The pilosophical hypocrisy

It isn’t a polemical essay but must say that I don’t bear the hypocrisy and incoherence, because I see for the first a false simulation, for second the opportunism that, is justified, when the it interest the national interest, to personal interest you must work to your interest without include the nation therefore the common interest, and stop. The man is always equal during the history, thereupon in 18^th century also hypocrisy was present, everywhere and incoherence was equal and when these faults become the philosophy it is alone the modern hypocrisy because it want see alone that is noble. Jean Jacques Rousseau(1712-1778), born Switzerland, was certainly a preromantic author but his importance is comparable to his incoherence and some error that is very important; in his Discourse on the sciences and arts, he said: “The French got rich of these spoils(Roman culture). Very soon the sciences followed the letters”, but truly is contrary, because the science in Egypt anticipated the letters, And. “…to art of write joined the art of think…”, but if a man doesn’t thinks a man doesn’t writes…and it feels the vantage of merchant of muses, that of become the men more sociable and like one to other…”; this is the pure fantasy, because the man lives in the word, this is in the earth and no certainly in the word of ideas of Plato where all is perfect. Other step: “The with has his needs as the body. These are fundaments of society, those are ornament. While the govern and the laws provide to security and wealth of men joined…”; it is exactly, but the hypocrisy and the fault in logic essence is that the govern and the security is a works purely human…; therefore these laws and security: “suffocate in the man the sentiment of original freedom to they are born…”. These  are opinions of Rousseau, but I think and I pretend coherence, this is, if in civil Geneva, where is civility, and you think that the civil word is give the chains you can go away, or you didn’t think never because in this chained you live more well? The secret answer would be: “Certainly I live well in my Geneva”, and somebody could answer: “Why do you tell these bullshit?”, we are waiting an answer, that neither Rousseau neither his following to us will give never. But we must also consider the historical and moral context of this discourse worth of an today radical chic, because the moral, to Rousseau was compliant, ordered this behavior, and further Rousseau lived in Geneva, this is Switzerland, where the austerity and simple life was prevailing,  , and I must add that Rousseau has judged his opinion in Latin language: “Barbarus hic ego sum quia non intelligor illis”, this is: “I am barbarian since I don’t I understand them”, but we can add this suggestion, this is: “If you are against this word and this prison”.

Alessandro Lusana