The
French Enlightenment
The Age of Enlightenment was a period of cultural and
intelligent significance. It challenged the old authority which had been in
place for centuries through absolutism and royal monarchies. Most famously,
this was the case in France. Great thinkers like Immanuel Kant, Isaac Newton,
Voltaire, and even Montesquieu would help bring about this change. The question
is how did they accomplish and help to spur on such thinking which was once
considered radical at the time? The answer is simple, by staying the course and
not following the traditional way of thinking. The idea was to lead, not follow.
As Immanuel Kant states in his essay publication, “It is more nearly possible,
however, for the public to enlighten itself; indeed, if it is only given
freedom, enlightenment is almost inevitable”.[1]
Together, the philosophers of the French Enlightenment would seek to undermine
the power of the centralized government in France, the nobility, and Catholic
Church especially. They used reason, science, and their minds to gain followers
or listeners but to do this they needed the freedoms they were given as natural
born citizens of the state. In this paper I am going to discuss
Pre-Enlightenment France, the philosophers behind it, and what this concept of
reason meant politically. I will also be touching on the Protestant
Reformation, the Renaissance, and how the Thirty Years’ War affected the
Enlightenment socially. All three of these historical events took place between
the 14th and 17th centuries, so to truly understand the
point of enlightenment we must first look at how it came into being in the
first place.
The Renaissance in
France
The French Renaissance would end up
being one of the most important and influential times for literature,
philosophy, and socially. It would last from the mid-15th century to
the 17th century and it grew to include art and poetry. Just as
France in the 16th century became involved in wars in Italy they
brought back with them not just art treasures but new ideas of thought and
perception. In essence, the Italian Renaissance influenced France the most along
with England’s Enlightenment and it’s no secret that the French monarchs of
this period made great headway into restoring royal power to what it once was
before the Hundred Years War. The creation of new sovereign courts called “parlements”
in Dijon, Aix, Bordeaux, Rennes, and Rouen; are the most visible examples of
this process at work.[2]
This however does not mean the King had complete authority over his subjects or
that it would represent progress to the people of France. He had to use propaganda
and sometimes rituals to get his point across. This in turn angered much of the
literary poets and philosophers of the Renaissance and even later on, the
Enlightenment.
The French word Renaissance did not actually come into
being until 1855 when historian Jules Michelet wrote the History of France, in
English its translation is “rebirth”.[3]
The Renaissance wouldn’t truly begin to catch on in France until the late 15th
century after the Black Death receded from Europe and the Hundred Years War was
over, restoring France to a colonial power. Another huge contributing factor to
the French Renaissance was the fall of Constantinople in 1453 which helped to
disperse scholars and manuscripts throughout France.[4]
What’s even more interesting is that the Catholic Church was pretty lenient to
everything that was being published throughout this time. It wasn’t until later
during the French Revolution when they assumed supremacy over the Protestants.
This is the period where they would really seek to clamp down on works being
published by authors such as Kant and Voltaire (whom argued for the separation
of church and state).
Another topic I’d like to discuss is the effect this
Renaissance had on literature and art. The three kings mostly associated with
art during this period were as follows: Francis I (1515-1547), Henry II
(1547-1589), and Louis XIII (1589-1643). Francis I encouraged humanism learning
and once invited Leonardo Da Vinci to France. His son, Henry II would translate
this form of art into architecture and borrowed from Italian classical
influence. France, following Italy’s lead did little to encourage this sort of
learning amongst their populations and tended to skew historical events;
focusing more on art than anything else. Germany however did not, leaning more
towards the Reformation. Dr. Ellis Knox writes that “They turned universal
history to patriotic ends, so that the German Empire appeared as the product
and culmination of history. They admired and published a good deal of medieval
Germanic literature. They often portrayed Germany as the protector of learning
in the age of darkness”.[5] Whenever
other historians talk about the Reformation in France they refer to it as the
“Protestant Reformation” because the French tended to lean more towards the
Catholic Church. Of course the King would side with Protestant Lutherans in
Germany but this was done only to cause disruptions to the Germanic Empire
before the start of the Thirty Years’ War.
