Sydney Smith 
Denysha Taylor Jean Jacques Rousseau believed that man was naturally good, but ruined by society. On the surface, this would appear to mostly relate to the Christian concept of the fall: People were good, but then turned bad. On closer inspection, however, his views conflict with the most widely-held Christian narrative, because Rousseau believed that people were not BORN into evil and that the problems society created could be overcome. This is more in line with the concept of an ongoing creation, or one that states that man didn’t actually fall, but rather that the fall is a concept invented to explain the broken state of man. In actuality, someone who held this view (not necessarily Rousseau) would say, the act of disobedience committed by Adam and Eve in the garden was not the original sin, because they were incapable of comprehending good and evil before partaking of huge forbidden fruit. It was their first, intended step toward further human development, and “creation” was still an act in-progress.
Rousseau said man was born free, but still put in chains, perhaps implying that our good nature by creation is still intact and is not destroyed at some fundamental level but by specific worldly obstacles. The imago dei (image of God) is not shattered, but more like a sculpture still being chiseled. Jesus, then, was an example for the future of humankind, rather than a flashback to the “perfection” of Adam. To put it more briefly, Rosseau’s views could be seen as relating to creation if you held that the entire Grand Narrative was “Creation, and then more creation.”
Hillary Richardson
11:46 am, 10.05.13
I love the concept of looking at Rosseau’s views as creation as opposed to the fall. I agree that the way he talks about man is an example of creation. Conflict would seem to make man fall, but the way that Rosseau discussed the subject, it would seem that man is always in a good state. Things may happen to make us think that we are not in that state, but in his view, sin is us not being able to comprehend what we have possibly done wrong. Although I would have probably categorized Rosseau in the fall category, I really enjoyed reading your aspect of putting his views in creation.
Rebecca McQueen
3:52 pm, 10.05.13
I described Rousseau’s thoughts to be categorized more with the fall, as it is something that is done to man – however I like the way you talked about him through the perspective of creation. It makes me think of verses where it talks about man being created in the image of God – also implying that our good nature by creation is still intact.
Mengyuan Tang
5:28 pm, 10.07.13
I like the way you related Rousseau’s view of human nature to the category of Creation. I think his belief that humans are born good can be understood as the nature of human nature. Although we are sinful because of the fall in the Garden of Eden and being contaminated by society, from very beginning, people were made “in the image of God” whose essence should be innocent and close to God.
Haley Conaway
11:12 pm, 10.07.13
This was a very interesting and insightful post. I too categorized Rousseau as a creation philosopher. I see what you were saying about continual creation. I think Rousseau would have said that God’s expectation of Adam and Eve not eating the fruit was a chain that He put on them. If man was created good then any impulse he may have had must be fundamentally good. It’s the rules and expectations that trap him. Perhaps Rousseau would say that based on the Biblical Narrative, Adam and Eve were doomed to failure.