AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT
The Age of Enlightenment was a cultural movement of intellectuals beginning in late 17th-century Western Europe emphasizing reason and individualism rather than tradition. It spread across Europe and to the United States, continuing to the end of the 18th century. Its purpose was
to reform society using reason, to challenge ideas grounded in tradition and
faith, and to advance knowledge through the scientific method. It promoted scientific thought, skepticism, and
intellectual interchange. The Enlightenment was a revolution in human thought.
This new way of thinking was that rational thought begins with clearly stated
principles, uses correct logic to arrive at conclusions, tests the conclusions
against evidence, and then revises the principles in the light of the evidence.
Enlightenment thinkers opposed
superstition. Some Enlightenment thinkers collaborated with enlightened despots, absolutist rulers who attempted to forcibly put some of
the new ideas about government into practice. The ideas of the Enlightenment
continue to exert significant influence on the culture, politics, and
governments of the Western world.
Originating around the 17th century,
it was mainly sparked by philosophers such as Francis Bacon (1562-1626), René Descartes (1596-1650), Baruch Spinoza (1632–1677), John Locke (1632–1704), Pierre Bayle (1647–1706), Voltaire (1694–1778), Francis Hutcheson, (1694–1746), David Hume (1711–1776), Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) and Isaac Newton (1643–1727). Ruling princes often endorsed and fostered
these figures and even attempted to apply their ideas of government in what was
known as enlightened absolutism. The Scientific Revolution is closely tied to the Enlightenment, as its discoveries overturned
many traditional concepts and introduced new perspectives on nature and man's
place within it. The Enlightenment flourished until about 1790–1800, at which
point the Enlightenment, with its emphasis on reason, gave way to Romanticism,
which placed a new emphasis on emotion; a Counter-Enlightenment began to increase in prominence. The Romantics argued that
the Enlightenment was reductionist insofar as it had largely ignored the forces of
imagination, mystery, and sentiment.
In France, Enlightenment was based
in the salons
and culminated in the great Encyclopédie (1751–72) edited by Denis Diderot (1713–1784) and (until 1759) Jean le Rond d'Alembert (1717–1783) with contributions by hundreds of leading
intellectuals who were called philosophes, notably Voltaire (1694–1778), Rousseau
(1712–1778) and Montesquieu (1689–1755). Some 25,000 copies of the 35 volume
encyclopedia were sold, half of them outside France. These new intellectual
strains would spread to urban centres across Europe, notably England, Scotland,
the German states, the Netherlands, Poland, Russia, Italy, Austria, Spain. It
was also very successful in the United States, where its influence was manifested in the works of
Francophiles like Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, among others. It played a major role in the American Revolution. The political ideals of the Enlightenment influenced the American Declaration of Independence, the United States Bill of Rights, the French Declaration of the
Rights of Man and of the Citizen,
and the Polish–Lithuanian Constitution of May 3, 1791.
PHYSIOCRACY
Physiocracy (from the Greek for "Government of Nature") is an economic theory developed by a group of 18th
century French economists
who believed that the wealth of nations was derived solely from the value of
"land agriculture"
or "land development" and that agricultural products should be highly
priced. Their theories originated in France
and were most popular during the second half of the 18th century. Physiocracy
is perhaps the first well-developed theory of economics.
The movement was particularly dominated by François Quesnay
(1694–1774) and Anne-Robert-Jacques
Turgot (1727–1781). It immediately preceded the first modern
school, classical economics,
which began with the publication of Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations
in 1776.
The most significant contribution of the Physiocrats
was their emphasis on productive work as the source of national wealth. This is
in contrast to earlier schools, in particular mercantilism, which often focused on the ruler's
wealth, accumulation of gold, or the balance of trade. Whereas, the Mercantilist school
of economics said that value in the products of society was created at the
point of sale, by the seller exchanging his products
for more money than the products had "previously" been worth, the
Physiocratic school of economics was the first to see labor as the sole source
of value. However, for the Physiocrats, only agricultural labor created this
value in the products of society. All "industrial" and
non-agricultural labor was "unproductive appendages" to agricultural
labor.
At the time the Physiocrats were formulating their
ideas, economies were almost entirely agrarian. That is presumably why the
theory considered only agricultural labor to be valuable. Physiocrats viewed
the production of goods and services as consumption of the agricultural
surplus, since the main source of power was from human or animal muscle and all
energy was derived from the surplus from agricultural production. Profit in
capitalist production was really only the "rent" obtained by the
owner of the land on which the agricultural production is taking place.
