Good afternoon, everybody. So for the last six weeks in this class, weve been examining the political thought of the imperial crisis. That is, weve been looking at the debates between British Imperial officials and american whig patriots. And that debate has really in many ways come down to one issue which is, broadly speaking, what is the british constitution and how does it define relations between the mother country and her colonies . And more specifically even the real question is, what is the political constitutional relationship between the power and the authority of the British Parliament and americas colonial legislators . And over the course of about 12 years between 1764 and 1776, the British Parliament passed a series of laws. In 1764, it began with the sugar act and then a year later the stamp act and then in 176768 the townsend acts and then the tea act and then the coercive acts and then in 1775 the prohibittory act. But standing behind all of these acts of british legislation was one overarching piece of legislation which i think was the driving force behind all of these particular acts. And that was the declaratory act of 1766 which claimed that parliaments authority extended to the american colonies in all cases whatsoever. And that meant that parliament was not only supreme over the colonies but in fact its power and its authority was absolutely supreme. Right . So it could pass it could pass taxes which it had never done before and it could pass taxes in the american colonies for revenue. And the most famous of course of all of these pieces of british legislation was the stamp act of 1765 which put a tax on stamped paper which the colonists needed for almost all legal and commercial transactions. So what was the what was the specific constitutional issue . It was where to draw the jurisdictional boundary between the authority of parliament and the authority of the colonial legislatures. With regard to the stamp act, the british argued that the stamp act was legal and therefore constitutional. The americans by contrast argued that the stamp act was unjust and therefore unconstitutional. And so over the course of the next 10 or 11 years, British Imperial officials and american patriots began a kind of search for principles. The principles first of the british constitution. Because they had competing understandings of the british constitution. But for the americans, the debate was not simply over the british constitution. The americans began starting in 1765, they began a search, a search for deeper moral principles. So when they argued that the stamp act was unjust and therefore constitutional, the real question is how or in what way was the stamp act unjust . So over the course of the next 10 and 11 years, the americans began this search for new standards, new principles of justice, of liberty, of equality, of rights, of sovereignty. And over the course of these 10 or 11 years, they began to see that the principles that had once tied the mother country to the colonies no longer worked. And the americans with their newly developing understanding of what the british constitution was, they began to see that it had to be grounded in absolute permanent universal principles. And that was what they searched for over the course of this the years of the imperial crisis. Now, in many ways, as john adams argued, in a letter that he wrote to Thomas Jefferson in 1815, the real American Revolution was not about the war. In 1815 adams wrote, quote, what do we mean by the revolution . The war . That was no part of the revolution. It was only an effect and consequence of it. The revolution was in the minds of the people. And this was if he could from 1760 to 1775 in the course of 15 years before a drop of blood was shed at lexington. Now, think about that. Adams is arguing that the real American Revolution was not military, it was not constitutional, it was not political, it was not economic. The real, the deepest cause where well find the true meaning of the revolution was in this transformation that took place in the minds of the American People. And then in 1782, thomas paine in a letter that he wrote to the abaranault of france this about the period leading up to the American Revolution, quote, our style and manner of thinking have undergone a revolution. More extraordinary than the Political Revolution of the country. We see with other eyes. We hear with other ears and think other thoughts than those we formerly used. Again, think about the think about the meaning of what paine is arguing here. Some kind of radical transformation took place in the way that the americans saw the world, the way that they thought about the most important, the most fundamental concepts of justice. And that takes us now to the topic of todays lecture which is the philosophy of the declaration of independence. And so thus far in this course, over the course of these last six weeks, weve been mostly looking at the political and constitutional principles and institutions that were developed by American Revolutionaries. But all of this comes to a head in 1776. As we talked about last class, the last link between the colonists and the mother country was through their relationship, the colonistsrelationship with the person of the king. But in january, 1776, with the publication of tom paines common sense that relationship is forever severed. So there is now intellectually there is no lingering remnant allegiance or loyalty between the colonists and the mother country. Once they have severed their connection with the person of the king, psychologically they are no longer members of the british empire. And so that then takes us straight to july 4, 1776. And to the passage which we talked about last week or last class of the declaration of independence. So what was this declaration of independence . That was ratified on july 4, 1776. Well, the first thing to note about it is that it is indeed a political and in some ways even a diplomatic document. It was written in part for george iii. It was written for european diplomats and financiers. And it was written of course for the American People, to organize, to help organize the American People politically. But the declaration of independence of course was a lot more than just a political document declaring the independence of these 13 colonies. And the calling forth of new states. Because thats what they are now. They will no longer be colonies. They are states. Independent political units that now have the authority to create their own constitutions, their own governments, and to forge alliances with foreign powers. But the declaration was more than that. In 1825, Thomas Jefferson was asked by henry lee what his object, what the purpose was in writing the declaration of independence and he wrote, quote, this was the object of the declaration of independence. It was intended to be an expression of the american mind. Now, think about what that means. An expression of the american mind. So on the one hand, what it clearly and obviously means is that the declaration is a summing up of all of the principles that the americans had been searching for during the years of the imperial crisis. Its a summing up. So when it says we hold these truths to be selfevident, and then it lays out its selfevident truths. This is these are the principles of the american mind. But as an expression of the american mind, the declaration was also laying the foundation for the new constitutions and for the new governments that were going to be created by the new states. And in fact what the declaration of course does is it establishes the moral foundations, not just of these new states, but of the United States of america. And that is the great meaning of the declaration is that it provides the moral foundation for this new nation going forward. All right. Before we jump into the declaration, and what were going to do in todays class is we are going to systematically line by line go through the declaration to elicit the deepest meaning of the declaration. Before we do that, though, let me mention something that weve talked about a little bit before in this class which is the philosophic background of the declaration of independence. So in my view, the declaration is the embodiment, it is a prasie of the philosophical principles of the enlightenment. All of the great enlightenment ideas and principles are in effect embodied in the declaration of reasons. And the three great philosophers of the enlightenment were sir isaac newton in his great work the princitia mathimatica, john lookes essay concerning human understanding, and lockes second treaties of government. And what im going to argue is that the ideas, the fundamental core ideas of newtons principia and lockes essay are in a sense summed up, embodied in the first paragraph of the declaration. And the second paragraph of the declaration is it is it is a it is an abstract, it is an abstract of the core basic principles that you will find in lockes second treatise of government. All right. Now, so let me just sum up for you very quickly the core ideas, the Core Principles of the enlightenment which i think can be seen as having been transposed onto the declaration of independence. So there is i think an enlightenment project, right . We can say we can identify a kind of comprehensive philosophy of this period known as the enlightenment, the 17th and 18th century enlightenment. And like all comprehensive systematic philosophies, it has four basic branches. It includes four basic branches of philosophy. First is metaphysics. What is metaphysics . Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy concerned with the nature of reality. And i can sum up for you in one word the enlightenments view of metaphysics. Nature. The Second Branch is epistemology. And epistemology is that branch of philosophy concerned with the nature of knowledge. And i can sum up the enlightenments view of epistemology in one word which is reason. The enlightenment also has an ethical theory. And an ethics is that branch of philosophy concerned with the nature of human action and human relationships. And i think i can sum up in one word the enlightenments view of ethics and that is rights. And then finally the enlightenment has a view of politics and politics is that branch of philosophy concerned with social and political organization. If i had to sum up the enlightenments view of politics in one word, it would be constitutionalism. All right. Now the question is, how did jefferson and the committee of five who helped him draft the declaration of independence, how did they take those ideas and put them into the declaration . Or to put the question how can we see those ideas within the declaration of independence . So what i would like to do now is just start to systematically go through what in effect, ladies and gentlemen, is just the first two sentences of the declaration. Sometimes people call them the first paragraph and the second paragraph. But if you think about it, its really just two sentences. Two very long sentences. And were going to were going to parse these sentences and try to pull out of them the deepest philosophic meaning. All right. So lets take the first sentence, the first paragraph of the declaration, which says when in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of natures god entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation, close quote. Now, what im going to argue is that this first sentence or paragraph has built into it a metaphysics and an epistemolorgy. That it draws on from the enlightenment. Now, what do i mean by in a . Lets first identify sort of the core ideas of that first sentence. And that first sentence has a kind of overarching thematic structure to it. It has a purpose, right . And whats the purpose of the first sentence . It is to declare to the world the, quote, causes which impel us to the separation. The causes which impel us to break from the mother country. And and in this case a moral standard. That moral standard would be the laws of nature and of natures guide and that first paragraph sentence also implies an action. The