Follow TV Tropes
This would definitely make more sense as "Locke Was Right" than it does now. Not only because, as others have said here, Locke is more known than Rousseau or because Locke is a better parallel to Hobbes, but most primarily because this is actually what Locke espoused unlike Rousseau who, like the page says, espoused /innocence/, not necessarily good.
Inuyasha fits this trope. Heck, even Sesshomaru does.
So the pessimistic "Hobbes was right" gets real examples, but this one doesn't?
What's your point? Rousseau Was Right is not on the No Real Life Examples Please index.
My point is, why aren't there any Real Examples? Get to it.
No trope needs real life examples.
Lord Gro: "No trope needs real life examples."
As true as that statement might be, it does seem pretty upsetting for Real Life to be seemingly more cynical than the idea of it being idealistic.
However, I don't think this necessarily needs to be proven.
Could Elfen Lied be considered as Rousseau Was Right, being that it's full of Humans Are Bastards and Humans Are the Real Monsters, the exact opposite of the trope.
Everyone knows Hobbes and Locke. Calvin, somewhat, from Calvin and Hobbes. Rousseau is less known to college crowd (since Locke is more likely to be discussed in high school). Should the trope be renamed to Locke Was Right, Hobbes Was Wrong, or Calvin Was Wrong? Or should Locke just be an example in the Real Life section?
I think this trope should be more of a case of a complete foil to Hobbes Was Right regardless of popularity.
Does this setting really avert tropes like Moral Event Horizon and Complete Monster? I've seen a few examples with these tropes in them. Like The Dark Knight. In fact, the Joker actually shows up on the Most Triumphant Example page.
The idea of "Rousseau was Right" is that in general, humanity isn't going to be overly sadistic if we can choose not to. That's not to say some exceptions aren't capable of existing.
Who exactly is Rousseau? I read the entire page and Still don't know, shouldn't the trope namer be explained a little like on the Hobbes was Right page?
What would be the inversion of this trope?
I too would like to know. It doesn't take three years to figure this out.
Well if the trope is Humans are good wouldn't the inversion be that good is human? so whatever humans do is inherently good.
So... I noticed the talk of moving tropes. This one isn't being cut out completely, is it?
Oh no, not remotely. That to-do note should have been zapped by now, anyway.
Dropped thread-mode bit on Jail from Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha. If he is a good, clear example please Repair Dont Respond and read Example Indentation In Trope Lists.
Jail actually seems to be another example of this, oddly enough. It's implied in the manga that his desire to overturn the TSAB was actually artificially implanted in him before birth by the people responsible for his creation. If nothing else, he gets a few sympathy points for treating the Numbers like his own children rather than giving them the usual tykebomb treatment.
Dropped this from Knights of the Old Republic — does not explain how putting a ghost to rest is an example of Rousseau Was Right.
Used to bittersweet effect if you choose to tell Ajunta Pall, the ghost of an ancient Sith Lord, that he doesn't have to be in pain any longer.
Dropped this conversation from Dr Who since it didn't add to the main point.
I think White and Grey Morality should be its own trope, not just a redirect to this one. This page seems to refer to any example where Humans Are Not Bastards, or any character who holds these views. White and Grey Morality would be the counterpart to Black and Grey Morality, and thus refer to the entire tone of the work.
Agreed. It seems to me that a story with Rousseau Was Right could be white and gray morality if the gray side was only fighting for something bad because of a misunderstanding or feeling mistreated or if any character that did bad things also did good things but not vice versa, but a Rousseau Was Right story could also be Good vs. Good. In fact, any story where the only conflict(s) is/are good vs. good is arguably saying - or at leas implying - by default that people are inherently good.
And depending on the degree of grayness involved, White vs. Gray stories can be quite brutal. Just because the villains have quite a lot of redeeming features, it doesn't mean that they are incapable of horrible deeds. The article should underline that White vs. Gray =/= Fluffy Bunnies.
I concurs. Actually, i opened one discussion in the Trope Repair Shop to this effect.
As someone who grew up with the SNES, it always bugs me when people make false accusations about the original game just to pimp the rerelease. That was not a mistranslation that the DS version fixed. The Robotopia thing is EXACTLY what Mother Brain said in the original release. The person who said she was trying to stop Lavos was just plain wrong (or at the very least, bizarrely focusing on one line about "the spawn won't have to leave" to the exclusion of the rest of her whole speech about forming a machine empire that will envelop the world - it's pretty clear in the original translation that, at most, she only wanted the spawn around to keep organic life from posing a threat). Since there's no way to fix it without rendering that bit of Conversation In The Main Page nonsensical, I'm just removing it, especially since Conversation In The Main Page is bad anyway.
As another example of this sort of thing (and Square-Enix rereleases seem to be huge magnets for it), another page once said that Ultros's lecherous dialogue was hopelessly bowlderized in the U.S. Final Fantasy III release, and only fixed in the DS FF6 rerelease... and then, as an example of the newly restored dialogue in the DS version, quoted a line that was exactly the same in the original American release. *sigh*
What happened to the Real Life section? There was a huge revelation in there. Someone please put it back. It's about the nature evolution of cooperation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evolution_of_Cooperation
Basically, it proves without any doubt that Rousseau Was Right
Seconded. Also, considering that this trope's counterpart, Hobbes Was Right has a Real Life section, it only makes sense that this should.
How come these statements were written so long ago but not put up yet?
I'll get down to it then.
Community Showcase More