Immanuel Kant's radical philosophy
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 14 พ.ค. 2024
- Use your brain! With that message, Immanuel Kant called on people to think for themselves. Born 300 years ago in Königsberg, Prussia, he developed his philosophy in a world of absolutist rulers. He confidently called on people to stop allowing themselves to be treated like "dumb animals" by politicians and the church.
And he was almost shockingly modern: Kant wanted world peace ensured by treaties between nations. His motto was “Make laws, not war.” That made Kant a pioneer of modern international law. If it were up to him, there wouldn’t even be standing armies to threaten other countries.
In addition, Kant set ethical norms for us all, including in everyday life: he demanded that no one should be used as a means to an end, that no one should be instrumentalized. This idea has become famous as the “Categorical Imperative.”
But it’s also true that some of Kant’s views would today be considered racist, antisemitic and sexist - and completely contradictory to his own philosophy. As progressive as he was in some areas, in others he was simply a product of his era and environment.
Yet, as an old man, Kant was fervently committed to global justice, and it’s astonishing how many of his ideas sound almost utopian, even in the 21st century. In 1795, he called for “world citizenship,” a kind of right of visitation for all people on Earth: freedom of movement without passports or visas. And he wanted refugees to be taken in.
Immanuel Kant: an amazing thinker who still has a lot to say to us 300 years after his birth!
#Kant #philosophy #enlightenment
#dwhistoryandculture
For more visit: www.dw.com/en/culture/s-1441
⮞ Follow DW Culture on Facebook: / dw.culture
⮞ Follow DW Culture on Twitter: DW_Culture
Please follow DW's netiquette: p.dw.com/p/MF1G
00:00 Intro
00:56 Who was Kant and what time did he live in?
04:40 Sapere aude! - Kant's rule of life
06:35 Kant's moral system: The Categorical Imperative
08:35 Kant's view on political justice
10:47 Kant's solution for peace
12:28 The racism of Kant
15:33 Hope in Kant's philosophy
Very insightful and quite balanced video. Thank you Aya and Sabine.
Will have to start reading his work, this programme should be available in schools to introduce the ideas and ideals of reason, thought and learning, especially tolerance. Thank you for reintroducing Kant to me as he is briefly touched on in sociology and psychology.
Thanks for your comment! We're glad you liked the video.
I am happy to hear that you will study Kant. It will enrich you intellectually.
This is a good introduction to some of Kant's ideas, if you want to know more then the best place to go next would be his books!
So glad you liked it!
Thank you for this excellent presentation. Unfortunately today there is as much, if not more, challenge to "thinking for one's self". I don't see any, or not much, evidence of any authority persons/figures encouraging people to think for themselves.
What struck me in particular was the fact that notwithstanding his high intellect and reasoning ability, the hidden influential authority of some contempary societal 'norms' or 'beliefs' escaped his scrutiny.
great video
In gratitude to have this, thanks DW!❤
DW, great work👍👍👍👍
You should make channel
for philosphy loving people
also.
Great thought-provoking breakdown of Kant, his life, his times, and his ideas many of which are very worth contemplating and applying today. Thank you, Sabine and Aya.
☺
While the existence of God cannot be proved or disproved through empirical means, according to Kant, belief in God is necessary for his ethical model to function effectively and for moral principles to have meaning and significance.
Thank You so much - so concise and important to know.
When I think about what he said at the end, Kant thought in a way that was consistent and in line with what he said at the beginning. What I take from this is the importance of moderation. The second thing I take from this is that the development of each individual's thought is a journey. This requires a determination to continue to seek the truth without fear of contradicting what you say, and to know in order to know (Sapere aude). Finally, I realize that there is not much difference between what Kant said in those days and today.
It's not just cowardice. It's also just fatigue.
So take your time, rest when you need to. Step back, observe and consider.
It is not reason that humanises, but the application of reason to ethical questions arising from observed contradictions between our convictions and our behaviours.
We can be convinced our work serves peace, equating peace with our personal comforts and freedom and that of our agreeable friends, while that pursuit of our own elbow-room jams an elbow into the space and prosperity of multitudes.
I'm thinking of those CEO's serving their shareholders in the peace of their boardrooms as their keystrokes facilitate genocidal famines and di$p£ac€d populations, but hey, I've a reservation for dinner at the Ritz after a hard days work in my penthouse.
