Views of Alienation

Philosophy is one of the most fascinating topics in human history, as it is literally the study of thought and human interaction. Most philosophers wrote some sort of treatise, and it is through these writings that one can learn new thoughts and ideas. But, one can gain a better understanding if one can examine the ideas of one philosopher and compare them with another. For instance, one can look at the writings of Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Karl Marx. These two writers wrote about alienation. Alienation is separation, and both of these writers discuss one being alienated from humanity. The writers have different ideas on the same subject, and it will be an edifying process to determine what these two theories have in common, and what is different. This paper will compare and contrast these two philosophies.

Rousseau’s third part of his treat Social Contract deals with alienation. Specifically, it mentions the alienation of oneself and one’s right to the community. He claims that to be totally free that one must alienate himself from all of his rights. After everyone gives up his or her rights, everyone is equal. In Rousseau’s vision, the alimentation occurs between a man and his rights. This theory holds that freedom and equality are in conflict. If one must get rid of everything, he is no longer free to do as he wishes, but if he does not alienate himself from his rights, then he will not be equal. It sets up a paradox. 

Another writer that dealt with alienation was Karl Marx, but his views on the matter differed slightly. Marx argues that the worker alienates from their humanity, because he or she can only express their output through a privately controlled system, and the worker has no way of capitalizing on his efforts. He had three theories about alienation. One was the alienation of a worker from his work, and its product, the alienation of the worker from working and production, and the production of the worker, their essence, and the alienation of workers from other workers, in this system, the alienation of the worker from their work.

These two theories have similarities. First, and perhaps the most obvious similarity is that both of these theories deal with alienation. Alienation is separation. Both of these theories deal with separation. Rousseau’s idea dealt with the separation between rights, and the person. Marx also deals with separation. In his theory, it deals with workers and their compensation.  Also, Rousseau makes a more elegant argument, as his argument presents as a paradox, and it seems more complicated. One needs to think harder in order for the meaning to come through. Marx, on the other hand, is much more straightforward. The worker is divorced from the proceeds of the work. Instead of receiving a share of the profits, workers are paid the same wage no matter what the products are sold for. This creates an inherent disconnect with the worker, which makes it hard to find value in it. 

These two writers make excellent points, and they both have merits to the position. Rousseau has the erudite approach, but Marx’s work is more tangible. I think that the Marx theory of alienation is the more palatable option. Rousseau creates an argument that is both paradoxical and very rigid. One must choose equality or freedom, and in the parameters set in Rousseau’s work do not allow one to have both. This means that Marx’s option is better. I prefer this position because of how elegant the theory is. The worker is central to this theory. Currently, workers do not have any ownership of the work that there are doing. The worker is alienated from their ability to find fulfillment in their work. This creates inherent displeasure in the work. It is an unfair system. The worker does not get to decide what to make, nor the consumer, the person who is going to buy the product, but the capitalist decides what to make. The capitalist does not do any of the work but gets to enjoy the results. If one subscribes to this theory, and the worker is given ownership over the product, it is a much better way to instill fairness. The makes the Marx option the better option because, in order for one to be equal in that option, one would have to forfeit all of his rights, which does not seem like a good option. Therefore, Marx is the better of the two.

By comparing philosophies, one can gain a better understanding of them. This was the case with the philosophies regarding alienation, by Rousseau and Marx. One gets a better understanding of which option would be better after comparing and contrasting the two philosophies. In this case, Marx was the better option.