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！
Creator… if our wills are not free； and the soul is divisible and
subject to corruption just like matter… the ideas and principles of
morality lose all validity and fall with the transcendental ideas
which constituted their theoretical support。
2。 But empiricism； in pensation； holds out to reason； in its
speculative interests； certain important advantages； far exceeding any
that the dogmatist can promise us。 For； when employed by the
empiricist； understanding is always upon its proper ground of
investigation… the field of possible experience； the laws of which
it can explore； and thus extend its cognition securely and with
clear intelligence without being stopped by limits in any direction。
Here can it and ought it to find and present to intuition its proper
object… not only in itself； but in all its relations； or； if it employ
conceptions； upon this ground it can always present the
corresponding images in clear and unmistakable intuitions。 It is quite
unnecessary for it to renounce the guidance of nature； to attach
itself to ideas； the objects of which it cannot know； because； as mere
intellectual entities； they cannot be presented in any intuition。 On
the contrary； it is not even permitted to abandon its proper
occupation； under the pretence that it has been brought to a
conclusion （for it never can be）； and to pass into the region of
idealizing reason and transcendent conceptions； which it is not
required to observe and explore the laws of nature； but merely to
think and to imagine… secure from being contradicted by facts； because
they have not been called as witnesses； but passed by； or perhaps
subordinated to the so…called higher interests and considerations of
pure reason。
Hence the empiricist will never allow himself to accept any epoch of
nature for the first… the absolutely primal state； he will not believe
that there can be limits to his outlook into her wide domains； nor
pass from the objects of nature； which he can satisfactorily explain
by means of observation and mathematical thought… which he can
determine synthetically in intuition； to those which neither sense nor
imagination can ever present in concreto； he will not concede the
existence of a faculty in nature； operating independently of the
laws of nature… a concession which would introduce uncertainty into
the procedure of the understanding； which is guided by necessary
laws to the observation of phenomena； nor； finally； will he permit
himself to seek a cause beyond nature； inasmuch as we know nothing but
it； and from it alone receive an objective basis for all our
conceptions and instruction in the unvarying laws of things。
In truth； if the empirical philosopher had no other purpose in the
establishment of his antithesis than to check the presumption of a
reason which mistakes its true destination； which boasts of its
insight and its knowledge； just where all insight and knowledge
cease to exist； and regards that which is valid only in relation to
a practical interest； as an advancement of the speculative interests
of the mind （in order； when it is convenient for itself； to break
the thread of our physical investigations； and； under pretence of
extending our cognition； connect them with transcendental ideas； by
means of which we really know only that we know nothing）… if； I say；
the empiricist rested satisfied with this benefit； the principle
advanced by him would be a maxim remending moderation in the
pretensions of reason and modesty in its affirmations； and at the same
time would direct us to the right mode of extending the province of
the understanding； by the help of the only true teacher； experience。
In obedience to this advice； intellectual hypotheses and faith would
not be called in aid of our practical interests； nor should we
introduce them under the pompous titles of science and insight。 For
speculative cognition cannot find an objective basis any other where
than in experience； and； when we overstep its limits our synthesis；
which requires ever new cognitions independent of experience； has no
substratum of intuition upon which to build。
But if… as often happens… empiricism； in relation to ideas；
bees itself dogmatic and boldly denies that which is above the
sphere of its phenomenal cognition； it falls itself into the error
of intemperance… an error which is here all the more reprehensible； as
thereby the practical interest of reason receives an irreparable
injury。
And this constitutes the opposition between Epicureanism* and
Platonism。
*It is； however； still a matter of doubt whether Epicurus ever
propounded these principles as directions for the objective employment
of the understanding。 If； indeed； they were nothing more than maxims
for the speculative exercise of reason； he gives evidence therein a
more genuine philosophic spirit than any of the philosophers of
antiquity。 That； in the explanation of phenomena； we must proceed as
if the field of inquiry had neither limits in space nor mencement
in time； that we must be satisfied with the teaching of experience
in reference to the material of which the world is posed； that we must
not look for any other mode of the origination of events than that
which is determined by the unalterable laws of nature； and finally；
that we not employ the hypothesis of a cause distinct from the world
to account for a phenomenon or for the world itself… are principles
for the extension of speculative philosophy； and the discovery of
the true sources of the principles of morals； which； however little
conformed to in the present day； are undoubtedly correct。 At the
same time； any one desirous of ignoring； in mere speculation； these
dogmatical propositions； need not for that reason be accused of
denying them。
Both Epicurus and Plato assert more in their systems than they know。
The former encourages and advances science… although to the
prejudice of the practical； the latter presents us with excellent
principles for the investigation of the practical； but； in relation to
everything regarding which we can attain to speculative cognition；
permits reason to append idealistic explanations of natural phenomena；
to the great injury of physical investigation。
3。 In regard to the third motive for the preliminary choice of a
party in this war of assertions； it seems very extraordinary that
empiricism should be utterly unpopular。 We should be inclined to
believe that the mon understanding would receive it with
pleasure… promising as it does to satisfy it without passing the
bounds of experience and its connected order； while transcendental
dogmatism obliges it to rise to conceptions which far surpass the
intelligence and ability of the most practised thinkers。 But in
this； in truth； is to be found its real motive。 For the mon
understanding thus finds itself in a situation where not even the most
learned can have the advantage of it。 If it understands little or
nothing about these transcendental conceptions； no one can boast of
understanding any more； and although it may not express itself in so
scholastically correct a manner as others； it can busy itself with
reasoning and arguments without end； wander