握握弌傍利 > 凪麿窮徨慕 > the critique of pure reason >

及83嫗

the critique of pure reason-及83嫗

弌傍�� the critique of pure reason 忖方�� 耽匈3500忖

梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ○ 賜 ★ 辛酔堀貧和鍬匈��梓囚徒貧議 Enter 囚辛指欺云慕朕村匈��梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ● 辛指欺云匈競何��
!!!!隆堋響頼��紗秘慕禰厮宴和肝写偬堋響��




disjunctive syllogism�察�the major of which contains the logical

division of the extent of a general conception�察�the minor limits

this extent to a certain part�察�while the conclusion determines the

conception by this part。 The general conception of a reality cannot be

divided a priori�察�because�察�without the aid of experience�察�we cannot

know any determinate kinds of reality�察�standing under the former as

the genus。 The transcendental principle of the complete

determination of all things is therefore merely the representation

of the sum´total of all reality�察�it is not a conception which is the

genus of all predicates under itself�察�but one which comprehends them

all within itself。 The complete determination of a thing is

consequently based upon the limitation of this total of reality�察�so

much being predicated of the thing�察�while all that remains over is

excluded´ a procedure which is in exact agreement with that of the

disjunctive syllogism and the determination of the objects in the

conclusion by one of the members of the division。 It follows that

reason�察�in laying the transcendental ideal at the foundation of its

determination of all possible things�察�takes a course in exact

analogy with that which it pursues in disjunctive syllogisms´ a

proposition which formed the basis of the systematic division of all

transcendental ideas�察�according to which they are produced in complete

parallelism with the three modes of syllogistic reasoning employed

by the human mind。

  It is self´evident that reason�察�in cogitating the necessary complete

determination of things�察�does not presuppose the existence of a

being corresponding to its ideal�察�but merely the idea of the ideal´

for the purpose of deducing from the unconditional totality of

complete determination�察�The ideal is therefore the prototype of all

things�察�which�察�as defective copies ��ectypa���察�receive from it the

material of their possibility�察�and approximate to it more or less��

though it is impossible that they can ever attain to its perfection。

  The possibility of things must therefore be regarded as derived´

except that of the thing which contains in itself all reality�察�which

must be considered to be primitive and original。 For all negations´

and they are the only predicates by means of which all other things

can be distinguished from the ens realissimum´ are mere limitations of

a greater and a higher´ nay�察�the highest reality�察�and they

consequently presuppose this reality�察�and are�察�as regards their

content�察�derived from it。 The manifold nature of things is only an

infinitely various mode of limiting the conception of the highest

reality�察�which is their common substratum�察�just as all figures are

possible only as different modes of limiting infinite space。 The

object of the ideal of reason´ an object existing only in reason

itself´ is also termed the primal being ��ens originarium���察�as having

no existence superior to him�察�the supreme being ��ens summum���察�and as

being the condition of all other beings�察�which rank under it�察�the

being of all beings ��ens entium��。 But none of these terms indicate the

objective relation of an actually existing object to other things�察�but

merely that of an idea to conceptions�察�and all our investigations into

this subject still leave us in perfect uncertainty with regard to

the existence of this being。

  A primal being cannot be said to consist of many other beings with

an existence which is derivative�察�for the latter presuppose the

former�察�and therefore cannot be constitutive parts of it。 It follows

that the ideal of the primal being must be cogitated as simple。

  The deduction of the possibility of all other things from this

primal being cannot�察�strictly speaking�察�be considered as a limitation��

or as a kind of division of its reality�察�for this would be regarding

the primal being as a mere aggregate´ which has been shown to be

impossible�察�although it was so represented in our first rough

sketch。 The highest reality must be regarded rather as the ground than

as the sum´total of the possibility of all things�察�and the manifold

nature of things be based�察�not upon the limitation of the primal being

itself�察�but upon the complete series of effects which flow from it。

And thus all our powers of sense�察�as well as all phenomenal reality��

phenomenal reality�察�may be with propriety regarded as belonging to

this series of effects�察�while they could not have formed parts of

the idea�察�considered as an aggregate。 Pursuing this track�察�and

hypostatizing this idea�察�we shall find ourselves authorized to

determine our notion of the Supreme Being by means of the mere

conception of a highest reality�察�as one�察�simple�察�all´sufficient��

eternal�察�and so on´ in one word�察�to determine it in its

unconditioned completeness by the aid of every possible predicate。 The

conception of such a being is the conception of God in its

transcendental sense�察�and thus the ideal of pure reason is the

object´matter of a transcendental theology。

  But�察�by such an employment of the transcendental idea�察�we should

be over stepping the limits of its validity and purpose。 For reason

placed it�察�as the conception of all reality�察�at the basis of the

complete determination of things�察�without requiring that this

conception be regarded as the conception of an objective existence。

