• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • 1
    CommentGo Back
Download
 
Michel FoucaultWhat Is Enlightenment?Today when a periodical asks its readers a question, it does so in ordertocollect opinions on some subject about which everyone has an opinionalready;there is not much likelihood of learning anything new. In the eighteenthcentury, editors preferred to question the public on problems that didnot yethave solutions. I don't know whether or not that practice was moreeffective; itwas unquestionably more entertaining.In any event, in line with this custom, in November 1784 a Germanperiodical,Berlinische Monatschrift published a response to the question: Was istAufklärung? And the respondent was Kant.A minor text, perhaps. But it seems to me that it marks the discreetentranceinto the history of thought of a question that modern philosophy has notbeencapable of answering, but that it has never managed to get rid of,either. Andone that has been repeated in various forms for two centuries now. FromHegelthrough Nietzsche or Max Weber to Horkheimer or Habermas, hardly anyphilosophyhas failed to confront this same question, directly or indirectly. What,then,is this event that is called the Aufklärung and that has determined, atleast inpart, what we are, what we think, and what we do today?Let us imaginethat theBerlinische Monatschrift still exists and that it is asking its readersthequestion: What is modern philosophy? Perhaps we could respond with anecho:modern philosophy is the philosophy that is attempting to answer thequestionraised so imprudently two centuries ago: Was ist Aufklärung?Let us linger a few moments over Kant's text. It merits attention forseveralreasons.1. To this same question, Moses Mendelssohn had also replied in the samejournal, just two months earlier. But Kant had not seen Mendelssohn'stext whenhe wrote his. To be sure, the encounter of the German philosophicalmovementwith the new development of Jewish culture does not date from thisprecisemoment. Mendelssohn had been at that crossroads for thirty years or so,in
 
company with Lessing. But up to this point it had been a matter of makingaplace for Jewish culture within German thought --which Lessing had triedto doin Die Juden --or else of identifying problems common to Jewish thoughtand toGerman philosophy; this is what Mendelssohn had done in his Phadon; oder,Überdie Unsterblichkeit der Seele. With the two texts published in theBerlinischeMonatschrift the German Aufklärung and the Jewish Haskala recognize thattheybelong to the same history; they are seeking to identify the commonprocessesfrom which they stem. And it is perhaps a way of announcing theacceptance of acommon destiny --we now know to what drama that was to lead.2. But there is more. In itself and within the Christian tradition,Kant's textposes a new problem.It was certainly not the first time that philosophical thought had soughttoreflect on its own present. But, speaking schematically, we may say thatthisreflection had until then taken three main forms.-The present may be represented as belonging to a certain era of theworld,distinct from the others through some inherent characteristics, orseparatedfrom the others by some dramatic event. Thus, in Plato's Statesman theinterlocutorsrecognize that they belong to one of those revolutions oftheworld in which the world is turning backwards, with all the negativeconsequences that may ensue.-The present may be interrogated in an attempt to decipher in it theheraldingsigns of a forthcoming event. Here we have the principle of a kind ofhistoricalhermeneutics of which Augustine might provide an example.-The present may also be analyzed as a point of transition toward thedawningof a new world. That is what Vico describes inthe last chapter of LaScienzaNuova; what he sees 'today' is 'a complete humanity ... spread abroadthroughall nations, for a few great monarchs rule over this world of peoples';it isalso 'Europe ... radiant with such humanity that it abounds in all thegoodthings that make for the happiness of human life.' <1>Now the way Kant poses the question of Aufklärung is entirely different:it is
 
neither a world era to which one belongs, nor an event whose signs areperceived, nor the dawning of an accomplishment. Kant defines Aufklärungin analmost entirely negative way, as an Ausgang, an 'exit,' a 'way out.' Inhisother texts on history, Kant occasionally raises questions of origin ordefinesthe internal teleology of a historical process. In thetext onAufklärung, hedeals with the question of contemporary reality alone. He is not seekingtounderstand the present on the basis of a totality or of a futureachievement. Heis looking for a difference: What difference does today introduce withrespectto yesterday?3. I shall not go into detail here concerning this text, which is notalwaysvery clear despite its brevity. I should simply like to point out threeor fourfeatures that seem to me important if we are to understand how Kantraisedthephilosophical question of the present day.Kant indicates right away that the 'way out' that characterizesEnlightenment isa process that releases us from the status of 'immaturity.' And by'immaturity,'he means a certain state of our will that makes us accept someone else'sauthority to lead us in areas where the use of reason is called for. Kantgivesthree examples: we are in a state of 'immaturity' when a book takes theplace ofour understanding, when a spiritual director takes the place of ourconscience,when a doctor decides for us what our diet is to be. (Let us note inpassingthat the register of these three critiques is easy to recognize, eventhough thetext does not make it explicit.) In any case, Enlightenment is defined byamodification of the preexisting relation linking will, authority, and theuse ofreason.We must also note that this way out is presented by Kant in a ratherambiguousmanner. He characterizes it as a phenomenon, an ongoing process; but healsopresents it as a task and an obligation. From the very first paragraph,he notesthat man himself is responsible for his immature status. Thus it has tobesupposed that he will be able to escape from it only by a change that hehimselfwill bring about in himself. Significantly, Kant says that thisEnlightenment
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
vitorMGL

gda livro pra comer o cerebro!

reply11 / 30 / 2009
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...