Isaiah Berlin has no need to be introduced.
He was one of the most brilliant philosophical minds of the XX century and is still famous for his remarkably clear prose and acute analyses.
*
The first book I chanced to read by him was the exceptional "The Roots of Romanticism", a study on the decline of the Enlightenment ideas and the development all over Europe of a different - more emotional - sensibility.
I was surprised and fascinated by his acumen.
A terse and unassuming style, introducing complex arguments with few simple words and remarkable composure.
An unwavering faith that ideas are not something outside history, but are the deep bone-structure of human events (a conviction he matured probably under the influence of Heinrich Heine).
The rare ability to surprise the reader introducing age-old arguments in unexpected and unusual ways, eventually drawing him to unforeseen conclusions.
All these features are present as well in this essay.
*
This work is the transcription of a series of BBC radio broadcasts held in 1952 about "the enemies of human freedom". Actually most of the original records have been lost but for the one dedicated to Rousseau and so the text has been partly restored with the use and collation of extant - sometimes shaky - transcripts.
This may account for a certain roughness of the style, specially visible in the first part.
*
In "The Roots of Romanticism" Berlin shows the development and the fascination of the new ideas and their impact on European history: the scene is immense and philosophy intertwines with history and literature.
In "Freedom and Its Betrayal" the effort is focused on a single theme, considered in its negative value (betrayal) showing how the "liberal" and individualistic modern concept of liberty has not just one, but many intellectual "enemies".
The conferences expand a theme that is central in his thinking and investigate the ideas of six seminal thinkers who lived just before or not long after the French Revolution: Helvetius, Rousseau, Fichte, Hegel, Saint-Simon and De Maistre.
*
This is not the place to consider in depth the charges moved to each one of them (I will be glad to discuss specific issues with any reader who wants to write me), but some features of Berlin's approach are remarkable.
Every introduction is more a presentation of the thinker's relevant ideas and the indictment is not directed to the author, but to the logical consequences of his ideas, with only occasional mention to the - alleged - historical outcome.
Every thinker is even treated with sympathy and curiosity - an almost reverential gratitude, because philosophy to Berlin is not strictly speaking a place to administer condemnation or to grant salvation, but the place dedicated to constant and peaceful evaluation.
*
While the book is not so stylish and captivating as "The Roots of Romanticism", it is nonetheless hugely interesting to all those interested in the history of ideas.
Occasionally and notwithstanding a sloppy prose, you can find true cameos, in which inspiration and passion bestow an unusual poetical force.
One especially deserves citation for the faint echo of Montaigne's skepticism and the elegance of its repetition:
"Nature, and she alone, teaches philosophers what the true ends of men are.
True, Nature at all times speaks with too many voices.
She said to Spinoza that she was a logical system, but to Leibniz that she was a congeries of souls.
She said to Diderot that the world was a machine with cords, pulleys and springs, whereas to Herder she said that it was an organic living whole.
To Montequieu she talked about the infinite value of variety, to Helvetius of unalterable uniformity.
To Rousseau she declared that she had been perverted by civilization, sciences and the art, whereas to d'Alembert she promised to reveal their secret.
Condorcet and Paine perceived that she implanted inalienable rights in man; to Bentham she says this is mere "bawling upon paper" - "nonsense upon stilts".
To Berkley she reveals herself as the language of God to man.
To d'Holbach she said that there was no God and Churches were conspiracies.
Pope, Shaftesbury, Rousseau see nature as a marvelous harmony. Hegel sees her as a glorious field in which great armies clash by night.
And De Maistre sees her as an agony of blood and fear of self immolation.
What is Nature? And what is meant by Natural?"(pag 54 in my edition)
*
I'm used to suggest other books to readers interested in the same topic. This time I will only suggest
- "The Roots of Romanticism" by the same author
- "The Power of Ideas" (see my review if interested) - a collection of short essays that is flawed by the dubious choice of the curator.
*
You are most welcome if you can suggest other books about the same theme or just share ideas and comments!
Thanks for reading.