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 very same grounds of proof which established in the thesis the
existence of a supreme being； demonstrated in the antithesis… and with
equal strictness… the non…existence of such a being。 We found；
first； that a necessary being exists； because the whole time past
contains the series of all conditions； and with it； therefore； the
unconditioned （the necessary）； secondly； that there does not exist any
necessary being； for the same reason； that the whole time past
contains the series of all conditions… which are themselves；
therefore； in the aggregate； conditioned。 The cause of this seeming
incongruity is as follows。 We attend； in the first argument； solely to
the absolute totality of the series of conditions； the one of which
determines the other in time； and thus arrive at a necessary
unconditioned。 In the second； we consider； on the contrary； the
contingency of everything that is determined in the series of time…
for every event is preceded by a time； in which the condition itself
must be determined as conditioned… and thus everything that is
unconditioned or absolutely necessary disappears。 In both； the mode of
proof is quite in accordance with the common procedure of human
reason； which often falls into discord with itself； from considering
an object from two different points of view。 Herr von Mairan
regarded the controversy between two celebrated astronomers； which
arose from a similar difficulty as to the choice of a proper
standpoint； as a phenomenon of sufficient importance to warrant a
separate treatise on the subject。 The one concluded： the moon revolves
on its own axis； because it constantly presents the same side to the
earth； the other declared that the moon does not revolve on its own
axis； for the same reason。 Both conclusions were perfectly correct；
according to the point of view from which the motions of the moon were
considered。
SECTION III。 Of the Interest of Reason in these
Self…contradictions。
We have thus completely before us the dialectical procedure of the
cosmological ideas。 No possible experience can present us with an
object adequate to them in extent。 Nay； more； reason itself cannot
cogitate them as according with the general laws of experience。 And
yet they are not arbitrary fictions of thought。 On the contrary；
reason； in its uninterrupted progress in the empirical synthesis； is
necessarily conducted to them； when it endeavours to free from all
conditions and to comprehend in its unconditioned totality that
which can only be determined conditionally in accordance with the laws
of experience。 These dialectical propositions are so many attempts
to solve four natural and unavoidable problems of reason。 There are
neither more； nor can there be less； than this number； because there
are no other series of synthetical hypotheses； limiting a priori the
empirical synthesis。
The brilliant claims of reason striving to extend its dominion
beyond the limits of experience； have been represented above only in
dry formulae； which contain merely the grounds of its pretensions。
They have； besides； in conformity with the character of a
transcendental philosophy； been freed from every empirical element；
although the full splendour of the promises they hold out； and the
anticipations they excite； manifests itself only when in connection
with empirical cognitions。 In the application of them； however； and in
the advancing enlargement of the employment of reason； while
struggling to rise from the region of experience and to soar to
those sublime ideas； philosophy discovers a value and a dignity；
which； if it could but make good its assertions； would raise it far
above all other departments of human knowledge… professing； as it
does； to present a sure foundation for our highest hopes and the
ultimate aims of all the exertions of reason。 The questions： whether
the world has a beginning and a limit to its extension in space；
whether there exists anywhere； or perhaps； in my own thinking Self； an
indivisible and indestructible unity… or whether nothing but what is
divisible and transitory exists； whether I am a free agent； or； like
other beings； am bound in the chains of nature and fate； whether；
finally； there is a supreme cause of the world； or all our thought and
speculation must end with nature and the order of external things… are
questions for the solution of which the mathematician would
willingly exchange his whole science； for in it there is no
satisfaction for the highest aspirations and most ardent desires of
humanity。 Nay； it may even be said that the true value of mathematics…
that pride of human reason… consists in this： that she guides reason
to the knowledge of nature… in her greater as well as in her less
manifestations… in her beautiful order and regularity… guides her；
moreover； to an insight into the wonderful unity of the moving
forces in the operations of nature； far beyond the expectations of a
philosophy building only on experience； and that she thus encourages
philosophy to extend the province of reason beyond all experience； and
at the same time provides it with the most excellent materials for
supporting its investigations； in so far as their nature admits； by
adequate and accordant intuitions。
Unfortunately for speculation… but perhaps fortunately for the
practical interests of humanity… reason； in the midst of her highest
anticipations； finds herself hemmed in by a press of opposite and
contradictory conclusions； from which neither her honour nor her
safety will permit her to draw back。 Nor can she regard these
conflicting trains of reasoning with indifference as mere passages
at arms； still less can she command peace； for in the subject of the
conflict she has a deep interest。 There is no other course left open
to her than to reflect with herself upon the origin of this disunion
in reason… whether it may not arise from a mere misunderstanding。
After such an inquiry； arrogant claims would have to be given up on
both sides； but the sovereignty of reason over understanding and sense
would be based upon a sure foundation。
We shall at present defer this radical inquiry and； in the meantime；
consider for a little what side in the controversy we should most
willingly take； if we were obliged to become partisans at all。 As；
in this case； we leave out of sight altogether the logical criterion
of truth； and merely consult our own interest in reference to the
question； these considerations； although inadequate to settle the
question of right in either party； will enable us to comprehend how
those who have taken part in the struggle； adopt the one view rather
than the other… no special insight into the subject； however； having
influenced their choice。 They will； at the same time； explain to us
many other things by the way… for example； the fiery zeal on the one
side and the cold maintenance of their cause on the other； why the one
party has met with