Kant’s Practical Dilemma in On the Disagreement between Morals and Politics in Relation to Perpetual Peace

Kant's practical dilemma on the difference between morality and politics on perpetual peace In Appendix 1 to the Kant's political book, Kant solved the adjustment between political moral theory and political realism theory to achieve permanence . In fact it is a dilemma of peace. Kant explained that permanent peace is achieved only by reasonable means, not mandatory or political convenience. )

Kant's view on international relations shows the same tension between the principle and the facts. Kant believes that a state of peace is necessary for morality. However, this situation only occurs when a series of impossible political conditions come into force. In order to realize sustainable peace, all countries must have Republican Constitution, participate in domestic alliances, abolish resident troops, refuse to undertake national war debt under some other conditions There is no doubt. We can not expect existing governments to establish these conditions based solely on their own but there is a historical objective theory (Kant argues), but they may appear . War plays a central role in this process. It is under the threat of war to know that humans form government and that the Republican Constitution is most effective in dealing with internal and external dangers. Therefore, the country will avoid war to pursue wealth more effectively.

The political regime is brought about by the evil elements of the human constitution, but Kant wants that these institutions can have some healing effect on their subjects. As he wrote in "Permanent Peace": "Good constitution is not expected from morality, but good moral conditions of humans can only be expected under good constitution". The gap between the moral world and the political natural world can never be completely closed. Kant's morality depends on intention. If they act only on the grounds that the devil 's tribe is moved by their own interests, their country will not be morally good. They just behave like morality. Morality requires people to comply with their will. In essence, however, it is impossible to distinguish reliability between those who act responsibly and those who follow natural trends.