A remarkable change has taken place in all of our ideas, and this change, due to its rapidity, promises greater future changes (...) Our times like to be called the 'epoch of philosophy'. And indeed, if we look at the current situation of our knowledge without prejudice, I cannot deny that philosophy has made great progress among us. The science of nautraleza is enriched day by day; geometry widens its borders and brings its light to the domains of physics, which are closest to it; finally, the true system of the world, developed and perfected, is known. (...) The discovery and the use of a new method of philosophizing awakens, through the enthusiasm that accompanies all the great discoveries, a general increase of ideas. (...) The result of this general effervecence of spirits, a new light is poured upon objects and new obscurities cover them, such as the flow and reflux of mere they put insesprated things on the shore and drag others with them. D'Alembert, Essay on the Elements of Philosophy
The enlightened are aware of the transformation that is taking place in ideas. The contributions of Locke and Newton generate a new form of rationality and a new conception of Nature. Confidence in progress becomes the main protagonist, as a result, hopes for a social transformation will also be renewed.
A new model of rationality that contrasts with the one proposed Descartes, appears during the era of illustration. Mathematic-geometric reason (the synthetic and deductive reason based on 'innate ideas') and systematic, is rejected by opting for an empirical and analytical model according to the inspiration of Newton and Locke.
It is then, from experience, sensation, is the origin of all knowledge. We lack innate truths to which everything can be reduced. The logic of principles is subtitled by that of facts. On the contrary, such principles will be found after meticulous experimentation.
We must never rely on pure hypotheses; nor begin with the discovery of any principle, and then proceed to explain everything. We must begin by the exact disarticulation of the known phenomenon. If we do not help ourselves with the compass of the mathematician and the torch of experience, we will never be able to take a step forward Voltaire, Treatise of metaphysc
The analytical method that is applied to all fields is added:
Therefore, to analyze is only to observe in a successive course the qualities of an object, in order to give the soul the simultaneous order in which it exists. This is what nature forces us all to realize. This composition and this decomposition are restored according to the relationships between things such as main and subordinates Condillac, Logic
The analysis was already a part of the resolution-composition method and the inductive method. But from the 18th century, deductive synthesis is imposed as a scientific method. So in the psychological analysis of empiricists or in the transcendental analysis of Kant, etc.
Condillac adds that analysis is the method we have learned from human nature itself. Indeed, opening a window to see a landscape allows the synthesis implied by the gaze in conjutno, but this will not reach us. We will then proceed to look at the objects at a time to perform the analysis that will allow us to relate them to each other. The natural method of contemplating is what should imitate reason.
The Enlightenment is the departure of man from his self-guilty minority. Minority means the inability to use one understanding without the guidance of the other. Kant, what is the Enlightenment ?
Critical attitude will be the common denominator of enlightened people. And the instrument of criticism is the analysis that crosses all fields.
Thus appears the critique of reason itself that seeks to find and set the limits of human knowledge. This limitation was not recognized by the rationalists, during the illustration everything will be reduced to the margins of sensitive experience. Metaphysics disappears as sensation is accepted as the frontier of knowledge.
And also will arise criticism of the tradition to which mistakes and superstitions are attributed. This is not limited to meresa ideas but will also cover the very institutions from which they come.
But this limited reason is, however, the only possible guide that man possesses as long as he has rejected the validity of tradition. Reason, free from external tutelary mandates (especially religion), is now a secular reason that should even independently judge the very value of religion that was once its guide.
Some philosophers have imagined hypotheses to explain everything mechanically, and relegate to metaphysics the other causes. However, the basic objective of natural philosophy is to argue from phenomena without imagining hypotheses, and to deduce the causes from effects, until reaching the very first cause, which is certainly not mechanical. Newton, Optica
The autonomous reason rejects any guardianship, but requires a point of reference. It will therefore focus on nature. The Cartian tradition, although strongly criticized, survives in France contributing to the elaboration of philosophical conceptions about reality (but admitting the impossibility of knowing the essence of things). The English tradition, with the exception of the deists, was more faithful to the influence of empiricism.
In France, Newton's inspiration led them to consider his mechanics to be definitive. But by the way, Newton turned to God, ultimately. But scientists of the 18th century really believe that it is not necessary to turn to God to elaborate an explanation of the world, so enlightened science is able to declare the autonomy of the world with regard to the divine hypothesis just as it had previously proclaimed the autonomy of reason. Voltaire will be an exception to this path, it will be, on the contrary Newtonian and Deist.
Two currents can be described in the thought of the French illustration.
Materialism (La Mettrie, Holbach)
In a mechanistic conception of nature, everything is explained by the movement of material particles without this movement requiring any transcendent cause. All movements are physical and mechanical.
But the materialism of the Enlightenment has above all an ethical and social intentionality in that it postulates a Nature that must be a guide for man, thus displaning the place previously occupied by religion, which appears as an enemy of nature, while it is found guilty of the introduction of superstition and violence - Yeah.
While strict mechanicism refused to admit the existence of 'forces' and referred exclusively to 'movements', naturalism not only considers' forces' in matter, but even admitting that they could be 'living' forces, not just mechanical.
But apart from certain conceptual differences, both materialists and naturalists consider Nature a final instance of reference. This means that everything 'supernatural' is denied. Religion itself is considered 'natural'. However, it is remarkable the level of ambiguity with which the term nature is frequently used: it can be the Universe, human nature, either in its rational or instinctive aspect or even, according to Rousseau, the primitive state in which man once lived.
The critical attitude to the past left aside any doubt as to whether humanity had progressed or not. For the enlightened, it was evident that they lived in the century of lights. From this perspective, humanity had only begun its path. Leibniz pointed out that this is not the best of worlds, because a 'better world' is in the future. Rousseau, however, stands out for its pessimism in that it seems not to believe in progress, even postulate certain human degeneration. However, it does not fail to say that there is a certain possibility of 'improving' through the education of the individual and the reform of society.
After the 1688 revolution, social and political philosophy in England enters a stage of little creativity. However, the English Constitution exerts a remarkable fascination among French thinkers. Touchard distinguishes three different currents during this period:
Represented by Montesquieu, belonging to the nobility, is located in the first generation of French illustration.
According to Montesquieu, the origin of society and law is not found in the social contract (as Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau suggest) but in the nature of man and the circumstances surrounding him (geographical and climatic).
Postula Mostesquieu in The Spirit of Laws, with clear aristocratic approach, that any form of government should be moderated by different counterweights:
Separation of powers: inspired by Locke and the English Constitution, the separation of powers (executive, legislative and judicial) must correspond to the balance between three social and political forces: king, people and aristocracy.
Intermediate bodies: their existence is fundamental. It refers to nobility and parliaments.
Decentralization
Morality of customs and religion: it will exercise a counterweight in order to achieve a balance.
From a political point of view, the French enlightened are conservative. Voltaire, an enriched bourgeois, disbelieved of social equality despite having fought for social reforms and tolerance.
Likewise, materialists are more adventurous in religious matters than politics, more concerned about happiness and well-being than about equality.
The proletariat did not yet exist in the strict sense; democratic ideas could, in fact, be defended only by isolated thinkers. In this line, the thought of Rousseau.