó°í ¸»ÇÑ Àΰ£ÀÇ Å¸°í³(natural) À̱â½ÉÀÌ ÈξÀ ´õ À¯µ¶ÇÑ amour-propre(À̱â½É)À¸·Î º¯ÇüÀÌ µÇ°í ÀÌ°ÍÀº Ç㿵°ú ÀںνÉÀ» °áÇÕÇÏ°Ô µÇ°í ÀÌ·¸°Ô µÇ¸é °¢°¢ÀÇ »ç¶÷Àº ŸÀÎÀÌ Àڱ⿡ ´ëÇؼ »ý°¢ÇÏ´Â °Í¿¡ ÀÇÇØ ÀÚ½ÅÀ» Æò°¡ÇÏ°Ô µÇ°í ±×·¯¸é ±×´Â ±×ÀÇ µ·°ú Èû°ú µÎ³ú¿Í µµ´öÀû ¿ì¿ù¼º¿¡ ÀÇÇؼ ŸÀο¡°Ô ÀλóÀ» ÁÖ·Á°í Ãß±¸ÇÑ´Ù. ±×ÀÇ Å¸°í³ À̱â½ÉÀº °æÀïÀûÀÌ°í Ž¿åÀûÀ¸·Î µÇ°í ±×·¡¼ ±×´Â ŸÀÎÀ» ÇüÁ¦°¡ ¾Æ´Ñ °æÀïÀÚ·Î º¸±â ¶§¹®¿¡ ŸÀÎÀ¸·ÎºÎÅÍ ¼Ò¿ÜµÉ »Ó ¾Æ´Ï¶ó ÀÚ½ÅÀ¸·ÎºÎÅ͵µ ¼Ò¿ÜµÈ´Ù. ¼Ò¿Ü°¨Àº ¿Ü°ß°ú ãùî¤(½ÇÀç) »çÀÌÀÇ ÝÂÐ÷(ºÐ±â)¿¡ ÀÇÇؼ Ư¡ Áö¿öÁö´Â ½É¸®ÀûÀÎ Áúº´À» Àΰ£¿¡°Ô ÀÏÀ¸Å²´Ù.
Rousseau°¡ »ý°¢ÇÑ °Íó·³, Àΰ£ÀÇ Å¸°í³ °øµ¿Ã¼ ÀǽÄÀ» Æı«ÇÏ°í ŸÀÎÀ» ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ·Á´Â ¿å¸ÁÀ» Æ÷ÇÔÇؼ Àΰ£ÀÇ ¸ðµç »ç¾ÇÇÑ Æ¯¼ºÀ» ð¾íþ(Á¶Àå)ÇÏ´Â °æÀïÀÇ ¾ÇÀº Rousseau¸¦ »çÀ¯Àç»êÀ» »çȸÀû ¹üÁËÀÇ ¿øõÀ¸·Î¼ ºÒ½ÅÇϵµ·Ï À̲ø¾ú´Ù. ±×·¯°í ³ª¼ ±×ÀÇ ´Ù¼¸ ¹ø° Çõ½ÅÀº, ¹Ù·Î »ê¾÷Çõ¸íÀÇ Àü¾ß¿¡, ±×ÀÇ Ð¼Üâ(±Øº») Narcisse ¿Í Discours sur l'inegalite(ºÒÆòµî·Ð)ÀÇ ¼¹®¿¡¼ Àç»ê°ú Àç»êÀ» ȹµæÇϱâ À§ÇÑ °æÀïÀ» ¼Ò¿Ü°¨ÀÇ ±âº»Àû ¿øÀÎÀÌ Æ²¸²¾ø´Ù°í È®ÀÎÇÔ(identify:Ʋ¸²¾ø´Ù°í È®ÀÎÇÏ´Ù)¿¡ ÀÇÇؼ ÀÚº»ÁÖÀÇ ºñÆÇÀÇ ¿ø¸®(elements)¸¦ °³¹ßÇÏ´Â °ÍÀ̾ú´Ù. ÀÌ°ÍÀº Marx¿Í ´Ù¸¥ »ç»ó°¡µéÀÌ RousseauÀÇ ¹®ÈÇõ¸íÀÇ °ü·Ã »ç»ó°ú ÇÔ²² ¹«ÀÚºñÇÏ°Ô Ã¤±¼ÇÏ°Ô µÉ »ç»óÀÇ ÎÎßÉ(±¤»ó)À̾ú´Ù. ±×¿¡°Ô ¡®ÀÚ¿¬Àû¡¯À̶ó´Â °ÍÀº ¡®¿øõÀû¡¯À̰ųª ¹®ÈÀÌÀüÀ» ÀǹÌÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¸ðµç ¹®È´Â ±×°ÍÀÌ Àΰ£ÀÇ »ç¾ÇÇÑ ¼ºÇâÀ» ³ªÅ¸³»´Â ´Ù¸¥ °Íµé°ú Àΰ£ÀÌ °ü·ÃµÇ´Â °ÍÀ̱⠶§¹®¿¡ ¹®Á¦¸¦ ÀÏÀ¸Å²´Ù : ±×°¡ Emile¿¡¼ ¡°Àΰ£ÀÇ È£ÈíÀº ´Ù¸¥ µ¿·á Àΰ£¿¡°Ô Ä¡¸íÀûÀÌ´Ù.¡±¶ó°í ¸»ÇÑ(put it) °Íó·³. ÀÌ·¡¼ Àΰ£ÀÌ ±× ¼Ó¿¡ »ì¾Ò°í ±× ÀÚü°¡ ÁøÈÇÏ°í ÀÖ´Â ÀΰøÀûÀÎ ±¸Á¶¹°ÀÎ ¹®È´Â »ç¶÷ÀÇ ÇൿÀ» ±ÔÁ¤Çß¾úÀ¸¸ç(dictated), ±×·¡¼ ´ç½ÅÀº ¹®È¿Í ±×°ÍÀ» »ý»êÇÑ °æÀï¼¼·ÂÀ» º¯È½ÃÅ´¿¡ ÀÇÇؼ, Áï »çȸ°øÀÛ¿¡ ÀÇÇؼ,Àΰ£ÀÇ ÇൿÀ» °³¼±ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ°í, Áø½Ç·Î ¿ÏÀüÈ÷ º¯Çü½Ãų ¼ö ÀÖ¾ú´Ù.
34-5-286
p. 10-11
It was part of Rousseau's vanity that he believed himself incapable of base emotions. 'I feel too superior to hate.' 'I love myself too much to hate anybody.' 'Never have I known the hateful passions, never did jealousy, wickedness, vengeance enter my heart ¡¦ anger occasionally but I am never crafty and never bear a grudge.' In fact he frequently bore grudges and was crafty in pursuing them. Men noticed this. Rousseau was the first intellectual to proclaim himself, repeatedly, the friend of all mankind. But loving as he did humanity in general, he developed a strong propensity for quarrelling with human beings in particular. One of his victims, his former friend Dr Tronchin of Geneva, protested: 'How is it possible that the friend of mankind is no longer the friend of men, or scarcely so?' Replying, Rousseau defended his right to administer rebukes to those who deserved it: I am the friend of mankind, and men are everywhere. The friend of truth also finds malevolent men everywhere¡ªand I do not need to go very far.' Being an egoist, Rousseau tended to equate hostility to himself to truth and virtue as such. Hence nothing was too bad for his enemies; their very existence made sense of the doctrine of eternal punishment: 'I am not ferocious by nature,' he told Madame d'Epinay, 'but when I see there is no justice in this world for these monsters, I like to think there is a hell waiting for them.'
