Kant’s Machiavellian Moment

Jay Foster

Resumen


At least two recent collections of essays – Postmodernism and the Enlightenment (2001) and What’s Left of Enlightenment?: A Postmodern Question (2001) – have responded to postmodern critiques of Enlightenment by arguing that Enlightenment philosophes themselves embraced a number of post-modern themes. This essay situates Kant’s essay Was ist Aufklärung (1784) in the context of this recent literature about the appropriate characterization of modernity and the Enlightenment. Adopting an internalist reading of Kant’s Aufklärung essay, this paper observes that Kant is surprisingly ambivalent about who might be Enlightened and unspecific about when Enlightenment might be achieved. The paper argues that this is because Kant is concerned less with elucidating his concept of Enlightenment and more with characterizing a political condition that might provide the conditions for the possibility of Enlightenment. This paper calls this political condition modernity and it is achieved when civil order can be maintained alongside fractious and possibly insoluble public disagreement about matters of conscience, including the nature and possibility of Enlightenment. Thus, the audience for the Aufklärung essay is not the tax collector, soldier or clergyman, but rather the sovereign. Kant enjoins and advises the prince that discord and debate about matters of conscience need not entail any political unrest or upheaval. It is in this restricted (Pocockian) sense that the Enlightenment essay is Kant’s Machiavellian moment.

Palabras clave


Kant; Enlightenment; Aufklärung; post-modernism; modernism; modernity; Machiavelli; Pocock; Foucault; Lyotard

Texto completo:

PDF

Referencias


Allison, Henry E. (2012), Essays on Kant, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Baker, Keith M. and Peter H. Reill (2001), What’s Left of Enlightenment?: A Postmodern

Question, Stanford University Press, Stanford.

Berman, Marshall (1988 [1982]), All That Is Solid Melts into Air: The Experience of

Modernity, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth.

Bernstein, Richard J. (1994), “Foucault: Critique as a Philosophical Ethos” in Critique and

Power: Recasting the Foucault/Habermas Debate, ed. Michael Kelly, MIT Press,

Cambridge, pp. 211-242.

Cassirer, Ernst (1955 [1951]), The Philosophy of the Enlightenment, trans. Fritz C.A.

Koelln and James P. Pettegrove, Beacon Press, Boston.

Deligiorgi, Katerina (2005), Kant and the Culture of Enlightenment, State University of

New York Press, Albany, N.Y.

Daston, Lorraine and Peter Galison (2007), Objectivity, Zone Books, New York.

Ecksteins, Modris (1989), Rites of Spring: The Great War and the Birth of the Modern

Age, Lester and OrpenDennys, Toronto.

Fleischacker, Samuel (2013), What is Enlightenment?, Routledge, New York.

Foucault, Michel (2008), The Government of the Self and Others: Lectures at the Collège

de France, 1982-1982, ed. Frédéric Gros and trans. Graham Burchell, Palgrave Macmillan,

New York.

Gordon, Daniel, ed. (2001) Postmodernism and Enlightenment: New Perspectives in

Eighteenth-Century French Intellectual History, Routledge, New York.

Greenberg, Clement (1939), “Avante-Garde and Kitsch”, Partisan Review 6, no. 5, pp. 34-

Habermas, Jürgen (1989), “Taking Aim at the Heart of the Present: On Foucault’s Lecture

on Kant’s What is Enlightenment?” in The New Conservatism: Cultural Criticism and the

Historians Debate, ed. and trans. S.W. Nicholson, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp.173-

Hollinger, David A. (2001), “The Enlightenment and the Genealogy of Cultural Conflict

in the United States” in What’s Left of Enlightenment?: A Postmodern Question, eds. Keith

M. Baker and Peter H. Reill, Stanford University Press, Stanford, pp.7-18.

Horace (1978 [20-14BC]), Satires. Epistles. The Art of Poetry, trans. H. Rushton

Fairclough, Loeb Classical Library, Cambridge, Mass.

Hughes, H. Stuart (1977{1958]), Consciousness and Society: The Reorientation of

European Social Thought, 1890-1930, Vintage Books, New York.

Kant, Immanuel (1997 [1784] “What is Enlightenment?” in The Politics of Truth: Michel

Foucault, ed. and trans. Sylvere Lotringer, Semiotext(e), New York.

Laursen, John Christian (1996), “The Subversive Kant: The Vocabulary of ‘Public’ and

‘Publicity’” in What is Enlightenment?: Eighteenth-Century Answers and Twentieth-

Century Questions, ed. James Schmidt, University of California Press, Berkeley. pp. 253-

Lears, T.J. Jackson (1981), No Place of Grace: Modernism and Antimodernism and the

Transformation of American Culture, Pantheon Books, New York.

Morgan, Diane (2000), Kant Trouble: The Obscurities of the Enlightened, Routledge, New

York.

Lyotard, Jean-François (1984), The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, trans.

G. Bennington and B. Massumi, Manchester University Press, Manchester.

Piché, Claude (2015), “Kant’s Conception of Enlightenment: Aristocratic or Democratic,”

Con-Textos Kantianos, above.

Pocock, J.G.A. (1975), The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the

Atlantic Republican Tradition, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

Porter, Roy and Mikuláš Teich, eds. (1981), The Enlightenment in National Context,

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Richardson, Alan W. (2003), “Conceiving, Experiencing, and Conceiving Experiencing:

Neo-Kantianism and the History of the Concept of Experience,” Topoi 22, no. 1, pp. 55-67.

Rorty, Richard (2001), “The Continuity Between the Enlightenment and

‘Postmodernism’,” in What’s Left of Enlightenment?: A Postmodern Question, eds. Keith

M. Baker and Peter H. Reill, Stanford University Press, Stanford, pp. 19-38.

Schmidt, James (2011), “Misunderstanding the Question: ‘What is

Enlightenment?’:Venturi, Habermas, and Foucault”, History of European Ideas 37, pp. 43-

Schmidt, James, ed. (1996), What is Enlightenment?: Eighteenth-Century Answers and

Twentieth-Century Questions, University of California Press, Berkeley.

Schorske, Carl E. (1981 [1961]), Fin-de-Siecle Vienna: Politics and Culture, Vintage

Books, New York.

Van Horn Melton, James (1988), Absolutism and the Eighteenth-Century Origins of

Compulsory Schooling in Prussia and Austria, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.


Enlaces refback

  • No hay ningún enlace refback.
Utilizamos cookies propias y de terceros para realizar análisis de uso y de medición de nuestra web para mejorar nuestros servicios. Si continua navegando, consideramos que acepta su uso.


Creative Commons by-nc 3.0 Logo

ISSN: 2386-7655

URL: http://con-textoskantianos.net

DOAJ LogoErih Plus LogoCitefactor logoredib Logo
LatIndex LogoISOC Logo MIAR Logo
SHERPA/RoMEO Logo
MLA LogoZenodo Logo
ESCI LogoEBSCO LOGOWeb of Sciencescopus logo