Philosophy of Thomas Jefferson

[archives]

To their credit, the Founders were deep into unknown territory. The common European prediction was that the US would fail and come crawling back to the English Monarchy because they sincerely believed that most people were too fucking stupid to take care of themselves. Notice that the Russians, once free of Soviet totalitarianism, ended up crawling back to being taken care of by a dictator.

In the 21st Century, both the Democratic and Republican parties have replaced the Euro Monarchists.

Not entirely, individuals as Voltaire and others who laid out the script had been popular for decades, and what they pulled off was gutsy, the biggest part is them actually writing it all down, spelling out the actual roles, rules, and obligations. Most viewed it as a gamble, actually represented a threat, but I wouldn’t say many felt they would return to the English, but rather evolve into some form of semi-absolutism

And politicians today, because of those recorded rules and regulations, can’t become monarchists, perhaps part of an oligarchy, but not totalitarianists, although, we do have one that is attempting such even today

 

[archives]

He was our Diplomat in France during the drafting of the Constitution, and so naturally he can't get any credit for the founding of the Republic under the constitutional framework.

I think the Declaration of Independence is one of history's truly significant rhetorical and philosophical documents, and I believe that is where Jefferson's legacy really lies.

The document was a brilliant fusion of natural law, Greek logic and Euclidean proof, and Enlightenment ideals about universal truths.

But essentially all it was was a Declaration, announcing an official split, which he borrowed from many to author, and you are correct, it is his legacy, but that alone I wouldn’t say put him up as high as he is considering what followed

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Not entirely, individuals as Voltaire and others who laid out the script had been popular for decades, and what they pulled off was gutsy, the biggest part is them actually writing it all down, spelling out the actual roles, rules, and obligations. Most viewed it as a gamble, actually represented a threat, but I wouldn’t say many felt they would return to the English, but rather evolve into some form of semi-absolutism

And politicians today, because of those recorded rules and regulations, can’t become monarchists, perhaps part of an oligarchy, but not totalitarianists, although, we do have one that is attempting such even today

Not Monarchists anymore than Putin. Just authoritarian assholes who seek to restrict rights and impose their will on the majority.

 

[Cypress]

But essentially all it was was a Declaration, announcing an official split, which he borrowed from many to author, and you are correct, it is his legacy, but that alone I wouldn’t say put him up as high as he is considering what followed

What sets him apart IMO, is not just the Declaration of Independence and the Virginia Bill Rights, but the fact that he was the most eloquent spokesperson for the aspirational ideal of equality. If it had been left up to men like John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, we would have taken the path to oligarchy and aristocracy. Many of the founders were basically North American versions of aristocrats with a deep hostility to democracy.

Jefferson was one of the truly radical ones, by 18th century standards. He was so radical he was one of the few Anglo-American intellectuals who fully embraced the radical ideals of the French revolution

 

[archives]

What sets him apart IMO, is not just the Declaration of Independence and the Virginia Bill Rights, but the fact that he was the most eloquent spokesperson for the aspirational ideal of equality. If it had been left up to men like John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, we would have taken the path to oligarchy and aristocracy. Many of the founders were basically North American versions of aristocrats with a deep hostility to democracy.

Jefferson was one of the truly radical ones, by 18th century standards. He was so radical he was one of the few Anglo-American intellectuals who fully embraced the radical ideals of the French revolution

In his writings perhaps, but not practice, and I don't believe many of the Founding Fathers including Jefferson embraced the French Revolution when it entered its Radical phase

The Federalist Party wasn't an agent of oligarchy and aristocracy, admittedly, some were obstinate as Adams, just as inflexible as Jefferson, but I would argue that it was Hamilton, a pragmatist, who gave the country direction

And I am not dissing Jefferson, rather, questioning the weight he is often granted, as I noted, individuals as Franklin and Hamilton played a big role

 

[Dutch Uncle]

In his writings perhaps, but not practice, and I don't believe many of the Founding Fathers including Jefferson embraced the French Revolution when it entered its Radical phase

The Federalist Party wasn't an agent of oligarchy and aristocracy, admittedly, some were obstinate as Adams, just as inflexible as Jefferson, but I would argue that it was Hamilton, a pragmatist, who gave the country direction

And I am not dissing Jefferson, rather, questioning the weight he is often granted, as I noted, individuals as Franklin and Hamilton played a big role

Agreed they didn't agree with the mayhem. The French Revolution was how most revolutions turn out; dictatorships. We, the People were lucky we didn't end up like the rest.

He was great, but you are right that others were great too. One person that's often underrated is George Mason. Maybe because he refused to sign the Constitution. LOL

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Mason

 

[Litmus]

Jefferson's beliefs were decidedly radical for his time. He was a free-thinking secular humanist.

Jefferson embraced science against revealed superstitions.

