Isaiah Berlin’s project of Counter-Enlightenment is based on value- pluralism which admit the notion of incomensurable and incompatible diversity of cultures.
Oxfordian Berlin’s the history of ideas lacks methodological strictness compare to the ones of J. G. A. Pocock and Quentin Skinner of Cambridge School. He neglectly treated the context of ideas and expressed textualism in some extent to arbitrary in perspect of presentism. Meanwhile he distort or exaggerate and over-imposited meaning of ideas that projected his own thought. But in contradictory he recepted concept of ‘understanding’ which is essence of epistemology of ‘Historism’ on the ground of ‘fantasia’ of G. Vico and ‘einfühlen’ of J. G. A Herder.
Berlin’s project of Counter-Enlightenment reveals the limit of a priori and rational inference which injuried unintentionally raison d'etre and telos of the project of Enlightenment. His arguments derived from G. Vico and J. G. A. Herder, even though there is descrepancy on they are advocacies of Counter-Enlightenment. But J. G. Hamann has unintentionally promoted liberal and plural aims by his irrationalism and romanticism though he surely held intention of reactionary. On the other hand, because Counter-Enlightenment of Joseph de Maistre implied over-reactionary and pessimistic realism, has resulted to totalitarianism of proto-fascist.
By this Berlin shows premise of ‘rules of unintended consequences’ that represents vitality of ideas which disgressed from orginal intention and implied self-contradiction and self-destruction. This is opposited expression to viewpoint of ‘recovery of intention’ that is main subject in Q, Skinner’s method. In conclusion, we can say that Berlin’s project of Counter-Enlightenment intended to complememnt and abundant the project of Enlightenment that is composed by elements as ‘human’, ‘nature’, ‘society’, ‘culture’, ‘history’, ‘knowledge’ and ‘understanding’ etc.