A Commentary to Kant's 'Critique of Pure Reason'
BY NORMAN KEMP SMITH, D.Phil. McCOSH PROFESSOR OF PHILOSOPHY, PRINCETON UNIVERSITY AUTHOR OF ‘STUDIES IN THE CARTESIAN PHILOSOPHY’ MACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED ST. MARTIN’S STREET, LONDON 1918
COPYRIGHT
TO THE MEMORY OF ROBERT ADAMSON WISE IN COUNSEL, IN FRIENDSHIP UNFAILING GRATEFULLY DEDICATED
The Critique of Pure Reason is more obscure and difficult than even a metaphysical treatise has any right to be. The difficulties are not merely due to defects of exposition; they multiply rather than diminish upon detailed study; and, as I shall endeavour to show in this Commentary , are traceable to two main causes, the composite nature of the text, written at various dates throughout the period 1772-1780, and the conflicting tendencies of Kant’s own thinking.
The Commentary is both expository and critical; and in exposition no less than in criticism I have sought to subordinate the treatment of textual questions and of minor issues to the systematic discussion of the central problems. Full use is made of the various selections from Kant’s private papers that have appeared, at intervals, since the publication of his Lectures on Metaphysics in 1821. Their significance has not hitherto been generally recognised in English books upon Kant. They seem to me to be of capital importance for the right understanding of the Critique .
Some apology is perhaps required for publishing a work of this character at the present moment. It was completed, and arrangements made for its publication, shortly before the outbreak of war. The printers have, I understand, found in it a useful stop-gap to occupy them in the intervals of more pressing work; and now that the type must be released, I trust that in spite of, or even because of, the overwhelming preoccupations of the war, there may be some few readers to whom the volume may be not unwelcome. That even amidst the distractions of actual campaigning metaphysical speculation can serve as a refuge and a solace is shown by the memorable example of General Smuts. He has himself told us that on his raid into Cape Colony in the South African War he carried with him for evening reading the Critique of Pure Reason . Is it surprising that our British generals, pitted against so unconventional an opponent, should have been worsted in the battle of wits?