the critique of pure reason-及96嫗
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��
idea。 The conceptions of reality�察�substance�察�causality�察�nay�察�even that
of necessity in existence�察�have no significance out of the sphere of
empirical cognition�察�and cannot�察�beyond that sphere�察�determine any
object。 They may�察�accordingly�察�be employed to explain the
possibility of things in the world of sense�察�but they are utterly
inadequate to explain the possibility of the universe itself
considered as a whole�察�because in this case the ground of
explanation must lie out of and beyond the world�察�and cannot��
therefore�察�be an object of possible experience。 Now�察�I may admit the
existence of an incomprehensible being of this nature´ the object of a
mere idea�察�relatively to the world of sense�察�although I have no ground
to admit its existence absolutely and in itself。 For if an idea
��that of a systematic and complete unity�察�of which I shall presently
speak more particularly�� lies at the foundation of the most extended
empirical employment of reason�察�and if this idea cannot be
adequately represented in concreto�察�although it is indispensably
necessary for the approximation of empirical unity to the highest
possible degree´ I am not only authorized�察�but compelled�察�to realize
this idea�察�that is�察�to posit a real object corresponding thereto。
But I cannot profess to know this object�察�it is to me merely a
something�察�to which�察�as the ground of systematic unity in cognition�察�I
attribute such properties as are analogous to the conceptions employed
by the understanding in the sphere of experience。 Following the
analogy of the notions of reality�察�substance�察�causality�察�and
necessity�察�I cogitate a being�察�which possesses all these attributes in
the highest degree�察�and�察�as this idea is the offspring of my reason
alone�察�I cogitate this being as self´subsistent reason�察�and as the
cause of the universe operating by means of ideas of the greatest
possible harmony and unity。 Thus I abstract all conditions that
would limit my idea�察�solely for the purpose of rendering systematic
unity possible in the world of empirical diversity�察�and thus
securing the widest possible extension for the exercise of reason in
that sphere。 This I am enabled to do�察�by regarding all connections and
relations in the world of sense�察�as if they were the dispositions of a
supreme reason�察�of which our reason is but a faint image。 I then
proceed to cogitate this Supreme Being by conceptions which have��
properly�察�no meaning or application�察�except in the world of sense。 But
as I am authorized to employ the transcendental hypothesis of such a
being in a relative respect alone�察�that is�察�as the substratum of the
greatest possible unity in experience´ I may attribute to a being
which I regard as distinct from the world�察�such properties as belong
solely to the sphere of sense and experience。 For I do not desire�察�and
am not justified in desiring�察�to cognize this object of my idea�察�as it
exists in itself�察�for I possess no conceptions sufficient for or task��
those of reality�察�substance�察�causality�察�nay�察�even that of necessity in
existence�察�losing all significance�察�and becoming merely the signs of
conceptions�察�without content and without applicability�察�when I attempt
to carry them beyond the limits of the world of sense。 I cogitate
merely the relation of a perfectly unknown being to the greatest
possible systematic unity of experience�察�solely for the purpose of
employing it as the schema of the regulative principle which directs
reason in its empirical exercise。
It is evident�察�at the first view�察�that we cannot presuppose the
reality of this transcendental object�察�by means of the conceptions
of reality�察�substance�察�causality�察�and so on�察�because these conceptions
cannot be applied to anything that is distinct from the world of
sense。 Thus the supposition of a Supreme Being or cause is purely
relative�察�it is cogitated only in behalf of the systematic unity of
experience�察�such a being is but a something�察�of whose existence in
itself we have not the least conception。 Thus�察�too�察�it becomes
sufficiently manifest why we required the idea of a necessary being in
relation to objects given by sense�察�although we can never have the
least conception of this being�察�or of its absolute necessity。
And now we can clearly perceive the result of our transcendental
dialectic�察�and the proper aim of the ideas of pure reason´ which
become dialectical solely from misunderstanding and inconsiderateness。
Pure reason is�察�in fact�察�occupied with itself�察�and not with any
object。 Objects are not presented to it to be embraced in the unity of
an empirical conception�察�it is only the cognitions of the
understanding that are presented to it�察�for the purpose of receiving
the unity of a rational conception�察�that is�察�of being connected
according to a principle。 The unity of reason is the unity of
system�察�and this systematic unity is not an objective principle��
extending its dominion over objects�察�but a subjective maxim�察�extending
its authority over the empirical cognition of objects。 The
systematic connection which reason gives to the empirical employment
of the understanding not only advances the extension of that
employment�察�but ensures its correctness�察�and thus the principle of a
systematic unity of this nature is also objective�察�although only in an
indefinite respect ��principium vagum��。 It is not�察�however�察�a
constitutive principle�察�determining an object to which it directly
