,illu/ration ,! ,critique ( ,pure ,reason ,by ,immanuel ,kant ,translat$ by ,j4 ,m4 ,d4 ,meiklejohn ,cont5ts ,preface to ! ,fir/ ,edition 7#agha7 ,preface to ! ,second ,edition 7#aghg7 ,introduction ,i4 ,( ! diff]5ce betwe5 ,pure & ,empirical ,k ,,ii4 ,! ,human ,intellect1 ev5 9 an ,unphilosophical ,/ate1 is 9 ,possession ( ,c]ta9 ,cognitions 8 priori04 ,,iii4 ,philosophy /&s 9 ne$ ( a ,sci5ce :i* %all ,det]m9e ! ,possibility1 ,pr9ciples1 & ,ext5t ( ,human ,k 8 priori0 ,,iv4 ,( ! ,diff]5ce ,betwe5 ,analytical & ,syn!tical ,judgem5ts4 ,v4 ,9 all ,!oretical ,sci5ces ( ,reason1 ,syn!tical ,judgem5ts 8 priori0 are conta9$ z ,pr9ciples4 ,,vi4 ,! ,univ]sal ,problem ( ,pure ,reason4 ,,vii4 ,idea & ,division ( a ,p>ticul> ,sci5ce1 "u ! ,"n ( a ,critique ( ,pure ,reason4 ,i4 ,transc5d5tal ,doctr9e ( ,elem5ts ,fir/ ,"p--,,transc5d5tal ,,/hetic #a4 ,introductory ,,section ,i4 ,,( ,,space #b4 ,metaphysical ,exposition ( ?is ,conception4 #c4 ,transc5d5tal ,exposition ( ! ,conception ( ,space4 #d4 ,conclusions f ! =ego+ ,conceptions4 ,,section ,,ii4 ,,( ,,"t #e4 ,metaphysical ,exposition ( ?is ,conception4 #f4 ,transc5d5tal ,exposition ( ! ,conception ( ,"t4 #g4 ,conclusions f ! above ,conceptions4 #h4 ,elucidation4 #i4 ,g5]al ,rem>ks on ,transc5d5tal /hetic4 #aj4 ,conclusion ( ! ,transc5d5tal /hetic4 ,second ,"p--,,transc5d5tal ,,logic ,introduction4 ,idea ( a ,transc5d5tal ,logic ,i4 ,( ,logic 9 ,g5]al ,,ii4 ,( ,transc5d5tal ,logic ,,iii4 ,( ! ,division ( ,g5]al ,logic into ,analytic & ,dialectic ,,iv4 ,( ! ,division ( ,transc5d5tal ,logic into ,transc5d5tal ,analytic & ,dialectic ,,fir/ ,,division--,,transc5d5tal ,,analytic ,,book ,i4 ,analytic ( ,conceptions4 #b ,*apt] ,i4 ,( ! ,transc5d5tal ,clue to ! ,discov]y ( all ,pure ,conceptions ( ! ,und]/&+ ,introductory #c ,section ,i4 ,( ! ,logical ,use ( ! ,und]/&+ 9 ,g5]al4 #d ,section ,,ii4 ,( ! ,logical ,function ( ! ,und]/&+ 9 ,judgem5ts4 #e ,section ,,iii4 ,( ! ,pure ,conceptions ( ! ,und]/&+1 or ,categories4 #f ,*apt] ,,ii4 ,( ! ,d$uction ( ! ,pure ,conception ( ! ,und]/&+ ,section ,i4 ,( ! ,pr9ciples ( a ,transc5d5tal ,d$uction 9 g5]al #i ,transition to ! ,transc5d5tal ,d$uction ( ! ,categories4 #aj ,section ,,ii ,transc5d5tal ,d$uction ( ! pure ,conceptions ( ! ,und]/&+4 ,( ! ,possibility ( a ,conjunction ( ! manifold repres5tations giv5 by ,s5se4 #aa4 ,( ! ,orig9ally ,syn!tical ,unity ( ,app]ception4 #ab ,! ,pr9ciple ( ! ,syn!tical ,unity ( ,app]ception is ! highe/ ,pr9ciple ( all ex]cise ( ! ,und]/&+4 #ac ,:at ,objective ,unity ( ,self-consci\sness is4 #ad ,! ,logical ,=m ( all ,judgem5ts consi/s 9 ! ,objective ,unity ( ,app]ception ( ! ,conceptions conta9$ !re94 #ae ,all ,s5su\s ,intuitions are subject to ! ,categories1 z ,conditions "u :i* alone ! manifold ,cont5t ( !m c be unit$ 9 "o ,consci\sness4 #af ,obs]vation4 #ag ,9 ,cognition1 its ,application to ,objects ( ,exp]i5ce is ! only legitimate use ( ! ,category4 #ah ,( ! ,application ( ! ,categories to ,objects ( ! ,s5ses 9 g5]al4 #bj ,transc5d5tal ,d$uction ( ! univ]sally possible employm5t 9 exp]i5ce ( ! ,pure ,conceptions ( ! ,und]/&+4 #bb ,result ( ?is ,d$uction ( ! ,conceptions ( ! ,und]/&+4 #bc ,,book ,,ii4 ,analytic ( ,pr9ciples ,,introduction4 ,( ! ,transc5d5tal ,faculty ( judgem5t 9 ,g5]al4 ,,transc5d5tal ,,doctr9e ,,( ,,! ,,faculty ,,( ,,judgem5t ,,or1 ,,analytic ,,( ,,pr9ciples4 ,*apt] ,i4 ,( ! ,s*ematism at ( ! ,pure ,conceptions ( ! ,und]/&+4 ,*apt] ,,ii4 ,sy/em ( all ,pr9ciples ( ! ,pure ,und]/&+4 ,section ,i4 ,( ! ,supreme ,pr9ciple ( all ,analytical ,judgem5ts4 ,section ,,ii4 ,( ! ,supreme ,pr9ciple ( all ,syn!tical ,judgem5ts4 ,section ,,iii4 ,sy/ematic ,repres5tation ( all ,syn!tical ,pr9ciples ( ! ,pure ,und]/&+4 ,*apt] ,,iii ,( ! ,gr\nd ( ! ,division ( all ,objects into ,ph5om5a & ,n\m5a4 ,,app5dix4 ,,second ,,division--,,transc5d5tal ,,logic ,,transc5d5tal ,,dialectic4 ,,introduction4 ,i4 ,( ,transc5d5tal ,illusory ,appe>ance4 ,,ii4 ,( ,pure ,reason z ! ,seat ( ,transc5d5tal ,illusory ,appe>ance4 ,,transc5d5tal ,,dialectic--,,book ,i--,,( ,,! ,,conceptions ,,( ,,pure ,,reason4 ,section ,i--,( ,ideas 9 ,g5]al4 ,section ,,ii4 ,( ,transc5d5tal ,ideas4 ,section ,,iii4 ,sy/em ( ,transc5d5tal ,ideas4 ,,transc5d5tal ,,dialectic--,,book ,,ii--,,( ,,! ,,dialectical ,,proc$ure ,,( ,,pure ,,reason4 ,*apt] ,i4 ,( ! ,p>alogisms ( ,pure ,reason4 ,*apt] ,,ii4 ,! ,ant9omy ( ,pure ,reason4 ,section ,i4 ,sy/em ( ,cosmological ,ideas4 ,section ,,ii4 ,anti!tic ( ,pure ,reason4 ,section ,,iii4 ,( ! ,int]e/ ( ,reason 9 ^! ,self-contradictions4 ,section ,,iv4 ,( ! necessity impos$ ^u ,pure ,reason ( pres5t+ a ,solution ( its ,transc5d5tal ,problems4 ,section ,v4 ,sceptical ,exposition ( ! ,cosmological ,problems pres5t$ 9 ! f\r ,transc5d5tal ,ideas4 ,section ,,vi4 ,transc5d5tal ,idealism z ! ,key to ! ,solution ( ,pure ,cosmological ,dialectic4 ,section ,,vii4 ,critical ,solution ( ! ,cosmological ,problem4 ,section ,,viii4 ,regulative ,pr9ciple ( ,pure ,reason 9 relation to ! ,cosmological ,ideas4 ,section ,,ix4 ,( ! ,empirical ,use ( ! ,regulative ,pr9ciple ( ,reason ) reg>d to ! ,cosmological ,ideas4 ,i4 ,solution ( ! ,cosmological ,idea ( ! ,totality ( ! ,composition ( ,ph5om5a 9 ! ,univ]se4 ,,ii4 ,solution ( ! ,cosmological ,idea ( ! ,totality ( ! ,division ( a ,:ole giv5 9 ,intuition4 ,,iii4 ,solution ( ! ,cosmological ,idea ( ! ,totality ( ! ,d$uction ( ,cosmical ,ev5ts f _! ,causes4 ,,iv4 ,solution ( ! ,cosmological ,idea ( ! ,totality ( ! ,dep5d5ce ( ,ph5om5al ,exi/5ces4 ,*apt] ,,iii4 ,! ,ideal ( ,pure ,reason4 ,section ,i4 ,( ! ,ideal 9 ,g5]al4 ,section ,,ii4 ,( ! ,transc5d5tal ,ideal 7,prototypon ,tranc5d5tale74 ,section ,,iii4 ,( ! ,argum5ts employ$ by ,speculative ,reason 9 ,pro( ( ! ,exi/5ce ( a ,supreme ,be+4 ,section ,,iv4 ,( ! ,impossibility ( an ,ontological ,pro( ( ! ,exi/5ce ( ,god4 ,section ,v4 ,( ! ,impossibility ( a ,cosmological ,pro( ( ! ,exi/5ce ( ,god4 ,section ,,vi4 ,( ! ,impossibility ( a ,physico-,!ological ,pro(4 ,section ,,vii4 ,critique ( all ,!ology bas$ ^u ,speculative ,pr9ciples ( ,reason4 ,app5dix4 ,( ! ,regulative ,employm5t ( ! ,ideas ( ,pure ,reason4 ,,ii4 ,transc5d5tal ,doctr9e ( ,me?od ,*apt] ,i4 ,! ,discipl9e ( ,pure ,reason4 ,section ,i4 ,! ,discipl9e ( ,pure ,reason 9 ! ,sph]e ( ,dogmatism4 ,section ,,ii4 ,! ,discipl9e ( ,pure ,reason 9 ,polemics4 ,section ,,iii4 ,! ,discipl9e ( ,pure ,reason 9 ,hypo!sis4 ,section ,,iv4 ,! ,discipl9e ( ,pure ,reason 9 ,relation to ,pro(s4 ,*apt] ,,ii4 ,! ,canon ( ,pure ,reason4 ,section ,i4 ,( ! ,ultimate ,end ( ! ,pure ,use ( ,reason4 ,section ,,ii4 ,( ! ,ideal ( ! ,summum ,bonum z a ,det]m9+ ,gr\nd ( ! ,ultimate ,end ( ,pure ,reason4 ,section ,,iii4 ,( ,op9ion1 ,k1 & ,belief4 ,*apt] ,,iii4 ,! ,ar*itectonic ( ,pure ,reason4 ,*apt] ,,iv4 ,! ,hi/ory ( ,pure ,reason4 ,,preface ,,to ,,! ,,fir/ ,,edition #agha ,human reason1 9 "o sph]e ( its cognition1 is call$ ^u to consid] que/ions1 :i* x _c decl9e1 z !y are pres5t$ by its own nature1 b :i* x _c answ]1 z !y transc5d e faculty ( ! m9d4 ,x falls into ?is difficulty )\t any fault ( its own4 ,x beg9s ) pr9ciples1 :i* _c be disp5s$ ) 9 ! field ( exp]i5ce1 & ! tru? & suffici5cy ( :i* are1 at ! same "t1 insur$ by exp]i5ce4 ,) ^! pr9ciples x rises1 9 ob$i5ce to ! laws ( its own nature1 to ev] high] & m remote conditions4 ,b x quickly discov]s t1 9 ?is way1 its lab\rs mu/ rema9 ev] incomplete1 because new que/ions nev] cease to pres5t !mselves2 & ?us x f9ds itself compell$ to h rec\rse to pr9ciples :i* transc5d ! region ( exp]i5ce1 :ile !y are reg>d$ by common s5se )\t di/ru/4 ,x ?us falls into confusion & contradictions1 f :i* x conjectures ! pres5ce ( lat5t errors1 :i*1 h[ev]1 x is unable to discov]1 because ! pr9ciples x employs1 transc5d+ ! limits ( exp]i5ce1 _c be te/$ by t crit]ion4 ,! ar5a ( ^! endless conte/s is call$ ,metaphysic4 ,"t 01 :5 %e 0 ! que5 ( all ! sci5ces2 &1 if we take ! w = ! de$1 %e c]ta9ly des]ves1 s f> z reg>ds ! high importance ( h] object-matt]1 ?is title ( hon\r4 ,n[1 x is ! fa%ion ( ! "t to heap contempt & scorn ^u h]2 & ! matron m\rns1 =lorn & =sak51 l ,hecuba3 ,modo maxima r]um1 ,tot g5]is1 natisque pot5s444 ,nunc trahor exul1 inops4 --,ovid1 ,metamorphoses4 xiii ,at fir/1 h] gov]nm5t1 "u ! adm9i/ration ( ! dogmati/s1 0 an absolute despotism4 ,b1 z ! legislative cont9u$ to %[ traces ( ! anci5t b>b>ic rule1 h] empire gradually broke up1 & inte/9e w>s introduc$ ! reign ( an>*y2 :ile ! sceptics1 l nomadic tribes1 :o hate a p]man5t habitation & settl$ mode ( liv+1 attack$ f "t to "t ^? :o _h organiz$ !mselves into civil communities4 ,b _! numb] 01 v happily1 small2 & ?us !y c\ld n entirely put a /op to ! ex]tions ( ^? :o p]si/$ 9 rais+ new edifices1 al?\gh on no settl$ or uni=m plan4 ,9 rec5t times ! hope dawn$ ^u u ( see+ ^? disputes settl$1 & ! legitimacy ( h] claims e/abli%$ by a k9d ( physiology ( ! human und]/&+--t ( ! celebrat$ ,locke4 ,b x 0 f\nd t--al?