Rousseau on Natural and Artificial Needs

The debate over the problem of evil, often referred to as ‘the Epicurean dilemma’, lay at the heart of the Enlightenment investigation of the psychological bases for behaviour, and in this the concept of needs was crucial. For the first time on such a scale, men addressed themselves to the moral and social function of the passions, those admittedly irrational aspects of human behaviour, in an open-minded way. They considered the relation of the appetites to needs as both an instinctual and cognitive stimulus. They compared natural physiological needs with those which are socially produced, considering their moral effects both on the individual and in society. Some saw in social, or artificial, needs the source of evil, but others considered them morally indifferent, perhaps even the source of social solidarity. Among the former a distinction was made between the needs for self-esteem, which were considered the cause of pride, envy, competition and social conflict, and genuine self-regarding needs, which were considered legitimate for the self-preservation and integrity of the individual. This distinction was expressed in terms of a contrast between amour-propre (selfishness) and amour-de-soi (self-regard), and in it we see implicit the distinction between natural and artificial needs, the idea that evil is socially created and may, given the right procedures, be socially eliminated.