Layla Quinones
SSH104.7761
Professor Timothy Coogan
January 17, 2009
Sources Homework 4
Chapter 3
Document 1 (page 53)
1. What did Immanuel Kant mean by the terms enlightenment and freedom?
Immanuel Kant used the terms enlightenment and freedom to identify each other. He
determined that the true meaning of enlightenment is to be free of any barriers that an individual
may put on themselves that may prevent them from thinking their own thoughts out of their own
will. He stated that to be enlightened is to be free to use one’s intelligence by itself, without any
guidance from the church, authority, etc. He asserts that to truly be enlightened , people must use
their own reason freely at all times in order to derive answers to any questions that they may
have without any influence of the church, religion, authority, etc. In addition, he stressed the
power of human beings to take control of their own reality and value their individual
intelligence.
2. In Kant’s view, what factors delayed the progress of human enlightenment?
According to Kant, the major factor that delayed the progress of human enlightenment
was tradition in the authority of the church. He noted that many governments have used their
power to shape the thoughts and lifestyles of their citizens and this is the main factor that is
preventing people from thinking on their own and deriving their own explanations about life.
Another factor that Kant identified to be delaying human enlightenment is an individual’s fear to
think on his own. He asserts that since people have been living with “guidance” their whole
lives, they are reluctant to think on their own because they simply don’t know how to or aren’t
familiar with the process. This factor boils down to the individual’s determination to be free of
any external restraints that he may have on himself in order to achieve enlightenment.
Lastly, he concludes that ultimately there are restrictions on freedom everywhere and it is
ultimately up to individuals to free themselves from intellectual bondage.
3. What are the political implications of Kant’s view?
The political implications of Kant’s view would be that one of the church’s and
government’s goals is to shape their citizen’s minds to their own benefit. In his essay he
mentions how people have too much guidance in the sense that they are taught what and how to
think. This is the exact bondage of the mind that he refers to when he stresses the freedom of the
mind. Ultimately, he is exposing authority in the way that its shapes the minds of the people it is
governing, therefore, insinuating that the government is restricting the people to think on their
own as individuals. Furthermore, this would be considered by Kant a form of restriction that
authority is putting on people and preventing them from achieving enlightenment.
Document 2 (page 57)
1. Compare the views of John Locke with those of Thomas Hobbes regarding the character of
human nature, political authority, and the right to rebellion.
John Locke and Thomas Hobbes have competing views regarding the character of human
nature. Locke believed that people are essentially good and human while Hobbes believed that,
although at times, humans are dangerous and should be protected from one another. Regarding
politics, Hobbes believed that the unlimited power of monarchy would be the only way to protect
people from each other and, maintain a civilized and successful state. Locke, on the other hand,
believed that people do not have to be protected from one another rather; it was the duty of the
government to protect the natural rights of life, liberty and property for human beings. He also
believed that the power in a government must be held by the consent of the people, as well as the
state’s authorities in a peaceful agreement. As for rebellion, Hobbes believed that a government
should exercise control over its territory so as to prevent any form of rebellion which could
ultimately lead to anarchy. Locke believed that, if the government in any way threatened the
natural rights of human beings, the people have the right to overthrow that government and in
place, put to authority the people so that they may govern themselves. His notion is that in the
sense of the government violating the peoples rights, they are the rebels who deserve to be
overthrown.
2. Compare Locke’s theory to natural rights with the principals stated in the American
Declaration of Independence.
In writing the American Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson took a lot of
their concepts about rights and liberty from John Locke’s theory. The Declaration of
Independence, like John Locke’s theory, emphasizes the natural human rights to life, liberty and
property, which should be enforced by a government appointed by the people. Both also
emphasize that right for the people to govern themselves under a government that would take
into consideration the people who are living there rather than the people governing. Lastly, the
Declaration also criminalizes any authority who prevents the people from their natural rights and
therefore, is subject to be replaced by a more fair representative of the people.
