The-Philosophy-Book-DK_345

150 DAVID HUME D avid Hume was born at dividing the contents of our minds
a time when European into two kinds of phenomena, and
IN CONTEXT philosophy was dominated then asking how these relate to
by a debate about the nature of each other. The two phenomena
BRANCH knowledge. René Descartes had are “impressions”—or direct
Epistemology in effect set the stage for modern perceptions, which Hume calls
philosophy in his Discourse on the the “sensations, passions, and
APPROACH Method, instigating a movement emotions”—and “ideas”, which
Empiricism of rationalism in Europe, which are faint copies of our impressions,
claimed that knowledge can be such as thoughts, reflections,
BEFORE arrived at by rational reflection and imaginings. And it is while
1637 René Descartes alone. In Britain, John Locke had analyzing this distinction that
espouses rationalism in his countered this with his empiricist Hume draws an unsettling
Discourse on the Method. argument that knowledge can only conclusion—one that calls into
be derived from experience. George question our most cherished
1690 John Locke sets out the Berkeley had followed, formulating
case for empiricism in An his own version of empiricism, In our reasonings
Essay Concerning Human according to which the world only concerning fact, there are
Understanding. exists in so far as it is perceived.
But it was Hume, the third of the all imaginable degrees
AFTER major British empiricists, who dealt of assurance. A wise man
1781 Immanuel Kant is the biggest blow to rationalism in therefore proportions his
inspired by Hume to write an argument presented in his
his Critique of Pure Reason. Treatise of Human Nature. belief to the evidence.
David Hume
1844 Arthur Schopenhauer Hume’s fork
acknowledges his debt to With a remarkable clarity of
Hume in The World as Will language, Hume turns a sceptical
and Representation. eye to the problem of knowledge,
and argues forcibly against the
1934 Karl Popper proposes notion that we are born with
falsification as the basis for the “innate ideas” (a central tenet of
scientific method, as opposed rationalism). He does so by first
to observation and induction.

David Hume Born in Edinburgh, Scotland, in Jean-Jacques Rousseau and
1711, Hume was a precocious became more widely known as
child who entered the University a philosopher. The controversial
of Edinburgh at the age of 12. Dialogues Concerning Natural
Around 1729 he devoted his time Religion occupied Hume’s final
to finding “some medium by years and, because of what he
which truth might be established”, called his “abundant caution”,
and after working himself into a were only published after his
nervous breakdown he moved to death in Edinburgh in 1776.
La Flèche in Anjou, France. Here
he wrote A Treatise of Human Key works
Nature, setting out virtually all
his philosophical ideas before 1739 A Treatise of Human Nature
returning to Edinburgh. 1748 An Enquiry Concerning
Human Understanding
In 1763 he was appointed to 1779 Dialogues Concerning
the Embassy in Paris, where he Natural Religion
befriended the philosopher

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 151

See also: Plato 50–55 ■ Aristotle 56–63 ■ René Descartes 116–23 ■ John Locke 130–33 ■ George Berkeley 138–41 ■
Immanuel Kant 164–71 ■ Ludwig Wittgenstein 246–51 ■ Karl Popper 262–65

beliefs, not only about logic and I see the sun rise I get into
science, but about the nature of every morning. a habit of expecting
the world around us.
the sun to rise
The problem, for Hume, is that every morning.
very often we have ideas that cannot
be supported by our impressions, I refine this into the
and Hume concerns himself with judgment “the sun rises
finding the extent to which this is
the case. To understand what every morning.”
he means, we need to note that for
Hume there are only two kinds of This judgment cannot This judgment cannot
statement—namely “demonstrative” be a truth of logic, because be empirical, because
and “probable” statements—and he the sun not rising (however I cannot observe future
claims that in everyday experience unlikely that seems to us)
we somehow confuse the two types risings of the sun.
of knowledge that these express. is conceivable.

A demonstrative statement is
one whose truth or falsity is self-
evident. Take, for example, the
statement 2 + 2 = 4. Denying this
statement involves a logical
contradiction—in other words, to
claim that 2 + 2 does not equal 4
is to fail to grasp the meanings of
the terms “2” or “4” (or “+” or “=”).
Demonstrative statements in logic,
mathematics, and deductive
reasoning are known to be true or
false a priori, meaning “prior to
experience.” The truth of a ❯❯

I have no rational
grounds for my belief,

but custom tells me
that it is probable.

Mathematics and logic yield what Custom is the great
Hume calls “demonstrative” truths, guide of life.
which cannot be denied without
contradiction. These are the only
certainties in Hume’s philosophy.

152 DAVID HUME

probable statement, however, is not possible kinds, as if forming the pattern really justifiable? Claiming
self-evident, for it is concerned with horns of a dilemma, is often referred that the sun will rise tomorrow is
matters of empirical fact. For to as “Hume’s fork.” not a demonstrative statement, as
example, any statement about the claiming the opposite involves no
world such as “Jim is upstairs”, is Inductive reasoning logical contradiction. Nor is it a
a probable statement because it There are no surprises in Hume’s probable statement, as we cannot
requires empirical evidence for it reasoning so far, but things take experience the sun’s future risings.
to be known to be true or false. In a strange turn when he applies
other words, its truth or falsity can this line of argument to inductive The same problem occurs if we
only be known through some kind inference—our ability to infer things apply Hume’s fork to the evidence
of experiment—such as by going from past evidence. We observe an for causality. The statement “event
upstairs to see if Jim is there. unchanging pattern, and infer that A causes event B” seems on the
it will continue in the future, tacitly face of it to be one that we can
In light of this, we can ask of assuming that nature will continue verify, but again, this does not
any statement whether it is probable to behave in a uniform way. For stand up to scrutiny. There is no
or demonstrative. If it is neither of example, we see the sun rise every logical contradiction involved in
these, then we cannot know it to morning, and infer that it will rise denying that A causes B (as there
be true or false, and so, for Hume, again tomorrow. But is our claim would be in denying that 2 + 2 = 4),
it is a meaningless statement. This that nature follows this uniform so it cannot be a demonstrative
division of all statements into two statement. Nor can it be proved
The grounds for our belief that empirically, since we cannot observe
the sun will rise tomorrow, or that every event A to see if it is followed
water rather than fruit will flow from by B, so it is not a probable
a faucet, are not logical, according to statement either. The fact that, in
Hume. They are simply the result of our limited experience, B invariably
our conditioning, which teaches us follows A is no rational ground for
that tomorrow the world will be believing that A will always be
the same as it is today. followed by B, or that A causes B.

If there is never any rational
basis for inferring cause and effect,
then what justification do we have
for making that connection? Hume
explains this simply as “human
nature”—a mental habit that reads
uniformity into regular repetition,
and a causal connection into what

Nature, by an absolute and
uncontrollable necessity,

has determined us to judge
as well as to breathe and feel.

David Hume

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 153

Science supplies us with ever more
detailed information about the world.
However, according to Hume, science
deals with theories only, and can never
yield a “law of nature.”

he calls the “constant conjunction”
of events. Indeed, it is this kind of
inductive reasoning that is the
basis of science, and tempts us to
interpret our inferences as “laws”
of nature—but despite what we
may think, this practice cannot
be justified by rational argument.

In saying this, Hume makes his
strongest case against rationalism,
for he is saying that it is belief (which
he defines as “a lively idea related
to or associated with a present
impression”), guided by custom,
that lies at the heart of our claims
to knowledge rather than reason.

Custom as our guide another—but since there is no remained a significant influence
Hume goes on to acknowledge that obvious connection between them, on German philosophers of the 19th
although inductive inferences are we should not infer that one clock’s century and the logical positivists of
not provable, this does not mean chiming is the cause of the other’s. the 20th century, who believed that
that they are not useful. After all, only meaningful statements could
we still have a reasonable claim Hume’s treatment of the “problem be verifiable. Hume’s account of
to expect something to happen, of induction”, as this became known, the problem of induction remained
judging from past observation and both undermines the claims of unchallenged throughout this period,
experience. In the absence of a rationalism and elevates the role of and resurfaced in the work of Karl
rational justification for inductive belief and custom in our lives. As he Popper, who used it to back up his
inference, custom is a good guide. says, the conclusions drawn by our claim that a theory can only be
beliefs are “as satisfactory to the deemed scientific if it is falsifiable. ■
Hume adds, however, that this mind... as the demonstrative kind.”
“mental habit” should be applied Hume was perfectly
with caution. Before inferring cause A revolutionary idea right in pointing out
and effect between two events, The brilliantly argued and innovative that induction cannot be
we should have evidence both that ideas in the Treatise of Human
this succession of events has been Nature were virtually ignored when logically justified.
invariable in the past, and that there they were published in 1739, despite Karl Popper
is a necessary connection between being the high-point of British
them. We can reasonably predict empiricism. Hume was better
that when we let go of an object it known in his own country for being
will fall to the ground, because this the author of a History of Great
is what has always happened in Britain than for his philosophy; in
the past, and there is an obvious Germany, however, the significance
connection between letting go of of his epistemology had more
the object and its falling. On the impact. Immanuel Kant admitted
other hand, two clocks set a few to being woken from his “dogmatic
seconds apart will chime one after slumbers” by reading Hume, who

MAN WAS BORN

FREE

YET EVERYWHERE HE

IS IN CHAINS

JEAN-JACQUES ROUSSEAU (1712–1778)



156 JEAN-JACQUES ROUSSEAU

IN CONTEXT Man in a When the idea of
“state of nature” is private property developed,
BRANCH fundamentally good.
Political philosophy society had to develop
a system to protect it.
APPROACH
Social contract theory These laws bind This system evolved
people in unjust ways. as laws imposed by
BEFORE those with property onto
1651 Thomas Hobbes puts those without property
forward the idea of a social
contract in his book Leviathan. Man is born free,
yet everywhere
1689 John Locke’s Two he is in chains.
Treatises of Government
asserts a human’s natural right
to defend “life, health, liberty,
or possessions.”

AFTER
1791 Thomas Paine’s Rights of
Man argues that government’s
only purpose is to safeguard
the rights of the individual.

1848 Karl Marx and Friedrich
Engels publish The
Communist Manifesto.

1971 John Rawls develops the
idea of “Justice as Fairness” in
his book A Theory of Justice.

R ousseau was very much a begun to question the status quo, Like them, Rousseau compared an
product of the mid- to late- undermining the authority of both idea of humanity in a hypothetical
18th-century period known the Church and the aristocracy, “natural state” with how people
as the Enlightenment, and an and advocates of social reform such actually live in a civil society.
embodiment of the continental as Voltaire continually fell foul of But he took such a radically
European philosophy of the time. the overbearing censorship of the different view of this natural
As a young man he tried to make establishment. Unsurprisingly in state and the way it is affected
his name as both a musician and this context, Rousseau’s main by society, that it could be
composer, but in 1740 he met Denis area of interest became political considered a form of “counter-
Diderot and Jean d’Alembert, the philosophy. His thinking was Enlightenment” thinking. It held
philosopher compilers of the new influenced not only by his French within it the seeds of the next
Encyclopédie, and became contemporaries, but also by the great movement, Romanticism.
interested in philosophy. The work of English philosophers—and
political mood in France at this in particular the idea of a social Science and art corrupt
time was uneasy. Enlightenment contract as proposed by Thomas Hobbes had envisaged life in the
thinkers in France and England had Hobbes and refined by John Locke. natural state as “solitary, poor,

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 157

See also: Thomas Hobbes 112–15 ■ John Locke 130–33 ■ Edmund Burke 172–73 ■
John Stuart Mill 190–93 ■ Karl Marx 196–203 ■ John Rawls 294–95

nasty, brutish, and short.” In his controversially puts forward the idea Jean-Jacques Rousseau
view humanity is instinctively self- that the arts and sciences corrupt
interested and self-serving, and and erode morals. He argues that far Jean-Jacques Rousseau was
that civilization is necessary to place from improving minds and lives, the born to a Calvinist family in
restrictions on these instincts. arts and sciences decrease human Geneva. His mother died only
Rousseau, however, looks more virtue and happiness. a few days after his birth, and
kindly on human nature, and sees his father fled home following
civil society as a much less The inequality of laws a duel a few years later, leaving
benevolent force. Having broken with established him in the care of an uncle.
thinking in his prize-winning and
The idea that society might be publicly acclaimed essay, Rousseau Aged 16, he left for France
a harmful influence first occurred took the idea a stage further in a and converted to Catholicism.
to Rousseau when he wrote an essay second essay, the Discourse on the While trying to make his name
for a competition organized by the Origin and Foundations of Inequality as a composer, he worked as a
Academy of Dijon, answering the among Men. The subject matter civil servant and was posted to
question: “Has the restoration of the chimed with the mood of the time, Venice for two years, but on
sciences and the arts contributed echoing the calls for social reform his return he began to write
to refining moral practices?” The from writers such as Voltaire, but ❯❯ philosophy. His controversial
expected answer from thinkers of views led to his books being
the time, and especially from a The Romantic movement in art banned in Switzerland and
musician such as Rousseau, was an and literature that dominated the late France, and warrants being
enthusiastic affirmative, but in fact 18th and early 19th centuries reflected issued for his arrest. He was
Rousseau argued the opposite case. Rousseau’s vision of the state of nature forced to accept David Hume’s
His Discourse on the Sciences and as one of beauty, innocence, and virtue. invitation to live in England for
Arts, which won him first prize, a short time, but after they
quarrelled he returned to
France under a false name. He
was later allowed to return to
Paris, where he lived until his
death at the age of 66.

Key works

1750 Discourse on the Sciences
and Arts
1755 Discourse on the Origin
and Foundations of Inequality
among Men
1755 Discourse on Political
Economy
1762 The Social Contract

158 JEAN-JACQUES ROUSSEAU

once again Rousseau contradicted once this state of innocence is Tranquility is found also
conventional thinking with his disrupted, and the power of reason in dungeons; but is that
analysis. The selfish, savage, and begins to separate humankind from enough to make them
unjust state of nature depicted the rest of nature, people become desirable places to live in?
by Hobbes is, for Rousseau, a detached from their natural virtues.
description not of “natural man”, The imposition of civil society on Jean-Jacques
but of “civilized man”. In fact the state of nature therefore entails Rousseau
he claims that it is civil society a move away from virtue toward
that induces this savage state. vice, and from idyllic happiness “back to nature!” and his pessimistic
Humanity’s natural state, he toward misery. analysis of modern society as full of
argues, is innocent, happy, and inequalities and injustices sat well
independent: man is born free. Rousseau sees the fall from a with the growing social unrest of
Society corrupts state of nature and the establishment the 1750s, especially in France.
The state of nature that Rousseau of civil society as regrettable but Not content with merely stating
describes is a pastoral idyll, where inevitable, because it resulted from the problem, Rousseau went on to
people in their natural state are the human capacity for reason. The offer a solution, in what is seen as
fundamentally good. (The English process began, he thought, the first perhaps his most influential work,
wrongly interpreted Rousseau’s idea time that a man enclosed a piece The Social Contract.
of natural man as a “noble savage”, of land for himself, so introducing
but this was due to a mistranslation the notion of property. As groups Rousseau opens his book with
of the French sauvage, which means of people began to live side by side the challenging declaration “Man is
simply “natural”, not brutish.) People like this, they formed societies, born free, yet everywhere he is in
are endowed with innate virtue which could only be maintained chains”, which was considered such
and, more importantly, the attributes though a system of laws. But a call for radical change that it was
of compassion and empathy. But Rousseau claims that every society adopted as a slogan during the
loses touch with humanity’s natural French Revolution 27 years later.
Adam and Eve represent the kind of virtues, including empathy, and so Having issued his challenge,
perfect “natural” humans that Rousseau imposes laws that are not just, Rousseau then sets out his vision of
thought predated society. He said that we, but selfish. They are designed to an alternative civil society, run not
like them, are corrupted by knowledge, protect property, and they are by aristocrats, the monarchy, and
becoming ever more selfish and unhappy. inflicted on the poor by the rich. the Church, but by all citizens, who
The move from a natural to a participate in the business of
civilized state therefore brought legislation. Modelled on Classical
about a move not only from virtue republican ideas of democracy,
to vice, Rousseau points out, but Rousseau imagines the citizen
also from innocence and freedom body operating as a unit,
to injustice and enslavement. prescribing laws according to the
Although humanity is naturally volonté générale, or general will.
virtuous, it is corrupted by society; The laws would arise from all and
and although man is born free, the apply to all—everyone would be
laws imposed by society condemn considered equal. In contrast with
him to a life “in chains.” the social contract envisaged by
Locke, which was designed to
The Social Contract
Rousseau’s second Discourse ruffled
even more feathers than his first,
but it gained him a reputation and
quite a following. His portrayal of
the state of nature as desirable and
not brutal formed a vital part of the
emerging Romantic movement in
literature. Rousseau’s rallying cry of

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 159

The general will reason threatens human innocence Rousseau’s political influence was
should come from all and, in turn, freedom and happiness. felt most strongly during the period
Instead of the education of the of revolution immediately after
to apply to all. intellect, he proposes an education his death, but his influence on
Jean-Jacques of the senses, and he suggests that philosophy, and political philosophy
our religious faith should be guided in particular, emerged to a greater
Rousseau by the heart, not the head. extent in the 19th century. Georg
Hegel integrated Rousseau’s ideas
protect the rights and property of Political influence of social contract into his own
individuals, Rousseau advocates Most of Rousseau’s writings were philosophical system. Later and
giving legislative power to the immediately banned in France, more importantly, Karl Marx was
people as a whole, for the benefit gaining him both notoriety and a particularly struck by some of
of all, administered by the general large following. By the time of his Rousseau’s work on inequality and
will. He believes that the freedom to death in 1778, revolution in France injustice. Unlike Robespierre, one of
take part in the legislative process and elsewhere was imminent, and the leaders of the French Revolution,
would lead to an elimination of his idea of a social contract in which who had appropriated Rousseau’s
inequality and injustice, and that the general will of the citizen body philosophy for his own ends during
it would promote a feeling of controlled the legislative process the Reign of Terror, Marx fully
belonging to society—that it would offered the revolutionaries a viable understood and developed
inevitably lead to the liberté, alternative to the corrupt system as Rousseau’s analysis of capitalist
égalité, fraternité (liberty, equality, it stood. But his philosophy was at society and the revolutionary
fraternity) that became the motto odds with contemporary thinking, means of replacing it. Marx’s
of the new French Republic. and his insistence that a state of Communist Manifesto ends with
nature was superior to civilization a nod to Rousseau, encouraging
led him to fall out with fellow the proletarians (workers) have
reformers such as Voltaire and Hume. “nothing to lose but their chains”. ■

The evils of education
In another book written in the same
year, entitled Emile, or On Education,
Rousseau expanded on his theme,
explaining that education was
responsible for corrupting the state
of nature and perpetuating the evils
of modern society. In other books
and essays he concentrated on the
adverse effects of both conventional
religion and atheism. At the center
of all his works lay the idea that

The French Revolution, which
began 11 years after Rousseau’s death,
was inspired by his claim that it was
unjust for the rich few to rule over the
effectively voiceless, powerless poor.

160 IN CONTEXT

MAN IS AN BRANCH
ANIMAL THAT Political philosophy
MAKES
BARGAINS APPROACH
Classical economics
ADAM SMITH (1723–1790)
BEFORE
c.350 BCE Aristotle emphasizes
the importance of domestic
production (“economy”) and
explains the role of money.

Early 1700s Dutch thinker
Bernard Mandeville argues
that selfish actions can
lead indirectly to socially
desirable consequences.

AFTER
1850s British writer John
Ruskin argues that Smith’s
views are too materialistic
and therefore anti-Christian.

1940s onward Philosophers
apply the idea of bargaining
throughout the social sciences
as a model for explaining
human behavior.

S cottish writer Adam Smith
is often considered the most
important economist the
world has ever known. The concepts
of bargaining and self-interest that
he explored, and the possibility of
different types of agreements and
interests—such as “the common
interest”—are of recurring appeal
to philosophers. His writings are
also important because they give
a more general and abstract form
to the idea of the “commercial”
society that was developed by
his friend David Hume.

Like his Swiss contemporary,
Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Smith
assumes that the motives of human
beings are partly benevolent and

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 161

See also: David Hume 148–53 ■ Jean-Jacques Rousseau 154–59 ■
Edmund Burke 172–73 ■ Karl Marx 196–203 ■ Noam Chomsky 304–05

People act out We often require
of self-interest. goods and services
that others provide.

We must therefore Man is Adam Smith
agree to exchange an animal
goods or money between that makes The “father of modern
us in a way that benefits bargains. economics” was born in
Kirkcaldy, Fife, in 1723. An
both parties. academic prodigy, Smith
became a professor first at
partly self-interested, but that they need help, because life requires Edinburgh University, then at
self-interest is the stronger trait “the cooperation and assistance of Glasgow University where he
and so is a better guide to human great multitudes.” For example, to became a professor in 1750. In
behavior. He believes that this can stay comfortably at an inn for a the 1760s, he took a lucrative
be confirmed by social observation, night we require the input of many job as a personal tutor to a
and so, broadly speaking, his people—to cook and serve the food, young Scottish aristocrat,
approach is an empirical one. In one to prepare the room and so on— Henry Scott, with whom he
of his most famous discussions of none of whose services can be visited France and Switzerland.
the psychology of bargaining, he depended on through good will
contends that the most frequent alone. For this reason, “man is an Already acquainted with
opening gambit in a bargain is for animal that makes bargains”—and David Hume and other Scottish
one party to urge the other—“the the bargain is struck by proposing Enlightenment thinkers, he
best way for you to get what you a deal that appears to be in the seized the chance to meet
want is for you to give me what I self-interest of both parties. leading figures of the European
want.” In other words, “we address Enlightenment as well. On his
ourselves, not to [another’s] The division of labor return to Scotland, he spent a
humanity, but to their self-love.” In his account of the emergence of decade writing The Wealth of
market economies, Smith argues Nations, before returning to
Smith goes on to claim that that our ability to make bargains public service as Commissioner
the exchange of useful objects is a put an end to the once universal of Customs, a position that
distinctively human characteristic. requirement that every person, allowed him to advise the
He notes that dogs are never or at least every family, be British government on various
observed exchanging bones, and economically self-sufficient. Thanks economic policies. In 1787, he
that should an animal wish to to bargaining, it became possible rejoined Glasgow University,
obtain something, the only way it for us to concentrate on producing and spent the last three years
can do so is to “gain the favor of fewer and fewer goods, and of his life as its rector.
those whose service it requires”. ultimately to produce just a single
Humans may also depend on this good, or offer a single service, and Key works
sort of “fawning or servile attention”, to exchange this for everything ❯❯
but they cannot resort to it whenever 1759 The Theory of Moral
Sentiments
1776 The Wealth of Nations
1795 Essays on Philosophical
Subjects

162 ADAM SMITH

else we required. This process was The greatest improvement Civilized society stands
revolutionized by the invention of in the productive at all times in need of
money, which abolished the need
to barter. From then on, in Smith’s powers of labor seem the cooperation
view, only those who were unable to have been the effects and assistance
to work had to depend on charity. of the division of labor. of great multitudes.
Everyone else could come to the Adam Smith
marketplace to exchange their Adam Smith
labor—or the money they earned it, pointing it, and grinding it, to
through labor—for the products Smith illustrates the importance of joining it to a pinhead—were able,
of other people’s labor. specialization at the beginning of in Smith’s time, to produce over
his masterpiece, The Wealth of 48,000 pins a day.
This elimination of the need to Nations, by showing how the
provide everything for ourselves led making of a humble metal pin is Smith was impressed by
to the emergence of people with radically improved by adopting the the great improvements in the
particular sets of skills (such as factory system. Where one man productivity of labor that took place
the baker and the carpenter), and working alone would find it hard during the Industrial Revolution—
then to what Smith calls a “division to produce 20 perfect pins in a day, improvements that saw workers
of labor” among workers. This is a group of 10 men, charged with provided with much better
Smith’s phrase for specialization, different tasks—from drawing out equipment, and often saw
whereby an individual not only the wire, straightening it, cutting machines replacing workers.
pursues a single type of work, but
performs only a single task in a job
that is shared by several people.

