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！
beginning comprehensible。
ON THE ANTITHESIS。
The assertor of the all…sufficiency of nature in regard to causality
（transcendental Physiocracy）； in opposition to the doctrine of
freedom； would defend his view of the question somewhat in the
following manner。 He would say； in answer to the sophistical arguments
of the opposite party： If you do not accept a mathematical first； in
relation to time； you have no need to seek a dynamical first； in
regard to causality。 Who compelled you to imagine an absolutely primal
condition of the world； and therewith an absolute beginning of the
gradually progressing successions of phenomena… and； as some
foundation for this fancy of yours； to set bounds to unlimited nature？
Inasmuch as the substances in the world have always existed… at
least the unity of experience renders such a supposition quite
necessary… there is no difficulty in believing also； that the
changes in the conditions of these substances have always existed；
and； consequently； that a first beginning； mathematical or
dynamical； is by no means required。 The possibility of such an
infinite derivation； without any initial member from which all the
others result； is certainly quite incomprehensible。 But； 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）； which you can just as little comprehend； 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； 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； although it is
certainly a bold assumption； that； over and above the complete content
of all possible intuitions； there still exists an object which
cannot be presented in any possible perception。 But； to attribute to
substances in the world itself such a faculty； is quite
inadmissible； for； in this case； the connection of phenomena
reciprocally determining and determined according to general laws；
which is termed nature； and along with it the criteria of empirical
truth； which enable us to distinguish experience from mere visionary
dreaming； would almost entirely disappear。 In proximity with such a
lawless faculty of freedom； a system of nature is hardly cogitable；
for the laws of the latter would be continually subject to the
intrusive influences of the former； and the course of phenomena； which
would otherwise proceed regularly and uniformly； would become
thereby confused and disconnected。
FOURTH CONFLICT OF THE TRANSCENDENTAL IDEAS。
THESIS。
There exists either in； or in connection with the world… either as a
part of it； or as the cause of it…an absolutely necessary being。
PROOF。
The world of sense； as the sum total of all phenomena； contains a
series of changes。 For； without such a series； the mental
representation of the series of time itself； as the condition of the
possibility of the sensuous world； could not be presented to us。*
But every change stands under its condition； 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； which alone is absolutely necessary。 It follows that
something that is absolutely necessary must exist； 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； as the beginning of a series in
time is determined only by that which precedes it in time； the supreme
condition of the beginning of a series of changes must exist in the
time in which this series itself did not exist； for a beginning
supposes a time preceding； in which the thing that begins to be was
not in existence。 The causality of the necessary cause of changes； and
consequently the cause itself； must for these reasons belong to
time… and to phenomena； time being possible only as the form of
phenomena。 Consequently； it cannot be cogitated as separated from
the world of sense… the sum total of all phenomena。 There is；
therefore； contained in the world； something that is absolutely
necessary… whether it be the whole cosmical series itself； or only a
part of it。
*Objectively； time； as the formal condition of the possibility of
change； precedes all changes； but subjectively； and in
consciousness； the representation of time； like every other； is
given solely by occasion of perception。
ANTITHESIS。
An absolutely necessary being does not exist； either in the world；
or out of it… as its cause。
PROOF。
Grant that either the world itself is necessary； or that there is
contained in it a necessary existence。 Two cases are possible。
First； there must either be in the series of cosmical changes a
beginning； which is unconditionally necessary； and therefore uncaused…
which is at variance with the dynamical law of the determination of
all phenomena in time； or； secondly； the series itself is without
beginning； and； although contingent and conditioned in all its
parts； is nevertheless absolutely necessary and unconditioned as a
whole… which is self…contradictory。 For the existence of an
aggregate cannot be necessary； if no single part of it possesses
necessary existence。
Grant； on the other band； that an absolutely necessary cause
exists out of and apart from the world。 This cause； as the highest
member in the series of the causes of cosmical changes； must originate
or begin* the existence of the latter and their series。 In this case
it must also begin to act； and its causality would therefore belong to
time； and consequently to the sum total of phenomena； that is； to
the world。 It follows that the cause cannot be out of the world； which
is contradictory to the hypothesis。 Therefore； neither in the world；
nor out of it （but in causal connection with it）； 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； I cannot be
permitted in this place to employ any other than the cosmological
argument； 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； belongs to another principle of
reason and requires separate discussion。
The pure cosmological proof demonstrates the existence of a
necessary being； but at the same time leaves it quite unsettled；
whether this being is the world itself； or quite distinct from it。
To establish the truth of the latter view； 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； by means of
mere conceptions； with a necessary being。 But the proper place for all
such arguments is a transcendent philosophy； which has unhappily not
yet been established。
But； if we begin our proof cosmologically； by laying at the
foundation of it the series of phenomena； and the regress in it
according to empirical laws of causality； 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； for the
series must conduct us in an unbroken regress to this supreme
condition。 But if this relation is sensuous； and belongs to the
possible empirical employment of understanding； the supreme
condition or cause must close the regressive series according to the
laws of sensibility and consequently； must belong to the series of
time。 It foll