Michel Foucault's "What is Enlightenment?"

Summary

In this philosophical exploration, David delves into Michel Foucault's interpretation of Kant's 'What is Enlightenment?', discussing the emancipation from mental servitude and the role of reason. Foucault critiques the concept of 'humankind' and the idea of a universal enlightenment, highlighting the importance of individual and collective self-reflection within modernity. He advocates for a perpetual critique of our historical period and a resistance to homogenization, urging a deeper understanding of the conditions that shape our societal dispositions towards enlightenment.

Takeaways

• 📚 The video discusses Michel Foucault's interpretation of 'What is Enlightenment?', contrasting it with Immanuel Kant's original essay.
• 🤔 Foucault questions Kant's use of the term 'humankind' and what it implies about the universality of the Enlightenment.
• 💡 Kant's view of Enlightenment is about emancipation from mental servitude to authority and esoteric knowledge holders.
• 🤓 Foucault highlights that Enlightenment for Kant is not about rejecting all authority but submitting to 'proper' authority reasoned through individual capacity.
• 📖 Kant's essay was a reflection on his own political philosophy and an attempt to apply it to the context of his time.
• 🕊️ Foucault sees value in Kant's essay for its reflection on the future and the human capacity for self-realization.
• 🎭 The video uses Charles Baudelaire's concept of modernity to frame Foucault's discussion on Enlightenment and modern attitudes.
• 🔄 Modernity disrupts traditional linear temporality and encourages a perpetual reinvention of oneself according to one's envisioned image.
• 🎨 Art is seen as a key element in modernity, embodying the aesthetic and the capacity to find beauty and value in the present moment.
• 🤨 Foucault advocates for a perpetual critique of our historical period, rather than accepting or rejecting Enlightenment outright.
• 🔍 The video suggests an archaeological and genealogical approach to understanding the institutions that shape our world and subjectivities.

Q & A

What is the main topic of the video script?

The main topic of the video script is the discussion of Michel Foucault's essay 'What is Enlightenment?', which is a response and modern rehashing of Immanuel Kant's original essay on the same topic.

How does the author describe his approach to explaining philosophical texts and ideas?

The author describes his approach as making philosophical texts and ideas accessible, ensuring that they are understandable to a broader audience.

What is the significance of the German periodical in the context of Kant's essay?

The German periodical is significant because it is where Kant's essay 'What is Enlightenment?' was originally published, and it posed the question to the public, reflecting the nature of journalism and op-eds at the time.

According to Kant, what does enlightenment represent?

For Kant, enlightenment represents a departure from mental servitude or submission to authority, particularly esoteric knowledge holders like priests, and the emancipation of individuals to think for themselves.

What does Foucault find problematic about Kant's use of the term 'humankind'?

Foucault finds it problematic because it implies that everyone is part of the enlightenment movement, which could be misleading since it might exclude those who do not demonstrate the capacity for reason or knowledge.

How does Foucault interpret Kant's view on the relationship between enlightenment and authority?

Foucault interprets that for Kant, enlightenment does not mean a total departure from authority but rather the submission to proper authority that allows individuals to reason and think to their full capacity.

What is the role of modernity in Foucault's discussion of enlightenment?

In Foucault's discussion, modernity is characterized by a disposition to reflect upon one's own life and the historical conditions that allow for the emergence of enlightenment attitudes and institutions.

What are the four attributes of modernity that Foucault takes from Baudelaire?

The four attributes are: 1) Disruption of temporality and linearity, 2) Heroization of the present, 3) Perpetual reinvention of oneself, and 4) An aesthetic approach to life, often attributed to art.

How does Foucault define the ethos of modernity?

Foucault defines the ethos of modernity as a permanent critique of our own historical period, which involves a skepticism towards the crystallization of ideas and institutions into unchanging frameworks.

What does Foucault suggest as the approach to engage with modernity and the enlightenment?

Foucault suggests an archaeological and genealogical excavation of the institutions that give life to our situation, focusing on the historical conditions that allow for the formation of enlightenment attitudes and institutions, rather than a transcendental approach.