ÀÚ½ÅÀº õÇÑ °¨Á¤Àº °¡Áú ¼ö ¾ø´Ù°í ¹Ï´Â °ÍÀº RousseauÀÇ Ç㿵½ÉÀÇ ÇÑ ºÎºÐÀ̾ú´Ù. ¡®³ª´Â ³Ê¹« ¶Ù¾î³ª¼ ¹Ì¿öÇÒ ¼ö°¡ ¾ø´Ù.¡¯ ¡®³ª´Â ³ª¸¦ ³Ê¹« »ç¶ûÇؼ ´©±¸¶óµµ Áõ¿ÀÇÒ ¼ö°¡ ¾ø´Ù.¡¯ ¡®³ª´Â Áõ¿ÀÀÇ ¿Á¤À» °áÄÚ ¾È ÀûÀÌ ¾ø°í ÁúÅõ, »ç¾Ç, º¹¼ö½ÉÀÌ ³» ¸¶À½¿¡ µé¾î¿Â ÀûÀÌ ¾ø¾ú´Ù. ¡¦ °¡²û ºÐ³ë´Â µé¾î ¿Ô¾úÁö¸¸ ³ª´Â °áÄÚ ±³È°ÇÏÁö ¾ÊÀ¸¸ç ¿øÇÑÀ» Ç°Àº ÀûÀÌ °áÄÚ ¾ø´Ù.¡¯ »ç½ÇÀº ±×´Â ºó¹øÇÏ°Ô ¿øÇÑÀ» Ç°¾ú¾ú°í ¿øÇÑÀ» Ãß±¸ÇÒ ¶§ ±³È°Çß¾ú´Ù. »ç¶÷µéÀº ÀÌ°ÍÀ» º¸¾Ò¾ú´Ù. Rousseau´Â ÀÚ½ÅÀ» ¸ðµç ÀηùÀÇ Ä£±¸¶ó°í ¹Ýº¹Çؼ ¼±¾ðÇÑ Ã¹ ¹ø° Áö½ÄÀÎÀ̾ú´Ù. ±×·¯³ª ÀüüÀûÀ¸·Î´Â Àηù¸¦ »ç¶ûÇÏ¿´Áö¸¸ ±×´Â ƯÈ÷ »ç¶÷µé°ú åëî³(¾ðÀï)À» ÇÏ´Â °ÇÑ ¼ºÇâÀ» ¹ß´Þ½ÃÄ×¾ú´Ù. Èñ»ýÀÚ ÁßÀÇ ÇÑ ¸íÀÎ ±×ÀÇ îñ Ä£±¸ Á¦³×¹ÙÀÇ Dr TronchinÀÌ Ç×ÀǸ¦ ÇÏ¿´´Ù: ¡°ÀηùÀÇ Ä£±¸°¡ ´õ ÀÌ»ó »ç¶÷µéÀÇ Ä£±¸°¡ ¾Æ´Ï°í ȤÀº °ÅÀÇ ±×·² ¼ö°¡ ¾ø´Â ÀÏÀÌ ¾î¶»°Ô °¡´ÉÇÑ°¡?¡± ÀÀ´äÀ» ÇÏ¸é¼ Rousseau´Â ¡®²ÙÁß(rebuke)À» ¹ÞÀ»¸¸ÇÑ »ç¶÷¿¡°Ô ²ÙÁßÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â ±×ÀÇ ±Ç¸®¸¦ ¿ËÈ£ÇÏ¿´´Ù: ³ª´Â ÀηùÀÇ Ä£±¸ÀÌ´Ù. ±×¸®°í »ç¶÷µéÀº ¾îµð¿¡³ª ÀÖ´Ù. Áø½ÇÀÇ »ç¶÷Àº Ç×»ó ¾ÇÀÇ°¡ ÀÖ´Â »ç¶÷µéÀ» ¹ß°ßÇÑ´Ù¡ª±×¸®°í ³ª´Â ¸Ö¸® °¥ ÇÊ¿äµµ ¾ø´Ù.¡¯ À̱âÁÖÀÇÀÚÀÎ Rousseau´Â Àڽſ¡ ´ëÇÑ Àû´ë°¨À» Áø¸®¿Í µµ´ö¿¡ ´ëÇÑ Àû´ë°¨°ú µ¿µîÇÏ°Ô Ãë±ÞÇÏ´Â °æÇâÀÌ ÀÖ¾ú´Ù. ±×·¡¼ ±×ÀÇ Àûµé¿¡°Ô´Â ¾î¶² °Íµµ ³Ê¹« ³ª»Ü ¼ö´Â ¾ø¾ú´Ù. ±×µéÀÇ ¹Ù·Î ±× Á¸Àç°¡ ¿µ¿øÇÑ Çü¹úÀÇ ±³¸®¸¦ ÀÌÇØÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ°Ô ÇØÁØ´Ù: ¡®³ª´Â ³¯ ¶§ºÎÅÍ(by nature) ÈäÆ÷ÇÏÁö ¾Ê½À´Ï´Ù. ±×·¯³ª ³»°¡ ¼¼»ó¿¡´Â ÀÌ·± ±«¹°µéÀ» À§ÇÑ Á¤ÀÇ´Â ¾ø´Ù´Â °ÍÀ» º¼ ¶§ ³ª´Â ±×µéÀ» ±â´Ù¸®°í ÀÖ´Â Áö¿ÁÀº ÀÖ´Ù°í »ý°¢ÇÏ°í ½Í½À´Ï´Ù.¡¯¶ó°í ±×´Â Madame d'Epinay¿¡°Ô ¸»ÇÏ¿´´Ù.
34-6-287
p.21
Since a large part of Rousseau's reputation rests on his theories about the upbringing of children¡¦ it is curious that, in real life as opposed to writing, he took so little interest in children. There is no evidence whatever that he studied children to verify his theories. He claimed that no one enjoyed playing with children more than himself, but the one anecdote we have of him in this capacity is not reassuring. The painter Delacroix relates in his Journal (31 May 1824) that a man told him he had seen Rousseau in the gardens of the Tuileries: 'A child's ball struck the philosopher's leg. He flew into a rage and pursued the child with his cane.' From what we know of his character, it is unlikely that Rousseau could ever have made a good father. Even so, it comes as a sickening shock to discover what Rousseau did to his own children.
The first was born to Therese in the winter of 1746-47. We do not know its sex. It was never named. With (he says) 'the greatest difficulty in the world', he persuaded Therese that the baby must be abandoned 'to save her honour'. She 'obeyed with a sigh'. He placed a cypher¡©card in the infant's clothing and told the midwife to drop off the bundle at the Hopital des Enfants¡©trouves. Four other babies he had by Therese were disposed of in exactly the same manner, except that he did not trouble to insert a cypher¡©card after the first. None had names. It is unlikely that any of them survived long.
RousseauÀÇ ¸í¼ºÀÇ Å« ºÎºÐÀº ±×ÀÇ ÀÚ³à¾çÀ°¿¡ °üÇÑ À̷п¡ ÀÇÁ¸Çϱ⠶§¹®¿¡, ½ÇÁ¦ »ýÈ°¿¡¼´Â ±×ÀÇ ±Û°ú ¹Ý´ë·Î ±×°¡ ¾ÆÀ̵鿡°Ô °ü½ÉÀÌ °ÅÀÇ ¾ø¾ú´Ù´Â °ÍÀÌ ½Å±âÇÏ´Ù. ±×°¡ ±×ÀÇ ÀÌ·ÐÀ» ÀÔÁõÇϱâ À§ÇÏ¿© ¾Æµ¿¿¡ ´ëÇØ ¿¬±¸¸¦ ÇÏ¿´´Ù´Â Áõ°Å´Â ÀüÇô ¾ø´Ù. ±×´Â Àڱ⸸Š¾ÆÀ̵é°ú ³ë´Â °ÍÀ» Áñ±â´Â »ç¶÷Àº ¾Æ¹«µµ ¾ø´Ù°í ÁÖÀåÇÏ¿´Áö¸¸ ÀÌ ´É·Â(¾ÆÀ̵é°ú ³ë´Â °ÍÀ» Áñ±â´Â)¿¡ ÀÖ¾î¼ ¿ì¸®°¡ °¡Áö°í ÀÖ´Â ±×¿¡ °üÇÑ ÇϳªÀÇ ìïü¥(ÀÏÈ)´Â ±×ÀÇ ÁÖÀåÀ» º¸ÀåÇØ ÁÖÁö ¾Ê´Â´Ù. È°¡ Delacroix´Â ±×ÀÇ Journal(Àϱâ)¿¡¼ ¾î¶² »ç¶÷ÀÌ Tuileries Á¤¿ø¿¡¼ Rousseau¸¦ ºÃ¾ú´Ù°í ±×¿¡°Ô ¸»ÇÏ¿´´Ù°í ±â·ÏÇÏ°í ÀÖ´Ù: ¡®¾î¶² ¾ÆÀÌÀÇ °øÀÌ ±× öÇÐÀÚÀÇ ¹«¸À» Ãƾî¿ä. ±×´Â ¹úÄÀ ȸ¦ ³»¸é¼ ÁöÆÎÀ̸¦ µé°í ±× ¾Ö¸¦ Ãß°ÝÇÏ¿´¾î¿ä.¡¯ ±×ÀÇ ¼º°Ý¿¡ °üÇØ ¿ì¸®°¡ ¾Ë°í ÀÖ´Â °ÍÀ¸·ÎºÎÅÍ ÆÇ´ÜÇØ º¸¸é Rousseau°¡ ÁÁÀº ¾Æ¹öÁö°¡ µÉ ¼ö ÀÖ¾úÀ» °Í °°Áö´Â ¾Ê´Ù. ±×·¸´Ù ÇÏ´õ¶óµµ, Rousseau°¡ ÀÚ½ÅÀÇ Àڽĵ鿡°Ô ÇÑ ÁþÀ» ¹ß°ßÇÏ°í ³ª¸é ±×°ÍÀº ±¸¿ªÁú ³ª´Â Ãæ°ÝÀ¸·Î ´Ù°¡¿Â´Ù.
1746-47³â °Ü¿ï¿¡ Therese(RousseauÀÇ µ¿°Å Çϳà)°¡ ù ¾ÆÀ̸¦ ³º¾Ò´Ù. ¿ì¸®´Â ±× ¾ÆÀÌÀÇ àõ(¼º)Àº ¸ð¸¥´Ù. ±× ¾ÆÀÌ´Â À̸§ÀÌ Áö¾îÁø ÀûÀÌ ¾ø¾ú´Ù. ¡®¼¼»ó¿¡¼ °¡Àå Èûµé°Ô¡¯(Rousseau°¡ ¸»ÇÏ¿´´Ù) ±×´Â ¡®±×³àÀÇ ¸í¿¹¸¦ ±¸Çϱâ À§ÇÏ¿©¡¯ ¾Æ±â¸¦ ¹ö·Á¾ß ÇÑ´Ù°í Therese¸¦ ¼³µæÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±×³à´Â ¡®ÇѼûÀ» ½¬¸é¼ º¹Á¾ÇÏ¿´´Ù.¡¯ ¾Æ±âÀÇ ¿Ê¿¡´Ù ½Å¿øÈ®ÀÎ ¾Ïȣīµå¸¦ ³Ö°í Á¶»ê¿ø¿¡°Ô Hopital des Enfants¡©trouves¿¡ ¾Æ±â¸¦ ½Ñ º¸µû¸®¸¦ ¹ö¸®¶ó°í ¸»ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±×°¡ Therese¿Í °¡Áø 4¸íÀÇ ´Ù¸¥ ¾Æ±âµéÀ» ù° ¾ÆÀÌ ÈÄ¿¡´Â ºñ¹Ð Ä«µå¸¦ Áý¾î³Ö´Â ³ë·Âµµ ÇÏÁö ¾Ê¾Ò´Ù´Â °Í ¿Ü¿¡´Â ¶È°°Àº ¹æ¹ýÀ¸·Î ó¸®ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±× ¾ÆÀ̵é Áß ÇÑ ¸íµµ »ýÁ¸ÇßÀ» °¡´É¼ºÀº ¾ø´Ù.
34-7-288
A history of this institution which appeared in 1746 in the Mercure de France makes it clear that it was overwhelmed by abandoned infants, over 3000 a year. In 1758 Rousseau himself noted that the total had risen to 5082. By 1772 it averaged nearly 8000. Two-thirds of the babies died in their first year. An average of fourteen out of every hundred survived to the age of seven, and of these five grew to maturity, most of them becoming beggars and vagabonds. Rousseau did not even note the dates of the births of his five children and never took any interest in what happened to them, except once in 1761, when he believed Therese was dying and made a perfunctory attempt, soon discontinued, to use the cypher to discover the whereabouts of the first child.*
p.23
Rousseau asserts that brooding on his conduct towards his children led him eventually to formulate the theory of education he put forward in EmiIe. It also clearly helped to shape his Social Contract, published the same year. What began as a process of personal self¡©justification in a particular case- a series of hasty, ill thought¡©out excuses for behaviour he must have known, initially, was unnatural - gradually evolved, as repetition and growing self¡©esteem hardened them into genuine convictions, into the proposition that education was the key to social and moral improvement and, this being so, it was the concern of the State. The State must form the minds of all, not only as children (as it had done to Rousseau's in the orphanage) but as adult citizens. By a curious chain of infamous moral logic, Rousseau's iniquity as a parent was linked to his ideological offspring, the future totalitarian state.
1774³â Mercure de France¿¡ ³ªÅ¸³ ÀÌ ½Ã¼³(institution)ÀÇ ¿ª»ç°¡ 1³â¿¡ 3000¸í ÀÌ»óÀÇ ¹ö·ÁÁø ¾Æ±âµé·Î ³ÑÃijµ´Ù´Â °ÍÀ» ºÐ¸íÈ÷ ÇÏ°í ÀÖ´Ù. 1758³â¿¡ Rousseau ÀÚ½ÅÀÌ ÃÑ°è°¡ 5082¸í±îÁö ¿Ã¶ó°¬´Ù°í ¾ð±ÞÇÏ¿´´Ù. 1772³â°æ¿¡´Â ±× ¼ýÀÚ´Â °ÅÀÇ Æò±Õ 8000¸íÀÌ µÇ¾ú´Ù. ¾Æ±âµéÀÇ 3ºÐÀÇ 2´Â ùÇØ¿¡ Á×¾ú´Ù. ¸Å 100¸í´ç Æò±Õ 14¸íÀÌ 7¼¼±îÁö »ì¾Æ³²¾Ò°í À̵é Áß 5¸íÀÌ ¼ºÀαâ(maturity)±îÁö ÀÚ¶ó³µÁö¸¸ ±×µé ÁßÀÇ ´ëºÎºÐÀº °ÅÁö³ª ºÎ¶ûÀÚ°¡ µÇ¾ú´Ù. Rousseau´Â ±×ÀÇ ´Ù¼¸ ¾ÆÀ̵éÀÇ Ãâ»ýÀϵµ ±â·ÏÇØ µÎÁö ¾Ê¾Ò°í ¾ÆÀ̵éÀÌ ¾î¶»°Ô µÇ¾ú´ÂÁö¿¡ ´ëÇؼ´Â ¾î¶°ÇÑ °ü½Éµµ ¾ø¾úÀ¸¸ç ´Ü ÇÑ ¹ø ¿¹¿ÜÀûÀ¸·Î 1761³â Therese°¡ Á׾°í ÀÖ´Ù°í ¹Ï°í ù ¾ÆÀÌÀÇ Çà¹æÀ» ¹ß°ßÇϱâ À§Çؼ ±â·ÏÄ«µå¸¦ ã¾Æº¸·Á°í ÇÏ´Ù°¡ °ð ±×¸¸µÎ¾ú´Ù.
