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！
apart from the world of sense （as an ens extramundanum）； for otherwise
it would be subject to the phenomenal law of contingency and
dependence。
In relation to the present problem； therefore； the regulative
principle of reason is that everything in the sensuous world possesses
an empirically conditioned existence… that no property of the sensuous
world possesses unconditioned necessity… that we are bound to
expect； and； so far as is possible； to seek for the empirical
condition of every member in the series of conditions… and that
there is no sufficient reason to justify us in deducing any
existence from a condition which lies out of and beyond the
empirical series； or in regarding any existence as independent and
self…subsistent； although this should not prevent us from
recognizing the possibility of the whole series being based upon a
being which is intelligible； and for this reason free from all
empirical conditions。
But it has been far from my intention； in these remarks； to prove
the existence of this unconditioned and necessary being； or even to
evidence the possibility of a purely intelligible condition of the
existence or all sensuous phenomena。 As bounds were set to reason；
to prevent it from leaving the guiding thread of empirical
conditions and losing itself in transcendent theories which are
incapable of concrete presentation； so it was my purpose； on the other
band； to set bounds to the law of the purely empirical
understanding； and to protest against any attempts on its part at
deciding on the possibility of things； or declaring the existence of
the intelligible to be impossible； merely on the ground that it is not
available for the explanation and exposition of phenomena。 It has been
shown； at the same time； that the contingency of all the phenomena
of nature and their empirical conditions is quite consistent with
the arbitrary hypothesis of a necessary； although purely
intelligible condition； that no real contradiction exists between them
and that； consequently； both may be true。 The existence of such an
absolutely necessary being may be impossible； but this can never be
demonstrated from the universal contingency and dependence of sensuous
phenomena； nor from the principle which forbids us to discontinue
the series at some member of it； or to seek for its cause in some
sphere of existence beyond the world of nature。 Reason goes its way in
the empirical world； and follows； too； its peculiar path in the sphere
of the transcendental。
The sensuous world contains nothing but phenomena； which are mere
representations； and always sensuously conditioned； things in
themselves are not； and cannot be； objects to us。 It is not to be
wondered at； therefore； that we are not justified in leaping from some
member of an empirical series beyond the world of sense； as if
empirical representations were things in themselves； existing apart
from their transcendental ground in the human mind； and the cause of
whose existence may be sought out of the empirical series。 This
would certainly be the case with contingent things； but it cannot be
with mere representations of things； the contingency of which is
itself merely a phenomenon and can relate to no other regress than
that which determines phenomena； that is； the empirical。 But to
cogitate an intelligible ground of phenomena； as free； moreover；
from the contingency of the latter； conflicts neither with the
unlimited nature of the empirical regress； nor with the plete
contingency of phenomena。 And the demonstration of this was the only
thing necessary for the solution of this apparent antinomy。 For if the
condition of every conditioned… as regards its existence… is sensuous；
and for this reason a part of the same series； it must be itself
conditioned； as was shown in the antithesis of the fourth antinomy。
The embarrassments into which a reason； which postulates the
unconditioned； necessarily falls； must； therefore； continue to
exist； or the unconditioned must be placed in the sphere of the
intelligible。 In this way； its necessity does not require； nor does it
even permit； the presence of an empirical condition： and it is；
consequently； unconditionally necessary。
The empirical employment of reason is not affected by the assumption
of a purely intelligible being； it continues its operations on the
principle of the contingency of all phenomena； proceeding from
empirical conditions to still higher and higher conditions； themselves
empirical。 just as little does this regulative principle exclude the
assumption of an intelligible cause； when the question regards
merely the pure employment of reason… in relation to ends or aims。
For； in this case； an intelligible cause signifies merely the
transcendental and to us unknown ground of the possibility of sensuous
phenomena； and its existence； necessary and independent of all
sensuous conditions； is not inconsistent with the contingency of
phenomena； or with the unlimited possibility of regress which exists
in the series of empirical conditions。
Concluding Remarks on the Antinomy of Pure Reason。
So long as the object of our rational conceptions is the totality of
conditions in the world of phenomena； and the satisfaction； from
this source； of the requirements of reason； so long are our ideas
transcendental and cosmological。 But when we set the unconditioned…
which is the aim of all our inquiries… in a sphere which lies out of
the world of sense and possible experience； our ideas bee
transcendent。 They are then not merely serviceable towards the
pletion of the exercise of reason （which remains an idea； never
executed； but always to be pursued）； they detach themselves pletely
from experience and construct for themselves objects； the material
of which has not been presented by experience； and the objective
reality of which is not based upon the pletion of the empirical
series； but upon pure a priori conceptions。 The intelligible object of
these transcendent ideas may be conceded； as a transcendental
object。 But we cannot cogitate it as a thing determinable by certain
distinct predicates relating to its internal nature； for it has no