Student Paper SP001-10
Spring 2000, Section I
Reviewer Comments
Evolution, human progress, has been charted through many centuries. A broad spectrum shows a non detailed glimpse into what humans have become. Even today, in the accelerated world of computers, humans are evolving and noticing their own human progressions. The people from the 15th, 16th, and 17th centuries also made the same observations about their own society. Although evolution typically refers to an extended period of time, the sheer plethora of changes in society in this short period of time can constitute evolution. Human progress, or evolution, can be accredited to the discovery and use of the scientific method; various philosophies about society pondered and handed down; and the eventual writing of the French and English Constitutions.
People in these centuries began to evolve when they repeatedly pondered, and sometimes answered, questions that were never contemplated. If a question was unanswerable, then a hypothesis would be formed. A hypothesis can be termed as any collection of ideas that explains any relation or phenomenon. A hypothesis was generally followed by an experiment from which recorded observation could be made and later tested. In the case of Galileo, whose hypothesis that the world was not the center of the universe was hushed by the Catholic Church, his hypothesis was tested and confirmed. Upon this confirmation his actions were deemed detrimental to societal issues on the presumption that disorder and chaos might erupt. One may argue that the official "living" doctrine of the Church being proven untrue, is shattering to the authority of any Christian governing body. Therefore one could hypothesize that not only could the Catholic Church have been protecting itself from a possible collapse, but that it was also saving all of Christianity, Catholic and Protestant, from possible disintegration. This hypothetical argument itself illustrates the slow progress made in the early 17th century.
Another contemplated question was evolution. Charles Darwin brought the issue to the forefront. Although he had many critics and many others were skeptics, Darwin hypothesis invoked people to question their existence. Where did people come from? With observation and testing, Darwin concluded his theory and published the On the Origin of Species. Being seen as another attempted to murder the institution of Christianity, the work was criticized and pummeled. Darwin never stood to the ridicule that he and his publishing took. He never stated he was trying to undermine Christianity, but that through hypothesizing and testing, he could prove that the biblical accounts of the origins of humans may not be interpreted correctly. The explanation of time may be one example of inaccuracy in the Bible. Though Darwin never defended his works, he never abandoned the theories or his work. His scientific progress had already begun a debate. A debate that made people question themselves and their existence by looking at their unending progression.
With a continued debate about from where we came, another more present binding debate began to arise. What is government? Who says that one person over another can rule? Can people rule themselves? Should it be for the good of the one or the good of the many? Is man inherently good or bad? If Newton could formulate laws of nature to the physical sense, why could someone not produce similar laws that would govern the social world? These questions were thought, hypothesized and answered by three prominent philosophers of the 17th and 18th centuries.
Jean Jacques Rousseau stated ". . . that the ideal state would be a genuine democracy, a moral association that bound people together in freedom, equality, and civic devotion. In this ideal state each person would have to surrender unconditionally all his rights to the community as a whole and submit to its authority and the state would then be governed by the general will--no the majority or unanimous vote--but rather by the plainly visible truth, easily discerned by common sense and by person." In one sense Rousseau's philosophy stands for democracy in its purist form, yet in the same breath he seems to submit testimony toward socialism.
Two other prominent philosophers were Thomas Hobbes and John Locke. Both pronounced the nature of man, but in different forms. Hobbes, a Royalist, believed that power was and should be evenly distributed due to humanity's innate qualities. That week could overcome strong and so on, interpreting his notions to explain the power and forethought of evolution and human progress. John Locke on the other hand believed that nature and humanity were in coexistence. His basic theory set out to prove that the good nature of man can be evenly balanced by the bad nature of man. One unjustifiable wrong can be corrected with a completely justifiable wrong. This simulates the "eye for an eye tooth for a tooth" proverb from the Bible. Locke goes on to state that the only human way to quell such acts of inherent "badness" is to be governed and to place a body over the people so as to conform peace and stability. Peace and stability are formed through written rules and a set of guidelines for people to follow and through which people can be protected.
The ultimate prize for people of any time period is being heard and to receive innate rights as people and individuals. The English, and later the French, assembled a set of rights to be laid out for their respective people. The English version was created in 1 689 and essentially set forth the powers adherent to the crown and those few inalienable rights that the English people had. The French enabled their Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen in 1789. This declaration is very similar to the United States' Bill of Rights. It spells out the protected rights of the people and for the people. It also limits the monarch/president from eliminating these rights and establishing new ones. These rights, which the people from both nations appealed for were brought to the forefront by peoples understanding and knowledge of whom they were, who they are, and who they wish to become as a people and a society.
Through self-awareness, self-explanation and exploration, the people of the world have evolved into a conglomeration of governing bodies. Some governmental bodies rule totally over others in dictatorships, others in communistic forms. Other governments rule through a type of democracy be it monarchical or representative. This can almost be viewed as one of the philosophes points in saying that these types of governing bodies balance each other just as good and evil. Evolution, human progress, has been charted through many centuries. The people from the 15th, 16th and 17th centuries also made the same observations about their own society. Although evolution typically refers to an extended period of time, the sheer plethora of changes in society in this short period of time constitutes evolution.