Document 3 (page 64)
1. What arguments did Voltaire offer in favor of religious toleration?
Although Voltaire did not agree with Christianity and felt that it attributed to the
problems in modern society, he still had great respect for their morality. However, he strongly
felt that it was religious intolerance that caused many wars and many problems in the world
today. He regarded intolerance as hypocritical to the Christian religion because the church
prosecuted other Christians and exercised corruption, because intolerance was also a power
struggle. He then goes to say that with tolerance, there have been no wars. Under the Christian
law, all men and women are brothers and sisters, therefore, regardless of religion, individuals
should be treated as such. He also notes that humans make mistakes and it is Christian to forgive
them therefore, a tolerant, forgiving authority will be the one that carries on the will of God and
keeps peace between the people.
2. Why did Voltaire ridicule Christian theological disputation?
Voltaire ridiculed Christian theological disputation due to the fact that the Christian
religion contains so many paradoxes and contradictions. In this sense he concludes that he
doesn’t understand it and believes that others do not understand it also. Furthermore, he
addressed the problem that Christianity has caused many wars and rebellions due to intolerance
against other Christians which is beyond his comprehension for reasonable men.
3. What did Voltaire mean by the term fanaticism? What examples did he provide? How was it
to be cured?
According to Voltaire, fanaticism is a “disease” that certain people contain for something
in which they feel so strongly about that they would do anything to fulfill their goals, with no
regards for the reason and logic of a respectful Christian. For example, he speaks of the St.
Bartholomew massacre where thousands of Protestants were slaughtered because they did not
want to renounce their religion. This, he states, is fanaticism for Christianity and power. He also
gives the example of corrupt judges who prosecute men and sentence them to death for doing
nothing but having a different opinion than they had. Furthermore, he then goes on to conclude
that “he who reinforces his madness by murder is a fanatic” (59). Voltaire results to only one
solution that may cure the disease of “fanaticism” is the philosophical spirit that he says softens
the disease and prevents it from spreading. Another solution he provides is to flee from the area
in which fanaticism is prevailing due to his belief that it spreads like a contagious disease, until
the “air has become purified”(59).
4. What Christian beliefs did Thomas Paine reject? Why?
Thomas Paine rejected almost all of the Christian beliefs except for the belief in God and
the morality that He represents. However, he does not believe in the Virgin Mary, Jesus Christ as
the son of God who was resurrected, or the creed in which all religions set forth for their
believers. He supports his views with the simple fact that there is no evidence that could possibly
render the scriptures and stories in the Bible as true. He does not choose to rely on years of
hearsay, as he proclaims the Bible is accounts of hearsay, and therefore does not believe in the
commandments or Christ. In doing so, Paine is using logic, reason, and his knowledge of science
to determine that religion in no way can be correct in every aspect and therefore, he would not
believe in it unless there is some sort of logical explanation for what the Bible proclaims.
5. How did Baron d’Holback’s critique of religion affirm basic Enlightenment ideals?
Holback’s critique of religion affirms the basic Enlightenment ideals of freedom and
reason. He asserted that God was a product of the ignorance of humanity, who tried to explain
the natural phenomena that they saw before them. Furthermore, he also implies that humanity
fabricated religion in order to obtain some sort of stability with the natural disasters that
occurred, and accredited it to a higher power in which they should please so as to prevent any
more disaster. He determined that religion is nothing but a long trend of logical fallacies that
over the years, authority figures have used to control and obtain power over people, land ,
etcetera. His ideas reflect that of the Enlightenment because his thoughts are breaking away from
the traditional, dominant theological view on life, and he is question religion itself. This type of
extreme secular thought was unheard of and brutally criminalized during the Middle Ages as
well as the Renaissance. In addition, extreme secular thought during the Enlightenment period
reflected the freedom and reason that scholars used to explain things around them. Holback’s
atheistic opinion on the world greatly corresponds to the free though of the individual and the
application of reason that was emphasized during the Enlightenment.
