Voltaire, Enlightenment philosophy, and the Jean Calas case

Pleasure Garden

In the eighteenth century, the concept of pleasure gardens flourished in Britain, a trend that could be traced partly to the relatively stable democratic government coupled with the international trade that thrived at that time in London. Vauxhall Gardens was perhaps the most famous pleasure garden according to the lectures. Founded in 1661, it reached the peak of popularity during the early years of the nineteenth century. It became a model for several other pleasure gardens in Europe, like the Tivoli Gardens in Copenhagen. Historians believed it was arguably the first modern amusement park. Some of the most popular entertainments offered in Vauxhall were firework displays, theatre shows, theatrical entertainments as well as dancing floors and drinking booths. Both Vauxhall and Tivoli Gardens were so popular that they became generic names for all pleasure gardens in both Europe and the United States (UoS 2015). According to the course, the pleasure gardens were part of the earliest modern amusement centers that charged very moderate entrance fee; it focused on enjoyment and liesure; a platform for escapism, socialize, entertainers, romance, social opening and entertainment.

Voltaire

The contribution of Voltaire to the histories of the philosophy of Enlightenment is minimal, and it will not be appropriate to consider him an original or significant thinker. According to the course lectures, with regards to the histories of ideas, the most important contribution of Voltaire, was perhaps, his 1730s introduction of Locke and Newton to France and the entire Europe; and with the recent proofs from Jonathan Israel, Voltaire's achievements cannot be said to be as radical as people have always believed. Voltaire defended his atheist beliefs all through his life (University of Oxford 2008).

Part II

Discussion on the rise of intellectual movements and their power in the later early modern period, such as the Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment. What these movements tell us, how they transformed the early modern period, and how they helped distance the European experience away from earlier periods in medieval and early modern history.

The era of reason or enlightenment was nothing more than a cultural movement of the 18th century European elites and intellectuals who sought the mobilization of the power to reform the society and advance knowledge. It was instrumental to the promotion of intellectual interchange and at the same time stood in opposition to the abuses and intolerance experienced in both the church and the state. This began in the early to mid-seventeenth century, and was initiated by philosophers like Baruch Spinoza (1632-1677), John Locke (1632-1704), Pierre Bayle (1647-1706), Isaac Newton (1643-1727) and Voltaire (1694-1778). The ruling princes were known to have fostered and endorsed these data and even attempted to use of their ideas about leadership. This enlightenment continued until around 1790-1800, after this, the emphasis on reason, paved way for Romanticism's emphasis on emotions, which brought about a Counter-Enlightenment force. France was the center of the Enlightenment, and it was based in the salons and ended in the enormous Encyclopedia (1751-72), with David Diderot as the editor (1713-1784) with several leading philosophers lending their insights like Voltaire (1694-1778), Rousseau (1712-1778) and Montesquieu (1689-1755) (Age of Enlightenment 2011).

Jonathan Israel the Historian dismissed the post-modern explanation of the Enlightenment coupled with the efforts of the modern historians to form a link between the social and the economic reasons that led to the revolutionary aspect of this era. Instead, he focused on ideas from the histories of the 1650-to end of the 18th century, with the claims that the ideas were responsible for the revolutions that took place between the latter half of the 18th century and the early 19th century. According to Israel, prior to the 1650s, Western Civilization was based largely on the shared center of faith, authority, and tradition. Until this period, most debates by scholars revolved around confessional-: Lutheran, Catholic, Calvinist (Reform), or Anglican issues and the major aim of these debates was the establishment of the block of faith that propounded Monopoly of truth and a God-given title of authority. Everything previously rooted in tradition was challenged after this date and were replaced with some concepts in the favor of philosophical reasoning. Immediately after the second-half of the seventeenth century and during the eighteenth century, a generalized study of secularization and rationalization came in, and swiftly overthrew theology's age-long hegemony in the scope of studies and researches, and that single confessional dispute became minimized to a mere secondary status to favor heightening contest between incredulity and faith (Age of Enlightenment 2011).

The eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries witnessed the rise of two distinct lines of enlightenment thoughts. First, the "radical enlightenment," which was greatly inspired by the Spinoza's one-substance philosophy, which in its political orientation was quite in agreement with racial and sexual equality, democracy; individual freedom of lifestyle (filled with liberty of thought, expression and the express); the eradication of religious powers from the legislative processes and education and finally, the full separation between the state and the church. Secondly, "moderate Enlightenment," which refers to several philosophical systems, such as the writings of men like Descartes, Isaac Newton, John Locke, Christian Wolff, all of them expressing their support for the critical review and for renewal of the old mode of thoughts, but sought reform in other parts and accommodation with the old system of faith and power. The conservative counter-enlightenment, which encompassed the thinkers that held on to the conventional belief-based thought modes, concurred with these lines of thoughts (Age of Enlightenment 2011).

