By
Ñacha E. Chiundiza · Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Perhaps a revolution can overthrow autocratic despotism and profiteering or power-grabbing oppression, but it can never truly reform a manner of thinking; instead, new prejudices, just like the old ones they replace, will serve as a leash for the great unthinking mass. —Immanuel Kant
As an act of reflexive thought, the question “What is Enlightenment?” may be its very own enlightenment. Foucault’s reiteration of Kant’s question revolves around this issue of reflexivity. Putting aside the Enlightenment’s audacious projections of the future of humankind, Foucault zeroed in on what he deemed the emblematic disposition of the modern: self-critique. In its microcosmic tenor, the question zeroes in on the problematique of the relation of the self to the self, and of the self to the other. In a Kierkegaardian sense, it proposes an ironic relationship both to one’s self and to one’s other. Sapere Audere is envisioned as a bi-directional activity.
Strangely enough, as interrelated as Zimbabwean post-colonial discourse has been to western thought categories, it is rare to find a serious consideration of the problematic of self-constitution and freedom, especially regarding the emancipatory goals of the Liberation Era.
Continue reading →