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.

Author's Profile

Melissa M Merritt
University of New South Wales

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-01-31

Downloads
283 (#57,857)

6 months
143 (#24,062)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?