ABSTRACT
The main question risen inside this text is this one: Why not going back to modernity after postmodernity? In order to answer it, the hypothesis is this: revisiting Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778), one of the most famous philosophers, who belongs to modernity, according to Western traditional thought. Thus, his ideas have helped to build modern Western civilization and, nowadays, they are useful to think about several topics, such as: education, ethics, philosophy, politics and religion. The aim of this paper is to show the importance of reading his works, especially concerning aforesaid themes, because their author is just inexhaustible and they are still necessary to understand what modernity is, as well as postmodernity. These are the chosen works: The Social Contract, or Principles of Political Right (Du contrat social), Emile, or On Education (Émile, ou de l’éducation), Discourse on the Arts and Sciences (Discours sur les sciences et les arts), Discourse on the Origin and Basis of Inequality Among Men (Discours sur l’origine et les fondements de l’inégalité parmi les hommes), Julie, or the New Heloise (Julie, ou la nouvelle Héloïse), Confessions of Jean-Jacques Rousseau (Les Confessions), Dialogues: Rousseau, Judge of Jean-Jacques (Dialogues: Rousseau, juge de Jean-Jacques) and Reveries of a Solitary Walker (Rêveries du promeneur solitaire). This is a theoretical research, developed according to this reference: historical and dialectical materialism. The approach is this: firstly, contextualization of the age of Rousseau; secondly, his life and works; thirdly, his ideas; fourthly, his legacy and actuality. In order to think about after postmodernity, one needs to think about modernity and, in order to think about modernity, one needs to think about Jean-Jacques Rousseau; that is because he is so important and this text intends to show why should not one be plausible to return to modernity and so trying another way from it, different from one that has been ended into the present day; finally, why would not it be possible? Rousseau has been helped to build some ideas that have become dominant values inside Western civilization, such as: democracy, equality, freedom and goodness. Moreover, he is a very good defender of nature and environment has been terribly attacked in global scale; Why would not he be profitable in order to teach respect for it? He is also a very good defender of natural religion, based on tolerance; Why would not he be useful in order to teach religious toleration?
