Problems with Religion and Politics 351as the Groundwork and the second Critique, that is, that it would take many
months before it appeared. For this reason, he changed publishers. The third
Critique appeared with de la Garde in Berlin. He recommended Kiesewet-
ter as the copy editor to the publisher.^83 He sent the first part of the man¬
uscript to Berlin on January 21, 1790, and the second part on February 9,
and a final small part on March 3. The Preface and the Introduction were
sent on March 22.^84 By April 20 he was correcting the proofs, albeit with
great reluctance. He found the work tedious.
Appreciation from a "Genuinely Philosophical Public"
and Enmity from "Popular Philosophers"At the same time, Kant's philosophy continually increased in importance
and influence in Germany. Especially Reinhold's Attempt of a Theory of
the Human Faculty of Representation (Versuch einer Theorie des menschlichen
Vorstellungsvermögens) of 1789, his publication of the Letters on Kantian
Philosophy {Briefe über die Kantische Philosophie) in book form in 1790, and
the Contributions toward the Correction of Past Philosophers' Misunderstand¬
ings (Beyträge zur Berichtigung bisheriger Missverständnisse der Philosophen)
of 1790, popularized and extended Kant's philosophy. In fact, it became
customary during this time to speak of the Kant-Reinholdian philosophy.
For Reinhold was no longer content just to present Kant's thought. He
wanted to develop it further. In particular, he claimed that he had under¬
cut Hume's position. Accordingly, his stance toward Hume is quite dif¬
ferent from that of Kant. Whereas Kant did not seem to mind very much
when he was called "skeptical" in some sense, his followers bristled at the
charge. For them, skepticism in general and Hume's skepticism in partic¬
ular was something dreadful. Thus while Reinhold, very early on, rec¬
ognized and accepted the skeptical dimension in Kant, he later vehe¬
mently argued against it.
In a paper that appeared in the 1789 issue of the Berlinische Monatsschrift,
entitled "From Which Skepticism Can We Expect a Reformation in Phi¬
losophy?," Reinhold differentiated among three different kinds of skepti¬
cism, namely "unphilosophical skepticism," "dogmatic skepticism," and
"critical skepticism," rejecting the first two and opting for the third. By
"unphilosophical skepticism," he had in mind the mitigated skepticism of
Kant's contemporaries, such as Feder, Meiners, Platner, and other so-
called popular philosophers. He did not argue against them, but simply dis¬
missed them because he was writing for a "genuinely philosophical public"