Hegel's Contradiction in Human History Essay

1243 Words 5 Pages
Human beings have been struggling to learn the meaning of life since the first day. Ideologies are born as human’s interpretation of the world and belief system, also an endeavor to seek the truth of human nature. Ideologies emerge throughout the periods of great changes: the Enlightenment, the English “Glorious” Revolution, the American Revolution, etc. They have become the motivations, the standards, and the roots to modern political systems. Their roots are the philosophies developed by famous philosophers throughout the time. However, as each ideology is developed, its own contradiction also grows, takes place in the realm of actions. This, in turn, shows contradiction as human nature. Everything changes over time, and there is no …show more content…
Not only that, but this also reflects though historical events. The historical events that reflect contradiction as human nature spread through times and happened all over the world. Considering the English “Glorious” Revolution happening during 1688 – 1689, the contradiction of the revolutionary leaders’ motivation and actions is obvious. Tracing to the causes of the revolution, they are based on the ascent of English Parliament toward a more liberal way, limiting the King’s power, giving the Parliament the power to be more involved in governing decisions. Beside that, the fear of “popery” took place as a very important cause of the revolution. The Parliament, playing the key role in this game, at the same time brought about a radical change in government system and tried their best to conserve the religious culture of Britain, which is to protect the Anglican Church. Thus, the contradiction of the revolution has become the topic for discussions between modern thinkers and philosophers. As John Carswell, author of The Descent on England, states in his book: “But it would be far from logical to suppose that because the causes of 1688 were diplomatic, military, and political, or because they brought about no manifest change of social structure, that the consequences of 1688 were not far-reaching. On the contrary, William’s victory was of the utmost importance not only to Britain but to Europe and to the world.”