How did the Enlightenment contribute to changes in government systems?

History

2 answers:

solong [7]3 years ago

7 0

Enlightenment thinkers such as Thomas Paine, Jean Jacques Rousseau, and Montesquieu developed governmental theories.

These governmental theories such as 'social contract', 'natural rights', and 'separation of powers' all influence government systems in modern times by providing a pathway, or base, for the ideas presented in our U.S. Constitution.

It is suspected that the founding fathers borrowed many ideas introduced in the Enlightenment -- For instance, separation of powers was an idea developed by Charles Montesquieu. It stated that political power should be separated amongst multiple so that no one could assume complete power over government. This idea was borrowed and is the basis of our U.S. government today.

Wewaii [24]3 years ago

4 0

Answer:

The Enlightenment led to the formation of new ideas of government where "rulers and rule" don't exist, but a government where people are able to govern themselves by choosing their leaders who are capable of handling power. This led to people getting new ideas and improving those ideas about government and these people were called Enlightenment thinkers. These people contributed to the formation of the U.S. government itself and they contributed to the improvement of many aspects of the U.S. government like criminal punishment.

You might be interested in

What urban problems discussed in your textbook does riis touch upon in this passage

Brums [2.3K]

It be the first passage that people mentioned it to children by saying"children pitching pennies" and stuff that"kicks and cuffs are their daily diet". Also, pollution is touched in this passage as it mentions "summer stenches" which are bad for poeple

6 0

3 years ago

Explain the meaning of the phrase “strong by nature” and how it relates to the Jamestown settlement.

Ghella [55]

Answer:

am now grown old and must soon die, and the succession must descend in order, to my brothers, Opitchapam, Opechancanough, and Kekataugh, and then to my two sisters, and their two daughters.

I wish their experience was equal to mine, and that your love to us might not be less than ours to you. Why should you take by force that from us which you can have by love? Why should you destroy us who have provided you with food? What can you get by war? We can hide our provisions and fly into the woods. And then you must consequently famish by wrongdoing your friends.

What is the cause of your jealousy? You see us unarmed and willing to supply your wants if you come in a friendly manner; not with swords and guns as to invade an enemy. I am not so simple as not to know that it is better to eat good meat, lie well, and sleep quietly with my women and children; to laugh and be merry with the English, and, being their friend, to have copper, hatchets, and whatever else I want, than to fly from all, to lie cold in the woods, feed upon acorns, roots and such trash, and to be so hunted that I cannot rest, eat, or sleep. In such circumstances, my men must watch, and if a twig should but break, all would cry out, "Here comes Captain Smith." And so, in this miserable manner to end my miserable life. And, Captain Smith, this might soon be your fate too through your rashness and advisedness.

I, therefore, exhort you to peaceable councils, and above all I insist that the guns and swords, the cause of all our jealousy and uneasiness, be removed and sent away.

5 0

3 years ago

In the circuit diagram what does the symbol made of two long lines into short lines with a positive and negative sign in each an

IRISSAK [1]

A source of electrical energy.

5 0

2 years ago

The writers are urging civil rights activities to be more

Elena L [17]

Answer: patient

Explanation:

3 0

3 years ago

Write a 250-word report on either the Sadducees or the Pharisees. Your report should include information concerning the backgrou

frosja888 [35]

Sadducees

SADDUCEES (săd'yū-sēz, Gr. Saddoukaioi). One of the religious parties that existed among the Jews in the days of Christ and the early church, but exercised comparatively little influence among the people. They resisted the truth of the gospel. Their origin is uncertain, but it is to be sought in the period in Jewish history between the restoration of the Jews to their own land (536 b.c.) and the Christian era. No evidence of Sadduceeism is to be found in Israel before the Captivity.

The origin of the name of the sect is obscure. The root of the word means “to be righteous,” and the word has sometimes been taken to be an adjective (“the righteous ones”); but since the Sadducees were not particularly distinguished for their righteousness, it is unlikely that they got their name from this word. Probably the name is derived from someone named Zadok. The best-known Zadok in history was the Davidic high priest (2Sam.8.17), from whom succeeding high priests claimed to descend. He himself was descended from Aaron through the line of Eleazar (1Chr.24.3) and was instrumental in the return of the ark (2Sam.15.24-2Sam.15.29). The prophet Ezekiel, in his description of the restored temple, says that because the sons of Zadok remained loyal to the Lord when the Israelites went astray, they would be ministers in the new sanctuary (Ezek.40.46; Ezek.44.15). Some scholars hold that the Sadducees trace their origin to this Zadok. Others, however, think that the name comes from another Zadok, a disciple of Antigonus of Socho (c. 250 b.c.), who taught that obedience to God should be absolutely disinterested, without expectation of future reward. This view goes back to an apocryphal legend in the Abot-de-Rabbi Nathan (c. a.d. 1000). There is also the possibility that the name may be derived from some Zadok unknown to us.

The chief authorities for our knowledge of this sect are the Jewish historian Josephus, the NT, and the Talmud. Josephus lays great stress on the aristocratic nature of the Sadducees. He says, “They only gain the well-to-do; they have not the people on their side.” They were the political party of the Jewish aristocratic priesthood from the time of the Maccabees to the final fall of the Jewish state. The Sadducees were priests, but not all priests were Sadducees. Josephus, for example, was a priest and a Pharisee. The likelihood is that the priestly party only gradually crystallized into the sect of the Sadducees. From the time of the Exile, the priesthood in general constituted the nobility of the Jewish people, and the high priest became an increasingly powerful figure. The priestly aristocracy became leaders in the Hellenizing movement that began with Alexander the Great. Because of their sympathy with the policy of Antiochus Epiphanes, they took no part in the Maccabean struggle, which was supported mainly by the Pharisees, a group of religious enthusiasts who opposed what they regarded as the religious deterioration of the Jewish nation. The high priesthood and the throne were united in a single person when, c. 143 b.c., Simon was recognized as both high priest and ruler of the Jews. This centralization of power led to a number of forms of reaction, especially from the Pharisees. Probably not theological at first, the Sadducees became so in order to defend their policies against the attacks of the Pharisees. Under the Romans they become the party favorable to the government. As aristocrats they were naturally very conservative and were more interested in maintaining the political status quo than in the religious purity of the nation. Since they were satisfied with the present, they did not look forward to a future messianic age. Not popular with the people, they nevertheless sometimes found it necessary to adopt the pharisaic policy in order to win the popular support.

8 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers