of Right,” and “Metaphysical Elements of the Theory of Virtue “), are devoted to the development of the system.  The year 1798 brought two more larger works, the Conflict of the Faculties and the Anthropology.  Of the reviews, that on Herder’s Ideen maybe mentioned, and among the minor essays, the following:  Idea for a Universal History in a Cosmopolitan Sense, Answer to the Question:  What is Illumination f both in 1784; What does it mean to Orient oneself in Thought? 1786; On the Use of Teleological Principles in Philosophy, 1788; On a Discovery according to which all Recent Criticism of Pure Reason is to be superseded by a Previous One, 1790; On the Progress of Metaphysics since the Time of Wolff; On Philosophy in General, The End of all Things, 1794; On Everlasting Peace, 1795.  Kant’s Logic was published by Jaesche in 1800; his Physical Geography and his Observations on Pedagogics by F.T.  Rink in 1803; his lectures on the Philosophical Theory of Religion (1817; 2d. ed., 1830) and on Metaphysics (1821; cf.  Benno Erdmann in the Philosophische Monatshefte, vol. xix. 1883, p. 129 seq., and vol. xx. 1884, p. 65 seq.) by Poelitz.  If we may judge by the specimens given by Reicke in the Altpreussische Monatsschrift, 1882-84, and by Krause himself,[3] the promised publication of a manuscript of Kant’s last years, now in possession of the Hamburg pastor, Albrecht Krause, and which discusses the transition from the metaphysical elements of natural science to physics, will hardly meet the expectations which some have cherished concerning it.  Benno Erdmann has issued Nachtraege zu Kants Kritik der reinen Vernunft aus Kants Nachlass, 1881, and Reflexionen Kants zur kritischen Philosophie aus handschriftlichen Aufzeichnungen—­the first volume first Heft (Reflexionen zur Anthropologie) appearing in 1882, the second volume (Reflexionen zur Kritik der reinen Vernunft, aus Kants Handexemplar von Baumgartens Metaphysica) in 1884.  Max Mueller has made an English translation of the Critique of Pure Reason, 2 vols., 1881.[4]

[Footnote 1:  There has been much discussion and much has been written concerning the relation of the two editions.  In opposition to Schopenhauer and Kuno Fischer it must be maintained that the alterations in the second edition consist in giving greater prominence to realistic elements, which in the first edition remained in the background, though present even there.]

[Footnote 2:  This publication was the occasion of a conflict between Kant and the censorship concerning the right of free religious inquiry; cf.  Dilthey in the Archiv fuer Geschichte der Philosophie, vol. in. 1890, pp. 418-450.]

[Footnote 3:  A. Krause:  I.  Kant wider K. Fischer, zum ersten Male mit Huelfe des verloren gewesenen Kantischen Hauptwerkes vertheidigt, 1884 (in reply, K. Fischer, Das Streber- und Gruenderthum in der Litteratur, 1884); also, Das nachgelassene Werk I. Kants, mit Belegen populaer-wissenschaftlich dargestellt, 1888.]