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！
sum total of that which is given in phenomena； considered as an
absolute whole； is itself a perception… and we cannot therefore seek
for explanations of this whole beyond itself； in other perceptions。
The explanation of this whole is the proper object of the
transcendental problems of pure reason。
Although； therefore； the solution of these problems is
unattainable through experience； we must not permit ourselves to say
that it is uncertain how the object of our inquiries is constituted。
For the object is in our own mind and cannot be discovered in
experience； and we have only to take care that our thoughts are
consistent with each other； and to avoid falling into the amphiboly of
regarding our idea as a representation of an object empirically given；
and therefore to be cognized according to the laws of experience。 A
dogmatical solution is therefore not only unsatisfactory but
impossible。 The critical solution； which may be a perfectly certain
one； does not consider the question objectively； but proceeds by
inquiring into the basis of the cognition upon which the question
rests。
SECTION V。 Sceptical Exposition of the Cosmological Problems
presented in the four Transcendental Ideas。
We should be quite willing to desist from the demand of a dogmatical
answer to our questions； if we understood beforehand that； be the
answer what it may； it would only serve to increase our ignorance；
to throw us from one inprehensibility into another； from one
obscurity into another still greater； and perhaps lead us into
irreconcilable contradictions。 If a dogmatical affirmative or negative
answer is demanded； is it at all prudent to set aside the probable
grounds of a solution which lie before us and to take into
consideration what advantage we shall gain； if the answer is to favour
the one side or the other？ If it happens that in both cases the answer
is mere nonsense； we have in this an irresistible summons to institute
a critical investigation of the question； for the purpose of
discovering whether it is based on a groundless presupposition and
relates to an idea； the falsity of which would be more easily
exposed in its application and consequences than in the mere
representation of its content。 This is the great utility of the
sceptical mode of treating the questions addressed by pure reason to
itself。 By this method we easily rid ourselves of the confusions of
dogmatism； and establish in its place a temperate criticism； which； as
a genuine cathartic； will successfully remove the presumptuous notions
of philosophy and their consequence… the vain pretension to
universal science。
If； then； I could understand the nature of a cosmological idea and
perceive； before I entered on the discussion of the subject at all；
that； whatever side of the question regarding the unconditioned of the
regressive synthesis of phenomena it favoured… it must either be too
great or too small for every conception of the understanding… I
would be able to prehend how the idea； which relates to an object
of experience… an experience which must be adequate to and in
accordance with a possible conception of the understanding… must be
pletely void and without significance； inasmuch as its object is
inadequate； consider it as we may。 And this is actually the case
with all cosmological conceptions； which； for the reason above
mentioned； involve reason； so long as it remains attached to them；
in an unavoidable antinomy。 For suppose：
First； that the world has no beginning… in this case it is too large
for our conception； for this conception； which consists in a
successive regress； cannot overtake the whole eternity that has
elapsed。 Grant that it has a beginning； it is then too small for the
conception of the understanding。 For； as a beginning presupposes a
time preceding； it cannot be unconditioned； and the law of the
empirical employment of the understanding imposes the necessity of
looking for a higher condition of time； and the world is； therefore；
evidently too small for this law。
The same is the case with the double answer to the question
regarding the extent； in space； of the world。 For； if it is infinite
and unlimited； it must be too large for every possible empirical
conception。 If it is finite and limited； we have a right to ask： 〃What
determines these limits？〃 Void space is not a self…subsistent
correlate of things； and cannot be a final condition… and still less
an empirical condition； forming a part of a possible experience。 For
how can we have any experience or perception of an absolute void？
But the absolute totality of the empirical synthesis requires that the
unconditioned be an empirical conception。 Consequently； a finite world
is too small for our conception。
Secondly； if every phenomenon （matter） in space consists of an
infinite number of parts； the regress of the division is always too
great for our conception； and if the division of space must cease with
some member of the division （the simple）； it is too small for the idea
of the unconditioned。 For the member at which we have discontinued our
division still admits a regress to many more parts contained in the
object。
Thirdly； suppose that every event in the world happens in accordance
with the laws of nature； the causality of a cause must itself be an
event and necessitates a regress to a still higher cause； and
consequently the unceasing prolongation of the series of conditions
a parte priori。 Operative nature is therefore too large for every
conception we can form in the synthesis of cosmical events。
If we admit the existence of spontaneously produced events； that is；
of free agency； we are driven； in our search for sufficient reasons；
on an unavoidable law of nature and are pelled to appeal to the
empirical law of causality； and we find that any such totality of
connection in our synthesis is too small for our necessary empirical
conception。
Fourthly； if we assume the existence of an absolutely necessary
being… whether it be the world or something in the world； or the cause
of the world… we must place it in a time at an infinite distance
from any given moment； for； other