Those suckers are just drowning loosers.
Such are the collective mindsets we confront...sophisticated rationalisations of primitive instincts of ego.
Fatigue, like pain, is a feedback signal to be heeded and attended to. Do not overload yourself. Know yourself, man, (Google attributes it to Socrates). Nobody has a tape of Socrates's answer to Google.
I'm one of the four Kant scholars featured in this video. Now I regret that I agreed to do the interview: I feel as though I was being used as a token, a mouthpiece to talk about Kant's racist views only to have these dismissed as merely "peripheral" parts of Kant's system that are and should ultimately be crowded out by the supposed "core" of that system (this is the standard but rarely critically reflected move that people make to evade the topic of Kant's racism). In my extensive conversation with the DW journalist who interviewed me, as well as in my book Kant, Race, and Racism (OUP 2023), I explained at pains why there is NO CONTRADICTION between Kant's moral universalism and his racist worldview: his extremely complex and sophisticated philosophical system is capacious enough to accommodate BOTH. But the video doesn't even mention that part of my interview.
I understand that the journalists who made this video had to make editorial decisions about what to include and what to exclude. But the agenda here is problematic: I get the impression that it's intended overall to glorify Kant and keep him on the pedestal exactly as he has always stood, so that whatever blemish that's superficially mentioned in passing gets completely overshadowed--and supposedly overcome--by the good parts of his philosophy.
By the way, and this is important, here is the exact version of Kant's Formula of Humanity: “So act that you use HUMANITY, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, always at the same time as an end, never merely as a means." In the video, Susan Neiman turned this into a command to treat other HUMAN BEINGS as ends in themselves. This is a misrepresentation of the formula. There is an important conceptual difference between "humanity" (in abstracto) and "human being" (in concreto) for Kant, especially as it pertains to his pure moral philosophy. I won't bore anyone with details here. For those who are interested, you may consult my late advisor Henry Allison's Kant's Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals: A Commentary (OUP 2011). Understanding that conceptual difference is also key to understanding WHY there is no contradiction between the teachings of Kant's pure moral philosophy and his racist worldview. I talk about this in the very first chapter of my book.
Thanks so much for your clarification @haupinglu-adler8697. I am very exctied to check out your recommendations. As a young philosophy student of Africa descent I, find your extended discussion extremely helpful. I am tired of the way many important thinker´s racism is pushed aside as if it is not a fundamental part of their thought. Luckily, I went to a university where we were able to have a more complex conversation about his ideas which brought greater insight into the racism of European Enlightenment in general. These conversations centered around the how the growing trans-Atlantic slave trade may have impacted their views. A concrete example of this racism is the ways in which Afro-German Enlightenment philosopher Anton Wilhelm Amo was erased from pantheon of German Enlightenement philosophers. Kant would have known of Amo and his work, it was widely regarded in his time only to be erased when his presence presented a contradiction to the racism other Enlightenment thinkers defended.
We regret that you find yourself misunderstood in our video. We make serious efforts to accurately reflect the positions of our interlocutors. Despite all care, misunderstandings can never be completely ruled out.
However, we do not fully understand your reproach. In a video intended to give an insight into Kant's philosophy to an audience who is not supposed to have any in-depth philosophical knowledge, we found it quite complicated to present the aspect you are missing.
As journalists, we are obliged to present different opinions on controversial topics. For this reason, we have also presented a contrasting statement from another Kant scholar. Furthermore, we correctly mentioned that the assessment of Kant's racist statements is controversial among Kant scholars.
We found your explanations of Kant's disturbing comments about the alleged "races" and their supposedly different moral and cultural abilities so important, impressive and clear that we decided to feature them in our video. We hope that our decision is understandable.
Hello. My area is also in Philosophy. I am not a Kant scholar, but Kant has had a great influence in my thinking since I was first introduced as an undergraduate to his thought by German philosopher in Baltimore. I would like to know more how you handle the issue of Kant's universalism and his ideas on race. I will be looking for your book.
This is a 16-minute informational video for the general public. Your research holds a significant place and relative importance, though it's debatable how much weight it carries. The video seems to reflect this well, in a balanced manner. Kind regards.
thank you for you explanation. i totally got your point. and i want to read your book too.
I am grateful to Kant for enriching my life. Of course, I would like to thank the DW team for producing this video for Kant's 300th birthday!
