Adams, R. 1994. Leibniz: Determinist, Theist, Idealist. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Allais, L. 2015. Manifest Reality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Allais, L. 2016. “Conceptualism and Nonconceptualism in Kant: Survey of the Recent Debate.” In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, accessed fall 2020.Google Scholar

Allais, L. 2017. “Synthesis and Binding.” In Kantian Nonconceptualism, Schulting, Dennis, ed. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Allison, H. 2004. Kant’s Transcendental Idealism: An Interpretation and Defense. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Anderson, L. 2005. “The Wolffian Paradigm and Its Discontents.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 87 (1): 22–74.Google Scholar

Anderson, R. L. 2015. The Poverty of Conceptual Truth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Annas, J. 1975. “Aristotle, Number and Time.” The Philosophical Quarterly 25: 97–112.Google Scholar

Aristotle. 1984. The Complete Works of Aristotle. Barnes, Jonathan, ed. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Aristotle. 1990 . Aristotle’s Categories and De Interpretatione. J. Ackrill, trans. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Aristotle. 1993. Metaphysics: Books Γ, Δ, and Ε. 2nd ed. Christopher Kirwan, trans. and notes. Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar

Baumgarten, A. 2014. Metaphysics. Fugate, Courtney and Hymers, John, eds. and trans. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar

Bennett, J. 1966. Kant’s Analytic. London: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beth, E. W. 1956–7. “Über Lockes ‘Allgemeines Dreieck.’” Kant-Studien 49: 361–80.Google Scholar

Boniface, J. 2007. “The Concept of Number from Gauss to Kronecker.” In Goldstein et al. (2007), pp. 315–42.Google Scholar

Brittan, G. 1978. Kant’s Theory of Science. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Campbell, N. R. 1928. An Account of the Principles of Measurement and Calculation. London: Longmans Green.Google Scholar

Carson, E. 1997. “Kant on Intuition in Geometry.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 27 (4): 489–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carson, E. 1999. “Kant on the Method of Mathematics.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 37 (4): 629–52.Google Scholar

Carson, E. 2006. “Locke and Kant on Mathematical Knowledge.” In Intuition and the Axiomatic Method, E. Carson and R. Huber, eds. Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 3–21.Google Scholar

Carson, E. 2012. “Pure Intuition and Kant’s Synthetic a priori.” In Debates in Modern Philosophy, LoLordo, Antonia and Duncan, Stewart, eds. Routledge.Google Scholar

Carson, E. Forthcoming. “Arithmetic and the possibility of experience.” To appear in a volume on Kant’s philosophy of mathematics edited by Carl Posy and Ofra Rechter, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Carson, E. (unpublished manuscript) “Number, the Category of Quantity, and Non-conceptual Content in Kant.”Google Scholar

Cassirer, E. 1954. Kant’s First Critique: An Appraisal of the Permanent Significance of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Clagett, Marshall. 1959. The Science of Mechanics in the Middle Ages. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar

Cohen, M., and Nagel, Ernst. 1968. An Introduction to Logic and Scientific Method. Mumbai: Allied Publishers.Google Scholar

Couturat, L. 1901. La logique de Leibniz. Paris: Ancienne Librairie Germer Bailliére et Cie.Google Scholar

Dedekind, R. 1872. “Stetigkeit und irrationale Zahlen.” Braunschweig: Vieweg. Repr. in Gesammelte mathematische Werke, Fricke, R., Noether, E., and Ore, O., eds., vol. 3, pp. 315–34. Braunschweig: Vieweg, 1932. English trans. in Ewald (1996), pp. 765–79.Google Scholar

De Risi, V. 2016. “The Development of Euclidean Axiomatics.” Archive for the History of the Exact Sciences 70 (6): 591–676.Google Scholar

Dunlop, Katherine. 2009. “‘The Unity of Time’s Measure: Kant’s Reply to Locke.” Philosophical Imprint 9: 1–31.Google Scholar

Dunlop, Katherine. 2012. “Kant and Strawson on the Content of Geometrical Concepts.” Nous 46: 86–126.Google Scholar

Einstein, A. 1922. “Geometry and Experience.” In Sidelights on Relativity: Ether and Relativity II: Geometry and Experience. London: Methuen.Google Scholar

