Kant and Burke on Enlightenment

Kant and Burke on Enlightenment

Although Kant emphasizes personal duty and Burke asserts the value of custom, the two theories are compatible because of each philosopher’s suspicion of outright revolution and respect for historical institutions and traditional wisdom. One may attempt to rebut this contention due to the fundamental method by which each theory arrives at the rights of citizens. Yes, Kant’s view uses reason to discern rights, while Burke’s view utilizes the notion of “entailed inheritance.” However, Kant’s cautionary approach to reformation uniquely respects historical institutions by forcing members of the community to justify policy changes before legitimate reformation occurs. Additionally, Kant’s emphasis on personal duty pushes individuals to respect custom by recognizing the necessity of the continuation of existing institutions until a better solution is discovered and agreed upon. The two also share the concern that science will gradually replace religion and drastic revolution will ultimately weaken the community. Each theory’s resulting focus on religion, as well as the social and political setting its existence arguably enhances, compliments the other and establishes a comprehensive theory.

After suggesting three primary causes of society’s intellectual bondage – laziness, cowardice, and complacency – Kant presents elements of a society necessary to overcome immaturity and achieve his ideal enlightenment. Alongside the fundamental prerequisite of one’s freedom to think, the essay encourages boldness, activity, and criticism to counter the passiveness that created the culture of acceptance. Kant believes that the ability for an individual to express oneself candidly, without fear of restriction or punishment, is paramount for enlightenment. Although essentially promoting freedom of speech and tolerance of thought diversity, he also reminds the reader of the potential conflict this poses with one’s duty to the public.

Consistent with his foundational understanding of the importance of context, Burke is quick to warn of abstraction in politics. “Circumstances,” he says, “give in reality to every political principle its distinguishing color and discriminating effect” (Burke, 551). Here, Burke asserts that liberties vary with time and circumstance, but cannot be founded upon any abstract rule. By simply rationalizing the rights of citizens without the context of a given community, the governing body is ineffectively applying political theory to an unclear political sphere. Burke emphasizes the need to first investigate a society’s individual culture before implementing perceivably rational policy.

In Reflections on the Revolution in France, Burke, the founder of modern conservativism, approaches the enlightenment with a concentration on the value of context and tradition. A nostalgia for the disappearing world repeatedly emerges throughout his counter-enlightenment argument as he explores the abstraction of politics, the increasingly mechanical operation of institutions, and the dissolving social contract.

In response to this conflict, Kant introduces the conception of gradualism, which necessitates enlightened guardians and a distinction between the public and private spheres. Enlightened leadership makes possible the environment through which members of the community can respectfully engage in thoughtful debate with the prospect of legitimate progress. In a society in which the monarch truly represents the people, the government does not intimidate its citizens into obedience, but rather encourages the pursuit of wisdom. However, Kant is quick to acknowledge that this debate must only occur in the public sphere, for individuals must remain committed to their duties in the private sphere. The unique obligation of restraining expression in the private sphere is meant to lessen the likelihood of an eruption of chaos. This approach permits the gradual reform of institutions in a mediated and controlled manner, which prevents the formation of new prejudice, e.g. the enlightened thinking down on the unenlightened. Kant is ultimately interested in preserving what he believes to be good about the enlightenment movement and doing so in a cautious, moderated manner.