Abstract
AbstractIn two recent articles I have argued that Kant’s legal and political philosophy can shed new light on his much-contested account of moral autonomy and that important changes in his political theory help to explain why in his later work the Formula of Autonomy disappears. In the present essay, I respond to comments by Sorin Baiasu and Marie Newhouse, who argue that the changes in Kant’s political theory fail to explain the disappearance of the Formula of Autonomy, since in both phases Kant held that laws are given by the people’s representatives. I offer additional support for my original argument by developing a more detailed account of Kant’s conception of the relation between the legislating representatives and the people they are taken to represent. I argue that Kant’s conception of the proper representation relation changed, and that it changed so fundamentally that the analogy at the basis of the Formula of Autonomy was no longer apt, thus providing a plausible explanation for its disappearance. I also address several related comments and propose an explanation for why Kant dropped the very idea of autonomy as a property of the will.
Funder
Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference12 articles.
1. Baiasu, S. (2023). How Far Do We Self-Legislate? Philosophia. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-023-00613-4.
2. Bacin, S. (2022). The Fate of Autonomy in Kant’s Metaphysics of Morals. British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 30, 90–108.
3. Dovi, S. (2018). Political Representation. In E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2018/entries/political-representation/.
4. Fk [Justus Friedrich Runde]. (1782). Review of Johann Christian Maier, Autonomie, vornemlich des Fürsten- und übrigen unmittelbaren Adelstandes im R[ömischen] deutschen Reiche. Allgemeine Deutsche Bibliothek, 50, 408–410.
5. Kant, I. (1996). Practical Philosophy. Translated and edited by M. J. Gregor. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813306.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献