Rev 5: Romanticism

1. "Worship" of Reason	7. Scientific Method
2. Religion Oppresses	8. Rationality Overcomes Emotions
3. Reason is Powerful	9. Universal Rights
4. Nature is Orderly	10. Progress
5. Universal Laws	11. Social Sciences Shepherd Progress
6 Deism	12. Individualism

In the pre enlightenment period religion & nobility ruled the direction of govt, scholarship, & overall treatment of people. This was to change. Great thinkers like Galileo & Newton proposed new ideas that could be seen, measured, & proven w/ evidence. The churches heliocentric view of the universe was challenged. John Locke also championed new ideals of viewing humanity at the individual level. No longer were people to be believed to be born as a finished product, but rather a product of their experiences & influenced by the world in which they grew & developed in (Goodwin, 2008, p. 64).

Four areas where significant change occurred were: 1. Religious: a. Questioning of Catholic beliefs and Protestantism led to tolerance for new ideas. 2. Intellectual: a. Free intellectual inquiry resulted from widespread opposition to religious intolerance. b. The French revolution led to 'age of reason'. c. Educational institutions free of religious allegiance also spread. 3. Economic: a. Industrial revolution, move away from agrarian fiefdoms led to an increasingly wealthy, independent and educated middle class. 4. Political: a. Nation states emerged, ruled by kings and parliaments that only paid lip service to religious rule. b. Parties and factions which have legitimate differences of opinion (Goodwin, 2008, p. 64).

1. WESTERN SOCIETY "WORSHIPS" REASON: SCIENCE ALLOWS US TO EXAMINE EVERYTHING

Western Society elevated reason / science so that it was the organizing principle for life

For some reason displaces religious worship, but for most, it supplements religious worship

The Enlightenment philosophers believed that given the advancement of knowledge, it's only a matter of time until people learned to let reason, not ignorance, emotion, or superstition, guide them and then people/society can would find happiness/harmony

We can know things beyond what holy men tell us

The Enlightenment's embrace of reason & science heralds a new theory of knowledge or epistemology

2. RELIGION CAN OPPRESS

Some could dare say in public: "God is Dead" but most people are still very religious

Religious leaders were accused of keeping people in ignorance in order to maintain their own personal power

The Enlightenment blamed people in authority, esp. the leaders of the Roman Catholic Church, for keeping people in ignorance in order to maintain their own personal power

Link

3. REASON / SCIENCE IS EXTREMELY POWERFUL

Enlightenment thinkers were influenced by discoveries in the physical sciences by such people as Galileo & Newton

For the Enlightenment philosophers, math yielded absolute truth since it was based on simple axioms (self evident truths), and then moved from one self evident step to another

For the Enlightenment philosophers, the mathematical / logical model was the model all the sciences should use

Reason is the power that allows one to “see” mathematical truths just as clearly as one's hand before one's eyes; the senses, however, yield only particular/contingent truths

4. NATURE IS ORDERLY & KNOWABLE

See Also: Civil Rights

Then Locke & others came to realize that confusion would result if each person enforced his or her own rights

Locke argued that govtl authority depends on the people's consent

People agreed to live under a common govt, but not to surrender their "rights of nature" to the govt

Instead, people expect the govt to protect these natural rights, especially the rights of life, liberty, & property

For Locke, human rights included liberty (political equality), life & ownership of property

The task of the state was to protect natural rights

States do inconvenience people, so justification for sates was to protect rights better than the individual could

Locke's ideas of limited govt & natural rights became part of the English Bill of Rights (1689), the French Declaration of the Rights of Man (1789), & the U.S. Bill of Rights (1791)

ON REVOLUTION

On revolution, Locke believed that if the state did not protect rights, people had right to find other rulers

In the US founding documents, there is the idea that it is not only necessary, but the duty of the people to revolt should the govt fail to protect their basic civil rights

Locke believed that people should decide who governs them

Top

John Locke 1632 - 1704
English philosopher
Locke's greatest influence on was on political science
Locke influenced Thomas Jefferson on the Declaration of Independence
b. Wrington in Somerset County
Attended Oxford University
1666 met Anthony Ashley Cooper who became the Earl of Shaftesbury
In 1679 the Earl became involved in plots against the King.
Suspicion also fell on Locke
So Locke left England in 1683... to Netherlands
Met Prince Wm. and Princess May of Orange
Wm. & May became rulers of England in 1689 & Locke
returned to England as a court favorite
Until his death he wrote widely on
- educational reform
- freedom of the press
- religious tolerance

Top

Major Works of Locke

Two Treatises of Government, 1690

An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, 1690 ( Most important work )

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on David Hume 1711 - 1776

External
Links

Link

- Biography & Major Works

- Project: Hume's Principles of Causality, & Scientific Uncertainty

Link

HUME CONTRIBUTED TO THE FORMATION OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD BY DEMONSTRATING HOW TO SHOW CAUSE & EFFECT A SCIENTIST MUST ESTB TIME ORDER, CORRELATION, & ELIMINATE ALT EXPLANATIONS

Hume was a Scottish philosopher who influenced the modern philosophical schools of skepticism & empiricism

SUMMARY:
Hume distrusted philosophical speculation & believed that knowledge came from experience
All experiences existed only in the mind as individual units of experience
Whatever we experience is only the contents of our own consciousness
Hume believed a world existed outside of consciousness, but this could not be proven

HUME'S CHALLENGE OF SKEPTICISM WAS THE SIMPLE QUESTION: 'HOW DO WE "KNOW" ANYTHING FOR SURE?'

Hume and the skeptical philosophers said it is impossible to prove anything

Hume distrusted philosophical speculation and believed knowledge came from the senses

For Hume, the senses were not infallible, & therefore faith must be in god

For Hume, understanding came from experience, which is a combination of sensory knowledge & shared understandings

The nature of shared understandings formed a 'proto scientific method' which Hume developed

Hume undermined the mechanistic view of Locke, et al, by attacking causality

For Hume, causality is simply an idea, or a customary way of thinking

Today, post modernists agree w/ Hume & the Skeptical Philosophers that causality is simply a customary way of thinking

For Hume who was a "skeptical philosopher," because B follows A, one assumes that A causes B or B is the effect of A

Hume's point is that any causal relationship is really open to question because we don't see the cause, only one even & then another that we call cause & effect

Hume believed experience existed only in the mind as individual units of experience

THE 3 PRINCIPLES OF CAUSALITY ARE TIME ORDER, CORRELATION, & ELIMINATION OF ALT EXPLANATIONS

From Hume's work, THREE principles of causality can be developed

A. TO SHOW CAUSALITY, THE TIME ORDER MUST BE CORRECT

In a causal relationship, time order must be preserved in that event A must always precede event B in time, i.e. does the cause precede the effect?