With the Enlightenment, came the theory of the social contract in which, likes of John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau stressed on the idea of social contract as the basis of every society. Locke laid much emphasis on the need for contact between the leaders and the followers. Rousseau was a lot more profound in his own version -- the social contract existed between every member of the society, and effectively replaced all natural rights as the basis for all human claims. The very capacity of this action speaks of the contract terms and makes their lowest modification inadmissible, which, sometimes, makes them both null and void. Thus, they are all the same and are recognized everywhere. This helps every individual enjoy his natural rights and liberties in instances of violation of the social contract and thereby loses his contractual freedom (Halsall 1997).

As opposed to the scholarly historiographical approach to the Enlightenment, which carries out an examination of the different currents, or dialogues the scholarly thought within the European situation between the 17th and the 18th centuries, the social approach looks at the different changes that took place in European culture and society. Under this approach, this Enlightenment is more of a collection of different thoughts than the mere process of changing cultural practices and social etiquettes. Both, the content and the processes that helped spread it are all important even today.

Roger Chartier describes it thus: The movement from the scholarly to the social/cultural involves doubting two different ideas: firstly, it is possible to deduce the practices from the discussions that either justify or authorize them; secondly, that translating the latent implication of social mechanism into the terms of plain ideology are quite possible. The rise of the public sphere in Europe remains one of the key elements of the cultural interpretation of the Enlightenment (Age of Enlightenment 2011).

Part III

I am presenting a theme on corruption in public affairs as presented by the writer, Niccolo Machiavelli, from the ancient sourcebook: Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527): Republics, and Monarchies, Excerpt from Discourse I, 55(Halsall 1998). The source explores the theme as it makes a presentation of several examples of cases of state corruption in Rome as well as Germany together with how to establish a republican state to ensure justice and equality in the state.

Lesson: Objective Teaching Points

How Germany observes laws and proofs of ancient virtues that still prevails there in part.

Examination of a resolution made by the Roman senate with regards to a vow made by Camillus, to offer the 10th part of the loot taken from Veinenti to Appolo

Spain and France's share of corruption: Taking a look at the several disorders and challenges people face in those countries.

Exploring the meaning of the term gentleman in places where people indulge in corrupt politics

The establishment of a new republic in a country

The source would be quite helpful in making a separation between the different examples on how this is not appropriate for the state and people from the same population that can spearhead a revolution.

Part IV

The Royal Affair does a good job of highlighting the course's themes since the film makes a good attempt to depict the reforms of Struensee and the attendant complexities. The scholars, often called philosophers, started developing a more rational critique of the Western Society in a movement they believed paralleled the Scientific Revolution. These men and some women started searching for appropriate societal laws and values for the human society.

Speaking from a broader perspective, philosophers were opposed to whatever they deemed arbitrary or irrational, like laws that offer legal privileges to nobility for the mere reason of being nobles. Several of them, like Voltaire, the great thinker, vehemently accused the Catholic Church leaders of teaching superstition instead of religion. Montesquieu sought legal reforms and a balance of powers that is more rational, in which the executive, the legislative, and the judiciary enjoyed different aspects of power thereby limiting the affect of each other through exclusivity (Aelarsen 2014), which make up for a number of the themes that were covered in 330.

Struensee revoked the censorship law and became shocked when he found out that the philosophers could actually use the press against him, which led to the reluctant re-instatement of the law by him. The new economic policies he proposed needed funding, and the moment he started paying back government subsidies to nobility, they started resisting the changes he was effecting. The film laid claim to the fact that Struensee got betrayed by a noble who previously was a good friend of his whom he didn't agree to help come out of his debt. Julaine-Marie successfully subverted the palace guards by letting their captain see how the reforms affected Danish army negatively. Thus, most part of the film explores the processes and machinations of an 18th century kingdom, and the challenge encountered while introducing key changes to an established system (Aelarsen 2014).

According to the film, Caroline Matilda was interested in the political reforms and Enlightenment; that is indeed, what attracts her to Struensee. The film also claims that Christian (Mikkel Folsgaard) had great interests in the reforms, but was too unstable emotionally to take action until Struenesee offered him help to find his will and strength. While there was a strong attraction between Christian and Caroline Matilda, their shared interests in Struensee's projects helped build their friendship and three of them make up the center of the reform-minded group of people at the court. Struenesee's inability to influence the king dooms both the political reforms and the affair. His strong relationship with Caroline Matilda coupled with the huge effort required for the running and reforming of the government made him neglect his strong relationship with the king, an opening that allows Juliane-Marie come in between them and get the king to her side. This way, the film shows the link between the political reforms and the romance by letting everyone see how one caused the doom of the other (Aelarsen 2014).

In general, the film presents what most English-speakers will consider a fairly obscure period, both intellectually and culturally. Since only a few films have been made on the Enlightenment, I would recommend it as a very easy way to learn what you can about the Enlightenment (Aelarsen 2014).