Kantian Journal

2017 Vol. 36. №3

Back to the list Download the article

I. Kant’s and E. Husserl’s practical philosophy



This article focuses on the problem of reconciling a priori and empirical dimensions of freedom, will, and action as the crucial point for understanding the relationship between theoretical and practical reason in Kant’s and Husserl’s practical philosophy. Relying on the explanation of the relationship between transcendental and practical freedom given in Kant's practical philosophy, the author problematizes Kant’s thesis about the primacy of practical reason. This is the starting point and leitmotif in analysing the nature of revision of Kant’s ideas, premises, and problems in the first draft of Husserl’s practical philosophy (scientific ethics). Comparative analysis reveals terminological and conceptual similarities and differences between Kant’s and Husserl’s practical philosophies. Another important result is identifying the principles and departure point ideas for both thinkers. These are a shared understanding of the relationship between theoretical and practical reason, the principle of the ‘purity’ of moral motives and compulsoriness of the a priori, the idea of parallelism between logic and ethics, the interaction between will and mind, and the determining role of the categorical imperative. The author stresses that an adequate understanding of the thinkers’ positions requires distinguishing between Kant’s transcendentalist perspective and Husserl’s phenomenological descriptive perspective, between the a priori of pure reason and the material a priori, between good will as a duty and the thetic acts of will, and between the absolute and relative compulsoriness of the categorical imperative. At the same time, the possibility of reconciling the obligatory and a priori greatest good with a concrete, practical situation of choice remains an open question.


