"All-Crushing" Critic of Metaphysics 255The result of his thinking was the so-called Prolegomena to Any Future
Metaphysics, which May Be Called a Science, which appeared in 1783. While
it would be wrong to regard the book simply as a reaction to the review in
the Göttingische Anzeigen, it is clear that this review had angered Kant very
much, and that he felt he had to answer the critic in Göttingen. Accord¬
ingly, the Prolegomena contained many overt and some not-so-overt refer¬
ences to the review. Though it ended up as a sustained polemic against the
Göttingen review, it did not start out that way. In a letter to Herz, written
shortly after the appearance of the Critique, Kant spoke of its subject mat¬
ter as "the metaphysics of metaphysics," and hinted that he had some idea
how it could be made "popular." If he had started with the subject matter
of the Antinomies and talked about it in a "flowery" style (sehr blühenden
Vortrag), he could have made his readers curious about the sources of the
contradictions.^29 In another letter, written about a month later, he expressed
his dissatisfaction with how he had expressed his views. Advancing age and
"worrisome illnesses" had made him publish the book sooner than would
perhaps have been advisable.^30 These second thoughts seem to have been
the cause of his willingness to write a "popular extract suitable for the gen¬
eral reader," or "in popular style."^31 By September 15, 1781, he seems to
have promised to Hamann and Hartknoch that he would indeed write such
a work.^32 But Hamann did not know late in October what the work would
be like, having heard rumors that it might be either a short extract or a text¬
book (Lesebuch) on metaphysical subjects.^33 When the Göttingen review
appeared in January of 1782, the plan changed. Kant now began to write
a "prolegomena of a still to be written metaphysics," and a response to the
Göttingen reviewer.^34 In late August the book had been written and was
being copied by Kant's amanuensis. By September it was finished, but its
publication was delayed until April of 1783.
Berkeley, Hume, and their critics play a much larger role in the new
book than they had in the Critique. Kant's reaction to being compared to
Berkeley was very different from his reaction to being compared to Hume.
While he was incensed at being called a Berkeleyan idealist, and vehemently
protested that there were no similarities whatsoever between him and the
Irish bishop, he was not opposed to being called a Humean, provided only
that it was understood what it meant to be a "Humean." He tried to put
as much distance as possible between himself and "all genuine idealists,
from the Eleatic school to Berkeley."^35 Their position is contained in the
"formula: 'All knowledge through the senses and experience is nothing but
sheer illusion, and only in the ideas of the pure understanding and reason