A Palingenesis and Its Consequences 171goes back to at least the summer of 1762, but probably not to a time much
earlier than that.^110 In a letter to Charlotte von Knobloch, Kant explained
how his interest in Emanuel Swedenborg (1688-1772) was piqued. Kant
pointed out that it was unlikely "that anyone ever noticed in him any trace
of a way of thinking inclined to the miraculous or a weakness that could
lead to credulity." He also claimed that he had never believed in spirits or
been afraid in cemeteries, following the rule of healthy reason, which, he
found, in general speaks against such apparitions. Yet Swedenborg's pre¬
dictions, or better, miraculous visions, seemed to be at least prima facie re¬
liable. They pointed in the direction of a proof of the reality of another
world. Thus Swedenborg was said to have reported the precise events that
were taking place in Stockholm when he was fifty miles away.^11! The wit¬
nesses of these "sightings" were for Kant absolutely reliable. So some¬
thing had to give; either the natural laws governing sight were incomplete,
or Swedenborg and his witnesses were mistaken. Kant had difficulty in
finding anything that undermined the credibility of these events. Thus he
was "longingly" waiting for a book Swedenborg was to publish soon in
London. When he read the book, he was disappointed and amused by
parallels between the speculations of Swedenborg and those of academic
metaphysicians.
By November 6, 1764, Hamann reported to Mendelssohn that Kant,
"to whose society I now restrict myself," will "review the Opera omnia of
a certain Schwedenberg [sie]," and expressed his hope to be able to send soon
a "small treatise by Magister Kant in lieu of an antidote" to Mendelssohn.
Kant had thus written a part or a preliminary version of the Dreams be¬
fore this time. Hamann was well informed; perhaps he even had in hand
some part in the project. The history of its publication was also peculiar.
It was not sent to the censor in manuscript form, as it should have been.
Kanter submitted a printed copy and was fined 10 Thalers, or the equiv¬
alent of one-sixth of Kant's yearly salary as a sublibrarian. Kanter's excuse
was that the manuscript was "very illegible." It had been sent to the print¬
ers page by page for that reason. Kant himself confirms this, trying to find
an excuse for the bad organization of the book in this procedure. He "was
not always able to see in advance what ought to be introduced early on to
facilitate the better understanding of what was to follow... and certain
elucidations had subsequently to be omitted because they would have other¬
wise appeared at an inappropriate place."^112 On the other hand, Kant seems
to have trusted his former student Herder to understand the parts of the
work without having seen the whole, since he sent him the book piece by