Non-Metaphysical Dimensions of Freedom: Embodiment of Reason from a Kantian Standpoint
-
Antonino Falduto
Abstract
This paper challenges the traditional interpretation of Kant’s theory of freedom, which typically locates its core understanding within the noumenal world. Instead, it argues that positive human freedom is grounded in the living human body. The living body, with its distinct beginning (birth) and end (death), thus becomes the foundational condition of possibility of freedom, since it provides the temporal existence for infinite reason. The embodiment of reason within the living body is then presented as equivalent to the limitation of autonomy, which in turn allows for positive freedom to come into the world. Embodied in a living body, reason, as a legislative entity, can thereby inhabits a world governed by laws that are both self-imposed, i.e. expression of autonomy, and heteronomous, such as the laws of nature.
References
With the exception of the first Critique, where the standard A/B pagination is used, citations of Kant’s works refer to the Akademie-Ausgabe, i.e. Kant’s gesammelte Schriften, 29 vols., vol. 1–22, ed. by Königlich-Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften, vol. 23 ed. by Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, vols. 24 – ed. by Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1900– (the so-called Akademie-Ausgabe, abbreviated as AA). References use the following format: volume:page number (e. g., IV:429). Unless otherwise noted, I use translations from The Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant, ed. by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood, Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992ff. Abbreviations are the commonly used ones, as they are defined in the journal Kant-Studien.Search in Google Scholar
Beck, L. W. 1960. A Commentary on Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Search in Google Scholar
Böhme, G. 2003. Leibsein als Aufgabe. Leibphilosophie in pragmatischer Hinsicht. Kusterdingen: Die Graue Edition.Search in Google Scholar
Böhme, G. 2008. Ethik leiblicher Existenz. Über unseren moralischen Umgang mit der eigenen Natur. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.Search in Google Scholar
Breitenbach, Angela. 2017. “Laws in Biology and the Unity of Nature.” In Kant and the Laws of Nature, edited by M. Massimi, and A. Breitenbach, 237–55. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781316389645.013Search in Google Scholar
David, Alain. 1984. “Le nom de la finitude. De Levinas à Kant.” In Les cahiers de la nuit surveillée, edited by J. Rolland, 245–81. Lagrasse: Verdier.Search in Google Scholar
David, Alain. 1991. “S’orienter dans la pensée. Notes zur l’extériorité.” In Emmanuel Lévinas, edited by C. Chalier, and M. Abensour, 226–40. Paris: Éditions de l’Herne.Search in Google Scholar
Düsing, K. 2002. Subjektivität und Freiheit. Untersuchungen zum Idealismus von Kant bis Hegel. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog.Search in Google Scholar
Falduto, A. 2014. The Faculties of the Human Mind and the Case of Moral Feeling in Kant’s Philosophy. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110351149Search in Google Scholar
Falduto, A. 2024. “On the Finitude of Life: Bernard Williams from a Kantian Standpoint.” In Problems of Reason: Kant in Context, edited by A. Falduto, 347–69. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783111502601-021Search in Google Scholar
Falduto, A. 2025. Autonomia e libertà individuale. Etica concreta ed educazione alla libertà. Roma: Carocci.Search in Google Scholar
Fuchs, T. 2000. Leib, Raum, Person. Entwurf einer phänomenologischen Anthropologie. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.Search in Google Scholar
Ginsborg, Hannah. 2001. “Kant on Understanding Organisms as Natural Purposes.” In Kant and the Sciences, edited by E. Watkins, 231–54. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/0195133056.003.0012Search in Google Scholar
Guyer, Paul. 2001. “Organisms and the Unity of Science.” In Kant and the Sciences, edited by E. Watkins, 259–80. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/0195133056.003.0013Search in Google Scholar
