>>Finally, the belief in absolutes is not a Romantic notion. Faith in thetrancendental is definatly a part of the enlightenment. Kant, the quintessential Enlightenment philosopher, speaks very clearly towards that.Jefferson penned such a faith statement in the Declaration of Independance. <<
Jefferson and Kant are called enlightenment figures because of timing and poor understanding. Jefferson in fact was the last person to straddle both romanticism and the enlightenment comfortably. But soon after the american revolution romantics like Keat saw that "democracy" was not socrates in togas but shopkeepers, tradesmen and farmers shouting at each other in town meetings. The Romantics turned their backs on democracy. Which is keeping in faith with kings and priests and Plato anyway... The alliance had been a brief one. Oh, and Kant led to Hegel who was the philosophical father of BOTH Communism and Nazism... and the neoconservative movement. Spare me. Oh, you can argue that I misuse the name "enlightenment" when I describe it in my JRRTolkien paper. Then maybe I need another term for whatever's the opposite in the two sides that posit nostalgia vs progress, past vs future golden ages, feudalism vs democracy, apprenticeships vs professions, crafts vs factories, incantations (of faith, reason or oideology) vs pragmatism. Even under "enlightenment" the french branch veered off course and resturned to essences and platonism. If our branch does that, Westren Civ will be captive again. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