action is the necessity to dissolve the connection between these two countries. Let me just say, that in my view, in many ways, and i will talk about this at the end of the class, the most interesting word for me of this first paragraph is the word necessary. Right in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political ban. The question, is necessary . Why necessary . How is it necessary that the American People dissolve their connection to the mother country . To say that it is necessary suggests that it must be. Been in human affairs, there is nothing that must be. The fact of the matter is, and 1776, at least a third of all american colonials at that time or loyalists, selfidentified loyalists. And the third had made up their mind about whether they supported independence or not. So how is it on july 4th 1776 the americans argue that is now necessary so the question is why necessary . Why not say win in the course of human events it is optional . To dissolve our political bans . Why necessary . I will come back to that question at the end of the top. I think the word necessary tells us something deeply important about the moral logic says and the moral characters of those who signed the declaration of independence. Let me break down what i think are the philosophical ideas, the enlightenment philosophically ideas that are contained in that first paragraph. So the declaration, as i have suggested, it has a metaphysics that it draws on from the enlightenment. Summed up in one word, which is nature. We see that in the declaration when we talk about the laws of nature and of natures got. In the 17 than 18 centuries says Natural Force oliver philosophers what what we would call scientists, they began to discover certain laws of nature. Scientific or physical laws of nature, and these laws of nature in effect, organized the universe, kept it in harmony, kept it as a system governed by certain core laws. For instance the laws of gravitation, newtons love planetary motion. But these laws a physical nature were absolutely and absolute. They are universal implied throughout the whole universe. They are permanent. As a result of these discreet discoveries of scientific laws of nature, more philosophers, the late 17th and into the 18th centuries, began to look or try to discover certain moral laws of nature. When the declaration refers to the laws of nature and the natures god, it is referring to moral laws of nature. If you go back to the very first class is when we read john adams diary. 21yearold john adams writing in his diary about what was he was learning as a graduate at harvard college. What he learned says in the universe, according to new tons laws, entities, physical things out there in nature have an identity. That identity is absolute. In addition to having identity, because it has identity, it is governed by certain laws of cause and effect. The same adams argued is true for human action as well. It is a bit more difficult leap from discovery scientific laws of nature to discovering human moral laws of nature, but that was at the deepest philosophical level. That was the quest, that was the search of 18th century moral philosophers, including the Founding Fathers. Says and we see in that first paragraph. Let me back up and say the laws of god and the nature scarred. It is interesting that it doesnt say the laws of nature and of god it says natures got. So for most American Revolutionist who were the philosophical grandchildren of the enlightenment, they viewed natures god not as the same guided steel testament, not the kind of omnipresent god who can change the laws of nature it will, but rather a guy who is like a watchmaker, or clock meager, who set the universe in motion and stepped back. That is what i think is being refer to their with regard to natures god. In that first sentence, it talks about the causes which compelled him to separation. This is a view of causation, in other words to understand how and why there is this declaration of independence and separation you have to understand the causes. There is a cause which leads to an effect. The effect is the declaration of independence and a literal separation of the colonists another country but it has causes. In order to understand the independent separation you have to understand the causes, which is a principal part of what the laws of independent dense. Does it lays out its charges against king george the third the first paragraph also has an epistemological. And in the context of the enlightenment of americas Founding Fathers, that means that it is going to in some way praise and promote mince faculty of reason how to do that in the first paragraph . Well at the very end of that first paragraph, it refers to a decent respect to the opinions of mankind. In other words, in this declaration to the world the americans in other words are speaking from one mind to another says theyre speaking to the reason for the powers of reason of all people everywhere. They respect the opinions of mankind. They respect the idea that they can lay out a case, appeal to the people around the world and that those reasons can be understood. That is why in the second paragraph just before the charges are laid out, the declaration says quote to prove this this meaning the absolute despotism of george the third as stated in the declaration, to prove this tyranny, let facts might be submitted to a candid world. Says the americans have written an indictment against george the third and indirectly to the British Parliament as well. Says it lays out the declaration, lays out all of the crimes committed by george the third in the breach parliament. By laying out those facts, they are laying them out to people everywhere, to determine whether the charges are in fact true or not true. This is why it says we are submitted to a candid world. We are appealing to the mines, to the reasons of people everywhere. Let us now turn to the second paragraph, which is, what is often considered to be the second paragraph is one long sentence. It says, we hold these truths to be sel