To place him in this condition requires of us…a big leap. For in actual fact the transition from the existence of a wild huntsman to that of a keeper of tame animals, and from haphazard digging for roots or fruit-gathering to an agricultural way of life must have been slow enough. Until that time men had lived peacefully side by side. But here that strife had to begin which separated those of a different way of life, and dispersed men all over the earth. The existence of the herdsmen is not only leisurely, it is also economically the safest; for there is no shortage of grazing land in sparsely populated country. But agriculture is troublesome, dependent on the caprices of climate, and hence insecure.
|Published (Last):||27 May 2005|
|PDF File Size:||11.32 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||12.71 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The procreative act of Yahweh is cooperative in the sense heaven and earth are combined, as well as the essence of the Divine and humankind. Kant prefers to change the circumstances of the origin of creation, making his essay a revolutionary enterprise. On the other hand, the Biblical narrative allows us to possess most human facilities from the moment we enter the garden. As the result of the Fall, Kant decides to present humankind as moving from a beastlike state to a more civilized condition.
The simple eidos of the account in Genesis takes the form of an ontological understanding of the universe; human existence becomes connected with the symbolization of creation.
Kant has learned a tactic from the greatest manipulator of Genesis, Sir Robert Filmer, who used the initial chapter of Genesis to defend divine right monarchy. In due course, Locke, Sidney and others would refute this exploitation of the text, and deliver their own distortions of various sorts.
Filmer and Kant commit the same error. The books Genesis to Joshua Hexateuch , in their present form, constitute an immense, connected narrative. In either case, wherever one begins, the reader must keep in mind the narrative as a whole, and the contexts into which all the individual parts fit, and from which they are to be understood.
The Biblical account of Genesis presents God as always participating in human history and maintaining a desire to improve the lot of humanity, albeit God does not always take an active role in these activities.
The precursor to a covenant is renewed and ratified at various intervals throughout the book; the mutual presence of God and humankind in the dialogue Kant has chosen to exegete is expanded into the mutual presence of God and his people. Kant and many contemporary biblical scholars argue that the structure and presentation of the creation idea are part of a cosmological world responding to the problems it was forced to encounter.
Cosmological humans, from this perspective, did not possess the modern tools of explanation and were forced to depend on this vocabulary. The Genesis story should be considered along with the Babylonian epic and other Memphite works as accounts that attempt to illuminate the creative act. Unfortunately, Kant and his epigones have failed to appreciate the reality of the event, and he is unsuccessful at reintroducing his version of a symbolic explication.
The use of nature also takes on a more regimented meaning, implying it may be teleological in form. Providence must then be understood as the role of Kantian nature in history. Kant observed that the development of humankind as a moral lot could ameliorate the conflict between culture and species. Humankind for Kant can be considered to be developing towards a healthy end: humans alone are able to move beyond a brutish state of existence to a more humane life.
But humanity is faced with at least three different types of dissatisfactions related to this new freedom. Natural maturity precedes civil maturity. This is alleviated as humans develop into ethical beings, but there will be an intermittent period of misery. Kant introduces the limitation of age as prohibiting humankind from achieving our moral potential.
The situation becomes even more complicated when the foundation of moral education, culture, is unable to fulfill its role in society. Culture, in a Kantian context, should be understood not as an aesthetic pursuit of the good, the true, and the beautiful, but as overarching basis for the moral improvement of all humans.
Culture can provide for human freedom if it can transcend nature. Kant, p. Kant, pp. Ibid, p. All comments are moderated and must be civil, concise, and constructive to the conversation. Comments that are critical of an essay may be approved, but comments containing ad hominem criticism of the author will not be published. Also, comments containing web links or block quotations are unlikely to be approved.
Keep in mind that essays represent the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Imaginative Conservative or its editor or publisher.
Kant on History and Culture as a Means to Ethical Evolution
Immanuel Kant, from Conjectural Beginning of Human History