Document 4 (page 71
1. According to John Locke, knowledge originates in experience and has two sources- the sense
and reflection. What does this mean, and what makes this view of knowledge so revolutionary?
John Locke declared that knowledge originates from experience through human senses
and reflection. By senses, he meant that the sensations that human beings experience in their
every day lives allow them to interpret things around them. This therefore constitutes as a source
of knowledge due to the information about the world that the mind is acquiring through the
human senses. He also emphasized sensation as knowledge itself, which allows people to
interpret their surroundings and relate various things to one another. By reflection, Locke meant
that it the human mind that contains the means to interpret its surroundings and experiences by
reflecting its experiences to others. He also stated that the unique human ability to reflect on
one’s self constitutes for a vast amount of knowledge. He continued to declare that through
reflection, humans are able to reason and derive conclusions from withstanding facts; which
fabricates understanding and therefore, knowledge. Locke’s view was so revolutionary due to
the theological ideas that were present at the time. Contrary to the beliefs of the church, Locke
argued that humans are not born with innate ideas implanted by a divine source. He asserted that
at birth, a child’s mind is like a blank sheet of paper, acquiring knowledge through experience,
reflection and sensation.
2. How does Locke’s view of the origin of knowledge compare to that of Rene Descartes? Which
view do you favor, or can you suggest another alternative?
Locke’s view of the origin of knowledge compliments the view of knowledge that
Descartes asserted. Descartes emphasized the ability for human beings to acquire knowledge by
means of their surrounding and the society that they live in. He determined that knowledge, as
well as personality, was manifested by an individual’s ability to think for himself, which was
formulated ultimately by his surroundings. Locke’s view also emphasized the ability for human
beings to acquire knowledge via direct experience from their surroundings by means of sensation
and reflection. Both scholars emphasized the fundamental rule that a human being has the ability
to acquire knowledge through his own right to think and reason. However, Descartes determined
that mathematical principals, logical relationships and principals of cause and effect were
inherent in the mind of a child. Locke, on the other hand, believed that children do not contain
these innate concepts; rather, they learn them as they grow older. I favor Locke’s view on
knowledge because I believe that children do not have any knowledge about their surrounds
when they are born. Children learn how to think and how to reason by means of their
environment and how they are taught and learn throughout their lives. This is a justification of
how all people contain unique ideas and mental capacities that differ from place to place.
3. How would you characterize Locke’s general theory of education? Is it compatible with his
theory of knowledge?
I would characterize Locke’s general theory of education by simply stating that, by
example, a child would learn how to live and acquire knowledge. This theory is therefore
compatible with Locke’s theory of knowledge because, according to that theory, children learn
by means of their surroundings through experience. Furthermore, when adults intend to educate
children, it should not be through beatings and punishment, but by example of how they observe
their educators acting. Consequently, through the observations of their teachers and parents,
children learn how to act accordingly which therefore would lead them to be educated civilized
people. In addition, Locke’s theories compliment each other with the fundamental rule that, at
birth, children do not have innate ideas about how to think rather, they must learn these ideas and
concepts by ways of their life experiences.
4. What implications do Locke’s theory of knowledge and educational theory have for his
conception of human nature?
According to Locke’s theories, it would be accurate to imply that it is in human nature to
learn and ultimately be a product of their environments. Contrary to the popular belief at the
time, Locke did not think that humans are born either good or evil rather; they are taught how to
be good and evil through their experiences and observing others. In all, Locke’s theories prove
that it is in the human mind’s capacity to be taught and therefore shape his being.
5. In what way may Claude Helvetius be regarded as a disciple of John Locke, and how did he
expand the significance of Locke’s ideas?
Claude Helvetius is regarded as a disciple of Locke because he expands upon Locke’s
theory of education that children learn through their surroundings and experiences. Helvetius
goes further to expand Locke’s theory by asserting that in order to make a nation happy, content,
and successful, education of the newer generations should be articulated in such a manner to
shape citizens accordingly. He also goes further and determines that the genius of man is only
produced through the circumstances in which they are placed. Therefore leading him to
conclude that in order to form happy, intelligent beings, reform should occur in both government
and education to alter a person’s surroundings in order to be able to produce logical, reasonable,
happy, good, etc., individuals.
6. What was Rousseau’s basic approach to educating a child?
Rousseau’s basic approach to educating a child is to allow him to learn on his own desire.
He stresses that a child should not be taught like a grown man is taught, told what to do all the
time and how to think because, as a consequence, he would be forever reliant on others to think
for him. He determined that if a child is learning through his own desire to learn, he would
acquire knowledge that would help him become a reasonable, intelligent and mature man. In
addition, Rousseau emphasized the need to allow children to explore and experiment with their
surroundings in order to teach them about themselves and how to think on their own. It is only
through thinking on his own, that he would become an independent, wise and reasonable man.
7. Compare Rousseau’s theory of education with Locke’s. How similar or different are their
views, and what implications do they have for their respective conceptions of human nature?
Rousseau and Locke have very similar theories about educating children. They both
strongly asserted that a child should learn by means of his surroundings and should not be taught
as an adult would be taught. Both scholars stress the importance of the child’s ability to interpret
information and education as reliable to them and not as a burden. It is only through this that
children would be able to think and learn effectively. Although these theories are fundamentally
similar, they do contain various differences. For example, Rousseau believed that child should
learn through his own desire to learn and therefore, should not be taught in a school where he
feels restrained and bored. He stressed that ability of the child to learn and develop on his own
terms by means of his own desire to learn. On the other hand Locke determined that children
should be taught through the example of others so they may follow and learn to be reasonable
men. In addition, Rousseau believed that children should not rely on adults for guidance all the
time because it would form an indestructible reliance to others as they become older. For him,
this would be the least effective in shaping an independent individual. Conclusively, both Locke
and Rousseau believe that ultimately, a child is shaped by his surrounding and by his education
however, they do differ in their approaches in teaching children by means of experience.
According to Rousseau, it is human nature to learn and desire. However, he also believed
that it is human nature to be formed by one’s surroundings and therefore a person may risk being
reliant on certain resources. On the other hand, Locke also believed that it is human nature to
learn and desire, however, he believed that educators must channel that desire and learning
through direct example and guidance for the child. This view is in contrast with Rousseau’s view
because he believed that through example, a child would rely too much on others, therefore a
child should learn through his natural desires rather than the desires of others.
Document 5 (page 74)
1. Why was the publication of the Encyclopedia a vital step in the philosophes’ hopes for
reform?
The publication of the Encyclopedia is a vital step in the philosophes hopes for reform
because it advocated freedom and liberty. It also advocates the history of mankind as a learning
tool to refrain from making mistakes that have been made in the past. Lastly, the Encyclopedia
also asserts that government should be at the people’s best interest and that in order for reform to
occur, the people as well as officials should be enlightened. Through the publication of the
Encyclopedia, the French philosophes hoped to spread the enlightened knowledge in order to
spread reform and wisdom among free, liberated people.
2. To what extent were John Locke’s political ideals reflected in the Encyclopedia?
John Locke’s fundamental political idea that people should be free to think, feel and live
as they please was reflected in the Encyclopedia. Locke asserted that it was the state’s obligation
and responsibility to the people to preserve their natural rights. The Encyclopedia also
emphasized the government’s right to preserve the liberty and rights of the people in order to
maintain a happy and successful nation. Lastly, both Locke and the Encyclopedia emphasized
the government’s need to acknowledge the people’s free will and their right to govern
themselves by means of a representative government.
3. Why was freedom of the press of such significance to the enlightened philosophes?
Freedom of the press was significant to the enlightened philosophes because it allowed
them to publish works that would spread their enlightened ideas to the people. This would
therefore contribute to the spread of liberty and the reform of government. It would also
constitute for the ultimate change in the quality of life in Europe.