Rousseau y la superación del dilema iusnaturalismo-convencionalismo

Abstract

Is Rousseau a representative of the law of nature tradition or a conventionalist? The debate is old enough, but R. Derathé's authority, adscribing Rousseau to the former tradition, seems to have prevailed, even over Vaughan's interpretation, that considers him a conventionalist. Indeed, we can find texts or paragraphs of both tendencies. Hence a genealogical study becomes necessary, as the one presented here. Hesitations appear as early as in the Discourse on inequality and are clear in the Geneva Manuscript, but Rousseau finally elaborates his own methodology based on the dialectics conscience-reason. I have proposed to call this methodology constructivist. It neatly appears in the Social Contract and in Emile. However, there are still paragraphs mixing the above cited traditions, and there are quite a few examples of the former one. The law of nature tradition provided the dominant political language of the age, thanks mainly to the iurisconsulti. Rousseau criticizes them, but he does the same with Hobbes.This paper aims to contribute to clarifying definitely this issue, thats heds light on the real meaning Rousseau had given to the social contract and to his democratic model.