Abstract

At the center of much of this chapter's disagreement with Jeremy Waldron is interpreting Immanuel Kant's doctrine of jus cosmopoliticum, which can be rendered into English as “cosmopolitan right” or “cosmopolitan law.” Kant's doctrine of universal hospitality opens up a space of discourse. The discourse of hospitality moves from the language of morals to that of juridical right. No matter how limited in scope the right of hospitality may be, Kant's three articles of “Perpetual Peace,” taken together, articulate principles of legal cosmopolitanism, according to which the individual is not only a moral being who is a member of a universal moral community but is also a person entitled to a certain status in a global civil society. Referring to “hospitality” as signifying all human rights claims that are cross-border in scope, may be more intelligible when viewed against the intentions of Kant's essay as a whole.