Ellis, B. 1966. Basic Concepts of Measurement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Euclid. 1956. Euclid The Thirteen Books of The Elements. 2nd ed. Sir T. Heath, trans. and commentator. New York: Dover.Google Scholar

Euler, L. 1738. Einleitung zur Rechen-Kunst zum Gebrauch des Gymnasii bei der Kaiserlichen Academie der Wissenschaft in St. Petersburg. Also reprinted in Euler Opera Omnia, ser. 3 v. 2, pp. 1–303. Berlin: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar

Euler, L. 1802. Vollständige Einleitung zur Algebra. Vol. 1. St. Petersburg: Kaiserlichen Academie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar

Euler, L. 1911–2015. Opera Omnia. Schweizerische Naturforschende Gesellschaft. Berlin: B. G. Teubneri.Google Scholar

Euler, L. 1984. Elements of Algebra. Reprint of 1890 of John Hewlett, trans. of Vollstäntige Einleitung zur Algebra. Berlin: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ewald, W. 1996. From Kant to Hilbert: A Source Book in the Foundations of Mathematics, vol. 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Friedman, M. 1992. Kant and the Exact Sciences. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Friedman, M. 2000. “Geometry, Construction and Intuition in Kant and His Successors.” In Between Logic and Intuition: Essays in Honor of Charles Parsons, Sher, G. and Tieszen, R., eds. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Friedman, M. 2012. “Kant on Geometry and Spatial Intuition.” Synthese 186: 231–55.Google Scholar

Friedman, M. 2013. Kant’s Construction of Nature: A Reading of Kant’s Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Friedman, M. 2020. “Space and Geometry in the B-Deduction.” In Posy and Rechter (2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gardner, Sebastian. 1999. Kant and the Critique of Pure Reason. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Goldstein, C. et al., eds. 2007. The Shaping of Arithmetic after C. F. Gauss’s Disquisitiones arithmeticae. Berlin: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar

Golob, S. 2011. “Kant on Intentionality, Magnitude, and the Unity of Perception.” European Journal of Philosophy 22 (4): 505–28.Google Scholar

Grattan-Guiness, I. 1996. “Numbers, Magnitudes, Ratios and Proportions in Euclid’s Elements: How Did He Handle Them?” Historia Mathematica 23: 355–75. Google Scholar

Guyer, P. 1987. Kant and the Claims of Knowledge. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Guyer, P. 1992. The Cambridge Companion to Kant. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hahn, H. 1956. “The Crisis of Intuition.” Translated in The World of Mathematics, Newman, James R., ed. New York: Simon and Schuster. (From lectures given in 1933.)Google Scholar

Heis, J. 2014. “Kant (versus Leibniz, Wolff, and Lambert) on Real Definitions in Geometry.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 44 (5–6): 605–30.Google Scholar

Heis, J. Forthcoming. “Kant on Parallel Lines.” In Kant’s Philosophy of Mathematics: Modern Essays. Vol. 1: The Critical Philosophy and Its Background, Ofra Rechter and Carl Posy, eds.Google Scholar

Hintikka, J. 1969. “On Kant’s Notion of Intuition (Anschauung).” In The First Critique: Reflections on Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, MacIntosh, J. J. and Penelhum, T., eds. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.Google Scholar

Hintikka, J. 1972. “Kantian Intuitions.” Inquiry 15: 341–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hintikka, J. 1974a. “Kant’s ‘New Method of Thought’ and His Theory of Mathematics.” In Knowledge and the Known. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar

Hintikka, J. 1974b. “Kant on the Mathematical Method.” In Knowledge and the Known. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hogan, D. 2009. “Three Kinds of Rationalism and the Non-spatiality of Things in Themselves.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 47 (3): 355–82.Google Scholar

Hume, D. 1978. A Treatise of Human Nature. 2nd ed. Selby-Bigge, L. A. and Nidditch, P. H., eds. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Ishiguro, H. 1990. Leibniz’s Philosophy of Logic and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Jolley, N., ed. 1995. The Cambridge Companion to Leibniz. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Kant, I. 1902–. Kant’s Gesammelte Schriften. 29 vols. Berlin: G. Reimer, subsequently Walter de Gruyter & Co.Google Scholar

Kant, I. 1926. Kritik der reinen Vernunft. Schmidt, Raymund, ed. Leipzig: F. Meiner.Google Scholar

Kant, I. 1965. The Critique of Pure Reason. Norman Kemp Smith, trans. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar

Kant, I. 1992. Theoretical Philosophy, 1755–1770. Walford, D., trans. and ed. The Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kant, I. 1996. The Metaphysics of Morals. M. Gregor, trans. and ed. The Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kant, I. 1997. Kant’s Lectures on Metaphyics. K. Ameriks and S. Naragon, trans. and ed. The Cambridge Edition of the Works of Kant. New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Kant, I. 1998. Critique of Pure Reason. Guyer, P. and Wood, A. W., trans. The Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kästner, A. 1796. Geschichte der Mathematik. Göttingen: Johan Georg Rosenbusch.Google Scholar

Kästner, A. 1800. Mathematische Anfangsgründe Teil I: Anfangsgründe der Arithmetik: Geometrie, ebenen und sphärischen Trigonometrie, und Perspektiv. Göttingen: Johan Georg Rosenbusch.Google Scholar

Kitcher, P. 1975. “Kant’s Foundations of Mathematics.” Philosophical Review 84: 23–50.Google Scholar

Kitcher, P. 1982. “How Kant Almost Wrote ‘Two Dogmas of Empiricism.’” In Essays on Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, Mohanty, J. N. and Shahan, R. W., eds. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar

Klein, J. 1992. Greek Mathematical Thought and the Origin of Algebra. New York: Dover.Google Scholar

Krantz, D. Lee, P. Suppes, , and Tversky, A.. 1971. Foundations of Measurement, vol. 1. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Land, T. 2013. “Intuition and Judgment: How Not to Think about the Singularity of Intuition (and the Generality of Concepts) in Kant.” In Kant and Philosophy in a Cosmopolitan Sense, La Rocca, Claudio et al., eds. Berlin: De Gruyter, 221–31.Google Scholar

Land, T. 2014. “Spatial Representation, Magnitude, and the Two Stems of Cognition.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 44: 524–50.Google Scholar

Land, T. 2016. “Moderate Conceptualism and Spatial Representation.” In Schulting (2016).Google Scholar

Leibniz, G. W. 1956. Philosophical Papers and Letters, vols. I and II. Loemker, L., trans. and ed. Boston: Kluwer Publishing.Google Scholar

Leibniz, G. W. 1961. Opuscules et fragments inédits de Leibniz: Extraits des manuscrits de la Bibliothèque royale de Hanovre. Couturat, L., ed. Hildesheim: G. Olms.Google Scholar

Leibniz, G. W. 1971. Mathematische Schriften. Vols. 1–7. Gerhardt, C. I., ed. Hildesheim: Georg Olms.Google Scholar

Leibniz, G. W. 1989. Philosophical Papers and Letters. Vols. 1 and 2. Loemker, L., trans. and ed. Boston: Kluwer Publishing.Google Scholar

Leibniz, G. W. 1995a. La caractéristique géométrique. Echeverría, J. and Parmentier, M., eds. and trans. Paris: J. Vrin.Google Scholar

Leibniz, G. W. 1995b. Philosophical Writings. G. H. R. Parkinson, trans. and ed. Rutland, VT: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar

Liang, Chen. 2020. “Form of Intuition and Formal Intuition.” PhD dissertation, University of Illinois at Chicago.Google Scholar

Longuenesse, B. 1998. Kant and the Capacity to Judge: Sensibility and Discursivity in the Transcendental Analytic of the Critique of Pure Reason. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Longuenesse, B. 2009. Kant on the Human Standpoint. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Mates, B. 1989. The Philosophy of Leibniz: Metaphysics and Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

McLear, Colin. 2014. “The Kantian (Non)-conceptualism Debate.” Philosophical Compass 9 (11): 769–90. Google Scholar

McLear, Colin. 2015. “Two Kinds of Unity in the Critique of Pure Reason.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 53 (1): 79–110.Google Scholar

McLear, Colin. 2020. “Kantian Conceptualism/Nonconceptualism.” In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Accessed September 2020.Google Scholar

Melnick, Arthur. 1973. Kant’s Analogies of Experience. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Michell, J. 2006. “Psychophysics, Intensive Magnitudes, and the Psychometrician’s Fallacy.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 17: 414–32.Mueller, I. 1970a. “Aristotle on Geometrical Objects.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 52: 156–71.Google Scholar

Michell, J. 1970b “Homogeneity in Eudoxus’ Theory of Proportion.” Archive for History of Exact Sciences 7: 1–6.Google Scholar

