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
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