Immanuel Kant: Civil Society and International Order 181

2015 ◽  
pp. 193-208
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Immanuel Kant ◽  
International Order

Transitional Figures: Immanuel Kant, Adam Smith, James Madison

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Greenwood Onuf
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Immanuel Kant ◽  
Final Stage ◽  
Adam Smith ◽  
Animal Husbandry ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Human History ◽  
James Madison ◽  
Human Reason ◽  
Mutual Exchange

Foucault’s sense of the modern epoch finds Kant everywhere in the background. If, for Kant, nature appears to accommodate our needs, human reason nevertheless has a purpose beyond ourselves; nature’s purpose dictates our use of reason. Kant had us use reason to progress from savagery to animal husbandry and the cultivation of the land, mutual exchange, culture, and civil society. Better known are Smith’s four stages of human history: the Ages of Hunters, Shepherds, Agriculture, and Commerce. Set back by nomadic barbarians, Europe belatedly developed a novel society of independent nations, ever vigilant (and often enough at war), committed to improving their productive capabilities and reaping the benefits of commerce. Rationalization and positivism marked the final stage, which in turn required a positive legal order grounded in unimpeachable sources of law. These James Madison definitively articulated when he was U.S. secretary of state.

scholarly journals Cultivating Virtue: Moral Progress and the Kantian State

2007 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 90-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris W. Surprenant
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Immanuel Kant ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Moral Philosophy ◽  
Moral Theory ◽  
Necessary Condition ◽  
Political Society ◽  
Moral Law ◽  
Apparent Paradox ◽  
Moral Cultivation

After examining the ethical and political writings of Immanuel Kant, one finds an apparent paradox in his philosophy as his perfectionist moral teachings appear to be linked to his anti-perfectionist political theory. Specifically, he writes that the perfection of moral character can only take place for an individual who is inside of civil society, a condition where no laws may legitimately be implemented expressly for the purpose of trying to make individuals moral. Kant believes that living in civil society is a necessary condition for an individual to refine his talents and reason completely, a process required by morality. I believe, however, that the connection between his moral and political theory runs much deeper than simply facilitating the refinement of talents. Kant's moral theory focuses on an individual's cultivation of virtue, but this cultivation cannot be most satisfactorily completed unless that individual is a member of civil society. Put differently, civil society plays a necessary role in cultivating an individual's character so that he is able to act from maxims consistent with the moral law, out of the respect for the law itself. However, because he believes that civic laws primarily intended to encourage moral cultivation cannot be implemented legitimately, it seems curious that this condition should play such a significant role in Kant's moral philosophy. Through this examination of Kant's moral and political theory, it will be shown that Kant's political society establishes a condition necessary for an individual's complete cultivation of virtue, not by implementing laws that make men moral but by weakening the forces of heteronomy, thereby removing barriers to moral action.

The relationship between civil society and the anarchic legal regime

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 79-83
Author(s):  
Akulenko D.
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Immanuel Kant ◽  
Social Model ◽  
Democratic Institutions ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
Common Features ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Objective View ◽  
The Relationship

Is not the freedom a daughter but a mother of order? Is the republic positive anarchy? Is anarchy an extremely destructive phenomenon? Does Ukrainian civil society have any common features with anarchic society? The author attempts to answer these questions in the article. To achieve this goal, the author analyzed a huge layer of information, consisting of both well-known sources (Laozi, Immanuel Kant, Petro Kropotkin) and local, little-known sources. The author even had to look for information among the articles of propaganda journalists from authoritarian countries, for whom democratic institutions and the thirst for freedom are simply a sound for which silencing could be well earned. As it turned out, finding such information was quite easy. The article is devoted to the study of the existence of civil society in state entities with anarchic legal regime. In the work much attention is paid to the functioning of state bodies on the territory of Ukraine in public centers that have signs of anarchism. Recent legal and historical studies of Ukrainian anarchism have been analyzed in the paper, opinions of famous scientists and philosophers of different times have been investigated, as well as significant differences in understanding of anarchy in the context of its coexistence with accepted state institutions. It should be emphasized separately that in the article the proposed political and social model is not declared as potentially the best, but it does rethink some of the phenomena that have become special for every citizen of Ukraine. There is a clear and objective view in the work that allows us to analyze different historical stages of state formation of Ukraine somewhat different from the conventional ideas about anarchism and its possible destructive influence. The author carefully identifies the hidden common features of anarchism, with well-known events. It is no secret that the wealth of Ukrainian freedom is ignited every time, after another attempt to usurp power by a dictator, corrupt officials, or after an attempt by another state to intervene militarily in the internal problems of Ukrainians. The author's position deserves attention, especially given the lack of interest of domestic scientists in the study of anarchism and its possible positive consequences. Keywords: anarchism, civil society, democracy, state, legal regime

Property and Territorial Rights in Political Philosophy

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim Angell
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Immanuel Kant ◽  
John Locke ◽  
Geographical Area ◽  
Political Authority ◽  
Territorial Rights ◽  
The Law

To have property rights over X is to have rights to determine, in some respect, what shall happen to X, for example a piece of land. To have territorial rights is to have rights to make, enforce, and adjudicate the law within a geographical area. Property and territorial rights thus seem closely related, and philosophical accounts reveal various interesting connections between these bundles of rights—both in their nature and justification. A significant division, which we find in both old and new accounts—of property as well as territory—originates in the diverging political philosophies of John Locke and Immanuel Kant. Lockean accounts regard property and territorial rights as natural. People may acquire both without the prior existence of an adjudicating political authority. Kantian accounts, however, regard property rights as pure legal conventions. Non-existent outside civil society, they must be fully constructed by a state with territorial (jurisdictional) rights. Further divisions exist within Lockean and Kantian theories, and all the most prominent theories—of property as well as territorial rights—face significant unresolved philosophical challenges.

scholarly journals Philosophy of History of Adam Ferguson and Immanuel Kant

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (01) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra ZÁKUTNÁ
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Immanuel Kant ◽  
Philosophy Of History ◽  
History Of ◽  
Basic Features

The paper compares central issues of philosophy of history of A. Ferguson and I. Kant. It deals with their explanation of origins and development of civil society, and characterizes its basic features, focusing on progress motivated by fruitful conflict and tension among individuals and nations. It also focuses on the role of citizens in civil society and the question of their activity. Then, in connection with Ferguson’s and Kant’s views on relationships among states the paper discusses their different portrayal of possible future history.

Hegel on Work, Ownership, and Citizenship

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Ryan
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Immanuel Kant ◽  
David Hume ◽  
John Locke ◽  
Private Ownership ◽  
Intellectual Context ◽  
And Performance

This chapter examines how G.W.F. Hegel combats both a utilitarian and a strictly Kantian account of the connections between work, ownership, and citizenship, with the ultimate aim of showing how various tensions that commonly beset theories of property bedevil his own account. Hegel certainly saw the importance of the distinction between owning one's job and having security of tenure during good behavior. Indeed, he argued that the transition from medieval to modern constitutional arrangements necessarily brought with it a transition from private ownership of public positions to crown appointment on the basis of qualifications and performance. The chapter first provides an overview of the intellectual context of Hegel's exposition, with emphasis on themes associated with John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant, and David Hume. It then considers Hegel's views on topics such as agriculture, civil society, family, and freedom.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document