What is the critical perspective Foucault proposes for understanding the enlightenment?

Foucault proposes a critical perspective that involves questioning the basic axiomatic assumptions underlying the formation of the enlightenment by performing historical analysis, rather than accepting global and radical efforts that may replicate existing structures.

Outlines

00:00

📚 Introduction to Foucault's 'What is Enlightenment?'

In this introductory paragraph, the speaker sets the stage for a discussion on Michel Foucault's essay 'What is Enlightenment?'. The speaker invites the audience to follow on social media and mentions the availability of their content across various platforms, including YouTube and Patreon. They introduce themselves as David, who simplifies philosophical texts and ideas, and encourage new viewers to subscribe for regular content. The speaker also hints at a previous video on Immanuel Kant's 'What is Enlightenment?', suggesting that Foucault's work is both a response to and a modern interpretation of Kant's ideas, raising questions about the nature of humankind and the collective movement towards enlightenment.

05:00

🤔 Foucault's Reflection on Kant's Enlightenment Views

This paragraph delves into Foucault's critical analysis of Kant's essay on enlightenment. Foucault questions Kant's definition of enlightenment as a departure from mental servitude to authority figures and the submission to proper authority arrived at through reason. The speaker highlights Foucault's interest in Kant's political philosophy and its application to the enlightenment, suggesting that Kant was trying to realize a future where his philosophy made sense. Foucault also considers the implications of modernity, using Charles Baudelaire's attributes of modernity to analyze Kant's reflection on his own times and the attitudes that point towards enlightenment.

10:01

🎨 Modernity and the Disruption of Temporality

The speaker explores Foucault's use of Baudelaire's conception of modernity to understand Kant's approach to enlightenment. Modernity, according to Baudelaire and interpreted by Foucault, disrupts linear temporality, questions traditional institutions, and lionizes the present. It encourages a poetic appreciation of the present moment and the capacity for perpetual self-reinvention. Foucault sees these modern attributes as dispositions that allow for enlightenment, characterized by a permanent critique of the historical period. The speaker also notes Foucault's distinction between modernity and humanism, emphasizing the dynamic nature of humanism in contrast to the more static nature of enlightenment and modernity.

15:04

🔍 Archaeological and Genealogical Approach to Enlightenment

In the final paragraph, the speaker discusses Foucault's proposed method for engaging with enlightenment and modernity. Foucault advocates for an archaeological and genealogical excavation of the institutions that shape our world and identities, rather than a transcendental critique. He encourages skepticism towards any crystallization of ideas and a focus on historical conditions that allow for the emergence of enlightenment dispositions. Foucault also warns against replicating existing power structures in our quest for experimentation and improvement, suggesting a careful consideration of technological and strategic elements of human interaction to reveal deeper relational dynamics.

Keywords

💡Enlightenment

Enlightenment refers to a historical intellectual movement of the 18th century that emphasized reason, individualism, and skepticism of traditional authority. In the context of the video, it is the central theme, with the discussion revolving around Kant's and Foucault's interpretations of what Enlightenment means. The script mentions Kant's view of Enlightenment as a departure from mental servitude to authority, and Foucault's critique and expansion on this idea.

💡Michel Foucault

Michel Foucault was a French philosopher known for his work on power structures and knowledge. The video discusses Foucault's essay 'What is Enlightenment?', which is a response to Kant's original essay with the same title. Foucault's perspective is used to explore the modern rehashing of Enlightenment ideas and his critique of Kant's philosophy.

💡Immanuel Kant

Immanuel Kant was an 18th-century German philosopher who is central to modern philosophy. The script references Kant's essay 'What is Enlightenment?', which defines Enlightenment as the exit from self-imposed immaturity. Kant's views are juxtaposed with Foucault's to examine the evolution of Enlightenment thought.

💡Modernity

Modernity is discussed as a period or condition characterized by significant cultural, economic, and social changes from the 18th century onwards. Foucault uses the concept of modernity to reflect on the attitudes and dispositions that point towards Enlightenment, such as the disruption of temporality and the capacity to perpetually reinvent oneself.

