Example: bachelor of science

Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics - Strange …

CAMBRIDGE TEXTS IN THEHISTORY OF PHILOSOPHYIMMANUEL KANTP rolegomena to Any Future MetaphysicsCAMBRIDGE TEXTS IN THEHISTORY OF PHILOSOPHYS eries editorsKARL AMERIKSP rofessor of Philosophy at the University of Notre DameDESMOND M. CLARKEP rofessor of Philosophy at University College CorkThe main objective of Cambridge Texts in the History of Philosophy is to expand the range,variety and quality of texts in the history of philosophy which are available in series includes texts by familiar names (such as Descartes and Kant) and also by lesswell-known authors. Wherever possible, texts are published in complete and unabridgedform, and translations are specially commissioned for the series.

IMMANUEL KANT Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics That Will Be Able to Come Forward as Science with Selections from the Critique of Pure Reason TRANSLATED AND EDITED BY

Tags:

  Future, Immanuel, Metaphysic, Prolegomena, Prolegomena to any future metaphysics

Information

Domain:

Source:

Link to this page:

Please notify us if you found a problem with this document:

Other abuse

Transcription of Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics - Strange …

1 CAMBRIDGE TEXTS IN THEHISTORY OF PHILOSOPHYIMMANUEL KANTP rolegomena to Any Future MetaphysicsCAMBRIDGE TEXTS IN THEHISTORY OF PHILOSOPHYS eries editorsKARL AMERIKSP rofessor of Philosophy at the University of Notre DameDESMOND M. CLARKEP rofessor of Philosophy at University College CorkThe main objective of Cambridge Texts in the History of Philosophy is to expand the range,variety and quality of texts in the history of philosophy which are available in series includes texts by familiar names (such as Descartes and Kant) and also by lesswell-known authors. Wherever possible, texts are published in complete and unabridgedform, and translations are specially commissioned for the series.

2 Each volume contains acritical introduction together with a guide to further reading and any necessary glossariesand textual apparatus. The volumes are designed for student use at undergraduate andpostgraduate level and will be of interest not only to students of philosophy, but also to awider audience of readers in the history of science, the history of theology and the historyof a list of titlespublished in the series, pleasesee end of KANTP rolegomena to AnyFuture MetaphysicsThat Will Be Able to Come Forward as Sciencewith Selections from theCritique of Pure ReasonTRANSLATED AND EDITED BYGARY HATFIELDU niversity of PennsylvaniaRevised Editioncambridge university pressCambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore.

3 S o PauloCambridge University PressThe Edinburgh Building, Cambridge cb2 2ru, UKFirst published in print format isbn-13 978-0-521-82824-6isbn-13 978-0-521-53535-9isbn-13 978-0-511-18483-3 Cambridge University Press 1997, 20042004 Information on this title: publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provision ofrelevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take placewithout the written permission of Cambridge University 0-511-18483-2isbn-10 0-521-82824-4isbn-10 0-521-53535-2 Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of urlsfor external or third-party internet websites referred to in this publication, and does notguarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New (NetLibrary)

4 EBook (NetLibrary)hardbackContentsAcknowledgme ntspageviiIntroductionixChronologyxxxvFu rther readingxxxviiiNote on texts and translationxlProlegomena to Any Future MetaphysicsTable of Contents3 Preface5 Preamble15 General Question of the Prolegomena24 General Question27 The Main Transcendental Question, First Part32 The Main Transcendental Question, Second Part46 The Main Transcendental Question, Third Part79 Solution to the General Question of the Prolegomena116 Appendix123 Selections from theCritique of Pure ReasonTable of contents of theCritique137 From thePreface to the Second Edition139 From theIntroduction154 From theTranscendental Aesthetic156 From theTranscendental Logic, Introduction161 From theAnalytic of Concepts163vContentsFrom theAnalytic of Principles171 From theTranscendental Dialectic192 From theTranscendental Doctrine of Method195 Background Source MaterialsThe G ottingen (or Garve Feder)

