A educação natural de Rousseau é uma tentativa de mostrar como as paixões, se liberadas da deformação provocada pela opinião social, podem ser moralmente corretas. Se o Emílio, afirma Rousseau, é um tratado sobre a bondade natural do homem, esta bondade está fundada sobre a liberdade, e, sobretudo, sobre a liberdade das paixões.

Drawing on the Second Discourse and the Social Contract and Notes from Underground and “The Dream of a Ridiculous Man,” this essay examines the striking similarities and fundamental differences between Dostoevskij’s and Rousseau’s treatment of the problem of individual vs. society and their notions of ideal social relations. The essay investigates Rousseau’s attempt to absorb morality into politics and “to concretize” Diderot’s universal moral man into citizen. It also suggests that Dostoevskij takes Rousseau’s attempt at concretization a step further by (...) exposing humanist conceptions of man and society in general as fiction and creating a model of ideal society that absorbs morality, not into politics (as does Rousseau’s model), but into the sanctity of the Word. (shrink)