the critique of pure reason-第111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！



　　In　the　case　of　the　apparent　antinomy　with　which　we　are　at　present

dealing；　there　exists　a　way　of　escape　from　the　difficulty；　for　it　is

not　impossible　that　both　of　the　contradictory　statements　may　be　true

in　different　relations。　All　sensuous　phenomena　may　be　contingent；

and　consequently　possess　only　an　empirically　conditioned　existence；

and　yet　there　may　also　exist　a　non…empirical　condition　of　the　whole

series；　or；　in　other　words；　a　necessary　being。　For　this　necessary

being；　as　an　intelligible　condition；　would　not　form　a　member…　not　even

the　highest　member…　of　the　series；　the　whole　world　of　sense　would　be

left　in　its　empirically　determined　existence　uninterfered　with　and

uninfluenced。　This　would　also　form　a　ground　of　distinction　between　the

modes　of　solution　employed　for　the　third　and　fourth　antinomies。　For；

while　in　the　consideration　of　freedom　in　the　former　antinomy；　the

thing　itself…　the　cause　（substantia　phaenomenon）…　was　regarded　as

belonging　to　the　series　of　conditions；　and　only　its　causality　to　the

intelligible　world…　we　are　obliged　in　the　present　case　to　cogitate

this　necessary　being　as　purely　intelligible　and　as　existing　entirely

apart　from　the　world　of　sense　（as　an　ens　extramundanum）；　for　otherwise

it　would　be　subject　to　the　phenomenal　law　of　contingency　and

dependence。

　　In　relation　to　the　present　problem；　therefore；　the　regulative

principle　of　reason　is　that　everything　in　the　sensuous　world　possesses

an　empirically　conditioned　existence…　that　no　property　of　the　sensuous

world　possesses　unconditioned　necessity…　that　we　are　bound　to

expect；　and；　so　far　as　is　possible；　to　seek　for　the　empirical

condition　of　every　member　in　the　series　of　conditions…　and　that

there　is　no　sufficient　reason　to　justify　us　in　deducing　any

existence　from　a　condition　which　lies　out　of　and　beyond　the

empirical　series；　or　in　regarding　any　existence　as　independent　and

self…subsistent；　although　this　should　not　prevent　us　from

recognizing　the　possibility　of　the　whole　series　being　based　upon　a

being　which　is　intelligible；　and　for　this　reason　free　from　all

empirical　conditions。

　　But　it　has　been　far　from　my　intention；　in　these　remarks；　to　prove

the　existence　of　this　unconditioned　and　necessary　being；　or　even　to

evidence　the　possibility　of　a　purely　intelligible　condition　of　the

existence　or　all　sensuous　phenomena。　As　bounds　were　set　to　reason；

to　prevent　it　from　leaving　the　guiding　thread　of　empirical

conditions　and　losing　itself　in　transcendent　theories　which　are

incapable　of　concrete　presentation；　so　it　was　my　purpose；　on　the　other

band；　to　set　bounds　to　the　law　of　the　purely　empirical

understanding；　and　to　protest　against　any　attempts　on　its　part　at

deciding　on　the　possibility　of　things；　or　declaring　the　existence　of

the　intelligible　to　be　impossible；　merely　on　the　ground　that　it　is　not

available　for　the　explanation　and　exposition　of　phenomena。　It　has　been

shown；　at　the　same　time；　that　the　contingency　of　all　the　phenomena

of　nature　and　their　empirical　conditions　is　quite　consistent　with

the　arbitrary　hypothesis　of　a　necessary；　although　purely

intelligible　condition；　that　no　real　contradiction　exists　between　them

and　that；　consequently；　both　may　be　true。　The　existence　of　such　an

absolutely　necessary　being　may　be　impossible；　but　this　can　never　be

demonstrated　from　the　universal　contingency　and　dependence　of　sensuous

phenomena；　nor　from　the　principle　which　forbids　us　to　discontinue

the　series　at　some　member　of　it；　or　to　seek　for　its　cause　in　some

sphere　of　existence　beyond　the　world　of　nature。　Reason　goes　its　way　in

the　empirical　world；　and　follows；　too；　its　peculiar　path　in　the　sphere

of　the　transcendental。

　　The　sensuous　world　contains　nothing　but　phenomena；　which　are　mere

representations；　and　always　sensuously　conditioned；　things　in

themselves　are　not；　and　cannot　be；　objects　to　us。　It　is　not　to　be

wondered　at；　therefore；　that　we　are　not　justified　in　leaping　from　some

