Kaitlyn Sisk
Dr. Adam Johns
Seminar in Composition
24 September 2008
The facts are available, but yet no one wants to believe them. Science has been disproving religion and people have been looking the other way, continuing to believe in false ideas. Immanuel Kant writes about this self-imposed immaturity in “What is Enlightenment?” Enlightenment is “man’s emergence from his self-imposed immaturity”(Kant 1). People are looking to guardians, such as priests, to tell them what to believe and how to live their lives. Kant says this immaturity is self-imposed because of a lack of courage to think for themselves, not an inability to. Because of these guardians willing to lead, people become an unthinking mass, following blindly. The only way to bring about enlightenment according to Kant is that “the public use of one’s reason must always be free”(Kant 2). The opportunity for people to think their own ideas does not come up very often, but when it does, people shrink away from it. Kant’s argument furthers Lee Silver’s ideas in “Challenging Nature” that progression in mankind is being held back because of this immaturity.
Mankind cannot progress if they are not allowing themselves to be enlightened. Kant gives the example of a priest who teaches under the direction of others. If he found something contradictory in the religion, the only thing he could do would be resign. The priest is a guardian to people, and Kant says that it is absurd for the guardians themselves to be immature and unenlightened (Kant 2). People have created forever-binding laws that make it impossible to revise them if in later times new knowledge is acquired. When there is new knowledge available, people are forced to ignore it, or question their faith, and most likely they will not be doing the latter. When this occurs, Kant has called it a “crime against human nature”(Kant 2).
Kant and Silver’s ideas promote each other’s arguments. Silver believes that biotechnology can help the world develop, but people’s ideas about religion are holding us back. One important instance where this is true is embryonic stem cell research. Stem cells can renew and differentiate themselves into new specialized cells, which can help regenerate tissues and organs in the body (Silver 129). Silver lists many ways in which these stem cells have been proven in the laboratory to cure diseases and other health problems. Tests on rats in laboratories have resulted in successful cures or treatments for blood diseases, Parkinson’s, spinal cord injuries, multiple sclerosis, heart disease, and diabetes (Silver 129). This should be wonderful news. But, unfortunately, many people are against stem cell research. Because of their religion, these people believe that these embryos have souls and it is wrong to use them for research. Therefore, living people are forced to suffer from these diseases because of the rights of a few cells in an embryo.
This has many negative effects. People act like an unthinking mass, like “machines”(Kant 4). An example Silver states is that the belief that heaven is above Earth in the clouds has been disproven by the discovery that our solar system is one of many, and there are trillions of galaxies in the universe (Silver 39). Even though these are proven facts, people still believe in heaven because they are unable to think for themselves and people in charge tell them it is true. People are holding themselves back from advancement by holding onto these ideas.
To sum it up, people are constantly learning new things about the world, things that could benefit humankind. Some laws and beliefs from before this new knowledge is acquired may contradict it, and people are forced to choose between their beliefs and facts. Because most people do not have the courage to become enlightened, they argue against these new facts and hold society back from evolving.
3 comments:
In “What is Enlightenment?” Immanuel Kant does define enlightenment as “man’s emergence from his self-imposed immaturity” (Kant 1). However, Kant makes mass generalizations of human society when he says that we do not currently live in an age of enlightenment. Some people may have the courage to think for themselves, but they might also want to hear what guardians, such as priests, have to say about a certain topic because they are most likely very knowledge on that specific subject. After hearing what a priest has to say, the individual is able to take that information, reflect on it, and then come up with his own thoughts and ideas now that he has the necessary background information. In my opinion, Kant does not consider the people who do make their own decisions and come up with their own ideas and for these reasons, have achieved self-enlightenment. Kant is only concerned with enlightening humanity as a whole and believes that we will either all achieve it, or we will all be lazy and cowards and continue to have others do our thinking for us.
I disagree with the claim that “when there is new knowledge available, people are forced to ignore it, or question their faith, and most likely they will not be doing the latter.” In an online article titled “Post-modern Judaism seems strangely familiar,” Rabbi Levi Brackman states “With all the new scientific knowledge that was suddenly available and with the breaking down of old boundaries and time-honored truths, religion seemed in urgent need of updating” (Brackman 1). For example, “the new movements such as Reform and Conservatism updated the Jewish religion and simultaneously made changes to it” (Brackman 1). This shows that when new information becomes available, it is not ignored. Rather it is studied, reviewed, and might cause changes in current religious laws or teachings.