The Reformation in France
France came fairly close to becoming
Protestant during the Reformation. It produced one of the major figures of this
movement in John Calvin and in the 1590s; it nearly had a Protestant King.[6] The
Reformation was led by Martin Luther and lasted from 1517 to 1648. It gave
Enlightenment thinkers like Kant and Voltaire a reason to defy royal authority
because so many years before a man by the name of Martin Luther had done the
exact same thing, so you can see how these two movements along with the Renaissance
are linked. However, those who were unable to read the works of Martin Luther
which was the case for nearly all lower class Frenchmen had to hear the “truth”
from the educated man in the village.[7] This
clash of religious philosophies reached a boiling point when the Roman Catholic
Church decided to argue a Counter-Reformation, which was initiated through the
Council of Trent in Northern Italy.
This fight over which religion
should remain dominant in France reigned in the Wars of Religion in 1562,
starting with the Massacre of Vassy on March 1st by armed troops who took it upon themselves
to murder Huguenot worshippers and even regular citizens. The 17th century was essentially torn by
witch-hunts, wars of religion, and imperial conquest. Protestants and Catholics
denounced each other as followers of Satan, and people could be imprisoned for
attending the wrong church, or for not attending any.[8]
Some people actually think the St. Bartholemow’s Day Massacre was the only
bloody event that occurred between Catholics and Protestants. This is
incorrect. The very reason I bring this up is because this is where witness
accounts begin to diverge so we cannot say for sure what happened during that
week of August 22-24 in 1572. All we know is that the battle between Catholics
and Protestants was about to implode.
An angry
Catholic mob carrying on orders from the King (Charles IX at the time) decided to
strike the first blow by massacring some 5,000 Huguenot leaders and followers
alike. Another reason this massacre was necessary in the eyes of the French
king was to avoid a long civil war. Catherine, the King’s mother felt compelled
to inform Charles IX of this and she was the other party who made the decision
to eliminate the threat.[9]
The last thing I’d like to point out is the picture drawn by Francois Dubois of
the massacre. Dubois was a Huguenot thinker and artist but he was also
influenced by the Renaissance, Reformation, and Enlightenment. This new way of
seeing the world through open eyes is evident in his work. After these two
massacres it was imprinted on all the Protestants minds in Europe that
Catholicism was an evil religion.[10]
This would also be a contributing factor to the Thirty Years War which was
about to engulf Europe in a firestorm by the beginning of the 17th
century.
The Thirty Years’ War
Besides
World War I and II, the Thirty Years War turned out to be one of the most
longest and destructive conflicts in European history. The body count is almost
endless, with the war engulfing central and southern Europe as a whole. Thus,
we can conclude this war started over economic, social, and cultural
differences between colonial empires in the coming Middle Ages. Not quite. Most
recently this view has been altered to reflect the view that this war began
over “religious antagonists” as Professor Peter H. Wilson puts it in his
abstract article regarding the Thirty Years’ War.[11]
The reason I mention this is because it’s been proven throughout history that
the reason this war started in the first place was the bitterness between
Catholics and Protestants towards the end of the 16th century.
In these next few
paragraphs I am now going to talk about the Thirty Years’ War, its
belligerents, the results, and how this inspired many of our Enlightenment
thinkers to think differently about the world. Leaders would now face a new challenge
from philosophers to give cause to their greedy ambitions.
No war in history has
ever lasted this long, not even Vietnam. By the time it was over nearly 60% of
Germany’s population was wiped out or decimated.[12] It ended with the rise of absolutism in the
majority of Europe’s great empires. Due to several sources that were finally
made available in English we are able to study this war more thoroughly than
ever before. It first began during the Second Defenestration in Prague when
Catholic Habsburgs and Protestants were feuding with each other.[13] Afterwards, they began recruiting familiar
allies and getting ready for war so you see the religious aspect of this
conflict already becoming the fire starter for this bloody conflict. All it
needed now was a match to light that fire. Conflict in the Holy Roman Empire
also played a big part in escalation and even helped to provoke a civil war in
Bohemia in 1618.[14] Therefore, a coalition of
alliances which poured money and mercenaries into Bohemia’s war would only
further worsen the situation at hand.
Just two years after
the incident in Prague, Catholics consolidated their power after the Battle of
White Mountain in 1620. This is widely known by historians as the first battle
in the Thirty Years’ War.[15]
Outnumbered, the German Catholic League and what remained of the Holy Roman
Empire would overcome Bohemia’s army. With Bohemia already spiraling out of
control the attention now turned to the Danish and their interference within the
private affairs of Germany. Denmark was a largely Protestant nation at the time
and they feared they would be next if they didn’t intervene in the war between
Germany and Bohemia. So in 1625, the Danes led an invasion force of over 14,000
men into Germany accompanied by French, British, and Scottish mercenaries.[16] Quickly nations became more involved
and the Protestant population wanted to strike back following their humiliating
defeat at the Battle of White Mountain.
Europe was coming apart
quicker than anyone had anticipated and Ottoman intervention would prove to be
another determining factor in prolonging the agony of the Thirty Years’ War.
Plans were made to reinforce the borders of what is now modern day Turkey. Bohemia,
now aligning itself with the Ottoman Empire gathered up all their forces for an
invasion of Poland with over 400,000 men; triggering a Polish-Ottoman War in
1620.[17]
The invasion proved successful and the Poles were defeated rather easily,
caught off guard by their invaders. The Spanish Empire also became more
involved, aiding the Catholics. Pretty soon so would Sweden and France;
directly siding with the Protestant armies. These wars continued well into the
1630s since new players were just on the horizon. Sweden and France were pretty
much in the same boat at this time so they became close allies during the
Thirty Years’ War. Sweden, about to side with the Catholics chose to take
advantage of the disruptions in Germany and wage war against them instead. France,
although it was split between Catholics and Protestants sided with the
Protestants because they were already embroiled in a war with the Spanish and
Holy Roman Empire. It’s quite interesting to see where all these pieces land by
the end of the war in 1648 when the Peace of Westphalia is agreed to.
Next, I am going to
discuss the consequences and results of the Thirty Year’s War. All nations were
wounded, especially Germany; whom had been invaded by nearly three different nationalist
armies. Sweden and France wanted to continue the fight but many of the warring
parties grew tired, understandably so.
If there’s one
successful thing that came out of the peace treaties signed during the end of
the Thirty Years’ War, it’s the fact that sovereign states had a right to
participate in international world order. This is still up for some dispute
among historians. But these treaties did not restore order and peace in Europe.
France would still have its revolution in the late 1700s. Nothing could change
that, not even the Thirty Years’ War. However, before multiple sovereign states
could be recognized the authority given to the Pope and Emperor had to be
undermined conceptually.[18]
This would drive Enlightenment thinkers in England and France to doubt what
their royal monarchies were saying or doing.
The results of these
three separate treaties signed included the decline of feudalism, Protestants
were allowed to continue their practice, and the recognition of the Dutch
Republic by the Spanish Empire.[19] After the war, France rose to become
the strongest colonial power in Europe but soon and undeniably so the Swedish Empire
consolidated power; riding the coat tails of the French.[20]
Speaking in general terms of suffering and consequences, Europe’s colonial
powers put themselves into tremendous debt by continuing to wage war for nearly
thirty years and it still wasn’t over. This put a drain on the system so the
monarchies decided to levy these taxes on the peasants to pay for it all.[21] Then there came an abundant number
of uprisings throughout Europe and France especially, which was just a shadow
of things to come.[22]
Another important detail we must not forget is the rampant disease, crop
devastation, famine, and death that occurred during this period. Much of this
would occur in Germany but other nations were affected too.
The Enlightenment
After being at war for nearly thirty years and
another one already beginning to take shape between the Spanish and French
empires, the Enlightenment was now in full swing with thinkers questioning both
their religious leaders and monarchies. Why so much bloodshed? Was it all worth
it in the end? These were the questions on everyone’s minds in Europe that needed
to be answered.
During
the late 1600s and early 1700s the growing nobility of France caused a threat
to the monarch in power, Louis XIV at the time.[23] After the Thirty Years’ War, the
French adopted absolutism as their main form of government and power was
instated in the central core.[24] The idea that the monarchy could
have total and complete dominion over subjects is something that goes against
what was originally intended for the powers of a limited monarchy. French Historian
Tocqueville noted that even before the Revolution, the French government “was
already highly centralized and all-powerful”.[25]
During this period, Enlightenment thinkers printed pamphlets to try and
convince the French that they were no longer living underneath a system of
feudalism or limited monarchy, but that it was quickly transitioning into a
dictatorship. Clash was inevitable. In Revolutionary France, there were
estates. This meant that economic classes and those of nobility were separated
by traditional and political value. The First Estate consisted of
Church/Clergy, the Second Estate was comprised of Nobility, and the Third
Estate was usually reserved for French citizens or peasants.[26]
(sentence out of place)
Finally, I
am going to talk about the influence Enlightenment thinkers had on European
politics, religion, and their thoughts during the start of the French
Revolution. The Enlightenment would last from 1650 to around the late 1780s.
