Bestätigung der Metadaten/Metadata Approval Sheet
Sehr geehrte Autoren,
Bitte prüfen Sie diese Angaben sorgfältig. Sie sind für alle nachfolgenden Publikationswege (Print, Online,
Abstracting und Indexing, De Gruyter Open, Suchmaschinen etc.) relevant. Änderungen sind später nicht
mehr möglich. Bitte führen Sie eventuelle Korrekturen in den beschreibbaren Feldern in der rechten Spalte
aus. Bitte bestätigen Sie die Korrektheit der Daten, indem Sie das Feld unten anklicken.
Vielen Dank für Ihre Mitarbeit, De Gruyter
Dear author,
Please check these data carefully. They are relevant for all following publication processes in
Abstract-ing and IndexAbstract-ing Services, De Gruyter Open, search engines. They can not be changed after publication.
Please fill in your corrections within the editable fields in the right column. Please confirm the correct
data by clicking the field below.
Thanks for your kind cooperation, De Gruyter
Journal-Name: Case Reports in Perinatal Medicine
Article-DOI: 10.1515/crpm-2015-0095
Article-Title: Acute myocardial infarction in a
premature infant on the first day of life
Subtitle: none
Article-Type:
Author 1:
Surname: Ciarmoli
First Name: Elena
Corresponding: yes
E-Mail: elena.ciarmoli@gmail.com
Affiliation: Neonatal Intensive Care Unit,
MBBM Foundation, San Gerardo Hospital,
Via Pergolesi 33, 20900 Monza, Monza, Italy,
Tel.: +39 039/2339174, Fax: +39 039/2339178
Author 2:
Surname: Doni
First Name: Daniela
Corresponding: no
E-Mail: no
Affiliation: Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, MBBM
Foundation, San Gerardo Hospital, Monza, Italy
Bestätigung der Autoren-Metadaten/
Author Metadata Approval Sheet
Sehr geehrte Autoren,
Bitte prüfen Sie die unten aufgeführten Autoren-Metadaten sorgfältig und ergänzen bzw. korrigieren Sie
diese ggf. in der beschreibbaren rechten Spalte.
Vielen Dank für Ihre Mitarbeit, De Gruyter
Dear author,
Please check and complete carefully the author metadata listed below by using the editable fields in the
right column.
Thanks for your kind cooperation, De Gruyter
Journal-Name: Kant Studien
Article-DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/kant-2017-0036
Article-Title: Kant’s Embedded Cosmopolitanism: History, Philosophy, and Education for World Citizens
Bitte vervoll- ständigen/ Please complete
Author Meta
Data Bitte ändern/To be changed
Author 1 Surname Pozzo First Name Riccardo Corresponding yes
E-Mail riccardo.pozzo@cnr.it
Affiliation 1 Cattedra di Storia della Filosofia, Università degli Studi di Verona Institution 1 Università degli Studi di Verona Department 1
City 1 I-37129 Verona, via San Francesco 22 Country 1 Italy
KANT-STUDIEN 2017; 108(3): 1–3
Georg Cavallar: Kant’s Embedded Cosmopolitanism: History, Philosophy, and
Education for World Citizens, Berlin/Boston 2015, 215 pp., ISBN 9783110438499.
Besprochen von Prof. Dr. Riccardo Pozzo, Cattedra di Storia della Filosofia, Dipartimento di Scienze Umane, Università degli Studi di Verona, via San Francesco 22, I-37129 Verona; riccardo.pozzo@cnr.it
https://doi.org/10.1515/kant-2017-0036
This book aims to show that “Kant’s theory of cosmopolitanism is the outcome of his systematically developed practical philosophy, not a mere repetition or copy of widely held Enlightenment beliefs” (1). Cavallar intends to go beyond both John Dewey’s attempt, in his German Philosophy and Politics (Holt, 1915), “to situate Kant as a child of his time” (1) and the comprehensive interpretation delivered by Pauline Kleingeld in Kant and Cosmopolitanism (Cambridge, 2012), which, while “very strong in contrasting Kant’s views with those of his contempo-raries” but “has little to say about the moral and educational dimension of Kant’s cosmopolitan theory” (3). Whereas Cavallar’s view bears greater similarities to Felicitas Munzel’s thesis in Kant’s Conception of Pedagogy (Northwestern, 2012), where she argues that critical philosophy is in fact a “pedagogical project, essen-tially a paideia” (3), Cavallar considers the paideia from a different angle, arguing that “external freedom helps humans to cultivate their dispositions and thus also their moral potentials as free moral agents” (4).
