Explanation:

a. Descartes was very sceptical about the possibility of discovering final causes, or purposes, in nature.
Yet this teleological understanding of the world was the very cornerstone of Aristotelian metaphysics,
which was the established philosophy of the time. And so Descartes’ method was to doubt these ideas,
which he claims can only be understood in a confused way, in favor of ideas that he could conceive
clearly and distinctly. In the Meditations, Descartes claims that the material world is made up of extension
in space, and this extension is governed by mechanical laws that can be understood in terms of pure
mathematics.
State of Nature
Also influential were the ideals of classical republicanism, which Rousseau took to be illustrative of
virtues. These virtues allow people to escape vanity and an emphasis on superficial values that he thought
to be so prevalent in modern society. This is a major theme of the Discourse on the Sciences and Arts.
General Will
This point can be understood in an almost Rawlsian sense, namely that if the citizens were ignorant of the
groups to which they would belong, they would inevitably make decisions that would be to the advantage
of the society as a whole, and thus be in accordance with the general will.
The stated aim of the Social Contract is to determine whether there can be a legitimate political authority.
In order to accomplish more and remove himself from the state of nature, man must enter into a Social
Contract with others. In this social contract, everyone will be free because all forfeit the same amount of
freedom and impose the same duties on all. Rousseau also argues that it is illogical for a man to surrender
his freedom forslavery; and so, the participants must be free. Furthermore, although the contract imposes
new laws, especially those safeguarding and regulatingproperty, a person can exit it at any time (except in
a time of need, for this is desertion), and is again as free as when he was born.
Rousseau posits that any administration, whatever form it takes, should be divided into two parts. First,
there must be the sovereign who represents the general will and is the legislative power within the state.
The second division is that of the government, being distinct from the sovereign. This division must be
since the sovereign cannot deal with particular, like applications of the law. Therefore a government must
be separate from that of the sovereign body.
Rousseau claims that the size of the territory to be governed often decides the nature of the government.
Since a government is only as strong as the people, and this strength is absolute, the larger the territory
the more strength the government must be able to exert over the populace. Normally, this relationship
requires the state to be an aristocracy or monarchy. It is important to note here that when Rousseau talks
of aristocracy and monarchy he does not necessarily mean they are not a democracy. when Rousseau uses
the word democracy he refers to a direct democracy rather than a representative democracy like most
democratic states have today. In light of all this, Rousseau argues that, like his native Geneva, small city-
states are the form of nation in which freedom can best flourish. For any state large enough to require
intermediaries between the people and the government, an elected aristocracy may be preferable, and in
very large states a benevolent monarch; but even monarchical rule, to be legitimate, must be subordinate
to the sovereign rule of law.