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！
the question； whether the employment of these pure conceptions of
the understanding ought to be merely empirical or also transcendental；
in other words； whether the categories； as conditions of a possible
experience； relate a priori solely to phenomena； or whether； as
conditions of the possibility of things in general； their
application can be extended to objects as things in themselves。 For we
have there seen that conceptions are quite impossible； and utterly
without signification； unless either to them； or at least to the
elements of which they consist； an object be given； and that；
consequently； they cannot possibly apply to objects as things in
themselves without regard to the question whether and how these may be
given to us； and； further； that the only manner in which objects can
be given to us is by means of the modification of our sensibility；
and； finally； that pure a priori conceptions； in addition to the
function of the understanding in the category； must contain a priori
formal conditions of sensibility （of the internal sense； namely）；
which again contain the general condition under which alone the
category can be applied to any object。 This formal and pure
condition of sensibility； to which the conception of the understanding
is restricted in its employment； we shall name the schema of the
conception of the understanding； and the procedure of the
understanding with these schemata we shall call the schematism of
the pure understanding。
The schema is； in itself； always a mere product of the
imagination。 But； as the synthesis of imagination has for its aim no
single intuition； but merely unity in the determination of
sensibility； the schema is clearly distinguishable from the image。
Thus； if I place five points one after another。。。。 this is an image of
the number five。 On the other hand； if I only think a number in
general； which may be either five or a hundred； this thought is rather
the representation of a method of representing in an image a sum
（e。g。； a thousand） in conformity with a conception； than the image
itself； an image which I should find some little difficulty in
reviewing； and paring with the conception。 Now this
representation of a general procedure of the imagination to present
its image to a conception； I call the schema of this conception。
In truth； it is not images of objects； but schemata； which lie at
the foundation of our pure sensuous conceptions。 No image could ever
be adequate to our conception of a triangle in general。 For the
generalness of the conception it never could attain to； as this
includes under itself all triangles； whether right…angled；
acute…angled； etc。； whilst the image would always be limited to a
single part of this sphere。 The schema of the triangle can exist
nowhere else than in thought； and it indicates a rule of the synthesis
of the imagination in regard to pure figures in space。 Still less is
an object of experience； or an image of the object； ever to the
empirical conception。 On the contrary； the conception always relates
immediately to the schema of the imagination； as a rule for the
determination of our intuition； in conformity with a certain general
conception。 The conception of a dog indicates a rule； according to
which my imagination can delineate the figure of a four…footed
animal in general； without being limited to any particular
individual form which experience presents to me； or indeed to any
possible image that I can represent to myself in concreto。 This
schematism of our understanding in regard to phenomena and their
mere form； is an art； hidden in the depths of the human soul； whose
true modes of action we shall only with difficulty discover and
unveil。 Thus much only can we say： 〃The image is a product of the
empirical faculty of the productive imagination… the schema of
sensuous conceptions （of figures in space； for example） is a
product； and； as it were； a monogram of the pure imagination a priori；
whereby and according to which images first bee possible； which；
however； can be connected with the conception only mediately by
means of the schema which they indicate； and are in themselves never
fully adequate to it。〃 On the other hand； the schema of a pure
conception of the understanding is something that cannot be reduced
into any image… it is nothing else than the pure synthesis expressed
by the category； conformably； to a rule of unity according to
conceptions。 It is a transcendental product of the imagination； a
product which concerns the determination of the internal sense；
according to conditions of its form （time） in respect to all
representations； in so far as these representations must be
conjoined a priori in one conception； conformably to the unity of
apperception。
Without entering upon a dry and tedious analysis of the essential
requisites of transcendental schemata of the pure conceptions of the
understanding； we shall rather proceed at once to give an
explanation of them according to the order of the categories； and in
connection therewith。
For the external sense the pure image of all quantities
（quantorum） is space； the pure image of all objects of sense in
general； is time。 But the pure schema of quantity （quantitatis） as a
conception of the understanding； is number； a representation which
prehends the successive addition of one to one （homogeneous
quantities）。 Thus； number is nothing else than the unity of the
synthesis of the manifold in a homogeneous intuition； by means of my
generating time itself in my apprehension of the intuition。
Reality； in the pure conception of the understanding； is that
which corresponds to a sensation in general； that； consequently； the
conception of which indicates a being （in time）。 Negation is that
the conception of which represents a not…being （in time）。 The
opposition of these two consists therefore in the difference of one
and the same time； as a time filled or a time empty。 Now as time is
only the form of intuition； consequently of objects as phenomena； that
which in objects corresponds to sensation is the transcendental matter
of all objects as things in themselves （Sachheit； reality）。 Now
every sensation has a degree or quantity by which it can fill time；
that is to say； the internal sense in respect of the representation of
an object； more or less； until it vanishes into nothing （= 0 =
negatio）。 Thus there is a relation and connection between reality
and negation； or rather a transition from the former to the latter；
which makes every reality representable to us as a quantum； and the
schema of a reality as the quantity of something in so far as it fills
time； is exactly this continuous and uniform generation of the reality
in time； as we descend in time from the sensation which has a
certain degree； down to the vanishing thereof； or gradually ascend
from negation to the quantity thereof。
The schema of substance is the permanence of the real in time；
that is； the representation of it as a substratum of the empirical
determination of time； a substratum which therefore remains； whilst
all else changes。 （Time passes not； but in it passes the existence
of the changeable。 To time； therefore