The Weiner Court of Muses
Der Weimarer Musenhof (1860); Schiller liest in Tiefurt
Theobald von Oer
If
enlightenment is an aspect of our true biological nature, we can make a
reasoned case for seeking out its continuation or presence in all other things.
If, however, by means of
technological advancement, we ultimately transcend the biological limitations
that have long-since defined the experience of being human, i.e., finite
existence, then the questions surrounding enlightenment may no longer hold our
imagination captive.
Discourse
Utilizing Kant’s Definition of
Enlightenment:
Discuss Rousseau, Kant and Marx as Enlightened
Figures
Kant’s (1724 – 1804) theory of enlightenment bridges the gap
between the rationalist and empiricist traditions of 18th century
Europe; a time characterized by dramatic revolutions in science, philosophy,
politics, and the social order. Despite spending his entire life in the town of
his birth, Königsberg (the then capital of Prussia; now Kaliningrad in Russia),
Kant is regarded as one of the most influential European philosophers since the
Ancient Greeks.
For Kant,
enlightenment was “man’s emergence from his self-incurred immaturity,” which,
if cultivated by means of his “natural endowments” (i.e., one’s own reason), could
serve to free him from the restrictions that prevent enlightenment. By this
reckoning, Kant would consider any scholar, who offered the public a “carefully
considered, well-intentioned thought on the mistaken aspects” of any doctrine,
an enlightened person, or at the very least, an individual freely acting out
“their own reason in all matters of conscience” in order to “liberate mankind
from immaturity”.
“It is a great and beautiful spectacle to see
a man somehow emerge from oblivion by his own efforts, dispelling with the light
of his reason the shadows in which nature had enveloped him, rising above
himself, soaring in his mind right up to the celestial regions, moving, like
the sun, with giant strides through the vast extent of the universe, and, what
is even greater and more difficult, returning himself in order to study man
there and learn of his nature, his obligations, and his end.”
Rousseau's
(1712 – 1778) explanation of human beings as initially existing in a “state of
nature is a highly romanticized one. He is thus known as the first philosopher
of Romanticism, and for his argument that human beings are innately good, but
have had their behavior altered by the corrupting influences of society. Given
Rousseau’s influence on Kant’s work, in particular in the area of ethics, we
can deduce that Kant considered Rousseau an enlightened figure.
The Happy Accidents of the Swing
Jean-Honoré Fragonard (1732 - 1806)
For Kant,
moral law is based on rationality, whereas with Rousseau, nature is a constant
theme that should not be ignored. Despite these differences, like Rousseau,
rather than ask the traditional question about whether our knowledge accurately
reflects reality, Kant asked how reality affected our cognition or
understanding. He attributed what we know as something that is determined by
the nature of our sensory and cognitive apparatus. More simply put, knowledge
starts with experience, which then requires ordering by the mind. Thus, it is possible
by means of our reason, to discover universal truths about our world.
Karl Marx
(1818 – 1883) thought that reality was historically constituted, containing
internal conflicts that drive change. Like Kant, Marx thought that external (economic)
forces affected our cognition and understanding.
Marx’s work
had a profound effect on world history, leading a third of the world’s
population to live under regimes claiming allegiance to his philosophy. Like
Kant, Marx believed that all concepts (including the processes belonging to
history) were open to rational investigation. In other words, the historical
situations upon which Marx based his philosophies were situations that
contained internal conflicts that could be alleviated.
Similar to
Rousseau’s explanation of how social or external influences affected the
natural state of mankind, Marx saw the inexorable logic driving the course of
history as material, rather than spiritual, evidence for changes, and
ultimately, the oppression of mankind, or more specifically, the worker. While
Rousseau perceived social influences as something that affected human action, Marx
further explained how those material forces, which affect human action, in
turn, served as the engine of social change.
Diego Rivera (1886 - 1957)
Diego Rivera (1886 - 1957)
For Marx, the
dialectical conflict between distinct socioeconomic classes that production and
distribution produce determines the course of history, driving social change, which
ultimately contributes to the nature of class conflict. Thus, the opium of the
people, accordingly, is that which sustains the status quo, the
“superstructural” social phenomena (such as political institutions, religions,
ideologies, philosophies, and the arts) that only serve the ruling class – the bourgeoisie.
.jpg)
La Bourgeoisie (1894)
Émile Pouget
Much like
how 18th century philosophers experienced what their generation
considered to be inconceivable heights of intelligence, industrial progress,
and longevity; we again find ourselves on the brink of great social and
philosophical change, the ramifications of which will be profound for
enlightenment thinkers. The adjustments technological advancement pose present
a glimpse of the coming age that is both a dramatic culmination of centuries of
social, philosophical, and technological ingenuity as well as a genuinely
inspiring vision of what Kant meant by “enlightenment” (man’s emergence from
his self-incurred immaturity”). At the onset of the twenty-first century, two
hundred years after Kant’s death, humanity once again stands on the verge of reconsidering
what it means to be enlightened, not only in this discourse, but as a global
community living in an era in which technology will challenge the very nature
of what it means to be human will be both enriched and challenged.
*Disclaimer:
Rousseau, Kant and Marx are still in the bar discussing their theories of enlightenment.
