A Relation to the Politikal Revolution as a Touchstone for Practical Philosophy
- DOI
- 10.5922/0207-6918-2015-4-8
- Pages
- 92-102
Abstract
This paper presents a critical review of an article by the eminent Russian Kantianist Prof A. N. Kruglov published under the title “Immaturity and the objective of a true reform in ways of thinking” in Kantovsky Sbornik (issues 3—4, 2014). The critical analysis focuses on the practical conclusion, in which Prof Kruglov expresses his negative attitude to the French Revolution and shows ambiguous disapproval of Kant’s positive attitude to it. This ambiguity can discredit modern practical philosophy, which has to present to the society clear and stable statements that can be understood by most readers. Otherwise, practical conclusions can be arbitrarily interpreted by politicians, ideologists, and general public as scientific recommendations and guidelines for decision-making. Moreover, Prof Kruglov ignores Kant’s important thought about socio-political revolutions being the fault of rulers incapable of implementing necessary reforms. Therefore, the violence and cruelty of revolutions are nothing but the nature's vengeance for social injustice. Prof Kruglov juxtaposes Kant’s notions of political revolution and ‘true reform in ways of thinking’ neglecting the fact that, without a ‘falling off of personal despotism and of avaricious or tyrannical oppression’, it is impossible to achieve a ‘true reform in ways of thinking’ and that cruel political revolutions can liberate the society from such oppression. The paper explains Kant’s positive attitude to the French revolution as a ‘historical sign’ of the possibility of moral and legal improvement of humanity through striving for moral goals. Political revolutions are considered as the initial (‘negative’) stage of enlightenment consisting in the liberation from coercion and ‘assistance’ from guardians. This s
Reference
1. Aldanov, M. A. 2002, Devyatoe termidora [The Ninth Thermidor]. In: Aldanov, M. A. Myslitel’. Tetralogiya [The Thinker, a tetralogy]. Moscow.
2. Kant, I. 1994a, O pogovorke „Mozhet byt’, eto i verno v teorii, no ne goditsya dlya praktiki“ [Über den Gemeinspruch: Das mag in der Theorie richtig sein, taugt aber nicht für die Praxis]. In: Kant, I. Sobranie sochinenii na nemetskom i russkom yazykakh [Works on German and Russian languages], ed. by B. Tuschling, N. W. Motroschilowa. Vol. 1. Moscow.
3. Kant, I. 1994в, K wechnomu miru [Zum ewigen Frieden]. In: Kant, I. Sobranie sochinenii na nemetskom i russkom yazykakh [Works on German and Russian languages], ed. by B. Tuschling, N. W. Motroschilowa. Vol. 1. Moscow.
4. Kant, I. 1994б, Otvet na vopros: chto takoe prosveshchenie? [Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklärung?] In: Kant, I. Sobranie sochinenii na nemetskom i russkom yazykakh [Works on German and Russian languages], ed. by B. Tuschling, N. W. Motroschilowa. Vol. 1. Moscow.
5. Kant, I., 2006 «Skandal’nuj Fragment» [Das sog. „Krakauer Fragment“]. In: Myasnikov A. G. Revoluzija w sposobe muschlenija kak sistemnaja problema fhilosofhii Kanta. Ekaterinburg, Penza, p. 219—227.
6. Kant, I. 1994л, Spor fakul’tetov [Der Streit der Facultäten]. In: Kant, I. Sobranie sochinenii, 8 Vols. [Works in 8 volumes], ed. by A. V. Gulyga. Vol. 7. Moscow.
7. Krouglov, A. N. 2014a, Nesowerschennoletie i sadacha istinnogo preobrasowanija obrasa mushclenija. Chast’ I. [Immaturity and the task of atrue reform in ways of thinking. Part I.]. In: Kantovsky Sbornik, № 3 (49), p. 19—39.
8. Krouglov, A. N. 2014б, Nesowerschennoletie i sadacha istinnogo preobrasowanija obrasa mushclenija. Chast’ II. [Immaturity and the task of atrue reform in ways of thinking. Part II.]. In: Kantovsky Sbornik, № 4 (50), p. 39—53.
9. Myasnikov, A. G. 2005, Kritika politicheckogo despotisma u Kanta i Robesp’era [Criticism of political despotism at Kant and Robespierre]. In: Kant mezhdu sapadom I wostokom. K 200-letiju so dnja smerti i 280-letiju so dnja rozhdenija Immanuila Kanta: Trudu mezhdunarodnogo seminara i mezhdunarodnoj konferenzii: W 2 zh. / Kaliningrad. Zh. II.,
p. 146—155.
10. Myasnikov, A. G. 2007, Protiworechit li otkas ot obchsenija kantowckomu besuclownomu dolgu prawdiwosti? [Whether refusal of communication contradicts a Kant unconditional debt of truthfulness?]. In: Fhilosofhskie nauki, № 9, p. 101—111.
11. Ern, W. 1914, Ot Kanta k Kruppu [From Kant to Krupp]. In: Russkaja musl’, p. 116—124.
12. Böckerstette, H. 1982, Aporien der Freiheit und ihre Aüfklärung durch Kant. — Stutt-gart.: fromman-holzboog,
13. Burg, P. 1974, Kant und die Französische Revolution. Berlin.
14. Deggau, H.-G. 1983, Die Aporien der Rechtslehre Kant. Stuttgart.
15. Langer, C. 1986, Reform nach Prinzipien Untersuchungen zur politische Theorie Im-manuel Kants. Stuttgart.
16. Losurdo, D., 1987, Immanuel Kant — Freiheit, Recht und Revolution. Köln.
17. Hinske, N., 1980, Kant als Herausforderung an die Gegenwart. Freiburg.
18. Höffe, O., 2001, „Königliche Völker“: Zu Kant kosmopolitische Rechts- u. Friedens-theorie. — Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.