the critique of pure reason-及74何蛍
梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ○ 賜 ★ 辛酔堀貧和鍬匈��梓囚徒貧議 Enter 囚辛指欺云慕朕村匈��梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ● 辛指欺云匈競何��
!!!!隆堋響頼��紗秘慕禰厮宴和肝写偬堋響��
and�察�consequently�察�that a first beginning�察�mathematical or
dynamical�察�is by no means required。 The possibility of such an
infinite derivation�察�without any initial member from which all the
others result�察�is certainly quite incomprehensible。 But�察�if you are
rash enough to deny the enigmatical secrets of nature for this reason��
you will find yourselves obliged to deny also the existence of many
fundamental properties of natural objects ��such as fundamental
forces���察�which you can just as little comprehend�察�and even the
possibility of so simple a conception as that of change must present
to you insuperable difficulties。 For if experience did not teach you
that it was real�察�you never could conceive a priori the possibility of
this ceaseless sequence of being and non´being。
But if the existence of a transcendental faculty of freedom is
granted´ a faculty of originating changes in the world´ this faculty
must at least exist out of and apart from the world�察�although it is
certainly a bold assumption�察�that�察�over and above the complete content
of all possible intuitions�察�there still exists an object which
cannot be presented in any possible perception。 But�察�to attribute to
substances in the world itself such a faculty�察�is quite
inadmissible�察�for�察�in this case�察�the connection of phenomena
reciprocally determining and determined according to general laws��
which is termed nature�察�and along with it the criteria of empirical
truth�察�which enable us to distinguish experience from mere visionary
dreaming�察�would almost entirely disappear。 In proximity with such a
lawless faculty of freedom�察�a system of nature is hardly cogitable��
for the laws of the latter would be continually subject to the
intrusive influences of the former�察�and the course of phenomena�察�which
would otherwise proceed regularly and uniformly�察�would become
thereby confused and disconnected。
FOURTH CONFLICT OF THE TRANSCENDENTAL IDEAS。
THESIS。
There exists either in�察�or in connection with the world´ either as a
part of it�察�or as the cause of it´an absolutely necessary being。
PROOF。
The world of sense�察�as the sum total of all phenomena�察�contains a
series of changes。 For�察�without such a series�察�the mental
representation of the series of time itself�察�as the condition of the
possibility of the sensuous world�察�could not be presented to us。*
But every change stands under its condition�察�which precedes it in time
and renders it necessary。 Now the existence of a given condition
presupposes a complete series of conditions up to the absolutely
unconditioned�察�which alone is absolutely necessary。 It follows that
something that is absolutely necessary must exist�察�if change exists as
its consequence。 But this necessary thing itself belongs to the
sensuous world。 For suppose it to exist out of and apart from it��
the series of cosmical changes would receive from it a beginning��
and yet this necessary cause would not itself belong to the world of
sense。 But this is impossible。 For�察�as the beginning of a series in
time is determined only by that which precedes it in time�察�the supreme
condition of the beginning of a series of changes must exist in the
time in which this series itself did not exist�察�for a beginning
supposes a time preceding�察�in which the thing that begins to be was
not in existence。 The causality of the necessary cause of changes�察�and
consequently the cause itself�察�must for these reasons belong to
time´ and to phenomena�察�time being possible only as the form of
phenomena。 Consequently�察�it cannot be cogitated as separated from
the world of sense´ the sum total of all phenomena。 There is��
therefore�察�contained in the world�察�something that is absolutely
necessary´ whether it be the whole cosmical series itself�察�or only a
part of it。
*Objectively�察�time�察�as the formal condition of the possibility of
change�察�precedes all changes�察�but subjectively�察�and in
consciousness�察�the representation of time�察�like every other�察�is
given solely by occasion of perception。
ANTITHESIS。
An absolutely necessary being does not exist�察�either in the world��
or out of it´ as its cause。
PROOF。
Grant that either the world itself is necessary�察�or that there is
contained in it a necessary existence。 Two cases are possible。
First�察�there must either be in the series of cosmical changes a
beginning�察�which is unconditionally necessary�察�and therefore uncaused´
which is at variance with the dynamical law of the determination of
all phenomena in time�察�or�察�secondly�察�the series itself is without
beginning�察�and�察�although contingent and conditioned in all its
parts�察�is nevertheless absolutely necessary and unconditioned as a
whole´ which is self´contradictory。 For the existence of an
aggregate cannot be necessary�察�if no single part of it possesses
