Robertson Flashcards
The essay ‘What is Enlightenment?’ by the philosopher Immanuel Kant can be interpreted in many different ways. Describe the various interpretations of this essay that are discussed in Robertson’s article.
In Robertson’s article, the essay ‘What is Enlightenment?’ by Immanuel Kant is interpreted in various ways. T.J. Reed’s interpretation emphasizes Kant’s essay as the “primal scene” of Enlightenment, signifying a transition in the individual’s life and history. Reed places it in the historical circumstances of Frederick II’s Prussia and explains what Kant meant by the public use of reason. He also argues that Kant is emphatically not an ivory-tower philosopher and intended his philosophy to address substantive issues that confront everyone in the real world.
Additionally, Robertson discusses the interpretation of Kant’s essay by Andreas Peˇcar and Damien Tricorne, who argue that the goals of the Enlightenment were very different from those of modern liberals. They also emphasize the need to re-place Enlightenment texts in their historical context to understand them accurately.
Furthermore, Robertson mentions Dennis Rasmussen’s interpretation, which notes how Kant’s outlook consciously departs from leading strands of eighteenth-century thought, emphasizing Kant’s extremely restrictive views on various moral and philosophical issues.
Overall, the interpretations of Kant’s essay ‘What is Enlightenment?’ discussed in Robertson’s article highlight the complexity and diversity of perspectives on the Enlightenment and its philosophical underpinnings.
1) How does the German Enlightenment differ from the standard account of the Enlightenment, which is mainly based on the French situation?
The German Enlightenment differs from the standard account of the Enlightenment, which is mainly based on the French situation in several key ways. According to Robertson, the proponents of the Enlightenment in Germany were typically university graduates with firm institutional positions, often academics or professional administrators in the civil service of the numerous large and small German states. This contrasts the French model, which presents an intelligentsia largely located in the capital, maintaining a degree of independence with some help from patrons, and in many cases opposed to the governing regime. The French model also focuses on high-profile frequenters of the Paris salons or half-starved hack writers. At the same time, the German Enlightenment was characterised by individuals with secure institutional positions and professional careers.
Furthermore, the German Enlightenment tended to be much more affirmative in its attitude towards society, in contrast to the French model, which often portrayed opposition to the governing regime. The career paths of French philosophes were seldom replicated in Germany, and the German Enlightenment tended to be much more integrated with society, with proponents often holding positions in academia or the civil service.
Additionally, the standard account of the Enlightenment often portrays it as a foreign body in German culture, identifying it with rationalism and French influence and recording with relief the advent of the Sturm und Drang movement in the 1770s. This narrative, rooted in nineteenth-century nationalism, can be traced back to disparaging remarks by Hegel and Wilhelm Dilthey and has been critiqued for its anti-French motivation and its inability to explain the emergence of Weimar classicism.
In summary, the German Enlightenment differed from the standard account of the Enlightenment by its emphasis on secure institutional positions, integration with society, and its divergence from the French model of opposition to the governing regime and independence from patrons.