\gh x 0 affirm$ t ?is s-call$ que5 c\ld n ref] h] desc5t to any high] s\rce ?an t ( common exp]i5ce1 a circum/ance :i* necess>ily br\ght suspicion on h] claims--z ?is g5ealogy 0 incorrect1 %e p]si/$ 9 ! advancem5t ( h] claims to sov]eignty4 ,?us metaphysics necess>ily fell back into ! antiquat$ & rott5 con/itution ( dogmatism1 & aga9 became obnoxi\s to ! contempt f :i* ef=ts _h be5 made to save x4 ,at pres5t1 z all me?ods1 accord+ to ! g5]al p]suasion1 h be5 tri$ 9 va91 !re reigns n\ght b we>9ess & complete indiff]5tism--! "m ( *aos & night 9 ! sci5tific _w1 b at ! same "t ! s\rce (1 or at lea/ ! prelude to1 ! re-creation & re9/allation ( a sci5ce1 :5 x has fall5 into confusion1 obscurity1 & disuse f ill direct$ ef=t4 ,= x is 9 reality va9 to pr(ess indiff]5ce 9 reg>d to su* inquiries1 ! object ( :i* _c be indiff]5t to humanity4 ,besides1 ^! pret5d$ indiff]5ti/s1 h[ev] mu* !y may try to disguise !mselves by ! assumption ( a popul> /yle & by *anges on ! language ( ! s*ools1 unavoidably fall into metaphysical decl>ations & propositions1 :i* !y pr(ess to reg>d ) s mu* contempt4 ,at ! same "t1 ?is indiff]5ce1 :i* has aris5 9 ! _w ( sci5ce1 & :i* relates to t k9d ( k :i* we %\ld wi% to see de/roy$ ! la/1 is a ph5om5on t well des]ves our att5tion & reflection4 ,x is pla9ly n ! effect ( ! levity1 b ( ! matur$ judgem5t#a ( ! age1 :i* refuses to be any long] ent]ta9$ ) illusory k1 ,x is1 9 fact1 a call to reason1 aga9 to und]take ! mo/ labori\s ( all tasks--t ( self-exam9ation1 & to e/abli% a tribunal1 :i* may secure x 9 its well-gr\nd$ claims1 :ile x pron\nces aga9/ all baseless assumptions & pret5sions1 n 9 an arbitr>y mann]1 b accord+ to its own et]nal & un*angeable laws4 ,?is tribunal is no?+ less ?an ! ,critical ,inve/igation ( ,pure ,reason4 #a ,we v (t5 he> compla9ts ( ! %all[ness ( ! pres5t age1 & ( ! decay ( pr(\nd sci5ce4 ,b ,i d n ?9k t ^? :i* re/ ^u a secure f\ndation1 su* z ma!matics1 physical sci5ce1 etc41 9 ! lea/ des]ve ?is reproa*1 b t !y r ma9ta9 _! anci5t fame1 & 9 ! latt] case1 inde$1 f> surpass x4 ,! same w\ld be ! case ) ! o!r k9ds ( cognition1 if _! pr9ciples 7 b firmly e/abli%$4 ,9 ! abs5ce ( ?is security1 indiff]5ce1 d\bt1 & f9ally1 sev]e criticism are r signs ( a pr(\nd habit ( ?\ght4 ,our age is ! age ( criticism1 to :i* ev]y?+ mu/ be subject$4 ,! sacr$ness ( religion1 & ! au?ority ( legislation1 are by _m reg>d$ z gr\nds ( exemption f ! exam9ation ( ?is tribunal4 ,b1 if !y are exempt$1 !y become ! subjects ( j suspicion1 & _c lay claim to s9c]e respect1 :i* reason accords only to t :i* has /ood ! te/ ( a free & public exam9ation4 ,i d n mean by ?is a criticism ( books & sy/ems1 b a critical inquiry into ! faculty ( reason1 ) ref]5ce to ! cognitions to :i* x /rives to atta9 )\t ! aid ( exp]i5ce2 9 o!r words1 ! solution ( ! "q reg>d+ ! possibility or impossibility ( metaphysics1 & ! det]m9ation ( ! orig91 z well z ( ! ext5t & limits ( ?is sci5ce4 ,all ?is mu/ be done on ! basis ( pr9ciples4 ,?is pa?--! only "o n[ rema9+--has be5 ent]$ ^u by me2 & ,i flatt] myself t ,i h1 9 ?is way1 discov]$ ! cause (--& consequ5tly ! mode ( remov+--all ! errors :i* h hi!rto set reason at v>iance ) itself1 9 ! sph]e ( non-empirical ?\ght4 ,i h n return$ an evasive answ] to ! que/ions ( reason1 by alleg+ ! inability & limitation ( ! faculties ( ! m9d2 ,i h1 on ! contr>y1 exam9$ !m completely 9 ! light ( pr9ciples1 &1 aft] hav+ discov]$ ! cause ( ! d\bts & contradictions into :i* reason fell1 h solv$ !m to its p]fect satisfaction4 ,x is true1 ^! que/ions h n be5 solv$ z dogmatism1 9 its va9 fancies & desires1 _h expect$2 = x c only be satisfi$ by ! ex]cise ( magical arts1 & ( ^! ,i h no k4 ,b nei!r d ^! come )9 ! compass ( our m5tal p[]s2 & x 0 ! duty ( philosophy to de/roy ! illusions :i* _h _! orig9 9 misconceptions1 :atev] d>l+ hopes & valu$ expectations may be ru9$ by its explanations4 ,my *ief aim 9 ?is "w has be5 ?or\ghness2 & ,i make bold to say t !re is n a s+le metaphysical problem t does n f9d its solution1 or at lea/ ! key to its solution1 "h4 ,pure reason is a p]fect unity2 & !re=e1 if ! pr9ciple pres5t$ by x prove to be insuffici5t = ! solution ( ev5 a s+le "o ( ^? que/ions to :i* ! v nature ( reason gives bir?1 we mu/ reject x1 z we c\ld n be p]fectly c]ta9 ( its suffici5cy 9 ! case ( ! o!rs4 ,:ile ,i say ?is1 ,i ?9k ,i see ^u ! c\nt5ance ( ! read] signs ( dissatisfaction m+l$ ) contempt1 :5 he he>s decl>ations :i* s\nd s boa/ful & extravagant2 & yet !y are beyond comp>ison m mod]ate ?an ^? advanc$ by ! commone/ au?or ( ! commone/ philosophical programme1 9 :i* ! dogmati/ pr(esses to demon/rate ! simple nature ( ! s\l1 or ! necessity ( a primal be+4 ,su* a dogmati/ promises to ext5d human k beyond ! limits ( possible exp]i5ce2 :ile ,i humbly confess t ?is is completely beyond my p[]4 ,in/ead ( any su* attempt1 ,i conf9e myself to ! exam9ation ( reason alone & its pure ?\ght2 & ,i d n ne$ to seek f> = ! sum-total ( its cognition1 because x has its seat 9 my own m9d4 ,besides1 common logic pres5ts me ) a complete & sy/ematic catalogue ( all ! simple op]ations ( reason2 & x is my task to answ] ! "q h[ f> reason c g1 )\t ! mat]ial pres5t$ & ! aid furni%$ by exp]i5ce4 ,s mu* = ! complet5ess & ?or\ghness necess>y 9 ! execution ( ! pres5t task4 ,! aims set be=e u are n arbitr>ily propos$1 b are impos$ ^u u by ! nature ( cognition itself4 ,! above rem>ks relate to ! matt] ( our critical inquiry4 ,z reg>ds ! =m1 !re are two indisp5sable conditions1 :i* any "o :o und]takes s difficult a task z t ( a critique ( pure reason1 is b\nd to fulfil4 ,^! conditions are c]titude & cle>ness4 ,z reg>ds c]titude1 ,i h fully conv9c$ myself t1 9 ?is sph]e ( ?\ght1 op9ion is p]fectly inadmissible1 & t ev]y?+ :i* be>s ! lea/ semblance ( an hypo!sis mu/ be exclud$1 z ( no value 9 su* discussions4 ,= x is a necess>y condition ( e cognition t is to be e/abli%$ ^u priori gr\nds t x %all be held to be absolutely necess>y2 mu* m is ?is ! case ) an attempt to det]m9e all pure priori cognition1 & to furni% ! /&>d--& consequ5tly an example--( all apodeictic 7philosophical7 c]titude4 ,:e!r ,i h succe$$ 9 :at ,i pr(ess$ to d1 x is = ! read] to det]m9e2 x is ! au?or's bus9ess m]ely to adduce gr\nds & reasons1 )\t det]m9+ :at influ5ce ^! ought to h on ! m9d ( 8 judges4 ,b1 le/ any?+ he may h said may become ! innoc5t cause ( d\bt 9 _! m9ds1 or t5d to weak5 ! effect :i* 8 argum5ts might o!rwise produce--he may be all[$ to po9t out ^? passages :i* may occasion mi/ru/ or difficulty1 al?\gh ^! d n conc]n ! ma9 purpose ( ! pres5t "w4 ,he does ?is solely ) ! view ( remov+ f ! m9d ( ! read] any d\bts :i* might affect 8 judgem5t ( ! "w z a :ole1 & 9 reg>d to its ultimate aim4 ,i "k no inve/igations m necess>y = a full insight into ! nature ( ! faculty :i* we call und]/&+1 & at ! same "t = ! det]m9ation ( ! rules & limits ( its use1 ?an ^? und]tak5 9 ! second *apt] ( ! 8,transc5d5tal ,analytic10 "u ! title ( ,d$uction ( ! ,pure ,conceptions ( ! ,und]/&+2 & !y h also co/ me by f> ! greate/ lab\r--lab\r :i*1 ,i hope1 w n rema9 uncomp5sat$4 ,! view !re tak51 :i* goes some:at deeply into ! subject1 has two sides4 ,! "o relates to ! objects ( ! pure und]/&+1 & is int5d$ to demon/rate & to r5d] compreh5sible ! objective validity ( its priori conceptions2 & x =ms = ?is reason an ess5tial "p ( ! ,critique4 ,! o!r consid]s ! pure und]/&+ itself1 its possibility & its p[]s ( cognition--t is1 f a subjective po9t ( view2 &1 al?\gh ?is exposition is ( great importance1 x does n belong ess5tially to ! ma9 purpose ( ! "w1 because ! gr& "q is :at & h[ mu* c reason & und]/&+1 ap>t f exp]i5ce1 cognize1 & n1 h[ is ! faculty ( ?\ght itself possible8 ,z ! latt] is an inquiry into ! cause ( a giv5 effect1 & has ?us 9 x "s semblance ( an hypo!sis 7al?\gh1 z ,i %all %[ on ano!r occasion1 ?is is really n ! fact71 x w\ld seem t1 9 ! pres5t in/ance1 ,i _h all[$ myself to en\nce a m]e op9ion1 & t ! read] mu/ !re=e be at lib]ty to hold a diff]5t op9ion4 ,b ,i beg to rem9d him t1 if my subjective d$uction does n produce 9 8 m9d ! conviction ( its c]titude at :i* ,i aim$1 ! objective d$uction1 ) :i* alone ! pres5t "w is prop]ly conc]n$1 is 9 e respect satisfactory4 ,z reg>ds cle>ness1 ! read] has a "r to dem&1 9 ! fir/ place1 discursive or logical cle>ness1 t is1 on ! basis ( conceptions1 &1 secondly1 intuitive or /hetic cle>ness1 by means ( intuitions1 t is1 by examples or o!r modes ( illu/ration 9 concreto4 ,i h done :at ,i c\ld = ! fir/ k9d ( intelligibility4 ,?is 0 ess5tial to my purpose2 & x ?us became ! accid5tal cause ( my inability to d complete ju/ice to ! second requirem5t4 ,i h be5 almo/ always at a loss1 dur+ ! progress ( ?is "w1 h[ to settle ?is "q4 ,examples & illu/rations always appe>$ to me necess>y1 &1 9 ! fir/ sket* ( ! ,critique1 naturally fell into _! prop] places4 ,b ,i v soon became aw>e ( ! magnitude ( my task1 & ! num]\s problems ) :i* ,i %\ld be engag$2 &1 z ,i p]ceiv$ t ?is critical inve/igation w\ld1 ev5 if deliv]$ 9 ! drie/ s*ola/ic mann]1 be f> f be+ brief1 ,i f\nd x unadvisable to enl>ge x /ill m ) examples & explanations1 :i* are necess>y only f a popul> po9t ( view4 ,i 0 induc$ to take ?is c\rse f ! consid]ation also t ! pres5t "w is n int5d$ = popul> use1 t ^? devot$ to sci5ce d n require su* helps1 al?