1. Gulyga, A. V. 1977, Kant [Kant], Moscow, 304 p.
2. Gulyga, A. V. 1986, Nemezkaja klassicheskaja filosophija [German classical philosophy],  Moscow, 334 p.
3. Gusejnov, A. A. 2003, Istorija eticheskih uchenij [History of ethical doctrines], Moscow, 911 p.
4. Gusejnov, A. A. 2004, Etika Kanta v istoricheskom kontekste [Kant’s Ethics in historical context], Moscow, Materiali konferenzii RAGS pri Presidente RF “Folosifija Kanta” [Materials of the RAGS conference by the President of the Russian Federation "Philosophy of Kant"], available at: http://www.guseinov.ru/conf/kant2.html (accessed 14 May 2017).
5. Gusserl, E. 2001, Logicheskie issledovanija. Issledovanija po fenomenologii i teorii posnanija [Logical Investigations, called Investigations in Phenomenology and Knowledge], Moscow, 470 p.
6. Kant, I. 2006, Kritika chistogo rasuma, in: Kant I. Sochinenija na nemezkom i russkom jazikah [Critique of Pure Reason. In: Kant I. Works in German and Russian], Moscow. Volume II, Ch.1.
7. Kant, I. 1997, Osnovopolozenie k metafisike nravov, in: Kant I. Sochinenija na nemezkom i russkom jazikah [Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals]. In: Kant I. Works in German and Russian], Moscow. Volume III.
8. Kant, I. 1997a, Kritika prakticheskogo rasuma, in: Kant I. Sochinenija na nemezkom i russkom jazikah [Critique of Practical Reason. In: Kant I. Works in German and Russian], Moscow. Volume III.
9. Kant, I. 2014, Metafizika nravov. Metafizicheskie nachala uchenija o prave, in: Kant I. Sochinenija na nemezkom i russkom jazikah [The Metaphysics of Morals. Doctrine of Right. In: Kant I. Works in German and Russian], Moscow. Volume V. Part I.
10. Kjung, G. Brentano, Gusserl I Ingarden ob ozenivajuchih aktah i posnanii zennostej [Brentano, Husserl and Ingarden about evaluating acts and knowledge of values], Filosofsko-literaturnij zurnal “Logos” [Philosophical and literary journal “Logos”], no. 6, p. 117—123.
11. Lavruhin, A. V. 2004, K voprosu o vlijanii filosofii Kanta na gusserlevskuju modelj konstituzii [To the question about the influence of Kant's philosophy on the Husserl model of the constitution], Materiali konferencii “Filosofija Kanta I sovremennostj” [Materials of the conference "Kant's Philosophy and Modernity"], Moscow, p. 11—21.
12. Lavruhin, A. V. 2007, Prakticheskaja filosofija Edmunda Gusserlja: project nauchnoj etiki [Practical Philosophy by Edmund Husserl: a project of scientific Ethics], Vestnik RGGU. Serija “Folosifija. Soziologija” [Bulletin of the RSUH. Series "Philosophy. Sociology"], Moscow, no. 2—3/07, p. 24—41.
13. Mehed, G. N. 2014, Moralj kak absolutnij predel rasuma v etike I. Kanta [Morality as the absolute limit of reason in the ethics of I. Kant], NB: Filosofskie issledovanija [NB: Philosophical Investigation], Moscow, no. 5, p. 17—44.
14. Molchanov, V. I. 1998, Vremja i soznanie. Kritika fenomenologicheskoj filosofii.  [Time and consciousness. Сritique of the phenomenological philosophy, Moscow.
15. Pisarchik, L. U. 2011, Problema posnanija zennostej I konzepzija nauki v fenomenologii E. Gusserla [The problem of knowledge of values and the concept of science in the phenomenology by E. Husserl], Vestnik Orenburgskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Bulletin of the Orenburg State University], Orenburg, no. 1(120)/January, p. 71—80. 
16. Riker, P. 1998, Kant i Gusserlj. Intenzionalnostj i tekstualjnostj. Folosofskaja mislj Franzii XX veka. [Kant and Husserl. Intentionality and textuality. Philosophical thought in France in the XX century] Tomsk.
17. Stolovich, L. N. 2009, I. Kant I problema zennosti [I. Kant and the problem of value], Kantovskij sbornik [Kant’s collection], no. 2, p. 20—30, available at: https://journals.kantiana.ru/kant_collection/350/ (accessed 15 May 2017).
18. Cobet, T. 2003, Husserl, Kant und die praktische Philosophie. Analysen zu Moralität und Freiheit. Würzburg.
19. Funke, G. 1983, Kant und Husserl. Vom Primat der praktischen Vernunft, Teil III (Husserl). In: Perspektiven der Philosophie, Bd. 9, S. 199—215.
20. Grondin, J. 2000, Zur Phänomenologie des moralischen ‘Gesetzes’. Das contemplative Moment der Erhebung in Kants praktischer Metaphysik. In: Kant-Studien 91 (2000), S. 385—394.
21. Heimsoeth, H. 1966, Zum kosmologischen Ursprung der Kantischen Freiheitsantinomie, Kant-Studien, no. 57, p. 206—229. 
22. Husserl, E., 1974. Formale und transzendentale Logik. Versuch einer Kritik der logischen Vernunft. In: P. Janssen, ed. 1974. Husserliana 17. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
23. Husserl, E., 1975. Logische Untersuchungen. Erster Teil. In: E. Holenstein, ed. 1975. Husserliana 18. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. 
24. Husserl, E., 1985. Einleitung in die Logik und Erkenntnistheorie. Vorlesungen 1906/07. In: U. Melle, ed. 1985. Husserliana 24. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. 
25. Husserl, E., 1986. Aufsätze und Vorträge (1911-1921). In: T. Nenon and H. R. Sepp, eds. 1986. Husserliana 25. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
26. Husserl, E., 1988. Vorlesungen über Ethik und Wertlehre (1908-1914). In: U. Melle, ed. 1988. Husserliana 28. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. 
27. Kern, I. 1964, Husserl und Kant. Eine Untersuchung über Husserls Verhältnis zu Kant und zum Neukantianismus. Den Haag. 
28. Melle, U., 1988. Einleitung des Herausgebers. In: U. Melle, ed. 1988. Husserliana 28. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
29. Morrison, R. Р. 1978, Kant, Husserl and Heidegger on time and the unity of «consciousness », in: Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. Buffalo, vol. XXXIX, no. 2.
30. Patzig, G., 1971. Die logischen Formen praktischer Sätze in Kants Ethik. In: Ethik ohne Metaphysik, Göttingen, p. 101—127.
31. Rinofner-Kreidl, S. 2010, Hussel's critique of Kant's categotrical imperative. In: P. Vandevelde & S. Luft (eds.) Epistemology, Archeology, Ethics: Current Investigations of Husserl's Corpus. London/New York. S. 188—210.
32. Schuhmann, K., 1981. Husserl-Chronik: Denk- und Lebensweg Edmund Husserls. In: Husserliana: Edmund Husserl Dokumente 1. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht.
33. Spahn, Ch., 1996. Phänomenologische Handlungstheorie. Edmund Husserls Untersuchungen zur Ethik, Würzburg.