This work contrasts two likely interpretations of Kant's Doctrine of Right. The first one, Rawls' interpretation, herein challenged, supports that Kant develops a contract theory of property, according to which distribution of goods could only be binding if everybody had approved it at the time the civil state had been constituted. The second interpretation, herein advocated, supports that different iura are possible as a result of the lex permissiva referred to by Kant in the private right doctrine. According to said law, the appropriation of property belonging to no one by way of the occupatio is plainly lawful, therefore, binding for the others.
|Translated title of the contribution||"Lex permissiva" or contract: Critique to rawl's reading of Kant's∗doctrine of right|
|Number of pages||25|
|Journal||Revista de Estudios Historico-Juridicos|
|State||Published - 2014|