The Enlightenment is one of the crucial periods in Western history. For both admirers and critics alike, it is considered the beginning of modernity, the time when the basic questions facing our world were posed, though not answered, at least adequately. As such, the Enlightenment can be seen from two vantage points. On the one hand, its shapers and followers undertook a far-ranging critique of the world they had inherited. All aspects of traditional life—religion, political organization, social structure, science, human relations, human nature, history, economics, and the very grounds of human understanding—were subjected to intense scrutiny and investigation. On the other hand, proponents of the Enlightenment attempted to establish adequate grounds for a clearer and surer understanding of these topics. In short, the Enlightenment was characterized by the dynamic between criticism and innovation. Both sides of this equation—the criticisms leveled and the solutions proposed—still shape much of our contemporary culture.

The traditional definitions of the Enlightenment have located the source for these activities in its supposed veneration of reason. In fact, the Enlightenment is often called the “Age of Reason.” The title is misleading on two counts. It seems to imply that the proponents of the Enlightenment were abstract thinkers, more concerned with utopian proposals than with practical solutions. But more important, it suggests that reason as an activity was enshrined over everything else, that recognition of the passions, desires, and the senses was largely ignored.

Both assumptions are incorrect. However one evaluates Enlightenment proposals, one basic strain runs through them all, namely a great disdain for abstract answers based upon empty logic. Perhaps the worst epithet one could hurl at an opponent was that he or she was a victim of “the spirit of systems.”