Furthermore, it seems a little bit harsh of Silver to blame a person’s religion as the sole reason for why people with diseases must suffer with them because they can’t use stem cell research to cure them. I am not arguing against stem cell research, but I know it is still a relatively new discovery and there are still many things that are not known about it and it may cause potential harmful effects to the patient. Therefore, Silver should take in account these other factors before he says that religious views are the only thing standing in the way of new scientific research and discoveries.
The facts are available, but yet no one wants to believe them. Science has been disproving old views and people have been looking the other way, continuing to believe in false ideas. Immanuel Kant writes about this self-imposed immaturity in “What is Enlightenment?” Enlightenment is “man’s emergence from his self-imposed immaturity”(Kant 1). People are looking to guardians, such as priests, to tell them what to believe and how to live their lives. Kant says this immaturity is self-imposed because of a lack of courage to think for themselves, not an inability to. Because of these guardians willing to lead, people become an unthinking mass, following blindly. Kant’s argument furthers Lee Silver’s ideas in “Challenging Nature” that progression in mankind is being held back because of this immaturity.
Mankind cannot advance if they are not allowing themselves to be enlightened. Kant gives the example of a priest who teaches under the direction of others. If he found something contradictory in the teachings of the religion, the only thing he could do would be resign. The priest is a guardian to people, and Kant says that it is absurd for the guardians themselves to be immature and unenlightened (Kant 2). People have created forever-binding laws that make it impossible to revise them if in later times new knowledge is acquired. When there is new knowledge available, people are forced to ignore it, or question their faith, and most likely they will not be doing the latter. This is especially true for the orthodox or conservative people of a religion who believe in the ways and teachings from the beginning of the religion. For example, Orthodox Jews believe in the strict adherence to and interpretation of the Torah, which was written thousands of years ago. When this occurs, Kant has called it a “crime against human nature”(Kant 2).
Kant and Silver’s ideas promote each other’s arguments. Silver believes that biotechnology can help the world develop, but people’s old ideas are holding us back. One important instance where this is true is embryonic stem cell research. Stem cells can renew and differentiate themselves into new specialized cells, which can help regenerate tissues and organs in the body (Silver 129). Silver lists many ways in which these stem cells have been proven in the laboratory to cure diseases and other health problems. Tests on rats in laboratories have resulted in successful cures or treatments for blood diseases, Parkinson’s, spinal cord injuries, multiple sclerosis, heart disease, and diabetes (Silver 129). This should be wonderful news. Unfortunately, many people are against stem cell research. Because of their religion, people believe that these embryos have souls and it is wrong to use them for research. This is restricting the rights of scientists to research and find cures. Therefore, living people may have to suffer more from these diseases because this research is not allowed.
Silver himself is enlightened in the way Kant defines enlightenment. In “Challenging Nature”, Silver is presenting the ideas he came up with by thinking for himself and finding out what he believes in. Although some might say that Silver is pushing his ideas on others, he is merely presenting his beliefs and the facts and every fact has a citation in the back of the book. Silver is trying to enlighten the public and show him or her that they do not have to keep thinking the way they have been taught to think by the people who lead them. Also, some might say Silver uses the term “well educated” in an insulting, condescending way. But he is using it to show that the well educated are enlightened and people can only become enlightened when they are educated on different views. Silver is just using the freedom Kant describes that the government should give its citizens to think and express his own opinions. As Kant says, “the public use of one’s reason must always be free, and it alone can bring about enlightenment among mankind”(Kant 2).
To sum it up, people are constantly learning new things about the world, things that could benefit humankind. Some laws and beliefs from before this new knowledge is acquired may contradict it, and people are forced to choose between their beliefs and facts. Because most people do not have the courage to become enlightened, they argue against these new facts and hold society back from evolving. Silver writes about this in hope that people will listen to another side and start to think for themselves.
Lauren - a response with research! Excellent, thoughtful work.
Kate - this is a detailed defense of Silver as being (to coin a terrible phrase) the second coming of Kant. It's an interesting and, to an extent, nuanced defense. It isn't ambitious, but it has a clear point of view which you follow throughout, with good use of material from Silver.
So far, so good.
What Lauren has done, though, is show you a detailed and revealing counterargument. Silver *is* one-sided, as she shows by digging up an article on the forms of religion which he neglects, which are capable, ala Kant, of changing with the times.
You didn't need to abandon your defense of Silver - but you could have pushed yourself farther, by dealing with the complex content of this counterargument. By showing that Silver is right *in spite* of his occasional one-sidendness, you would have made your case by strengthening his argument.
Post a Comment