Chapter III: The Architectonic of Pure Reason1743

Adickes[1744] very justly remarks that “this is a section after Kant’s own heart, in which there is presented, almost unsought, the opportunity, which he elsewhere so frequently creates for himself, of indulging in his favourite hobby.” The section is of slight scientific importance, and is chiefly of interest for the light which it casts upon Kant’s personality. Moreover the distinctions which Kant here draws are for the most part not his own philosophical property, but are taken over from the Wolffian system.

The distinctions may be exhibited in tabular form as follows:[1745]

KNOWLEDGE

+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Historical| |
| or | |
| empirical | Rational (_cognitio ex principiis_) |
| (_cognitio_ | |
| _ex datis_) |-------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------|Mathe- |Philosophical[1746] (based on pure concepts):--meta- |
| | |matics,| physics in the widest sense. |
|Empi-|Empi-|based |-------------------------------------------------------|
|rical|rical|on the |Prop- |System of pure reason, both practical and |
|phys-|anth-|constr-|aedeu-|speculative: metaphysics in the wider sense. |
|iolo-|ropo-|uction |tic: |------------------------------------------------|
|gy |logy |of con-|Cri- |Metaph-|Metaphysics (in a more limited sense) of|
| | |cepts. |tique.|ysics | nature,[1747] _i.e_. of all that is. |
| | | | |of mor-|----------------------------------------|
| | | | |als, _i.e._|Trans- |Physiology of pure reason. |
| | | | |of all |cend- |--------------------------------|
| | | | |ought |ental | Immanent. | Transcendent. |
| | | | |to be. |phil- |------------+-------------------|
| | | | | |osophy |Rat- |Rat- |Cosmology| Theology|
| | | | | |of pure|ional|ional | | | | |
| | | | | |reason:|phy- |psych-| -----|----- |
| | | | | |ontol- |sics.|ology.|Metaphysics in the |
| | | | | |ogy.[1748]| most limited sense.|
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Kant further distinguishes between the “scholastic” and the “universal” or traditional meaning of the term philosophy.[1749] In the former sense philosophy is viewed from the point of view of its _logical_ perfection, and the philosopher appears as an _artist_ of Reason.[1750] Philosophy in the broader and higher sense is “the science of the relation of all knowledge to the essential ends of human Reason.”[1751] The philosopher then appears as the _lawgiver_ of human Reason. Of the essential ends, the _ultimate_ end is man’s moral destiny; to this the other essential ends of human Reason are subordinate means. For though the legislation of human Reason concerns nature as well as freedom, and has therefore to be dealt with by a philosophy of nature, _i.e._ of _all that is_, as well as by a philosophy of morals, _i.e._ of _that which ought to be_, the former is subordinate to the latter in the same degree in which in human life knowledge is subordinate to moral action. Whereas speculative metaphysics serves rather to ward off errors than to extend knowledge,[1752] in the metaphysics of morals “all culture [_Kultur_] of human Reason”[1753] finds its indispensable completion.

Empirical psychology is excluded from the domain of metaphysics. It is destined to form part of a complete system of anthropology, the pendant to the empirical doctrine of nature.[1754]