An Imperfect Enlightenment
Despite its great advances in political and social liberties, the process of the Enlightenment of 18th-20th century Europe and America was not a perfect enterprise. But given the horrors of the distant past, an imperfect Enlightenment was definitely preferred to no Enlightenment at all! In fact, the imperfections lay not in the ideals of the Enlightenment but rather in those proponents of the Enlightenment and democracy whose deeds contradicted their own words. There were also those whose practices were simply anti-Enlightenment and actively anti-democratic, creating exclusive financial clubs of white male elites who went on to exploit the rest of society and natural resources using the umbrella of freedom and democracy.
The ideals of the Enlightenment were tied to greed and white supremacy of the mercantile classes, creating a convoluted knot that is still difficult to untie. Capitalism has had nothing to do with democracy, and in reality, they are two different beasts. But capitalism became a beast that has entered the womb of democracy in Europe and America and has nourished itself from the niches and laws of freedom. The challenging confrontation of the two beasts has continued to our modern day.
The intertwined pair of democracy-capitalism has occasionally been at odds with each other, such as the contradictory attitude towards taxes (democracy needs taxes; capitalism hates taxes), compensating workers (democracy supports workers; capitalism uses workers), and making profits (democracy wants to put profits towards the wellbeing and pursuit of happiness of its citizens; capitalism wants to gain more and more profit for a few). So, the unholy alliance between democracy and free or un-regulated capitalism has turned the Enlightenment ideals of equality, liberty and fraternity into a conundrum.
Thus, as much as we might like to idealize The Enlightenment for confronting many of the repressive conditions of the previous centuries, contradiction and moral corruption crept in from the beginning. During the 18th-19th centuries, The Enlightenment both in America and Europe was localized and racialized and maintained the white male primacy that perpetuated the oppression of women from medieval times and long before. It also brought with it enthusiastic nationalistic components which later became confrontational, while ignoring the damage done by slavery and colonialism. So, it is clear that the Enlightenment operated in the face of slavery-racism, colonialism-imperialism, misogyny, inequality, nationalism-otherness, exploitation of nature, militarism-war, and fascism or abuse of democracy.
Other examples of contradictions between Enlightenment ideals and their actual application are not hard to find. On one hand, America became politically independent and free (1775-76) largely thanks to the liberating ideals of the Enlightenment such as liberty and equality. At the same time, it allowed for the storing and trading of slaves, decimating indigenous people, and exercising racism, segregation and misogyny. Thus, it becomes even more clear that the Enlightenment should not be put on a pedestal, nor are we subject to its ongoing multiple unrevised premises for eternity. The recent research and publication of The 1619 Project by Pulitzer Prize winner Nikole Hannah-Jones in 2019, for the 400th year anniversary of the arrival of the first enslaved Africans in Virginia (although slaves may have been brought to the new continent in the mid-1500s) demonstrates the founding father of modern America not only turned their face away from the wicked practice of slavery but they even condoned it, which went on for couple more centuries. This act of cruelty, Hannah-Jones calls it ‘the original sin.’ In the same contextual connection, the Swiss historian Aram Mattioli in 2017 wrote a historical narrative from the point of view of the indigenous natives of America, which covers between 1700 to 1900. The title and premise of his book point to the trivialization and marginalization of the dismantling of the Native American heritage: Verlorene Welten: Geschichte der Indianer Nordamerikas 1700-1900 (Lost Worlds: History of Native Americans of North America 1700-1900). This work covers the unique perspective of the merciless war of survival and colonization of land by the white settlers and destruction of the social order and culture of the native peoples.
Even though the phenomenon of slavery was historically dealt with in the 20th century, the issue of crime and shame remain marginalized and unaccounted for in the history of the Enlightenment. The thought of owning another human being as property may give us goosebumps today, but the practice of it continued during the time when the ideals of the Enlightenment were the model of a better life for everyone. As is commonly known, Thomas Jefferson embodied this paradox quite openly by owning slaves until the end of his life – his estate and income in Monticello depended on it. He believed the class difference between whites and blacks was already imposed by nature. (Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, Paris, 1785, London, 1787). In addition, Kant, Goethe, Marx, and many other famous European literati of the Enlightenment made condescending remarks about the black Africans that had serious impacts in supporting slavery and even modern racism which we cannot do anything about today except to confront and denounce, while avoiding the same contradictory behavior ourselves.
