In this essay I show that Kant intended his anthropology lectures and book, Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View, to be a Klugheitslehre (theory of prudence). The essay draws on many quotes from these sources to show that Kant wanted to develop a theory of how to use other people for one’s own ends. Although so much of the lectures and book are in conversation with Baumgarten’s empirical psychology, there are enough references to Klugheit (prudence) and klug (clever) action (...) to support this thesis. Prudence is a skill that human beings should develop and hence is not excluded from human life even though it is not the basis of morality. The purpose of Klugheit is to achieve happiness but the means to that happiness involves using other people for one’s own ends. In order to use others as a means to one’s own ends, a person must in someway satisfy the inclinations of the other person so that they cooperate in one’s ends. However it is also possible to dominate another person and use them as well if they are dominated by a passion but this is not prudent since it does not achieve happiness except in the case of a husband and wife. Kant’s distinction between Weltklugheit and Privatklugheit also appears to be confirmed in that he advances the idea that sociable means of gaining the cooperation of others (Privatklugheit) leads to the lasting happiness of a person and to the development of civilization. (shrink)

Kant is widely admired – and sometimes also widely criticized – as the founding father of transcendental philosophy. But in much of my own writing, I have been concerned with a very different Kant: an impure rather than a pure Kant, an a posteriori rather than an a priori Kant, a naturalistic rather than a transcendental Kant. This other Kant has often been overlooked by professional philosophers, and when not overlooked, he is often regarded as shallow and unoriginal. My aim (...) in this paper is to demonstrate not only the existence but also the importance and originality of Kant, the naturalist. Without Kant’s naturalism, we lack what he called the empirically-informed “eye of true philosophy” that gives its possessors a necessary “broadened way of thinking” and provides philosophy with “dignity, i. e., an absolute worth.”. (shrink)

Recensione di: S. Feloj, Estetica del disgusto. Mendelssohn, Kant e i limiti della rappresentazione. Roma: Carocci, 2017, pp. 190. ISBN: 978-88-430-8674-0.

El artículo presenta la Antropología en sentido pragmático como una obra en la que se manifiesta de manera clara el contenido “material” de la filosofía práctica de Kant. Dicho contenido tiene la peculiaridad de no ser algo arbitrario sino parte fundamental de la filosofía práctica considerada como totalidad, como reunión de crítica y sistema. En este sentido se propone una lectura materialista del texto.

In der Kritik der Urteilskraft vertritt Kant noch die analogische Beziehung zwischen Schönheit und Sittlichkeit (KU, AA 05: 351–354). Aber wir befinden uns hier in einem ganz anderen Zusammenhang. Und dies nicht nur, weil die Erörterung dieser analogischen Beziehung eine Lösung für das Problem der Verknüpfung zwischen theoretischer und praktischer Vernunft beansprucht. Die Reflexionen in den Vorlesungen über Anthropologie über die pragmatische Dimension des Geschmacks setzten die Möglichkeit dieser Verknüpfung bereits voraus, bevor Kant eine kritische Begründung derselben erreichte. Wir dürfen (...) aber diese Reflexionen nicht als das Ergebnis unreifer Versuche zur Lösung dieses kritischen Problems der Rationalitätstheorie Kants deuten. Während der Paragraph 59 der Kritik der Urteilskraft Teil der spekulativen Philosophie ist, wird die Kritik des Geschmacks in den Vorlesungen über Anthropologie vielmehr insofern sinnvoll, da sie zu einem pragmatischen, populären und aufgeklärten Bildungsprogramm der Anthropologie Kants gehört. (shrink)

Recent decades have seen increased attention to the empirical and naturalistic dimensions of Kant’s philosophy, across both his theoretical and practical philosophy. Anik Waldow’s impressively wide...

Neste artigo indicaremos que a proposição fundamental dos cursos de Geografia física de Kant é: o homem é habitante da Terra. Para validar essa tese, alinharemos a metodologia utilizada por Kant nos cursos de Antropologia e de Geografia física, a fim de evidenciar as convergências e divergências desses cursos. Além disso, também compararemos a metodologia empregada por Kant na História natural e na Geografia física, porque a distinção entre essas ciências nos permitirá ratificar a tese aqui defendida e delimitar os (...) critérios de validade da proposição acima indicada. Em Physische Geographie, Kant diferencia as proposições dessas disciplinas da seguinte maneira: as proposições geográficas se referem aos homens como habitantes da Terra, mas os investiga sem nenhuma perspectiva histórica, ou seja, os investiga no tempo presente. Ao contrário disso, as proposições naturalistas investigam os seres humanos em uma linha temporal sucessiva, a fim de demonstrar o que natureza fez deles. Dito isso, o problema central da história natural é demonstrar que os diferentes povos possuem uma origem comum e o problema central da geografia física é demonstrar de que maneira o habitat influencia no processo civilizador, moralizador, político e religioso dos diferentes povos. (shrink)