This paper compares Cohen’s Logic of Pure Knowledge and Cassirer’s Substance and Function in order to evaluate how in these works Cohen and Cassirer go beyond the limits established by Kantian philosophy. In his Logic , Cohen seeks to ground in pure thought all the elements which Kant distinguishes in empirical intuition: its matter (sensation) as well as its form (time and space). In this way, Cohen tries to provide an account of knowledge without appealing to any receptivity. In accordance with Cohen’s project of reformulating the Kantian theory of sensibility, Cassirer undertakes in Substance and Function the task of developing an alternative doctrine of pure and empirical manifolds. But whereas Cohen analyzes the laws of pure thought, Cassirer aims to highlight the functional character of concepts in the development of modern mathematics and physics. I will discuss these two different approaches to the problems raised by Kantian philosophy and I will argue that Cassirer went further than Cohen in the project of critical idealism.

中文翻译：

---

科恩的《逻辑学》和《卡西尔的实事求是》

本文比较了科恩的纯知识逻辑和卡西尔的实质和功能，以评估科恩和卡西尔在这些著作中是如何超越康德哲学所确立的范围的。科恩在《逻辑学》中力求以纯粹的思想为基础，以康德的经验直觉来区分所有要素：其实质（感觉）及其形式（时间和空间）。通过这种方式，科恩试图在不诉诸任何接受性的情况下提供知识的描述。根据科恩提出的重新设计康德感性理论的计划，卡西尔在物质和功能方面承担着开发纯净的和经验的流形的另一种学说的任务。但是，尽管科恩分析了纯思想的定律，卡西尔（Cassirer）旨在强调概念在现代数学和物理学发展中的功能特征。我将讨论这两种不同的方法来解决康德哲学所提出的问题，并且我认为在批判唯心主义的项目中，卡西尔比科恩走得更远。