جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « کانت » در نشریات گروه « علوم سیاسی »

 Previous political readings of Kant's work have often taken the form of pitting ethics and politics against each other in the field of practical philosophy, where Kant seeks for laws that govern the actions of free and independent subjects. Looking at Kant's thought from this point of view, society (that is, the realm of Kant's aims) is, on the one hand, full of moral laws that human wisdom imposes on itself, and, on the other hand, man is confronted with legal laws that the government imposes. In fact, the readings of Kant so far have presented Kantian ethics as a separate system from Kantian politics, a disintegration that will bring the Kantian system to the verge of collapse. This paper discusses the various conceptions of freedom in Kant's texts, and analyzes the connection between them and Kant's moral theory and epistemology. Kant rejects a basis for the state, in particular, arguing that the welfare of citizens cannot be a basis for a state power. He argues that a state cannot legitimately impose any particular conception of happiness upon its citizens. It is important to try at the outset to clarify the relation between Kant political philosophy and his moral philosophy in general. He clearly subordinates politics to morality while at the same time basing politics on "right" not on utility or happiness.

Radical hermeneutic (ontological) method is used in this article. From the perspective of this methodology, there is no a priori meaning in the text that can be discovered by empathizing. In fact, from this point of view, instead of reconstructing and recovering the objective meaning of the text, the interpreter through mental agreement with the text participates in the creation of meaning and understands the text.

The findings of this study are discussed under the following themes:Political and social implications of Kant's Copernican revolution in the field of political thought According to Kant, man is "an end in himself" and "existence in itself", and therefore he calls the living space of these ends together "the realm of ends". In fact, Kant's thought, after introducing a specific type of subject that was created in the modern era, brings that subject into the social field.The influence of Protestant political theology on Kant's political thought By rejecting the church as a mediator, Protestantism made possible the manifestation of the subject for the first time in the history of theology. The importance of understanding Protestantism for understanding Kant's political and social thought is not through leaving the church, but this importance lies in the confrontation of the particular and the general.The subject as The AutonomyAccording to Kant, the Autonomy is pure principle of all moral laws and all duties corresponding to them. Production of a new type of social contract in Kant's political thought Kant's intended social contract is a subject-centered social contract due to the elimination of superior authority.

Analysis:

Kant's social contract is fundamentally different from previous social contracts in the thinking of Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, etc., and this difference is in the sense that this contract is actually a mechanism for judging the optimal performance of the government. In the sense that the social contract does not include any practical agreement with a practical obligation to obey the government.

German Idealism and Kant, as the pioneers of this intellectual current, brought two fundamental legacies to political thought; the first legacy was "subjectivity". From Kant onwards, the subject became capable of action, an action that involved knowledge on the one hand, and moral will and action on the other. These possibilities are the possibilities of human subjectivity and action, and their outcome is a second fundamental concept that is considered the second fundamental legacy of German idealism for modern political thought; this concept is "right". In fact, according to Kant, man is a subject with action and right, and therefore he follows only the moral laws of wisdom that other people also have, and through these general and universal laws he respects both his right and the right of others, because both he and the other have an end in themselves. According to Kant, man is a moral subject. Therefore, the government that manages the society of such moral people is not an authoritarian or totalitarian government. In other words, it is a civil state and not a political and police state.

If we consider Apollo as a symbol of systematicity, rationality and order, Kant intends to rule peace in the world with a systematic strategy based on rationality. Kant believes that war should be considered as the last solution with the utmost respect for human life and dignity. to be War should only be used when all other means of conflict resolution have been exhausted. On the other hand, if we consider Dionysus as a symbol of drunkenness, passion and breaking taboos, Nietzsche considered morality as a human structure that has been used throughout history to suppress and control people. Therefore, peace is a sign of weakness and degeneration and a product of herd mentality. Real strength comes from conflict and struggle. Struggle with the rules that modernity has dominated human life with the view of pure rationality and its product has become a machine human. Nietzsche considered peace to be a necessary part of life, but on the condition that it is based on power. Understanding what and formulating the criticism of these two thinkers on peace and war and how they interpret it is the central issue of this article. Nietzsche believed that peace is not an end in itself, but a means to an end, and argued that peace is necessary for the development of higher forms of culture and civilization, but it should not be pursued at the expense of creativity and progress.

