# The Enlightenment A study of the [[Enlightenment]] era which in this book runs from about 1680 to about 1790. ## Takeaways #### Soziale Philosophen Aufklärung geschieht nicht im Selbstgespräch, sondern im Austausch mit anderen – sei es in direkter [[conversation|Konversation]] oder vermittels Literatur. Gespräche und Lektüre sind grundlegende Tätigkeiten für das aufgeklärte Denken und Handeln. Diderot sagte über den »philosophe«, dass er neben den Vermögen der Reflexion und der Urteilskraft auch soziale Qualitäten haben müsse. %% >Enlightened reason, typically, is a faculty that is exercised not in solitude, but in dialogue with others. The philosophe, according to Diderot, ‘combines a spirit of reflection and judgement with manners and qualities that are sociable’ The others in dialogue may be the physical people with whom one conducts an argument, or the opinions stored in books; in either case, conversation and reading are essential additions to the intellectual material that the individual can draw on. added: [[2024-01-17]] %% #### Gesetze der Vernunft Laut [[Cicero]] entsprechen wahre [[law|Gesetze]] der rechten [[reason|Vernunft]], die jedem gesunden Menschenverstand innewohnt und Recht von Unrecht zu unterscheiden weiß. Vernunft in diesem Sinne ist nicht die Fähigkeit logischen Denkens, sondern vernünftigen Abwägens. %% >This ‘reason’ is not a specialized faculty, requiring logical or mathematical training. In the words of Cicero, one of the classical authorities to whom the Enlightenment most often appealed, it is common to all humanity: True law is right reason, consonant with nature, spread through all people. It is constant and eternal; it summons to duty by its orders, it deters from crime by its prohibitions … There will not be one law at Rome and another at Athens, one now and another later; but all nations at all times will be bound by this one eternal and unchangeable law Thus when Enlighteners advocate reason, they usually mean the use of this ‘right reason’ and good sense to arrive at truth by means of debate. They urge people to be rational, but, still more, to be reasonable. added: [[2024-04-07]] ad: [[ideas and works]] > my content on reason %% #### Selbst denken – und sprechen Im Deutschen bezeichnet der »Mund« unsere Körperöffnung zum Atmen, Essen – und Sprechen. Die ursprüngliche Bedeutung des Wortes »Mund« lautet auch »Schutz«, was im Begriff »Vormund« noch mitschwingt, als Instanz, die für andere, unmündige Mitglieder einer Gemeinschaft, spricht. Selbst mündig zu werden, heißt, für sich selbst sprechen (und damit einhergehend: für sich selbst denken) zu lernen. Das meint Kant, wenn er im Kontext von Aufklärung über Mündigkeit schreibt. #toprocess %% added: [[2024-04-10]] linked: [[on enlightenment|Aufklärung]], [[on thinking|Denken]] processed: (insert dates) ##### Original highlight >In the word Vormund, the syllable mund is derived from an archaic word meaning ‘protection’, but it happens also to be the modern German word for ‘mouth’, so one can, if one wants, read into Kant’s wording the implication that immature people are forbidden to speak and must rely on guardians to speak on their behalf. Such an implication is appropriate, for in Kant’s essay thinking for oneself leads to speaking for oneself. Kant is concerned with how the mature individual takes part in the wider conversation of a community. – (location) note: %% %% ### Definition of Enlightenment #### Understand to advance How, in the early twenty-first century, should we define and interpret the Enlightenment? The best starting-point remains the definition of the Enlightenment, already quoted, as a coherent intellectual movement united by a ‘commitment to understanding, and hence to advancing, the causes and conditions of human betterment in this world’ This formulation, however, needs some qualifications. Yes, the Enlightenment was a conscious and deliberate attempt by thinkers better to understand humanity – and the world in which humans live – in order to promote happiness. ^d25eb2 #### Increase people’s well-being (...) the Enlightenment stands for the endeavours of thinkers, writers and practical administrators in many countries (...) to enlighten humanity is to clear away the false beliefs which have blinded people to their own interests; to oppose the power of institutions, especially the organized Churches, which have encouraged such blindness; to arrive at a true understanding of human nature, and of the political and economic societies in which people live; to increase people’s well-being and happiness; and to do so by close attention to empirical facts and the use of reason. The conviction animating these endeavours is that the world need not be a vale of tears; the earth is the destined home of humanity, and a place where [[happiness is attainable]]. ^pXV1 location: p. XV / [Location 826](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B084TDZYPM&location=826) used in: [[Enlightenment and Modernity]] #### [Location 833](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B084TDZYPM&location=833) Recently, the case for the Enlightenment has been put with particular eloquence by the psychologist Steven Pinker and the philosopher Susan Neiman. ‘The era’, according to [[Enlightenment Now|Pinker]], ‘was a cornucopia of ideas, some of them contradictory, but four themes tie them together: reason, science, humanism, and progress.’ 1 Neiman’s summary of Enlightenment values has a somewhat different emphasis. Alongside freedom and autonomy, she singles out ‘happiness, reason, reverence and hope’ as ‘values cherished by every thinker who was central to the Enlightenment’. 2 ### p. XVI #### [L 843](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B084TDZYPM&location=843) / [846](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B084TDZYPM&location=846) ##### Between us and darkness I believe that one of the few things that stands between us and an accelerated descent into darkness is the set of values inherited from the eighteenth-century Enlightenment (...) but it is also the only foundation for all the aspirations to build societies fit for all human beings to live in anywhere on this Earth, and for the assertion and defence of their human rights as persons. ^pXVI #[Location 853](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B084TDZYPM&location=853) The grain of [[truth|truth]] in some of these charges has been hugely exaggerated by two factors. The first is simply insufficient knowledge of what was really said, written and done in the Enlightenment. The second is a fault to which even defenders of the Enlightenment are sometimes prone: what historians call ‘[[presentism]]’ – that is, a tendency to see the past only from a present-day perspective, and to ignore or underestimate its difference from the present. Pinker’s term ‘[[humanism]]’, for example, could mislead incautious readers. Nowadays it serves well to define a secular morality, based not on supposedly divine commandments but on the sympathies which, as Enlighteners increasingly realized, bound human beings together in a community that transcended national frontiers. Yet the word ‘humanism’ was not used in this sense until the mid-nineteenth century. In this book, I have tried to remain aware of the continuities between the present and the past, but to avoid projecting present-day concerns onto a period separated from us by several centuries. Note: Always be aware of these problems! #### [Location 861](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B084TDZYPM&location=861) In the opinion of most Enlighteners, [[God]] had planned the universe in accordance with laws (which had recently been discovered by [[Isaac Newton (1642–1727)|Isaac Newton]]), and had then left it to run its orderly course. Only a small minority thought there was no God, and they took care not to advertise their scepticism. Even the boldest thinkers estimated the age of the earth at no more than a hundred thousand years. Species were thought to be constant: God would not have created beings only to let them become extinct. In the political world, the default mode of government, despite its acknowledged shortcomings, was monarchy. Republics were rare. Direct democracy, as known mainly from the history of ancient Rome and Athens, was distrusted, because experience showed that power usually fell into the hands of demagogues and this led to anarchy, followed by tyranny. Only representative democracy could work, as in the fledgling United States and – to a still very limited extent – in Britain. Women could have no part in politics, though this assumption was rendered dubious by the conspicuous success of women in governing the empires of Austria and Russia. We should not expect to find in the Enlightenment, therefore, some early version of the liberal values of the present day; but we can certainly find there the seedbed in which many of these values germinated. ### The governing idea is happiness In particular, the cliché of ‘the [[Enlightenment|age of reason]]’ needs to be questioned. (...) Whether by freeing people from false [[believing|beliefs]] or by increasing their material well-being, the pursuit of [[happiness]], long before Thomas Jefferson used the phrase in drafting the American Declaration of Independence, was the overriding purpose of enlightened thought and activity. Accordingly, although ‘[[reason]]’ is an important concept throughout this book, its governing [[idea]] is the pursuit of happiness. [Location 872](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B084TDZYPM&location=872) / [Location 878](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B084TDZYPM&location=878) ### A far-reaching change in mentality p. 2 | [Location 1029](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B084TDZYPM&location=1029) It meant overcoming centuries of Christian teaching that represented this world as a mere vale of tears in which we had to earn the true happiness that could only be found in heaven. St [[Augustine]], the theologian who more than any other shaped the character of medieval (and subsequent) Christianity, declared that, even for the righteous, true happiness was unattainable in our present life.8 The medieval pope [[Innocent III]], in his much-read treatise on the wretchedness of life, observed: ‘We be all borne yelling and crying, to the end we may expresse our myserie’; after which things would only get worse, especially as, for most people, misery on earth was a mere prelude to much greater suffering in hell.9 The Enlightenment was only possible once such assumptions had been discarded. Hence, we must consider it not only as a philosophical movement aiming ultimately to increase earthly happiness, but also as part of a tectonic shift in outlook, a far-reaching change in mentality. #### [Location 1037](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B084TDZYPM&location=1037) #### The pursuit of happiness The [[believing|belief]] that the [[purpose]] of human life is the attainment of happiness is called ‘[[eudaemonism]]’. But eudaemonism leaves open the question of what happiness is, and whether it is attainable at all. These were central questions for the Enlightenment, both in theory and (as we shall see in Chapter 8) in practice. #### [Location 1233](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B084TDZYPM&location=1233) ##### The nights were really dark Even normal life became frightening as soon as the sun set. In contrast to the light pollution that nowadays lightens the darkness around every town or village, moonless or overcast nights were truly dark. Admittedly, human beings have reasonably good night vision, and lanterns and torches were often available to help nocturnal travellers Nevertheless, night-time provoked both superstitious fear of spirits and realistic fear of lurking criminals. ### p. 20 #### [Location 1461](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B084TDZYPM&location=1461) The accumulated evidence may suggest not that people became sceptical about witchcraft, but that an already widespread, though inadmissible, scepticism could eventually be uttered. Caveats like Addison’s, admitting the possibility of witchcraft, do not imply any firm or ardent belief, but are merely a formal acknowledgement. Even during the great persecutions, how many people really credited the fantasies of the inquisitors? ### Rationalism gave way to empiricism [Location 1585](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B084TDZYPM&location=1585) Around the turn of the seventeenth and [[18th century|eighteenth centuries]], [[philosophy]] made a sharp [[change]] of direction, which is fundamental to the Enlightenment. [[Rationalism]] began giving way to [[empiricism]]; the authority of [[René Descartes|Descartes]] yielded, though slowly and unevenly, to that of John Locke. ### Philosophy is sound judgement Reason is shown not only in calculation, but also in judgement: in [[judging]] whether a narrative is plausible, an argument convincing, or a course of action likely to [[success|succeed]]. Judgement is exercised above all in social life. In this sense, although few people can be philosophers, [[philosophy]], or sound judgement, may spread throughout society.155 Hume expresses this aspiration in [[An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding]] (1748) (...) [Location 1656](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B084TDZYPM&location=1656) ### [Location 1711](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B084TDZYPM&location=1711) #### Kant’s »two hats« doctrine This is what [[Kant1724-1804|Kant]], a little confusingly, calls ‘the private use of [[reason]]’: the restrictions on intellectual expression imposed by professional responsibilities. However, the clergyman can also exercise ‘the public use of reason’. As a learned man, he can publish articles querying this or that dogma of his Church. Similarly, as a private citizen I must pay my taxes, but as a member of the public I can argue in the press about the state’s fiscal policy. This has been called Kant’s ‘“two hats” doctrine’: with my private hat on