That is not the case. He reviews the - primarily British - Enlightenment thinkers such as Hume, Shelburne, Macaulay, Gibbon, Burke, Brissot, Paine and finally Mary Wollstonecraft, all the subject of a chapter each. Whatmore explains the context for their philosophies and ideas, their reception, and the ensuing debates in the historical setting of the French Revolution, the American constitution and other political game-changers.
Despite all the years of philosophy at university, and my subsequent reading of philosophy books, this book requires quite some knowledge to grasp everything and is clearly written for specialists, rather than for the interested lay person like myself.
The real references to our time only come at the end of the book, which is aptly called "And By Confusion Stand":
"The assumotion is that eighteenth century authrs, would, if they were beamed across time into the present, recognize and appreciate that many of their hopes and dreams about politics had been realized. They would praise the creation of democracies defending human rights. They would applaud the extent of toleration and the breakup of empire, even if the latter had been largely within living memory. They might accept that war remained part of the human condition, but the extent of social and technological progress would no doubt overwhelm them. Many of our intellectuals would seek to congratulate their ancestors on establishing the foundations of our world: many global traditions of revolution, we might tell them, can be charted from their historical moment, and so too can traditions of gradual reform, the basis of breathtaking technological and social progress that deserves to be lauded" (p. 310)
"Those battling to prevent the end of enlightenment worried about the loss of cultural diversity, the loss of alternative political or economic systems, and the identification of happiness with theever-growing consumption of luxury goods. They worried that their own world was a return to the past: to times of division, turbulence, sacrifice, war and death. Enlightenment figures saw what we call modern politics largely in religious terms, with politicians in free states presenting themselves as latter-day priests. They were concerned that fanatics had won the day, with enthusiasm the most powerful force in social intercourse. Political puritanism, they believed, had defeated enlightenment". (p. 312)
Indeed, I am one of those baffled and perplexed citizens who follow what's happening in the world almost by the minute, shocked by the lack of fact-based rationality, of social and legal justice, of human rights and the freedom of speech. We are witnessing a regression into darkness, with intolerance, brutal nationalism, imperialism and greed running politics. If only for this reason, every little brick that can help to bring society a step closer to real Enlightenment is welcome. Whatmore gave us the foundations again.
No comments:
Post a Comment