💡Baudelaire

Charles Baudelaire is a French poet who Foucault references to discuss the concept of modernity. Baudelaire's ideas about the aesthetic disruption of temporality and the poetics of the present are used to frame the discussion on how modern humans reflect on their own lives and the historical conditions that allow for the emergence of Enlightenment attitudes.

💡Reason

Reason is a capacity of the mind to think, understand, and draw conclusions logically. In the script, reason is highlighted as a key component of the Enlightenment, where Kant suggests that Enlightenment is the submission to proper authority arrived at through reason, allowing individuals to enact reason to their full capacity.

💡Critique

Critique in the video refers to the act of analyzing and evaluating something, particularly the historical and philosophical underpinnings of the Enlightenment. Foucault advocates for a perpetual critique of our own historical period, which is a central part of his approach to understanding and engaging with modernity and the Enlightenment.

💡Genealogy

Genealogy, as used by Foucault, is a method of investigation that involves tracing the historical evolution of ideas and practices. The script mentions Foucault's preference for an archaeological and genealogical excavation of institutions that give life to the situation we find ourselves in, rather than a transcendental approach.

💡Humanism

Humanism is an outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters. The video discusses Foucault's distinction between Enlightenment and humanism, suggesting that while Enlightenment and modernity were relatively steady, humanism has adapted over time, with various forms such as scientific, Christian, and Marxist humanism.

💡Power Relations

Power relations refer to the ways in which different forms of power are distributed and exercised within society. Foucault's work often focuses on these relations, and the script discusses how power relations influence how people interact with one another and how they form as moral subjects.

💡Self-Reflection

Self-reflection is the process of thinking deeply about one's own experiences, thoughts, and feelings. The script describes modernity as a disposition that involves self-reflection upon one's own life, which is a key characteristic of the modern human and is essential to the ethos of perpetual critique.

Highlights

Introduction to the discussion of Michel Foucault's interpretation of 'What is Enlightenment?'

Foucault's response to Kant's essay and his modern rehashing of Kant's ideas

Kant's view of Enlightenment as a departure from mental servitude to authority figures

Foucault's curiosity about Kant's use of the term 'humankind' and its implications

Enlightenment as a balance between reason and submission to proper authority

Kant's political philosophy applied to the Enlightenment as a means to realize his vision

Foucault's use of Baudelaire to define the attributes of modernity

Modernity's disruption of temporality and the traditional linear sequence of history

The concept of heroizing the present moment as a modern disposition

Modernity's capacity for perpetual self-reinvention in line with one's self-image

The aesthetic dimension of modernity and its association with art

Foucault's definition of modernity's ethos as a permanent critique of the historical period

The negative and positive approaches to engaging with modernity and the Enlightenment

Foucault's critique of the homogeneity and unchanging nature of Enlightenment and modernity

The distinction between Foucault's view of modernity and various forms of humanism

Foucault's advocacy for an archaeological and genealogical approach to understanding our world

The importance of avoiding replication of existing structures in new forms of experimentation

Foucault's proposal to consider technological and strategic elements of human interaction

The three relational questions prompted by Foucault's approach to understanding human interaction

The need for historical analysis to question the basic assumptions of the Enlightenment

Transcripts

[Music]

