Property and “Nuda Potestas” as Constitutions of Reinach’s Philosophy of Law

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-6069.90.06

Keywords:

dominium, nuda potestas, property, law, slavery

Abstract

This contribution centers on the notions of property and nuda potestas in Reinach’s philosophy of law. I aim to demonstrate how both terms ground an important part of Reinach’s understanding of a priori condition for civil rights. Consequently, I assess the principle of property with a comparison to Luis de Molina, since he shows in his De Iustitia et Iure how dominium and rights justify some forms of property (lay and ecclesiastical) and political power (Molina 1659, disp2 n1; Kaufmann 2014, 129). Hence, the right of the person is discussed by following the potestas. In Die apriorischen Grundlagen des bürgerlichen Rechtes, Reinach implicitly refers to the nuda potestas, which is a kind of power that can be applied only formally and not in fact to something else and for that reason, it can only be caught a priori, since acts are performed by another person within it. This is the reason why the rights of a person can be divided between more people, and it is at first just a kind of property, which can be exercised upon the individual. Consequently, I divide my contribution as follows. First, in considering the social act, I show how its characteristics of Anspruch and Verbindlichkeit result from the commitment that human beings make to one another. In doing this, I discuss the particular condition of slavery through which it is possible to find the property and the nuda potestas since there is no enjoyment of the good to which it refers. Second, I apply both concepts by showing a parallel with Luis de Molina. This comes about in consideration of the case of dominium, in which absolute rights can be ascribed to their relative claim. Third and finally, I offer a critique of Reinach, in which I show how absolute rights and relative claims cannot be assimilated.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Brunner, Melanie. 2014. “Pope John XXII and the michaelists the scriptural title of evangelical poverty in quia vir reprobus”. Church History and Religious Culture 94(2): 197–226.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/18712428-09402002

Burkhardt, Armin. 1987. “Verpflichtung und Verbindlichkeit. Ethische Aspekte in der Rechtsphilosophie Adolf Reinachs”. In Speech Act and Sachverhalt. 155–174. Edited by Kevin Mulligan. Dordrecht: Springer.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3521-1_7

Byrd, B. Sharon. Joachim Hruschka. 2006. “The Natural Law Duty to Recognize Private Property Ownership: Kant’s Theory of Property in His Doctrine of Right”. The University of Toronto Law Journal 56(2): 217–282.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/tlj.2006.0006

Calcagno, Antonio. 2016. “A place for the role of community in the structure of the state: Edith Stein and Edmund Husserl”. Continental Philosophy Review 49(4): 403–416.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11007-015-9363-z

Calcagno, Antonio. Ed. 2018. Gerda Walther’s Phenomenology of Sociality, Psychology, and Religion. Vol. 2. Women in the History of Philosophy and Sciences. New York: Springer.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97592-4

Carron, Delphine. 2018. “Dominium in Ptolemy of Lucca’s De regime Principum (c. 1301–1302)”. In Von Natur und Herrschaft: ‘Natura’ und ‘Dominium’ in der politischen Theorie des 13. und 14. Jahrhunderts. Edited by Matthias Lutz Bachmann, Delphine Carron, Anselm Spindler, Marco Toste. Frankfurt–New York: Campus Verlag.
Google Scholar

DuBois, James M. 2002. “Adolf Reinach: Metaethics and the philosophy of law”. In Phenomenological approaches to moral philosophy. 327–346. Dordrecht: Springer Verlag.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9924-5_17

Duxbur, Neil. 1991. “The Legal Philosophy of Adolf Reinach”. Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie/Archives for Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy 77(3): 314–347.
Google Scholar

Falcioni, Daniela. 2002. “Immanuel Kant und Adolf Reinach: Zwei Linien des Widerstandes im Vergleich”. Kant Studien 93(3): 351–370.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/kant.2002.013

Ferrer, Urbano. 2015. “Los múltiple a priori de los actos sociales en Adolf Reinach”. Tópicos, Revista De Filosofía 49: 209–230.
Google Scholar

Flikschuh, Katrin. Lea Ypi. 2014. Kant and colonialism: Historical and critical perspectives. Oxford – New York: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199669622.001.0001

González-Di Pierro, Eduardo. 2016. “The influence of Adolf Reinach on Edith Stein’s concept of the state: Similarities and differences”. In Edith Stein: Women, Social-Political Philosophy, Theology, Metaphysics and Public History: New Approaches and Applications. 93–105. Edited by Antonio Calgagno. Cham: Springer.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21124-4_9

Grotius, Hugo. 2012. On the Law of War and Peace. Edited by Stephen C. Neff. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Harding, Andrew. Esin Örücü. Eds. 2002. Comparative law in the 21st century. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International.
Google Scholar

Husserl, Edmund. Manuscript A I 3.
Google Scholar

Husserl, Gerhart. 1944. “Global War and the Law of Nations”. Virginia Law Review 30(4): 543–602.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1068410

Jörs, Paul. Leopold Wenger. 1927. Römisches Recht: Geschichte und System des römischen Privatrechts. Abriss des römischen Zivilprozessrechts. Enzyklopädie der Rechts- und Staatswissenschaft. Abteilung Rechtswissenschaft 2–3. Berlin: Springer.
Google Scholar

Kant, Immanuel. 1887. The philosophy of law: an exposition of the fundamental principles of jurisprudence as the science of right. Translated by W. Hastie. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark
Google Scholar

Kant, Immanuel. 1991. The metaphysics of morals. Translated by Mary J. Gregor. Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Kaufmann, Matthias. 2005. “Das Recht auf Eigentum im Mittelalter”. In Was ist Eigentum? Philosophische Eigentumstheorien von Platon bis Habermas. Edited by Andreas Eckl, Bernd Ludwig. München: C.H. Beck.
Google Scholar

Kaufmann, Matthias. 2013. “Subjektive Rechte bei Luis de Molina”. In Contending for law: arguments about the foundation of law from Vitoria to Suárez. 291–311. Edited by Kirstin Bunge, Andreas Wagner. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog.
Google Scholar

Kaufmann, Matthias. 2016. “Giambattista Vicos Umgang mit dem Begriff des dominium”. Laboratorio Dell’ISPF 13.
Google Scholar

Molina, Lodovici. 1602. De iustitia et iure tomi duo. Moguntiae: Excudebat Balthasarus Lippius, sumptibus Arnoldi Mylij.
Google Scholar

Paulson, Stanley L. 1987. “Demystifying Reinach’s legal theory”. In Speech Act and Sachverhalt. 133–154. Edited by Kevin Mulligan. Dordrecht: Springer.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3521-1_6

Planitz, Hans. 1949. Grundzüge des deutschen Privatrechts. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-86915-0

Reinach, Adolf. 1905. Über den Ursachenbegriff im geltenden Strafrecht. Leipzig: Verlag von Johann Ambrosius Barth.
Google Scholar

Reinach, Adolf. 1983. The Apriori Foundations of the Civil Law. Translated by John F. Crosby. Aletheia 3: 1–142.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110329803.1

Salice, Alessandro. 2008. “Obbligazione e pretesa in Adolf Reinach: Due relazioni sociali”. Rivista Di Estetica 39: 225–240.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/estetica.2046

Salice, Alessandro. Hans B. Schmid. Eds. 2016. Social Reality – The Phenomenological Approach. In The Phenomenological Approach to Social Reality. History, Concepts, Problems. 1–14. Cham: Springer.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27692-2_1

Simmermacher, Danaë. 2018. Eigentum als ein subjektives Recht bei Luis de Molina (1535–1600): Dominium und Sklaverei in De Iustitia et Iure. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110551938

Smith, James. 2017. Wert, Rechtheit und Gut: Adolf Reinach’s Contribution to Early Phenomenological Ethics. Nordhausen: Traugott Bautz.
Google Scholar

Stella, Giuliana. 1990. I giuristi di Husserl: L’interpretazione fenomenologica del diritto. Milano: Giuffrè.
Google Scholar

Tellkamp, Joerg Allejandro. 2014. “Rights and dominium”. In A Companion to Luis de Molina. Edited by Alexander Aichele, Mathias Kaufmann. 123–153. Leiden–Boston: Brill.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004262188_005

Walther, Gerda. 1922. Ein Beitrag zur Ontologie der sozialen Gemeinschaft. Halle: Max Niemeyer.
Google Scholar

Zelaniec, Wojciech. 1992. “Fathers, kings, and promises: Husserl and Reinach on the a priori”. Husserl Studies 9(3): 147–177.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00142814

Downloads

Published

2020-03-28

How to Cite

Massa, M. (2020). Property and “Nuda Potestas” as Constitutions of Reinach’s Philosophy of Law. Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Iuridica, 90, 75–89. https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-6069.90.06

Issue

Section

Articles