In social or natural experiments, it can be very difficult to determine time order

The complexities of time ordering in causality can be seen in the relationship btwn low income as a cause of juvenile delinquency where juvenile delinquency can also be seen to cause low income

What is needed to show time order?

Could juvenile delinquency come before low income & cause low income?

B. TO SHOW CAUSALITY, A CORRELATION MUST BE EVIDENT

In a causal relationship, a correlation must be evident as event A must be correlated to event B; that is, the variables change together in a predictable way

For Hume, the principle of causality of correlation indicates that the variables change together in a predictable way

When the independent variable changes, the dependent variable also has a tendency to change, there is a correlation

Correlation is often aka covariation or a statistical relationship

Scientists report findings such as, "Isolation is correlated w/ suicide," and not "Isolation causes suicide"

For scientists to find results, whenever event A occurs, we must see event B follow a certain percentage of the time

The percentage of times event B follows event A is called the reliability coefficient

C. TO SHOW CAUSALITY, ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATIONS MUST BE ELIMINATED

In a causal relationship, alternative explanations must be eliminated, that is other possible causes that may cause both events A & B must be eliminated

To establish a causal relationship, the researcher must eliminate any alternative explanations

In establishing causality, eliminating alternative relationships is the most difficult to establish, & we can never know for sure that we have done so

Researchers can test for other explanations, but frequently this cannot be done because they are not aware of other relationship or because the situation is simply too complicated to be sorted out

A spurious relationship occurs when the observed effect is caused by a 3rd variable, i.e. another explanation

A control variable is used to test for alternative explanations

Example:
What caused delinquency?
What is the control variable in pop density & delinquency?
What is the Independent Variable?
What is the Dependent Variable?
What relationship was spurious?

SCIENTISTS CAN NEVER BE CERTAIN OF THEIR FINDINGS BECAUSE THE PRINCIPLES OF CAUSALITY (TIME ORDER, CORRELATION, & ALT EXPLANATIONS) CAN BE VALID IN ONE CASE & THEN INVALIDATED IN ANOTHER

Hume demonstrates that there can be no certainty in establishing a cause & effect relationship through research

Hume's dissection of the scientific process of showing cause & effect demonstrates that we never know anything for certain, because:

a. Correlation shows that we only see two things occur together, we do not actually see cause & effect. We may see effect w/o cause

b. Time order is valid only until we see a counter case, that is, we see cause precede effect

c. We can never be certain that we have eliminated other causes, i.e. alternative explanations

d. Because of illusions, we cannot trust the senses

For Hume, then, science was not a panacea or solution for all human challenges & problems...

...& thus he remained very religious

Top

David Hume
1711 - 1776
b Edinburgh, Scottish
Spent most of his life writing
Occasional diplomat to France

Top

Major Works of Hume

A Treatise of Human Nature       1739, 1740
Essays Concerning Human Understanding     1748
An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals   1751
History of Great Britain     1754, 1756
History of England     1759, 1762

Internal
Links

Top

Overview on Immanuel Kant 1724 - 1804

External
Links

Link

- Biography & Major Works

Kant, Burke, Hegel, et al would all be part of the Romantic Conservative Reaction

Kant countered Locke's theory of knowledge

Kant's work is important because he established the main lines for modern philosophy to the present period

Kant's belief in the importance of geography legitimized the subject, & he did embrace what might be called cultural & social geography today

Geography classified things according to space

History classified things according to time

Kant delineated SIX types of geography, including:

1. commercial geography
2. theological geography
3. moral geography: customs & ways of life

4. math geography: Earth's shape & motion
5. political geography
6. physical geography

Top

Immanuel Kant
1724 - 1804
Born & lived in Konigsberg, in East Prussia (now Kalingrad, USSR)
Attended University of Konigsberg 1740-1744
Worked as private tutor, returned in 1755 to
receive master's degree & became a lecturer

Top

University life
In 1770 he was appointed professor & taught
    near Konigsberg from 1746-1755, & then
    taught at Konigsberg Un until his death.
He never traveled
In addition to phil topics, he lectured on math,
   physics, anthropology, pedagogy, & physical geog
He retired in 1796 & died in 1804

Top

3 periods of Kant's work
1. 1747-1770: concern w/ the foundations of natural science & metaphysics
2. 1771-1780: did not publish
3. 1781-1804: published major works

Top

Major Works of Kant

1781 The Critique of Pure Reason
1783 Prolegomena to any Future Metaphysics
1785 Groundwork to the Metaphysics of Morals
1786 Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science
1787 Second edition of Critique of Pure Reason

1788 Critique of Practical Reason
1790 Critique of Judgment
1793 Religion w/in the Limits of Reason Alone
1797 Metaphysics of Morals

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on The Critique of Pure Reason ( 1781 ) by Immanuel Kant

External
Links

The major problem addressed by the Critique of Pure Reason (1781) is what are the nature & limits of human knowledge

Kant agrees w/ Locke that knowledge begins w/ experience

But Kant disagrees w/ Locke in that all knowledge arises out of experience

For Kant, the existence of any knowledge independent of experience is an open question

Ultimately Kant shows that there is absolute knowledge independent of experience

Kant is concerned w/ objectiveness & subjectivity in reason in that how do we determine the difference w/ them

For Kant the mind is active & creative & always plays a role in sensory experience

Kant agreed w/ Locke on the role of the senses in acquiring knowledge but insisted that sensory experience had to be interpreted by the mind's internal patterns. This meant that certain ideas, the mind's categories for sorting & recording experience , were "a priori", that is, they existed before the sensory experience occurred. Typical innate ideas of this sort were width, depth, beauty, cause, & God; all were understood yet none were learned directly through the senses. Kant concluded, as had Descartes, that some truths were not derived from material objects through scientific study. Beyond the material world was a realm unapproachable by science

Kant's position that the mind is active & plays a role in the sensory experience is parallel w/ Hume, the post positivists & the post modernists

We cannot think of mind & its object as separate things because the mind is actively involved in the object it experiences

