….Cont

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/11/30/evolution-and-the-american-myth-of-the-individual/?action=click&contentCollection=Europe&module=MostEmailed&version=Full&region=Marginalia&src=me&pgtype=article
“Consequently I find it more than ironic that American individualism today — which many link closely with Christian fundamentalism — is self-consciously founded on 17th- and 18th-century ideas about human beings as inherently self-interested and self-centered individuals despite the fact that what essayists like Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau wrote back then about the “natural state” of humankind at the beginning of history was arguably never meant to be taken as the gospel truth.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlightenment
“Debates[edit]
Historian Keith Thomas says the Enlightenment has always been contested territory. He says that its supporters:
hail it as the source of everything that is progressive about the modern world. For them, it stands for freedom of thought, rational inquiry, critical thinking, religious tolerance, political liberty, scientific achievement, the pursuit of happiness, and hope for the future.[152]
However, he adds, "its enemies accuse it of 'shallow' rationalism, naïve optimism, unrealistic universalism, and moral darkness."
Thomas points out that from the start there was a Counter-Enlightenment in which conservative and clerical defenders of traditional religion attacked materialism and skepticism as evil forces that encouraged immorality. By 1794, they pointed to the Terror during the French Revolution as confirmation of their predictions. As the Enlightenment was ending, new generations of Romantic philosophers argued that excessive dependence on reason was a mistake perpetuated by the Enlightenment, because it disregarded the powerful bonds of history, myth, faith and tradition that were necessary to hold society together.”

Cont..

....Cont

“Many others like Voltaire held that without belief in a God who punishes evil, the moral order of society was undermined. That is, since atheists gave themselves to no Supreme Authority and no law, and had no fear of eternal consequences, they were far more likely to disrupt society.[177] Bayle (1647–1706) observed that in his day, "prudent persons will always maintain an appearance of [religion].". He believed that even atheists could hold concepts of honor and go beyond their own self-interest to create and interact in society.[178] Locke considered the consequences for mankind if there were no God and no divine law. The result would be moral anarchy. Every individual “could have no law but his own will, no end but himself. He would be a god to himself, and the satisfaction of his own will the sole measure and end of all his actions”.
Cont...

“[The Enlightenment] stands for freedom of thought, rational inquiry, critical thinking, religious tolerance, political liberty, scientific achievement, the pursuit of happiness, and hope for the future,” writes Constance, quoting throwback historian Keith Thomas.

And presumably, Constance, you don’t.

Throwbacks have nothing to offer but obedience to invented celestial “sirs” and their self-proclaimed terrestrial servants to restrict the individual from reasoned moral conduct and free participation in society. This throwback stream we see in Islam and for that matter in all coercive cults rejecting the “pale cast of reason” in favour of the rule that comes out of the barrel of a gun (and before that a sword). Throwbacks bearing swastika flags and thousands of tanks, warplanes, warships and guns sought to drive the world back hundreds of years, but humanity won a victory that has never ceased to be opposed by the Counter-Enlightenment, aka the Revolt Against Reason. It’s not “God who punishes evil” but evil people who rattle a “God” under our noses that punish dissent from their eternal quest for power over others in the evil people’s own interests. No “God” tortured heretics, burned witches, suppressed truth-telling, slaughtered unbelievers, enslaved humans especially women, just evil people. Decent philosophers like Immanuel Kant have applied reason to explore the principles of morality to supersede those sirs who claim that reason is theirs to exercise while the common herd must be made to do as the sirs tell them. Indeed the Counter-Enlightenment is not a true Revolt Against Reason as such but an attempt to filch its power from the people. It’s a plea for power for the few over the many, a hostile finger appearing under the door. Fancy seeing it crop up in a forum set up allow people to exercise their reasoning.

Hi Constance,

Those Enlightenment values have been attacked from Day One, and before - most of Isaiah Berlin's work is, one way or another, a fascinating chronicle of the struggle against the Counter-Enlightenment (and sometimes I have thought of Marx as having, against his own opinion, many counter-Enlightenment notions, not least the notion of a contented Heaven on Earth, something like Hodgkinson's return to the simplicities of life of a peasant or feudal serf.

But I suspect that we have to defend those Enlightenment values with all our might, they are under threat from so many quarters, even (why do I say 'even' ?!) within the Left. Ultimately, that's all we have. The rest is bankrupt illusion.

Joe

EmporerJulian,

Firstly, Why do you have such an AUTHORITARIAN name?

“freedom of thought, rational inquiry, critical thinking, religious tolerance (within reason), political liberty which is not adverse), scientific achievement, the pursuit of happiness, and hope for the future,” Exactly, very important except you missed "Creativity"! BUT most importantly, REAL FREEDOM.

But I think you really mean an odd mix of Protestant corporate enslavement and pompous lefty shite.

Hi Joe,

Peter Vexatious has been writing some interesting things on OLO on Judges and the legal fraternity and legal history that goes way back pre Enlightenment. There are far too many lawyers in the world. All is corrupted.

When it was once possible to have a train driver as a Prime Minister is impossible now. I think there are too many people going to university, and too many Marxist thinking academics.

Gillard catered for them (the professional class), I’ll call them Bourgeoisie (over institutionalised), or CAREERISTS. Once upon a time, there were “vocations” – much more virtuous.

With Islam, it’s a mixed bag. Islam is more cult ideology than a religion. The Islamists are either uneducated or educated. The Sep 11 terrorists were, engineers etc. What about all the other incidences of Muslim individuals – like the US military psychologist, the Boston attack by the two brothers, etc. They do not like where the Western is going or gone and have trouble coming to terms with Secularism. I hate to repeat myself, but what the heck. Gay marriage and all that is completely anathema to them. Islamism has been slowing growing and still growing. It is a very alpha male culture - you said it - a lot of frustration, then they become walking time bombs. And women are only considered objects of desire – nothing else. Japan limits Muslims in their country; I read somewhere the Vatican warns Western women what to expect if marrying Muslims and living in the Middle East. They have to forget their previous life and escape is difficult. So they must be hidden as they are a threat. A lot of Muslims hold contempt for Christians but much worse for Non Believers. I’m always personally hearing more and more worrying incidents/anecdotes. Plus the daily news stories and also what I see in my workplace, and I know people. A lot of these people don’t read anything outside their own (tribal) culture. And what do they create?

Cont..