In a new interpretation, Garrett Wallace Brown considers Kant's cosmopolitan thought as a form of international constitutional jurisprudence that requires minimal legal demands. He explores and defends topics such as cosmopolitan law, cosmopolitan right, the laws of hospitality, a Kantian federation of states, a cosmopolitan epistemology of culture and a possible normative basis for a Kantian form of global distributive justice.

Leading experts and rising stars in the field explore whether cosmopolitanism becomes impossible in the theoretical framework that assumed the absence of a final ground. The questions that the volume addresses refer exactly to the foundational predicament that characterizes cosmopolitanism: How is it possible to think cosmopolitanism after the critique of foundations? Can cosmopolitanism be conceived without an ‘ultimate’ ground? Can we construct theories of cosmopolitanism without some certainties about the entire world or about the cosmos? Should we continue to look for foundations of cosmopolitan rights, norms and values? Alternatively, should we aim towards cosmopolitanism without foundations or towards cosmopolitanism with ‘contingent foundations’? Could cosmopolitanism be the very attempt to come to terms with the failure of ultimate grounds? Written accessibly and contributing to key debates on political philosophy, and social and political thought, this volume advances the concept of post-foundational cosmopolitanism by bridging the polarised approaches to the concept.

Two kinds of cosmopolitan vision are typically associated with Kant's practical philosophy: on the one hand, the ideal of a universal moral community of rational agents who constitute a 'kingdom of ends' qua shared humanity. On the other hand, the ideal of a distinctly political community of'world citizens' who share membership in some kind of global polity. Kant's Grounded Cosmopolitanism introduces a novel account of Kant's global thinking, one that has hitherto been largely overlooked: a grounded cosmopolitanism concerned with spelling out the normative implications of the fact thata plurality of corporeal agents concurrently inhabit the earth's spherical surface. It is neither concerned with a community of shared humanity in the abstract, nor of shared citizenship, but with a 'disjunctive' community of earth dwellers, that is, embodied agents in direct physical confrontationwith each other. Kant's grounded cosmopolitanism as laid out in the Doctrine of Right frames the question how individuals relate to one another globally by virtue of concurrent existence and derives from this a specific set of constraints on cross-border interactions.

This book examines the history of cosmopolitanism from its origins in the ancient world up to its use in Kantian political philosophy. Taking the idea of ‘common property of the land’ as a starting point, the author makes the original case that attention to this concept is needed to properly understand the notion of cosmopolitan citizenship. Offering a reconstruction of cosmopolitanism from an interdisciplinary point of view, Toward Kantian Cosmopolitanism shows how the concept sits at the intersection between philosophical debates, legal realities and the origins of the construction of the discipline of international law. Essential reading for all researchers and advances students of cosmopolitanism, political philosophy and the history of international law, it broadens the current understanding of the concept of cosmopolitanism and reflects on cosmopolitan studies from a historical and philosophical point of view.

Is a global institutional order composed of sovereign states fit for cosmopolitan moral purpose? Cosmopolitan political theorists challenge claims that states, nations or other collectives have ultimate moral significance. They focus instead on individuals: on what they share and on what each may owe to all the others. They see principles of distributive justice - and increasingly political justice - applying with force in a global system in which billions continue to suffer from severe poverty and deprivation, political repression, interstate violence and other ills. Cosmopolitans diverge widely, however, on the institutional implications of their shared moral view. Some argue that the current system of competing sovereign states tends to promote unjust outcomes and stands in need of deep structural reform. Others reject such claims and contend that justice can be pursued through transforming the orientations and conduct of individual and collective agents, especially states. This volume brings together prominent political theorists and International Relations scholars -- including some skeptics of cosmopolitanism -- in a far-ranging dialogue about the institutional implications of the cosmopolitan approach. Contributors offer penetrating analyses of both continuing and emerging issues around state sovereignty, democratic autonomy and accountability, and the promotion and protection of human rights. They also debate potential reforms of the current global system, from the transformation of cities and states to the creation of some encompassing world government capable of effectively promoting cosmopolitan aims.

Enlightenment Cosmopolitanism brings together ten innovative contributions by outstanding scholars working across a wide array of disciplines in the humanities and social sciences. Interdisciplinary in its methodology and compass, with a strong comparative European dimension, the volume examines discourses ranging from literature, historiography, music and opera to anthropology and political philosophy. It makes an original contribution to the study of 18th-century ideas of universal peace, progress and wealth as the foundation of future debates on cosmopolitanism. At the same time, it analyses examples of counter-reaction to these ideas and discusses the relevance of the Enlightenment for subsequent polemics on cosmopolitanism, including 21st-century debates in sociology, politics and legal theory.

A perennial debate in the field of global ethics revolves around the possibility of a universalist ethics as well as arguments over the nature, and significance, of difference for moral deliberation. Decolonial literature, in particular, increasingly signifies a pluriverse – one with radical ontological and epistemological differences. This book examines the concept of the pluriverse alongside global ethics and the ethics of care in order to contemplate new ethical horizons for engaging across difference. Offering a challenge to the current state of the field, this book argues for a rethinking of global ethics as it has been conceived thus far.