Immanuel Kant on “Enlightenment”
An analysis of Kant’s famous essay, and its relevance in the modern era.
INTRODUCTION
One of the most influential philosophers, Immanuel Kant published “Answering the Question: What Is Enlightenment?” in December 1784. It was intended as a reply to Reverend Johann Friedrich Zöllner’s year old question (What is enlightenment?).
Kant’s essay defines enlightenment, explores reasons for its lack, and specifies the preconditions that make its achievement possible. He claims that freedom is the foremost prerequisite for acquiring enlightenment. Kant boldly refuted church and state paternalism while praising Frederick II of Prussia for being a liberal monarch.
Immanuel Kant describes enlightenment as man’s emancipation from “self-incurred tutelage”.
The opening lines of the essay, which define enlightenment as the inability of a person to think for oneself because of the lack of courage, and not intellect, are widely quoted.
MEANING OF ENLIGHTENMENT
Answering the title question in the opening paragraph of his essay, Kant states that “Enlightenment is man’s emergence from his self-incurred tutelage (Unmündigkeit in German)”. Tutelage means guardianship, and self-incurred guardianship means either the individual or certain actors in the society have presumed the role of a guardian for that individual.
Tutelage means guardianship, but here, Kant uses it to refer to lack of resolution and intellectual courage. He elucidates that a lack of intellect or understanding is not the underlying cause of lack of enlightenment; it is the paucity of courage to use one’s own wisdom and reason without external guidance.
In simpler words, enlightenment is the state of being free from immaturity that one causes oneself. This immaturity is the inability that one has in thinking for oneself, and the habit of relying on others’ opinions for guidance. This immature individual is incapable of forming their own understanding or judgement of things.
Kant uses the German word “Unmündigkeit”, which, when literally translated, means “legal adulthood. “Unmündig”, the word it has been derived from, means “closed-mouthed” or “dependent”.
Since Kant’s moral philosophy centers around the concept of autonomy, he highlights the contrast between an intellectually independent, mature or “enlightened” person and an intellectually dependent, immature and “non-enlightened” person.
He then states that this deficiency (of intellectual freedom) is common among the masses as it is also considered threatening by most. Therefore, he aptly coins the effective motto of Enlightenment as “sapere aude!”, translated to — “dare to be wise”.
REASONS FOR THE LACK OF ENLIGHTENMENT
Kant elucidates that an immature person is so because they let other people make decisions for them, so much so that they become dependent on them and start to find independent thinking difficult.
Kant provides a vivid analogy to illustrate this claim. The government, claims Kant, tames and trains citizens like animals. They are instructed to not cross certain lines, and told of the danger that would befall them if they do. This makes the citizens too scared to even try. Then, the government provides these gullible citizens with a set of beliefs and judgements that they unthinkingly accept, adding to their own immaturity.
Kant gives four reasons for a human’s self incurred tutelage — laziness, cowardice, domination and complacency.
Humans often find it bothersome to reason on their own or to push the horizons of their knowledge independently. To simply obey others without questioning them is a much easier alternative.
Also, their laziness is further encouraged by their cowardice. Because they are so used to following the norm, they are afraid of crossing over into uncharted territories. They fear failure in their venture to independence.
This is seen as an opportunity for some smart(er) people, who gain control of the public and lull them into submission and obedience. The few smart ‘elites’ exaggerate the benefits of following ‘their’ norm and overstate the dangers that exist outside of it.
Kant then compares humans to domestic cattle who are so comfortable with their complacency that they remain silently in their serfdom shackles, without challenging the elites or the norm.
This gullible public is education and knowledge deprived, and stays stuck in the vicious circle of immaturity and tutelage.
ENLIGHTENMENT : INDIVIDUAL AND SOCIETY
The public, at large, is comfortable with blindly following the guidance of Church and Monarchy, two of the main guiding institutions in the society. Because of their lack of will to be autonomous, the immature public is incapable of accepting the uncomfortable task of thinking for themselves.
Here, Kant adds that even if the public did try to overthrow the norm that has been imposed on them, they would still be confined by their own uncultivated minds.
Kant highlights the comparative ease of attaining enlightenment as a group (in society) as compared to a lone individual.
His reason for making this claim is that the journey of an individual achieving enlightenment on their own is exceedingly difficult because that person will inevitably commit mistakes. These mistakes could discourage that person as breaking old patterns of habit (here, it refers to blind obedience) is extremely challenging. This implies that two qualities that such a candidate should possess to become free of immaturity are vigor and fearlessness.
Kant believed that an individual’s freedom is completely useless, as only the use of the combined public’s freedom is useful in reaching an enlightened state.
Kant expressed that for a society to be enlightened, its citizens should obey laws. At the same time, they should have the strength to criticize what they think to be unjust.
REQUIREMENTS FOR ENLIGHTENMENT
After analyzing the cause of immaturity and tutelage in the public, Kant proposes a solution. Kant states that the tools required to attain enlightenment are freedom and reason. These tools would enable the masses to think independently, act wisely and “be treated in accordance with their dignity”.
Freedom
Kant emphasizes that freedom is the first and foremost prerequisite for the attainment of enlightenment. He justifies this by claiming that a person who has the right to express their thoughts and judgements without the fear of punishment will offer uninhibited ideas.
By this, Kant expresses his advocacy for the freedom of speech and tolerance for divergent opinions. Note that Kant cautions that this freedom of expression must not act as a hindrance in the individual performing their duties to the society.
Kant firmly believes that the enlightenment of leaders is necessary for the subsequent enlightenment of the public. He gives the example of monarchy in which, only a monarch who is truly enlightened would grant their subjects the vital freedom to think without getting offended by their opposing viewpoints, and punishing them for it.
In his bold statement, Kant states that “his (monarch’s) law giving authority rests on uniting the general public will on his own”. By this, he is reinstating that a monarch’s wishes are the representation of the public’s wishes. He expresses support for a government that, instead of intimidating its citizens, encourages them. This government would take into account the wishes and interests of its citizens instead of imposing its absolute and unmoving authority on them.
Reason
Reason is the key to overthrowing immaturity and self-incurred tutelage. Kant hopes that, given freedom, the general public will become a force of free thinking.
He points out that there will always exist some people who do not comply with the norm of tutelage and think for themselves. These people will help the rest cultivate their minds.
Drawing reference to the era he lived in, Kant notes that “a revolution may well put an end to autocratic despotism… or power seeking oppression, but it will never produce a true reform in ways of thinking.”
While acknowledging the great impact that the American Revolution had in Europe, Kant warns that new prejudices will take the place of the old ones and renew the cycle of the tutelage of the “great unthinking masses.”
ANALYSIS OF KANT’S IDEAS IN THE DEMOCRATIC ERA
The 18th century was a very different age as compared to the modern 21st century. At that time, Monarchy — the widely prevalent mode of governance was also considered the most ideal one. But now that title has unanimously been transferred to Democracy. This raises serious questions for the relevance of Kant’s enlightenment in the current era.
Kant describes revolutions as being counterproductive as they replace the old norm with a new one. This new imposition is just like the old one — in the sense that it has no decreasing effect on the public’s immaturity. However this claim is far from true when it comes to democracy (which is a revolution). Here, people have a say in selecting their leaders and they also have the power to unanimously change them if they feel dissatisfied with their governance.
Freedom or liberty is often represented as the chief principle of democracy. The public has the freedom to either re-elect or change their representatives, based on their performance.
It should be noted that many of Kant’s ideas hinted at the intellectual success of systems like democracy, where there is freedom of thought and speech. This idea is undoubtedly relevant in the current age.
RELEVANCE OF KANT’S IDEAS
One common criticism for Immanuel Kant theories is that they are impractical and vague, rendering them useless for practical application. Rationality is a big part of one’s personality, and these two are often inseparable. That is why it is hard for even philosophers to come up with universally applicable principles.
Because Kant and other enlightenment philosophers belonged to the same era, their ideas were not completely independent of their cultural influence.
With time, culture evolves and the validity of old ideas decreases.
That being said, laziness, cowardice, domination and complacency. the four ‘reasons’ for the lack of enlightenment, are still as relevant today as they were back then. The only difference is that in this ‘age of enlightenment’, we are getting much better at spotting and working towards alleviating these vices.
CONCLUSION
In this essay, Kant sheds light on the reasons for lack of enlightenment and requirements for acquiring it. He describes enlightenment as the process of shedding intellectual bondage that had been persisting for centuries.
While he admitted that monarchies exploited their authority by robbing people of education and forcing them to comply with the monarch’s will, he thought of the general public as the culprit for their own immaturity.
Kant strongly expresses the importance of public use of freedom for the attainment of enlightenment. He believes that if the masses started expressing themselves freely in public spaces, their ideas and inputs will influence those of authority. Consequently, decision making would not be an isolated process.
Kant expertly quotes that — “Are we living in an enlightened age? No, but we live in an age of enlightenment.”
While his theory has been subjected to a lot of criticism, its historical significance cannot be denied. Kant’s theory continues to be an important tool that helps in understanding the meaning of enlightenment.
