KANT, ARENDT VE LYOTARD’DA İLERLEMECİ, ANLATISAL VE PARÇALANMIŞ TARİH

Öz

Bu makale, Kant'ın estetiğine karşı felsefi bir ilgiden doğan farklı tarih anlayışlarını incelemektedir. Temel argüman, Kant'ın Yargı Gücünün Eleştirisi'ndeki düşünümsel yargının belirlenemez karakterinin – özünde belirlenemez bir kavrama dayanmasının – tarih konusunda birbirinden ayrışan yorumlara zemin hazırladığıdır. Kant için tarih, zorunlu olarak en yüksek iyinin düzenleyici ideasıyla yönlendirilen ilerlemeci bir ahlaki çabadır. Ereksellik ilkesi doğa ile özgürlük arasındaki uçurum arasında köprü kurarak, “Fakültelerin Çatışması”nda büyük tarihsel olaylara karşı duyulan çıkarsız coşku ise insanlığın iyileşmeye yönelik ahlaki eğiliminin tarihsel bir işareti olarak işlev görür. Hannah Arendt ve Jean-François Lyotard, siyasi yargının olası bir eleştirisinin kaynağı olarak Kant'ın açıkça siyasi yazılarına değil de Yargı Gücünün Eleştirisi'ne geri dönerler. Ancak ikisinin dönüşü kendi düşünceleri çerçevesinde farklı yorumlarla sonuçlanır. Arendt, ortak akıl, genişletilmiş zihniyet ve örnek geçerlilik kavramlarından yararlanarak anlatımsal bir tarih anlayışı geliştirir. Lyotard ise coşkuyu ahlaki anlamdan yoksun salt bir Affekt'e indirger; eleştirel olanı sanatçı-filozof figürü aracılığıyla estetik olanla özdeşleştirir ve heterojen söylem ailelerinin herhangi bir birleştici anlatıya dirençli olduğu parçalı bir tarih anlayışına ulaşır. Makale, ilerlemeci, anlatısal ve parçalı olarak adlandırdığı bu üçlü ayrışmanın tesadüfi olmadığını; tersine, Kantçı düşünümsel yargının yapısal belirsizliğinden kaynaklandığını savunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Düşünümsel Yargı
• Tarih
• Ereksellik
• Coşku
• Ortak Akıl
• Differend
• Anlatı

HISTORY AS PROGRESSIVE, NARRATED AND FRAGMENTED IN KANT, ARENDT AND LYOTARD

Öz

This article examines three distinct understandings of history that emerge from the philosophical engagement with Kant's aesthetics. The central argument is that the indeterminate character of reflective judgment in Kant's Critique of Judgment – its reliance on a concept that is intrinsically indeterminable – opens the ground for divergent interpretations of history. For Kant, history is necessarily a progressive moral endeavour oriented by the regulative idea of the highest good. The principle of purposiveness bridges the gap between nature and freedom, and the disinterested enthusiasm of spectators towards great historical events – as formulated in 'The Contest of the Faculties' – serves as a historical sign of humanity's moral tendency towards betterment. Hannah Arendt and Jean-François Lyotard both return to Kant's Critique of Judgment rather than his explicitly political writings as the source of a possible critique of political judgment. However, their appropriations lead to fundamentally different conclusions. Arendt, drawing on the notions of common sense, enlarged mentality, and exemplary validity, develops a narrated understanding of history in which the spectator's reflective judgment redeems human dignity through the retelling of the past. Lyotard, by contrast, reduces enthusiasm to a mere Affekt devoid of moral significance, equates the critical with the aesthetic through the figure of the philosopher-artist, and arrives at a fragmented understanding of history in which heterogeneous phrase families resist any unifying narrative. The article argues that this threefold divergence – progressive, narrated, fragmented – is not incidental but is rooted in the structural indeterminacy of Kantian reflective judgment itself.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Reflective Judgment
• History
• Purposiveness
• Enthusiasm
• Common Sense
• Differend
• Narrative

Kaynakça

1. Arendt, H. (1970). Men in dark times. New York: Harcourt Brace & Company.
2. Arendt, H. (1982). Lectures on Kant's political philosophy (R. Beiner, Ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3. Beardsworth, R. (1992). On the critical post: Lyotard's agitated judgment. In A. Benjamin (Ed.), Judging Lyotard (pp. 43–80). London: Routledge.
4. Beiner, R. (1997). Rereading Hannah Arendt's Kant lectures. Philosophy and Social Criticism, 23(1), 21–32.
5. Benhabib, S. (1990). Hannah Arendt and the redemptive power of narrative. Social Research, 57(1), 167–196.
6. Benhabib, S. (1996). The reluctant modernism of Hannah Arendt. New York: SAGE Publications.
7. Benjamin, W. (1969). Theses on the philosophy of history. In H. Arendt (Ed.) & H. Zohn (Trans.), Illuminations (pp. 253–264). New York: Schocken Books.
8. Booth, J. W. (1986). Interpreting the world: Kant's philosophy of history and politics. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

9. Calcagno, A. (1995). Interface: Modernity and post-modernity: The possibility of enthusiasm according to Immanuel Kant and Jean-François Lyotard. Philosophy Today, 39(4), 362–371.
10. Cascardi, A. J. (1997). Aesthetics and politics in Kant and Arendt. In C. Calhoun & J. McGowan (Eds.), Hannah Arendt and the meaning of politics (pp. 99–127). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
11. Flynn, T. R. (2002). Lyotard and history without witnesses. In H. J. Silverman (Ed.), Lyotard: Philosophy, politics, sublime (pp. 148–167). New York: Routledge.
12. Herzog, A. (2000). Illuminating inheritance: Benjamin's influence on Arendt's political storytelling. Philosophy and Social Criticism, 26(5), 1–27.
13. Ingram, D. (1988). The postmodern Kantianism of Arendt and Lyotard. Review of Metaphysics, 42(1), 51–77.
14. Kant, I. (1784/1963). Idea for a universal history from a cosmopolitan point of view. In L. W. Beck (Ed.), On history (pp. 11–26). New York: Macmillan.
15. Kant, I. (1798/1970). The contest of the faculties. In H. S. Reiss (Ed.), Political writings (pp. 176–190). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16. Kant, I. (1790/1987). The critique of judgment (W. Pluhar, Trans.). Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing.
17. Kant, I. (1781/1996). The critique of pure reason (W. Pluhar, Trans.). Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing.
18. Kateb, G. (1999). The judgment of Arendt. Revue Internationale de Philosophie, 208, 261–283.
19. Lyotard, J.-F. (1984). The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge (G. Bennington & B. Massumi, Trans.). Manchester: Manchester University Press.
20. Lyotard, J.-F. (1988). The differend: Phrases in dispute (G. van den Abbeele, Trans.). Manchester: Manchester University Press.
21. Lyotard, J.-F. (1991). The inhuman: Reflections on time (G. Bennington & R. Bowlby, Trans.). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
22. Lyotard, J.-F. (2009). Enthusiasm: The Kantian critique of history (G. van den Abbeele, Trans.). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
23. Nuzzo, A. (2005). Kant and the unity of reason. West Lafayette: Purdue University Press.
24. Piché, C. (1992). The philosopher-artist: A note on Lyotard's reading of Kant. Research in Phenomenology, 22, 150–163.
25. Yovel, Y. (1986). Kant and the philosophy of history. Princeton: Princeton University Press.