Shop now Shop now Shop now  Up to 50% Off Fashion  Shop all Amazon Fashion Cloud Drive Photos Shop now Learn More Shop now Shop now Shop Fire Shop Kindle Listen with Prime Shop now Shop now

Customer Reviews

4.2 out of 5 stars6
4.2 out of 5 stars
5 star
4 star
3 star
2 star
1 star
Format: Paperback|Change
Price:£4.99+ Free shipping with Amazon Prime
Your rating(Clear)Rate this item

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

on 11 December 2008
This is a very small version of the book, but it is unabridged. It comes at a very fair price and keeps things concise by by avoiding the copious footnotes and commentaries provided in more expensive versions. It is therefore a perfect addition to the collection of both the casual reader, and those like myself- undergraduate students using it for reference rather than involved study.

I too was surprised to see it lacked a contents and index page (this is not an issue with the four other 'Dover Books on Western Philosophy' I have purchased), and I can understand this is not an ideal version for a detailed study of the work, but as for the problem of the contents:

Part I
Analytic of Pure Practical Reason
Chapter 1 - p. 17
Chapter 2 - p. 60
Chapter 3 - p. 76

Part II
Dialectic of Pure Practical Reason
Chapter 1 - p. 114
Chapter 2 - p. 118

Part III
Methodology of Pure Practical Reason - p. 159

Problem solved.

The book itself is also pretty good, as no doubt you are aware. Much more readable than Critique of Pure Reason, especially if you are more interested in ethics than epistemology. Though if that is the case you should read the groundwork first, for a ... well a groundwork.
0Comment|6 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 1 February 2008
On receiving this Dover Publications edition, translated by Thomas Kingsmill Abbott, I was dismayed to find that it does not contain a table of contents or an index. This omission alone was enough to move me to write this review; I bought this edition because it was cheap, but it was of little use to me.

I subsequently bought a translation by Pluhar, published by Hackett, which has a table of contents and a comprehensive index; it has been much more useful to me in my studies.
0Comment|4 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 12 August 2014
This is a commendable translation of Kant's most 'popular' Critique, though I think White Beck's has the edge in expression (I'm unqualified to judge on accuracy - read Professor Paton's Categorical Imperative).

It appears Kant found this 'outworking' of the principles he evolved in the first Critique an enjoyment of the spoils of all his hard work. He even felt that the first two Critiques beautifully substantiated each other: what was impossible for speculative reason was amazingly available to practical reason: there are things we cannot know but must be presupposed to give ultimate value to the things we do. Practical Reason completes Pure Reason.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 18 August 2015
Kants second great Critique. A low priced version and not as attractively produced as others. The transation is by Thomas Abbott and is not the version most commonly used now. (I am no expert on this!) Content of course masterly and another product of Kant's genius.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
HALL OF FAMEon 13 October 2005
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.
0Comment|4 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 20 July 2012
The turn which philosophy took with Kant matched the Enlightenment turn toward progressive modernisation of society.

Basically, Kant divided the world into the Inner world, and the Outer world. The inner world contains an apparently free individual, 'me'. My main concern is my freedom or autonomy.

The outer world is not me and generally restricts my autonomy. Other people are around and they take offence if I just do what I want. So morals are necessary.

It is doubtful whether Kant was either religious, or whether he even cared about religious things in the slightest. He wrote of the Immortal Soul, the Kingdom of Heaven, and other such Ideals, but only so that he could justify to himself PHILOSOPHICALLY and to others why they should be good to each other. If there is no Kingdom of Heaven, then isn't everything permitted to the autonomous individual? It is therefore necessary to follow our instincts, and if our instincts say that we should be loving to each other, then there must be an Ideal world which will reward us for it.

Whether there is an ideal world or not is the subject of Kant's First Critique, and is outside the remit of this review. Suffice to say that Reason could never alone prove that there are entities such as God. Reason is a faculty which derives from those faculties such as Understanding which are made to deal with mere appearances. God does not appear, so the mind is not fit to know, perceive, or understand Him.

Kant wrote his works because he was a teacher, and because he was a part of his culture: he believed in education and Enlightenment, freedom, and individualism. To that extent, his philosophy reflects his prejudices, and even his epistemology is a result of these moral sheepishnesses.

Nietzsche was particularly brutal when dealing with Kant for that reason. For though Kant was as great a mind as there has ever been, he was also petty minded when it came to morality, and turned Prussian manners and morals into something eternal and God given. It is as if, in a later age, Kant could really have done something great, a philosophy of true freedom. But he was too early. And now that Germany is humiliated, it is too late.

The Germans are always unable to bring things to true fulfilment: a people of tomorrow and yesterday. Lacking synchronicity with themselves.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse

Sponsored Links

  (What is this?)