hey everyone back again today i'm going

to talk about michelle foucault's that

say

what is enlightenment now before jumping

into that if you want to follow me

anywhere than here

you can find me on instagram theory

underscore and underscore philosophy or

on twitter at davidginyo

uh if you found this in youtube form or

on youtube you'll be able to find it in

podcast form anywhere where you get

podcasts where there shouldn't be any

ads

if you found this in podcast form you'll

be able to find it on youtube where i

sometimes release

videos now if you're new here welcome hi

i'm david i try to explain philosophical

text and ideas in a way that makes them

accessible

so if you're new here be sure to

subscribe and you can see videos i

release at least

once sometimes twice a week and

make sure to like share tell your

friends who knows they might get a real

kick out of this

if you want to help me out monetarily

you can do that via patreon or paypal

but obviously no pressure

and yeah let's just jump right into

michelle fuco's what is enlightenment

now a few weeks ago i did i guess

a few months ago now i don't know it's

been a while i did

emmanuel kant's what is enlightenment

now this is

very much a response to kant but also

kind of

modern rehashing of what kant was on

about

in order to raise various problems that

foucault has with his own philosophy and

with

the other historical developments that

would happen since kant's time because

he wrote his text

kant wrote his text what is

enlightenment at the end of the 18th

century so

about 200 years before foucault wrote

this essay so he begins by recounting

the fact that

kant wrote his essay for a magazine at

the time which really

it was this german periodical really

reveals the the way that we've regressed

in terms of what journalism is like or

what uh

op-eds are like but anyways it was a the

question put out to the public was what

is enlightenment in which

kant uh submitted his answer now for

more detail on that i'm going to go

through

uh the key points that foucault brings

up here but i've covered that text

itself

on this channel as i've already kind of

hinted at so you can go check that out

if you want more background but you

don't really need it like we're going to

cover here

what foucault sees as being important so

for

kant enlightenment marked a departure

from servitude from a mental servitude

or submission to authority

so submission to priests one of the

other examples he gives is like

dietitians

to doctors to people who claim to know

things and that are the secret wielders

of knowledge of esoteric knowledge that

only

they can provide so enlightenment is the

emancipation

from those specific esoteric sites of

knowledge or from those sites of

knowledge being the only

kind of containers of of knowledge so it

is

an individual effort for kant but that

by virtue of its being enacted

individually across

you know across all of society becomes a

kind of collective movement then

and of course he refers to this as as

mankind

or as human kind to which foucault is

curious what exactly does

kant mean here by humankind and it is a

very short text

it he doesn't go into all the details

about it uh and kant

couldn't himself actually explain all

these

various things it was just for a

magazine but foucault is curious and he

thinks it's quite suspect that we're

discussing this in terms of

a human revolution so to speak this

movement into enlightenment

because that would necessarily mean then

that everyone is a part of it

because it wouldn't be enlightenment if

it's just a few people

like that would be that that would just

be a few people

uh demonstrating some superior capacity

for something

at least in terms of the various uh

modes of power and knowledge that

determine

something as being greater than any

other so it could mean for foucault like

this

it has to be a global thing or it's

going to call into question the very act

or the very idea of what

humanity is altogether now foucault

doesn't really know

because he's not in kant's head but he's

raising this problem here

that he'll kind of come to show his own

position on the matter as we go through

here

now another thing that foucault adds

that is found in kant's text is that

enlightenment doesn't mean a total

departure from authority rather

it is the submission to the proper

authority that is arrived at through

reason knowing what is kind of proper uh

authority under which people can still

enact

reason to their full capacity so it's

not about getting rid of the capacity or

getting rid of obeying

but just obeying while still retaining

the capacity to think

so there's still that submission to

authority to some extent now for

foucault

he points out and i think this is really

interesting

that kant's piece was not just

to question the emergence the arrival of

in the enlightenment

it was also to apply his own that is

kant's

own political philosophy to what was

happening

at the time it was almost a way by which

kant could usher in

what his political philosophy was hoping

to realize to some extent that is

the demonstration of a kind of

collective will framed around these

individuals that had

a capacity to recognize their own moral

capacity their own capacity for

knowledge and for more on that i've done

the three critiques the critique of

furies and the critique of practical

reason the creektique of judgment on

this channel

which i will say i treat the critique of

practical reason

and the critique of judgment much better

than the first one the critique of pure

reason

but you'd probably still get something

from it and it'd be worth checking out

if you want more about kant's

background uh here and what foucault is

picking out about it

but just to kind of reiterate foucault

is really highlighting the point that

kant seems to be tried

trying to realize his own political

philosophy with this

writing about what is the enlightenment

like he's almost trying to

realize a situation in which his

political philosophy will make the most

sense

and foucault says that this is a very

interesting moment

of philosophical insight because

it muses on the possibility of a future

not for the sake of the future itself

but on the reflection of or in

motivating a reflective capacity not

only of the future but of one's own

stake within the future now

this is going to have implications in

just a couple moments

when we are going to think about this in

terms of modernity

but for now let's let's just put that on

the back burner and keep that keep that

close

in your mind because we're going to come

back to it so foucault is like

honestly this is the only value to be

found in god's text because it's not

like

politically or historically rigorous at

all like it's not really giving us much

in that domain like the only thing that

really seems to make it stand out

is how it is applying its own uh

knowledge of history

in a way that assumes this kind of

capacity

of of the human that that kant

firmly holds on to this capacity that we

all have

so the way that this relates to

modernity for foucault

is that in kant's reflection upon

the times with his own philosophy he is

demonstrating

an a a disposition of the modern human

that is someone who reflects upon their

own

lives so there we really need to be

laying more of a groundwork here to

modernity foucault uses baudelaire to

think about

modernity because baudelaire gives us

some kind of preliminary

attributes of what modernity is that

he then applies to kant and kant's own

reflection

upon the possibility of enlightenment

with his own philosophy

so from baudelaire that foucault is

picking out of number one

modernity essentially disrupts

temporality

it disrupts linearity whereas previously

tradition you know was always looking to

the past

in order to determine the future so

there's a kind of straight

line sequence i don't know if you're

seeing this in reverse but

a kind of straight line sequence that's

going to determine

how events will unfold modernity creates

a rupture

in that because it starts to question

things it questions things like

religion like the family like identity

to some extent

that will then problematize this linear

sequence and in that is the capacity

or a new capacity to what foucault calls

to heroize the present hero eyes

the present to lionize the present so

that we can find value not only

in where we will be going or where we've

come from

but in the moment in the very immediate

that we find ourselves in so that puts

us here into the second thing that

foucault takes from baudelaire that in

this lionization of the present

we aren't kind of making it uh sacred we

which would then just be a

recapitulation of the same kind of

traditional framework

it instead is a way to find what he

calls a kind of poetry

of the present defining kind of beauty

of the present within

itself that we are very prepared might

disappear

at any moment but that we can still find

value in

now thirdly it would be all too

we'd be all too quick if we were to say

that modernity is then characterized by

perpetual transformations you know this

kind of idea the

of the perpetual present like we only

look towards the

the now which would necessarily then

pretend

transformations all the time no what

properly characterizes the present

for foucault that is taken from

baudelaire is the

capacity to perpetually reinvent

yourself in accordance to the image of

yourself that you

envision so this idea is being bound

or this possibility is bound around the

idea of who you are

kind of um homogenously how you want

yourself to be

and allowing for these transformations

to better attain that self to better

realize yourself

as human which is of course

fuco's critical of it in his other text

but still it is a marker of modernity

and then fourthly

this plays itself out in a kind of

aesthetic way

and it's for that reason that baudelaire

kind of attributes this to art or

locates within

art this capacity so these are a series

of kind of dispositions the kind of

characteristics of what it means to be

disposed to words that are kind of

geared towards

enlightenment not of what enlightenment

is itself but

rather the attitudes that allow for

enlightenment or point towards

enlightenment or modernity and its

ethos is then a permanent critique or

perpetual critique

of our own historical period now this

can be further

kind of taxonomized understood in the

following ways and either

what he calls negatively or and

positively

where negatively is kind of raising some

problematic

elements of it not not in like a

negative way but presenting some

attributes about

modernity that don't actually say

anything about it per se

but that nevertheless they'll contribute

to our understanding of it by saying

what it is not

which is important to know but that

doesn't actually say what it is

so to engage with modernity and to

engage with the enlightenment

is to not either completely submit to it

or to repudiate it or any of the kind of

satellite institutions that form around

it that form this kind of constellation

of effects

called the called modernity or the

enlightenment like for example

rationalism rather we should be

skeptical or worried about the

crystallization of any of these

institutions any of these ideas into

like

a steady framework that is unchanging or

that is unadaptable

and instead then we should be focused on

the kind of historical conditions that

make this

possible that kind of allow the

formation not only of these dispositions

towards enlightenment or that mark

enlightenment

but these other institutions like

rationalism or or whatever

you know you'd like to introduce here

that can emerge the conditions that

allow these institutions to emerge

and he kind of adds this as an aside

he's like well

someone could misconstrue this as being

a kind of project of finding

the proper uh you know what it means to

be properly human in this act of like

constantly reinventing yourself

now foucault wants to dissuade us from

thinking that because he doesn't see

modernity and humanism being congruent

at all

because for him enlightenment and

modernity

were pretty steady that is they they

were quite homogenous unchanging

whereas humanism was adapting all the

time so you had like

scientific humanism you had christian

humanism you had marxist humanism

and so on and so forth so he doesn't

want us to think about it in those terms

at all

and this isn't to mention of course that

the enlightenment's

prod process of kind of permanent

critique

is anathema to anything humanist because

humanist

implies that there are these kind of key

attributes of the human that can be

unearthed with the right framework so

that's the kind of negative side the

negative

approach to it now the positive one is

where he begins to dis or he wants us

to dissuade us from thinking about this

in terms of a transcendental

approach now he's using this from kant's

philosophy where

in kant's philosophy and i've done an

episode on what transcendental idea

idealism is for kant a transcendental

critique

is concerned with the faculties that

make reasoning possible that make

morality possible that make

judgment possible to be quite um simple

about it

which are universal and there's really

no getting around that so

foucault doesn't want to do that he

wants to do an

archaeological and genealogical

excavation of the

various institutions that give life to

the situation we find ourselves in and

that determine

us as subjects in this world now he he

doesn't want this to be just critique

for the sake of routine critique rather

he's pointing to the

or kind of encouraging us to use this as

a

roadmap to begin to experiment with the

newness

in order to try to make the world better

as best as we can

which for him automatically implies a

departure

from what he calls global and radical

efforts and it's hard to think of this

in

that he's you know criticizing anything

other than marxism here

but he's very much taking aim at marxism

proposing

this kind of grandiose uh alternative to

the situation we find ourselves in that

doesn't get into the nitty-gritty of the

various historical manifestations

institutions that make this situation

possible so with this new approach we

must be careful

that we don't replicate the same

structures with this kind of

experimentation that seeks to

unearth these various capabilities and

capacities of humans that have been

maybe stifled by

various institutions or disallowed we we

have to be prepared not to replicate

those same

frameworks then he proposes what he

calls a homogenization which is to

consider the

technological and strategic elements

of human interaction where those are

concerned with the

with what humans do and how they do

what they do that is with what

technologies they do what they do

so he's concerned here then with the

ways that people

interact with one another in accordance

with power relations and the various

motivations behind people doing the

things

they do like why is it that people you

know wake up and go to work or

act the ways they do in in work

or at work or or whatever so this these

these approaches the technological and

the

strategic will reveal three other kinds

of relations that is the relations of

people to

other people of people to things

and of people to themselves which will

prompt

these three questions in accordance with

these three relations

how do people relate to themselves that

is as them

as themselves as subjects how do we

relate to one another and ourselves

under these

these power relations and how do we kind

of

relate to ourselves and are formed as

moral subjects that is in having

kind of an obligation to act in a

certain way with certain people in

accordance with what is right and wrong

how do these different these kinds of

ways of living in the world

come to be and how are they dictated and

determined by

power relations and it is only when we

begin to consider these things that we

can then

really begin to interrogate the basic

axiomatic assumptions that underlie

the formation of these this thing called

the enlightenment and how it is made

possible and we can begin to question it

by performing this kind of historical

analysis of it and that more or less

covers what foucault is on about here if

anyone has anything to add

i'd love to hear about it you know

comment below and i

i'll see it and it'd be great and people

hopefully will comment on what you say

but yeah if i did anything wrong i'd

love to hear about it if you like what i

did like share subscribe tell your

friends who knows they might get a kick

of it

out of it and yeah catch you next time