Thought-Factory.net Philosophical Conversations Public Opinion philosophy.com Junk for code
hegel
"When philosophy paints its grey in grey then has a shape of life grown old. By philosophy's grey in grey it cannot be rejuvenated but only understood. The owl of Minerva spreads its wings only with the falling of dusk." -- G.W.F. Hegel, 'Preface', Philosophy of Right.
RECENT ENTRIES
SEARCH
ARCHIVES
Library
Links - weblogs
Links - Political Rationalities
Links - Resources: Philosophy
Public Discussion
Resources
Cafe Philosophy
Philosophy Centres
Links - Resources: Other
Links - Web Connections
Other
www.thought-factory.net
'Constant revolutionizing of production, uninterrupted disturbance of all social conditions, everlasting uncertainity and agitation distinquish the bourgeois epoch from all earlier ones ... All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned.' Marx

Enlightenment and Terror « Previous | |Next »
July 31, 2007

In his Enlightenment and Terror ----The Thomas More Lecture, Amsterdam, 2004--John Gray links enlightenment and terror with the belief in progress. He says that:

The belief that the accelerating advance of knowledge produces a better world is a myth. Now I am far from thinking that humankind can do without myths, and the myth of progress may once have been useful. It may be that some of the genuine advances of recent times—such as the prohibition of torture--could not have been achieved without it. Yet the myth of progress has long since become harmful. It suggests that by remoulding human beings the evils of human life can be eliminated—an idea that is one of the main sources of terror in the late modern world.
The Jacobins believed through the use of terror they could reshape human nature on a more virtuous model. Lenin followed them in this belief and used terror on a much larger scale. At the same time he gave state terror a theoretical foundation. Communism was not just an ethical ideal. It was the only possible result of a scientific understanding of history. In using terror Lenin believed he was advancing the progressive forces of history.


| Posted by Gary Sauer-Thompson at 11:15 PM | | Comments (2)
Comments

Comments

This is a rather overwhelming bit of reading --intimidating in its scope. And it contains a passionate and welcome condemnation of the revolutionary agenda of the American neocons.

However, I'm so habituated to think of philosophies as the product of social relations, rather than the other way around, that I lose interest after a point.

Which really came first -- Strauss's interest in Plato and Machiavelli, or his lived, physical aversion to democracy and desire to tutor a ruling elite? And what presented the neocons the opportunity for their right-wing revolutionary experiment but the 100 year history of the American empire?

Who can even say for sure if the neocon "philosophers" believed what they said, or simply found these ideas useful propaganda?

The lecture is also used in his new book Black Mass.