The Bounds of Sense: An Essay on Kant's Critique of Pure Reason (University Paperbacks)

3 customer reviews
ISBN-13: 978-0416835601
ISBN-10: 0416835600
Why is ISBN important?
ISBN
This bar-code number lets you verify that you're getting exactly the right version or edition of a book. The 13-digit and 10-digit formats both work.
Scan an ISBN with your phone
Use the Amazon App to scan ISBNs and compare prices.
Have one to sell? Sell on Amazon
Buy used
$7.28
Condition: Used - Good
In Stock. Sold by Reuseaworld
Condition: Used: Good
Comment: Please note this product will be shipped from the UK within 24 hours of receiving your order. We not offer tracked shipment in order to maintain great prices. Please therefore be patient in waiting for your items to arrive. Please refer to your Amazon delivery dates as a guide, we hope your item arrives with you shortly. Aged book. PLEASE READ BEFORE PURCHASE. Please note this book is over 20 years old. It will therefore have tanned pages, age spots and plenty of shelfwear. However for its age it is still very useable, and a great read.
Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items.
12 Used from $7.28
+ $3.99 shipping
Rent from Amazon Price New from Used from
Kindle
"Please retry"
$11.75
Hardcover
"Please retry"
$88.64 $17.69
Paperback, June, 1966
"Please retry"
$76.34 $7.28
Unknown Binding, Import
"Please retry"
More Buying Choices
4 New from $76.34 12 Used from $7.28 1 Collectible from $49.90
Free Two-Day Shipping for College Students with Amazon Student Free%20Two-Day%20Shipping%20for%20College%20Students%20with%20Amazon%20Student

--This text refers to an alternate Paperback edition.

InterDesign Brand Store Awareness Rent Textbooks
NO_CONTENT_IN_FEATURE

Best Books of the Month
Best Books of the Month
Want to know our Editors' picks for the best books of the month? Browse Best Books of the Month, featuring our favorite new books in more than a dozen categories.

Product Details

  • Paperback: 296 pages
  • Publisher: Routledge (June 1966)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 0416835600
  • ISBN-13: 978-0416835601
  • Product Dimensions: 1 x 5.8 x 8.8 inches
  • Shipping Weight: 12.8 ounces
  • Average Customer Review: 3.7 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (3 customer reviews)
  • Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #3,540,117 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

32 of 36 people found the following review helpful By Flounder on October 5, 2002
Format: Paperback
This is an extremely important classic text on Kant. Strawson has a metaphysical project that is at once inspired by Kantian issues (and insights) and independent of them, which is more elaborately developed in his Individuals. Here, Strawson offers us an eloquent exposition and critical discussion of the CPR. He is not altogether sympathetic with K's TI. However, most Kant scholars agree that Bounds of Sense is not a defense of Kant's metaphysics--Strawson's Kant is not a Kant that a student should walk away with as the genuine article. Nevertheless, Strawson provides us with elegant philosophical prose, while highlighting both areas: marks of Kant's genius and piteous incoherence (or obscurity).
Despite the fact that Strawson's attribution of inconsistency to K's TI isn't well argued or defensible, there is still much to learn here about good analytic philosophy (although not in terms of historical accuracy).
I also recommend: Guyer, Longuenesse, Allison, Langton, Stroud, Forster, McDowell's M and W, and A. Brueckner's UCLA dissertation on Kantian anti-skeptical strategies, as well as H. Ginsborg's Harvard dissertation on judgment. Also see Stern on Transcendental Arguments (Oxford UP).
Part One in Bounds of Sense is the General Review, which is important reading, especially the conclusion with its most elegant (and longish) last paragraph. This provides us with compelling reasons to take Kant seriously in our contemporary philosophical climate, despite Strawson's charge of the Second Analogy as a non sequitur of numbing grossness (a famous quote, p 28). Strawson is correct to hail the insights of the Trans.
Read more ›
1 Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
25 of 27 people found the following review helpful By Roderick T. Long on January 24, 2004
Format: Paperback
I'm baffled by a previous reviewer's claim that Strawson's book "offers the typical idealist interpretation of Kant." The principal achievement of Strawson's excellent book is to break AWAY from the traditional idealist interpretation of Kant.
3 Comments Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
7 of 34 people found the following review helpful By henning rasmussen on December 13, 2002
Format: Hardcover
Strawson's work reigned as the supreme example of Kant scholarship in English for several decades. It might have been ok for its time, but it offers the typical idealist interpretation of Kant, and attempts to separate the contents of Kant's Transcendental Aesthetic from his Transcendental Analytic, arguing that only the contents of the latter have merit. But the two sections play the similar roles in Kant's revolution and to wholly reject the aesthetic and not the analytic is, I believe, impossible. Strawson does not even take seriously the arguments of Kant's aesthetic, probably because he is English and the English always get nervous around the aesthetic. While one may still have to deal with this book if writing a paper on Kant, as Strawson is still held in fairly high regard, I would recommend this book only for one who is not familiar with the traditional idealist interpretations of Kant.
3 Comments Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again