The book under discussion is the one written by an English author Roy Porter. The book called The Enlightenment appeared in 2001 and was a suggestion t sink into western philosophy. It belongs to the genre of non-fiction.
Actually, my choice of this book was determined by the fact that this is the very book that gives an insight on the specific philosophic problems that concern not only some particular stage of mankind development but provides an observation of human nature as it is, which makes the epoch irrelevant. These are the people that matter, not the time they are living in. That viewpoint made me pick up The Enlightenment, and the choice that I have made has proved right because I loved the book immensely. To summarize the plot and retell it briefly, I would start with what the enlightenment was as a social phenomenon.
The author suggests that this is the event that has triggered a bunch of the others nonetheless important. Porter claims that it has caused even the French revolution! The ideas that were soaring in the air as the events span harder and harder were much more liberal than the government of those times could afford.
For some philosophers, like Kant, the point of enlightenment could mean only that the sunset would inevitably follow. Some other philosophers suggested that this was the beginning of the new era, the era of people more perfect than those of the XVIII century, No one could tell it for sure then.
Porter emphasizes that this was the time when science stopped being obscure and turned into the field where a man could reign and make discoveries. Speaking of the politics of the Enlightenment era, Porter points out that “It lacked that quality they pretended to value most: experience.” They simply were far too half-baked and unprepared for the journey they were heading for. Naturally, they were the first to start it, but those to continue it were to be awaited.
The next point Porter dwelled upon was the relationship between the people and religion. Indeed, until then it had the greatest and the saddest influence, launching witch hunting, making autos-da-fe, and imposing their point of view as the only one possible.
From the beginning of the Enlightenment era, things changed dramatically. The church was deprived of its power and influence, and it was no longer a scarecrow for sinners. Porter asks a very important question. Who was the Enlightenment? Was it Unity or Diversity? And with the standards of today, we have the full right to answer that it is Diversity that united people. His next question was whether it was a movement or a mentality. In his understanding, mentality suits here better, since the Enlightenment meant a certain way of thinking, unusual and new.
Finally, he raises the question of whether the Enlightenment was of any significance. And this is the question that needs no answer. It was, for us – for future us. The author tells unexpected things to the reader. He shows that the past is much more complicated than it seems and it actually is the material the future is built of. Just think what could have happened if these ideas had been never sounded like! The principles of freedom and education would be in the rear position, and the modern population would enjoy all the drawbacks and flaws of the XVI century life, the Inquisition attached.
Porter has made it obvious to me that the past, however distant and obscure it could be, must not be judged by any means. It has gone anyways, and the achievements of the epoch are evident, so there is nothing to rake over. It is also clear to me now that the hidden mysteries of the past are yet to be solved and we still have some puzzles from times immemorial that we should think of.
The author considers the Enlightenment a certain stage of the development of mankind and this stage was a great achievement of the people of that epoch. This achievement was needed immensely because the people understood the old means of living had come to an end and there was a strong need in the other approach and the other philosophy, the philosophy of beauty. As people understood it, they felt the urge to make it real. The very goal was to turn the old and obscure picture of the world into the scientifically based observation of nature. A man should not be afraid of the environment he is living in, but he should learn to watch it and respect it.
The boundaries imposed by the government and the church should be loosened and, ideally, broken for good. These are only the moral rules that matter. Here the Enlightenment culture comes very close to Plato’s philosophy.
As Porter claims, “the political preferences of certain philosophers can be made to seem mighty unrealistic, naïve, or even nightmarish.” Still, he argues that those steps were of utter importance for a better understanding of the human needs and social problems, as well as for the further development of the state and society.
To prove his point of view, Porter takes Rousseau, whose brilliant speeches proved that he was one of the most prominent philosophers and speakers of the epoch of Enlightenment. Rousseau was supporting the revolutionary views of the Enlightenment era, not to say that he was speaking them himself. He was a significant personality of that era, and there was hardly anyone who could be compared to him.
The book helped me to understand that the epoch was much more than one more step toward the twenty-first century. It was the time when people finally realized that a man is born to be happy just like a bird is born to fly free in the sky. People finally found out that there is no need to be afraid of nature, that they can explore it and enjoy its gifts.
The pressure that dawned upon the citizen, that was the church and the monarch’s power, unlimited and at times cruel, was loosened and the time came to create the new university that could be better and less miserable than the previous existence that could hardly be called life. The ideas the author expressed were so unexpected that they made me look at the world from a different angle and see the things I never noticed before. It was like walking in someone else’s shoes. Well, that was the experience that I would have never refused.
The book gives a lot of food for thought. Mostly these are the ideas on the topic discussed in class. What is the main asset of mankind, and a particular state? Is it just now and here that matters? And what is the way we should treat the past? There is no way to take it as something long gone. History likes driving people to the same situations that have already taken place, and it likes watching people making the same mistakes.
Can we ever make the step just as huge as the people of the Enlightenment era made? Are we civilized enough to beat the record of our honored ancestors? Those are just questions, and they don’t have any answers yet. These are the people of the future that can judge, not us.
Bibliography
Porter, Roy. The Enlightenment. New York: Palgrave, 2001.