the+critique+of+pure+reason_纯粹理性批判-第139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！


without　detriment；　however；　to　the　employment　of　mathematics　in　this
sphere　of　cognition。

　　The　fundamental　idea　of　a　philosophy　of　pure　reason　of　necessity
dictates　this　division；　it　is；　therefore；　architectonical…　in
accordance　with　the　highest　aims　of　reason；　and　not　merely
technical；　or　according　to　certain　accidentally…observed
similarities　existing　between　the　different　parts　of　the　whole
science。　For　this　reason；　also；　is　the　division　immutable　and　of
legislative　authority。　But　the　reader　may　observe　in　it　a　few　points
to　which　he　ought　to　demur；　and　which　may　weaken　his　conviction　of　its
truth　and　legitimacy。
　　In　the　first　place；　how　can　I　desire　an　a　priori　cognition　or
metaphysic　of　objects；　in　so　far　as　they　are　given　a　posteriori？　and
how　is　it　possible　to　cognize　the　nature　of　things　according　to　a
priori　principles；　and　to　attain　to　a　rational　physiology？　The
answer　is　this。　We　take　from　experience　nothing　more　than　is　requisite
to　present　us　with　an　object　（in　general）　of　the　external　or　of　the
internal　sense；　in　the　former　case；　by　the　mere　conception　of　matter
（impenetrable　and　inanimate　extension）；　in　the　latter；　by　the
conception　of　a　thinking　being…　given　in　the　internal　empirical
representation；　I　think。　As　to　the　rest；　we　must　not　employ　in　our
metaphysic　of　these　objects　any　empirical　principles　（which　add　to　the
content　of　our　conceptions　by　means　of　experience）；　for　the　purpose　of
forming　by　their　help　any　judgements　respecting　these　objects。
　　Secondly；　what　place　shall　we　assign　to　empirical　psychology；
which　has　always　been　considered　a　part　of　metaphysics；　and　from　which
in　our　time　such　important　philosophical　results　have　been　expected；
after　the　hope　of　constructing　an　a　priori　system　of　knowledge　had
been　abandoned？　I　answer：　It　must　be　placed　by　the　side　of　empirical
physics　or　physics　proper；　that　is；　must　be　regarded　as　forming　a　part
of　applied　philosophy；　the　a　priori　principles　of　which　are
contained　in　pure　philosophy；　which　is　therefore　connected；　although
it　must　not　be　confounded；　with　psychology。　Empirical　psychology
must　therefore　be　banished　from　the　sphere　of　metaphysics；　and　is
indeed　excluded　by　the　very　idea　of　that　science。　In　conformity；
however；　with　scholastic　usage；　we　must　permit　it　to　occupy　a　place　in
metaphysics…　but　only　as　an　appendix　to　it。　We　adopt　this　course
from　motives　of　economy；　as　psychology　is　not　as　yet　full　enough　to
occupy　our　attention　as　an　independent　study；　while　it　is；　at　the　same
time；　of　too　great　importance　to　be　entirely　excluded　or　placed
where　it　has　still　less　affinity　than　it　has　with　the　subject　of
metaphysics。　It　is　a　stranger　who　has　been　long　a　guest；　and　we　make
it　wele　to　stay；　until　it　can　take　up　a　more　suitable　abode　in　a
plete　system　of　anthropology…　the　pendant　to　empirical　physics。
　　The　above　is　the　general　idea　of　metaphysics；　which；　as　more　was
expected　from　it　than　could　be　looked　for　with　justice；　and　as　these
pleasant　expectations　were　unfortunately　never　realized；　fell　into
general　disrepute。　Our　Critique　must　have　fully　convinced　the　reader
that；　although　metaphysics　cannot　form　the　foundation　of　religion；
it　must　always　be　one　of　its　most　important　bulwarks；　and　that　human
reason；　which　naturally　pursues　a　dialectical　course；　cannot　do
without　this　science；　which　checks　its　tendencies　towards　dialectic
and；　by　elevating　reason　to　a　scientific　and　clear　self…knowledge；
prevents　the　ravages　which　a　lawless　speculative　reason　would
infallibly　mit　in　the　sphere　of　morals　as　well　as　in　that　of
religion。　We　may　be　sure；　therefore；　whatever　contempt　may　be　thrown
upon　metaphysics　by　those　who　judge　a　science　not　by　its　own　nature；
but　according　to　the　accidental　effects　it　may　have　produced；　that
it　can　never　be　pletely　abandoned；　that　we　must　always　return　to　it
as　to　a　beloved　one　who　has　been　for　a　time　estranged；　because　the
questions　with　which　it　is　engaged　relate　to　the　highest　aims　of
humanity；　and　reason　must　always　labour　either　to　attain　to　settled
views　in　regard　to　these；　or　to　destroy　those　which　others　have
already　established。
　　Metaphysic；　therefore…　that　of　nature；　as　well　as　that　of　ethics；
but　in　an　especial　manner　the　criticism　which　forms　the　propaedeutic
to　all　the　operations　of　reason…　forms　properly　that　department　of
knowledge　which　may　be　termed；　in　the　truest　sense　of　the　word；
philosophy。　The　path　which　it　pursues　is　that　of　science；　which；
when　it　has　once　been　discovered；　is　never　lost；　and　never　misleads。
Mathematics；　natural　science；　the　mon　experience　of　men；　have　a
high　value　as　means；　for　the　most　part；　to　accidental　ends…　but　at
last　also；　to　those　which　are　necessary　and　essential　to　the　existence
of　humanity。　But　to　guide　them　to　this　high　goal；　they　require　the　aid
of　rational　cognition　on　the　basis　of　pure　conceptions；　which；　be　it
termed　as　it　may；　is　properly　nothing　but　metaphysics。
　　For　the　same　reason；　metaphysics　forms　likewise　the　pletion　of
the　culture　of　human　reason。　In　this　respect；　it　is　indispensable；
setting　aside　altogether　the　influence　which　it　exerts　as　a　science。
For　its　subject…matter　is　the　elements　and　highest　maxims　of　reason；
which　form　the　basis　of　the　possibility　of　some　sciences　and　of　the
use　of　all。　That；　as　a　purely　speculative　science；　it　is　more　useful
in　preventing　error　than　in　the　extension　of　knowledge；　does　not
detract　from　its　value；　on　the　contrary；　the　supreme　office　of
censor　which　it　occupies　assures　to　it　the　highest　authority　and
importance。　This　office　it　administers　for　the　purpose　of　securing
order；　harmony；　and　well…being　to　science；　and　of　directing　its
noble　and　fruitful　labours　to　the　highest　possible　aim…　the
happiness　of　all　mankind。
　　　　　　　　　　　　　CHAPTER　IV。　The　History　of　Pure　Reason。

