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 t 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 put a ct of 1765 which 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 rgued 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 american, 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 risis. 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 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 colonists relationship 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 rge 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 these ons, not just of 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 math mat ca, 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 treaties 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. Ature. The Second Branch is epistemolorgy. And epistemolorgy is that branch of philosophy concerned ith the nature of knowledge. And i can sum up the enlightenments view of epistemolorgy 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. D 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 parise these sentences and were going to pars these sentences and were going to try to pull out of them the deepest philosophic meaning. All right. So lets take the first sentence, the first paragraph which says ration 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 aragraph 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 . T 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 that first paragraph also has a principle or a standard and in this case a moral standard. And that moral standard would be the laws of nature and of natures god. And that first paragraph or implies an action. Nd the action is the necessity to dissolve the connection between these two countries. Ow, let me just say that in my view, in many ways, and ill talk about this at the end at the end of class, the most interesting word for me of this first paragraph is the word necessary. When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands, etc. , etc. The question is necessary . Why necessary . Now is it necessary that the American People dissolve their connection to the mother country . To say that its necessary uggests that it must be. But in human affairs, theres nothing that must be. Right . The fact of the matter is in 1776, at least a third of all american colonials at that time were loyalists. Selfidentified loyalists. And a third hadnt made up their mind about whether they supported independence or not. So how is it on july 4, 1776, the americans argue that it is now necessary . So the question is why necessary . Like why not say when in the course of human events its tional to dissolve our political bands . Why necessary . Well, im going to come back to that, that question, at the end of the talk. Because i think the word necessary tells us actually something deeply important about the moral logic and the moral characters of those who signed the declaration of independence. All right. Now, let me break down what i think are the philosophic ideas, the enlightenment philosophic ideas that are contained in that first paragraph. So the declaration, as ive suggested, it has a metaphysics that it draws on from the enlightenment. Summed up in one word which is nature. And we see that in the declaration when it talks about the laws of nature and of atures god. So in the 17th and 18th centuries, natural called at the time natural philosophers what today we would call scientists, natural 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 like, for instance, the law of gravitation or newtons three laws of planetary motion. But these laws of physical nature, they were absolute they were, they are absolute. They are universal. They apply throughout the whole universe. And they are permanent. And as a result of these discoveries, the discovery of these scientific laws of nature, moral philosophers in the late 17th and then into the 18th centuries began to look or ry to discover certain moral aws of nature. So when the declaration refers to the laws of nature and of atures god, it is referring to moral laws of nature. And if you remember, go back to one of the very first classes when we read john adams diary, the young 21yearold john adams writing in his diary about the things that he was learning as an undergraduate at harvard college, right . In hat he learned is that the universe, right . According to newtons laws that entities, things, physical things out there in nature, have an identity. And that identity is absolute. And in addition to having identity, because it has identity, it is governed by certain laws of cause and effect. And then the same adams argued is true for human action as well. Now, its a much more difficult leap to go from to discovering scientific laws of nature to discovering human, moral laws of nature. But that was that was at the deepest philosophic level that was the quest, that was the search of 18th century moral philosophers including the ounding fathers. And we see in that first paragraph well, im sorry. Let me back up and also say that the phrase in the declaration is the laws of god and of natures god. Now, its interesting that it doesnt say the laws of nature and of god. It says natures god. So for most American Revolutionaries who were the grandchildren, the philosophic grapped children of the enlightenment, they viewed natures god not as the same god of the old testament. Not a kind of omnipresent god who can change the laws of nature at will. But rather a god who was like a watch maker or a clock maker who set the universe in motion and then stepped back. And thats what i think is being referred to there with regard to natures god. And then in the declaration in that first sentence it talks about the causes which impel them to the separation. So this is a kind of view of causation. To n other words, 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 the declaration of independence and the literal separation of the colonies from the mother country. But it has causes, right . And in order to understand the action of independence and separation, you have to understand the causes which of course is a principal part of what the declaration does in the second and the very long body of the second paragraph of the declaration, it lays out it lays out its charges against king george iii. Now, the first paragraph also has an epistemology. And in the context of the enlightenment and americas Founding Fathers, that means that its going to in some way aise and promote mans faculty of reason. And how does it 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. Theyre speaking to the reason or 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, an argument, appeal to the reason of people around the world and that those reasons can be understood. And thats why in the second paragraph, just before the charges are laid out against the king, the declaration says, quote, to prove this, this, meaning the absolute despotism of george iii, the tierney of george iii as stated in the declaration to prove this ranny, let that be submitted to a candid world. The americans are making they have essentially written an indictment against george iii and indirectly to the British Parliament as well. And it lays out the the declaration lays out all of the iii committed by george and the British Parliament. And so by laying out those facts, they are laying them out to people everywhere to charges whether the are in fact true or not true. And this is why it