Product Description
Critique of Practical Reason, written by legendary author Immanuel Kant is widely considered to be one of the greatest classic and historical texts of all time. This great classic will surely attract a whole new generation of readers. For many, Critique of Practical Reason is required reading for various courses and curriculums. And for others who simply enjoy reading timeless pieces of classic literature, this gem by Immanuel Kant is highly recommended. Published by Classic Books International and beautifully produced, Critique of Practical Reason would make an ideal gift and it should be a part of everyone's personal library. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

It's Too Good for Me to Read
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000JQUEUQ/ref=cm_cr_rev_prod_img

This is one of the most important philosophy books ever written; unfortunately it is so dense that it is over the heads of most people. I'm one of them, and I have a Ph.D.(Doctor of Philosophy)degree in English. But I studied only the philosophy of creating and reading texts, rather than general philosophy. I can talk all day about deconstruction and semiotics, but don't expect me to understand Kant. (By the way, deconstruction is often used completely incorrectly, to prove things that just aren't true.) I find myself wondering how Kant would have made out in Van Vogt's Null-A universe.

Making the ideas stick
The 'Critique of Practical Reason' is the second volume in Immanuel Kant's major Critique project. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is considered one of the giants of philosophy, of his age or any other. It is largely this book that provides the foundation of this assessment. Whether one loves Kant or hates him (philosophically, that is), one cannot really ignore him; even when one isn't directly dealing with Kantian ideas, chances are great that Kant is made an impact.

Kant was a professor of philosophy in the German city of Konigsberg, where he spent his entire life and career. Kant had a very organised and clockwork life - his habits were so regular that it was considered that the people of Konigsberg could set their clocks by his walks. The same regularity was part of his publication history, until 1770, when Kant had a ten-year hiatus in publishing. This was largely because he was working on this book, the 'Critique of Pure Reason'. He then published this second installment, 'Critique of Practical Reason', seven years later.

Kant as a professor of philosophy was familiar with the Rationalists, such as Descartes, who founded the Enlightenment and in many ways started the phenomenon of modern philosophy. He was also familiar with the Empiricist school (John Locke and David Hume are perhaps the best known names in this), which challenged the rationalist framework. Between Leibniz' monads and Hume's development of Empiricism to its logical (and self-destructive) conclusion, coupled with the Romantic ideals typified by Rousseau, the philosophical edifice of the Enlightenment seemed about to topple.

The foundations of this text (a much briefer one than the first Critique) can be found in the short volume 'Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals'. Whereas 'Groundwork' sets out some short, basic principles, the Critique is a more synthetic text - it takes these principles and combines them with experiences, then presenting them 'as the structure of a peculiar cognitive faculty, in their natural combination.'

According to translator and scholar Lewis White Beck, this second Critique has two functions - it affirms concepts 'without which moral experience would be unintelligible or impossible' while it negates dogmatism and fanaticism that claims unique ultimate insight into metaphysical realities. Kant does make his argument for the existence of the immortal soul and for God in this volume, but these are considered lesser areas of Kant's competence. His discussion of freedom and autonomy, carried forward from his discussion in 'Groundwork', is much more studied and used in today's philosophical circles.

... Read more

Product Description
An Unabridged, Digitally Enhanced Edition Including, But Not Limited To: Transition From The Common Rational Knowledge Of Morality To The Philosophical - Transition From Popular Moral Philosophy To The Metaphysic Of Morals - Final Step From The Metaphysic Of Morals To The Critique Of The Pure Practical Reason ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

U concise introduction to Kant's thought
Kant is not considered as one of the more accessible philosophers, and most of his monumental works are too long and beyond reach of an average reader. This short book is still fairly advanced and conceptually sophisticated, but fortunately due to its length it does not go much too deep in philosophical concepts. The book deals on several occasions with the central concept in Kant's moral philosophy, and that is the concept of categorical imperative. This imperative can be summed up in Kant's famous dictum: "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law." Several other famous Kant concepts - like practical reason, pure reason, treating humans like ends and not as means in moral considerations, etc. - are dealt with throughout the book. You might need to read the book several times before you get a better understanding of what is being discussed, but again, since it is so short, this can be easily done. The language of the translation sounds a bit archaic to the modern ear, but this does not obscure the meaning at all. Overall, reading this book would be a worthwhile endeavor and as good of a starting point to start reading Kant as they come.

Read this book more than once
This short compendium is noteworthy in its pith. Kant can say an awful lot in a short book. To get the full value of this read, be sure to take plenty of notes and re read it in a few months when you have mulled the book over, perhaps talking to friends about it.

There is one essential concept here and of course that is morals. How do we come by them and how do we distinguish them. In contemporary America, the most strident and vocal "moralists" will explain that it takes the acceptance of a personal God. Kant makes us look more closely at this concept.

Essentially he distinguishes between a moral that has "ends". We do the right thing, perhaps even the noblest thing because of various ends. Those may include the good graces of others who admire your morality or the desire to avoid the shame of acting in an immoral fashion for two examples.
... Read more

Product Description
A pivotal piece of philosophical literature, "The Critique of Pure Reason" is quite likely Immanuel Kant's greatest work. Kant was a professor of philosophy in the German city of Konisberg during the late 1700s. It was during that time that he penned several works based on his philosophical beliefs of which the greatest is often considered to be this work. Considered by many as one of the most important works of philosophy ever written, "The Critique of Pure Reason" puts forth Kant belief that true knowledge comes from a combination of pure reason and experience. Presented here in this volume is the classic translation of J. M. D. Meiklejohn. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

mobi version
This book is both long and dense, and that is putting it lightly. As usual, the mobi version of this book for Kindle has a fully linked table of contents, but each and every footnote throughout the book is a link as well. In most cases I wouldn't make a deal of this, but for this book in particular the feature is indispensable. You can quickly jump to the footnote, then press back and jump right back to the page you were reading. In regard to the table of contents being linked to each and every little section of this book, one might call it excessive, but I prefer to call it "thorough."

In short, this version is perfect to have for referencing specific sections or even for a full reading of Kant's Critique of Pure Reason.

A foundation stone of modern philosophy
Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is considered one of the giants of philosophy, of his age or any other. It is largely this book that provides the foundation of this assessment. Whether one loves Kant or hates him (philosophically, that is), one cannot really ignore him; even when one isn't directly dealing with Kantian ideas, chances are great that Kant is made an impact.

Kant was a professor of philosophy in the German city of Konigsberg, where he spent his entire life and career. Kant had a very organised and clockwork life - his habits were so regular that it was considered that the people of Konigsberg could set their clocks by his walks. The same regularity was part of his publication history, until 1770, when Kant had a ten-year hiatus in publishing. This was largely because he was working on this book, the 'Critique of Pure Reason'.

Kant as a professor of philosophy was familiar with the Rationalists, such as Descartes, who founded the Enlightenment and in many ways started the phenomenon of modern philosophy. He was also familiar with the Empiricist school (John Locke and David Hume are perhaps the best known names in this), which challenged the rationalist framework. Between Leibniz' monads and Hume's development of Empiricism to its logical (and self-destructive) conclusion, coupled with the Romantic ideals typified by Rousseau, the philosophical edifice of the Enlightenment seemed about to topple.

Kant rode to the rescue, so to speak. He developed an idea that was a synthesis of Empirical and Rationalist ideas. He developed the idea of a priori knowledge (that coming from pure reasoning) and a posterior knowledge (that coming from experience) and put them together into synthetic a priori statements as being possible. Knowledge, for Kant, comes from a synthesis of pure reason concepts and experience. Pure thought and sense experience were intertwined. However, there were definite limits to knowledge. Appearance/phenomenon was different from Reality/noumena - Kant held that the unknowable was the 'ding-an-sich', roughly translated as the 'thing-in-itself', for we can only know the appearance and categorial aspects of things.

Kant was involved heavily in scientific method, including logic and mathematical methods, to try to describe the various aspects of his development. This is part of what makes Kant difficult reading for even the most dedicated of philosophy students and readers. He spends a lot of pages on logical reasoning, including what makes for fallacious and faulty reasoning. He also does a good deal of development on the ideas of God, the soul, and the universe as a whole as being essentially beyond the realm of this new science of metaphysics - these are not things that can be known in terms of the spatiotemporal realm, and thus proofs and constructs about them in reason are bound to fail.

Kant does go on to attempt to prove the existence of God and the soul (and other things) from moral grounds, but that these cannot be proved in the scientific methodology of his metaphysics and logic. This book presents Kant's epistemology and a new concept of metaphysics that involves transcendental knowledge, a new category of concepts that aims to prove one proposition as the necessary presupposition of another. This becomes the difficulty for later philosophers, but it does become a matter that needs to be addressed by them.

As Kant writes at the end of the text, 'The critical path alone is still open. If the reader has had the courtesy and patience to accompany me along this path, he may now judge for himself whether, if he cares to lend his aid in making this path into a high-road, it may not be possible to achieve before the end of the present century what many centuries have not been able to accomplish; namely, to secure for human reason complete satisfacton in regard to that with which it has all along so eagerly occupied itself, though hitherto in vain.' This is heavy reading, but worthwhile for those who will make the journey with Kant.
... Read more

Product Description
The book has no illustrations or index. Purchasers are entitled to a free trial membership in the General Books Club where they can select from more than a million books without charge. Subjects: Philosophy / General; Philosophy / Ethics ... Read more

Product Description
The masterpiece of the father of modern philosophy

A seminal text of modern philosophy, Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason (1781) made history by bringing together two opposing schools of thought: rationalism, which grounds all our knowledge in reason, and empiricism, which traces all our knowledge to experience. Published here in a lucid reworking of Max Müller's classic translation, the Critique is a profound investigation into the nature of human reason, establishing its truth, falsities, illusions, and reality. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (9)

I dare you to read this book!
Like Musil's adolescent hero, Törle, who "stopped reading in exhaustion after half an hour, and had only reached page two", I only got to page 2 of the last "book" : the section on "Reason".
I reread the two pages, and decided I'd better read the introduction. My advice, be sure to read all of the Introductions first.If you really want to suffer, read the 400+ pages on logic.
(Though you could save yourself some torment and just skip to the section on Reason.)
Then be prepared for pure frustration. Take long walks or sit on the porch and just think. Or do what Kant did, take a lot of naps, maybe the clarification will come to you in a dream. And limit it to no more than 40 or 50 pages per day.

It's not that what he is trying to say is so difficult to understand, it's his manner of writing. He starts sentences (just about all of them), then inserts a clause, then a clause to clarify that clause, ad infinitum. One "paragraph" was a page and a half long, and contained 9 commas and a semi-colon. By the time you get to the end, you have no idea what he said.
What was interesting, and the reason I choose to read it is that the book was referenced by several other challenging books I read recently on Religion, Reason and recent discoveries in Astrology. He does, infact, express thoughts on all three subjects.
Yes, there is a tie.
I dare you to read it.

Misses some vital points
Insofar as Marcus Weigelt has preserved and improved upon the virtues of the original Müller versions of 1881 and 1896, his work is to be commended. On the other hand he has made some poor choices in departing from Müller. In particular, his choice of "purposiveness" for "Zweckmassigkeit" is one that merits comment. Lamentably, the more recent translations made by Paul Guyer/Allen Wood and Werner Pluhar have moved toward a more "literalistic" approach and have also adopted certain questionable terminology that Müller did not. The choices they made were unfortunate in many cases, and regrettably Weigelt has followed them in this practice. What made Müller the best version available was that he avoided terms such as "purposiveness", which is anachronistic, unintelligible, ambiguous, incorrect, absurd, and therefore indefensible.

Perhaps only a tiny fraction of English speakers know the word "purposiveness", and those very few who do know what it means also know that it's the wrong word to use in a translation of Kant.

This revision is therefore to be used with caution and cannot be recommended without reservation.

The introduction is excellent, by the way, and is perhaps the most significant contribution in the volume.

I am, however, deeply disappointed in some of the changes Marcus has made.

Let's consider the changes Marcus has made in this passage from A691/B719:

Denn da dienen alle sich in der Natur zeigenden, oft nur von uns selbst dazu gemachten Zwecke dazu, es uns in der Erforschung der Ursachen recht bequem zu machen, nämlich, anstatt sie in den allgemeinen Gesetzen des Mechanismus der Materie zu suchen, sich geradezu auf den unerforschlichen Ratschluß der höchsten Weisheit zu berufen, und die Vernunftbemühung alsdann für vollendet anzusehen, wenn man sich ihres Gebrauchs überhebt, der doch nirgend einen Leitfaden findet, als wo ihn uns die Ordnung der Natur und die Reihe der Veränderungen, nach ihren inneren und allgemeineren Gesetzen, an die Hand gibt. Dieser Fehler kann vermieden werden, wenn wir nicht bloß einige Naturstücke, als z. B. die Verteilung des festen Landes, das Bauwerk desselben, und die Beschaffenheit und Lage der Gebirge, oder wohl gar nur die Organisation im Gewächs- und Tierreiche aus dem Gesichtspunkte der Zwecke betrachten, sondern diese systematische Einheit der Natur, in Beziehung auf die Idee einer höchsten Intelligenz, ganz allgemein machen. Denn alsdann legen wir eine Zweckmäßigkeit nach allgemeinen Gesetzen der Natur zum Grunde, von denen keine besondere Einrichtung ausgenommen, sondern nur mehr oder weniger kenntlich für uns ausgezeichnet worden..."

Here is Müller's original 1881 version of the passage:

For here all the aims which we observe in nature, many of which we only imagined ourselves, serve to make the investigation of causes extremely easy, if, instead of looking for them in the general mechanical laws of matter, we appeal directly to the unsearchable counsel of the supreme wisdom, imagining the efforts of our reason as ended, when we have really dispensed with its employment, which nowhere finds its proper guidance, except where the order of nature and the succession of changes, according to their own internal and general laws, supply it. This error may be avoided, if we do not merely consider certain parts of nature, such as the distribution of land, its structure, the constitution and direction of certain mountains, or even the organisation of plants and animals, from the standpoint of final aims, but look upon this systematical unity of nature as something general, in relation to tile idea of a supreme intelligence. For, in this case, we look upon nature as founded on intelligent purposes, according to general laws, no particular arrangement of nature being exempt from them, but only exhibiting them more or less distinctly.

Here is Weigelt's revision:

For here all the purposes which we observe in nature, many of which we only convert into such ourselves, serve to make the investigation of causes extremely easy, if, instead of looking for them in the universal laws of the mechanism of matter, we appeal directly to the unsearchable counsel of the supreme wisdom; and we thus imagine the efforts of our reason as being completed, when we have really dispensed with its use, which use finds no proper guidance anywhere, except where it is supplied by the order of nature and the series of alterations occurring according to their own inner and universal laws. This error may be avoided if we do not merely consider, from the standpoint of purposes, certain parts of nature, such as the distribution of land, its structure, the constitution and location of certain mountains, or even just the organization of the plant and animal kingdoms, from the standpoint of final aims, but instead make this systematical unity of nature in relation to tile idea of a supreme intelligence something universal. For in this case we look upon nature as founded on purposiveness according to universal laws of nature, from which no particular arrangement is exempt, but which only exhibit such arrangement more or less distinctly.

I see no improvement here. I believe that Weigelt may have erred in changing Müller's attribution of "them" from "laws" to "arrangement". The former seems more likely, i.e., that any particular arrangement exhibits the laws more or less distinctly.

Also, 'unerforschlich' is 'inscrutable', not 'unsearchable'.

I offer the following revision as being clearer and more intelligible:

For, in this case, the design which we observe in nature, and often that which we merely fancy to exist, makes the investigation of causes quite an easy task, if, instead of looking for them in the universal mechanical laws of matter, we appeal directly to the inscrutable counsel of a supreme wisdom. We are thus persuaded that reason has finished its work, when we have merely dispensed with its employment, which is guided surely and safely only by the order of nature and the succession of changes in the world, which are disposed according to immanent and universal laws. This error may be avoided, if we do not merely regard certain parts of nature, such as the distribution of continents, their structure, the constitution and orientation of certain mountains, or even the organization existing in the vegetable and animal kingdoms, from the standpoint of fulfilling particular ends, but look upon this systematical unity of nature as something universal, in relation to the idea of a supreme intelligence. For, in this case, we look upon nature as founded on intelligent purposes, though in conformity with universal laws, no particular arrangement of nature being exempt from them, but only exhibiting them more or less distinctly.

Critique of Pure Reason
Recently, I was walking back to my office when a university undergraduate student stopped me and asked if I had an interest in philosophy.I replied, yes and she proceeded to tell me that she had begun a study of the subject and wondered what I recommended for her to read.

Since I knew she was very bright, I asked if she had heard of Immanuel Kant. Her answer was no.Have you heard of the Critique of Pure Reason?I received another no.

As any good philosophy student knows, Emmanuel Kant is one of the cornerstones of Western Philosophy.The Critique of Pure Reason is a sacrosanct text.

Emanuel Kant was not elevated to this position by happenstance.He earned his place in philosophy.

According to Kant, experience is the basis of all our knowledge.A person born blind, has no knowledge of darkness since it has no relevance to his/her reality because light is an experience unknown to the blind.Without light there is no corresponding darkness.

To Kant the world is a never ending stage which presents marvels which overwhelms our limited abilities and senses to comprehend or appreciate the beauty of creation. The Author of the World gives people the ability to experience and therefore to reason based on that experience.

The logical path of the critique of pure reason is scientific knowledge.Therefore, the critique of pure reason is a special science.It is not dogmatic in nature; it is a critique not a doctrine.

So, if you want to get into philosophy at a deep level, dive into Kant.If you want to build up to the pure reason architectural framework in Kant, begin with Plato, Aristotle and Epicurus.

To pursue philosophy should not be viewed as an adventure for the young.One is never too old to embrace the heritage of philosophy.

Excellent Translation and Introduction
As a philosophy undergrad, I found the text well translated and the translator's introduction instructive. Obviously, if you are looking for a heavily annotated version, this is not it. This version, rather, contains a modest amount of necessary endnotes and clarifications that are necessary for a proper reading of the text. Various terms ("appearance", "knowledge", and "representation" being among the most notorious) are translated consistently. I found this relative lack of clutter on the page at least psychologically reassuring as I read the Critique, an otherwise un-reassuring text. If you want to read the Critique, then purchase this addition. If you require more depth, then purchase an additional compendium and commentary. I am myself familiar with the Meiklejohn translation; I would recommend this text over that text or any reworking of that text (the Muller translation came after Meiklejohn's and was unanimously considered an improvement).

If you are wondering whether or not you should read this book at all, then my advice is to read the first hundred pages for your own edification. If you are a philosophy student, then read the Transcendental Logic. In any case, this is a classic, so a complete reading is optimal. As someone who studies philosophy of mind, I find many parallels between what Kant claims and what present day philosophers claim.

It is reasonable to say that if one takes a well-reasoned stance on Kant in his Critique of Pure Reason and Critique of Judgment, then one has taken a stance on modern western philosophy.

the Über-translation of the Kritik...
Über-translation of the Kritik...
.
The Critique of Pure Reason is the sine qua non of modern thought, as it incorporates the most significant earlier critiques of Plato, Aristotle, Hume, and Descartes, in turn becoming the point of departure (on one hand) for Schopenhauer, and (on the other) for Hegel, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Wittgenstein, and Deleuze--besides its further influence on social and literary criticism (e.g., Marx, Mill, Arnold, Eliot, Adorno, et al.).

Of course the Kritik is a very complex and dry text--(more readable than Hegel and Heidegger; less readable than Schopenhauer and Nietzsche)--which requires much moisture of psychic perspiration.

Question: which English translation should one get?

Modern English readers have five choices:

1) Kemp Smith (1929) based on Müller (1881) [based on Meiklejohn (1855) and Haywood (1838)];
2) Politis (1993) based on Meiklejohn (1855);
3) Pluhar (1996);
4) Guyer/Wood (1998);
5) Weigelt (2007) based on Müller (1881).

(F. Max Müller was the son of Wilhelm Müller who supplied Schubert with the texts for his immortal song-cycles The Lovely Mill-Maid, and the Winter's Journey.)

Bottom line: Guyer/Wood (Cambridge UP) though touted to be "definitive," in fact contains numerous errors.

Conclusion: scholars and thinkers of all walks would be doing themselves a favour in utilising Weigelt's fine translation featured here.
For Weigelt is a perspicacious scholar of great intellectual integrity and technical accuracy who writes a nice English with a sense of humour.
Weigelt's 60 page introduction is invaluable.
Moreover, the design of the text and the physical dimensions book itself are of the most propitious and gratifying qualities.

As with any great text--however many superb commentaries, criticisms, and explications one may read--there is absolutely NO SUBSTITUTE for personal interaction with the primary text itself.

Therefore, this English version of the Kritik is recommended.
. ... Read more

Product Description
This is the first full-length biography in more than fifty years of Immanuel Kant, one of the giants among the pantheon of Western philosophers, and one of the most powerful and influential in contemporary philosophy. Taking account of the most recent scholarship, Manfred Kuehn allows the reader to follow the same journey that Kant himself took in emerging as a central figure in modern philosophy.Manfred Kuehn was formerly Professor of Philosophy at Purdue University. A specialist on German philosophy of the period, he is the author of numerous articles and papers on Immanuel Kant. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (10)

Explore the life of a Prussian Genius
I found this book engaging. It was recommended to me by a former philosophy professor. For anyone looking for a solid, accesible introduction to the life and mind of a great thinker, this is the place to start. Kuehn delves into Kant's family background, the society, his ideas, his relationships with women and the Prussian upper-classes. We learn about Kant's health, his weak digestion and the strained relationships he had with his siblings. He lived a quiet life but Kuehn illustrates how rich and human his daily life truly was.

Of all the biographies I have read over the past few years, this remains my favourite and the most memorable. Ideal for those interested in philosophy or the social history of Prussia in the 18th century.

indispensable
Kuehn begins his comprehensive and engaging volume, adjectives not generally associated with Kant studies, with a clever Dickensian inversion: "The year 1724 was not one of the most significant years in the history of the human race, but it was not wholly insignificant either." He goes on to offer a most compelling look at the life and thought of one of the modern era's most important contributors respectfully, yet without a trace of the schmoozing so tempting in Kant scholarship.A look not only at the minutae of a man's private life, but also a convincing examination of many well-worn historical interpretations, sometimes lending credence, often challenging some of our most basic assumptions about the influences at play for Kant and his broader philosophical project.

A clear view on one of the greatest masters
Superb, biography !!! In which the writer seems to heading for a definitive biography on one of the greatest masters that ever touched a Philosophical matter. Kant has earned the reputation as a very complicated thinker. I have read a few of his works and I can do nothing else than agree in this.

After I read this book I really seemed to understand his philosophy much beter. I feel I have a good idea about what were his major concerns and what was it that he tried to solve and prove. I have a good idea now about what the Critique Of Pure Reason is, such as other works as the other 2 Critiques & Groundworks.

If you want to read the works of Kant himself, make sure you pick this one up first and learn it by heart. Its as best as any introduction can get on his work, A truly homage to a great master.

There are besides that plenty of details about his personal life. His love for Frederik The Great, plenty of stuff from his students, how they thought about him, and what kept him occupied in his free hours. And there we get a very different Kant than the one that went into history for so far.

This is modern, but it doesn't rock.
This book is an interesting guide to what we now know about Kant's life, and a scholarly summary of what he might have meant in his own time and place.Kant was the philosopher selected by Nietzsche for section 193 of THE GAY SCIENCE:"Kant's joke.Kant wanted to prove in a way that would dumfound the common man that the common man was right:that was the secret joke of this soul.He wrote against the scholars in favor of the popular prejudice, but for scholars and not for popularity."(THE PORTABLE NIETZSCHE, p. 96).In TWILIGHT OF THE IDOLS, Nietzsche named Kant in his explanation of "How the `true world' finally became a fable:" (THE PORTABLE NIETZSCHE, pp. 485-6)."Any distinction between a `true' and an `apparent' world ~ whether in the Christian manner or in the manner of Kant (in the end, an underhanded Christian) ~ is only a suggestion of decadence, a symptom of the decline of life."(THE PORTABLE NIETZSCHE, p. 484).What set Nietzsche apart from the scholars of his own day, at least as long as he was considered sane, was his willingness to display a sly contempt for the kind of clarity which any functioning society demands, which suggests that Nietzsche had some different ideas.If anyone who wrote philosophically at the level of Kant could still be understood well enough to be called "an underhanded Christian," it is ironic that a more modern philosopher would consider Kant "an embodiment on a large scale of what is wrong with philosophy" for the opposite reason:"Suppose he had not insisted on certainty, necessity, and completeness!"(Walter Kaufmann, DISCOVERING THE MIND, VOLUME ONE, GOETHE, KANT, AND HEGEL, p. 195).

One of the things that makes philosophy interesting is the range of ideas which it offers to anyone who is trying to think of something to say about his enemies.Fichte was a contemporary of Kant, in trouble with the authorities from 1997 to 1800 when he was suspected of being an atheist because he thought a moral world order provided a more godly deity than the underhanded Christians of his day were used to.This was very close to the end of Kant's life, and Kant's circle of friends consoled themselves with ideas like:"The name `Fichte' means pine, and bad proofs were sometimes called `proofs of pine.'Furthermore, to `lead someone behind the pines' could mean to be deceptive.Some of Kant's acquaintances agreed."(Manfred Kuehn, KANT, A BIOGRAPHY, p. 391).

I was most interested in examining this book because it considers an early work, included in Kant's THEORETICAL PHILOSOPHY, 1755-1770, on Emanuel Swedenborg, DREAMS OF A SPIRIT-SEER ILLUSTRATED BY DREAMS OF METAPHYSICS.The existence of the work itself, like Freud's summary ON DREAMS (1901), drawn from Freud's on INTERPRETATION OF DREAMS (1900), shows a strong affinity for the kind of thinking about Christianity which is much closer to a modern understanding than most people would expect from the contemporaries of Kant and Swedenborg.Kant might be much more modern than Swedenborg because he willingly states a conclusion, as "a matter of policy, in this as in other cases, to fit the pattern of one's plans to one's powers, and if one cannot obtain the great, to restrict oneself to the mediocre."(p. 174).Anyone who would consider this book mediocre ought to reflect on the scholarly norms that preclude this kind of writing from exhibiting the outrageous emotional tricks which are usually displayed in rock 'n' roll, movies, state lotteries, election campaigns, or exciting books.It is the scholars who live in a separate world, and Kant will always be a great example of how it can be done.

An Excellent Biography
Kuehn has taken on a handful with this project, yet the outcome is superb.This is a careful and scholarly text.Contrary to what one of the reviewers commented here, I think the book was an interesting and entertaining read.I highly recommend this biography to anyone with even the slightest interest in Kant (or his contribution to Enlightenment Philosophy).And it would make a great text for an Introduction to Kant course (just as Monk's bio on Wittgenstein is often used in intro courses).

We sometimes think of Kant as having lived a boring and dull life--that he was in fact as mundane and interesting a person as the schedule he kept (shop owners in the marketplace would often set their clocks to his daily walks).But the picture of Kant that Kuehn provides us with here is radically different.Sure, Kant lead a regular and ordered life, but Kuehn breathes accurate life into pedestrian images of Kant that we may have learned in school (or in textbooks). ... Read more

Product Description
This volume contains four versions of the lecture notes taken by Kant's students of his university courses in ethics given regularly over a period of some thirty years.The notes are very complete and expound not only Kant's views on ethics but many of his opinions on life and human nature. Much of this material has never before been translated into English.As with other volumes in the series, there are copious linguistic and explanatory notes and a glossary of key terms. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

Understand Kantian ethics, it is not easy
I read this book for a graduate seminar on Ethics.In "The Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals," Kant astutely observes how ordinary people speak about morality.He argues, ordinary people's views are presupposed about morality, that there is one supreme moral principle it is the "Categorical Imperative" which is discussed in section two of the book.In section one, he talks about value, and special regard or esteem we have for someone who does the right things.Sometimes, people do the right things for wrong reasons.He is interested in what has to be true for an action to have moral worth.He has a kind of criticism of Utilitarians.Utilitarians say you can talk about what is good, i.e., happiness, before talking about what is right or moral.For Kantians "right" comes prior to the question of what is good.One must bring morality in before talking about the good.Talent and ability is good if put to good use, it can also be bad; for example computer hackers creating "viruses."Only one thing is good in and of itself unconditionally, which is a good "will" which means the will of a person who wants to do the right thing.Even if the plan doesn't work out they still have good will.They desire to do the right thing because it is the right thing.

Kant argues that action has moral worth only if it is done out of respect for duty.For example, if a shopkeeper is honest in an effort to look good to customers he did the right thing, but only in "conformity with duty."He acted out of inclination.If the shopkeeper is honest out of being nice or likes kids then his action is still done out of inclination because he "likes to do it," but his moral worth is less in the action.The shopkeeper who has moral worth is the one who is honest because it was the right thing to do.

Kant's 2nd proposition is that an action gets its moral worth from its "maxim."Maxim is a technical term for Kant; maxim is a kind of principle that explains why someone does something.Kant thinks that whenever we act on an action there always is some maxim that we are acting on.So you can think of a maxim as having the form:I will do A (some kind of action) in C (some set of circumstances) for P. (for some purpose).Now it is not as if normally when you act you formulate to yourself here is my maxim, here is what I am acting on.However, Kant thinks that when you do something there is some maxim that describes your choice.Therefore, Kant thinks there is an underlying maxim there, and it is this maxim Kant thinks that is the real decider about whether your action has moral worth or not.Only actions with the right maxim he thinks have moral worth.

Kant's3rd proposition is that duty is the necessity of acting out of respect for law, (not government law).Kant thinks that actions get there moral worth from being done out of respect for a "universal moral law" that is binding on all rational beings.This is the real clincher for Kant in the first section of his book.That actions have moral worth when the person who did the action did it because he or she thought that there is a moral law that commands them to do the action.For example, "I must obey that law, it is necessary; I have no choice but to obey the law."That notion of following the universal moral law is what gives the action, Kant thinks, its worth that is what makes it worthy of the special esteem he thinks we give actions when people have done them just because they thought they were right.

This is the setup for Kant's all important and famous "categorical imperative which he argues applies to everyone.This is all in Section II.We can deduce many rules from the categorical imperative.The categorical imperative is the only one fundamental principle of morality, but it can be formulated in a variety of different ways.Kant had three formulas of the categorical imperative.All three formulas are a different way of wording the categorical imperative.The categorical imperative is a moral law that has to apply to all rational beings, regardless of what ends they have.

The 1st formula is the "Universal Law Formula," which Kant said that every action has a maxim.Whenever you do anything there is some maxim, some subjective principle you are acting on and that we shouldn't act on any maxim that we couldn't choose to become a universal law.Kant then goes on to say that still for every action, in addition to its maxim, there is also an end, every action has an end.Mill and Aristotle also say this.Kant says if you have a categorical imperative there has to be an end that all rational beings see as a good end, this is mandatory.It can't be some kind of effect of our actions, because the kinds of things we produce in the phenomenal world only have value because we care about them.It has to be an end that all rational beings must care about; it can't be a utilitarian end, or one from consequences.If we value it as an end it has value, if we choose it as an end then there is a claim on others to see it as important as well, thus, this is a real mandatory end that humanity itself sees.Rational nature itself then has value.