Guyer, Paul. 2004. “Zum Stand der Kant-Forschung. Beiträge von Paul Guyer, Dieter Henrich, Beatrix Himmelmann und Dieter Schönecker.” Information Philosophie 1: 10–21.Search in Google Scholar
Hochberg, G. M. 1982. Kant. Moral Legislation and Two Senses of Will. Washington: University Press of America.Search in Google Scholar
Höffe, O. 2015. Kritik der Freiheit. Das Grundproblem der Moderne. München: Beck.10.17104/9783406675041Search in Google Scholar
Huneman, Philippe, eds. 2007. Understanding Purpose. Kant and the Philosophy of Biology. Rochester: University of Rochester Press.10.1017/9781580466950Search in Google Scholar
Jaeschke, W., and A. Arndt. 2013. “Die Philosophie der Neuzeit 3/2: Klassische Deutsche Philosophie von Fichte bis Hegel.” In Geschichte der Philosophie, Vol. IX/2, edited by W. Rödl. München: Beck.Search in Google Scholar
Klemme, H. F. 2023. Die Selbsterhaltung der Vernunft. Kant und die Modernität seines Denkens. Frankfurt a.M.: Klostermann.10.5771/9783465146193Search in Google Scholar
La Rocca, Claudio. 1987. “La distinzione kantiana tra Wille e Willkür e il problema della libertà.” In Eticidad y Estado en el Idealismo Aleman, edited by C. La Rocca, and F. Oncina Coves, 19–40. Valencia: Natán.Search in Google Scholar
La Rocca, C. 1990. Strutture Kantiane. Pisa: ETS.Search in Google Scholar
Landucci, S. 1994. Sull’etica di Kant. Milano: Guerini.Search in Google Scholar
Ludwig, Bernd. 2014. “Ohne alles moralische Gefühl ist kein Mensch… Lebendige, vernünftige und sittliche Weltwesen bei Kant.” In Affektivität und Ethik bei Kant und in der Phänomenologie, edited by I. Römer, 117–42. Berlin-Boston: de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Meerbote, Ralph. 1982. “Wille and Willkür in Kant’s Theory of Action.” In Interpreting Kant, edited by M. S. Gram, 69–84. Jowa City: University of Jowa Press.Search in Google Scholar
Meld Shell, S. 1996. The Embodiment of Reason: Kant on Spirit, Generation and Community. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar
Mellin, Georg S. A. 1796–1804. Encyclopädisches Wörterbuch der kritischen Philosophie. Züllichau: Frommann.Search in Google Scholar
Norcross, Alastair. 2013. “The Significance of Death for Animals.” In The Oxford Handbook of the Philosophy of Death, edited by Ben Bradley, Fred Feldman, and Jens Johansson, 465–74. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195388923.013.0021Search in Google Scholar
Nuzzo, A. 2008. Ideal Embodiment: Kant’s Theory of Sensibility. Bloomington-Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.10.2979/5292.0Search in Google Scholar
Plessner, Helmuth. 1940. “Lachen und Weinen.” In Philosophische Anthropologie, 11–171. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.Search in Google Scholar
Powell, Charles T. 1985. “Kant, Elanguescence, and Degrees of Reality.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 46 (2): 199–217. https://doi.org/10.2307/2107353.Search in Google Scholar
Prauss, G.. 1983. Kant über Freiheit als Autonomie. Frankfurt a.M.: Klostermann.10.3196/9783465015871Search in Google Scholar
Römer, I. 2018. Das Begehren der reinen praktischen Vernunft. Kants Ethik in phänomenologischer Sicht. Hamburg: Meiner.Search in Google Scholar
Rosas, Alejandro. 2015. “Leben.” In Kant-Lexikon, edited by M. Willaschek, J. Stolzenberg, G. Mohr, and S. Bacin, 1375–9. Berlin-Boston: de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Rosefeldt, Tobias. 2015. “Tod.” In Kant-Lexikon, edited by M. Willaschek, J. Stolzenberg, G. Mohr, and S. Bacin, 2296–7. Berlin-Boston: de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Sidgwick, Henry. 1888. “The Kantian Conception of Free Will.” Mind 12 (51): 405–12. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/os-xiii.51.405.Search in Google Scholar
Steigleder, K. 2002. Kants Moralphilosophie. Die Selbstbezüglichkeit reiner praktischer Vernunft. Stuttgart-Weimar: Metzler.10.1007/978-3-476-02850-1Search in Google Scholar
Stekeler-Weithofer, Pirmin. 1990. “Willkür und Wille bei Kant.” Kant-Studien 81 (3): 304–20. https://doi.org/10.1515/kant.1990.81.3.304.Search in Google Scholar
Yost, Benjamin S. 2017. “Kant’s Theory of Motivation: A Hybrid Approach.” The Review of Metaphysics 71 (2): 293–319.Search in Google Scholar
© 2025 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
