Emmanuel Kant describes enlightenment as a situation of self-awareness where an individual emerges from self-imposed immaturity. Thus, this state marks a transition from darkness to awareness, and it comes with freedom. Moreover, Kant regards immaturity as a complete inability of an individual to use his conscience or understanding without the intervening guidance of another person (Deligiorgi, 2005). A clear lack of resolve and courage precipitates to the denial of personal freedom, but an affliction on others for sole guidance. Principally, Kant’s assertion about enlightenment is entrenched on having the courage to use personal understanding and courage to dispense critical objectives in life.
As reiterated before, Kant modeled the theory of enlightenment around the concept of freedom. The right to choice is an absolute declaration of freedom, and one uses such rights to make reasonable and responsible decisions. Life choices are thus granted through enlightenment that is consequently provided by the attainment of a state of freedom in life. The context of freedom entails using one’s reason in making open and independent decisions. Therefore, the ideas of independence and democracy have been entrenched in providing absolute freedom to the people in the society (Deligiorgi, 2005). In a nutshell, enlightenment is provisioned through total freedom that spans from the tenets of democracy and independence.
The age of enlightenment came to define certain rights that were inherent in humanity, and as such the society could not deny their manifestation. Unalienable rights are inseparable from the people, and they are deeply inherent in the people. The example of such rights includes freedom to speech, freedom to worship, among other rights. Indeed, the advocacy of these rights has remained firm within the society, and people have learned to live by their tenets. Moreover, these rights form the fundamental part of human life and existence, and they can never be forfeited within the realms of social existence. Indeed, these rights form the basis for moral interactions between people in the society, besides being irrevocable in the pure sense of application.
The unalienable rights have a direct correspondence and correlation with the period of enlightenment. Initially, the society was controlled by the black laws that disregarded the existence of any guaranteed eights. However, the emergence of science, philosophy, and politics catapulted the society to a new paradigm of thinking and institutionalism. After that, the age of enlightenment came to the existence, thereby subjecting the mainstream social laws to a series of amendments. Kant’s philosophy is significant to this fact and remains very realistic to the period of enlightenment. Thus, the traditionally-inscribed notions were challenged during the Enlightenment period, which rooted for the new definition of the common laws and rights that controlled human conduct (Deligiorgi, 2005). Indeed, philosophers, as well as the political thinkers, began questioning the admissibility of governance in controlling human rights that were unalienable in nature.
Pragmatically, it was during the period of enlightenment that the unalienable rights became manifest into the society. In this regards, political thinkers mainstreamed their arguments that the government could not deny certain rights on account of social affiliation or class. Therefore, the year 1725 saw the classification of certain rights as alienable while others exhibited the category of unalienable rights. In fact, the maiden classification of these laws marked a new onset to the society where unalienable rights were given way and became part of the society. Philosophers like Kant among others have given due regards to this period as behind the admission of unalienable rights into the society.
The US Declaration of Independence is perfectly congruent with Kant’s definition of enlightenment. Therefore, I believe in the admissibility of this document to Kant’s definition of enlightenment in the American society. Thomas Jefferson, who first drafted this document enlists that injustice was unfairly imposed on the colonies by the British administration. Thus, this document was an awakening alert to the Americans that they should rise beyond this state, and demand their freedom. This statement indeed implies a state of enlightenment to the people who later actualized their rights and fought hard to retain them.
Jefferson’s document followed the due regards for intellectual maturity to impart self-esteem on the Americans, who seemingly slumbered under the imposed rule by the British administration (Farber, 2016). Besides, Enlightenment is the age of human emancipation that the public revolutionizes from weakness to a state of self-maturity. All these tenets were captured in the definition of enlightenment by Kant. The detailed attributes of this document enlisted conformal points of enlightenment to the concepts that had been reiterated by Kant in his maiden philosophy. For example, Jefferson unveils a legitimate and a mature argument that would leverage off his people from parochial British administration and rules. Thus, this document stimulates the people from a state of immaturity to a new paradigm of independence, where they could enjoy their basic freedom and rights through democratization.
In the US Declaration of Independence, the core precepts of this document exonerated the plight of the people. Thus, the liberation of the people became a critical point of reflection in determining the prospects of independence and liberation. For example, the American people were denied the freedom to practice certain freedom and rights, which they felt were inherent to them. Therefore, the war to liberation was curtailed along the prospects of leveraging the people against archaic laws imposed on them by the British authority (Farber, 2016). However, the maturity to independence was short-lived after the attainment of freedom. The American constitution once again began limiting the freedom that its people fought for during the Revolutionary war. Oppression and segregation were still eminent in certain regions, and this furthered the course of a new freedom and liberation in America.
References
Deligiorgi, K. (2005).Kant and the Culture of Enlightenment. State University of New York Press.
Farber, D. (2016). Historical Versus Iconic Meaning: The Declaration, the Constitution, and the Interpreter's Dilemma. Southern California Law Review, 89457.
