English III
meek.leslee@blvcs.org

Course Description

Academic Requirements

Textbooks

Curriculum Standards

First Semester

Second Semester

Online Testing

About the Instructor

Related Links

FAQ

Feedback

Log-In

Log-Off

Web Mail

BLVS Secure Site

BLVS Public Site

BLVS Support Staff

USD 458 Calendar

USD 458 Home

Notes: Rationalism in Colonial Times

Rationalism, also known as the Age of Reason, gave rise to new scientific and philosophic influences that championed the individual and challenged the older establishments of religion and the community. Quite simply, the literature from about 1715 to 1800 focused almost exclusively on the foundations of our country. There were some common characteristics of literature during this time period:

Characteristics of Rationalist Literature:

• non-fiction
• persuasive
• relies heavily on logic and carefully constructed arguments
• written to gain support for independence
• written by founding fathers and patriots

There are three primary events that ushered in the new period.

In April of 1721, a ship arriving from the West Indies docked in Boston Harbor. The ship carried sugar, molasses, and smallpox. The colonists had no treatment for this disease, and as the death toll increase, so did the need for a cure. Cotton Mather, a Puritan Minister who dabbled in science, heard of a treatment used in Turkey. Mather soon introduced America to the medical wonders of inoculation. Unfortunately, the religious colonists didn't agree with Mather's methods. To cure a disease was considered an affront to God, and Mather's life-saving technique was quickly seen as sacrilegious.

In Context:

Today, the scientific community is struggling with the idea of stem cell research. We realize that it is possible to cure diseases, replace bad organs, and prevent social and physical disorders through the study of genetic research, but we also acknowledge that this research requires fetal tissue samples. Many claim that it is immoral to use fetal tissue as a means to an end.

The decision we make with genetics today is similar to the decision that the Puritans had to make in light of Mather's efforts. In time; however, Mather's contribution was readily accepted when it proved highly effective, resulting in thousands of saved lives. Suddenly, our infant country was force to reconcile the merits of science with the mysteries of God. The result was Deism, a philosophy that suggests God does not control the universe, but instead created a perfect world that controls itself. It was; therefore, humankind's destiny to discover how to control its own environment using God's greatest gift -- the gift of reason. If the world is God's garden, then the human mind has all the tools necessary to maintain that garden. This spiritual shift in reason become known as Rationalism. God's greatest goal, according to the rationalists, was the happiness of His creatures. To do good work for others is to serve God. The colonists became increasingly aware of the need to separate from England in order to maintain the garden and do the greatest good. Our Founding Fathers were deists, and it is the deist principle that lead us into freedom.

The Age of Reason is a time period in which Rationalism dominated the social and political trends. The literature of the time suddenly shifted away from God and toward democracy. There were two important questions to be answered, and there was no short supply of suggestions. First, was it absolutely necessary to break away from England? Second, if such a break were necessary, how would we form a new government? Tempered in Deistic influences, this age give rise to a clear vision of freedom and independence from the increasingly paternalistic monarchy of England. It was our destiny, said many colonists, to become an independent, self-governed nation. When Patrick Henry delivered his now famous "Speech to the Virginia Convention" he called for a separation from England, no matter what the consequences. This prompted Thomas Jefferson and others to write the Declaration of Independence and our national Constitution.

These literary documents could not have been written 50 years earlier. There is a Puritan quote that suggests "God's altar needs not our polishing." The world, it is suggested, is exactly how God wants it. Nothing more, nothing less. Therefore, it was not necessary to try to define who should be given life, what are the restrictions of liberty, and what happens when you have been denied your happiness. God's plan includes us all, say the Puritans, and it isn't possible to change that plan through our own philosophy (which can only be based on what we observe). So why change what cannot be?

In Context:

The difference between Puritanism and Rationalism is similar to the difference between a high school senior and a college freshman. While the senior has many decisions made for him by his parents (curfew, meals, allowance, cars), the college freshman must make his own decisions. In both scenarios, the parents play a vital, yet different role in the lives of both students.

Between the Puritan tradition and the onset of Rationalism, our country began to change its sense of "community" and "individual". The Puritans, by necessity, relied on a shared sense of community to create and maintain their village. In order to have food, shelter, livestock, meeting houses, and a social structure, it was necessary for every single person to "pull his or her weight" in the community. This meant that there was very little time for relaxing or hanging out with friends (except in church). Instead, there was always something that needed to be done.

As the size and strength of our nation grew, we began to have some more time to ourselves, as individuals. Yet the oppression from England still required our attention as a society. Consequently, our founding fathers found it necessary to grapple with the balance between individualism and community.

The balance was struck in a document known as "The Constitution" and subsequently the "Bill of Rights". In addition to establishing our government, these documents also outlined the needs of the community and the needs of the individual. This balance is now known as the "will of the majority vs. rights of the individual."

The "will of the majority vs. rights of the individual" is a keystone idea in modern government. There is no more important question than this one. At what point does the will of the majority take precedence over the rights of the individual? Can a government force individuals to move out of their homes so that a racetrack may be built? Is a government justified in taking the life of a convicted criminal to satisfy the needs of the community? The very notion of a law is an attempt to create order in an otherwise disorderly society.

In Context:

A classroom is a great example of "will of the majority vs. rights of the individual." Should a teacher allow an individual student freedom of speech if it prevents other students from learning? Are we willing to forfeit some of our 4th amendment search and seizure rights to prevent a student from bringing weapons or drugs to school? Should the dual notions of "fairness" and "equality" be defined differently?

Comments