Kant in The Danish Philosophical and Juridical Debate of the early 19th-Century.

Authors

  • Ingrid Basso Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36311/2318-0501.2019.v7n2.05.p55

Keywords:

Ascribing Responsibility, Empiricism, Freedom, Madness, Morality, Utilitarianism, Will

Abstract

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.

Author Biography

  • Ingrid Basso, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore

    Research assistant in Theoretical Philosophy in the Department of Philosophy at the Catholic University of Milan, Italy. She also teaches Philosophy of communication for the Master’s degree program in digital asset and media management (G.E.C.O.) at the Catholic University of Brescia, Italy. Her main research interest is in the thought of Søren Kierkegaard and the decline of the German Idealism. She has been a Ph-D research fellow at the Søren Kierkegaard Research Centre at the University of Copenhagen and at the Howard V. and Edna H. Hong Kierkegaard Library of the St. Olaf College, Northfield, Minnesota - USA. Besides several articles in English and Italian, she is the author of the monographs Kierkegaard uditore di Schelling (Mimesis, Milano 2008) and Søren Kierkegaard e la metafisica di Aristotele (AlboVersorio, Milano 2013), and she has edited the Italian critical edition of Kierkegaard’s notes from F.W.J. Schelling’s course on philosophy of revelation in Berlin, 1841-1842 (Bompiani, Milano 2008). She has been Visiting professor at the Bergische Universität Wuppertal - Germany (2017) and the Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora - Brasil (2019). She also collaborates with several Italian publishing houses as a translator of Danish and Norwegian literature.

Additional Files

Published

2020-01-14

Issue

Section

Artigos / Articles

How to Cite

Kant in The Danish Philosophical and Juridical Debate of the early 19th-Century. (2020). Kantian Studies (EK), 7(2), 55-72. https://doi.org/10.36311/2318-0501.2019.v7n2.05.p55