Michell, J. 1981. Philosophy of Mathematics and Deductive Structure in Euclid’s Elements. New York: Dover.Google Scholar

Parsons, C. 1983. Mathematics in Philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

Parsons, C. 1983a. “Infinity and Kant’s Conception of the “Possibility of Experience.” In Mathematics in Philosophy.Google Scholar

Parsons, C. 1983b. “Kant’s Philosophy of Arithmetic.” In Mathematics in Philosophy.Google Scholar

Parsons, C. 1984. “Arithmetic and the Categories.” Topoi (3): 109–21.Google Scholar

Parsons, C. 1992. “The Transcendental Aesthetic.” In Guyer (1992).Google Scholar

Parsons, C. 2012. From Kant to Husserl: Selected Essays. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Paton, H. J. 1965. Kant’s Metaphysic of Experience: A Commentary on the First Half of the Kritik der reinen Vernunft. 2 vols. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar

Penelhum, T., and MacIntosh, J., eds. 1969. The First Critique. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar

Petri, B., and Schappacher, N.. 2007. “On Arithmetization.” In Goldstein et al. (2007), pp. 243–374.Google Scholar

Place, U. T. 1956. “Is Consciousness a Brain Process?” British Journal of Psychology 47 (1): 44–50.Google Scholar

Popkin, R. 1966. The Philosophy of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar

Posy, C., and Rechter, Ofra, eds. 2020. Kant’s Philosophy of Mathematics, vol. 1: The Critical Philosophy and Its Roots. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Proclus. 1970. A Commentary on the First Book of Euclid’s Elements. G. Morrow, trans. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Rechter, O. 2006. “The View From 1763: Kant on the Arithmetical Method before Intuition.” In Intuition and the Axiomatic Method, Carson, Emily and Huber, Renate, eds. Springer, pp. 21–46.Google Scholar

Rosen, G. 2017. “Abstract Objects.” In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Accessed online November 2019.Google Scholar

Rusnock, P., and George, Rolf. 1995. “A Last Shot at Kant on Incongruent Counterparts.” Kant-Studien 86 (3): 257–77.Google Scholar

Russell, B. 1903. The Principles of Mathematics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Rutherford, D. 1995. “Philosophy and Language in Leibniz.” In The Cambridge Companion to Leibniz, Jolley, N., ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 224–69.Google Scholar

Ryle, G. 1949. The Concept of Mind. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Schepers, H. 1966. “Leibniz’s Arbeiten zu einer Reformation der Kategorien.” Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung 20 (vols. 3 and 4): 539–67.Google Scholar

Schepers, H. 1969. “Begriffsanalyse und Kategorialsynthese Zur Verflechtung von Logik and Metaphysik bei Leibniz.” In Studia Leibnitiana Supplementa, Vol. III, Akten des Internationalen Leibniz-Kongresses Hannover, 14–19 November 1966. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag: 34–9. Google Scholar

Schulting, D. 2016. Kantian Nonconceptualism. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Sellars, W. 1968. Science and Metaphysics: Variations on Kantian Themes. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar

Shabel, L. 1998. “Kant on the ‘Symbolic Construction’ of Mathematical Concepts.” Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 29: 589–621.Google Scholar

Smit, H. 2000. “Kant on Marks and the Immediacy of Intuition.” The Philosophical Review 109 (2): 235–66.Google Scholar

Smith, N. K. 1979. A Commentary to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. 2nd ed. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Smyth, D. 2014. “Infinity and Givenness: Kant on the Intuitive Origin of Spatial Representation.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 44 (5–6): 551–7.Google Scholar

Stein, H. 1990. “Eudoxus and Dedekind: On the Ancient Greek Theory of Ratios and Its Relation to Modern Mathematics.” Synthese 84: 163–211. Google Scholar

Stevens, S. S. 1946. “On the Theory of Scales and Measurement.” Science 103: 677–80.Google Scholar

Stevens, S. S. 1951. “Mathematics, Measurement, and Psychophysics.” In Handbook of Experimental Psychology, Stevens, S. S., ed. New York: Wiley, pp. 1–49.Google Scholar

Strawson, P. F. 1989. The Bounds of Sense: An Essay on Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Suppes, P.A. 1951. “A Set of Independent Axioms for Extensive Quantities.” Portugaliae Mathematica 10: 163–72.Google Scholar

