Talk:Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Purpose

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Philosophy: Literature / Continental / Modern Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature
	Continental philosophy
	Modern philosophy

Genesis of this article

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

For future reference, while I "created" this article I did not in fact write it (save a few small changes after bringing it into article space). Oddly, the article was born at, of all places, User talk:dreamshit, the article talk page of a new user account now indefinitely blocked for a username violation. While it was suggested that they simply create a new account, this has not happened and as such per a note on their talk page I've placed the article here. It's been quite awhile since I read this essay, but the current article is a decent start/summary and this is definitely something we can expand on (I can only assume this book, mentioned in the article as further reading, would be especially useful for fleshing out the description of Kant's text, and particularly varying interpretations).

I might try to add a bit more to this, but I'm too far away from my undergraduate study of philosophy (and way too far away from a serious engagement with Kant) to do major work on it. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 04:20, 3 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Title

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I'm not sure which translated English title is considered standard or at least most common, but we have this for now and Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Aim and Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Intent both redirect here. Moving this to one of those titles (or possibly another one) and leaving this a redirect would not be a problem to my mind, though I don't think it matters overmuch and I'm fine with this title. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 04:58, 3 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

While I know number of Google hits is not a reliable guide to anything, for what it's worth:

"Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Purpose" gets 22000,

"Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Aim" gets 3350

"Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Intent " gets 4550.

It seems to me that the difference is large enough to suggest that the present title of the article is the one to keep. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:41, 16 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Add topic