5 Review201 The Gotha Review208 Index212viAcknowledgmentsThis work of translation has benefited from the advice of colleagues,students, and friends. Rolf Peter Horstmann read and commented on anearly draft, raising many interesting points for discussion. Henry Allison,Peter Heath, and Karl Ameriks each provided timely and helpful com-ments and suggestions on a later version. During the academic year1995 6I met with a group of students and recent at the Univer-sity of Pennsylvania to discuss translating and to go over the translation;I am especially indebted to Lanier Anderson, Curtis Bowman, CynthiaSchossberger, and Lisa Shabel for their contributions to these discus-sions.

6 Bowman and Michelle Casino later served as my research assistantsin preparing the typescript of theProlegomenaand selections from theCritique of Pure Reasonfor publication. Lindeth Vasey at Cambridge pre-pared the typescript for printing with care and thoughtfulness. Finally,Holly Pittman read the typescript with an eye for intelligibility to a newreader of Kant. Her advice and suggestions helped the second edition I have been especially aided by Peter Heath scomments on Part Three and following of theProlegomena. Karl Ameriksand Lanier Anderson offered advice on the scope of the newly addedCritiqueselections and section of reviews.

7 Brian Chance, Mark Navin, andYumiko Inukai served as research assistants. Finally, my colleague LotharHaselberger has kindly abided discussion of Kant s German duringlunchtime at the Faculty was characteristic of the great modern philosophers to attempt, each inhis own way, to rebuild philosophy from the ground up. Kant embracedthis goal more fully than any other classical modern philosopher. And hiswork did in fact change philosophy permanently, though not always ashe intended. He wanted to show that philosophers and natural scientistswere not able, and would never be able, to give final answers to questionsabout the nature of the physical world and of the human mind or soul,and about the existence and attributes of a supreme being.

8 While he didnot accomplish precisely that, his work changed philosophy s conceptionof what can be known, and how it can be known. Kant also wanted to setforth new and permanent doctrines in Metaphysics and morals. Thoughhis exact teachings have not gained general acceptance, they continue toinspire new positions in philosophical discussion stands at the center of modern philosophy. His criticism of previ-ous work in Metaphysics and the theory of knowledge, propounded in theCritique of Pure Reasonand summarized in theProlegomena, provided acomprehensive response to early modern philosophy and a starting pointfor subsequent work.

9 He rejected previous philosophical explanations ofphilosophical cognition itself. His primary target was the rationalist useof reason or pure intellect advanced by Descartes and Leibniz as abasis for making claims about God and the essences of mind and argued that these philosophers could not possibly know what theyclaimed to know about such things, because direct knowledge of a mind-independent reality exceeds the capacity of the human intellect. He thushad some sympathy with the conclusions of empiricist philosophers, suchas Locke and Hume, who prescribed limits to human understanding. But,ixIntroductionhe contended, because these philosophers also did not analyze humancognition properly, they lacked knowledge of the principles by whichthe boundaries of human knowledge might be charted, and they did notunderstand the foundation of the legitimate Metaphysics falling withinthose boundaries.

10 Kant maintained that even the empiricist attitude toknowledge, if unchecked by an account of reason s boundaries, wouldinevitably extend beyond its own domain in the world of nature, andwould lead to unjustified assertions about such topics as the free will ofhuman beings and the existence of God, assertions that he feared wouldconflict with a proper theory of explained his own revolutionary insight by analogy with theCopernican revolution in astronomy. As Kant observed,Copernicus wasbetter able to account for the phenomena of astronomy by assuming thatthe motion attributed to the stars actually results from the motion of theobserver as stationed on the sixteenth-century astronomerattributed a daily rotation to the earth, rather than to the planets andstars themselves, and he accounted for yearly cycles in the motions of thesun and planets by attributing a yearly revolution to the earth.


Related search queries