Cosmopolitanisms in Kant's philosophy

Cavallar, Georg

doi:10.3402/egp.v5i2.14924

Cited by 16 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cosmopolitanism is a concept with lineage, dating back to the ancient Greeks, and revived by enlightenment philosopher Immanuel Kant (Beck, 2002;Cavallar, 2012). It has been conceptualized and operationalized in many ways.…”

Section: A Measure Of Cosmopolitan Orientationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…States, like religions, have the ability to increase cooperativeness among ingroup members, but this may also increase competition or conflict with outgroups (Romano et al, 2017). To address this problem, Kant's original conception of cosmopolitanism included a political project to form a federation of states committed to world peace (Cavallar, 2012), like the United Nations. Other resonances of this idea are retained in modern times with the idea that democracies have a duty to band together to fight tyranny (most famously in World War II, see Liu & Sibley, 2009).…”

Section: Cosmopolitanism and Nationalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How Do Religiosity and National Identity Relate to Cosmopolitanism? An Empirical Study Using Representative Samples in Christian, Muslim, and Buddhist Societies

Zhang

Liu

Cai

et al. 2020

The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cosmopolitan Orientation's (COS) relationship with personal religiosity, organizational religiosity, and national identity was examined in nationally representative samples from 19 societies (13 mainly Christian, 2 Muslim, and 4 societies with historically Buddhist influences, N = 8740). Multi-group structural equation models found that personal religiosity was a positive and significant predictor of global prosociality (willingness to help others in a global community) overall (b = .18), and in 13 of 19 societies. This relationship was stronger in countries higher on the Human Development Index. National identity was overall a weak and positive predictor of global prosociality (b = .06) and respect for cultural diversity (b = .07), but results were culturally variable. There were negative relationships between national identity and COS indicators in Germany, the UK and USA (countries with active antiimmigration discourses popularized by populist right-wing politicians). Separate analyses for different religious groups found that among Christians, personal religiosity was positively associated with global prosociality, respect for cultural differences, and cultural openness (in that order). Among Buddhists, both personal and organizational religiosity were associated with global prosociality and cultural openness. For the smaller sample of Muslims, the only significant association was the positive link between personal religiosity and global prosociality. Findings support the idea that, contrary to much established literature, there are country-level moderators, but no overall negative relationship between cosmopolitanism and religiosity or national identity at the individual-level across cultures. Historically, the conceptual relationship between religiosity, state sovereignty, and cosmopolitanism has been troubled. Cosmopolitanism, which involves identifying oneself as "a citizen of the world" (Brock, 2013), is often thought of as being "above religion and the state" (Pogge, 1992). It seeks to form a mandate for respecting human rights and taking responsibility for the welfare of others in a global community that transcends religion and state. However, the universality of this mandate is being interrogated on three fronts. One, religion can produce justifications for intergroup conflict ("Holy War") that contest core ideas in cosmopolitanism (Atran & Ginges, 2012; Preston et al., 2010). Two, states, and nationalists within them, are jealous of their sovereignty, and have mobilized against cosmopolitan (or supra-state) institutions like the European Union (Conversi, 2014). Three, cosmopolitanism assumes different forms in different parts of the world, so a universal form is hard to define (Appiah, 2005) and measure (Roudometof, 2012). However, the world continues to rise and fall together economically (Ritzer, 2011, Coronavirus response in 2020 as the most recent example), so there is a need for something that functions

show abstract

Section: A Measure Of Cosmopolitan Orientationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Cosmopolitanism and Nationalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Do Religiosity and National Identity Relate to Cosmopolitanism? An Empirical Study Using Representative Samples in Christian, Muslim, and Buddhist Societies

Zhang

Liu

Cai

et al. 2020

The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…13 On the other hand, this misreading suggests the existence of a kind of natural transit between epistemological and moral cosmopolitanism in Kant's philosophy. 14 This systematic transit becomes impossible, as Cavallar himself once recognized, 15 if we introduce in the notion of epistemological cosmopolitanism the particular no-moral and antitheological character of the version in IaG. The absence of a moral principle leading his philosophy of history and the strong anti-theological and secularized character of the notion of cosmopolitanism in the article of 1784 16 makes impossible the compatibility of Kant's moral and religious cosmopolitanism with his cosmopolitanism based on his philosophy of history.…”

Section: On Kant's Cosmopolitanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One of the most important contributions of Cavallar to Kleingeld's research has been the identification of a Kantian epistemological cosmopolitanism. 6 Nevertheless, on the one hand in his article of 2012 Cavallar only mentions the existence of this form of cosmopolitanism and gives a brief description of it, leaving it aside from the scope of his paper 7 and, on the other, in his book, published in 2015, Kant's Embedded Cosmopolitanism he does not discuss the epistemological cosmopolitanism one can find in Kant's IaG. Instead, Cavallar's analysis of Kant's epistemological cosmopolitanism refers to other Kantian writings such as Anthropology, the first and third critiques, Kant's lectures on the philosophical doctrine of religion and the Metaphysics of Morals.…”

Section: On Kant's Cosmopolitanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Revisiting Kant and Fichte’s Conceptions of Cosmopolitanism

Acosta¹

2018

ref

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, I present some preliminary considerations on relevant, but, as far as I know, still unexplored, aspects of the Kantian and Fichtean conceptions of cosmopolitanism. These aspects can be grouped in three thematic axes: the ontologicopolitical (not legal) side of the cosmopolitan conceptions of both philosophers, the existence of a diversity of forms of cosmopolitanism in Fichte's philosophy, and the idea and role of nature, economy and history in Kant and Fichte's cosmopolitanism. 1 Recent Kant-studies have shown that contrary to the traditional approach exclusively focused on Kant's theory of international order (legal cosmopolitanism), Kant also offers an economic, religious, epistemological and moral account on cosmopolitanism. 2 Nevertheless, these new interpretations leave the Kantian ontologico-political version of cosmopolitanism aside. The reason of this systematic omission seems to be the little attention these studies have given to what I consider the conceptual core of Kant's article of 1784 Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Aim, namely Kant's postulate of an ontological continuity from nature to reason aiming at legitimating a political praxis of cultural, political and moral progress and emancipation. 3 Concerning Fichte's theory of cosmopolitanism, research has always been focused on the tensions between nationalism and/or patriotism and cosmopolitanism in Fichte's political and legal philosophy, leaving the question aside whether Fichte, like Kant, does not conceive of cosmopolitanism in very different perspectives. 4 The recent published Cambridge Companion to Fichte shows that Fichte's cosmopolitanism has been displaced in the last years from the set of main problems concerning the study of the work of this philosopher. 5 The paper is structured as follows. I will begin with an analysis of Kant's epistemological cosmopolitanism and show that Cavallar's reconstruction of this form of cosmopolitanism needs to be improved. This will lead me to the explanation of the ontologico-political side of the Kantian cosmopolitanism. I will mainly focus on the mentioned article Idea for a universal history with a cosmopolitan aim (from now on IaG). I Revisiting Kant and Fichte's Conceptions of Cosmopolitanism Revista de Estud(i)os sobre Fichte, 16 | 2018 ABSTRACTS In this paper, I present some preliminary considerations on relevant, but, as far as I know, still unexplored, aspects of the Kantian and Fichtean conceptions of cosmopolitanism. These aspects can be grouped in three thematic axes: the ontologico-political (not legal) side of the cosmopolitan conceptions of both philosophers, the existence of a diversity of forms of cosmopolitanism in Fichte's philosophy, and the idea and role of nature, economy and history in Kant and Fichte's cosmopolitanism.

show abstract

“…There is plenty of disagreement regarding the details of Kant's moral philosophy, which I do not discuss here, but there is hardly any controversy about the question whether Kant defends moral cosmopolitanism. It is often regarded as obvious that he does (e.g., Cavallar , 98–99). After all, he regards all humans (and even more broadly, all rational beings) as members of a single moral community, a community he discusses in terms derived from the political domain.…”

Section: Moral Cosmopolitanismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Kant's Moral and Political Cosmopolitanism

Kleingeld

2016

Philosophy Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this essay, I first outline the contexts in which the idea of cosmopolitanism appears in Kant's moral and political philosophy. I then survey the three main debates regarding his political cosmopolitanism, namely, on the nature of the international federation he advocated, his theory of cosmopolitan right, and his views on colonialism and ‘race’, and I consider the relation between patriotism and cosmopolitanism in Kant's work. I subsequently discuss Kant's moral cosmopolitanism. Kant is widely held to be a defender of moral cosmopolitanism, but the terminology of world citizenship is in fact strikingly rare in Kant's writings on moral theory. I offer a two‐part explanation for why this is the case.

show abstract

Cosmopolitanisms in Kant's philosophy

Cited by 16 publications

References 18 publications

How Do Religiosity and National Identity Relate to Cosmopolitanism? An Empirical Study Using Representative Samples in Christian, Muslim, and Buddhist Societies

How Do Religiosity and National Identity Relate to Cosmopolitanism? An Empirical Study Using Representative Samples in Christian, Muslim, and Buddhist Societies

Revisiting Kant and Fichte’s Conceptions of Cosmopolitanism

Kant's Moral and Political Cosmopolitanism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About