history of philosophy-第87节

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！


this　to　be　the　truth；　making　it　a　simple　subjective；　because　it　has　once　for　all　accepted　finite
knowledge　as　the　fixed　and　ultimate　standpoint。　This　philosophy　made　an　end　of　the　metaphysic　of
the　understanding　as　an　objective　dogmatism；　but　in　fact　it　merely　transformed　it　into　a　subjective
dogmatism；　i。e。　into　a　consciousness　in　which　these　same　finite　determinations　of　the　understanding
persist；　and　the　question　of　what　is　true　in　and　for　itself　has　been　abandoned。　Its　study　is　made
difficult　by　its　diffuseness　and　prolixity；　and　by　the　peculiar　terminology　found　in　it。　Nevertheless
this　diffuseness　has　one　advantage；　that　inasmuch　as　the　same　thing　is　often　repeated；　the　main
points　are　kept　before　us；　and　those　cannot　easily　be　lost　from　view。

We　shall　endeavour　to　trace　the　lines　which　Kant　pursued。　The　philosophy　of　Kant　has　in　the　first
place　a　direct　relation　to　that　of　Hume　as　stated　above　（p。　370）。　That　is　to　say；　the　significance　of
the　Kantian　philosophy；　generally　expressed；　is　from　the　very　beginning　to　allow　that
determinations　such　as　those　of　universality　and　necessity　are　not　to　be　met　with　in　perception；　and
this　Hume　has　already　shown　in　relation　to　Locke。　But　while　Hume　attacks　the　universality　and
necessity　of　the　categories　generally；　and　Jacobi　their　finitude；　Kant　merely　argues　against　their
objectivity　in　so　far　as　they　are　present　in　external　things　themselves；　while　maintaining　them　to　be
objective　in　the　sense　of　holding　good　as　universal　and　necessary；　as　they　do；　for　instance；　in
mathematics　and　natural　science。（1）　The　fact　that　we　crave　for　universality　and　necessity　as　that
which　first　constitutes　the　objective；　Kant　thus　undoubtedly　allows。　But　if　universality　and　necessity
do　not　exist　in　external　things；　the　question　arises　“Where　are　they　to　be　found？”　To　this　Kant；　as
against　Hume；　maintains　that　they　must　be　a　priori；　i。e。　that　they　must　rest　on　reason　itself；　and　on
thought　as　self…conscious　reason；　their　source　is　the　subject；　“I”　in　my　self…consciousness。（2）
This；　simply　expressed；　is　the　main　point　in　the　Kantian　philosophy。

In　the　second　place　the　philosophy　of　Kant　is　likewise　called　a　critical　philosophy　because　its　aim；
says　Kant；　is　first　of　all　to　supply　a　criticism　of　our　faculties　of　knowledge；　for　before　obtaining
knowledge　we　must　inquire　into　the　faculties　of　knowledge。　To　the　healthy　human　understanding
that　is　plausible；　and　to　it　this　has　been　a　great　discovery。　Knowledge　is　thereby　represented　as　an
instrument；　as　a　method　and　means　whereby　we　endeavour　to　possess　ourselves　of　the　truth。　Thus
before　men　can　make　their　way　to　the　truth　itself　they　must　know　the　nature　and　function　of　their
instrument。　They　must　see　whether　it　is　capable　of　supplying　what　is　demanded　of　it　—　of　seizing
upon　the　object；　they　must　know　what　the　alterations　it　makes　in　the　object　are；　in　order　that　these
alterations　may　not　be　mixed　up　with　the　determinations　of　the　object　itself。（3）　This　would　appear
as　though　men　could　set　forth　upon　the　search　for　truth　with　spears　and　staves。　And　a　further　claim
is　made　when　it　is　said　that　we　must　know　the　faculty　of　knowledge　before　we　can　know。　For　to
investigate　the　faculties　of　knowledge　means　to　know　them；　but　how　we　are　to　know　without
knowing；　how　we　are　to　apprehend　the　truth　before　the　truth；　it　is　impossible　to　say。　It　is　the　old
story　of　the　who　would　not　go　into　the　water　till　he　could　swim。　Thus　since　the　investigation　of　the
faculties　of　knowledge　is　itself　knowing；　it　cannot　in　Kant　attain　to　what　it　aims　at　because　it　is　that
already　—　it　cannot　come　to　itself　because　it　is　already　with　itself；　the　same　thing　happens　as
happened　with　the　Jews；　the　Spirit　passes　through　the　midst　of　them　and　they　know　it　not。　At　the
same　time　the　step　taken　by　Kant　is　a　great　and　important　one　—　that　is；　the　fact　that　he　has　made
knowledge　the　subject　of　his　consideration。

