So what Strauss sees in Rousseau is that the concept of nature in Rousseau is one that already has, kind of, historical prejudices built into it, so that for Rousseau, we are perfectible creatures, and corruptible ones, and that is not the same as, figuring on a stable concept The nature because Rousseau's natural human, as Strauss says is sub, is, is sub human or proto human and as he's, he's going to change.He is capable of, of perfectibility or of corruption.Um, and that the error of what Strauss sees in Rousseau, is that, thinking you have a national standard, when what you really have is a framework, for thinking about how human beings will change, rather than a standard that allows you to judge human actions. 