No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Freedom from Autonomy: An Essay on Accountability
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 December 2020
Abstract
Neo-Kantian philosophers see accountability as a key property of autonomy, or of social freedom more broadly. Autonomy, among those theorists, is, I contend, implicitly co-conceived with responsibility, producing a quasi-juridical conception of autonomy and a limiting notion of freedom. This article criticizes the connecting of freedom with accountability on a number of grounds. First, various conceptions of autonomy not only operate without a notion of accountability, but, in fact, would be impaired by an accountability requirement. Second, the neo-Kantians are unable to defend the freedom enhancing properties that are supposedly brought about by the giving of reasons for one’s beliefs and actions. Third, the project of accountability is indifferent to personal outlooks, not because it takes a holistic perspective, but because of its interest in social convergence.
Keywords
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Kantian Review , Volume 25 , Special Issue 4: Special Issue on Kant and the Frankfurt School , December 2020 , pp. 655 - 674
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Kantian Review
References
Anderson, Joel, and Axel, Honneth (2005) ‘Autonomy, Vulnerability, Recognition, and Justice’. In John, Christman and Joel, Anderson (eds), Autonomy and the Challenges to Liberalism: New Essays (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 127–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colburn, Ben (2011) ‘Autonomy and Adaptive Preferences’. Utilitas, 23
(1), 52–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooke, Maeve (2004) ‘Privacy and Autonomy: A Comment on Jean Cohen’. In Beate, Rössler (ed.), Privacies: Philosophical Evaluations (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press), 98–112.Google Scholar
Forst, Rainer (2012) The Right to Justification: Elements of a Constructivist Theory of Justice. Trans. Jeffrey Flynn. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen (1992) Postmetaphysical Thinking. Trans. William Mark Hohengarten, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen (2006) ‘Religion in the Public Sphere’. European Journal of Philosophy, 14
(1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobi, Friedrich Heinrich (2009) Main Philosophical Writings and the Novel Allwill. Ed. and trans. George di Giovanni. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1996) Practical Philosophy. Trans. Mary J. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Koselleck, Reinhart (1988) Critique and Crisis: Enlightenment and the Pathogenesis of Modern Society. Cambridge, MA, and London: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Mann, Thomas (1992) Doctor Faustus. The Life of a German Composer Adrian Leverkühn as Told by a Friend. Trans. Lowe-Porter, H. T.. London: Everyman’s Library.Google Scholar
O’Connor, Brian (2013) ‘Self-Determination and Responsibility in Schelling’s Freiheitsschrift
’. Studies in Social and Political Thought, 21, 3–18.Google Scholar
O’Connor, Brian (2015) ‘The Neo-Hegelian Theory of Freedom and the Limits of Emancipation’. European Journal of Philosophy, 23
(2), 171–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scanlon, T. M. (1972) ‘A Theory of Freedom of Expression’. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1
(2), 204–26.Google Scholar
Velleman, J. David (2006) Self to Self: Selected Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar