Immanuel Kant's "What Is Enlightenment?"

Kant is a brilliant writer.  It’s so easy to follow his train of thought; everything he says is rational and in a perfect world, he would be right.  The problem is that we don’t live in a perfect world, where we can expect our co-habitants to hold to the same morals as we do.  The idea of the categorical imperative only works if a) the entire world actually acts as they should and b) the entire world shares the same perspectives, beliefs and moral code.

 

Kant says that moral enlightenment – moral maturity, requires only freedom to reason.  Obviously, I agree with his belief that we each deserve the space and freedom to reason.  But what Kant doesn’t see, and what Hume acknowledges, is that sentiment plays a lot of part in influencing one’s decisions.  Rational arguments only work as equations if everyone comes built with the same influencing factors.  Kant doesn’t seem to see that a community must be built on shared beliefs – John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarian ideas that “the greater good for the greatest number of people” must be included to keep society running forward. 

 

I would even temper this with Hume’s understanding of innate benevolence. The might of the majority cannot trample on the rights of the minority, so in an ideal society, we would all share the freedom to reason (Kant), the natural and rational inclination for benevolence (Hume) and work together to form a society that fosters the greatest good for the greatest number of people (Mill).

 

Works Cited:

Kant, Immanuel. "What is Enlightenment". Trans. Mary C. Smith. Web. Link to full text.