AP European History Document-Based Question #1 Due Tuesday, December 6, 2016 30 points Prompt In The Heavenly City of the Eighteenth-Century Philosophers, Carl Becker criticized the Age of Reason as just another age of faith, like the church-based system of thought that it had rejected? Were Enlightenment thinkers able to question the foundations of their own beliefs as honestly as they often questioned more traditional belief systems? (Historical Thinking Skills to use: I B. Continuity and Change or II A. Comparison) Documents Document A History is good for nothing if it be not united with morality it is certain that one might know all that men ever did and still be ignorant of Man himself. Bernard de Fontenelle (1657-1757) Eglogues (1688) Document B Philonus: How sincere a pleasure is it to behold the natural beauties of earth! To preserve and renew our relish for them, is not the veil of night alternately drawn over her face, and does she not change her dress with the seasons? How aptly are the elements disposed? What variety and use in the meanest productions of nature? What delicacy, what beauty, what contrivance in animal and vegetable bodies? How exquisitely are all things suited, as well to their particular ends, as to constitute apposite parts of the whole! And while they mutually aid and support, do they not also set off and illustrate each other? Raise now your thoughts from this ball of earth, to all those glorious luminaries that adorn the high arch of heaven. The motion and situation of the planets, are they not admirable for use and order? Were those (miscalled erratic) globes ever known to stray, in their repeated journeys through the pathless void? Do they not measure areas round the sun ever proportioned to the times? So fixed, so immutable are the laws by which the unseen author of nature actuates the universe. Bishop George Berkeley (1685-1753), 2nd Dialogue between Hylas and Philonus (1713) (3rd edition, 1734) Document C But theologians have a bad habit of complaining that God is outraged when someone has simply failed to be of their opinion. Voltaire (1694-1778), Philosophical Letters (1733) Document D You find certain phenomena in nature. You seek a cause or author. You imagine that you have found him. You afterwards become so enamoured of this offspring of your brain, that you imagine it impossible, but he must produce something greater and more perfect than the present scene of things, which is so full of ill and disorder. You forget, that this superlative intelligence and benevolence are entirely imaginary, or at least, without any foundation in reason; and that you have no ground to ascribe to him any qualities, but what you see he has actually exerted and displayed in his productions. Let your gods, therefore, O philosophers, be suited to the present appearances of nature; and presume not to alter these appearances by arbitrary suppositions, in order to suit them to the attributes, which you so fondly ascribe to your deities. David Hume (1711-1776), An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section XI Of a particular Providence and of a future State. (1748)
Document E Epicurus s old questions are yet unanswered. Is he [God] willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is impotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Whence then is evil? To be a philosophical Sceptic is, in a man of letters, the first and most essential step in being a sound believing Christian. The true conclusion is that the original Source of all these things is entirely indifferent to all these principles, and has no more regard for good above ill than for heat above cold, or to drought above moisture, or to light above heavy. David Hume (1711-1776), Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1750-1776, publication postponed on the advice of friends until after Hume s death) Document F Writers begin by seeking the rules on which, for the common utility, it would be appropriate that men agree among themselves; and then they give the name natural law to the collection of these rules, without other proof than the good which they judge would result from their universal application. This is surely a very facile way to compose definitions and to explain the nature of things by almost arbitrary conveniences. Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778), Preface to the Discourse on the Nature of Inequality (1755) (Translated by Roger D. and Judith R. Masters) Document G `For,` said [Pangloss], `all this is for the very best end, for if there is a volcano at Lisbon it could be in no other spot and it is impossible but things should be as they are, for everything is for the best.` Voltaire (1694-1778), Candide (1759), Chapter 5, writing of the 1755 Lisbon earthquake. Document H Posterity is for the philosopher as the other world is for the man of religion. [Of all religions, Christianity is] the most absurd and the most atrocious in its dogma. Denis Diderot (1713-1784) Letters to Falconet (1765) and Étienne Noël Damilaville (1766) Document I Whatever was the beginning of this world, the end will be glorious and paradisiacal, beyond what our imagination can now conceive. Joseph Priestly (1733-1804), History of the Corruptions of Christianity (1782) Document J Natural Law is the regular and constant order of facts by which God rules the universe; the order which his wisdom presents to the sense and reason of men, to serve them as an equal and common rule of conduct, and to guide them, without distinction of race or sect, towards perfection and happiness. Constantin François Volney (1757-1820), Voyage en Egypte et en Syrie (1787)