The market is the key to establishing
an equitable society, in Smith’s view.
With the freedom provided by the
buying and selling of goods, individuals
can enjoy lives of “natural liberty.”

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 163

The jack-of-all-trades could not within national boundaries, so it The production line is an incredible
survive in such a system, and even can flourish across them, leading to money-creating machine, but Smith
philosophers began to specialize international trade—a phenomenon warns against the dehumanizing
in the various branches of their that was spreading across the effects it can have on workers if it
subject, such as logic, ethics, world in Smith’s time. is used without regulation.
epistemology, and metaphysics.
Smith recognized that there and consumers within his social
The free market were problems with the notion of model, or integrating into it the
Because the division of labor a free market—in particular with domestic labor, performed mainly
increases productivity and makes it the increasingly common bargain by women, that helped to keep
possible for everyone to be eligible of wages for working time. He also society running efficiently.
for some kind of work (since it frees acknowledged that while the
us from training in a craft), Smith division of labor had huge For these reasons, and with the
argues that it can lead to universal economic benefits, repetitive work rise of socialism in the 19th century,
wealth in a well-ordered society. is not only boring for the worker, it Smith’s reputation declined, but
Indeed, he says that in conditions can destroy a human being—and renewed interest in free market
of perfect liberty, the market can for this reason he proposed that economics in the late 20th century
lead to a state of perfect equality— governments should restrict the saw a revival of Smith’s ideas.
one in which everyone is free to extent to which the production Indeed, only today can we fully
pursue his own interests in his own line is used. Nevertheless, when appreciate his most visionary
way, so long as it accords with the The Wealth of Nations was first claim—that a market is more than
laws of justice. And by equality published, its doctrine of free and just a place. A market is a concept,
Smith is not referring to equality unregulated trade was seen as and as such can exist anywhere—
of opportunity, but to equality of revolutionary, not only because of not only in a designated place such
condition. In other words, his goal its attack on established commercial as a town square. This foreshadows
is the creation of a society not and agricultural privileges and the kind of “virtual” marketplace
divided by competitiveness, but monopolies, but also because of its that only became possible with the
drawn together by bargaining argument that a nation’s wealth advent of telecommunications
based on mutual self-interest. depends not on its gold reserves, technology. Today’s financial
but on its labor—a view that went markets and online trading bear
Smith’s point, therefore, is not against all economic thinking in witness to Smith’s great vision. ■
that people should have freedom just Europe at the time.
because they deserve it. His point is
that society as a whole benefits from Smith’s reputation for being a
individuals pursuing their own revolutionary was bolstered during
interests. For the “invisible hand” of the long debate about the nature
the market, with its laws of supply of society that followed the French
and demand, regulates the amount Revolution of 1789, prompting the
of goods that are available, and mid-Victorian historian H.T. Buckle
prices them far more efficiently than to describe The Wealth of Nations
any government could. Put simply, as “probably the most important
the pursuit of self-interest, far book that has ever been written.”
from being incompatible with an
equitable society, is, in Smith’s view, Smith’s legacy
the only way of guaranteeing it. Critics have argued that Smith was
wrong to assume that the “general
In such a society, a government interest” and “consumer interest”
can limit itself to performing just a are the same, and that the free
few essential functions, such as market is beneficial to all. What is
providing defense, criminal justice, true is that even though Smith was
and education, and taxes and duties sympathetic toward the victims of
can be reduced accordingly. And poverty, he never fully succeeded in
just as bargaining can flourish balancing the interests of producers

THERE ARE TWO WORLDS:

OUR BODIES

AND THE EXTERNAL

WORLD

IMMANUEL KANT (1724–1804)



166 IMMANUEL KANT

IN CONTEXT went on to counter this sceptical According to Kant, we can only
point of view with an argument experience time through things in the
BRANCH that claims to prove the existence world that move or change, such as
Metaphysics of God, and therefore the reality of the hands of a clock. So time is only
an outside world. However, many ever experienced by us indirectly.
APPROACH philosophers (including Kant) have
Transcendental idealism not found Descartes’ proof of God constantly changing “now” is found
to be valid in its reasoning. in material objects outside me in
BEFORE space (including my own physical
1641 René Descartes Berkeley, on the other hand, body). Saying that I exist requires
publishes his Meditations, in argued that knowledge is indeed a determinate point in time, and
which he doubts all knowledge possible—but that it comes from this, in turn, requires an actually
apart from the knowledge of experiences our consciousness existing outside world in which
his own consciousness. perceives. We have no justification time takes place. My level of
for believing that these experiences certainty about the existence of the
1739 David Hume publishes have any external existence outside external world is thus precisely the
his Treatise of Human Nature, our own minds. same as my level of certainty about
which suggests limitations the existence of consciousness,
on how the human mind Time and consciousness which Descartes believed was
perceives reality. Kant wants to demonstrate that absolutely certain.
there is an external, material world,
AFTER and that its existence cannot be The problem of science
19th century The German doubted. His argument begins as Kant also looked at how science
idealist movement develops in follows: in order for something to understood the exterior world. He
response to Kant’s philosophy. exist, it must be determinable in admired the awesome progress
time—that is, we must be able to that the natural sciences had made
1900s Edmund Husserl say when it exists and for how long. over the previous two centuries,
develops phenomenology, the But how does this work in the case compared with the relative
study of objects of experience, of my own consciousness? stagnation in the subject from
using Kant’s understanding ancient times until that point. Kant,
of consciousness. Although consciousness seems along with other philosophers,
to be constantly changing with a wondered what was suddenly being
I mmanuel Kant thought it was continuous flow of sensations and done correctly in scientific research.
“scandalous” that in more than thoughts, we can use the word The answer given by many thinkers
2,000 years of philosophical “now” to refer to what is currently of the period was empiricism. The
thought, nobody had been able to happening in our consciousness. empiricists, such as John Locke
produce an argument to prove that But “now” is not a determinate time and David Hume, argued that there
there really is a world out there, or date. Every time I say “now”, is no knowledge except that which
external to us. He particularly had consciousness is different.
in mind the theories of René
Descartes and George Berkeley, Here lies the problem: what
who both entertained doubts about makes it possible to specify the
the existence of an external world. “when” of my own existence? We
cannot experience time itself,
At the start of his Meditations, directly; rather, we experience time
Descartes argued that we must through things that move, change,
doubt all knowledge except that or stay the same. Consider the
of our own existence as thinking hands of a clock, constantly moving
beings—even the knowledge that slowly around. The moving hands
there is an external world. He then are useless for determining time on
their own—they need something
against which they change, such as
the numbers on a clock face. Every
resource I have for measuring my

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 167

See also: René Descartes 116–23 ■ John Locke 130–33 ■ George Berkeley 138–41 ■ David Hume 148–53 ■
Johann Gottlieb Fichte 176 ■ Georg Hegel 178–85 ■ Friedrich Schelling 335 ■ Arthur Schopenhauer 186–88

comes to us through our experience Our sensibility is the Our understanding
of the world. They opposed the ability to sense things is the ability to think
views of rationalist philosophers,
such as Descartes or Gottfried in the world. about things.
Leibniz, who argued that the
mind’s ability to reason and deal Space and time
with concepts is more important cannot be learned
for knowledge than experience. about through experience;
they are intuitions
The empiricists claimed that
the recent success of science of the mind.
was due to scientists being much
more careful in their observations So a thing appears Concepts only apply
of the world than they had been in space and time only to things insofar
previously, and making fewer as they are sensed
unjustified assumptions based insofar as it is sensed by our minds.
on reason alone. Kant argues that by our minds.
although this is no doubt partly
true, it could not be the whole A “thing-in-itself”
answer, as it is simply false to say (something considered exterior
that there was no detailed and to our minds) may have nothing
careful empirical observation in
science before the 16th century. to do with space,time,
or any of our concepts.
The real issue, Kant argues, is
that a new scientific method arose
that made empirical observations
valuable. This method involves
two elements. First, it asserts that
concepts such as force or movement
can be perfectly described by
mathematics. Second, it tests its
own conceptions of the world by
asking specific questions about
nature and observing the answers. ❯❯

It is precisely in There are two
knowing its limits that worlds: the world of
experience sensed
philosophy exists.
Immanuel Kant by our bodies and
the world as it
“Things-in-themselves” is in itself.
are unknowable.

168 IMMANUEL KANT

Thoughts without content These direct acquaintances he my concept of some type of thing
are empty; intuitions calls “intuitions.” Second is what (books) and my concept of a “thing”
without concepts are Kant calls the “understanding”, our as such (substance). A concept
blind… only from their ability to have and use concepts. such as substance defines what
For Kant, a concept is an indirect it means to be a thing in general
union can cognition arise. acquaintance with things as rather than defining some type
Immanuel Kant examples of a type of thing, such of thing like a book. My intuition
as the concept of “book” in general. of a book and the concept of a book
For example, the experimental Without concepts we would not are empirical, for how could I know
physicist Galileo Galilei wanted to know our intuition was of a book; anything about books unless I had
test the hypothesis that two things without intuitions we would never come across them in the world?
of different weights will nevertheless know that there were books at all. But my intuition of space and time
fall through the air at the same rate. and the concept of substance are
He designed an experiment to test Each of these elements has, in a priori, meaning that they are
this in such a way that the only turn, two sides. In sensibility, there known before or independently
possible explanation of the observed is my intuition of a particular thing of any experience.
result would be the truth or falsity in space and time (like the book)
of the hypothesis. and my intuition of space and time A true empiricist would argue
as such (my acquaintance with against Kant that all acquaintances
Kant identifies the nature and what space and time are like in come from experience—in other
importance of the scientific method. general). In understanding, there is words, nothing is a priori. They
He believes that this method had
put physics and other subjects on Kant split knowledge into intuitions, gained Key
the “secure road of a science.” from direct sensibility of the world, and concepts,
However, his investigations do not which come indirectly from our understanding. Empirical
stop there. His next question is: Some of our knowledge—both of sensibility and knowledge
“Why is our experience of the world understanding—comes from empirical evidence,
such that the scientific method while some is known a priori. A priori
works?” In other words, why is our knowledge
experience of the world always the concept “book”
mathematical in nature, and how
is it always possible for human intuition of a
reason to put questions to nature? particular book

Intuitions and concepts intuition of
In his most famous work, Critique space and time
of Pure Reason, Kant argues that
our experience of the world involves the concept of substance
two elements. The first is what he
calls “sensibility”—our ability to be
directly acquainted with particular
things in space and time, such as
this book you are reading now.

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 169

Our understanding that entities such sensibility. A thing-in-itself—Kant’s through that experience that we
as trees undergo change presupposes an term for a thing that is considered learn anything empirical, the
a priori grasp of the concept “substance”, separately from sensibility, and concept of substance could not
according to Kant. Such concepts are therefore exterior to our minds— be empirical: it is rather a priori.
the preconditions of our experience. may have nothing to do with space.
Kant used similar arguments to The limits of knowledge
might say that we learn what space prove the same thing of time. A philosophical position that
is by observing things in space; and asserts that some state or activity
we learn what substance is from Kant then turns to proving the of the mind is prior to and more
our observation that the features existence of a priori concepts, such fundamental than things we
of things change without the as substance. He asks us first to experience is called idealism,
underlying thing itself changing. distinguish between two types of and Kant calls his own position
For instance, though a tree’s leaves alteration: variation and change. “transcendental idealism.” He
turn from green to brown, and Variation concerns the properties insists that space, time, and
eventually fall from the tree, it is that things have: for instance, a certain concepts are features of
still the same tree. tree’s leaves may be green or the world we experience (what
brown. Change is what the tree Kant called the phenomenal world)
Space and substance does: the same tree changes its rather than features of the world
Kant’s arguments show that, on leaves from green to brown. To itself considered separately from
the contrary, space is an a priori make this distinction is already to experience (what Kant called the
intuition. In order to learn about use the notion of substance: the noumenal world).
things outside of me, I need to tree (as substance) changes, but
know that they are outside of me. the leaves (as the properties of Kant’s claims about a priori
But that shows that I could not substance) vary. If we do not accept knowledge have both positive
learn about space in this way: how this distinction, then we cannot and negative consequences. The
can I locate something outside of accept the validity of the concept positive consequence is that the
me without already knowing what of substance. We would be saying a priori nature of space, time, and
“outside of me” means? Some that any time there is alteration, certain concepts is what makes our
knowledge of space has to be something “pops” into or out of experience of the world possible
assumed before I can ever study existence; the tree with green and reliable. Space and time make
space empirically. We must be leaves is annihilated at the same our experience mathematical in
familiar with space a priori. time that the tree with brown nature; we can measure it against
leaves begins to exist from nothing. known values. A priori concepts
This argument has an such as substance make it possible
extraordinary consequence. Kant needs to prove that such a to address questions about nature
Because space itself is a priori, it view is impossible. The key to this such as “Is that a substance?” and
does not belong to things in the is time determination. Time cannot “What properties does it exhibit ❯❯
world. But our experience of things be directly experienced (it is not a
in space is a feature of our thing); rather, we experience time Only from the
through things that alter or do not human standpoint can
alter, as Kant has already shown. If
we experienced time through the we speak of space.
tree with green leaves and also Immanuel Kant
experienced time through the tree
with brown leaves without there
being any connection between the
two, then we would be experiencing
two separate real times. Since this
is absurd, Kant believes he has
demonstrated that the concept of
substance is absolutely essential
before we can gain any experience
of the world. And, since it is

170 IMMANUEL KANT

and according to what laws?” In Human reason is Reason only has insight
other words, Kant’s transcendental troubled by questions that into that which it
idealism is what makes it possible
for our experience to be considered it cannot dismiss, but produces after a plan
useful to science. also cannot answer. of its own.
Immanuel Kant
On the negative side, certain Immanuel Kant
types of thinking call themselves things-in-themselves. So the
science and even resemble science, existence of God (considered, as it Transcendental idealism gives
but fail utterly. This is because usually is, as a being independent us a much more radical way of
they apply to things-in-themselves of the experienced world) is not understanding the distinction
intuitions about space and time, something that could be known. between ourselves and the external
or concepts such as substance— The negative consequence of world. What is external to me is
which according to Kant must be Kant's philosophy, then, is to place interpreted as not just external to
valid for experience, but have no quite severe restrictions on the me in space, but external to space
validity with respect to things-in- limits of knowledge. itself (and to time, and to all the
themselves. Because they resemble a priori concepts that make my
science, these types of thinking are experience of the world possible).
a constant temptation to us, and And there are two worlds: the
are a trap that many fall into “world” of experience, which
without realizing it. For example, includes both my thoughts and
we might wish to claim that God is feelings, and also includes
the cause of the world, but cause experience of material things such
and effect is another of the a priori as my body, or books; and the
concepts, like substance, that Kant “world” of things-in-themselves,
believes is entirely valid for our which is precisely not experienced
experienced world, but not for and so not in any sense known, and
which we must constantly strive to
avoid fooling ourselves about.

Our bodies have a curious role
to play in all this. On the one hand,
my body as a material thing is a
part of the external world. On the
other hand, the body is a part of us,
and indeed is the medium through
which we encounter other things

The Flammarion woodcut depicts a
man looking outside of space and time.
For Kant, what is external to us is
external to space and time also, and
can never be known as a thing-in-itself.

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 171

Rationalism
The rationalists believed that
the use of reason, rather than
experience, leads to knowledge
of objects in the world.

Empiricism Immanuel Kant
The empiricists believed that
knowledge comes from our Immanuel Kant was born into a
experience of objects in the family of financially struggling
world, rather than our reason. artisans in 1724, and he lived
and worked his whole life in
Transcendental Idealism the cosmopolitan Baltic port
Kant’s theory of transcendental city of Konigsberg, then part
idealism stated that both reason of Prussia. Though he never
and experience were necessary left his native province, he
to understand the world. became an internationally
famous philosopher within
(using our skin, nerves, eyes, ears, After Kant, German philosophy in his own lifetime.
and so on). This provides us with particular progressed rapidly. The
one way of understanding the idealists Johann Fichte, Friedrich Kant studied philosophy,
distinction between bodies and Schelling, and Georg Hegel all took physics, and mathematics at
the external world: the body as Kant’s thought in new directions the University of Konigsberg,
the medium of my sensations is and, in their turn, influenced the and taught at the same
different from other external and whole of 19th-century thought, institution for the next 27
material things. from romanticism to Marxism. years. In 1792 his unorthodox
Kant's sophisticated critique of views led King Friedrich
Lasting influence metaphysical thought was also Wilhelm II to ban him from
Kant’s book Critique of Pure Reason important in positivism, which teaching, to which he returned
is arguably the most significant held that every justifiable assertion after the king’s death five
single work in the history of is capable of being scientifically years later. Kant published
modern philosophy. Indeed, the or logically verified. throughout his career, but is
whole subject of philosophy is often best known for the series of
divided by many modern thinkers The fact that Kant locates the ground-breaking works he
into everything that happened a priori even within our intuitions produced in his 50s and 60s.
before Kant, and everything that of the world was important for Though a bright and sociable
has happened since. 20th-century phenomenologists man, he never married, and
such as Edmund Husserl and died at the age of 80.
Before Kant, empiricists such as Martin Heidegger, who sought to
John Locke emphasized what Kant examine objects of experience Key works
termed sensibility, but rationalists independently of any assumptions
such as Descartes tended to we may have about them. Kant’s 1781 Critique of Pure Reason
emphasize understanding. Kant work also remains an important 1785 Foundations of the
argues that our experience of the reference point for contemporary Metaphysics of Morals
world always involves both, so it is philosophers today, especially 1788 Critique of Practical
frequently said that Kant combined in the branches of metaphysics Reason
rationalism and empiricism. and epistemology. ■ 1790 Critique of Judgement

172

SOCIETY
IS INDEED
A CONTRACT

EDMUND BURKE (1729–1797)

IN CONTEXT M any a disaffected person the idea that society is a mutual
cries “It’s not my fault... agreement between its members—
BRANCH blame society!” But the like a commercial company—was
Political philosophy meaning of the word “society” is readily understood. However, this
not entirely clear, and it has changed point of view also implies that it
APPROACH over time. During the 18th century, is only the material things in life
Conservatism when the Irish philosopher and that matter. Burke attempts to
statesman Edmund Burke was redress the balance by reminding
BEFORE writing, Europe was becoming us that human beings also enrich
c.350 BCE Aristotle argues that increasingly commercialized, and their lives through science, art,
society is like an organism,
and that man is by nature a Human beings have
political animal. material, scientific,
artistic, and moral needs.
5th century St. Augustine of
Hippo argues that government They cannot meet all these
is a form of punishment for needs through their own efforts.
“original sin.”
They refer to the They agree to help
17th century Thomas Hobbes customs and religion each other since this
and John Locke develop the is the best way to meet
idea of the “social contract.” of their ancestors
wherever possible. their mutual needs.
AFTER
19th century French Society is indeed
philosopher Joseph de Maistre a contract.
points out the antidemocratic
legacy of Burke since the
French Revolution.

20th century British
philosopher Michael Oakeshott
develops a more liberal form
of conservatism.

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 173

See also: John Locke 130–33 ■ David Hume 148–53 ■ Jean-Jacques Rousseau
154–59 ■ Adam Smith 160–63 ■ John Rawls 294–95

and virtue, and that while society Jacques Rousseau, whose book, Edmund Burke
is indeed a contract or partnership, The Social Contract, argued that
it is not simply concerned with the contract between citizens and The Anglo-Irish politician
economics, or, as he puts it, “gross the state can be broken at any time, Edmund Burke was born
animal existence.” Society embodies depending on the will of the people. and educated in Dublin. From
the common good (our agreement Another regular target for Burke his youth onward, he was
on customs, norms, and values), but was the English philosopher and convinced that philosophy
for Burke “society” means more scientist Joseph Priestley, who was useful training for
than just the people living now— applauded the French Revolution politics, and in the 1750s
it also includes our ancestors and and pilloried the idea of original sin. he wrote notable essays on
descendants. Moreover, because aesthetics and the origins
every political constitution is part Despite his scepticism about of society. He served as an
of “the great primeval contract of modern commercial society, Burke English MP from 1766 until
eternal society”, God himself is was a great defender of private 1794, and he was a prominent
society’s ultimate guarantor. property, and was optimistic about member of the Whig party—
the free market. For this reason, he is the more liberal of the two
Burke’s view has the doctrine often hailed as the “father of modern aristocratic parties of the day.
of original sin (the idea that we are conservatism”—a philosophy that
born sinful) at its core, so he has values both economic freedom and Burke was sympathetic
little sympathy for anyone seeking tradition. Today, even socialists toward the cause of American
to blame society for their conduct. would agree with Burke that private independence—which sparked
Likewise, he dismisses the idea, property is a fundamental social a revolution that was entirely
proposed by John Locke, that we institution, but would disagree justified, in his view—and
can be perfected by education—as with him about its value. Likewise, later became involved in the
though we are born innocent and ecologically-minded philosophers impeachment trial of Warren
merely need to be given the correct share his belief in the duties of one Hastings, the Governor-
influences. For Burke, the fallibility generation to the next, but with General of India. He remained
of individual judgment is why we the new agenda of creating a a scathing critic of colonial
need tradition, to give us the moral “sustainable society.” ■ malpractice for the rest of his
bearings we need—an argument life, and earned a reputation
that echoes David Hume, who for being the conscience of
claimed that “custom is the great the British Empire.
guide to human life.”
Key works
Tradition and change Burke condemned the French
Because society is an organic Revolution for its wholesale rejection 1756 A Vindication of Natural
structure with roots stretching of the past. He believed that change Society
deep into the past, Burke believed should occur gradually—an idea that 1770 Thoughts on the Present
its political organization should became central to modern conservatism. Discontents
develop naturally over time. He 1790 Reflections on the
opposed the idea of sweeping or Revolution in France
abrupt political changes that cut
through this natural process. For
this reason he opposed the French
Revolution of 1789, foreseeing its
dangers long before the execution
of the king and the year-long Reign
of Terror. It also prompted him on
several occasions to criticize Jean-

174

THE GREATEST
HAPPINESS FOR THE
GREATEST NUMBER

JEREMY BENTHAM (1748–1832)

IN CONTEXT J eremy Bentham, a legal ideas, you avoid the confusions and
reformer and philosopher, misinterpretations of more complex
BRANCH was convinced that all political systems that can often
Ethics human activity was driven by lead to injustices and grievances.
only two motivating forces—the
APPROACH avoidance of pain and the pursuit Calculating pleasure
Utilitarianism of pleasure. In The Principles of More controversially, Bentham
Morals and Legislation (1789), he proposes a “felicific calculus” that
BEFORE argues that all social and political can express mathematically the
Late 4th century BCE decisions should be made with degree of happiness experienced
Epicurus states that the main the aim of achieving the greatest by each individual. Using this
goal of life should be the happiness for the greatest number precise method, he states, provides
pursuit of happiness. of people. Bentham believes that an objective platform for resolving
the moral worth of such decisions ethical disputes, with decisions
Early 17th century Thomas relates directly to their utility, or being made in favor of the view
Hobbes argues that a strong efficiency, in generating happiness that is calculated to produce the
legal system, with severe or pleasure. In a society driven by highest measure of pleasure.
penalties for criminals, leads this “utilitarian” approach, he
to a stable and happier society. claims that conflicts of interest Bentham also insists that all
between individuals can be settled sources of pleasure are of equal
Mid-18th century David by legislators, guided solely by the value, so that the happiness derived
Hume claims that emotion principle of creating the broadest from a good meal or close friendship
governs our moral judgement. possible spread of contentment. If is equal to that derived from an
everyone can be made happy, so activity that may require effort or
AFTER much the better, but if a choice is education, such as engaging in
Mid-19th century John necessary, it is always preferable philosophical debate or reading
Stuart Mill advocates education to favor the many over the few. poetry. This means that Bentham
for all, arguing that it would assumes a fundamental human
improve general happiness. One of the main benefits of his equality, with complete happiness
proposed system, Bentham states, being accessible to all, regardless
Late 19th century Henry is its simplicity. By adopting his of social class or ability. ■
Sidgwick says that how moral
an action is equates directly to See also: Epicurus 64–65 ■ Thomas Hobbes 112–15 ■ David Hume 148–53 ■
the degree of pleasure it brings. John Stuart Mill 190–93 ■ Henry Sidgwick 336

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 175

MIND HAS
NO GENDER

MARY WOLLSTONECRAFT (1759–1797)

IN CONTEXT F or most of recorded history, the Rights of Woman, published
women have been seen as in 1792, was partly a response to
BRANCH subordinate to men. But Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Emile
Political philosophy during the 18th century, the justice (1762), which recommends that girls
of this arrangement began to be be educated differently to boys, and
APPROACH openly challenged. Among the that they learn deference to them.
Feminism most prominent voices of dissent
was that of the English radical Wollstonecraft’s demand that
BEFORE Mary Wollstonecraft. women be treated as equal citizens
4th century BCE Plato advises to men—with equal legal, social,
that girls should have a similar Many previous thinkers had and political rights—was still
education to boys. cited the physical differences largely treated with derision in the
between the sexes to justify the late 18th century. But it did sow the
4th century CE Hypatia, a social inequality between women seeds of the suffragette and feminist
noted female mathematician and men. However, in the light of movements that were to flourish in
and philosopher, teaches in new ideas that had been formulated the 19th and 20th centuries. ■
Alexandria, Egypt. during the 17th century, such as
John Locke’s view that nearly all Let woman share
1790 In Letters on Education, knowledge was acquired through the rights and she will
British historian Catherine experience and education, the emulate the virtues of man.
Macaulay claims the apparent validity of such reasoning was Mary Wollstonecraft
weakness of women is caused being called into question.
by their miseducation.
Equal education
AFTER Wollstonecraft argues that if men
1869 John Stuart Mill’s The and women are given the same
Subjection of Women argues education they will acquire the
for equality of the sexes. same good character and rational
approach to life, because they have
Late 20th century A surge of fundamentally similar brains and
feminist activism begins to minds. Her book, A Vindication of
overturn most of the social and
political inequalities between See also: Plato 50–55 ■ Hypatia of Alexandria 331 ■ John Stuart Mill 190–93 ■
the sexes in Western society. Simone de Beauvoir 276–77 ■ Luce Irigaray 320 ■ Hélène Cixous 322

176

WHAT SORT OF PHILOSOPHY
ONE CHOOSES DEPENDS
ON WHAT SORT OF
PERSON ONE IS

JOHANN GOTTLIEB FICHTE (1762–1814)

IN CONTEXT J ohann Gottlieb Fichte was outside of causal influences, and
an 18th-century German is able to think and choose freely,
BRANCH philosopher and student of independently, and spontaneously.
Epistemology Immanuel Kant. He examined how
it is possible for us to exist as Fichte understands idealism and
APPROACH ethical beings with free will, while dogmatism to be entirely different
Idealism living in a world that appears to be starting points. They can never be
causally determined; that is to say, “mixed” into one philosophical
BEFORE in a world where every event follows system, he says; there is no way of
1641 René Descartes discovers on necessarily from previous events proving philosophically which is
that it is impossible to doubt and conditions, according to correct, and neither can be used to
that “I exist.” The self is unvarying laws of nature. refute the other. For this reason one
therefore the one and only can only “choose” which philosophy
thing of which we can be sure. The idea that there is a world one believes in, not for objective,
like this “out there”, beyond our rational reasons, but depending
18th century Immanuel selves and independent of us, is upon “what sort of person one is.” ■
Kant develops a philosophy of known as dogmatism. This is an
idealism and the transcendental idea that gained ground in the Think the I,
ego, the “I” that synthesizes Enlightenment period, but Fichte and observe what is
information. This forms the thinks that it leaves no room for involved in doing this.
basis of Fichte’s idealism and moral values or choice. How can Johann Gottlieb Fichte
notion of the self. people be considered to have free
will, he asks, if everything is
AFTER determined by something else
20th century Fichte’s that exists outside of ourselves?
nationalist ideas become
associated with Martin Fichte argues instead for a
Heidegger and the Nazi version of idealism similar to Kant’s,
regime in Germany. in which our own minds create all
that we think of as reality. In this
1950S Isaiah Berlin holds idealist world, the self is an active
Fichte’s idea of true freedom entity or essence that exists
of the self as responsible for
modern authoritarianism. See also: René Descartes 116–23 ■ Benedictus Spinoza 126–29 ■
Immanuel Kant 164–71 ■ Martin Heidegger 252–55 ■ Isaiah Berlin 280–81

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 177

ABOUT NO SUBJECT
IS THERE LESS
PHILOSOPHIZING THAN
ABOUT PHILOSOPHY

FRIEDRICH SCHLEGEL (1772-1829)

IN CONTEXT T he German historian and theories about art and life. These
poet, Friedrich Schlegel, value individual human emotion
BRANCH is generally credited with above rational thought, in contrast
Metaphilosophy introducing the use of aphorisms to most Enlightenment thinking.
(short, ambiguous sayings) into While his charge against earlier
APPROACH later modern philosophy. In 1798 philosophy was not necessarily
Reflexivity he observed that there was little correct his contemporary, Georg
philosophizing about philosophy Hegel, took up the cause for
BEFORE (metaphilosophy), implying that we reflexivity—the modern name for
C.450 BCE Protagoras says that should question both how Western applying philosophical methods to
there are no first principles philosophy functions and its the subject of philosophy itself. ■
or absolute truths; “man is assumption that a linear type of
the measure of all things.” argument is the best approach. Philosophy is the art of thinking, and
Schlegel points out that its methods
1641 René Descartes claims Schlegel disagrees with the affect the kind of answers it can find.
to have found a first principle approaches of Aristotle and René Western and Eastern philosophies use
on which to build beliefs about Descartes, saying they are wrong very different approaches.
existence when he states that to assume that there are solid “first
“I think, therefore I am.” principles” that can form a starting
point. He also thinks that it is not
AFTER possible to reach any final answers,
1830 Georg Hegel says that because every conclusion of an
“the whole of philosophy argument can be endlessly perfected.
resembles a circle of circles.” Describing his own approach,
Schlegel says philosophy must
1920S Martin Heidegger always “start in the middle… it is a
argues that philosophy is a whole, and the path to recognizing
matter of our relationship with it is no straight line but a circle.”
our own existence.
Schlegel’s holistic view—seeing
1967 Jacques Derrida claims philosophy as a whole—fits within
that philosophical analysis can the broader context of his Romantic
only be made at the level of
language and texts. See also: Protagoras 42–43 ■ Aristotle 56–63 ■ René Descartes 116–23 ■
Georg Hegel 178–85 ■ Martin Heidegger 252–55 ■ Jacques Derrida 308–13

REALITY

IS A HISTORICAL

PROCESS

GEORG HEGEL (1770–1831)



180 GEORG HEGEL H egel was the single most Certain changes, such those brought
famous philosopher in about by the American Revolution,
IN CONTEXT Germany during the first are explained by Hegel as the progress
half of the 19th century. His central of Spirit from a lesser stage of its
BRANCH idea was that all phenomena, development to a higher stage.
Metaphysics from consciousness to political
institutions, are aspects of a single is something that we learn and
APPROACH Spirit (by which he means “mind” or change as we use it, and the same
Idealism “idea”) that over the course of time is true of science—scientists start
is reintegrating these aspects into with a body of theory, and then go
BEFORE itself. This process of reintegration on either to confirm or to disconfirm
6th century BCE Heraclitus is what Hegel calls the “dialectic”, it. The same is also true of social
claims that all things pass into and it is one that we (who are all institutions, such as the family, the
their opposites, an important aspects of Spirit) understand as state, banks, churches, and so on—
factor in Hegel’s dialectic. “history.” Hegel is therefore a most of which are modified forms
monist, for he believes that all of earlier practices or institutions.
1781 Immanuel Kant publishes things are aspects of a single thing,
his Critique of Pure Reason, and an idealist, for he believes that
which shows the limits of reality is ultimately something
human knowledge. that is not material (in this case
Spirit). Hegel’s idea radically
1790s The works of Johann altered the philosophical landscape,
Fichte and Friedrich Schelling and to fully grasp its implications
lay the foundations for the we need to take a look at the
school of German Idealism. background to his thought.

AFTER History and consciousness
1846 Karl Marx writes The Few philosophers would deny that
German Ideology, which uses human beings are, to a great
Hegel’s dialectical method. extent, historical—that we inherit
things from the past, change them,
1943 Jean-Paul Sartre’s and then pass them on to future
existentialist work Being and generations. Language, for example,
Nothingness relies upon
Hegel’s notion of the dialectic.

Georg Hegel Georg Hegel was born in 1770 in became a newspaper editor and
Stuttgart, Germany, and studied then a school headmaster before
theology at Tübingen where he being appointed to the chair of
met and became friends with the philosophy first in Heidelberg
poet Friedrich Hölderlin and the and then at the prestigious
philosopher Friedrich Schelling. University of Berlin. At the age
He spent several years working of 41 he married Marie von
as a tutor before an inheritance Tucher, with whom he had
allowed him to join Schelling at three children. Hegel died in
the University of Jena. Hegel 1831 during a cholera epidemic.
was forced to leave Jena when
Napoleon’s troops occupied the Key works
town, and just managed to rescue
his major work, Phenomenology 1807 Phenomenology of Spirit
of Spirit, which catapulted him to 1812–16 Science of Logic
a dominant position in German 1817 Encyclopedia of the
philosophy. In need of funds, he Philosophical Sciences

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 181

See also: Heraclitus 40 ■ Johann Gottlieb Fichte 176 ■ Friedrich Schelling 335 ■ Arthur Schopenhauer 186–88 ■
Karl Marx 196–203 ■ Jean-Paul Sartre 268–71

Human beings, therefore, never may give us knowledge about the To comprehend what is
begin their existence from scratch, outside world, but nothing within is the task of philosophy,
but always within some kind of experience itself teaches us that
context—a context that changes, the outside world actually contains, for what is, is reason.
sometimes radically within a single for example, causes and effects. Georg Hegel
generation. Some things, however, For Kant, knowledge of the basic
do not immediately appear to be structure of the outside world is a
historical, or subject to change. priori knowledge. It is only possible
because we are all born with
An example of such a thing is categories that supply us with a
consciousness. We know for certain framework for experience—part of
that what we are conscious of will which is the assumption that there
change, but what it means to be is an external world. However, Kant
conscious—what kind of a thing it continues, this a priori framework
is to be awake, to be aware, to be means that the world as it appears ❯❯
capable of thinking and making
decisions—is something that we Philosophy must begin
tend to believe has always been by making no assumptions.
the same for everyone. Likewise,
it seems plausible to claim that We must not assume We must not assume that
the structures of thought are not that the structures of the whole of reality is divided
historical—that the kind of activity thought and consciousness
that thinking is, and what mental into thoughts and the
faculties it relies on (memory, never change. objects of thought.
perception, understanding, and so
on), has always been the same for
everyone throughout history. This
was certainly what Hegel’s great
idealist predecessor, Immanuel
Kant, believed—and to understand
Hegel, we need to know what he
thought about Kant’s work.

Kant’s categories These structures themselves Thoughts and objects are
For Kant, the basic ways in which are aspects of spirit. both aspects of spirit.
thought works, and the basic
structures of consciousness, are a All reality is spirit, and
priori—that is, they exist prior to all spirit undergoes
(and so are not are not derived from)
experience. This means that they historical development.
are independent not only of what we
are thinking about, or are conscious All reality is a
of, but are independent of any historical process.
historical influence or development.

