Kant’s sacrificial turns

  • Paolo Diego Bubbio


This paper addresses the role of the notion of sacrifice in Kant’s theoretical philosophy, practical philosophy, and in his account of religion. First, I argue that kenotic sacrifice, or sacrifice as ‘withdrawal’, plays a hidden and yet important role in the development of Kant’s transcendental philosophy. Second, I focus on Kant’s practical philosophy, arguing that the notion of sacrifice that is both implied and explicitly analyzed by Kant is mainly suppressive sacrifice. However, Kant’s account is fundamentally ambiguous, as sometimes the kenotic meaning of sacrifice seems to resurface, especially in the context of Kant’s discussion of the happiness of others as an end in itself. Because religious notions are regarded by Kant as necessary transitional forms (Darstellungen) to be used to make moral ideas applicable to the world, I then scrutinize Kant’s view of sacrifice as an improper symbol, and I analyze Kant’s arguments for such a dismissal and discuss the subject matter in recent literature. Finally, I examine the role of sacrifice in Kant’s account of Christ as the prototype of pure moral disposition. I conclude by arguing that Kant indeed grasped the importance of including kenotic dynamics in practical philosophy but was somehow unable or unwilling to integrate it into the formal grounding of his ethics. This tension, however, effectively provides an entry point for features that can be found in the post-Kantians.


Immanuel Kant Sacrifice Perspectivism Kenosis 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. KrV = Kritik der reinen Vernunft, trans. and ed. by P. Guyer and A. W. Wood, Critique of Pure Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998 [A and B editions are cited in the usual way: A/B].Google Scholar
  2. KpV = Kritik der praktischen Vernunft, trans. Mary J. Gregor, Critique of Practical Reason. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1996.Google Scholar
  3. KU = Kritik der Urteilskraft Trans, trans. W. S. Pluhar, Critique of Judgment. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1987.Google Scholar
  4. GMS = Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten, trans. by M. Gregor, Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  5. MS = Metaphysik der Sitten, trans. by M. Gregor, The Metaphysics of Morals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  6. RGV = Die Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft, trans. and ed. by A. W. Wood and G. Di Giovanni, Religion Within the Boundaries of Mere Reason, in Religion and Natural Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  7. SF = Der Streit der Fakultäten, trans. and ed. by A. W. Wood and G. Di Giovanni, The Conflict of the Faculties, in Religion and Natural Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  8. JL = Jäsche Logik, trans. and ed. by P. Guyer and A. W. Wood, Lectures on Logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.Google Scholar
  9. Agacinski S. (1998) We are not sublime: Love and sacrifice, Abraham and ourselves. In: Jonathan R., Jane C. (Eds.), Kierkegaard: A critical reader. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 129–150Google Scholar
  10. Atterton P. (2007) A duty to be charitable? A rigoristic reading of Kant. Kant Studien 98(2): 135–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Axinn S. (2010) Sacrifice and value. A Kantian interpretation. Lexington Books, LenhamGoogle Scholar
  12. Bohme, J. (1955–1961). Aurora. In W.-E. Peuckert (Ed.), Sämtliche Schriften. Stuttgart: Fr. Frommanns. The works of Jacob Behman (sic) (W. Law, Trans., 1764). London: Richardson.Google Scholar
  13. Bowes R. L. (2001) Sacrifice and the categorical imperative of human security. International Journal 56(4): 649–664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bubbio P. D. (2009) Solger’s notion of sacrifice as double negation. Heythrop Journal 50(2): 206–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bubbio P. D. (2012) Sacrifice in Hegel’s Phenomenology of spirit. British Journal of the History of Philosophy 20(4): 797–815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cummiskey D. (1990) Kantian consequentialism. Ethics 100(3): 586–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dawe D. G. (1963) The form of a servant: A historical analysis of the kenotic motif. Westminster, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  18. Firestone C. L., Jacobs N. (2008) In defense of Kant’s religion. Indiana University Press, BloomingtonGoogle Scholar
  19. Gardner S. (1999) Kant and the “Critique of pure reason”. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Griffiths A. P. (1991) Kant’s psychological hedonism. Philosophy 66(256): 207–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Guevara D. (1999) The impossibility of supererogation in Kant’s moral theory. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 59(3): 593–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hegel, G. W. F. (1991). Elements of the philosophy of right. (W. Wood, Ed. and H. B. Nisbet, Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Hegel, G. W. F. (1997). Phenomenology of spirit (A. V. Miller, Trans.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  24. Hill T. E. (1989) Kantian constructivism in ethics. Ethics 99(4): 752–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Houlgate S. (2005) Freedom, truth and history. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  26. Keenan D. K. (2005) The question of sacrifice. Indiana University Press, Bloomington and IndianapolisGoogle Scholar
  27. Kreeft P. (1990) Summa of the summa. Essential passages of Aquinas. Ignatius Press, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  28. Lanzetta B. J. (1992) Three categories of nothingness in Eckhart. The Journal of Religion 72(2): 248–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. MacKinnon D. M. (1975) Kant’s philosophy of religion. Philosophy 50(192): 131–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McCarthy V. (1986) Quest for a philosophical Jesus. Mercer University Press, Macon, GAGoogle Scholar
  31. Millbank J. (2003) Being reconciled. Ontology and pardon. Routledge, London and New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. Nietzsche, F. (1918). The antichrist. (H. L. Mencken, Trans.). New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
  33. Palmquist S. (2000) Kant’s critical religion. Ashgate, AldershotGoogle Scholar
  34. Peikoff L. (1971) Kant and self-sacrifice. Objectivist 10(9): 1092–1104Google Scholar
  35. Pinkard T. (1996) Hegel’s Phenomenology: The sociality of reason. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  36. Pinkard T. (2002) German philosophy 1760–1860: The legacy of idealism. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  37. Pippin R. B. (1991) Idealism and agency in Kant and Hegel. The Journal of Philosophy 88(10): 532–541Google Scholar
  38. Rand A. (1982) Philosophy: Who needs it. Penguins Book, LondonGoogle Scholar
  39. Redding P. (2009) Continental idealism: Leibniz to Nietzsche. Routledge, London and New YorkGoogle Scholar
  40. Solger, K. W. F. (1826/1973). Nachgelassene Schriften und Briefwechsel, Herausgegeben von Ludwig Tieck und Friedrich von Raumer. Heidelberg: Verlag Lambert Scheider.Google Scholar
  41. Ward K. (1971) Kant’s teleological ethics. The Philosophical Quarterly 21(85): 337–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Williams D. T. (2005) The kenosis of god: The self-limitation of god-father, son, and holy spirit. iUniverse, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  43. Wood A. W. (1977) Kant’s rational theology. Cornell University Press, Ithaca and LondonGoogle Scholar
  44. Wood A. W. (2006) Kant’s life and works. In: Graham B. A companion to Kant. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  45. Zachhuber, J. (2008). Modern discourse on sacrifice and its theological background. Accessed September 12, 2012.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Humanities and Communication ArtsUniversity of Western SydneyPenrithAustralia

Personalised recommendations