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

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

[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!