How Did The Enlightenment Change
Change The Enlightenment movement in Western Europe is one of the most studied movements in history. That being said there are many different ideas about just what the Enlightenment was intended to do. In his book, The Intellectual Origins of the French Enlightenment, Ira Wade argues that, “The Enlightenment did not attempt to develop a new body of teachings, though, nor did it seek a new dogma. […] It is a manner of thinking [….] It functions in every enterprise in which the human being is engaged, and by its manner of thinking, it aims to change the common way of thinking and doing. Thus Enlightenment thought carries within itself powers of destruction as well as powers of construction” (Wade, 92). Although, Wade does make some good
…show more content…
points in his writing, overall I would have to disagree with his claim that the Enlightenment did not attempt to develop a new body of teaching and a new dogma because, the enlightened thinkers were trying to change the common way of thinking and doing, and this alone I believe proves they were attempting to create a new dogma and way of teaching. In order to support my argument I will be examining documents from induviduals who experienced the Enlightenment first hand, as well as, including evidence from scholars who have studied the works of these first hand enlighteners.
In doing this I will demonstrate that the point of the Enlightenment was to create a new dogma and a new body of teaching. The Lisbon Earthquake was a major tragedy which not only took the lives of many, but led people at the time to questions the very beliefs that they have always held so dear. Even though some tried to rationalize the earthquake as God exercising his divine power, many of the Enlightenment thinkers took this opportunity to show that the current dogma, of the time, as well as the body of teaching had some unexplainable holes. As mentioned before many induviduals attempted to try and rationalize the earthquake as a reminder of God’s ultimate power such as Gabriel Malagrida, in an opinion on the true cause of the earthquake, when he writes, “It is scandalous to pretend the earthquake was just a natural event, for if that be true, there is no need to repent and to try to avert the wrath of God, and not even the Devil himself could invent a false idea more likely to lead us all to irreparable ruin” (Malagrida,72). Malagrida was a missionary who actually was imprisoned after his claims about the Lisbon earthquake and ultimately executed for blasphemy. This being
said not only do I believe that Malagrida had a bias toward believing everything was due to God’s divine power, but the fact that he was executed for blasphemy in my opinion makes his claims unreliable, at best. Furthermore, assuming individuals were on the same side as Malagrida before for the earthquake many of them took to Enlightenment thinking after for a number of reasons. One of the very popular reasons that people at the time were questioning the idea that God’s power was the cause of everything is that many people thought of God as a being who was good and did not cause unnecessary harm. Individuals could not rationalize why God would hurt so many innocent people and Enlightenment thinkers took advantage of this and saw this as a chance to change people’s view of how the world operates. For instance, in response to claims like Malagrida’s, Enlighteners such as, Paul-Henry Thiry, Baron d’Holbach, in The System of Nature, claimed, “Nature, equal in her distributions, entirely destitute of goodness or malice, follows only necessary and immutable laws”(Thiry, 89). Thiry furthers his point when he later claims, “The universe, that vast assemblage of everything that exists, presents only matter -on: the whole offers to our contemplation nothing but an in- Immense, an uninterrupted succession of causes and effects” (Thiry, 89). Thiry was a prominent social figure of the French Enlightenment, as well as, a philosopher and a translator. He also made significant contributions to Enlightenment science and religion, and even owned his own salon which was a safe place for radical thinking, at the time. This evidence gives me reason to believe that this writer was well qualified to be making claims about the Enlightenment. Furthermore, his claims support my argument to be true because, in his argument, Thiry is claiming that the earthquake was not an event caused solely by the wrath of God, but that it had to also do primarily be attributed to the cause and effect system of nature. This conveys that the Enlightenment was an attempt at creating a new body of teaching because, it had never been acceptable before to believe that things happened for a reason other than the power and will of God. Many people started to take the idea of Enlightened thinking seriously because, of events like the Lisbon earthquake because, they simply could not understand why God would cause something like that, so their belief was that something else must have been responsible. This is how the primary sources I used on the Lisbon earthquake support my claim that the Enlightenment was a movement with the goal of creating a new dogma. “The Enlightenment's concept of a machine-like universe contradicted much in the traditional Judeo-Christian concept of God. Most important, perhaps, Enlightenment thought precluded any belief in divine intervention in the physical world. Miracles or divinely ordained disasters, for example simply were impossible for the philosophes because they violated natural laws of cause and effect” (Wiesner, 66). This is a quote from, what is labeled as ‘the problem’, in the beginning of chapter 3 in, Discovering the Western Past a look at the evidence. These quotes helps demonstrate that the Enlightenment was an attempt to completely change the way of thinking that was present at the time as well as create a new dogma. Many individuals believe that the Enlightenment was purposed with establishing a brand new body of teaching different from anything ever accepted previously. For example, one of the most audacious and popular works of the time was the Encyclopedia which was published by Denis Diderot, in which he stated, “we have for quite some time needed a reasoning age when men would no longer seek the rules in classical authors but in nature, when men be conscious of what is false and true abuts so many arbitrary treatises on aesthetic” (Diderot, 158). Furthermore when describing the new way of thinking and doing he describes it as, “All things must e examined, debated, investigated without regard for anyone’s feelings” (Diderot, 158). Denis Diderot was one of the prominent intellectual thinkers in the enlightenment who beloved strongly in rationality and reason. He also wrote many books including one on the Newtonian mathematics. This proves that Diderot is a reliable source for support of my claim. The quotes which I took from Diderot portray that the Enlightenment was aimed with completely altering the way in which induviduals thought about things, as well as, changing the body of teaching that was acceptable at the time. Furthermore, Diderot is not the only scholar whose work supports my argument; it is also supported by David Hume. For instance in, “The Essay on Miracles”, Hume writes, “Upon the whole, then, it appears, that no testimony for any kind of miracle has ever amounted to a probability, much less to a proof; and that, even supposing it amounted to a me opposed by another proof” (Hume, 86). David Hume was a published philosopher who focused primarily on religion. I think that although Hume is a reliable source, it is important to note that he had a bias against religious beliefs at the time; Hume’s main focus was on proving that there were holes in the religious beliefs of the time. Either way, Hume’s quote supports my claim that the Enlightenment was focused on creating a new dogma because, in him claiming that miracles are simply impossible he is challenging everything everyone thought they knew. Hume is creating valid reasons to question everything that was believed at the time by disproving it or analyzing it with science. This demonstrates how both Hume and Diderot can be citied as sources whose work supports my argument that the Enlightenment was purposed with implementing a new dogma and a new body of teachings. Although it might be opposed by some, I believe that the goal of the Enlightenment was to create a new body of teaching and present a new dogma. “the Enlightened man, is man in his maturity, in his perfection; who is capable of pursuing his own happiness; because he has learned to examine, to think for himself, and not to take that for truth upon the authority of others, which experience has taught him examination will frequently prove erroneous” (Hume, 88-89). This quote from David Hume represents my argument that an enlightened man not only has different beliefs than a civilized man, but that he is a whole different being completely, with his own beliefs and ways of reasoning. This further proves how the Enlightenment was aimed at not just making man see things differently, but how it was aimed at changing virtually everything that people at the time thought they knew.
points in his writing, overall I would have to disagree with his claim that the Enlightenment did not attempt to develop a new body of teaching and a new dogma because, the enlightened thinkers were trying to change the common way of thinking and doing, and this alone I believe proves they were attempting to create a new dogma and way of teaching. In order to support my argument I will be examining documents from induviduals who experienced the Enlightenment first hand, as well as, including evidence from scholars who have studied the works of these first hand enlighteners.
In doing this I will demonstrate that the point of the Enlightenment was to create a new dogma and a new body of teaching. The Lisbon Earthquake was a major tragedy which not only took the lives of many, but led people at the time to questions the very beliefs that they have always held so dear. Even though some tried to rationalize the earthquake as God exercising his divine power, many of the Enlightenment thinkers took this opportunity to show that the current dogma, of the time, as well as the body of teaching had some unexplainable holes. As mentioned before many induviduals attempted to try and rationalize the earthquake as a reminder of God’s ultimate power such as Gabriel Malagrida, in an opinion on the true cause of the earthquake, when he writes, “It is scandalous to pretend the earthquake was just a natural event, for if that be true, there is no need to repent and to try to avert the wrath of God, and not even the Devil himself could invent a false idea more likely to lead us all to irreparable ruin” (Malagrida,72). Malagrida was a missionary who actually was imprisoned after his claims about the Lisbon earthquake and ultimately executed for blasphemy. This being
