How are changes in the social order of recognition to be evaluated normatively? We argue that the conventional means of liberal philosophical theories of justice are insufficient to answer this question. This is for three reasons: First, relations of recognition are neither basic rights nor distributable goods, but rather constitutive for the meaning of those rights and goods which constitute the object domain of distributive theories of justice. Second, relations of recognition provide the framework for many questions of justice, outside (...) of which they make no sense. Third, the focus of contemporary theories of justice on basic rights risks supporting colonialization tendencies of purely legal forms of recognition. As an alternative, we discuss hermeneutic theories of justice and a conception of social freedom as inclusion and individualization. (shrink)
Anerkannt zu werden, ist nicht nur ein menschliches Grundbedurfnis, sondern vermittelt ebenfalls das Gefuhl, in einen sozialen Kontext integriert zu sein.
(Title: ‘Judgment, Mutual Recognition and Rational Justification’.) This paper extends my prior analysis of Hegel’s solution to the Pyrrhonian Dilemma of the Criterion (which is more serious than Chisholm’s ‘Problem of the Criterion’) to moral philosophy. So doing provides a uniform account of rational justification in non-formal, substantive domains, i.e. empirical knowledge and morals. It argues that the Pyrrhonian Dilemma refutes both foundationalist and coherentist models of justification, and raises serious issues about the justificatory adequacy of contemporary forms of moral (...) constructivism. It explicates and defends Kant’s account of the autonomy of reason as the self-critical regulation of one’s own thought and judgment in view of relevant principles, standards, evidence and alternative analyses. It argues that Kant’s account of autonomy is defensible independently of transcendental idealism and of natural causality. Due to our fallibility and incomplete knowledge and understanding, our individual critical self-assessment requires the constructive mutual criticism of others. Hence maximally rational justification in non-formal, substantive domains is in part, ineliminably, a social and historical phenomenon. These aspects of rational justification are consistent with, and ultimately support, realism about the objects of empirical knowledge and strict objectivity about basic moral principles. One’s own maximally rational justification of non-formal, substantive claims or views accordingly requires recognition of one’s justificatory dependence upon the constructive criticism of others. This requires recognizing their capacities for critical assessment and rational justification. This is the most fundamental (and heretofore neglected) form of mutual recognition in Hegel’s analysis. It provides direct and powerful justification for Kant’s thesis that we ought and must respect all others as autonomous rational agents, as agents who can think and act on the basis of justifying reasons. This justification is independent of Kant’s account of ‘dignity’ or the incommensurable value of rational agency. (shrink)
In this paper I analyze interpersonal and institutional recognition and discuss the relation of different types of recognition to various principles of social justice (egalitarianism, meritarianism, legitimate favouritism, principles of need and free exchange). Further, I try to characterize contours of good autonomous life, and ask what kind of preconditions it has. I will distinguish between five kinds of preconditions: psychological, material, cultural, intersubjective and institutional. After examining what the role of recognition is among such preconditions, and how they figure (...) in the work of Axel Honneth, Nancy Fraser and Charles Taylor, I suggest a somewhat complex and hopefully rich picture of interpersonal and institutional recognition as a precondition of autonomous good life. (shrink)
Prior to Kojève's well-known account in his Introduction to the Reading of Hegel there seems to have been relatively little interest in Hegel's concept of recognition— Anerkennung.1 After Kojève, however, a popular view of Hegel's philosophy emerged within which the idea of recognition plays a central role: what distinguishes us as selfconscious beings from the rest of nature is that we are driven by a peculiar type of desire, the desire for recognition leading to struggle's over recognition. While Kojève (...) directed attention to the importance of Hegel's use of notion of recognition in the famous dialectic of "lord and bondsman" in chapter 4 of the Phenomenology of Spirit,2 his reading, inspired equally by Marx and Heidegger, was nevertheless difficult to reconcile not only with the more systematic features of Hegel's philosophy, but also with what Hegel had to say on the topic of recognition within chapter 4, but especially, elsewhere in the Phenomenology. (shrink)
