Who Was Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and Why Should Christians Care?

My left elbow is aching as I type these words while sitting on a ferry in Switzerland. I just wiped out exquisitely in a setting significant to the rise of the French Revolution, totalitarian communism, and the Neo-Marxist identity politics overturning Western society today. That’s right—as part of my journey to trace the history of Marxism, I fell nearly flat on my face (thanks, elbow, for catching me) right outside the historic dwelling of eighteenth-century philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau.

Before unpacking who Rousseau was, how he impacted our culture, and why Christians should care, I feel compelled to blame my hiking boots for the wipeout. When the laces of one boot snuggle into the other boot’s brackets while you’re walking, effectively binding your feet together—well, let’s hope you’re not holding delicate filming equipment like I was.

Anyway, back to Rousseau.

Rousseau, the Enlightenment, and “Just Be Yourself”

Born in Geneva, Switzerland, in 1712, Rousseau grew up during the peak of the Enlightenment—the days when rejecting God’s Word in favor of human reasoning became as fashionable as tricorn hats and powdered wigs. Contrary to its cheery name, the Enlightenment led Western culture down the dark path of humanism, which Europe had entered during the Renaissance.

Many Enlightenment philosophers viewed human reasoning as the supreme authority for truth.1 But Rousseau placed a premium on feelings as the authority instead. According to Dr. Arthur Melzer in The Harvard Review of Philosophy, “For Rousseau, the true self is not the rational self. We are not our intellect, our mind, but our feelings. The ground of our being is the sentiment of existence, which is a sentiment, a feeling: ‘to exist, for us, is to feel [sentir].’”2

By suggesting that our feelings define who we are, Rousseau launched what Melzer calls the “Modern Cult of Sincerity”3—a human-centered religion which claims that self-authenticity is the highest good. In this religion, feelings take the place of God as the source of truth, foundation of reality, and definer of our identities. Our feelings-based identities, in turn, become the source of moral norms for the rest of society. As critical theorist4 Alessandro Ferrara wrote,

Among the modern philosophers who have shaped the world we inhabit, Rousseau is the one to whom we owe the idea that identity can be a source of normativity (moral and political) and that an identity’s potential for playing such a role rests on its capacity for being authentic.5

In other words, the idea that political and moral standards should align not with God’s Word, but with the identities which people believe to reflect their authentic selves, traces straight back to Rousseau. Rousseau’s human-centered religion is therefore the basis for movements which claim that people’s inner feelings determine their true selves, and that others who don’t affirm these identities are committing a moral wrong worthy of legal punishment. To resist affirming another’s self-identity is to break a type of cultural blasphemy law, committing heresy against the doctrine that feelings are God.

But that’s not all. Rousseau’s “Cult of Sincerity” is also a wellspring of today’s humanistic pop theology found everywhere from social media posts to kids’ movies, reflected in catchphrases like “You be you,” “Follow your heart,” and “Just be yourself.” Rousseau expressed these doctrines clearly through the voice of a (decidedly unbiblical6) vicar in his novel, Emile.

I do not derive these rules [principles of conduct] from the principles of the higher philosophy, I find them in the depths of my heart, traced by nature in characters which nothing can efface. I need only consult myself with regard to what I wish to do; what I feel to be right is right, what I feel to be wrong is wrong; conscience is the best casuist;7 and it is only when we haggle with conscience that we have recourse to the subtleties of argument. Our first duty is towards ourself.8

In his eighteenth-century way, Rousseau’s vicar is saying that feelings are the guide to morality—a statement summed up by the modern mantra, “Follow your heart.” Here are a few other lines from Rousseau which reflect our culture’s current thinking:

We should be ourselves at all times instead of struggling against nature.9

In weighing up so carefully what I owed to others, have I paid enough attention to what I owed myself? If one must act justly towards others, one must act truthfully towards oneself.10

When man is content to be himself he is strong indeed.11

The highest enjoyment is that of being contented with ourselves.12

These ideas could easily flicker across the nearest social media feed, yet they’re quotes from a Swiss philosopher who lived over 200 years ago. Rousseau’s doctrines clearly conflict with the Bible’s revelation13 that “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick,” (Jeremiah 17:9). But they’ve become deeply engrained in today’s culture. So, who was this philosopher who so radically shaped our society?

