In the wake of the Scientific Revolution, the late seventeenth and eighteenth centuries saw the complete demolition of traditional structures of authority, scientific thought, and belief by the new philosophy and the philosophes, including Voltaire, Diderot, and Rousseau. The Radical Enlightenment played a part in this revolutionary process, which effectively overthrew all justification for monarchy, aristocracy, and ecclesiastical power, as well as man's dominance over woman, theological dominance of education, and slavery. Despite the present day interest in the revolutions of the eighteenth century, the origins and rise of the Radical Enlightenment have received limited scholarly attention. The greatest obstacle to the movement finding its proper place in modern historical writing is its international scope: the Racial Enlightenment was not French, British, German, Italian, Jewish or Dutch, but all of these at the same time.
In this wide-ranging volume, Jonathan Israel offers a novel interpretation of the Radical Enlightenment down to La Mettie and Diderot, two of its key exponents. Particular emphasis is placed on the pivotal role of Spinoza and the widespread underground international philosophical movement known before 1750 as Spinozism.
具體描述
讀後感
評分
評分
評分
評分
用戶評價
寫得不好。不是說Israel本身對Spinoza的分析有什麼細枝末節的技術問題，而是這本書的整個分析框架其實挺problematic的。在某種意義上，Israel跟以前的Adorno他們一樣，要不你就全盤接受Enlightenment，要不你就徹底地把它否定掉。這種從一個極端到另一個極端的分析框架其實真的沒什麼益處。一個曆史學傢其實更應該去看Enlightenment裏麵的那些ambiguities, uncertainties, tensions，不然整個分析就很缺乏張力和洞察力瞭。
评分寫得不好。不是說Israel本身對Spinoza的分析有什麼細枝末節的技術問題，而是這本書的整個分析框架其實挺problematic的。在某種意義上，Israel跟以前的Adorno他們一樣，要不你就全盤接受Enlightenment，要不你就徹底地把它否定掉。這種從一個極端到另一個極端的分析框架其實真的沒什麼益處。一個曆史學傢其實更應該去看Enlightenment裏麵的那些ambiguities, uncertainties, tensions，不然整個分析就很缺乏張力和洞察力瞭。
评分寫得不好。不是說Israel本身對Spinoza的分析有什麼細枝末節的技術問題，而是這本書的整個分析框架其實挺problematic的。在某種意義上，Israel跟以前的Adorno他們一樣，要不你就全盤接受Enlightenment，要不你就徹底地把它否定掉。這種從一個極端到另一個極端的分析框架其實真的沒什麼益處。一個曆史學傢其實更應該去看Enlightenment裏麵的那些ambiguities, uncertainties, tensions，不然整個分析就很缺乏張力和洞察力瞭。
评分寫得不好。不是說Israel本身對Spinoza的分析有什麼細枝末節的技術問題，而是這本書的整個分析框架其實挺problematic的。在某種意義上，Israel跟以前的Adorno他們一樣，要不你就全盤接受Enlightenment，要不你就徹底地把它否定掉。這種從一個極端到另一個極端的分析框架其實真的沒什麼益處。一個曆史學傢其實更應該去看Enlightenment裏麵的那些ambiguities, uncertainties, tensions，不然整個分析就很缺乏張力和洞察力瞭。
评分寫得不好。不是說Israel本身對Spinoza的分析有什麼細枝末節的技術問題，而是這本書的整個分析框架其實挺problematic的。在某種意義上，Israel跟以前的Adorno他們一樣，要不你就全盤接受Enlightenment，要不你就徹底地把它否定掉。這種從一個極端到另一個極端的分析框架其實真的沒什麼益處。一個曆史學傢其實更應該去看Enlightenment裏麵的那些ambiguities, uncertainties, tensions，不然整個分析就很缺乏張力和洞察力瞭。
相關圖書
本站所有內容均為互聯網搜索引擎提供的公開搜索信息，本站不存儲任何數據與內容，任何內容與數據均與本站無關，如有需要請聯繫相關搜索引擎包括但不限於百度，google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 qciss.net All Rights Reserved. 小哈圖書下載中心 版权所有