The Heritage of the Enlightenment

Shore’s own judgments and connections

The Enlightenment's talk of universal civilization, Shore observes, often shrinks on inspection to one Parisian café standing in for Paris, France, Europe and the world: universalism with a hypocritical streak.

Put simply Shore: when Enlightenment thinkers spoke of a civilization for all humanity, they often meant one Paris café, standing in for Paris, France, Europe and the world. Their claim to speak for everyone had a hypocritical streak.

The Enlightenment disenchanted the world (Weber's Entzauberung): belief in miracles, mythical beings, and powers beyond human grasp was draining out of how people understood things.

Even if a demon has planted every thought in my head, the thinking itself is happening, so I must exist: "cogito, ergo sum."

Put simply Descartes: even if a demon had put every thought in my head, I would still be thinking, so I must exist. Hence "cogito, ergo sum": I think, therefore I am.

Tolerance among Christians is the easy case; Voltaire goes further and calls the Turk, the Chinese and the Jew brothers, all "children of the same father."

Rousseau's natural human was virtuous and compassionate; property and society made people vain, selfish and competitive, and there is no road back to that lost condition.

In the text In Part One of the Discourse on Inequality (1755), Rousseau writes that men in the state of nature "could not be either good or bad, virtuous or vicious", and calls pity "the only natural virtue".

Authority belongs to the general will, which is neither a majority vote nor a tally of individual wills but a collective thing in its own right.

Put simply Rousseau: the right to rule belongs to the "general will". It is not a majority vote, nor a count of what each person wants, but the will of the community as a whole, a thing in its own right.

Where to read it Rousseau, The Social Contract, Book II, ch. 3, and Book IV, ch. 2.

Enlightenment is humanity's exit from immaturity, an immaturity that is self-imposed rather than forced on us from outside.

Put simply Kant: enlightenment is humanity leaving its immaturity behind. And that immaturity is our own doing, not something forced on us from outside.

Where to read it Kant, "An Answer to the Question: What Is Enlightenment?" (1784), opening paragraph.

"Sapere aude," dare to know: Kant's motto for enlightenment asks for courage, the nerve to reason for oneself rather than let a priest or a book decide.

Where to read it Kant, "An Answer to the Question: What Is Enlightenment?" (1784), opening paragraph.

The Copernican turn in Kant's epistemology reverses the direction of fit: not the mind conforming to things as they are, but knowable things conforming to the mind's capacities.

Put simply Kant's "Copernican turn": it was assumed that the mind must fit itself to things as they are. Kant reverses this: what we can know of things has to fit what the mind is able to take in.

The Enlightenment's talk of universal civilization, Shore observes, often shrinks on inspection to one Parisian café standing in for Paris, France, Europe and the world: universalism with a hypocritical streak.

Put simply Shore: when Enlightenment thinkers spoke of a civilization for all humanity, they often meant one Paris café, standing in for Paris, France, Europe and the world. Their claim to speak for everyone had a hypocritical streak.

Philosophical movements have moods, and the Enlightenment's, as Shore reads it, is exultant: reason worshipped and trusted, disenchantment greeted with joy rather than regret.

Put simply Shore: philosophical movements have moods. The Enlightenment's was elated: it worshiped and trusted reason, and greeted the fading of magic and miracles ("disenchantment") with joy rather than regret.

Berlin's image for the Enlightenment picture of progress: the world is a vast jigsaw, each piece fitted brings the whole nearer, and makes the next piece easier.

The Enlightenment disenchanted the world (Weber's Entzauberung): belief in miracles, mythical beings, and powers beyond human grasp was draining out of how people understood things.

Knowledge should be rebuilt from scratch: treat as false whatever admits the slightest doubt, and see what survives to serve as a foundation.

Put simply Descartes: to rebuild knowledge from the ground up, treat as false anything you can doubt even slightly. Whatever survives can serve as a firm foundation.

Even if a demon has planted every thought in my head, the thinking itself is happening, so I must exist: "cogito, ergo sum."

Put simply Descartes: even if a demon had put every thought in my head, I would still be thinking, so I must exist. Hence "cogito, ergo sum": I think, therefore I am.

After securing his own existence, Descartes brings God back in; a non-deceiving God lets him recover the whole world he had doubted away.

Shore finds Descartes's proof of God deeply unconvincing: bringing God back in to recover the world looks like cheating after such radical doubt.

Hobbes's state of nature means permanent war: greed, self-interest and the appetite for power and wealth set everyone against everyone, in unending terror.

Put simply Hobbes: imagine people before any government (his "state of nature"). Greed, self-interest and the hunger for power and wealth would set everyone against everyone, in endless war and terror.

Escaping the natural state of war takes a one-time, irrevocable bargain: everyone hands their freedom to an absolute ruler, the Leviathan, who provides peace and security in return.

Put simply Hobbes: the way out of that war is one bargain that can never be undone. Everyone hands their freedom to an all-powerful ruler, the "Leviathan", who in return keeps them safe and at peace.

In the text In Leviathan (1651), ch. 17, each person covenants with every other to authorize "one man, or ... one assembly of men" as sovereign; ch. 14 holds that the right to defend one's life cannot be given up.

For Locke, people in the natural state were free and equal, not at war; government arises gradually, after they have worked the land, acquired property and want it protected.

Put simply Locke: before government, people were free and equal, not at war (his "state of nature"). Government grew gradually, once people had worked the land, owned property and wanted it protected.

Government is legitimate only by consent of the governed, never by divine right, and that consent is revocable: rulers who abuse their power can be replaced.

Put simply Locke: a government has the right to rule only if the people agree to it, never because God chose the ruler ("divine right"). That agreement can be withdrawn: rulers who abuse their power can be replaced.

Deism's God made the world, gave humans reason, and then withdrew: no puppeteer working the strings, but a creator who left people responsible for their own affairs.

Put simply Voltaire's deism: God made the world and gave people reason, then stepped back. He is not a puppeteer pulling the strings; people are left responsible for their own affairs.

Every dogma breeds disputes and disputes breed misery; religion exists for our happiness, which requires only that we be just and indulgent, not that we agree about metaphysics.

Put simply Voltaire: every fixed doctrine starts quarrels, and quarrels bring misery. Religion is there to make us happy, and for that we need only be fair and forgiving, not agree on ultimate questions ("metaphysics").

Tolerance among Christians is the easy case; Voltaire goes further and calls the Turk, the Chinese and the Jew brothers, all "children of the same father."

Rousseau was so hard to live with that, as Shore recalls Charles Taylor putting it, calling him difficult to get on with would be the eighteenth century's great understatement.

Rousseau's natural human was virtuous and compassionate; property and society made people vain, selfish and competitive, and there is no road back to that lost condition.

In the text In Part One of the Discourse on Inequality (1755), Rousseau writes that men in the state of nature "could not be either good or bad, virtuous or vicious", and calls pity "the only natural virtue".

Authority belongs to the general will, which is neither a majority vote nor a tally of individual wills but a collective thing in its own right.

Put simply Rousseau: the right to rule belongs to the "general will". It is not a majority vote, nor a count of what each person wants, but the will of the community as a whole, a thing in its own right.

Where to read it Rousseau, The Social Contract, Book II, ch. 3, and Book IV, ch. 2.

Humanity's destiny should be "the measure and goal of all of our strivings," the fixed point we watch so as not to go astray.

Put simply Mendelssohn: what human beings are meant to become should be the yardstick and aim of everything we strive for, the fixed point we keep our eyes on so we do not lose our way.

Enlightenment is humanity's exit from immaturity, an immaturity that is self-imposed rather than forced on us from outside.

Put simply Kant: enlightenment is humanity leaving its immaturity behind. And that immaturity is our own doing, not something forced on us from outside.

Where to read it Kant, "An Answer to the Question: What Is Enlightenment?" (1784), opening paragraph.

"Sapere aude," dare to know: Kant's motto for enlightenment asks for courage, the nerve to reason for oneself rather than let a priest or a book decide.

Where to read it Kant, "An Answer to the Question: What Is Enlightenment?" (1784), opening paragraph.

Kant's call to think for yourself is no license for rebellion: soldiers still obey and taxes still get paid, but across many other spheres, nobody else should do your thinking.

Where to read it Kant, "An Answer to the Question: What Is Enlightenment?" (1784), on the public and private use of reason.

The Copernican turn in Kant's epistemology reverses the direction of fit: not the mind conforming to things as they are, but knowable things conforming to the mind's capacities.

Put simply Kant's "Copernican turn": it was assumed that the mind must fit itself to things as they are. Kant reverses this: what we can know of things has to fit what the mind is able to take in.

Goethe's charge against Mendelssohn: he treats beauty as an entomologist treats a butterfly, pinning it down until its color pales and nothing living is left.

Put simply Shore has Goethe say of Mendelssohn that he treats beauty the way an insect collector treats a butterfly: he pins it down, its color fades, and nothing living is left.

Rousseau, after wandering as an orphan and becoming a benefactress's lover, arrives in Paris and meets Diderot; they collaborate on the Encyclopédie.

Discourse on the Method Discours de la méthode

Meditations on First Philosophy Meditationes de Prima Philosophia

Leviathan

Two Treatises of Government

Discourse on the Origin of Inequality Discours sur l'origine et les fondements de l'inégalité parmi les hommes

The Social Contract Du contrat social

A Treatise on Toleration Traité sur la tolérance

An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment? Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklärung?

What is Enlightenment? Über die Frage: was heißt aufklären?

Mendelssohn (September) and Kant (December) each answer "What is Enlightenment?" in the Berlinische Monatsschrift, a question the pastor Johann Friedrich Zöllner had raised in the journal the year before.

Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen Déclaration des droits de l'homme et du citoyen

French Revolution: the Bastille falls (July 14) and the Declaration of the Rights of Man is proclaimed.

The Terror: the revolutionary government's period of mass political violence.

The Magic Mountain Der Zauberberg