{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017543859649122806, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.838582677165355, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
New Work on Kant's Doctrine of Right

Until relatively recently, The Metaphysics of Morals, Kant’s final published work in practical philosophy, was pretty much unknown to Englishlanguage philosophers. Concentration on Kant’s practical philosophy was focused overwhelmingly on the Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals with little discussion of what it was that this work was providing the ‘groundwork’ for. In recent years there has been a welcome change in this regard with some attention finally beginning to be paid to the later work. To have not one, but two, full-length detailed commentaries devoted to the first part of the Metaphysics of Morals, the Doctrine of Right, is, however, a sign that serious attention is at last being paid not just to the late work but to the specific part of it in which Kant gives his most detailed and mature views concerning law and politics. The two works under review have quite different approaches to the Doctrine of Right. Ripstein largely abstains from sustained textual analysis, attempting instead an elaborate reconstruction of the arguments of the Doctrine of Right. Byrd and Hruschka, by contrast, pay detailed attention to specific passages and questions in the work with the aim of elaborating what they take to be its core argument. Another way of glossing this difference would be to say that Ripstein’s work is intended to give an account of the import of the Doctrine of Right in such a way that the lay reader will grasp