Immanuel
Kant was a German philosopher who was born in Russia and considered a humanist
at the time of the French Revolution.[27] Rejecting the skepticism view of
David Hume, Kant stressed that it was human experience which prompted a person
to question the order of things.[28] He is most famous for writing The Critique of Pure Reason and What is Enlightenment, both written just
before the outbreak of war in France. During my research I also came across
another document Kant wrote in 1795 titled Perpetual
Peace: A Philosophical Sketch. Kant wrote these works mainly to promote the
Enlightenment and its social views. His pamphlets were widely known to be
controversial at the time.[29] He believed that the Revolution was
just, ignoring the policies of the monarchy and believing that if a state
cannot serve its people it should be overthrown.[30]
His quote from Perpetual Peace is one
that resounds more towards the Thirty Years’ War and you can really tell this
just by his tone, “No state shall by force interfere with the Constitution or
Government of another state”.[31]
Throughout this whole scripture it was very telling how much he cared about the
human spirit. Kant was just a magnificent philosopher and already one of my
favorites.
What you
must understand about the Enlightenment is that these philosophers back came from
England, essentially going off the ideas from other thinkers who had been
through exactly what the people in France have as well. The next philosopher I
am going to be talking about is Rene Descartes. Rene Descartes differed
fundamentally from those who came before him. He warned historians not to revert
back to older times, stating that "the well-ordered world in which every
object and every being has perfectly marked boundaries”.[32]
Descartes was born in France but remained in the Dutch Republic his entire life
and he is mostly known for making the important connection between algebraic
equations and geometry.[33]
He was and still is one of the leading men during the Scientific Revolution. However,
not everyone agreed with his way of thinking. David Hume for example discounted
Descartes’ views and offered his own take.
Responsible for the famous phrase, “I
think therefore I am”, Descartes was a firm believer in faith and religion,
something most Enlightenment thinkers weren’t too fond of.[34] It’s interesting that Descartes was
one of the only scientific researchers besides Francis Bacon (another
Scientific Revolution contributor) who acknowledged God’s existence. To
distinguish the idea of a supreme being creating Earth vs. science must have
been tough for the both of them. Not to mention the French Monarchy breathing
down their neck twenty four hours seven days a week. Religion and science are
both controversial topics even to this day but Descartes still managed to print
his essays and mathematical equations to a general public fed up with the
government of France.
The next Enlightenment thinker I am
going to discuss is Charles-Louis Montesquieu. Simply referred to as
Montesquieu by many historians, he was an astute student of law who graduated
from the University of Bordeaux in 1708.[35] His major works include The Persian Letters and The Spirit of the Laws. These works
which he is vastly famous for included the idea that government should have a
separation of powers through three different branches: legislative, executive,
and judicial. Sadly, the Roman Catholic Church placed his works on the list of
“Forbidden Books” in 1751.[36]
The United States government itself was built on the very foundation of
Montesquieu’s ideas of checks and balances. Undoubtedly, he has had a profound
impact in political science and history.
Widely known as a French writer and
public activist, Voltaire stands apart from every other Enlightenment
philosopher there is.[37] Writing more plays, poetry, and
short stories than actually philosophical essays; he was a firm believer in the
natural science.[38]
An outspoken critic of the monarchy and aristocracy in France, Voltaire found
them to be too corrupt for their own good. On the other hand he also distrusted
democracy and once stated that “Democracy seems to suit only a very small
country. Discord will prevail in it, as in a convent of monks”.[39] Emphasizing
reason over virtue, Voltaire believed that every institution in France was a
contradiction because reason was not enthroned in the place of authority within
the state.[40]
He was an also an avid believer in the freedom of religion and expression.
Jean Jacques-Rousseau’s political
contributions during the French Revolution would echo throughout history.
Probably the most famous out of all philosophers, he was considered a national
hero in much of Paris after the Revolution. Rousseau emphasized that in the
modern world one must work to achieve and protect freedom.[41] In addition to political science, Rousseau
was also a famous music theorist; composing several songs.[42]
Theorizing that it wasn’t nature which made humankind evil but society,
Rousseau set upon proving this by writing The
Discourse in 1750.[43]
These ideas most notably had a profound impact on Karl Marx when he set about
writing The Communist Manifesto in
1848. The most famous body of work Rousseau is known for is The Social Contract, published in 1762.
In it Rousseau stated “I enter upon my task
without proving the importance of the subject. I shall be asked if I am a
prince or a legislator, to write on politics. I answer that I am neither, and
that is why I do so”.[44]
Rousseau here is clearly questioning the legitimacy of the state and even its
authority over individual rights. The importance of this document and many
others written by Rousseau cannot be more overstated.
The last two thinkers
from the Enlightenment I will be talking about are Thomas Hobbes and John
Locke. Thomas Hobbes was an English philosopher who in 1651 published The Leviathan, based mainly on the
principles of liberal thought and self-indulgence.[45]
In history he translated Thucydides’ History
of the Peloponnesian War into English.[46] A vast intellectual even from birth,
he set upon his journey with both eyes forward. This began in 1620, when he was
endowed as a secretary for Sir Francis Bacon.[47]
Along with Voltaire, Hobbes was also influential in building the Social Contract
Theory and was marked as a “champion of absolutism for the sovereign”.[48]
Another fellow Englishmen by the name of John Locke agreed with most of these
theories. Locke can be hailed for his liberal theories which are reflected in
the United States’ Declaration of Independence.[49]
This is why Hobbes and Locke are often grouped together as one set of ideas
they put forth. I won’t go into much detail with Locke considering it would
just be a restatement of the evidence I just stated, but I will say that many
Scottish Enlightenment thinkers got their ideas from these two brilliant thinkers
and Locke is considered by many to be an empiricist. Together they represent
the very best the Enlightenment had to offer in terms of overall contribution.
Changes
after the Enlightenment began included the influence people had on governments
and religious ideals. They finally had a say in what was once a demonic
structure of estates which you were bound to for life, whether it be a peasant
or nobleman. There was ample room for opportunity to advance in not just
currency, but property as well. These rights are the very thing Enlightenment
thinkers felt were under threat so in their minds they had no choice but to
act.
I
have now given a detailed fifteen page rendition about the French Enlightenment
and the people behind it, touching upon what sparked this great exchange of
ideas. Literature, art, history, and philosophy were all affected by Europe’s
culture and when these very things which make us human were under threat all
kinds of people stepped up to the plate. Kant, Descartes, and Montesquieu are
all names which should be remembered throughout history for helping to preserve
liberties and life as we know it today. Not only did these men and women put
their reputation at stake but their lives as well. It takes great courage to
publish works outlawed by a monarchy wanting to take over and rule over all its
subjects, spreading propaganda instead of educating its citizenry.
Bibliography
[1]Kant, Immanuel. An Answer to the Question: What is
Enlightenment (Konigsberg, Prussia; 1784), p. 1.
[2] Holt, Mack P. Renaissance and Reformation France:
1500-1648 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), p. 7.
[3] Murray P. and Murray L., The Art of the Renaissance (London:
Thames and Hudson, 1963), p. 9.
[4] MacCaffrey, James. History of the Catholic Church from the
Renaissance to the French Revolution: Volume 1 (Bibliolife, 2008), p. 21.
[5] Dr. Ellis Knox, “Historiography
of the Idea of Renaissance”, Boise State
University, 1994. <https://europeanhistory.boisestate.edu/latemiddleages/renaissance/historyren.shtml>.
[6] Dr. Ellis Knox, “The Reformation
in France,” Boise State University,
1994. <https://europeanhistory.boisestate.edu/reformation/france/16thc.shtml>.
[7] H. Hauser, The French Reformation and the French People in the Sixteenth Century (New
York: Oxford University Press, 1899), p. 219.
[8] Paul Brians, “The
Enlightenment,” Washington State
University, 2000. <http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/hum_303/enlightenment.html>.
[9] Goyau, Georges. “Saint
Bartholomew’s Day”, The Catholic
Encyclopedia: Volume 13 (New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1912).
[10] Chadwick, H. and Evans, G.R. Atlas of the Christian Church. (London:
Facts on File, 1987), p.113.
[11] Wilson, H. Peter. “Causes of the
Thirty Years War: 1618-1648,” The English
Historical Review (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008), pp. 554-586.
[12] MacDonald, Michael J. “Europe – The Thirty Years’ War,”
(bookoflife.org, 2004) <http://bookoflife.org/history/europe/europe_the30yearswar.htm>.
[13] Gutmann, Myron P. “The Origins
of the Thirty Years War,” Journal of
Interdisciplinary History: Vol. 18 (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1988),pp. 749-770.
