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！
of experience。 These dialectical propositions are so many attempts
to solve four natural and unavoidable problems of reason。 There are
neither more； nor can there be less； than this number； because there
are no other series of synthetical hypotheses； limiting a priori the
empirical synthesis。
The brilliant claims of reason striving to extend its dominion
beyond the limits of experience； have been represented above only in
dry formulae； which contain merely the grounds of its pretensions。
They have； besides； in conformity with the character of a
transcendental philosophy； been freed from every empirical element；
although the full splendour of the promises they hold out； and the
anticipations they excite； manifests itself only when in connection
with empirical cognitions。 In the application of them； however； and in
the advancing enlargement of the employment of reason； while
struggling to rise from the region of experience and to soar to
those sublime ideas； philosophy discovers a value and a dignity；
which； if it could but make good its assertions； would raise it far
above all other departments of human knowledge… professing； as it
does； to present a sure foundation for our highest hopes and the
ultimate aims of all the exertions of reason。 The questions： whether
the world has a beginning and a limit to its extension in space；
whether there exists anywhere； or perhaps； in my own thinking Self； an
indivisible and indestructible unity… or whether nothing but what is
divisible and transitory exists； whether I am a free agent； or； like
other beings； am bound in the chains of nature and fate； whether；
finally； there is a supreme cause of the world； or all our thought and
speculation must end with nature and the order of external things… are
questions for the solution of which the mathematician would
willingly exchange his whole science； for in it there is no
satisfaction for the highest aspirations and most ardent desires of
humanity。 Nay； it may even be said that the true value of mathematics…
that pride of human reason… consists in this： that she guides reason
to the knowledge of nature… in her greater as well as in her less
manifestations… in her beautiful order and regularity… guides her；
moreover； to an insight into the wonderful unity of the moving
forces in the operations of nature； far beyond the expectations of a
philosophy building only on experience； and that she thus encourages
philosophy to extend the province of reason beyond all experience； and
at the same time provides it with the most excellent materials for
supporting its investigations； in so far as their nature admits； by
adequate and accordant intuitions。
Unfortunately for speculation… but perhaps fortunately for the
practical interests of humanity… reason； in the midst of her highest
anticipations； finds herself hemmed in by a press of opposite and
contradictory conclusions； from which neither her honour nor her
safety will permit her to draw back。 Nor can she regard these
conflicting trains of reasoning with indifference as mere passages
at arms； still less can she mand peace； for in the subject of the
conflict she has a deep interest。 There is no other course left open
to her than to reflect with herself upon the origin of this disunion
in reason… whether it may not arise from a mere misunderstanding。
After such an inquiry； arrogant claims would have to be given up on
both sides； but the sovereignty of reason over understanding and sense
would be based upon a sure foundation。
We shall at present defer this radical inquiry and； in the meantime；
consider for a little what side in the controversy we should most
willingly take； if we were obliged to bee partisans at all。 As；
in this case； we leave out of sight altogether the logical criterion
of truth； and merely consult our own interest in reference to the
question； these considerations； although inadequate to settle the
question of right in either party； will enable us to prehend how
those who have taken part in the struggle； adopt the one view rather
than the other… no special insight into the subject； however； having
influenced their choice。 They will； at the same time； explain to us
many other things by the way… for example； the fiery zeal on the one
side and the cold maintenance of their cause on the other； why the one
party has met with the warmest approbations； and the other has
always been repulsed by irreconcilable prejudices。
There is one thing； however； that determines the proper point of
view； from which alone this preliminary inquiry can be instituted
and carried on with the proper pleteness… and that is the
parison of the principles from which both sides； thesis and
antithesis； proceed。 My readers would remark in the propositions of
the antithesis a plete uniformity in the mode of thought and a
perfect unity of principle。 Its principle was that of pure empiricism；
not only in the explication of the phenomena in the world； but also in
the solution of the transcendental ideas； even of that of the universe
itself。 The affirmations of the thesis； on the contrary； were based；
in addition to the empirical mode of explanation employed in the
series of phenomena； on intellectual propositions； and its
principles were in so far not simple。 I shall term the thesis； in view
of its essential characteristic； the dogmatism of pure reason。
On the side of Dogmatism； or of the thesis； therefore； in the
determination of the cosmological ideas； we find：
1。 A practical interest； which must be very dear to every
right…thinking man。 That the word has a beginning… that the nature
of my thinking self is simple； and therefore indestructible… that I am
a free agent； and raised above the pulsion of nature and her
laws… and； finally； that the entire order of things； which form the
world； is dependent upon a Supreme Being； from whom the whole receives
unity and connection… these are so many foundation…stones of
morality and religion。 The antithesis deprives us of all these
supports… or； at least； seems so to deprive us。
