康德的好客、强迫与和平

Efraín Lazos
{"title":"康德的好客、强迫与和平","authors":"Efraín Lazos","doi":"10.1515/9783110492415-024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": In this essay, I discuss Kant ’ s right of hospitality in Toward Perpetual Peace. In the proposed reading, the right of hospitality protects foreigners from the xenophobic practices of the locals, while protecting the locals from the colonial practices of foreigners. The main question guiding this paper is whether hospitality is for Kant a moral injunction calling for a ‘ humane ’ treatment of foreigners; or whether it is rather a right senso strictu — namely, one that entails full coercive authority against violations. I argue that once the con-nections between the dilemma of coercion and the so-called ‘ institutionalization dilemma ’ are properly understood, they may be resolved in favor of the first op-tion, namely, coercion. Additionally, by examining the notions of non-central-ized coercion and transnational political participation, this paper explores a way to match hospitality ’ s need of coercion with Kant ’ s federalist proposal. to decisive some-how grounded in our common humanity, or is it strict right, coercive norm to which individuals, groups, and — notice — autonomous political entities are subject? This interrogation is the subject of this essay.","PeriodicalId":126664,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy of Globalization","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hospitality, Coercion and Peace in Kant\",\"authors\":\"Efraín Lazos\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/9783110492415-024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\": In this essay, I discuss Kant ’ s right of hospitality in Toward Perpetual Peace. In the proposed reading, the right of hospitality protects foreigners from the xenophobic practices of the locals, while protecting the locals from the colonial practices of foreigners. The main question guiding this paper is whether hospitality is for Kant a moral injunction calling for a ‘ humane ’ treatment of foreigners; or whether it is rather a right senso strictu — namely, one that entails full coercive authority against violations. I argue that once the con-nections between the dilemma of coercion and the so-called ‘ institutionalization dilemma ’ are properly understood, they may be resolved in favor of the first op-tion, namely, coercion. Additionally, by examining the notions of non-central-ized coercion and transnational political participation, this paper explores a way to match hospitality ’ s need of coercion with Kant ’ s federalist proposal. to decisive some-how grounded in our common humanity, or is it strict right, coercive norm to which individuals, groups, and — notice — autonomous political entities are subject? This interrogation is the subject of this essay.\",\"PeriodicalId\":126664,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Philosophy of Globalization\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-06-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Philosophy of Globalization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110492415-024\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy of Globalization","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110492415-024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在本文中,我讨论了康德在《走向永久和平》中的好客权。在拟议案文中,款待权保护外国人不受当地人仇外做法的影响,同时保护当地人不受外国人殖民做法的影响。指导本文的主要问题是,对康德来说,待客之道是否是一种要求“人道”对待外国人的道德禁令;或者更确切地说,它是一种正确的严格意义——也就是说,它包含了对违规行为的充分强制权力。我认为,一旦正确理解了强制困境和所谓的“制度化困境”之间的联系,它们可能会被解决,有利于第一种选择,即强制。此外,本文透过检视非集中强制与跨国政治参与的概念,探讨如何将款待的强制需求与康德的联邦制建议相匹配。以某种方式以我们共同的人性为基础的决定性的,还是严格的权利,强制规范,个人,群体,注意,自治的政治实体都是主体?这篇文章的主题就是这个问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Hospitality, Coercion and Peace in Kant
: In this essay, I discuss Kant ’ s right of hospitality in Toward Perpetual Peace. In the proposed reading, the right of hospitality protects foreigners from the xenophobic practices of the locals, while protecting the locals from the colonial practices of foreigners. The main question guiding this paper is whether hospitality is for Kant a moral injunction calling for a ‘ humane ’ treatment of foreigners; or whether it is rather a right senso strictu — namely, one that entails full coercive authority against violations. I argue that once the con-nections between the dilemma of coercion and the so-called ‘ institutionalization dilemma ’ are properly understood, they may be resolved in favor of the first op-tion, namely, coercion. Additionally, by examining the notions of non-central-ized coercion and transnational political participation, this paper explores a way to match hospitality ’ s need of coercion with Kant ’ s federalist proposal. to decisive some-how grounded in our common humanity, or is it strict right, coercive norm to which individuals, groups, and — notice — autonomous political entities are subject? This interrogation is the subject of this essay.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信