Kant and Dependency Relations: Kant on the State’s Right to Redistribute Resources to Protect the Rights of Dependents

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Contrary to much Kant interpretation, this article argues that Kant's moral philosophy, including his account of charity, is irrelevant to justifying the state's right to redistribute material resources to secure the rights of dependents (the poor, children, and the impaired). The article also rejects the popular view that Kant either does not or cannot justify anything remotely similar to the liberal welfare state. A closer look at Kant's account of dependency relations in "The Doctrine of Right" reveals an argumentative structure sufficient for a public institutional protection of dependents and evidence that Kant identifies concerns of economic justice as lying at the heart of the state's legitimacy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)257-284
Number of pages28
JournalDialogue-Canadian Philosophical Review
Volume45
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2006
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Immanuel Kant
Resources
Dependency Relations
Charity
Welfare State
Doctrine
Legitimacy
Moral philosophy
Economic Justice

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Philosophy

Cite this

@article{05e6649783a8423288e4981eb1f0a083,
title = "Kant and Dependency Relations: Kant on the State’s Right to Redistribute Resources to Protect the Rights of Dependents",
abstract = "Contrary to much Kant interpretation, this article argues that Kant's moral philosophy, including his account of charity, is irrelevant to justifying the state's right to redistribute material resources to secure the rights of dependents (the poor, children, and the impaired). The article also rejects the popular view that Kant either does not or cannot justify anything remotely similar to the liberal welfare state. A closer look at Kant's account of dependency relations in {"}The Doctrine of Right{"} reveals an argumentative structure sufficient for a public institutional protection of dependents and evidence that Kant identifies concerns of economic justice as lying at the heart of the state's legitimacy.",
author = "Helga Varden",
year = "2006",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1017/S0012217300000561",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "45",
pages = "257--284",
journal = "Dialogue-Canadian Philosophical Review",
issn = "0012-2173",
publisher = "Wilfrid Laurier University Press",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Kant and Dependency Relations

T2 - Kant on the State’s Right to Redistribute Resources to Protect the Rights of Dependents

AU - Varden, Helga

PY - 2006/12/1

Y1 - 2006/12/1

N2 - Contrary to much Kant interpretation, this article argues that Kant's moral philosophy, including his account of charity, is irrelevant to justifying the state's right to redistribute material resources to secure the rights of dependents (the poor, children, and the impaired). The article also rejects the popular view that Kant either does not or cannot justify anything remotely similar to the liberal welfare state. A closer look at Kant's account of dependency relations in "The Doctrine of Right" reveals an argumentative structure sufficient for a public institutional protection of dependents and evidence that Kant identifies concerns of economic justice as lying at the heart of the state's legitimacy.

AB - Contrary to much Kant interpretation, this article argues that Kant's moral philosophy, including his account of charity, is irrelevant to justifying the state's right to redistribute material resources to secure the rights of dependents (the poor, children, and the impaired). The article also rejects the popular view that Kant either does not or cannot justify anything remotely similar to the liberal welfare state. A closer look at Kant's account of dependency relations in "The Doctrine of Right" reveals an argumentative structure sufficient for a public institutional protection of dependents and evidence that Kant identifies concerns of economic justice as lying at the heart of the state's legitimacy.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=60950173397&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=60950173397&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/S0012217300000561

DO - 10.1017/S0012217300000561

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:60950173397

VL - 45

SP - 257

EP - 284

JO - Dialogue-Canadian Philosophical Review

JF - Dialogue-Canadian Philosophical Review

SN - 0012-2173

IS - 2

ER -