Dear Readers,

"Why do we never get to ask you questions, Mr. Yarnall?" (Me)
"Well..." (Yarn)
"To be fair he doesn't let us speak that much." (Cory)
"OOOOOHHHHH." (All)

And on that note...

Effects of the Scientific Revolution-
What are the consequences of the Scientific Revolution? How did the revolution effect society as a whole?- During the Renaissance & eras that preceded it, authority was based on ancient laws & ideas with religion as a major influence (i.e. the Divine Right of Kings). However, during the Scientific Revolution & Enlightenment period, methodology & authority based on reason & natural law took precedence. The idea of human progress flourished in the Enlightenment, specifically due to the scientific method & a growth in the "search for truth" outside of religion.

Were people, in their beliefs & in progress, truly in pursuit of perfection?- no. Scientists were aware that they could never achieve perfection. So then what is our end goal? Was there really any end goal? “The journey is more important than the destination.” Scientists & Enlightenment thinkers sought truths & new knowledge through nature & scientific explanation, but they were well-aware of the fact that they would never attain all knowledge. (Relatable example: Why do we go to school if we are aware that we will never know everything?)

Is skepticism anti-progress?- no! Skepticism actually furthered most research & experimentation during this time period as people avidly sought new & untainted (by the Church, that is) knowledge.

"Where da truf at? FOUND IT."

Sentiment of the Enlightenment-

So...the people living during the Enlightenment were optimistic?- yes! People were optimistic in that they were hopeful for the future in a positive way ("Yes, we will make new discoveries & obtain new knowledge!"). Doesn't the rich’s view of the poor seem pessimistic, though? "The philosophes believed that the great majority of the common people were doomed to superstition & confusion because they lacked the money & leisure to look beyond their bitter struggle with grinding poverty." (page 608) Did the rich essentially say, “Why bother with the poor, or the rabble, because they will never be enlightened anyway?” The French upper & educated class, the philosophes, were "the enlightened". The poorer classes were not exposed to Enlightenment ideas as they were uneducated & had neither the time nor the money to ponder Enlightenment thoughts as the rich did. Therefore, you could say that views were both optimistic & pessimistic when referring the ability of society to become enlightened (optimistic = rich, pessimistic = poor). However, you could also say that the rich believed education & literacy (the "reading revolution" is coming up!) could help the poor out of their unenlightened ways.

Does society progress as a whole?- yes. There will always be a lower & higher end of society because just as a poorer class progresses, a wealthy class progresses even further. “The few smaller states were successful in making reform.” This statement refers to the fact that a "close gap" between classes & a more reformed society is much more tangible in a smaller society as there are less people to oppose public opinion, halt reforms, & contribute to class divides.

Awkward Topic that Did Not Fit in with the Lesson-

Is Montesquieu more modern than the rest?- yes, he applied the critical method (scientific method, but in regard to politics) to government & criticized the idea of an all-powerful monarch. Montesquieu believed in a separation of powers. 

Would Montesquieu agree with Montaigne?- yes! Montaigne wrote On Cannibals, an account of the mistreatment of natives by strong & arrogant European overlords. Both Montaigne & Montesquieu were against a domineering & extremely strong government.

When you realize Montaigne is from another chapter & you already blocked all of that information our of your mind.

To ponder for the next class-

Of Voltaire & Rousseau, who was wackier?

xoxo,

Nicole Flo :)

Me after I finished this post (& at semi, obviously).