Mendelssohn and Kant on Human Progress: a Neo-Stoic Debate

In Luigi Filieri & Sophie Møller (eds.), Kant on Freedom and Nature: Essays in Honor of Paul Guyer. Routledge (2024)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The chapter replies to Paul Guyer’s (2020) account of the debate between Mendelssohn and Kant about whether humankind makes continual moral progress. Mendelssohn maintained that progress can only be the remit of individuals, and that humankind only “continually fluctuates within fixed limits”. Kant dubs Mendelssohn’s position “abderitism” and explicitly rejects it. But Guyer contends that Kant’s own theory of freedom commits him, malgré lui, to abderitism. Guyer’s risky interpretive position is not supported by examination of the relevant texts in their intellectual context. I first identify the historical origins of the term abderitism, which here signifies the independence of individual progress from social conditions. By contrast, Kant argues that individual progress cannot be independent of the progress of the species, acting as a corporate agent. This arresting position, I argue, must be understood in light of the Stoic ethical-teleological presuppositions generally accepted in eighteenth-century German discussion of human progress.

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Reason and Experience in Mendelssohn and Kant. [REVIEW]Ekin Erkan - 2021 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 29 (2):1-7.
Mendelssohn und Kant über den ontologischen Gottesbeweis.Stefan Lang - 2021 - Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie 69 (5):720-741.
Liberalism and enlightenment in eighteenth‐century Germany.James Schmidt - 1999 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 13 (1-2):31-53.
Mendelssohn, Kant, and Religious Pluralism.Paul Guyer - 2020 - Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie 68 (4):590-610.
What enlightenment was: How Moses mendelssohn and Immanuel Kant answered the.James Schmidt - 1992 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 30 (1):77-101.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-01-31

Downloads
287 (#71,587)

6 months
145 (#24,647)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Melissa M Merritt
University of New South Wales

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations