Pros And Cons Of Enlightenment
Lejla Subasic
In my stance, my argument is that the Enlightenment has failed, but not completely. There is still a reminiscence that remains. However because of t The influence of the enlightenment on the French revolution
THREE CRITICS OF THE ENLIGHTENMENT
Goethe declared long ago that under no circumstances that the statement of fact is free from theory. The Enlightenment was not complete. The Enlightenment was not a complete amalgamated political plank, a determined manifesto or plan, but a budding outlook of society that engrossed in an imprecise, though distinguishable, forms of assumptions, a category of suggestions, and a rhetorical style like the Socratic dialogue. page 13 These dreams were just dreams, just that, inflated expectations …show more content…
A huge proponent of the Enlightenment, Montesquieu’s Spirit of the Laws suggested the theory of the separation of powers in order to obtain a political system of checks and balances, promoting order and equality. The elected officials are susceptible to use one’s to their advantage in the present climate in society, to a greater extent now that they can make sense of the population more. It is nearly impossible to have knowledge and be good willed, since jealousy, suspicion, fear, coldness, reserve, hate, and fraud lie constantly concealed. There is no rational reason to be good. So how does the American government control its population? The way it still is – divide and conquer. It pits one group against the other and lets them fight. Native-Americans against whites. Blacks against whites. Red states against blue states. Pro-choice against pro-life. Women against men. Liberals against conservatives. Straight against gay. The fighting is endorsed and encouraged by the power elite because it distracts their unjust or illegal methods of control, that if carefully examined and brought to light, would bring into question their very justification of authority. People don’t have the time to question systems, so like sheep we go along with the flow of society. I.e. our phones, the facts we don’t look for, and the influence of others who are uncredible. People are hard-wired to decide what’s true, ethical, or ideal based on emotional triggers, not rationality. Science shows that people are not interested in thinking for themselves. This exact quality of people is the reason for the proliferation of Fake News, it’s why our elected leaders continue to ignore climate change, and it’s the reason Russian troll farms were able to exert so much influence over the opinions of American voters in 2016 and beyond. Nowadays, individualism is fully grown and counterproductive. For example, a doctor must constantly struggle
In my stance, my argument is that the Enlightenment has failed, but not completely. There is still a reminiscence that remains. However because of t The influence of the enlightenment on the French revolution
THREE CRITICS OF THE ENLIGHTENMENT
Goethe declared long ago that under no circumstances that the statement of fact is free from theory. The Enlightenment was not complete. The Enlightenment was not a complete amalgamated political plank, a determined manifesto or plan, but a budding outlook of society that engrossed in an imprecise, though distinguishable, forms of assumptions, a category of suggestions, and a rhetorical style like the Socratic dialogue. page 13 These dreams were just dreams, just that, inflated expectations …show more content…
A huge proponent of the Enlightenment, Montesquieu’s Spirit of the Laws suggested the theory of the separation of powers in order to obtain a political system of checks and balances, promoting order and equality. The elected officials are susceptible to use one’s to their advantage in the present climate in society, to a greater extent now that they can make sense of the population more. It is nearly impossible to have knowledge and be good willed, since jealousy, suspicion, fear, coldness, reserve, hate, and fraud lie constantly concealed. There is no rational reason to be good. So how does the American government control its population? The way it still is – divide and conquer. It pits one group against the other and lets them fight. Native-Americans against whites. Blacks against whites. Red states against blue states. Pro-choice against pro-life. Women against men. Liberals against conservatives. Straight against gay. The fighting is endorsed and encouraged by the power elite because it distracts their unjust or illegal methods of control, that if carefully examined and brought to light, would bring into question their very justification of authority. People don’t have the time to question systems, so like sheep we go along with the flow of society. I.e. our phones, the facts we don’t look for, and the influence of others who are uncredible. People are hard-wired to decide what’s true, ethical, or ideal based on emotional triggers, not rationality. Science shows that people are not interested in thinking for themselves. This exact quality of people is the reason for the proliferation of Fake News, it’s why our elected leaders continue to ignore climate change, and it’s the reason Russian troll farms were able to exert so much influence over the opinions of American voters in 2016 and beyond. Nowadays, individualism is fully grown and counterproductive. For example, a doctor must constantly struggle