Kant and the Causal LawIntroductionIn the critique of pure reason, Kant states: “All alternations occur in accordance with the law of the connection of cause and effect. »1 This statement is interpreted in two different ways: weak readings and strong readings. Weaker readings basically suggest that Kant's statement refers only to "All events have a cause"; however, strong readings suggest that "the Second Analogy focuses not only on causes, but also on causal laws." »2 To understand the difference between the readings, it is helpful to note Kant's distinction between empirical laws of nature and universal transcendental laws. principles. Empirical laws have an empirical element that universal transcendental principles cannot imply. On the other hand, empirical experiments require that necessity become law; consequently, “the transcendental laws “found” the empirical laws by providing them with their necessity. »3 In this article, according to this distinction, I argue first that the second analogy supports the weak reading, second, show how in the Prolegomena it uses the concept of causality in a way that is compatible with the strong reading , and third, examine whether this incongruity can be resolved. Hume's Criticism In the preface to the Prolegomena, Kant freely admits that David Hume was the one who "first interrupted [his] dogmatic sleep and gave [his] investigations in the field of speculative philosophy a completely different direction." Hume attacked metaphysics by questioning the necessity of the general law of causality, according to which "all events have a cause." Kant believes that this objection applies to the entire category of understanding and insists that the possibility of metaphysics depends entirely on this problem. ...... middle of paper ...... indication of cure of a certain condition, but it is the latter which determines the appearance. (A194/B293) There are two possible interpretations of the causal rule: first, any rule that includes a causal dependence, and second, a rule that necessarily determines in a given situation which state occurs next. The first is what the weak reading suggests, which reduces the causal law to "Every event has a cause", and the second is the strong reading and states that "type A events are the cause of type B events". In the next section, I argue that the second reading is what Kant explains here. David Hume", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (spring edition 2013))