友情提示:如果本网页打开太慢或显示不完整,请尝试鼠标右键“刷新”本网页!阅读过程发现任何错误请告诉我们,谢谢!! 报告错误
飞读中文网 返回本书目录 我的书架 我的书签 TXT全本下载 进入书吧 加入书签

the+critique+of+pure+reason_纯粹理性批判-第40章

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 possible intuition to the unity of apperception; there is
necessary a determinate mode of intuition; whereby this manifold is
given; although my own existence is certainly not mere phenomenon
(much less mere illusion); the determination of my existence* Can only
take place conformably to the form of the internal sense; according to
the particular mode in which the manifold which I conjoin is given
in internal intuition; and I have therefore no knowledge of myself
as I am; but merely as I appear to myself。 The consciousness of self
is thus very far from a knowledge of self; in which I do not use the
categories; whereby I cogitate an object; by means of the
conjunction of the manifold in one apperception。 In the same way as
I require; for the sake of the cognition of an object distinct from
myself; not only the thought of an object in general (in the
category); but also an intuition by which to determine that general
conception; in the same way do I require; in order to the cognition of
myself; not only the consciousness of myself or the thought that I
think myself; but in addition an intuition of the manifold in
myself; by which to determine this thought。 It is true that I exist as
an intelligence which is conscious only of its faculty of
conjunction or synthesis; but subjected in relation to the manifold
which this intelligence has to conjoin to a limitative conjunction
called the internal sense。 My intelligence (that is; I) can render
that conjunction or synthesis perceptible only according to the
relations of time; which are quite beyond the proper sphere of the
conceptions of the understanding and consequently cognize itself in
respect to an intuition (which cannot possibly be intellectual; nor
given by the understanding); only as it appears to itself; and not
as it would cognize itself; if its intuition were intellectual。

  *The 〃I think〃 expresses the act of determining my own existence。 My
existence is thus already given by the act of consciousness; but the
mode in which I must determine my existence; that is; the mode in
which I must place the manifold belonging to my existence; is not
thereby given。 For this purpose intuition of self is required; and
this intuition possesses a form given a priori; namely; time; which is
sensuous; and belongs to our receptivity of the determinable。 Now;
as I do not possess another intuition of self which gives the
determining in me (of the spontaneity of which I am conscious);
prior to the act of determination; in the same manner as time gives
the determinable; it is clear that I am unable to determine my own
existence as that of a spontaneous being; but I am only able to
represent to myself the spontaneity of my thought; that is; of my
determination; and my existence remains ever determinable in a
purely sensuous manner; that is to say; like the existence of a
phenomenon。 But it is because of this spontaneity that I call myself
an intelligence。

      Transcendental Deduction of the universally possible
        employment in experience of the Pure Conceptions
                of the Understanding。 SS 22

  In the metaphysical deduction; the a priori origin of categories was
proved by their plete accordance with the general logical of
thought; in the transcendental deduction was exhibited the possibility
of the categories as a priori cognitions of objects of an intuition in
general (SS 16 and 17)。At present we are about to explain the
possibility of cognizing; a priori; by means of the categories; all
objects which can possibly be presented to our senses; not; indeed;
according to the form of their intuition; but according to the laws of
their conjunction or synthesis; and thus; as it were; of prescribing
laws to nature and even of rendering nature possible。 For if the
categories were inadequate to this task; it would not be evident to us
why everything that is presented to our senses must be subject to
those laws which have an a priori origin in the understanding itself。
  I premise that by the term synthesis of apprehension I understand
the bination of the manifold in an empirical intuition; whereby
perception; that is; empirical consciousness of the intuition (as
phenomenon); is possible。
  We have a priori forms of the external and internal sensuous
intuition in the representations of space and time; and to these
must the synthesis of apprehension of the manifold in a phenomenon
be always formable; because the synthesis itself can only take
place according to these forms。 But space and time are not merely
forms of sensuous intuition; but intuitions themselves (which
contain a manifold); and therefore contain a priori the
determination of the unity of this manifold。* (See the Transcendent
Aesthetic。) Therefore is unity of the synthesis of the manifold
without or within us; consequently also a conjunction to which all
that is to be represented as determined in space or time must
correspond; given a priori along with (not in) these intuitions; as
the condition of the synthesis of all apprehension of them。 But this
synthetical unity can be no other than that of the conjunction of
the manifold of a given intuition in general; in a primitive act of
consciousness; according to the categories; but applied to our
sensuous intuition。 Consequently all synthesis; whereby alone is
even perception possible; is subject to the categories。 And; as
experience is cognition by means of conjoined perceptions; the
categories are conditions of the possibility of experience and are
therefore valid a priori for all objects of experience。

  *Space represented as an object (as geometry really requires it to
be) contains more than the mere form of the intuition; namely; a
bination of the manifold given according to the form of sensibility
into a representation that can be intuited; so that the form of the
intuition gives us merely the manifold; but the formal intuition gives
unity of representation。 In the aesthetic; I regarded this unity as
belonging entirely to sensibility; for the purpose of indicating
that it antecedes all conceptions; although it presupposes a synthesis
which does not belong to sense; through which alone; however; all
our conceptions of space and time are possible。 For as by means of
this unity alone (the understanding determining the sensibility) space
and time are given as intuitions; it follows that the unity of this
intuition a priori belongs to space and time; and not to the
conception of the understanding (SS 20)。

  When; then; for example; I make the empirical intuition of a house
by apprehension of the manifold contained therein into a perception;
the necessary unity of space and of my external sensuous intuition
lies at the foundation of this act; and I; as it were; draw the form
of the house conformably to this synthetical unity of the manifold
in space。 But this very synthetical unity remains; even when I
abstract the form of space; and has its seat in the understanding; and
is in fact the category of the synthesis of the homogeneous in an
intuition; that is to say; the category of quantity; to which the
aforesaid synthesis of apprehension; that is; the percepti
返回目录 上一页 下一页 回到顶部 0 0
未阅读完?加入书签已便下次继续阅读!
温馨提示: 温看小说的同时发表评论,说出自己的看法和其它小伙伴们分享也不错哦!发表书评还可以获得积分和经验奖励,认真写原创书评 被采纳为精评可以获得大量金币、积分和经验奖励哦!