Kant calls these structures
of thought “categories”, and these
include the concepts “cause”,
“substance”, “existence”, and
“reality.” For example, experience

182 GEORG HEGEL

Hegel’s dialectic shows how opposites find resolution. ANTITHESIS they are “dialectical”—meaning
A state of tyranny, for example, generates a need for that they are always subject to
freedom—but once freedom has been achieved there change. Where Kant believes in
can only be anarchy until an element of tyranny is an unchanging framework of
combined with freedom, creating the synthesis “law.” experience, Hegel believes that
the framework of experience itself
THESIS is subject to change—as much,
indeed, as the world that we
TYRANNY FREEDOM experience. Consciousness,
therefore, and not merely what
we are conscious of, is part of an
evolving process. This process is
“dialectical”—a concept that has a
very specific meaning in Hegel’s
philosophical thought.

LAW Hegel’s dialectic
SYNTHESIS The notion of dialectic is central
to what Hegel calls his immanent
is dependent upon the nature of two respects to be sufficiently (internal) account of the development
the human mind, and does not thorough in his analysis. First of of things. He declares that his
represent the world as it really is— all, Hegel regards Kant’s notion of account will guarantee four things.
in other words, the world as it is “in the “world in itself” as an empty First, that no assumptions are made.
itself.” This “world as it is in itself” abstraction that means nothing. Second, that only the broadest
is what Kant calls the noumenal For Hegel, what exists is whatever notions possible are employed, the
world, and he claims that it is comes to be manifested in better to avoid asserting anything
unknowable. All that we can consciousness—for example, as without justification. Third, that it
know, according to Kant, is the something sensed or as something shows how a general notion gives
world as it appears to us through thought. Kant’s second failure, Hegel rise to other, more specific, notions.
the framework of the categories— argues, is that he makes too many Fourth, that this process happens
and this is what Kant calls the assumptions about the nature and entirely from “within” the notion
“phenomenal” world, or the world origin of the categories. itself. This fourth requirement
of our everyday experience. reveals the core of Hegel’s logic—
Hegel’s task is to understand namely that every notion, or
Hegel’s critique of Kant these categories without making “thesis”, contains within itself a
Hegel believes that Kant made any assumptions whatsoever, contradiction, or “antithesis”, which
great strides forward in eliminating and the worst assumption that is only resolved by the emergence
naivety in philosophy, but that his Hegel sees in Kant concerns the of a newer, richer notion, called a
accounts of the “world in itself” relationships of the categories to “synthesis”, from the original notion
and the categories still betray each other. Kant assumes that the itself. One consequence of this
uncritical assumptions. Hegel categories are original and distinct, immanent process is that when we
argues that Kant fails in at least and that they are totally separate become aware of the synthesis,
from each other—but for Hegel we realize that what we saw as the
earlier contradiction in the thesis
was only an apparent contradiction,
one that was caused by some
limitation in our understanding
of the original notion.

An example of this logical
progression appears at the
beginning of Hegel’s Science of

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 183

Each of the parts of between two aspects of a single, beginning of the dialectical process,
philosophy is a philosophical higher concept in which they find which goes on to repeat itself at
whole, a circle rounded and resolution. In the case of “being” a higher level. That is, any new
and “not-being”, the concept that synthesis turns out, on further
complete in itself. resolves them is “becoming.” When analysis, to involve its own
Georg Hegel we say that something “becomes”, contradiction, and this in turn
we mean that it moves from a state is overcome by a still richer or
Logic, where he introduces the of not-being to a state of being—so “higher” notion. All ideas, according
most general and all-inclusive it turns out that the concept of to Hegel, are interconnected in this
notion of “pure being”—meaning “being” that we started off with way, and the process of revealing
anything that in any sense could be was not really a single concept at those connections is what Hegel
said to be. He then shows that this all, but merely one aspect of the calls his “dialectical method.”
concept contains a contradiction— three-part notion of “becoming.”
namely, that it requires the opposite The vital point here is that the In saying that the structures of
concept of “nothingness” or “not- concept of “becoming” is not thought are dialectical, therefore,
being” for it to be fully understood. introduced from “outside”, as it Hegel means that they are not
Hegel then shows that this were, to resolve the contradiction distinct and irreducible, as Kant
contradiction is simply a conflict between “being” and “not-being.” maintained, but that they emerge
On the contrary, Hegel’s analysis from the broadest, emptiest notions
shows that “becoming” was always by means of this movement of self-
the meaning of “being” and “not- contradiction and resolution.
being”, and that all we had to do
was analyze these concepts to see Dialectic and the world
their underlying logic. The discussion of Hegel’s dialectic
above uses terms such as “emerge”,
This resolution of a thesis (being) “development”, and “movement.”
with its antithesis (not-being) in a On the one hand, these terms
synthesis (becoming) is just the reflect something important ❯❯

In Hegel’s view, a synthesis emerging from
an antagonism of thesis and antithesis itself
becomes a new thesis, which generates its
own antithesis—which finally gives birth
to another synthesis. This dialectical
process is one in which Spirit comes to
ever more accurate understandings
of itself—culminating in
the philosophy of Hegel,
in which it achieves
complete understanding.

T1 A1 A2

S1 / T2

KEY S2 / T3 A3

T = THESIS S3 / T4
A = ANTITHESIS
S = SYNTHESIS

184 GEORG HEGEL

about this method of philosophy— development of these forms of Each stage of
that it starts without assumptions consciousness. He starts with the world-history is a necessary
and from the least controversial types of consciousness that an
point, and allows ever richer and individual human being might moment in the Idea of
truer concepts to reveal themselves possess, and works up to collective the World Spirit.
through the process of dialectical forms of consciousness. He does so Georg Hegel
unfolding. On the other hand, in such a way as to show that these
however, Hegel clearly argues that types of consciousness are to be of oppression —of overcoming
these developments are not simply found externalized in particular tyrannies that may themselves be
interesting facts of logic, but are real historical periods or events—most the result of the overcoming of
developments that can be seen at famously, for example, in the previous tyrannies.
work in history. For example, a man American and French revolutions.
from ancient Greece and a man This extraordinary idea—that
living in the modern world will Indeed, Hegel even argues that the nature of consciousness has
obviously think about different at certain times in history, Spirit’s changed through time, and changed
things, but Hegel claims that their next revolutionary change may in accordance with a pattern that is
very ways of thinking are different, manifest itself as an individual visible in history—means that
and represent different kinds of (such as Napoleon Bonaparte) who, there is nothing about human
consciousness—or different stages as an individual consciousness, is beings that is not historical in
in the historical development of completely unaware of his or her character. Moreover, this historical
thought and consciousness. role in the history of Spirit. And the development of consciousness
progress that these individuals cannot simply have happened at
Hegel’s first major work, make is always characterized by random. Since it is a dialectical
Phenomenology of Spirit, gives the freeing of aspects of Spirit (in process, it must in some sense
an account of the dialectical human form) from recurring states contain both a particular sense of
direction and an end point. Hegel
calls this end point “Absolute
Spirit”—and by this he means a
future stage of consciousness
which no longer even belongs to
individuals, but which instead
belongs to reality as a whole.

At this point in its development,
knowledge is complete—as it must
be, according to Hegel, since Spirit
encompasses, through dialectical

Napoleon Bonaparte, according to
Hegel, perfectly embodied the zeitgeist
(spirit of the age) and was able, through
his actions, to move history into the
next stage of its development.

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 185

Of the Absolute it must “only Life” (nature as a living whole) only one reality—that of Spirit,
be said that it is essentially to that which has “existence as which knows and reflects on
Spirit” (the whole of nature now itself, and is both thought and
a result, that only in the revealed as always having been, what is thought about.
end is it what it truly is. when properly understood, Spirit).
The “Whole of Spirit”, or
Georg Hegel At this stage of nature, a different “Absolute Spirit”, is the end point
dialectic begins, namely that of of Hegel’s dialectic. However,
synthesis, both the knower and consciousness itself—of the forms the preceding stages are not left
what is known. Furthermore, Spirit that Absolute Spirit takes in its behind, as it were, but are revealed
grasps this knowledge as nothing dialectical progression toward self- as insufficiently analyzed aspects
other than its own completed realization. Hegel’s account of Spirit as a whole. Indeed, what
essence—the full assimilation of of this progression begins with we think of as an individual person
all forms of “otherness” that were consciousness first thinking of is not a separate constituent of
always parts of itself, however itself as an individual thing among reality, but is an aspect of how
unknowingly. In other words, Spirit other individuals, and occupying a Spirit develops—or how it “empties
does not simply come to encompass separate space to that of matter or itself out into time.” Thus, Hegel
reality—it comes to be aware of the natural world. Later stages of writes, “The True is the Whole.
itself as having always been nothing consciousness, however, are no But the Whole is nothing other
other than the movement toward longer those of individuals, but are than the essence consummating
this encompassing of reality. As those of social or political groups— itself through its development.”
Hegel writes in The Phenomenology and so the dialectic continues, Reality is Spirit—both thought
of Spirit, “History is a conscious, refining itself until it reaches the and what is known by thought—
self-mediating process—[it is] stage of Absolute Spirit. and undergoes a process of
Spirit emptied out into time.” historical development. ■
Spirit and mind
Spirit and nature At the time Hegel was writing, German history had reached its end
But what about the world in which there was a dominant philosophical point in the Prussian state, according
we live, and which seems to go its view that there are two kinds of to Hegel. However, there was a strong
way quite separately from human entities in the world—things that feeling in favor of a united Germany, as
history? What does it mean to say exist in the physical world and personified by the figure of Germania.
that reality itself is historical? thoughts about those things—
According to Hegel, what we these latter being something like
ordinarily call “nature” or “the world” pictures or images of the things.
is also Spirit. “Nature is to be Hegel argues that all versions of
regarded as a system of stages,” he this distinction are mistakes, and
writes, “one arising necessarily from involve committing ourselves to the
the other and being the proximate ridiculous scenario in which two
truth of the stage from which it things are both absolutely different
results.” He goes on to claim that (things and thoughts), but also
one of the stages of nature is the somehow similar (because the
progression from that which is thoughts are images of things).

Hegel argues that it only seems
as though the objects of thought are
different from thought itself. For
Hegel, the illusion of difference and
separation between these two
apparent “worlds” is shown as such
when both thought and nature are
revealed as aspects of Spirit. This
illusion is overcome in Absolute
Spirit, when we see that there is

186 IN CONTEXT

EVERY MAN TAKES BRANCH
THE LIMITS OF Metaphysics
HIS OWN FIELD
OF VISION FOR APPROACH
THE LIMITS OF Idealism
THE WORLD
BEFORE
ARTHUR SCHOPENHAUER (1788–1860) 1690 John Locke publishes
An Essay Concerning Human
Understanding, explaining
how all our knowledge comes
from experience.

1781 Immanuel Kant’s Critique
of Pure Reason introduces the
concept of a “thing in itself”,
which Schopenhauer used as
a starting point for his ideas.

AFTER
Late 19th century Friedrich
Nietzsche puts forward the
notion of a “Will to power” to
explain human motivations.

Early 20th century Austrian
psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud
explores what lies behind our
basic human urges.

Arthur Schopenhauer was not
part of the mainstream of
early 19th-century German
philosophy. He acknowledged
Immanuel Kant, whom he idolized,
as a major influence, but dismissed
the idealists of his own generation,
who held that reality ultimately
consists of something nonmaterial.
Most of all he detested the idealist
Georg Hegel for his dry writing
style and optimistic philosophy.

