About 100 years.

17th century philosophy in the West is generally regarded as seeing the start of modern philosophy, and the shaking off of the medieval approach, especially scholasticism. It is often called the “Age of Reason” and is considered to succeed the Renaissance and precede the Age of Enlightenment. Alternatively, it may be seen as the earlier part of the Enlightenment.

The Enlightenment Period receives modern attention as a central model for many movements in the modern period. Another important movement in 18th century philosophy, closely related to it, focused on belief and piety. Some of its proponents, such as George Berkeley, attempted to demonstrate rationally the existence of a supreme being. Piety and belief in this period were integral to the exploration of natural philosophy and ethics, in addition to political theories of the age. However, prominent Enlightenment philosophers such as Thomas Paine, Voltaire, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and David Hume questioned and attacked the existing institutions of both Church and State. The 19th century also saw a continued rise of empiricist ideas and their application to political economy, government and sciences such as physics, chemistry and biology.

That’s a pretty broad question. Any specific differences you’re interested in?

Very broadly, the 17th century philosophers consist of people advocating rationalist and empiricist understandings of the world. The new foundations of philosophy are being grounded on human reason and empirical investigation instead of church authority and dogmatism. Interest in science grows as time progresses.

Ultimately, the project of the 17th century finds it’s greatest synthesis and also critique in the 18th century’s Immanuel Kant.

Males and females are the same, but their knowledge of the world and their perceptions of the world have changed. Human beings started depending more on scientific and observable proof than they depended on religious knowledge in the nineteenth century, which resulted in a major shift in conceptualization. Some parts of humanity are still struggling with these concepts. The resistance of religious institutions to scientific knowledge, rather than amalgamating into those concepts and absorbing them, accentuated the difference and antipathy between them. This difference might be analogous to the difference between men and women and the “ancient” concepts of women and “modern” concepts of women. Science freed women from ancient paternalistic atavistic concepts.