康德论和平、荣誉与王子的“观点”,1755-1795

IF 0.7 2区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY Modern Intellectual History Pub Date : 2022-09-27 DOI:10.1017/S1479244322000476
Olivier Higgins
{"title":"康德论和平、荣誉与王子的“观点”,1755-1795","authors":"Olivier Higgins","doi":"10.1017/S1479244322000476","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"By recovering the pre-critical foundations of Immanuel Kant's political idealism, this article elucidates his fundamental concern with reorienting the “point of view” of real princes and sovereigns to the cause of peace. I trace this priority to Kant's reading of Pierre Bayle, whose skepticism illustrated that the true nature of princes rendered Saint-Pierre's ideal of peace “not possible.” Beginning in 1756, Kant reframed perpetual peace as the ultimate political honor for those unmoved by strict moral necessity, promising them a legacy that was entwined with the providential course of human history. This appeal to honor identified the first necessary phase of political change, accounting for ruling motives that might otherwise lead to wars of conquest and expansion. This view of Kant's shrewd attempt to steer the “point of view” of real power, which persisted into his final political writings in the 1790s, challenges dominant readings of a Kantian politics concerned solely with the distant realization of ideal institutions.","PeriodicalId":44584,"journal":{"name":"Modern Intellectual History","volume":"20 1","pages":"738 - 763"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Kant on Peace, Honor and the “Point of View” of Princes, 1755–1795\",\"authors\":\"Olivier Higgins\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S1479244322000476\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"By recovering the pre-critical foundations of Immanuel Kant's political idealism, this article elucidates his fundamental concern with reorienting the “point of view” of real princes and sovereigns to the cause of peace. I trace this priority to Kant's reading of Pierre Bayle, whose skepticism illustrated that the true nature of princes rendered Saint-Pierre's ideal of peace “not possible.” Beginning in 1756, Kant reframed perpetual peace as the ultimate political honor for those unmoved by strict moral necessity, promising them a legacy that was entwined with the providential course of human history. This appeal to honor identified the first necessary phase of political change, accounting for ruling motives that might otherwise lead to wars of conquest and expansion. This view of Kant's shrewd attempt to steer the “point of view” of real power, which persisted into his final political writings in the 1790s, challenges dominant readings of a Kantian politics concerned solely with the distant realization of ideal institutions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44584,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Modern Intellectual History\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"738 - 763\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Modern Intellectual History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1479244322000476\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Modern Intellectual History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1479244322000476","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文通过恢复伊曼纽尔·康德政治理想主义的前批判基础,阐明了他对将真正的王子和君主的“观点”重新定位于和平事业的根本关注。我把这种优先权追溯到康德对皮埃尔·贝勒的解读,他的怀疑主义表明,王子的真实本性使圣皮埃尔的和平理想“不可能”。从1756年开始,康德将永久和平重新定义为那些不受严格道德必要性影响的人的终极政治荣誉,并向他们承诺一份与人类历史的天意交织在一起的遗产。这种荣誉诉求确定了政治变革的第一个必要阶段,解释了可能导致征服和扩张战争的统治动机。康德精明地试图引导实权的“观点”,这种观点一直延续到他1790年代的最后一部政治著作中,挑战了对纯粹关注理想制度的遥远实现的康德政治的主流解读。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Kant on Peace, Honor and the “Point of View” of Princes, 1755–1795
By recovering the pre-critical foundations of Immanuel Kant's political idealism, this article elucidates his fundamental concern with reorienting the “point of view” of real princes and sovereigns to the cause of peace. I trace this priority to Kant's reading of Pierre Bayle, whose skepticism illustrated that the true nature of princes rendered Saint-Pierre's ideal of peace “not possible.” Beginning in 1756, Kant reframed perpetual peace as the ultimate political honor for those unmoved by strict moral necessity, promising them a legacy that was entwined with the providential course of human history. This appeal to honor identified the first necessary phase of political change, accounting for ruling motives that might otherwise lead to wars of conquest and expansion. This view of Kant's shrewd attempt to steer the “point of view” of real power, which persisted into his final political writings in the 1790s, challenges dominant readings of a Kantian politics concerned solely with the distant realization of ideal institutions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
11.10%
发文量
55
期刊最新文献
Structuralist or Lesbian? Claude Lévi-Strauss and Monique Wittig on Rousseau's “Science” From the Hebrew Commonwealth to Party Politics: Rousseau's Legacy and the Nation-State in Nineteenth-Century Political Thought From the Body of the King to the Body of the Nation: Sovereignty, Sodomy, and the English Revolution of 1688 Legal Counterrevolution: Property and Judicial Power in the Weimar Republic Isaac Breuer's Antiliberal Neo-Kantianism and the Politicization of Jewish Ultra-Orthodoxy
×
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