All things & mind are connected

Kant's proposition that all things & mind are connected is contrary to Locke's tabula rasa theory of mind & the photographic theory of knowledge

Thus, we are not objective observers outside of things we examine & we are highly connected to all objects

Kant divided objects of knowledge into a priori & a posteriori elements

a priori means preceding, before, or antecedent & is used when reasoning from cause to effect or from a general law or notion to a particular instance

Kant says that cognitions originating in the mind independently of experience include “any knowledge that is thus independent of experience and even of all impressions of the senses”

a posteriori means derived from experience; empirical knowledge which has its sources in experience

Kant agrees w/ Hume that experience cannot provide universal or necessary knowledge

There are universal & necessary elements in all knowledge which are found in the nature of human thinking & not in objects themselves

When using the universal & necessary elements, our thinking is almost divine/ transcendental because those elements are necessary in all experience

If there is any universal knowledge, it must be a priori, known independently of experience

Necessity & strict universality are the criteria for a priori knowledge

There are FOUR a priori elements
   - pattern making
   - causality
   - space
   - time

An example of an a priori judgment is “every alteration has a cause”

An example of an a priori a priori concept is "space must be occupied if there is a body"

So far, however, neither a priori judgments nor concepts are proven

Link

Kant believes that some knowledge is independent of all experience

a. The pattern making element emphasizes that the mind organizes experiences into definite patterns

We become sure that all things capable of being experienced are arranged in these patterns even though we have not yet experienced them

We can have knowledge of what is not experienced as well as what is experienced

The pattern making element is similar to an Enlightenment principle & to one of Parsons' functional prerequisites

Knowledge is impossible w/o patterns, categorization, etc.

Patterns are the a fundamental form of knowledge

b. On the causality element, Kant knew Hume was right to say that causality is somehow added by people

Knowing nature & the limits of human reason was important to Kant because of Hume's findings

Hume attacked the principle of generalization: how can we know that "all bodies gravitate" if we have only sampled a few cases?

Causality & other a priori elements characterize all human experience

Some events occur before, after or together w/ each other & we see cause & effect in this

Even animals see cause & effect

Knowledge is impossible w/o cause & effect

Kant believed that there is no absolute knowledge in this world

Kant answered Hume on causality by noting that it was “universal” i.e. there is causality out there, but we cannot truly know it, we can only show it statistically: there is a 90 % probability that A causes B

Kant's causality meant having to abandon any claim to know things as they are in themselves, things in which mind is not involved

K believed, like H, that we never know anything for sure, but only statistically

Standards of causality today: 99 or 95% (P < .01 or P < .05)

Statistical causality holds only that we have observed the examined relationship & found it to hold in all but less than 1% of cases or 5% of cases

c. & d. On the space & time elements, Kant asked: What elements are not objects of perception but are still necessary for perception?

All objects of experience appear in space & time

We cannot imagine anything outside of space & time: Even heaven & hell: they are places, they last for eternity, that is in time

Eastern religions try to imagine existence outside of space & time

Modern physics tries to imagine outside of space & time

Is K correct?

We have not obtained concept of space empirically, that is, from outward appearances

In referring certain of our sensations to outward objects, we already presuppose space

While we can think the absence of objects in space, we cannot think absence of space

Thus the concept of space is the a priori condition for outward appearances

As the pure intuition of space is basis for geometry, so the pure intuition of time is the basis for arithmetic

Arithmetic is founded on the intuition of succession

The forms of intuition, space & time do not exist in themselves in that they are transcendentally ideal

But as conditions for appearances, they are empirically real

Space is the foundation of geometry

The a priori representation of space is the intuitive foundation of geometry & the source of its certainty

Kant offers the example that for any triangle,

a b c

For ac + bc > ab, the truth of the proposition cannot be determined analytically, but requires an intuition, yet the proposition is not only true, but necessarily true

Just as space is the presupposition of our representing outward objects, so time is presupposition of our representing coexistence or succession, i.e. Time

Time underlies all representations, both outward & inward & time has only one dimension

Time is presupposed in concepts of alteration & motion

No change could be thought, much less be perceived, w/o presupposition of time

Neither space nor time are things in themselves, rather, time is the necessary condition for any experience, & space the necessary condition for any outward experience

In examining the subjectivity of experience, Kant believes that patterns, causality, space, time are subjective, thus there is a subjective element in all experience

The mind does not photograph; it interprets

We view world through a lens of patterns, causality, space & time

Is science more valid than other ways of knowing?

Link

Kant points out that if "causality" & "necessity" (space & time) are products of a creative mind, then why should scientific knowledge be more valid than other types of knowing?

Does subjectivity incapacitate science?

Thus knowledge is not absolute, but ‘tainted’ by our lens of a priori elements of knowledge: patterns causality, space & time

Some regard this refusal to claim absolute knowledge as too serious a limitation on systems of phil & sci

Others argues that we have an intuitive, non rational knowledge of things

A Post modernist critique of Kant we improperly impose causality & rationality to a wide range of phenomenon, esp, social, historical, & political events

Post Modernists take a more abstract & general view of social sciences

	For Kant, there is not absolute science, therefore we must also study religion, morality, art, etc.
	Kant wants to free mind from dependence on external sources & give renewed validity to spiritual realm: religion, morality, & art
	Enlightenment Philosophers saw this knowledge as inferior
	Some have called Kant's view of knowledge a ‘relativistic view of knowledge.’
	Is this ‘inferior?’
	It is for many of us, less secure, less absolute
	We want to believe in knowledge, ed, progress in the way our society once believed in divinity
	For Kant, knowledge from spiritual & scientific realms had equal validity
Link	If a priori elements are products of a creative mind, then why should scientific knowledge be more valid?

Top

Quote by Kant:
“...we shall understand by a priori knowledge, not knowledge independent of this or that experience, but knowledge absolutely independent of all experience. Opposed to it is empirical knowledge, which is knowledge possible only a posteriori, that is, through experience.
A priori modes of knowledge are entitled pure when there is no admixture of anything empirical. Thus, for instance, the proposition, 'every alteration has its cause', while an a priori proposition, is not a pure proposition, because alteration is a concept which can be derived only from experience.”

Top

Why should scientific knowledge be more valid than other types of knowing?
It is not more valid than other ways of knowing

Top

If a priori elements are products of a creative mind,
then why should scientific knowledge be more valid?