Hegel’s treatment of ‘Moralität’ in both the Phenomenology of Spirit and the Philosophy of Right provides important clues as to how he conceives the recognitive dynamics of modern moral life. As ‘spirit that is certain of itself’, morality as comprehended in the Phenomenology is the final form of spirit [Geist], which, in Hegel’s exposition, follows ‘reason’ which itself had followed ‘consciousness’ and ‘self-consciousness’. Spirit had first been considered in its objective form as an ‘in itself’. This was the ‘true spirit’ (...) of the ethical world of antiquity. As something ‘for itself’, spirit had then been considered in its self-alienated form as ‘culture’ which had culminated in an analysis of modern politics—specifically the political project of ‘absolute freedom’, the French Revolution, and the terroristic consequences that had been so acutely linked to the modern rationalist political project by Schiller. But, as many have pointed out, if Rousseau was the theorist of the modern political struggle for autonomy, Kant had an equally revolutionary conception of moral autonomy, which, like Rousseau, put the idea of a self-legislating will at the centre of thought. Such an internalization of the self-legislating will, however, now reveals the proper object for judgment in terms of the evaluative polarity of good and bad—the will itself. This evaluation becomes the task of conscience. In this paper I examine Hegel’s treatment of the role of conscience in moral judgment in the light of his relationship to Fichte, and interpret it in terms of a broadly conceived pragmatics of reason-giving in moral life implicit in his concept of intersubjective recognition [Anerkennung]. (shrink)
In this article I intend to show the strict relation between the notions of “second nature” and “recognition”. To do so I begin with a problem (circularity) proper to the theory of Hegelian and post- Hegelian Anerkennung. The solution strategy I propose is signifi cant also in terms of bringing into focus the problems connected with a notion of “space of reasons” that stems from the Hegelian concept of “Spirit”. I thus broach the notion of “second nature” as a (...) bridgeconcept that can play a key role both for a renewal of the theory of Anerkennung and for a rethinking of the “space of reasons” within the debate between Robert Brandom and John McDowell. Against this background I illustrate the novelties introduced by the dialectical conception of the relation between fi rst and second nature developed by Hegel and the contribution this idea can make to a revisited theory of recognition as a phenomenon articulated on two levels. I then return to the question of the space of reasons to show the contribution the renewed conception of recognition as second nature makes to the definition of its intrinsic sociality as something that is not in principle opposed to a sense of naturalness. (shrink)
Die meisten liberalen Versionen des Staates beruhen auf einer philosophisch an- spruchsvollen Theorie über die Natur menschlicher Individualität und deren norma- tiv relevanten Implikationen. Es wird oft angenommen, daß kontrastierende Theorien über die Unhintergehbarkeit intersubjektiver Beziehungen sowie über den abgeleite- ten oder sekundären Status der Individualität potentiell, wenn nicht sogar tatsächlich illiberal sind, und Hegels mutmaßliche „organische“ Theorie des Staates wird dabei oft als Beispiel angeführt. Ein Hauptschauplatz dieser Debatten ist die These solcher Neo-Hegelianer wie Charles Taylor und Axel Honneth, (...) daß auch nur die Möglichkeit des liberalen Schlüsselbegriffs eines freien und rationalen Individuums auf einer sozialen Voraussetzung von großer politischer Relevanz beruht – der gegenseitigen Anerkennung. Ich werde mich den Quellen dieser Auseinandersetzung zuwenden (die zuweilen auch postmoderne „Identitätspolitik“ genannt wird) und damit Hegel’s ursprünglichem Argument. Dabei werde ich untersuchen, worin genau Hegel zufolge die Natur der menschlichen Abhängigkeit besteht, um die es in dieser Auseinander- setzung geht, und was genau als Erfüllung einer solchen Abhängigkeitsbedingung gelten kann. Was Hegels Antwort auf die erste Frage ist, wird, so meine These, sich als leichter eruierbar erweisen als die Antwort auf die zweite Frage. (shrink)
In this paper I present an interpretation of J. G. Fichte's transcendental argument for the necessity of mutual recognition (Anerkennung) in Foundations of Natural Right. Fichte's argument purports to show that, as a condition of the possibility of self-consciousness, we must take ourselves to stand in relations of mutual recognition with other agents like ourselves. After reconstructing the steps of Fichte's argument, I present what I call the ‘modal dilemma’, which highlights a serious ambiguity in Fichte's deduction. According to (...) the modal dilemma, the conclusion to Fichte's transcendental argument—that as a condition of the possibility of our self-consciousness, we must recognize and be recognized by others—expresses either metaphysical or normative necessity. However, no normative conclusion follows from Fichte's premises, and the metaphysical claim that does follow from his argument appears to be implausibly strong. Thus the argument looks like a failure on either interpretation of the conclusion's modality. In the penultimate section of the paper, I propose a new interpretation of the argument that avoids the modal dilemma and provides a normative grounding of Fichte's concept of right. (shrink)
Zusammenfassung Wie Max Weber verlangt auch Marx die Wertfreiheit der Wissenschaften, hält es aber im Gegensatz zu Weber dennoch für möglich, politische Entscheidungen durch wissenschaftliche Aussagen zu begründen. Der Grund liegt in Marx' Anerkennung eines allgemein verbindlichen politischen Ziels, der Interessenharmonie, das Weber aus empirischen Gründen für ohne EinbuÃe an Kultur unrealisierbar hält. Dieser Grund für die unterschiedliche Auffassung der Wertfreiheit der Wissenschaften wird als der entscheidende Grund für den methodologischen Gegensatz zwischen Kritischer Theorie und Kritischem Rationalismus hervorgehoben.
