Traitors to the Enlightenment - Europe turns its back on Socrates, Locke, et al.

National Review Online ^ | October 02, 2006 | Victor Davis Hanson

[neverdem]

October 02, 2006, 6:02 a.m.

Traitors to the Enlightenment
Europe turns its back on Socrates, Locke, et al.

By Victor Davis Hanson

The first Western Enlightenment of the Greek fifth-century B.C. sought to explain natural phenomena through reason rather than superstition alone. Ethics were to be discussed in the realm of logic as well as religion. Much of what Pythagoras, Socrates, Plato, and the Sophists thought may today seem self-evident, if not at times nonsensical. But that century was the beginning of the uniquely Western attempt to bring to the human experience empiricism, self-criticism, irony, and tolerance in thinking.

The second European Enlightenment of the late 18^th century followed from the earlier spirit of the Renaissance. For all the excesses and arrogance in its thinking that pure reason might itself dethrone religion — as if science could explain all the mysteries of the human condition — the Enlightenment nevertheless established the Western blueprint for a humane and ordered society.

But now all that hard-won effort of some 2,500 years is at risk. The new enemies of Reason are not the enraged democrats who executed Socrates, the Christian zealots who persecuted philosophers of heliocentricity, or the Nazis who burned books. No, they are a pampered and scared Western public that caves to barbarism — dwarves who sit on the shoulders of dead giants, and believe that their present exalted position is somehow related to their own cowardly sense of accommodation.

What would a Socrates, Galileo, Descartes, or Locke believe of the present decay in Europe — that all their bold and courageous thinking, won at such a great cost, would have devolved into such cheap surrender to fanaticism?

Just think: Put on an opera in today’s Germany, and have it shut down, not by Nazis, Communists, or kings, but by the simple fear of Islamic fanatics.

Write a novel deemed critical of the Prophet Mohammed, as did Salman Rushdie, and face years of ostracism and death threats — in the heart of Europe no less.

Compose a film, as did Theo Van Gogh, and find your throat cut in “liberal” Holland.

Or better yet, sketch a cartoon in postmodern Denmark, and then go into hiding.

Quote an ancient treatise, as did the pope, and learn your entire Church may come under assault, and the magnificent stones of the Vatican offer no refuge.

There are three lessons to be drawn from these examples. In almost every case, the criticism of the artist or intellectual was based either on his supposed lack of sensitivity or of artistic excellence. Van Gogh was, of course, obnoxious and his films puerile. The pope was woefully ignorant of public relations. The cartoons in Denmark were amateurish and unnecessary. Rushdie was an overrated novelist, whose chickens of trashing the West he sought refuge in finally came home to roost. The latest Hans Neuenfels adaptation of Mozart’s Idomeneo was silly.

But isn’t that precisely the point? It is easy to defend artists when they produce works of genius that do not offend popular sensibilities — Da Vinci’s Mona Lisa or Montesquieu’s Spirit of the Laws — but not so when an artist offends with neither taste nor talent. Yes, Pope Benedict is old and scholastic; he lacks both the smile and tact of the late Pope John Paul II, who surely would not have turned for elucidation to the rigidity of Byzantine scholarship. But isn’t that why we must come to the present Pope’s defense — if for no reason other than because he has the courage to speak his convictions when others might not?

Note also the constant subtext in this new self-censorship: fear of radical Islam and its gruesome appendages of beheadings, suicide bombings, improvised explosive devices, barbaric fatwas, riotous youth, petrodollar-acquired nuclear weapons, oil boycotts and price hikes, and fist-chanting mobs.

In contrast, almost daily in Europe, “brave” artists caricature Christians and Americans with impunity. Why?

For a long list of reasons, among them most surely the assurance that they can do this without being killed. Such cowards puff out their chests when trashing an ill Oriana Fallaci or Ariel Sharon or beleaguered George W. Bush in the most demonic of tones, but prove sunken and sullen when threatened by a Dr Zawahri or a grand mufti of some obscure mosque.

Second, almost every genre of artistic and intellectual expression has come under assault: music, satire, the novel, films, academic exegesis. Somehow Europeans have ever-so-insidiously given up the promise of the Enlightenment that welcomed free thought of all kinds, the more provocative the better.

So the present generation of Europeans really is heretical, made up of traitors of a sort, since they themselves, not just their consensual governments or some invader across the Mediterranean, have nearly destroyed their won freedoms of expression — out of worries over oil, or appearing as illiberal apostates of the new secular religion of multiculturalism, or another London or Madrid bombing.

Europe boldly produces films about assassinating an American president, and routinely disparages the Church that gave the world the Sermon of the Mount, but it simply won’t stand up for an artist, a well-meaning Pope, or a ranting filmmaker when the mob closes in. The Europe that believes in everything turns out to believe in nothing.