Scientific knowledge is not more valid that the arts

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on the Critique of Practical Reason ( 1788 ) by Immanuel Kant

External
Links

The Critique of Pure Reason demonstrated that theoretical reason could not be used to attain metaphysical truths beyond the realm of applied theoretical reason

For Kant pure theoretical reason must be restrained, because it produces confused arguments when applied outside its sphere & therefore practical reason must be utilized to examine the spheres outside of reason

Practical reason is capable of producing grounding behavior which is superior to that grounded by desire based reasoning

Practical reason often considers aesthetics & ethics

While pure reason must be constrained, practical reason must be cultivated

In ethics, Kant demonstrated that what is ethical is not useful to the self, but is useful to society

Doing one's duty is more important than being happy or making other people happy

On free will, Kant held that even though scientists can predict what we are going to do, predictions do not conflict w/ our use of free will

Therefore, the predictions of scientists have no bearing on our duty to live morally

For pure reason, examining something like freedom is out of its realm, & instead can only be examined w/ practical reason

For Kant, freedom is knowable because it is revealed through the force of the moral law because practical reason requires belief in them

For Kant, empiricists are confused in thinking of freedom as a purely psychological thing in the phenomenal world

While the Critique of Pure Reason showed god, freedom, & immortality as unknowable, the Critique of Practical Reason mitigates that by providing some manner to know those things that are beyond direct experience

For Kant, practical reason is possible & it is the ground of morality

The pure / impure distinction of reason or knowledge has to do w/ whether contingent, sensory factors are involved

Pure reason is not impacted by the senses; it is knowledge arrived at strictly through logic

Like Hume & other skeptical philosophers, knowledge based on sensory or empirical information is impure in that it is not absolute, & must always be considered to be contingently valid

The theoretical / practical distinction of reason or knowledge has to do w/ the faculty of knowing versus the faculty of acting

Theoretical reason is used to build practical reason, but is not practical in & of itself; i.e. cannot be used practically in the world; i.e. cannot be used to act

Practical reason is used to act in the world & thus always has a moral, political, etc. component

Kant responds to those who accuse him of writing incomprehensible jargon by challenging them to find a more suitable language for these types of ideas, thus his complexity is of a different type than that of the post modernists, who are also accused of incomprehensibility

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Edmund Burke 1729 - 1797

External
Links

Link

- Biography

- Project: Can education eliminate sexism?

Link

Wollstonecraft's Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792) is a response to these Rousseau, Edmund Burke & other men of the age

Though Burke worked to decrease the power of rulers, Burke bitterly criticized the Fr Rev

Burke denounced the Fr Rev's:
a. injustice to the individual,
b. attack on religion,
c. attempts to build a completely new social order
d. violence & chaos

Burke's Reflections on the Revolution in France, 1790 greatly influenced British policy & opinion

Burke's ideas became the philosophy of the Conservative Party which was the most liberal party of the time

Burke was conservative in that he opposed many of the ideas of the Enlightenment, but liberal in that he supported others, & an end to tyranny

Burke condemned the Fr Rev as a threat to society

Burke supported many Enlightenment / liberty actions including:
a. the support of the US
b. the abolition of slavery
c. the harsh penal system
d. reform in India

Burke maintained that inheritance & inequalities in rank were important elements in a civilized society

An example of the importance of rank would be the defense of the wisdom contained in spontaneous custom & tradition

Burke developed the “principles of natural submission,” which held that lower classes, including women should submit to aristocracy

In A Philosophical Inquiry into the Sublime & Beautiful (1757), Burke described women's beauty as a result of their littleness & weakness; proving that women do not have souls

Burke believe in reform, not revolution

Unlike Burke, many of the Enlightenment thinkers believed that only revolution could solve problems

Burke criticized sociological assumptions of the Enlightenment & the Fr Rev

Burke believed that society is an organism, but its organs are not necessarily well coordinated, just as many functionalists do today

For Burke & many of this time reforms, but not revolution, are necessary

Organicism refuted the rationalization of the Fr Philosophers

While Fr Philosophers posited nat laws & rights, this implied that soc was simply a machine & that proper elements could be added, & improper elements eliminated almost at will, a la revolution

The organizing metaphor of the intellectuals of the time shifted from society as a machine to society as an organism

Burke helped transform the metaphor of society from machine to organism

The Enlightenment was not as practical as a revolution

Burke recognized that Enlightenment supporters tried to eliminate ancient institutions & replace them w/ new ones based on abstract principles

If the state were a mere contract, why couldn't it be dissolved or rewritten?

Reflections on the Revolution in France, 1790

1. In Burke's Reflections, he made the point that the individual has no abstract rights, rather rights develop out of society & develop organically

For Burke, rights are historic, not abstract

Burke said of the Fr Rev that not even 26 mm revolutionaries have a right to claim sovereignty

2. I n Burke's Reflections, he made the point that the state is no mere contract, rather it is a higher organic unity; an integral part of national community; a partner in all virtues & vices; partners w/ living & dead

For Burke, the state is not made of deliberate calculated inventions & it is not rat convictions that hold nations & societies together, but certain non rational forces

Not only material interests, but spiritual ties hold nations together

The ties which hold nations together may be "light as air" but they are "as strong as links of iron"

Burke's views were developed more by Hegel

Top

Edmund Burke

1729 - 1797

Born in Dublin, Ireland,
Worked for better Irish English relations
British Statesman
Served as a Whig member of Parliament from 1765 to his death
Burke influenced history of many nations besides England.
He opposed slavery
Achieved fame in attempt to improve Brit admin in India
During the American Revolution, urged Brit govt to reconcile w/
colonies, giving them same rights as Brit citizens

Top

Important Works

A Philosophical Inquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and the Beautiful, 1757
Reflections on the Revolution in France, 1790

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Georg Hegel 1770 - 1831

External
Links

Link

- Biography & Major Works

Hegel wanted to create a historical synthesis which would bring together ideas of Enlightenment & Romantic Era

In order to understand any aspect of human culture, we must retrace & understand its history

George Santayana, 1863 - 1952 said, "Those ignorant of history are doomed to repeat it."

