The Philosophy of the Enlightenment - Research Paper Example

The Philosophy of the Enlightenment History encompasses many different spheres of human life and existence. History in the early era could be considered as descriptive volumes of patterns and cultures of humanity relying heavily on socio-political, religious and cultural evolvement. The linear progression of history associated with dates and causes and effects also gave rise to other schools of thought. This paper will seek to demonstrate that progressive history is not absolute and that there are other views of history that are as compelling and debatable as the prominent views. In many circles the importance of history is downplayed and in some cases not much credence is given to historians and their work. Some argue that one cannot measure history like science, for example, and so the subject sometimes suffers from lack of credibility. Many believe that history is only about collection and recalling facts where the historian is receptive only, as he has no task of reconstruction (Oakeshott 2002,33). The fact of the matter is that the historian has to use different methods to extract facts and data from the available documents. These facts also have to coincide with data from other branches in both social and natural sciences. It is safe to say that every aspect of life is dependent upon history. It is through history that one is able to make predictions, give valid evaluations, connect forms of life with another, creates programs and strategies as they relate to success and continuity. History helps to revolutionize the thinking processes. The different experiences help to prepare a generation of people for a new age and a new era. The level to which they use the knowledge to steer away from the mistakes of the past should not solely be the responsible of history and historians. The consequences are related to the attitudes, will and direction of events at any given time. History is responsible for producing new schools of evidence and debate. In the different explanations of the creation story, for example, there are opposing sides as to how the earth was generated. In the absence of concrete record that can withstand the scrutiny of scientists and other scholars, history provides a medium through which religion, philosophy, sociology and psychology can equally share and contribute to the different explanations. One must admit that although history is essential and indispensable there exist many doubts and uncertainties. In many prominent universities such as the University of Oxford, while subjects such as theology, law, music among others were included in the curriculum of the university for many years it was not until 1850 that history was added to the program of studies. It could not be described as having claims to a wealth of truth and there was a lack of systematic knowledge. The discipline of history has evolved and is continuing to provide for much debate. Hegel (1988,3) categorized history into three parts namely, original, reflective, and philosophic. According to Hegel the original historian relies on the accounts and reports of others. The reflective historian weaves his beliefs and mental energy into his work, while the philosophic historian applies a certain volume of philosophy to his work. Based on these descriptions it would be evident that history lacks a certain level of scientific methodology that would render it reliable and respectable. As we move through time, however, it has developed other attributes that enable it to make valuable contributions to mankind just like other subject areas. As history began to take its rightful place among scholars, philosophers and historians in the nineteenth century began to accept the idea that history was a progression toward some higher goal and human state. Leading up to the nineteenth century the period of the Enlightenment started a new stream of thought toward history and place the subject in a more favorable light as more persons started to examine the importance and development. As Cassirer (1968)stated, the content of history is indebted to the Enlightenment. For it was the eighteenth century which raised the central philosophical problem in this field of knowledge. It inquires concerning the ‘conditions of the possibility’ of history, just as it inquires the conditions of the possibility of natural science. To be sure, the eighteenth century seeks only to establish these conditions in preliminary outline. It tries to grasp the meaning of history by endeavoring to gain a clear and distinct concept of it, to ascertain the relation between the general and the particular, between idea and reality, and between laws and facts and to draw the exact boundaries between these terms. Although history was viewed as progress from this era it still fell under different categories within the progressive view. Theories of linear progression were developed by Lessing, Herder and Comte who were the leading thinkers of Europe at that time. They believed that there could be worldwide human improvement if different aspects were modified based on the findings of history. Romanticism explored the errors brought about by the Enlightenment view of history. They didn’t find history to be able to improve human condition. Rather, they felt that experience led to oppression; hence, their intellectual thinking came to be described as spiral progression. As world events continue to shape the thinking and ideas of history and philosophy many scholars began to doubt the idea of history being progressive. One historian whose faith was shaken after the First World War was American historian, Charles Beard. He felt that there was no connection between progress and objectivity (Breisach 2003,330). Beard also thought that there were three prevailing views of history from which the historian could choose. History is chaos and every attempt to interpret it otherwise is an illusion. History moves around in a kind of cycle. History moves in a line straight or spiral, or in some direction. Neither objectivity nor positivistic science could assist historians in making their choices. Of course, the historian may seek to escape these issues by silence or by a confession or by a confession of avoidance or he may face them boldly, aware of the intellectual