How many centuries would separate in them of this scene if it really had occurred? Who will be able to prove that it did not occur? Answering to a question proposal for the Academy of Dijon, Rousseau affirms that the inaquality is authorized for the natural law and possesss two species: natural or physical that is established by the nature and the moral or the politics that is established by the conventions or the customs. The Speech has the objective of ‘ ‘ to point in the progress of the things, the moment where, succeeding the right to the violence, the nature was submitted to the law; to explain for which chaining of prodigies the fort can be decided to serve it the weak one, and the people to buy imaginary tranquillity for the price of a happiness real.
Rousseau discards the man idea who is conceived by the tradition Jewish-Christian; this tradition configures the man as a being that received laws from its creator, while the pretension of Rousseau is to analyze the man in a state that precedes any law and whose law is its proper creation and destruction. Also it seems to ignore evolutionist biological theories, conceiving and describing the man as if it can to still know at its time and today, at least in what it refers to the anatomy. NATURAL ASPECTS OF the NATURAL MAN Of course, or physically, the natural man is a robust and strong animal, therefore when imitating the nature if prepares to live in it, being capable to surpass the obstacles that if impose to it; to the animals that do not obtain to fight for the force it is capable to be successful for the dexterity. Being thus the physical or geographic obstacles and the proper animals they would not be implacable to the natural man; for Rousseau males has only two, of course caused, of which the man cannot escape, they are it infancy and perhaps the oldness, that debilitates the body they become and it fragile, making it to perish when nor if she had perhaps given account of its existence..