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

第100章

the critique of pure reason-第100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!




I must stop; and at what point in the regress I am to find this

member… is transcendental; and hence necessarily incognizable。 But

with this we have not to do; our concern is only with the law of

progression in experience; in which objects; that is; phenomena; are

given。 It is a matter of indifference; whether I say; 〃I may in the

progress of experience discover stars; at a hundred times greater

distance than the most distant of those now visible;〃 or; 〃Stars at

this distance may be met in space; although no one has; or ever will

discover them。〃 For; if they are given as things in themselves;

without any relation to possible experience; they are for me

non…existent; consequently; are not objects; for they are not

contained in the regressive series of experience。 But; if these

phenomena must be employed in the construction or support of the

cosmological idea of an absolute whole; and when we are discussing a

question that oversteps the limits of possible experience; the

proper distinction of the different theories of the reality of

sensuous objects is of great importance; in order to avoid the

illusion which must necessarily arise from the misinterpretation of

our empirical conceptions。



    SECTION VII。 Critical Solution of the Cosmological Problem。



  The antinomy of pure reason is based upon the following

dialectical argument: 〃If that which is conditioned is given; the

whole series of its conditions is also given; but sensuous objects are

given as conditioned; consequently。。。〃 This syllogism; the major of

which seems so natural and evident; introduces as many cosmological

ideas as there are different kinds of conditions in the synthesis of

phenomena; in so far as these conditions constitute a series。 These

ideas require absolute totality in the series; and thus place reason

in inextricable embarrassment。 Before proceeding to expose the fallacy

in this dialectical argument; it will be necessary to have a correct

understanding of certain conceptions that appear in it。

  In the first place; the following proposition is evident; and

indubitably certain: 〃If the conditioned is given; a regress in the

series of all its conditions is thereby imperatively required。〃 For

the very conception of a conditioned is a conception of something

related to a condition; and; if this condition is itself

conditioned; to another condition… and so on through all the members

of the series。 This proposition is; therefore; analytical and has

nothing to fear from transcendental criticism。 It is a logical

postulate of reason: to pursue; as far as possible; the connection

of a conception with its conditions。

  If; in the second place; both the conditioned and the condition

are things in themselves; and if the former is given; not only is

the regress to the latter requisite; but the latter is really given

with the former。 Now; as this is true of all the members of the

series; the entire series of conditions; and with them the

unconditioned; is at the same time given in the very fact of the

conditioned; the existence of which is possible only in and through

that series; being given。 In this case; the synthesis of the

conditioned with its condition; is a synthesis of the understanding

merely; which represents things as they are; without regarding whether

and how we can cognize them。 But if I have to do with phenomena;

which; in their character of mere representations; are not given; if I

do not attain to a cognition of them (in other words; to themselves;

for they are nothing more than empirical cognitions); I am not

entitled to say: 〃If the conditioned is given; all its conditions

(as phenomena) are also given。〃 I cannot; therefore; from the fact

of a conditioned being given; infer the absolute totality of the

series of its conditions。 For phenomena are nothing but an empirical

synthesis in apprehension or perception; and are therefore given

only in it。 Now; in speaking of phenomena it does not follow that;

if the conditioned is given; the synthesis which constitutes its

empirical condition is also thereby given and presupposed; such a

synthesis can be established only by an actual regress in the series

of conditions。 But we are entitled to say in this case that a

regress to the conditions of a conditioned; in other words; that a

continuous empirical synthesis is enjoined; that; if the conditions

are not given; they are at least required; and that we are certain

to discover the conditions in this regress。

  We can now see that the major; in the above cosmological

syllogism; takes the conditioned in the transcendental signification

which it has in the pure category; while the minor speaks of it in the

empirical signification which it has in the category as applied to

phenomena。 There is; therefore; a dialectical fallacy in the

syllogism… a sophisma figurae dictionis。 But this fallacy is not a

consciously devised one; but a perfectly natural illusion of the

common reason of man。 For; when a thing is given as conditioned; we

presuppose in the major its conditions and their series;

unperceived; as it were; and unseen; because this is nothing more than

the logical requirement of complete and satisfactory premisses for a

given conclusion。 In this case; time is altogether left out in the

connection of the conditioned with the condition; they are supposed to

be given in themselves; and contemporaneously。 It is; moreover; just

as natural to regard phenomena (in the minor) as things in

themselves and as objects presented to the pure understanding; as in

the major; in which complete abstraction was made of all conditions of

intuition。 But it is under these conditions alone that objects are

given。 Now we overlooked a remarkable distinction between the

conceptions。 The synthesis of the conditioned with its condition;

and the complete series of the latter (in the major) are not limited

by time; and do not contain the conception of succession。 On the

contrary; the empirical synthesis and the series of conditions in

the phenomenal world… subsumed in the minor… are necessarily

successive and given in time alone。 It follows that I cannot

presuppose in the minor; as I did in the major; the absolute

totality of the synthesis and of the series therein represented; for

in the major all the members of the series are given as things in

themselves… without any limitations or conditions of time; while in

the minor they are possible only in and through a successive

regress; which cannot exist; except it be actually carried into

execution in the world of phenomena。

  After this proof of the viciousness of the argument commonly

employed in maintaining cosmological assertions; both parties may

now be justly dismissed; as advancing claims without grounds or title。

But the process has not been ended by convincing them that one or both

were in the wrong and had maintained an assertion which was without

valid grounds of proof。 Nothing seems to be clearer than that; if

one maintains: 〃The world has a beginning;〃 and another: 〃The world

has no beginning;〃 one of the two must be right。 But it is likewise

clear that; if the evidence on both sides is equal; it is impossible

to discover on what side the truth lies; and the controversy

continues; although the parties have been recommended to peace

before the tribunal of reason。 There remains; then; no other means

of settling the question than to convince the parties; who refute each

other with such conclusiveness and ability; that they are disputing

about nothing; and that a transcendental illusion has been mocking

them with visions of reality where there is none。 The mode of

adjusting a dispute which cannot be decided upon its own merits; we

shall now proceed to lay before our readers。



  Zeno of Elea; a subtle dialectician; was severely reprimanded by

Plato as a sophist; who; merely from the base motive of exhibiting his

skill in discussion; maintained and subverted the same propositi

返回目录 上一页 下一页 回到顶部 0 0

你可能喜欢的