p.23
Rousseau´Â ±×ÀÇ Àڽĵ鿡 ´ëÇÑ ±×ÀÇ ÇൿÀ» °ñ¶ÊÈ÷ »ý°¢ÇÑ °ÍÀÌ °á±¹ EmiIe¿¡¼ ±×°¡ ð«åë(Á¦¾ð)ÇÑ ±³À°ÀÌ·ÐÀ» ü°èÈÇϵµ·Ï À̲ø¾ú´Ù°í ÁÖÀåÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±×°ÍÀº ºÐ¸íÈ÷ °°Àº ÇØ¿¡ ÃâÆÇµÈ Social Contract(»çȸ°è¾à·Ð)À» ÁýÇÊÇÏ´Â µ¥µµ µµ¿òÀÌ µÇ¾ú´Ù. ÇϳªÀÇ Æ¯º°ÇÑ »ç°Ç(case)¿¡¼ °³ÀÎÀûÀÎ ÀÚ±âÁ¤´çȸ¦ À§ÇÑ °úÁ¤(process: ó¸®, ¹æ¹ý)À¸·Î ½ÃÀÛµÈ °ÍÀÌ¡ª±×°¡ ÃÖÃÊ¿¡´Â ºÎµµ´öÇÑ(unnatural: õ·û¿¡ ¾î±ß³ª´Â, º¯ÅÂÀûÀÎ) ÁþÀ̶ó´Â °ÍÀ» ¾Ë°í ÀÖ¾úÀ½¿¡ Ʋ¸²¾ø´Â ÇàÀ§¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ÀÏ·ÃÀÇ Á¶±ÞÇÏ°í À߸ø »ý°¢µÈ º¯¸í¡ª¹Ýº¹(º¯¸íÀÇ)°ú Áõ°¡ÇÏ´Â ÀںνÉÀÌ ±× º¯¸íµé(them)À» Áø½ÉÀÇ È®½ÅÀ¸·Î Ìãûù(°æÈ)½ÃÄÑ°¨¿¡ µû¶ó ±³À°Àº »çȸÀû, µµ´öÀû °³·®À¸·Î °¡´Â ¿¼èÀÌ¸ç ±×·¡¼ ±³À°Àº ±¹°¡ÀÇ °ü½É»çÇ×À̶ó´Â ¸íÁ¦·Î Â÷Â÷ ÁøÈµÇ¾î °¬´Ù. ±¹°¡´Â ¾ÆÀ̷μ»Ó ¾Æ´Ï¶ó (±¹°¡°¡ Rousseau ÀÚ½ÅÀÇ Àڽĵ鿡°Ô °í¾Æ¿ø¿¡¼ ÇÑ °Íó·³) ¼ºÀÎ ½Ã¹ÎÀ¸·Î¼µµ ¸ðµç »ç¶÷µéÀÇ Á¤½ÅÀ» Çü¼º(form)ÇØ¾ß ÇÑ´Ù. »ç¾ÇÇÑ µµ´öÀû ³í¸®ÀÇ ±âÀÌÇÑ »ç½½¿¡ ÀÇÇؼ ºÎ¸ð·Î¼ÀÇ RousseauÀÇ Á˾Ç(iniquity)Àº ±×ÀÇ »ç»óÀû ÀÚ½ÄÀÎ ¹Ì·¡ÀÇ ÀüüÁÖÀÇ ±¹°¡¿Í ¿¬°üµÇ¾ú´Ù.
34-8-289
p.24
However, once we understand the nature of the state Rousseau wished to create, his views begin to cohere. It was necessary to replace the existing society by something totally different and essentially egalitarian; but, this done, revolutionary disorder could not be permitted. The rich and the privileged, as the ordering force, would be replaced by the State, embodying the General Will, which all contracted to obey. Such obedience would become instinctive and voluntary since the State, by a systematic process of cultural engineering, would inculcate virtue in all. The State was the father, the patrie, and all its citizens were the children of the paternal orphanage. (Hence the supposedly puzzling remark of Dr Johnson, who cut clean through Rousseau's sophistries, 'Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.') It is true that the citizen¡©children, unlike Rousseau's own babies, originally agree to submit to the State/orphanage by freely contracting into it. They thus constitute, through their collective will, its legitimacy, and thereafter they have no right to feel constrained, since, having wanted the laws, they must love the obligations they impose.
Though Rousseau writes about the General Will in terms of liberty, it is essentially an authoritarian instrument, an early adumbration of Lenin's 'democratic centralism'. Laws made under the General Will must, by definition, have moral authority. ¡®The people making laws for itself cannot be unjust.¡¯ ¡®The General Will is always righteous.¡¯ Moreover, provided the State is 'well-intentioned' (i.e., its long¡©term objectives are desirable) interpretation of the General Will can safely be left to the leaders since 'they know well that the General Will always favours the decision most conducive to the public interest.'
p.24
±×·¯³ª Rousseau°¡ âÁ¶Çϱ⸦ ¿øÇÏ¿´´ø ±¹°¡ÀÇ ¼ºÁú(nature)À» ÀÌÇØÇÏ°Ô µÉ ¶§ ±×ÀÇ °üÁ¡(view)ÀÌ ±¸Ã¼ÀûÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³ª±â ½ÃÀÛÇÑ´Ù. ±âÁ¸»çȸ¸¦ ÀüÀûÀ¸·Î ´Ù¸¥, ±Ùº»ÀûÀ¸·Î ÆòµîÇÑ °ÍÀ¸·Î ±³Ã¼ÇÏ´Â °ÍÀÌ ÇÊ¿äÇß¾ú´Ù; ±×·¯³ª ÀÌ°ÍÀÌ ½ÇÇàµÇ¾úÀ» ¶§´Â Çõ¸íÀû ¹«Áú¼´Â Çã¿ëµÉ ¼ö ¾ø¾ú´Ù. ¸í·ÉÇÏ´Â ¼¼·ÂÀ¸·Î¼ÀÇ ºÎÀÚ¿Í Æ¯±ÇÃþÀº ¸ðµç »ç¶÷ÀÌ º¹Á¾Çϱâ·Î µ¿ÀÇÇÑ ÃÑÀÇ(General Will: ±¹¹ÎÀÇ ÀÇÁö)¸¦ ÎýúÞ(±¸Çö)ÇÏ°í ÀÖ´Â ±¹°¡(the State)¿¡ ÀÇÇØ ´ëüµÉ °ÍÀÌ´Ù. ÀÌ·¯ÇÑ º¹Á¾Àº ±¹°¡°¡ Á¶Á÷ÀûÀÎ ¹®È°øÀÛ(cultural engineering) ¹æ¹ý(process)¿¡ ÀÇÇØ Àüü ±¹¹Î¿¡°Ô µµ´ö¼ºÀ» ÁÖÀÔÇϱ⠶§¹®¿¡ º»´ÉÀûÀÌ°í ÀÚ¹ßÀûÀÌ µÉ °ÍÀÌ´Ù. ±¹°¡°¡ ¾Æ¹öÁöÀÌ°í ðÓÏÐ(Á¶±¹)ÀÌ°í ±¹°¡ÀÇ ¸ðµç ½Ã¹ÎÀº ¾Æ¹öÁö °°Àº °í¾Æ¿øÀÇ ÀڽĵéÀ̾ú´Ù. (±×·¡¼ ¾Æ¸¶µµ RousseauÀÇ Ïøܪ(±Ëº¯)À» ¸íÄèÇÏ°Ô ÁöÀûÇÑ(cut clean through) Dr JohnsonÀÇ ¡°¾Ç´çÀÇ ÃÖÈÄÀÇ Çdzó´Â ¾Ö±¹½ÉÀÌ´Ù.¡±¶ó´Â ¸Ó¸®¸¦ ¶òÇÏ°Ô ¸¸µå´Â ³íÆòÀÌ ³ª¿ÔÀ» °ÍÀÌ´Ù.) RousseauÀÚ½ÅÀÇ Àڽĵé°ú´Â ´Þ¸® ½Ã¹Î-ÀڽĵéÀº ¿ø·¡ ÀÚÀ¯ÀÇÁö·Î °è¾àÇÔ¿¡ ÀÇÇØ ±¹°¡/°í¾Æ¿ø¿¡ º¹Á¾ÇÑ´Ù´Â °ÍÀº »ç½ÇÀÌ´Ù. ±×·¡¼ ±×µé(½Ã¹Î-Àڽĵé)Àº ±×µéÀÇ Áý´ÜÀÇÁö¸¦ ÅëÇؼ ±¹°¡ÀÇ ÇÕ¹ý¼ºÀÇ ±¸¼º¿ä¼Ò°¡ µÇ°í(constitute) ±× ÈÄ¿¡´Â, ±×µéÀÌ ¹ýÀ» ¿øÇß¾ú±â ¶§¹®¿¡, ¹ýÀÌ °Á¦ÇÏ´Â Àǹ«¸¦ »ç¶ûÇØ¾ß ÇϹǷΠ°Á¦´çÇÏ°í ÀÖ´Ù°í ´À³¥ ¾î¶² ±Ç¸®µµ ¾ø´Ù.
Rousseau´Â ÀÚÀ¯¶ó´Â Ç¥Çö(terms)À¸·Î ÃÑÀÇ(General Will)¿¡ ´ëÇؼ ½èÁö¸¸, ±×°ÍÀº ±Ùº»ÀûÀ¸·Î LeninÀÇ ¡®¹ÎÁÖÀû Áß¾ÓÁý±Ç¡¯ÀÇ Ãʱâ îñð¼(ÀüÁ¶)ÀÎ ±ÇÀ§ÁÖÀÇÀû µµ±¸ÀÌ´Ù. ÃÑÀÇ ¾Æ·¡¿¡¼ ¸¸µé¾îÁø ¹ýÀº ´ç¿¬È÷(by definition: Á¤ÀÇ¿¡ ÀÇÇÏ¿©) µµ´öÀû ±ÇÀ§¸¦ °¡Á®¾ß ÇÑ´Ù. ¡®½º½º·Î¸¦ À§ÇØ ¹ýÀ» ¸¸µå´Â ÀιÎÀÌ Á¤ÀÇ·ÓÁö ¾ÊÀ» ¼ö ¾ø´Ù.¡¯ ¡®ÃÑÀÇ´Â Ç×»ó ¿Ç´Ù.¡¯ ´õ¿íÀÌ, ±¹°¡°¡ ¡®¼±ÀÇ·Î ÇÏ´Â °ÍÀ̶ó¸é¡¯ (Áï, ±¹°¡ÀÇ Àå±â¸ñÇ¥´Â ¹Ù¶÷Á÷ÇÏ´Ù) ¡®ÁöµµÀÚµéÀº ÃÑÀÇ°¡ Ç×»ó °ø°øÀÇ ÀÌÀÍÀ» °¡Àå ¸¹ÀÌ °¡Á®¿À´Â(conductive to: °á°ú¸¦ °¡Á®¿À´Â) °áÁ¤À» ¼±È£ÇÑ´Ù´Â °ÍÀ» Àß ¾Ë°í Àֱ⡯ ¶§¹®¿¡ ÃÑÀÇ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ Çؼ®Àº ¾ÈÀüÇÏ°Ô ÁöµµÀڵ鿡°Ô ¸Ã±æ ¼ö ÀÖ´Ù.
34-9-290
p.24-25
Hence any individual who finds himself in opposition to the General Will is in error: 'When the opinion that is contrary to my own prevails, this simply proves that 1 was mistaken and that what I thought to be the General Will, was not so.' Indeed, 'if my particular opinion had carried the day I should have achieved the opposite of what was my will and I should not therefore have been free' We are here almost in the chilly region of Arthur Koestler's Darkness at Noon or George Orwell's 'Newspeak'.
Rousseau's state is not merely authoritarian: it is also totalitarian, since it orders every aspect of human activity, thought included. Under the social contract, the individual was obliged to 'alienate himself, with all his rights, to the whole of the community' (i.e., the State). Rousseau held that there was an ineradicable conflict between man's natural selfishness and his social duties, between the Man and the Citizen. And that made him miserable. The function of the social contract, and the State it brought into being, was to make whole again: 'Make man one, and you will make him as happy as he can be. Give him all to the State, or leave him all to himself. But if you divide his heart, you tear him in two.' You must, therefore, treat citizens as children and control their upbringing and thoughts, planting 'the social law in the bottom of their hearts'. They then become 'social men by their natures and citizens by their inclinations; they will be one, they will be good, they will be happy, and their happiness will be that of the Republic'.
p.24-25
±×·¯¹Ç·Î ÃÑÀÇ¿Í ¹Ý´ë°¡ µÇ´Â ÀÔÀå¿¡ ÀÖ´Â ¸ðµç °³ÀÎÀº »ý°¢ÀÌ Æ²¸° °ÍÀÌ´Ù: ¡®³» ÀÚ½ÅÀÇ »ý°¢°ú ¹Ý´ëµÇ´Â »ý°¢ÀÌ ½Â¸®ÇÒ ¶§´Â ÀÌ°ÍÀº ³»°¡ Âø°¢ÇßÀ¸¸ç ³»°¡ ÃÑÀÇÀÎ °ÍÀ¸·Î »ý°¢ÇÑ °ÍÀÌ ±×·¸Áö ¾Ê´Ù´Â °ÍÀ» Áõ¸íÇÏ´Â °ÍÀÌ´Ù.¡¯ Áø½Ç·Î ¡®¸¸¾à ³ªÀÇ Æ¯º°ÇÑ(ÃÑÀÇ°¡ ¾Æ´Ñ °³ÀÎÀûÀÎ) »ý°¢ÀÌ ½Â¸®Çß¾ú´õ¶ó¸é ³» ÀÚ½ÅÀÇ ÀÇÁö¿Í ¹Ý´ëµÇ´Â °ÍÀ» ¼ºÃëÇßÀ» °ÍÀÌ°í ±×·¡¼ ³ª´Â ÀÚÀ¯·ÓÁö ¸øÇÏ¿´À» °ÍÀÌ´Ù.¡¯ ¿©±â¿¡¼ ¿ì¸®´Â Arthur KoestlerÀÇ ¡°Darkness at Noon¡±(Á¤¿ÀÀÇ ¾ÏÈæ) À̳ª George OrwellÀÇ 'Newspeak'(ãæ¾ð¾î)ÀÇ À¸½º½ºÇÑ Áö°æ¿¡ ¿À°Ô µÈ´Ù.
