the critique of pure reason-第62章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



confidence　and　obstinate　persistence　in　certain　assertions；　without

granting　a　fair　hearing　to　the　other　side　of　the　question。　Either　is

the　death　of　a　sound　philosophy；　although　the　former　might　perhaps

deserve　the　title　of　the　euthanasia　of　pure　reason。

　　Before　entering　this　region　of　discord　and　confusion；　which　the

conflict　of　the　laws　of　pure　reason　（antinomy）　produces；　we　shall

present　the　reader　with　some　considerations；　in　explanation　and

justification　of　the　method　we　intend　to　follow　in　our　treatment　of

this　subject。　I　term　all　transcendental　ideas；　in　so　far　as　they

relate　to　the　absolute　totality　in　the　synthesis　of　phenomena；

cosmical　conceptions；　partly　on　account　of　this　unconditioned

totality；　on　which　the　conception　of　the　world…whole　is　based…　a

conception；　which　is　itself　an　idea…　partly　because　they　relate　solely

to　the　synthesis　of　phenomena…　the　empirical　synthesis；　while；　on

the　other　hand；　the　absolute　totality　in　the　synthesis　of　the

conditions　of　all　possible　things　gives　rise　to　an　ideal　of　pure

reason；　which　is　quite　distinct　from　the　cosmical　conception；　although

it　stands　in　relation　with　it。　Hence；　as　the　paralogisms　of　pure

reason　laid　the　foundation　for　a　dialectical　psychology；　the

antinomy　of　pure　reason　will　present　us　with　the　transcendental

principles　of　a　pretended　pure　（rational）　cosmology…　not；　however；

to　declare　it　valid　and　to　appropriate　it；　but…　as　the　very　term　of

a　conflict　of　reason　sufficiently　indicates；　to　present　it　as　an

idea　which　cannot　be　reconciled　with　phenomena　and　experience。



　　　　　　　　　　　SECTION　I。　System　of　Cosmological　Ideas。



　　That　We　may　be　able　to　enumerate　with　systematic　precision　these

ideas　according　to　a　principle；　we　must　remark；　in　the　first　place；

that　it　is　from　the　understanding　alone　that　pure　and　transcendental

conceptions　take　their　origin；　that　the　reason　does　not　properly

give　birth　to　any　conception；　but　only　frees　the　conception　of　the

understanding　from　the　unavoidable　limitation　of　a　possible

experience；　and　thus　endeavours　to　raise　it　above　the　empirical；

though　it　must　still　be　in　connection　with　it。　This　happens　from　the

fact　that；　for　a　given　conditioned；　reason　demands　absolute　totality

on　the　side　of　the　conditions　（to　which　the　understanding　submits

all　phenomena）；　and　thus　makes　of　the　category　a　transcendental

idea。　This　it　does　that　it　may　be　able　to　give　absolute　completeness

to　the　empirical　synthesis；　by　continuing　it　to　the　unconditioned

（which　is　not　to　be　found　in　experience；　but　only　in　the　idea）。　Reason

requires　this　according　to　the　principle：　If　the　conditioned　is

given　the　whole　of　the　conditions；　and　consequently　the　absolutely

unconditioned；　is　also　given；　whereby　alone　the　former　was　possible。

First；　then；　the　transcendental　ideas　are　properly　nothing　but

categories　elevated　to　the　unconditioned；　and　they　may　be　arranged

in　a　table　according　to　the　titles　of　the　latter。　But；　secondly；　all

the　categories　are　not　available　for　this　purpose；　but　only　those　in

which　the　synthesis　constitutes　a　series…　of　conditions　subordinated

to；　not　co…ordinated　with；　each　other。　Absolute　totality　is　required

of　reason　only　in　so　far　as　concerns　the　ascending　series　of　the

conditions　of　a　conditioned；　not；　consequently；　when　the　question

relates　to　the　descending　series　of　consequences；　or　to　the

aggregate　of　the　co…ordinated　conditions　of　these　consequences。　For；

in　relation　to　a　given　conditioned；　conditions　are　presupposed　and

considered　to　be　given　along　with　it。　On　the　other　hand；　as　the

consequences　do　not　render　possible　their　conditions；　but　rather

presuppose　them…　in　the　consideration　of　the　procession　of

consequences　（or　in　the　descent　from　the　given　condition　to　the

conditioned）；　we　may　be　quite　unconcerned　whether　the　series　ceases　or

not；　and　their　totality　is　not　a　necessary　demand　of　reason。

　　Thus　we　cogitate…　and　necessarily…　a　given　time　completely　elapsed

up　to　a　given　moment；　although　that　time　is　not　determinable　by　us。

But　as　regards　time　future；　which　is　not　the　condition　of　arriving

at　the　present；　in　order　to　conceive　it；　it　is　quite　indifferent

whether　we　consider　future　time　as　ceasing　at　some　point；　or　as

prolonging　itself　to　infinity。　Take；　for　example；　the　series　m；　n；

o；　in　which　n　is　given　as　conditioned　in　relation　to　m；　but　at　the

same　time　as　the　condition　of　o；　and　let　the　series　proceed　upwards

from　the　conditioned　n　to　m　（l；　k；　i；　etc。）；　and　also　downwards　from

the　condition　n　to　the　conditioned　o　（p；　q；　r；　etc。）…　I　must

presuppose　the　former　series；　to　be　able　to　consider　n　as　given；　and　n

is　according　to　reason　（the　totality　of　conditions）　possible　only　by

means　of　that　series。　But　its　possibility　does　not　rest　on　the

following　series　o；　p；　q；　r；　which　for　this　reason　cannot　be

regarded　as　given；　but　only　as　capable　of　being　given　（dabilis）。

　　I　shall　term　the　synthesis　of　the　series　on　the　side　of　the

conditions…　from　that　nearest　to　the　given　phenomenon　up　to　the　more

remote…　regressive；　that　which　proceeds　on　the　side　of　the

conditioned；　from　the　immediate　consequence　to　the　more　remote；　I

shall　call　the　progressive　synthesis。　The　former　proceeds　in

antecedentia；　the　latter　in　consequentia。　The　cosmological　ideas　are

therefore　occupied　with　the　totality　of　the　regressive　synthesis；

and　proceed　in　antecedentia；　not　in　consequentia。　When　the　latter

takes　place；　it　is　an　arbitrary　and　not　a　necessary　problem　of　pure

reason；　for　we　require；　for　the　complete　understanding　of　what　is

given　in　a　phenomenon；　not　the　consequences　which　succeed；　but　the

grounds　or　principles　which　precede。

　　In　order　to　construct　the　table　of　ideas　in　correspondence　with

the　table　of　categories；　we　take　first　the　two　primitive　quanta　of　all

our　intuitions；　time　and　space。　Time　is　in　itself　a　series　（and　the

formal　condition　of　all　series）；　and　hence；　in　relation　to　a　given

present；　we　must　distinguish　a　priori　in　it　the　antecedentia　as

conditions　（time　past）　from　the　consequentia　（time　future）。

Consequently；　the　transcendental　idea　of　the　absolute　totality　of

the　series　of　the　conditions　of　a　given　conditioned；　relates　merely　to

all　past　time。　According　to　the　idea　of　reason；　the　whole　past　time；

as　the　condition　of　the　given　moment；　is　necessarily　cogitated　as

given。　But；　as　regards　space；　there　exists　in　it　no　distinction

between　progressus　and　regressus；　for　it　is　an　aggregate　and　not　a

series…　its　parts　existing　together　at　the　same　time。　I　can　consider　a

given　point　of　time　in　relation　to　past　time　only　as　conditioned；

because　this　given　moment　comes　into　existence　only　through　the　past

time　rather　through　the　passing　of　the　preceding　time。　But　as　the

parts　of　space　are　not　subordinated；　but　co…ordinated　to　each　other；

one　part　cannot　be　the　condition　of　the　possibility　of　the　other；

and　space　is　not　in　itself；　like　time；　a　series。　But　the　synthesis

of　the　manifold　parts　of　space…　（the　syntheses　whereby　we　apprehend

space）…　is　nevertheless　successive；　it　takes　place；　therefore；　in

time；　and　contains　a　series。　And　as　in　this　series　of　aggregated

spaces　（for　example；　the　feet　in　a　rood）；　beginning　with　a　given

portion　of　space；　those　which　continue　to　be　annexed　form　the

