The necessary revolution in man's thinking after Immanuel Kant
range than the theme we have just sketched here. When he had done justice to this basic insight of his, he worked out its implications rigorously in every field of thought, reaching important conclusions, particularly with reference to ethics, art, scientific methodology and religion; and he concluded his long series of illuminating works with one entitled Pragmatic Anthropology. Confronted by this monumental output of philosophical thought, we must now ask: How much of this still remains vital and not out of date? How much of his thinking can still be of use to us?
Such answer as I give will be confined to my own special field of studies, as a cultural anthropologist. It is my opinion, then, that without the acceptance of certain Kantian premises the discipline in which my professional work lies could not possibly exist.
The necessary revolution in Man’s thinking which Kant brought about is the critical as opposed to the naive approach to every aspect of life. The naive approach is to accept things and ideas, as they appear to us, as being an absolute reality outside ourselves. The critical approach is to realise that reality is in our own experience: that different factors contribute to our cognition, and that it is necessary to assess these factors, to put them under a critical control. Kant was concerned only with the categories which are necessarily present in all human cognition—although not always formulated exactly in the same way—but he gave us the clue to extend this realisation to the many presuppositions and tendencies arising from our culture, religion, upbringing, social class, etc. which come right into our judgement and perception as part of them, without our realising it, and which we quite naturally refer to the object of our perception or judgement as if they were part of some real thing outside ourselves.
Cultural anthropology consists precisely in the attempt to bring into critical consciousness all these cultural premises, these ruling ideas to which we can give the name of cultural categories, or cultural patterns, which serve to orientate our thinking and regulate our behaviour in the life of the particular society in which we live; and this aim and focus of anthropology is directed towards two fundamental objectives. The first is: to be able to judge whether these patterns of thought and behaviour are still valid today and fully a match for our changing life-problems; the second is, by elucidating these problems, to discover a commo:
II