RousseauÀÇ ±¹°¡´Â ´Ü¼øÈ÷ ±ÇÀ§ÁÖÀÇÀûÀÎ °Í¸¸Àº ¾Æ´Ï´Ù: ±×°ÍÀº »ç»óÀ» Æ÷ÇÔÇؼ ¸ðµç ÇüÅÂÀÇ Àΰ£ÇàÀ§¸¦ ¸í·ÉÇϱ⠶§¹®¿¡ ÀüüÁÖÀÇÀûÀÌ´Ù. »çȸ°è¾àù»(ÇÏ)¿¡¼´Â °³ÀÎÀº ¡°ÀÚ½ÅÀÇ ¸ðµç ±Ç¸®¿Í ÇÔ²² ÀÚ½ÅÀ» °øµ¿Ã¼ Àüü (Áï ±¹°¡)¿¡ ¾çµµÇØ¾ß ÇÒ Àǹ«°¡ ÀÖ¾ú´Ù. Rousseau´Â Àΰ£ÀÇ Å¸°í³ À̱â½É°ú ±×ÀÇ »çȸÀû Àǹ« »çÀÌ¿¡´Â, °³Àΰú ½Ã¹Î »çÀÌ¿¡´Â ±ÙÀýÇÒ ¼ö ¾ø´Â °¥µîÀÌ ÀÖ´Ù°í ÁÖÀåÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±×¸®°í ±×°ÍÀÌ ±×¸¦ ºñÂüÇÏ°Ô ¸¸µé¾ú´Ù. »çȸ°è¾à°ú ±×°ÍÀÌ Åº»ý½ÃÅ°´Â ±¹°¡ÀÇ ±â´ÉÀº Àüü¸¦ ´Ù½Ã ¸¸µå´Â °ÍÀ̾ú´Ù: ¡®»ç¶÷À» Çϳª·Î ¸¸µé¾î¶ó. ±×·¯¸é ±×¸¦ °¡´ÉÇÑ ÇÑ ÇູÇÏ°Ô ¸¸µé ¼ö ÀÖÀ» °ÍÀÌ´Ù. ±×ÀÇ ¸ðµÎ¸¦ ±¹°¡¿¡ ÁÖ¾î¶ó ¾Æ´Ï¸é ±×¸¦ ¸ðµÎ ±×´ë·Î ³öµÎ¾î¶ó. ±×·¯³ª ¸¸¾à ±×ÀÇ ¸¶À½À» °¥¶ó³õÀ¸¸é ±×¸¦ µÎ °³·Î Âõ¾î ³õ°Ô µÈ´Ù.¡¯ ±×·¯¹Ç·Î ½Ã¹ÎµéÀ» ¾ÆÀÌ·Î Ãë±ÞÇÏ°í ¡®±×µéÀÇ ½ÉÀåÀÇ ¹Ø¹Ù´Ú¿¡ »çȸÀû¹ý¡¯À» ½ÉÀ¸¸é¼ ±×µéÀÇ ÈÆÀ°°ú »ç»óÀ» ÅëÁ¦ÇÏ¿©¾ß ÇÑ´Ù. ±×·¯¸é ±×µéÀº ¡®º»¼º(±¹°¡ÀÇ ÅëÁ¦¿¡ ÀÇÇØ ¹Ù²î¾î¹ö¸° º»¼º)¿¡ ÀÇÇØ »çȸÀû »ç¶÷ÀÌ µÇ°í ¼ºÇâ¿¡ ÀÇÇØ ½Ã¹ÎÀÌ µÈ´Ù; ±×µéÀº Çϳª°¡ µÉ °ÍÀÌ°í ±×µéÀº ÇູÇÒ °ÍÀÌ°í ±×µéÀÇ ÇູÀº °øȱ¹ÀÇ ÇູÀÌ µÉ °ÍÀÌ´Ù.¡¯
34-10-291
p.25
This procedure demanded total submission. The original social contract oath for his projected constitution for Corsica reads: 'I join myself, body, goods, will and all my powers, to the Corsican nation, granting her ownership of me, of myself and all who depend on me.' The State would thus 'possess men and all their powers', and control every aspect of their economic and social life, which would be spartan, anti-luxurious and anti-urban, the people being prevented from entering the towns except by special permission. In a number of ways the State Rousseau planned for Corsica anticipated the one the Pol Pot regime actually tried to create in Cambodia, and this is not entirely surprising since the Paris-educated leaders of the regime had all absorbed Rousseau's ideas. Of course, Rousseau sincerely believed that such a State would be contented since the people would have been trained to like it. He did not use the word 'brainwash', but he wrote: 'Those who control people's opinions control its actions.' Such control is established by treating citizens, from infancy, as children of the State, trained to ¡®consider themselves only in their relationship to the Body of the State'. 'For being nothing except by it, they will be nothing except for it. It will have all they have and will be all they are.' Again, this anticipates Mussolini's central Fascist doctrine: 'Everything within the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State.' The educational process was thus the key to the success of the cultural engineering needed to make the State acceptable and successful; the axis of Rousseau's ideas was the citizen as child and the State as parent, and he insisted the government should have complete charge of the upbringing of all children. Hence¡ªand this is the true revolution Rousseau's ideas brought about¡ªhe moved the political process to the very centre of human existence by making the legislator, who is also a pedagogue, into the new Messiah, capable of solving all human problems by creating New Men. 'Everything,' he wrote, 'is at root dependent on politics.' Virtue is the product of good government. 'Vices belong less to man, than to man badly governed.' The political process, and the new kind of state it brings into being, are the universal remedies for the ills of mankind. Politics will do all. Rousseau thus prepared the blueprint for the principal delusions and follies of the twentieth century.