In this research, we want to answer the question that what is the relationship between the concept of tradition and modern rationality in the thought of Seyyed Javad Tabatabaei and how did he understand the element of modern reason, which is one of the important components of modernity. Tabatabai is one of the modern thinkers who tries to present a new interpretation of the Sunnah. An interpretation that is based on reason and modern science. In this research, we have tried to analyze Tabatabai's point of view based on the views of Descartes and Kant on modern rationality. It seems that Seyyed Javad Tabatabai, with a non-essentialist and non-ethnocentric view of modernity, believes that Kant's view of modern reason, unlike Cartesian view, is not transhistorical and essentialist in nature, but has a historical and contingent nature, and therefore, such a view of modern reason is not incompatible with the tradition of societies, but by relying on this reading of reason, it is possible to understand the dynamic parts of the tradition and remove the rigid parts contaminated with superstitions and ideology. did

Kant's idea of perpetual peace has long been the subject of much intellectual controversy; His realist critics, with the argument that the field of international politics is a place of power and anarchy, have come out against him and considered his idea as idealism. On the other hand, the idealists welcomed his idea and considered it as a goal that "must" be there, even though it is not currently there. The basic problem in Kant's idea is the relationship between domestic politics and international politics, which he himself tried to explain in a theoretical framework. In this article, the question has been raised that in the idea of perpetual peace, Kant has established a relationship between domestic politics and international politics? And what reactions have been encountered in the later theories of international relations? And which theories or schools have tried to use the idea of perpetual peace to establish a new relationship between domestic politics and international politics? The answer of this article to these questions is that Kant firmly believed that there is no possibility of perpetual peace without the relationship between domestic politics and international politics, and among the later theories, the critical theory of international relations and the approach of international society. By returning to Kant's idea, the international community has tried to use the theoretical possibilities of his thought to reconstruct this relationship. The method of this research is descriptive and analytical with a philosophical approach.

In Kant's philosophy of morality, what guarantees the morality of actions is the intention and motivation of the doer, but intention alone cannot guarantee the morality of actions. To know. Given the specific structure of the human mind, he believes that although in a strict philosophical approach one tries to identify all the main elements influencing a moral act, it can nevertheless be assumed that there are hidden elements in the course of moral actions. Not all of these motivations and requirements can be enumerated.This article has been prepared in a library method and from an analytical-descriptive perspective and seeks to explain the process of issuing a moral act from Kant's point of view, and to emphasize elements such as motives, requirements, intentions and tasks, which despite Kant considers the main essence of a moral act to be the observance of the law of ethics and the performance of duty, and considers considerations such as respect for the moral law as an element that necessitates the performance of duty. It has caused controversy among cantologists.

This study aims to examine the theoretical foundations of right and duty in the thought of Kant and Habermas, two German thinkers of the eighteenth and twentieth centuries, and the educational implications derived from those foundations.Method of this research; In terms of research and practical purpose and according to the type of data used, it is of historical-analytical and argumentative type.Findings of the research show that Kant and Habermas's legal views are influenced by two social and epistemological contexts, and these two views - the first of which focuses on highlighting the role of the subject (mind) in cultural, social, political and legal developments, and the second It focuses on the subject's interactions with social factors, in response to the needs of their time. The educational implications of the views of these two are presented in exactly the same context. The results of this study showed; During the comparison and discussion of these two systems of thought, which consider both human intellect as the only refuge for the development and realization of intellectual and institutional modernity, we will try as much as possible to discuss the issues raised, especially in the field of education and culture and territorial conditions. We Iranians should also be expanded to benefit from the issues raised both for a better understanding and possible use for the Iranian education system.Keywords: Kant, Habermas, Right, Homework, Education

Freedom is the most important concept in Kant's practical philosophy. Purpose of this paper is to examine relation between freedom and other concepts of Kant's practical philosophy with politics in general and desirable government in particular. We first provided a theoretical framework derived from phenomenology theory. We studied it in a descriptive-analytical method. In this theoretical framework, we can analyze how to prove the freedom of human will. The authority is base of Kant's practical philosophy and the two concepts of "duty" and "right" are determined by it. Duty in realm of inner freedom is object of ethic and right in realm of external freedom is object of private and public rights. By examining Kant's political thought a number of important results were obtained; first, when one's practice is ethically valid that be completely free and there is no other motive other than free will (principle of duty). Under these circumstances, individual’s perfection is possible. The characteristics of a Kant's desirable government that provide the conditions for individual’s perfection are: 1- Ending human beings 2- Individual freedom 3- Rule of law 4- Principle of separation of powers. Kant introduces the constitutional republic as the desirable state.

Following to their inquiry into the history of philosophy with a lot of vicissitudes, philosophers and scholars are almost unanimous over this point that the world has witnessed three great philosophers in the west countries since the start point of the history. These philosophers are Plato, Aristotle and Kant. It has been frequently discussed about Plato and Aristotle and their political and non-political doctrines so that these two philosophers are well-known even among all the people today. Inter alia, despite existing unique richness and impact of Kant and his political philosophy on subsequent philosophers and even use of them in codification of international documents, this issue has been overlooked for several reasons. One of foremost Kant’s paradigms that have highly influenced in formation of governments in the west is type of human’s approach toward the government and the present paper has been written for familiarity with this doctrine.

This study is an applied research in terms of objective and descriptive in terms of method (content analysis).

Taking human’s position into consideration, Kant argues that the government should be formed and founded on primary principles e.g. freedom, independence and equality of humans and the republic is the only legitimate government. Law and freedom as a natural right are coordinated with each other only at this type of government.

Political power should be reflected by public will and this is possible only in the republic system.

The addition of the term "international security" has also not helped to define peace. In addition to the concept of peace, this paper examines the political philosophy of peace from the point of view of Hobbes and kant. Hobbes, in his pessimistic look considered peace as a fake. A view that led to political realism and to realpolitik.Realpolitik emphasis the imposition of criminal justice for victims of human rights violation and do not punish perpetrators of international crimes. But Kant pursued a lasting peace with his moral philosophy as a result of respect for human rights. The notion that crystallized political liberalism and the UN's search for negative peace in efforts to achieve positive peace through criminal justice for the victim societies of widespread human rights violation.The function that led to the establishment of international criminal tribunals and international criminal court.This suggests that future of international law inextricably linked to the promotion of human rights.

The success of British colonial rule during the nineteenth century was not only dependent on the threat of military force, but also on the sophisticated use of rhetoric so the civilizing mission of Europeans established based on culture as rhetoric and followd 18th and 19th century literature and philosophy. This superiority was followed by 18th and 19th century`s philosophy and literature. Emanuel Kant, the great philosopher of 18th century, in his book “Critique of Judgment” that its first part is the Critique of Aesthetic Judgment and its second part deals with the Critique of Teleological Judgment. Kant in this book introduced a subject, that achieves beauty and sublimity and finality under special conditions; however since in Kant’s view, such understanding is not specific to all people, this question arises for critics that whether there is a sign of racism and colonianism in third criticism of Kant Subject. So, the main question of this article is that is there any colonial and racism streaks in third critique of Kant. This article based on the ideas of the post-colonial critic and theorist, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, is a well-known scholar in diverse fields of post-colonial research, examines and answers this question. Spivak believes that Kant’s theories in two cases, use racism and colonialism; first in analysis of sublimity he states that raw man can understand sublimity as a terrible conceptions because he is not educated and cultured; secondly, in finality discussion, considers Australian indigenous inhabitants without humane nominality. Therfore, the indicating subject of universality or Kant Human does not refer to all humans, but only pays attention to burgeous educated man subject of European Enlightenment period as providing a part of rational principles of Imperialism development.

