Tucker, Ericka

English

epublications@Marquette

Marquette Universitye-Publications@MarquettePhilosophy Faculty Research and Publications Philosophy, Department of1-1-2012Review of A Revolution of the Mind: RadicalEnlightenment and the Intellectual Origins of ModernDemocracy, by Jonathan IsraelEricka TuckerMarquette University, ericka.tucker@marquette.eduPublished version. Studies in Social & Political Thought, No. 20, (Winter 2012): 138-140. Publisherlink. © 2012 University of Sussex. Used with permission.Erika Tucker was affiliated with Cal Poly Pomona at the time of publication.138A Revolution of the Mind: Radical Enlightenment and the IntellectualOrigins of Modern Democracyby Jonathan Israel Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2011, pbk £13.95 (ISBN: 978-0-691-15260-8), 296pp.by Ericka TuckerJonathan Israel is an academic on a mission. His aim is to reconceivethe Enlightenment as a pan-European, transatlantic phenomenon with twodistinct, incompatible strains: a Radical Enlightenment and a ModerateEnlightenment. The Radical Enlightenment, Israel argues, was characterizedphilosophically by materialism, monism and determinism; religiously bysecularism and universalism and politically by its commitment to democracyand revolutionary reform of political institutions. The ModerateEnlightenment, on the other hand, was characterized by its commitment todualism, deism, constitutional monarchism, and a morality based onsentiment and tradition rather than the Radical insistence on reason.According to Israel, figures in the Moderate Enlightenment eschewedrevolution and instead believed progress to be based on Providence. Israelargues that the revolutionary events of the 18th Century were preceded byrevolutionary ideas of ‘la nouvelle philosophie’, which he identifies with theRadical Enlightenment. In particular, revolutionary events in America,France and the Netherlands were preceded, Israel argues, by the ideas ofequality, democracy, and reason as the basis of a universal morality,proposed by the most radical of the Enlightenment thinkers. Israel does not write short books. His average tome weighs in at 3 lbspaperback, with an average of 800 pages. A Revolution of the Mind is a muchshorter work; it is an attempt to bring out in a manageable length the core ofIsrael’s project in his three larger works: Radical Enlightenment, EnlightenmentContested and Democratic Enlightenment. As such, it is a good place for thestudent of political philosophy to begin. Having used it in an undergraduatepolitical philosophy class, I can attest that although it is dense, and its castof characters rather large, the arguments are clear, original and provocativeenough to engage students. A Revolution of the Mind successfully brings out the original points ofIsrael’s larger trilogy on the history of the Enlightenment, and engagesstudents of philosophy and politics of all ages, backgrounds and expertise.As an original jaunt through the radical history of politics and metaphysics,this is an excellent beginning point for the student of history, contemporarySSPT 20_SSPT  18/02/2013  18:44  Page 138139political philosophy and the history of political thought. Revolution alsooffers much to the philosopher, both professional and student, by offeringagain, a highly original alternative narrative of the politics and philosophyof the Enlightenment.Although he focuses his attention on the 18th century, Israel recognizesthe foundations of the Radical Enlightenment in the 17th century.  Heidentifies the political and moral kernel of the Radical Enlightenment inSpinoza’s metaphysics and political writings. According to Spinoza and hisRadical Enlightenment followers, democracy is the freest and most absolutestate and therefore the best form of state. However, we cannot count onhuman nature or Providence alone to achieve this political freedom. Actionis required in order to achieve enlightenment. Israel gives us not only an interesting new take on the historiographyof the Enlightenment, but also does important philosophical work. Hereveals what radicals in the 17th century knew – dualism and free will do notsave genuine freedom; they deny its conditions of possibility. One cannothave genuine freedom, argued Spinoza, without understanding the causalconditions of our existence as material beings. To improve our lives and thelives of our neighbors, we need to understand ourselves as part of Nature,as part of the causal structure of the universe. Beloved Enlightenment figures, such as Kant, Rousseau and Locke,are lambasted and replaced with new heroes: d’Holbach,Schimmelpenninck, Price and Helvétius. Although Kant, Rousseau andLocke are often forgiven their peccadilloes on race, imperialism and gender,their views on rights, freedom, the scope of reason and Enlightenment aretaken as “radical for their time”; however, Israel exposes their views ascomparatively conservative, and moderate given the radical ideas on offer. Israel occasionally errs on the side of grand pronouncement overspecific argumentation. For example, his major thesis, that there are twoEnlightenments: Radical and Moderate, is well supported. Israel shows us avariety of ways in which the elements of the two Enlightenments can bedifferentiated. However, his further claim that these two are incompatiblephilosophically is a claim that merits more detailed argumentation. That is,to say two philosophical views are different is one thing; to say that they areincompatible because of those differences, is quite another. Israel’sarguments for difference succeed, but he does not meet the burden of prooffor incompatibility. Specialists may take issue with his interpretation of thecentral figures: Hume, Locke, Diderot, d’Holbach and Spinoza. Israel’sinterpretations of these figures are controversial; however, his extendedarguments for his novel interpretation, while available in Israel’s articles andlonger works, here merit nary a footnote. Given the overarching mission andReviewsSSPT 20_SSPT  18/02/2013  18:44  Page 139140argument of the book, Israel chooses to frustrate specialists in favour ofgreater readability. Individual philosophers are always more wily and interesting thanthe ‘schools’ or movements to which they belong. Surely, Locke, Smith andHume fit into Israel’s category of Moderate, but their specific arguments andviews are quite complex. This tension between the historian’s aim to groupand synthesize and the philosopher’s tendency to find differences and tofocus on nuances emerges in each chapter. Philosophers will be annoyed,but perhaps that’s all the better. Part of the aim of the book is to reconsiderour narratives of 17th and 18th century philosophy and this book succeedsin doing so. Methodologically, Israel practices what he calls the “controversialistmethod in the history of ideas.” This method is characterized by interpretingthe ideas of individual philosophers in the context of the debates of theirown time, by which they are influenced and to which their work contributes.Seeing this method in action is perhaps the most promising aspect forcontemporary philosophers who want to take historical context seriously.Too often, the ideas of philosophers such as Kant are cherry picked bycontemporary philosophers, and the religious, political and philosophicalcontext in which they were conceived is ignored. Israel shows us that byfailing to understand the context and controversies in the history of ideas,we fail to understand the contextual nature of philosophy itself. In doing so,we deliberately misinterpret philosophers the past and ignore the contextualnature of our own work. Ericka Tucker (eltucker@csupomona.edu) is an Assistant Professor at CalPoly Pomona. She is currently developing a Spinozan framework for globaljustice.ReviewsSSPT 20_SSPT  18/02/2013  18:44  Page 140

Review of \u3cem\u3eA Revolution of the Mind: Radical Enlightenment and the Intellectual Origins of Modern Democracy,\u3c/em\u3e by Jonathan Israel

https://epublications.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1656&amp;context=phil_fac

Review of \u3cem\u3eA Revolution of the Mind: Radical Enlightenment and the Intellectual Origins of Modern Democracy,\u3c/em\u3e by Jonathan Israel

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

epublications@Marquette