Kant's what is enlightenment

the essay

Enlightenment as a realization of dignity is clearly stated. It is especially noteworthy that Kant put much emphasis on the importance of using reason publicly, instead of privately. However it was pointed out that the largest resistance for oneself to be enlightened is his own laziness. Institutional and eccelescial influence is rather secondary. Another difficulty stressed by Kant is the paradox of 'guiding' the blind public towards self-guiding enlightenment.

However Kant made a strange distinction on the 'executive' and 'scholarly' roles which any person plays simultaneously. To Kant, the 'executive self' can do nothing but obey; while all the reflections and oppositions are left to the 'scholar self'. It is a complete inconsistence. One must not do anything he find immoral. Otherwise how is it different from commiting crime consciously? On the otherhand, to too many people, 'not working' is the only weapon to fight against the vicious capitalists. What can they do besides disobedience?

Though one should not criticize with a view which is too modern even in this day and age when civil disobedience is still a matter of dispute, it is clearly shown that the mild Janus play of executive and scholar does not work. In the world of capitalist oligopoly, one can only success by arguing with action. It is not ideal as it is not purely rational. But we have no choice.