Different schools and scholars have emphasized the importance of peace and the necessity to realize it as the essential and fundamental necessity in human life. Muslim scholars such as Farabi in the Muslim world and Kant and his followers in contemporary the West, have focused on this issue in their own way. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to study and explain "sustainable peace" in Abu Nasr Farabi and Kant's attitude in a comparative manner. The main question of the research is that: Which of the Kant and Farabi's theories of peace, according to their worldviews, are capable of explaining the nature of peace and realizing it in a stable and steady state?
In a comparative study, the findings of the research show that both theories are considered to be "human" and both put forward a moral attitude towards the realization of peace; but Farabi, with a comprehensive and virtuous look, observes and explains human and society, and the needs of both, such as peace and calmness. In addition, the foundations of peace in al-Farabi's political philosophy, in compared to the Kant's sustained foundations of peace, due to divine-humanity and innateness, as one of the sources of human identity and human security, has the potential to be more feasible and more realistic.

In this article, the authors try to analyze the issue of human dignity in the thoughts of two prominent Islamic and Western thinkers. Such an analysis will be conducted within the framework of three humanist, adjunct and potential humanity theories. The main question we would like to answer is that “what is the criterion of human dignity”? In relation to this main question, we also discuss about some other questions such as “is it possible to deprive the man from dignity and if the answer is yes, with what excuse”? Our main hypothesis is that Kant, with a humanist approach, rules out the possibility of depriving the man from dignity and Allameh Jafari with a religious-oriented approach, consider the man as God’s caliph who has responsibilities towards its status and in case of the violation of those responsibilities, he would be deprived from his dignity by himself. By adopting a descriptive-analytical method, this article first explains the thoughts of these two thinkers and then analyzes them within the intended framework.

John Rawls is affected by Kant's ethical philosophy and the representation of Kant's ethical philosophy can be seen in his works. In this paper, in order to reveal the legacy of Kant for Rawls political theory, three subjects are surveyed: humanism, ethical alternative and constructivism. In humanism, the ideas of Kant and Rawls stress on the human. Kant considered the human as a goal not as an instrument. This issue in the thought of the two can provide an ethical alternative against teleological morality is described deontological morality. Kant and Rawls tried to establish suitable relation between the concept of the free and equal individual and the concept of justice, as they create their own constructivism. In this article, we have tried to explain political philosophy and ideas of Kantian Ethics in Rawls political philosophy by normative method.

This paper is a study of “democratic peace theory” from the viewpoint of “religious democracy.” Kant, the outstanding German philosopher, introduced “democratic peace theory” to political sciences in the 18th century. Afterwards, the Austrian economist, Joseph Schumpeter, underpinned the theory from an economic perspective. After the development of secular liberal democracy in the second half of 20th century, more attention was paid to the relationship between peace and democracy. At this stage, many political science researchers strengthened the “democratic peace theory”, using various statistical research methods. The strong reading of this theory, which has few supporters, claims that democratic countries have always peaceful foreign relationships. However, the weak reading maintains that democratic countries tend to resolve disagreements peacefully only in the relationships among themselves. The reading also concedes that these countries, in their relationships with non-democratic countries, have no differences with non-democratic countries concerning peacefulness. After a critical evaluation of “democratic peace theory”, the paper proposes the principle that the establishment of mutual equal respect culture among governments is a key factor in the establishment of world peace, whether these governments be secular democracies or religious democracies. Thus, the only way for developing world peace is that the West renounce the common idea that secular Western culture has priority over other cultures. This conception by West governments practically leads to the denial of the mutual equal respect principle in regulating the relationships among the West and the non-West. This the main obstacle to develop world peace.