The Spherical Shape of Reason: Theoretical Implications in Kant’s Cosmopolitan Right

Angelo Cicatello

Resumo


What is the meaning of the Kantian “right to visit”? What role does it play in his cosmopolitan project of peace? Kant scholars answer differently. Two opposite interpretive tendencies can be traced paradigmatically. One position points out freedom of circulation of the stranger as a condition of communication and peaceful coexistence between peoples. The other sees the constitutional limitation of the right to visit as a starting point for the creation of a global society. Kant’s philosophy offers elements that go beyond both interpretations. However, this only becomes apparent when the right to visit is read from a new perspective that goes beyond the specific space of the Kantian doctrine of right. The right to visit and the difference from the right to inhabit should be considered in connection with the broad architectural design of Kant’s thought. There is a deep connection between the right to visit as founded on common possession of the Earth, and the nature of reason as a field that only becomes our property insofar as we make ourselves able to grant others the same right to enter it. From this point of view we must all be at once hosts and guests.

Palavras-chave


Kant, Reason, Deduction, Cosmopolitan Right, Hospitality

Texto completo:

PDF

Referências


ARENDT, H. Lectures on Kant’s Political Philosophy, Edited and with an interpretive Essay by R. Beiner, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1982.

BELFORT, C. “Estudo da natureza do homem em Kant a partir do caso do estrangeiro e o conceito de hospitalidade”, in: Kant E-Prints, 2, 2, 127-142, 2007.

BENHABIB, S. The Rights of Others. Aliens, Residens, and Citizens, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

BÖSCH, M. “Globale Vernunft. Zum Kosmopolitismus der Kantischen Vernunftkritik”, in: Kant-Studien, 98, 4, 473-486, 2007.

BROWN, G. W. “The Laws of Hospitality, Asylum Seekers and Cosmopolitan Right. A Kantian Response to Jacques Derrida”, in: European Journal of Political Theory, 9, 3, 308-327, 2010.

CAIMI, M. “Acerca de la Interpretación del Tercer Artículo Definitivo del Ensayo de Kant Zum ewigen Frieden”, in: V. Rohden, (a cura di), Kant e a instituição da paz, Porto Alegre: Ed. da Universidade/UFRGS, Goethe-Institut/ICBA,191-200, 1997.

CAVALLAR, G. Pax Kantiana: Systematisch-historische Untersuchung des Entwurfs "Zum ewigen Frieden" (1795) von Immanuel Kant (Schriftenreihe der oesterreichischen Gesellschaft zur Erforschung des 18. Jahrhunderts). Wien: Böhlau, 1992.

CAVALLAR, G. The Rights of Strangers. Theories of International Hospitality, The Global Community, and Political Justice since Vitoria, Burlington: Ashgate, 2002.

DE FREITAS MEIRELLES, A. “Philosophie transcendentale et historie chez Kant”, in V. ROHDEN, R. R. TERRA, Guido A. DE ALMEIDA, M. RUFFING (eds.), Recht Und Frieden in der Philosophie Kants: Akten des X. Internationalen Kant Kongresses, Berlin-New York: de Gruyter, Bd. 5, 679-686, 2008.

DERRIDA, J. Cosmopolites de tous les pays, encore un effort! Paris: Galilée,1997.

DERRIDA J. De l'hospitalité. Paris: Calmann-Lévy, 1997a.

GARZÓN, E. “La paz republicana”, in: Enrahonar, 17, 21-23, 1994.

HÖFFE, O. “Kants universaler Kosmopolitismus”, in: Recht und Frieden in der Philosophie Kants, cit., Bd. 1, 139-155, 2008.

HOWARD, D. The Politics of Critique, London: Macmillan, 1989.

KLEINGLED, P. “Kant's Cosmopolitan Law: World Citizenship for a Global Order”, in: Kantian Review, 2, 72-90, 1998.

KLEINGLED, P. “Kant’s Second Thoughts on Colonialism”, in: K. FLIKSCHUH and L. YPI (eds.), Kant and Colonialism: Historical and Critical Perspectives, Oxford: Oxford Univerisity Press, 43-67, 2014.

MALTER, R. Nachwort zu: Immanuel Kant, Zum ewigen Frieden, Reclam, Stuttgart, 1984.

MORI, M. La pace e la ragione. Kant e le relazioni internazionali: diritto, politica, storia, Bologna: il Mulino, 2004.

MUTHU, S. “Justice and Foreigners: Kant's Cosmopolitan Right”, in: Constellations. An International Journal of Ctitical and Democratic Theory, 7, 1, 23-45, 2000.

ROSSI, P.J. “Cosmopolitanism and the Interests of Reason. A Social Framework for Human Action in History”, in: Recht und Frieden in der Philosophie Kants, cit., Bd. 4, 65-75, 2008.

SCHMITZ, H.G. “Moral oder Klugheit. Überlegungen zur Gestalt der Autonomie des Politischen im Denken Kants”, in: Kant-Studien, 81, 4, 413-434, 1990.

TERRA, R. “La actualidad del piensamento politico de Kant”, in: Episteme, 28, 2: 93-119, 2008.

THUMFART, J. “Kolonialismus oder Kommunikation. Zur Kants Auseinandersetzung mit Francisco de Vitorias ius communicationis”, in: S. BACIN, A. FERRARIN, C. LA ROCCA, M. RUFFING (a cura di), Kant und die Philosophie in weltbürgerlicher Absicht, Akten des XI. Internationalen Kant-Kongresses, Pisa 2010. Berlin-Boston: De Gruyter, Bd. 3, 929-939, 2013.

WALDRON, J. Kant’s heading ‘Cosmopolitan Right. Manuscript. Cambridge University, 1999.

WALDRON, J. “Redressing historic injustice”, in: L. Meyer (ed.), Justice in time: Responding to historical injustice, Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, 55-77, 2004.

WALIGORE “Cosmopolitan Right, Indigenous Peoples, and the Risks of Cultural Interaction”, in: Public Reason, 1, 1, 27-56, 2009.

VÄYRYNEN, K. “Weltbürgerrecht und Kolonialismuskritik bei Kant”, in: V. GERHARDT, R.-P. HORSTMANN, R. SCHUMACHER (Hrsg.), Kant und die Berliner Aufklärung. Akten des IX. Internationalen Kant-Kongresses, Berlin 2000, Berlin-New York: de Gruyter, 2001, Bd. 4, 302-309, 2001.


Apontamentos

  • Não há apontamentos.