In my comments on Karin de Boer’s Kant’s Reform of Metaphysics, I pose five questions. First, I ask how the fundamental principle of practical philosophy that Kant identifies and claims is fundamentally different from Wolff’s is consistent with the claim that Kant is reforming Wolff’s metaphysics. Second, I ask whether De Boer thinks that Kant, as a reformer of Wolff, continues to accept the Principle of Sufficient Reason (or some variant thereof). Third, I ask whether De Boer accepts Wolff’s conception of analytic judgements, especially as applied to the fundamental principles of metaphysics, and if she does not, how Kant can be reforming rather than rejecting Wolff’s metaphysics. Fourth, I ask what De Boer’s argument is for thinking that Kant is not begging the question against Wolff in thinking that a priori cognition needs schemata. Fifth, I ask how De Boer understands the division of labour between the Transcendental Analytic and the Transcendental Dialectic in establishing the claims of metaphysics.

在我对卡琳·德波尔的康德的形而上学改革的评论中，我提出了五个问题。首先，我要问，康德确定并声称的实践哲学的基本原则与沃尔夫的根本不同，与康德正在改革沃尔夫的形而上学的主张是如何一致的。其次，我问德波尔是否认为康德作为沃尔夫的改革者，继续接受充足理由原则（或其变体）。第三，我问德波尔是否接受沃尔夫的分析判断概念，尤其是应用于形而上学的基本原则，如果她不接受，康德如何能够改革而不是拒绝沃尔夫的形而上学。第四，我要问德波尔的论据是什么，认为康德不是在向沃尔夫提出问题，因为他认为先验认知需要图式。第五，我问德波尔如何理解先验分析和先验辩证法在确立形而上学主张时的分工。