p.25-26
ÀÌ ÀýÂ÷´Â ¿ÏÀüÇÑ ¼øÁ¾À» ¿ä±¸ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±×°¡ °èȹÇÑ(projected) Corsica Çå¹ýÀ» À§ÇÑ »çȸ°è¾à ¼¾à ¿øº»Àº ¾Æ·¡¿Í °°´Ù: ¡®³ª´Â ÀڽŰú ¸ö°ú Àç»ê°ú ÀÇÁö¿Í ¸ðµç ±ÇÇÑÀ» Corsica±¹°¡¿¡ ¹ÙÄ¡¸ç ³ª¿Í ³ª ÀڽŰú ³ª¿¡ ¼ÓÇÑ ¸ðµç »ç¶÷µé¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ±¹°¡ÀÇ ¼ÒÀ¯±ÇÀ» ÀÎÁ¤ÇÕ´Ï´Ù.¡¯ ÀÌ·¸°Ô Çؼ ±¹°¡´Â ¡®»ç¶÷µé°ú ±×µéÀÇ ±Ç¸®¡¯¸¦ ¼ÒÀ¯ÇÏ°Ô µÉ °ÍÀÌ°í »ç¶÷µéÀÇ »çȸÀû °æÁ¦Àû »îÀÇ ¸ðµç ºÐ¾ß¸¦ ÅëÁ¦ÇÏ°Ô µÉ °ÍÀÌ°í »ç¶÷µéÀÇ »îÀº °£¼ÒÇÏ°í(spartan), Úã»çÄ¡ÀûÀÌ°í, Úãµµ½ÃÀûÀÌ µÉ °ÍÀÌ°í »ç¶÷µéÀº Ưº° Çã°¡ ¾øÀÌ´Â µµ½Ã¿¡ µé¾î¿À´Â °ÍÀÌ ±ÝÁöµÉ °ÍÀÌ´Ù. ¸¹Àº ¸é¿¡¼ Rousseau°¡ Corsica¸¦ À§ÇØ °èȹÇÑ ±¹°¡´Â Pol PotÁ¤±ÇÀÌ Cambodia¿¡ ½ÇÁ¦·Î â°ÇÇϱâ·Î °èȹÇÑ ³ª¶ó¸¦ ¿¹»óÇÏ°Ô ÇÏ´Â °ÍÀÌ°í Paris¿¡¼ ±³À°¹ÞÀº Pol PotÁ¤±ÇÀÇ ÁöµµÀÚµéÀÌ ¸ðµÎ RousseauÀÇ »ç»óÀ» Èí¼öÇÏ¿´±â ¶§¹®¿¡ ÀÌ°ÍÀº ÀüÀûÀ¸·Î ³î¶ö °ÍÀº µÇÁö ¾Ê´Â´Ù. ¹°·Ð ±×·¯ÇÑ ±¹°¡´Â ±¹¹ÎµéÀÌ ±×°ÍÀ» ÁÁ¾ÆÇϵµ·Ï ÈÆ·ÃÀ» ¹Þ¾Ò±â ¶§¹®¿¡ ¸¸Á·½º·¯¿ï °ÍÀ̶ó°í Rousseau´Â ÁøÁöÇÏ°Ô ¹Ï¾ú´Ù. ±×´Â ¡®á©Òà(¼¼³ú)¡¯¶ó´Â ´Ü¾î´Â »ç¿ëÇÏÁö ¾Ê¾ÒÁö¸¸ ¡®»ç¶÷ÀÇ »ý°¢À» ÅëÁ¦ÇÏ´Â íº(ÀÚ)´Â »ç¶÷ÀÇ ÇൿÀ» ÅëÁ¦ÇÑ´Ù.¡¯¶ó°í ½è¾ú´Ù. ±×·¯ÇÑ ÅëÁ¦´Â ½Ã¹ÎµéÀ» êáä®(À¯¾Æ)¶§ºÎÅÍ ÏÐô÷(±¹Ã¼)¿ÍÀÇ °ü°è¿¡¼¸¸ ÀÚ½ÅÀ» »ý°¢Çϵµ·Ï ÈÆ·ÃµÈ ±¹°¡ÀÇ ÀÚ½ÄÀ¸·Î Ãë±ÞÇÔ¿¡ ÀÇÇؼ È®¸³µÈ´Ù. ¡®±¹°¡¿¡ ÀÇÇÏÁö ¾Ê°í´Â ¾Æ¹«°Íµµ ¾Æ´Ñ Á¸Àç°¡ µÇ±â ¶§¹®¿¡ ½Ã¹ÎµéÀº ±¹°¡¸¦ Á¦¿ÜÇÏ¸é ¾Æ¹«°Íµµ ¾Æ´Ñ Á¸Àç°¡ µÈ´Ù. ±¹°¡´Â ±×µéÀÌ °¡Áø ÀüºÎÀÌ°í ±×µé Á¸ÀçÀÇ ÀüºÎ°¡ µÉ °ÍÀÌ´Ù.¡¯ ´Ù½Ã ÀÌ°ÍÀº MussoliniÀÇ Áß¾ÓÁý±ÇÀû ÆĽýºÆ® ¿øÄ¢À» ¿¹°ßÇÏ°í ÀÖ´Ù: ¡®¸ðµç °ÍÀº ±¹°¡ ¾È¿¡ ÀÖÀ¸¸ç, ±¹°¡¹Û¿¡´Â ¾Æ¹«°Íµµ ¾ø°í ¾î¶² °Íµµ ±¹°¡¿¡ ´ëÇ×ÇÒ ¼ö ¾ø´Ù.¡¯ ±×·¡¼ ±³À°Àû ¹æ¹ý(process)ÀÌ ±¹°¡¸¦ ¸¸Á·½º·´°í(acceptable) ¼º°øÀûÀ¸·Î ¸¸µé±â À§Çؼ ÇÊ¿äÇÑ ¹®È°øÀÛÀÇ ÇÙ½ÉÀ̾ú´Ù; Rousseau »ç»óÀÇ õî(Ãà)Àº ½Ã¹ÎÀº ÀÚ½ÄÀÌ°í ±¹°¡´Â ºÎ¸ð¶ó´Â °ÍÀÌ°í ±×´Â ¸ðµç ÀÚ³àÀÇ ÈÆÀ°À» Á¤ºÎ°¡ ÀüÀûÀ¸·Î ´ã´çÇؾßÇÑ´Ù°í ÁÖÀåÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±×·¡¼ ¡ªÀÌ°ÍÀÌ Rousseau»ç»óÀÌ ÀÏÀ¸Å² ÁøÁ¤ÇÑ Çõ¸íÀÌ´Ù¡ª±×´Â ÎçÞÔ(±³»ç)À̱⵵ÇÑ ÀÔ¹ýÀÚ¸¦ »õ·Î¿î Àΰ£À» âÁ¶ÇÏ¿© ¸ðµç Àΰ£¹®Á¦¸¦ ÇØ°áÇØ ÁÙ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â »õ·Î¿î ¸Þ½Ã¾Æ·Î ¸¸µê¿¡ ÀÇÇؼ Á¤Ä¡Àû 󸮹æ¹ýÀ» Àΰ£Á¸ÀçÀÇ ¹Ù·Î Áß½ÉÀ¸·Î À̵¿½ÃÄѳõ¾Ò´Ù. ±×´Â ¡®¸¸»ç´Â ±Ùº»ÀûÀ¸·Î Á¤Ä¡¿¡ ´Þ·ÁÀÖ´Ù.¡¯¶ó°í ½è´Ù. ¹Ì´öÀº ÈǸ¢ÇÑ ÅëÄ¡ÀÇ »ê¹°ÀÌ´Ù. ¡®¾Ç´öÀº Àΰ£¿¡°Ô º¸´Ù´Â ³ª»Ú°Ô ÅëÄ¡ ¹Þ´Â Àΰ£¿¡°Ô ´õ ¸¹ÀÌ ¼ÓÇÑ´Ù.¡¯ Á¤Ä¡Àû ¹æ¹ýÀÌ, ±×¸®°í ±× ¹æ¹ýÀÌ Åº»ý½ÃÅ°´Â »õ·Î¿î Á¾·ùÀÇ ±¹°¡°¡ Àηù°¡ °¡Áø ¸ðµç º´Æó¿¡ ´ëÇÑ º¸ÆíÀû Ä¡·áÃ¥ÀÌ µÈ´Ù. Á¤Ä¡°¡ ¸ðµç °ÍÀ» Çس¾ °ÍÀÌ´Ù. Rousseau´Â ÀÌ·¸°Ô Çؼ 20¼¼±âÀÇ Áß¿äÇÑ ¸Á»ó°ú ¾î¸®¼®Àº ÁþµéÀÇ Ã»»çÁøÀ» ÁغñÇß¾ú´Ù.
