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

第38章

the critique of pure reason-第38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!




objects can be cogitated。 Either experience makes these conceptions

possible; or the conceptions make experience possible。 The former of

these statements will not bold good with respect to the categories

(nor in regard to pure sensuous intuition); for they are a priori

conceptions; and therefore independent of experience。 The assertion of

an empirical origin would attribute to them a sort of generatio

aequivoca。 Consequently; nothing remains but to adopt the second

alternative (which presents us with a system; as it were; of the

epigenesis of pure reason); namely; that on the part of the

understanding the categories do contain the grounds of the possibility

of all experience。 But with respect to the questions how they make

experience possible; and what are the principles of the possibility

thereof with which they present us in their application to

phenomena; the following section on the transcendental exercise of the

faculty of judgement will inform the reader。

  It is quite possible that someone may propose a species of

preformation…system of pure reason… a middle way between the two… to

wit; that the categories are neither innate and first a priori

principles of cognition; nor derived from experience; but are merely

subjective aptitudes for thought implanted in us contemporaneously

with our existence; which were so ordered and disposed by our Creator;

that their exercise perfectly harmonizes with the laws of nature which

regulate experience。 Now; not to mention that with such an

hypothesis it is impossible to say at what point we must stop in the

employment of predetermined aptitudes; the fact that the categories

would in this case entirely lose that character of necessity which

is essentially involved in the very conception of them; is a

conclusive objection to it。 The conception of cause; for example;

which expresses the necessity of an effect under a presupposed

condition; would be false; if it rested only upon such an arbitrary

subjective necessity of uniting certain empirical representations

according to such a rule of relation。 I could not then say… 〃The

effect is connected with its cause in the object (that is;

necessarily);〃 but only; 〃I am so constituted that I can think this

representation as so connected; and not otherwise。〃 Now this is just

what the sceptic wants。 For in this case; all our knowledge; depending

on the supposed objective validity of our judgement; is nothing but

mere illusion; nor would there be wanting people who would deny any

such subjective necessity in respect to themselves; though they must

feel it。 At all events; we could not dispute with any one on that

which merely depends on the manner in which his subject is organized。



             Short view of the above Deduction。



  The foregoing deduction is an exposition of the pure conceptions

of the understanding (and with them of all theoretical a priori

cognition); as principles of the possibility of experience; but of

experience as the determination of all phenomena in space and time

in general… of experience; finally; from the principle of the original

synthetical unity of apperception; as the form of the understanding in

relation to time and space as original forms of sensibility。



  I consider the division by paragraphs to be necessary only up to

this point; because we had to treat of the elementary conceptions。

As we now proceed to the exposition of the employment of these; I

shall not designate the chapters in this manner any further。

                         BOOK II。



                 Analytic of Principles。



  General logic is constructed upon a plan which coincides exactly

with the division of the higher faculties of cognition。 These are;

understanding; judgement; and reason。 This science; accordingly;

treats in its analytic of conceptions; judgements; and conclusions

in exact correspondence with the functions and order of those mental

powers which we include generally under the generic denomination of

understanding。

  As this merely formal logic makes abstraction of all content of

cognition; whether pure or empirical; and occupies itself with the

mere form of thought (discursive cognition); it must contain in its

analytic a canon for reason。 For the form of reason has its law;

which; without taking into consideration the particular nature of

the cognition about which it is employed; can be discovered a

priori; by the simple analysis of the action of reason into its

momenta。

  Transcendental logic; limited as it is to a determinate content;

that of pure a priori cognitions; to wit; cannot imitate general logic

in this division。 For it is evident that the transcendental employment

of reason is not objectively valid; and therefore does not belong to

the logic of truth (that is; to analytic); but as a logic of illusion;

occupies a particular department in the scholastic system under the

name of transcendental dialectic。

  Understanding and judgement accordingly possess in transcendental

logic a canon of objectively valid; and therefore true exercise; and

are comprehended in the analytical department of that logic。 But

reason; in her endeavours to arrive by a priori means at some true

statement concerning objects and to extend cognition beyond the bounds

of possible experience; is altogether dialectic; and her illusory

assertions cannot be constructed into a canon such as an analytic

ought to contain。

  Accordingly; the analytic of principles will be merely a canon for

the faculty of judgement; for the instruction of this faculty in its

application to phenomena of the pure conceptions of the understanding;

which contain the necessary condition for the establishment of a

priori laws。 On this account; although the subject of the following

chapters is the especial principles of understanding; I shall make use

of the term Doctrine of the faculty of judgement; in order to define

more particularly my present purpose。



  INTRODUCTION。 Of the Transcendental Faculty of judgement in General。



  If understanding in general be defined as the faculty of laws or

rules; the faculty of judgement may be termed the faculty of

subsumption under these rules; that is; of distinguishing whether this

or that does or does not stand under a given rule (casus datae legis)。

General logic contains no directions or precepts for the faculty of

judgement; nor can it contain any such。 For as it makes abstraction of

all content of cognition; no duty is left for it; except that of

exposing analytically the mere form of cognition in conceptions;

judgements; and conclusions; and of thereby establishing formal

rules for all exercise of the understanding。 Now if this logic

wished to give some general direction how we should subsume under

these rules; that is; how we should distinguish whether this or that

did or did not stand under them; this again could not be done

otherwise than by means of a rule。 But this rule; precisely because it

is a rule; requires for itself direction from the faculty of

judgement。 Thus; it is evident that the understanding is capable of

being instructed by rules; but that the judgement is a peculiar

talent; which does not; and cannot require tuition; but only exercise。

This faculty is therefore the specific quality of the so…called mother

wit; the want of which no scholastic discipline can compensate。

  For although education may furnish; and; as it were; engraft upon

a limited understanding rules borrowed from other minds; yet the power

of employing these rules correctly must belong to the pupil himself;

and no rule which we can prescribe to him with this purpose is; in the

absence or deficiency of this gift of nature; secure from misuse。* A

physician therefore; a judge or a statesman; may have in his head many

admirable pathological; juridical; or political rules; in a degree

that may enable him to be a profound teacher in his particular

science; and yet in the application of

返回目录 上一页 下一页 回到顶部 0 0

你可能喜欢的