1

Olufifehanmi Osikoya

Kendall Jaggers

English 102

1 November 2018

Converging Enlightenment Philosophy on Race and its Implications on Western Society

Throughout the span of the enlightenment period in the late eighteenth century, two conflicting

philosophical ideologies cultivated the western world as a whole; utilitarianism and Kantianism,

which the latter bloomed from the disputes and manifestation of the birth of natural science.

Although Newton triumphed the enlightenment era with his emerging ideologies and theses of

the physical world through Physics, natural science and its evolution led to the cultivation of race

and conversations over

the origins of men. Influential philosophers and naturalists such as Buffon, Kant, Kames, etc.

shifted the definition of depicting humans toward a naturalistic perspective in an effort to elicit

their perceived truth of the birth of humanity while consequently furthering the trivialization of

minorities. By emphasizing natural science, enlightenment thinkers drew connections to the

science of the animal kingdom to hierarchize the human race. Despite conflicting and converging

ideologies clashing

in relation to race and ethnology, the Kantian philosophical ideology (although influenced by

those said-conflicting ideologies) remains to be the viewpoint in which predominantly impacted

Western society. Kantian racial philosophy comprises his “anthropology and his ethics” but fails

to parallel with his transcendental philosophy. Although Kant’s racial philosophy may fail to

correspond to his transcendental philosophy, Kant’s theories and ideologies evolved from

prominent enlightenment pioneers.

 Osikoya 2

1. Theory

To delve into the depths of the German Kantian racial philosophy, providing

contextualization of the basis of racial Kantianism is required. Prior to Immanuel Kant, there was

little conversation in regard to the concept of ‘race’ other than the viewpoints of “Isaac la

Peyrere to Voltaire and Hume, a polygenist minority had suggested that humanity in fact

comprised several distinct groups without a common origin” (Larrimore). Despite Kant’s initial

description of race “as Ausartunsen

(species that do not change) that endure and survive through climatic change and

categorizes race into four categories: ‘the race of the Whites, 2) the Negro race, 3) the Hunnish

(Mongolian or Kalmuck) race, 4) the Hindu or Hindustani race;" subsequently after he

manifested a stem genus hierarchizing race: stem genus, whites of brunette skin, first; whites of

blonde skin of damp cold; second, copper red (Native American) of dry cold; third, black

(Senegambia) of damp heat; and fourth, olive-yellow (Indians) of dry heat. Kant contradicts his

theory by excluding the Hunnish as a race but most importantly Kant

has now eliminated the concept of nationality from describing humans and has now

differentiated humanity by race.

Providing a naturalistic, anthropological approach to Kant’s racial theory, Kant espouses

a theory of monogenesis, “the idea that mankind comes from a single original stock” with the

thesis conceptualizing around keine, the original seed of the four races (Cohen). Theorizing

about keine, Kant emphasizing the existence of “‘Phlogiston’ which needed to be removed from

the blood.” (Gray). Kant then proceeds to add the scientific approach to support his argument by

claiming “iron in the

 Osikoya 3

blood reacts in different ways to the large quantities of salty acid, phosphoric acid, or

volatile lye of various climates and turns their inhabitants red, black, or yellow” yielding the

causation of keine. (Lattimore). As Kant elaborates on this argument, he elicits the use of

allusion in relation to Africans and pale Europeans by stating pale Europeans rid themselves of

Phlogiston via respiration, contrasting Africans wherein release the chemical through the skin in

a process called dephlogistisieren due to the extensive amount in equatorial regions where

Africans reside, thusly the reason for dark skin. Despite contrary arguments conflicting with his

theory, Kant ‘proves’ the reasoning of

the yellow and red skin of Indians and Native Americans, respectively, by utilizing the

analogy previously stated.

In the Darwinian viewpoint of the conception of race, Kant supported the monogenesistic

philosophy except for supporting evolution. Darwin’s ideology differed from Kant’s classical

ideology due to his belief in “the claim that the various races had evolved from a common ape-

like ancestor,” emphasizing the evolution of cognition (Alter). In Darwin’s The Descent of Man,

Darwin noted that humanity evolved from a gradual spectrum from ape to human, varying in

degree, not in kind. Darwin elaborated

on the theory that the gap between humanity and primates varies widely incorporating the

entirely of humanity from the most intellectual and civilized human to the lowest form of an ape,

not from Africans and Australians to primates.

Decomposing Kant’s racial ideology spurs from the rejection of the racial theories of

Henry Home Lord Kames, and Richard Crawfurd. Kames’ racial theory forms from his theory of

polygenesis, where he hypothesizes that humanity's birth not from a singular source. By radically

rejecting Mosaic history for its religious pretense by triumphing monogenesis, a theory
 Osikoya 4

proclaiming human origins relay to one source where varying environmental circumstances

yielded the shift in color. Kames and Crawfurd

parallel in this ideology wherein “As two autocrondi aboriginal races interacted with each

other, they produced a new, third mixed race” which elicits diversity (Knapman). Kames then

draws parallels of the human race to other species in relation to breeding, alluding to human

discourse in relation to cultivation to seals

Seals have a singular oeconomy. Polygamy seems to be a law of nature among them, as a

male associates with several females. The sea-turtle has no occasion to pair, as the female

concludes her task with laying her eggs in the sand. The young are hatched by the sun; and

immediately crawl to the sea (Kames).

