Abstract
This article challenges interpretations of Rousseau's Emile that see its program of female education as inconsistent with that of males and with Rousseau's general principles. Using Rousseau's definition of freedom, the author explores how the educations of both sexes aim at creating interdependencies rather than self-sufficiency or slavery and concludes that Emile is not as free, nor Sophie as enslaved, as some have argued. The differences in their educations are seen as appealing to identical understandings of the human condition and development, freedom and dependence, happiness and suffering, and the tasks of politics.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
