The Renaissance that spread across Europe, while effectively marking the transformation from medieval traditionalism to modern pragmatism, brought a plethora of old and new ideas into conflict with each other. From the Enlightenment born of the Renaissance came new interests in logic, reason, science, individuality, and humanity. These characteristics often clashed with the traditional traditionalism of old world religion and superstition. But this period cannot exactly be defined as a conflict between science and religion. With the sudden influx of new ideas complicating life, ideas rooted in seemingly contrasting forms of rationality and religion each had very divergent characteristics. The eternal religious conflict, particularly between different branches of Christianity, has sparked unspeakable bloodshed and hatred. Likewise, science and reason became buzzwords often abused by people who indulged in nothing but their imagination, hoping it would pass for some form of creative logic. In a sense, these differences of thought produced, for the more sensitive members of society, a clear polarization between those who pursued the truth and those who simply made foolish attempts to create it. As a result, humorous stories full of sarcasm and subtle ridicule became a popular literary tool for writers of the time. Their satires attempted to bring true rationality to a time full of confusion that passed for clarity. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Jonathan Swift's Tale of a Tub satirizes the era's attempts to apply reason and logic to select the one "true" religion. At that time, sects of Christianity such as Catholics, Lutherans, Protestants, and Calvinists came into bitter conflict with each other. Each claimed that this was the only true path to salvation. The hostilities between these different Christians have inspired a number of people to use logic and reason to promote the "truth" of their religion. In the section of Tale of a Tub entitled "Digression Concerning the Original, Use, and Improvement of Madness in a Commonwealth," Swift attacks the brand of "rationality" used by many people involved in these debates by ridiculing the concept of "rationality" absurdity of their style of focusing on the most mysterious elements of ourselves and our world with imaginative but incredibly simple explanations. John Donne's Satire III is similarly grounded in the futility of allowing people's limited capacity for knowledge and understanding to determine the truth behind God. But Donne's shorter poem gets more directly to the point of Christian fundamentalism. Rather than engage in lengthy satirical explanations of how foolish certain rationalists can be, he makes quick and easy work of denouncing the Churches of Europe that he believes undermine the most basic principles of Christianity. Together, these selections by Donne and Swift complement each other by bringing into focus the relationship between futile arguments concerning the truths of religion and the hopelessly flawed reason and logic that spewing charlatan scientists and rationalists. Jonathan Swift's narrator in his satire, Tale of a Tub represents the arbitrary, nonlinear, and overly imaginative tendency of some "thinkers" who helped shape the wildly conflicting philosophies of the late 17th century. This character attempts to weave together the legitimately philosophical views of other characters in The Tale, each representing a contrasting vision of theChristianity (Abrams, 2312). Consequently, this narrator is the target of his satire and, through his many digressions throughout the piece, demonstrates the wide disparity between those who based their opinions on rationality and evidence and those who used this moment of innovative thinking to indulge in uncontrolled ejaculations. of thought.In the section titled "A Digression on the Original, Use, and Improvement of Madness in a Commonwealth," the narrator expresses a deeply convoluted series of paradoxes. In a long-winded manner, the narrator accuses some profound "thinkers" of his time and earlier times of conjecturing extravagant opinions and theories that have no basis in reality. He accuses early scientists like Epicurus of conjuring up the idea that the universe was formed by the attraction of atoms. Apparently, Epicurus was not far away, but the narrator, of course, implies that such a miracle would be necessary to take him seriously (Swift, 2315). Yet, the reasons he explains exhaustively for this trend smack of the same illogicality he tries to denounce. In an attempt to provide a pseudo-scientific explanation for the inconsistencies of modern thought, the narrator describes a kind of vapor that spreads from the "inferior faculties" (Swift, 2313) of men, and infects the brain with the disease of irrationality . Although he uses the surprisingly accurate metaphor of the process by which a thunderstorm forms, his analogy seeks scientific merit where there clearly is none. According to the narrator, Man is, in his natural state, docile and yet unlikely to stand out, just like a clear sky. But like moisture in the ground that eventually makes its way to the sky to form rain clouds, vapors rise from the "lower faculties" of men, forming thought storms that have different results depending on the source of the vapor (Swift 2313 ). The narrator turns to the example of Henry IV, who inexplicably summoned