condition　of　the　limits　of　the　former…　the　measurement　of　a　space　must

also　be　regarded　as　a　synthesis　of　the　series　of　the　conditions　of　a

given　conditioned。　It　differs；　however；　in　this　respect　from　that　of

time；　that　the　side　of　the　conditioned　is　not　in　itself

distinguishable　from　the　side　of　the　condition；　and；　consequently；

regressus　and　progressus　in　space　seem　to　be　identical。　But；

inasmuch　as　one　part　of　space　is　not　given；　but　only　limited；　by　and

through　another；　we　must　also　consider　every　limited　space　as

conditioned；　in　so　far　as　it　presupposes　some　other　space　as　the

condition　of　its　limitation；　and　so　on。　As　regards　limitation；

therefore；　our　procedure　in　space　is　also　a　regressus；　and　the

transcendental　idea　of　the　absolute　totality　of　the　synthesis　in　a

series　of　conditions　applies　to　space　also；　and　I　am　entitled　to

demand　the　absolute　totality　of　the　phenomenal　synthesis　in　space　as

well　as　in　time。　Whether　my　demand　can　be　satisfied　is　a　question　to

be　answered　in　the　sequel。

　　Secondly；　the　real　in　space…　that　is；　matter…　is　conditioned。　Its

internal　conditions　are　its　parts；　and　the　parts　of　parts　its　remote

conditions；　so　that　in　this　case　we　find　a　regressive　synthesis；　the

absolute　totality　of　which　is　a　demand　of　reason。　But　this　cannot　be

obtained　otherwise　than　by　a　complete　division　of　parts；　whereby　the

real　in　matter　becomes　either　nothing　or　that　which　is　not　matter；

that　is　to　say；　the　simple。　Consequently　we　find　here　also　a　series　of

conditions　and　a　progress　to　the　unconditioned。

　　Thirdly；　as　regards　the　categories　of　a　real　relation　between

phenomena；　the　category　of　substance　and　its　accidents　is　not　suitable

for　the　formation　of　a　transcendental　idea；　that　is　to　say；　reason　has

no　ground；　in　regard　to　it；　to　proceed　regressively　with　conditions。

For　accidents　（in　so　far　as　they　inhere　in　a　substance）　are

co…ordinated　with　each　other；　and　do　not　constitute　a　series。　And；

in　relation　to　substance；　they　are　not　properly　subordinated　to　it；

but　are　the　mode　of　existence　of　the　substance　itself。　The

conception　of　the　substantial　might　nevertheless　seem　to　be　an　idea　of

the　transcendental　reason。　But；　as　this　signifies　nothing　more　than

the　conception　of　an　object　in　general；　which　subsists　in　so　far　as　we

cogitate　in　it　merely　a　transcendental　subject　without　any　predicates；

and　as　the　question　here　is　of　an　unconditioned　in　the　series　of

phenomena…　it　is　clear　that　the　substantial　can　form　no　member

thereof。　The　same　holds　good　of　substances　in　community；　which　are

mere　aggregates　and　do　not　form　a　series。　For　they　are　not

subordinated　to　each　other　as　conditions　of　the　possibility　of　each

other；　which；　however；　may　be　affirmed　of　spaces；　the　limits　of

which　are　never　determined　in　themselves；　but　always　by　some　other

space。　It　is；　therefore；　only　in　the　category　of　causality　that　we　can

find　a　series　of　causes　to　a　given　effect；　and　in　which　we　ascend　from

the　latter；　as　the　conditioned；　to　the　former　as　the　conditions；　and

thus　answer　the　question　of　reason。

　　Fourthly；　the　conceptions　of　the　possible；　the　actual；　and　the

necessary　do　not　conduct　us　to　any　series…　excepting　only　in　so　far　as

the　contingent　in　existence　must　always　be　regarded　as　conditioned；

and　as　indicating；　according　to　a　law　of　the　understanding；　a

condition；　under　which　it　is　necessary　to　rise　to　a　higher；　till　in

the　totality　of　the　series；　reason　arrives　at　unconditioned　necessity。

　　There　are；　accordingly；　only　four　cosmological　ideas；

corresponding　with　the　four　titles　of　the　categories。　For　we　can

select　only　such　as　necessarily　furnish　us　with　a　series　in　the