The 2nd formula is "The Formula of Humanity" which states, I'm not just special because everyone thinks they are valuable.Can't treat other people as merely a means to an end.This gives one a claim to the help from other people.Slavery is an epitome of this formula as an example.It is wrong to treat people ONLY as a means to an end.(However, you are not using a grocery bagger as such because he gets paid).When you put the Universal Law Formula and Formula of Humanity together, you get another way of formulating the Categorical Imperative.

The 3rd Formula is "The Kingdom of Ends Formula."We ought to be thinking of ourselves as legislators for a kingdom of people who are ends to themselves and for Kant that is what we are doing when we are acting morally.We should only act on maxims that can be laws for a community (Kingdom) of rational beings.Thus, we are both subjects and sovereigns in this community, because we make our own laws and then we must obey them.This is the reason Kant thinks that the categorical imperative is binding on all of us because we impose it on ourselves and make the laws, not binding just because somebody might punish us if we disobey.We already accept the categorical imperative according to Kant without thinking about it.We end up with the ideas of autonomy and motivation.We end up with the idea that reason alone must be capable of motivating us to act a certain way which for Kant means we have autonomy (self rule), (motivated by reason as opposed to desires), which gives us free will.We can only be bound by moral laws if we have this kind of autonomy, if we are motivated by reason, if we have in a sense a free will.Kant thinks it goes in the other direction as well, if we have a free will then we are bound by the categorical imperative.

Thus, philosophers ask do we truly have free will?Also, to what extent are we moved by causation?Kant says laws govern causation.One type of law is Newton's laws of motion, scientific laws.Philosophers debate the question is human actions like these laws?Can we predict human actions?Do our desires cause us to act in certain ways; can our actions be predetermined?Some say yes.Aristotle calls this "efficient causation."Some call them "laws of natural necessity."Given the way the natural world works, things have to happen in a certain way and the world is governed by certain laws.

Kant says if we have a free will, then the laws that govern our choices are not going to be laws of natural necessity.If we have a free will, then our will or our practical reason will choose its own principles, its own laws to act on, and those will be the laws that will cause us to do certain things.If we have a free will, then our will chooses certain principles these must have form of a law for everyone; a universal law, this is the categorical imperative.Thus, for Kant, if we have free will then the categorical imperative is binding on us.

I recommend you read this work slowly and repeat key passages for better comprehension.Kant's work is a must for anyone interested in philosophy, and ethics.

Ethics and Morality
This book contains what Kant believed concerning Ethics and Morality.It is a good book and I found it a easy-reader too.A must for philosophers and people interested in ethics.

This is the best introduction to Kant's ethics.
I have used this book as a freshman-level text in my Introduction to Ethics course for years.Unlike many of Kant's books, this one is quite easy to read and understand.It is a translation of his students' notes taken from his lectures on ethics, so it is in the language of undergraduate students.(There is some minor debate as to its accuracy, since it is composed by his students, but I find nothing contrary to books witten by the master's own hand.)

This volume should not be read from the first page to the last.Rather, you should browse through it.The table of contents lists specific topics, such as sex, suicide, prayer, and rights.The novice will enjoy selecting topics of particular interest from that table.As one becomes more familiar with the easier issues of interest, the more challenging sections are less difficult.(The one drawback is the lack of an index.)

Everyone interested in any moral issue should carefully read this vital work in classical ethics. ... Read more

Product Description
The purpose of the Cambridge Edition is to offer translations of the best modern German edition of Kant's work in a uniform format suitable for Kant scholars. This volume contains the first translation into English of notes from Kant's lectures on metaphysics.These lectures, dating from the 1760's to the 1790's, touch on all the major topics and phases of Kant's philosophy. Most of these notes have appeared only recently in the German Academy Edition and this translation offers many corrections of that edition. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

Finally, A Kant Book That Kan
How long have the myriad metaphysiphiles in global academe waited for an astute, detailed, precisely annotated, intensely careful translation from the original German of Kant's very own brilliant lectures?This book is, to any serious Kant scholar or meta-groupie, as my collegues and I only mildly jocularly refer to ourselves as well as other devotees of Kant's metaphysics, the land of milk and honey, well seasoned by a plethora of footnote gracefully placed upon footnote.Losing ones "Self" in the densely layered forest of meaning and annotations is a philosopher's uberdream.

Neitzche was a fool!Kant lives on!

If Kant is Your Haupt Mann This is Your Book
I laughed. I cried. What a brilliant translation of Kant's work! Every subtelty, every nauance of the big guys thought brought to sparkling light and clarity. A must for all serious scholars of this German thinker. I raise my glass of tepid water to this magnum opus.

* The publishers at Cambridge have finally answered our prayers with a paperback version of this tour-de-force.At only 38 Samolians this could well be the new chart busting "Mover and Shaker" in Amazon.com's Kantian line-up. Find out why cognitive giants are praising this translation as "brilliant,""definitive"and "bodacious!" ... Read more

Product Description
Collected in this 3-in-one omnibus edition are Kant's ground breaking critiques. The Critique of Pure Reason, The Critique of Practical Reason, and The Critique of Judgement. The Critique of Pure Reason is one of the most influential philosophy books of all times. Kant's influence on modern perception of reason cannot be over estimated. Here Kant redefines reason and gives us the tools to understand reason on two levels: the empirical and the metaphysical. The Critique of Practical Reason is the second of Immanuel Kant's three critiques and it deals with Kant's own moral philosophy and his views on free will. A masterpiece of philosophical writing. In The Critique of Judgement Kant states that "Philosophy may be said to contain the principles of the rational cognition that concepts afford us of things (not merely, as with logic, the principles of the form of thought in general irrespective of the objects), and, thus interpreted, the course, usually adopted, of dividing it into theoretical and practical is perfectly sound." ... Read more

Product Description
Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, written by legendary author Immanuel Kant, is widely considered to be one of the greatest classic texts of all time. This great classic will surely attract a whole new generation of readers. For many, Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals is required reading for various courses and curriculums. And for others who simply enjoy reading timeless pieces of classic literature, this gem by Immanuel Kant is highly recommended. Published by Classic Books International and beautifully produced, Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals would make an ideal gift and it should be a part of everyone's personal library. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

Understand Kantian ethics, it is not easy
I read this book for a graduate seminar on Ethics.In "The Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals," Kant astutely observes how ordinary people speak about morality.He argues, ordinary people's views are presupposed about morality, that there is one supreme moral principle it is the "Categorical Imperative" which is discussed in section two of the book.In section one, he talks about value, and special regard or esteem we have for someone who does the right things.Sometimes, people do the right things for wrong reasons.He is interested in what has to be true for an action to have moral worth.He has a kind of criticism of Utilitarians.Utilitarians say you can talk about what is good, i.e., happiness, before talking about what is right or moral.For Kantians "right" comes prior to the question of what is good.One must bring morality in before talking about the good.Talent and ability is good if put to good use, it can also be bad; for example computer hackers creating "viruses."Only one thing is good in and of itself unconditionally, which is a good "will" which means the will of a person who wants to do the right thing.Even if the plan doesn't work out they still have good will.They desire to do the right thing because it is the right thing.

Kant argues that action has moral worth only if it is done out of respect for duty.For example, if a shopkeeper is honest in an effort to look good to customers he did the right thing, but only in "conformity with duty."He acted out of inclination.If the shopkeeper is honest out of being nice or likes kids then his action is still done out of inclination because he "likes to do it," but his moral worth is less in the action.The shopkeeper who has moral worth is the one who is honest because it was the right thing to do.

Kant's 2nd proposition is that an action gets its moral worth from its "maxim."Maxim is a technical term for Kant; maxim is a kind of principle that explains why someone does something.Kant thinks that whenever we act on an action there always is some maxim that we are acting on.So you can think of a maxim as having the form:I will do A (some kind of action) in C (some set of circumstances) for P. (for some purpose).Now it is not as if normally when you act you formulate to yourself here is my maxim, here is what I am acting on.However, Kant thinks that when you do something there is some maxim that describes your choice.Therefore, Kant thinks there is an underlying maxim there, and it is this maxim Kant thinks that is the real decider about whether your action has moral worth or not.Only actions with the right maxim he thinks have moral worth.

Kant's3rd proposition is that duty is the necessity of acting out of respect for law, (not government law).Kant thinks that actions get there moral worth from being done out of respect for a "universal moral law" that is binding on all rational beings.This is the real clincher for Kant in the first section of his book.That actions have moral worth when the person who did the action did it because he or she thought that there is a moral law that commands them to do the action.For example, "I must obey that law, it is necessary; I have no choice but to obey the law."That notion of following the universal moral law is what gives the action, Kant thinks, its worth that is what makes it worthy of the special esteem he thinks we give actions when people have done them just because they thought they were right.

This is the setup for Kant's all important and famous "categorical imperative which he argues applies to everyone.This is all in Section II.We can deduce many rules from the categorical imperative.The categorical imperative is the only one fundamental principle of morality, but it can be formulated in a variety of different ways.Kant had three formulas of the categorical imperative.All three formulas are a different way of wording the categorical imperative.The categorical imperative is a moral law that has to apply to all rational beings, regardless of what ends they have.

The 1st formula is the "Universal Law Formula," which Kant said that every action has a maxim.Whenever you do anything there is some maxim, some subjective principle you are acting on and that we shouldn't act on any maxim that we couldn't choose to become a universal law.Kant then goes on to say that still for every action, in addition to its maxim, there is also an end, every action has an end.Mill and Aristotle also say this.Kant says if you have a categorical imperative there has to be an end that all rational beings see as a good end, this is mandatory.It can't be some kind of effect of our actions, because the kinds of things we produce in the phenomenal world only have value because we care about them.It has to be an end that all rational beings must care about; it can't be a utilitarian end, or one from consequences.If we value it as an end it has value, if we choose it as an end then there is a claim on others to see it as important as well, thus, this is a real mandatory end that humanity itself sees.Rational nature itself then has value.