necessary existence。
Grant�察�on the other band�察�that an absolutely necessary cause
exists out of and apart from the world。 This cause�察�as the highest
member in the series of the causes of cosmical changes�察�must originate
or begin* the existence of the latter and their series。 In this case
it must also begin to act�察�and its causality would therefore belong to
time�察�and consequently to the sum total of phenomena�察�that is�察�to
the world。 It follows that the cause cannot be out of the world�察�which
is contradictory to the hypothesis。 Therefore�察�neither in the world��
nor out of it ��but in causal connection with it���察�does there exist any
absolutely necessary being。
*The word begin is taken in two senses。 The first is active´ the
cause being regarded as beginning a series of conditions as its effect
��infit��。 The second is passive´ the causality in the cause itself
beginning to operate ��fit��。 I reason here from the first to the
second。
OBSERVATIONS ON THE FOURTH ANTINOMY。
ON THE THESIS。
To demonstrate the existence of a necessary being�察�I cannot be
permitted in this place to employ any other than the cosmological
argument�察�which ascends from the conditioned in phenomena to the
unconditioned in conception´ the unconditioned being considered the
necessary condition of the absolute totality of the series。 The proof��
from the mere idea of a supreme being�察�belongs to another principle of
reason and requires separate discussion。
The pure cosmological proof demonstrates the existence of a
necessary being�察�but at the same time leaves it quite unsettled��
whether this being is the world itself�察�or quite distinct from it。
To establish the truth of the latter view�察�principles are requisite��
which are not cosmological and do not proceed in the series of
phenomena。 We should require to introduce into our proof conceptions
of contingent beings´ regarded merely as objects of the understanding��
and also a principle which enables us to connect these�察�by means of
mere conceptions�察�with a necessary being。 But the proper place for all
such arguments is a transcendent philosophy�察�which has unhappily not
yet been established。
But�察�if we begin our proof cosmologically�察�by laying at the
foundation of it the series of phenomena�察�and the regress in it
according to empirical laws of causality�察�we are not at liberty to
break off from this mode of demonstration and to pass over to
something which is not itself a member of the series。 The condition
must be taken in exactly the same signification as the relation of the
conditioned to its condition in the series has been taken�察�for the
series must conduct us in an unbroken regress to this supreme
condition。 But if this relation is sensuous�察�and belongs to the
possible empirical employment of understanding�察�the supreme
condition or cause must close the regressive series according to the
laws of sensibility and consequently�察�must belong to the series of
time。 It follows that this necessary existence must be regarded as the
highest member of the cosmical series。
Certain philosophers have�察�nevertheless�察�allowed themselves the
liberty of making such a saltus ��metabasis eis allo gonos��。 From the
changes in the world they have concluded their empirical
contingency�察�that is�察�their dependence on empirically´determined
causes�察�and they thus admitted an ascending series of empirical
conditions�此�and in this they are quite right。 But as they could not
find in this series any primal beginning or any highest member�察�they
passed suddenly from the empirical conception of contingency to the
pure category�察�which presents us with a series´ not sensuous�察�but
intellectual´ whose completeness does certainly rest upon the
existence of an absolutely necessary cause。 Nay�察�more�察�this
intellectual series is not tied to any sensuous conditions�察�and is
therefore free from the condition of time�察�which requires it
spontaneously to begin its causality in time。 But such a procedure
is perfectly inadmissible�察�as will be made plain from what follows。
In the pure sense of the categories�察�that is contingent the
contradictory opposite of which is possible。 Now we cannot reason from
empirical contingency to intellectual。 The opposite of that which is
changed´ the opposite of its state´ is actual at another time�察�and
is therefore possible。 Consequently�察�it is not the contradictory
opposite of the former state。 To be that�察�it is necessary that�察�in the
same time in which the preceding state existed�察�its opposite could
have existed in its place�察�but such a cognition is not given us in the
mere phenomenon of change。 A body that was in motion = A�察�comes into a
state of rest = non´A。 Now it cannot be concluded from the fact that a
state opposite to the state A follows it�察�that the contradictory
opposite of A is possible�察�and that A is therefore contingent。 To
prove this�察�we should require to know that the state of rest could
have existed in the very s