the+critique+of+pure+reason_纯粹理性批判-第113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！


of　its　three　angles；　is　self…contradictory；　but　to　suppose　the
non…existence　of　both　triangle　and　angles　is　perfectly　admissible。　And
so　is　it　with　the　conception　of　an　absolutely　necessary　being。
Annihilate　its　existence　in　thought；　and　you　annihilate　the　thing
itself　with　all　its　predicates；　how　then　can　there　be　any　room　for
contradiction？　Externally；　there　is　nothing　to　give　rise　to　a
contradiction；　for　a　thing　cannot　be　necessary　externally；　nor
internally；　for；　by　the　annihilation　or　suppression　of　the　thing
itself；　its　internal　properties　are　also　annihilated。　God　is
omnipotent…　that　is　a　necessary　judgement。　His　omnipotence　cannot　be
denied；　if　the　existence　of　a　Deity　is　posited…　the　existence；　that
is；　of　an　infinite　being；　the　two　conceptions　being　identical。　But
when　you　say；　God　does　not　exist；　neither　omnipotence　nor　any　other
predicate　is　affirmed；　they　must　all　disappear　with　the　subject；　and
in　this　judgement　there　cannot　exist　the　least　self…contradiction。
　　You　have　thus　seen　that　when　the　predicate　of　a　judgement　is
annihilated　in　thought　along　with　the　subject；　no　internal
contradiction　can　arise；　be　the　predicate　what　it　may。　There　is　no
possibility　of　evading　the　conclusion…　you　find　yourselves　pelled
to　declare：　There　are　certain　subjects　which　cannot　be　annihilated
in　thought。　But　this　is　nothing　more　than　saying：　There　exist　subjects
which　are　absolutely　necessary…　the　very　hypothesis　which　you　are
called　upon　to　establish。　For　I　find　myself　unable　to　form　the
slightest　conception　of　a　thing　which　when　annihilated　in　thought　with
all　its　predicates；　leaves　behind　a　contradiction；　and　contradiction
is　the　only　criterion　of　impossibility　in　the　sphere　of　pure　a
priori　conceptions。
　　Against　these　general　considerations；　the　justice　of　which　no　one
can　dispute；　one　argument　is　adduced；　which　is　regarded　as
furnishing　a　satisfactory　demonstration　from　the　fact。　It　is
affirmed　that　there　is　one　and　only　one　conception；　in　which　the
non…being　or　annihilation　of　the　object　is　self…contradictory；　and
this　is　the　conception　of　an　ens　realissimum。　It　possesses；　you　say；
all　reality；　and　you　feel　yourselves　justified　in　admitting　the
possibility　of　such　a　being。　（This　I　am　willing　to　grant　for　the
present；　although　the　existence　of　a　conception　which　is　not
self…contradictory　is　far　from　being　sufficient　to　prove　the
possibility　of　an　object。）*　Now　the　notion　of　all　reality　embraces
in　it　that　of　existence；　the　notion　of　existence　lies；　therefore；　in
the　conception　of　this　possible　thing。　If　this　thing　is　annihilated　in
thought；　the　internal　possibility　of　the　thing　is　also　annihilated；
which　is　self…contradictory。

　　*A　conception　is　always　possible；　if　it　is　not　self…contradictory。
This　is　the　logical　criterion　of　possibility；　distinguishing　the
object　of　such　a　conception　from　the　nihil　negativum。　But　it　may　be；
notwithstanding；　an　empty　conception；　unless　the　objective　reality
of　this　synthesis；　but　which　it　is　generated；　is　demonstrated；　and　a
proof　of　this　kind　must　be　based　upon　principles　of　possible
experience；　and　not　upon　the　principle　of　analysis　or　contradiction。
This　remark　may　be　serviceable　as　a　warning　against　concluding；　from
the　possibility　of　a　conception…　which　is　logical…　the　possibility
of　a　thing…　which　is　real。

　　I　answer：　It　is　absurd　to　introduce…　under　whatever　term
disguised…　into　the　conception　of　a　thing；　which　is　to　be　cogitated
solely　in　reference　to　its　possibility；　the　conception　of　its
existence。　If　this　is　admitted；　you　will　have　apparently　gained　the
day；　but　in　reality　have　enounced　nothing　but　a　mere　tautology。　I　ask；
is　the　proposition；　this　or　that　thing　（which　I　am　admitting　to　be
possible）　exists；　an　analytical　or　a　synthetical　proposition？　If　the
former；　there　is　no　addition　made　to　the　subject　of　your　thought　by
the　affirmation　of　its　existence；　but　then　the　conception　in　your
minds　is　identical　with　the　thing　itself；　or　you　have　supposed　the
existence　of　a　thing　to　be　possible；　and　then　inferred　its　existence
from　its　internal　possibility…　which　is　but　a　miserable　tautology。　The
word　reality　in　the　conception　of　the　thing；　and　the　word　existence　in
the　conception　of　the　predicate；　will　not　help　you　out　of　the
difficulty。　For；　supposing　you　were　to　term　all　positing　of　a　thing
reality；　you　have　thereby　posited　the　thing　with　all　its　predicates　in
the　conception　of　the　subject　and　assumed　its　actual　existence；　and
this　you　merely　repeat　in　the　predicate。　But　if　you　confess；　as
every　reasonable　person　must；　that　every　existential　proposition　is
synthetical；　how　can　it　be　maintained　that　the　predicate　of
existence　cannot　be　denied　without　contradiction？…　a　property　which　is
the　characteristic　of　analytical　propositions；　alone。
　　I　should　have　a　reasonable　hope　of　putting　an　end　for　ever　to　this
sophistical　mode　of　argumentation；　by　a　strict　definition　of　the
conception　of　existence；　did　not　my　own　experience　teach　me　that　the
illusion　arising　from　our　confounding　a　logical　with　a　real
predicate　（a　predicate　which　aids　in　the　determination　of　a　thing）
resists　almost　all　the　endeavours　of　explanation　and　illustration。　A
logical　predicate　may　be　what　you　please；　even　the　subject　may　be
predicated　of　itself；　for　logic　pays　no　regard　to　the　content　of　a
judgement。　But　the　determination　of　a　conception　is　a　predicate；　which
adds　to　and　enlarges　the　conception。　It　must　not；　therefore；　be
contained　in　the　conception。
　　Being　is　evidently　not　a　real　predicate；　that　is；　a　conception　of
something　which　is　added　to　the　conception　of　some　other　thing。　It
is　merely　the　positing　of　a　thing；　or　of　certain　determinations　in　it。
Logically；　it　is　merely　the　copula　of　a　judgement。　The　proposition；
God　is　omnipotent；　contains　two　conceptions；　which　have　a　certain
object　or　content；　the　word　is；　is　no　additional　predicate…　it
merely　indicates　the　relation　of　the　predicate　to　the　subject。　Now；　if
I　take　the　subject　（God）　with　all　its　predicates　（omnipotence　being
one）；　and　say：　God　is；　or；　There　is　a　God；　I　add　no　new　predicate　to
the　conception　of　God；　I　merely　posit　or　affirm　the　existence　of　the
subject　with　all　its　predicates…　I　posit　the　object　in　relation　to
my　conception。　The　content　of　both　is　the　same；　and　there　is　no
addition　made　to　the　conception；　which　expresses　merely　the
possibility　of　the　object；　by　my　cogitating　the　object…　in　the
expression；　it　is…　as　absolutely　given　or　existing。　Thus　the　real
contains　no　more　than　the　possible。　A　hundred　real　dollars　contain
no　more　than　a　hundred　possible　dollars。　For；　as　the　latter　indicate
the　conception；　and　the　former　the　object；　on　the　supposition　that　the
content　of　the　former　was　greater　than　that　of　the　latter；　my
conception　would　not　be　an　expression　of　the　whole　object；　and　would
consequently　be　an　inadequate　conception　of　it。　But　in　reckoning　my
wealth　there　may　be　said　to　be　more　in　a　hundred　real　dollars　than
in　a　hundred　possible　dollars…　that　is；　in　the　mere　conception　of
them。　For　the　real　object…　the　dollars…　is　not　analytically
contained　in　my　conception；　but　forms　a　synthetical　addition　to　my
conception　（which　is　merely　a　determination　of　my　mental　state）；
although　this　objective　reality…　this　existence…　apart　from　my
conceptions；　does　not　in　the　least　degree　increase　the　aforesaid
hundred　dollars。
　　By　whatever　and　by　whatever　number　of　predicates…　even　to　the
plete　determination　of　it…　I　may　cogitate　a　thing；　I　do　not　in
the　least　augment　the　object　of　my　conception　by　the　addition　of　the
statement：　This　thing　exists。　Otherwise；　not　exactly　the　same；　but
something　more　than　what　was　cogitated　in　my　conception；　would
exist；　and　I　could　not　affirm　that　the　exact　object　of　my　conception
had　real　existence。　If　I　cogitate　a　thing　as　containing　all　modes　of
reality　except　one；　the　mode　of　reality　which　is　absent　is　not　added
to　the　conception　of　the　thing　by　the　affirmation　that　the　thing
exists；　on　the　contrary；　the　thing　exists…　if　it　exist　at　all…　with
the　same　defect　as　that　cogitated　in　its　conception；　otherwise　not
that　which　was　cogitated；　but　something　different；　exists。　Now；　if　I
cogitate　a　being