and moral perils inherent in any decision – in his act of faith. (331) Based on Beard’s three views history lacked any depth and any fruitful end to any scholarly attempt. According to his views it also lacked any team work that could give credence to findings and results. Another American historian, Carl Becker, put it succinctly in his Presidential Speech of December 1931 when he stated that, “Everyman is his own historian.” The different concepts and ideas were subjected to a number of factors within the scope of the historian’s environment as well as conditions beyond his control. As the idea of progress made its way in the chambers of history there are three phrases that were developed as a result. The first phase was an ethical ideal toward which humanity was considered to be moving. With more positive beliefs resurrected in the Renaissance and the Enlightenment the future of mankind was now predicted in a positive light. The second phase of progressive history can be described as the period in which attempts were made to define the notion of progress more clearly and to formulate and establish general laws of progress. It was during this period that witnessed the flourishing of new denominations within Christianity. The different faiths professed the ability of mankind to be saved from the decadence and disorder which seemed to have been the norm. The scientific world also witnessed a move towards an ethical ideal. Charles Darwin published his evolution theory. In his most famous publication, “The origin of the Species”, he stated that the universe was a continuous process. Although the work fell in the category of natural sciences and biology it embraced the universe of which humanity is a part of as one entity. His idea of progression towards an ethical ideal was evident. As Julian Huxley said in his introduction to Darwin’s work, Thus, in the light of sciences of evolutionary biology which Darwin founded, man is seen not just as a part of nature, but as a very peculiar and indeed unique part. In his person the evolutionary process has become conscious of itself, and he alone is capable of leading it on to realizations of possibility. (16). A move towards an ethical ideal was not only evident in natural history but also in the social and political landscape. According to Marx theory, after passing through different political systems humanity will reach an ideal and absolute political state through the system of communism. History is a reflection of humanity. The different attributes and the varied aspects of human living, as well as other participants in the universe are what carve out the way in history and provide historians with the resources that he needs to work with. Consequently, all the philosophical, social, scientific and political views associated with the move towards an ethical ideal filtered into the historical views and concepts of the day. It was seen as if history has reached its heights. By virtue of its content and methodology it was seen as a tool that could help mankind advance on his way towards self actualization. It was seen as a tool of learning, one that could motivate and create positive ideals for self and posterity. The third phase in the identity of progressive history was where the idea that emerges that if progress has occurred it is neither simple nor continuous, that advance in one direction is frequently accompanied by retrogression in another, that the question of value must be clearly distinguished from the question of fact and that the criteria of general progress are still to seek. The revolution of ideas and the move towards success in all facets of human living took center stage and also received positive responses from scholars in history, sciences and social sciences as well. It seemed as if everything was in place to facilitate that ideal. There was an interruption, however, with the advent of World War I in 1914. This was seen as a retardation of the process that began in the previous century. The blame game among historians started at this point. Many revisionist historians pointed to Germany as the cause of World War 1. Some even went further as identifying other world leaders with Adolf Hitler. Sydney Bradshaw Fay was a noted revisionist historian and was one of the first scholars to publish documents about the war. He was seen as one of those participating in the strong debate on the cause of the war. Among the underlying causes of the war according to Fray, were the system of secret alliances, militarism, nationalism, economic imperialism and the newspaper media. Another American historian, Harry Barnes, wrote a book entitled The Genesis of World War. He was expressing his anger at another work that was earlier published allegedly by the Russian and Serbian governments (Henig 1999, 36). Fay’s work, Origin of the World War was published three years after the Barnes publication. Some historians viewed the war as an accident. Interestingly some historians even blamed the war on Social Darwism. Some Marxist historians blamed the war on imperialism that they predicted would give rise to conflicts and ultimately a socialist state. The Germans did not accept the blame of the historians. One of the ways of showing denial was summarized in one of the textbooks that were used in German secondary schools in the 1920s. In the so-called peace treaty, the unheard of demand for reparations and the unexampled exploitation of Germany was founded on the lie regarding German’s war guilt. Did Germany desire the war? Did she prepare it maliciously and begin it wantonly? Today every informed person inside and outside Germany knows that Germany is absolutely innocent with regard to the outbreak of war. Russia, France and England wanted war and unleashed it. (Henig, 34). Those historians who were not fazed by the events of World War I and were still holding on to their beliefs of progression had their hopes dashed with the occurrence of World War II. The Second World War was termed the costliest in history. This was measured in both economic and human standards. On one hand it changed the course of history with regards to the idea of progress while on the other hand it provided ready made resources for historians. It was indeed a great moment for historians. Adamthwaite wrote, “that never before have