For Hegel all social phenomenon must be understood not as solitary events but as historical stages or events

Hegel's advocacy of understanding hist development, greatly promoted study of philosophy, art, religion, science & politics

Marx also accepted Hegel's understanding of the dialectics of history in his historical materialism

C. Wright Mills accepted Hegel's understanding of the dialectics of history in his sociological imagination which advocates that intersection of history & biography is essential in understanding the social world

Hegel believe that history is rational & orderly as did the Enlightenment Philosophers

History is not just random events, or a narrative, it is the unfolding or expression of reason

Reason is inherent in the process of history itself

The Divine is Reason

Reason is not only an individual faculty

Quote: "What is rational is real" & "what is real is rational."

Reason is not a mere abstraction from real (ala the Enlightenment), but an immanent force which determines structure & the development of universe

Reason is a great cosmic force which he calls
- the Idea
- the Spirit
- the Absolute
- or God

Thus Hegel takes reason to a higher, non personal level than Kant

Hegel's ideas on reason are similar to Kant's ideas

For K, reason is not god-like as it is for Hegel, but rather an ‘absolute’ or ‘Natural’ (small a, cap N) quality that perceiving beings must embrace to makes sense of world

For H, reason is a developmental, impersonal, logical, cosmic process which unites all spheres of life (social, natural, etc.) into one organic whole

While reason is divine, it is unfolding for us in the material world

Reason develops in a similar way to how human thought develops

Reason manifests itself in institutions through the dialectic: a fusion of contradictions

The dialectic produces new contradictions, which are brought together in a new synthesis

Each thesis carries seeds of, & thus develops into its antithesis which carries seeds of, & thus develops into a new thesis
SEE DIALECTIC BELOW

In his analysis of the state, Hegel divides history into epochs, each which expresses a phase of development of World Spirit

When a nation is ascending, it embodies a part of cosmic reason, & its particular fulfillment

For Hegel, the Prussian (German) nation stands higher than all other institutions

The Prussian state is highest expression of Cosmic Reason

What would Hegel say about UN or trade pacts?

Hegel defended Germanic culture & concluded that what is, is rational & therefore necessary & unavoidable

In his analysis of both the state & national culture, his phil is conservative in that it preserves the status quo

But there is also an emphasis on constant, dialectical change

Hegel's view of reason in history became know as his dialectic

All historical developments have three basic characteristics in that it:
a. has necessity
b. exhibits progress
c. is a dialectical developmental process

a. Necessity as a characteristic of hist dev, denotes that people, nations, history, etc. follow a course that is necessary: It could not have happened any other way

To understand a historical development in any area of human thought or activity, we must see why it necessarily happened as it did

Hegel's view of necessity, predestination, free will is complicated there is necessity in historical developments & yet we have free will

Hegel is attacked because necessity seems to indicate that
a. evil must happen, e.g. slavery, Hitler & other historic atrocities
b. necessity is too similar to predestination
c. we must play our historic roles & so it appears that there is no free will
d. reality is unfolding & humans are no different from other mechanisms such as cosmology

For Hegel, we are moving toward a purer expression of god's idea, which is something akin to our understanding of a rational world, but because we have free will that movement is a possibility which we can attain, but not inevitable

The unfolding of the world in a divinely rational society is a necessity in that there is no other choice; i.e. we can accept god's plan or not, & thus for Hegel it is necessary that we accept, move toward a divinely rational society

Necessity is seen in history in that once social forces line up to dialectically change society, there may be little any one person, or society can do & thus incremental changes are possible & individuals have free will & power in respect to these, but once 'the die is cast,' i.e. social forces are lined up, individuals & societies are necessarily compelled to act in a particular manner

b. Progress as a characteristic of hist dev, denotes that each hist dev represents not only change but progress

The concept of progress is seen in Hegel's concept of the Idea which as it unfolds, realizes itself & so things get "better"

c. Dialectics as a characteristic of hist dev, denotes that one form (thesis) of any hist dev tends to be confronted & replaced by its opposite or negation (antithesis)

The antithesis, this opposite, in turn, is replaced by a phase that is resolution of two opposed phases the negation of the negation: (synthesis)

Hegel did not use the terms thesis, antithesis, synthesis

Top

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, 1770 - 1831
Born in Stuttgart, Germany
Attended University of Tubingen, near Stuttgart
Began university teaching in 1801 (at 31 years old)
Was professor of philosophy at University of Berlin
from 1818 until his death.
After his death, his students reconstructed
& published his lectures

Top

Major Works

Phenomenology of Spirit, 1807
Science of Logic, 1812-1816
Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences, 1817
Philosophy of Right, 1821

Top

Immanent

Inherent, indwelling, remaining within
A mental act or action
Taking place entirely within the mind & producing no effect outside of it

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on the Dialectic

External
Links

- Video: The French Revolution

Link

- Project: The Dialectics of the French Revolution

Link

THE DIALECTIC DENOTES THAT SOCIAL RELATIONS DEVELOP, & CREATE THEIR OWN WEAKNESSES, WHICH ARE THEN RESOLVED THROUGH NEW SOCIAL RELATIONS, WHICH CREATE THEIR OWN WEAKNESSES...

Dialectics:

Stage:	Explanation:
Thesis	Social relations develop,
Antithesis	which creates its own weaknesses
Synthesis	which are then resolved through new social relations

Link

Chart on the Dialectic

As a synthesis is reached, resolving the old conflicts of the antithesis, the new social relations develop & become a thesis, & the dialectical cycle begins again

The Chart on the Dialectical Tree of Development

The Chart on the Dialectical Tree shows how each synthesis becomes a thesis, w/ new social relations, which create contradictions in the form of a antithesis, indicating that dialectical relations constantly continue to evolve

DIALECTICAL DOES NOT MEAN MUTUALLY INTERDEPENDENT

Many people, even some social theorists, misuse the term dialectic to mean a mutually, interdependent relationship such as btwn income & education: one's level of education is impacted by one's income; & one's income is impacted by one's education

Some relationships are dialectical, & mutually interdependent

Culture & social structure are dialectically related in that one may evolve into the other through the dialectical process; furthermore, culture & social structure affect each other in a mutually independent manner on a day to day basis

The history of the dialectic is that it's first known reference is w/ ancient Greek societies

The dialectic was first made famous by Hegel, & then more so by Marx, & also by Freud

One of the lessons of the dialectic is that stability is impossible & progress is inevitable

The dialectic embodies the idea that the old must be destroyed to pave the way for the new

The dialectic embodies the idea that progress may appear as other than progress, i.e. destruction

Aristotle believed that development, individual & societal, was a natural process that should occur in an unhindered manner where no disturbing influence could intrude

HEGEL'S DIALECTIC HELD THAT IT WAS THE DEVELOPMENT, CONFLICT, & RESOLUTION OF IDEAS / IDEOLOGY THAT CHANGED THE WORLD

Link

Examples

The dialectic is one place where Marx is said to have "Turned Hegel on his head"

For Hegel, historical ideas dialectically developed & then shaped the world

For Marx, material relations in history dialectically developed which then shaped our ideology, culture, law, etc.

Dialectical materialism is the analytic method that all social phenomena are formed as a result of material relationships

A reversal of Hegel's dialectical idealism, dialectical materialism holds that everything is material & that human beings create social life solely in response to economic needs

Materialism rejects idealistic explanations, such as those examined by Hegel

Both Hegel & Marx would agree that development depends on the clash of contradictions & the creation of a new, more advanced synthesis

Marx applied dialectical materialism to the economy:

Social phenomena form as a result of material relationships, i.e. economic relationships

Material, or economic, relationships themselves form dialectically

Dialectically, a new form of production w/ new relations of production replaces the old & allows yet a newer form to begin develop which will eventually replace the old

In a dialectic relationship, growth, change, & development take place through a naturally occurring struggle of opposites, a process that individuals cannot influence

Marx applied dialectics to history is his development of the concept of historical materialism

Historical materialism holds that history develops dialectically in that one era develops problems which are resolved by the new era

By way of a dialectical process, social, cultural & political phenomena are determined by the mode of production of material things

Thus, for Marx, we end up w/ historic epochs based largely on economic relationships

In a dialectical relationship, all aspects of society are considered to reflect the economic structure, & classes in society are determined by their relationship to the means of production

Top

Chart on the Dialectic

An argument of logic, which holds that...

...each condition creates or embodies the

Thesis

Which development it's own weaknesses / seeds of destruction, which are called the

Antithesis

Until they are resolved by established new conditions, which are called the

Thesis

Top

Examples

Each attempt at control sews the seeds of its own destruction.

Pollution was an advantage for businesses but people organized against it.

Assembly line allowed for greater control of workers.
But working together made people more likely to organize

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Hegel's Dialectic

External
Links

Hegel embraces typical components of the dialectic:

Stage:	Explanation:
Thesis	Social relations develop,
Antithesis	which creates its own weaknesses
Synthesis	which are then resolved through new social relations

For Hegel the dialectic is not a strict & logically brittle method, but a way of thinking concretely & multi dimensionally about human experience

The dialectic is a demonstration that things strive to attain actually what they always were potentially

Hegel's view of the dialectic is similar to Aristotle's beliefs on development that dialectical dev is a natural process that unfolds in an unhindered manner because no disturbing influence can intrude

But in the social realm, development is mediated by consciousness & will; the spirit is at war w/ itself

The spirit strives for actualization of its ideal being, but hides that goal from its own vision

Thus dialectics in the social realm is characterized by conflict

The thesis is seen as a period of stability & progress

The thesis is the continuation of the synthesis of past eras

The development of the thesis is slow organic change

There are inherent conflicts being worked out, developed

But compromises are still possible & progress is visibly made

The antithesis is seen as a period of rapid, dramatic, maybe violent change

The antithesis is often thought of as a revolution, a social, moral, economic, political, etc., revolution

The antithesis is the negation of the thesis, a period of destruction

But, in larger picture, the antithesis is a period creative destruction

Thus negation is not destruction but transformation

Negation occurs when the initial form, i.e. the thesis is transcended by new qualities inherent in first... when new qualities actualize

The synthesis is seen as the new era, beginning of a new phase

The synthesis is the negation of the negation

The synthesis is a period of optimism where conflict is past & old contradictions & struggles are resolved

The synthesis is a resolution of opposites

For Hegel, the crucifixion meant learning to understand reality & the necessity of continuing division & conflict as true harmony & unity in human spirit & society

A true unity is a unity of differences

The Greek polis did not find unity

The modern state, in its ability to unify conflicting interests, does find this unity

It is pluralism that allows for a unity of conflicting interests

It is the strength of modern state that it is able to contain its contradictions

It was not Prussian state that he admired, but its form

The state is not an end in itself, but a means to freedom of art, religion, & philosophy

Dialectics in nature can be seen in:

- the acorn developing into the oak tree

- a cloud of matter developing into a blob of matter, which becomes a star, which becomes an exploding red star, becoming a to cloud of matter

- the cycle of life & death: youth to mid age: bear children, to old age

- the cycle of summer, fall, winter, spring

Dialects in psychology can be seen at the psychological level where attempts to achieve satisfaction through external pursuit of power & property tend to be rejected in favor of achieving inner state of harmony & tranquillity

The opposition btwn external activity & an inner non active state of mind can be resolved by having one's external activity emerge from a harmonious inner state

Oedipus Rex is dialectical in that even though Oedipus' fate is told to him that he will sleep w/ his mother & kill his father, that tragic fate still befalls him

Dialectics in politics can be seen where a period of concentration of political power in one person tends to be followed by a period of widely distributed power

This opposition in politics might be resolved by a period in which there is both some distribution & some concentration of power

Thus an absolute monarchy might be replaced by an absolute democracy, & in turn, by a representative form of govt

The cycles of hot war, cold war, peace is an example of dialectics

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Hegel's Influence on Other Thinkers

External
Links

Romanticism & Hegel are at once both a critique of the Enlightenment ( 1642 - 1789 ) & a continuation or development of it

Through concept of the dialectic, Marxism manifests Romanticism's influence

Hegel is a Romantic in his insistence on change as an overcoming of contradictions

Both Hegel & the Romantics are committed to an optimistic & very 18th Century stand on the rational organization of people & society

Change somehow turns out to be, in the workings of the World-Spirit, the real form of permanence

Hegel is regarded an intellectual forefather to Marx ( 1818 - 1886 ) & even Marx himself acknowledged Hegel's influence on his work

See Marx & Hegel

Marx did accept much of Hegel's liberalism but because Marx's philosophy was an attack on the [ bourgeoisie ] state, it looked as if Marx stood Hegel on his head

Marx's emphasis was on civil society which is everyday life w/ the economic sphere at center

Marx wanted to show that state was self-contradictory because it was an illusion of alienated false consciousness of bourgeois society

For Marx, the state is unable to intervene in civil society & correct its ills because it is a tool of bourgeoisie

