Rousseau’s Question and Kant’s Answer
|Course||The philosophy of Marxism|
|Keywords||Rousseau Kant Hegel Enlightenment Ethnics|
Kant’s Ethics usually was concerned as transcendental and high stylistic theory among the academia. The motive was that they aimed at satisfying the requirement to giving a complete structure for the transcendental philosophy. It was extending people’s Existence of Super-sensitivity (noumenon) into the domain of morality from its inherent domain of knowledge. Thus, its substantiality was confirmed simultaneously. However, it is not enough to explain the motive of Kant’s Ethic if only based on the reason of theory. It is due to the vicissitude of mind which lies in the vicissitude of manners and morals of the time. Therefore, people can comprehend little social and political significance only though this monotonous explanation. Once concerning this point, we may belittle Kant if only affirming his wisdom lacking of reality. Kant was considered as a transcendental philosophy and especially the philosopher in the Enlighten Era. Through reviewing the history of thinking particularly, we see that the chief motive of Kant’s Ethic was to response the intense criticism to modernity of Rousseau. Rousseau took the initiative concept such as“public ideology”and“capitalist”and then aroused Kant’s research about Ethic. Through against Rousseau’s thinking, Kant pledged his life to defend for the“Enlighten Era”. Therefore at the first time Kant’s ethics indicates core value of Enlightenment: good is not natural while it is the product of ration; ration is qualified by universality; human is out of nature’s wardship by universality and becomes his own dominator. It is in such sense that Kant praised Enlightenment was social and moral progress.Concerning the original idea of making structure for the transcendental morality, Kant made great efforts to counterpunch Rousseau’s slander to achieve the enlightenment by clarifying people target which is endued by nature, establishing real humanities dignity or sense universality. Then he awoke people to shake off capitalist’s parochialism and selfish motive to renew the construction for morality and justice for modern society. According to Kant’s mind, transcendental morality theory aims at achieving such thinking way which can transform rough nature gift about distinguish morality into definite practical principle,“Thus the morbid social unanimity finally is transformed into a moralistic whole”. That is indubitably that Kant’s intention to constituting transcendental moralistic theory contains an inner quality to surpass morality and a demand to extend to the field of social action. For the particular purpose of this demand the transcendental ethic was bound to spread to a transcendental jurisdiction.In addition, the riotous of French Revolution in 1789 made Kant recognize the importance to establish a public secure order which depending on the transcendental principle. His main literatures about jurisdiction were published during this stage. What we need to advert is that this extension destined failure because of the inanition in Kant’s ethic. Morality’s stylization led to an opposite political consequence. As morality be seen as an inane homogeneity (for obligation to obligate) which involves no guide line can be concerned unimportant in moral aspect. What practice relying on is the public instauration when expanding itself,“Every target in my self-will should be regarded objective and possible‘mine’and‘yours’”. Obviously, the necessity for this public instauration is formula system which is lying on the property power. In this formula system, the universality of rationality was dematerialized afresh. People’s original relation is considered as derivative relation between the occupants. Our national citizen performs as asset proprietor and the country no more than a medium as capitalists’expediency.Therefore, the inanition of jurisprudence in Kant’s ethic is exposed undoubtedly even though it was against the capitalist’s contemptible benefit and self-love principle fiercely in pure moral domain. It offers trenchant defend for the capitalist’s benefit when expanding to the reality domain. Based on this significance, Hegel claimed that Kant’s Ethic Forms hadn’t surpassed Bourgeois citizen society ultimately.