哲學冷知識－Proceßaktenstück
若干年前，俄羅斯有一新聞記述，有兩人在酒吧討論康德哲學，誰知竟然最後大打出手。其中一人更加是拔出氣槍，向他的對手連發數槍，幸好只是橡膠子彈，雖然受了傷，不過沒有生命危險。討論哲學吵架時有發生，不過更多都只是面子問題，不是學理問題。(新聞報道請按此處。)
討論康德哲學到大打出手，則不是現在才發生的事情，早在他的時代已經發生過。例如在〈Analekten f¨ur Politik und Literatur〉(Leipzig, 1787) 便有報道：
A student from the Mosel region defends the Kantian philosophy, resorting to violence against someone from lower Saxony, who studied in Göttingen. The Saxon was wounded and the student from the Mosel region incarcerated. He wrote to the academic senate from his cell that he knew he could only presume that there was a conflict of interest in the minds of the members of the senate because he did know that they disliked Kant’s new philosophy. Therefore, no one could blame him, if he objected to their measures and judgments concerning his presumed misdeed. The senate decided that the case was so novel that it was almost necessary that all members of the senate would have to read Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason and study it carefully. Thus, this “abstruse work” is destined to become a piece of evidence (Proceßaktenstück) in criminal court.
同樣一開始是口舌之爭，最後出手傷人，再對簿公堂，誰是誰非要靠法庭來解決。康德的《純粹理性批判》目的是建立一理性的法庭，來審視事物的基礎。有趣的是，此書卻成為了法庭上的物證，而參議員委員會需要認真閱讀康德，才能夠裁決案件。
康德哲學難懂，也因此經常出現爭論，那種詮釋才是正確。例如，費希特就曾經與一軍官爭論上帝與靈魂不滅的問題，軍官引用康德來支持他的觀點，費希特便破口大罵：「You did not read Kant!」
參與資料：
Kuehn, M. (2006). Kant’s critical philosophy and its reception — the first five years (1781–1786). In P. Guyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Kant and Modern Philosophy (pp. 630–664). chapter, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
