States, states of nature and the moral law: a comparison between Immanuel Kant’s and Thomas Hobbes’ political and legal theory

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31977/grirfi.v24i2.4794

Keywords:

State; Law; Right of Resistance; Kant, Hobbes.

Abstract

This article delves into the philosophical theses on law and ethics as presented by Thomas Hobbes and Immanuel Kant, with a focus on the notion of resistance in a legal context. It contrasts Hobbes’ advocacy for nearly unrestricted state authority and a morality closely tied to the state, against Kant’s emphasis on moral law and natural rights as the underpinnings of legality. A pivotal discussion point is Kant’s perceived contradiction in supporting a fundamental right to freedom while limiting the right to resist laws that infringe upon this freedom. By comparing these philosophical authors, the article posits that Kant’s theory of resistance requires integration with his broader ethical views, suggesting that human rights should constrain positive law.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Fernando Campos, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)

Doutorando(a) em Filosofia na Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre – RS, Brasil. Pesquisador(a) visitante da Ludwig Maximilian Universitat, Munique – Alemanha.

References

KANT, I. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (M. Gregor, Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. (Original work published 1785)

KANT, I. The Metaphysics of Morals (M. Gregor, Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. (Original work published 1797)

HÖFFE, Otfried. Kants Kritik der praktischen Vernunft: eine Philosophie der Freiheit. München: Verlag, C.H. Beck, 1996.

KANT, I. Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten. Riga: Johann Friedrich Hartknoch, 1785.

KANT, I. Die Metaphysik der Sitten. Königsberg: Friedrich Nicolovius, 1797.

HÖFFE, Otfried. Kants Kritik der praktischen Vernunft: eine Philosophie der Freiheit. München: Verlag C.H. Beck, 2012. Pp. 229.

CURLEZ, E. (Ed.). Leviathan: With Selected Variants From the Latin Edition of 1668. Hackett Publishing Company, 1994.

ROUSSEAU, J.-J. On the Social Contract. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1987. (Edited by Donald A. Cress) (Original work published 1762)

HOBBES, Thomas. Leviathan. Harmondsworth,: Penguin Books. Edited by C. B. Macpherson, 1651.

BENTHAM, J. An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation (J. H. Burns & H. L. A. Hart, Eds.). Dover Publications, 1780.

HART, H. L. A. The concept of law (2nd ed., P. A. Bulloch & J. Raz, Eds.). Oxford University Press, 1977.

COLLINS, J. The Early Modern Foundations of Classic Liberalism. In G. Klosko (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of Political Philosophy (pp. 258-268). Oxford University Pres, 2011.

VON DER PFORDTEN, D. Zum Recht auf Widerstand bei Kant. In Menschenwürde, Recht und Staat bei Kant. Brill | mentis, 2009.

Published

2024-06-30

How to Cite

CAMPOS, Fernando. States, states of nature and the moral law: a comparison between Immanuel Kant’s and Thomas Hobbes’ political and legal theory. Griot : Revista de Filosofia, [S. l.], v. 24, n. 2, p. 78–93, 2024. DOI: 10.31977/grirfi.v24i2.4794. Disponível em: https://www3.ufrb.edu.br/index.php/griot/article/view/4794. Acesso em: 22 dec. 2024.

Issue

Section

Articles