The perceptiveness of the Physiocrats' recognition of
the key significance of land was reinforced in the following half-century, when
fossil fuels had been harnessed through the use of steam power. Productivity
increased many fold. Railways, and steam-powered water supply and sanitation
systems, made possible cities of several millions, with land values many times
greater than agricultural land. Thus, whilst modern economists also recognize
manufacturing and services as productive and wealth-creating, the underlying
principles laid down by the Physiocrats remain valid. Physiocracy also has an
important contemporary relevance in that all life remains dependent on the
productivity of the raw soil and the ability of the natural environment to
renew itself.
Historian David B. Danbom explains, "The Physiocrats
damned cities for their artificiality and praised more natural styles of
living. They celebrated farmers."[7] They called themselves economists, but are
generally referred to as physiocrats to distinguish them from the many schools
of economic thought that followed them.
HISTORY OF ENCYCLOPEDIAS
Encyclopedias have progressed from the beginning of
history in written form, through medieval and modern times in print, and most
recently, displayed on computer and distributed via computer networks.
One of the earliest encyclopedic works to have
survived to modern times is the Naturalism
Historian of Pliny the Elder,
a Roman statesman living in the 1st century AD. He
compiled a work of 37 chapters covering natural history, architecture,
medicine, geography, geology, and all aspects of the world around him. He
stated in the preface that he had compiled 20,000 facts from 2000 works by over
200 authors, and added many others from his own experience. The work was
published around AD 77-79, although he probably never finished proofing the
work before his death in the eruption of Vesuvius in AD 79. Saint Isadora of Seville,
one of the greatest scholars of the early Middle Ages, is widely recognized as
being the author of the first known encyclopedia of the Middle Ages, the Etymologiae or Origins, in which he compiled a
sizable portion of the learning available at his time, both ancient and modern.
The encyclopedia has 448 chapters in 20 volumes, and is valuable because of the
quotes and fragments of texts by other authors that would have been lost had
they not been collected by Saint Isidore.
The most popular encyclopedia of the Carolingian Age was the De universo or De
rerum naturis by Rabanus Maurus,
written about 830, which was based on Etymologiae.
The early
Muslim compilations of knowledge in the Middle Ages included many
comprehensive works. Around year 960, the Brethren of Purity
of Basra were engaged in their Encyclopedia
of the Brethren of Purity. Notable works include Abu Bakr al-Razi's encyclopedia of science, the Mutazilite Al-Kindi's prolific output of 270 books, and Ibn Sina's medical encyclopedia, which was a
standard reference work for centuries. Also notable are works of universal history (or sociology) from Asharites, al-Tabri, al-Masudi,
Tabari's History
of the Prophets and Kings, Ibn Rustah, al-Athir, and Ibn Khaldun, whose Muqadimmah contains cautions regarding trust in
written records that remain wholly applicable today.
The enormous encyclopedic work in China of the Four Great Books of Song,
compiled by the 11th century AD during the early Song Dynasty (960–1279), was a massive literary
undertaking for the time. The last encyclopedia of the four, the Prime
Tortoise of the Record Bureau, amounted to 9.4 million Chinese characters
in 1,000 written volumes.
Renaissance
Anatomy
in Margarita Philosophica, 1565
These works were all hand copied and thus rarely
available, beyond wealthy patrons or monastic men of learning: they were
expensive, and usually written for those extending knowledge rather than those
using it.
During Renaissance the creation of printing allowed a wider diffusion of
encyclopedias and every scholar could have his or her own copy. The De
expetendis et fugiendis rebus by Giorgio Valla was posthumously printed in
1501 by Aldo Manuzio in Venice.
This work followed the traditional scheme of liberal arts. However, Valla added
the translation of ancient Greek works on mathematics (firstly by Archimedes), newly discovered and translated. The Margarita
Philosophica by Gregor Reisch,
printed in 1503, was a complete encyclopedia explaining the seven liberal arts.
The term encyclopaedia was coined by 16th century
humanists who misread copies of their texts of Pliny and Quintilian, and combined the two Greek words
"enkyklios paideia" into one word, έγκυκλοπαιδεία. The phrase enkyklios paideia
(ἐγκύκλιος παιδεία) was used by Plutarch and the Latin word Encyclopedia came
from him.
The first work titled in this way was the Encyclopedia
orbisque doctrinarum, hoc est omnium artium, scientiarum, ipsius philosophiae
index ac divisio written by Johannes Aventinus
in 1517.
The English physician and philosopher, Sir Thomas Browne used the word 'encyclopaedia' in
1646 in the preface to the reader to define his Pseudodoxia Epidemica,
a major work of the 17th-century scientific revolution. Browne structured his
encyclopaedia upon the time-honoured schemata of the Renaissance, the so-called
'scale of creation' which ascends through the mineral, vegetable, animal,
human, planetary and cosmological worlds. Pseudodoxia Epidemica was a
European best-seller, translated into French, Dutch and German as well as Latin
it went through no less than five editions, each revised and augmented, the
last edition appearing in 1672.