a frighteningly powerful military presence that was ready for a battle or conquest that no one saw the need for. The narrator describes, in true satirical style, how a "surgeon", curious as to the cause of Henry's actions, planted a spike in his head to demonstrate his hunch that mind-altering vapors would escape, "accidentally" killing him in the process. (Swift 2313). Indeed, vapors did escape, and from this clearly invented story, the narrator professes a most improbable theory. According to the narrator, Henry was in pursuit of the Princess de Conde, who had been transferred by her husband to the Spanish Netherlands. The prince, desperate and unable to find "relief" for his heated sexual urges, falls victim to the dreaded vapors. The narrator speculates that the unspent, “raised and inflamed” sperm (Swift, 2313) burned away and was converted into a pure form of anger or irritability. They ascended through the body via the spinal "duct" and poisoned the brain. Naturally, Henry was then led to delusions about the need to pursue and conquer; and thus his vast armies were born. While this attempt to rationalize a series of obviously coinciding events is a ridiculous excuse for science, it makes for a perfectly valid, creative, and colorful metaphor. Perhaps Henry's insecurity after his failed pursuit of Princess Condé drove him to obsess over other forms of conquest. But Swift's point is clear. By thus rendering his narrator's scientific reasoning absurd, he brings into focus the misconception that the peculiar events of the world can be explained in terms no greater than the scale or scope of men. Swift even allows his narrator to make this very point.“For what man, in the natural state, or in the course of thought, ever conceived in his power to reduce the notions of all mankind to exactly the same length, breadth, and height as his own” (Swift, 2314)? And so the hypocrisy and paradoxes continue. In the same way that Swifts mocks those who, like his narrator, fabricate truth from conjecture, Donne's Satire III questions people's ability to decide what is and what is not religious truth. Donne seems embittered by the narrow-mindedness of various forms of religion and rationality. To attack their methods, he uses the characters Mirreus, Crantz, Graius, Phrygius and Gracchus to represent the Roman Catholics, Calvinists, Church of England, skeptics and relativists respectively (Abrams, 1258). He accuses Mirreo of fleeing England for Rome where he can enjoy its ancient traditions (Donne, 1258, 43). It implies that Crantz is completely devoid of character, passion, love, or anything other than state-prescribed religious allegiances (Donne, 1259, 48). Phrygian, the sceptic, denounces every religion because he is dissatisfied with only one (Donne, 1259, 62). Meanwhile Gracchus, the relativist, is so blinded by his acceptance of all truths, that he does not deem it appropriate to pursue at least a deeper understanding of the truth (Donne, 1259, 65). Each of these characters is stuck in their ways, unwilling or unable to accept the infinite possibilities of themselves and the world they live in. Worse, they are all self-promoters, insisting on their way as the only true way. They, especially those who represent various religions, try to impose their version of the truth on others. But Donne understands that truth is not a universal constant. One of the most fundamental characteristics of the Renaissance is the rebirth of humanity as an object worthy of praise rather than contempt. Acceptance of differences and individuality was taken more seriously than before. Donne makes clear his belief that people should be free to choose for themselves what they believe to be religious truth. This plays on the idea that truth is not easily defined; that people do not have the ability to discover the truth in its entirety. As a result, people must engage in an intimate dialogue with their hearts, allowing themselves the freedom to move toward the religion that speaks most effectively to them. Donne makes this opinion clear by saying: Be committed to seeking her1, believe me, He is not of the not, nor of the worst, seeking the best. (Donne, 1259, 74) Donne goes on to use the image of a craggy mountain whose peak represents the personal realization of religious truth (Donne, 1259, 80). The path to the summit is arduous and difficult, having no straight and easy paths; paths that Catholics, Calvinists, etc. they try to create. By looking at one of the major conflicts of the 17th century with Donne's Satire III and understanding the character of the narrator in Swift's Tale of a Tub, we can begin to understand the method behind the madness. which has helped create such a quagmire of religious conflict. Donne encourages those who lack conviction to explore the infinite possibilities of spirituality and decide for themselves, and only themselves, their true path to religious truth. It questions the process by which people arrive at their interpretation of religious truth with such conviction that they feel it is their job to impose it on others. Those who do so have reduced the truth “to exactly the same length, breadth, and height as [their] own” (Swift, 2314), as Swift's narrator states, elevating themselves to a level of perceived understanding that rivals that of God. And they arrive at these conclusions through similar processes satirized by the, 2000.