Corrections / Additions to Week 2 Reading Guide

As you'll see, I wrote out the Reading Guide rather quickly...

1) In my haste, I accidentally wrote "Welterkenntniss" and "Menscherkenntniss.". The terms are actually "Weltkenntniss" and "Menschen-Kenntniss." "Kenntniss" means "knowledge," whereas "Erkenntniss" is more specifically "cognition." So, knowledge of the world and knowledge of men.

2) There is an incomplete sentence in the "QUESTIONS OF TRANSLATION" section. It should read, "The concept of Kunst suggests both artifice and the intentional production of meaningful phenomena." Also, the end of the sentence before that should read "a phenomenon" not "a phenomena."

3) Foucault uses "I-subject" and "I-object." I wrote "object-I" and "subject-I."

4) Upon further review I believe that Foucault is referring to the whole critical project (including all three Critiques) when he writes, "the Critique." However, the Critique of Pure Reason is still central because that is where Kant discusses "apperception" and "understanding."

5) One important point I did not include is that Kant is concerned with 4 main questions. What can I know? (addressed in The Critique of Pure Reason); What should I do? (addressed in The Critique of Practical Reason); What can I hope for? (addressed in The Critique of Judgment); and, finally, What is man? (dealt with, obviously, in the Anthropology). Foucault states that the final question, "What is man?" does not have an independent content, but rather is to carry the division of the other three questions into a final cohesion (p. 86 is crucial here). After all, what is the being that knows, acts, and hopes? Foucault goes as far as to say that the Anthropology takes the Kantian project from mere critical philosophy to "the realization of transcendental philosophy?" What he seems to mean is that "man" is the regulative idea that allows us to imagine that all of the conditions of possibility for an adequate knowledge have been met. Does Foucault overstate the primacy of the Anthropology?