Little if it can say regarding a state, or a time that preceded exactly to the language. Everything that if can present to this respect or is pure speculation, or is fruit of an attempt of regressive agreement, that it aims at to find causes unknown of known consequences. However, it was not conceived that the society as we know has appeared of the nothing, and efforts that did not autonomearam ‘ especulao’ they had been undertaken in the intention of aplacar this doubt. Some philosophers as the contratualistas calls had affirmed that the society if installed under gide of the law and through a contract, a social pact. Thomases Hobbes, Jean Jacques Rousseau and John Locke are the main names of the contratualismo. For Hobbes alone he has the war in the State of Nature; for Locke in the Natural state the men do not know more than the divine law and for Rousseau the mercy was the only effective law in this state. In intention to establish differences between the State of Nature and the Civil Society, we will analyze the ideas of Rousseau to this respect.

We will try to make use the main characteristics presented for it on the man natural and seguiz it in the explanations regarding as the Civil Society if it established. In the end of this article we will present, in panoramic way, the main divergent ideas of Thomas Hobbes and will see as ‘ State of Natureza’ ‘ Natural’ man; they are opposing concepts to the ones of Rousseau under the hobbesiana perspective. NATURE OF the QUESTION Would be the fact of asking in them when, (when in data time space), the inaquality if installed and the nature of the man started to dissolve it the step that this if became different, different? Or it would be the case of first asking in them on the causes of this inaquality? To answer to these questions we will follow the presuppositions of Rousseau whose ranks many times seem in them to take to a so real while possibility and so improbable scene while reality.