\gh !y are always acceptable1 & t !y w\ld h mat]ially int]f]$ ) my pres5t purpose4 ,abb ,t]rasson rem>ks ) great ju/ice t1 if we e/imate ! size ( a "w1 n f ! numb] ( its pages1 b f ! "t :i* we require to make ourselves ma/] ( x1 x may be said ( _m a book--t x w\ld be mu* %ort]1 if x 7 n s %ort4 ,on ! o!r h&1 z reg>ds ! compreh5sibility ( a sy/em ( speculative cognition1 connect$ "u a s+le pr9ciple1 we may say ) equal ju/ice3 _m a book w\ld h be5 mu* cle>]1 if x _h n be5 int5d$ to be s v cle>4 ,= explanations & examples1 & o!r helps to intelligibility1 aid u 9 ! compreh5sion ( p>ts1 b !y di/ract ! att5tion1 dissipate ! m5tal p[] ( ! read]1 & /& 9 ! way ( 8 =m+ a cle> conception ( ! :ole2 z he _c atta9 soon en\gh to a survey ( ! sy/em1 & ! col\r+ & embelli%m5ts be/[$ ^u x prev5t 8 obs]v+ its articulation or organization--:i* is ! mo/ important consid]ation ) him1 :5 he comes to judge ( its unity & /ability4 ,! read] mu/ naturally h a /rong inducem5t to co-op]ate ) ! pres5t au?or1 if he has =m$ ! int5tion ( erect+ a complete & solid edifice ( metaphysical sci5ce1 accord+ to ! plan n[ laid be=e him4 ,metaphysics1 z "h repres5t$1 is ! only sci5ce :i* admits ( completion--& ) little lab\r1 if x is unit$1 9 a %ort "t2 s t no?+ w be left to future g5]ations except ! task ( illu/rat+ & apply+ x didactically4 ,= ?is sci5ce is no?+ m ?an ! inv5tory ( all t is giv5 u by pure reason1 sy/ematically arrang$4 ,no?+ c escape our notice2 = :at reason produces f itself _c lie conceal$1 b mu/ be br\ght to ! light by reason itself1 s soon z we h discov]$ ! common pr9ciple ( ! ideas we seek4 ,! p]fect unity ( ?is k9d ( cognitions1 :i* are bas$ ^u pure conceptions1 & un9flu5c$ by any empirical elem5t1 or any peculi> intuition lead+ to det]m9ate exp]i5ce1 r5d]s ?is complet5ess n only practicable1 b also necess>y4 ,tecum habita1 et nris quam sit tibi curta supellex4 --,p]sius4 ,satirae iv4 #eb4 ,su* a sy/em ( pure speculative reason ,i hope to be able to publi% "u ! title ( ,metaphysic ( ,nature#b4 ,! cont5t ( ?is "w 7:i* w n be half s long7 w be v mu* ri*] ?an t ( ! pres5t ,critique1 :i* has to discov] ! s\rces ( ?is cognition & expose ! conditions ( its possibility1 & at ! same "t to cle> & level a fit f\ndation = ! sci5tific edifice4 ,9 ! pres5t "w1 ,i look = ! pati5t he>+ & ! imp>tiality ( a judge2 9 ! o!r1 = ! good-w & assi/ance ( a co-lab\r]4 ,=1 h[ev] complete ! li/ ( pr9ciples = ?is sy/em may be 9 ! ,critique1 ! correctness ( ! sy/em requires t no d$uc$ conceptions %\ld be abs5t4 ,^! _c be pres5t$ priori1 b mu/ be gradually discov]$2 &1 :ile ! syn!sis ( conceptions has be5 fully exhau/$ 9 ! ,critique1 x is necess>y t1 9 ! propos$ "w1 ! same %\ld be ! case ) _! analysis4 ,b ?is w be r an amusem5t ?an a lab\r4 #b ,9 contradi/9ction to ! ,metaphysic ( ,e?ics4 ,?is "w 0 nev] publi%$4 ,,preface ,,to ,,! ,,second ,,edition #aghg ,:e!r ! treatm5t ( t portion ( our k :i* lies )9 ! prov9ce ( pure reason advances ) t undeviat+ c]ta9ty :i* *>act]izes ! progress ( sci5ce1 we %all be at no loss to det]m9e4 ,if we f9d ^? :o are engag$ 9 metaphysical pursuits1 unable to come to an und]/&+ z to ! me?od :i* !y ought to foll[2 if we f9d !m1 aft] ! mo/ elaborate prep>ations1 inv>iably br\ght to a /& be=e ! goal is rea*$1 & compell$ to retrace _! /eps & /rike into fre% pa?s1 we may !n feel q sure t !y are f> f hav+ atta9$ to ! c]ta9ty ( sci5tific progress & may r be said to be m]ely grop+ ab\t 9 ! d>k4 ,9 ^! circum/ances we %all r5d] an important s]vice to reason if we succe$ 9 simply indicat+ ! pa? along :i* x mu/ travel1 9 ord] to arrive at any results--ev5 if x %\ld be f\nd necess>y to ab&on _m ( ^? aims :i*1 )\t reflection1 h be5 propos$ = its atta9m5t4 ,t ,logic has advanc$ 9 ?is sure c\rse1 ev5 f ! e>lie/ times1 is app>5t f ! fact t1 s9ce ,ari/otle1 x has be5 unable to advance a /ep &1 ?us1 to all appe>ance has rea*$ its completion4 ,=1 if "s ( ! mod]ns h ?\ght to enl>ge its doma9 by introduc+ psy*ological discussions on ! m5tal faculties1 su* z imag9ation & wit1 metaphysical1 discussions on ! orig9 ( k & ! diff]5t k9ds ( c]titude1 accord+ to ! diff]5ce ( ! objects 7idealism1 scepticism1 & s on71 or an?ropological discussions on prejudices1 _! causes & rem$ies3 ?is attempt1 on ! "p ( ^! au?ors1 only %[s _! ignorance ( ! peculi> nature ( logical sci5ce4 ,we d n enl>ge b disfigure ! sci5ces :5 we lose sight ( _! respective limits & all[ !m to run into "o ano!r4 ,n[ logic is enclos$ )9 limits :i* admit ( p]fectly cle> def9ition2 x is a sci5ce :i* has = its object no?+ b ! exposition & pro( ( ! =mal laws ( all ?\ght1 :e!r x be priori or empirical1 :atev] be its orig9 or its object1 & :atev] ! difficulties--natural or accid5tal--:i* x enc\nt]s 9 ! human m9d4 ,! e>ly success ( logic mu/ be attribut$ exclusively to ! n>r[ness ( its field1 9 :i* ab/raction may1 or r mu/1 be made ( all ! objects ( cognition ) _! *>act]i/ic di/9ctions1 & 9 :i* ! und]/&+ has only to deal ) itself & ) its own =ms4 ,x is1 obvi\sly1 a mu* m difficult task = reason to /rike into ! sure pa? ( sci5ce1 :]e x has to deal n simply ) itself1 b ) objects ext]nal to itself4 ,h5ce1 logic is prop]ly only a propdeutic--=ms1 z x 71 ! ve/ibule ( ! sci5ces2 & :ile x is necess>y to enable u to =m a correct judgem5t ) reg>d to ! v>i\s bran*es ( k1 /ill ! acquisition ( real1 sub/antive k is to be s\ght only 9 ! sci5ces prop]ly s call$1 t is1 9 ! objective sci5ces4 ,n[ ^! sci5ces1 if !y c be t]m$ rational at all1 mu/ conta9 elem5ts ( priori cognition1 & ?is cognition may /& 9 a tw(old relation to its object4 ,ei!r x may h to det]m9e ! conception ( ! object--:i* mu/ be suppli$ extrane\sly1 or x may h to e/abli% its reality4 ,! =m] is !oretical1 ! latt] practical1 rational cognition4 ,9 bo?1 ! pure or priori elem5t mu/ be treat$ fir/1 & mu/ be c>efully di/+ui%$ f t :i* is suppli$ f o!r s\rces4 ,any o!r me?od c only lead to irrem$iable confusion4 ,ma!matics & physics are ! two !oretical sci5ces :i* h to det]m9e _! objects priori4 ,! =m] is purely priori1 ! latt] is p>tially s1 b is also dep5d5t on o!r s\rces ( cognition4 ,9 ! e>lie/ times ( :i* hi/ory af=ds u any record1 ma!matics _h already ent]$ on ! sure c\rse ( sci5ce1 among t wond]ful nation1 ! ,greeks4 ,/ill x is n to be suppos$ t x 0 z easy = ?is sci5ce to /rike into1 or r to con/ruct = itself1 t royal road1 z x 0 = logic1 9 :i* reason has only to deal ) itself4 ,on ! contr>y1 ,i believe t x mu/ h rema9$ long--*iefly among ! ,egyptians--9 ! /age ( bl9d grop+ aft] its true aims & de/9ation1 & t x 0 revolutioniz$ by ! happy idea ( "o man1 :o /ruck out & det]m9$ = all "t ! pa? :i* ?is sci5ce mu/ foll[1 & :i* admits ( an indef9ite advancem5t4 ,! hi/ory ( ?is intellectual revolution--mu* m important 9 its results ?an ! discov]y ( ! passage r\nd ! celebrat$ ,cape ( ,good ,hope--& ( its au?or1 has n be5 pres]v$4 ,b ,diog5es ,la]tius1 9 nam+ ! suppos$ discov]] ( "s ( ! simple/ elem5ts ( geometrical demon/ration--elem5ts :i*1 accord+ to ! ord9>y op9ion1 d n ev5 require to be prov$--makes x app>5t t ! *ange introduc$ by ! fir/ indication ( ?is new pa?1 mu/ h seem$ ( ! utmo/ importance to ! ma!maticians ( t age1 & x has ?us be5 secur$ aga9/ ! *ance ( oblivion4 ,a new light mu/ h fla%$ on ! m9d ( ! fir/ man 7,?ales1 or :atev] may h be5 8 "n7 :o demon/rat$ ! prop]ties ( ! isosceles triangle4 ,= he f\nd t x 0 n suffici5t to m$itate on ! figure1 z x lay be=e 8 eyes1 or ! conception ( x1 z x exi/$ 9 8 m9d1 & ?us endeav\r to get at ! k ( its prop]ties1 b t x 0 necess>y to produce ^! prop]ties1 z x 71 by a positive priori con/ruction2 & t1 9 ord] to arrive ) c]ta9ty at priori cognition1 he mu/ n attribute to ! object any o!r prop]ties ?an ^? :i* necess>ily foll[$ f t :i* he _h himself1 9 accordance ) 8 conception1 plac$ 9 ! object4 ,a mu* long] p]iod elaps$ be=e ,physics ent]$ on ! highway ( sci5ce4 ,= x is only ab\t a c5tury & a half s9ce ! wise ,,bacon gave a new direction to physical /udies1 or r--z o!rs 7 already on ! "r track--imp>t$ fre% vig\r to ! pursuit ( ?is new direction4 ,"h1 too1 z 9 ! case ( ma!matics1 we f9d evid5ce ( a rapid intellectual revolution4 ,9 ! rem>ks :i* foll[ ,i %all conf9e myself to ! empirical side ( natural sci5ce4 ,:5 ,,galilei exp]im5t$ ) balls ( a def9ite weight on ! incl9$ plane1 :5 ,,torricelli caus$ ! air to su/a9 a weight :i* he _h calculat$ be=eh& to be equal to t ( a def9ite column ( wat]1 or :5 ,,/ahl1 at a lat] p]iod1 conv]t$ metals into lime1 & reconv]t$ lime into metal1 by ! addition & subtraction ( c]ta9 elem5ts2#c a light broke ^u all natural philosoph]s4 ,!y le>n$ t reason only p]ceives t :i* x produces aft] its own design2 t x mu/ n be cont5t to foll[1 z x 71 9 ! lead+-/r+s ( nature1 b mu/ proce$ 9 advance ) pr9ciples ( judgem5t accord+ to unv>y+ laws1 & compel nature to reply its que/ions4 ,= accid5tal obs]vations1 made accord+ to no preconceiv$ plan1 _c be unit$ "u a necess>y law4 ,b x is ?is t reason seeks = & requires4 ,x is only ! pr9ciples ( reason :i* c give to concordant ph5om5a ! validity ( laws1 & x is only :5 exp]im5t is direct$ by ^! rational pr9ciples t x c h any real utility4 ,reason mu/ approa* nature ) ! view1 inde$1 ( receiv+ in=mation f x1 n1 h[ev]1 9 ! "* ( a pupil1 :o li/5s to all t 8 ma/] *ooses to tell him1 b 9 t ( a judge1 :o compels ! witnesses to reply to ^? que/ions :i* he himself ?9ks fit to propose4 ,to ?is s+le idea mu/ ! revolution be ascrib$1 by :i*1 aft] grop+ 9 ! d>k = s _m c5turies1 natural sci5ce 0 at l5g? conduct$ into ! pa? ( c]ta9 progress4 #c ,i d n "h foll[ ) exactness ! hi/ory ( ! exp]im5tal me?od1 ( :i*1 inde$1 ! fir/ /eps are involv$ 9 "s obscurity4 ,we come n[ to metaphysics1 a purely speculative sci5ce1 :i* occupies a completely isolat$ position & is entirely indep5d5t ( ! tea*+s ( exp]i5ce4 ,x deals ) m]e conceptions--n1 l ma!matics1 ) conceptions appli$ to intuition--& 9 x1 reason is ! pupil ( itself alone4 ,x is ! olde/ ( ! sci5ces1 & w\ld /ill survive1 ev5 if all ! re/ 7 swall[$ up 9 ! abyss ( an all-de/roy+ b>b>ism4 ,b x has n yet _h ! good =tune to atta9 to ! sure sci5tific me?od4 ,?is w be app>5t2 if we apply ! te/s :i* we propos$ at ! outset4 ,we f9d t reason p]petually comes to a /&1 :5 x attempts to ga9 priori ! p]ception ev5 ( ^? laws :i* ! mo/ common exp]i5ce confirms4 ,we f9d x compell$ to retrace its /eps 9 innum]able in/ances1 & to ab&on ! pa? on :i* x _h ent]$1 because ?is does n lead to ! desir$ result4 ,we f9d1 too1 t ^? :o are engag$ 9 metaphysical pursuits are f> f be+ able to agree among !mselves1 b t1 on ! contr>y1 ?is sci5ce appe>s to furni% an ar5a specially adapt$ = ! display ( skill or ! ex]cise ( /r5g? 9 mock-conte/s--a field 9 :i* no combatant ev] yet succe$$ 9 ga9+ an in* ( gr\nd1 9 :i*1 at lea/1 no victory 0 ev] yet cr[n$ ) p]man5t possession4 ,?is leads u to inquire :y x is t1 9 metaphysics1 ! sure pa? ( sci5ce has n hi!rto be5 f\nd4 ,%all we suppose t x is impossible to discov] x8 ,:y !n %\ld nature h visit$ our reason ) re/less aspirations aft] x1 z if x 7 "o ( our weightie/ conc]ns8 ,nay1 m1 h[ little cause %\ld we h to place confid5ce 9 our reason1 if x ab&ons u 9 a matt] ab\t :i*1 mo/ ( all1 we desire to "k ! tru?--& n only s1 b ev5 allures u to ! pursuit ( va9 phantoms1 only to betray u 9 ! end8 ,or1 if ! pa? has only hi!rto be5 miss$1 :at indications d we possess to guide u 9 a r5ew$ inve/igation1 & to enable u to hope = great] success ?an has fall5 to ! lot ( our pr$ecessors8 ,x appe>s to me t ! examples ( ma!matics & natural philosophy1 :i*1 z we h se51 7 br\ght into _! pres5t condition by a sudd5 revolution1 are suffici5tly rem>kable to fix our att5tion on ! ess5tial circum/ances ( ! *ange :i* has prov$ s advantage\s to !m1 & to induce u to make ! exp]im5t ( imitat+ !m1 s f> z ! analogy :i*1 z rational sci5ces1 !y be> to metaphysics may p]mit4 ,x has hi!rto be5 assum$ t our cognition mu/ con=m to ! objects2 b all attempts to asc]ta9 any?+ ab\t ^! objects priori1 by means ( conceptions1 & ?us to ext5d ! range ( our k1 h be5 r5d]$ abortive by ?is assumption4 ,let u !n make ! exp]im5t :e!r we may n be m successful 9 metaphysics1 if we assume t ! objects mu/ con=m to our cognition4 ,?is appe>s1 at all ev5ts1 to accord bett] ) ! possibility ( our ga9+ ! end we h 9 view1 t is to say1 ( arriv+ at ! cognition ( objects priori1 ( det]m9+ some?+ ) respect to ^! objects1 be=e !y are giv5 to u4 ,we "h propose to d j :at ,,cop]nicus did 9 attempt+ to expla9 ! cele/ial movem5ts4 ,:5 he f\nd t he c\ld make no progress by assum+ t all ! heav5ly bodies revolv$ r\nd ! spectator1 he rev]s$ ! process1 & tri$ ! exp]im5t ( assum+ t ! spectator revolv$1 :ile ! />s rema9$ at re/4 ,we may make ! same exp]im5t ) reg>d to ! intuition ( objects4 ,if ! intuition mu/ con=m to ! nature ( ! objects1 ,i d n see h[ we c "k any?+ ( !m priori4 ,if1 on ! o!r h&1 ! object con=ms to ! nature ( our faculty ( intuition1 ,i c !n easily conceive ! possibility ( su* an priori k4 ,n[ z ,i _c re/ 9 ! m]e intuitions1 b--if !y are to become cognitions--mu/ ref] !m1 z repres5tations1 to some?+1 z object1 & mu/ det]m9e ! latt] by means ( ! =m]1 "h aga9 !re are two c\rses op5 to me4 ,ei!r1 fir/1 ,i may assume t ! conceptions1 by :i* ,i effect ?is det]m9ation1 con=m to ! object--& 9 ?is case ,i am r$uc$ to ! same p]plexity z be=e2 or secondly1 ,i may assume t ! objects1 or1 :i* is ! same ?+1 t exp]i5ce1 9 :i* alone z giv5 objects !y are cogniz$1 con=m to my conceptions--& !n ,i am at no loss h[ to proce$4 ,= exp]i5ce itself is a mode ( cognition :i* requires und]/&+4 ,be=e objects1 are giv5 to me1 t is1 priori1 ,i mu/ presuppose 9 myself laws ( ! und]/&+ :i* are express$ 9 conceptions priori4 ,to ^! conceptions1 !n1 all ! objects ( exp]i5ce mu/ necess>ily con=m4 ,n[ !re are objects :i* reason ?9ks1 & t necess>ily1 b :i* _c be giv5 9 exp]i5ce1 or1 at lea/1 _c be giv5 s z reason ?9ks !m4 ,! attempt to ?9k ^! objects w h]eaft] furni% an excell5t te/ ( ! new me?od ( ?\ght :i* we h adopt$1 & :i* is bas$ on ! pr9ciple t we only cognize 9 ?+s priori t :i* we ourselves place 9 !m4#d #d ,?is me?od1 accord+ly1 :i* we h borr[$ f ! natural philosoph]1 consi/s 9 seek+ = ! elem5ts ( pure reason 9 t :i* admits ( confirmation or refutation by exp]im5t4 ,n[ ! propositions ( pure reason1 especially :5 !y transc5d ! limits ( possible exp]i5ce1 d n admit ( our mak+ any exp]im5t ) _! objects1 z 9 natural sci5ce4 ,h5ce1 ) reg>d to ^? conceptions & pr9ciples :i* we assume priori1 our only c\rse w be to view !m f two diff]5t sides4 ,we mu/ reg>d "o & ! same conception1 on ! "o h&1 9 relation to exp]i5ce z an object ( ! s5ses & ( ! und]/&+1 on ! o!r h&1 9 relation to reason1 isolat$ & transc5d+ ! limits ( exp]i5ce1 z an object ( m]e ?\ght4 ,n[ if we f9d t1 :5 we reg>d ?+s f ?is d\ble po9t ( view1 ! result is 9 h>mony ) ! pr9ciple ( pure reason1 b t1 :5 we reg>d !m f a s+le po9t ( view1 reason is involv$ 9 self-contradiction1 !n ! exp]im5t w e/abli% ! correctness ( ?is di/9ction4 ,?is attempt succe$s z well z we c\ld desire1 & promises to metaphysics1 9 its fir/ "p--t is1 :]e x is occupi$ ) conceptions priori1 ( :i* ! correspond+ objects may be giv5 9 exp]i5ce--! c]ta9 c\rse ( sci5ce4 ,= by ?is new me?od we are enabl$ p]fectly to expla9 ! possibility ( priori cognition1 &1 :at is m1 to demon/rate satisfactorily ! laws :i* lie priori at ! f\ndation ( nature1 z ! sum ( ! objects ( exp]i5ce--nei!r ( :i* 0 possible accord+ to ! proc$ure hi!rto foll[$4 ,b f ?is d$uction ( ! faculty ( priori cognition 9 ! fir/ "p ( metaphysics1 we d]ive a surpris+ result1 & "o :i*1 to all appe>ance1 militates aga9/ ! great end ( metaphysics1 z treat$ 9 ! second "p4 ,= we come to ! conclusion t our faculty ( cognition is unable to transc5d ! limits ( possible exp]i5ce2 & yet ?is is precisely ! mo/ ess5tial object ( ?is sci5ce4 ,! e/imate ( our rational cognition priori at :i* we arrive is t x has only to d ) ph5om5a1 & t ?+s 9 !mselves1 :ile possess+ a real exi/5ce1 lie beyond its sph]e4 ,"h we are enabl$ to put ! ju/ice ( ?is e/imate to ! te/4 ,= t :i* ( necessity impels u to transc5d ! limits ( exp]i5ce & ( all ph5om5a is ! uncondition$1 :i* reason absolutely requires 9 ?+s z !y are 9 !mselves1 9 ord] to complete ! s]ies ( conditions4 ,n[1 if x appe>s t :51 on ! "o h&1 we assume t our cognition con=ms to its objects z ?+s 9 !mselves1 ! uncondition$ _c be ?\ght )\t contradiction1 & t :51 on ! o!r h&1 we assume t our repres5tation ( ?+s z !y are giv5 to u1 does n con=m to ^! ?+s z !y are 9 !mselves1 b t ^! objects1 z ph5om5a1 con=m to our mode ( repres5tation1 ! contradiction disappe>s3 we %all !n be conv9c$ ( ! tru? ( t :i* we began by assum+ = ! sake ( exp]im5t2 we may look ^u x z e/abli%$ t ! uncondition$ does n lie 9 ?+s z we "k !m1 or z !y are giv5 to u1 b 9 ?+s z !y are 9 !mselves1 beyond ! range ( our cognition4#e #e ,?is exp]im5t ( pure reason has a great simil>ity to t ( ! ,*emi/s1 :i* !y t]m ! exp]im5t ( r$uction1 or1 m usually1 ! syn!tic process4 ,! analysis ( ! metaphysician sep>ates pure cognition priori into two het]og5e\s elem5ts1 viz41 ! cognition ( ?+s z ph5om5a1 & ( ?+s 9 !mselves4 ,dialectic comb9es ^! aga9 into h>mony ) ! necess>y rational idea ( ! uncondition$1 & f9ds t ?is h>mony nev] results except ?r\gh ! above di/9ction1 :i* is1 !re=e1 conclud$ to be j4 ,b1 aft] we h ?us d5i$ ! p[] ( speculative reason to make any progress 9 ! sph]e ( ! sup]s5sible1 x /ill rema9s = our consid]ation :e!r data d n exi/ 9 practical cognition :i* may enable u to det]m9e ! transc5d5t conception ( ! uncondition$1 to rise beyond ! limits ( all possible exp]i5ce f a practical po9t ( view1 & ?us to satisfy ! great ends ( metaphysics4 ,speculative reason has ?us1 at lea/1 made room = su* an ext5sion ( our k3 &1 if x mu/ leave ?is space vacant1 /ill x does n rob u ( ! lib]ty to fill x up1 if we c1 by means ( practical data--nay1 x ev5 *all5ges u to make ! attempt4#f #f ,s ! c5tral laws ( ! movem5ts ( ! heav5ly bodies e/abli%$ ! tru? ( t :i* ,cop]nicus1 fir/1 assum$ only z a hypo!sis1 &1 at ! same "t1 br\ght to light t invisible =ce 7,newtonian attraction7 :i* holds ! univ]se toge!r4 ,! latt] w\ld h rema9$ =ev] undiscov]$1 if ,cop]nicus _h n v5tur$ on ! exp]im5t--contr>y to ! s5ses b /ill j--( look+ = ! obs]v$ movem5ts n 9 ! heav5ly bodies1 b 9 ! spectator4 ,9 ?is ,preface ,i treat ! new metaphysical me?od z a hypo!sis ) ! view ( r5d]+ app>5t ! fir/ attempts at su* a *ange ( me?od1 :i* are always hypo!tical4 ,b 9 ! ,critique itself x w be demon/rat$1 n hypo!tically1 b apodeictically1 f ! nature ( our repres5tations ( space & "t1 & f ! elem5t>y conceptions ( ! und]/&+4 ,?is attempt to introduce a complete revolution 9 ! proc$ure ( metaphysics1 aft] ! example ( ! geometricians & natural philosoph]s1 con/itutes ! aim ( ! ,critique ( ,pure ,speculative ,reason4 ,x is a treatise on ! me?od to be foll[$1 n a sy/em ( ! sci5ce itself4 ,b1 at ! same "t1 x m>ks out & def9es bo? ! ext]nal b\nd>ies & ! int]nal /ructure ( ?is sci5ce4 ,= pure speculative reason has ?is peculi>ity1 t1 9 *oos+ ! v>i\s objects ( ?