By Naomi Walters
Prominent philosophers such as Immanuel Kant emphasized human dignity, rationality, and autonomy as the basis for moral life. Enlightenment thinkers viewed reason and the capacity for self-governance as the defining feature of human nature (Robertson 7). While these ideas professed to be universal, they historically excluded enslaved Africans from their definitions of humanity. In Toni Morrison’s Beloved, Paul D’s struggle to define his manhood serves as a powerful critique of Enlightenment philosophy. Through Paul D’s traumatic experiences and internal battles, Morrison exposes the limitations of this framework and how notions of autonomy and rationality were weaponized to justify the system of slavery and deny African Americans an identity shaped by personal agency. His fractured identity highlights the dangers of a philosophy that grants full humanity only to those deemed rational by its own narrow standards.
In Beloved, Paul D struggles with an internal conflict to define himself despite the confines that enslavement has imposed upon him. As he recounts his memories at Sweet Home and the prison camp, the impact of the trauma from these instances further complicates his understanding of his identity. Critical encounters throughout the novel underscore the profound impact of his past experiences on his present identity. At the Sweet Home plantation, Paul D draws a comparison between his own freedom and that of a rooster named Mister. He expresses a longing for the autonomy that Mister has, almost envious of his ability to live freely. He remembers that “Mister was allowed to be and stay what he was. But I wasn’t,” which highlights how slavery has stripped Paul D of his sense of self (Morrison 86). While Mister, as a rooster, maintains his intrinsic nature, Paul D feels that his identity is not something for him to own. He observes that “even if you cooked [Mister], you’d still be cooking a rooster named Mister” and makes the opposite reference to himself (Morrison 86). This moment reflects the Enlightenment ideals of agency that Paul D is painfully denied. While Mister is afforded a stable identity, he is stripped of this philosophical right. This fully encapsulates the immense loss of identity Paul D feels and how his circumstances lead him to perceive himself as less than human. His sense of self has been so fragmented that he feels insignificant even in death, illustrating the profound and destructive effect that slavery has wrecked on his humanity.
An even more profound instance of Paul D’s internal conflict with his identity is illustrated in a later portion of the novel. In this excerpt, Paul D grapples with the conditionality of his identity as a man due to his enslavement. Reflecting on the differences in his life before and after Schoolteacher arrived at Sweet Home, Paul D recalls how Mr. Garner referred to him and the other enslaved men. He remembers the dehumanizing treatment they endured under Mr. Garner’s ownership, which starkly contrasts that of Schoolteacher. When Mr. Garner called the Sweet Home slaves “men,” Paul D wondered if he was “naming what he saw or creating what he did not” (Morrison 260). His questioning of his manhood reveals the destructive impact of slavery on his identity. Based on his experiences, Paul D realizes that his sense of self is not innate or self-determined, but contingent on the whims and perceptions of his enslavers.
This exploration of identity aligns with Jamelle Bouie’s critique of Enlightenment ideals, which he believes are inapplicable to the slave experience. In his article “Taking the Enlightenment Seriously,” Bouie cites Immanuel Kant, known for his philosophical work on autonomy and identity. According to Kant, to be human is to possess reason and the capacity for self-governance, and these capacities demand the ethical treatment of others. However as Bouie reveals, Kant’s racist views betray these very principles. To Kant, humanity exists in its greatest perfection in the white race, and “[African Americans] are lower and the lowest part of the American peoples” (Bouie 3). Kant’s complete disregard for African Americans as people contradicts the ideas he posits in Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. The very ideas he poses here should, in essence, bar slavery according to his philosophy. However, his dehumanization of Africans as rational beings allows him to justify this system of oppression. One of Kant’s founding principles for his ethics is based on the idea of treating others “in every case as an end withal, never as a means only,” showing his value for human dignity (Kant 36). His founding principle encourages us never to treat any other human as a means to achieve an end if they are to get nothing in return. However, this is the exact basis slavery was founded on. For Kant to justify slavery, he would have to completely strip humanity and rationality away from African Americans, which is unfortunately what is taught through his Enlightenment ideals. This contradiction highlights the limitations of Enlightenment thought and how philosophical frameworks that claim to uphold human dignity can be distorted to support systems of oppression.
Paul D’s journey in Beloved powerfully reveals these differences and limitations as he struggles to understand an identity not shaped by personal agency. As he comes to the realization that his identity has been dictated for him by external forces, he grapples with the painful realization that his humanhood was never his to define. This discrepancy illustrates how the ideas of the Enlightenment, a movement based on individuality, rationality, and self-expression, were never meant for African-Americans to participate in. They do not account for the denigrating effects of slavery on selfhood. This dangerous concept of conditional manhood that Paul D discovers is central to his identity crisis. He finds that his sense of self-worth and masculinity is only valid in the context of his owner’s recognition: without such acknowledgment, could he even be considered a man? To Paul D, the yearning for self-identity is compounded by the realization that he has been reduced to a means to an end, shaped entirely by the prejudices of others.
Bouie’s critique of Enlightenment thought stresses this issue further by arguing that philosophy tends to lack the inclusion of those deemed “not human” or incapable of rational thought. Enlightenment ideals are by definition universally applicable and ones of liberty and equality. The inherent hypocrisy of these ideals is apparent when considering that while Enlightenment thinkers advocate for the rights of individuals, they coincidentally deny these same rights to oppressed groups. Paul D’s internal conflict with his conditional manhood offers an example of the selective application of Enlightenment ideals. His realization that his manhood and identity are only valid when defined by white slave owners illustrates the limitations of the Enlightenment framework. Bouie’s citation of Kant’s dismissal of a statement from an African American further emphasizes this. He dismisses the statement as illogical, stating “This fellow was quite black from head to foot, a clear proof that what he said was stupid” (Bouie 3). This judgment underscores the contradiction within Enlightenment thinking, where supposed “universal” values are applied selectively. In highlighting these discrepancies, Beloved insightfully deconstructs the foundation of Enlightenment thought.
Paul D’s journey crafts a powerful narrative that effectively calls for reevaluating what we deem universal. Morrison’s Beloved offers a complex examination of the intersectionality of selfhood and system oppression, with Paul D’s journey illustrating how slavery has dismantled the slave’s sense of self and identity. As he struggles to comprehend his manhood in a world where his identity is consistently undermined, Paul D highlights the fallacy of Enlightenment ideals that champion universal equality and reason yet exclude enslaved African Americans from these very concepts. His conflict shows that even simple self-recognition, considered a fundamental human privilege according to the Enlightenment, is distorted when filtered through the lens of ownership. Paul D’s story transcends his journey, embodying the collective struggle of all African Americans to reclaim themselves in a system where humanity is not offered to them. It reflects the limits of Western philosophical ideas and challenges their universal applicability. The correlation between Paul D’s narrative and Bouie’s critique of Enlightenment ideals suggests that frameworks designed to define humanity essentially fail when applied in the context of the lived experiences of the oppressed, calling for a reexamination of what it means to be fully recognized as a human. It challenges us to consider whether there can be a universal definition of a human without being exclusionary and advocates for one that recognizes the intersecting identities that contribute to the human experience.
Works Cited
Bouie, Jamelle. “The Enlightenment’s Dark Side”. Slate, 5 June 2018
Kant, Immanuel. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Translated by H.J. Paton, Harper & Row, 1964
Morrison, Toni. Beloved. Vintage International, 2004
Robertson, John. The Enlightenment: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press, 2015
