The reading, “The Enlightenment in Europe and the America’s”, underscores and foreshadows many key aspects of our contemporary life and it’s Enlightenment legacy. The reading begins with the “quarrel between ancients and moderns”—which points to a similar parallel we see in modern society, between the quarrel and tension of conservatives and progressives. Ancients held on to things that were familiar and deemed established truths; they feared,”…that new commitment to individualism promoted by the moderns might lead to social alienation, unscrupulous self-seeking, and lack of moral responsibility.” (Norton 1) Ancients did not have a desire, nor justify the necessity thereof, to create new values—based on their understanding of universal and absolute truth. On the contrary, modernists sought the importance of “individual autonomy” and the push for education among women, along with other progressive and intellectual findings. Fundamentally, the concept of an “ancient” like thinking and a “modern” like thinking, did not change and will never change in an ever-growing society.

Enlightenment thinkers challenged the constant reliance and dependence on higher authority—sparking a rebellion like mentality, similar to what American colonists did to Great Britain. Human beings, according to the thinkers, argued they “…could rely on their own authority—rather than looking to priests or prices—to decide how to act well in the world.” (Norton 5). This was a progressive view point, that directly challenged those who held on to traditional and classical views, whom where known as deists. Deists argued against the need to rely on their own authority, because there was a “divine plan” that was set in place. The analogy of the watchmaker explains how a divine figure ordained and planned our lives, though does not facilitate the day-to-day operations. “…God never interfered with nature or with nature or human action…as ethics was increasingly understood as a matter of reason.” (Norton 4). The reading recognizes the need for balance in passion and reason among human beings. “One could hope to steer with reason as guide, but one had to face the omnipresent of unreasonable passions.” (Norton 5). We can see this unfold in the contemporary political environment, among both conservatives and liberals alike. The violent and brewed up emotions across both political camps, unfortunately discourage and eliminate the opportunity for individuals to discuss controversial topics based on reason and fact. The constant fear among past and current politicians are expressed here: “Those who believed in the desirability of reason’s governance often worried that it rarely prevailed over feelings of greed, lust, or the desire for power.

-Danny Lee