I must serve the state, but with my public hat on I can argue for the improvement of its institutions In this way, Kant hopes, enlightened discussion can gradually modify and liberalize the state. Note: Thinking of Arendt. ### Shift in mentality and deliberate undertaking Similarly, [[believing|belief]] in [[witchcraft]] was already disappearing before Enlighteners – excepting a few isolated voices at earlier periods – debunked its absurdity. The Enlightenment is therefore presented here in two interconnected ways: both as a deliberate undertaking and as the continuation of a shift in mentality; indeed, it could be summed up as the interaction between the two. Treatises and campaigns against [[superstition]] reinforced a tendency that was already under way, and that tendency in turn made [[intellectual]] arguments seem even more persuasive. Thanks to the [[growth|growth]] of the print media, illustrated by ‘moral weeklies’ written by Joseph Addison, Richard Steele and their many imitators, debates among philosophers were transmitted in accessible form to a wide public. Accordingly, I have at many points drawn on life-writings and travel literature to present aspects of people’s experience during the eighteenth century. – [Location 1872](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B084TDZYPM&location=1872) Note: The Enlightenment was not just an »age of reason« as in, a deliberate approach towards more rational thinking. ### A more accurate understanding The Enlightenment’s search for the betterment of human life, for the increase of [[happiness]], required a more accurate understanding of the world. [[Ernst Cassirer (1874–1945)|Cassirer]] speaks of ‘the almost unlimited power which scientific knowledge gains over all the thought of the Enlightenment’. 216 That understanding of the physical and natural worlds was transformed by the [[Scientific Revolution (1500–1700)|Scientific Revolution]], which provided the Enlightenment with a model of knowledge and impelled it to extend its inquiries to what Hume called ‘the science of man’ and to the study of society. – [Location 1956](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B084TDZYPM&location=1956) ### Descartes’ impact and intent [Location 2073](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B084TDZYPM&location=2073) The version of the mechanical philosophy that achieved most impact was that of [[René Descartes]]. Although he is chiefly remembered now as a philosopher, Descartes’ philosophy was intended to support his science, by providing a basis in absolutely certain knowledge. ### Burning a changeling [Location 19582](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B084TDZYPM&location=19582) Judith Devlin, The Superstitious Mind: French Peasants and the Supernatural in the Nineteenth Century (New Haven, 1987), pp. 116–17. The death in 1895 in County Tipperary of Bridget Cleary, often claimed as ‘the last witch-burning in Ireland’, represented a different [[superstition]]: when Bridget Cleary was disfigured by illness, her husband thought that the fairies had stolen her and substituted a [[changeling]]. As burning a changeling was believed to be a way of restoring the real person, he poured paraffin on her and set her on fire. See Angela Bourke, The Burning of Bridget Cleary: A True Story (London, 1999). Changling. Spooky. Things existing in peoples minds... ### A great symbolic moment A great symbolic moment for the Enlightenment, and for its project of freeing humanity from needless terrors, occurred in 1752 in Philadelphia. During a thunderstorm, Benjamin Franklin flew a kite with a pointed wire at the end and succeeded in drawing electric sparks from a cloud. He thus proved that lightning was an electrical phenomenon and made possible the invention of the lightning-rod, which, mounted on a high building, diverted the lightning and drew it harmlessly to the ground by means of a wire. Humanity no longer needed to fear fire from heaven. ^9b56be Note: [[Kant1724-1804|Kant]] verglich [[Benjamin Franklin (1706–1790)|Franklin]] mit [[Prometheus]]. Story von Prometheus mal aufarbeiten. Dient öfter als Referenz. Wow! %% ## Check location Anyone who thinks it pointless to argue with dead authors should remember that their [[idea|ideas]] are still alive. Although as a scholar I am committed to a historical understanding of [[literature]] and [[philosophy]], I am also conscious that historicism can be a dead hand laid on the past, denying it the power to interfere with our thinking and disturb our complacencies. Part of my purpose is to depict the Enlightenment as a set of ideas that are still vital, and a set of controversies that are still unresolved, at the present day. ^55c9ee