Kant and Foucault both addressed the question of “What is Enlightenment?”, but they approached it from distinct historical, philosophical, and methodological perspectives. While Kant’s essay (“Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment?”, 1784) reflects the ideals of the Enlightenment as a universal and optimistic project centered on reason and autonomy, Foucault’s essay (“What is Enlightenment?”, 1984) offers a more critical, postmodern reinterpretation, questioning the legacy of the Enlightenment and its implications for power, subjectivity, and freedom.
Kant’s “What is Enlightenment?”
Core Ideas
1. Definition of Enlightenment:
• Kant defines Enlightenment as “man’s emergence from his self-imposed immaturity”—the inability to use one’s reason without guidance from others.
• Immaturity is “self-imposed” because it stems from laziness and cowardice, not from a lack of capability.
2. Autonomy and the Motto of Enlightenment:
• “Sapere aude!” (Dare to know!) becomes the rallying cry of Enlightenment, urging individuals to think independently and use their reason without reliance on authority.
3. Freedom and Public Use of Reason:
• Kant distinguishes between:
• Public use of reason: The unrestricted ability to critique and discuss ideas as a scholar or citizen, essential for Enlightenment.
• Private use of reason: Obedience in specific roles within institutions (e.g., as a soldier or clergyman), where following rules may be necessary for order.
• He argues that freedom of thought in public discourse is vital for societal progress.
4. Optimism and Universal Progress:
• Kant believes that Enlightenment represents humanity’s collective progress toward intellectual and moral autonomy.
• Enlightenment is framed as a universal and timeless project, achievable through reason and education.
Philosophical Context
• Kant’s essay is rooted in the Enlightenment ideals of rationality, universal truth, and human progress.
• It reflects his broader philosophy, particularly his emphasis on autonomy, morality, and the use of reason as the foundation of individual and collective freedom.
Foucault’s “What is Enlightenment?”
Core Ideas
1. Critical Reinterpretation of Enlightenment:
• Foucault views Enlightenment not as a universal, linear project but as a historical moment and an attitude toward the present.
• Enlightenment is about critically interrogating the conditions of one’s existence and challenging established norms, rather than achieving universal progress.
2. Modernity as a Critical Attitude:
• Foucault describes modernity as an ethos or way of being, characterized by self-critical reflection and experimentation with new ways of life.
• Enlightenment becomes a permanent critique of ourselves and our historical moment.
3. Power, Subjectivity, and Freedom:
• Foucault highlights how the Enlightenment ideals of reason and progress were intertwined with systems of power and domination (e.g., colonialism, surveillance, and control of bodies and populations).
• He questions whether Enlightenment truly liberated individuals or simply transformed the ways in which they were governed and disciplined.
4. Rejecting Universalism:
• Unlike Kant, Foucault rejects the notion of universal truths or a singular path to Enlightenment.
• He emphasizes the contingency and context-dependence of knowledge and freedom, advocating for localized and situated critiques.
Philosophical Context
• Foucault’s essay is deeply influenced by postmodern and poststructuralist thought, which critiques the Enlightenment’s faith in reason, universal truth, and progress.
• His focus is on genealogy—examining how historical processes shape knowledge, power, and subjectivity.
Key Differences Between Kant and Foucault
Aspect Kant Foucault
Definition of Enlightenment The emergence from self-imposed immaturity through reason and autonomy. A critical attitude toward the present and historical conditions of existence.
Role of Reason Central to achieving autonomy and universal progress. Viewed critically; reason is historically contingent and linked to power.
Universality vs. Context Enlightenment as a universal and timeless project for humanity. Enlightenment as historically situated and context-dependent.
Optimism vs. Critique Optimistic about progress through education and freedom. Ambivalent about progress; emphasizes power’s role in shaping knowledge and freedom.
Power and Governance Focus on individual autonomy and public discourse. Highlights the ways Enlightenment ideals were tied to new forms of power and governance.
Freedom Achieved through the use of reason and the public exchange of ideas. A process of ongoing critique and resistance to structures of power.
Methodology Philosophical idealism and normative ethics. Historical and genealogical critique of knowledge and power.
Similarities Between Kant and Foucault
Despite their differences, Kant and Foucault share some common ground:
1. Emphasis on Critique:
• Both see critique as essential to Enlightenment, though they conceptualize it differently:
• Kant focuses on critiquing the limits of reason and the reliance on authority.
• Foucault focuses on critiquing the conditions of knowledge, power, and subjectivity.
2. Focus on Freedom:
• Both associate Enlightenment with the pursuit of freedom, though Kant emphasizes rational autonomy, while Foucault emphasizes resisting domination.
3. Individual Responsibility:
• Both stress the individual’s role in engaging with their present reality and questioning inherited systems of thought.
Synthesis: What Can We Learn from Both?
• From Kant:
• The importance of reason, autonomy, and intellectual courage as tools for personal and societal liberation.
• The optimistic belief in humanity’s capacity for progress and the transformative power of education and free discourse.
• From Foucault:
• A critical awareness of the historical and social conditions that shape knowledge, power, and freedom.
• A skepticism toward universal claims, emphasizing the need for ongoing critique and experimentation in the face of power structures.
Together, Kant and Foucault offer complementary insights: Kant provides a foundation for Enlightenment ideals, while Foucault reminds us to critically examine their limitations and unintended consequences. Their works encourage us to balance hope for progress with vigilance against the ways in which even the noblest ideals can be co-opted by power.
