(Instructions for all forums)
You are asked to compose a commentary and post it here to discuss the learning materials and readings assigned to this Unit.
Your posting needs to address three items:
- (a) list a few short quotes (citations) from the texts that you found most interesting or relevant;
- (b) describe your comments, interpretations, and thoughts regarding these quotes; and
- (c) address one other issue of interest, including your response to discussions by other course members.
One of the most interesting aspects of the Enlightenment (and the resultant French Revolution) is the way that the philosophers, scientists, and artists in various genres responded to the political upheaval. (Indeed, in many cases, they also helped generate revolution). Immanuel Kant's observation that mankind was growing out of its "self-inflicted immaturity" is very apropos- people were wanting to find their own way, and abandon the parent/child relationship of being a king's "subjects", or the church's "flock".
In science, a revolution of its own was growing, parallel to the shifts in government. Per the digital revised textbook, "technical innovations... led to groundbreaking inventions" in the sciences, mathematics, mechanics, and the arts. A very exciting and/or frightening era, depending on how open-minded one was. Innovation brings change, and there's always both good and bad results... Certain tasks become easier, but the people that were doing things the old way- their trades become obsolete.
I think the world is going through a similar phase now, with the very rapid advances in computers and communication. We all enjoy, even rely, on the Internet; but we also know that the government or law enforcement can now monitor our private lives in great detail. Not to mention the millions of businesses scouting for our money... and tracking our browsing history.
As a musician myself, I was impressed at how the musical forms of the day shifted with the politics. Again from our text, "the middle classes... could now participate in... leisure activities formerly reserved for the aristocracy". This translated into the first public performances for orchestras, and a new "business model" for composers. The arts were finally trickling down to the masses, and I consider that a very positive change.
Finally, I found the Neo-Classical movement intriguing. It makes a lot of sense in retrospect, for the leaders of the Enlightenment to find inspiration in the much earlier cultures of Greece and Rome, who had made many innovations themselves in philosophy and politics. The very important science of archaeology sprang from this revived interest in the past, and unearthed important historical relics.
@Candace Chilcoat:
"Do the ends justify the means?" is one of the toughest historical questions. We can look at some truly horrible examples, such as the Holocaust, and the vast majority of the world would answer a resounding "NO"! (Even the "ends" were not justified).
But for most other revolutions and uprisings of history, such a consensus is more difficult to reach. Our American forefathers killed a lot of Britons, and a lot of Native Americans, to establish this country. Was that justified?
Beheading King Louis XVI was of course a very symbolic gesture on the part of the revolutionaries. Here in more modern times it seems appalling that vast crowds would gather to witness such a gruesome event. But I postulate that we really haven't changed that much- nowadays we would just watch it on the Internet instead (such as the ISIS and al qaeda executions).
@Noelle Patterson:
The King's Declaration is very enlightening. The element most palpable to me was the fear and desperation you could read between the lines. In one sense, he is literally pleading for his life. He senses the changes coming and already knows in his gut that they will render his and his predecessor's royal existences obsolete.
You make a good observation that his criticisms of the "assembly" and its inefficiency are similar to the frustrations many Americans have regarding all the bureaucracy in the US government- too many committees and micro-managers, too much red-tape...
Democracy might be the best policy for the citizens of a nation, but it's not nearly as easy to deploy as an aristocracy- where the King makes all the decisions. That's much more efficient.
@Stephanie Davis:
European History is such a huge subject that I think most of us feel daunted by it. You could divide it into various sub-genres (the history of individual European nations, different political ideologies) and still have a lot on your plate... From what I've scanned through the text so far, it's organized into reasonably manageable "bites". And to go just one more food analogy (before everyone groans)- the scope of European history will take some time to digest. Hopefully it metabolizes into a deeper understanding of our own place and time in the world.
icons at the top right corner of the subsection.