18th–19th centuries
Encyclopédie, 1773
The beginnings of the modern idea of the
general-purpose, widely distributed printed encyclopedia precede the 18th
century encyclopedists. However, Chambers' Cyclopaedia, or Universal Dictionary of Arts and Sciences
(1728), and the Encyclopédie
of Denis Diderot and Jean le Rond d'Alembert
(1751 onwards), as well as Encyclopædia Britannica
and the Conversations-Lexikon,
were the first to realize the form we would recognize today, with a
comprehensive scope of topics, discussed in depth and organized in an
accessible, systematic method. Chambers, in 1728, followed the earlier lead of
John Harris's Lexicon Technicum
of 1704 and later editions (see also below); this work was by its title and
content "A Universal English Dictionary of Arts and Sciences: Explaining
not only the Terms of Art, but the Arts Themselves".
During the 19th and early 20th century, many smaller
or less developed languages saw their first encyclopedias, using French,
German, and English role models. While encyclopedias in larger languages,
having large markets that could support a large editorial staff, churned out
new 20-volume works in a few years and new editions with brief intervals, such
publication plans often spanned a decade or more in smaller language.
PHILOSOPHE
Philosophe
is the French word for "philosopher," and was a word that the French
Enlightenment thinkers usually applied to themselves. The philosophes, like many ancient
philosophers, were public intellectuals dedicated to solving the real problems
of the world. They wrote on subjects ranging from current affairs to art
criticism, and they wrote in every conceivable format. The Swiss philosophe Jean-Jacques Rousseau,
for example, wrote a political tract, a treatise on education, constitutions
for Poland and Corsica, an analysis of the effects of the theater on public
morals, a best-selling novel, an opera, and a highly influential autobiography.
The philosophes wrote for a broad educated public of readers who snatched up
every Enlightenment book they could find at their local booksellers, even when
rulers or churches tried to forbid such works.
Between 1740 and 1789, the Enlightenment acquired its
name and, despite heated conflicts between the philosophes and state and
religious authorities, gained support in the highest reaches of government.
Although philosophe is a French word, the Enlightenment was distinctly
cosmopolitan; philosophes could be found from Philadelphia to St. Petersburg.
The philosophes considered themselves part of a grand "republic of
letters" that transcended national political boundaries. In 1784, the
German philosopher Immanuel Kant
summed up the program of the Enlightenment in two Latin words: sapere aude,
dare to know -- have the courage to think for yourself. The philosophes used
reason to attack superstition, bigotry, and religious fanaticism, which they
considered the chief obstacles to free thought and social reform. Voltaire took religious fanaticism as his chief
target: "Once fanaticism has corrupted a mind, the malady is almost
incurable....The only remedy for this epidemic malady is the philosophical
spirit."
Enlightenment writers did not necessarily oppose
organized religion, but they strenuously objected to religious intolerance.
They believed that the systematic application of reason could do what religious
belief could not: improve the human condition by pointing to needed reforms.
Reason meant critical, informed, scientific thinking about social issues and
problems. The philosophes believed that the spread of knowledge would encourage
reform in every aspect of life, from the grain trade to the penal system. Chief
among their desired reforms was intellectual freedom -- the freedom to use
one's own reason and to publish the results. The philosophes wanted freedom of
the press and freedom of religion, which they considered "Natural
rights" guaranteed by "natural law." In their view, progress
depended on these freedoms
|
In the early stages of this
investigation the scalar nature of spacetime was embodied in an additional
postulate. Further study indicated that it was a necessary consequence of the
previous assumptions, as indicated in the preceding paragraph, and it was
therefore eliminated from the list of postulates. However, if there is any
question as to the logic involved in deriving this conclusion from the First
Postulate the additional postulate can be restored and the number of basic
physical assumptions will be increased from four to five. This comment is
being made to clarify the point that the status of this principle has no
bearing on the validity of the subsequent development of theory. The scalar
nature of space-time is a part of the system; the only question at issue is
whether or not it needs to be expressed as an additional postulate.
From the foregoing it is apparent
that where n units of one component replace a single unit in
association with one unit of the other kind in a linear progression, the
direction of the multiple component must reverse at each end of the single
unit of the opposite variety. Since space-time is scalar the reversal of
direction is meaningless from the space-time standpoint and the uniform
progression, one unit of space per unit of time, continues just as if there
were no reversals. From the standpoint of space and time individually the
progression has involved n units of one kind but only one of the
other, the latter being traversed repeatedly in opposite directions. It is
not necessary to assume any special mechanism for the reversal of direction.
In order to meet the requirements of the First Postulate the multiple units
must exist, and they can only exist by means of the directional reversals. It
follows that these reversals are required by the Postulate itself.