\ght1 x is able to def9e ! limits ( its own faculties1 & ev5 to give a complete enum]ation ( ! possible modes ( propos+ problems to itself1 & ?us to sket* out ! entire sy/em ( metaphysics4 ,=1 on ! "o h&1 9 cognition priori1 no?+ mu/ be attribut$ to ! objects b :at ! ?9k+ subject d]ives f itself2 &1 on ! o!r h&1 reason is1 9 reg>d to ! pr9ciples ( cognition1 a p]fectly di/9ct1 indep5d5t unity1 9 :i*1 z 9 an organiz$ body1 e memb] exi/s = ! sake ( ! o!rs1 & all = ! sake ( ea*1 s t no pr9ciple c be view$1 ) safety1 9 "o relation%ip1 unless x is1 at ! same "t1 view$ 9 relation to ! total use ( pure reason4 ,h5ce1 too1 metaphysics has ?is s+ul> advantage--an advantage :i* falls to ! lot ( no o!r sci5ce :i* has to d ) objects--t1 if once x is conduct$ into ! sure pa? ( sci5ce1 by means ( ?is criticism1 x c !n take 9 ! :ole sph]e ( its cognitions1 & c ?us complete its "w1 & leave x = ! use ( po/]ity1 z a capital :i* c nev] receive fre% accessions4 ,= metaphysics has to deal only ) pr9ciples & ) ! limitations ( its own employm5t z det]m9$ by ^! pr9ciples4 ,to ?is p]fection x is1 !re=e1 b\nd1 z ! fundam5tal sci5ce1 to atta91 & to x ! maxim may ju/ly be appli$3 ,nil actum reputans1 si quid sup]esset ag5dum4 ,b1 x w be ask$1 :at k9d ( a treasure is ?is t we propose to bequea? to po/]ity8 ,:at is ! real value ( ?is sy/em ( metaphysics1 purifi$ by criticism1 & !reby r$uc$ to a p]man5t condition8 ,a cursory view ( ! pres5t "w w lead to ! supposition t its use is m]ely negative1 t x only s]ves to w>n u aga9/ v5tur+1 ) speculative reason1 beyond ! limits ( exp]i5ce4 ,?is is1 9 fact1 its prim>y use4 ,b ?is1 at once1 assumes a positive value1 :5 we obs]ve t ! pr9ciples ) :i* speculative reason endeav\rs to transc5d its limits lead inevitably1 n to ! ext5sion1 b to ! contraction ( ! use ( reason1 inasmu* z !y ?reat5 to ext5d ! limits ( s5sibility1 :i* is _! prop] sph]e1 ov] ! entire realm ( ?\ght &1 ?us1 to supplant ! pure 7practical7 use ( reason4 ,s f>1 !n1 z ?is criticism is occupi$ 9 conf9+ speculative reason )9 its prop] b\nds1 x is only negative2 b1 inasmu* z x !reby1 at ! same "t1 removes an ob/acle :i* imp$es & ev5 ?reat5s to de/roy ! use ( practical reason1 x possesses a positive & v important value4 ,9 ord] to admit ?is1 we h only to be conv9c$ t !re is an absolutely necess>y use ( pure reason--! moral use--9 :i* x inevitably transc5ds ! limits ( s5sibility1 )\t ! aid ( speculation1 requir+ only to be insur$ aga9/ ! effects ( a speculation :i* w\ld involve x 9 contradiction ) itself4 ,to d5y ! positive advantage ( ! s]vice :i* ?is criticism r5d]s u w\ld be z absurd z to ma9ta9 t ! sy/em ( police is productive ( no positive b5efit1 s9ce its ma9 bus9ess is to prev5t ! viol5ce :i* citiz5 has to appreh5d f citiz51 t s ea* may pursue 8 vocation 9 peace & security4 ,t space & "t are only =ms ( s5sible intuition1 & h5ce are only conditions ( ! exi/5ce ( ?+s z ph5om5a2 t1 moreov]1 we h no conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 &1 consequ5tly1 no elem5ts = ! cognition ( ?+s1 except 9 s f> z a correspond+ intuition c be giv5 to ^! conceptions2 t1 accord+ly1 we c h no cognition ( an object1 z a ?+ 9 itself1 b only z an object ( s5sible intuition1 t is1 z ph5om5on--all ?is is prov$ 9 ! analytical "p ( ! ,critique2 & f ?is ! limitation ( all possible speculative cognition to ! m]e objects ( exp]i5ce1 foll[s z a necess>y result4 ,at ! same "t1 x mu/ be c>efully borne 9 m9d t1 :ile we surr5d] ! p[] ( cogniz+1 we /ill res]ve ! p[] ( ?9k+ objects1 z ?+s 9 !mselves4#g ,=1 o!rwise1 we %\ld require to affirm ! exi/5ce ( an appe>ance1 )\t some?+ t appe>s--:i* w\ld be absurd4 ,n[ let u suppose1 = a mom5t1 t we _h n und]tak5 ?is criticism &1 accord+ly1 _h n drawn ! necess>y di/9ction betwe5 ?+s z objects ( exp]i5ce & ?+s z !y are 9 !mselves4 ,! pr9ciple ( causality1 &1 by consequ5ce1 ! me*anism ( nature z det]m9$ by causality1 w\ld !n h absolute validity 9 relation to all ?+s z effici5t causes4 ,i %\ld !n be unable to ass]t1 ) reg>d to "o & ! same be+1 e4g41 ! human s\l1 t its w is free1 & yet1 at ! same "t1 subject to natural necessity1 t is1 n free1 )\t fall+ into a palpable contradiction1 = 9 bo? propositions ,i %\ld take ! s\l 9 ! same signification1 z a ?+ 9 g5]al1 z a ?+ 9 itself--z1 )\t previ\s criticism1 ,i c\ld n b take x4 ,suppose n[1 on ! o!r h&1 t we h und]tak5 ?is criticism1 & h le>nt t an object may be tak5 9 two s5ses1 fir/1 z a ph5om5on1 secondly1 z a ?+ 9 itself2 & t1 accord+ to ! d$uction ( ! conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 ! pr9ciple ( causality has ref]5ce only to ?+s 9 ! fir/ s5se4 ,we !n see h[ x does n involve any contradiction to ass]t1 on ! "o h&1 t ! w1 9 ! ph5om5al sph]e--9 visible action--is necess>ily ob$i5t to ! law ( nature1 &1 9 s f>1 n free2 &1 on ! o!r h&1 t1 z belong+ to a ?+ 9 itself1 x is n subject to t law1 &1 accord+ly1 is free4 ,n[1 x is true t ,i _c1 by means ( speculative reason1 & /ill less by empirical obs]vation1 cognize my s\l z a ?+ 9 itself & consequ5tly1 _c cognize lib]ty z ! prop]ty ( a be+ to :i* ,i ascribe effects 9 ! _w ( s5se4 ,=1 to d s1 ,i mu/ cognize ?is be+ z exi/+1 & yet n 9 "t1 :i*--s9ce ,i _c support my conception by any intuition--is impossible4 ,at ! same "t1 :ile ,i _c cognize1 ,i c q well ?9k fre$om1 t is to say1 my repres5tation ( x involves at lea/ no contradiction1 if we be> 9 m9d ! critical di/9ction ( ! two modes ( repres5tation 7! s5sible & ! intellectual7 & ! consequ5t limitation ( ! conceptions ( ! pure und]/&+ & ( ! pr9ciples :i* fl[ f !m4 ,suppose n[ t morality necess>ily presuppos$ lib]ty1 9 ! /ricte/ s5se1 z a prop]ty ( our w2 suppose t reason conta9$ c]ta9 practical1 orig9al pr9ciples priori1 :i* 7 absolutely impossible )\t ?is presupposition2 & suppose1 at ! same "t1 t speculative reason _h prov$ t lib]ty 0 incapable ( be+ ?\ght at all4 ,x w\ld !n foll[ t ! moral presupposition mu/ give way to ! speculative affirmation1 ! opposite ( :i* involves an obvi\s contradiction1 & t lib]ty &1 ) x1 morality mu/ yield to ! me*anism ( nature2 = ! negation ( morality involves no contradiction1 except on ! presupposition ( lib]ty4 ,n[ morality does n require ! speculative cognition ( lib]ty2 x is en\gh t ,i c ?9k x1 t its conception involves no contradiction1 t x does n int]f]e ) ! me*anism ( nature4 ,b ev5 ?is requirem5t we c\ld n satisfy1 if we _h n le>nt ! tw(old s5se 9 :i* ?+s may be tak52 & x is only 9 ?is way t ! doctr9e ( morality & ! doctr9e ( nature are conf9$ )9 _! prop] limits4 ,= ?is result1 !n1 we are indebt$ to a criticism :i* w>ns u ( our unavoidable ignorance ) reg>d to ?+s 9 !mselves1 & e/abli%es ! necess>y limitation ( our !oretical cognition to m]e ph5om5a4 #g ,9 ord] to cognize an object1 ,i mu/ be able to prove its possibility1 ei!r f its reality z atte/$ by exp]i5ce1 or priori1 by means ( reason4 ,b ,i c ?9k :at ,i please1 provid$ only ,i d n contradict myself2 t is1 provid$ my conception is a possible ?\ght1 ?\gh ,i may be unable to answ] = ! exi/5ce ( a correspond+ object 9 ! sum ( possibilities4 ,b some?+ m is requir$ be=e ,i c attribute to su* a conception objective validity1 t is real possibility--! o!r possibility be+ m]ely logical4 ,we are n1 h[ev]1 conf9$ to !oretical s\rces ( cognition = ! means ( satisfy+ ?is additional requirem5t1 b may d]ive !m f practical s\rces4 ,! positive value ( ! critical pr9ciples ( pure reason 9 relation to ! conception ( ,god & ( ! simple nature ( ! s\l1 admits ( a simil> exemplification2 b on ?is po9t ,i %all n dwell4 ,i _c ev5 make ! assumption--z ! practical int]e/s ( morality require--( ,god1 fre$om1 & immortality1 if ,i d n deprive speculative reason ( its pret5sions to transc5d5t insight4 ,= to arrive at ^!1 x mu/ make use ( pr9ciples :i*1 9 fact1 ext5d only to ! objects ( possible exp]i5ce1 & :i* _c be appli$ to objects beyond ?is sph]e )\t conv]t+ !m into ph5om5a1 & ?us r5d]+ ! practical ext5sion ( pure reason impossible4 ,i mu/1 !re=e1 aboli% k1 to make room = belief4 ,! dogmatism ( metaphysics1 t is1 ! presumption t x is possible to advance 9 metaphysics )\t previ\s criticism1 is ! true s\rce ( ! unbelief 7always dogmatic7 :i* militates aga9/ morality4 ,?us1 :ile x may be no v difficult task to bequea? a legacy to po/]ity1 9 ! %ape ( a sy/em ( metaphysics con/ruct$ 9 accordance ) ! ,critique ( ,pure ,reason1 /ill ! value ( su* a beque/ is n to be depreciat$4 ,x w r5d] an important s]vice to reason1 by sub/itut+ ! c]ta9ty ( sci5tific me?od = t r&om grop+ aft] results )\t ! guidance ( pr9ciples1 :i* has hi!rto *>act]iz$ ! pursuit ( metaphysical /udies4 ,x w r5d] an important s]vice to ! inquir+ m9d ( y\?1 by lead+ ! /ud5t to apply 8 p[]s to ! cultivation ( g5u9e sci5ce1 in/ead ( wa/+ !m1 z at pres5t1 on speculations :i* c