What one reviewer said about Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant, Paul Guyer, Allen W. Wood:
Though he wrote in the early 19th century, Kant belongs as much to contemporary philosophy as he does to the history of philosophy. This is not to say that all (or any) of his arguments are valid or sound. Kant's transcendental idealism, though taken seriously from a historical point of view, is no longer considered (and rightfully so) a defensible doctrine. But then again, in epistemology and metaphysics no doctrine is uncontroversial. Be that as it may, the reviewer who dismisses this book as failing to employ logic are as deeply misguided as the reviewer who claims to be persuaded by theCritique's arguments. In philosophy, the most important thing is to clarify questions, pose problems, and advance useful methods of analysis. Kant did that to a greater extent and with greater breadth than any other philosopher except Aristotle. But any none-student of philosophy who picks up this book without having taken a course is a fool. Sometimes, and this is one of those times, one is better off not thinking at all than thinking wrong. This is not a real worry, however, because anyone who attempts to read this book without the help of a Kant specialist won't get past the first ten pages. The Critique is an excrutiatingly dull read, despite its profundity. Kant's writing is dense, his arguments are not easy to follow, and he is no Goethe. As for the translation, short of learning German, this translation is the clearest one available and is standard at most universities.
Download The Critique Of Pure Reason from Project Gutenberg
or find a hard copy