historians been able to write so close to events with the benefits of archives.” The war heralded modern history. New allies and enemies in the aftermath of the war provided a wealth of material for modern historians. It steered the way for pre-enlightenment ideas in history to once again be at the forefront. The different world events that reflected a regression in the life of mankind can never be described as being progressive. Linear progressive history has become the norm over the last two centuries. In the assumption of progress, linear also signify the freedom of self from the constraints of nature. Hegel described it as the realization of his simultaneous oneness with Spirit. The western world views linear progression in the context of time influenced by the chronology of Christianity. This linear progression is evidenced by the notion that time began with the Creation story and will end when the world comes to an end. The cyclic view of time, however, has always been prevalent among non Christian people. Just as how the western notion of linear progression ties in neatly with Christianity, it is with the same trend that cyclical progression in the East coincides with their religious belief of reincarnation. History in their context may be then seen from a different perspective than the western world if one examines their belief systems in that context. Linear and cyclic progressions, however, do not have to contradict each other. In his book, Intercultural Philosophy, Mall explains further. The cyclic view of time emphasizing the recurrent pattern in nature and human history points to structural recurrences that do not mean exact repetition of what has happened before. The present is just not a copy of the past and the future the present. Life and death do repeat themselves but those who love life and suffer death and do it very differently. (62) Against this background one could argue that both types of ideologies are not as far apart as some historians would have the wider community to believe. Again everything could be pointing to perception and the age old motif of cause and effect. The two world wars has always been compared and examined by scholars in looking at patterns and recurrence of events. He also explained his theory of the two wars. There is of course a structural pattern that is repeated as, for example, between the two world wars, when the individuals, societies, and generations experienced this general pattern with many novelties. We may think of time in terms of recurrent patterns and still experience it as full of novelties. One can examine several events that took place in the western world that would also be identified as cyclical. The rise and fall of nations would appear to occur in cycles rather than as linear progression. The power of certain nations in the fifteenth to twentieth centuries serves as a reminder that history is cyclical. If history was absolute then some learning should take place. One should learn from the other’s mistake. Or it seems that humans become so excited in their time line that they pay little attention to their history. As powerful as the Roman Empire was in its era, it suffered a collapse just as other empires before and after such as the Babylonians and the Mayans. Human error could be at fault. As Bentley, (875) explained, “The Roman Empire for instance did not collapse because of the barbarian invasions but rather from its own internal contradictions.” Although these civilizations collapsed sections of their cultures such as their educational and scientific methods were passed on to succeeding groups of peoples. The scientific knowledge gained from the Babylonians and the expertise in agriculture that has been copied from Mayan civilizations are just two of the examples of transfer of knowledge. One could view succeeding world powers in cyclical terms of events. During the Atlantic Slave Trade, for example, countries such as Spain, England, and France had substantial periods of economic growth. The Marshall Plan ushered in after World War II helped in the economic recovery of these countries although they were surpassed in military and economic strategy by the United States of America. Now the world is grappling with a global economic shift as the focus turns to parts of Asia. It would be interesting to examine what the different nations had gained from their spouts and also which group of persons would be the next beneficiaries. Will it be the former groups of nations or new emerging groups of peoples? Some historians who favor the idea of cyclical progression argue that there is nothing new under the sun. This is not an absolute truth. Every era produces elements that help to improve life. The invention of the steam engine that propelled the Industrial Revolution has pushed the world to a level that it has not seen before. The major changes in agriculture and transportation, among others have greatly improved the lives of millions of persons. Many historians view the revolution as the most far-reaching, influential transformation of human culture since the advent of agriculture approximately ten thousand years ago. The cyclical nature in world history can be beneficial. Historians should be able to use the different human cycles to predict the future. Some historians have used certain events such as the different civilizations to make predictions. In historical terminology progress doesn’t necessarily means something positive. It sometimes can be accompanied by retrogression. There have been many instances of genocides as recent as the twentieth century which saw the rise of linear progressive views. Genocides are certainly not only common to the twentieth century. They have been happening from many centuries before. There are many biblical stories, for example, that relate instances of genocide such as destructions recorded in the book of Joshua in the Old Testament. Especially in the twentieth century these destructive events have some common elements that give them some level of identity. Weitz also believed that there is some commonality. Genocides have become more extensive, more systematic, and more thorough. They represent a lethal, depressing culmination of the large-scale violence that so marked the twentieth century. Genocides stand at the center of our contemporary