Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Daniel Levine
PSC 422
February 17, 2014
What is the Meaning of Enlightenment?
Enlightenment is the human beings emergence from his self-incurred minority. Minority is the
inability to make use one's own understanding without direction from another. This minority is
self-incurred when its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in lack of resolution and
courage to use it without direction from another. Sapere Aude! Have courage to make use of
your own understanding! is therefore the motto of the enlightenment (Kant, 17).
The previous quote is an excerpt from an article published by Immanuel Kant.
The article, titled An answer to the question: What is enlightenment? was
publicized in an intellectual journal circa 1784. Kant was and is a greatly influential,
and famously quotable philosopher from the age of enlightenment. In his article
Kant aims to postulate a theory that explains the meaning of enlightenment, and its
effect on individual freedom.
The principal purpose of this paper is to provide an explanation for Kants
view of the answer to the principal question What is Enlightenment? In my
explanation I will cover Kants view on enlightenment, as well as his beliefs on its
ties to individual freedom. My response will strictly cover material from the source
article, An answer to the question: What is enlightenment (Kant). Through this
examination, I will offer explanations for his claims, and any dissenting opinions, if
they exist. Before I begin my examination, it is important to first explain how this
principle came to be.
differential treatment. Put that all together and what you have is something like
this - enlightenment is a possibility of the human experience that comes into
existence when one has subjected oneself to a part of a population which is given
differential treatment however, this is not what he meant.
Modern definitions dont help to explain his claim, but thankfully we have
definitions from Kant himself. Kant states that minority is the inability to make use
of ones own understanding without the help of another. He also states that the
minority is self-incurred if its cause lies not in lack of understand but in lack of
resolution and courage to use it without direction from another. He basically says
that for humans, enlightenment is the separation of thought from accepted beliefs
of others which leads to the transcendence of independent thought that is selfevaluated for validity through reason and ones understanding of their observations
in the world. Also, these thoughts or beliefs must be protected from outside
influence after their construction as well. This can be simplified into saying that you
must use your power of comprehension to agree upon personal opinions that are
void of any ideas not of your own, whereby a self-reflection of your ideas will leave
you with a belief that is truly yours. From this, I constructed my previous
clarification that Kant essentially claims enlightenment to be the ability of a person
to think for themself.
Kant follows this with his beliefs for a public emergence versus individual
emergence. Although he believes that a public emergence is more likely than
individual emergence, he argues for both that all which is required for this to
happen, is to have the existence of freedom. Thus, without freedom, there would be
no possibility for an emergence on either level. This seems ridiculous, as ones
To this question he replies, and explains the three forms of use for reason; public,
private, and scholarly.
He proposes that public use of reason alone can bring about enlightenment in
humans. Public use of reason is the use which he believes helps promote
enlightenment, and it is essentially the declaration of ones reason to the public via
any medium. Private use of reason is described as the declaration of ones reason
while holding a certain civil post or office. We still have this practice of limited use of
ones reason and it can be seen in many white collar careers, as well as civil post or
political office. This responsibility is referred to as a professional liability, in which
one cannot state a personal opinion if it is dissenting towards ones professional
career standard. Although private use restricts the ability of some to voice their
opinion, Kant says that they still have a civic responsibility to voice their opinions.
This can be done through the third use of ones reason, the scholarly use. As a
scholar, it is permissible for one to voice their opinion to the world of readers
regardless of their limitations through private use (Kant, 18-19).
An import factor for individual freedom, which ties to this emergence, is the
civic duty that we humans must uphold against the guardians of society. He
believes that an unalterable creed, which would perpetuate a guardianship over the
systems members and all citizens through them, is one that is null and void. It is
null and void because it binds the systems members into following a condition that
would prove impossible for progress in enlightenment. On this he states The
touchstone of whatever can be decided upon as law for a people lies in the
question: whether a people could impose such a law upon itself (Kant, 20). I
believe this to be a subtle hint at the transition of his claims applicability from a
religious standpoint, to a governmental one. He is saying that the people must
References:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/self+incurred
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/minority
http://www.learnersdictionary.com/definition/emergence