Document K Festival of the Goddess Reason, 20 th Brumaire, 1793, celebrated by proclamation of the French National Convention
Grading Rubric (7 point scale) A. Thesis: 1 point Skills assessed: Argumentation (III A) and a targeted thinking skill (I A, B or C, or II A) States a thesis that directly addresses all parts of the question. The thesis must do more than restate the question. B. Analysis of historical evidence and support of argument: 4 points Skills assessed: Use of Evidence (III B), Argumentation (III A), and a targeted skill (I A, B or C, or II A) 1. Analysis of documents for up to 3 points: (1 point) Offers plausible analysis of the content of a majority of the documents, explicitly using this analysis to support the stated thesis or a relevant argument (2 points) Offers plausible analysis of BOTH the content of a majority of the documents, explicitly using this analysis to support the stated thesis or a relevant argument AND at least one of the following for the majority of the documents: intended audience purpose historical context author s point of view (3 points) Offers plausible analysis of BOTH the content of all or all but one of the documents, explicitly using this analysis to support the stated thesis or a relevant argument AND at least one of the following for all or all but one of the documents: intended audience purpose historical context author s point of view 2. Analysis of outside examples to support thesis/argument for 1 point: (1 point) Offers plausible analysis of historical examples beyond/outside the documents to support the stated thesis or a relevant argument C. Contextualization (II B): 1 point Accurately and explicitly connects historical phenomena relevant to the argument to broader historical events and/or processes D. Synthesis (IV B): 1 point Response synthesizes the argument, evidence, analysis of documents, and context into a coherent and persuasive essay by accomplishing one or more of the following as relevant to the question: Appropriately extends or modifies the stated thesis or argument Recognizes and effectively accounts for disparate, sometimes contradictory evidence from primary sources and/or secondary works in crafting a coherent argument Appropriately connects the topic of the question to other historical periods, geographical areas, contexts, or circumstances Draws on appropriate ideas and methods from different fields of inquiry or disciplines in support of the argument
I. Chronological Reasoning Historical Thinking Skills A. Historical causation- the ability to identify, analyze, and evaluate multiple cause-and-effect relationships in a historical context, distinguishing between the long-term and proximate. B. Patterns of continuity and change over time- the ability to recognize, analyze, and evaluate the dynamics of historical continuity and change over periods of varying lengths, as well as relating these patterns to larger historical processes or themes. C. Periodization- the ability to describe, analyze, evaluate, and construct models of historical periodization and recognizing relevant turning points. II. Comparison and Contextualization A. Comparison- the ability to describe, compare, and evaluate, in various chronological and geographical contexts, multiple historical developments within one society and one or more developments across or between different societies. B. Contextualization- the ability to connect historical developments to specific circumstances in time and place, and to broader regional, national or global processes. III. Crafting Historical Arguments from Historical Evidence A. Historical argumentation- the ability to define and frame a question about the past and to address that question by constructing an argument. A plausible and persuasive argument requires a clear, comprehensive and analytical thesis, supported by relevant historical evidence. B. Appropriate use of relevant historical evidence- the ability to identify, describe, and evaluate evidence about the past from diverse sources, making supportable inferences, and drawing appropriate conclusions from historical evidence. IV. Historical Interpretation and Synthesis A. Interpretation- the ability to describe, analyze, evaluate, and create diverse interpretations of the past as revealed through primary and secondary historical sources by analyzing evidence, reasoning, contexts, points of view, and frames of reference. B. Synthesis- the ability to arrive at meaningful and persuasive understandings of the past by drawing appropriately on ideas from different fields of inquiry or disciplines and by creatively fusing disparate, relevant (and perhaps contradictory) evidence from primary sources and secondary works. Additionally, synthesis may involve applying insights about the past to other historical contexts or circumstances, including the present.