Kant and Twain again (and essay) – D14

I kant believe it! Another dialogue about whether Kant and Twain agree or not about what is Enlightenment! Actually, it wasn’t bad at all. I was just practicing my irony, got it? And Twain thinks his irony is good, ha! The dialogue went pretty well, we had a long discussion with many arguments and although we didn’t reach a general consensus, it was very constructive. My point of view is that they don’t agree because in order for them to agree, Twain’s entire essay must be an irony, and I didn’t see any concrete evidence on his essay that he was doing so. Also, nobody was successful persuading me that he was in fact being ironic. I was not the only one thinking this way, since Kata and Chacho also thought this way. It was a relief to finally put an “end” to this discussion, although I’m sure we will eventually come back to this.

Here is my essay of whether I consider them agreeing or not, enjoy!

Michael Polanyi College                                              Guatemala, September 17^th, 2012

“The Enlightenment”

Do Kant and Twain agree on what is Enlightenment?

“Enlightening is, Man’s quitting the nonage occasioned by himself. Nonage or minority is the inability of making use of one’s own understanding without the guidance of another”

– Immanuel Kant, An Answer to the Question, What is Enlightening?

“We all do no end of feeling, and we mistake it for thinking. And out of it we get an aggregation, which we consider a boon. Its name is Public Opinion. It is held in reverence. It settles everything. Some think it the Voice of God.”

– Mark Twain, Corn-Pone Opinions

Do they agree? In order to know if Kant and Twain agree on what is Enlightening, first we must see each perspective and definition of what it is to be Enlightened. I warn you, readers, that this essay may have a turn in opinion through it, so it’s your duty to resolve those questions by your own.

Kant’s definition of Enlightening is mentioned above. He thinks that in the world there are two groups, the minority and the majority. The minors are those in nonage, and only they are capable of “stepping beyond the go-cart, in which they are inclosed”, and step to majority, those who reach the Enlightenment. This is not simple, mainly because of the “guardians” that prevent the minors to venture them to walk by themselves. In conclusion, Kant thinks is in our capacity to “make use of one’s own understanding without the guidance of another”, as long as we quit the laziness and cowardice that are almost natural to human beings.

Twain says: “I am persuaded that a coldly-thought-out and independent verdict… is a most rare thing – if it has indeed ever existed.” He doesn’t believe in original opinions, neither as independent ones. He believes that the self-approval comes from the approval of other people, thus it is our nature is to conform to the general opinion and render to it. We are beings of association and sympathy, not reasoning and examination. He says: “Broadly speaking, there are non but corn-pone opinions… corn-pone stands for self-approval… The result is conformity.”

I think they are on the same page. I mean they both think of the same problem, and that is that we are in a society in which it is easier to go with what most people think and not resist the general opinions. Kant says there are “guardians” that prevent us from stepping to majority, but it is up to us to change that and think for ourselves. Twain says that everything we think comes from an external cause, we don’t think independently but with our party. The problem is the same, external causes that affect the use of our own understanding. Do they agree? Definitely not. Kant believes there is another way to live our life. He believes we can step to majority, live by our own understanding, and create original ideas. Twain thinks that we are doomed to being minority, to not ever think by ourselves. We are only guided by the fashions, by what the general opinion accepts. For Twain, there is no such thing as majority, we will always be minors and there is nothing we can do about it but to conform. His essay constantly reinforces these statements, and does not mention anything we can do in order to stop being a minor. Is he really implying that? Or is he just being ironic by fooling us to believe that this is the way it is supposed to be, but at the end is our duty to get free from the general opinion? There is little evidence that this might be the case mainly because he is not being clear in some statements. For example, he says: “It is our nature to conform; it is a force which not many can successfully resist.” This might imply that there are some people that do resist conformity. Nevertheless, he refutes it later by saying: “(…) The inborn requirement of self-approval. We all have to bow to that; there are no exceptions.” In this statement, he is reinforcing his argument that our self-approval comes from the approval of other people, of external influences.

Do you still think he is being ironic? How about this? As mentioned before, Twain writes that he doesn’t believe in a “coldly-thought-out and independent verdict or opinion”. If he is being ironic, then this statement implies that he does think there are original opinions and that he is in fact writing one. So, his essay is an original opinion. But wait, is his essay and Kant’s based on the same problem, and Kant was born before him? Indeed, Kant was born in 1724 and died in 1804, while Twain was born in 1835 and died in 1910. By logic based on chronology and on Kant’s reputation, there is an enormous possibility that Twain might have read Kant’s essay. So Twain may think he has a coldly-though-out and original opinion, but he had an external influence. If, by any means, he didn’t even heard of Kant’s ideas, his idea is still not original because Twain got the base of his idea from the black philosopher.

Kant says we can think for ourselves; Twain says we mistake the feeling for thinking. If Twain is being ironic throughout his entire essay, then they agree, but in my perspective, that’s not the case. Sapere aude!

Corn Hole Game – D12

So, Juanma Bonifasi (founder of Acton Academy Guatemala) brought us a gift to celebrate Twain’s essay, Corn-Pone Opinions. The game is called Corn Hole and basically it’s about throwing a small bag of corn grains and trying to get it in a hole. It was a lot of fun!

*Here is the video of us playing it! 

Inner and Outer Circle (Discussing if Kant and Twain agree) – D10

After reading Kant’s and Twain’s essays about Enlightening, we had to do an essay arguing whether they agree or not in their essays. That was due for Tuesday. Today we made a dynamic called the inner and outer circle. It consisted in forming two circles (one in the other). The circle that was inside (inner circle) would dialogue while the others (outer circle) would only listen. The inner circle was conformed by two groups previously formed for this semester, so the dynamic would be repeated three times. The first two went pretty smooth; they reached conclusions very fast and agreed on most things. The conclusion both circles draw was that Kant and Twain agree on their essays. I was on the last circle and everyone thought we would go as the other two circles went. My conclusions about the questions were very different from those of the previous circles and I thought I was alone on this one. I thought it would be an exhausting discussion between the rest of my circle and me. To my surprise, Katarina thought the same way I did, and almost arrived to the same conclusions I did! We did have a lot of disagreement on the circle; nevertheless it was full of good arguments and discussions, reviewing in very detail both texts. We didn’t even notice that the 15 minutes we had already had passed. We were having a great dialogue for more than 20 minutes until the whole circle achieved a conclusion. They understood the point Katarina and I were making and got persuaded by our arguments. It was a great dialogue!

*Here you may find both, Kant and Twain essays and also my essay regarding whether they agree or not. I strongly recommend that before you read my essay you form your own criteria on both essays. Have fun!

Southern Lunch (Corn-Pone lunch) – D10

Remember Twain’s essay Corn-Pone Opinions? If you do and know what is corn pone, you must know that it is a very typical Southern food. We arranged to bring other Southern food for lunch today (mainly because Katarina offered herself to bring corn pone and white beans with bacon and pork, since her father is from Louisiana). There were corn pone, white beans, mashed potatoes, beef in some kind of gravy, sweet corn with butter, a purple cabbage with apple salad, corn bread, apple pie, pecan pie, and real lemonade. We had a great time eating all this starch and carbohydrates, which made us all sleepy but fully satisfied!

The Enlightenment: Kant and Twain – D4 & 5

“Enlightening is, Man’s quitting the nonage occasioned by himself. Nonage or minority is the inability of making use of one’s own understanding without the guidance of another”

–      Immanuel Kant, Freedom to Reason

During these days, we discussed Kant’s definition of Enlightening. We had trouble finding what Kant meant by nonage, because in my perspective we can have understanding and use it. The difference between some who has reached the Enlightment and someone who hasn’t is that the enlightened does not need the guidance of another for him or her to use their own understanding. Nevertheless, both can make use of their understanding. This idea was one of the main points to discuss, without getting to a unanimous decision. What I liked of Kant’s essay was the phrase, Sapere aude! In Latin, this means, “dare to wise” or “dare to know”. Kant made this phrase well known, however it is attributed to Horace in his Epistles where he wrote: dimidium facti qui coepit habet: sapere aude, incipe ("He who has begun is half done: dare to know!").

On Tuesday, we read Mark Twain’s posthumous essay, Corn-Pone Opinions. It is about the relationship he had with his family’s slave, a black man. Twain says: “The black philosopher’s idea was that a man is not independent, and cannot afford views which might interfere with his bread and butter”. Bread and butter? Please, don’t get me into it again! After an exhausting discussion (which I take part of the responsibility) of what does Twain meant by “bread and butter”, we concluded that it was the “well being” of people. At first, I thought Twain was referring to the group’s opinions and way of thinking in which one belongs. Part of the problem was that many of my classmates thought of “bread and butter” as only the food and way of survival, there was my problem. I then realized that it was not only that, but also the social status and general well being, and how can our opinions, if different from those of the general opinion, can harm our well being, our “bread and butter”.

Today, I also learned that many times in a dialogue people discuss what they believe, and not the texts. They don’t try to understand what the author is trying to tell us. It also bothers me that people don’t respect their time to talk, and just keep interrupting. Some of them don’t listen, but they want to be heard. I keep telling myself that this is a process of learning to dialogue, so I try to keep calm. Easy Hulk, not yet! Goosfraba…