太子爷小说网 > 英语电子书 > the critique of pure reason >

第42节

the critique of pure reason-第42节

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 perceptions themselves; because apprehension is only a placing

together of the manifold of empirical intuition; and no representation

of a necessity in the connected existence of the phenomena which

apprehension brings together; is to be discovered therein。 But as

experience is a cognition of objects by means of perceptions; it

follows that the relation of the existence of the existence of the

manifold must be represented in experience not as it is put together

in time; but as it is objectively in time。 And as time itself cannot

be perceived; the determination of the existence of objects in time

can only take place by means of their connection in time in general;

consequently only by means of a priori connecting conceptions。 Now

as these conceptions always possess the character of necessity;

experience is possible only by means of a representation of the

necessary connection of perception。

  The three modi of time are permanence; succession; and

coexistence。 Accordingly; there are three rules of all relations of

time in phenomena; according to which the existence of every

phenomenon is determined in respect of the unity of all time; and

these antecede all experience and render it possible。

  The general principle of all three analogies rests on the

necessary unity of apperception in relation to all possible

empirical consciousness (perception) at every time; consequently; as

this unity lies a priori at the foundation of all mental operations;

the principle rests on the synthetical unity of all phenomena

according to their relation in time。 For the original apperception

relates to our internal sense (the complex of all representations);

and indeed relates a priori to its form; that is to say; the

relation of the manifold empirical consciousness in time。 Now this

manifold must be combined in original apperception according to

relations of time… a necessity imposed by the a priori

transcendental unity of apperception; to which is subjected all that

can belong to my (i。e。; my own) cognition; and therefore all that

can become an object for me。 This synthetical and a priori

determined unity in relation of perceptions in time is therefore the

rule: 〃All empirical determinations of time must be subject to rules

of the general determination of time〃; and the analogies of

experience; of which we are now about to treat; must be rules of

this nature。

  These principles have this peculiarity; that they do not concern

phenomena; and the synthesis of the empirical intuition thereof; but

merely the existence of phenomena and their relation to each other

in regard to this existence。 Now the mode in which we apprehend a

thing in a phenomenon can be determined a priori in such a manner that

the rule of its synthesis can give; that is to say; can produce this a

priori intuition in every empirical example。 But the existence of

phenomena cannot be known a priori; and although we could arrive by

this path at a conclusion of the fact of some existence; we could

not cognize that existence determinately; that is to say; we should be

incapable of anticipating in what respect the empirical intuition of

it would be distinguishable from that of others。

  The two principles above mentioned; which I called mathematical;

in consideration of the fact of their authorizing the application of

mathematic phenomena; relate to these phenomena only in regard to

their possibility; and instruct us how phenomena; as far as regards

their intuition or the real in their perception; can be generated

according to the rules of a mathematical synthesis。 Consequently;

numerical quantities; and with them the determination of a

phenomenon as a quantity; can be employed in the one case as well as

in the other。 Thus; for example; out of 200;000 illuminations by the

moon; I might compose and give a priori; that is construct; the degree

of our sensations of the sunlight。 We may therefore entitle these

two principles constitutive。

  The case is very different with those principles whose province it

is to subject the existence of phenomena to rules a priori。 For as

existence does not admit of being constructed; it is clear that they

must only concern the relations of existence and be merely

regulative principles。 In this case; therefore; neither axioms nor

anticipations are to be thought of。 Thus; if a perception is given us;

in a certain relation of time to other (although undetermined)

perceptions; we cannot then say a priori; what and how great (in

quantity) the other perception necessarily connected with the former

is; but only how it is connected; quoad its existence; in this given

modus of time。 Analogies in philosophy mean something very different

from that which they represent in mathematics。 In the latter they

are formulae; which enounce the equality of two relations of quantity;

and are always constitutive; so that if two terms of the proportion

are given; the third is also given; that is; can be constructed by the

aid of these formulae。 But in philosophy; analogy is not the

equality of two quantitative but of two qualitative relations。 In this

case; from three given terms; I can give a priori and cognize the

relation to a fourth member; but not this fourth term itself; although

I certainly possess a rule to guide me in the search for this fourth

term in experience; and a mark to assist me in discovering it。 An

analogy of experience is therefore only a rule according to which

unity of experience must arise out of perceptions in respect to

objects (phenomena) not as a constitutive; but merely as a

regulative principle。 The same holds good also of the postulates of

empirical thought in general; which relate to the synthesis of mere

intuition (which concerns the form of phenomena); the synthesis of

perception (which concerns the matter of phenomena); and the synthesis

of experience (which concerns the relation of these perceptions)。

For they are only regulative principles; and clearly distinguishable

from the mathematical; which are constitutive; not indeed in regard to

the certainty which both possess a priori; but in the mode of evidence

thereof; consequently also in the manner of demonstration。

  But what has been observed of all synthetical propositions; and must

be particularly remarked in this place; is this; that these

analogies possess significance and validity; not as principles of

the transcendental; but only as principles of the empirical use of the

understanding; and their truth can therefore be proved only as such;

and that consequently the phenomena must not be subjoined directly

under the categories; but only under their schemata。 For if the

objects to which those principles must be applied were things in

themselves; it would be quite impossible to cognize aught concerning

them synthetically a priori。 But they are nothing but phenomena; a

complete knowledge of which… a knowledge to which all principles a

priori must at last relate… is the only possible experience。 It

follows that these principles can have nothing else for their aim than

the conditions of the empirical cognition in the unity of synthesis of

phenomena。 But this synthesis is cogitated only in the schema of the

pure conception of the understanding; of whose unity; as that of a

synthesis in general; the category contains the function

unrestricted by any sensuous condition。 These principles will

therefore authorize us to connect phenomena according to an analogy;

with the logical and universal unity of conceptions; and

consequently to employ the categories in the principles themselves;

but in the application of them to experience; we shall use only

their schemata; as the key to their proper application; instead of the

categories; or rather the latter as restricting conditions; under

the title of 〃formulae〃 of the former。



                     A。 FIRST ANALOGY。



           Principle of the Permanence of Substance。



   In all changes of phenomena; substance is permanent; and the

   quantum thereof in nature is neither increased nor diminished。



                          PROOF。



  All phenomena exist in time; wherein alone as substratum; that is;

as the permanent form of the internal intuition; coexistence and

succession can be represented。 Consequently time; in which all changes

of phenomena must be cogitated; remains and changes not; because it is

that in which succession and coexistence can be represented only as

determinations thereof。 Now; time in itself cannot be an object of

perception。 It follows that in objects of perception; that is; in

phenomena; there must be found a substratum which represents time in

general; and in which all change or coexistence can be perceived by

means of the relation of phenomena to it。 But the substratum of all

reality; that is; of all that pertains to the existence of things;

is substance; all that pertains to existence can be cogitated only

as a determinat

返回目录 上一页 下一页 回到顶部 1 1

你可能喜欢的