Most scholars, following Rousseau himself, have had little to say about what Rousseau calls “the desire to extend our being.” Yet the concept is foundational to his political philosophy. Though less compelling a formulation (and deliberately so) than Plato's “eros” or Nietzsche's “will to power,” “the desire to extend our being” is comparable to these in its strength and reach, and hence in its power to unlock the full meaning of Rousseau's thought. My purpose in this paper is to uncover Rousseau's view of the meaning and significance of this desire; its pervasive influence on moral and political life; and the means through which it can and cannot, and should and should not, be fulfilled.

Whereas traditionally self–love was considered a moral evil, Rousseau contended that some self–love is benign—and not only benign, but morally necessary and even praiseworthy. The following article offers an interpretation of Rousseau's criteria for distinguishing between good self–love and bad. The distinction between good and bad self–love is neither as simple as many readers think—it does not correspond exactly to the distinction between amour de soi and amour–propre—nor as blurry as many others think. It is, rather, both subtle and coherent. And it might well prove useful in our current efforts to inculcate pride and self-esteem without encouraging complacency or exploitation, efforts which themselves owe much to Rousseau's influence.

Few philosophic devices have proved as influential or enduring as the tripartition of the soul in Plato's Republic. For all its virtues, however, we are mistaken to believe that the tripartite model is sufficient to convey, or that it was meant to convey, all the elements of the dialogue's psychological teaching. What is needed is an interpretation that takes fuller account of the soul's forces, and not just its "parts" (which are metaphorical anyway). This article outlines the basic elements of such an interpretation. After considering the virtues and limits of the tripartite model and of the structural perspective from it arises, the article examines eros and spiritedness, the soul's chief and most politically consequential forces, both in themselves and in their (surprising) relation to one another.

No abstract

No abstract