3 ms·

Good/Bad is too simplistic. It seemed like the book was trying to bring back some nuance, that 'reason' didn't solve everything like the thinkers of the time t

Good/Bad is too simplistic. It seemed like the book was trying to bring back some nuance, that 'reason' didn't solve everything like the thinkers of the time thought it would. So it is valuable to look back and see how the rise of 'reason' still leaves some gaps that humans can't seem to get over. And is pretty relevant to todays rise of nationalism and corporate wars (US government supporting dictators for business gains, is not unlike British Colonies draining resources). Like, we are repeating some history here, so lets go back and see how that worked out.

zozbot234 3y ago
The English and Scottish attitude to the Enlightenment was never based on abstract "reason" alone, this is just a canard and a common strawman historically among anti-Enlightenment thinkers (if perhaps understandable when talking about the quite separate reception of Enlightenment ideas in continental Europe). There was always an emotional component too, and it wasn't the nationalism and chauvinism that OP goes on about.