However, I think that this topic so often returning and always subordinate, the subject of humanism can be contrasted to the principle of criticism the principle of permanent creation of ourselves in our autonomy, that is the principle located in the heart of the historical consciousness of the Aufkl(rung. From this point of view, I'd see more of a tension than an identity between the Aufkl(rung and humanism. Anyway, to mix them seems to me to be dangerous and, besides, historically inaccurate. If the question is about the person, about humanity, about humanity and was significant in the eighteenth century, the very Aufkl(rung very rarely see themselves as humanism. It is also worth noting that in the nineteenth century historiography the humanism of the XVI century, is so important, for example, to Sainte-BEUVE and Burkhart, always different, and sometimes directly opposed to the Enlightenment and the XVIII century. In the XIX century there was a tendency for their opposition - at least, the same. as to the confusion. Anyway, I think we should resist this intellectual and political blackmail - "to be the Aufkl(rung or against him?"; you need to avoid the historical and moral confusion, mixing the theme of humanism and the question of Aufkl(rung. The analysis of their complex relationships in the last two centuries would be a special work, important to to understand a little bit how we understand ourselves and our past.
However, I think that this topic so often returning and
ReplyDeletealways subordinate, the subject of humanism can be contrasted to the principle of criticism
the principle of permanent creation of ourselves in our autonomy, that is the principle
located in the heart of the historical consciousness of the Aufkl(rung. From this point
of view, I'd see more of a tension than an identity between the Aufkl(rung and
humanism. Anyway, to mix them seems to me to be dangerous and, besides,
historically inaccurate. If the question is about the person, about humanity, about humanity and
was significant in the eighteenth century, the very Aufkl(rung very rarely see themselves as
humanism. It is also worth noting that in the nineteenth century historiography the humanism of the XVI
century, is so important, for example, to Sainte-BEUVE and Burkhart, always different,
and sometimes directly opposed to the Enlightenment and the XVIII century. In the XIX century
there was a tendency for their opposition - at least, the same.
as to the confusion. Anyway, I think we should resist
this intellectual and political blackmail - "to be the Aufkl(rung or
against him?"; you need to avoid the historical and moral confusion, mixing
the theme of humanism and the question of Aufkl(rung. The analysis of their complex relationships in
the last two centuries would be a special work, important to
to understand a little bit how we understand ourselves and our past.