Notes on the Kantbook
1. On the Kantbook
It was taken (1) as a one-sided interpretation of Kant, (2) as a forerunner for "Being and Time"-both were confused ways of thinking.
Discovering "Kant in himself" is to be left to Kant philology. Even if it should emerge that it has actually learned something from the violent Heideggerian interpretation.
But the question is: the Problem of Metaphysics, and that means-the Question of Being.
To be sure, by itself as "'historical' ['geschichtliche'] introduction" to "Being and Time" in a more limited sense-not "historiological" ["historisch"l, rather- "questioning debate" ["Auseinandersetzung"].
an attempt to question what has not been said, instead of writing in a fixed way about what Kant said. What has been said is insufficient, what has not been said is filled with riches.
The distinction between analytic and synthetic judgments and these ways of judging always exhibited for themselves as characteristics of finitude.
Finite thinking is a tautology, after the fashion of a round circle. What does it mean: that thinking is finite?
Critique of Judgment
Only considered far enough to be able to see that it is not contradicted.
But now the highest corroboration of the interpretation; see §59, p. 258 [Bernard translation, p. 198-tr.]!!, likewise p. 238 [Bernard translation,