Analysis Of The Article 'The Enlightenment's Race Problem And Our'

The article “The Enlightenment’s “Race” problem and ours” by Justin E.H. Smith is a powerful article critiquing and showing the reader how we as a society have been looking up to the philosopher’s of the past that have praised for their intellect and understanding of the world yet have shown to have shown to have very serious underlying tones of racism. The writer says “The question for us today is why we have chosen to stick with categories inherited from the 18th century, the century of the so-called Enlightenment” (Smith), so why do we still refer to Hume and Krant, even though it is shown to be quite racist and close minded? With the facts and research done within this article the author will give a better understanding on why this is

Amo’s work was praised for showing natural genius of Africa, and its appreciation for learning. Smith then goes on and shows the reader how even though Amo’s work was shown to be amazing it was clearly not shown to white philosophers or not taken seriously as he writes “In the following decade, the Scottish philosopher David Hume would write: “I am apt to suspect the Negroes, and in general all other species of men to be naturally inferior to the whites. There never was any civilized nation of any other complexion than white, nor even any individual eminent in action or speculation.” Hume had not heard of Amo, that much is clear.” (Smith). This shows the reader that how different the understanding of human capacities between that of Hume and Krause. The writer also states in the 3rd paragraph on the article that “For Kraus, Amo represents a continent and its long and distinguished history; he does not represent a “race.””(Smith). Even more solidifying the fact that even though people were writing about human capacities without even mentioning something on the lines of “race” the ladder was more popular cause of the

He has had publications which have since been lost or as the writer states “ (or, one might suspect, intentionally purged)” (Smith), even though Amos views are highly implausible when it comes to all Africans in Europe having a status of visitation of stature of royal subjects, its incredible to see how different from Kant’s which the writes says “Kant’s account of global history, on which black Africans stood, from the very beginning and as if by definition, beyond the pale of history, and therefore led lives of no intrinsic value, lives that could only be given value through absorption into a global system dominated by Europe.” (Smith). This just shows the reader as Amos work was lost and not only not viewed by much cause of at the times that his opinions would have no matter cause of the colour of his skin and how the bigger philosophers were pushing this agenda of race being a deciding factor on ones intelligence was set as the norm because of the overflowing information at the time pushing said