Rousseau’s Story

Raised in a family of watchmakers, Rousseau grew up in the climate of civil freedom which had sprung from the Swiss Protestant Reformation.14 Rousseau’s mother died shortly after his birth, so he lived with his father, Isaac Rousseau, until Isaac had to move away for legal reasons.15 At that time, young Rousseau went to live with an uncle who sent him to board with a Protestant minister.16 Rousseau began an engraving apprenticeship under an abusive overseer but ran away to wind up in the care of Madame de Warrens, a nominally Catholic woman.17

Rousseau too became a nominal Catholic, although he returned to identifying as a Protestant over 20 years later to regain his Genevan citizenship.18 As we’ll soon see, however, Rousseau’s worldview remained far from biblical. Instead, his writings reflect a form of deism—the belief that an impersonal God created the world but does not care about humans, cannot be known by them, and has not revealed truth through his Word.19

Without God’s Word as his foundation, Rousseau seemed to live by his own doctrine to “follow your heart.” For example, while he never married, Rousseau’s love interests included his former caregiver Madame de Warrens;20 a Countess Houdetot,21 who called Rousseau an “interesting madman”;22 and Thérèse Levasseur, who bore Rousseau as many as five children.23 However, Rousseau abandoned every one of their children to a foundling hospital—a fate which the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy calls “an almost certain sentence of death in eighteenth-century France.”24 While Thérèse hadn’t wanted to comply, Rousseau reflected, “[Thérèse’s] mother, who, in addition, was afraid of this new embarrassment in the shape of a number of brats, supported me, and Thérèse at last yielded.”25

During these years with Thérèse, Rousseau lived in Paris, where he had befriended Enlightenment philosopher Denis Diderot. While walking to visit Diderot one summer afternoon, Rousseau happened to read the topic of an upcoming essay contest, which asked, “Has the progress of sciences and arts contributed to corrupt or purify morals?” Rousseau, struck by the thought that society corrupts humans, responded by writing his first famous essay, “Discourses on Arts and Science.”26 The essay not only won the competition but also triggered a seismic shift in thinking that still ripples through Western culture today.27

Rousseau’s Worldview

In this essay and its sequel, “Discourse on the Origin and Basis of Inequality Among Men,” Rousseau assumed that humans are naturally “innocent and virtuous.” So, Rousseau argued, humans originally lived in peace and simplicity as nomadic hunter-gatherers. As people multiplied, however, they began to increasingly depend upon one another, forming societies. Life in society brought changes including the division of labor, the rise of private property, and the need for laws and morals. Along the way, humans began to compare themselves with others, to compete for power, status, and property, and to view their own self-worth in terms of others’ evaluations. Physical differences between people meant that some individuals—the strongest, smartest, or most beautiful—could best succeed in society, leading other forms of inequality to develop.28

As a result of all these factors, society corrupted humanity’s original goodness, leading to problems including envy, rivalry, cheating, theft, cruelty, warfare, and other evils.29 Worse still, people could no longer live comfortably without conforming themselves to society—the very source of human vice and inequality. Individuals began to mask their true selves to fit into a corrupting culture, in which they could never be free.30 Summarizing these assumptions about humanity, Rousseau wrote,

So long as men remained content with their rustic huts . . . they lived free, healthy, honest and happy lives. . . . But from the moment one man began to stand in need of the help of another; from the moment it appeared advantageous to any one man to have enough provisions for two, equality disappeared, property was introduced, work became indispensable, and vast forests became smiling fields, which man had to water with the sweat of his brow, and where slavery and misery were soon seen to germinate and grow up with the crops.31

Clearly, Rousseau’s ideas hardly resemble the biblical view.32 (For a quick overview of how Rousseau’s worldview contrasts with God’s Word, check out Table 1 at the end of this article.) This faulty view of God, truth, humanity, and the source of humans’ corruption led Rousseau to propose a faulty solution to society’s problems—a solution Rousseau called the “social contract.”

The Social Contract

Before looking at what Rousseau’s social contract entails, we need to back up and examine the dilemma his worldview created. Remember how Rousseau esteemed feelings, not God, as the authority for truth? As catchy as this “follow your heart” philosophy might sound, it fails at a practical level. Individual feelings can’t function as the authority in a society where different peoples’ feelings can lead to conflicting truth claims. Some individuals’ feelings must be more authoritative than others. In a battle of wills, whose will should win?

For Rousseau, the answer lay in determining a “General Will”—a collective consensus which reflects not what the majority of people want so much as what’s supposedly good for them.33 Rousseau thought the only way for humans to live together and still have freedom to be “true to themselves” was to paradoxically give up their individual freedom and submit to this General Will.34 The result would be a totalitarian state35 governed by “the people”—or at least, by the people considered qualified to participate.36

The General Will would become the ultimate authority for truth, to the point that individuals who oppose the General Will must be punished by exile or death.37 Citizens would also be required to relinquish private ownership of whatever property the General Will demanded of them.38 In these respects, Rousseau believed a form of communism would cure humanity’s ills.39 This is the system of government which Rousseau prescribed in his book, The Social Contract.

