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！
of a science in general； it ought to prehend； first； a Doctrine
of the Elements； and； secondly； a Doctrine of the Method of pure
reason。 Each of these main divisions will have its subdivisions； the
separate reasons for which we cannot here particularize。 Only so
much seems necessary； by way of introduction of premonition； that
there are two sources of human knowledge （which probably spring from a
mon； but to us unknown root）； namely； sense and understanding。 By
the former； objects are given to us； by the latter； thought。 So far as
the faculty of sense may contain representations a priori； which
form the conditions under which objects are given； in so far it
belongs to transcendental philosophy。 The transcendental doctrine of
sense must form the first part of our science of elements； because the
conditions under which alone the objects of human knowledge are
given must precede those under which they are thought。
I。
TRANSCENDENTAL DOCTRINE OF ELEMENTS。
FIRST PART。 TRANSCENDENTAL AESTHETIC。
SS I。 Introductory。
In whatsoever mode； or by whatsoever means； our knowledge may relate
to objects； it is at least quite clear that the only manner in which
it immediately relates to them is by means of an intuition。 To this as
the indispensable groundwork； all thought points。 But an intuition can
take place only in so far as the object is given to us。 This； again；
is only possible； to man at least； on condition that the object affect
the mind in a certain manner。 The capacity for receiving
representations （receptivity） through the mode in which we are
affected by objects； objects； is called sensibility。 By means of
sensibility； therefore； objects are given to us； and it alone
furnishes us with intuitions； by the understanding they are thought；
and from it arise conceptions。 But an thought must directly； or
indirectly； by means of certain signs； relate ultimately to
intuitions； consequently； with us； to sensibility； because in no other
way can an object be given to us。
The effect of an object upon the faculty of representation； so far
as we are affected by the said object； is sensation。 That sort of
intuition which relates to an object by means of sensation is called
an empirical intuition。 The undetermined object of an empirical
intuition is called phenomenon。 That which in the phenomenon
corresponds to the sensation； I term its matter； but that which
effects that the content of the phenomenon can be arranged under
certain relations； I call its form。 But that in which our sensations
are merely arranged； and by which they are susceptible of assuming a
certain form； cannot be itself sensation。 It is； then； the matter of
all phenomena that is given to us a posteriori； the form must lie
ready a priori for them in the mind； and consequently can be
regarded separately from all sensation。
I call all representations pure； in the transcendental meaning of
the word； wherein nothing is met with that belongs to sensation。 And
accordingly we find existing in the mind a priori； the pure form of
sensuous intuitions in general； in which all the manifold content of
the phenomenal world is arranged and viewed under certain relations。
This pure form of sensibility I shall call pure intuition。 Thus； if
I take away from our representation of a body all that the
understanding thinks as belonging to it； as substance； force；
divisibility； etc。； and also whatever belongs to sensation； as
impenetrability； hardness； colour； etc。； yet there is still
something left us from this empirical intuition； namely； extension and
shape。 These belong to pure intuition； which exists a priori in the
mind； as a mere form of sensibility； and without any real object of
the senses or any sensation。
The science of all the principles of sensibility a priori； I call
transcendental aesthetic。* There must； then； be such a science forming
the first part of the transcendental doctrine of elements； in
contradistinction to that part which contains the principles of pure
thought； and which is called transcendental logic。
*The Germans are the only people who at present use this word to
indicate what others call the critique of taste。 At the foundation
of this term lies the disappointed hope； which the eminent analyst；
Baumgarten； conceived； of subjecting the criticism of the beautiful to
principles of reason； and so of elevating its rules into a science。
But his endeavours were vain。 For the said rules or criteria are； in
respect to their chief sources； merely empirical； consequently never
can serve as determinate laws a priori； by which our judgement in
matters of taste is to be directed。 It is rather our judgement which
forms the proper test as to the correctness of the principles。 On this
account it is advisable to give up the use of the term as
designating the critique of taste； and to apply it solely to that
doctrine； which is true science… the science of the laws of
sensibility… and thus e nearer to the language and the sense of the
ancients in their well…known division of the objects of cognition into
aiotheta kai noeta； or to share it with speculative philosophy； and
employ it partly in a transcendental； partly in a psychological
signification。
In the science of transcendental aesthetic accordingly； we shall
first isolate sensibility or the sensuous faculty； by separating
from it all that is annexed to its perceptions by the conceptions of
understanding； so that nothing be left but empirical intuition。 In the
next place we shall take away from this intuition all that belongs
to sensation； so that nothing may remain but pure intuition； and the
mere form of phenomena； which is all that the sensibility can afford a
priori。 From this investigation it will be found that there are two
pure forms of sensuous intuition； as principles of knowledge a priori；
namely； space and time。 To the consideration of these we shall now
proceed。
SECTION I。 Of Space。
SS 2。 Metaphysical Exposition of this Conception。
By means of the external sense （a property of the mind）； we
represent to ourselves objects as without us； and these all in
space。 Herein alone are their shape； dimensions； and relations to each
other determined or determinable。 The internal sense； by means of
which the mind contemplates itself or its internal state； gives；
indeed； no intuition of the soul as an object； yet there is
nevertheless a determinate form； under which alone the contemplation
of our internal state is possible； so that all which relates to the
inward determinations of the mind is represented in relations of time。
Of time we cannot have any external intuition； any more than we can
have an internal intuition of space。 What then are time and space？ Are
they real existences？ Or； are they merely relations or
determinations of things； such； however； as would equally belong to
these things in themselves； though they should never bee objects of
intuition； or； are they such as belong only to the form of
intuition； and consequently to the subjective constitution of the
mind； without which these predi