Beati Possidentes? Kant on Inequality and Poverty

Autores

  • Alessandro Pinzani Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, S. C.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5007/1677-2954.2017v16n3p475

Resumo

The paper starts from an expression used by Kant in the Doctrine of Right: Beati possidentes. It then discusses Kant’s arguments for justifying the possession of land by individuals and by political community. Its main hypothesis is the following: If we consider unacceptable the application of the Beati possidentes principle on a global level, then we have a good reason to reject it also on the domestic level. It reaches this conclusion not by pointing out the undesirable consequences of the principle, for this would be an empirical argument resulting from a consequentialist approach. Rather, it chooses a procedimental approach, showing that the way in which land was initially distributed was neither rightful on the domestic nor on the global level

Biografia do Autor

Alessandro Pinzani, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, S. C.

Possui mestrado em Filosofia - Università degli Studi - Firenze (1992) e doutorado em filosofia - Universität Tübingen (1997). Fez pós-doutorado na Columbia University de New York (2001-2002) e na Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (2010-2011). Obteve a Habilitation (Livre-Docência) e a Venia Legendi em filosofia na Universität Tübingen (2004). Desde 2004 é professor adjunto de Ética e Filosofia Política da Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina. Desde 2008 é coordenador do Centro de Investigações Kantianas - CIK (Florianópolis) e desde 2003 é membro da Forschungsstelle für politische Philosophie da universidade de Tübingen. É pesquisador do Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico no nível 1D. Tem experiência na área de Filosofia, com ênfase em Filosofia Política, atuando principalmente nos seguintes temas: democracia, Maquiavel, Kant, Habermas, teorias da justiça e republicanismo.

Referências

Brandt, Reinhard (1974): Eigentumstheorien von Grotius bis Kant. Stuttgart Bad Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog.

Brocker, Manfred (1987): Kants Besitzlehre. Zur Problematik einer transzendental-philosophischen Eigentumslehre. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann

Buchda, Gerhard (1929): Das Privatrecht Immanuel Kants (Der erste Teil der Rechtslehre in der Metaphysik der Sitten). Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte und zum System des Naturrechts. Jena: Univ. Diss.

Byrd, Sharon; Hruschka, Joachim (2010). Kant’s Doctrine of Right. A Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cicero, Marcus Tullius (1913): On Duties. Translated by W. Miller. Cambridge, (MA): Harvard University Press.

Cicero, Marcus Tullius (1928): On the Republic; On the Laws. Translated by C. W. Keyes. Cambridge, (MA): Harvard University Press.

Diderot, Denis (1992): Political writings. Edited by John Hope Mason and Robert Walker. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fulda, Hans Friedrich (1999): Erkenntnis der Art, etwas Äußeres als das Seine zu haben (Erster Teil. Erstes Hauptstück). In: Immanuel Kant: Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Rechtslehre (Reihe: Klassiker Auslegen). Edited by O. Höffe. Berlin: Akademie, 87-115.

Gilens, Martin; Page, Benjamin I. (2014): Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens. Perspectives on Politics, 12/3, 564-581.

Hruschka, Joachim (2015): Kant und der Rechtsstaat und andere Essays zu Kants Rechtslehre und Ethik. Freiburg: Alber

Kühl, Kristian (1984): Eigentumsordnung als Freiheitsordnung. Zur Aktualität der Kantischen Rechts- und Eigentumslehre. Freiburg: Alber

____________. (1999): Von der Art, etwas Äußeres zu erwerben, insbesondere vom Sachenrecht (§§ 10-17). In: Immanuel Kant: Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Rechtslehre (Reihe: Klassiker Auslegen). Edited by O. Höffe. Berlin: Akademie, 117-132.

O’Neill, Onora (2016): Justice across Boundaries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Pinzani, Alessandro; Sanchez, Nuria (2016): The State Looks Down. Some Reassesments of Kant’s Appraisal of Citizenship. In: Kant and Social Policies. Edited by A. Pinzani, A. Faggion and N. Sanchez. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 25-47.

Pogge, Thomas (1989): Realizing Rawls. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Rousseau, Jean-Jacques (2008): A Discourse on Political Economy. Edited by Ch. Betts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Saage, Richard (1973): Eigentum, Staat und Gesellschaft bei Immanuel Kant. Stuttgart Bad Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog.

Struck, Peter (1987): Ist Kants Rechtspostulat der praktischen Vernunft aporetisch? Ein Beitrag zur neuerlich ausgebrochenen Kontroverse um Kants Rechtsphilosophie. Kant-Studien, 78, 471-476.

Waldron, Jeremy (1992): Superseding Historic Injustice. Ethics, 103, 4-/28.

Waldron, Jeremy (2002): Redressing Historic Injustice. University of Toronto Law Journal, LII, 135-160.

Westphal, Kenneth (2002): A Kantian Justification of Possession. In: Kant’s Metaphysics of Morals. Interpretative Essays. Edited by M. Timmons. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 89-109.

Zotta, Franco (2000): Immanuel Kant. Legitimität und Recht. Eine Kritik seiner Eigentumslehre, Staatslehre und seiner Geschichtsphilosophie. Freiburg: Alber

Downloads

Publicado

2017-12-01

Edição

v. 16 n. 3 (2017): Special Issue on "Kant's Metaphysics of Morals as Guidance in a Morally and Legally Complex World"

Seção

Artigos

Licença

Licença Creative Commons
This obra is licensed under a  Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial-SemDerivações 4.0 Internacional