The Metaphysical Spectator and the Sphere of Social Life in Kant’s Political Writings

IF 0.4 Q3 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Critical Horizons Pub Date : 2020-04-02 DOI:10.1080/14409917.2020.1759283
Alexandra Cain
{"title":"The Metaphysical Spectator and the Sphere of Social Life in Kant’s Political Writings","authors":"Alexandra Cain","doi":"10.1080/14409917.2020.1759283","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Through a reading of Kant’s essay, “An Old Question Raised Again: Is the Human Race Constantly Progressing?”, I argue that Kant’s political philosophy fails to adequately engage with the political event in itself, and that Kant’s so-called political writings only provide a theory of the social sphere. First, I present the Kantian political subject as an antinomy between the metaphysically grounded spectator and the physically situated actor. Second, I show that Kant tries to solve the antinomy between the actor and the spectator by attributing primacy to the judgement of the spectator. Third, I show that this move fails because it removes from political judgment what ultimately defines the political, i.e. plurality, spontaneity, and action. I conclude that rather than a theory of the sphere of political life, what Kant achieves is the thinking out of a theory of society (Gesellschaft).","PeriodicalId":51905,"journal":{"name":"Critical Horizons","volume":"21 1","pages":"153 - 166"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14409917.2020.1759283","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Horizons","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14409917.2020.1759283","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT Through a reading of Kant’s essay, “An Old Question Raised Again: Is the Human Race Constantly Progressing?”, I argue that Kant’s political philosophy fails to adequately engage with the political event in itself, and that Kant’s so-called political writings only provide a theory of the social sphere. First, I present the Kantian political subject as an antinomy between the metaphysically grounded spectator and the physically situated actor. Second, I show that Kant tries to solve the antinomy between the actor and the spectator by attributing primacy to the judgement of the spectator. Third, I show that this move fails because it removes from political judgment what ultimately defines the political, i.e. plurality, spontaneity, and action. I conclude that rather than a theory of the sphere of political life, what Kant achieves is the thinking out of a theory of society (Gesellschaft).
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
形而上学的旁观者与康德政治著作中的社会生活领域
摘要通过阅读康德的文章《再次提出一个古老的问题:人类在不断进步吗?》,我认为康德的政治哲学没有充分地参与到政治事件本身,康德所谓的政治著作只提供了一种社会领域的理论。首先,我将康德的政治主体呈现为一种在形而上学基础上的旁观者和身体上的行动者之间的矛盾。其次,我表明康德试图通过将首要地位归因于观众的判断来解决行动者和观众之间的矛盾。第三,我表明,这一举措之所以失败,是因为它从政治判断中去除了最终定义政治的东西,即多元性、自发性和行动性。我的结论是,康德所实现的不是政治生活领域的理论,而是社会理论的思考(Gesellschaft)。
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
Critical Horizons
Critical Horizons SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
期刊最新文献
Giorgio Agamben’s Critique of the Covid-19 Response has Little to Do with Biopolitics Political Judgment and Ingenium: Rethinking the Sensus Communis Through Arendt and Vico The Politics of Bodies: Philosophical Emancipation with and Beyond Rancière Of Israel, Forst & Voltaire: Deism, Toleration, and Radicalism The Human Crisis Revisited: Albert Camus and Climate Rebellion
×
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