This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

What do you mean by "reading"? If you read it in bite sized chunks, giving your self plenty of time to get through it, you'll do just fine. Of course parts of it you will have to read more than once or twice. — tim wood

I mean to imply that we start a reading group on Kant's monumental work with some companion in mind. It was a Copernican revolution in philosophy, according to Kant himself.

I don't know how many times I'd need to read the work to get a good grasp on it. Perhaps, ten (?) times? Have you read it?

Before starting, research what translations are best. A bad one is worse than useless. — tim wood

I'm using the Britannica's edition of Kant. Here's all the info on the subject:

Apparently it is just as hard in German. He sent the manuscript to his best friend who begged him to be allowed to stop reading it. By the first half the poor fellow was quite sure he was going mad.

John Searle has some great lectures on Kant as does Dan Brown, but I won't be attempting the book any time soon.

He sent the manuscript to his best friend who begged him to be allowed to stop reading it. By the first half the poor fellow was quite sure he was going mad. — Jamesk

*laughs*

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

I can't tell you if those meet current criteria. Try reviews on Amazon. The Critique of Pure Reason should have two prefaces. They should be readable and you should get a lot out of them - probably even enjoy them. And no, you do not have to read Kant ten times. — tim wood

Do you want to be the leader of the reading group on Kant's Critique of Pure Reason? I'd happily oblige to your directionality on the issue.

That's not a copy of the CPR. That's a collection of abridged readings from different works of Kant. The CPR alone is about 800 or so pages long (from the top of my head).

That's not a copy of the CPR. That a collection of abridged readings from different works of Kant. The CPR alone is about 800 or so pages long (from the top of my head). — StreetlightX

Oh, okay. Sorry to misinform otherwise. I'm sure a PDF is available online somewhere. I go search for one, now.

Do you want to assist us with this reading group?

'fraid not.

Here's what I have found:

http://strangebeautiful.com/other-texts/kant-first-critique-cambridge.pdf

Translation by PAUL GUYER University of Pennsylvania ALLEN W. WOOD Yale University.

And a second one:

http://files.libertyfund.org/files/1442/0330_Bk.pdf

Translation by: F. MAX MULLER

http://woozapooza.tumblr.com/post/65858615349/betterbooktitles-immanuel-kant-critique-of

This was the original title.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

Here's a useful commentary.

Not that I've compared them all, but I love Kemp Smith's translation, which, while supposedly less strictly faithful to the letter of the CPR, has a lovely fluidity to it, moreso at least than Guyer and Woods' one.

Also - again, not that I've read them all - but I really enjoyed Adorno's lecture series on the CPR, which one can find in published form as an accompanying text.

https://youtu.be/-T7VOrdWVPc?list=PLBHxLhKiPKxDVZ1QyWMRyaJC6vRhU2qSU

Eh, at the moment I just don't have that kind of time/energy to put into leading a group. But I'd probably read along with the thread. There are others here too that'd be able to put in a good word -- I know @jamalrob and @casalisbury both have done some deep Kant reading, and I'm certain they aren't the only ones. He's kinda a big figure ;).

I know that I prefer the Pluhar translation for its consistency and readability. But potaytoe potahtoe -- I don't know if it really matters all that much.

But if you want the group I'd suggest just starting up and leading it. It doesn't take any special knowledge -- just energy, dedication, and a willingness to be wrong.

Shouldn't we maybe do less than 20 books at a time?

If you really want to understand what Kant is on about in the CPR the best way to study the work, in my experience, is to put the audiobook version on your phone and listen to it at 2.5 speed while you do your groceries.

@Wallows You seem to be proliferating reading groups without wanting to do much hard work on them. I'd suggest no-one propose a text for a reading group unless they're willing to lead it. That way, more of them might be more productive.

You seem to be proliferating reading groups without wanting to do much hard work on them. — Baden

I progress at a slow pace. I'm a slug when it comes to reading.

That's fair enough. I don't devour books the way some others here do either. All I'm saying is if that's the case maybe be a bit more conservative in your involvement in these things.

All I'm saying is if that's the case maybe be a bit more conservative in your involvement in these things. — Baden

Ok, I'll refrain from starting new group readings. I'm awash in Schopenhauer's WWAR and others as it already stands.

I progress at a slow pace. I'm a slug when it comes to reading. — Wallows

Good reason to start 20 different reading groups at the same time.

Good reason to start 20 different reading groups at the same time. — Terrapin Station

I can't help it. Curiosity, you know?

I didn't want to lead this reading group; but, follow it.

Sure, but why not just systematically tackle one thing at a time? I don't know how many pages you can feasibly do in a day, but even if it's just 5, say, you'd get through all of Philosophical Investigations in less than a month, and then all of the World as Will and Representation in less than two months . . . you could tackle 6-8 of the major philosophy texts per year at least. If you could do 10 pages per day, you could double that. You just would need to make a commitment to sit down every day and read however many pages, concentrating on one thing at a time until you finish it.

You just would need to make a commitment to sit down every day and read however many pages, concentrating on one thing at a time until you finish it. — Terrapin Station

Well, to my case, the Naming and Necessity reading group is doing well with the grace of Banno. Schopenhauer is a difficult beast to tackle so, I'm doing slowly on that. The Philosophical Investigations thread is doing alright, though quite haphazardous. What am I doing wrong here?

How about we jazz things up with some more light reading, what about Russell 'On denoting", here is some serious competition for Emmanuel!

Bump ? Haha... Bit late to the party, but late enough to start another!

Just picking up the Critique for the first time. Having traversed most of it's themes and ideas in other people's work, this should be a great straightening-out for me :)
Anyone want to read along?

A coceptual map of the Critique of Pure Reason.

Also Online editions of CPR