The first
Enlightenment a.k.a.
Age of Reason
began around 1650 and lasted about 150 years.
It was a
philosophical revolution,
lifting
reason and
rational thinking,
in society as well as in each individual person,
above the powers of traditions and institutions.
Education,
research,
science got propelled forward;
striving for knowledge, understanding, insight
was an ideal shared by many.
Through all that also
technology and
culture
progressed as never before.
And, most importantly, the
power structures
of
monarchs and
churches got called into question.
These didn't passively watch that for 150 years,
but kept learning in their own way and continuously
worked the so-called
Counter-Englightenment.
The
end of the Enlightenment, however,
came only with the
French Revolution (1789-1799),
which, though born from the Enlightenment,
lead by
massive excesses of violence
to a
traumatizing shock.
This and the return of power corruption in the
leaders of the very revolution caused a deep
resignation and lead from the Age of Reason
to the
escapism of Romanticism.
Those in power had learned a lot in the Enlightenment
and began to purposefully
filter and steer
in which fields
progress would rapidly continue
— and in which fields not,
what the masses learn
— and what not, which
ideals and values
would be widely shared — and which ones not.
This works
never perfectly and everywhere,
minorities and individuals always go their own ways,
but only the
mass effect determines the world.
Therefore we have fascinating, rapid developments
in
technology and
culture, whereas in
politics
and the
general intellectual advancement
we do not make any real progress.
Particularly the power-serving developments
in
technology and
manipulation lead, by way of
the relative to them
increasing inadequacy of man,
to ever greater
threats.
Of these, the
nuclear bombs and the
Holocaust
are but the widely recognized
tip of a
gigantic iceberg
of
suffering caused and
future at risk.
Intellectual circles have tried again and again
to
revive and continue the
Enlightenment.
But a truly
New Enlightenment is needed,
one that consciously learns from the failing of the first,
that consciously
factors in adversary currents,
that consciously
compensates for the past
two centuries of power manipulations —
and that consciously
prevents excesses
such as those of the French Revolution.
The New Enlightenment simply has to strive for
such social and philosophical progresses
that exhilerate and liberate
all people,
including those who today still live off harm,
such as exploitation or conflict.
The
name "Enlightenment" still fits today;
to speak of a
Second Enlightenment,
however, would be incorrect.
Firstly because, even though only from 1650-1800
people officially actually spoke of "Enlightenment",
earlier progress movements occassionally
get counted as periods of Enlightenment, too,
such as a Greek and a Roman one,
so there is big confusion as to the numbering.
Secondly because the first Enlightenment
shall not and can
not be repeated.
Indeed, the fundamental
ideals and goals remain
(education, knowledge, insight, justice),
yet the New Enlightenment has to, as mentioned,
consider several
additional issues, and it should
not only strive for reason and knowledge,
but also explicitly for
wisdom.
This series here can only be a
spark for that.
You too decide now if it will be fully realized.
›