relates�察�it is merely a regulative principle or maxim�察�advancing and
strengthening the empirical exercise of reason�察�by the opening up of
new paths of which the understanding is ignorant�察�while it never
conflicts with the laws of its exercise in the sphere of experience。
But reason cannot cogitate this systematic unity�察�without at the
same time cogitating an object of the idea´ an object that cannot be
presented in any experience�察�which contains no concrete example of a
complete systematic unity。 This being ��ens rationis ratiocinatae�� is
therefore a mere idea and is not assumed to be a thing which is real
absolutely and in itself。 On the contrary�察�it forms merely the
problematical foundation of the connection which the mind introduces
among the phenomena of the sensuous world。 We look upon this
connection�察�in the light of the above´mentioned idea�察�as if it drew
its origin from the supposed being which corresponds to the idea。
And yet all we aim at is the possession of this idea as a secure
foundation for the systematic unity of experience´ a unity
indispensable to reason�察�advantageous to the understanding�察�and
promotive of the interests of empirical cognition。
We mistake the true meaning of this idea when we regard it as an
enouncement�察�or even as a hypothetical declaration of the existence of
a real thing�察�which we are to regard as the origin or ground of a
systematic constitution of the universe。 On the contrary�察�it is left
completely undetermined what the nature or properties of this
so´called ground may be。 The idea is merely to be adopted as a point
of view�察�from which this unity�察�so essential to reason and so
beneficial to the understanding�察�may be regarded as radiating。 In
one word�察�this transcendental thing is merely the schema of a
regulative principle�察�by means of which Reason�察�so far as in her lies��
extends the dominion of systematic unity over the whole sphere of
experience。
The first object of an idea of this kind is the ego�察�considered
merely as a thinking nature or soul。 If I wish to investigate the
properties of a thinking being�察�I must interrogate experience。 But I
find that I can apply none of the categories to this object�察�the
schema of these categories�察�which is the condition of their
application�察�being given only in sensuous intuition。 But I cannot thus
attain to the cognition of a systematic unity of all the phenomena
of the internal sense。 Instead�察�therefore�察�of an empirical
conception of what the soul really is�察�reason takes the conception
of the empirical unity of all thought�察�and�察�by cogitating this unity
as unconditioned and primitive�察�constructs the rational conception
or idea of a simple substance which is in itself unchangeable��
possessing personal identity�察�and in connection with other real things
external to it�察�in one word�察�it constructs the idea of a simple
self´subsistent intelligence。 But the real aim of reason in this
procedure is the attainment of principles of systematic unity for
the explanation of the phenomena of the soul。 That is�察�reason
desires to be able to represent all the determinations of the internal
sense as existing in one subject�察�all powers as deduced from one
fundamental power�察�all changes as mere varieties in the condition of a
being which is permanent and always the same�察�and all phenomena in
space as entirely different in their nature from the procedure of
thought。 Essential simplicity ��with the other attributes predicated of
the ego�� is regarded as the mere schema of this regulative
principle�察�it is not assumed that it is the actual ground of the
properties of the soul。 For these properties may rest upon quite
different grounds�察�of which we are completely ignorant�察�just as the
above predicates could not give us any knowledge of the soul as it
is in itself�察�even if we regarded them as valid in respect of it��
inasmuch as they constitute a mere idea�察�which cannot be represented
in concreto。 Nothing but good can result from a psychological idea
of this kind�察�if we only take proper care not to consider it as more
than an idea�察�that is�察�if we regard it as valid merely in relation
to the employment of reason�察�in the sphere of the phenomena of the
soul。 Under the guidance of this idea�察�or principle�察�no empirical laws
of corporeal phenomena are called in to explain that which is a
phenomenon of the internal sense alone�察�no windy hypotheses of the
generation�察�annihilation�察�and palingenesis of souls are admitted。 Thus
the consideration of this object of the internal sense is kept pure��
and unmixed with heterogeneous elements�察�while the investigation of
reason aims at reducing all the grounds of explanation employed in
this sphere of knowledge to a single principle。 All this is best
effected�察�nay�察�cannot be effected otherwise than by means of such a
schema�察�which requires us to regard this ideal thing as an actual
existence。 The psychological idea is�察�therefore�察�meaningless and
inapplicable�察�except as the schema of a regulative conception。 For�察�if
I ask whether the soul is not really of a spiritual nature´ it is a
question which has no meaning。 From such a conception has been
abstracted�察�not merely all corporeal nature�察�but all nature�察�that
is�察�all the predicates of a possible experience�察�and consequently�察�all
the conditions which enable us to cogitate an object to this
conception have disappeared。 But�察�if these conditions are absent�察�it
is evident that the conception is meaningless。
The second regulative idea of speculative reason is the c