said not only do I believe that Malagrida had a bias toward believing everything was due to God’s divine power, but the fact that he was executed for blasphemy in my opinion makes his claims unreliable, at best. Furthermore, assuming individuals were on the same side as Malagrida before for the earthquake many of them took to Enlightenment thinking after for a number of reasons. One of the very popular reasons that people at the time were questioning the idea that God’s power was the cause of everything is that many people thought of God as a being who was good and did not cause unnecessary harm. Individuals could not rationalize why God would hurt so many innocent people and Enlightenment thinkers took advantage of this and saw this as a chance to change people’s view of how the world operates. For instance, in response to claims like Malagrida’s, Enlighteners such as, Paul-Henry Thiry, Baron d’Holbach, in The System of Nature, claimed, “Nature, equal in her distributions, entirely destitute of goodness or malice, follows only necessary and immutable laws”(Thiry, 89). Thiry furthers his point when he later claims, “The universe, that vast assemblage of everything that exists, presents only matter -on: the whole offers to our contemplation nothing but an in- Immense, an uninterrupted succession of causes and effects” (Thiry, 89). Thiry was a prominent social figure of the French Enlightenment, as well as, a philosopher and a translator. He also made significant contributions to Enlightenment science and religion, and even owned his own salon which was a safe place for radical thinking, at the time. This evidence gives me reason to believe that this writer was well qualified to be making claims about the Enlightenment. Furthermore, his claims support my argument to be true because, in his argument, Thiry is claiming that the earthquake was not an event caused solely by the wrath of God, but that it had to also do primarily be attributed to the cause and effect system of nature. This conveys that the Enlightenment was an attempt at creating a new body of teaching because, it had never been acceptable before to believe that things happened for a reason other than the power and will of God. Many people started to take the idea of Enlightened thinking seriously because, of events like the Lisbon earthquake because, they simply could not understand why God would cause something like that, so their belief was that something else must have been responsible. This is how the primary sources I used on the Lisbon earthquake support my claim that the Enlightenment was a movement with the goal of creating a new dogma. “The Enlightenment's concept of a machine-like universe contradicted much in the traditional Judeo-Christian concept of God. Most important, perhaps, Enlightenment thought precluded any belief in divine intervention in the physical world. Miracles or divinely ordained disasters, for example simply were impossible for the philosophes because they violated natural laws of cause and effect” (Wiesner, 66). This is a quote from, what is labeled as ‘the problem’, in the beginning of chapter 3 in, Discovering the Western Past a look at the evidence. These quotes helps demonstrate that the Enlightenment was an attempt to completely change the way of thinking that was present at the time as well as create a new dogma. Many individuals believe that the Enlightenment was purposed with establishing a brand new body of teaching different from anything ever accepted previously. For example, one of the most audacious and popular works of the time was the Encyclopedia which was published by Denis Diderot, in which he stated, “we have for quite some time needed a reasoning age when men would no longer seek the rules in classical authors but in nature, when men be conscious of what is false and true abuts so many arbitrary treatises on aesthetic” (Diderot, 158). Furthermore when describing the new way of thinking and doing he describes it as, “All things must e examined, debated, investigated without regard for anyone’s feelings” (Diderot, 158). Denis Diderot was one of the prominent intellectual thinkers in the enlightenment who beloved strongly in rationality and reason. He also wrote many books including one on the Newtonian mathematics. This proves that Diderot is a reliable source for support of my claim. The quotes which I took from Diderot portray that the Enlightenment was aimed with completely altering the way in which induviduals thought about things, as well as, changing the body of teaching that was acceptable at the time. Furthermore, Diderot is not the only scholar whose work supports my argument; it is also supported by David Hume. For instance in, “The Essay on Miracles”, Hume writes, “Upon the whole, then, it appears, that no testimony for any kind of miracle has ever amounted to a probability, much less to a proof; and that, even supposing it amounted to a me opposed by another proof” (Hume, 86). David Hume was a published philosopher who focused primarily on religion. I think that although Hume is a reliable source, it is important to note that he had a bias against religious beliefs at the time; Hume’s main focus was on proving that there were holes in the religious beliefs of the time. Either way, Hume’s quote supports my claim that the Enlightenment was focused on creating a new dogma because, in him claiming that miracles are simply impossible he is challenging everything everyone thought they knew. Hume is creating valid reasons to question everything that was believed at the time by disproving it or analyzing it with science. This demonstrates how both Hume and Diderot can be citied as sources whose work supports my argument that the Enlightenment was purposed with implementing a new dogma and a new body of teachings. Although it might be opposed by some, I believe that the goal of the Enlightenment was to create a new body of teaching and present a new dogma. “the Enlightened man, is man in his maturity, in his perfection; who is capable of pursuing his own happiness; because he has learned to examine, to think for himself, and not to take that for truth upon the authority of others, which experience has taught him examination will frequently prove erroneous” (Hume, 88-89). This quote from David Hume represents my argument that an enlightened man not only has different beliefs than a civilized man, but that he is a whole different being completely, with his own beliefs and ways of reasoning. This further proves how the Enlightenment was aimed at not just making man see things differently, but how it was aimed at changing virtually everything that people at the time thought they knew.