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！
shall not decline the challenge to detect the fallacy and destroy
the pretensions of every attempt of speculative theology。 And yet
the hope of better fortune never deserts those who are accustomed to
the dogmatical mode of procedure。 I shall； therefore； restrict
myself to the simple and equitable demand that such reasoners will
demonstrate； from the nature of the human mind as well as from that of
the other sources of knowledge； how we are to proceed to extend our
cognition completely a priori； and to carry it to that point where
experience abandons us； and no means exist of guaranteeing the
objective reality of our conceptions。 In whatever way the
understanding may have attained to a conception； the existence of
the object of the conception cannot be discovered in it by analysis；
because the cognition of the existence of the object depends upon
the object's being posited and given in itself apart from the
conception。 But it is utterly impossible to go beyond our
conception； without the aid of experience… which presents to the
mind nothing but phenomena； or to attain by the help of mere
conceptions to a conviction of the existence of new kinds of objects
or supernatural beings。
But although pure speculative reason is far from sufficient to
demonstrate the existence of a Supreme Being； it is of the highest
utility in correcting our conception of this being… on the supposition
that we can attain to the cognition of it by some other means… in
making it consistent with itself and with all other conceptions of
intelligible objects； clearing it from all that is incompatible with
the conception of an ens summun； and eliminating from it all
limitations or admixtures of empirical elements。
Transcendental theology is still therefore； notwithstanding its
objective insufficiency； of importance in a negative respect； it is
useful as a test of the procedure of reason when engaged with pure
ideas； no other than a transcendental standard being in this case
admissible。 For if； from a practical point of view； the hypothesis
of a Supreme and All…sufficient Being is to maintain its validity
without opposition； it must be of the highest importance to define
this conception in a correct and rigorous manner… as the
transcendental conception of a necessary being； to eliminate all
phenomenal elements （anthropomorphism in its most extended
signification）； and at the same time to overflow all contradictory
assertions… be they atheistic； deistic； or anthropomorphic。 This is of
course very easy； as the same arguments which demonstrated the
inability of human reason to affirm the existence of a Supreme Being
must be alike sufficient to prove the invalidity of its denial。 For it
is impossible to gain from the pure speculation of reason
demonstration that there exists no Supreme Being； as the ground of all
that exists； or that this being possesses none of those properties
which we regard as analogical with the dynamical qualities of a
thinking being； or that； as the anthropomorphists would have us
believe； it is subject to all the limitations which sensibility
imposes upon those intelligences which exist in the world of
experience。
A Supreme Being is； therefore； for the speculative reason； a mere
ideal； though a faultless one… a conception which perfects and
crowns the system of human cognition； but the objective reality of
which can neither be proved nor disproved by pure reason。 If this
defect is ever supplied by a moral theology； the problematic
transcendental theology which has preceded； will have been at least
serviceable as demonstrating the mental necessity existing for the
conception； by the complete determination of it which it has
furnished； and the ceaseless testing of the conclusions of a reason
often deceived by sense； and not always in harmony with its own ideas。
The attributes of necessity； infinitude； unity； existence apart from
the world （and not as a world soul）； eternity （free from conditions of
time）； omnipresence （free from conditions of space）； omnipotence；
and others； are pure transcendental predicates； and thus the
accurate conception of a Supreme Being； which every theology requires；
is furnished by transcendental theology alone。
APPENDIX
APPENDIX。
Of the Regulative Employment of the Ideas of
Pure Reason。
The result of all the dialectical attempts of pure reason not only
confirms the truth of what we have already proved in our
Transcendental Analytic； namely； that all inferences which would
lead us beyond the limits of experience are fallacious and groundless；
but it at the same time teaches us this important lesson； that human
reason has a natural inclination to overstep these limits； and that
transcendental ideas are as much the natural property of the reason as
categories are of the understanding。 There exists this difference；
however； that while the categories never mislead us； outward objects
being always in perfect harmony therewith； ideas are the parents of
irresistible illusions； the severest and most subtle criticism being
required to save us from the fallacies which they induce。
Whatever is grounded in the nature of our powers will be found to be
in harmony with the final purpose and proper employment of these
powers； when once we have discovered their true direction and aim。
We are entitled to suppose； therefore； that there exists a mode of
employing transcendental ideas which is proper and immanent； although；
when we mistake their meaning； and regard them as conceptions of
actual things； their mode of application is transcendent and delusive。
For it is not the idea itself； but only the employment of the idea
in relation to possible experience； that is transcendent or
immanent。 An idea is employed transcendently； when it is applied to an
object falsely believed to be adequate with and to correspond to it；
imminently； when it is applied solely to the employment of the
understanding in the sphere of experience。 Thus all errors of
subreptio… of misapplication； are to be ascribed to defects of
judgement； and not to understanding or reason。
Reason never has an immediate relation to an object； it relates
immediately to the understanding alone。 It is only through the
understanding that it can be employed in the field of experience。 It
does not form conceptions of objects； it merely arranges them and
gives to them that unity which they are capable of possessing when the
sphere of their application has been extended as widely as possible。
Reason avails itself of the conception of the understanding for the
sole purpose of producing totality in the different series。 This
totality the understanding does not concern itself with； its only
occupation is the connection of experiences； by which series of
conditions in accordance with conceptions are established。 The
object of reason is； therefore； the understanding and its proper
destination。 As the latter brings unity into the diversity of
objects by means of its conceptions； so the former brings unity into
the diversity of conceptions by means of ideas； as it sets the final
aim of a collective unity to the operations of the understanding；
which without this occupies itself with a distributive unity alone。
I accordingly maintain that transcendental ideas can never be
employed as constitutive ideas； that they cannot be conceptions of
objects； and that； when thus considered； they assume a fallacious
and dialectical character。 But； on the other hand； they are capable of
an admirable and indispensably necessary application to objects… as
regulative ideas； directing the understanding to a certain aim； the
guiding lines towards which all its laws follow； and in which they all
meet in one point。 This point… though a mere idea （focus imaginarius）；
that is； not a point from which the conceptions of the understanding
do really proceed； for it lies beyond the sphere of possible
experience… serves； notwithstanding； to give to these conceptions
the greatest possible unity combined with the greatest possible
extension。 Hence arises the natural illusion which induces us to
believe that these lines proceed from an object which lies out of
the sphere of empirical cognition； just as objects reflected in a
mirror appear to be behind it。 But this illusion… which we may
hinder from imposing upon us… is necessary and unavoidable； if we
desire to see； not only those objects which lie before us； but those
which are at a great distance behind us； that is to say； when； in
the present case； we direct the aims of the understanding； beyond
every given experience； towards an extension as great as can
possibly be attained。
If we review our cognitions in their entire extent； we shall find
that the peculiar business of reason is to arrange them into a system；
that is to say； to give them connection according to a principle。 This
unity presuppos