Hi, everyone.
For the first week of class, we are talking about Immanuel
Kant, who is one of the most famous philosophers
of the Enlightenment.
And of course, the text that we're reading for
today is called, "What is enlightenment?"
or Aufklarung in German.
So the Enlightenment, as you may know already, is a period
in the 17th and 18th centuries that roughly begins with
the Scientific Revolution, following the Renaissance.
And it's a time in European history where
people are really starting to take on projects of
knowledge for themselves.
They're no longer relying on the church to
give them information.
They're starting to focus more on scientific and mathematical
processes of observation.
In the scientific revolution,
you have two new modes of knowing that come
to be emphasized.
And the first is the method of experimentation that
we now associate with the scientific method.
Things like the telescope start to be used by folks
like Galileo in order to prove that the earth
actually revolves around the sun rather than the sun
revolving around the earth.
And this emphasis on experimentation really
shows that humans as observers can attain truth.
This method of observation often doesn't just rely
on observation through the naked eye however.
It's often mediated through technological
means such as telescopes or microscopes, et cetera.
And this is the foundation for now what we associate
with the natural sciences.
On the other hand, you have a more mathematical
method that's emphasized by people like Newton.
Here, the idea is that the universe obeys a set of
natural laws, and if humans can access those laws and
interpret them-- laws like gravity-- then we can make
calculations that will allow us to understand the
course of the universe.
So there's less of an emphasis here on experimentation
and observation, and more on structures of reason.
And so where you have somebody like Galileo suggesting that
the earth revolves around the sun using means of
observation, you have Newton saying, 'actually, we can
prove that the earth revolves around the sun just by making
mathematical calculations.'
If you've studied Modern Philosophy, you might
recognize these two methods as the methods of
empiricism, which focuses on sensory observation,
and rationalism, which focuses on laws of reason.
Kant tries to do something like bring these two
methods together, and this is what he calls
'transcendental idealism.'
What are some features of the Enlightenment
that are important for our purposes here?
Well, the first is the idea that the individual themselves
can understand the world as it is structured, right?
We don't have to rely on the authority of things outside of
us, whether it's the church, whether it's a textbook
or something like that.
A second, which will be essential for the theme
of this course overall, is the theme of progress.
The Enlightenment develops this idea that humans
are increasingly getting more and more free, more
and more intelligent.
We are becoming better.
You see this type of thinking explicitly developed by Kant
in "What is enlightenment?"
In this text, Kant suggests that humans are gradually
emerging out of immaturity and into enlightenment.
And we're doing this by means of developing our reason.
So we see here the emphasis on reason that emerges
through the scientific revolution and the focus
on universal natural laws.
And we also see the emphasis on progress.
The motto of the enlightenment, which Kant
uses here, is the Latin term 'sapere aude,' which
means 'dare to know.' For Kant, immaturity is defined
as the incapacity to know without someone else's
guidance, whereas maturity or wisdom is associated
with being able to be guided by yourself--specifically,
by your own reason.
When we fail to overcome ignorance, it's
often self-incurred, according to Kant.
Self-incurred ignorance or immaturity is caused by a
lack of determination or courage, rather than by
a lack of intelligence.
So it's really easy for us, Kant thinks, to be huddled
up in a cocoon of ignorance and to be overtaken by
laziness and cowardice.
Because
it feels nice, right?
It's stressful to be faced with the responsibility
of knowing things beyond the realm of what we've
been told, what we've been taught from an early age.
We like to rely on what Kant calls statutes and formulas,
rather than undertaking the task of figuring
things out for ourselves.
But a problem here is that this leaves us open
to being manipulated by others, especially those
in power who may not have the best of intentions.
Now you might be hearing this and think, 'Great!
All I have to do is think my way out of ignorance because
I have, as an individual, the tools to do so!' But,
as Kant notes in this text,
it's really challenging for us to do that.
Right?
I can't just be like, 'I will myself magically to have
the answers to everything.' Even though, as humans, we
are endowed with reason, which means that we have the
tools we need in order to overcome ignorance, according
to Kant it's hard for us to do so by an individual
cultivation of the mind.
The best way is for the public as a group
to enlighten itself.
Here's where things get a little tricky for Kant,
because it seems like we need some individuals
initially to be enlightened in order for the rest of the
group to enlighten itself.
But how do those individuals initially get enlightened?
Well, he says a few people have the ability to do that.
And after that, they're able to sort of trigger
the enlightenment process in other people.
So teaching here is not a matter of forcing ideas into
somebody's head, but rather a matter of sparking something
in them that will encourage a process of self-development.
According to Kant, the public will naturally enlighten
itself when it has freedom.
So for instance, Kant says on page 136 that
all that is required for enlightenment is freedom.
Now, he also distinguishes between a private use of
reason and a public use of reason on this same page and
on the page that follows.
And he says here that we should always have
freedom when it comes to our public use of reason.
We should be able to debate, for instance, about
whether laws are just.
About whether the information we've been
fed is accurate or not.
The public use of reason has to be free and unrestricted
in order for enlightenment to be able to occur.
But Kant says that there's also a private use of
reason, which is the way we use our reason in a civic
post or office--basically, in our jobs.
Right?
And he says that in many cases, this type of reason
does have to be restricted.
And example that Kant gives is that I might
disagree with current tax law, but as a citizen, I
still have to pay my taxes.
Here.
We see that, for Kant, we have to obey the laws
of the state, even as we might critique them.
This pertains to a paradox Kant describes on page
141, where paradoxically, we have freedom through
the limitation of it.
And I just want to flag that paradox here because it's
something we'll come back to.
Broadening now from beyond this text, I just want to
give you a few key takeaways that I think are important for
understanding how Kant sets up the theme of this course.
The first is the reliance on a reason rather than
on God, religion, or other forms of authority.
When Kant is describing, coming out of self incurred
immaturity, he associates this immaturity in large
part with religion.
Now, Kant is not against religion, but he thinks
that it should not be the driving force of our reason.
Instead, our reason should follow the natural
laws of the human mind.
A second theme is a belief in the progress of history,
which I mentioned as being a very important theme
in the Enlightenment.
Overall, this is what sometimes known as a
teleological view of history-- or the idea that history is
tending towards some end goal.
Teleology comes from the Greek word telos, which
means end, aim or goal, and -ology--logos, which means,
among other things, rule.
A third theme, which is not one that comes up
particularly explicitly in this text, is that Kant
thinks that there is a difference between appearances
and things in themselves, but that we can never
know what things are like
beyond appearances.
So for instance, when I am drinking this can
of LaCroix, I only know it as it appears to me.
Right?
It's cool to the touch.
It's pink and orange.
It tastes a certain way in my mouth: it has a
vague taste of grapefruit.
I can't ever know what this is like in and of itself outside
of my perception, because
I'm always experiencing it through the lens
of my perception.
Kant says the fact that I can never know something
as it is in itself isn't a particularly depressing
feature of human existence.
It's actually kind of cool because it means that all we
have to do is focus on the way that things appear to
us--and what we find is that they actually appear according
to certain laws of reason.
I look forward to discussing this with you
on Slack and on Zoom.
See you soon.