När Immanuel Kant år 1795 lät publicera sin lilla skrift Om den eviga freden väckte den stor uppmärksamhet över hela Europa och översattes snart till flera språk. Hur kom det sig att den i samband med tvåhundraårsjubileet 1995 åter var så populär att flera av världens tongivande filosofer diskuterade den och skrev artiklar om den? Nutida tänkare lockas dock av andra idéer än de som engagerade Kants samtida. Det är främst idén om världsmedborgarskapet som på senare tid har fått förnyad aktualitet. En av grunderna för Kants ”eviga fred” är att stater ska organiseras inbördes enligt vissa principer för att sedan bilda en sammanslutning. Hur kan det inspirera i vår tids Europa? Genom att studera fredsskriftens tillkomst och de reaktioner den utsattes för, inte bara omedelbart vid utgivningen eller år 1995 utan även i exempelvis det wilhelminska Tyskland och under första världskriget, framkommer dess betydelse ur ett verkningshistoriskt perspektiv.

Cosmopolitanism is a value-loaded concept that seems to become popular in intervals. The latest cosmopolitan period started after the end of the Cold War and the breakdown of the Soviet Union and concentrated mostly on aspects such as “a new world order”, and often with reference to Kant. It might be questioned if the cosmopolitan period still exists. Here it is suggested that a historical understanding of cosmopolitanism together with experience from later social and political experiences might give a new perspective on the difficulties of creating a better world in a Kantian sense, including cosmopolitan education. Considering its history and taking concern of experience Kant’s cosmopolitanism still is relevant, not least in its broader sense.

Lettevall tager i artiklen fat på næste større fase i kosmopolitismens idéhistorie – den helt uomgængelige formulering den får i oplysningstiden og specielt hos Kant; ikke mindst i hans lille, men meget vigtige værk fra 1795, Til den evige fred. Lettevall diskuterer Kants begrænsning af kosmopolitisk ret til gæstfrihed, som han formulerede i en kritik af sin samtids kolonialisme. Hun viser også i en diskussion af Kants antropologiske forelæsninger, at kosmopolitter sagtens kan være snæversynede.

Contemporary discussions on cosmopolitanism are often based on older assumptions that have become invisible or hard to unearth. This volume explores the idea of kosmopolis by placing it into different historical, philosophical, social, and political contexts. By bringing together different views on and aspects of cosmopolitanism, the volume aims at contributing to new understandings of kosmopolis and the resulting cosmopolitan ideal, and of the fears this concept may generate.

The nine contributors discuss kosmopolis within the contexts of philosophers such as Heraclitus and Kant, the thoughts and texts of the nobility, intellectual thoughts from the Enlightenment, contemporary political institutions, and grass root cosmopolitanism. The intent is to illustrate how the meaning of »cosmopolitanism« is influenced not only by its history but also by its specific contexts.

Since the Enlightenment, the definition of terms such as humanity, citizenship and rights has fluctuated and these ideas continue to haverelevance for contemporary discussions of globalization from a «cosmopolitan» perspective. This volume goes back to the conception ofcosmopolitanism in Greek antiquity in order to trace it through history, resulting in an unmasking of its many myths. The concept is reconstructedwith reference not only to well-known (and some lesser known) historical thinkers of cosmopolitanism, but also to noted «anti-cosmopolitans».The first aim of the book is to display historical perspectives on a discourse which has been dominated by ahistorical presumptions. Thesecond is to critically explore alternative paths beyond the Western imagination, redefining the Enlightenment legacy and the centre-peripherydichotomy. Most notably, Eastern Europe and the Arab world are integrated within the analysis of cosmopolitanism. Within a framework ofconceptual history (Begriffsgeschichte), cosmopolitan reason is criticized from the viewpoints of comparative literature, psychoanalysis,phenomenology, postcolonialism and moral philosophy.The book’s critical approach is an attempt to come to terms with the anachronism, essentialism, ethnocentrism and anthropocentrism thatsometimes underlie contemporary theoretical and methodological uses of the term «cosmopolitanism». By adding historical and contextualdepth to the problem of cosmopolitanism, a reflexive corrective is presented to enhance ongoing discussions of this topic within as well asoutside academia.