本文主旨在於闡明康德的政治自由，在康德政治哲學中，康德所 討論的是什麼樣的自由概念？本文分析當代對康德《道德形上學》(The Metaphysics of Morals )之兩種不同取向的詮釋：其一為倫理式 詮釋，主張這種取向的詮釋者傾向透過康德道德哲學的理論框架來理 解其後期的政治著作；另一則為政治式詮釋，主要是因應倫理式詮釋 所遇到的詮釋困難而興起，傾向給予康德後期政治著作較多獨立性。 本文除了闡明當代對康德政治哲學的現狀外，亦探討當前討論最多的政治式詮釋---以Arthur Ripstein之共和式詮釋為代表-本文指出儘管此一詮釋成功因應了倫理式詮釋所遇到的困難，其本身仍有所疏 漏，藉著指出「外在自由」在康德政治論述中的關鍵地位，本文期望 對政治式詮釋提出修正。

This article aims to answer a fundamental question about Kant’s political philosophy: what is political freedom in Kant’s political writings (especially in his mysterious The Metaphysics of Morals)? I argue in this article that what Kant intended to stress is the conception of external freedom as property right. To argue this, I first analyze two main contemporary interpretations of Kant’s political philosophy, namely ethical reading and political reading of Kant. While the latter has resolved some of the interpretive difficulties that the former encounters, the political reading has its own internal difficulties. By drawing attention to Kant’s oft-ignored conception of external freedom, I argue that these internal difficulties can be resolved.