tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8746692.post114753057899680719..comments2024-03-29T02:03:49.151-04:00Comments on History Unfolding: The Rise and Fall of ReasonDavid Kaiserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05020082243968071584noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8746692.post-1148230531868050292006-05-21T12:55:00.000-04:002006-05-21T12:55:00.000-04:00Anyway....I lean more towards Page Smith's view, t...Anyway....I lean more towards Page Smith's view, that the Constitution was written at the last possible moment before Rationalism succumbed to Romanticism.<BR/><BR/>Why does our history appear to be rationalistic? Because it was shaped by two great forces- almost unlimited access to material goods, and the lack of constraints, allowing society to expand instead of dealing with problems.<BR/><BR/>Yes, elements of society were rationalized, but often not in a rational manner. Railroads standardized gauges and time, but the regulation of the railroads proceeded in a piecemeal and chaotic manner, lurching backwards as often as it lurched forward.<BR/><BR/>The Progressive movement championed pure food and drug laws, which in any case would have been necessary to the functioning of an increasingly mechanized food industry and the need to create consuming markets for an emerging flood of processed foods.<BR/><BR/>In short, the needs of the machine often drove the actions of people who were not rationalistic. The solution to the problems of rogue romanticism was always imagined to be some variation of an expanding economy.<BR/><BR/>Unsurprisingly, in the 50s the chickens flew the coop, with millions of Americans choosing to settle in suburban enclaves barren of any romantic associations. Has any cohort in history, so distictively native in origin, been so freed from the artifacts of a decaying romanticist society?<BR/><BR/>I will not argue that there has been any great revival of Rationalism, or even that there will be, for Rationalism may have been based, like Newton's physics, in a limited view of the universe.<BR/><BR/>I will argue that the end of Rationalism in the 1790s simply did not become apparent because our society continued to expand, just as countless generations watched steam rising from boiling pots without realizing the power of steam when it is confined.<BR/><BR/>And yield back the balance of my time-<BR/><BR/>ye olde serial catownerAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8746692.post-1147563374395746222006-05-13T19:36:00.000-04:002006-05-13T19:36:00.000-04:00"A calm study of history..."Uh, excuse me, but in ..."A calm study of history..."<BR/><BR/>Uh, excuse me, but in what previous history did a nuclear-armed colossus girdle the globe with threats of atomic annihilation, ruled by semi-insane Senators, the population infantilized by their consumption of broadcasting aimed at the eight-year-old mind, and dedicated to the proposition that no men are created equal to the white men born with money?<BR/><BR/>And for that matter, how did the idea that women and people of color might be equal become an "indulgence"? Just on the face of it, one might alternatively imagine that these 'radical' ideas were part of the same historical process that ground down and spit out the idea that kings were related to God, and that God spoke through them.<BR/><BR/>Put down the Camille Paglia and back slowly away from the word processor....<BR/><BR/>ye olde serial catownerAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com