Thoughts on Rousseau's Discourse Part 1

One of the points that Rousseau implicitly makes in part one of his discourse is that God’s influence (or some supreme being) is much more prominent in the natural and barbaric state of man. Rousseau does not argue this explicitly, but rather shows many examples of how the savage man is a better representation of being in the ‘image and likeness of God himself’ than the reasoned and civilized man. On page 96-97, he makes a point that suggests that maybe humans didn’t even invent language, but rather discovered it from some divine force. He believes that the notion that language could not have been created by purely human means, and he asks the reader this question: “Which was the more necessary, a society already established for the invention of language, or language already invented for the establishment of society? (96-97)”
He goes on to talk about many of the instincts of the savage man, the heart of which he sees is compassion. He says that all humans and even animals possess some innate sense of pity when another member of their species is suffering. This instinct is stronger with the man of nature, because without language or reason, his primary purpose is to sustain and reproduce his species. With this idea in mind, his concept of ‘love’ is a purely physical one, without any moral attachment. Rousseau then claims that “men must experience the ardours of their temperament less frequently and less vividly and consequently have fewer and less cruel quarrels (103).”
For Rousseau, the changing of the heart of man from a savage and compassionate instinctual being to that of the 18th century man is parallel to the forming of reason: “It is reason which breads pride and reflection which fortifies it; reason which man turns inward toward himself; reason which separates him from everything which troubles or affects him (101).” Through philosophy and reason, man learns to care more for himself than the betterment of the species as a whole. He learns to not feel threatened when another man’s life is at stake. In conclusion of Rousseau’s beliefs: “In instinct alone, man had all he needed for living in a state of nature; in cultivated reason he has what is necessary only for living in society (97).”
For me, Rousseau clearly believes that man was originally created in the image and likeness of God. These compassionate instincts and peaceful ways of life seem to point toward a divine inspiration. Only through the development of culture and socialization have we lost what it meant to be created in the likeness of God; to be truly compassionate beings. We have learned to care more for ourselves than others. One point Rousseau does not touch upon is why the compassion could not go hand in hand with reason. Also, Rousseau makes a lot of judgments and conclusions drawn from savage man, which I am very doubtful of his foundations. How could Rousseau know so much and generalize so much about this ‘savage man?’