Kant is the philosopher who claims public space as the emblematic site of the Enlightenment: the space where ideas are communicated and compared. However, he is also the one who sees the conflict between ideas, the philosophical form of which is the argumentative dispute, as a Sophistic trick. Is the absence of dispute compatible with the Enlightenment? Does consensus really have as a condition the overcoming of the conflict of ideas? To answer this question, the essay examines the section on the polemical use of reason (in the Critique of Pure Reason), with due reference to the general framework of the dialectic of reason. In polemical usage, even the critical philosopher is temporarily allowed to be a dialectician taking sides in a dispute. Explaining the reason for this concession can help to re-evaluate the dispute as a means of publicly discussing ideas, judging conflicting reasons and making justified choices. The use of controversy thus allows the Enlightenment’s Kant to be reunited with his critique of dialectical reason, to reunite public space and the art of argumentation. The critique of the dispute should be compatible with the critical dispute, through which we perhaps also understand which ideas to commit to.

L’uso polemico della ragione. Idee, dialettica, spazio pubblico

Marco Russo
2024-01-01

Abstract

Kant is the philosopher who claims public space as the emblematic site of the Enlightenment: the space where ideas are communicated and compared. However, he is also the one who sees the conflict between ideas, the philosophical form of which is the argumentative dispute, as a Sophistic trick. Is the absence of dispute compatible with the Enlightenment? Does consensus really have as a condition the overcoming of the conflict of ideas? To answer this question, the essay examines the section on the polemical use of reason (in the Critique of Pure Reason), with due reference to the general framework of the dialectic of reason. In polemical usage, even the critical philosopher is temporarily allowed to be a dialectician taking sides in a dispute. Explaining the reason for this concession can help to re-evaluate the dispute as a means of publicly discussing ideas, judging conflicting reasons and making justified choices. The use of controversy thus allows the Enlightenment’s Kant to be reunited with his critique of dialectical reason, to reunite public space and the art of argumentation. The critique of the dispute should be compatible with the critical dispute, through which we perhaps also understand which ideas to commit to.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11386/4898937
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact