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

第82章

the critique of pure reason-第82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!




the rationalist is bold enough to construct; on the mere authority

of the faculty of thought… without any intuition; whereby an object is

given… a self…subsistent being; merely because the unity of

apperception in thought cannot allow him to believe it a composite

being; instead of declaring; as he ought to do; that he is unable to

explain the possibility of a thinking nature; what ought to hinder the

materialist; with as complete an independence of experience; to employ

the principle of the rationalist in a directly opposite manner…

still preserving the formal unity required by his opponent?



  If; now; we take the above propositions… as they must be accepted as

valid for all thinking beings in the system of rational psychology… in

synthetical connection; and proceed; from the category of relation;

with the proposition: 〃All thinking beings are; as such;

substances;〃 backwards through the series; till the circle is

completed; we come at last to their existence; of which; in this

system of rational psychology; substances are held to be conscious;

independently of external things; nay; it is asserted that; in

relation to the permanence which is a necessary characteristic of

substance; they can of themselves determine external things。 It

follows that idealism… at least problematical idealism; is perfectly

unavoidable in this rationalistic system。 And; if the existence of

outward things is not held to be requisite to the determination of the

existence of a substance in time; the existence of these outward

things at all; is a gratuitous assumption which remains without the

possibility of a proof。

  But if we proceed analytically… the 〃I think〃 as a proposition

containing in itself an existence as given; consequently modality

being the principle… and dissect this proposition; in order to

ascertain its content; and discover whether and how this Ego

determines its existence in time and space without the aid of anything

external; the propositions of rationalistic psychology would not begin

with the conception of a thinking being; but with a reality; and the

properties of a thinking being in general would be deduced from the

mode in which this reality is cogitated; after everything empirical

had been abstracted; as is shown in the following table:



                        1

                      I think;



            2                             3

        as Subject;              as simple Subject;



                        4

               as identical Subject;

           in every state of my thought。



  Now; inasmuch as it is not determined in this second proposition;

whether I can exist and be cogitated only as subject; and not also

as a predicate of another being; the conception of a subject is here

taken in a merely logical sense; and it remains undetermined;

whether substance is to be cogitated under the conception or not。

But in the third proposition; the absolute unity of apperception…

the simple Ego in the representation to which all connection and

separation; which constitute thought; relate; is of itself

important; even although it presents us with no information about

the constitution or subsistence of the subject。 Apperception is

something real; and the simplicity of its nature is given in the

very fact of its possibility。 Now in space there is nothing real

that is at the same time simple; for points; which are the only simple

things in space; are merely limits; but not constituent parts of

space。 From this follows the impossibility of a definition on the

basis of materialism of the constitution of my Ego as a merely

thinking subject。 But; because my existence is considered in the first

proposition as given; for it does not mean; 〃Every thinking being

exists〃 (for this would be predicating of them absolute necessity);

but only; 〃I exist thinking〃; the proposition is quite empirical;

and contains the determinability of my existence merely in relation to

my representations in time。 But as I require for this purpose

something that is permanent; such as is not given in internal

intuition; the mode of my existence; whether as substance or as

accident; cannot be determined by means of this simple

self…consciousness。 Thus; if materialism is inadequate to explain

the mode in which I exist; spiritualism is likewise as insufficient;

and the conclusion is that we are utterly unable to attain to any

knowledge of the constitution of the soul; in so far as relates to the

possibility of its existence apart from external objects。

  And; indeed; how should it be possible; merely by the aid of the

unity of consciousness… which we cognize only for the reason that it

is indispensable to the possibility of experience… to pass the

bounds of experience (our existence in this life); and to extend our

cognition to the nature of all thinking beings by means of the

empirical… but in relation to every sort of intuition; perfectly

undetermined… proposition; 〃I think〃?

  There does not then exist any rational psychology as a doctrine

furnishing any addition to our knowledge of ourselves。 It is nothing

more than a discipline; which sets impassable limits to speculative

reason in this region of thought; to prevent it; on the one hand; from

throwing itself into the arms of a soulless materialism; and; on the

other; from losing itself in the mazes of a baseless spiritualism。

It teaches us to consider this refusal of our reason to give any

satisfactory answer to questions which reach beyond the limits of this

our human life; as a hint to abandon fruitless speculation; and to

direct; to a practical use; our knowledge of ourselves… which;

although applicable only to objects of experience; receives its

principles from a higher source; and regulates its procedure as if our

destiny reached far beyond the boundaries of experience and life。

  From all this it is evident that rational psychology has its

origin in a mere misunderstanding。 The unity of consciousness; which

lies at the basis of the categories; is considered to be an

intuition of the subject as an object; and the category of substance

is applied to the intuition。 But this unity is nothing more than the

unity in thought; by which no object is given; to which therefore

the category of substance… which always presupposes a given intuition…

cannot be applied。 Consequently; the subject cannot be cognized。 The

subject of the categories cannot; therefore; for the very reason

that it cogitates these; frame any conception of itself as an object

of the categories; for; to cogitate these; it must lay at the

foundation its own pure self…consciousness… the very thing that it

wishes to explain and describe。 In like manner; the subject; in

which the representation of time has its basis; cannot determine;

for this very reason; its own existence in time。 Now; if the latter is

impossible; the former; as an attempt to determine itself by means

of the categories as a thinking being in general; is no less so。*



  *The 〃I think〃 is; as has been already stated; an empirical

proposition; and contains the proposition; 〃I exist。〃 But I cannot

say; 〃Everything; which thinks; exists〃; for in this case the property

of thought would constitute all beings possessing it; necessary

being Hence my existence cannot be considered as an inference from the

proposition; 〃I think;〃 as Descartes maintained… because in this

case the major premiss; 〃Everything; which thinks; exists;〃 must

precede… but the two propositions are identical。 The proposition; 〃I

think;〃 expresses an undetermined empirical intuition; that perception

(proving consequently that sensation; which must belong to

sensibility; lies at the foundation of this proposition); but it

precedes experience; whose province it is to determine an object of

perception by means of the categories in relation to time; and

existence in this proposition is not a category; as it does not

apply to an undetermined given o

返回目录 上一页 下一页 回到顶部 0 0

你可能喜欢的