😊Thanks ✌️👍😊Kant was a superstar philosopher 🌹❤️Awesome video 📝📚🌍
If you think that you have found an inconsistency in Kant between his claims regarding race and his claims regarding freedom/morality, I suggest that you probably have an incomplete understanding of his work. On this point, it also helps to remember that Kant was, in large part, dependent upon others for his information regarding other cultures. He was apparently an avid reader of travel literature.
Could you translate and published in the Arctic DW
Use your ambient ❤
"And he wanted refugees to be taken in."
I wonder if he lived today in former Prussia now Germany!
Amazing Video! 👏 imo you guys should have included the fact that he would go by the name "Koninsberg Clock" because of his insane discipline 😅
Thanks for sharing!
Yes, reason is important to understand and know the world and people around us. Thanks , Team DW ❤
So, Kant told us what we should think and how we should think it.
How about making one about Schiller? Sehr gut!
Had Emmanuel Kant lived today he would have likely said "Mainstream media such as DW have taken away the inherent right of the people to think for themselves". 😅
Nothing can take away your right to think for yourself unless you give it up yourself.
Yeah but Wittgenstein would have told Kant to shove it before this time also. Heck Kierkegaard would have destroyed Kant’s categorical imperative before Wittgenstein.
❤
@@IAmWhatIAm7573 viva
But think more critically on this, they aren’t taking any rights, they are merely encouraging you to think on your own as Kant would have. If you swallow information without reflection, perhaps you are not thinking about it, but you always will have the ability to think about it for yourself, even if someone took away all your rights, they cannot take your thoughts
❤❤❤❤
What’s the song at 10:43 ?
I tried to but I Kant.
Not a single mention of Transcendental Idealism? Did I miss it?
Without the 'critique of pure reason' what weight do the rest of his works even have?
Excelente video!
Glad you liked it. Make sure to follow for the latest uploads.
" I am reminded of a great German philosopher, Immanuel Kant. He is a specimen of those people who are absolutely in the mind. He lived according to mind so totally that people used to set their watches, whenever they saw Immanuel Kant going to the university. Never - it may rain, it may rain fire, it may rain cats and dogs, it may be utterly cold, snow falling … Whatever the situation, Kant will reach the university at exactly the same time all the year round, even on holidays. Such a fixed, almost mechanical … He would go on holiday at exactly the same time, remain in the university library, which was specially kept open for him, because otherwise what would he do there the whole day? And he was a very prominent, well-known philosopher, and he would leave the university at exactly the same time every day.
One day it happened … It had rained and there was too much mud on the way - one of his shoes got stuck in the mud. He did not stop to take the shoe out because that would make him reach the university a few seconds later, and that was impossible. He left the shoe there. He just arrived with one shoe. The students could not believe it. Somebody asked, “What happened to the other shoe?”
He said, “It got stuck in the mud, so I left it there, knowing perfectly well nobody is going to steal one shoe. When I return in the evening, then I will pick it up. But I could not have been late.”
A woman proposed to him: “I want to be married to you” - a beautiful young woman. Perhaps no woman has ever received such an answer, before or after Immanuel Kant. Either you say, “Yes,” or you say, “No. Excuse me.” Immanuel Kant said, “I will have to do a great deal of research.”
The woman asked, “About what?”
He said, “I will have to look in all the marriage manuals, all the books concerning marriage, and find out all the pros and cons - whether to marry or not to marry.”
The woman could not imagine that this kind of answer had ever been given to any woman before. Even no is acceptable, even yes, although you are getting into a misery, but it is acceptable. But this kind of indifferent attitude towards the woman - he did not say a single sweet word to her. He did not say anything about her beauty, his whole concern was his mind. He had to convince his mind whether or not marriage is logically the right thing.
It took him three years. It was really a long search. Day and night he was working on it, and he had found three hundred reasons against marriage and three hundred reasons for marriage. So the problem even after three years was the same.
One friend suggested out of compassion, “You wasted three years on this stupid research. In three years you would have experienced all these six hundred, without any research. You should have just said yes to that woman. There was no need to do so much hard work. Three years would have given you all the pros and cons - existentially, experientially.”
But Kant said, “I am in a fix. Both are equal, parallel, balanced. There is no way to choose.”
The friend suggested, “Of the pros you have forgotten one thing: that whenever there is a chance, it is better to say yes and go through the experience. That is one thing more in favor of the pros. The cons cannot give you any experience, and only experience has any validity.”
