etaphysics are possible, while others are not. Transcendental, or general, metaphysics is possible if the Copernican turn is applied. Applications of all his theories- such as phenomena, spatial and temporal origins- led him to believe that this type of metaphysics, despite what Hume believed, is possible. He admits that transcendent, or special, metaphysics, is not possible. For us to go beyond our limits of thinking and to get passed spatial and temporal terms is not possible. Essentially, what special metaphysics is asking is to think beyond our limits of thinking, which Kant sees as impossible.Hume's work can be criticized from many angles- Kant's writing is basically a critique of Hume's thoughts. The most obvious critique is one brought up and dealt with by Kant in the Prolegomena, that Hume does not let himself go beyond the physical, obvious world. He finds fault with our understanding and grasp of the world, but does nothing to correct it. Although he feels that we can not accurately make statements with totally validity he does not let himself imagine a case where this might be possible. It was this skepticism that Kant addressed in his works. Kant's work is a little more difficult to examine. The one flaw that stands out is that Kant, like Hume, found an obstacle and did not try to make sense of it, rather they both just accepted it. Kant could not explain metaphysics on a transcendent level, so he simply turned to faith to justify the existence of it. He stood by faith much like Hume stood by skepticism. He relies blindly on faith to explain a large part of what he is trying to discredit Hume for. It is almost as if he is not making a definitive statement on the existence of metaphysics. Rather, he is caught in the middle, claiming that it may be true in one instance, but not in another. Kant directly deals with the problems presented in Hume's analysis of metaphysics. Where Hume stops his line of thinking ...
