A Commentary to Kant's 'Critique of Pure Reason' — Kant — John Shaqi
A Commentary to Kant's 'Critique of Pure Reason'
Kant · en
“I am willing to admit out of love of humanity that most of our
actions are indeed correct, but if we examine them more closely we
everywhere come upon the dear self which is always
prominent....”[59] “Nothing but moral fanaticism and exaggerated
self-conceit is infused into the mind by exhortation to actions as
noble, sublime and magnanimous. Thereby men are led into the
delusion that it is not duty, that is, respect for the law, whose
yoke ... they must bear, whether they like it or not, that
constitutes the determining principle of their actions, and which
always humbles them while they _obey_ it. They then fancy that
those actions are expected from them, not from duty, but as pure
merit.... In this way they engender a vain high-flying fantastic
way of thinking, flattering themselves with a spontaneous goodness
of heart that needs neither spur nor bridle, nor any
command....”[60]
In asserting the goodness and self-sufficiency of our natural impulses
Rousseau is the spokesman of a philosophy which has dominated social and
political theory since his day, and which is still prevalent. This
philosophy, in Kant’s view, is disastrous in its consequences. As a
reading of human nature and of our moral vocation, it is hardly less
false than the Epicurean teaching, which finds in the pursuit of
pleasure the motive of all our actions. A naturalistic ethics, in either
form, is incapacitated, by the very nature of its controlling
assumptions, from appreciating the distinguishing features of the moral
consciousness. Neither the successes nor the failures of man’s spiritual
endeavour can be rightly understood from any such standpoint. The human
race, in its endurance and tenacity, in its dauntless courage and in its
soaring spirit, reveals the presence of a _prevenient_ influence,
_non-natural_ in character; and only if human nature be taken as
including this higher, directive power, can it assume to itself the
eulogy which Rousseau so mistakenly passes upon the natural and
undisciplined tendencies of the human heart. For as history
demonstrates, while _men_ are weak, _humanity_ is marvellous.
“There is one thing in our soul which, when we take a right view of
it, we cannot cease to regard with the highest astonishment, and in
regard to which admiration is right and indeed elevating, and that
is our original moral capacity in general.... Even the
incomprehensibility of this capacity,[61] a capacity which
proclaims a Divine origin, must rouse man’s spirit to enthusiasm
and strengthen it for any sacrifices which respect for his duty may
impose on him.”[62]