He understood, it was intellectually right. He immediately went to the woman’s house, knocked on her door. Her old father opened the door and said, “Young man, you are too late. You took too long in your research. My girl is married and has two children.” That was the last thing that was ever heard about his marriage. From then on no woman ever asked him, and he was not the kind of man to ask anybody. He remained unmarried."
I think this is spoken by "Osho"
@@RRijesh yes
MY GOD FUCK YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I AM HIS FOLLOWER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
❤
They said Immanuel Kant. Immanuel did it anyway.
Let's avoid "Presentism" and take the timeless ideas from past thinkers, but also recognize that they were products of their time and may have had flawed thinking.
Achieving world peace would be insane
Karl Jaspers said that Immanuel Kant was Germany's greatest philosopher.
الانظمه هي التي تخلق ثقافه اجتماعيه لتغذي طبقتها ووجودها وتطور نفسها واليات طرق التأثير بالوعي الاجتماعي بحيث تجعل الفرد يتكيف لاشعوريا وفق ايدلوجيتها وخصوصا بعد اكتشاف علم النفس وجيشه من محللين ومحللات نفسيين تابعين للنظام السلطوي ومؤسساته ودورهم في التأثير الاجتماعي الداخلي والخارجي والتلاعب بالميول الاجتماعي وثقافته وفق خليط وتوازن، لهذا تعتبر المعرفه مهمه لفهم الواقع الذي ابتزته الانظمه بأساليبها النفسيه وغير.. في خلق معنى وهدف وقيمه للانسان، وايضا مع المعرفه يمكن احتواء نقاط ضعف العقل وثغراته التي يراهن عليها طبقه طفيليه سلطويه وتابعيهم.
And now onto Hegel, and then Fichte. The Geist beckons!
My own philosophical orientation is in the area of what is sometimes called "continental philosophy.' That philosophical tradition would be severely impoverished without the work of Immanuel Kant.
He makes many demands, whilst saying freedom is the ultimate.
His views on India looks like real...red race is not modernizing their thoughts...
We stuck with culture of thousands of years ago
Still In my thinking about religion mostly..
Why human beings are an enemy for one another?
😮
I’m pretty sure he didn’t say any of the stuff they said he did, except for “dare to know”!
Kant's telling you you can!
I agree with Kant. But the man who says Russia cancels it's treaties needs a kit of reading to see how many treaties the west either refused to ratify, cancelled or simply violated...Vis a vis the ones that Russia/USSR has cancelled or violated or cancelled. Russia declared it's change in strategy in 2008, when the west could simply not be trusted anymore as the facilitator of justice. The west wanted it all and cared not about the interests of other countries.
Are you fine?
No one is perfect, and hence we shouldn't idolize anybody regardless of his/her achievements. Interesting to me though, the racists or supremacists of the day, at one time or another, were considered bararians, savages, non-cultured or generally inferior, by other tribes/peoples/races. Human spirits are dynamic, everyone, every nation, all have the potential to become dominant in the forseeable future. On a personal level, we should learn from each other, regardless the differences in beliefs, status, knowledge, cultural backgrounds.
Meantime Jeremy Bentham snorts silently.
PACERE AUDE¡¡
His books are very complex. I don't understand almost anything in his philosophy
I recommend that you refer to the commentary.
Im kant ask me
It's about political philosophy not metaphysics
The mind is primarily not an active agent, Kant as all western philosophers after the scholastics was a fool.
of course. all of us in the west are fools. we need to turn to eastern wisdoms
Surely Kant failed in chosing 1980s style graphics to represent his ideas.
Use your brain and look at me for it.
DW really? A doco on Kant, while not using the words he wrote, only commentaries offered by the modern day fatuous ..
From these speakers as well as his books I read, I see Kant was "other"--non-European by origin and culture, non-white, he was there against his choice, forcibly conscripted, poor guy, resistant to the fate imposed on him and hence was Black African. His biography also indicates he never married or gave birth---why? Was he a castrated slave abducted and taken to Europe? Why did he 'write' a book in a language no one could read hence not buy?
The Left have forgotten the root thought of Kant. Tribalism and identity politics ie acceptance of archaic culture without critical analysis has defined the Left for 3 decades now. I was always shocked about his views on race though. It seemed so in conflict with his basic ideas. It's so depressing thinking how far off course the left have gone now.