　　This　title　is　placed　here　merely　for　the　purpose　of　designating　a
division　of　the　system　of　pure　reason　of　which　I　do　not　intend　to
treat　at　present。　I　shall　content　myself　with　casting　a　cursory
glance；　from　a　purely　transcendental　point　of　view…　that　of　the　nature
of　pure　reason…　on　the　labours　of　philosophers　up　to　the　present　time。
They　have　aimed　at　erecting　an　edifice　of　philosophy；　but　to　my　eye
this　edifice　appears　to　be　in　a　very　ruinous　condition。
　　It　is　very　remarkable；　although　naturally　it　could　not　have　been
otherwise；　that；　in　the　infancy　of　philosophy；　the　study　of　the　nature
of　God　and　the　constitution　of　a　future　world　formed　the　mencement；
rather　than　the　conclusion；　as　we　should　have　it；　of　the　speculative
efforts　of　the　human　mind。　However　rude　the　religious　conceptions
generated　by　the　remains　of　the　old　manners　and　customs　of　a　less
cultivated　time；　the　intelligent　classes　were　not　thereby　prevented
from　devoting　themselves　to　free　inquiry　into　the　existence　and　nature
of　God；　and　they　easily　saw　that　there　could　be　no　surer　way　of
pleasing　the　invisible　ruler　of　the　world；　and　of　attaining　to
happiness　in　another　world　at　least；　than　a　good　and　honest　course
of　life　in　this。　Thus　theology　and　morals　formed　the　two　chief
motives；　or　rather　the　points　of　attraction　in　all　abstract　inquiries。
But　it　was　the　former　that　especially　occupied　the　attention　of
speculative　reason；　and　which　afterwards　became　so　celebrated　under
the　name　of　metaphysics。
　　I　shall　not　at　present　indicate　the　periods　of　time　at　which　the
greatest　changes　in　metaphysics　took　place；　but　shall　merely　give　a
hasty　sketch　of　the　different　ideas　which　occasioned　the　most
important　revolutions　in　this　sphere　of　thought。　There　are　three
different　ends　in　relation　to　which　these　revolutions　have　taken
place。
　　1。　In　relation　to　the　object　of　the　cognition　of　reason；
philosophers　may　be　divided　into　sensualists　and　intellectualists。
Epicurus　may　be　regarded　as　the　head　of　the　former；　Plato　of　the
latter。　The　distinction　here　signalized；　subtle　as　it　is；　dates　from
the　earliest　times；　and　was　long　maintained。　The　former　asserted
that　reality　resides　in　sensuous　objects　alone；　and　that　everything
else　is　merely　imaginary；　the　latter；　that　the　senses　are　the
parents　of　illusion　and　that　truth　is　to　be　found　in　the　understanding
alone。　The　former　did　not　deny　to　the　conceptions　of　the　understanding
a　certain　kind　of　reality；　but　with　them　it　was　merely　logical；　with
the　others　it　was　mystical。　The　former　admitted　intellectual
conceptions；　but　declared　that　sensuous　objects　alone　possessed　real
existence。　The　latter　maintained　that　all　real　objects　were
intelligible；　and　believed　that　the　pure　understanding　possessed　a
faculty　of　intuition　apart　from　sense；　which；　in　their　opinion；　served
only　to　confuse　the　ideas　of　the　understanding。
　　2。　In　relation　to　the　origin　of　the　pure　cognitions　of　reason；　we
find　one　school　maintaining　that　they　are　derived　entirely　from
experience；　and　another　that　they　have　their　origin　in　reason　alone。
Aristotle　may　be　regarded　as　the　bead　of　the　empiricists；　and　Plato　of
the　noologists。　Locke；　the　follower　of　Aristotle　in　modern　times；
and　Leibnitz　of　Plato　（although　he　cannot　be　said　to　have　imitated　him
in　his　mysticism）；　have　not　been　able　to　bring　this　question　to　a
settled　conclusion。　The　procedure　of