Such an existence would be purely fictitious�察�and the hypostatizing of

the content of the idea into an ideal�察�as an individual being�察�is a

step perfectly unauthorized。 Nay�察�more�察�we are not even called upon to

assume the possibility of such an hypothesis�察�as none of the

deductions drawn from such an ideal would affect the complete

determination of things in general´ for the sake of which alone is the

idea necessary。

  It is not sufficient to circumscribe the procedure and the dialectic

of reason�察�we must also endeavour to discover the sources of this

dialectic�察�that we may have it in our power to give a rational

explanation of this illusion�察�as a phenomenon of the human mind。 For

the ideal�察�of which we are at present speaking�察�is based�察�not upon

an arbitrary�察�but upon a natural�察�idea。 The question hence arises�此�How

happens it that reason regards the possibility of all things as

deduced from a single possibility�察�that�察�to wit�察�of the highest

reality�察�and presupposes this as existing in an individual and

primal being��

  The answer is ready�察�it is at once presented by the procedure of

transcendental analytic。 The possibility of sensuous objects is a

relation of these objects to thought�察�in which something ��the

empirical form�� may be cogitated a priori�察�while that which

constitutes the matter´ the reality of the phenomenon ��that element

which corresponds to sensation��´ must be given from without�察�as

otherwise it could not even be cogitated by�察�nor could its possibility

be presentable to the mind。 Now�察�a sensuous object is completely

determined�察�when it has been compared with all phenomenal

predicates�察�and represented by means of these either positively or

negatively。 But�察�as that which constitutes the thing itself´ the

real in a phenomenon�察�must be given�察�and that�察�in which the real of

all phenomena is given�察�is experience�察�one�察�sole�察�and all´embracing´

the material of the possibility of all sensuous objects must be

presupposed as given in a whole�察�and it is upon the limitation of this

whole that the possibility of all empirical objects�察�their distinction

from each other and their complete determination�察�are based。 Now�察�no

other objects are presented to us besides sensuous objects�察�and

these can be given only in connection with a possible experience�察�it

follows that a thing is not an object to us�察�unless it presupposes the

whole or sum´total of empirical reality as the condition of its

possibility。 Now�察�a natural illusion leads us to consider this

principle�察�which is valid only of sensuous objects�察�as valid with

regard to things in general。 And thus we are induced to hold the

empirical principle of our conceptions of the possibility of things��

as phenomena�察�by leaving out this limitative condition�察�to be a

transcendental principle of the possibility of things in general。

  We proceed afterwards to hypostatize this idea of the sum´total of

all reality�察�by changing the distributive unity of the empirical

exercise of the understanding into the collective unity of an

empirical whole´ a dialectical illusion�察�and by cogitating this

whole or sum of experience as an individual thing�察�containing in

itself all empirical reality。 This individual thing or being is

then�察�by means of the above´mentioned transcendental subreption��

substituted for our notion of a thing which stands at the head of

the possibility of all things�察�the real conditions of whose complete

determination it presents。*



  *This ideal of the ens realissimum´ although merely a mental

representation´ is first objectivized�察�that is�察�has an objective

existence attributed to it�察�then hypostatized�察�and finally�察�by the

natural progress of reason to the completion of unity�察�personified�察�as

we shall show presently。 For the regulative unity of experience is not

based upon phenomena themselves�察�but upon the connection of the

variety of phenomena by the understanding in a consciousness�察�and thus

the unity of the supreme reality and the complete determinability of

all things�察�seem to reside in a supreme understanding�察�and��

consequently�察�in a conscious intelligence。



   SECTION III。 Of the Arguments employed by Speculative Reason in

            Proof of the Existence of a Supreme Being。



  Notwithstanding the pressing necessity which reason feels�察�to form

some presupposition that shall serve the understanding as a proper

basis for the complete determination of its conceptions�察�the

idealistic and factitious nature of such a presupposition is too

evident to allow reason for a moment to persuade itself into a

belief of the objective existence of a mere creation of its own

thought。 But there are other considerations which compel reason to

seek out some resting place in the regress from the conditioned to the

unconditioned�察�which is not given as an actual existence from the mere

conception of it�察�although it alone can give completeness to the

series of conditions。 And this is the natural course of every human

reason�察�even of the most uneducated�察�although the path at first

entered it does not always continue to follow。 It does not begin

from conceptions�察�but from common experience�察�and requires a basis

in actual existence。 But this basis is insecure�察�unless it rests

upon the immovable rock of the absolutely necessary。 And this

foundation is itself unworthy of trust�察�if it leave under and above it

empty space�察�if it do not fill all�察�and leave no room for a why or a

wherefore�察�if it be not�察�in one word�察�infinite in its reality。

  If we admit the existence of some one thing�察�whatever it may be��

we must also admit that there is something which 

卦指朕村 貧匯匈 和匯匈 指欺競何 壘��6�� 家��1��

低辛嬬浪散議