nev] lead to any result1 or on ! idle attempt to inv5t new ideas & op9ions4 ,b1 above all1 x w conf] an ine/imable b5efit on morality & religion1 by %[+ t all ! objections urg$ aga9/ !m may be sil5c$ = ev] by ! ,socratic me?od1 t is to say1 by prov+ ! ignorance ( ! objector4 ,=1 z ! _w has nev] be51 &1 no d\bt1 nev] w be )\t a sy/em ( metaphysics ( "o k9d or ano!r1 x is ! highe/ & weightie/ conc]n ( philosophy to r5d] x p[]less = h>m1 by clos+ up ! s\rces ( error4 ,?is important *ange 9 ! field ( ! sci5ces1 ?is loss ( its fanci$ possessions1 to :i* speculative reason mu/ submit1 does n prove 9 any way detrim5tal to ! g5]al int]e/s ( humanity4 ,! advantages :i* ! _w has d]iv$ f ! tea*+s ( pure reason are n at all impair$4 ,! loss falls1 9 its :ole ext5t1 on ! monopoly ( ! s*ools1 b does n 9 ! slighte/ degree t\* ! int]e/s ( mank9d4 ,i appeal to ! mo/ ob/9ate dogmati/1 :e!r ! pro( ( ! cont9u$ exi/5ce ( ! s\l aft] dea?1 d]iv$ f ! simplicity ( its sub/ance2 ( ! fre$om ( ! w 9 opposition to ! g5]al me*anism ( nature1 drawn f ! subtle b impot5t di/9ction ( subjective & objective practical necessity2 or ( ! exi/5ce ( ,god1 d$uc$ f ! conception ( an ens realissimum--! cont+5cy ( ! *angeable1 & ! necessity ( a prime mov]1 has ev] be5 able to pass beyond ! limits ( ! s*ools1 to p5etrate ! public m9d1 or to ex]cise ! slighte/ influ5ce on its convictions4 ,x mu/ be admitt$ t ?is has n be5 ! case & t1 ow+ to ! unfitness ( ! common und]/&+ = su* subtle speculations1 x c nev] be expect$ to take place4 ,on ! contr>y1 x is pla9 t ! hope ( a future life arises f ! feel+1 :i* exi/s 9 ! brea/ ( e man1 t ! temporal is inadequate to meet & satisfy ! dem&s ( 8 nature4 ,9 l mann]1 x _c be d\bt$ t ! cle> exhibition ( duties 9 opposition to all ! claims ( incl9ation1 gives rise to ! consci\sness ( fre$om1 & t ! glori\s ord]1 beauty1 & provid5tial c>e1 ev]y:]e display$ 9 nature1 give rise to ! belief 9 a wise & great ,au?or ( ! ,univ]se4 ,su* is ! g5esis ( ^! g5]al convictions ( mank9d1 s f> z !y dep5d on rational gr\nds2 & ?is public prop]ty n only rema9s undi/urb$1 b is ev5 rais$ to great] importance1 by ! doctr9e t ! s*ools h no "r to arrogate to !mselves a m pr(\nd insight into a matt] ( g5]al human conc]nm5t ?an t to :i* ! great mass ( m51 ev] held by u 9 ! highe/ e/imation1 c )\t difficulty atta91 & t ! s*ools %\ld1 !re=e1 conf9e !mselves to ! elaboration ( ^! univ]sally compreh5sible &1 f a moral po9t ( view1 amply satisfactory pro(s4 ,! *ange1 !re=e1 affects only ! arrogant pret5sions ( ! s*ools1 :i* w\ld gladly reta91 9 _! own exclusive possession1 ! key to ! tru?s :i* !y imp>t to ! public4 ,quod mecum nescit1 solus vult scire vid]i4 ,at ! same "t x does n deprive ! speculative philosoph] ( 8 j title to be ! sole depositor ( a sci5ce :i* b5efits ! public )\t its k--,i mean1 ! ,critique ( ,pure ,reason4 ,?is c nev] become popul> &1 inde$1 has no occasion to be s2 = f9espun argum5ts 9 fav\r ( useful tru?s make j z little impression on ! public m9d z ! equally subtle objections br\ght aga9/ ^! tru?s4 ,on ! o!r h&1 s9ce bo? inevitably =ce !mselves on e man :o rises to ! height ( speculation1 x becomes ! manife/ duty ( ! s*ools to ent] ^u a ?or\gh inve/igation ( ! rights ( speculative reason &1 ?us1 to prev5t ! sc&al :i* metaphysical controv]sies are sure1 soon] or lat]1 to cause ev5 to ! masses4 ,x is only by criticism t metaphysicians 7&1 z su*1 !ologians too7 c be sav$ f ^! controv]sies & f ! consequ5t p]v]sion ( _! doctr9es4 ,criticism alone c /rike a bl[ at ! root ( mat]ialism1 fatalism1 a!ism1 free-?9k+1 fanaticism1 & sup]/ition1 :i* are univ]sally injuri\s--z well z ( idealism & scepticism1 :i* are dang]\s to ! s*ools1 b c sc>cely pass ov] to ! public4 ,if gov]nm5ts ?9k prop] to int]f]e ) ! affairs ( ! le>n$1 x w\ld be m consi/5t ) a wise reg>d = ! int]e/s ( sci5ce1 z well z = ^? ( society1 to fav\r a criticism ( ?is k9d1 by :i* alone ! lab\rs ( reason c be e/abli%$ on a firm basis1 ?an to support ! ridicul\s despotism ( ! s*ools1 :i* raise a l\d cry ( dang] to ! public ov] ! de/ruction ( cobwebs1 ( :i* ! public has nev] tak5 any notice1 & ! loss ( :i*1 !re=e1 x c nev] feel4 ,?is critical sci5ce is n oppos$ to ! dogmatic proc$ure ( reason 9 pure cognition2 = pure cognition mu/ always be dogmatic1 t is1 mu/ re/ on /rict demon/ration f sure pr9ciples priori--b to dogmatism1 t is1 to ! presumption t x is possible to make any progress ) a pure cognition1 d]iv$ f 7philosophical7 conceptions1 accord+ to ! pr9ciples :i* reason has long be5 9 ! habit ( employ+--)\t fir/ inquir+ 9 :at way & by :at "r reason has come into ! possession ( ^! pr9ciples4 ,dogmatism is ?us ! dogmatic proc$ure ( pure reason )\t previ\s criticism ( its own p[]s1 & 9 oppos+ ?is proc$ure1 we mu/ n be suppos$ to l5d any c\nt5ance to t loquaci\s %all[ness :i* arrogates to itself ! "n ( popul>ity1 nor yet to scepticism1 :i* makes %ort "w ) ! :ole sci5ce ( metaphysics4 ,on ! contr>y1 our criticism is ! necess>y prep>ation = a ?or\ghly sci5tific sy/em ( metaphysics :i* mu/ p]=m its task entirely priori1 to ! complete satisfaction ( speculative reason1 & mu/1 !re=e1 be treat$1 n popul>ly1 b s*ola/ically4 ,9 c>ry+ out ! plan :i* ! ,critique prescribes1 t is1 9 ! future sy/em ( metaphysics1 we mu/ h rec\rse to ! /rict me?od ( ! celebrat$ ,,wolf1 ! greate/ ( all dogmatic philosoph]s4 ,he 0 ! fir/ to po9t out ! necessity ( e/abli%+ fix$ pr9ciples1 ( cle>ly def9+ our conceptions1 & ( subject+ our demon/rations to ! mo/ sev]e scrut9y1 in/ead ( ra%ly jump+ at conclusions4 ,! example :i* he set s]v$ to awak5 t _s ( pr(\nd & ?or\gh inve/igation :i* is n yet ext9ct 9 ,g]many4 ,he w\ld h be5 peculi>ly well fitt$ to give a truly sci5tific "* to metaphysical /udies1 _h x occurr$ to him to prep>e ! field by a criticism ( ! organum1 t is1 ( pure reason itself4 ,t he fail$ to p]ceive ! necessity ( su* a proc$ure mu/ be ascrib$ to ! dogmatic mode ( ?\ght :i* *>act]iz$ 8 age1 & on ?is po9t ! philosoph]s ( 8 "t1 z well z ( all previ\s times1 h no?+ to reproa* ea* o!r )4 ,^? :o reject at once ! me?od ( ,wolf1 & ( ! ,critique ( ,pure ,reason1 c h no o!r aim b to %ake (f ! fett]s ( sci5ce1 to *ange lab\r into sport1 c]ta9ty into op9ion1 & philosophy into philodoxy4 ,9 ?is second edition1 ,i h endeav\r$1 z f> z possible1 to remove ! difficulties & obscurity :i*1 )\t fault ( m9e p]haps1 h giv5 rise to _m misconceptions ev5 among acute ?9k]s4 ,9 ! propositions !mselves1 & 9 ! demon/rations by :i* !y are support$1 z well z 9 ! =m & ! entire plan ( ! "w1 ,i h f\nd no?+ to alt]2 :i* mu/ be attribut$ p>tly to ! long exam9ation to :i* ,i _h subject$ ! :ole be=e (f]+ x to ! public & p>tly to ! nature ( ! case4 ,= pure speculative reason is an organic /ructure 9 :i* !re is no?+ isolat$ or indep5d5t1 b e ,s+le "p is ess5tial to all ! re/2 & h5ce1 ! slighte/ imp]fection1 :e!r defect or positive error1 c\ld n fail to betray itself 9 use4 ,i v5ture1 fur!r1 to hope1 t ?is sy/em w ma9ta9 ! same unalt]able "* = ! future4 ,i am l$ to ent]ta9 ?is confid5ce1 n by vanity1 b by ! evid5ce :i* ! equality ( ! result af=ds1 :5 we proce$1 fir/1 f ! simple/ elem5ts up to ! complete :ole ( pure reason &1 & !n1 backw>ds f ! :ole to ea* "p4 ,we f9d t ! attempt to make ! slighte/ alt]ation1 9 any "p1 leads inevitably to contradictions1 n m]ely 9 ?is sy/em1 b 9 human reason itself4 ,at ! same "t1 !re is /ill mu* room = improvem5t 9 ! exposition ( ! doctr9es conta9$ 9 ?is "w4 ,9 ! pres5t edition1 ,i h endeav\r$ to remove misappreh5sions ( ! /hetical "p1 especially ) reg>d to ! conception ( "t2 to cle> away ! obscurity :i* has be5 f\nd 9 ! d$uction ( ! conceptions ( ! und]/&+2 to supply ! suppos$ want ( suffici5t evid5ce 9 ! demon/ration ( ! pr9ciples ( ! pure und]/&+2 &1 la/ly1 to obviate ! misund]/&+ ( ! p>alogisms :i* imm$iately prec$e ! ,rational ,psy*ology4 ,beyond ?is po9t--! end ( ! second ma9 division ( ! 8,transc5d5tal ,dialectic0--,i h n ext5d$ my alt]ations1#h p>tly f want ( "t1 & p>tly because ,i am n aw>e t any portion ( ! rema9d] has giv5 rise to misconceptions among intellig5t & imp>tial critics1 :om ,i d n "h m5tion ) t praise :i* is _! due1 b :o w f9d t _! sugge/ions h be5 att5d$ to 9 ! "w itself4 #h ,! only addition1 prop]ly s call$--& t only 9 ! me?od ( pro(--:i* ,i h made 9 ! pres5t edition1 consi/s ( a new refutation ( psy*ological ,idealism1 & a /rict demon/ration--! only "o possible1 z ,i believe--( ! objective reality ( ext]nal intuition4 ,h[ev] h>mless idealism may be consid]$--al?\gh 9 reality x is n s--9 reg>d to ! ess5tial ends ( metaphysics1 x mu/ /ill rema9 a sc&al to philosophy & to ! g5]al human reason to be oblig$ to assume1 z an article ( m]e belief1 ! exi/5ce ( ?+s ext]nal to ourselves 7f :i*1 yet1 we d]ive ! :ole mat]ial ( cognition = ! int]nal s5se71 & n to be able to oppose a satisfactory pro( to any "o :o may call x 9 "q4 ,z !re is "s obscurity ( expression 9 ! demon/ration z x /&s 9 ! text1 ,i propose to alt] ! passage 9 "q z foll[s3 8,b ?is p]man5t _c be an intuition 9 me4 ,= all ! det]m9+ gr\nds ( my exi/5ce :i* c be f\nd 9 me are repres5tations &1 z su*1 d !mselves require a p]man5t1 di/9ct f !m1 :i* may det]m9e my exi/5ce 9 relation to _! *anges1 t is1 my exi/5ce 9 "t1 :]e9 !y *ange40 ,x may1 probably1 be urg$ 9 opposition to ?is pro( t1 aft] all1 ,i am only consci\s imm$iately ( t :i* is 9 me1 t is1 ( my repres5tation ( ext]nal ?