The Relationship Between Freedom and Law in Kant's View
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26750/zh7a7198الكلمات المفتاحية:
Kant, Freedom, Law, Human, Logic, Moral.الملخص
This paper which is entitled ‘the relationship between freedom and law from Kant’s perspective’ is an attempt to discuss Kant’s concern with respect to the significance and the role of rule in the society. He claims that the priority is for the behavioral rules in that the derivative rules should be harmonic with the behavioral ones. The behavioral rules are logical as humans themselves naturally carry these values. On this basis, these rules play a fundamental role to have a philosophical understanding of Kant. Kant tries to arrange humans’ freedom in the framework of laws in a way that laws do not be barriers in front of humans’ freedom, that is why law by Kant is regarded as the copy of these criteria that the talent of each one is surrendered to in order for them to be suitable with others. In this regard, Kant thinks that laws are not against humans’ freedom, rather they arrange their daily affairs on a condition that they are applicable for all. Henceforth, Kant claims that laws do not restrict the freedom, instead they are means to express freedom because they cause their reaching to coexistence in the society. The method used in the paper is a descriptive analytic one which is theoretically comment on the aforementioned philosopher’s perspective to law and freedom.
المراجع
ئەرستۆ (٢٠١٠) ئێتیکی نیکۆماخی. هەولێر: چاپخانەی کوردستان.
کانت (٢٠٠٥) ڕۆشنگەری چییە؟. سلێمانی: چاپخانەی ڕۆژهەڵات.
کانت (٢٠٠٨) بناغەدانای میتافیزیکی ئاکار. هەولێر: چاپخانەی کوردستان.
کانت (٢٠١٢) ئاشتی هەمیشەیی. سلێمانی: چاپخانەی کوردستان.
هۆبز (٢٠٠٩) لیڤیاسان. هەولێر: چاپخانەی ڕۆژهەڵات.
لۆک (٢٠١١) دو تریتی لەسەر حکومەت. دهۆک: چاپخانەی زاگرۆس.
ڕۆسۆ (٢٠١٤) گرێبەستی کۆمەڵایەتی. هەولێر: چاپخانەی کوردستان.
أرسطو (١٩٨٥) السياسة. بيروت: دار الكتب العلمية.
أفلاطون (١٩٧٨) الجمهورية. القاهرة: دار المعارف.
أوغسطينوس (١٩٩٢) الاعترافات. بيروت: المكتبة الشرقية.
توما الأكويني (١٩٨٨) الخلاصة اللاهوتية. بيروت: دار المشرق.
سينيكا (١٩٩٠) الرسائل الأخلاقية. القاهرة: دار الفكر العربي.
المعجم الوسيط (٢٠٠٤). القاهرة: مجمع اللغة العربية.:
Aristotle (1998). Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cicero (2010). De Republica. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dworkin, R. (1986). Taking Rights Seriously. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Dworkin, R. (2011). Justice for Hedgehogs. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Fuller, L. (1964). The Morality of Law. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Habermas, J. (1996). Between Facts and Norms. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Hart, H. L. A. (1961). The Concept of Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hobbes, T. (1996). Leviathan. London: Cambridge University Press.
Kant, I. (1998). Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kant, I. (1997). Critique of Practical Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kant, I. (1996). The Metaphysics of Morals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Locke, J. (1988). Two Treatises of Government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Oxford English Dictionary (2023). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Rawls, J. (1999). Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
Ricardo, I. (1995). Theory of Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sartre, J.-P. (1992). Being and Nothingness. New York: Washington Square Press.
United Nations (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. New York: UN Publications.
التنزيلات
منشور
إصدار
القسم
الرخصة
الحقوق الفكرية (c) 2025 Journal of University of Raparin
هذا العمل مرخص بموجب Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
