Comparing Kant's Prolegomena To Any Future Metaphysics

Metaphysics is a subject of study that limits our understanding, puts our reason in front of borders that are very hard to cross. Every science, if I could call metaphysic a field of science requires some criteria that are fundamental to every science. In other words, faculties that makes such science distinct, important, worthy to be explored. In Kant’s Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics similar question is raised into wonder. Weather metaphysics are possible at all. However, such question is not my intention of this paper but a starting point of what Kant meant when he says in the Prolegomena that David Hume’s account of Cause and Effect had awoken him from his “dogmatic slumber.” It is very interesting approach that Kant is giving us. One might think that it is indeed a criticism of Hume’s philosophy,

“For human reason is eager to build that several times already it has built the tower and has dismantled it again afterwards, to see what its foundation might be like.” We see that it is in a way the domain of philosophy to question. In the preface, Kant explains his intention to question the scientific quality of metaphysics, mainly because he does not see Hume’s approach to metaphysics as whole, rather as something particular without solid foundation. The “awakening from dogmatic slumber” is Kant’s enrichment that was caused by Hume, in which he concluded that we must use our criticism of reason to any possible metaphysics. “[Hume] brought no light into this kind of cognition, but he struck a spark at which a light could well have been kindled, if it had found a receptive tinder and if the glow had been carefully kept up and increased.” Precisely, Kant argues that Hume’s understanding of the connection of cause and effect is an important challenge to metaphysics but is not entirely accurate. The account of Hume’s objection that it is impossible