贝壳电子书 > 英文原著电子书 > the critique of pure reason >

第124章

the critique of pure reason-第124章

小说: the critique of pure reason 字数: 每页4000字

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!




priori a mere arbitrary presupposition in aid of the cognition; by

reason; of the conditioned。 If; then; we are to possess a

theoretical cognition of the absolute necessity of a thing; we

cannot attain to this cognition otherwise than a priori by means of

conceptions; while it is impossible in this way to cognize the

existence of a cause which bears any relation to an existence given in

experience。

  Theoretical cognition is speculative when it relates to an object or

certain conceptions of an object which is not given and cannot be

discovered by means of experience。 It is opposed to the cognition of

nature; which concerns only those objects or predicates which can be

presented in a possible experience。

  The principle that everything which happens (the empirically

contingent) must have a cause; is a principle of the cognition of

nature; but not of speculative cognition。 For; if we change it into an

abstract principle; and deprive it of its reference to experience

and the empirical; we shall find that it cannot with justice be

regarded any longer as a synthetical proposition; and that it is

impossible to discover any mode of transition from that which exists

to something entirely different… termed cause。 Nay; more; the

conception of a cause likewise that of the contingent… loses; in

this speculative mode of employing it; all significance; for its

objective reality and meaning are comprehensible from experience

alone。

  When from the existence of the universe and the things in it the

existence of a cause of the universe is inferred; reason is proceeding

not in the natural; but in the speculative method。 For the principle

of the former enounces; not that things themselves or substances;

but only that which happens or their states… as empirically

contingent; have a cause: the assertion that the existence of

substance itself is contingent is not justified by experience; it is

the assertion of a reason employing its principles in a speculative

manner。 If; again; I infer from the form of the universe; from the way

in which all things are connected and act and react upon each other;

the existence of a cause entirely distinct from the universe… this

would again be a judgement of purely speculative reason; because the

object in this case… the cause… can never be an object of possible

experience。 In both these cases the principle of causality; which is

valid only in the field of experience… useless and even meaningless

beyond this region; would be diverted from its proper destination。

  Now I maintain that all attempts of reason to establish a theology

by the aid of speculation alone are fruitless; that the principles

of reason as applied to nature do not conduct us to any theological

truths; and; consequently; that a rational theology can have no

existence; unless it is founded upon the laws of morality。 For all

synthetical principles of the understanding are valid only as immanent

in experience; while the cognition of a Supreme Being necessitates

their being employed transcendentally; and of this the understanding

is quite incapable。 If the empirical law of causality is to conduct us

to a Supreme Being; this being must belong to the chain of empirical

objects… in which case it would be; like all phenomena; itself

conditioned。 If the possibility of passing the limits of experience be

admitted; by means of the dynamical law of the relation of an effect

to its cause; what kind of conception shall we obtain by this

procedure? Certainly not the conception of a Supreme Being; because

experience never presents us with the greatest of all possible

effects; and it is only an effect of this character that could witness

to the existence of a corresponding cause。 If; for the purpose of

fully satisfying the requirements of Reason; we recognize her right to

assert the existence of a perfect and absolutely necessary being; this

can be admitted only from favour; and cannot be regarded as the result

or irresistible demonstration。 The physico…theological proof may add

weight to others… if other proofs there are… by connecting speculation

with experience; but in itself it rather prepares the mind for

theological cognition; and gives it a right and natural direction;

than establishes a sure foundation for theology。

  It is now perfectly evident that transcendental questions admit only

of transcendental answers… those presented a priori by pure

conceptions without the least empirical admixture。 But the question in

the present case is evidently synthetical… it aims at the extension of

our cognition beyond the bounds of experience… it requires an

assurance respecting the existence of a being corresponding with the

idea in our minds; to which no experience can ever be adequate。 Now it

has been abundantly proved that all a priori synthetical cognition

is possible only as the expression of the formal conditions of a

possible experience; and that the validity of all principles depends

upon their immanence in the field of experience; that is; their

relation to objects of empirical cognition or phenomena。 Thus all

transcendental procedure in reference to speculative theology is

without result。

  If any one prefers doubting the conclusiveness of the proofs of

our analytic to losing the persuasion of the validity of these old and

time honoured arguments; he at least cannot decline answering the

question… how he can pass the limits of all possible experience by the

help of mere ideas。 If he talks of new arguments; or of improvements

upon old arguments; I request him to spare me。 There is certainly no

great choice in this sphere of discussion; as all speculative

arguments must at last look for support to the ontological; and I

have; therefore; very little to fear from the argumentative

fecundity of the dogmatical defenders of a non…sensuous reason。

Without looking upon myself as a remarkably combative person; I

shall not decline the challenge to detect the fallacy and destroy

the pretensions of every attempt of speculative theology。 And yet

the hope of better fortune never deserts those who are accustomed to

the dogmatical mode of procedure。 I shall; therefore; restrict

myself to the simple and equitable demand that such reasoners will

demonstrate; from the nature of the human mind as well as from that of

the other sources of knowledge; how we are to proceed to extend our

cognition completely a priori; and to carry it to that point where

experience abandons us; and no means exist of guaranteeing the

objective reality of our conceptions。 In whatever way the

understanding may have attained to a conception; the existence of

the object of the conception cannot be discovered in it by analysis;

because the cognition of the existence of the object depends upon

the object's being posited and given in itself apart from the

conception。 But it is utterly impossible to go beyond our

conception; without the aid of experience… which presents to the

mind nothing but phenomena; or to attain by the help of mere

conceptions to a conviction of the existence of new kinds of objects

or supernatural beings。

  But although pure speculative reason is far from sufficient to

demonstrate the existence of a Supreme Being; it is of the highest

utility in correcting our conception of this being… on the supposition

that we can attain to the cognition of it by some other means… in

making it consistent with itself and with all other conceptions of

intelligible objects; clearing it from all that is incompatible with

the conception of an ens summun; and eliminating from it all

limitations or admixtures of empirical elements。

  Transcendental theology is still therefore; notwithstanding its

objective insufficiency; of importance in a negative respect; it is

useful as a test of the procedure of reason when engaged with pure

ideas; no other than a transcendental standard being in this case

admissible。 For if; from a practical point of view; the hypoth

返回目录 上一页 下一页 回到顶部 0 0

你可能喜欢的