Sutherland, D. 2004a. “The Role of Magnitude in Kant’s Critical Philosophy.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 34(4): 411–42.Google Scholar

Sutherland, D. 2004b. “Kant’s Philosophy of Mathematics and the Greek Mathematical Tradition.” Philosophical Review 113 (2): 157–201.Google Scholar

Sutherland, D. 2005a. “Kant on Fundamental Geometrical Relations.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 87 (2): 117–58.Google Scholar

Sutherland, D. 2005b. “The Point of Kant’s Axioms of Intuition.” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 86: 135–59.Google Scholar

Sutherland, D. 2006. “Kant on Arithmetic, Algebra, and the Theory of Proportions.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 44 (4): 533–58.Google Scholar

Sutherland, D. 2008. “From Kant to Frege: Numbers, Pure Units, and the Limits of Conceptual Representation.” Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 63.Google Scholar

Sutherland, D. 2010. “Philosophy and Geometrical Practice in Leibniz, Wolff, and the Early Kant.” In Discourse on a New Method: Reinvigorating the Marriage of History and Philosophy of Science, Dickson, Michael and Domski, Mary, eds. Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar

Sutherland, D. 2014. “Kant on Construction and Composition of Motion in the Phoronomy.” Special supplement to Canadian Journal of Philosophy 44 (5–6): 686–718.Google Scholar

Sutherland, D. 2017. “Kant’s Conception of Number.” Philosophical Review 126 (2).Google Scholar

Sutherland, D. 2020a. “Kant’s Philosophy of Arithmetic: A New Approach.” In Posy (2020).Google Scholar

Sutherland, D. 2020b. “Continuity and Intuition in 18th Century Analysis and in Kant.” In The History of Continua: Philosophical and Mathematical Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Tait, W. 2005. “Frege versus Cantor and Dedekind: On the Concept of Number.” In The Provenance of Pure Reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Thompson, Manley 1972. “Singular Terms and Intuitions in Kant’s Epistemology.” Review of Metaphysics 26 (2): 314–43.Google Scholar

Vaihinger, H. 1900. “Siebzig textkritische Randglossen zur Analytik.” Kant-Studien 4: 452–63.Google Scholar

Vaihinger, H. 1922. Kommentar zu Kant’s Kritik der reinen Vernunft. 2 vols. Aalen: Scientia Verlag.Google Scholar

Walsh, W. H. 1975. Kant’s Criticism of Metaphysics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar

Warren, D. 2001. Reality and Impenetrability in Kant’s Philosophy of Nature. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Wilson, J. 2017. “Determinables and Determinates.” In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, first published February 7, 2017.Google Scholar

Wilson, K. D. 1975. “Kant on Intuition.” Philosophical Quarterly 25: 247–65.Google Scholar

Wolff, C. 1736. Philosophia Prima Sive Ontologia. 3. Auflage. Verona: Dionisio Ramanzini.Google Scholar

Wolff, C. 1962–2009. Christian Wolff: Gesammelte Werke. Hildesheim: G. Olms.Google Scholar

Wolff, C. 1962. Philosophia Prima Sive Ontologia. 1736. In Christian Wolff, Gesammelte Werke. II. Abteilung Lateinische Schriften, Band 3.Google Scholar

Wolff, C. 1965. Mathematisches Lexikon. 1716. In Christian Wolff, Gesammelte Werke. I. Abteilung Deutsche Schriften, Band 11.Google Scholar

Wolff, C. 1968. Elementa Matheseos Universae. 1742. In Christian Wolff, Gesammelte Werke. II. Abteilung Lateinische Schriften, Band 29.Google Scholar

Wolff, C. 1973. Anfangsgründe aller Mathematischen Wissenschaften. Erstausgabe 1710–17. (7. Auflage 1750–7). In Christian Wolff, Gesammelte Werke, I. Abteilung Deutsche Schriften, Band 12.Google Scholar

Wolff, C. 2009. Auszug aus den Anfangs-Gründen aller Mathematischen Wissenschaften, in multiple editions. Auflage 1728. In Christian Wolff, Gesammelte Werke, 1. Abteilung, Deutsche Schriften, Band 25.Google Scholar

Wolff, R. P. 1963. Kant’s Theory of Mental Activity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Wood, A. 1979. Kant’s Rational Theology. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar