论正义战争与国际秩序

IF 0.2 0 PHILOSOPHY
Nenad Miličić
{"title":"论正义战争与国际秩序","authors":"Nenad Miličić","doi":"10.2298/FID2101105M","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Kant’s legal and political philosophy is essential for understanding and advancing international order. The article aims to posit arguments that confront the claims that Kant was just war theorist. Since that is the most opposed part of Kant’s political philosophy, mostly due to the misleading interpretation of his argumentation, the author presents Kant’s standpoint on the matters of just war and international order and discusses potential ambiguities between Kant’s and his critics’ theories. Furthermore, the consequences of opponents’ arguments considering states of states, world republic and cosmopolitan democracy in contemporary political philosophy are debated. Finally, the possibility of consent between the three model solutions which are arising from the contemporary international order theory and Kant’s position are compared and analysed.","PeriodicalId":41902,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy and Society-Filozofija i Drustvo","volume":"40 1","pages":"105-127"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Kant on just war and international order\",\"authors\":\"Nenad Miličić\",\"doi\":\"10.2298/FID2101105M\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Kant’s legal and political philosophy is essential for understanding and advancing international order. The article aims to posit arguments that confront the claims that Kant was just war theorist. Since that is the most opposed part of Kant’s political philosophy, mostly due to the misleading interpretation of his argumentation, the author presents Kant’s standpoint on the matters of just war and international order and discusses potential ambiguities between Kant’s and his critics’ theories. Furthermore, the consequences of opponents’ arguments considering states of states, world republic and cosmopolitan democracy in contemporary political philosophy are debated. Finally, the possibility of consent between the three model solutions which are arising from the contemporary international order theory and Kant’s position are compared and analysed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41902,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Philosophy and Society-Filozofija i Drustvo\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"105-127\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Philosophy and Society-Filozofija i Drustvo\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2298/FID2101105M\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy and Society-Filozofija i Drustvo","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2298/FID2101105M","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

康德的法律哲学和政治哲学对于理解和推进国际秩序至关重要。这篇文章的目的是提出与康德只是一个战争理论家的说法相反的论点。由于这是康德政治哲学中最受反对的部分,主要是由于对他的论证的误导性解释,作者提出了康德在正义战争和国际秩序问题上的立场,并讨论了康德与其批评者的理论之间潜在的歧义。此外,对手的论点考虑到国家的国家,世界共和国和世界主义民主在当代政治哲学的后果进行了辩论。最后,比较分析了当代国际秩序理论所产生的三种模式解决方案与康德立场一致的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Kant on just war and international order
Kant’s legal and political philosophy is essential for understanding and advancing international order. The article aims to posit arguments that confront the claims that Kant was just war theorist. Since that is the most opposed part of Kant’s political philosophy, mostly due to the misleading interpretation of his argumentation, the author presents Kant’s standpoint on the matters of just war and international order and discusses potential ambiguities between Kant’s and his critics’ theories. Furthermore, the consequences of opponents’ arguments considering states of states, world republic and cosmopolitan democracy in contemporary political philosophy are debated. Finally, the possibility of consent between the three model solutions which are arising from the contemporary international order theory and Kant’s position are compared and analysed.
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
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
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