Kant’s Observations and Remarks: A Critical Guide ed. by Susan Meld Shell and Richard Velkley (review)

This collection in the Cambridge Critical Guides series is something of an anomaly. While there are guides on major publications such as the second Critique, Groundwork, and Metaphysics of Morals, it might be wondered whether the Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and the Sublime (1764) and the associated Remarks constitute the kind of important unified text that warrants such a companion piece. Kant himself regarded the Observations as a minor work. The Remarks are thought important not because of their intrinsic philosophical value, but because they function to mark a crucial period in Kant’s intellectual development and to anticipate themes in the critical period. While these points remain true, this volume clearly justifies its own existence, however, and contains some excellent pieces that will be of interest to most Kant scholars.

The book comprises an introduction by the editors, Susan Meld Shell and Richard Velkley, and thirteen papers. These are divided into four sections: Kant’s Ethical Thought: Sources and Stages; Ethics and Aesthetics; Education Politics and National Character; and Science and History. The first section begins with Dieter Henrich’s republished essay “Concerning Kant’s early ethics” (translated by Jerome Veith). Henrich outlines the early influence upon Kant’s ethics and perceives a move away from the intellectualism of Wolff and Baumgarten as early as the Prize Essay of 1762. He argues that the primary source of influence in this regard (before Rousseau) is that of Hutcheson. Corey Dyck considers the notion of “chimerical” ethical systems with particular regard to the influence of Baumgarten. Patrick Frierson argues that a change is observable between the Observations and Remarks regarding two notions of universality at play in regard to ethics. The switch that Frierson perceives is from that of a Hutcheson-influenced demand to extend a disinterested benevolence to all of humanity to the ideal of “universalizing the point of view of the deliberating subject” (60). Paul Guyer reviews the evidence in these early notes for different tendencies toward taking freedom as the ground of morality.

The second section begins with an extensive examination by Rudolf Makkreel regarding Kant’s early account of sociable and moral feelings. Along with Dyck’s and Ameriks’s contributions, Makkreel provides some helpful context for Kant’s later consideration of both the positive and negative roles of sympathy and honor. Robert Clewis considers the distinction between true and false sublimity and is surprisingly the only one in the collection to focus exclusively on aesthetic themes. Alix Cohen finds in the Observations an account of the natural drives and feelings relating to human nature that is entirely descriptive, and as such in stark contrast to Kant’s later normative considerations. In particular she argues that the account claims that aesthetics standards for whole human species can be achieved independently of moral concerns.

The third section begins with G. Felicitas Munzel’s examination of the role of pedagogy and moral education in the Remarks. Munzel situates the development of Kant’s notions of pedagogy against Rousseau’s critique of Locke’s account of education and the rise of the Philanthropin movement. Reinhard Brandt’s contribution (also translated by Jerome Veith) argues that, in contrast to Kant’s public caution, in the Remarks an “indignation blazes” (186) with regard to the social order of his times, though it is perhaps a challenge to read Kant’s attitude so clearly from such meager resources. Robert Louden examines Kant’s reflections on national character, tracing an interesting route from his lectures on geography to the Observations. Louden examines Kant’s response to concern about the elimination of differentiating national characteristics through the progress of globalization, and finds a claim in response that “nature wills progress through diversity and plurality” (216).

The fourth section begins with Peter Fenves’s challenging paper on the opening lines of the Observations. Fenves proceeds from the unusual observation regarding the...