Very nice, thanx for sharing! I'm studying the relation between Spinoza and Van den Enden (specially on radical democracy), and I'm also very interested in the sources of modern western thought that were ignored and erased later on. Marc Bedjaï sees Van den Enden's philosophy (and Spinoza's too) as part of the Hermetic tradition, which dates back to ancient Egypt (Kemet). Unfortunately, I could only access his "Franciscus Van Den Enden, maître spirituel de Spinoza". Cheers from Brazil, hope to keep in touch with your research!
I doubt I understand the 'presentism' debate (don't do history) and what I have read seems a bit reactionary --but it's puzzling why someone would think 'in the present we can see through racist ideology, we are capable of giving an account that is accurate enough because we are respectful & sympathetic to colonized people but IN THE PAST nobody had this capacity.
Why not? There were competing outlooks and ideologies then as well. Obviously, they don't quite have our methods and accountability for inaccuracy --but they were closer in time, and it's not as if people weren't curious and truth seeking in the past.
I don't really think this is the 'presentism' debate but the word fits. It's as if there's a sense of superiority of present people over past peopl.
One thing I hope to do with this project of looking at Enlightenment figures and texts is to try to get a better grasp on the immense diversity of viewpoints and to outline a richer account of reason than you see in present discussions. I am going to write a piece soon on racism and the rise of scientific racism in the 18th c and the pushback at the time. I think this view of diversity also lays to rest the “man of his time” defenses for bigots like Immanuel Kant. Plenty of people didn’t think like him!
A couple of interesting examples that not everyone thought this way
are the Germantown protest in 1688 & John Wesley's defense of African people as equals to English people. I realize that's not philosophy but it's noteworthy that there were some Europeans who simply weren't buying in the same way.
I think John Wesley does count as philosophy. And of course the entire 18th century abolitionist movement is, I feel, an inspiring example of people-powered change. The sugar boycott in the UK and France was a way that housewives, who lacked the vote, could nevertheless influence policy and demand change. We're not at the mercy of our time! We can try to discern (difficult as it is) what the right thing to do is and to try to find the means to make the change.
Very nice, thanx for sharing! I'm studying the relation between Spinoza and Van den Enden (specially on radical democracy), and I'm also very interested in the sources of modern western thought that were ignored and erased later on. Marc Bedjaï sees Van den Enden's philosophy (and Spinoza's too) as part of the Hermetic tradition, which dates back to ancient Egypt (Kemet). Unfortunately, I could only access his "Franciscus Van Den Enden, maître spirituel de Spinoza". Cheers from Brazil, hope to keep in touch with your research!
I doubt I understand the 'presentism' debate (don't do history) and what I have read seems a bit reactionary --but it's puzzling why someone would think 'in the present we can see through racist ideology, we are capable of giving an account that is accurate enough because we are respectful & sympathetic to colonized people but IN THE PAST nobody had this capacity.
Why not? There were competing outlooks and ideologies then as well. Obviously, they don't quite have our methods and accountability for inaccuracy --but they were closer in time, and it's not as if people weren't curious and truth seeking in the past.
I don't really think this is the 'presentism' debate but the word fits. It's as if there's a sense of superiority of present people over past peopl.
One thing I hope to do with this project of looking at Enlightenment figures and texts is to try to get a better grasp on the immense diversity of viewpoints and to outline a richer account of reason than you see in present discussions. I am going to write a piece soon on racism and the rise of scientific racism in the 18th c and the pushback at the time. I think this view of diversity also lays to rest the “man of his time” defenses for bigots like Immanuel Kant. Plenty of people didn’t think like him!
A couple of interesting examples that not everyone thought this way
are the Germantown protest in 1688 & John Wesley's defense of African people as equals to English people. I realize that's not philosophy but it's noteworthy that there were some Europeans who simply weren't buying in the same way.
De Las Casas protested certain aspects as well
I would love to know of more on this.
I think John Wesley does count as philosophy. And of course the entire 18th century abolitionist movement is, I feel, an inspiring example of people-powered change. The sugar boycott in the UK and France was a way that housewives, who lacked the vote, could nevertheless influence policy and demand change. We're not at the mercy of our time! We can try to discern (difficult as it is) what the right thing to do is and to try to find the means to make the change.