34-11-292
p.26-27
Rousseau's reputation during his lifetime, and his influence after his death, raise disturbing questions about human gullibility, and indeed about the human propensity to reject evidence it does not wish to admit. The acceptability of what Rousseau wrote depended in great part on his strident claim to be not merely virtuous but the most virtuous man of his time. Why did not this claim collapse in ridicule and ignominy when his weaknesses and vices became not merely public knowledge but the subject of international debate? After all the people who assailed him were not strangers or political opponents but former friends and associates who had gone out of their way to assist him. Hume, who had once thought him 'gentle, modest, affectionate, disinterested and exquisitively sensitive', decided, from more extensive experience, that he was 'a monster who saw himself as the only important being in the universe'. Diderot, after long acquaintance, summed him up as 'deceitful, vain as Satan, ungrateful, cruel, hypocritical and full of malice'. To Grimm he was 'odious, monstrous'. To Voltaire, 'a monster of vanity and vileness'. Saddest of all are the judgements passed on him by kind-hearted women who helped him, like Madame d'Einay.*
It is all very baffling and suggests that intellectuals are as unreasonable, illogical and superstitious as anyone else. The truth seems to be that Rousseau was a writer of genius but fatally unbalanced both in his life and in his views. He is best summed up by the woman whom, he said, was only his love, Sophie d'Houdtot. She lived on until 1813 and, in extreme old age, delivered his verdict: 'He was ugly enough to frighten me and love did not make him more attractive. But he was a pathetic figure and I treated him with gentleness and kindness. He was an interesting madman.'
p.26-27
RousseauÀÇ »ì¾Æ ÀÖ´Â µ¿¾ÈÀÇ ¸í¼º°ú ±×°¡ Á×Àº ÈÄÀÇ ¿µÇâ·ÂÀº Àΰ£ÀÇ Àß ¼Ó´Â ¼ºÇâ°ú ÀÎÁ¤ÇÏ°í ½ÍÁö ¾ÊÀº Áõ°Å´Â ¹èôÇÏ´Â Àΰ£¼ºÇâ¿¡ ´ëÇØ ºÒ¾È½º·¯¿î Àǹ®À» Á¦±âÇÑ´Ù. Rousseau°¡ ¾´ ±ÛÀÇ ¿ëÀμºÀº ±×´Â µµ´öÀûÀÏ »Ó ¾Æ´Ï¶ó ±× ½Ã´ë¿¡ °¡Àå µµ´öÀûÀÎ Àΰ£À̶ó´Â ±×ÀÇ °ÅÄ£ ÁÖÀå¿¡ Å©°Ô ÀÇÁ¸ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±×ÀÇ ¾àÁ¡°ú ¾Ç´öÀÌ °ø°øÀÇ Áö½ÄÀÏ »Ó ¾Æ´Ï¶ó ±¹Á¦Àû ³íÀïÀÇ ÁÖÁ¦°¡ µÇ¾úÀ» ¶§ ¾î¶»°Ô ±×ÀÇ ÀÌ·± ÁÖÀåÀÌ Á¶¼Ò¿Í ºÒ¸í¿¹¸¦ ¹ÞÀ¸¸ç ¹«³ÊÁöÁö ¾Ê¾ÒÀ»±î? °á±¹ ±×¸¦ °ø°ÝÇÑ »ç¶÷µéÀº ¸ð¸£´Â »ç¶÷µéÀ̰ųª Á¤Ä¡Àû ¹Ý´ëÀÚµéÀÌ ¾Æ´Ï°í ±×µéÀÇ ïáÔ³(Á¤µµ)¸¦ ¹þ¾î³ª¼ ±×¸¦ µµ¿ÍÁÖ¾ú´ø îñÄ£±¸µéÀ̰ųª µ¿·áµéÀ̾ú´Ù. ÇѶ§ ±×¸¦ ¡®¿¹ÀÇ ¹Ù¸£°í, °â¼ÕÇÏ°í, ¾ÖÁ¤ÀÌ ±í°í, »ç½ÉÀÌ ¾ø°í, ´õ ¾øÀÌ ¿¹¹ÎÇÏ´Ù¡¯¶ó°í »ý°¢ÇÏ¿´´ø HumeÀº º¸´Ù ´õ ±¤´ëÇÑ °æÇèÀ» ÅëÇؼ Rousseau´Â ¡®ÀÚ½ÅÀ» ¿ìÁÖ¿¡¼ À¯ÀÏÇÏ°Ô Áß¿äÇÑ »ç¶÷À¸·Î °£ÁÖÇÏ¿´´ø ±«¹°¡¯À̾ú´Ù°í ÆÇ°áÇÏ¿´´Ù. Diderot´Â ¿À·§µ¿¾ÈÀÇ Ä£±³ ÈÄ¿¡ ±×¸¦ ¡®Àß ¼ÓÀÌ°í, ¾Ç¸¶Ã³·³ Ç㿵½ÉÀÌ °ÇÏ°í, °¨»çÇÒ ÁÙ ¸ð¸£°í, ÀÜÀÎÇÏ°í, À§¼±ÀûÀÌ°í ¾ÇÀÇ·Î °¡µæ Âù¡¯ »ç¶÷À¸·Î ¿ä¾àÇÏ¿´´Ù. Grimm¿¡°Ô ±×´Â ¡®¹Ó»ì½º·´°í ±â±«ÇÏ¿´´Ù.¡¯ Voltaire¿¡°Ô´Â ¡®Ç㿵ÇÏ°í ºñ¿ÇÑ ±«¹°¡¯À̾ú´Ù. Madame d'Einayó·³ ±×¸¦ µµ¿ÍÁØ Ä£ÀýÇÑ ¸¶À½À» °¡Áø ¿©ÀεéÀÌ ±×¿¡°Ô ³»¸° ÆÇ´ÜÀÌ °¡Àå ½½Ç °ÍÀ̾ú´Ù.*
ÀÌ ¸ðµç °ÍÀº ¸Å¿ì ´çȲ½º·´°í Áö½ÄÀεéÀº ¾î´À ´©±¸ ¸øÁö¾Ê°Ô ºñÇÕ¸®ÀûÀÌ°í ºñ³í¸®ÀûÀÌ°í ¹Ì½ÅÀûÀ̶ó´Â °ÍÀ» ¾Ï½ÃÇÑ´Ù. Áø½ÇÀº Rousseau´Â õÀçÀûÀÎ ÀÛ°¡¿´Áö¸¸ ±×ÀÇ »î°ú °üÁ¡¿¡¼ Ä¡¸íÀûÀ¸·Î Âø¶õ»óÅ¿¡ ÀÖ¾ú´ø °Í °°´Ù. ±×¿¡ ´ëÇؼ´Â ±×°¡ ¸»Çϱâ·Î´Â ±×ÀÇ À¯ÀÏÇÑ »ç¶ûÀ̾ú´ø ¿©ÀÎ Sophie d'Houdtot¿¡ ÀÇÇؼ °¡Àå Àß ¿ä¾àµÇ¾ú´Ù. ±×³à´Â 1813³â±îÁö »ýÁ¸ÇÏ¿´¾ú°í Áö±ØÈ÷ ´ÄÀº ³ªÀÌ¿¡¼ ±×¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ÆÇ°áÀ» ³»·È´Ù: ¡®±×´Â ³ª¸¦ ³î¶ó°Ô ÇÒ ¸¸Å Ãß¾ÇÇÏ¿´°í »ç¶ûÀÌ ±×¸¦ ´õ ¸Å·ÂÀûÀ¸·Î ¸¸µéÁö´Â ¸øÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±×·¯³ª ±×´Â ¸Å¿ì Êïß¿îÜ(°¨»óÀû)ÀÎ Àι°À̾ú°í ³ª´Â ±×¸¦ »ó³ÉÇÏ°í Ä£ÀýÇÏ°Ô ´ëÇØ ÁÖ¾ú´Ù. ±×´Â Èï¹Ì ÀÖ´Â ÎÊìÑ(±¤ÀÎ)À̾ú´Ù.¡¯