Reason, the idea of pure reason is a fiction as is the concept of secularism. Reason is a product of it's history and culture and can never be decoupled from it, for without it, reason has no foundations. As Hamann stated in his critique, secularism is simply bad theology. One cannot prove reason is reasonable, without using reason... a circular argument. Just as one cannot prove mathematics is valid, without using the axioms of mathematics, again circular. One cannot even prove words have any meaning whatsoever, without using language and words. Hamann nailed the logical inconsistencies of the enlightenment of pure reason and the myth of secularism, but his writings have gone largely unnoticed, which is not surprising.
Absolutely! With everything said here. I hope to redo a lot of these older videos and discuss more of what you state in this comment, and give Hamann a better overview. Thank you for the great comment!
The Age of Enlightenment was a favorite subject when I studied at a local Christian college some years back. I’ve never heard of Sturm und Drang and so this has certainly captured my interest. Love the humor too! I want a yellow rubber ducky. Haha 😊
Thank you! And yes, Sturm und Drang is usually lumped in with the Romantic movement. But I do believe Johann Hamann should be a bit more recognized for his philosophical contributions than he is. At least, on my side of the globe.
You already have your own style of video making. Fascinating subject. I have recently picked up an interest in the enlightenment and started looking into the thinkers and their works. Voltaire appeals.
Yes! I find that is what the focus is on when talking about the enlightenment in most circles (of course it depends on the class/lecture and its subject). But this was also during a time in which political models were shaping countries. Of course, the American and French Revolution, but the industrial revolution and the invention of the Watt steam engine didn't only change the views/tactics of political wars at the time, but the discussion revolving around politics. Whereas authors that remained, for the most part, traditional in the ways of doing things. So, though it does make sense to focus on political writers of the time in most studies of the 18th century, I just prefer the romantics hahah
How did I miss this one? Loved it. Unfortunately, instead of “only” purifying religion from credulous beliefs, many Enlightenment thinkers went beyond that, and paved the way for Nietzsche’s folly. At the end of the day, “Enlightenment” is a mix of very different ideas, and it’s a terrible word because it promoted the stereotype of the Middle Ages as “Dark Ages” where only ignorance reigned supreme, and that produced nothing useful. Which is, of course, wrong, but the stereotype survives.
Yes! I completely agree with the term "enlightenment" being a word that greatly undermines the Middle Ages. I had a proff who was a fantastic scholar on this subject, and she would not allow students to get away with using the term "dark ages." There really was no "dark age." I hope to redo this video in the future. I think I could do it much better now, with an actual written script, and put a lot more into it that really does need to be mentioned. Thanks for checking it out!😊😎
@@attention5638 And yet, that mistaken concept of Dark Ages is the foundation (pun intended!) of Asimov’s “Foundation Trilogy” ! He took it from Edward Gibbon, who infused his “Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire” with anti-Christian bias and with this warped idea of “the dark ages”. Ideas have always consequences, huh?