The 2nd formula is "The Formula of Humanity" which states, I'm not just special because everyone thinks they are valuable.Can't treat other people as merely a means to an end.This gives one a claim to the help from other people.Slavery is an epitome of this formula as an example.It is wrong to treat people ONLY as a means to an end.(However, you are not using a grocery bagger as such because he gets paid).When you put the Universal Law Formula and Formula of Humanity together, you get another way of formulating the Categorical Imperative.

The 3rd Formula is "The Kingdom of Ends Formula."We ought to be thinking of ourselves as legislators for a kingdom of people who are ends to themselves and for Kant that is what we are doing when we are acting morally.We should only act on maxims that can be laws for a community (Kingdom) of rational beings.Thus, we are both subjects and sovereigns in this community, because we make our own laws and then we must obey them.This is the reason Kant thinks that the categorical imperative is binding on all of us because we impose it on ourselves and make the laws, not binding just because somebody might punish us if we disobey.We already accept the categorical imperative according to Kant without thinking about it.We end up with the ideas of autonomy and motivation.We end up with the idea that reason alone must be capable of motivating us to act a certain way which for Kant means we have autonomy (self rule), (motivated by reason as opposed to desires), which gives us free will.We can only be bound by moral laws if we have this kind of autonomy, if we are motivated by reason, if we have in a sense a free will.Kant thinks it goes in the other direction as well, if we have a free will then we are bound by the categorical imperative.

Thus, philosophers ask do we truly have free will?Also, to what extent are we moved by causation?Kant says laws govern causation.One type of law is Newton's laws of motion, scientific laws.Philosophers debate the question is human actions like these laws?Can we predict human actions?Do our desires cause us to act in certain ways; can our actions be predetermined?Some say yes.Aristotle calls this "efficient causation."Some call them "laws of natural necessity."Given the way the natural world works, things have to happen in a certain way and the world is governed by certain laws.

Kant says if we have a free will, then the laws that govern our choices are not going to be laws of natural necessity.If we have a free will, then our will or our practical reason will choose its own principles, its own laws to act on, and those will be the laws that will cause us to do certain things.If we have a free will, then our will chooses certain principles these must have form of a law for everyone; a universal law, this is the categorical imperative.Thus, for Kant, if we have free will then the categorical imperative is binding on us.

I recommend you read this work slowly and repeat key passages for better comprehension.Kant's work is a must for anyone interested in philosophy, and ethics.

Read it, ponder it, implement it...
This is a powerful book about the rationale of a moral philosophy.For all of you who are not familiar with Kant, he is by no means an easy read.If you plan on getting this book plan on being engaged fully in the book.Some of the thoughts reveberate in your mind for months afterword.Kant breaks it down to pure logic and sets forth a notion of the categorical imperative.Check it out if you are into thought... and lots of it. ... Read more

Product Description
Immanuel Kant is arguably the most influential modern philosopher, but is also one of the most difficult. In this illuminating Very Short Introduction, Roger Scruton--a well-known and controversial philosopher in his own right--tackles his exceptionally complex subject with a strong hand, exploring the background to Kant's work and showing why Critique of Pure Reason has proved so enduring. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (21)

The Best Explanation of Kant's Thought I've Run Across
I love almost everything about the "Very Short Introduction" series.

I find them easy to read ("easy" is relative with Philosophy books) and fun...The writing tends to be witty.

I love the colors of the books.I love sitting out on an ocean beach reading a book with a beautiful cover.

With some of my beach ensembles the books help me to be quite a turner of heads.

The books are the most portable books I've encountered which makes for a perfect blend of utilitarian function and beauty.

The Kant introduction has helped me understand more about Kant's Critique of Pure Reasoning more than anything else I've read and I've read several accounts of the work.

I look at understanding Kant's work the way I look at driving up a steep hill in the snow....One has to make several runs up the hill in order to clear enough snow to be able to get to the top.Each run gets one a bit closer to the top.

I now understand far more about Kant's philosophy than I ever thought I would thanks to the book.Roger Scruton has an incredible ability to unpack Kant's ideas.

A quick FYI
The book is good and Roger Scruton always has a free flowing beautiful style of writing. That said - almost the same content by the same author - plus three other philosophers, are in this book -
German Philosophers: Kant, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche
and that is a better buy and would give a far better understanding of a bigger picture too.

hard to make Kant any easier
Immanuel Kant is arguably one of the most influential, and yet most difficult to read, philosophers of all time. Roger Scruton does as good a job as it is reasonable to expect in this short introduction to Kant's work. The reader is given a bit of background to Kant's philosophy, and then is introduced to the transcendental deduction, the logic of illusion, the categorical imperative, as well as Kant's ideas on aesthetic and law. The booklet concludes with a few comments on the meaning and impact of Kant's "transcendental" philosophy. I must say that the section that gripped (yes, that is the right word!) me the most is chapter 7, "Enlightenment and Law," where Scruton comments on the role Kant had in developing modern concepts such as human rights and even the idea of a league of nations. Kant was an anti-utopian, in the sense that he did not believe that an ideal political system could actually be realized in practice, and indeed despised the violence of the then recent French revolution. (He would certainly not have approved of Bush's war to bring democracy to other countries.) But he was a man of the Enlightenment in the sense that he thought we still ought to strive toward such ideals, to keep them in mind as a guide to our behavior and our discussions about what is right and just. It makes for much food for thought even in modern times.

A very accessible introduction to Kant
Kant is one of those modern philosophers whose presence looms large over much of what has been achieved over the past couple of centuries in modernphilosophy, and yet he is not very likely to be read in most introductory philosophy classes. Part of the difficulty lies with Kant's highly technical and oftentimes convoluted use of language, which gave even his contemporaries who were native German speakers some difficulties. The philosophers and scholars have since had a chance to debate, oftentimes vehemently, the "true" meaning of Kant's works and it is unlikely that those debates will end any time soon. With such formidable baggage, it would be very difficult for an absolute novice in philosophy to just plunge into Kant's work and start reading it on its own. A good first exposition by an expert is invaluable and this thin volume serves exactly such purpose. It does a remarkable job of delineating the scope of Kant's thought and bringing this philosopher to life for the new generation of readers.

Only 4 stars because any short introduction doesn't give Kant his due
It's a pretty good introduction, I'd recommend reading several introductions to Kant before diving in (he's pretty dense). I think Goethe said that reading Kant was like walking into a well-lit room, I hardly think he was talking about Kant's dry, scholastic writing style. The clarity of his thought, however, is pretty intense. I do recommend this book, merely because jumping straight into Kant probably isn't going to fare well. When, and if, you do choose to read Kant, take a look at Jonathan Bennett's website (a philosopher and Kant scholar), I think he translates Kant into more readable English. Early Modern Texts or something. I agree with some of the other commentators, that this introduction is kinda hard for a first time look into Kant. A history of philosophy book might be your best bet to read first. It is pretty good for such a short introduction though. Take your time and don't do it in a day. Digest it. Good luck all. ... Read more

Product Description

A Monumental Figure of Western Thought Wrestles with the Question of God

Customer Reviews (5)

Bought for mom...
I can only say that regarding this book I bought it for my mother, whom is well educated and she found it to be a challenging read.

I purchased it based on the recomendation of a professor I was friends with, probably where I went wrong.I think conseptually it was a solid book based on the feedback I received, it was just challenging.

so great, it makes the usual religion piffle
It would be a great benefit to me if I could openly admit a fondness for a Kant kind of crazy which is discussed very near the end of RELIGION WITHIN THE LIMITS OF REASON ALONE, which I discovered when I was seeking to comprehend the meaning of the index entry:

Fetishism, 165-8, 181 ff. See Faith, ceremonial, and Religion

For me this was like looking up crazy in an index and finding an entry for:

Crazy, 182-6, See talking to yourself, and Prayer

To quote Kant directly:

1. Praying, thought of as an inner formal service of God and hence as a means of grace, is a superstitious illusion (a fetish-making); for it is no more than a stated wish directed to a Being who needs no such information regarding the inner disposition of the wisher; therefore nothing is accomplished by it, and it discharges none of the duties to which, as commands of God, we are obligated; hence God is not really served. . . . (pp. 182-183).

Anyone will find the truth of this last remark confirmed if he conceives of a pious and well-meaning man, but one who is circumscribed in respect of these purified religious concepts, whom some one takes unawares, I will not say in praying aloud, but merely in behavior indicative of prayer. Everyone will of him, of course, without my saying so, expect a man thus surprised to fall into confusion or embarrassment, as though in a situation whereof he should be ashamed. But why? It is because a man caught talking aloud to himself is suspected for the moment of having a slight attack of madness; and thus do we also judge a man (and not altogether unjustly) when we find him, all alone, in an occupation or attitude which can properly belong only to one who sees some one else before him--and in the example we have given this is not the case. (p. 183, n. *).

The Part Two "Concerning The Pseudo-Service Of God In A Statutory Religion" which begins on page 156 is concerned with "religious illusion whose consequence is a pseudo-service, that is, pretending honoring of God through which we work directly counter to the service demanded by God Himself." (p. 156). I used to feel that way when I was in the army, serving the army for a few short years, including a year in Nam and a week in Cambodia, having the feeling when I listened to chaplains that I had actually been to church before and the overriding message which I heard elsewhere hardly applied to what the chaplains were saying. I was not entirely happy about being in the army, and my inner reaction to being in the infantry in Nam was more like shock than Kant, but Kant never wrote a book called WAR WITHIN THE LIMITS OF REASON ALONE. In Kant's book, the second topic in this Part Two is called "The Moral Principle of Religion Opposed to the Religious Illusion." (p. 158). The waste of effort is summarized by Kant as "They are all alike in worth (or rather worthlessness), and it is a mere affectation to regard oneself as more excellent, because of a subtler deviation from the one and only intellectual principle of genuine respect for God, than those who allow themselves to become guilty of an assumedly coarser degradation of sensuality. Whether the devotee betakes himself to church according to rule or whether he undertakes a pilgrimage to the sanctuaries in Loretto or in Palestine; whether he brings his formulas of prayer to the court of heaven with his lips, or by means of a prayer-wheel, like the Tibetan (who believes his wishes will reach their goal just as well if they are set down in writing, provided only they be moved by something or other, by the wind, for example, if they are written on flags, or by the hand, if they are enclosed in a sort of revolving cylinder)--whatever be substituted for the moral service of God, it is all one and all equal in value. (pp. 160-161).

