The Utility of Enlightenment Philosophy in the Modern Era

이성의 시대(Age of Reason) 또는 **계몽주의(Enlightenment)**는 현대 민주주의의 정치적 및 사회적 발전에 중요한 영향을 미쳤으며, 이 시대의 철학자들은 과학 혁명과 탐험 시대의 지식을 바탕으로 교회의 절대적 권위에 도전하고, 이성적 사고와 개인의 권리 및 책임을 사회의 기초로 삼고자 했다. 그러나 최근 계몽주의의 사상은 윤리적 기준에 부합하지 않거나 유럽/북미 중심적이고, 많은 철학자들이 모순적인 행동을 했다는 비판을 받는다. 그럼에도 불구하고 계몽주의 시대의 사상은 여전히 현대 사회에 유용한 가치를 제공할 수 있다. 계몽주의는 단일한 철학적 체계가 아니라 다양한 사상가들이 참여한 여러 학파로 구성되어 있으며, 그들 사이에 공통된 주제들이 존재했다. 따라서 계몽주의 철학을 단순화하려는 시도보다는, 그 시대의 지식 추구 방식과 현대 사회에서 나타나는 집단적 사고 방식을 대비시키는 것이 중요하다. 계몽주의의 개인의 권리와 책임에 대한 개념은 현대 사회에서 더욱 중요하게 여겨지며, 확인 편향, 인지 부조화, 그리고 집단적 성향이 현대 민주주의에서 갈등과 분열을 심화시키는 상황에서 계몽주의의 이성적 사고가 이를 완화하는 데 기여할 수 있다. 건강한 대표 민주주의가 지속되기 위해서는 시민들이 자발적으로 참여하고 교육을 받으며, 기존의 믿음을 비판적으로 검토할 수 있어야 한다는 점을 강조한다. 이는 계몽주의 사상가들이 주장했던 이성적 사고와 논리적 결론에 도달하려는 노력과 일치한다.

The Age of Reason, or the Enlightenment(s), produced an abundance of influential philosophers and philosophies that markedly impacted the political and social development of many modern democracies. Following on the heels of the Scientific Revolution and equipped with information from the Age of Exploration, these philosophers challenged and further diminished the absolute authority of the Church while advocating for a society ruled by reason in which rational thought (and usually individual rights and responsibilities) was the building block. However, many of these ideas and those who shared them have come under increasing scrutiny in recent years, and this paper investigates what, if anything, the thinkers of that era have to offer us in this modern era. This paper recognizes that some of the ideas of that era do not hold up to modern ethical standards, that they are Euro/North American-centric, and that many of the greatest philosophers of the time engaged in seemingly hypocritical behavior. While leaving the debate over whether to take an ahistorical approach to moral virtue for another time, this paper maintains that despite its imperfection, the era of the Enlightenment(s) still has a lot to offer. To be clear, there was never a single Enlightenment. It was a time in which thinkers from across Europe and North America engaged in different schools of thought that tended to have a few common themes that tied them together. Therefore, one should tread lightly when attempting to homogenize “Enlightenment philosophy” as the title of this paper might imply it is attempting to do. On the contrary, rather than reduce the complexities of the thought that came from the era, this paper juxtaposes the ruthless quest for knowledge that defined the era with the increasing herd mentality of the present. Accordingly, this paper also explores the centralization of the individual found in different forms throughout Enlightenment philosophy and focuses on how the some of the Enlightenments’ concept of the individual rights and responsibilities are needed to battle confirmation bias, cognitive dissonance, and tribal proclivities that accentuate polarization in so many modern democracies. In doing so, this paper maintains that if healthy representative forms of government, in which we do not yield to authoritarian powers who presume to know better because of their position rather than the merit of their arguments, are to survive, we must cultivate a citizenry that is capable and willing to participate of their own volition, educated, and confident enough in its foundations to question the common narrative, think past the echoes of their chambers, and use reason to come to logical conclusions as those Enlightenment thinkers did long ago, usually.