Third, examine why all these incidents took place in Europe. Since 2000 it has been the habit of blue-state politicians to rebuke the yokels of America, in part by showing us a supposedly more humane Western future unfolding in Europe. It was the European Union that was at the forefront of mass transit; the EU that advanced Kyoto and the International Criminal Court. And it was the heralded EU that sought “soft” power rather than the Neanderthal resort to arms.

And what have we learned in the last five years from its boutique socialism, utopian pacifism, moral equivalence, and cultural relativism? That it was logical that Europe most readily would abandon the artist and give up the renegade in fear of religious extremists.

Those in an auto parts store in Fresno, or at a NASCAR race in southern Ohio, might appear to Europeans as primordials with their guns, “fundamentalist” religion, and flag-waving chauvinism. But it is they, and increasingly their kind alone, who prove the bulwarks of the West. Ultimately what keeps even the pope safe and the continent confident in its vain dialogues with Iranian lunatics is the United States military and the very un-Europeans who fight in it.

We may be only 30 years behind Europe, but we are not quite there yet. And so Europe has done us a great favor in showing us not the way of the future, but the old cowardice of our pre-Enlightenment past.

— Victor Davis Hanson is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. He is the author, most recently, of A War Like No Other. How the Athenians and Spartans Fought the Peloponnesian War.

[neverdem]

ping

[mel]

BUMP FOR LATER READING

[kalee]

ping

[Cicero]

I really don't think Victor Davis Hanson understands the Pope, or what his initiative has already achieved. Too bad, because I usually enjoy reading his work.

Hanson is a bright guy, but Pope Benedict can think circles around him.

[NutCrackerBoy]

Bump.

[Revolting cat!]

We're not there yet? Oh yes, we're there, we're there! You haven't gotten the memo? The word 'niggardly'is forbidden in our public schools. Computer term 'master/slave' ist verbotten in our gummint. I could go on.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Good writing...

[what's up]

The first Western Enlightenment of the Greek fifth-century B.C. sought to explain natural phenomena through reason

This article is accurate in just about everything except I think the Greek enlightenment happened in the 6th century BC.

[B.O. Plenty]

bump

[Cicero]

No, fifth century BC is correct.

[ChiMark]

If you read this carefully you will realize Hanson is
not berating the Pope in any way.

[Earthdweller]

Way to go Vic! I'm so glad you picked this up and ran with it.

I have been "yelling" at the "Enlightened" to wakeup for about two years now.

If Europe goes...the US is not far behind.

[Billthedrill]

An angry column from Hanson. I like him angry.

Three French philosophers managed to work up the courage to issue a public statement today that maybe the French teacher who disparaged Islam and is now in hiding shouldn't be killed if the bad guys would be so kind. That's the stuff of the Marne, all right...

In fact European intellectual life has rejected the Enlightenment since Sartre and his coterie of fashionable Marxists took over the academe. Foucault? Baudrillard? Derrida? Lyotard especially, who built a career on criticism of an Enlightenment he patently did not comprehend? These fellows would do very well under dhimmitude so long as they restricted their polemics to the West. Which they did.

European intellectual life will slough off this stifling, enervating multicultural nihilism or it will go under, period. When it does so the world will not miss it, but the tragedy is that it will drag so many of its fellow citizens with it.

[tpaine]

I really don't think Victor Davis Hanson understands the Pope, or what his initiative has already achieved. Too bad, because I usually enjoy reading his work.

Perhaps VDH reads and understands the FR 'type' too much for you?

"-- Those in an auto parts store in Fresno, or at a NASCAR race in southern Ohio, might appear to Europeans as primordials with their guns, "fundamentalist" religion, and flag-waving chauvinism.
But it is they, and increasingly their kind alone, who prove the bulwarks of the West.
Ultimately what keeps even the pope safe and the continent confident in its vain dialogues with Iranian lunatics is the United States military and the very un-Europeans who fight in it. --"

[what's up]

I would think the Greek enlightenment would begin in Ionia with the pre-socratics.

Weren't they in the 6th century?

[Cicero]

Sure, the pre-Socratics were important, and Homer was no slouch, either.

But it's commonplace to refer to the Age of Pericles or the Golden Age of Athens in the Fifth century.

You can do similar things with the Renaissance, moving it earlier, since there aren't always distinct lines. For instance, many historians speak of a Renaissance of the 12th century. But normally when you use the word it means somewhat later, maybe the fifteenth century in Italy.

[TonyRo76]

» Those in an auto parts store in Fresno, or at a NASCAR race in southern Ohio, might appear to Europeans as primordials with their guns, “fundamentalist” religion, and flag-waving chauvinism. But it is they, and increasingly their kind alone, who prove the bulwarks of the West.

