{"title":"Kants Hedonismus","authors":"Moritz Hildt","doi":"10.7203/rek.5.2.15538","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Immanuel Kant famously rejected hedonism. It is, however, much less known that Kant himself – despite his rejection of hedonism in moral matters – puts forward a hedonistic theory when he talks about human happiness. While this essay is primarily concerned with a discussion of what I shall call Kant’s „prudential hedonism“, my findings are also systematically relevant, in at least two ways: Firstly, Kant’s argumentative strategy – dismissing hedonism with regard to morality, while endorsing it with regard to human happiness– suggests that hedonism as a philosophical approach deserves a nuanced treatment. Secondly, Kant’s own hedonism suggests that this approach might have a considerably higher systematic potential as hedonism is frequently granted in contemporary debates. In this essay, I will start by sketching Kant’s prudential hedonism. Then, I will discuss three difficulties my reading encounters – the indeterminacy of pleasure, the possibility of something like a „theory“ of well-being in Kantian terms, and the problem of a deficit in autonomy –, before returning to the two systematic implications of my interpretation in the conclusion.","PeriodicalId":153284,"journal":{"name":"Revista de Estudios Kantianos","volume":"202 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista de Estudios Kantianos","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7203/rek.5.2.15538","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Immanuel Kant famously rejected hedonism. It is, however, much less known that Kant himself – despite his rejection of hedonism in moral matters – puts forward a hedonistic theory when he talks about human happiness. While this essay is primarily concerned with a discussion of what I shall call Kant’s „prudential hedonism“, my findings are also systematically relevant, in at least two ways: Firstly, Kant’s argumentative strategy – dismissing hedonism with regard to morality, while endorsing it with regard to human happiness– suggests that hedonism as a philosophical approach deserves a nuanced treatment. Secondly, Kant’s own hedonism suggests that this approach might have a considerably higher systematic potential as hedonism is frequently granted in contemporary debates. In this essay, I will start by sketching Kant’s prudential hedonism. Then, I will discuss three difficulties my reading encounters – the indeterminacy of pleasure, the possibility of something like a „theory“ of well-being in Kantian terms, and the problem of a deficit in autonomy –, before returning to the two systematic implications of my interpretation in the conclusion.