in reading about the enlightenment, one is struck by the
interplay between the philosophes and society…
we see this interaction in ways we have not seen between
people and society before…
if you think about the Greeks or Romans thinkers,
you don’t see this separation between the thinkers and
their society… the philosophers of the Greek and Roman world
were solidly part of their world and their society… if the
philosophers were attacked, it was not a societal attack, it
was because for whatever reason, the philosopher fell on the wrong
side of the current ruler of that society, but it wasn’t a societal
attack on either side, just between the ruler and the philosopher…
in the middle ages, the philosophers were church members, quite often
priest and they existed firmly within the norms and beliefs of their society…
and if you reach say, Galileo he existed within society, but he ran afoul of
religious precepts in the church, not outside of the church, he fitted within
society, he was a university professor…
but beginning with Descartes, you have something different…
Descartes and Spinoza didn’t have a set place within society…
Descartes was independently wealthy and Spinoza rejected a couple
of university offers…and both were attacked by society at large…
in ways, you never seen before…both of them were independent of
society in ways we haven’t seen before in philosophers/thinkers…
both of their thoughts, help revolutionize university thought and help
create quite a bit of intellectual conflict within both the university and
within the society at large…this intellectual conflict hasn’t really been
seen before them…it engaged society at large, from the top to the bottom
of society…intellectual discussions that once only occupied leading intellectuals,
now took place in the streets and in the coffee houses and taverns all over Europe…
said another way, intellectual disputes were now democratize, instead of
being discussed in isolated intellectual circles, intellectual debates were
part of society at large… the intellectual debate were now part of the growth
of democracy…long before the democratic ideal reach the political sphere,
it reached the intellectual sphere… the common man engaged in
intellectual matters…this has never happened before…
and the whole of society was part of this increase intellectual debate…
where once only a small elite part of society was involved…
and this trend existed until the 20th century… when the balkanization
of idea’s occurred and they shattered into a million pieces…
today, you might hear of a discussion of events or personalities,
but not idea’s… we don’t engaged in idea’s like they did starting from
1650… the only public discussion of idea’s now involves in education…
and that is done in terms of money spent, not how to educate children,
but in how much it costs or how efficient it is…
what values should we teach children?
is that a discussion you have ever heard in a public space?
that was a common discussion since Rousseau wrote “Emile” until
before World War 1…
and the question of education revolves around one basic question…
are we trying to create workers or are we trying to create human beings?
anyway to return to my point…we have lost this much needed discussion
about the effect and point of idea’s and their influence in society…
what ideas are needed to improve what part of society and why?
and therein lies part of my discourse, I am engaging in a public discussion
of idea’s that society at large should be engaged in… I am playing my role
as a voice the public needs to engage in idea’s that the society and public
should be engaging in…
what other idea’s that society should be engaging in?
we are lacking in and in desperate need of a public engagement of
idea’s that shows us new paths to the discovery of who we are and what
are our possibilities?
Kropotkin