How Did The Enlightenment Change Society

906 Words4 Pages
From medieval times even up to the 19th century, Europe was ruled by numerous monarchs, each one with absolute power over their respective countries. In these kingdoms, only the clergy and and the very rich had any rights or political power whatsoever. The poor and middle class, which made up the vast majority of the population, were completely subject to the government. This system was the norm in Europe for centuries- until the Enlightenment, a movement that believed in humanity’s ability to solve its own problems concerning government, the economy, society, and other areas. Heading the Enlightenment were philosophers such as John Locke, Montesquieu, and Adam Smith, whose writings help change society for the better. In fact, All three philosophers…show more content…
For example, Locke mainly believed that government existed to carry out its people’s will, as well as protect their rights– and that the people had the right to overthrow their government if it failed to do so. This was in stark contrast to the average government at the time, usually headed by an absolute monarch, and allotted most of its people little to no rights- this shows he wanted to change society by changing its government. Locke also wrote that all men had natural rights to life, liberty and property, and that these powers cannot be taken away without their consent. Once again, during this time period, lower-class citizens had little to none of these rights due to the governments they lived in. This shows that Locke wanted to change society by granting it more individual freedom. Finally, Locke believed that a contract of sorts existed between the ruler and the ruled- that government had to be limited and not interfere with a person’s rights. Again, during this period, most governments were headed by an absolute monarch who believed he had received his right to rule from God. Locke scorned this idea and believed that the people deserved to have a large say in government. This shows that Locke wanted to change society by giving the people more political power. Altogether, this ultimately proved that Locke wanted…show more content…
Firstly, Montesquieu advocated for the separation of powers in government, splitting government into three departments, each with clearly defined powers and equal checks over other branches. As previously stated, government was usually headed by an absolute monarch with no limits on his power. This shows that Montesquieu wanted to change society by doing away with what was then the political norm. Montesquieu also wrote that the branch that creates laws (legislative) and the branch that enforces them (executive) must stay separate, as combining them often paves the way to tyranny. Kings during this time held both legislative and executive powers, and used them to rule their kingdoms with an iron fist. This shows that Montesquieu wanted to change society by distributing power more evenly. Finally, Montesquieu warned that the branch that interprets laws and their applications (judicial) should be separated from the executive and legislative branches, since as with the previous example, combining them often leads to the abuse of power. Kings during this time held judicial powers as well, allowing them to create laws, make them apply to any situation they desired, and enforce them by any means they deemed necessary. Montesquieu showed that he wanted to change all that by separating and balancing political
Open Document