+s1 & t1 consequ5tly1 x mu/ always rema9 unc]ta9 :e!r any?+ correspond+ to ?is repres5tation does or does n exi/ ext]nally to me4 ,b ,i am consci\s1 ?r\gh int]nal exp]i5ce1 ( my exi/5ce 9 "t 7consequ5tly1 also1 ( ! det]m9ability ( ! =m] 9 ! latt]71 & t is m ?an ! simple consci\sness ( my repres5tation4 ,x is1 9 fact1 ! same z ! empirical consci\sness ( my exi/5ce1 :i* c only be det]m9$ 9 relation to some?+1 :i*1 :ile connect$ ) my exi/5ce1 is ext]nal to me4 ,?is consci\sness ( my exi/5ce 9 "t is1 !re=e1 id5tical ) ! consci\sness ( a relation to some?+ ext]nal to me1 & x is1 !re=e1 exp]i5ce1 n fiction1 s5se1 n imag9ation1 :i* insep>ably connects ! ext]nal ) my int]nal s5se4 ,= ! ext]nal s5se is1 9 itself1 ! relation ( intuition to some?+ real1 ext]nal to me2 & ! reality ( ?is some?+1 z oppos$ to ! m]e imag9ation ( x1 re/s solely on its insep>able connection ) int]nal exp]i5ce z ! condition ( its possibility4 ,if ) ! intellectual consci\sness ( my exi/5ce1 9 ! repres5tation3 ,i am1 :i* accompanies all my judgem5ts1 & all ! op]ations ( my und]/&+1 ,i c\ld1 at ! same "t1 connect a det]m9ation ( my exi/5ce by intellectual intuition1 !n ! consci\sness ( a relation to some?+ ext]nal to me w\ld n be necess>y4 ,b ! int]nal intuition 9 :i* alone my exi/5ce c be det]m9$1 ?\gh prec$$ by t purely intellectual consci\sness1 is itself s5sible & atta*$ to ! condition ( "t4 ,h5ce ?is det]m9ation ( my exi/5ce1 & consequ5tly my int]nal exp]i5ce itself1 mu/ dep5d on some?+ p]man5t :i* is n 9 me1 :i* c be1 !re=e1 only 9 some?+ ext]nal to me1 to :i* ,i mu/ look ^u myself z be+ relat$4 ,?us ! reality ( ! ext]nal s5se is necess>ily connect$ ) t ( ! int]nal1 9 ord] to ! possibility ( exp]i5ce 9 g5]al2 t is1 ,i am j z c]ta9ly consci\s t !re are ?+s ext]nal to me relat$ to my s5se z ,i am t ,i myself exi/ z det]m9$ 9 "t4 ,b 9 ord] to asc]ta9 to :at giv5 intuitions objects1 ext]nal me1 really correspond1 9 o!r words1 :at intuitions belong to ! ext]nal s5se & n to imag9ation1 ,i mu/ h rec\rse1 9 e p>ticul> case1 to ^? rules accord+ to :i* exp]i5ce 9 g5]al 7ev5 int]nal exp]i5ce7 is di/+ui%$ f imag9ation1 & :i* are always bas$ on ! proposition t !re really is an ext]nal exp]i5ce4--,we may add ! rem>k t ! repres5tation ( some?+ p]man5t 9 exi/5ce1 is n ! same ?+ z ! p]man5t repres5tation2 = a repres5tation may be v v>iable & *ang+--z all our repres5tations1 ev5 t ( matt]1 are--& yet ref] to some?+ p]man5t1 :i* mu/1 !re=e1 be di/9ct f all my repres5tations & ext]nal to me1 ! exi/5ce ( :i* is necess>ily includ$ 9 ! det]m9ation ( my own exi/5ce1 & ) x con/itutes "o exp]i5ce--an exp]i5ce :i* w\ld n ev5 be possible int]nally1 if x 7 n also at ! same "t1 9 "p1 ext]nal4 ,to ! "q ,h[8 we are no m able to reply1 ?an we are1 9 g5]al1 to ?9k ! /ation>y 9 "t1 ! coexi/5ce ( :i* ) ! v>iable1 produces ! conception ( *ange4 ,9 attempt+ to r5d] ! exposition ( my views z intelligible z possible1 ,i h be5 compell$ to leave out or abridge v>i\s passages :i* 7 n ess5tial to ! complet5ess ( ! "w1 b :i* _m read]s might consid] useful 9 o!r respects1 & might be unwill+ to miss4 ,?is trifl+ loss1 :i* c\ld n be avoid$ )\t swell+ ! book beyond due limits1 may be suppli$1 at ! pleasure ( ! read]1 by a comp>ison ) ! fir/ edition1 & w1 ,i hope1 be m ?an comp5sat$ = by ! great] cle>ness ( ! exposition z x n[ /&s4 ,i h obs]v$1 ) pleasure & ?ankfulness1 9 ! pages ( v>i\s reviews & treatises1 t ! _s ( pr(\nd & ?or\gh inve/igation is n ext9ct 9 ,g]many1 ?\gh x may h be5 ov]borne & sil5c$ = a "t by ! fa%ionable tone ( a lic5ce 9 ?9k+1 :i* gives itself ! airs ( g5ius1 & t ! difficulties :i* beset ! pa?s ( criticism h n prev5t$ en]getic & acute ?9k]s f mak+ !mselves ma/]s ( ! sci5ce ( pure reason to :i* ^! pa?s conduct--a sci5ce :i* is n popul>1 b s*ola/ic 9 its "*1 & :i* alone c hope = a la/+ exi/5ce or possess an abid+ value4 ,to ^! des]v+ m51 :o s happily comb9e pr(undity ( view ) a tal5t = lucid exposition--a tal5t :i* ,i myself am n consci\s ( possess+--,i leave ! task ( remov+ any obscurity :i* may /ill adh]e to ! /atem5t ( my doctr9es4 ,=1 9 ?is case1 ! dang] is n t ( be+ refut$1 b ( be+ misund]/ood4 ,= my own "p1 ,i mu/ h5ce=w>d ab/a9 f controv]sy1 al?\gh ,i %all c>efully att5d to all sugge/ions1 :e!r f fri5ds or adv]s>ies1 :i* may be ( use 9 ! future elaboration ( ! sy/em ( ?is ,propdeutic4 ,z1 dur+ ^! lab\rs1 ,i h advanc$ pretty f> 9 ye>s ?is mon? ,i rea* my sixty-f\r? ye>--x w be necess>y = me to economize "t1 if ,i am to c>ry out my plan ( elaborat+ ! metaphysics ( nature z well z ( morals1 9 confirmation ( ! correctness ( ! pr9ciples e/abli%$ 9 ?is ,critique ( ,pure ,reason1 bo? speculative & practical2 & ,i mu/1 !re=e1 leave ! task ( cle>+ up ! obscurities ( ! pres5t "w--inevitable1 p]haps1 at ! outset--z well z1 ! def5ce ( ! :ole1 to ^? des]v+ m51 :o h made my sy/em _! own4 ,a philosophical sy/em _c come =w>d arm$ at all po9ts l a ma!matical treatise1 & h5ce x may be q possible to take objection to p>ticul> passages1 :ile ! organic /ructure ( ! sy/em1 consid]$ z a unity1 has no dang] to appreh5d4 ,b few possess ! ability1 & /ill few] ! incl9ation1 to take a compreh5sive view ( a new sy/em4 ,by conf9+ ! view to p>ticul> passages1 tak+ ^! out ( _! connection & comp>+ !m ) "o ano!r1 x is easy to pick out app>5t contradictions1 especially 9 a "w writt5 ) any fre$om ( /yle4 ,^! contradictions place ! "w 9 an unfav\rable light 9 ! eyes ( ^? :o rely on ! judgem5t ( o!rs1 b are easily reconcil$ by ^? :o h ma/]$ ! idea ( ! :ole4 ,if a !ory possesses /ability 9 itself1 ! action & reaction :i* seem$ at fir/ to ?reat5 its exi/5ce s]ve only1 9 ! c\rse ( "t1 to smoo? d[n any sup]ficial r\ghness or inequality1 &--if m5 ( insight1 imp>tiality1 & truly popul> gifts1 turn _! att5tion to x--to secure to x1 9 a %ort "t1 ! requisite elegance also4 ,k,,nigsb]g1 ,april #aghg4 ,introduction ,i4 ,( ! diff]5ce betwe5 ,pure & ,empirical ,k ,t all our k beg9s ) exp]i5ce !re c be no d\bt4 ,= h[ is x possible t ! faculty ( cognition %\ld be awak5$ into ex]cise o!rwise ?an by means ( objects :i* affect our s5ses1 & p>tly ( !mselves produce repres5tations1 p>tly r\se our p[]s ( und]/&+ into activity1 to comp>e to connect1 or to sep>ate ^!1 & s to conv]t ! raw mat]ial ( our s5su\s impressions into a k ( objects1 :i* is call$ exp]i5ce8 ,9 respect ( "t1 !re=e1 no k ( ours is antec$5t to exp]i5ce1 b beg9s ) x4 ,b1 ?\gh all our k beg9s ) exp]i5ce1 x by no means foll[s t all arises out ( exp]i5ce4 ,=1 on ! contr>y1 x is q possible t our empirical k is a comp\nd ( t :i* we receive ?r\gh impressions1 & t :i* ! faculty ( cognition supplies f itself 7s5su\s impressions giv+ m]ely ! occasion71 an addition :i* we _c di/+ui% f ! orig9al elem5t giv5 by s5se1 till long practice has made u att5tive to1 & skilful 9 sep>at+ x4 ,x is1 !re=e1 a "q :i* requires close inve/igation1 & n to be answ]$ at fir/ sight1 :e!r !re exi/s a k altoge!r indep5d5t ( exp]i5ce1 & ev5 ( all s5su\s impressions8 ,k ( ?is k9d is call$ priori1 9 contradi/9ction to empirical k1 :i* has its s\rces po/]iori1 t is1 9 exp]i5ce4 ,b ! expression1 8 priori10 is n z yet def9ite en\gh adequately to indicate ! :ole mean+ ( ! "q above />t$4 ,=1 9 speak+ ( k :i* has its s\rces 9 exp]i5ce1 we are wont to say1 t ?is or t may be kn[n priori1 because we d n d]ive ?is k imm$iately f exp]i5ce1 b f a g5]al rule1 :i*1 h[ev]1 we h itself borr[$ f exp]i5ce4 ,?us1 if a man und]m9$ 8 h\se1 we say1 8he might "k priori t x w\ld h fall520 t is1 he ne$$ n to h wait$ = ! exp]i5ce t x did actually fall4 ,b /ill1 priori1 he c\ld n "k ev5 ?is mu*4 ,=1 t bodies are heavy1 &1 consequ5tly1 t !y fall :5 _! supports are tak5 away1 mu/ h be5 kn[n to him previ\sly1 by means ( exp]i5ce4 ,by ! t]m 8k priori10 !re=e1 we %all 9 ! sequel und]/&1 n su* z is indep5d5t ( ?is or t k9d ( exp]i5ce1 b su* z is absolutely s ( all exp]i5ce4 ,oppos$ to ?is is empirical k1 or t :i* is possible only po/]iori1 t is1 ?r\gh exp]i5ce4 ,k priori is ei!r pure or impure4 ,pure k priori is t ) :i* no empirical elem5t is mix$ up4 ,= example1 ! proposition1 8,e *ange has a cause10 is a proposition priori1 b impure1 because *ange is a conception :i* c only be d]iv$ f exp]i5ce4 ,,ii4 ,! ,human ,intellect1 ev5 9 an ,unphilosophical ,/ate1 is 9 ,possession ( ,c]ta9 ,cognitions 8 priori04 ,! "q n[ is z to a crit]ion1 by :i* we may securely di/+ui% a pure f an empirical cognition4 ,exp]i5ce no d\bt tea*es u t ?is or t object is con/itut$ 9 su* & su* a mann]1 b n t x c\ld n possibly exi/ o!rwise4 ,n[1 9 ! fir/ place1 if we h a proposition :i* conta9s ! idea ( necessity 9 its v conception1 x is priori4 ,if1 moreov]1 x is n d]iv$ f any o!r proposition1 unless f "o equally involv+ ! idea ( necessity1 x is absolutely priori4 ,secondly1 an empirical judgem5t nev] exhibits /rict & absolute1 b only assum$ & comp>ative univ]sality 7by induction72 !re=e1 ! mo/ we c say is--s f> z we h hi!rto obs]v$1 !re is no exception to ?is or t rule4 ,if1 on ! o!r h&1 a judgem5t c>ries ) x /rict & absolute univ]sality1 t is1 