Although seldom used in philosophical discourse, the term embedded that appears in the title is meant to point out that “Kant’s cosmopolitanism should be understood as rooted in one’s particular community and thus embedded” (2). Cavallar talks of Kant’s trying “to develop a synthesis of republican patriotism and republican as well as thin moral cosmopolitanism… in the dynamic tensions between embedded local attachments and cosmopolitan obligations” (2), where thin refers to the notion of thick and thin identities discussed by cultural anthro-pologists. Kees Terlouw’s paper on “Rescaling Regional Identities: Communicat-ing Thick and Thin Regional identities” (Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism 9 [2009], 452–464) provides a contemporary example of this notion of embedded-ing and delves into the contrast between thick traditional, historically rooted, well-established regional identities and thin regional identities, which are more transitory and focus more on economic competitiveness.
Cavallar agrees with Robert Louden’s claim in Kant’s Impure Ethics (Oxford, 2000) that Kant endorsed a form of “western Eurocentric gradualism” and takes it up again it by remarking that according to Kant “we are not equal in terms of our cultivated prudence, of cultural development, skin color, talents, perhaps not even in terms of moral capacities. However, we are equal in terms of our human-ity or dignhuman-ity and our moral vocation” (12).
KANT-STUDIEN 2017; 108(3): 2–3
The methodology used is that of intellectual history, which aims to recon-struct an individual’s belief as a reasonably consistent web, while investigating all hints of weak intentionalism and procedural individualism. Cavallar sub-scribes to Mark Bevir’s “Post-Analytic Historicism” (Journal of the History of Ideas 7 [1999], 657–665), which is all in favor of critical genealogies “to check whether moral claims just reflect particular traditions, interests or metaphysics rather than universal truths” (19).
One could take this as an opportunity, of course, to accentuate the sociolog-ical aspect as against the purely theoretsociolog-ical aspects of many of Kant’s writings, and a skeptical reader might question whether such an approach helps to explain exegetical and philosophical issues. Keeping the skeptics in mind, however, and considering current discussions on the methodology of the history of philosophy, one might say that the main contribution of this book comes from the point of view of cultural development. Just as the Kant-Forschung benefits from correlat-ing certain Kantian passages, say from the Logikvorlesungen, with antecedents passage by other philosophers, so scholarship benefits from linking Kant’s theory of cosmopolitan education with the academic and administrative documents pro-duced by his alma mater. When it comes to university teachers, Kant clearly did not detect any incompatibility between their exercising the public use of reason and conforming to the state that supported them, and they conform to that state in their private use of reason. By the public use of reason, he understood the the-oretical use that a person makes of reason ‘as a scholar before the reading public’, which, he added, ‘must always be free, and it alone can bring about enlighten-ment among men’. By the private use of reason, in contrast, he understood the use of reason in the specific context of ‘a particular civil post or office which is entrusted to him’. This latter use, he specified, ‘may often be very narrowly delim-ited’ (Kant, Was ist Aufklärung?, AA 08: 37 [trans. Kant, On History, 5]).
Historians find it auspicious when institutional traditions force philosophers to search for a clear approach to an issue. An example is provided by Kant’s jus-tification, in the preface to the Streit, of his position on academic freedom within the philosophy faculty. His apologia pro libertate philosophandi demonstrates that the traditional view of philosophy as a propaedeutic discipline was chang-ing. The time was still to come when statesmen like Humboldt and philosophers like Hegel were to be vested by the government with the power to legislate on matters pertaining to education for the nation’s benefit. Kant, by contrast, was never called upon by the government to educate the nation. He was instead a petitioner, who asked that the government stipulate the conditions for the imple-mentation of an effective and truthful national education. He suggested that the mechanism of this project be designed ‘in agreement with a well-weighted plan of the sovereign power, put into play according to the purpose of this plan,
KANT-STUDIEN 2017; 108(3): 3–3
and steadily maintained therein’ (SF, AA 07: 93 [308]). To that end, Kant added that ‘it might well behoove the state likewise to reform itself from time to time and, attempting evolution instead of revolution, progress perpetually toward the better’ (ibid.). This suggestion, however, was not to be carried out during his life-time, as Kant died two years before the beginning of the Prussian state reforms (1806) and six years before Humboldt founded the university of Berlin (1810).
