In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

304 Book Reviews steUungen tragen auf ihre Weise zur nötigen Revision der ÜberUeferung ihres Lebens bei. University of Iowa Waltraud Maierhofer John H. Zammito, Kant, Herder, and the Birth of Anthropology. Chicago, London: U of Chicago P, 2002. 576 pp. In a nutsheU, this inteUectual biography argues that Kant would have been more Uke Herder, had he not become a Kantian. Zammito focuses on the early Kant and his affinities with Herder, before theft parting of the ways by the 1780s. Indeed, Zammito is a sort of Geisterseher, foUowing the spirit of the early Kant as it possessed Herder. The inspiration Kant's early works gave to writers later associated with popular phUosophy and with anthropology has not been fuUy appreciated. It is not the "Kant who persisted or prevaUed" (6), but rather the Kant who has been buried in most histories of phUosophy under the marker "pre-critical" that interests Zammito. Having afteady turned against Wolffian school phUosophy, this Kant flirted with the essayistic style of popular phUosophy . He did abandon this path, but Herder "fulfUtfs] the promise of the path Kant abandoned" (J). In reconstructing that path, Zammito paints a complex picture; his text can feel at times like a dense critical forest. But no neat narrative could honestly capture this decade, these thinkers, these texts. He shifts between biography, analysis of works, and reception history. This wide-ranging ambitious study begins widi a seemingly modest goal: to see the effects of the 1760s on two philosophers. This study is a veritable schooling Ui the philosophical concerns of the 1760s and 1770s; one could imagine graduate courses buüt around this book. The study amounts to 351 pages, foUowed by 1,982 endnotes, an extensive bibUography, and separate name and subject indices. Zammito's documentation provides numerous helpful leads; scholars wUl be inspfted to foUow up on any number of his suggestions. Eight chapters are subdivided into sixty-three named sections that average five pages in length; this subdivision helps the reader organize the detaUs. EngUsh translations are used throughout, occasionaUy with original German, Latin, or French terms given Ui brackets. Infelicities include: some repetitions, even identical sentences Ui the main body and Ui the endnotes ; several misspeUed names, including that of Herder scholar Wulf Koepke; misspeUed titles of Greek, Latin, French, and German texts, such as Gnosse [!] seauton, oder Magazin für [!] Erfahrungsseelenkunde or even Kant's "Von den verschiedenen Races [!] des Menschen"; a number of case declination errors, most often with the Viertes kritischen [!] Wäldchen; and one factual error: Wieland 's Agathon, not Goedie's Werther, is the crowning example in Blankenburg 's 1774 theory of the novel. GUankenburg wrote about Werther Ui a 1775 essay.) None of this detracts from Zammito's main arguments, but one wishes that the study had been more careniUy edited. Chapter 1 discusses the educated ranks and focuses on the Thomasian impulse for schöngeistig writing, which was taken up as a weapon against Wolffianism after mid-century. A section on the institutional history of die university is particularly informative. Chapter 2 shows the importance of physical influx for Kant's metaphysics and of faculty psychology for Kant's logic. In a flurry of writings from 1762 to 1763, Kant distances himsetf from academic philosophy. Herder witnessed this "provocation to the guüd" (65), as is evident from his notes of Kant's lectures. Kant scholars wiU appreciate a section on Henrichs views on Kant in 1762/63; what is clear to the rest of us is that Zammito wants Goethe Yearbook 305 to fiU in the gap left in Henrich's depiction, which ignores the seven-year period when Kant was between metaphysical systems. It seems Henrich is so anxious to see Kant as a systematic thinker that he overlooks the alternative styles of thinking and writing that characterize Kant's works of the 1760s. Zammito wants to take this Kant—the popular phüosopher, the mud sceptic—seriously. Kant had a life, despite rumors to the contrary, and Zammito carefully examines his social and professional situation from 1762 to 1773, throwing much Ught upon his writings. Chapters 3 and 5 delve into Kant's discontent with...

pdf

Share