Kant, Judaizer

Bringing a long history to its culmination, Kant put duty at the center of ethics, even speaking of a “duty of virtue.” For Agamben ( Opus Dei: An Archaeology of Duty ), this is a development from Christian conceptions of liturgical action, but with a decisive difference: “If in office the guarantee of effectiveness of the liturgical action ex opere operato is in Christ, what takes the place of Christ as guarantee of the effectiveness of duty in Kant is the law” (112). Replacing Christ with law, shall we say, smacks of Judaizing.

The Judaizing continues: According to Kant, respect for the law is what makes the “auto-constraint of moral duty operative.” This respect is not a feeling but, in Kant’s terms, “consciousness of the subordination of my will to a law” (113). This sense of subordination is a negative feeling of humiliation: “The effect of this law on feeling is merely humiliation, which we can thus discern a priori though we cannot cognize in it the force of the pure practical law as incentive but only the resistance of incentives of sensibility.” There is “no pleasure” in submission to a law as command but “displeasure in the action” (116).

No wonder Lacan discerned an inner connection between Kant and de Sade. In Agamben’s summary of Lacan, “the virtuous Kantian and the masochist indeed coincide precisely in the fact that both find their proper element solely in duty and humiliation, that is, in the execution of a command.” Agamben wants to stats this differently: If Kant were a straightforward masochist, he would find pleasure in the humiliation of submission to law; thus, it is necessary to say “the masochist finds pleasure in the fact that the law finds pleasure in humiliating him. The masochist does not find pleasure in pain and humiliation, but in procuring for the sadist a pleasure that consists in inflicting pain and humiliation. The masochist . . . causes the law . . . to get off” (117).

It is worth considering how deeply Kantian humiliation before command has infiltrated Christian ethics, that is, how much Christian ethics has been infected by Kantian Judaizing.

Dear Reader,

Can I be direct with you?

War abroad. Socialists on the rise. AI upending human life. Endless uproar online. The modern attention economy doesn’t want readers — it wants users enslaved to the tyranny of the present.

First Things is the antidote: literary excellence, timeless truths, and a fixed point of reference in a culture that has lost its bearings.

But we can’t do it without readers like you.

Our goal: Raise $150,000 by November 1 to sustain First Things in the year ahead.


Your gift anchors readers in the permanent things.

Make your Fall Campaign gift now using the button below.

GIVE NOW

If you have any questions or would like more information, please contact Giovanni Del Piero, Director of the Editor’s Circle, at gdelpiero@firstthings.com or 212-627-1985.

Next
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

The Church in the Age of Therapy

Matthew Loftus

In 1966, Philip Rieff wrote in The Triumph of the Therapeutic that “Religious man was born to…

Canada’s Deadliest Blind Spot

Anna Farrow

On September 20, the Daily Mail ran a story with the provocative headline, “Our 83-year-old Christian grandmother…

The Faithful Joy of Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen

Mike Aquilina

Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen seem to have had little in common. She favored rhinestones; he wore…