Proud red-state, redneck Bttt!

[RKV]

Not really.

[Cicero]

No, but he appears to have a major blind spot about Catholics and the Pope, in this article at least. I hadn't noticed it before.

And, no, I have no problems with NASCAR fans or energetic Americans. That part of it doesn't bother me at all.

[what's up]

He put Pythagoras in there which made me think he was thinking early Greek enlightenment.

Pythagoras was 6th century I believe.

[Cicero]

Not berating him, but misunderestimating him.

"Yes, Pope Benedict is old and scholastic; he lacks both the smile and tact of the late Pope John Paul II, who surely would not have turned for elucidation to the rigidity of Byzantine scholarship. But isn’t that why we must come to the present Pope’s defense — if for no reason other than because he has the courage to speak his convictions when others might not?"

Also, he numbers the Pope with second rate artists and cartoonists, etc.

Sure, he recognizes the Pope's bravery in speaking out. But I think he underestimates his diplomatic intelligence. The Pope didn't say that by accident; he did it on purpose, for very good reasons, to start a dialogue on the problems of rationality without religion and religion without rationality. It has done a great deal to clarify the issues and put it to the Muslims in a way they have found very hard to deal with.

[ClaireSolt]

Europe is controlled by a stiffling, aristocratic elite that imposes groupthink. Just as the Enlightenment thinkers paved the way for the American and French revolutions that deposed that aristocracy, so it may be Fox news by satellite and Rush Limbaugh via internet that opens European thought to new the new people and ideas it needs now.

[tpaine]

.
"-- he [VDC] appears to have a major blind spot about Catholics and the Pope, in this article at least. I hadn't noticed it before. --

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hansen writes:

"-- Quote an ancient treatise, as did the pope, and learn your entire Church may come under assault, and the magnificent stones of the Vatican offer no refuge.

There are three lessons to be drawn from these examples. In almost every case, the criticism of the artist or intellectual was based either on his supposed lack of sensitivity or of artistic excellence.

The pope was [supposedly] woefully ignorant of public relations.

Yes, Pope Benedict is old and scholastic; he lacks both the smile and tact of the late Pope John Paul II, who surely would not have turned for elucidation to the rigidity of Byzantine scholarship.
But isn't that why we must come to the present Pope's defense- ; if for no reason other than because he has the courage to speak his convictions when others might not? --"


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I find him defending the pope, instead of being 'blind' to what he said.

[Tench_Coxe]

What Mr Hansen is describing is the setting of a stage--along the lines of a human tragedy. IMHO, either a new Dark Age is on the horizon, or a bloodbath ala the 1930's/1940's. Either way, it isn't going to be pretty.

[Cicero]

Well, well. No point in arguing. In any case, I have always admired Hanson and enjoyed reading him, which was why I was a bit surprised.

And he may find the Pope a useful ally in his campaign against the decadence that troubles this age, because the Pope too has been arguing for a return precisely to the thinking of the Greek fifth century, a return to rationality in its deepest sense.

[neverdem]

The Pope didn't say that by accident; he did it on purpose, for very good reasons, to start a dialogue on the problems of rationality without religion and religion without rationality. It has done a great deal to clarify the issues and put it to the Muslims in a way they have found very hard to deal with.

Can't disagree with that!

[Cicero]

Yes, it certainly can be extended back. And you can make the argument that the Greeks were the true inventors of literature, back in 10th century BC.

The argument has been made that although written Hebrew was earlier than written Greek, Greek was the first written language in which new literary texts could be widely read. The Hebrew Bible was not pointed in the early texts, so it was difficult or impossible to know how to pronounce or read it unless it was accompanied by an oral tradition of rabbis who could train up new generations to understand what it said.

With the Greek alphabet, on the other hand, you could write a new poem or a play, and anyone could pick it up, read it, and now how to pronounce it, without any oral guidance. That was the necessary prerequisite to the Greek Golden Age, and it happened centuries earlier.

[neverdem]

Either way, it isn't going to be pretty.

BLOAT

[what's up]

Yes, I know that the Greeks "democratized" literature by making it easily read by the masses.

Just going on what the author said, though. You would think that because he mentioned Pythagoras, he would have said 6th instead of 5th century.

[Blind Eye Jones]

The Enlightenment has come full circle in Europe: where unaided reason is now meaningless and embraces the irrationality of POMO thought and socialism. What does this mean? POMO thought makes reason frivolous, so that language can only point to more language for meaning and never to anything in the real world; and socialism has abandoned reason by never rationally assessing its own miserable failures in the 20th century. Socialism only offers a dogmatic morality that the "grieved" classes need to be compensated through multiculuralism. The irony is socialism started as a rational experiment under Marx -- communism was considered a science -- but it has come to the conclusion that all cultures are equal, that there is no truth and that power is the final end. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are not universal and self evident truths to the socialists. Thus the Lockean formulation was just a prejudice of the west -- a west that has sought to colonize and dominate the less powerful peoples of the world.

POMO thought and socialism (often espoused by the same people) go hand in hand with a virulent rationalism that is irrational -- and this is the legacy of the Enlightenment.

[Tench_Coxe]

BLOAT

Well, maybe not today, but I have made some folks in the powder business happy in the past.
I read stuff like this and its like watching a train wreck in slow motion.
BTW, a certain C****e W***e is still writing Hardyville articles out there, in case you're interested.

[Tench_Coxe]

"...but it has come to the conclusion that all cultures are equal, that there is no truth and that power is the final end. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are not universal and self evident truths to the socialists"

The split came apparent when two Revolutions--the American and then the French, occurred. The French went down the wrong path, and (with the help of others) dragged a lot of continental Europe with them.

[what's up]

it may be Fox news by satellite and Rush Limbaugh via internet

Don't forget FR!

[GOPJ]

And what have we learned in the last five years from its boutique socialism, utopian pacifism, moral equivalence, and cultural relativism? That it was logical that Europe most readily would abandon the artist and give up the renegade in fear of religious extremists.

Those in an auto parts store in Fresno, or at a NASCAR race in southern Ohio, might appear to Europeans as primordials with their guns, “fundamentalist” religion, and flag-waving chauvinism. But it is they, and increasingly their kind alone, who prove the bulwarks of the West. Ultimately what keeps even the pope safe and the continent confident in its vain dialogues with Iranian lunatics is the United States military and the very un-Europeans who fight in it.

Well said.

[hinckley buzzard]

all their bold and courageous thinking, won at such a great cost, would have devolved into such cheap surrender to fanaticism?

This is the core of the message--that in a very real way, terror has already won on the conrtinent. The best illustration is not the Pope, but the German opera--shut down not by totalitarian police but by mere fear of cutthroats whom the state is unwilling to control.

[VOA]

bump

[GOPJ]

Those in an auto parts store in Fresno, or at a NASCAR race in southern Ohio, might appear to Europeans as primordials with their guns, “fundamentalist” religion, and flag-waving chauvinism. But it is they, and increasingly their kind alone, who prove the bulwarks of the West. Ultimately what keeps even the pope safe and the continent confident in its vain dialogues with Iranian lunatics is the United States military and the very un-Europeans who fight in it.

Is this a subtle nod to Freepers?

[Jim Robinson]

Could be, but he is from Fresno and he hangs out with a pretty conservative bunch here.

[Left2Right]

That was the best paragraph of the whole article!

[RobbyS]

The regnant philosphy is deconstructionism, which embrazons Pilates's question on the wall: What is truth?

[RobbyS]

Socrates and Platon launched the scholastic enterprise. The abandoment of it by our educational establish explains the failures of our schools. The Sophists have taken over.

[ClaireSolt]

Yes, that , too.

[goldstategop]

European Christianity is dead. The craven surrender to Islam reveals Europeans have no real beliefs except immediate self-preservation and enjoying their pampered lifestyle. In short, Europe is really Eurarabia. And the more Europe shows its weakness and its contempt for the values that gave it birth, the bolder its enemy grows along with its assault upon Europe itself. As Europeans have learned in the past five years, their servility to Islam has won them no immunity.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus

[grey_whiskers]

Love your Freeper name.

Say hello to Gravel Gertie for me; and little Sparkle.

Cheers!

[grey_whiskers]

Perhaps VDH reads and understands the FR 'type' too much for you?

Not in the slightest.

He is a Democrat, and is painting the Democrat's stereotypical version of conservatives.

Cheers!

[neverdem]

European Christianity is dead.

While it's not a large country, I'm hesitant to ignore the effect of the Ould Sod, i.e. Ireland. Its scholarship helped to carry Europe through the Dark Ages, and the physical courage of its descendents helped to make the Anglosphere.

[Earthdweller]

[Tolik]

    Victor Davis Hanson Ping ! 

       Let me know if you want in or out.

Links:    FR Index of his articles:  http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=victordavishanson 
            His website: http://victorhanson.com/    
                NRO archive: http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson-archive.asp
New Link!    http://victordavishanson.pajamasmedia.com/

[SquirrelKing]

We may be only 30 years behind Europe, but we are not quite there yet. And so Europe has done us a great favor in showing us not the way of the future, but the old cowardice of our pre-Enlightenment past.

Beautifully put. [Of course.]