Ist das rechtliche postulat ein postulat der reinen praktischen vernunft

Abstract

While German speaking Kant scholars tend to focus on interpreting the ‘postulate of practical reason with regard to Right' as a permissive law ( lex permissiva ), their English speaking counterparts emphasise its status as a postulate of pure practical reason. The present article seeks to establish a connection between the postulate's two functions. The paper distinguishes between a.) a justificatory function and b.) a referring function of the postulate of Right. In its first function as a lex permissiva the postulate justifies the right to external possession of each person. In its second function as a postulate of pure practical reason it refers agents to the ‘final end' or ‘final purpose' of the Doctrine of Right as a whole, namely to the idea of cosmopolitan Right as an idea of pure practical reason. The referring function of the postulate of Right follows as a corollary from its justificatory function: b.) is thus conceptually dependent upon a.). This interpretation establishes a systematic connection between Kant's account of Private Right on the one hand and his view of cosmopolitan Right on the other hand: the final end of securing the right of each lies in establishing ‘thoroughgoing' relations of Right among all