member　of　an　empirical　series　beyond　the　world　of　sense；　as　if

empirical　representations　were　things　in　themselves；　existing　apart

from　their　transcendental　ground　in　the　human　mind；　and　the　cause　of

whose　existence　may　be　sought　out　of　the　empirical　series。　This

would　certainly　be　the　case　with　contingent　things；　but　it　cannot　be

with　mere　representations　of　things；　the　contingency　of　which　is

itself　merely　a　phenomenon　and　can　relate　to　no　other　regress　than

that　which　determines　phenomena；　that　is；　the　empirical。　But　to

cogitate　an　intelligible　ground　of　phenomena；　as　free；　moreover；

from　the　contingency　of　the　latter；　conflicts　neither　with　the

unlimited　nature　of　the　empirical　regress；　nor　with　the　complete

contingency　of　phenomena。　And　the　demonstration　of　this　was　the　only

thing　necessary　for　the　solution　of　this　apparent　antinomy。　For　if　the

condition　of　every　conditioned…　as　regards　its　existence…　is　sensuous；

and　for　this　reason　a　part　of　the　same　series；　it　must　be　itself

conditioned；　as　was　shown　in　the　antithesis　of　the　fourth　antinomy。

The　embarrassments　into　which　a　reason；　which　postulates　the

unconditioned；　necessarily　falls；　must；　therefore；　continue　to

exist；　or　the　unconditioned　must　be　placed　in　the　sphere　of　the

intelligible。　In　this　way；　its　necessity　does　not　require；　nor　does　it

even　permit；　the　presence　of　an　empirical　condition：　and　it　is；

consequently；　unconditionally　necessary。

　　The　empirical　employment　of　reason　is　not　affected　by　the　assumption

of　a　purely　intelligible　being；　it　continues　its　operations　on　the

principle　of　the　contingency　of　all　phenomena；　proceeding　from

empirical　conditions　to　still　higher　and　higher　conditions；　themselves

empirical。　just　as　little　does　this　regulative　principle　exclude　the

assumption　of　an　intelligible　cause；　when　the　question　regards

merely　the　pure　employment　of　reason…　in　relation　to　ends　or　aims。

For；　in　this　case；　an　intelligible　cause　signifies　merely　the

transcendental　and　to　us　unknown　ground　of　the　possibility　of　sensuous

phenomena；　and　its　existence；　necessary　and　independent　of　all

sensuous　conditions；　is　not　inconsistent　with　the　contingency　of

phenomena；　or　with　the　unlimited　possibility　of　regress　which　exists

in　the　series　of　empirical　conditions。



　　　　　　　Concluding　Remarks　on　the　Antinomy　of　Pure　Reason。



　　So　long　as　the　object　of　our　rational　conceptions　is　the　totality　of

conditions　in　the　world　of　phenomena；　and　the　satisfaction；　from

this　source；　of　the　requirements　of　reason；　so　long　are　our　ideas

transcendental　and　cosmological。　But　when　we　set　the　unconditioned…

which　is　the　aim　of　all　our　inquiries…　in　a　sphere　which　lies　out　of

the　world　of　sense　and　possible　experience；　our　ideas　become

transcendent。　They　are　then　not　merely　serviceable　towards　the

completion　of　the　exercise　of　reason　（which　remains　an　idea；　never

executed；　but　always　to　be　pursued）；　they　detach　themselves　completely

from　experience　and　construct　for　themselves　objects；　the　material

of　which　has　not　been　presented　by　experience；　and　the　objective

reality　of　which　is　not　based　upon　the　completion　of　the　empirical

series；　but　upon　pure　a　priori　conceptions。　The　intelligible　object　of

these　transcendent　ideas　may　be　conceded；　as　a　transcendental

object。　But　we　cannot　cogitate　it　as　a　thing　determinable　by　certain

distinct　predicates　relating　to　its　internal　nature；　for　it　has　no

connection　with　empirical　conceptions；　nor　are　we　justified　in

affirming　the　existence　of　any　such　object。　It　is；　consequently；　a

mere　product　of　the　mind　alone。　Of　all　the　cosmological　ideas；

however；　it　is　that　occasioning　the　fourth　antinomy　which　compels　us

to　venture　upon　this　step。　For　the　existence　of　phenomena；　always

conditioned　and　never　self…subsistent；　requires　us　to　look　for　an

object　different　from　phenomena…　an　intelligible　object；　with　which

all　contingency　must　cease。　But；　as　we　have　allowed　ourselves　to

assume　the　existence　of　a　self…subsistent　reality　out　of　the　field

of　ex