Jefferson was part of the Enlightenment struggle against intolerance and tyranny.

Jefferson's world view was an eclectic mix of naturalism, rationalism, and proto-romantic sensibility.

Jefferson's metaphysical views were grounded in scientific naturalism.

Jefferson explicitly rejected the rationalist belief in innate ideas as well as the more elaborate idealism of Plato and Christian dualism.

Jefferson associated his three heroes of the Enlightenment - Bacon, Newton, Locke - with materialism.
Jefferson argued that all physical realities can be constructed with sense data.

Jefferson's materialism resulted in a radical psychological reductionism.

Jefferson's religious beliefs were part of what was called "Christian paganism".

He was dismissive of evangelical religion.

Jefferson's attitude towards Jesus is complicated.

He deeply admired the ethical teachings of Jesus and kept a scrapbook of them.

Jefferson was an Arian in that he denied the divinity of Jesus, seeing him as a wise moral teacher like Socrates.

A radical free thinker, Jefferson was the most advanced spokesperson for the complete separation of church and state.



Source credit: Professor Darren Staloff, City College of New York

but not for the separation of humanity from morality.

 

[Cypress]

In his writings perhaps, but not practice, and I don't believe many of the Founding Fathers including Jefferson embraced the French Revolution when it entered its Radical phase

The Federalist Party wasn't an agent of oligarchy and aristocracy, admittedly, some were obstinate as Adams, just as inflexible as Jefferson, but I would argue that it was Hamilton, a pragmatist, who gave the country direction

And I am not dissing Jefferson, rather, questioning the weight he is often granted, as I noted, individuals as Franklin and Hamilton played a big role

thanks for the comment

Right, that's why I said Jefferson's legacy is for his rhetoric, not for the way his aspirational ideas didn't match his personal conduct. I also tried to be careful to say that Jefferson embraced the radical ideals of the French revolution, if not the terroristic regime instigated in 1792 by Robespierre et al.

Even by American standards, the ideals of the French revolution were radical and democratic in a way the American revolution wasn't. That is why most Anglo-American intellectuals thought the ideals of the French revolution were going to far.

I would say America history, broadly speaking, owes more to Jefferson's rhetoric of the self-evident nature of human equality. Adams and Hamilton were aristocrats who didn't trust democracy. The emergence of populist-based Jacksonian democracy, emancipation and the 13th amendment, and the switch to popular election of senators probably owes far more to Jeffersonian ideals than to anything Adams, Washington, or Hamilton wrote.

 

[Melchizedek = Michael]

We know from his own writings that he considered slavery morally wrong, even though he couldn't bring himself to free his own slaves during his lifetime.

But in my opinion, the ideas of Jefferson can be considered separately from his sins as an individual.

The Declaration of Independence is rhetorically and philosophically one of the most powerful documents ever written, and that is why it has been used as the model around the world by European colonies declaring their independence from their colonial masters.

I find it morally bankrupt to give lip service to anti-slavery,but own slaves!

 

[Cypress]

I find it morally bankrupt to give lip service to anti-slavery,but own slaves!

Frederick Douglass and the abolitionists were able to use Jefferson's words to turn the tide against slavery, so Jeffersonian ideals shaped this nation, even as we realize the man's personal actions didn't match the rhetoric.

Jefferson blamed the British for introducing the evils of slavery to North America - but it is widely thought as a businessman he wasn't willing to give up his slaves and concede his business to his economic competitors in Virginia.

It is obviously a dark stain on his reputation as an individual.

 

[Melchizedek = Michael]

Frederick Douglass and the abolitionists were able to use Jefferson's words to turn the tide against slavery, so Jeffersonian ideals shaped this nation, even as we realize the man's personal actions didn't match the rhetoric.

Jefferson blamed the British for introducing the evils of slavery to North America - but it is widely thought as a businessman he wasn't willing to give up his slaves and concede his business to his economic competitors in Virginia.

It is obviously a dark stain on his reputation as an individual.

I'll stand by my statement

 

[archives]

Frederick Douglass and the abolitionists were able to use Jefferson's words to turn the tide against slavery, so Jeffersonian ideals shaped this nation, even as we realize the man's personal actions didn't match the rhetoric.

Jefferson blamed the British for introducing the evils of slavery to North America - but it is widely thought as a businessman he wasn't willing to give up his slaves and concede his business to his economic competitors in Virginia.

It is obviously a dark stain on his reputation as an individual.

Using today’s understanding, you can admonish any of the Founding Fathers for something they did or said, but you have to consider context. Fact is they were not perfect men, but those men that created the new country that today values those principle they are being criticized for today

 

[Cypress]

I'll stand by my statement

There are individuals in the bible who practiced polygamy and spoke approvingly of slavery, does that cause you to reject the spiritual and moral truths embedded in the bible?