A review by ostrava
Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant

3.0

OK, instead of lamenting myself over the fact that I hit the wall with the book, let me try again on why I think people are convinced that Kant was not a good writer:

1) Kant talks about very complicated stuff.

2) Kant talks about a lot of complicated stuff.

3) Kant talks about a lot of complicated stuff and explains himself poorly.


The first one is fairly obvious. The second one is where it gets tricky because Kant went overboard on the task and that's why he loses many readers who can't keep up with his nonsense. We're hardly out of synthetic/analythic graduation and Kant wants to immediately discuss every single thought that crosses his mind. I choke reading him.

The last one however is subjective. But Kant is unfortunately, in my opinion, trapped in the labyrinth of his own musings, which is why it feels schematic, forced and infamously "dry".

There is a lot going on here, but ask yourself, why are YOU here? To learn about the basics? Read the introduction and the preface and some additional chapters and you're done. You're free to go. If you want the full Kant you can get the full Kant, but is it what you want? The full Kant? Are you serious?