友情提示:如果本网页打开太慢或显示不完整,请尝试鼠标右键“刷新”本网页!阅读过程发现任何错误请告诉我们,谢谢!! 报告错误
九色书籍 返回本书目录 我的书架 我的书签 TXT全本下载 进入书吧 加入书签

the critique of pure reason-第107章

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 phenomena; and; in connection with it; the reason why our

sensibility possesses this rather than that particular kind of

conditions; are and must ever remain hidden from our mental vision;

the fact is there; the reason of the fact we cannot see。 But an

ideal of pure reason cannot be termed mysterious or inscrutable;

because the only credential of its reality is the need of it felt by

reason; for the purpose of giving completeness to the world of

synthetical unity。 An ideal is not even given as a cogitable object;

and therefore cannot be inscrutable; on the contrary; it must; as a

mere idea; be based on the constitution of reason itself; and on

this account must be capable of explanation and solution。 For the very

essence of reason consists in its ability to give an account; of all

our conceptions; opinions; and assertions… upon objective; or; when

they happen to be illusory and fallacious; upon subjective grounds。



     Detection and Explanation of the Dialectical Illusion in

       all Transcendental Arguments for the Existence of a

       Necessary Being。



  Both of the above arguments are transcendental; in other words; they

do not proceed upon empirical principles。 For; although the

cosmological argument professed to lay a basis of experience for its

edifice of reasoning; it did not ground its procedure upon the

peculiar constitution of experience; but upon pure principles of

reason… in relation to an existence given by empirical

consciousness; utterly abandoning its guidance; however; for the

purpose of supporting its assertions entirely upon pure conceptions。

Now what is the cause; in these transcendental arguments; of the

dialectical; but natural; illusion; which connects the conceptions

of necessity and supreme reality; and hypostatizes that which cannot

be anything but an idea? What is the cause of this unavoidable step on

the part of reason; of admitting that some one among all existing

things must be necessary; while it falls back from the assertion of

the existence of such a being as from an abyss? And how does reason

proceed to explain this anomaly to itself; and from the wavering

condition of a timid and reluctant approbation… always again

withdrawn… arrive at a calm and settled insight into its cause?

  It is something very remarkable that; on the supposition that

something exists; I cannot avoid the inference that something exists

necessarily。 Upon this perfectly natural… but not on that account

reliable… inference does the cosmological argument rest。 But; let me

form any conception whatever of a thing; I find that I cannot cogitate

the existence of the thing as absolutely necessary; and that nothing

prevents me… be the thing or being what it may… from cogitating its

non…existence。 I may thus be obliged to admit that all existing things

have a necessary basis; while I cannot cogitate any single or

individual thing as necessary。 In other words; I can never complete

the regress through the conditions of existence; without admitting the

existence of a necessary being; but; on the other hand; I cannot

make a commencement from this being。

  If I must cogitate something as existing necessarily as the basis of

existing things; and yet am not permitted to cogitate any individual

thing as in itself necessary; the inevitable inference is that

necessity and contingency are not properties of things themselves…

otherwise an internal contradiction would result; that consequently

neither of these principles are objective; but merely subjective

principles of reason… the one requiring us to seek for a necessary

ground for everything that exists; that is; to be satisfied with no

other explanation than that which is complete a priori; the other

forbidding us ever to hope for the attainment of this completeness;

that is; to regard no member of the empirical world as

unconditioned。 In this mode of viewing them; both principles; in their

purely heuristic and regulative character; and as concerning merely

the formal interest of reason; are quite consistent with each other。

The one says: 〃You must philosophize upon nature;〃 as if there existed

a necessary primal basis of all existing things; solely for the

purpose of introducing systematic unity into your knowledge; by

pursuing an idea of this character… a foundation which is

arbitrarily admitted to be ultimate; while the other warns you to

consider no individual determination; concerning the existence of

things; as such an ultimate foundation; that is; as absolutely

necessary; but to keep the way always open for further progress in the

deduction; and to treat every determination as determined by some

other。 But if all that we perceive must be regarded as conditionally

necessary; it is impossible that anything which is empirically given

should be absolutely necessary。

  It follows from this that you must accept the absolutely necessary

as out of and beyond the world; inasmuch as it is useful only as a

principle of the highest possible unity in experience; and you

cannot discover any such necessary existence in the would; the

second rule requiring you to regard all empirical causes of unity as

themselves deduced。

  The philosophers of antiquity regarded all the forms of nature as

contingent; while matter was considered by them; in accordance with

the judgement of the common reason of mankind; as primal and

necessary。 But if they had regarded matter; not relatively… as the

substratum of phenomena; but absolutely and in itself… as an

independent existence; this idea of absolute necessity would have

immediately disappeared。 For there is nothing absolutely connecting

reason with such an existence; on the contrary; it can annihilate it

in thought; always and without self…contradiction。 But in thought

alone lay the idea of absolute necessity。 A regulative principle must;

therefore; have been at the foundation of this opinion。 In fact;

extension and impenetrability… which together constitute our

conception of matter… form the supreme empirical principle of the

unity of phenomena; and this principle; in so far as it is empirically

unconditioned; possesses the property of a regulative principle。

But; as every determination of matter which constitutes what is real

in it… and consequently impenetrability… is an effect; which must have

a cause; and is for this reason always derived; the notion of matter

cannot harmonize with the idea of a necessary being; in its

character of the principle of all derived unity。 For every one of

its real properties; being derived; must be only conditionally

necessary; and can therefore be annihilated in thought; and thus the

whole existence of matter can be so annihilated or suppressed。 If this

were not the case; we should have found in the world of phenomena

the highest ground or condition of unity… which is impossible;

according to the second regulative principle。 It follows that

matter; and; in general; all that forms part of the world of sense;

cannot be a necessary primal being; nor even a principle of

empirical unity; but that this being or principle must have its

place assigned without the world。 And; in this way; we can proceed

in perfect confidence to deduce the phenomena of the world and their

existence from other phenomena; just as if there existed no

necessary being; and we can at the same time; strive without ceasing

towards the attainment of completeness for our deduction; just as if

such a being… the supreme condition of all existences… were

presupposed by the mind。

  These remarks will have made it evident to the reader that the ideal

of the Supreme Being; far from being an enouncement of the existence

of a being in itself necessary; is nothing more than a regulative

principle of reason; requiring us to regard all connection existing

between phenomena as if it had its origin from an all…sufficient

necessary cause; and basing upon this the rule of a systematic and

necessary unity in the explanation of phenomena。 We cannot; at the

same time; avoid regarding; by a transcendental subreptio; this formal

principle as constitutive; and hypostatizing this unity。 Precisely

similar is the case with our notion of space。 Space is the primal

condition of all forms; which are properly just so many different

limitations of it; and thus; although it is merely a principle of

sensibility; we cannot help regarding it as an absolutely necessary

and self…subsistent thing… as an object given a priori in itself。 In

the same way; it is quite natural that; as the systematic unity of

nature cannot be established as a principle for the empirical

employment of reason; unless it is based upon the idea of an ens

realissimum; as the supreme cause; we should regard this idea as a

real object; and this object; in its character of supreme condition;

as absolutely necessary; and that in this way a regulative should be

transformed into a constitutive principle。 This interchange becomes
返回目录 上一页 下一页 回到顶部 0 1
未阅读完?加入书签已便下次继续阅读!
温馨提示: 温看小说的同时发表评论,说出自己的看法和其它小伙伴们分享也不错哦!发表书评还可以获得积分和经验奖励,认真写原创书评 被采纳为精评可以获得大量金币、积分和经验奖励哦!