the+critique+of+pure+reason_纯粹理性批判-第121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！


demonstration　that　there　exists　no　Supreme　Being；　as　the　ground　of　all
that　exists；　or　that　this　being　possesses　none　of　those　properties
which　we　regard　as　analogical　with　the　dynamical　qualities　of　a
thinking　being；　or　that；　as　the　anthropomorphists　would　have　us
believe；　it　is　subject　to　all　the　limitations　which　sensibility
imposes　upon　those　intelligences　which　exist　in　the　world　of
experience。
　　A　Supreme　Being　is；　therefore；　for　the　speculative　reason；　a　mere
ideal；　though　a　faultless　one…　a　conception　which　perfects　and
crowns　the　system　of　human　cognition；　but　the　objective　reality　of
which　can　neither　be　proved　nor　disproved　by　pure　reason。　If　this
defect　is　ever　supplied　by　a　moral　theology；　the　problematic
transcendental　theology　which　has　preceded；　will　have　been　at　least
serviceable　as　demonstrating　the　mental　necessity　existing　for　the
conception；　by　the　plete　determination　of　it　which　it　has
furnished；　and　the　ceaseless　testing　of　the　conclusions　of　a　reason
often　deceived　by　sense；　and　not　always　in　harmony　with　its　own　ideas。
The　attributes　of　necessity；　infinitude；　unity；　existence　apart　from
the　world　（and　not　as　a　world　soul）；　eternity　（free　from　conditions　of
time）；　omnipresence　（free　from　conditions　of　space）；　omnipotence；
and　others；　are　pure　transcendental　predicates；　and　thus　the
accurate　conception　of　a　Supreme　Being；　which　every　theology　requires；
is　furnished　by　transcendental　theology　alone。
APPENDIX
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　APPENDIX。

　　　　　　　　Of　the　Regulative　Employment　of　the　Ideas　of
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　Pure　Reason。