Notably, Rousseau did not directly advocate that this reshaping of society should come about through violent revolution, but rather, through a long process of education.40 Nevertheless, revolutionaries who sought a quicker path to “curing inequalities” championed Rousseau’s political ideas during the French Revolution, running parts of Rousseau’s teachings to their logical conclusions in ways that precipitated the deaths of thousands.41^,42

Why Rousseau Matters for Christians Today

By now, it’s clear that Christians should care about Rousseau for at least three reasons. First, his ideas are foundational to the culture we live in—the culture we’re trying to reach, love, and navigate as Christ-followers. Rousseau’s doctrine that feelings define truth permeates society at every level from pop culture to legal policy, washing the West in the “Modern Cult of Sincerity.”43 Notably, this doctrine that human feelings are the authority for truth is another manifestation of the Genesis 3:5 lie, “You will be like God.”

Second, because of their popularity, Rousseau’s ideas can easily infiltrate our own thinking—and even our churches—with deeply unbiblical ideas. For example, while Jesus clearly detested the hypocrisy of religious leaders who weren’t being true to God,44 Jesus never said, “Be true to yourself.” Quite the opposite of telling people to follow their hearts, Jesus warned that “out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander,” (Matthew 15:19). (On that note, it’s also worth mentioning that, while Christian circles often claim that the key to reaching young people lies in “being authentic,” this advice—beyond its biblical application as a caution against hypocrisy and appearance-based religiousness45—comes not from Scripture, but from Rousseau.)

Third, Christians should beware of Rousseau because of the drastic political consequences his doctrines reap when put into practice. An example we’ve already seen involves Christians being placed under pressure to bow to the ideology that inner feelings determine external reality. Another example lies in the consequences for religious freedom which stem from making the General Will the authority, as Rousseau proposed in The Social Contract.46

Wrong Foundations, Wrong Results

We’ll unpack Rousseau’s political ideas—and their links to Marxism—next time. For now, it’s enough to recognize how Rousseau’s impactful doctrines show yet again how starting with the wrong worldview foundation means drawing the wrong conclusions. Drawing the wrong conclusions, in turn, leads to proposing the wrong “solutions” for humanity’s problems. And those solutions tend to deliver the opposite of the effects promised. Solutions based on a false view of humanity may promise freedom and progress, but—like a pair of misbehaving hiking boots—leave us lying flat on our faces, or worse.

Instead, the only foundation from which to clearly view, understand, and respond to humanity’s problems is God’s Word. This foundation alone lets us discern our true selves, recognizing that, unlike what Rousseau believed, we are authentically sinners in need of a Savior, Jesus. And Jesus does not abandon us to follow our hearts—broken compasses which can only point toward death.47 Instead, Jesus calls us to follow him, the only Way, Truth, and Life.48

Table 1: Differences between God’s Word and Rousseau’s views in response to common worldview questions.

Worldview question	Biblically based answer	Rousseau’s answer
Does God exist? If so, who is he?	Yes, God is our holy, personal Creator who reveals truth through his Word.49	Yes, the “Supreme Being” is a distant Creator who does not necessarily interact with humans or reveal truth through Scripture.50
What is the human condition?	All humans have sinned and fallen short of God’s perfection.51	Humans in their natural state are innocent and virtuous.52
Who determines truth?	Truth is rooted in God’s character, with God’s Word being humanity’s authority for truth.53	Truth is rooted in humans, with internal feelings being individuals’ authority for truth,54 and the General Will being society’s authority.55
What is the purpose of human life?	We were created for God’s glory, designed to be in relationship with God and others as we live out his sovereign purposes for us.56	Our highest goal is being free to live as our authentic selves and to fully “feel” our existences, leading to happiness.57 In society, this freedom is only possible under the conditions of the Social Contract.58
What is humanity’s problem? (That is, what root cause alienated humans from our original purpose, resulting in human suffering?)	Human sin has corrupted every person, every society, and all creation, having spread to all people through Adam.59	Society itself and its institutions have corrupted humanity, causing inequalities and inauthenticity.60
What is the solution to humanity’s problem?	Jesus’ death and resurrection solves the problem of sin eternally, providing life for those who put their faith in Christ61 and enabling the eventual restoration of creation.62 Meanwhile, following Jesus’ commands to love others helps mitigate certain earthly effects of humanity’s fall into sin.63	People may regain their freedom by reverting to a life of contemplative solitude in nature64 or by living in society under the conditions of the Social Contract.