On　the　one　hand　this　critique　of　knowledge　applies　to　the　empirical　knowledge　of　Locke；　which
asserts　itself　to　be　grounded　on　experience；　and；　on　the　other　hand；　it　also　deals　with　what　claims
to　be　on　the　whole　a　more　metaphysical　kind　of　philosophy　—　the　Wolffian　and　German　—　which
had　also　taken　up　the　line　of　proceeding　on　the　more　empiric　method　which　has　been　depicted。
But　this　last　has　at　the　same　time　kept　itself　separate　from　the　merely　empiric　method；　inasmuch　as
its　main　efforts　have　been　directed　towards　making　such　categories　of　thought　as　those　of
potentiality；　actuality；　God；　&c。；　have　as　their　foundation　categories　of　the　understanding；　and　then
reasoning　from　them。　The　Kantian　philosophy　is　in　the　first　instance　directed　against　both。　Kant
takes　away　the　objective　significance　of　the　determinations　of　the　Wolffian　metaphysics；　and
shows　how　they　must　be　ascribed　to　subjective　thought　alone。　At　the　same　time　Jacobi　likewise
declared　himself　against　this　metaphysic；　but　since　he　started　more　especially　from　the　standpoint
of　the　French　and　Germans；　his　point　of　view　was　different：　he　asserts　that　our　finite　thought　can
set　forth　finite　determinations　alone；　and　thus　can　only　consider　God　and　Spirit　in　accordance　with
finite　relationships。　On　the　practical　side　there　reigned　at　that　time　the　so…called　happiness　theory；
since　man’s　inherent　Notion　and　the　way　to　realize　this　Notion　was　apprehended　in　morality　as　a
satisfaction　of　his　desires。　As　against　this　Kant　has　very　rightly　shown　that　it　involves　a　heteronomy
and　not　an　autonomy　of　reason　—　a　determination　through　nature　and　consequently　an　absence　of
freedom。　But　because　the　rational　principle　of　Kant　was　formal；　and　his　successors　could　not
make　any　further　progress　with　reason；　and　yet　morality　had　to　receive　a　content；　Fries　and　others
must　still　be　called　Hedonists　though　they　avoid　giving　themselves　the　name。

In　the　third　place；　as　regards　the　relation　of　the　categories　to　the　material　which　is　given　through
experience；　there　is　according　to　Kant　already　inherent　in　the　subjective　determinations　of　thought；
e。g。　in　those　of　cause　and　effect；　the　capacity　of　themselves　to　bind　together　the　differences　which
are　present　in　that　material。　Kant　considers　thought　as　in　great　measure　a　synthetic　activity；　and
hence　he　represents　the　main　question　of　Philosophy　to　be　this；　“How　are　synthetic　judgments　a
priori　possible？”（4）　Judgment　signifies　the　combination　of　thought…determinations　as　subject　and
predicate。　Synthetic　judgments　a　priori　are　nothing　else　than　a　connection　of　opposites　through
themselves；　or　the　absolute　Notion；　i。e。　the　relations　of　different　determinations　such　as　those　of
cause　and　effect；　given　not　through　experience　but　through　thought。　Space　and　time　likewise　form
the　connecting　element；　they　are　thus　a　priori；　i。e。　in　self…consciousness。　Since　Kant　shows　that
thought　has　synthetic　judgments　a　priori　which　are　not　derived　from　perception；　he　shows　that
thought　is　so　to　speak　concrete　in　itself。　The　idea　which　is　present　here　is　a　great　one；　but；　on　the
other　hand；　quite　an　ordinary　signification　is　given　it；　for　it　is　worked　out　from　points　of　view　which
are　inherently　rude　and　empirical；　and　a　scientific　form　is　the　last　thing　that　can　be　claimed　for　it。　In
the　presentation　of　it　there　is　a　lack　of　philosophical　abstraction；　and　it　is　expressed　in　the　most
commonplace　way；　to　say　nothing　more　of　the　barbarous　terminology；　Kant　remains　restricted　and
confined　by　his　psychological　point　of　view　and　empirical　methods。

To　mention　one　example　only　of　big　barbarous　expressions；　Kant　calls　his　philosophy　（Kritik　der
reinen　Vernunft；　p。　19）　a　Transcendental　philosophy；　i。e。　a　system　of　principles　of　pure　reason
which　demonstrate　the　universal　and　necessary　elements　in　the　self…conscious　understanding；
without　occupying　themselves　with　objects　or　inquiring　what　universality　and　necessity　are；　this　last
would　be　transcendent。　Transcendent　and　transcendental　have　accordingly　to　be　clearly
distinguished。　Transcendent　mathematics　signifies　the　mathematics　in　which　the　determination　of
infinitude　is　made　use　of　in　a　preeminent　degree：　in　this　sphere　of　mathematics　we　say；　for　instance；
that　the　circle　consists　of　an　infinitude　of　straight　lines；　the　periphery　is　represented　as　straight；　and
since　the　curve　is　represented　as　straight　this　passes　beyond　the　geometric　category　and　is
consequently　transcendent。　Kant；　on　the　contrary；　defines　the　transcendental　philosophy　as　not　a
philosophy　which　by　means　of　categories　passes　beyond　its　own　sphere；　but　one　which　points　out
in　subjective　thought；　in　consciousness；　the　sources　of　what　may　become　transcendent。　Thought
would　thus　be　transcendent　if　the　categories　of　universality；　of　cause　and　effect；　were　predicated
of　the　object；　for　in　this　way　men　would　from　the　subjective　element　‘transcend’　into　another
sphere。　We　are　not　justified　in　so　doing　as　regards　the　result　nor　even　to　begin　with；　since　we
merely　contemplate　thought　within　thought　itself。　Thus　we　do　not　desire　to　consider　the　categories
in　their　objective　sense；　but　in　so　far　as　thought　is　the　source　of　such　synthetic　relationships；　the
necessary　and　universal　thus　here　receive　the　significance　o