It was the ancient Greeks who created the term “barbaros”, and they used it to mean alien or foreigner. However, under the influence of subconscious xenophobic psychology, a neutral word which referred to the differences of language and speech becomes a derogatory term refers to cultural hierarchies. This paper mainly compares and contrasts Rousseau, Gibbon and Darwin’s opinions of Rousson barbarians, the differences between “other” and “us”, as well as the essence of humanity.
In the first place, all the three authors believed that, the barbarians had lower level of civilization. In Discourse on the Origin of Inequality, Rousseau argued that, “in speaking of the savage, they described the social man.” Rousseau treated the savage and the social man or the civilized as different kinds of people. For Rousseau, the barbarians were only obedient to their instinct, and their emotions were caused by natural impulsion because of the lack of various wisdom. The desire of the barbarians was not out of their physiological need. In the whole world, what the barbarians need were only food, people in the opposite sex, and rest; and what they only fear were pain and hungry. Nevertheless, the civilized people are able to find the highest truth and create just and rational motto from a serious of abstract inference, keen on the order of the universe and the intention showed by the creator.
Generally, for Rousseau, the barbarians were dull and stupid, and they do not have the wisdom and intelligence owned by the civilized people. What is more, in Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Gibbon also held a similar view. For Gibbon, the barbarians were the people in addition to the Roman, who were rude, uncivilized and cruel; and they were always naked and chasing with groups of deer in the brimless forest. Gibbon claims that, the conquerors from western countries can bring civilization to the barbarians. In other words, the barbarians had no civilization, or at least their civilization cannot compare with the Romans. In The Descent of Man, Darwin also pointed out that, the barbarians lived tough lives, and they could not gain as many nourishing food as the civilized people do. Consequently, in the eyes of Darwin, the barbarians had low level of civilization.
In the second place, the three authors had different attitudes towards the barbarians. For Rousseau, the barbarians were noble since they kept original natural characteristic of human beings. Compared to the civilized people, it was more likely for the barbarians to feel pity for the people around them. Because of the lack of wisdom and logos, the barbarians were always obedient to the original feelings of human beings. It was much easier for the barbarians to know others well and live in harmony with others. Generally, Rousseau’s opinion on the barbarians was positive. However, Gibbon’s opinion on the barbarians was negative. In Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, the barbarians were very brutal and ruthless. For Gibbon, the barbarians were the enemies for all the civilized societies. It was the barbarians who led to the decline and fall of the Roman. The barbarians hindered social progress, and they committed all manners of crimes whenever they went.
According to the description of Gibbon, the barbarians were low and treacherous people, and the only thing they knew was to plunder others’ fruit of labor. The brutal behaviors of the barbarians were because of their brutish nature, and they got happiness from the process of plundering and killing. In addition, Darwin took a neutral attitude towards the barbarians. The evolution from the barbarians was the result of natural selection, and the reason why the barbaric people became so distinguished and excellent was due to their observation, memory, curiousness and the development of the inferential capability. During the process of natural selection, stronger and more capable people survived.
What is more, the three authors had different opinions on the differences between “others” and us. For Rousseau, the barbarians were noble because they lived in a natural environment, they were free and equal; on the contrary, “we” civilized people lived in a civilized era in which decay, sin and various maladies were everywhere. For Gibbon, “we” civilized people were noble, moral and kind, and “others” were low, rude and brutal people. For Darwin, “others” were different from “us” in terms of the ability in adapting the world. In addition, when it comes to the essence of humanity, Rousseau believed that, natural human beings should have high morality, and they were unsophisticated, straight-out, brave and kind. Gibbon viewed logos as the essence of humanity. For Gibbon, it was necessary for human beings to use logos to have a deep understanding of themselves, the past and the future. For Darwin, human beings derived from apes, and natural selection and survival of the fittest demonstrated the evolution of various creatures.
Leave A Comment