is kant's prolegomena a fit presupposition for understanding schopenhauer's metaphysics?
CPR will be a long tedious read, and probably i won't able to read alongside with schopenhauer. Althought prolegomena is just relatively less dense than CPR, it won't trouble me so much. i have meagre familliarities with kant's ideas. I feel certain that reading kant is not so necessary and we have this "tradition" in philosophy enthusiasm that we can read whichever philosopher we are interested in and do not need to worry about reading a predecessor philosospher, but i also feel certain that not reading kant will build passive tendency to misinterpret and have a irrelevant view on his metaphysics not acknowledging that some of his ideas are references to kant's metaphysics. any guides please?
u/ForsakenSweet3878 — 5 days ago