the critique of pure reason- 第69部分

three　modes　of　conclusion；　by　which　reason　attains　to　cognitions　on

principles；　and　that　in　all　it　is　the　business　of　reason　to　ascend

from　the　conditioned　synthesis；　beyond　which　the　understanding　never

proceeds；　to　the　unconditioned　which　the　understanding　never　can

reach。

　　Now　the　most　general　relations　which　can　exist　in　our

representations　are：　1st；　the　relation　to　the　subject；　2nd；　the

relation　to　objects；　either　as　phenomena；　or　as　objects　of　thought

in　general。　If　we　connect　this　subdivision　with　the　main　division；　all

the　relations　of　our　representations；　of　which　we　can　form　either　a

conception　or　an　idea；　are　threefold：　1。　The　relation　to　the

subject；　2。　The　relation　to　the　manifold　of　the　object　as　a

phenomenon；　3。　The　relation　to　all　things　in　general。

　　Now　all　pure　conceptions　have　to　do　in　general　with　the

synthetical　unity　of　representations；　conceptions　of　pure　reason

（transcendental　ideas）；　on　the　other　hand；　with　the　unconditional

synthetical　unity　of　all　conditions。　It　follows　that　all

transcendental　ideas　arrange　themselves　in　three　classes；　the　first　of

which　contains　the　absolute　（unconditioned）　unity　of　the　thinking

subject；　the　second　the　absolute　unity　of　the　series　of　the　conditions

of　a　phenomenon；　the　third　the　absolute　unity　of　the　condition　of

all　objects　of　thought　in　general。

　　The　thinking　subject　is　the　object…matter　of　Psychology；　the　sum

total　of　all　phenomena　（the　world）　is　the　object…matter　of

Cosmology；　and　the　thing　which　contains　the　highest　condition　of　the

possibility　of　all　that　is　cogitable　（the　being　of　all　beings）　is

the　object…matter　of　all　Theology。　Thus　pure　reason　presents　us　with

the　idea　of　a　transcendental　doctrine　of　the　soul　（psychologia

rationalis）；　of　a　transcendental　science　of　the　world　（cosmologia

rationalis）；　and　finally　of　a　transcendental　doctrine　of　God

（theologia　transcendentalis）。　Understanding　cannot　originate　even

the　outline　of　any　of　these　sciences；　even　when　connected　with　the

highest　logical　use　of　reason；　that　is；　all　cogitable　syllogisms…

for　the　purpose　of　proceeding　from　one　object　（phenomenon）　to　all

others；　even　to　the　utmost　limits　of　the　empirical　synthesis。　They

are；　on　the　contrary；　pure　and　genuine　products；　or　problems；　of

pure　reason。

　　What　modi　of　the　pure　conceptions　of　reason　these　transcendental

ideas　are　will　be　fully　exposed　in　the　following　chapter。　They

follow　the　guiding　thread　of　the　categories。　For　pure　reason　never

relates　immediately　to　objects；　but　to　the　conceptions　of　these

contained　in　the　understanding。　In　like　manner；　it　will　be　made

manifest　in　the　detailed　explanation　of　these　ideas…　how　reason；

merely　through　the　synthetical　use　of　the　same　function　which　it

employs　in　a　categorical　syllogism；　necessarily　attains　to　the

conception　of　the　absolute　unity　of　the　thinking　subject…　how　the

logical　procedure　in　hypothetical　ideas　necessarily　produces　the

idea　of　the　absolutely　unconditioned　in　a　series　of　given

conditions；　and　finally…　how　the　mere　form　of　the　disjunctive

syllogism　involves　the　highest　conception　of　a　being　of　all　beings：

a　thought　which　at　first　sight　seems　in　the　highest　degree

paradoxical。

　　An　objective　deduction；　such　as　we　were　able　to　present　in　the

case　of　the　categories；　is　impossible　as　regards　these

transcendental　ideas。　For　they　have；　in　truth；　no　relation　to　any

object；　in　experience；　for　the　very　reason　that　they　are　only　ideas。

But　a　subjective　deduction　of　them　from　the　nature　of　our　reason　is

possible；　and　has　been　given　in　the　present　chapter。

　　It　is　easy　to　perceive　that　the　sole　aim　of　pure　reason　is　the

absolute　totality　of　the　synthesis　on　the　side　of　the　conditions；

and　that　it　does　not　concern　itself　with　the　absolute　completeness

on　the　Part　of　the　conditioned。　For　of　the　former　alone　does　she　stand

in　need；　in　order　to　preposit　the　whole　series　of　conditions；　and　thus

present　them　to　the　understanding　a　priori。　But　if　we　once　have　a

completely　（and　unconditionally）　given　condition；　there　is　no

further　necessity；　in　proceeding　with　the　series；　for　a　conception

of　reason；　for　the　understanding　takes　of　itself　every　step

downward；　from　the　condition　to　the　conditioned。　Thus　the

transcendental　ideas　are　available　only　for　ascending　in　the　series　of

conditions；　till　we　reach　the　unconditioned；　that　is；　principles。　As

regards　descending　to　the　conditioned；　on　the　other　hand；　we　find　that

there　is　a　widely　extensive　logical　use　which　reason　makes　of　the　laws

of　the　understanding；　but　that　a　transcendental　use　thereof　is

impossible；　and　that　when　we　form　an　idea　of　the　absolute　totality

of　such　a　synthesis；　for　example；　of　the　whole　series　of　all　future

changes　in　the　world；　this　idea　is　a　mere　ens　rationis；　an　arbitrary

fiction　of　thought；　and　not　a　necessary　presupposition　of　reason。

For　the　possibility　of　the　conditioned　presupposes　the　totality　of　its

conditions；　but　not　of　its　consequences。　Consequently；　this　conception

is　not　a　transcendental　idea…　and　it　is　with　these　alone　that　we　are

at　present　occupied。

　　Finally；　it　is　obvious　that　there　exists　among　the　transcendental

ideas　a　certain　connection　and　unity；　and　that　pure　reason；　by　means

of　them；　collects　all　its　cognitions　into　one　system。　From　the

cognition　of　self　to　the　cognition　of　the　world；　and　through　these

to　the　supreme　being；　the　progression　is　so　natural；　that　it　seems

to　resemble　the　logical　march　of　reason　from　the　premisses　to　the

conclusion。*　Now　whether　there　lies　unobserved　at　the　foundation　of

these　ideas　an　analogy　of　the　same　kind　as　exists　between　the

logical　and　transcendental　procedure　of　reason；　is　another　of　those

questions；　the　answer　to　which　we　must　not　expect　till　we　arrive　at

a　more　advanced　stage　in　our　inquiries。　In　this　cursory　and

preliminary　view；　we　have；　meanwhile；　reached　our　aim。　For　we　have

dispelled　the　ambiguity　which　attached　to　the　transcendental

conceptions　of　reason；　from　their　being　commonly　mixed　up　with　other

conceptions　in　the　systems　of　philosophers；　and　not　properly

distinguished　from　the　conceptions　of　the　understanding；　we　have

exposed　their　origin　and；　thereby；　at　the　same　time　their

determinate　number；　and　presented　them　in　a　systematic　connection；　and

have　thus　marked　out　and　enclosed　a　definite　sphere　for　pure　reason。



　　*The　science　of　Metaphysics　has　for　the　proper　object　of　its

inquiries　only　three　grand　ideas：　GOD；　FREEDOM；　and　IMMORTALITY；　and

it　aims　at　showing；　that　the　second　conception；　conjoined　with　the

first；　must　lead　to　the　third；　as　a　necessary　conclusion。　All　the

other　subjects　with　which　it　occupies　itself；　are　merely　means　for　the

attainment　and　realization　of　these　ideas。　It　does　not　require　these

ideas　for　the　construction　of　a　science　of　nature；　but；　on　the

contrary；　for　the　purpose　of　passing　beyond　the　sphere　of　nature。　A

complete　insight　into　and　comprehension　of　them　would　render　Theology；

Ethics；　and；　through　the　conjunction　of　both；　Religion；　solely

dependent　on　the　speculative　faculty　of　reason。　In　a　systematic

representation　of　these　ideas　the　above…mentioned　arrangement…　the

synthetical　one…　would　be　the　most　suitable；　but　in　the

investigation　which　must　necessarily　precede　it；　the　analytical；　which

reverses　this　arrangement；　would　be　better　adapted　to　our　purpose；

as　in　it　we　should　proceed　from　that　which　experience　immediately

presents　to　us…　psychology；　to　cosmology；　and　thence　to　theology。

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　BOOK　II。



　　　　　　　　OF　THE　DIALECTICAL　PROCEDURE　OF　PURE　REASON。



　　It　may　be　said　that　the　object　of　a　merely　transcendental　idea　is

something　of　which　we　have　no　conception；　although　the　idea　may　be　a

necessary　product　of　reason　according　to　its　original　laws。　For；　in

fact；　a　conception　of　an　object　that　is　adequate　to　the　idea　given

by　reason；　is　impossible。　For　such　an　object　must　be　capable　of

being　presented　and　intuited　in　a　Possible　experience。　But　we　should

express　our　meaning　better；　and　with　less　risk　of　being　misunderstood；

if　we　said　that　we　can　have　no　knowledge　of　an　object；　which　perfectly

corresponds　to　an　idea；　although　we　may　possess　a　problematical

conception　thereof。

　　Now　the　transcendental　（subjective）　reality　at　least　of　the　pure

conceptions　of　reason　rests　upon　the　fact　that　we　are　led　to　such

ideas　by　a　necessary　procedure　of　reason。　There　must　therefore　be

syllogisms　which　contain　no　empirical　premisses；　and　by　means　of　which

we　conclude　from　something　that　we　do　know；　to　something　of　which　we

do　not　even　possess　a　conception；　to　which　we；　nevertheless；　by　an

unavoidable　illusion；　ascribe　objective　reality。　Such　arguments　are；

as　regards　their　result；　rather　to　be　termed　sophisms　than　syllogisms；

although　indeed；　as　regards　their　origin；　they　are　very　well

entitled　to　the　latter　name；　inasmuch　as　they　are　not　fictions　or

accidental　products　of　reason；　but　are　necessitated　by　its　very

nature。