Beiträge zur Geschichte und Interpretation der Philosophie Kants (review)
In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

BOOK REVIEWS 385 double-aspect theory, and the concept of causality. Part VI develops the growing competition between absolute and relative concepts of space and time. A concluding review briefly draws together some of the dominant methods, concepts, and themes as a summary of the whole. No final synthesis or general evaluation is attempted. For those who have some familiarity with the individual thinkers of the period, Seventeenth-Century Metaphysics provides the opportunity to consider their metaphysical doctrines anew with the assistance of a knowledgeable guide. The analysis is informed and the criticism penetrating. The copious footnotes alone are worth considering for the information they provide and as models of how to bring together historical commentary, contemporary discussion, and occasional literary analogues. The twelve-page index is helpful, but a selected bibliography would have been even more so and a concluding evaluation would have been particularly appropriate and welcome. However, these are minor quibbles and perhaps the last can be the occasion for another book. Seventeenth-Century Metaphysics is well worth reading, even for those who may not at first be overly sympathetic to its topic. CHARLES A. CORR Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville Beitriige zur Geschichte und Interpretation der Philosophie Kants. By Gerhard Lehmann. (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter & Co., 1969) This book consists of 19 essays, previously published in various journals between 1935 and 1967, which, together, are bound to have a profound effect upon Kant scholarship and Kant interpretation from here on out. In one way or another, all essays pertain to the Akademieausgabe of Kant's works; and this is natural since their author was one of the editors of that Ausgabe and, together with Arthur Buchenau, prepared Kant's opus postumum for publication as volumes XXI and X_XII of that all-inclusive edition of Kant's works. In the book here under review Gerhard Lehmann has given us a profound and challenging interpretation of the much-neglected opus and of its relation to the problems and issues of Kant's published works, especially to those of the third Critique. The essays have been arranged in four groups. The first of these (essays 1 to 5) pertains more or less directly to the history of the Akademieausgabe from its inception in 1893 to the present, including an essay on the history of the manuscript copy of the opus postumum and an interesting "Introduction to Kant's Lectures" in which the author points up various differences in the "mode of thinking" of "Kant the lecturer" who spoke freely and developed ideas as he proceeded in his presentations, "Kant the author of published works" whose style became involved and often obtuse, and "Kant as revealed in the opus postumum" who considers and reconsiders basic issues but lacks the power to weave his ideas into a rounded-out whole. More important than these initia/ essays is the second group (essays 6 to 12). Here basic questions of interpretation are raised. Is Kant a "system-thinker" or is he a "problem-thinker"? Perhaps his whole philosophy is but a struggle with the problems inherent in the very conception of a philosophical system; and Kant never quite managed to develop the system itself. Because of this "unfinished business," Kant interpretatious have varied a great deal, some interpreters stressing the "problem-aspect" and others the "system-aspect" of his work. The spectrum of variations in interpretation is well represented by thinkers such as Friedrich Paulsen, Erich Adickes, Nicolai 386 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY Hartmann, Franz Erhardt, Paul Natorp, and Martin Heidegger. In view of such diverse conceptions of what Kant is all about, a "historical" approach to the unfolding of Kant's ideas may be most helpful in giving us "the real Kant"; and Lehmann's "Criticism and the Critical Motive in the Development of Kant's Philosophy " (pp. 117-151) is at least a very promising sketch of such an approach. Kant himself, we know, confessed in a letter to Garve that "the year 69 gave me a great insight." This "insight" was Kant's realization that there is a profound conflict between a "nature-pantheistic monism" and a "personalistic-pluralistic metaphysic," and that the one cannot be reduced to the other. The Kant...