Saw this in my feed. Sorry, but who are DW to lecture me on using my brain? 😂Preposterous.
If I'd ever seen DW using its own brains effectively, I'd hear them out. But I haven't and I won't. So TTFN.
Political correctness aside, Kant's ideas on races also holds true till this day.
This not my job
I'll barrow his views on hope ❤
It’s ironic , Kant also believed that the colonials in America had the right to eliminate the inferior native population. he believed enlightenment for white people.
You still might not disagree with Kants’ racist theories and ideas. The Western European ideology is overwhelmingly dominant in our mother Africa and it’s shocking to know that there is a big number of our people that think that they are less inferior in terms of reason as compared to the other races. Very interesting. Probably a topic that will never be exhausted with today’s influence of cancel culture and race debates.
What racist theory?
Лежат, пусть и дальше лежат": ЕС просят не трогать замороженные активы России - СМИ
04.04.24, 08:11
617
Китай, Саудовская Аравия и Индонезия пытаются убедить Евросоюз не передавать эти деньги на нужды Украины. И Ирана
Good popular video.
The contradiction unfortunately is stark between the Kantian ideals and the authoritariam policies the German state is taking towards people protesting against the genicide in Gaza.
Ideals are only credible if they are put into practice.
taught 7 to 9? , taught who?
What is less known is that Kant wrote terrible things against the jews.
immanuel kant's ethics is pretty not so bold, not less different than a christian theologian.
Racism. What a Kant!
Yes, Kant continues to be an important philosophical reference. The reflections he made on public opinion, freedom of conscience, Justice, Politics and Statecraft shaped the modern world. In one of his works, Kant said that even a race of demons could solve the question of how to organize the State, as long as they were intelligent. The Israelis are neither demons nor intelligent. They organized a State that can only exist if it is at permanent war with a portion of its population and with all its neighbors. This is not sustainable, as all militarized and aggressive states were inevitably destroyed, but Israel seems to value the Zionist myth of its creation more than the historical lessons.
Good documentary, until the "racist" end.
He was a racist, like we all are.
Because there ARE differences between the races.
Something we should celebrate, and not be condemned for saying out loud.
Like the difference between women and men. Hurray and amen.
That means we must keep trying until we come to know that everything is meaningless???!!!
One has to reach this by oneself... It s onesown reality.. Noone can be helped..
Neil DeGrasse Tyson - ???????????????????????????
Humanism is discrimination of all non anthropomorphic live and non-human intelligence.
So why not to be a racist if you already humanist?
You only need strict definition of a "pure" human.
Humanism is the direct opposite of blind and dogmatic theocentrism... That's how it was conceived in the 17th century.
No, humanism isn't anthropocentric.
@@PhilSophia-ox7ep not true, bot.
@@arodvaz1528 I'm a "bot" because I don't believe humanism is anthropocentric? Let me know when you have an argument.
@@PhilSophia-ox7ep yes you are a bot. If you say it isn't, it's your turn to prove why it isn't.
Marx is more relevant today than Kant.
Interesting!
DW comment guidelines are woke, but they call Kant a 'little man'. What utter hypocrisy.
1.57 metres when describing height is nonsensical jibberish. How many feet is that?
One foot.
🚨 American Spotted 🚨
@@PhilSophia-ox7ep haha actually Canadian. We use the metric system for things like distance, like we use kilometres instead of miles. We are technically supposed to use the metric system for everything but in practice nobody uses the metric system for the height of things. For height we always use feet. I have a friend who is an Eastern European immigrant. He immigrated to Canada when we was 10. He’s now over 40 but still has a thick Slovakian accent and always uses metres for height and it drives me nuts cuz nobody knows what the fuck he is talking about. If you use feet you have an instant picture in your head of how high a thing is, but if you use metres that instant picture does not pop up in your head and nobody bothers to google how many feet he is talking about when he is talking so it goes right over everyone’s head.
I don't think so!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Respect God The Father!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Amen!
You poor deluded dinosaurs. History has taught you nothing. If only you read history books as much as you do your silly religious books.
*crickets...
🙏
Just three more exclamation points would have made me a believer. Alas, you are a few short, showing the laxity of your faith.
What’s the song at 10:44 ?
Why human beings are an enemy for one another?
😮