In the Darwinian viewpoint of the conception of race, he supported the monogenesistic

philosophy, slightly aligning with Kant. Darwin’s ideology differed from Kant’s classical

ideology due to his belief in “the claim that the various races had evolved from a common ape-

like ancestor,” emphasizing the evolution of cognition (Alter). In Darwin’s The Descent of Man,

Darwin noted that humanity evolved from a gradual spectrum from ape to human, varying in

degree, not in kind. Darwin elaborated

on the theory that the gap between humanity and primates varies widely incorporating the

entirely of humanity from the most intellectual and civilized human to the lowest form of an ape,

not from Africans and Australians to primates.

1. Race and Slavery

Although Kant’s ideologies on the cultivation of race may be accepted in his time period,

his racist depiction of non-Europeans reverberated throughout Europe and fueled that
 Osikoya 5

trivialization of minorities in India, Africa, and North America. Kant stated that white is not a

race “whites are not really a race (A+ B); that it is unnatural to mix races (B + C); and that only

whites are the subjects of history, while the (other) races seem dispensable (A+ B +C)”

(Larrimore). As stated earlier, Kant

viewed Europeans as Persians, Greeks, Egyptians, Middle-Easterns, Spanish, and

mainland west-Europe; other nationalities/races not grouped with Europeans were considered

inferior. Kant digresses on race;

1) The American people are uneducable (nimmt keine Bildung an); for they lack affect and

passion. They are not amorous, and so are not fertile. They speak hardly at all, ... care for nothing

and are lazy.

2) The race of Negroes, one could say, is entirely the opposite ...; they are full of affect and

passion, very lively, chatty and vain. It can be educated, but only to the education of servants, i.e.

they can be trained. They have many motives (Tnebfedern), are sensitive, fear blows and do

much out of concern for honor.

3) The Hindus have incentives, but have a strong degree of calm, and all look like philosophers.

That notwithstanding, they are much inclined to anger and love. They thus are educable in the

highest degree, but only to arts and not to sciences. They will never achieve abstract concepts.23

... The Hindus will always stay as they are, they will never go farther, even if they started

educating themselves much earlier.

4) The race of the whites contains all motives and talents in itself; and so, one must observe it

more carefully. To the white race belong all of Europe, the Turks, and the Kalmucks. If ever a

revolution occurred, it was always brought about by the whites, and the Hindus, Americans,

Negroes never had any part in it. (xxv.2 1187-88) (Kant, xxv.2 1187-88).
 Osikoya 6

This digression of non-European races allows for their oppression due to the impartial

ostracizing nature of his ideology and defends his ruminations by claiming only the white race

possesses the “drive to activity,” alluding that only the whites manipulates for their benefit thusly

leading to their prominence and superiority in Western society; wherein African-Americans,

Native Americans, and Indians allowed themselves to be ostracized and oppression regardless if

the ostracized is the majority.

This viewpoint justified the oppression of African-Americans in relation to the slavery,

Indians in their subsistence in Colonial India, and the elimination of Native Americans in the

Americas.

Despite Kant having conflicting ideologies of the birth of humanity and the conception of

race toward Kames and Crawfurd, these enlightenment thinkers shared the same racial

viewpoints. Kant, Kames and Crawfurd analyzed the trivialities of Native American and

reflected on their society, claiming Native Americans “The “native” Americans were not merely

a savage society: their society had not developed itself and remained savage” and that the society

will not develop due to the sexual frigidity, lack

of breeding (Sebastiani). Although African-Americans were in servitude, the argument is

that African-Americans do not have the ability to revolt.

1. Discussion

Although Kant’s theory on race remains to ostracize the minority races, his theory on

ethics and morals contradict his ideologies. In his discretion of history, Kant claims that human
 Osikoya 7

freedom allows for the creation of history, yet he may be only elaborating about white people.

Inconsistencies in Kant’s logic lie throughout his theories, wherein his thesis on categorical

imperatives, Kant’s second imperative, The Formula of Humanity, elicits that humans are

autonomous and should not be manipulated.

Yet, when analyzing Kant’s ideology of race, he believes that the manipulation and

objection of minority races is due to our lack of action and knowledge, despite that his second

imperative dictates that humanity should never be used as a ‘mere means’ wherein people are

used simply for the objectification of those people. Although in our everyday lives, we ask

friends and strangers for requests to receive a personal want or service, which is tolerable, but the

injustice applies when people are strictly used for that means.

