Immanuel Kant\u27s Four Questions and His Plan for Anthropology

As is usual with a systematizing philosopher, the development of his/her thinking follows the concept he/she holds in advance. The philosopher conceives an idea about the systematic whole of knowledge. Then, this idea as program directs the course of his/her philosophical development toward its realization. But we need not assume that the idea once held is unchangeable, and that the same idea rules the development forever. On the contrary, it often happens that in the process of development the discrepancy between the idea and the system so far constructed becomes conspicuous. Then the philosopher is obliged to revise his/her idea. This revision of the idea, or we can say, of the program, brings about, in its turn, the change of his/her further philosophical construction. We can justly suppose that this cycle repeats itself through the life of one philosopher. Therefore it is very important for a research into the inner development of a philosopher to explicate which idea the philosopher conceived at a certain point of time about the attainable whole of knowledge, and which revised idea he/she came to conceive in the next stage in consequence of his/her philosophical development. Now, what is the case with Immanuel Kant? Which concept of the whole of knowledge did he have at the time when he was about to construct his critical philosophy? And then, which revised concept did he have at the time right after the completion of his three great critical works in consequence of his philosophical development thereto? We can find the former near the end of Critique of Pure Reason, in the chapter "the Canon of Pure Reason" (A804-06, B832-34). With regard to the latter, we can mention at least two passages: one from the transcript of his lectures on metaphysics in the semester 1790-91 (L2), the other from his Letter to Carl Friedrich Staudlin, on May 4, 1793. In this paper I analyze each concept and then compare them. In this way I reveal the difference and try to explicate it as the revision of Kant\u27s concept of the whole of knowledge consequent upon the development of his critical philosophy