Armando Manchisi

What does it mean to be a person? And in what way is this connected to our finitude, i.e. to the properly human aspect of our existence? By analyzing some of the core features of our form of life (personal identity, self-consciousness, freedom, autonomy, responsibility), Michael Quante answers these questions arguing that it is possible to be a person and lead an authentically human life only within social relationships of recognition: only in these relationships, it is possible to know oneself and act autonomously and responsibly. Through a close examination of the philosophies of Fichte and Hegel, on the one hand, and of the most recent debates on analytical ethics, on the other, Quante thus lays the foundations for a pragmatistic anthropology, that is, for a conception focused on the active nature of human existence. The volume is a revised version of the Lectures given by Michael Quante in 2017 at the PhD Course in Philosophy at the University of Padova.

In the paragraphs of the Encyclopedia (1830) dedicated to the «Third position of thought towards objectivity» Hegel critically examines Jacobi’s ‘immediate knowing’. My aim is to reconstruct the main arguments of these paragraphs, still little studied today, while trying to shed light on three issues: (a) the relevance given here to Jacobi’s philosophy; (b) the problems that arise within the epistemological models of immediacy; (c) the passage from the analysis of immediate knowing to the speculative thinking of the Logic.

The essay introduces Michael Quante's pragmatistic anthropology, focusing on three main ethical issues, namely: (1) the problem of realism, (2) the problem of particularism, and (3) the question about personal identity and its social conditions. By also emphasizing Quante's historical-philosophical debts, the essay thus aims to present the project of the pragmatistic anthropology as a worthwhile alternative to some of the fundamental assumptions of modern ethics. The essay is the Editor's Introduction to the volume: Michael Quante, "Antropologia pragmatista. Padova Lectures" (Padova University Press, 2020)

The aim of this paper is to provide a philosophical analysis of the relationship between self-realization and social recognition on the basis of a view that I characterize as “pragmatist.” According to this view, an individual realizes herself to the extent that she acts for the sake of establishing rational and dynamic interactions with her natural and social environment. Focusing on the social sphere, I show that we can interpret such interactions as relations of mutual recognition between an individual, who thus receives the ontological and ethical status of personhood, and an environment, which thereby acquires the normative and institutional features of society. Insofar as interactions with the surrounding reality are constitutive of a person’s self-realization, and not mere conditions of possibility, I finally suggest that we conceive of the problem of human flourishing in terms not only of the “good life” but also of the “good world.”

The contribution pursues two interrelated aims: the first one is to interpret the transition from Morality to Ethical Life in the "Elements of the Philosophy of Right" as a theory of moral justification; the second one is to show the meaning of this theory for contemporary philosophy. The essay thus seeks to turn to Hegel’s conception in order to shed light on the limits of the current discussion in moral epistemology and then to present a possible alternative. To this end, Hegel’s text is confronted with the main theses of intuitionism, on the one hand, and Kantian constructivism, on the other, as the most prominent contemporary forms, respectively, of ethical foundationalism and coherentism.

The concept of “self-realization” plays a central role in philosophy, since it summarizes the idea that a good life is a flourishing life, that is, an existence in which a person makes the best of what she is. A long tradition has understood this in terms of actualizing one’s potential or fulfilling one’s highest and most worthy aspirations. The aim of this paper is to analyze Hegel’s Logic and Philosophy of Right, in order to show that they outline an alternative and valuable account of self-realization that conceives of human flourishing as tied to the flourishing of the world.

In political liberalism there is an unsolved tension between respect for pluralism and the claims for recognition demanded by religious forms of life: on the one hand, it is held that institutions must remain neutral towards values; on the other, many citizens or groups require that their religious beliefs be socially and politically recognized and defended. The aim of my contribution is to analyze such tension in light of the pages that, in the 'Elements of the Philosophy of Right', Hegel devotes to the relationship of the state towards religion. In this way, I wish to show that the Hegelian perspective not only makes it possible to successfully criticize some crucial aspects of the liberal account, but also provides an alternative framework that still today deserves to be taken into consideration.

In the pages devoted to the ‘Idea of the Good’ in the Science of Logic and in the Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences, Hegel analyzes the relationship between practical rationality and reality, and in this way develops a form of philosophical analysis that today we would call ‘metaethical’. The aim of this paper is to explore this interpretative hypothesis, in order not only to shed light on extremely complex and still little studied texts, but also to demonstrate their possible contribution to the contemporary ethical debate on the problems of realism and cognitivism.

It is a commonly held idea that modern and contemporary societies, insofar as they aim to guarantee the principle of pluralism, must remain neutral towards specific moral or religious beliefs. John Rawls sums up this idea by claiming the priority of the right over the good. The aim of this contribution is to critically explore this view in light of Hegel’s 'Elements of the Philosophy of Right'. To this end, I first address the core features of Hegel’s social ontology and the role of recognition in it. I then consider its political implications in detail. My ultimate goal is to provide an alternative account to political liberalism that allows, on the one hand, for a reinterpretation of the concept of a ‘just society’ and, on the other, a reassessment of the role of values in public debate.

In this paper I focus on Kantian notions of 'idea' and 'system' and the pages that Alfredo Ferrarin dedicates to these topics in his book "The Powers of Pure Reason". In particular, I examine two key texts, namely the Appendix to Transcendental Dialectics and the Architectonics of Pure Reason in the "Critique of Pure Reason". Finally, I try to outline a comparison with Hegel's position and, in so doing, to illustrate two different ways of understanding the relationship between thought and reality.

The starting point for this essay is the idea that a good life is a life in which a person realizes herself, i.e. pursues those ends that she has reason to value. On this basis, I aim, first, to clarify the structure of human self-realization, that is, to understand how it “works”, and, second, to shed light on the role played by the natural environment in that structure. My main goal is thus to provide a theoretical framework in which nature can be understood not as an external limit to human self-realization, but as an integral part of it, namely as a constitutive feature of the good life.

The chapter on the Idea of the Good is a very important step in Hegel's Logic. In these pages, the German philosopher analyzes the fundaments of practical rationality through a reflection that today we would call "metaethical": by investigating the nature of the norms and ends that guide will and action in their interaction with reality, Hegel provides the "fundamental grammar" of his practical philosophy. The volume aims to reconstruct Hegel's texts, while showing their possible contributions to the contemporary ethical debate on the problems of realism and cognitivism.

The relation between normativity and reality represents one of the most important and challenging issues that metaethics has to deal with. Both Hegel and McDowell have faced the problem in an original way, by reaching philosophical positions that reveal interesting similarities. The core of their proposals, in fact, is the idea that both the extremes of ethical antirealism (for which norms are completely dependent on subjectivity) and strong ethical realism (for which norms are completely independent from subjectivity) provide unsatisfying answers. My aim is to sketch some outlines for a comparison between Hegel’s and McDowell’s metaethical solutions, in order to consider their affinities and divergences.

One of the strongest arguments that ethical non-cognitivism uses in its own defense is that according to which knowledge and will structure themselves as different “directions of fit”: while knowledge, in order to be correct, implies that the mind has to fit the world, the will, in order to be effective, requires that the world has to fit the mind. Non-cognitivists thus believe that moral judgments are expression of will alone, and not of knowledge, and cannot therefore be considered true or justifiable. At the end of the Science of Logic, in the pages devoted to the idea of the true and the idea of the good, Hegel analyzes in details this kind of argument and shows its groundlessness: for Hegel it is not possible to separate will from knowledge without falling into complex aporias. Aim of the contribution is to shed light on those pages, still little studied today, and thus outline a possible alternative to the non-cognitivist ethical model.

Inquiring about the quality of our lives represents a fundamental component of our self-understanding, both as individuals and as a society. This implies the possibility of describing and evaluating our development with reference both to the material living conditions in which we are and to the opportunities we have to realize ourselves. But to do this, it is important to answer preliminarily two central questions, namely: (a) in what does an individual’s self-realization consist?, and (b) how does society relate to it? The aim of this contribution is to answer these two questions by appealing to Hegel’s Elements of the Philosophy of Right. In doing so, I will attempt to show that this work allows us to deal effectively with the problem of the relationship between individual realization and social unity. By highlighting some affinities between Hegel’s Philosophy of Right and Amartya Sen’s capability approach, I will finally outline Hegel’s contribution to a social philosophy focused on the problem of human development.

The political legacy of classical German philosophy can contribute in a crucial way to the most recent developments of contemporary political thought, thereby also making sense of the contradictions underlying the social practices and institutional values of our societies. What justifies this perspective is, in the first place, the complexity of contemporaneity, which holds within itself a doubleness that can be understood in the light of the conceptual tools of classical German philosophy. On the one hand, contemporary societies seem to be facing relentless crises in the modern idea of democracy, the political subject of the nation-state, and capitalist economic structures. On the other hand, there is an ever-increasing demand for rights and new forms of recognition, not to mention the emergence of grassroots movements that strive for greater political participation and generate new collective subjectivities. By radically questioning traditional philosophical categories, Kant, Fichte and Hegel provide a new and insightful understanding of the crucial challenges of modernity. They outline a conception of practical rationality and its multiple manifestations that is irreplaceable for philosophically understanding our contemporary world.