One Challenge to a Democracy Founded by Enlightenment Thinkers

Isaiah Berlin argued that the Enlightenment faith in reason was changed by Romanticism. This has profound consequences for democracy.

Enlightenment trust in reason suggests that reality is something that gives way to the scientific method, rational analysis yielding insights about reality. Romanticism, by contrast, suggests invented reality that is the product of the complex mix of values, feelings, and creative ability of individuals and groups. The Enlightenment gave us a new way to look at natural reality. For instance, Benjamin Franklin's lightning rod that treated lightning as a natural phenomenon rather than a divine act. But to the extent that experienced reality becomes something manufactured by consensus rather than given by nature, rational analysis of what we observe gives way to passionate discussion of what we want to see.

This can change political discourse. A purely rational, Enlightenment-based approach might emphasize technocratic decision-making, while a Romantic approach might prioritize the lived experiences, feelings, and intuitions of individuals and groups. Debates about best policies for creating the good life give way to debates about the very definition of the good life. As Louis Menand puts it, "Romanticism rejected the end [goal] of self-understanding and replaced it with the end [goal] of self-creation."

If that end goal is about how an individual creates a life, there is no conflict. If that end goal is about how a people create a nation, there is infinite debate and conflict to follow.

The Ancient Greek's Obligation To Take an Interest in Politics (Or Why Plato May Have Called You an Idiot)

Don't be an idiot.

Plato recognized that power could easily corrupt in politics and was skeptical that good men would be attracted to politics, given its state. Plato has a character named Socrates say, in the Republic, "to be sure, good men will have to go into politics, whether they wish it or not. For, as you say, if they don't, they'll be ruled by people worse than themselves."

The engagement of virtuous people in politics is not presented by Plato as an attractive option but rather as a necessary one to save society from deteriorating into tyranny or anarchy.
And this realization of how important is public policy is the origin for a particular Greek word we use today.

Idiotes was a private citizen who wasn't involved in public affairs or politics. This didn't imply stupidity or a lack of intelligence. Rather, it referred to someone who was preoccupied with their own private life and showed a lack of concern for the well-being of the community or state. These "idiotes" were not looked down upon for their intelligence but rather for their self-centered focus and disengagement from civic life.

The Athenians encouraged citizens to take part in public decision-making given the welfare of the community depended on active participation from members. In such a culture, the choice to abstain from politics was considered a form of neglect.

We, of course, still have the word democracy from these ancient Greeks and have inherited the word idiot from them as well.