Kant: Theorist beyond Limits

  • Howard Williams
  • Ken Booth
Part of the St Antony’s Series book series


Kant’s reputation in world philosophy is secure; in the study of world politics it is still being made. For decades Kant’s work was marginal and marginalised in academic international relations, though he has a justifiable claim to be the first comprehensive theorist of world politics. Kant has something to say, inter alia, about justice, international government, domestic politics and interstate relations, war and peace — and other priority issues on the international relations agenda. He also makes a fundamental contribution to our thinking about ontology and epistemology. If for nothing else he is a key figure because he was the first political philosopher of significance to emphasise the primacy of the international in understanding politics.


Human Nature International Relation Social Contract Liberal Democracy Definitive Article 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Martin Wight, International Theory. The Three Traditions, ed. Gabriele Wight and Brian Porter (Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1991), passim.Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    For a general discussion, see Timothy Dunne, ‘Mythology or methodology? Traditions in international relations’, Review of International Studies Vol. 19 (3), July 1993, pp. 305–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 6.
    Raymond Williams, Keywords (London: Fontana, 1976), p. 227.Google Scholar
  4. 7.
    E. H. Carr, The 20 Years’ Crisis (London: Macmillan, 1946).Google Scholar
  5. 8.
    F. H. Hinsley, Power and the Pursuit of Peace (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1963), pp. 62–80.Google Scholar
  6. 9.
    W. B. Gallie, Philosophers of Peace and War (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978), pp. 8–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 10.
    Michael Doyle, ‘Kant, liberal legacies and foreign affairs’, parts 1 and 2, Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 12 (3 and 4), 1983.Google Scholar
  8. 11.
    Steve Smith, ‘The Forty Years’ Detour: The Resurgence of Normative Theory in International Relations’, Millennium, Vol. 12 (3), Winter 1992, pp. 489–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 12.
    Timothy Garton Ash, ‘Kant in one hand, deterrence in the other’, The Independent, 10 May 1990.Google Scholar
  10. 13.
    See, inter alia, Evan Luard, Basic Texts in International Relations (London: Macmillan, 1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 14.
    Ed. L. W. Beck, Perpetual Peace, in Kant Selections (New York: Macmillan, 1988), p. 445;Google Scholar
  12. Gesammelte Schriften, VIII (Berlin, 1902), p. 368 (hereafter GS).Google Scholar
  13. 23.
    Respectively, Michael Foucault, ‘What is Enlightenment?’ in Paul Rainbow (ed.), The Foucault Reader (New York: Pantheon, 1984), pp. 32–51 and Gallie, op. cit., pp. 14–15.Google Scholar
  14. 27.
    Michael Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1980).Google Scholar
  15. 29.
    Kenneth N. Waltz, Man, the State and War (New York: Columbia University Press, 1959).Google Scholar
  16. 30.
    Hans Reiss, (ed.), Kant’s Political Writings (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), p. 54 (‘An Answer to the Question “What is Enlightenment”?’).Google Scholar
  17. 32.
    Isaiah Berlin used this phrase as the basis for the title of his book about the glories of pluralism against the pulls of fundamentalism: The Crooked Timber of Humanity (London: Fontana Press, 1991).Google Scholar
  18. 35.
    For what this can mean in the empirical world, see Nadezhda Mandelstam, Hope against Hope. A Memoir (London: Collins Harvill, 1989), trans. Max Hayward.Google Scholar
  19. 36.
    T. W. Pogge, Realizing Rawls (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1989), p. 240.Google Scholar
  20. 37.
    M. Gregor (ed. and trans.), Metaphysics of Morals (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), p. 55; G. S., VI, p. 230.Google Scholar
  21. 41.
    Cf. H. Williams, International Relations in Political Theory (Milton Keynes: Open University Press, 1992), p. 42.Google Scholar
  22. 42.
    A. P. D’Entreves (ed.), Aquinas: Selected Political Writings (Oxford: Blackwell, 1959), p. 123.Google Scholar
  23. 43.
    H. Williams, M. Wright & A. Evans (eds), A Reader in International Relations and Political Theory (Milton Keynes: Open University Press, 1993), p. 87.Google Scholar
  24. 44.
    Daniele Archibugi, ‘Models of international organization in perpetual peace projects’, Review of International Studies, Vol. 18, 1992, pp. 295–317;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hidemi Suganami, The Domestic Analogy and World Order Proposals (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), pp. 40–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 53.
    Kenneth N. Waltz, Theory of International Politics (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1979).Google Scholar
  27. 56.
    This is well argued in Andrew Hurrell, ‘Kant and the Kantian paradigm in international relations’, Review of International Studies, Vol. 16 (3), July 1990, pp. 183–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 59.
    Karl Deutsch, et al., Political Community in the North Atlantic Area (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1957).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Howard Williams
  • Ken Booth

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations