Beati Possidentes? Kant on Inequality and Poverty
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5007/1677-2954.2017v16n3p475Resumen
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 levelCitas
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
Descargas
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Os autores retêm os direitos autorais e direitos de publicação sobre suas obras, sem restrições.
Ao submeterem seus trabalhos, os autores concedem à revista ethic@ o direito exclusivo de primeira publicação, com o trabalho simultaneamente licenciado sob a Licença Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 International. Essa licença permite que terceiros remixem, adaptem e criem a partir do trabalho publicado, desde que seja dado o devido crédito de autoria e à publicação original neste periódico.
Os autores também têm permissão para firmar contratos adicionais, separadamente, para distribuição não exclusiva da versão publicada do trabalho neste periódico (por exemplo: depositar em repositório institucional, disponibilizar em site pessoal, publicar traduções ou incluí-lo como capítulo de livro), desde que com reconhecimento da autoria e da publicação inicial na revista ethic@.
