Has the Restoration of the Arts and Sciences Had a Purifying Effect Upon Morals?

Did Rousseau respond to the question (the blog title) proposed by the Academy of Dijon in 1750 as both 'yes' and 'no' ?

[So long as government and law provide for the security and well-being of men in their common life the arts, literature and sciences, less despotic though perhaps more powerful, fling garlands of flowers over the chains which weigh them down. They stiffle in men's breasts that sense of original liberty, for which they seem to have been born; cause them to love their own slavery, and so make of them what is called a cilvilised people]

[But so long as power alone is on one side, and knowledge and understanding alone on the other, the learned will seldom make great objects their study, princes will still more rarely do great action, and the people will continue to be, as they are, mean, corrupted, and miserable]

Of course this is an over-simplifictaion, but can this be concluded that upon the rise of man's civilisation as emerging form his state of nature, Rousseau's argument laid at the end in opposing against snobbery of the artist and the philosopher, whom more often than not claim themselves superiority of beholders of the good, the true and the beautbiful.