The aim of this paper is to analyze the criticism of fanaticism in Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s texts and to reconstruct his intention to deal with the nature of the people. To begin, it sheds light on the debate or the dialogue about the idea of fanaticism in eighteenth-century France in order to clarify what fanaticism is and who is a fanatic. This investigation shows that the term “fanaticism” came to have a political connotation beyond its strictly theological use and it represents a menace because it can easily catch on among the people and drive them to destructive actions. Second, this paper examines Rousseau’s comparison of fanaticism and atheism in Émile. It is discussed that Rousseau recognizes the power of passion proper to fanaticism in contrast with atheism and the possibility of producing virtue if it could be properly guided. Finally, this paper argues that the conception of civil religion in the Social Contract and its draft, the Geneva Manuscript, could be supposed to counteract fanaticism. For, in the discussion of civil religion, the people are expected to be the citizen and to act autonomously. These analyses clarify the menace of fanaticism recognized by Rousseau as well as the treatments of fanaticism from a political point of view.