2。 A speculative interest of reason manifests itself on this side。
For； if we take the transcendental ideas and employ them in the manner
which the thesis directs； we can exhibit pletely a priori the
entire chain of conditions； and understand the derivation of the
conditioned… beginning from the unconditioned。 This the antithesis
does not do； and for this reason does not meet with so wele a
reception。 For it can give no answer to our question respecting the
conditions of its synthesis… except such as must be supplemented by
another question； and so on to infinity。 According to it； we must rise
from a given beginning to one still higher； every part conducts us
to a still smaller one； every event is preceded by another event which
is its cause； and the conditions of existence rest always upon other
and still higher conditions； and find neither end nor basis in some
self…subsistent thing as the primal being。
3。 This side has also the advantage of popularity； and this
constitutes no small part of its claim to favour。 The mon
understanding does not find the least difficulty in the idea of the
unconditioned beginning of all synthesis… accustomed； as it is； rather
to follow our consequences than to seek for a proper basis for
cognition。 In the conception of an absolute first； moreover… the
possibility of which it does not inquire into… it is highly
gratified to find a firmly…established point of departure for its
attempts at theory； while in the restless and continuous ascent from
the conditioned to the condition； always with one foot in the air；
it can find no satisfaction。
On the side of the antithesis； or Empiricism； in the determination
of the cosmological ideas：
1。 We cannot discover any such practical interest arising from
pure principles of reason as morality and religion present。 On the
contrary； pure empiricism seems to empty them of all their power and
influence。 If there does not exist a Supreme Being distinct from the
world… if the world is without beginning； consequently without a
Creator… if our wills are not free； and the soul is divisible and
subject to corruption just like matter… the ideas and principles of
morality lose all validity and fall with the transcendental ideas
which constituted their theoretical support。
2。 But empiricism； in pensation； holds out to reason； in its
speculative interests； certain important advantages； far exceeding any
that the dogmatist can promise us。 For； when employed by the
empiricist； understanding is always upon its proper ground of
investigation… the field of possible experience； the laws of which
it can explore； and thus extend its cognition securely and with
clear intelligence without being stopped by limits in any direction。
Here can it and ought it to find and present to intuition its proper
object… not only in itself； but in all its relations； or； if it employ
conceptions； upon this ground it can always present the
corresponding images in clear and unmistakable intuitions。 It is quite
unnecessary for it to renounce the guidance of nature； to attach
itself to ideas； the objects of which it cannot know； because； as mere
intellectual entities； they cannot be presented in any intuition。 On
the contrary； it is not even permitted to abandon its proper
occupation； under the pretence that it has been brought to a
conclusion （for it never can be）； and to pass into the region of
idealizing reason and transcendent conceptions； which it is not
required to observe and explore the laws of nature； but merely to
think and to imagine… secure from being contradicted by facts； because
they have not been called as witnesses； but passed by； or perhaps
subordinated to the so…called higher interests and considerations of
pure reason。
Hence the empiricist will never allow himself to accept any epoch of
nature for the first… the absolutely primal state； he will not believe
that there can be limits to his outlook into her wide domains； nor
pass from the objects of nature； which he can satisfactorily explain
by means of observation and mathematical thought… which he can
determine synthetically in intuition； to those which neither sense nor
imagination can ever present in concreto； he will not concede the
existence of a faculty in nature； operating independently of the
laws of nature… a concession which would introduce uncertainty into
the procedure of the understanding； which is guided by necessary
laws to the observation of phenomena； nor； finally； will he permit
himself to seek a cause beyond nature； inasmuch as we know nothing but
it； and from it alone receive an objective basis for all our
conceptions and instruction in the unvarying laws of things。
In truth； if the empirical philosopher had no other purpose in the
establishment of his antithesis than to check the presumption of a
reason which mistakes its true destination； which boasts of its
insight and its knowledge； just where all insight and knowledge
cease to exist； and regards that which is valid only in relation to
a practical interest； as an advancement of the speculative interests
of the mind （in order； when it is convenient for itself； to break
the thread of our physical investigations； and； under pretence of
extending our cognition； connect them with transcendental ideas； by
means of which we really know only that we know nothing）… if； I say；
the empiricist rested satisfied with this benefit； the principle
advanced by him would be a maxim remending moderation in the
pretensions of reason and modesty in its affirmations； and at the same
time would direct us to the right mode of extending the province of
the understanding； by the help of the only true teacher； experience。
In obedience to this advice； intellectual hypotheses and faith would
not be called in aid of our practical interests； nor should we
introduce them under the pompous titles of science and insight。 For
speculative cognition cannot find an objective basis any other where
than in experience； and； when we overstep its limits our synthesis；
which requires ever new cognitions independent of experience； has no
substratum of intuition upon which to build。
But if… as often happe