‘A Kantian Justification of Possession’.
Graduate studies at Western
In M. Timmons (ed.), Kant’s Metaphysics of Ethics: Interpretive Essays. Oxford (2002)
|Abstract||Kant’s justification of possession appears to assume rather than prove its legitimacy. This apparent question-begging has been recapitulated or exacerbated but not resolved in the literature. However, Kant provides a sound justification of limited rights to possess and use things (qualified choses in possession), not of private property rights. Kant’s argument is not purely a priori; it is in Kant’s Critical sense ‘metaphysical’ because it applies the pure a priori ‘Universal Principles of Right’ to the concept of finite rational human agency. This use implicitly involves a ‘Contradiction in Conception’ test, which I explicate in detail. The limited rights to possession and use justified by Kant’s argument suffice for his social contract argument for the legitimacy of the state.|
|Keywords||usufruct use rights property Critical metaphysics|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|External links||This entry has no external links. Add one.|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Kenneth R. Westphal (1997). ‘Do Kant’s Principles Justify Property or Usufruct?’. Jahrbuch für Recht Und Ethik/Annual Review of Law and Ethics 5:141-194.
Peter Vallentyne (2001). Self-Ownership. In Laurence Becker & Charlotte Becker (eds.), Encyclopedia of Ethics, 2nd edition. Garland Publishing.
Doris Schroeder (2012). Human Rights and Human Dignity. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15 (3):323-335.
Larry May (1986). Corporate Property Rights. Journal of Business Ethics 5 (3):225 - 232.
Louis-Philippe Hodgson (2010). Kant on Property Rights and the State. Kantian Review 15 (1):57-87.
Kenneth R. Westphal (2005). ‘Kant, Hegel, and Determining Our Duties’. Jahrbuch für Recht and Ethik/Annual Review of Law & Ethics 13:335-354.
Karl Widerquist (2009). A Dilemma for Libertarianism. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 8 (1):43-72.
L. Wenar (1998). Original Acquisition of Private Property. Mind 107 (428):799-820.
Kenneth R. Westphal (2011). ‘Kant’s [Moral] Constructivism and Rational Justification’. In Pihlström & Williams Baiasu (ed.), Politics and Metaphysics in Kant. Wales University Press.
Jay E. Kantor (1980). The “Interests” of Natural Objects. Environmental Ethics 2 (2):163-171.
Jeremy Shearmur (1990). From Dialogue Rights to Property Rights: Foundations for Hayek's Legal Theory. Critical Review 4 (1-2):106-132.
J. M. Elegido (1995). Intrinsic Limitations of Property Rights. Journal of Business Ethics 14 (5):411 - 416.
Tom Regan (1979). An Examination and Defense of One Argument Concerning Animal Rights. Inquiry 22 (1-4):189 – 219.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2012-03-25
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?