A paragraph on pages 164-165 pictures God as "the invisible Power which presides over the destiny of men;" Kant's religion is, "If they think of Him as a moral Being they easily convince themselves through their own reason that the condition of earning his favor must be their morally good life-conduct, and especially the pure disposition as the subjective principle of such conduct." (pp. 164-165). Kant compares the free observance of moral laws which reason supports to the vexation (drudgery) involved in "a man's conformity with an established churchly commonwealth, and he need not either inwardly or outwardly profess the belief that he regards them as institutions founded by God; and it is by confession of the latter sort that conscience is really burdened." (p. 167). Kant opposes imposed observances in which "the faith remains a fetish-faith through which the masses are ruled and robbed of their moral freedom by subservience to a church (not to religion)." (p. 168).

Actually hoping for an empire of American superpower dominated corporations benefiting from oil obtained from troublesome parts of the world reminds me of a note in which Kant asserts, "Mohammedanism is characterized by arrogant pride because it finds confirmation of its faith not in miracles but in victories and in the subjugation of many peoples, and because its devotional practices are all of the spirited sort." (p. 172, n. *). Each of the segments currently fighting for domination of Iraq might well be seeking to benefit its future by securing for itself the wealth expected to result from vast oil reserves, and those who are fleeing from the fighting have little chance of getting the big bucks that geopolitical economic schemes depend on. This applies to Kant's thinking as well as the idea of a `fetish' works for obtaining God's pleasure, if you please, or damn it if you don't.

The General Observation which begins on page 179 has a footnote on the meaning of edification on page 186 which questions how often the weight of duties are secured "against the onslaughts of the desires, and thus, as it were, builds up a new man as a temple of God." All too often, "But men believe themselves to be mightily edified [erbaut] (through listening or reading and singing) while absolutely nothing has been built up [gebauet], yea, where no hand has been put to work. They believe this, presumably, because they hope that this moral edifice will rise up of itself, like the walls of Thebes, to the music of sighs and yearning wishes."

Which translation?
I assume that this "Religion Within the Limits of Reason Alone" is a different translation of the same book entitled by another publisher as "Religion Within the Boundaries of Mere Reason."The question is, which is better and for what reasons?

What can be done in the space between your ears!
Let me state up front that I do not think Kant succeeded in what he tried to do in this book. That caveat in place, Kant's book a fine attempt at grounding religious belief in something other than revelation. Now, of course that might ruffle a few feathers on both sides of the belief-fence (as it did in his day, and will continue to do), but that was Kant's goal in this text. However, no understanding of Kant's reasoning in this book (or any other of his works) can be complete without taking into account the Lutheran Pietism in which he was raised. (Regarding the review below, Kant was never Roman Catholic; the Lutheran streak is part of what made Kant who he was, for good or ill.) The subjectivism of his Pietist background had an almost incalculable affect on Kant's philosophy and metaphysics. As a matter of fact, the subjectivist principle of his "Copernican revolution" in philosophy could arguably be seen as a natural outgrowth of the personalism that his Lutheran Pietist upbringing gave to him. Members of the Pietist sects current in Kant's day believed that religion should be realized, contained, and held deep within the inner self. They also held that religion should be expressed through simplicity and obedience to moral law. Hence, to oversimplify, we get Kant's famous "starry heavens above and the moral law within" as the two things which fill him "with ever increasing wonder."

Kant was convinced that the moral basis of religion, specifically the Christian religion, was available to any and all by introspection and meditation. In this work, he sets out to show why that is the case and how it could be achieved. Kant's anti-supernaturalist project of Kant's book is explicit from the beginning, though I should point out that, as in his Critique of Pure Reason, Kant certainly does not refuse to entertain ideas such as miracles and such. He simply says that they are not he purview of speculative philosophy. This could become a naive fideism, but with Kant it (arguably) never does. What Kant wants to do is plain in his title, and clear in his text: develop the idea of religion strictly within the bounds of reason, alone. For Kant, pure philosophy was the realm of human reason, and within that realm (at least pushing against the antinomies) religion could be found and established. Anything beyond that was simply beyond the ability and thus the interest of philosophy.

This is a great translation and as good an introduction to reading Kant as any of his works.

Kant and Religion
Though the title may imply so, Religion Within the Limits of Reason Alone is not an attempt to confine religion to reason per se, but rather an attempt to display what can be perceived by reason on the subject ofreason, naturally of Kant, a priori (outside of experience). When Kantencountered a topic that was outside the limits of reason (i.e. miracles)he fully conceded that reason could not explain that which is of directDivine influence, thus making his point clear that reason can be usefulwithin religion, but there comes a point where God takes over and reasonmust bow before His Sovereignty.This book contains a wealth ofinteresting ideas and concepts, and I personally used it to teach lessonsto my Sunday School class. However, due to Kant's deeply profound writingstyle, this book, along with his others, is generally misunderstood, orelse not understood at all. I believe that Religion would be an excellentdevotional if taken in small parts over a period of time. There are manyinteresting concepts that could be overlooked if one rushed through,therefore it is imperative that the reader be sure to take time to think onwhat Kant was trying to convey.As a Christian witness, Kant mademany beautiful comments on the necessity of being "Born-again"through the Son of God and on the Law of God and its influence on thesinner who is incapable of being righteous outside of this law. Kant is notsomeone who will be quoted in a common Sunday morning sermon, but I believethat he is an unsung Christian hero who has been disregarded due to thedifficulty of his writing and his Catholic origin, at least in Protestantdenominations, which to quote Catholic theologians is generally taboo. Allof his works are noteworthy, but a little more effort is needed to read andunderstand him than the average person is willing to invest, but I believethat the insight gained from his works are well worth the effort. ... Read more

Product Description
The eleven essays in this volume constitute Kant's theoretical, pre-critical philosophical writings from 1755 to 1770.Several essays have never been translated into English before, while others have long been unavailable. The development of Kant's thought can be traced to the eventual emergence in 1770 of the two chief tenets of his mature philosophy: the subjectivity of space and time, and the phenomena-noumena distinction. Hb ISBN (1992): 0-521-39214-4 ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

This book has been studied, not just read
In the newly released KANT ON SWEDENBORG, consisting of DREAMS OF A SPIRIT-SEER AND OTHER WRITINGS, Edited by Gregory R. Johnson, there are two paragraphs devoted to the translation which is contained in this book:

The third translation, DREAMS OF A SPIRIT-SEER ELUCIDATED BY DREAMS OF METAPHYSICS, appeared in 1992.It is the work of David Walford in collaboration with Ralf Meerbote, both of them established Kant scholars.The intention of Walford's edition is straightforward.It appears in a collection of Kant's precritical writings in the first volume of the Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant, THEORETICAL PHILOSOPHY, 1755-1770.
. . . Walford's translation is highly accurate and very readable.Indeed, it would be hard to justify a new translation of DREAMS at all were the Walford translation available in an inexpensive paperback edition.

Unfortunately, the only entry for David Walford in the index of KANT ON SWEDENBORG is to the page with the information above.Kant's DREAMS was published as an anonymous pamphlet, and did not contain the scholarly notes which appear on pages 156-183 of KANT ON SWEDENBORG, many of which refer to this book (henceforth Walford).Readers of KANT ON SWEDENBORG who would like to check the citations for this information need this book to refer to:

To appreciate the continuity of Kant's conception of matter throughout his career both before and after DREAMS, see . . . Walford, 53-65 . . .

Walford offers two sources for this argument: . . .

On the impenetrability of matter, see . . . Walford, 56-60: . . . Walford, 218 and . . . Walford, 260.

On the repulsive force of matter, see . . . Walford 56-60; . . . Walford, 218 and . . . Walford, 260.

On materials entities filling the space in which they operate, see . . . Walford, 56-57 . . .

Kant makes essentially the same distinction, between "virtual" and "local" presence, in . . . Walford, 409-410; . . . See also . . . Walford, 56-57; INQUIRY (AK 2: 286-288; Walford, 259-261).

All of the above notes pertain to paragraphs 3-7 of Part I, Chapter 1, "A Tangled Metaphysical Knot That Can Be Either Untied or Cut as One Pleases."The next note in KANT ON SWEDENBORG attempts to locate a source for Kant's remark, in paragraph 7, "Therefore, I would demand a strong proof to find absurd what the scholastics said:`My soul is wholly in my body, and wholly in each of its parts.' "Johnson's note 18."Walford(449, n11) claims that this phrase derives from Daries . . . The idea is, however, clearly much older:cf. Thomas Hobbes . . ." and goes on to Plotinus (c. 204/5-270), ENNEAD IV.7 "On the Immortality of the Soul," 8.2.Johnson carefully studied Kant's later writings for signs that Kant had adopted elements of Swedenborg's thoughts for his own use.He found lecture notes that Mrongovius dated to the winter semester of 1782-3 in which Kant lectured:"The ancients also said:anima est tota in corpore, sed totum tamen in parte ejus" in latin, of course, and the METAPHYSIK VIGILANTIUS had a different variation.

Kant did not attempt a detailed description of the ideas of Swedenborg until Part II of DREAMS OF A SPIRIT-SEER, Chapter 2, Ecstatic Journey of an Enthusiast Through the Spirit World."His paragraphs are long, and my favorite part doesn't come until the final sentence of the third paragraph."Thus, although I have robbed the reader of some of the moments that he may have otherwise devoted with no great benefit to the reading of thorough books on just this material, I have at the same time, for the delicacy of his tastes, through the omission of many wild chimeras, brought the quintessence of the book to a few drops, for which I expect from him just as much thanks as a certain patient believed he was obliged to the doctors who let him eat the bark of the quinquina when they could have easily made him eat the whole tree."(Johnson translation, KANT ON SWEDENBORG, p. 50).

I can't decide how many pages on this anyone should want, but now you can shop around for what you would consider most suitable. ... Read more

Product Description
This volume is the first-ever English translation of Kant's last major work, the so-called Opus postumum, a work Kant himself described as his "chef d'oeuvre" and as the keystone of his entire philosophical system. It occupied him for more than the last decade of his life. Professor Förster's introduction places the text in the context of Kant's earlier writings and provides a comprehensive account of the remarkable history of the manuscript from Kant's death to its eventual publication in the 1930s. Also included are extensive explanatory notes and a helpful glossary. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

Kant Applies the Architectonic to -- Everything!
In this book Kant goes wild and applies his philosophical system to everything, particular physics.This should be considered one of the great seminal works of philosophy.It was certainly written by a genius.

Was Kant right?Probably.Who knows? ... Read more

Product Description
Die Klassiker der deutschen und weltweiten Literatur in einer einzigartigen Reihe. Lesen Sie die besten Werke großer Schriftsteller und Autoren auf Ihrem Kindle Reader.

Die Kritik der Urteilskraft (KdU) ist Immanuel Kants drittes Hauptwerk nach der Kritik der reinen Vernunft und der Kritik der praktischen Vernunft, erschienen 1790. Sie enthält in einem ersten Teil Kants Ästhetik(Lehre vom ästhetischen Urteil) und im zweiten Teil die Teleologie(Lehre von der Auslegung der Natur mittels Zweckkategorien). (aus wikipedia.de) ... Read more

Product Description
Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals: With on a Supposed Right to Lie Because of Philanthropic Concerns, written by legendary author Immanuel Kant, is widely considered to be one of the greatest classic texts of all time. This great classic will surely attract a whole new generation of readers. For many, Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals: With on a Supposed Right to Lie Because of Philanthropic Concerns is required reading for various courses and curriculums. And for others who simply enjoy reading timeless pieces of classic literature, this gem by Immanuel Kant is highly recommended. Published by Classic Books International and beautifully produced, Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals: With on a Supposed Right to Lie Because of Philanthropic Concerns would make an ideal gift and it should be a part of everyone's personal library. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (13)

Great
A very good philosophy. Kant gives us great insight on the duties that we all have.

ehh.
I didn't receive this package on time, and I contacted the seller but never got a response.

Must read
This little volume is undeniably one of the most discussed works of ethical philosophy in the Western tradition. It stems from Kant's work on metaphysics, established in the Critique of Pure Reason in which Kant lays out the crucial principles of human understanding. This work, is a logical extension of Kant's noumenal-phenomenal division, in which man is given the choice of being an ethical legislator. For Kant, universality is the primary guideline to all ethical choice, in contradistinction to the utilitarian thinkers such as Mill and Bentham. There is nothing in this book that will sound peculiar to a new reader, as the ideas are so rational from a Western-Enlightenment point of view, they simply formulate what we have already been told. Never the less, this is essential reading for any real understanding of ethics and its development in relation to its rejection in the post-modern tradition. The translator, James Ellington, has done a fair job to Kant's work.

Which translation of the Grundlegung is right for you?
There is no doubt that Kant's Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten is one of the three or four most important texts of modern moral philosophy.The only question is, if you have to rely on an English translation, which translation is best?I think that depends on why you are reading this book.If you have only a casual interest in Kant, or if you are reading this book only because it is required for a class and you plan on selling this book back to the university co-op the second the semester ends (if not before), then I would definitely go with the Hackett; Ellington's translation is quite good and reads well, plus it's cheap (in general, Hackett produces reliable, though rarely definitive, and inexpensive translations).If you prefer a more literal translation, I would recommend either the Allen Wood translation (Yale) or the Mary Gregor translation (Cambridge), though you sacrifice a bit of readability with Gregor and a bit more with Wood.Wood says that his translation is intended to be more literal than Gregor's, but in my opinion he does not altogether succeed in that intention; I believe the Wood and Gregor translations are roughly of the same caliber (for example, they both translate Verstand as "understanding" as opposed to "intellect").Oxford also has a translation out, but I have not reviewed it yet.

If, however, you have a serious interest in Kant, then I would recommend the volume entitled _Practical Philosophy_, published as part of the Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant._Practical Philosophy_ includes the Groundwork, the Critique of Practical Reason, and The Metaphysics of Morals (all translated by Gregor), in addition to the essays on Enlightenment and Perpetual Peace.

Profound, Inspiring, and, Of Course, Difficult
Kant's Groundwork (or Foundations) of the Metaphysics of Morals is probably the single most influential work of philosophical ethics since Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics.While Kant himself considered this a sort of introduction to ethical thinking, it's come to be his most influential and widely read work on ethics.Despite its length--it's less than a hundred pages--this is a work of remarkable depth and intellectual insight.

And what makes the Groundwork especially interesting is its clear statement of a distinctive Kantian vision of the nature of morality.It's not just that this work includes original and exceptionally insightful philosophizing, but that there's a vision of morality underlying the details, and it's a general conception of morality in which there is something inspiring and awesome.The absolutism, the lack of concern for consequences and for human nature, the emphasis on a sort of radical freedom, the distrust of human feeling, the emphasis on our rationality--all of these are elements of Kant's emphasis on the purity of ethics.(Later works reveal that Kant's thinking about these issues was considerably more complex, but there is something fundamental about the presentation here--even if it doesn't provide a wholly accurate account of all his thinking.)Moral action, he claims, is action in which we act for duty's sake, and acting for duty's sake requires an independence of one's actions from our ordinary concerns, from everyday motives and inclinations, from self-interest, and from nearly all human feeling.And since moral action is free action, understanding moral action in this way requires Kant to carve out a sphere of freedom in which we are the authors of our actions. It's not just that we're free of external constraints in moral action; we also need to be free of the characteristics qualities of our personalities and of the distinctive patterns of thought and feeling that constitute human nature.Nevertheless, Kant claims that the moral law is one that comes from within--though not from our contingent feelings and desires.It is instead a law that we give to ourselves as rational beings.In moral action we act in ways that express our natural as rational beings, and only as rational beings.So act morally, acting with a wholly good will, is action in which we reveal ourselves to beings deserving of the dignity that comes with being a free and rational being.

Now, even though this is intended as an introduction to Kant's moral thought, this isn't an easy work.It needs to be read and re-read (and, I suppose, re-read) to be fully understood and appreciated.I've never found Kant as difficult and obscure as his reputation would suggest, but as a writer of philosophical prose he's certainly not the caliber of, say, Hume or Descartes.Still, Kant's ideas in the Groundwork, while subtle and sometimes elusive, are profound and original, and this book is a must-read for anyone interested in philosophical ethics.

Kant's aim in the Groundwork is to discover the fundamental principle of morality.In the first section he attempts to derive this fundamental principle from ordinary moral thought.In particular, he attempts to derive this principle from considerations concerning what is unconditionally good.Kant claims that the only thing that is unconditionally good is a good will.Moreover, its goodness is not a matter of the results of acting on a good will; it is good in itself.As a matter of fact, Kant claims that the results of an action done with a good will and the aims and inclinations of the agent with the good will are morally insignificant.

What, then, is it to act with a good will?It is, Kant argues, a matter of doing one's duty for duty's sake, regardless of one's feeling and the results of doing so.What is it to act from duty's sake? It is to act from principles that accord with the fundamental principle of morality.And here we get the first formulation of the fundamental principle of morality: act only on maxims that you can consistently will to be universal laws. In other words, if one is unable to will the principle of one's action to become a universal law, the action is morally impermissible.

In the second section of the Groundwork Kant attempts to draw the same conclusion from some philosophical points about the nature of duty.He begins by claiming that our knowledge of our duty is a priori and based on the exercise of reason.He then argues that facts about our duties are necessary facts, and that this shows that they must be based on a categorical imperative: that is, that our duties apply to us insofar as we are rational beings, irrespective of the contingent aspects of their nature.And, Kant argues, the one categorical imperative is the fundamental principle of morality mentioned above.He then applies this principle to some examples in order to display just how it grounds our duties in particular cases.

The rest of the second section is filled with lots of interesting, albeit abstruse, ideas.First, Kant attempts to ground the categorical imperative in something that is of unconditional worth.What is that something?The existence of rational beings, which, he says, is an end in itself.And this leads to a second formulation of the categorical imperative: (ii) act only in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in the person of yourself or someone else, as an end and never merely as a means.

This section also includes a third formulation of the categorical imperative: (iii) act only on maxims that you could will to become universal laws legislated by your own will.This formulation encapsulates Kant's claim that we can achieve autonomy only by acting in accordance with the moral law.Conformity with the moral law does not constrain our freedom since we legislate the moral law for ourselves.The moral law is not forced on us from without; its source is to be found in our own rational nature.Indeed, it is only by acting morally that we are able to achieve genuine freedom by transcending the contingent desires and inclinations that are beyond our control.

Of course, that doesn't come close to summing up the Groundwork.But it's a start. ... Read more

Product Description
This entirely new translation of Kant's Critique of the Power of Judgmentfollows the principles and high standards of all other volumes in The Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant. This volume includes for the first time the first draft of Kant's introduction to the work; the only English edition notes to the many differences between the first (1790) and second (1793) editions of the work; and relevant passages in Kant's anthropology lectures where he elaborated on his aesthetic views. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (4)

Kant's argument for finding the universal concept of beauty
I read this book for a graduate seminar on the philosophy of art.Kant is one of the major figures in expression theory.What we understand as aesthetics changed only recently.Kant lays this out well in his "Critique of Judgment," which is one of his easier books to comprehend!Science and math development was momentous in re-interpreting how nature is understood, and all this starts in his time.The modern science narrative that says ancient thought erred; caused a split between science and philosophy.Scientific method and math causes nature to be seen in a "mechanistic" way, there are no "value" judgments anymore so this valueless nature by science caused the split because nature can't explain values anymore.Thus, philosophy finds that "values" are in humans, not in nature, we are the "location" of values now.Beauty, which is a value, is an idea in our minds.This expression theory says something about us it is in our minds.Kant agrees with this notion of how modern science operates especially in "Critique of Pure Reason." However, with questions of art he doesn't rely on science.

Kant begins that there is such a thing as an experience of beauty, and that we normally presuppose that it must be compelling rather than just mere opinion unlike taste in food.Then he asks why would there be such a thing?He is now trying to lay out possible answers to that question.In the experience of beauty, the mind gets a special perspective on its own powers.Thus, this special perspective is free of the normal constraints of the things we do in our lives like knowing and worrying.Kant realizes that the aesthetic experience is subjective; it is in the human mind not in reality.He wants to make artistic judgments.Not just interested in individual subjectivity, he looks for a "universal" character of experience of judgment.It is not real useful to just catalogue people's subjective opinions.Kant says inter-subjective principle is part of the human mind as more of a collective.Thus, humans can make judgment.Kant's idea of taste is not to merely have a subjective opinion; people have a kind of competency they have discernment.The difficulty in this notion is, how does one know when they find a universal.

