The Critique of Pure Reason

First of all, yes, this is a difficult read. If you're fairly new to philosophy, then Kant is not the place to start. What makes the Critique such a dense read is the simple fact that it assumes prior knowledge (no pun intended) of particular epistemological issues that had been hotly debated in the West up to that point (a period of roughly 2000 years). So, to jump into philosophy with Kant would be like walking into a room in the middle of a conversation that's already been going on for hours on end; you're going to be fairly lost. A basic familiarity with Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Descartes and at least one Empiricist (either Locke or Hume) is greatly helpful in establishing the context of the Critique and helps the reader follow the general line of Kant's thought. Also helpful is a reading of Kant's Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics before the much larger Critique.Just as it's nearly impossible to understand Kant without some general knowledge of philosophy up to his time, it's even more so to understand philosophy up to our time without reading Kant. His work was that influential. And while, as Bertrand Russell pointed out, the advent of non-Euclidean geometry and non-Aristotelian logic have rendered Kant's application of his theory to human knowledge and experience obsolete, Kant's general agenda is still very much the agenda of modern philosophy. We are still concerned with what constitutes consciousness, the structure of our faculties of knowledge and understanding (both practical and theoretical), and the nature of objective experience. In short, there's no avoiding Kant if you want to move on to any of the later philosophical movements.Which is where a good translation of the Critique comes in for the English-speaking reader. The translation in this edition is up-to-date and in line with the most recent scholarship, and it has the added benefit of being eminently affordable. Extensive endnotes help clear up certain obscurities in the text owing to difficulties of rendering Kant's German into English; they also explain the frequent references to Scholastic concepts for the non-Latinate. I also like the manner in which this edition presents comparative passages of Kant's own different redactions of the work. It allows the reader to look at passages from both the earlier and later redactions or simply ignore the earlier redaction, which is often admittedly incomprehensible in spots. The introduction provides a decent enough biographical sketch of the man himself. No doubt there are more scholarly editions out there, but if you want a decent edition of the Critique for very little money, then this is your best bet.

One could argue that the Critique of Pure Reason is the first modern Theory of Everything (ToE). This term, coined in the twentieth century, describes a so far undiscovered body of equations that would describe the behavior of everything in the universe, from the birth of stars to the peculiarly strong sense of consciousness in Homo Sapiens.While there is reason to read Kant beyond the validity of his ToE, he was arguably the first modern who thought he had come up with such a theory. In essence, he held that the human mind has a common way of experiencing the world that results in universally valid laws of matter. The world, as it is in itself, is for ever unknown. In this sense, one could say it is a theory of nothing. But we now can account for the fact that mathematics and science yield laws that are universally agreed upon. Subjects, however, like metaphysics, not subject to human experience, remain forever mired in controversy.The corresponding architecture of this mind and the reformed sciences is then fully detailed in the Critique. And while it’s easy to poke holes in the theory It can still be argued as the way the human mind naturally groks the world. For example, Kant held that space and time are imposed on the world by the mind distinctly. We now know that space and time have to be considered together to account for the effects of special relativity.But, how many physicists, fully conscious of the unity of space and time, make use of this union in their day to day life? As a former physics major I can assure one it is not many.Beyond the Uber-theory of how the mind must be constructed for math and science to be held in common, Kant can also be credited with forever shaping the terms of the idealist/realist debate in philosophy. The highly creative construct of such ideas as analytic/synthetic and a posteriori/a priori, while not wholly due to Kant, led to a permanent modification in their meaning.Moreover, Kant can be acclaimed for getting the mind/world duality partially right. While little is still known about precisely how the brain works, we do know that it evolved for survival purposes and that its intuitions are accordingly sometimes incorrect.We intuit that a cat some type of essential catness. But a cat does not possess an essence that determines its kind. Its kind is determined by the DNA it inherits.Similarly, a table is not completely solid but consists mostly of an electron cloud filled space around a small nucleus. It is our eyes and sense of touch that make the table appear solid, not its underlying reality.So even now we have to admit that our mind imposes certain ways of perceiving upon the world and does not merely take in reality, raw and unfiltered. As the first transcendental philosopher, Kant can be accredited for his early perception of this. For better or worse, he has come up with a proto Theory of Everything.Difficult, boring at times, but absolutely essential reading in the history of modern civilization. In brief, highly recommended.

Great a book now as it was ever!

Kant must be regarded as one of the best philosophers, but can be confusing at times. Kant even said himself: he was worried about content, not style. He identified and explained a priori synthetic judgments, this is one of the greatest achievements of mankind. This book is not well written so I'd recommend: Theory and History, The Ultimate Foundations of Economics, and Pure Political Philosophy: Natural Law and Sulaocracy.https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1098020227/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o02_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Kant e Hegel são os clássicos da filosofia eurocêntrica. Então, ainda são importantes para quem tentar compreender as dinâmicas transfenomrnais do pensamento ocidental.

This book brought together other reasoning i gathered from other sources. ive read many books on thinking about thinking (mentalism) . but this book made it all make sense.

Ive read Schopenhauer, Principles of Sufficeint Reason, just. The reason why I am reading this. At the beginning so it would be unfair to provide a critique. Both books to date are interesting if one analytically seeks truth.

Scholar Select’s edition is plain awful, you can barely read it. Looks as a bad quality photocopy

First of all, it's not an easy book to read. It's very long and almost unreadable due to its dry prose and complex terminology. That's something you should always expect when you're reading a high-end philosophy book.Anyway, there are a few terms you need to understand before I come to the core ideas of this book.1. Synthetic a posteriori knowledge, that is, the knowledge we gain from our experiences.2. Analytic a priori knowledge, that is, the universal knowledge which is independent of experience, such as our knowledge of mathematics.These two ideas are found in the earlier empiricist philosophers such as John Locke and David Hume as well as in rationalist philosophers such as G.Wilhelm.In the "Critique of Pure Reasons"  Kant argues that "Synthetic A priori" Judgement is also possible.  And for this, Kant gave the Newtonian example of (7 + 5 = 12).Here, no amount of analysis will find 12 in either 7 or 5. Thus Kant concludes that all pure mathematics is synthetic through a priori, the number 7 is seven and the number 5 is five, and the number 12 is twelve, In other words, they are universal and necessary.The entire Kant's philosophy can be understood within the three transcendental critiques, or approaches.1. Transcendental Aesthetics (Sensibility)2. Transcendental Analytic  (Understanding)3. Transcendental Dialectic (Reason)Human thinking faculty is divided into two aspects on which we understand things around us.Understanding, that is, Transcendental Aesthetics and Reason, that is, Transcendental Dialectic ( Note: Kant keeps Reason at a slightly higher domain. Reasons tell us about the limitations of our Understandings.And the Transcendental Dialectic that is according to Kant will free us from the Transcendental illusion or the Metaphysical illusionsHe also gave the concept of Noumena and phenomena world.Noumena: Reality as we see it, experience it, and which are given to us in one experience which is known as phenomena world.And then there is noumena world which can be understood as things in themselves. Its existence is never doubted. Just because we do not experience it, we can not know about it. It's preconditioning and without that, we can not know anything with certainty about matters of facts.God, Freedom, Immortality, these are transcendental concepts, that is, a metaphysical concept, But philosottendstities.The most fundamental concepts which later Kant would call them " Idea of Pure Reason"Soul ( unitary and substantial)Cosmos (infinite world process as a unity)God (the totality of existence )For more book reviews you can follow me on Instagram at @ravishratnesh