A. What is Enlightenment?
The 18th century is usually called the “Age of Enlightenment” in Europe. “What is enlightenment?” was the theme of a German essay competition in 1784. Immanuel Kant’s famous response opened with the motto, “Have the courage to use your own understanding,” and concluded with, “At last, free thought acts even on the fundamentals of government.” 2 In the Enlightenment, the torch of reason that had been ignited in science and mathematics was held up to the church and state.
There was good reason to apply free thought to government, especially to question authority. Wealth and power were concentrated in a small class of monarchs, nobles, and priests. 3 The power struggles among them held undue sway on the fortunes of ordinary people. The advent of reason encouraged writers and thinkers (philosophes) to ask if might really makes right. They asked bold questions such as, “Can citizens govern themselves? Should the church be involved in matters of state? Do monarchs really have a divine right to rule? In fact, how much about divinity can we really know at all?”
Like the Reformation before it, the Enlightenment spread through literacy. Books, pamphlets, and newspapers influenced an increasingly important public opinion. Some of the most widely read Enlightenment writers were Hume and Smith in Scotland, Rousseau and Voltaire in France, and Franklin and Paine in America. Denis Diderot supervised publication of France’s great Encyclopedie. Gathering the nation’s collective knowledge into a single source that could be consulted by everyone, it was created in the same spirit as personal computers and the internet 200 years later. Meanwhile, amateur philosophes found community in private forums like salons, coffeehouses, and masonic lodges.
Seventeenth century philosophers such as John Locke had provided an inspiring template for ideal government. Locke wrote about separation of powers, including the church from the state. He expressed the liberal viewpoint that legitimacy to rule does not come from above but from below. Divine right should be replaced by a social contract detailing the consent of the governed. He listed the natural human rights as life, liberty, and property 4 and argued that, if government does not protect these rights, rebellion is justified. His words were directed backward to the English Civil War, but they reverberated well into the future.
The post-Renaissance public was passionate about applying reason to the political sphere. Of course, this was easier said than done. Europe’s traditions were ancient, and its dynasties were entrenched. Most dissidents felt safer meeting in secret to avoid trouble with authorities. The final key to Enlightenment success was the availability of a new continent on which to test its principles.
By the 1760s, England’s American colonies felt the strains of imperial oppression. London had been taxing and regulating colonial trade, without giving colonists votes or seats in Parliament, since the 1660s. Americans had mostly circumvented tariffs with widespread smuggling. Parliament had imposed increasingly stringent laws to deter smuggling and enforce taxes. Some of these laws had given courts and the military undue power over citizens. The pace of this cat-and-mouse game accelerated after the costly French and Indian War (1754 – ’63), when the crown became desperate for revenue.
The Americans’ response to “taxation without representation” went through a significant change of spirit within the next decade. The first time the colonies assembled together, in the Stamp Act Congress of 1765, their petition to England was a comparatively polite plea that recent taxes were “unconstitutional” according to British law. 1 Nine years later, colonists formed the First Continental Congress as a permanent body to represent their common interests. This congress included such iconic founding fathers as Washington, Hancock, Henry, and Samuel Adams. The First Continental Congress issued a Declaration of Resolves, which was the real philosophical turning point of the revolution. This time around, congress did not appeal to British legal principles, but lay claim to a higher power altogether. All men, it wrote, have natural rights that no government can overrule. The Declaration of Resolves concluded that a particular set of recent British acts must be repealed for violating natural law. It is obvious that these representatives had spent the early 1770s steeping themselves in Enlightenment literature.
The conflict soon came to arms. Rallied by Thomas Paine in 1776, the colonies were then swept by a collective decision that England itself had lost legitimacy as a governing body. 5 The Second Continental Congress declared independence that summer, though the Americans and French had to fight for eight years to dislodge the British military from the newly independent nation.
If the American Revolution had been merely about colonies’ independence from an empirical central government, it would have been just another grudge match. What made it unique was that it stood on liberal principles of democracy, natural rights, and the consent of the governed. Americans did not replace the old king with a new one. The United States became the first modern republic, a nation that elects its own rulers. Congress set about writing a real-life example of a social contract between the people and the government. The first form of this contract, the Articles of Confederation, was replaced by the current US Constitution in 1787.
The French Revolution was an attempt to duplicate the American example, and initially it shared many similarities. France was going bankrupt after its expensive American campaign. King Louis XVI sought revenue with new taxes on the upper classes, who would have no part of it. Desperate and on the verge of bankruptcy, the king called a national assembly to reorganize the nation’s finances in 1789. To everyone’s surprise, the emerging middle class seized control of this assembly and took advantage of the moment to craft a Declaration of Rights and Man and a new constitution that gave voice to the people.
France desperately needed reform. The king and the upper classes had been exploiting the lower classes unsustainably, and it was a failed state by that time. However, the country was not ready for such breakneck change. The rebels had no experience at government. They alienated the church and threw out entire institutions without forethought about consequences. Social experiments such as the first constitution failed. The new “enlightened” government was seized by radicals called Jacobins, who took the extreme measure of executing Louis XVI. Before too long, there was a growing backlash from counter-revolutionary conservatives. France was plunged into civil war. The Jacobin party engaged in a hideous Reign of Terror, murdering tens of thousands of political opponents.
The monarchs of Europe, terrified of this revolutionary mania, intervened to control it and to try restoring the Bourbon Dynasty in France. This led to a series of French Revolutionary Wars involving England, Russia, the Holy Roman Empire, and other nations. By the end of the 1790s, the entire continent was traumatized and in turmoil.
One profound effect of the revolution and its wars was a sense of nationalism among French citizens. For the first time, they were fighting for themselves rather than for a king. They began to identify themselves with the French nation-state. The military grew stronger, not only because of governmental reforms but also because of the soldiers’ fervor.
This was the tide that brought Napoleon to power in 1799. A career soldier who had risen through the ranks of the army, he led a coup against the fractured government and declared himself the new emperor. He conscripted a national army into the most powerful military force the world had ever seen, save perhaps for the British navy. He then began a campaign of French expansionism. His objectives were to secure France to its “natural borders”, to eliminate the belligerent governments around him, and even, ironically, to spread liberalism by force. He had a powerful effect on the peoples nearby. Inspired by the French spirit, they too caught the fever of nationalism. By necessity, it had to be a militaristic nationalism so they could defend themselves. By 1815, an allied coalition was finally able to capture Napoleon. France, like the rest of Europe, fell under monarchical rule once again – but the spirit of democracy was not forgotten.
The American and French Revolutions were the first major experiments in nationalism and liberal democracy. With such mixed results, they left the rest of the world in a state of confusion for the next century. Both revolutions offered a sharp distinction between conservative “right” and liberal “left” ideologies, which has come to characterize all self-governing nations. This metaphor originated with the literal seating arrangement at the 1789 French National Assembly.
For the European right, the French Revolution demonstrated that liberal ideals led to chaos and violence. The conservative theory was that only an absolute dictator could hold a nation together. 8 After Napoleon was defeated, Austria, Prussia, and Russia formed a Holy Alliance committed to stabilizing monarchies and quelling revolutions.
That did not keep liberalism from spreading underground. A series of revolutions peaked in the Spring Of Nations in 1848 – ’49. Nationalists sought unity and independence from foreign rule. Nobles fought for a greater share of state control from monarchs, while the middle and working classes sought equality with nobles. Liberals fought for self-rule. Nationalism was much more successful than democracy. By 1900, several new nations were on the map, including Germany, Italy, Belgium, and Serbia. 9 Only Switzerland, France, and Portugal were republics by the eve of WWI.
Liberal reforms continued piecemeal through the continent. Some countries adopted an English-style constitutional monarchy, where the king’s power was limited by the rule of law or parliament. Others borrowed from the Napoleonic Code, which had pulled France out of chaos. Napoleon’s reforms of law 10 and public education 11 have had lasting worldwide influence.
By 1825, almost all of Latin America had claimed independence from Spain and Portugal. Most of the new South American nations of the 19th century aspired to republicanism, but they set up weak governments easily exploited by small wealthy classes or military leaders. Even the enlightened South American liberator, Simon Bolivar, became an unpopular autocratic ruler. Civil wars were common.
In the United States, too, the coherence of the nation was threatened by a massive civil war. The central conflict was the balance of power between individual states and the federal government, especially on the issue of slavery. Abraham Lincoln made it his mission to keep the country together. He was deeply concerned that if the United States fell apart, it would prove democracy unworkable. His famous Gettysburg address concludes, “we here highly resolve that … government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish from the earth.” 12
Between the Civil War and WWI, the US made significant political changes. The 13th – 17th constitutional amendments demonstrated the trends toward truer democracy and a stronger central government. 2 The American economy quickly grew to the world’s largest.
Besides statecraft, the other important legacy of the Enlightenment was the application of reason toward religion. Prior to the 18th century, the whole world was religious but for isolated places, times, and individuals. The Enlightenment sparked a complete revolution in the way educated people think about religion.
The rise of “free thinking” has occurred in at least four phases, some of which were discussed in Chapter 3. First was the challenge to the Catholic Church’s monopoly on European church and state functions. Some American states, and then the US, were the first secular governments with no state religion at all. The second phase was an experimentation with untraditional concepts of God, influenced largely by 17th-century Dutch author Baruch Spinoza. These political and philosophical matters alone did not cause any widespread doubts about God’s existence before 1700.
The third and most significant phase was a centuries-long flood of scientific observations. Major breakthroughs in biology, chemistry, geology, and astronomy cast serious doubts on mythological models of the universe. Some findings conflicted directly with scripture: Earth and life were formed over billions of years, not in one week a few thousand years ago. More subtly, science continued to replace supernatural assumptions with natural explanations. Newton had shown how planetary motion was a natural result of gravity. Like clockwork, celestial bodies did not require divine will. Scientists continued to make such discoveries: a few big ones and countless small ones. By the 1800s, it had become commonplace understanding that unconscious “inert” particles and forces of nature can account for incredibly complex phenomena, including life functions. Even the greatest mysteries of science are just the last links in long chains of natural explanations. All the while, there is still no convincing theory of what spirits would be or how they would influence the physical world with magic willpower. Carrying these thoughts through to their logical end, atheism teaches that nature is completely self-contained and that supernatural causes are only an illusion, a product of human imagination.
The fourth phase of atheism, of which this book is a part, is the psychology of that imagination – the study of how and why people think religiously. We now understand that animism is the default, instinctive human outlook. It takes difficult training in science to depersonify nature and reckon with it on its own inhuman terms. Religion, despite its fallacies, is simple and comforting. It is easy for children to believe and difficult for adults to abandon.
Although the “unaffiliated” are now the third largest religious group in the world, 13 they are still a minority position in every country. 14 Right or wrong, atheism is not natural for the human mind, and it has always carried a strong stigma. 15 It started to become socially acceptable only in small intellectual circles by the 1770s. 16 The conservative concern was that, without fear of God’s punishment, atheists would have no incentive to behave morally. 17 To the contrary, today’s least religious countries are among the wealthiest and most peaceful. 18 Righteous behavior can be enforced by law or by reputation in the community.
Secular legal systems have had to deal with the fascinating question of “why” proscribed activity is immoral. Some moral values have persisted not because they are inherently noble but simply because they reproduce successfully in the meme pool. A culture that sent its women to war while the men stayed home and had sex with each other would die out pretty quickly. We do not have these values, simply because we could not possibly have inherited them from ancestors. But does that make it “immoral” for women to serve in combat, or for gay men to be honest about their sexuality? Are these matters of brute survival still relevant in today’s world? These are questions that are still being worked out in courts of law and public opinion.
Most post-enlightenment religions have downplayed ancient mythology. New Age religion vaguely associates God with “the universe”. Conspiracy theorists blame evil on secret societies of the rich and powerful. 3 This continuous updating of religious thought shows that faith and superstition are unquenchable instincts.
Most people consider the modern transition to democracy to be a positive trend. 19 But, as anyone who’s made New Year’s resolutions knows, what’s healthy ain’t necessarily easy! Self-governance, even in the best circumstances, presents something of an existential crisis for an emerging democracy. The ancient Greeks already wrung their hands over problems like “idiocracy”. 4 20 National governance is extremely complicated. Even the brightest minds and the most selfless souls will never manage it perfectly. As we expand suffrage, the electorate actually resembles the broadest, lowest base of the educational pyramid. These are the voters who are easiest to manipulate with scare tactics, over-simplifications, and short-term promises. 5
Modern democratization faces even more challenges because of its timing. It is emerging at the same time as science, secularism, and globalism, which compete confusingly with organized religion and national identity. The value of organized religion is that it holds its people together with a shared reality. What do we do when the people can’t even agree on what’s real? Should we base policy on science and global goodwill, or on covenants, prophecies, and mandates of Heaven? Should we fatalistically accept God’s will for us, or should people take a proactive role in managing the environment? These are among the hardest soul-searching questions that pluralistic nations still struggle with today.
Finally, mass migration and global integration make the question of “Who are we?” more difficult for nations to answer. All the standard indicators of nationality are getting blurred. These days, it is common to find different birth countries, religions, languages, or skin tones in the same family! What we call nation-states are becoming de facto country-states, defined primarily by their borders and their laws. Meanwhile, we are increasingly in need of a worldwide shared reality, a task larger than any single religion. That’s why the elements of our nascent global culture – like capitalism, technology, and the Olympics – are secular.
- Cover image by Eugene Delacroix, “Liberty Leading the People” (1830), public domain. ↩
- Immanuel Kant, “What is Enlightenment?” (1784, German) translated into English by Mary C. Smith, available at http://www.columbia.edu/acis/ets/CCREAD/etscc/kant.html (accessed and saved 5/04/19). ↩
- Vladimir Popov and Jomo Kwame Sundaram, “Income Inequalities in Perspective”, Development 58, 196-205 (2/24/2017), https://link.springer.com/article/10.1057/s41301-016-0019-z (accessed and saved 12/30/20). Table 1 shows that European Gini coefficients, which measure income inequality, were much higher in 1750 and 1800 than in 2000. Also see Branko Milanovic, “Global Income Inequality by the Numbers: In History and Now – An Overview”, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 6259 (Nov., 2012), https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/12117/wps6259.pdf (accessed and saved 12/30/20). See esp. p. 20. Milanovic shows that income inequality across classes has fallen significantly since 1870, although inequality has risen across different locations of the world. ↩
- This is a famous paraphrase of Locke’s actual words, “life, liberty, or estate” and “life, liberty, or possessions.” Two Treatises of Government (1689), available at https://oll.libertyfund.org/pages/john-locke-two-treatises-1689 (accessed 5/05/19). ↩
- Paine encouraged Americans to break free of England in his tract Common Sense, published January, 1776. That April, George Washington wrote, “I find Common Sense is working a powerful change … in the minds of many men.” Letter from George Washington to Joseph Reed, 4/01/1776, available at https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/03-04-02-0009 (accessed and saved 5/05/19). ↩
- Image of 2nd Continental Congress based on John Trumbull, “Declaration of Independence” (1818), public domain; 3D reconstruction by James van Nuys (2014); photograph by Scot Fagerland (2015) ↩
- French Revolution image by Isidore Stanislas Helman / Public domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Execution_of_Louis_XVI.jpg (accessed and saved 5/23/20). ↩
- This had been conventional wisdom ever since the Roman Republic gave way to strong-man monarchy. Thomas Hobbes presented this thesis forcefully in his highly influential Leviathan (1651). ↩
- Christos Nüssli, “Europe in Year 1800” and “Europe in Year 1900”, Euratlas (2009) http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/ (accessed and saved 5/05/19). ↩
- Robert B. Holtman, The Napoleonic Revolution, LSU Press (1979). ↩
- L. Pearce Williams, “Science, Education and Napoleon I”, Isis 47(4):369-382 at 369 (Dec., 1956), https://www.jstor.org/stable/226629 (accessed and saved 5/06/19). ↩
- Abraham Lincoln, “Gettysburg Address”, spoken on November 19, 1863 and often reprinted. Public domain. ↩
- Conrad Hackett et al., “The Global Religious Landscape”, Pew Research Center (12/18/2012), https://www.pewforum.org/2012/12/18/global-religious-landscape-exec/ (accessed, saved, and archived 12/28/20). ↩
- Jess Staufenberg, “The Six Countries in the World with the Most ‘Convinced Atheists’”, The Independent (3/23/2016), https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/atheists-countries-list-six-world-most-convinced-a6946291.html (accessed, saved, and archived 12/28/20). ↩
- Karen Armstrong, A History of God, Vintage (London, 1999) p. 288. ↩
- Jonathan I. Israel, Foreword to Wayne Hudson, et al., eds., Atheism and Deism Revalued, Routledge (New York, 2016), https://books.google.com/books?id=mxWdBQAAQBAJ , pp. 21 – 22 (accessed and saved 5/06/19). ↩
- Will M. Gervais et al., “Global evidence of extreme intuitive moral prejudice against atheists”, Nature Human Behaviour vol. 1, Article 0151, pp. 1-5 (8/07/2017), https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-017-0151 (accessed and saved 5/06/19). ↩
- Phil Zuckerman, Society Without God, NYU Press (2008), https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0029VCUVK ↩
- Richard Wike et al., “Globally, Broad Support for Representative and Direct Democracy”, Pew Research Center (10/16/2017), https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2017/10/16/globally-broad-support-for-representative-and-direct-democracy/ (accessed, saved, and archived 3/27/21). ↩
- See e.g. Plato’s “Ship of State” metaphor, Republic 6:488a-489d (360 BCE), https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0168%3Abook%3D6%3Asection%3D488a . Adapted from Lycaeus, who was alive in 600 BCE. Accessed, saved, and archived 3/21/21. ↩
Facebook comments preferred; negative anonymous comments will not display. Please read this page / post fully before commenting, thanks!
Powered by Facebook Comments