JOURNAL ARTICLE
Cite JOURNAL ARTICLE
Style
Format
Kants Rechtslehre zwischen ethischer Überhöhung und positivistischer Verflachung
Zum Scheitern von Martin Heusers angeblich „dezidiert metaphysischem“ Unternehmen, „die Riege der führenden Kantinterpreten“ das Fürchten zu lehren
Jahrbuch Recht und Ethik, Vol. 29 (2021), Iss. 1 : pp. 189–235
Additional Information
Article Details
Pricing
Author Details
Geismann, Georg, Prof. em. Dr., Elßholzstraße 15, D-10781 Berlin; auch erreichbar unter: www.georggeismann.de
Abstract
This essay deals with Kant’s Doctrine of Right, but in a rather unusual way by being at the same time a review of a book on that doctrine. It was, indeed, that book which brought me, by trying to review it, to reformulate my own view on the issue To sum up the main mistakes of the author of that book: he takes the Doctrine of Right as a direct application of the doctrine of freedom, as developed in the Analytic of the Critique of Practical Reason, to external acting of humans. That leads him on a crooked path to the thesis that provisional right is not „real“ right in the state of nature, but a conceptual assumption, which can be only thought of. With his idea that real right can only exist in a civil state, the author ends up in a position of legal positivism. The essay tries to expose the decisive steps which made the author go astray so that he eventually failed to grasp Kant’s Metaphysics of Morals altogether. Accordingly, apart from the mentioned mistakes, some connected problem areas, which are completely muddled up in the book, will be subjected to a closer investigation: freedom of the will versus freedom of action; free will versus general will; freedom in the doctrine of right versus freedom in ethics; validity of right versus effectiveness of right. Towards the end, some pages are dedicated to a critical statement on the author’s thesis that Kant’s Doctrine of Right is absolutely unsuited as basis for any claim to distributive justice.
Table of Contents
| Section Title | Page | Action | Price |
|---|---|---|---|
| Georg Geismann, Kants Rechtslehre zwischen ethischer Überhöhung und positivistischer Verflachung. Zum Scheitern von Martin Heusers angeblich „dezidiert metaphysischem“ Unternehmen, „die Riege der führenden Kantinterpreten“ das Fürchten zu lehren | 189 | ||
| I. Rechtslehre und die Analytik der Kritik der praktischen Vernunft | 189 | ||
| II. Willensfreiheit – Handlungsfreiheit | 195 | ||
| III. Freier Wille – allgemeiner Wille | 189 | ||
| IV. Freiheit in der Rechtslehre – Freiheit in der Ethik | 189 | ||
| V. Rechtsgeltung – Rechtskraft | 189 | ||
| VI. Rechtspositivismus | 191 | ||
| VII. Verteilungsgerechtigkeit | 191 | ||
| VIII. Ehe – unnatürlicher Geschlechtsgebrauch | 192 | ||
| IX. Machart | 192 | ||
| Summary | 192 |