Time of Purpose And Realm of Actions: Theologicalpolitical Subject on Kant’s Philosophy of History

Abstract

The article examines the clashes in Immanuel Kant’s texts that created the political-historical subject of modernity — the agent who serves as both the creator and interpreter of history. The main difficulty here is the heterogeneity in principle of the subject, which must combine ethical autonomy with the pursuit of goals that are unattainable within the boundaries of autonomous being. The author proposes that in Kant’s thought reflection is elicited by the very temporality of human existence within history and entrained by the paradox of action, which on the one hand is aimless and on the other is striving toward an unattainable goal. Within this temporality, the meaning of the subject’s personal will depends upon the relation of their goals to the presumed goals of human history. Special emphasis is placed on the problem of a specific motive, desire or interest of the mind, which connects the order of nature with the order of freedom. It is Kant’s discovery of this motive, the “subjective basis of human action,” that gives rise to his interpretation of religion. The article maintains that this is as close as Kant comes to a political philosophy. Kant connects the meaning of historicity with the boundary conditions for human action. Describing “religion” as a subjective need of reason, Kant creates a transcendental pattern of being in history. Capturing the ultimate goal of being gives rise to a supersensible motive for action. A person who fulfills the law is affected by experiencing such a promise, which cannot be reduced to a pure consciousness of the law, but expands the limits of practical reason. This gap creates the specific temporality of religion as transcendental history. Its field is limited by the initial revelation of reason, and therefore a messianic demand becomes possible within it. The author maintains that the conditional heterogeneity of Kant’s thinking about human beings is not the result of a compromise or a remnant of metaphysics. It corresponds to the heterogeneity of the subject of historical action, the temporality of which is created by holding different orders of being in a truly impossible relation.