Rousseau and Romanticism

Key themes

Classicism vs. Romanticism

This is the overarching framework of the entire book. Babbitt defines Classicism as an adherence to an inner ethical check, proportion, and universal human experience, emphasizing reason and disciplined will. In contrast, he characterizes Romanticism as a movement defined by individualism, the supremacy of emotion, unchecked imagination, and a focus on the unique, often idiosyncratic, self. The book is a sustained argument for the virtues of the former and a critique of the excesses of the latter.

Individualism and Egoism

Babbitt critiques the Romantic emphasis on radical individualism, tracing its roots to Rousseau's belief in man's natural goodness and the idea that societal institutions corrupt. He argues that this focus on the unique, unconstrained self often devolves into egoism, leading to a lack of ethical responsibility, self-indulgence, and a retreat from shared human experience into subjective fantasy. He contrasts this with the classical view that true individuality emerges from disciplined self-mastery within a social context.

Naturalism vs. Humanism

This theme explores the tension between a worldview that sees humans primarily as products of nature (naturalism) and one that emphasizes a distinct human capacity for ethical choice and self-transcendence (humanism). Babbitt argues that Rousseau's sentimental naturalism—the belief in man's inherent goodness and the desirability of returning to a 'natural' state—erodes moral distinctions and undermines the need for ethical effort. He advocates for a humanistic perspective that acknowledges the dual nature of humanity (both natural and ethical) and the necessity of cultivating a higher will.

Worth discussing

How does Babbitt define Classicism and Romanticism, and are these definitions fair or overly simplistic?