When analyzing the effects of Kant, Kames and Darwin had on theory in respect to race,

the reader can draw their own personal understanding of how each thinker influenced each other

to create multitudes of theories to push toward a better uunderstandingof humanity. Although

today, the populace may view some of these thinkers to be racist in their ideologies, it raises

questions and inquiry on human thought. Although Kant and Kames differed in their philosophy

of the cultivation of humanity, it allowed

the populace to try to gain an understanding of how and why we differ. Negative racial

undertones remain throughout most theories, including Darwin when analyzing the

circumference of human brains separated by race. Despite the original racial theories consisted of

four races, the racial construct was biased heavily.

In the researcher’s critique of Kantian and Kamian, the researcher will focus heavily on

the ‘white race’. Kant and Kames both viewed Greeks, Western Europeans, Egyptians, Persians,

the Turks, and Middle-Easterns were considered ‘white.’ Although Kant shifted his viewpoint of
 Osikoya 8

race to be a natural characteristic, these nationalities are still considered ‘white.’ By including the

societies wherein blossomed to a developed society, it allows Kant to continue his argument

toward labeling Africans,

Americans, and Indians as trivial societies. Although some may support his argument,

Kant forgets about the Mansa Musa’s powerful empire in Ghana and the Native-American

civilizations throughout the Americans such as the Mayans and the Aztecs, wherein those

societies thrived and flourished.

Contrasting Kant, the ‘white’ race’s superiority is not to a ‘drive to activity’ but instead a

‘impulse of destruction.’ Since colonialism/imperialism, western Europeans invaded, conquered

and assimilated other societies and civilization to improve their own livelihood. Although

imperialism allowed for greater global connection, foreign societies and civilizations collapsed.

Examples are shown throughout the world: British extraction of herbs and spices in India

through imperialism; British, French

and Belgian extortion of diamonds and raw resources in Africa; Spanish invasion of the

Americans, nearly annihilating the entire Aztec empire while extracting gold; and the United

States triangular trade, the violent separation of western Africans from their homeland to the

Americans. Due the reasoning Kant and other enlightenment thinkers provide, society as a whole

accepted these beliefs as confirmation of their actions.

1. Conclusion
 Osikoya 9

Enlightenment Europe elicited a period of revolutionary thought and theories, yet racism

and the subjection to adversity and servitude remained. In spite of the variance in racial theory

and the cultivation of humanity, the objection and trivialization of minority groups tended to

remain consistent. Whether the thinker portrayed monogenesis or polygenesis theory, the

overlying perception is that if the people be not white, inferiority is the only other option.

Although the cultivation of the concept

of race helped provide insight on humanity, the conception of race evolves throughout

time and allowed for governments and the populace to target a ‘race’ that differs their own, not a

nation or group. Multiple enlightenment thinkers helped frame Kant’s racial ideologies on race,

but his philosophy on ethics and morality supersedes his racial theory. Although Kant’s displays

cognitive dissonance in relation to the two conflicting ideologies, maybe the reasoning is that

Kant views the white’s trivialization of the minority races as a catalyst

to cast away passiveness and ignite the oppressed ‘drive to activity.’

Osikoya 10
 Osikoya 11

Bibliography

Alter, Stephen G. “RACE, LANGUAGE, AND MENTAL EVOLUTION IN DARWIN’S

DESCENT OF MAN.” Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, vol. 43, no. 3, 2007,

pp. 239–255., doi:10.1002/jhbs.20238.

Cohen, Alix A. “Kant on Epigenesis, Monogenesis and Human Nature: The Biological Premises of

Anthropology.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and

Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, vol. 37, no. 4, 2006, pp. 675–693.,

doi:10.1016/j.shpsc.2006.09.005.

Crawfurd, John. “History of the Indian Archipelago.” 2013, doi:10.4324/9781315020792.

Gray, Sally Hatch. “Kant’s Race Theory, Forster’s Counter, and the Metaphysics of Color.” The

Eighteenth Century, vol. 53, no. 4, 1 Dec. 2012, pp. 394–432.

Hudson, Nicholas. “From Nation & Race” : The Origin of Racial Classification in Eighteenth-

Century Thought.” Eighteenth-Century Studies, vol. 29, no. 3, 1996, pp. 247–264.,

doi:10.1353/ecs.1996.0027.

Kames, Henry Home. Sketches of the History of Man: (1778). Olms, 1968.

Kant, Immanuel. “VI. The Categorical Imperative.” The Form of Practical Knowledge,

doi:10.4159/9780674053793-007.

Knapman, Gareth. “Race, Polygenesis and Equality: John Crawfurd and Nineteenth-Century

Resistance to Evolution.” History of European Ideas, vol. 42, no. 7, 2016, pp. 909–923.,

doi:10.1080/01916599.2016.1161535.
 Osikoya 12

Larrimore, Mark. “Sublime Waste: Kant on the Destiny of the ‘Races.’” Canadian Journal of

Philosophy, 2 May 1998.

Niekerk, Carl. “The German Invention of Race.” Monatshefte, vol. 99, no. 4, 2007, pp. 563–566.,

doi:10.1353/mon.2008.0026.

Wood, P.B. “The Natural History of Humankind and the Natural History of Man.” The Scottish

Enlightenment, doi:10.1057/9781137069795.0006.
Osikoya 13