[15] Gould, Stephen Jay. “The Diet of
Worms and the Defenestration of Prague.” Natural
History Vol. 105 (1996): 18.
[16] Rickard, J. “Thirty Years War (1618-48)”,
(historyofwar.org, 2002).
<http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/wars_thirtyyears.html>.
[18] Croxton, Derek. “The Peace of
Westphalia and the Origins of Sovereignty.” The
International History Review Vol. 21 (1999): 569.
[19] Spahn, Martin. “The Thirty Years
War,” The Catholic Encyclopedia Vol. 14
(New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1912).
[20] Ibid
[21] Phyllis A. Corzine. The French Revolution (San Diego: Lucent
Books, 1995), p. 20.
[22] John P. McKay, Bennett D. Hill,
and John Buckler. A History of Western
Society 6th edition (Bedford: St. Martins, 2006), p. 545.
[23] Timothy J. Shannon.
“Pre-Enlightenment France,” Gettysburg
University. <http://www3.gettysburg.edu/~tshannon/hist106web/site6/enlightenment_in_france.htm>
[24] Swann, Julia. Provincial Power and Absolute Monarchy: The
Estates General of Burgundy, 1661-1790 (London: Cambridge University Press,
2007), p. 2.
[26] Phyllis A. Corzine. The French Revolution (San Diego: Lucent
Books, 1995), pp. 15-16.
[27] McCormick, Matt. “Immanuel Kant:
Metaphysics.” Internet Encyclopedia of
Philosophy, Sacramento State University. <http://www.iep.utm.edu/kantmeta/>.
[28] Ibid
[29] Rauscher,
Frederick. "Kant's Social and Political Philosophy", The Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer
2012 Edition).
<http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2012/entries/kant-social-political/>.
[30] Ibid
[31] Kant, Immanuel. Perpetual Peace: Philosophical Sketch, 1795.
Translated by Vincent Ferraro, Mt. Holyoke College. <https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/kant/kant1.htm>.
[32] James B. Collins. 1998. “The
Culture of Merit: Nobility, Royal Service, and the Making of Absolute Monarchy
in France, 1600-1789”. Journal of Interdisciplinary History Vol. 19, no. 1: 109-110.
[33] Smith,
Kurt. "Descartes' Life and Works", The
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter
2014 Edition).
<http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/descartes-works/>.
[34] Deem, Rich. “Famous Scientists
Who Believed in God”, (GodandScience.org, 2005).
<http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/sciencefaith.html>.
[35] Bok, Hilary.
"Baron de Montesquieu, Charles-Louis de Secondat", The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy (Summer
2014 Edition). <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2014/entries/montesquieu/>.
[36] Ibid
[37] Shank,
J.B., "Voltaire", The
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer
2010 Edition). <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2010/entries/voltaire/>.
[39] William F. Fleming trans. A Philosophical Dictionary Derived from The
Works of Voltaire (South Australia: University of Adelaide, last updated
December 22, 2014), eBook edition.
<https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/v/voltaire/dictionary/index.html>.
[40] Philip G. Neserius. 1926.
“Voltaire’s Political Ideas”, The
American Political Science Review Vol. 20, no. 1: 31-51.
[41] Bertram,
Christopher. "Jean Jacques Rousseau", The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy (Winter
2012 Edition).
<http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2012/entries/rousseau/>.
[42] Ibid
[43] Cameron, J’anet. “Jean-Jacques Rousseau – We are Good by
Nature but Corrupted by Society”, 2013.
<http://decodedpast.com/jean-jacques-rousseau-good-nature-corrupted-society/3811>.
[44] Jean-Jacques Rousseau, The Social Contract and Discourses by
Jean-Jacques Rousseau, translated with an Introduction by G.D.
H. Cole (London and Toronto: J.M. Dent and Sons, 1923). <http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/638>.
[45] Lloyd,
Sharon A. and Sreedhar, Susanne. "Hobbes's Moral and Political
Philosophy", The
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring
2014 Edition).
<http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/hobbes-moral/>.
[46] Duncan,
Stewart. "Thomas Hobbes", The
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer
2013 Edition).
<http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2013/entries/hobbes/>.
[47] Ibid
[48] Manent, Pierre. An Intellectual History of Liberalism,
translated by Rebecca Balinski (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1996),
pp. 20-38.
[49] Carl Lotus Becker, “The Declaration of Independence: A Study on
the History of Political Ideas” (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co.,
1922). <http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/1177>.
No comments:
Post a Comment