Contradictions Are Not Necessarily Anachronistic
In criticizing such contradictions of the time of the Enlightenment, I am quite aware that it can be seen as anachronistic to apply our modern standards to the values and practices of the enlighteners of the 18th – 20th centuries. There is an argument that practices such as slavery belonged to that era, and we should not expect the men of that time to be different. But the contradiction between the lofty words and actual practices during this critical transition of eras impels us to scrutinize the Enlightenment honestly, without brushing troublesome and lingering contradictions under the rug: the authors of Constitutions initially designed democracy by excluding all women and non-white men and all the people of the countries they colonized.
Why would such contradictory behavior ensue? It seems that the jargon of freedom and equal rights and the pursuit of happiness for all in the Declaration of Independence proved to have limited application, secondary to the urgency of domination and stability. Perhaps in order to maintain stability and self-preservation it was better to have hypocrites govern and call it democracy, rather than risk ‘instability’ by freeing slaves and involving all the people in governing the society. If slaves, women and indigenous people had been in government, they probably would not have served the same interests of those holding power. Integrity and egalitarianism could have been seen as a danger to mercantilism on its way to becoming the new capitalism.
Many minds have tried to analyze why the deepest ideals of the Enlightenment were not fully applied. Members of the Frankfurt School, a pre-WWII institute known for its progressive theories, drew upon psychoanalysis, sociology and philosophy to try to understand societies’ contradictory thoughts and behaviors, such as the rise of dictatorship and fascism in the face of a clear longing for democracy and egalitarianism. Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer in their Dialektik der Aufklärung (the Dialectic of The Enlightenment), published in 1947, criticized the Enlightenment without rejecting it, from the view of premodern and modern standards which in their turn have also failed to improve the quality of human life. The premodern failed due to its regressive tenets; the modern failed to integrate science, medicine, and technical progress in order to liberate all people, and instead led to war, domination and the fear of the unknown, and included embracing fascist ideology. Both authors encouraged self-reflection on our contradictory behaviors and an alternative narrative to the ‘myth’ or the ‘ideology’ of the Enlightenment.
The idealization of the Enlightenment has turned the enterprise into a myth that the Enlightenment did not in reality deliver what it promised – like a fairytale full of wonders without actually testing the concrete reality on the ground. In fact, one could say that the Enlightenment itself contained enough doctrinal holes and weaknesses that without the forces of scientific progress occurring at the same time (critical medical and technological discoveries such as germ theory, radiation, engines, and industrialization), it is very possible that the Enlightenment would not have had nearly the impact that it did, and today it would not be seen as an admirable model (see Steven Pinker’s book, Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism and Progress, 2018). What actually saved the reputation of the Enlightenment was the scientific revolution happening simultaneously as a source of the value of rationalism and reason. That is why the Enlightenment looms large – because it rode on the tides of scientific progress and overdue sociopolitical reforms.
There is another reason to reflect honestly on the contradictions within the Enlightenment: modern-day “ancestor-worship” is a new kind of political fundamentalism in search of primordialism, like the adherents of religious fundamentalism who believe in taking people and the world back in time. A modern-day example of such ‘ancestor worship’ is occurring in the US, where some see the Constitution as a divine document to be adhered to literally at all costs. Reasonable solutions to modern controversies such as flaws in the Electoral College system, gerrymandering, the right to own assault weapons, gender equality and same-sex marriage, and other critical democratic issues are held captive by a mindset that seems to be frozen in time: “…because the founding fathers said so,” (or didn’t say so). (See Louis Menand, “American Democracy Was Never Designed to Be Democratic,” The New Yorker, August 15, 2022).
But there is no room today for a belief in the infallibility of founding fathers if we aim to move forward together into a new world beset with issues that the ‘founding fathers’ or Enlightenment thinkers simply could never have anticipated. They could not have known that animal rights, environmental protection, same-sex marriage, gender and race equality, and so much more would become critical issues just a few hundred years later.
