Disastrous by Kant, as being that private reason is meant to ensure social order prevails, the professor, in this case, is risking the social order; as chaos or any form of disaster might happen.In the use of private reason, it is very important for one to obey and strictly follow the guidelines given by a particular establishment or organization so that they do not risk being demoted from their positions of leadership. It is equally important so that the authority of the establishment does not undergo collapse, as well as the establishment itself (Putnam, 2000). The professor, therefore, by speaking against the college was risking being sacked and excommunicated from the college for disobedience and disloyalty to the administration. At the same time, it is quite unrealistic for an establishment or institution to keep running with a lot of ills covered; which might in the long run have it rotten and destroyed, when the lying time ends. It is important as responsible members of the society to ensure that we expose all that is unjust so that the required adjustments can get fixed and have the society proceed genuinely. Meaning, it is very necessary for an individual to find out the right time to obey whatever guidelines have been set and argue against.In matters to do with what affects the community, it is important for the government to find ways of protecting its people in terms of the information that is relayed to them; which is to ensure that the objectives of a particular establishment are not done away with. For this to, therefore, get implemented, it is important for the private reason to at all times prevail; where one is expected to obey without any form of argument. As far as private reason is concerned, there is a difference when a certain scholar is addressing the public through their writings and when they are strictly under some establishment or organization. What should get clear here is that there is no freedom restriction from the scholar who communicates to the public through their writings even when they still work under a particular organization. This scholar is free to argue and can communicate as many ideas to the public as they please, as they are now acting on public reason. Different from it is when a scholar is strictly under an establishment, surrounded with rules and guidelines on how to behave; for the sake of the public. While on duty however, it is important for former to obey orders from their superiors at all costs,
Putnam, R. (2000). Public and Private Reasons of Philosophy. London: Sage Publications.
Taylor, C. (2005). Philosophical Arguments. Cambridge, M. A: Harvard University Press.
Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples