Would a Feminist Appropriation of the Kantian Thought be Possible?

Özlem Duva Kaya
{"title":"Would a Feminist Appropriation of the Kantian Thought be Possible?","authors":"Özlem Duva Kaya","doi":"10.5840/kilikya2022919","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is one of the main allegations impelled by feminist theorists against Kant's philosophy that the subject Kant placed at the base of his understanding of rationality is masculine, a Westerner and belongs to upper/middle class. In fact, there is considerable supporting evidence to promote this claim for mainstream Western philosophy in general and Kant's philosophy in particular. On the other hand, while reckoning with the history of philosophy, and examining whether it is possible to break away from philosophical concepts and categories or not, is another matter of discussion. In this article, I try to focus on various possibilities that can reconcile Kant's philosophy with the demands of liberal feminism and an inclusive democratic participation principle. It is important that to discuss whether it is possible to make a new reading that can be reconciled with feminist demands by ignoring the misogynistic discourses in Kant's works, especially starting from the concepts of autonomy and personality. Today, many factors like traditions, prejudices, oppressive forms of government, etc. prevent women from taking part in public life as free agents and autonomously, and from being considered as “subjects with the status of rights”. Therefore, I argue that Kant's concepts such as autonomy, becoming a person and having the conditions for free action, do have something in common with feminist demands.","PeriodicalId":304114,"journal":{"name":"Kilikya Felsefe Dergisi / Cilicia Journal of Philosophy","volume":"126 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kilikya Felsefe Dergisi / Cilicia Journal of Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/kilikya2022919","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

It is one of the main allegations impelled by feminist theorists against Kant's philosophy that the subject Kant placed at the base of his understanding of rationality is masculine, a Westerner and belongs to upper/middle class. In fact, there is considerable supporting evidence to promote this claim for mainstream Western philosophy in general and Kant's philosophy in particular. On the other hand, while reckoning with the history of philosophy, and examining whether it is possible to break away from philosophical concepts and categories or not, is another matter of discussion. In this article, I try to focus on various possibilities that can reconcile Kant's philosophy with the demands of liberal feminism and an inclusive democratic participation principle. It is important that to discuss whether it is possible to make a new reading that can be reconciled with feminist demands by ignoring the misogynistic discourses in Kant's works, especially starting from the concepts of autonomy and personality. Today, many factors like traditions, prejudices, oppressive forms of government, etc. prevent women from taking part in public life as free agents and autonomously, and from being considered as “subjects with the status of rights”. Therefore, I argue that Kant's concepts such as autonomy, becoming a person and having the conditions for free action, do have something in common with feminist demands.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
女权主义对康德思想的挪用可能吗?
女权主义理论家对康德哲学的主要指控之一是,康德将其作为理性理解的基础的主体是男性的、西方人的、属于中上层阶级的。事实上,有相当多的证据支持西方主流哲学的这一主张,特别是康德哲学。另一方面,考察哲学史,考察是否有可能脱离哲学概念和范畴,则是另一回事。在这篇文章中,我试图把重点放在各种可能性上,这些可能性可以调和康德哲学与自由女权主义的要求和包容性民主参与原则。重要的是,讨论是否有可能通过忽略康德作品中的厌女话语,特别是从自主和人格的概念出发,做出一种与女权主义要求相协调的新解读。今天,传统、偏见、压迫性的政府形式等诸多因素阻碍了妇女以自由主体和自主的身份参与公共生活,也阻碍了妇女被视为“具有权利地位的主体”。因此,我认为康德的自主性、成为一个人、拥有自由行动的条件等概念确实与女权主义的要求有共同之处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Aristoteles’te İyi Yaşam, Kendine Yeterlilik ve Kölelik David Hume’un Beğeni Standardı II Schrödinger’in Yaşam Nedir? Kitabı, Gen-Merkezcilik ve Biyolojik Organizasyon Farabi’nin Eğitim Felsefesi Bağlamında Din ve Felsefeyi Konumlandırışı İki Farklı Evren Tasarımı
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1