Hume would not have considered the analytical response as adequate indeed neither does Kant. Only a synthetic treatment of the subject of logic and causality it

Hume would not have considered the analytical response as adequate indeed neither does Kant. Only a synthetic treatment of the subject of logic and causality itself could resolve the Scottish Skepticism--that's why these books do not have a comparable degree of profundity. It is the synthetic movement from experience to intuition and back to concept which is the great achievement. The analytical treatment provided by Prolegomena does not afford this. It is not intended as an introduction to Critique of Pure Reason it works from the conclusions of that work and why those conclusions are necessary. We can remember the title isn't Prolegomena to Critique of Pure Reason but instead Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics.