The General Will and its three forms

The concept of the general will is one of the most important components of political philosophy. It was developed by 

the 18th century philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau in his book The Social Contract. In his work Rousseau argued 

that a society can only be truly free when its citizens work together to pursue a common goal rather than their own 

private interests. The general will represents the collective interests of the community as a whole and serves as the 

foundation of legitimate government, Although the concept may appear simple at first, political theorists often 

distinguish between 3 forms of will that help explain Rousseau’s ideas: the particular will, the will of all, and the 

general will. Understanding these 3 forms show how societies can balance individual freedom with the needs of the 

community. 

 

The first form is the particular will, which directly addresses the desires and interests of an individual. Every citizen 

has personal interests, preferences, and goals that influence their decisions. For example, a business owner may 

want lower taxes to increase their profits, while a student may want more funding for schools. These desires are not 

necessarily harmful, but they focus on what benefits a specific individual or group rather than the community of a 

whole. Rousseau believed that people naturally possess particular wills because humans are concerned with their 

own well being, However, if governments were guided solely by particular wills then public policy would favor 

special interests and create inequality. Citizens might compete against one another instead of cooperating, making it 

difficult to achieve justice and social harmony, 

  

The second form is the will of all. This occurs when the individual opinions of citizens are simply added together. 

In other words, the will of all is the sum of everyone's personal interests. At first glance, it may seem democratic 

because it reflects what many people want. However, Rousseau argued that the will of all is not the same as the 

general will. When people vote based only on personal gain, the resulting decision may benefit a majority while 

harming society as a whole. For example, if most citizens support a policy that reduces services for a minority 

group because it saves them money, the decision will reflect the will of all but not the common good. The will of all 

is therefore a collection of private desires rather than a genuine expression of what is best for the entire community.  

 

The third and final form is the general will itself. Unlike the particular will and the will of all, the general will focuses

on the common goal shared by everyone. It requires individuals to think beyond their personal interests and 

consider what policies will benefit society as a whole. When citizens deliberately prioritize the welfare of the 

community, they can discover the general will. Rousseau believed that laws should express this general will because 

id represents the true interests of the collective. For example, funding public education may require taxpayers to 

contribute money, but an educated population benefits society through economic growth, civic participation, and 

social stability. Even if some individuals would prefer to keep their money, supporting education would reflect the 

general will because it serves the common good.

 

This connection between all three types of wills shows Rousseau’s overall view of freedom and citizenship. 

Freedom, in his opinion, is not just a free will to do anything one likes whenever one feels like it. Freedom lies in 

living in a political society in which citizens take part in the creation of laws aimed at providing the benefit of the 

entire population. By obeying laws resulting from the general will, one acts according to the norms that he or she 

as an element of society participates in creating. This concept opposes both the particular will and the will of all, 

since the former concentrates only on personal wishes while the latter counts their number without considering the 

essence of each wish.

 

In spite of its great significance, however, there have been controversies regarding the idea of the general will 

among political scientists. The former regard the notion as something that can ensure greater civic duty and equality 

as well as enhance democracy. But the latter believe that states can invoke the concept to suppress their citizens' 

freedom and views. Such problems can arise because it is often difficult to ascertain what can be in the best interest 

of everyone. Nonetheless, the classification of the will as per Rousseau remains relevant.

 

To conclude, the general will theory by Rousseau is an excellent tool for the analysis of political decisions. The 

particular will stands for individual benefits; the will of all is a synthesis of individual interests and does not benefit 

society; the general will tries to seek the public interest. In other words, by identifying the three types of wills, 

Rousseau shows how essential it is for a well-developed society to think of something more than one’s own benefit 

and take into account the well-being of everyone else too.