Search

What political principles should Kantians adopt in the twenty-first century? For Kant scholars such as Allen W. Wood - co-general editor of the Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant and prominent advocate of Kant's ethical thought - the answer is clear: Kant's principles, rightly understood. For other Kantians, however, philosophers should heed Kant's advice in his essay on Enlightenment and courageously invent new principles. This essay draws upon the writings of John Rawls and Gilles Deleuze - preeminent Kant scholars and political theorists in Anglo-American and Continental philosophy, respectively - to support the latter thesis. Initially, I examine Wood's exposition and defense of Kant's principles in his essay, "The Supreme Principle of Morality." Then, I consider Rawls's analysis and reworking of Kantian constructivism in his essays and lectures on Kant as well as in Political Liberalism. Next, I examine Deleuze's interpretation and use of Kantian constructivism in What is Philosophy? and A Thousand Plateaus. Finally, I advance two claims why Kantians should invent new principles rather than retain Kant's. Philosophically, Kantians may advance stronger theories by incorporating the criticisms of Kant's principles made by such philosophers as Hegel, Dewey, Nietzsche, and Bergson; and politically, Kantians may articulate more timely theories by adapting Kant's principles to the conditions of late-modernity. The debate over Kantian principles affects whether philosophers view Kant scholarship as practical philosophy itself or as a preparatory exercise for the task of generating new principles. The debate also impacts whether Kant's heirs on the Left retain the ideals of the Enlightenment or confidently invent new ones. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Gilles Deleuze had a life-long interest in Kant. To provide a new perspective on Deleuze?s political theory, to facilitate a conversation between Continental and Anglo-American political theorists, and to promote a certain way to be Kantian, I track how Deleuze interprets and transforms Kant?s contested legacy (or what I call the Kantian problematic). In this essay, I show how Deleuze reworks four key moves of the Kantian problematic: the identification of the problem, the engagement with common sense, the construction of principles, and the learning of principles. In the conclusion, I contest the thesis ? advanced by Paul Patton, Michael Hardt, and Philip Goodchild ? that Deleuze views Kant primarily as ?an enemy.? My claim, instead, is that Deleuze (like Foucault) cherishes the Kantian critical ethos even as he disavows Kant?s moral doctrines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

John Rawls had a life-long interest in Kant. To provide a new perspective on Rawls's political theory, to facilitate a conversation between Anglo-American and Continental political theorists, and to promote a certain way to be Kantian, I track how Rawls interprets and transforms Kant's contested legacy (or what I call the Kantian problematic). In this essay, I show how Rawls reworks four key moves of the Kantian problematic: the identification of the problem, the engagement with common sense, the construction of principles, and the authentication of principles. In the conclusion, I defend Rawls from the charge -- made by Allan Bloom and Michael Sandel, among others -- that Rawls fundamentally misunderstands or misuses Kant. The basis of my defense is that Rawls considers a critical intellectual sensibility (or ethos), rather than a specific doctrine (e.g., the categorical imperative), as the most valuable component of the Kantian problematic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]