Número 46 - 2014
Articles

Función y papel del contrato en el Fundamento del Derecho natural de Fichte (1796): las aporías del contractualismo fichteano

Felipe Schwember Augier
Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez, Chile

Published 2014-06-27

How to Cite

Augier, F. S. (2014). Función y papel del contrato en el Fundamento del Derecho natural de Fichte (1796): las aporías del contractualismo fichteano. Tópicos, Revista De Filosofía, (46), 95–120. https://doi.org/10.21555/top.v0i46.648

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Altmetrics

Citas

Abstract

Fichte uses profusely different versions of the social contract when drafting his doctrine of right in the Foundations of the Natural Right (1796). This usage, which seems to follow a typical strategic reasoning of the hobbesian contractarianism, seems to be at odds with the altruistic reasoning employed in the first part of the work, in which it deduces the concept of right from mutual recognition. Here we attempt to demonstrate that there is no break between the deduction of right and its systematic application, and that the motive of self-preservation and the use of contract are in principle compatible with the deduction of right as technical practical science by Fichte. It will be argued, however, that the use of the social contract as a tool to develop a material doctrine of right is problematic, not for the motivations that are supposed to be attributed to the agents, but for the gap that this use opens in the methodological presuppositions of the work and its normative claims.

References

  1. Alexy, Robert, Begriff und Geltung des Rechts, Karl Alber, München, 2011.
  2. Kant, Immanuel, Kants Gesammelte Schriften herausgegeben von der Königlich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Bände I - VII. Druck und Verlag von Georg Reimer. Berlin, 1910-17. Bände VII-XXVIII, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin und Leipzig, 1923-72.
  3. Fichte, Johann Gottlieb, Fichte-Gesamtausgabe, Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Reinhard Lauth — Hans Gliwitzky — Erich Fuchs — Peter K. Schneider — Günter Zöller (eds.), Stuttgart-Bad Cannstat, Fromman-Holzboog, 1962 ff.
  4. Fichtes Werke, Immanuel Hermann Fichte (ed.), Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, 1971.
  5. Hart, H. L. A., El concepto de Derecho, Genaro R. Carrió (trad.), Abeledo Perrot, Buenos Aires, 2012.
  6. Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts, tomo 7, Eva Moldenhaure — Karl Marcus Michel (eds.), Suhrkam, Frankfurt am Main, 1986.
  7. Honneth, Axel, “Transzendentale Notwendigkeit von Intersubjektivität”, en Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Grundlage des Naturrechts, Merle, Jean-Christophe (ed.), Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 2001, pp. 61-80.
  8. Lloyd Thomas, D.A., In defense of Liberalism, Basil Blackwell, New York, 1988.
  9. Martin, Wayne M., “Is Fichte a Social Contract Theorist?,” en Rights, Bodies and Recognition. New Essays on Fichte’s Foundations of Natural Right, Rockmore, Tom — Breazelae Daniel (ed.), Ashgate, Hampshire, 2006, pp. 1-9.
  10. Schottky, Richard, Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der Staatsphilosophischen Vertragstheorie im 17. Und 18. Jahrhundert (Hobbes-Locke-Rousseau und Fichte) mit einem Beitrag zum Problem der Gewalttenteilung bei Rousseau und Fichte, Fichte-Studien Supplementa, Rodopi, Amsterdam, 1995.
  11. Schwember Augier, Felipe, “Libertad, corporalidad, impulso y ley moral en la Doctrina de las Costumbres de Fichte”, en Oikeiosis and the Natural Basis of Morality. From Classical Stoicism to Modern Phlosophy, Alejandro Vigo (ed.), OLMS, Hildesheim – Zurich – New York, pp. 347- 376.
  12. —. Libertad, derecho y propiedad. El fundamento de la propiedad en la filosofía del derecho de Kant y Fichte, OLMS, Hildesheim – Zurich – New York, 2013.
  13. Siep, Ludwig, Praktische Philosophie im Deutschen Idealismus, Surkhamp, Frankfurt am Main, 1992.
  14. Williams, Robert R., “Recognition, Right, and Social Contract,” en Rights, Bodies and Recognition. New Essays on Fichte’s Foundations of Natural Right, Rockmore, Tom — Breazelae Daniel (ed.), Ashgate, Hampshire, 2006, pp. 26-44.