Kant and the New Enlightenment: On the Balance between Duty and Utilitarian Ends

Author:

Zilber Andrey S.1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University

Abstract

The relation between Kant’s philosophy and the “philosophy of balance” as it is described in the report Come on! Capitalism, Short-termism, Population and the Destruction of the Planet, delivered to the Club of Rome in 2018, requires some analysis. The authors of the report consider Kant to be a philosopher of European Enlightenment which laid the foundations of the modern world, but also proved to be the source of global problems. The report characterises the philosophy of the Enlightenment as lop-sided rationalism which dismisses everything that does not possess desirable properties. In exchange, the authors offer a philosophy of balance, described in several points as the balance between conflicting values. The overarching problem of the philosophy of balance is the restraining of egoism. For this reason I first examine the relationship between duty and human inclinations in Kant’s ethics. I then demonstrate that the topic of political forecasts and the recommendations which Kant prescribes both in his philosophy of history and in his reflections on politics, right and justice, essentially boils down to three points of the philosophy of balance: the balance between development and justice (Kantian republicanism), between the speed and stability of development (external policy, the Kantian peace project), and between the short-term and long-term perspectives (reform policy). I then touch upon the problem of the implementation of Kantian principles in politics in the light of the reception of Kant in the modern theories of social conflicts, the communication theory of J. Habermas and the justice theory of J. Rawls. The overall conclusion is that Kant’s philosophy is not a philosophy of exclusion, capitalist values and utilitarianism and is not their ideological basis.

Publisher

Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University

Subject

Philosophy

Reference37 articles.

1. Anscombe, E., 1958. Modern Moral Philosophy. Philosophy. The Journal of the Royal Institute of Philosophy, 33(124), pp. 1-19.

2. Bakhurst, D., 2022. Categorical Moral Requirements. Kantian Journal, 41(1), pp. 40-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.5922/0207-6918-2022-1-2.

3. Castillio, М., 2013. The Policy of Cosmopolitism: From Universalism to Pluralism. Translated by D. Е. Fetisova. Kantian Journal, 2(44), pp. 19-32. (In Rus.)

4. Cavallar, G., 1992. Pax Kantiana: systematisch-historische Untersuchung des Entwurfs „Zum ewigen Frieden” (1795) von Immanuel Kant. Wien: Böhlau.

5. Chaly, V. A., 2013. John Rawls’ Interpretation of Categorical Imperative in “Theory of Justice”. Kantian Journal, 2(44), pp. 33-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.5922/0207-6918-2013-2-3. (In Rus.)

Cited by 1 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

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3