Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Kant maintains that while claims to property are morally possible in a state of nature, such claims are merely “provisional”; they become “conclusive” only in a civil condition involving political institutions. Kant’s commentators find this thesis puzzling, since it seems to assert a natural right to property alongside a commitment to property’s conventionality. We resolve this apparent contradiction. Provisional right is not a special kind of right. Instead, it marks the imperfection of an action (that of acquiring ordinary rights) where public authorization is lacking. Provisional right thereby functions as a methodological device in a sequential elucidation of the moral basis of public law. To develop this reading, we first explain Kant’s two-step account of property rights—his division between ‘having’ and ‘acquiring’. Then we explain what is involved in a sequential exposition of right more generally.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Martin J. Stone
New York Law School
Rafeeq Hasan
Amherst College
The Philosophical Review
Amherst College
Ave Maria School of Law
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Stone et al. (Sat,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/6a20030fd4e6d3589704cc2c — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1215/00318108-9415141