　　The　result　of　all　the　dialectical　attempts　of　pure　reason　not　only
confirms　the　truth　of　what　we　have　already　proved　in　our
Transcendental　Analytic；　namely；　that　all　inferences　which　would
lead　us　beyond　the　limits　of　experience　are　fallacious　and　groundless；
but　it　at　the　same　time　teaches　us　this　important　lesson；　that　human
reason　has　a　natural　inclination　to　overstep　these　limits；　and　that
transcendental　ideas　are　as　much　the　natural　property　of　the　reason　as
categories　are　of　the　understanding。　There　exists　this　difference；
however；　that　while　the　categories　never　mislead　us；　outward　objects
being　always　in　perfect　harmony　therewith；　ideas　are　the　parents　of
irresistible　illusions；　the　severest　and　most　subtle　criticism　being
required　to　save　us　from　the　fallacies　which　they　induce。
　　Whatever　is　grounded　in　the　nature　of　our　powers　will　be　found　to　be
in　harmony　with　the　final　purpose　and　proper　employment　of　these
powers；　when　once　we　have　discovered　their　true　direction　and　aim。
We　are　entitled　to　suppose；　therefore；　that　there　exists　a　mode　of
employing　transcendental　ideas　which　is　proper　and　immanent；　although；
when　we　mistake　their　meaning；　and　regard　them　as　conceptions　of
actual　things；　their　mode　of　application　is　transcendent　and　delusive。
For　it　is　not　the　idea　itself；　but　only　the　employment　of　the　idea
in　relation　to　possible　experience；　that　is　transcendent　or
immanent。　An　idea　is　employed　transcendently；　when　it　is　applied　to　an
object　falsely　believed　to　be　adequate　with　and　to　correspond　to　it；
imminently；　when　it　is　applied　solely　to　the　employment　of　the
understanding　in　the　sphere　of　experience。　Thus　all　errors　of
subreptio…　of　misapplication；　are　to　be　ascribed　to　defects　of
judgement；　and　not　to　understanding　or　reason。
　　Reason　never　has　an　immediate　relation　to　an　object；　it　relates
immediately　to　the　understanding　alone。　It　is　only　through　the
understanding　that　it　can　be　employed　in　the　field　of　experience。　It
does　not　form　conceptions　of　objects；　it　merely　arranges　them　and
gives　to　them　that　unity　which　they　are　capable　of　possessing　when　the
sphere　of　their　application　has　been　extended　as　widely　as　possible。
Reason　avails　itself　of　the　conception　of　the　understanding　for　the
sole　purpose　of　producing　totality　in　the　different　series。　This
totality　the　understanding　does　not　concern　itself　with；　its　only
occupation　is　the　connection　of　experiences；　by　which　series　of
conditions　in　accordance　with　conceptions　are　established。　The
object　of　reason　is；　therefore；　the　understanding　and　its　proper
destination。　As　the　latter　brings　unity　into　the　diversity　of
objects　by　means　of　its　conceptions；　so　the　former　brings　unity　into
the　diversity　of　conceptions　by　means　of　ideas；　as　it　sets　the　final
aim　of　a　collective　unity　to　the　operations　of　the　understanding；
which　without　this　occupies　itself　with　a　distributive　unity　alone。
　　I　accordingly　maintain　that　transcendental　ideas　can　never　be
employed　as　constitutive　ideas；　that　they　cannot　be　conceptions　of
objects；　and　that；　when　thus　considered；　they　assume　a　fallacious
and　dialectical　character。　But；　on　the　other　hand；　they　are　capable　of
an　admirable　and　indispensably　necessary　application　to　objects…　as
regulative　ideas；　directing　the　understanding　to　a　certain　aim；　the
guiding　lines　towards　which　all　its　laws　follow；　and　in　which　they　all
meet　in　one　point。　This　point…　though　a　mere　idea　（focus　imaginarius）；
that　is；　not　a　point　from　which　the　conceptions　of　the　understanding
do　really　proceed；　for　it　lies　beyond　the　sphere　of　possible
experience…　serves；　notwithstanding；　to　give　to　these　conceptions
the　greatest　possible　unity　bined　with　the　greatest　possible
extension。　Hence　arises　the　natural　illusion　which　induces　us　to
believe　that　these　lines　proceed　from　an　object　which　lies　out　of
the　sphere　of　empirical　cognition；　just　as　objects　reflected　in　a
mirror　appear　to　be　behind　it。　But　this　illusion…　which　we　may
hinder　from　imposing　upon　us…　is　necessary　and　unavoidable；　if　we
desire　to　see；　not　only　those　objects　which　lie　before　us；　but　those
which　are　at　a　great　distance　behind　us；　that　is　to　say；　when；　in
the　present　case；　we　direct　the　aims　of　the　understanding；　beyond
every　given　experience；　towards　an　extension　as　great　as　can
possibly　be　attained。
　　If　we　review　our　cognitions　in　their　entire　extent；　we　shall　find
that　the　peculiar　business　of　reason　is　to　arrange　them　into　a　system；
that　is　to　say；　to　give　them　connection　according　to　a　principle。　This
unity　presupposes　an　idea…　the　idea　of　the　form　of　a　whole　（of
cognition）；　preceding　the　determinate　cognition　of　the　parts；　and
containing　the　conditions　which　determine　a　priori　to　every　part　its
place　and　relation　to　the　other　parts　of　the　whole　system。　This
idea；　accordingly；　demands　plete　unity　in　the　cognition　of　the
understanding…　not　the　unity　of　a　contingent　aggregate；　but　that　of
a　system　connected　according　to　necessary　laws。　It　cannot　be
affirmed　with　propriety　that　this　idea　is　a　conception　of　an　object；
it　is　merely　a　conception　of　the　plete　unity　of　the　conceptions
of　objects；　in　so　far　as　this　unity　is　available　to　the
understanding　as　a　rule。　Such　conceptions　of　reason　are　not　derived
from　nature；　on　the　contrary；　we　employ　them　for　the　interrogation　and
investigation　of　nature；　and　regard　our　cognition　as　defective　so　long
as　it　is　not　adequate　to　them。　We　admit　that　such　a　thing　as　pure
earth；　pure　water；　or　pure　air；　is　not　to　be　discovered。　And　yet　we
require　these　conceptions　（which　have　their　origin　in　the　reason；　so
far　as　regards　their　absolute　purity　and　pleteness）　for　the　purpose
of　determining　the　share　which　each　of　these　natural　causes　has　in
every　phenomenon。　Thus　the　different　kinds　of　matter　are　all　ref　erred
to　earths；　as　mere　weight；　to　salts　and　inflammable　bodies；　as　pure
force；　and　finally；　to　water　and　air；　as　the　vehicula　of　the　former；
or　the　machines　employed　by　them　in　their　operations…　for　the
purpose　of　explaining　the　chemical　action　and　reaction　of　bodies　in
accordance　with　the　idea　of　a　mechanism。　For；　although　not　actually　so
expressed；　the　influence　of　such　ideas　of　reason　is　very　observable　in
the　procedure　of　natural　philosophers。
　　If　reason　is　the　faculty　of　deducing　the　particular　from　the
general；　and　if　the　general　be　certain　in　se　and　given；　it　is　only
necessary　that　the　judgement　should　subsume　the　particular　under　the
general；　the　particular　being　thus　necessarily　determined。　I　shall
term　this　the　demonstrative　or　apodeictic　employment　of　reason。　If；
however；