Marx, in his analysis of Class Consciousness, found Hegelian philosophy to be useful in its conception of the development toward freedom,

Development in general, & specifically the development of Class Consciousness, is far from being a natural & mindless process

Development, e.g. Class Consciousness, was was contingent upon consciousness & will

Marx also accepted Hegel's understanding of the dialectics of history in his historical materialism

Hegel is regarded an intellectual forefather to Weber ( 1864 - 1920 )

Hegel anticipates Weber's account of the modern rational state

For Hegel & Weber, the State has THREE universal, necessary qualities

a. an essentially public impersonal institution that belongs to no one

b. everyone recognizes as their own in so far as it upholds their own particular interest

c. which generates a perpetual tension btwn freedom & control, liberty & order

Hegel spells this out in Philosophy of Right, 1942, a compendium of his lectures

C Wright Mills accepted Hegel's understanding of the dialectics of history in his sociological imagination which is the intersection of history & biography

Hegel is so complex & addresses such fundamental issues in insightful ways that his ideas are used by such 'liberals' & 'conservatives"

On the Conservative Side, Hegel, like Burke, saw the state as the embodiment of Law, not the individual nor even the family

The State is highest order to which all must subordinate themselves

The state supersedes all prehistoric forms, e.g. the family, community, etc.
[ Could modern corporation or ‘the pact’ be more developed? ]

The German State represents the arrival of a third epoch & this the modern state embodies consciousness that is free, inasmuch as it wills the True, the Eternal, that which is Universal

Many writers see Hegel as an authoritarian idealist, conservative especially because Marx “stood Hegel on his head” & shifted his philosophy from idealist to materialists

On the Liberal Side, while Hegel was more idealist than Marx akin to Weber & neo-Marxists

Hegel saw the power of ideology

Hegel is a down-to-earth realist, pro-French Revolutionist & closer to Benthamite radicalism than to Burkeian conservatism

Hegel used his philosophy to expound the logic of the claim of modern people to self-realization & freedom & therefore rationale of modern democratic state, & thus is writing in the liberal democratic tradition

External
Links

Top

Outline on the Conservative Reaction to the Enlightenment

External
Links

- Project: The Conservative Reaction to the Enlightenment

Link

In response to the post revolutionary disorder, the conservatives advanced TEN propositions about society, including that

1. society is an organic unity
2. communitarianism not individualism is fundamental
3. the basic elements of society are soc orgs
4. society is interdependent & interrelated
5. people have needs which society fills

6. customs & trads are functional
7. the basic unit of society is not the individual
8. social organization in society must be maintained
9. the humanities have a positive function
10. status & hierarchy are essential

The post rev propositions advanced by the conservatives are not necessarily in direct contradiction to the Enlightenment in that they most often address assumptions of areas of society not considered by the Enlightenment paradigm

1. Society is an organic unity, not a mechanical "clockworks"

Society has internal laws & development & deep roots in the past

Society is a reality that is greater than the individuals who comprise it

Contrary to the Enlightenment nominalists who believe that only individuals exist & that society is simply the name one gives to those individuals in their interrelationships, for conservatives, society is more than the sum of its parts

2. The nature or foundation of society is communitarianism & not individualism

Society predates the individual & is ethically superior to individuals

People have no existence outside of a social group or context

We become human by participating in society

Far from individuals constituting society, it is society that creates the individual by means of a moral education (Durkheim's concept)

Theorists today such as Giddens, Mills, etc., like the conservative theorists who reacted against the Enlightenment, hold that society & individuals constitute each other

3. The basic elements of society are social organizations, especially the family, community & state, not the individual

The individual is an abstraction & not the basic element of society

The basic elements include both relationships & institutions

Bonald always focused on THREE institutions including the family, the community, & the state

Individuals fulfill certain statuses & roles in support of society

4. Parts of society are interdependent & interrelated

Change in one sphere of society will affect other spheres

5. People have constant & unalterable needs which society & it's institutions function to fulfill

Institutions are positive organizations through which needs are met

If social organizations are disrupted, suffering, chaos, etc. results

6. Customs & institutions are positive functions

Customs & institutions fill needs directly [ manifest functions ] or indirectly [ latent functions ]

Even seemingly negative relationships must logically have a positive function or they would not exist e.g. prejudice, ethnocentrism, etc.

7. The basic units of society are not individuals, but rather social groups including the family, community, religion, occupational groups, the state

8. Social organization in society must be maintained

Modern, secular, industrial, capitalist, democratic society creates social disorder

Therefore we must return to ancient, theological, agricultural, feudal, authoritarian society

9. The non rational, humanities have a positive value in the moral development of people / society

An important aspect of the integrating the arts into social life is participation in ritual, ceremony, & worship

Ritual, ceremony, & worship imply a respect for authority & for past social relationships

10. Status & hierarchy [ stratification ] are essential aspects of human relationships as reflected in the relationship w/ the divine

Hierarchy is necessary in the family, church & State

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Louis de Bonald 1754 - 1850

External
Links

Link

- Biography & Major Works

In their reluctance to accept rationalism, Louis de Bonald & Joseph de Maistre had an almost mystical attitude to authority & monarchy

Bonald, Maistre, Condorcet are considered to be intellectual forefathers to St. Simon & modern sociology

Bonald & Maistre held what is called a reactionary position in relation to the Enlightenment & the French Rev

Bonald & Maistre wanted to return to medieval times

TWO important concepts were developed by Bonald & Maistre that were used by St. Simon & August Comte were:

- social stratification

- the relationship between dominant ideas & social organization

Bonald & Maistre held that conflict btwn classes & resulting revolutions were explosions of social contradictions which were recurrent features of Western history

Bonald's first & best known work was a critique of Rousseau's Social Contract & Montesquieu's Spirit of the Laws

Bonald's work is important for SIX reasons

1. Bonald wants to demonstrate the error of individualism & the validity of traditional ideas

Bonald sees all "knowledge," including art & literature, as expressions of the society that produces them

Literature is a manifestation of the moral aspect of society

Bonald denies the effectiveness of individual action because the creation of knowledge is a collective action

The errors of a scientist or artist are also viewed as the faults of an age, not of the person

2. Thus he critiques the Enlightenment & its core concepts such as liberty, equality, etc.

Such core concepts are not the result of natural laws, per the Enlightenment, but rather the result of definite & concrete social relationships