Using Kant’s metaphysics as
his starting point, Schopenhauer
developed his own view of the
world, which he expressed in clear,
literary language. He took Kant’s
view that the world is divided into
what we perceive through our

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 187

See also: Empedocles 330 ■ John Locke 130–33 ■ Immanuel Kant 164–71 ■
Georg Hegel 178–85 ■ Friedrich Nietzsche 214–21

My version of the world
is limited by…

…the limited …my limited Arthur Schopenhauer
observations I can experience of a vast
make of a vast universe. universal Will, of which Born into a wealthy and
my will is just a part. cosmopolitan family in Danzig
(now Gdansk), Schopenhauer
My version of the world does was expected to become a
not include things I have merchant like his father. He
travelled through France and
not perceived, nor the universal England before his family
Will I have not experienced. settled in Hamburg in 1793. In
1805, after his father’s death—
I take the limits of my own field of possibly by suicide—he felt
vision for the limits of the world. able to stop working and go to
university, where he studied
senses (phenomena), and “things in The idea of knowledge being philosophy and psychology.
themselves” (noumena), but he limited to our experience was not He maintained an uneasy
wanted to explain the nature of the an entirely new one; the ancient relationship with his mother,
phenomenal and noumenal worlds. philosopher Empedocles had said who constantly criticized
that “each man believes only his his achievements.
Interpreting Kant experience”, and in the 17th
According to Kant, we each century John Locke had asserted After completing his
construct a version of the world that “no man’s knowledge here can studies, Schopenhauer taught
from our perceptions—the go beyond his experience.” But the at Berlin University. He attained
phenomenal world—but we can reason Schopenhauer gives for this a reputation as a philanderer
never experience the noumenal limitation is quite new, and it and misogynist; he had several
world as it is “in itself.” So we each comes from his interpretation of affairs and avoided marriage,
have a limited vision of the world, Kant’s phenomenal and noumenal and was once convicted of
as our perceptions are built from worlds. The important difference assaulting a woman. In 1831
information acquired through a between Kant and Schopenhauer he moved to Frankfurt, where
limited set of senses. Schopenhauer is that for Schopenhauer, the he lived until his death with a
adds to this that “every man takes phenomenal and noumenal are succession of poodles called
the limits of his own field of vision not two different realities or worlds, either Atman (“soul” in
for the limits of the world.” but the same world, experienced ❯❯ Hinduism and Buddhism) or
Butz (German for hobgoblin).

Key works

1818 and 1844 The World as
Will and Representation
1851 Parerga and
Paralipomena

188 ARTHUR SCHOPENHAUER

differently. It is one world, with two concepts within our minds, not The fundament upon
aspects: Will and Representation. things outside of them—so the which all our knowledge
This is most easily evidenced by our Will of the world does not mark
bodies, which we experience in two time, or follow causal or spatial and learning rests
ways: we perceive them as objects laws. This means it must be is the inexplicable.
(Representations), and experience timeless and indivisible, and so Arthur Schopenhauer
them from within (as Will). must our individual wills. It follows,
then, that the Will of the universe pessimistic character. He realizes
Schopenhauer says that an act and individual will are one and the that if we can recognize that our
of will, such as wishing to raise my same thing, and the phenomenal separateness from the universe is
arm, and the resulting movement, world is controlled by this vast, essentially an illusion—because all
are not in two different worlds—the timeless, motiveless Will. our individual wills and the Will of
noumenal and phenomenal—but the universe are one and the same
the same event experienced in two Eastern influence thing—we can learn empathy with
different ways. One is experienced At this point in his argument, everyone and everything else, and
from inside, the other observed Schopenhauer’s pessimism shows moral goodness can arise from a
from outside. When we look at through. Where contemporaries universal compassion. Here, again,
things outside ourselves, although such as Hegel saw will as a positive Schopenhauer’s thinking reflects
we see only their objective force, Schopenhauer sees humanity the ideals of Eastern philosophy.
Representation, not their inner at the mercy of a mindless, aimless
reality or Will, the world as a whole universal Will. It lies behind our Lasting legacy
still has the same simultaneous most basic urges, he insists, and Schopenhauer was largely ignored
outer and inner existences. is what causes us to live lives of by other German philosophers in
constant disappointment and his lifetime, and his ideas were
A universal Will frustration as we attempt to relieve overshadowed by those of Hegel,
Schopenhauer uses the word “will” our cravings. For Schopenhauer, the though he did have an influence
to express a pure energy that has world is neither good nor bad, but on writers and musicians. Toward
no driving direction, and yet is meaningless, and humans who the end of the 19th century, the
responsible for everything that struggle to find happiness achieve primacy he gave to Will became
manifests itself in the phenomenal at best gratification and at worst a theme in philosophy once more.
world. He believes, like Kant, that pain and suffering. Friedrich Nietzsche in particular
space and time belong in the acknowledged his influence, and
phenomenal world—they are The only escape from this Henri Bergson and the American
miserable condition, according to pragmatists also owe something
Schopenhauer studied the Hindu Schopenhauer, is nonexistence or to his analysis of the world as Will.
Bhagavad Gita, in which Krishna the at least a loss of will for gratification. Perhaps Schopenhauer’s greatest
charioteer tells Arjuna that a man is He proposes that relief can be found influence, however, was in the field
a slave to his desires unless he can through aesthetic contemplation, of psychology, where his ideas
free himself from his cravings. especially in music, which is the about our basic urges and their
one art that does not attempt to frustration influenced the
represent the phenomenal world. psychoanalytic theories of both
Schopenhauer’s philosophy here Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung. ■
echoes the Buddhist concept of
nirvana (a transcendent state free
from desire or suffering). He had
studied Eastern thinkers and
religions in great detail.

From his idea of one universal
Will, Schopenhauer develops a
moral philosophy that may be
somewhat surprising, considering
his otherwise misanthropic and

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 189

THEOLOGY IS
ANTHROPOLOGY

LUDWIG ANDREAS FEUERBACH (1804–1872)

IN CONTEXT T he 19th-century German than anthropology (the study of
philosopher Ludwig humanity). Not only have we
BRANCH Feuerbach is best known deceived ourselves into thinking
Philosophy of religion for his book The Essence of that a divine being exists, we have
Christianity (1841), which inspired also forgotten or forsaken what we
APPROACH revolutionary thinkers such as Karl are ourselves. We have lost sight of
Atheism Marx and Friedrich Engels. The the fact that these virtues actually
book incorporates much of the exist in humans, not gods. For this
BEFORE philosophical thinking of Georg reason we should focus less on
C.600 BCE Thales is the first Hegel, but where Hegel saw an heavenly righteousness and more
Western philosopher to deny Absolute Spirit as the guiding force on human justice—it is people
that the universe owes its in nature, Feuerbach sees no reason in this life, on this Earth, that
existence to a god. to look beyond our experience to deserve our attention. ■
explain existence. For Feuerbach,
C.500 BCE The Indian school humans are not an externalized
of atheistic philosophy known form of an Absolute Spirit, but the
as Carvaka is established. opposite: we have created the idea
of a great spirit, a god, from our
C.400 BCE The ancient Greek own longings and desires.
philosopher Diagoras of Melos
puts forward arguments in Imagining God The Israelites of the Bible, in their
defense of atheism. Feuerbach suggests that in our need for certainty and reassurance,
yearning for all that is best in created a false god—the golden calf—
AFTER humankind—love, compassion, to worship. Feuerbach argues that all
Mid-19th century Karl kindness, and so on—we have gods are created in the same way.
Marx uses Feuerbach’s imagined a being that incorporates
reasoning in his philosophy all of these qualities in the highest
of political revolution. possible degree, and then called
it “God.” Theology (the study of
Late 19th century The God) is therefore nothing more
psychoanalyst Sigmund
Freud argues that religion is See also: Thales of Miletus 22–23 ■ Georg Hegel 178–85 ■ Karl Marx 196–203
a projection of human wishes.

190 IN CONTEXT

OVER HIS OWN BRANCH
BODY AND MIND, Political philosophy
THE INDIVIDUAL
IS SOVEREIGN APPROACH
Utilitarianism
JOHN STUART MILL (1806–1873)
BEFORE
1651 In Leviathan, Thomas
Hobbes says that people
are “brutish” and must be
controlled by a social contract.

1689 John Locke’s book, Two
Treatises of Government, looks
at social contract theory in the
context of empiricism.

1789 Jeremy Bentham
advocates the “greatest
happiness principle.”

AFTER
1930s Economist J.M. Keynes,
influenced by Mill, develops
liberal economic theories.

1971 John Rawls publishes
A Theory of Justice, based on
the idea that laws should be
those everyone would accept.

J ohn Stuart Mill was born into
an intellectually privileged
family, and he was aware
from an early age of the British
traditions of philosophy that had
emerged during the Enlightenment
of the 18th century. John Locke and
David Hume had established a
philosophy whose new empiricism
stood in stark contrast to the
rationalism of continental European
philosophers. But during the late
18th century, Romantic ideas from
Europe began to influence British
moral and political philosophy. The
most obvious product of this
influence was utilitarianism, which
was a very British interpretation of
the political philosophy that had

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 191

See also: Thomas Hobbes 112–15 ■ John Locke 130–33 ■ Jeremy Bentham 174 ■
Bertrand Russell 236–39 ■ Karl Popper 262–65 ■ John Rawls 294–95

Decisions should be Individuals should be
made on the principle free to do whatever gives
of the greatest good for
the greatest number. them pleasure, even if
it could harm them…

Individuals can choose …but they are John Stuart Mill
to do things that affect not entitled to do
their own body, but not things that could John Stuart Mill was born in
that of someone else. London in 1806. His father
harm others. was the Scottish philosopher
and historian James Mill, who
Over his own founded the movement of
body and mind, “philosophical radicals” with
the individual Jeremy Bentham. John was
educated at home by his
is sovereign. father, whose demanding
program began with teaching
shaped the 18th-century revolutions experience, and nothing is certain) Greek to John when he was
of both Europe and America. Its and less dogmatic than Bentham only three years old.
originator, Jeremy Bentham, was (who insisted that everything be
a friend of the Mill family, and he judged on its usefulness), but their After years of intense study,
influenced John’s home education. empiricism and utilitarianism Mill suffered a breakdown
informed his thinking. Mill’s moral at the age of 20. He left
Victorian liberalism and political philosophy is less university to work for the East
As a philosopher Mill sets himself extreme than his predecessors’, India Company, where he
the task of synthesizing a valuable aiming for reform rather than stayed until his retirement in
intellectual heritage with the new revolution, and it formed the basis 1857, as it gave him a living
19th-century Romanticism. His of British Victorian liberalism. and time to write. During this
approach is less sceptical than period he met Harriet Taylor,
that of Hume (who argued that all After completing his first advocate of women’s rights,
knowledge comes from sense philosophical work, the exhaustive who—after a relationship of 20
six-volume Systemof Logic, Mill ❯❯ years—eventually became his
wife. Mill served as a Member
of Parliament from 1865 to
1868, putting into practice his
moral and political philosophy.

Key works

1843 System of Logic
1848 Principles of Political
Economy
1859 On Liberty
1861 Utilitarianism
1869 The Subjection of Women
1874 On Nature

192 JOHN STUART MILL

turned his attention to moral wants to find out how it might It is better
philosophy, particularly Bentham’s be implemented in the real world. to be Socrates
theories of utilitarianism. He had He is interested in the social and dissatisfied than
been struck by the elegant simplicity political implications of the principle, a fool satisfied.
of Bentham’s principle of “the rather than merely its use in John Stuart Mill
greatest happiness for the greatest making moral decisions. How
number”, and was a firm believer in would legislation promoting the should therefore allow all individuals
its usefulness. He describes his ”greatest happiness of the greatest the freedom to pursue happiness.
interpretation of how utilitarianism number” actually affect the Furthermore, he says that this
might be applied as similar to Jesus individual? Might laws that sought right should be protected by the
of Nazareth’s “golden rule”: do as to do this, enacting a kind of majority government, and that legislation
you would be done by, and love your rule, actually prevent some people should be drawn up to protect the
neighbor as yourself. This, he says, from achieving happiness? individual’s freedom to pursue
constitutes “the ideal perfection of personal goals. There is, however,
utilitarian morality.” Mill thinks that the solution one situation in which this freedom
is for education and public opinion should be curtailed, Mill says, and
Legislating for liberty to work together to establish an that is where one person’s action
Mill supports Bentham’s happiness “indissoluble association” between impinges on the happiness of
principle, but he thinks it lacks an individual’s happiness and the others. This is known as the “harm
practicality. Bentham had seen the good of society. As a result, people principle.” He underlines this by
idea as depending upon an abstract would always be motivated to act pointing out that in these cases, a
“felicific calculus” (an algorithm for not only for their own good or person’s “own good, either physical
calculating happiness), but Mill happiness, but toward that of or moral, is not a sufficient warrant.”
everyone. He concludes that society

Quantifying happiness
Mill then turns his attention to how
best to measure happiness. Bentham
had considered the duration and
intensity of pleasures in his felicific
calculus, but Mill thinks it is also
important to consider the quality
of pleasure. By this, he is referring
to the difference between a simple
satisfaction of desires and sensual
pleasures, and happiness gained

The good samaritan helps his enemy
in a biblical parable that demonstrates
Mill’s golden rule: do as you would be
done by. He believed this would raise
society’s overall level of happiness.

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 193

through intellectual and cultural The National Society for Women’s and mind.” His ideas came to
pursuits. In the “happiness Suffrage was set up in Britain in 1868, embody Victorian liberalism,
equation” he gives more weight a year after Mill tried to secure their softening the radical ideas that had
to higher, intellectual pleasures legal right to vote by arguing for an led to revolutions in Europe and
than to baser, physical ones. amendment to the 1867 Reform Act. America, and combining them with
the idea of freedom from interference
In line with his empiricist about until much later, but his by authority. This, for Mill, is the
background, Mill then tries to pin speeches brought the liberal basis for just governance and the
down the essence of happiness. applications of his utilitarian means to social progress, which
What is it, he asks, that each philosophy to the attention of a was an important Victorian ideal.
individual is striving to achieve? wide public. As a philosopher and He believes that if society leaves
What causes happiness? He politician, he argued strongly in individuals to live in a way that
decides that “the sole evidence it is defense of free speech, for the makes them happy, it enables them
possible to produce that anything promotion of basic human rights, to achieve their potential. This
is desirable, is that people do and against slavery—all of which in turn benefits society, as the
actually desire it.” This seems a were obvious practical applications achievements of individual talents
rather unsatisfactory explanation, of his utilitarianism. Strongly contribute to the good of all.
but he goes on to distinguish influenced by his wife Harriet
between two different desires: Taylor-Mill, he was the first British In his own lifetime Mill was
unmotivated desires (the things we parliamentarian to propose votes regarded as a significant philosopher,
want that will give us pleasure) and for women as part of his government and he is now considered by many
conscientious actions (the things reforms. His liberalist philosophy to be the architect of Victorian
we do out a sense of duty or charity, also encompassed economics, and liberalism. His utilitarian-inspired
often against our immediate contrary to his father’s economic philosophy had a direct influence on
inclination, that ultimately bring theories, he advocated a free- social, political, philosophical, and
us pleasure). In the first case, we market economy where government economic thinking well into the
desire something as a part of our intervention is kept to a minimum. 20th century. Modern economics
happiness, but in the second we has been shaped from various
desire it as a means to our A softer revolution interpretations of his application
happiness, which is felt only when Mill places the individual, rather than of utilitarianism to the free market,
the act reaches its virtuous end. society, at the center of his utilitarian notably by the British economist
philosophy. What is important is John Maynard Keynes. In the field
Practical utilitarianism that individuals are free to think of ethics, philosophers such as
Mill was not a purely academic and act as they please, without Bertrand Russell, Karl Popper,
philosopher, and he believed his interference, even if what they do is William James, and John Rawls all
ideas should be put into practice, harmful to them. Every individual, took Mill as their starting point. ■
so he considered what this might says Mill in his essay On Liberty,
mean in terms of government and is “sovereign over his own body One person with a belief
legislation. He saw any restriction is a social power
of the individual’s freedom to pursue
happiness as a tyranny, whether equal to 99 who have
this was the collective tyranny of only interests.
the majority (through democratic
election) or the singular rule of a John Stuart Mill
despot. He therefore suggested
practical measures to restrict the
power of society over the individual,
and to protect the rights of the
individual to free expression.

In his time as a Member of
Parliament, Mill proposed many
reforms which were not to come

194

ANXIETY IS THE
DIZZINESS OF
FREEDOM

SØREN KIERKEGAARD (1813–1855)

IN CONTEXT When making decisions, We realize that we can
we have absolute choose to do nothing,
BRANCH freedom of choice.
Metaphysics or anything.
Our minds reel at
APPROACH the thought of this A feeling of dread
Existentialism absolute freedom. or anxiety accompanies

BEFORE Anxiety is the the thought.
1788 Immanuel Kant stresses dizziness of freedom.
the importance of freedom
in moral philosophy in his S øren Kierkegaard’s philosophy development, by arguing for a more
Critique of Practical Reason. developed in reaction to the subjective approach. He wants to
German idealist thinking examine what “it means to be a
1807–22 Georg Hegel suggests that dominated continental Europe human being”, not as part of some
a historical consciousness, in the mid-19th century, particularly great philosophical system, but as
or Geist, establishing a that of Georg Hegel. Kierkegaard a self-determining individual.
relationship between human wanted to refute Hegel’s idea of
consciousness and the world a complete philosophical system, Kierkegaard believes that our
in which it lives. which defined humankind as lives are determined by our actions,
part of an inevitable historical which are themselves determined
AFTER by our choices, so how we make
1927 Martin Heidegger
explores the concepts of Angst
and existential guilt in his
book Being and Time.

1938 Jean-Paul Sartre lays
down the foundations of his
existentialist philosophy.

1946 Ludwig Wittgenstein
acknowledges Kierkegaard’s
work in Culture and Value.

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 195

See also: Immanuel Kant 164–71 ■ Georg Hegel 178–85 ■ Friedrich Nietzsche 214–21 ■ Martin Heidegger 252–55 ■
Jean-Paul Sartre 268–71 ■ Simone De Beauvoir 276–77 ■ Albert Camus 284–85

those choices is critical to our lives. we experience the same anxiety Hamlet is caught on the edge of a
Like Hegel, he sees moral decisions in all our moral choices, when we terrible choice: whether to kill his uncle
as a choice between the hedonistic realize that we have the freedom or leave his father’s death unavenged.
(self-gratifying) and the ethical. But to make even the most terrifying Shakespeare’s play demonstrates the
where Hegel thought this choice was decisions. He describes this anxiety anxiety of true freedom of choice.
largely determined by the historical as “the dizziness of freedom”, and
and environmental conditions of our goes on to explain that although it choice, except the act of our own
times, Kierkegaard believes that induces despair, it can also shake birth. Unlike these later thinkers,
moral choices are absolutely free, us from our unthinking responses Kierkegaard did not abandon his
and above all subjective. It is our will by making us more aware of the faith in God, but he was the first to
alone that determines our judgement, available choices. In this way it acknowledge the realization of self-
he says. However, far from being a increases our self-awareness and consciousness and the “dizziness”
reason for happiness, this complete sense of personal responsibility. or fear of absolute freedom. ■
freedom of choice provokes in us a
feeling of anxiety or dread. The father of existentialism
Kierkegaard’s ideas were largely
Kierkegaard explains this feeling rejected by his contemporaries, but
in his book, The Concept of Anxiety. proved highly influential to later
As an example, he asks us to generations. His insistence on the
consider a man standing on a cliff importance and freedom of our
or tall building. If this man looks choices, and our continual search
over the edge, he experiences two for meaning and purpose, was
different kinds of fear: the fear of to provide the framework for
falling, and fear brought on by the existentialism. This philosophy,
impulse to throw himself off the developed by Friedrich Nietzsche
edge. This second type of fear, or and Martin Heidegger, was later
anxiety, arises from the realization fully defined by Jean-Paul Sartre.
that he has absolute freedom to It explores the ways in which we
choose whether to jump or not, can live meaningfully in a godless
and this fear is as dizzying as his universe, where every act is a
vertigo. Kierkegaard suggests that

Søren Kierkegaard Søren Kierkegaard was born in engaged, but Kierkegaard broke
Copenhagen in 1813, in what off the engagement the following
became known as the Danish year, saying that his melancholy
Golden Age of culture. His father, made him unsuitable for married
a wealthy tradesman, was both life. Though he never lost his
pious and melancholic, and his faith in God, he continually
son inherited these traits, which criticized the Danish national
were to greatly influence his church for hypocrisy. In 1855 he
philosophy. Kierkegaard studied fell unconscious in the street,
theology at the University of and died just over a month later.
Copenhagen, but attended
lectures in philosophy. When he Key works
came into a sizeable inheritance,
he decided to devote his life to 1843 Fear and Trembling
philosophy. In 1837 he met and fell 1843 Either/Or
in love with Regine Olsen, and 1844 The Concept of Anxiety
three years later they became 1847 Works of Love

THE HISTORY

OF ALL HITHERTO EXISTING

SOCIETY

IS THE HISTORY OF
CLASS STRUGGLES

KARL MARX (1818–1883)



198 KARL MARX

IN CONTEXT through the ages. Earlier approaches Intellectual debate was widespread in
to history had emphasized the role Germany at the time Marx was writing,
BRANCH of individual heroes and leaders, or though he himself believed that it was
Political philosophy stressed the role played by ideas, the task of philosophy not to discuss
but Marx focused on a long ideas, but to bring about real change.
APPROACH succession of group conflicts,
Communism including those between ancient and run his own business. Marx
masters and slaves, medieval lords describes how the discovery and
BEFORE and serfs, and modern employers colonization of America, the opening
c.1513 Niccolò Machiavelli and their employees. It was conflicts of the Indian and Chinese markets,
discusses class struggles in between these classes, he claimed, and the increase in the commodities
ancient Rome and Renaissance that caused revolutionary change. that could be exchanged had, by
Italy in Discourses on Livy. the mid-19th century, led to the
The Communist Manifesto rapid development of commerce
1789 The French Revolution Marx wrote the Manifesto with and industry. Craftsmen no longer
provides the template for most the German philosopher Friedrich produced enough goods for the
19th-century philosophical Engels, whom he had met when growing needs of new markets, and
arguments about revolution. they were both studying academic so the manufacturing system had
philosophy in Germany during the taken their place. As the Manifesto
1800s Georg Hegel develops late 1830s. Engels offered financial relates, “the markets kept growing,
a theory of historical change support, ideas, and superior writing demand ever rising.”
through intellectual conflict. skills, but Marx was acknowledged
as the real genius behind their Values of the bourgeoisie
AFTER combined publications. Marx claims that the bourgeoisie,
1880s Friedrich Engels tries who controlled all this trade, had left
to develop Marx’s theories into In their private manuscripts no link between people other “than
a fully-fledged philosophy of from the early and mid-1840s, Marx naked self-interest, than callous
historical materialism. and Engels emphasized that while ‘cash payment.’” People were once
previous philosophers had only valued for who they were, but the
1930s Marxism becomes sought to interpret the world, the bourgeoisie “has resolved personal
the official philosophy of the whole point of their activities was worth into exchange value.” Moral,
Soviet Union and many other to change it. During the 1850s and religious, and even sentimental
communist countries. 60s Marx refined his ideas in many values had been cast aside, as
short documents, including The
C an the complex history Communist Manifesto, a pamphlet
of the human species be of about 40 pages.
reduced to a single formula?
One of the greatest thinkers of the The Manifesto seeks to explain
19th century, Karl Marx, believed the values and political plans of
that it could. He opened the first communism—a new belief system
chapter of his most famous work, put forward by a small and relatively
The Communist Manifesto, with new group of radical German
the claim that all historical change socialists. The Manifesto claims
comes about as the result of an that society had simplified into
ongoing conflict between dominant two classes in direct conflict: the
(upper) and subordinate (lower) bourgeoisie (the capital-owning
social classes, and that the roots class) and the proletariat (the
of this conflict lie in economics. working class).

Marx believed that he had The word “bourgeoisie” is
gained a uniquely important derived from the French word
insight into the nature of society burgeis, or burgher: a property-
owning tradesman who had risen
above the general populace to own