Hauptinhalt

Vortrag: The “Scientific Dispute” between Hermann Cohen and Rudolf Stammler and the Beginning of ‘Left-Kantianism’ von Elisabeth Theresia Widmer

Veranstaltungsdaten

Abstract

Recent literature suggests that Hermann Cohen, Rudolf Stammler, and Paul Natorp worked towards a coherent philosophical foundation of socialism. Prima facie, this interpretation seems to make sense given that all of them based their view on the Marburg school’s critical-idealist interpretation of the Kantian framework to justify social justice and socialism. However, a more detailed comparison of their philosophical basis challenges this view. I argue that there are two camps noticeable within this school of thought. A “natural-law” justification of jurisdiction developed by Cohen and a “positivist” foundation of jurisdiction provided by Stammler. The natural-law camp was influenced by the liberal tradition embossed by Adolf Trendelenburg and argued that it was the state’s moral duty to protect the citizen’s freedom. The positivist camp, on the other hand, was influenced by Friedrich Carl von Savigny and argued for legal reforms towards a socialist planned organization of economic relations. Given these differences, I suggest letting go of the standard classification of “Marburg neo-Kantian socialism” that gives the impression of a coherent philosophical system. Instead, I argue that the “scientific dispute”—as Natorp called it—set the foundation of a pluralist left-liberal current that had far-reaching consequences outside of the Marburg school. I shall call this current ‘left-Kantianism.’

Zur Person: Elisabeth Theresia Widmer is a PhD student at the University of Vienna interested in the history of philosophy and the history of political thought. In her thesis, she investigates the emergence of ‘Left-Kantianism’—a philosophical stream in the long 19th-century that started in the Marburg School and justified socialism on a neo-Kantian basis.