Autor: Luigi CARANTI

Resumo:

The relation between Rousseau's and Kant's political philosophies has attracted the attention of different generations of scholars. This is hardly surprising not only because of the stature of the two philosophers, but also because they offer two similarand perhaps complementary versions of republicanism. Despite the abundance of studies, however, the impression is that the real similarities and the real differences between the two philosophers have not been fully grasped. On points that Rousseau and Kant are traditionally cited for their philosophical distance, this paper argues a much closer proximity. In addition, areas considered overlapping are highlighted as points of genuine disagreement. Three theses of the first kind (apparent dissimilarities) and three theses of the second kind (apparent similarities) are offered as examples. The paper thus naturally falls in two parts and six sections. In the first part, we discuss the following apparent dissimilarities: a) Rousseau's idea that sovereignty cannot be divided Vs Kant's idea that the republican state must be founded on the division of powers, b) Rousseau's dismissal of representative government in favour of direct democracy Vs Kant's harsh criticism of democracy, c) Rousseau's allegedly illiberal idea of "forcing individuals to be free" Vs Kant's liberal commitment to the protection of individuals' pre-political rights. In the second part, we analyze the following apparent similarities: a) Rousseau's and Kant's allegedly identical notions of moral freedom/autonomy, b) their accounts of the reasons why individuals "ought to" leave the state of nature, often considered as nearly indistinguishable, c) the notion of general will seemingly borrowed by Kant from Rousseau without significant modifications. The overall analysis should serve to draw two different, yet complementary faces of republicanism. The composition of the two faces construes a position in political philosophy halfway between standard republicanism and standard liberalism that may have some value on its own terms.

Texto Completo: http://www2.marilia.unesp.br/revistas/index.php/ek/article/view/3331