The term "natural" as used by Rousseau & the Enlightenment thinkers implied that natural rights & the natural social relationships as described by Rousseau existed previous to society

Thus for Rousseau & the Enlightenment thinkers, rights did not result from social organization, i.e. society

For Bonald, there is no natural person, only a social person

The idea of the social person is much closer to the perspective of modern anthropologists than Rousseu's or Hobbes' view

Thus for Bonald, there are no natural rights, only social rights

3. Bonald attacked Condillac's view of ideas & language: that language developed from gestures

For Bonald, the developmental of language view denied Creationism & thus must be wrong

Ideas for Bonald were innate but not in the individualist Cartesian sense

Rather moral truth is innate [ because it is divinely given ] & is transmitted to the individual through speech

Thus the word is the principal instrument of divide truth

Humans did not invent language; it has a divine origin

The word was given by revelation that imparted general truth

Society became the context for language & truth

To find the truth, people & society should subordinate themselves to god's will

God imposed language, society, & authority, & individuals have no right to tamper w/ them

4. Bonald examined how society functioned

Bonald believed that authority, like language, was divinely given

The family, the Church, & the state must assure social stability

These social structures, the family, the Church, the state, etc., are all given by god

Bonald believed in social laws, but they were based on the law of god

The purpose of society is to create people who follow the general will as designated by god

Bonald, like Burke, rejected the idea of the social contract

There is no contract except for divine & necessary relationships

Society must have THREE elements: monarchy, nobility, & subjects

5. Bonald critiqued modern, secular, industrial, capitalist, democratic society

Bonald believed we must return to ancient, theological, agricultural, feudal, authoritarian society

Bonald's theory was an idealization of the feudal order

Bonald saw the socio historical forces that lead to the end of Feudalism

Bonald saw the repressive & alienating consequences of industrial civilization

Bonald despised commerce & industry

From our historical perspective, it is ironic that Bonald critiqued industrial society in much the same way as writers such as Marx, Mills, etc.

Bonald despised capitalism & longed for the good old days of feudalism

Marx, et al, despised capitalism & longed for socialism

Bonald scoffed at the argument that industrial society as providing for people's needs & pleasures

It is not industry that creates peace & liberty

It is agricultural society that is superior, the family can feed & nourish itself because people are not dependent on others in agricultural

The industrial family produces children whom it cannot be assured of feeding

Industrial society sends the husband & wife to work & thus upsets a divine institution

Agriculture unifies people & society while industrial society divides people & society

6. Many modern theorists built on Bonald's work, stripping it of its conservative & theological aspects

"The general will of society, of the social body, of social man (sic), the nature of social beings or of society, the social will, the will of God are synonymous expression is this work."

Durkheim turned this around to say that god is an expression of society

Stripped of its theology, Bonald's work becomes the source of many major sociological concepts

But later contradictory conclusions were drawn from Bonald's argument

Secularists argued that all ideas, including language, morals, society, etc. are a function of the socio historical conditions in which they are conceived

The dialectical historicism, as outlined by Bonald & his ideas of the contradictions of capitalism, became a major part of Marx's theory of ideology & later, the sociology of knowledge

Top

Louis de Bonald
1754 - 1850

Top

Major Works

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Joseph de Maistre 1754 - 1821

External
Links

Link

- Biography & Major Works

Bonald, Maistre, Condorcet are considered to be intellectual forefathers to St. Simon

Bonald & Maistre held what is called a reactionary position in relation to the Enlightenment & the French Revolution

De Maistre is now known chiefly as a proponent of monarchical govt & of the Christian foundations of civil society

Maistre developed his Christian Civil Society originally in his analysis of the French Rev, which he regarded as divine punishment for France's embrace of the anti-Christian Enlightenment

Maistre argued in On the Pope (Du pape (1819), that an infallible papacy is the unique source not only for Christian orthodoxy, but for all legitimate political power & for the progress of universal civilization

Maistre wrote further both an extended vindication of divine providence & a polemical refutation of the materialism of Francis Bacon

Bonald & Maistre wanted to return to medieval times

a. Maistre & Bonald were important to the development of early sociological thought

Like Bonald, Saint-Simon felt the stability of medieval Europe was the result of its universally accepted religion

Bonald, Maistre, St. Simon, Comte, & Burke appreciated the feudal, theological order

Maistre believed the feudal, theological order facilitated development of new order

But while Maistre & Bonald believe it was possible to return to feudalism, Comte thought it was impossible

Maistre, Bonald, St. Simon, & Comte recognized stratification as an important.social relationship in understanding society; however they have inconsistent positions on it

b. Maistre, Bonald, et al are unique because they are part of the critical-order paradigm

Kerbo places Maistre & Bonald in the critical-order paradigm

For Kerbo, placing Maistre & Bonald in the critical-order paradigmmeans they critique modern, secular, industrial, capitalist, democratic society & they advocated an "ordered" society

There are no modern theories in the critical-order paradigm, but many fringe political-religious groups such as the KKK, Nazis, Taliban, etc. embrace such beliefs

c. Maistre, Bonald, et al critiqued the Enlightenment

Like Bonald, Maistre believed that Rousseau & the Enlightenment thinkers were wrong to believe that "natural people" could be separated out by stripping them of their sociocultural attributes

Order is accomplished through a return to ancient, theological, agricultural, feudal, authoritarian society, contrary to the Enlightenment

d. Maistre pointed out errors in Rousseau' thinking

There was no presocial state of humanity

Maistre & Bonald opposed the concept of the natural person, not because it is contrary to the anthropological evidence ( which it is ), but because it denied the concept of the Divine origin of man

Rousseau's natural person was amoral

e. Maistre critiqued modernity & desire a return to the previous era: feudalism

Maistre & other conservatives analyzed the social events & processes in European history which caused the Enlightenment & the downfall of the feudal order

They singled out Protestantism, capitalism, & science

These lead to the atomization of peoples

Large "masses" now appeared unanchored in any stable social groups, widespread insecurity, frustration & alienation

And a monolithic secular power emerged that is dependent on the mass of rootless individuals

Top

Joseph de Maistre 1754 - 1821

Top

Major Works

On the Pope: Du pape (1819)

A Vindication of Divine Providence: Soirées de Saint-Pétersbourg (1821)

A Refutation of the Materialism of Francis Bacon; L'Examen de la philosophie de Bacon (1826)

The End

Top