Just Finished Reading: Rousseau’s Dog – Two Great Thinkers at War in the Age of Enlightenment by David Edmonds & John Eidinow

It quickly became apparent on reading this historical work that the dog referred to in the title had a double meaning – that of Rousseau’s faithful companion Sultan and the fact that Rousseau suffered from the darkest depressions. It also became apparent that the ‘war’ alluded to in the sub-title was nothing of the sort. The actual conflict – between Rousseau and the Scottish philosopher David Hume - was more of a spat, conducted in public, over a simple misunderstanding. Fought in the press and through letters to friends both in London and Paris the argument – such as it was – became a momentary sensation and distraction to the intellectual elites of both great cities of Enlightenment Europe.

Though interesting enough from an historical point of view the authors rarely touched on the philosophy of either Hume or Rousseau (which disappointed me slightly) but did throw a great deal of light of Rousseau’s character and the many flaws in contained. Clearly the man was very ill indeed and I couldn’t help wondering what would have been the consequence for philosophy and politics if Rousseau could have been cured by the judicious use of chemicals. Would we have lost a great mind or gained one of even superior genius?

This was an enjoyable enough read – if more than a little disappointing – and, I think, should be read as a historical study rather than a philosophical one. Offering interesting insights into the character of both Hume and especially Rousseau it should really be read as a study of the times rather than a study of the gentlemen involved. An informative piece of background reading, but little more than that I’m afraid.