Starting from man, the absolute can be thought. These texts of the Anthropology are situated in the direct obedience to the Transcendental Dialectic.
To say that an anthropology is pragmatic and to say that it envisages man as a citizen of the world amounts to saying the same thing. Then this world thus disclosed is neither the Physis, nor the universe of validity of the law.
The structure of the relations of the Anthropology to the Critique alone will allow us, if correctly defined, to decipher the genesis that moves towards this last equilibrium- or last but one - if it is true that the Opus Postumum already walks the first steps on the finally rejoined soil of transcendental philosophy.
World Citizen. I think Gregor's "mould" has more style than either alternatives, but there is no philosophical import to it. To be honest the difference of level between the Critique and the Anthropology is such that it discourages, at the beginning, the undertaking of the establishment of a structural comparison of one with the other.
With respect to Empirical Psychology, a long tradition has made it necessary for it to be placed within metaphysics, and furthermore, the recent failures of metaphysics have been able to make one believe that the solution of the insolvable problems is concealed in the psychological phenomena that pertain to an empirical study of the soul; and thus psychology has confiscated a discouraged metaphysics within which it had already taken an improper place.
It explores a region where freedom and utility are already tied within the reciprocity of usage; where the ability and the duty belong to the unity of a game that measures one against the other; and where the world becomes school within the prescriptions of a culture.