Because of the periodic reversal
of direction the multiple unit of space or time replaces the normal
unidirectional space-time progression with a progression which merely
oscillates back and forth over the same path. But when the translatory motion
in this dimension is eliminated there is nothing to prevent the oscillating
unit from progressing in another dimension, and it therefore moves outward at
the normal unit velocity in a direction perpendicular to the direction of
vibration. When viewed from the standpoint of a reference system which
remains stationary and does not participate in the space-time progression the
resultant path of the oscillating progression takes the form of a sine curve.
It is now possible to make some
identifications. The oscillating system which has been described will be
identified as a photon. The process of emission and movement of these
photons will be identified as radiation and the space-time ratio of
the oscillation will be identified as the frequency of the radiation.
Since space-time is scalar the
actual direction in which any photon will be emitted is indeterminate and
where a large number of photons originate at the same location the
probability principles whose validity was assumed as a part of the Second
Fundamental Postulate require that they be distributed equally in all
directions. We find then that the theoretical universe which we are
developing from the Fundamental Postulates includes radiation consisting of
photons travelling outward in all directions from various points of emission
at a constant velocity of one unit of space per unit of time; that is at unit
velocity.
At this point it is in order to
call attention to the fact that even in this early stage of the development
simple explanations are already emerging for items with which previous
theories have experienced great difficulty. The dual nature of radiation
which causes it to travel as a wave but to act as a particle in emission and
absorption has been a controversial issue for decades, yet the foregoing
explanation shows that the reasons for this behavior are actually very simple.
The photon acts as a particle in emission or absorption because it is a
single independent entity; it travels as a wave because the resultant of its
own inherent motion and that of the space-time progression has the form of a
wave.
Furthermore, it is clear that this
wave motion requires no medium; no troublesome hypothetical ether needs to be
brought into the picture. Nor is there any need to make the unwelcome and
disturbing postulate of action at a distance. The photon, having no independent
translatory motion, remains at the same space-time location permanently but
it is carried along by the progression of space-time itself. It acts only
upon objects which do not participate in the progression and are therefore
encountered in the path of motion. The nature of these objects will be
discussed shortly.
A simple explanation is also
provided for the observed fact that the velocity of radiation remains
constant regardless of the reference system. Let us consider two photons
originating at the same point and traveling in opposite directions. Each
moves one unit of space in one unit of time. When the first unit of motion is
complete the photons are separated by two units of space, and in the
Newtonian system the relative velocity is obtained by dividing the increase
in separation, two units, by the elapsed time, one unit. The result is a
relative velocity of two units. But experiments indicate that if this
velocity were measured it would be found to be unit velocity, not two units.
The Newtonian system therefore fails at these high velocities.
Einstein met this situation by
adopting a hypothesis previously advanced by Fitzgerald and Lorentz in which
it is assumed that distance is not an absolute magnitude but varies with the
velocity of the reference system in such a manner as to keep the relative
velocity of radiation constant. In the case under consideration the velocity
equation s/t = v, which produces the incorrect result
2/1 = 2 in the Newtonian system, now becomes s/1 = 1. Here it is assumed
that the distance, s, automatically takes whatever value is required
in order to arrive at the observed constant value of the velocity, the latter
being accepted as being fixed by a law of nature. The highly artificial
character of this solution of the problem aroused strong opposition when it
was first proposed but it has won general acceptance by default, no
reasonable alternative having heretofore appeared to challenge it.
In the theoretical universe being
developed from the Fundamental Postulates physical magnitudes are absolute,
and the variability which relativity theory introduces into the measurement
of distance cannot be accepted. In this system, however, there is no
necessity for any adhoc assumption of this kind to force agreement
with the observed facts since the constant relative velocity of radiation is
a natural and unavoidable consequence of the Postulates.
The controlling factor in this
situation is the three-dimensional nature of time. In the particular example
under consideration each photon moves one unit of space in one unit of time
(the normal unit velocity of the space-time progression). Both Newton and
Einstein accepted the unit of time applicable to photon B as the same
unit of time which is applicable to photon A. But the Postulates of this work
specify that each unit of space is equivalent to a unit of time and since the
motion involves two different units of space the equivalent units of time are
also two separate and distinct units. Therefore when the photons increase
their separation by two units of space they also increase their separation by
two units of time; that is it takes two units of time to move the photons
apart two units in space. The relative velocity is then 2/2 = 1, which is
completely in agreement with the observed facts.
This unit velocity relative to a
photon moving in the opposite direction is identical with the velocity
relative to a stationary object, and the same result is obtained for any
intermediate velocity of the reference system. We therefore arrive at the
general principle that the velocity of radiation in free space is independent
of the reference system. Basically this is a necessary consequence of the
status of unity as the true physical zero.
|