the+critique+of+pure+reason_纯粹理性批判-第66部分

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！


idea；　pure　reason　possesses　even　causality　and　the　power　of
producing　that　which　its　conception　contains。　Hence　we　cannot　say　of
wisdom；　in　a　disparaging　way；　〃it　is　only　an　idea。〃　For；　for　the
very　reason　that　it　is　the　idea　of　the　necessary　unity　of　all　possible
aims；　it　must　be　for　all　practical　exertions　and　endeavours　the
primitive　condition　and　rule…　a　rule　which；　if　not　constitutive；　is　at
least　limitative。
　　Now；　although　we　must　say　of　the　transcendental　conceptions　of
reason；　〃they　are　only　ideas；〃　we　must　not；　on　this　account；　look　upon
them　as　superfluous　and　nugatory。　For；　although　no　object　can　be
determined　by　them；　they　can　be　of　great　utility；　unobserved　and　at
the　basis　of　the　edifice　of　the　understanding；　as　the　canon　for　its
extended　and　self…consistent　exercise…　a　canon　which；　indeed；　does　not
enable　it　to　cognize　more　in　an　object　than　it　would　cognize　by　the
help　of　its　own　conceptions；　but　which　guides　it　more　securely　in
its　cognition。　Not　to　mention　that　they　perhaps　render　possible　a
transition　from　our　conceptions　of　nature　and　the　non…ego　to　the
practical　conceptions；　and　thus　produce　for　even　ethical　ideas
keeping；　so　to　speak；　and　connection　with　the　speculative　cognitions
of　reason。　The　explication　of　all　this　must　be　looked　for　in　the
sequel。
　　But　setting　aside；　in　conformity　with　our　original　purpose；　the
consideration　of　the　practical　ideas；　we　proceed　to　contemplate　reason
in　its　speculative　use　alone；　nay；　in　a　still　more　restricted
sphere；　to　wit；　in　the　transcendental　use；　and　here　must　strike　into
the　same　path　which　we　followed　in　our　deduction　of　the　categories。
That　is　to　say；　we　shall　consider　the　logical　form　of　the　cognition　of
reason；　that　we　may　see　whether　reason　may　not　be　thereby　a　source
of　conceptions　which　enables　us　to　regard　objects　in　themselves　as
determined　synthetically　a　priori；　in　relation　to　one　or　other　of
the　functions　of　reason。
　　Reason；　considered　as　the　faculty　of　a　certain　logical　form　of
cognition；　is　the　faculty　of　conclusion；　that　is；　of　mediate
judgement…　by　means　of　the　subsumption　of　the　condition　of　a
possible　judgement　under　the　condition　of　a　given　judgement。　The　given
judgement　is　the　general　rule　（major）。　The　subsumption　of　the
condition　of　another　possible　judgement　under　the　condition　of　the
rule　is　the　minor。　The　actual　judgement；　which　enounces　the
assertion　of　the　rule　in　the　subsumed　case；　is　the　conclusion
（conclusio）。　The　rule　predicates　something　generally　under　a　certain
condition。　The　condition　of　the　rule　is　satisfied　in　some　particular
case。　It　follows　that　what　was　valid　in　general　under　that　condition
must　also　be　considered　as　valid　in　the　particular　case　which
satisfies　this　condition。　It　is　very　plain　that　reason　attains　to　a
cognition；　by　means　of　acts　of　the　understanding　which　constitute　a
series　of　conditions。　When　I　arrive　at　the　proposition；　〃All　bodies
are　changeable；〃　by　beginning　with　the　more　remote　cognition　（in　which
the　conception　of　body　does　not　appear；　but　which　nevertheless
contains　the　condition　of　that　conception）；　〃All　pound　is
changeable；〃　by　proceeding　from　this　to　a　less　remote　cognition；　which
stands　under　the　condition　of　the　former；　〃Bodies　are　pound；〃　and
hence　to　a　third；　which　at　length　connects　for　me　the　remote　cognition
（changeable）　with　the　one　before　me；　〃Consequently；　bodies　are
changeable〃…　I　have　arrived　at　a　cognition　（conclusion）　through　a
series　of　conditions　（premisses）。　Now　every　series；　whose　exponent　（of
the　categorical　or　hypothetical　judgement）　is　given；　can　be　continued；
consequently　the　same　procedure　of　reason　conducts　us　to　the
ratiocinatio　polysyllogistica；　which　is　a　series　of　syllogisms；　that
can　be　continued　either　on　the　side　of　the　conditions　（per
prosyllogismos）　or　of　the　conditioned　（per　episyllogismos）　to　an
indefinite　extent。
　　But　we　very　soon　perceive　that　the　chain　or　series　of　prosyllogisms；
that　is；　of　deduced　cognitions　on　the　side　of　the　grounds　or
conditions　of　a　given　cognition；　in　other　words；　the　ascending
series　of　syllogisms　must　have　a　very　different　relation　to　the
faculty　of　reason　from　that　of　the　descending　series；　that　is；　the
progressive　procedure　of　reason　on　the　side　of　the　conditioned　by
means　of　episyllogisms。　For；　as　in　the　former　case　the　cognition
（conclusio）　is　given　only　as　conditioned；　reason　can　attain　to　this
cognition　only　under　the　presupposition　that　all　the　members　of　the
series　on　the　side　of　the　conditions　are　given　（totality　in　the　series
of　premisses）；　because　only　under　this　supposition　is　the　judgement　we
may　be　considering　possible　a　priori；　while　on　the　side　of　the
conditioned　or　the　inferences；　only　an　inplete　and　being；　and
not　a　presupposed　or　given　series；　consequently　only　a　potential
progression；　is　cogitated。　Hence；　when　a　cognition　is　contemplated
as　conditioned；　reason　is　pelled　to　consider　the　series　of
conditions　in　an　ascending　line　as　pleted　and　given　in　their
totality。　But　if　the　very　same　condition　is　considered　at　the　same
time　as　the　condition　of　other　cognitions；　which　together　constitute　a
series　of　inferences　or　consequences　in　a　descending　line；　reason
may　preserve　a　perfect　indifference；　as　to　how　far　this　progression
may　extend　a　parte　posteriori；　and　whether　the　totality　of　this　series
is　possible；　because　it　stands　in　no　need　of　such　a　series　for　the
purpose　of　arriving　at　the　conclusion　before　it；　inasmuch　as　this
conclusion　is　sufficiently　guaranteed　and　determined　on　grounds　a
parte　priori。　It　may　be　the　case；　that　upon　the　side　of　the　conditions
the　series　of　premisses　has　a　first　or　highest　condition；　or　it　may
not　possess　this；　and　so　be　a　parte　priori　unlimited；　but　it　must；
nevertheless；　contain　totality　of　conditions；　even　admitting　that　we
never　could　succeed　in　pletely　apprehending　it；　and　the　whole
series　must　be　unconditionally　true；　if　the　conditioned；　which　is
considered　as　an　inference　resulting　from　it；　is　to　be　held　as　true。
This　is　a　requirement　of　reason；　which　announces　its　cognition　as
determined　a　priori　and　as　necessary；　either　in　itself…　and　in　this
case　it　needs　no　grounds　to　rest　upon…　or；　if　it　is　deduced；　as　a
member　of　a　series　of　grounds；　which　is　itself　unconditionally　true。