Kant astutely argues that one can't argue towards an aesthetic judgment like in logic, aesthetics is subjective but he wants humans to be able to say; "this painting is beautiful, and not just to me."Important point: is there such a thing as subjective universality?This is his dilemma, although he thinks there is if you can use the principle of "disinterest."The realm of subjectivity is realm of interests.Once one is divorced of all normal interest, one can view art with a "disinterested" view.This notion of disinterest screens out allot but has to be connected to pleasure but not mere opinion universally.The other important element of disinterest has been the continuing idea and even could be something that could be applicable to any area of art.There is something about art that has some relationship to a "pause" from normal relationships.There is something special about artworks that even though there was no such thing as a museum in Greece, Greek statuary and architecture was all part of the cityscape, part of the actual landscape and livingscape of Greece, and therefore part of the city so no such thing as a museum.However, whenever a statue was put up or a temple, or a play was put on, that would seem to be something different from the normal relationships with objects either in terms of using them for some practical purpose and therefore using them up giving the works some special reserve, special status.Disinterest wouldn't require that it have the subjectivism term because you would simply say that the whole point of art could be disengaged normal ways of engaging things, even if it didn't have a subjective theory of expression.According to this notion of "disinterest," the idea of political art would be a contradiction in terms.Art as applied as nothing more than serving political needs.Like how the Soviet Union used art for nothing else but to serve the workers revolution.Kant is saying, the whole idea of engaging beauty is to be divorced from the normal ways of things, and that would include end purposes, goals, and outcomes.

Distinction between subjective universal validity and objective universal validity.
An important argument Kant makes is that all judgments of "taste" and "beauty" are of a singular judgment.If it is unique, it cannot fit in the universal concept of beauty.There are no formulas, principles, or rules for identifying beauty.There is only the "possibility" of aesthetic judgments, so he can't list items of art that conform to his aesthetic judgment.Kant says something about art is different than everything else it doesn't have interest, axioms, rules, can't list things, but it has some positives, it is pleasurable, it draws us, it satisfies us, it isn't pleasure of practical needs or pleasure of knowledge or any interests.It doesn't excite our personal desires, it just gives us a direct experience of pleasure.Thus, Kant gives an intellectual picture of aesthetic taste and he says it is always a species of pleasure.The category of disinterest provides two notions for Kant, one is freedom, and the other is universality.By freedom, he means, freedom from both desire and knowledge, and that is the interesting part.

Another important concept for Kant is that the free play of imagination is one of the features that make up beauty.Free play of imagination of art gives pleasure because the mind is free from normal cognitive needs, logical rules, or empirical findings, practical needs, and therefore it has an element of openness.Thus, imagination is very important here, imagination is the ability to conjure up something that is not a fact in the real world.The free play in the imagination in art gives pleasure, because here the mind can simply enjoy its own cognitive powers independent of the constraints of the other realms, like science, math, logic, and other practical needs.Free play opens the idea that the artist has allot of leeway.The artist is not bound by facts and realities, nor is the audience someone who has to have that attitude either.Therefore, when you are looking at a painting or you are reading a poem or listening to music in this mode you are not bound by other ways of knowing.You are going to be free of that.What does that mean?First of all, all art is going to have a tangible means of presentation through sound or sight or color, texture, structure, so forth.This excites pleasure because art is a less ordered realm than other areas.Kant wouldn't say you could take pleasure in something that was chaotic.Kant says you can't force aesthetic judgment on others, but beauty has a universal claim, that is the tightrope he is walking.It is complicated, beauty is not chaotic, but not private opinion.

Disinterest and free play of mind is two sides of same coin.Imagination is not bound by normal modes of knowing, or normal needs or desires so it is associated with free play.Normally our desires are compelling to us.Imagination is the faculty, which is not bound to any particular object in the world that has to govern what we say.Then he goes to say that pleasure is the other element that has to be; that beauty has to be experienced as pleasure, and the theory does say something that is culturally specific, that pleasure comes from the experience of the harmony of the faculties.The free play of imagination is pleasurable, when within certain principles of harmony and order.This really is a kind of formalism, because it is not bound by the particular aesthetic object.This is one of the fullest senses of expression theory means, the expression of the mind's capacity rather then the direct reading out of the object itself.

So, what is aesthetic beauty, what is aesthetic judgment?Aesthetic judgment has to do with the sensuous form.So it obviously has to do with some kind of sensuous medium, some kind of visual or auditory stuff, which is probably what art is about, a sensuous form producing a harmony of the faculties that are released from normal judgments like science, and hence free to notice and explore structural relations and patterns as such.Not tied to condition or use or even the abstract universality of mere concepts (that is where singularity comes in).The abstract universality of mere concepts is there is a dog; the abstract concept of "dog" is the universal organization of all particular dogs.Here pleasure is excited which would not occur in logical form.So remember there are sensuous pleasures that are different from cognition; thus, scientific cognition has nothing to do with pleasure, it solely has to do with truth.So art is something that is disinterested, so therefore, it is relieved from the normal kinds of pleasures or normal kinds of things, but it is pleasure and in that respect, it is different from logic or reason.

Art is not something useful and you have to pick out what it isn't and say that yes aesthetic judgments can be made and there is such a thing as beauty.However, it doesn't operate the same way as normal reason does, it doesn't operate the way practical reason does, and it is not mere cognition because it has elements of sensuality and pleasure.The universality part of art has to do with disinterest and Kant is filling out the concept a little bit more.Kant argues that disinterest opens the door for the mind to enjoy its faculties independent of the usual ways in which the faculties are applied.The usual ways the faculties are applied are in science, the scientific accounts of nature, practical reasons like, "how do I get this thing done," these are the faculties that reach out towards something to understand.The artwork is obviously something that is out there, but with the power of aesthetic appreciation with artwork is not simply in the artwork but in the mind, the appreciation of the work by way of the mind's faculties and experience of pleasure.

Thus, Kant argues that everyone has there own taste, but the concept of the beautiful is universal.For Kant, the beautiful is a special characteristic.Thus, people can't deny an aesthetic judgment of taste.This sounds like Kant believes in cultural and foundational forms of beauty, which he observed in his Prussian society.

I recommend this work for anyone interested in philosophy and philosophy of art.

Aesthetics, Teleology, and Kant
This book, the 'Critique of Judgement', is the third volume in Immanuel Kant's Critique project, which began with 'Critique of Pure Reason' and continued in 'Critique of Practical Reason'. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is considered one of the giants of philosophy, of his age or any other. It is largely this book that provides the foundation of this assessment. Whether one loves Kant or hates him (philosophically, that is), one cannot really ignore him; even when one isn't directly dealing with Kantian ideas, chances are great that Kant is made an impact.

Kant was a professor of philosophy in the German city of Konigsberg, where he spent his entire life and career. Kant had a very organised and clockwork life - his habits were so regular that it was considered that the people of Konigsberg could set their clocks by his walks. The same regularity was part of his publication history, until 1770, when Kant had a ten-year hiatus in publishing. This was largely because he was working on this book, the 'Critique of Pure Reason'.

Kant as a professor of philosophy was familiar with the Rationalists, such as Descartes, who founded the Enlightenment and in many ways started the phenomenon of modern philosophy. He was also familiar with the Empiricist school (John Locke and David Hume are perhaps the best known names in this), which challenged the rationalist framework. Between Leibniz' monads and Hume's development of Empiricism to its logical (and self-destructive) conclusion, coupled with the Romantic ideals typified by Rousseau, the philosophical edifice of the Enlightenment seemed about to topple.

This book is divided into two major sections, the Critique of Aesthetic Judgement, and the Critique of Teleological Judgement. In the part on Aesthetics, Kant sets up for possible judgements - agreeable, good, sublime and beautiful. This relates back to the 'Critique of Pure Reason' (and scholar J.H. Bernard indicates that this framework is sometimes a bit of a shackle placed on Kant). Those things that are agreeable are wholly sensory in character, whereas those things that are good are ethical in nature. Kant argues that those things that are beautiful and sublime fall between the two poles of 'agreeable' and 'good'. Beauty is involved in purpose (teleology), whereas sublimity is that which goes beyond comprehension (and can be an object of fear). This also involves an idea of mind that allows for genius and creative activity.

In the section on teleology, this is a way of looking at things based on their ends (telos), and links to aesthetics in terms of beauty (which has a sense of finality of form) as well as links to scientific purposes - Kant particularly is concerned to explore biology and the telos of the natural world. This also involves physics and logical principles, bringing Kant full circle back to some of the ideas from the 'Critique of Pure Reason'.

This is one of Kant's master works, and while there is much that modern philosophers disagree with, there is also the sense in which no subsequent philosophy can ignore the developments and implications of Kant's Critique project.

Novalis
The editors list as one of their principles for rendering Kant's difficult German into English:"Our translators try to avoid sacrificing literalness to readability."Their notion of literalness is simply this:if one of Kant's sentences has five subordinate clauses, the English version should have five subordinate clauses.They obtusely fail to consider that German has grammatical markers that English does not have (e.g., gender of nouns and pronouns).Hence while Kant's German sentence might have a pronoun separated from its noun by some distance, gender will indicate the appropriate reference.In English, the referent for a pronoun is usally the noun most proximate--thus their introduction of great ambiguity into the English that does not exist in the German.The translators also presume that the only way to preserve Kant's argumentative structure is by adhering to his complex surface structure.But the logical grammar of Kant's arguments is obscured in English by the sacrifice of readability to their notion of literalness.Werner Pluhar has a better translation.

A fine edition
The placement of the First Introduction at the beginning of the book is very useful, providing a different feel as to the nature of the work as a whole.The relative of lack of [bracketed] comments compared to the Pluhar edition is also a plus. ... Read more

Product Description
The Works of Immanuel Kant in one collection with active table of contents.

Works include:
The Critique of Practical Reason
The Critique of Pure Reason
Fundamental Principals of the Metaphysic of Morals
The Metaphysical Elements of Ethics
... Read more

Product Description
This volume is the first to assemble the writings that Kant published to popularize, summarize, amplify and defend the doctrines of his masterwork, the 1781 Critique of Pure Reason. The Prolegomena is often recommended to students, but the other texts are also important representatives of Kant's intellectual development. The series includes copious linguistic notes and a glossary of key terms. The editorial introductions and explanatory notes reveal much about the critical reception given Kant by the metaphysicians of his day as well as his own efforts to derail his opponents. ... Read more

Product Description
What is the standing of a sovereign nation and what are its rights relative to other sovereign nations?

What is our obligation to pursue peace?

Can intervention in the affairs of another sovereign nation be justified?

Who, if any one, has the right to intervene?

--

In this short essay, Kant completes his political theory and philosophy of history, considering the prospects for peace among nations and addressing questions that remain central to our thoughts about nationalism, war, and peace.

Ted Humphrey provides an eminently readable translation, along with a brief introduction that sketches Kant’s argument. ... Read more