The world is ready for a new, updated Enlightenment. The change in the tone and purpose of a new Enlightenment aims to update the ideals based on what we now know, both scientifically and morally. It is time for a Second Enlightenment aimed at making all people’s circumstances more conducive to feeling safe and respected and ensuring that all our voices and votes are honored equally, without distortion, around the world.
****
Backstory of The Enlightenment…
The history of the original Enlightenment is well known to many, but it can be helpful to review and remember how societies struggled and evolved over the centuries, eventually leading up to the radical ideas of the Enlightenment of the 18th century.
Life in the Middle Ages, with its religiously repressive and intellectually impoverished conditions, was hard to bear. People were illiterate, had no civil rights and were ignorant about the physical laws which regulated the sun, gravity, earthquake, and storms. They believed that the cause and cure of diseases were the solely work of God or the Devil. Religion was exploitative, and citizens’ fear of hell as threatened by the theologians was real and intense. There were no just and proper laws to protect the rights of people. The lives of ordinary people were nearly worthless; capricious feudal landlords and the priesthood could easily tilt rules in their own favor.
Read More
But such conditions could not last forever. The occurrence of the plague (Black Death), the Reformation, the development of the printing press and other critical factors drastically changed the social and political dynamics. Between the 14th and 15th centuries, waves of the plague wiped out 50 to 200 million people (between 1347 and 1351, 25 million people are estimated to have died) without anyone understanding the real reason or etiology. In a scenario combining religious fanaticism with lack of science, among multiple theories one theory suggests that the epidemics resulted secondarily from a massive cat massacre: In the medieval period, witches and sorcerers were associated with cats, and the cats thus symbolized the devil. In the course of witch hunts, many cats were burned. Consequently, rodents overran European cities, and their yersinia pestis bacteria transmitted to humans caused by the bites of infected fleas.
Since the Middle Age authorities did not understand the etiology and biology of the plague, they attributed it to divine punishment for blasphemy and heresy, etc. But in light of people’s miseries, many began to question the power and wisdom of God. The priestly class lost the popularity it had previously enjoyed.
After all this upheaval, along with the dislocation of power and shift in the church-feudal dynamic, as the plagues receded the 15th century must have seemed like a fresh start. From a renewed interest in ancient thought and the rebirth of Greek and Roman ideas came the Renaissance. This Renaissance aimed at a new kind of freedom from the medieval church and the bondage of serfdom. With new undertakings in the worlds of art and music and literature, the century gradually veered toward reason, beauty and understanding the philosophers’ notion of happiness in life.
An infusion of ancient Greek and Eastern thought would begin to radically influence Europe Long-lost Greek philosophical works arrived in a circuitous way, with Eastern ideas carried along on the way. Many Greek thinkers and scholars had relocated from Constantinople to Europe after the fall of that city in 1453. Their presence gradually galvanized the literary atmosphere, enabling much greater access to forgotten Greco-Roman philosophies and sciences. In an interesting twist of lesser-known cross-influences, 11th and 13th century-philosophers such as Farabi, Avicenna, Razi, and Averroes were the first who brought the ancient Greek philosophy back into circulation. Their work in Arabic was then translated into Latin in Spain and Italy. These and other Arabic scientific translations opened a critical gateway to the ideas of the most prominent Greek thinkers.
The circulation of the Arabic and Greco-Roman literature had an enormous impact on European universities. In addition, the European literati, who had until then almost exclusively focused on Christian texts, began to learn the Greek language in order to understand more from the pre-Christian philosophies and sciences. The fresh revelations that emerged from these Greco-Roman and Eastern philosophies and sciences of antiquity provided the intellectual fuel for the Renaissance and paved the way for the Enlightenment. Nothing was going to be accepted blindly as it had been in the Middle Ages.
The starting engine of what we call “The Enlightenment” today is typically considered to be Isaac Newton’s revolutionary realizations of mathematical laws (Principia Mathematica in 1678) that universally govern our physical world, such as gravity and forces controlling movement. Newton’s laws were predictive and mathematical, not arbitrary, and therefore they could not be swayed by the wish of a king or a pope.