　　　　　　　　SECTION　III。　System　of　Transcendental　Ideas。

　　We　are　not　at　present　engaged　with　a　logical　dialectic；　which
makes　plete　abstraction　of　the　content　of　cognition　and　aims　only
at　unveiling　the　illusory　appearance　in　the　form　of　syllogisms。　Our
subject　is　transcendental　dialectic；　which　must　contain；　pletely
a　priori；　the　origin　of　certain　cognitions　drawn　from　pure　reason；　and
the　origin　of　certain　deduced　conceptions；　the　object　of　which
cannot　be　given　empirically　and　which　therefore　lie　beyond　the
sphere　of　the　faculty　of　understanding。　We　have　observed；　from　the
natural　relation　which　the　transcendental　use　of　our　cognition；　in
syllogisms　as　well　as　in　judgements；　must　have　to　the　logical；　that
there　are　three　kinds　of　dialectical　arguments；　corresponding　to　the
three　modes　of　conclusion；　by　which　reason　attains　to　cognitions　on
principles；　and　that　in　all　it　is　the　business　of　reason　to　ascend
from　the　conditioned　synthesis；　beyond　which　the　understanding　never
proceeds；　to　the　unconditioned　which　the　understanding　never　can
reach。
　　Now　the　most　general　relations　which　can　exist　in　our
representations　are：　1st；　the　relation　to　the　subject；　2nd；　the
relation　to　objects；　either　as　phenomena；　or　as　objects　of　thought
in　general。　If　we　connect　this　subdivision　with　the　main　division；　all
the　relations　of　our　representations；　of　which　we　can　form　either　a
conception　or　an　idea；　are　threefold：　1。　The　relation　to　the
subject；　2。　The　relation　to　the　manifold　of　the　object　as　a
phenomenon；　3。　The　relation　to　all　things　in　general。
　　Now　all　pure　conceptions　have　to　do　in　general　with　the
synthetical　unity　of　representations；　conceptions　of　pure　reason
（transcendental　ideas）；　on　the　other　hand；　with　the　unconditional
synthetical　unity　of　all　conditions。　It　follows　that　all
transcendental　ideas　arrange　themselves　in　three　classes；　the　first　of
which　contains　the　absolute　（unconditioned）　unity　of　the　thinking
subject；　the　second　the　absolute　unity　of　the　series　of　the　conditions
of　a　phenomenon；　the　third　the　absolute　unity　of　the　condition　of
all　objects　of　thought　in　general。
　　The　thinking　subject　is　the　object…matter　of　Psychology；　the　sum
total　of　all　phenomena　（the　world）　is　the　object…matter　of
Cosmology；　and　the　thing　which　contains　the　highest　condition　of　the
possibility　of　all　that　is　cogitable　（the　being　of　all　beings）　is
the　object…matter　of　all　Theology。　Thus　pure　reason　presents　us　with
the　idea　of　a　transcendental　doctrine　of　the　soul　（psychologia
rationalis）；　of　a　transcendental　science　of　the　world　（cosmologia
rationalis）；　and　finally　of　a　transcendental　doctrine　of　God
（theologia　transcendentalis）。　Understanding　cannot　originate　even
the　outline　of　any　of　these　sciences；　even　when　connected　with　the
highest　logical　use　of　reason；　that　is；　all　cogitable　syllogisms…
for　the　purpose　of　proceeding　from　one　object　（phenomenon）　to　all
others；　even　to　the