I am now working my way through the second edition version of the chapter in the Critique entitled "Deduction of the Pure Concepts of Understanding," the so-called Deduction in B. Yesterday I read the Deduction in A. For me, this is a stroll down Memory Lane. Here are all the familiar terms and arguments with which I wrestled more than half a century ago -- old friends, I feel. But as I read, a part of my mind imagines how these passages will appear to my audience, for most of whom they will be completely new, and I realize with dismay just how mysteriously difficult, nay impenetrable, they are. How on earth can I get my audience to sit still for the elaborate explanations and clarifications that will be necessary? And how many lectures will I require to do these passages justice? In the Kemp-Smith translation, the A and B Deductions run 49 pages. My discussion of them, in Kant's Theory of Mental Activity, occupies 127 pages!
I hope I have not bitten off more than they can chew.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Did you ever see the movie "Philadelphia"?
There the defense attorney, played by Denzel Washington, asks various witnesses to explain things to him as if he were a 4 year old or a 5 year old or a 6 year old child.
That's a great strategy. By the way, 4 year old children are generally very bright, much brighter than adults because society has had less time to fill their heads with dreck.
Post a Comment