This revelation of a lawful universe was slowly applied to human society. Transferring the concept of immutable laws of the universe to a societal application of laws meant no exceptions, no nepotism, no favoritism – no one is exempt from gravity. Thinkers like Locke, Kant, Rousseau, Voltaire, and Montesquieu were the intellectual offspring of the Newtonian model of such laws. They began to conceive of a lawful society, where laws are applied equally to all, with civil liberties and an accountable government.
Reason (discussed specially by Kant) became an agent for debating, theorizing, experimenting and verifying results. The laziness of faith and the blind acceptance of sensual experiences were no longer enough to explain the physical world and the solar system, nor could they provide a foundation for structural freedom from tyranny. The Enlightenment as a result became known as the Age of Reason.
A major event that dealt a heavy blow to the power of the institution of religion, kings, faith, and the role of God came on November 1, 1755 when the massive Lisbon tsunami-earthquake (magnitude of around 8.5) struck on a day for a saintly religious gathering. It devastated cathedrals, drowned priests, sunk ships, destroyed housing of the poor of Lisbon, and rattled the entire Iberian Peninsula. This prompted to the study of earthquakes and other natural disasters, and even the diseases and epidemics in medieval Europe, which had long been attributed to God’s wrath and His punishment of sinners. Modern and empirical thinking had to replace reflection in investigating the laws of earthquakes.
The role of religion within the Enlightenment shifted in two major ways. Although religion had suffered from the turbulence of previous mistakes and misdeeds, the belief in Jesus and God remained, but in the Enlightenment, the first stage was to remove religion from the political sphere as a governing body along with the realization that personal faith could not be the basis of reason. The second step involved a shift in how God was defined – moving from a theistic, all-powerful and fully interventionist view of God, to a deistic definition of a god that created the world and left the rest to the human power of reason.
The embrace of reason as a more reliable partner in existence was strengthened as the Enlightenment progressed. The ancient Greco-Roman thinkers, particularly the pre-Socratic philosophers such as Democritus and Epicurus, emerged as models of using reason, not religion, to understand and enjoy life. Their examples showed how to live a life where cultivating pleasure is the primary and ultimate goal of existence, and this attitude was embraced by many Enlightenment thinkers and greatly influenced society at the time.
An unprecedented leap forward occurred in all streams of life, from the new breakthroughs in medicine, to the idea of personal civil liberties, to new government systems with checks and balances. Modern government buildings were copied after the ancient styles of Greece and Rome characterized with multiple columns – Romanesque and Neoclassical architectures – a radical move away from gothic and church architecture.
Evolutions in mathematics and astronomy provided new empirical understanding about our existence, transcending the old and obsolete model of geocentricism to embrace heliocentrism and increase knowledge about the movements of our fellow planets in the solar system. Today, as we see the scenes transmitted from the Hubble and more recently the James Webb telescopes, it is clear that science continues to radically change the nature of our existence on a nearly daily basis.
It is clear that the Enlightenment has brought us to where we are today, a world where reason is the predominant paradigm, and where freedom and civil liberty have made great progress.
But in the same way that limitations in the Renaissance worldview pointed the way to changes that the Enlightenment ultimately prompted, today’s world is also at a point where some idealistic fresh ideas and approaches are needed. We can see in our world that there are issues, both latent and obvious, that urgently need to be addressed in order to further the evolution of our global existence in a positive direction. And this points to the need for a reformed, or more comprehensive Enlightenment, which we can call The Second Enlightenment.
In summary, the transition from the religion-bound Renaissance into the reason-filled Enlightenment three centuries ago required challenging ideas and applying actions to a historically traumatized continent. It must have seemed at minimum idealistic, but more probably, it was inconceivable. Entering into the modern era must have been frightening on many levels, with the influx of so many ideas that threatened the old way of life. But courageous actions behind the chain of ideas gradually made such seemingly unrealistic ideas functional.
We could say that the good usually begins with a good idea, and manifests itself due to the individual will behind it. This process must continue today. Ahead of our generation is a paradigm shift, that is to say, old keys do not open new locks. We are facing new challenges, and we are being emancipated in many different ways intellectually and socially, so we need to construct new democracies and new ways that we can implement our global ideals of wellbeing for all. The lingering initial Enlightenment must either be given a serious facelift or we must move on to construct new models in the Second Enlightenment that really work for all humans and nature.