cultural crisis. They challenge our hopes for peaceful, tolerant coexistence among diverse peoples; they raise the deepest fears that the modern world we inhabit is not a site of continual improvement in the human condition but the very cause of more intense, seemingly unstoppable violence against civilian populations. (8) This shows history in a decadent and retrogressive light. It shows that humanity has not learned from past events and they continue to repeat the same mistakes. This is only negative aspects that have no bearing on moving humanity forward or showing the improvement of life. Weitz continued to identify the different events namely Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union under Stalin and Lenin, Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge and the former Yugoslavia. Just like some earlier description of cyclical and linear history, Weitz elaborated on some of the communalities of the great mistakes in history. “Each of the cases has its peculiarities, but together they also display some notable common features, especially in relation to the historical origins and the practices of genocide.” The purity of the Aryan races was not an ideology that began in Nazism. Arthur de Gobineau a French aristocrat wrote extensively on his racialist theory in his publication An Essay on the Inequality of the Human Races. Racial tensions are not the only indicators of history as retrogression. Slavery, the Mideast crisis, other international conflicts and the threat of destruction by nuclear weapons also symbolize the flip side of the progress of history. There display of aggression towards small and developing countries by powerful nations also prove that history has not been kind to some groups of persons. While they continue to participate in the same human experiences that have kept them in bondage centuries ago those who wield power and authority over them in the same way pay scant regard to their traditions and history. Although history has not been fully progressive it still helps in many ways in trying to move humanity forward. One of the important contributions is providing a wealth of knowledge to posterity. Mankind may not use the knowledge to benefit himself as he should but it still better to be armed with knowledge than to be ignorant of the past. The question of fact and the question value will also help everyone to be critical of the knowledge that they have. One can look at events and make better critiques and also predictions. Ultimately it is mankind that makes the determinations and steer events for the future. History is a culmination of all the different genres of human life. It expounds and brings one to a level of self examination. Historians have been looking at different world civilizations, where although many of them have seen more progress than others, they have helped students of history to make intelligent predictions. This can be seen as cyclical progression where man can learn and prepare himself for what is to come. While linear progression is seen as a line of events waiting to happen cyclical can add more energy in its expectations. According to historians the world has seen four civilizations that have helped humanity to progress in various ways. Although the earliest form of civilization was characterized by wars and conflicts, successive groups of peoples have benefitted from some of its technology. The value of writing was gained from this first civilization that began in about 4 B.C. Historians portray the second civilizations as one that saw the introduction of varying religious ideologies. One should remember that the two major progressions in history have some religious ties in terms of their contextual approaches. The third civilization saw a rise in aesthetics and ethics with a turning point in literature, art, science, and paved way for other intellectual genres. The fourth civilization is to be credited with the way knowledge is disseminated. News, forms of entertainment and related electronic devices have pushed the value of living to a point that helps to bring the world to a global village. Hopefully the fifth civilizations will help mankind to realize his full potential in terms of developing himself to an ethical ideal that has been theorized but still has not yet fully been realized. When this happens then history would really have made its mark, probably more so than any of its counterparts. The multitude of problems that are present in the world today along with the many inventions and developments aimed at the progress of mankind could be testimony to the fact that history is progressive. There is also enough evidence, however, to prove that this progressive nature is not the only theory. Other strong arguments such as history as being of a cyclical nature continue to create a divide among historians and scholars.   Becker, Carl. Everyman His Own Historian. American Historical Review Vol. 37, Issue 2, 221-236 Bentley, Michael. Companion to Historiography. London: Routledge, 1997. Breisach, Ernst. On the future of history: the postmodernist challenge and its aftermath. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003. Cassirer, Ernst. The Philosophy of the Enlightenment. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1968. Copleston, Frederick. A History of Philosophy. London: Tower Building, 1960. Darwin, Charles and Huxley, Julian.  The Origin of Species: With a Special Introduction by Sir Julian Huxley. New York: New American Library, 2003 Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich. Introductions to the philosophy of history. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1988. Henig, Ruth Beatrice. The origins of the First World War. London: Routledge, 1999 Kramer, Lloyd S. A Companion to Western Historical Thought. Malden: Blackwell Publishers, 2002. Mall, Ram Adhar. Intercultural Philosophy. Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 2000. Oakeshott, Michael. What is history? and other essays. Exeter: Imprint Academic, 2002.  Weitz, Eric D. A century of genocide: utopias of race and nation. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009. Williams, Louise Blakeney. Modernism and the ideology of history: literature, politics, and the past. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. . . . Read More