Permalink
“What is Enlightenment?”
Kant describes his idea of enlightenment similar to the idea of individualism. He begins his article by stating that Enlightenment is the ability of a man to escape immaturity, and immaturity is man not being able to use his own mind, his knowledge and guidance, without the guiding hand of another person. Kant urges people in general to have the courage to be individual, to escape the guidance of others and to use pure knowledge and understanding through only the guidance of one’s own mind.
Kant, in searching for a reason why human beings tend to rely on others for the entirety of their lives on such a large scale, decided upon the human nature of laziness and cowardice as being the culprit for keeping men in their state of immaturity. He explains that when one ceases to be an individual, when one relies solely on the thinking of another, he does not have to think himself, and is therefore freeing himself from any meaningful work in his life. Kant alludes to different aspects of society in order to support and exemplify his point, pointing toward books to hold knowledge in the stead of a human mind, spiritual advisers to take the weight of having a conscience away, and a doctor to dictate even one’s diet.
Kant characterizes this immaturity as being naturally imbedded into the minds of human beings, coming to the conclusion that not many people are able to bridge the gap between being immature followers of others and freeing themselves of maturity. Looking toward a positive outcome of humanity’s current state, Kant claims that it would be easier for an entire public of people to enlighten itself rather than an individual. He says that those who have already gained the ability to think for themselves, especially those who are placed in powerful positions by society could be able to stir the minds of those under them into believing that they too can think for themselves. However, in doing so, a true change in the ways that individuals think would not be replaced with the ideas of the powerful people who encouraged them to think for themselves in the first place. This is the reason why many people are likely to be confused, thinking they are independent, when in reality; they are following the ideas and guidance of others. These powerful people who have learned to think for themselves are thus held somewhat responsible for the very society in which they live.
Using his description of the few people in power over others, Kant begins to talk about the clergy and the religious institutions themselves, feeling as though immaturity in matters of religion is the most dishonorable of all other immaturities. He claims that the guardians or powerful people who represent spirituality should not be immature themselves. He alludes to oaths that clergymen take when they are accepted into service, arguing that such an oath goes against human nature because it is unethical to ask a younger generation of clergy to comply to the same doctrine as a much older generation. In this way, the new age is kept from expanding and learning, something that Kant believes is essential in the progression of humanity.
Although Kant somewhat supports religious institutions as long as their clergy are able to think for themselves and evolve into what is most needed by society, he also points out that it is unacceptable to raise up a religious institution that means to be permanent and unyielding in its way of belief without letting others speak out against it in public.
Kant quickly jumps back to speaking of the individual and his means of achieving enlightenment by saying that although it is acceptable for a man to wait to receive enlightenment, it is not acceptable for him to forget it altogether. In Kant’s eyes, this is spitting in the face of one’s natural freedoms, these natural freedoms including the search for personal salvation. This search for salvation is something that Kant touches upon in relation to the idea of a ruling monarchy, saying that the monarchy has no business poking its fingers into the way that its subjects achieve salvation. In Kant’s opinion, the job of government is to protect those who’s search for salvation is being halted or hindered by any other. Kant ends his article by claiming that at his time of writing, the world was not in an enlightened age, but was well on its way in that direction.
I agree with most of what Kant says. It is man’s duty to think for himself, and by refusing to do so, man becomes another cog in the machine of society, a mindless fool who follows orders and ideas as if they were his own, but never questions them. This goes back to the idea that it is man’s duty to scrutinize certain things and question them and doubt them in order to find truth. The man who simply follows, or the man who is steeped in immaturity, as Kant would call it, is one who does not question the ideas and beliefs that are spoon fed to him from the hand of society. This is the man who does not have an opinion outside of the common one. The man whom you ask, “What do you think about this issue” and he usually replies with something along the lines of “I’ve never thought about it before,” or “I don’t have an opinion on that.”
This immature man is the man who keeps society at a standstill because he listens only to the teachings of others, relying on their guidance without using the wisdom to discern whether it is true or even prevalent. The man who listens to everything his parents taught him without wondering whether they were right, the man who believes in his government no matter what they say, the man who is virtually void of any feelings or opinions on pressing matters, even when they are explained to him in full detail; this man is a danger to the progression of society as a whole, as human beings, as a community of thinkers.