This book focuses on the connections between two contemporary, intensively debated fields of inquiry: Hegel-inspired theories of recognition (Anerkennung)i and analytical social ontologyii. The aim of the collection is to make philosophical progress by bringing together the substantially overlapping but in practice so far mostly isolated debates in these fields. If recognition has social ontological significance, as it seems to have, how does taking this seriously fit with the analyses put forward in contemporary social ontology (or, as it is (...) sometimes called by some of the main proponents, “philosophical social theory”, or “philosophy of society”, or “philosophy of sociality”)? Are there ways in which theories of recognition and the current understandings in analytical social ontology could enrich one another? How do leading theorists in these fields, as well as younger scholars familiar with both fields, see the connections? (shrink)
Zusammenfassung Während âLogik der Forschung als Wissenschaftstheorie sich längst etabliert hat, steht eine ebenso notwendige âEthik der Forschung als Wissenschaftsmoral noch aus. Dazu liefert die kritische Auseinandersetzung mit Francis Bacon wichtige Bausteine: Allgemeines Menschheitswohl als letztes Ziel aller Forschung; Betonung des unabhängigen Selbstdenkens; Forschertugenden wie Wahrhaftigkeit, Hoffnung, Demut, Menschenliebe; Anerkennung von sittlichen Grenzen des Wissens. Hingegen ist zugunsten einer engagierten Eigenverantwortlichkeit der Wissenschaftler vor Bacons Unterwürfigkeit gegenüber der Staatsgewalt zu warnen.
This unique collection examines the connections between two complementary approaches to philosophical social theory: Hegel-inspired theories of recognition (Anerkennung), and analytical social ontology.
Im Februar 1930 beschloß das Parlament der tschechoslowakischen Republik, Präsident Th. G. Masaryk aus Anerkennung seiner Verdienste um die Republiksgründung eine Summe von 20 Millionen Kronen zu widmen. Aus Dankbarkeit seinem philosophischen Lehrer Franz Brentano gegenüber ermöglichte Masaryk mit einem Teil dieser Summe im darauffolgenden Jahr die Gründung einer Brentano-Gesellschaft und eines Brentano-Archives in Prag unter der Leitung von Oskar Kraus. Der vorliegende Beitrag versucht die Vorgeschichte und die Geschichte der Gesellschaft bis zu ihrer endgültigen Auflösung im Jahre 1955 (...) und damit ein Stück vergessener Wissenschaftsgeschichte zu rekonstruieren. Besonderes Augenmerk wird dabei auf die Rolle gelegt, die die Brentano-Gesellschaft im Bemühen um den wissenschaftlichen Nachlaß Brentanos spielte. (shrink)
Der erste Teil des Aufsatzes untersucht den Inhalt der These. Im Zentrum steht dabei die Frage, was Frege unter ,,Wahrheit" versteht. Das Ergebnis der Untersuchung ist, daß Freges Undefinierbarkeitsthese (entgegen der üblichen Auffassung) sich nicht auf den „Inhalt des Wortes ,wahr'" (bzw. auf das Wahrheitsprädikat) bezieht, sondern auf „die Wahrheit, deren Anerkennung in der Form des Behauptungssatzes liegt" (bzw. auf den Urteilsstrich. Das Kernstück des zweiten Teils der Arbeit ist eine Rekonstruktion der Argumente Freges für die These in drei (...) Versionen. Für die Rekonstruktion wird nicht (wie sonst üblich) Freges Redundanztheorie der Wahrheit herangezogen, sondern seine Urteilstheorie. Im dritten Teil schließlich wird die Frage behandelt, ob Freges These durch Tarskis Wahrheitsdefinitionen widerlegt ist. (shrink)
Das "Ideal des hobbes", der Kampf und die Anerkennung : Kants und Hegels Auseinandersetzung mit Thomas Hobbes -- Carl Schmitt und Thomas Hobbes -- "... das einzig taugliche Princip ein beharrliches Ganzes unter wiedersinnischen Köpfen möglich zu machen ..." : Kants Gemeinschaftsphilosophie vom commercium der Substanzen bis zum ethischen Staat -- Immanuel Kants Geschlechtertheorie : Vom ästhetischen Gegenverhältnis der Geschlechter zum rechtlichen Besitzverhältnis in der Ehe -- Sittliche Erkenntnis, die "moralische Möglichkeit des Erlaubten" und die Moralwahl : Themen der (...) frühen praktischen Philosophie Reinholds -- Die Wirklichkeit des Sittlichen : Hegels Kritik der Moralphilosophie -- Kelsen und Aristoteles -- Zur philosophischen Begründung der Strafe : Historische Skizzen und systematische Probleme -- Macht und Moral : Über das ethische Dilemma der Politik -- Nietzsche, Foucault und die Lebenskunst. (shrink)
An attempt at moral interpretation of Hegelian ‘struggle for recognition’. The Author shows how the Hegelian figures of ‘Lord’ and ‘Bondsman’ (from The Phenomenology of Spirit) can be used to explain social role and importance of the idea of tolerance in the context of (intolerant) group moralities and the universal morality. The text is built of three parts: (1) the author sketches the connection of the traditional idea of tolerance and sociological understanding of morality on the basis of Hegel’s understanding (...) of recognition (Anerkennung). In the second step (2), he gives an outline of Hegelian two accounts of mutual recognition, finally (3) the author shows the moral dimension of recognition, as referred to the idea of tolerance and universalistic morality. (shrink)
