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！
Every general proposition； even if derived from experience by the
process of induction； may serve as the major in a syllogism； but it is
not for that reason a principle。 Mathematical axioms （for example；
there can be only one straight line between two points） are general
a priori cognitions； and are therefore rightly denominated principles；
relatively to the cases which can be subsumed under them。 But I cannot
for this reason say that I cognize this property of a straight line
from principles… I cognize it only in pure intuition。
Cognition from principles； then； is that cognition in which I
cognize the particular in the general by means of conceptions。 Thus
every syllogism is a form of the deduction of a cognition from a
principle。 For the major always gives a conception； through which
everything that is subsumed under the condition thereof is cognized
according to a principle。 Now as every general cognition may serve
as the major in a syllogism； and the understanding presents us with
such general a priori propositions； they may be termed principles；
in respect of their possible use。
But if we consider these principles of the pure understanding in
relation to their origin； we shall find them to be anything rather
than cognitions from conceptions。 For they would not even be
possible a priori； if we could not rely on the assistance of pure
intuition （in mathematics）； or on that of the conditions of a possible
experience。 That everything that happens has a cause； cannot be
concluded from the general conception of that which happens； on the
contrary the principle of causality instructs us as to the mode of
obtaining from that which happens a determinate empirical conception。
Synthetical cognitions from conceptions the understanding cannot
supply； and they alone are entitled to be called principles。 At the
same time； all general propositions may be termed parative
principles。
It has been a long…cherished wish… that （who knows how late）； may
one day； be happily acplished… that the principles of the endless
variety of civil laws should be investigated and exposed； for in
this way alone can we find the secret of simplifying legislation。
But in this case； laws are nothing more than limitations of our
freedom upon conditions under which it subsists in perfect harmony
with itself； they consequently have for their object that which is
pletely our own work； and of which we ourselves may be the cause by
means of these conceptions。 But how objects as things in themselves…
how the nature of things is subordinated to principles and is to be
determined。 according to conceptions； is a question which it seems
well nigh impossible to answer。 Be this； however； as it may… for on
this point our investigation is yet to be made… it is at least
manifest from what we have said that cognition from principles is
something very different from cognition by means of the understanding；
which may indeed precede other cognitions in the form of a
principle； but in itself… in so far as it is synthetical… is neither
based upon mere thought； nor contains a general proposition drawn from
conceptions alone shall prehend
The understanding may be a faculty for the production of unity of
phenomena by virtue of rules； the reason is a faculty for the
production of unity of rules （of the understanding） under
principles。 Reason； therefore； never applies directly to experience；
or to any sensuous object； its object is； on the contrary； the
understanding； to the manifold cognition of which it gives a unity a
priori by means of conceptions… a unity which may be called rational
unity； and which is of a nature very different from that of the
unity produced by the understanding。
The above is the general conception of the faculty of reason； in
so far as it has been possible to make it prehensible in the
absence of examples。 These will be given in the sequel。
B。 OF THE LOGICAL USE OF REASON。
A distinction is monly made between that which is immediately
cognized and that which is inferred or concluded。 That in a figure
which is bounded by three straight lines there are three angles； is an
immediate cognition； but that these angles are together equal to two
right angles； is an inference or conclusion。 Now； as we are constantly
employing this mode of thought and have thus bee quite accustomed
to it； we no longer remark the above distinction； and； as in the
case of the so…called deceptions of sense； consider as immediately
perceived； what has really been inferred。 In every reasoning or
syllogism； there is a fundamental proposition； afterwards a second
drawn from it； and finally the conclusion； which connects the truth in
the first with the truth in the second… and that infallibly。 If the
judgement concluded is so contained in the first proposition that it
can be deduced from it without the meditation of a third notion； the
conclusion is called immediate （consequentia immediata）； I prefer
the term conclusion of the understanding。 But if； in addition to the
fundamental cognition； a second judgement is necessary for the
production of the conclusion； it is called a conclusion of the reason。
In the proposition： All men are mortal； are contained the
propositions： Some men are mortal； Nothing that is not mortal is a
man； and these are therefore immediate conclusions from the first。
On the other hand； the proposition： all the learned are mortal； is not
contained in the main proposition （for the conception of a learned man
does not occur in it）； and it can be deduced from the main proposition
only by means of a mediating judgement。
In every syllogism I first cogitate a rule （the major） by means of
the understanding。 In the next place I subsume a cognition under the
condition of the rule （and this is the minor） by means of the
judgement。 And finally I determine my cognition by means of the
predicate of the rule （this is the conclusio）； consequently； I
determine it a priori by means of the reason。 The relations；
therefore； which the major proposition； as the rule； represents
between a cognition and its condition； constitute the different
kinds of syllogisms。 These are just threefold… analogously with all
judgements； in so far as they differ in the mode of expressing the
relation of a cognition in the understanding… namely； categorical；
hypothetical； and disjunctive。
When as often happens； the conclusion is a judgement which may
follow from other given judgements； through which a perfectly
different object is cogitated； I endeavour to discover in the
understanding whether the assertion in this conclusion does not
stand under certain conditions according to a general rule。 If I
find such a condition； and if the object mentioned in the conclusion
can be subsumed under the given condition； then this conclusion
follows from a rule which is also valid for other objects of
cognition。 From this we see that reason endeavours to subject the
great variety of the cognitions of the understanding to the smallest
possible number of principles （general conditions）； and thus to
produce in it the highest unity。
C。 OF THE PURE USE OF REASON。
Can we isolat