Biblioteca Digital de VanguardiaKant in The Danish Philosophical and Juridical Debate of the early 19th-Century.
The so-called “Howitz-dispute”, which arose in Copenhagen in the second half of the 1820s, represents the first genuine Danish philosophical debate occurred in Scandinavia in the XIX century. Its name is due to the Danish forensic doctor Frantz Gotthard Howitz (1789-1826), who in 1824 wrote the phil...
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
| Lenguaje: | Portugués |
| Publicado: |
Faculdade de Filosofia e Ciências
2020
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://revistas.marilia.unesp.br/index.php/ek/article/view/9668 http://biblioteca-repositorio.clacso.edu.ar/handle/CLACSO/72746 |
| _version_ | 1782335174822854656 |
|---|---|
| author | Basso, Ingrid |
| author_facet | Basso, Ingrid |
| author_sort | Basso, Ingrid |
| collection | Repositorio |
| description | The so-called “Howitz-dispute”, which arose in Copenhagen in the second half of the 1820s, represents the first genuine Danish philosophical debate occurred in Scandinavia in the XIX century. Its name is due to the Danish forensic doctor Frantz Gotthard Howitz (1789-1826), who in 1824 wrote the philosophical-juridical treatise On Madness and Ascribing Responsibility: A Contribution on Psychology and Jurisprudence. The treatise was published as an article in the Journal for Jurisprudence directed by the jurist and future Danish Prime Minister, Anders Sandøe Ørsted (1778-1860), who in 1798 had written a treatise on Kant’s theory of freedom, a book that is nowadays considered the most mature fruit of the Kantianism in Denmark. As a member of the Danish College of Health, Howitz had to evaluate the degree of responsibility of criminals. He accused the Danish law of the time of being based on Kant’s view of morality, so he criticized Kant’s conception of freedom as the ability to determine one’s own actions based on a correct rational understanding of the situation. According to Howitz the human being isn’t free, since every human action is necessarily determined by a motive that weighs more than another motive, and the so-called rationality is nothing but a capacitas motivorum; freedom as capacitas motivorum, Howitz says, should be the freedom juridically considered, a freedom that has nothing to do with morality. He argued against Kant’s view that the moral development essentially depends on the material organization of the brain. When Howitz’s treatise appeared, it immediately evoked the critical reactions of prominent figures such as Anders Sandøe Ørsted himself, the theologian and later bishop Jacob Peter Mynster, the aesthetician Johan Ludvig Heiberg and the professor of philosophy Frederik Christian Sibbern, later mentor of Søren Kierkegaard. The article aims to explore the philosophical basis of the controversy and especially the role of Kant’s moral philosophy in it.
Recebido / Received: 4.9.2019.Aprovado / Approved: 28.10.2019. |
| format | info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
| id | clacso-CLACSO72746 |
| institution | CLACSO, Repositorio Digital |
| language | Portugués |
| publishDate | 2020 |
| publisher | Faculdade de Filosofia e Ciências |
| record_format | greenstone |
| spelling | clacso-CLACSO727462022-03-21T17:55:47Z Kant in The Danish Philosophical and Juridical Debate of the early 19th-Century. Kant nel dibattito filosofico e giuridico danese del primo Ottocento. Basso, Ingrid Ascribing Responsibility Empiricism Freedom Madness Morality Utilitarianism Will Arbitrio Empirismo Follia Imputabilità Libertà Moralità Responsabilità Utilitarismo Volontà The so-called “Howitz-dispute”, which arose in Copenhagen in the second half of the 1820s, represents the first genuine Danish philosophical debate occurred in Scandinavia in the XIX century. Its name is due to the Danish forensic doctor Frantz Gotthard Howitz (1789-1826), who in 1824 wrote the philosophical-juridical treatise On Madness and Ascribing Responsibility: A Contribution on Psychology and Jurisprudence. The treatise was published as an article in the Journal for Jurisprudence directed by the jurist and future Danish Prime Minister, Anders Sandøe Ørsted (1778-1860), who in 1798 had written a treatise on Kant’s theory of freedom, a book that is nowadays considered the most mature fruit of the Kantianism in Denmark. As a member of the Danish College of Health, Howitz had to evaluate the degree of responsibility of criminals. He accused the Danish law of the time of being based on Kant’s view of morality, so he criticized Kant’s conception of freedom as the ability to determine one’s own actions based on a correct rational understanding of the situation. According to Howitz the human being isn’t free, since every human action is necessarily determined by a motive that weighs more than another motive, and the so-called rationality is nothing but a capacitas motivorum; freedom as capacitas motivorum, Howitz says, should be the freedom juridically considered, a freedom that has nothing to do with morality. He argued against Kant’s view that the moral development essentially depends on the material organization of the brain. When Howitz’s treatise appeared, it immediately evoked the critical reactions of prominent figures such as Anders Sandøe Ørsted himself, the theologian and later bishop Jacob Peter Mynster, the aesthetician Johan Ludvig Heiberg and the professor of philosophy Frederik Christian Sibbern, later mentor of Søren Kierkegaard. The article aims to explore the philosophical basis of the controversy and especially the role of Kant’s moral philosophy in it. Recebido / Received: 4.9.2019.Aprovado / Approved: 28.10.2019. La cosiddetta disputa-Howitz che si accese a Copenaghen nella seconda metà degli anni Venti dell’Ottocento rappresentò il primo dibattito filosofico autenticamente danese occorso in Scandinavia nel XIX secolo. Il nome si deve al medico legale Frantz Gotthard Howitz (1789-1826) che nel 1824 pubblicò il trattato filosofico-giuridico Su follia e imputabilità. Un contributo alla Psicologia e al diritto, che fu pubblicato in forma di articolo nella Rivista giuridica diretta dal giurista e futuro primo ministro danese Anders Sandøe Ørsted (1778-1860), che nel 1798 aveva pubblicato un trattato sulla dottrina kantiana della libertà, opera considerata oggi il frutto più maturo del kantismo in Danimarca. Quale membro del Collegio di Sanità, Howitz doveva valutare l’imputabilità dei criminali. Nel suo testo egli accusò la giurisprudenza danese dell’epoca di essere fondata sul sistema kantiano della moralità; criticò dunque la concezione kantiana della libertà come capacità di determinare le proprie azioni sulla base di un fondamento puramente razionale. Secondo Howitz l’essere umano non è propriamente dotato di libertà in questo senso, poiché ogni azione umana è necessariamente determinata da un motivo che pesa più di altri e la cosiddetta razionalità altro non è che capacitas motivorum. La libertà dovrebbe essere intesa dalla giurisprudenza come capacitas motivorum, ovvero una libertà che non ha nulla a che vedere con la moralità. Howitz sostiene contro la visione morale kantiana che la stessa moralità nasce e si sviluppa sulla base dell’organizzazione cerebrale. Quando apparve, il trattato di Howitz suscitò immediatamente le reazioni critiche di figure di intellettuali di spicco quali lo stesso Anders Sandøe Ørsted, il teologo e futuro vescovo Jacob Peter Mynster, il drammaturgo e critico letterario Johan Ludvig Heiberg e il filosofo Frederik Christian Sibbern, futuro professore e mentore del giovane of Søren Kierkegaard. L’articolo mira a esplorare i fondamenti filosofici del dibattito e soprattutto il ruolo che ebbe in esso la filosofia morale di Kant. Recebido / Received: 4.9.2019.Aprovado / Approved: 28.10.2019. 2020-01-14 2022-03-21T17:55:47Z 2022-03-21T17:55:47Z info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion https://revistas.marilia.unesp.br/index.php/ek/article/view/9668 10.36311/2318-0501.2019.v7n2.05.p55 http://biblioteca-repositorio.clacso.edu.ar/handle/CLACSO/72746 por https://revistas.marilia.unesp.br/index.php/ek/article/view/9668/6153 Copyright (c) 2019 Estudos Kantianos [EK] http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 application/pdf Faculdade de Filosofia e Ciências Kantian Studies (EK); Vol. 7 No. 2 (2019); 55-72 Estudos Kantianos [EK]; v. 7 n. 2 (2019); 55-72 2318-0501 |
| spellingShingle | Ascribing Responsibility Empiricism Freedom Madness Morality Utilitarianism Will Arbitrio Empirismo Follia Imputabilità Libertà Moralità Responsabilità Utilitarismo Volontà Basso, Ingrid Kant in The Danish Philosophical and Juridical Debate of the early 19th-Century. |
| title | Kant in The Danish Philosophical and Juridical Debate of the early 19th-Century. |
| title_full | Kant in The Danish Philosophical and Juridical Debate of the early 19th-Century. |
| title_fullStr | Kant in The Danish Philosophical and Juridical Debate of the early 19th-Century. |
| title_full_unstemmed | Kant in The Danish Philosophical and Juridical Debate of the early 19th-Century. |
| title_short | Kant in The Danish Philosophical and Juridical Debate of the early 19th-Century. |
| title_sort | kant in the danish philosophical and juridical debate of the early 19th-century. |
| topic | Ascribing Responsibility Empiricism Freedom Madness Morality Utilitarianism Will Arbitrio Empirismo Follia Imputabilità Libertà Moralità Responsabilità Utilitarismo Volontà |
| url | https://revistas.marilia.unesp.br/index.php/ek/article/view/9668 http://biblioteca-repositorio.clacso.edu.ar/handle/CLACSO/72746 |