admits ( no possible exception1 x is n d]iv$ f exp]i5ce1 b is valid absolutely priori4 ,empirical univ]sality is1 !re=e1 only an arbitr>y ext5sion ( validity1 f t :i* may be pr$icat$ ( a proposition valid 9 mo/ cases1 to t :i* is ass]t$ ( a proposition :i* holds good 9 all2 z1 = example1 9 ! affirmation1 8,all bodies are heavy40 ,:51 on ! contr>y1 /rict univ]sality *>act]izes a judgem5t1 x necess>ily indicates ano!r peculi> s\rce ( k1 namely1 a faculty ( cognition priori4 ,necessity & /rict univ]sality1 !re=e1 are infallible te/s = di/+ui%+ pure f empirical k1 & are insep>ably connect$ ) ea* o!r4 ,b z 9 ! use ( ^! crit]ia ! empirical limitation is sometimes m easily detect$ ?an ! cont+5cy ( ! judgem5t1 or ! unlimit$ univ]sality :i* we atta* to a judgem5t is (t5 a m conv9c+ pro( ?an its necessity1 x may be advisable to use ! crit]ia sep>ately1 ea* be+ by itself infallible4 ,n[1 t 9 ! sph]e ( human cognition we h judgem5ts :i* are necess>y1 & 9 ! /ricte/ s5se univ]sal1 consequ5tly pure priori1 x w be an easy matt] to %[4 ,if we desire an example f ! sci5ces1 we ne$ only take any proposition 9 ma!matics4 ,if we ca/ our eyes ^u ! commone/ op]ations ( ! und]/&+1 ! proposition1 8,e *ange mu/ h a cause10 w amply s]ve our purpose4 ,9 ! latt] case1 inde$1 ! conception ( a cause s pla9ly involves ! conception ( a necessity ( connection ) an effect1 & ( a /rict univ]sality ( ! law1 t ! v notion ( a cause w\ld entirely disappe>1 7 we to d]ive x1 l ,hume1 f a frequ5t association ( :at happ5s ) t :i* prec$es2 & ! habit !nce orig9at+ ( connect+ repres5tations--! necessity inh]5t 9 ! judgem5t be+ !re=e m]ely subjective4 ,besides1 )\t seek+ = su* examples ( pr9ciples exi/+ priori 9 cognition1 we might easily %[ t su* pr9ciples are ! indisp5sable basis ( ! possibility ( exp]i5ce itself1 & consequ5tly prove _! exi/5ce priori4 ,= :5ce c\ld our exp]i5ce itself acquire c]ta9ty1 if all ! rules on :i* x dep5ds 7 !mselves empirical1 & consequ5tly =tuit\s8 ,no "o1 !re=e1 c admit ! validity ( ! use ( su* rules z fir/ pr9ciples4 ,b1 = ! pres5t1 we may cont5t ourselves ) hav+ e/abli%$ ! fact1 t we d possess & ex]cise a faculty ( pure priori cognition2 &1 secondly1 ) hav+ po9t$ out ! prop] te/s ( su* cognition1 namely1 univ]sality & necessity4 ,n only 9 judgem5ts1 h[ev]1 b ev5 9 conceptions1 is an priori orig9 manife/4 ,= example1 if we take away by degrees f our conceptions ( a body all t c be ref]r$ to m]e s5su\s exp]i5ce--col\r1 h>dness or s(tness1 weight1 ev5 imp5etrability--! body w !n vani%2 b ! space :i* x occupi$ /ill rema9s1 & ?is x is utt]ly impossible to annihilate 9 ?\ght4 ,aga91 if we take away1 9 l mann]1 f our empirical conception ( any object1 corporeal or incorporeal1 all prop]ties :i* m]e exp]i5ce has taught u to connect ) x1 /ill we _c ?9k away ^? ?r\gh :i* we cogitate x z sub/ance1 or adh]+ to sub/ance1 al?\gh our conception ( sub/ance is m det]m9$ ?an t ( an object4 ,compell$1 !re=e1 by t necessity ) :i* ! conception ( sub/ance =ces itself ^u u1 we mu/ confess t x has its seat 9 our faculty ( cognition priori4 ,,iii4 ,philosophy /&s 9 ne$ ( a ,sci5ce :i* %all ,det]m9e ! ,possibility1 ,pr9ciples1 & ,ext5t ( ,human ,k 8 priori0 ,( f> m importance ?an all t has be5 above said1 is ! consid]ation t c]ta9 ( our cognitions rise completely above ! sph]e ( all possible exp]i5ce1 & by means ( conceptions1 to :i* !re exi/s 9 ! :ole ext5t ( exp]i5ce no correspond+ object1 seem to ext5d ! range ( our judgem5ts beyond its b\nds4 ,& j 9 ?is transc5d5tal or sup]s5sible sph]e1 :]e exp]i5ce af=ds u nei!r in/ruction nor guidance1 lie ! inve/igations ( reason1 :i*1 on acc\nt ( _! importance1 we consid] f> pref]able to1 & z hav+ a f> m elevat$ aim ?an1 all t ! und]/&+ c a*ieve )9 ! sph]e ( s5su\s ph5om5a4 ,s high a value d we set ^u ^! inve/igations1 t ev5 at ! risk ( error1 we p]si/ 9 foll[+ !m out1 & p]mit nei!r d\bt nor disreg>d nor indiff]5ce to re/ra9 u f ! pursuit4 ,^! unavoidable problems ( m]e pure reason are ,god1 fre$om 7( w71 & immortality4 ,! sci5ce :i*1 ) all its prelim9>ies1 has = its especial object ! solution ( ^! problems is nam$ metaphysics--a sci5ce :i* is at ! v outset dogmatical1 t is1 x confid5tly takes ^u itself ! execution ( ?is task )\t any previ\s inve/igation ( ! ability or inability ( reason = su* an und]tak+4 ,n[ ! safe gr\nd ( exp]i5ce be+ ?us ab&on$1 x seems nev]!less natural t we %\ld hesitate to erect a build+ ) ! cognitions we possess1 )\t kn[+ :5ce !y come1 & on ! /r5g? ( pr9ciples1 ! orig9 ( :i* is undiscov]$4 ,in/ead ( ?us try+ to build )\t a f\ndation1 x is r to be expect$ t we %\ld long ago h put ! "q1 h[ ! und]/&+ c arrive at ^! priori cognitions1 & :at is ! ext5t1 validity1 & wor? :i* !y may possess8 ,we say1 8,?is is natural en\gh10 mean+ by ! ^w natural1 t :i* is consi/5t ) a j & reasonable way ( ?9k+2 b if we und]/& by ! t]m1 t :i* usually happ5s1 no?+ inde$ c\ld be m natural & m compreh5sible ?an t ?is inve/igation %\ld be left long unattempt$4 ,= "o "p ( our pure k1 ! sci5ce ( ma!matics1 has be5 long firmly e/abli%$1 & ?us leads u to =m flatt]+ expectations ) reg>d to o!rs1 ?\gh ^! may be ( q a diff]5t nature4 ,besides1 :5 we get beyond ! b\nds ( exp]i5ce1 we are ( c\rse safe f opposition 9 t qu>t]2 & ! *>m ( wid5+ ! range ( our k is s great t1 unless we are br\ght to a /&/ill by "s evid5t contradiction1 we hurry on und\bt+ly 9 our c\rse4 ,?is1 h[ev]1 may be avoid$1 if we are suffici5tly cauti\s 9 ! con/ruction ( our fictions1 :i* are n ! less fictions on t acc\nt4 ,ma!matical sci5ce af=ds u a brilliant example1 h[ f>1 indep5d5tly ( all exp]i5ce1 we may c>ry our priori k4 ,x is true t ! ma!matician occupies himself ) objects & cognitions only 9 s f> z !y c be repres5t$ by means ( intuition4 ,b ?is circum/ance is easily ov]look$1 because ! said intuition c itself be giv5 priori1 & !re=e is h>dly to be di/+ui%$ f a m]e pure conception4 ,deceiv$ by su* a pro( ( ! p[] ( reason1 we c p]ceive no limits to ! ext5sion ( our k4 ,! light dove cleav+ 9 free flight ! ?9 air1 ^: resi/ance x feels1 might imag9e t h] movem5ts w\ld be f> m free & rapid 9 airless space4 ,j 9 ! same way did ,plato1 ab&on+ ! _w ( s5se because ( ! n>r[ limits x sets to ! und]/&+1 v5ture ^u ! w+s ( ideas beyond x1 into ! void space ( pure intellect4 ,he did n reflect t he made no real progress by all 8 ef=ts2 = he met ) no resi/ance :i* might s]ve him = a support1 z x 71 :]eon to re/1 & on :i* he might apply 8 p[]s1 9 ord] to let ! intellect acquire mom5tum = its progress4 ,x is1 inde$1 ! common fate ( human reason 9 speculation1 to f9i% ! impos+ edifice ( ?\ght z rapidly z possible1 & !n = ! fir/ "t to beg9 to exam9e :e!r ! f\ndation is a solid "o or no4 ,arriv$ at ?is po9t1 all sorts ( excuses are s\ght aft]1 9 ord] to console u = its want ( /ability1 or r1 inde$1 to enable ,u to disp5se altoge!r ) s late & dang]\s an inve/igation4 ,b :at frees u dur+ ! process ( build+ f all appreh5sion or suspicion1 & flatt]s u into ! belief ( its solidity1 is ?is4 ,a great "p1 p]haps ! greate/ "p1 ( ! bus9ess ( our reason consi/s 9 ! analysation ( ! conceptions :i* we already possess ( objects4 ,by ?is means we ga9 a multitude ( cognitions1 :i* al?\gh really no?+ m ?an elucidations or explanations ( t :i* 7?\gh 9 a confus$ mann]7 0 already ?\ght 9 our conceptions1 are1 at lea/ 9 respect ( _! =m1 priz$ z new introspections2 :il/1 s f> z reg>ds _! matt] or cont5t1 we h really made no addition to our conceptions1 b only dis9volv$ !m4 ,b z ?is process does furni% a real priori k1 :i* has a sure progress & useful results1 reason1 deceiv$ by ?is1 slips 91 )\t be+ itself aw>e ( x1 ass]tions ( a q diff]5t k9d2 9 :i*1 to giv5 conceptions x adds o!rs1 priori inde$1 b entirely =eign to !m1 )\t our kn[+ h[ x arrives at ^!1 &1 inde$1 )\t su* a "q ev] sugge/+ itself4 ,i %all !re=e at once proce$ to exam9e ! diff]5ce betwe5 ^! two modes ( k4 ,,iv4 ,( ! ,diff]5ce ,betwe5 ,analytical & ,syn!tical ,judgem5ts4 ,9 all judgem5ts :]e9 ! relation ( a subject to ! pr$icate is cogitat$ 7,i m5tion affirmative judgem5ts only "h2 ! application to negative w be v easy71 ?is relation is possible 9 two diff]5t ways4 ,ei!r ! pr$icate ,b belongs to ! subject ,a1 z some:at :i* is conta9$ 7?\gh cov]tly7 9 ! conception ,a2 or ! pr$icate ,b lies completely out ( ! conception ,a1 al?\gh x /&s 9 connection ) x4 ,9 ! fir/ in/ance1 ,i t]m ! judgem5t analytical1 9 ! second1 syn!tical4 ,analytical judgem5ts 7affirmative7 are !re=e ^? 9 :i* ! connection ( ! pr$icate ) ! subject is cogitat$ ?r\gh id5tity2 ^? 9 :i* ?is connection is cogitat$ )\t id5tity1 are call$ syn!tical judgem5ts4 ,! =m] may be call$ explicative1 ! latt] augm5tative judgem5ts2 because ! =m] add 9 ! pr$icate no?+ to ! conception ( ! subject1 b only analyse x into its con/itu5t conceptions1 :i* 7 ?\ght already 9 ! subject1 al?\gh 9 a confus$ mann]2 ! latt] add to our conceptions ( ! subject a pr$icate :i* 0 n conta9$ 9 x1 & :i* no analysis c\ld ev] h discov]$ !re94 ,= example1 :5 ,i say1 8,all bodies are ext5d$10 ?is is an analytical judgem5t4 ,= ,i ne$ n g beyond ! conception ( body 9 ord] to f9d ext5sion connect$ ) x1 b m]ely analyse ! conception1 t is1 become consci\s ( ! manifold prop]ties :i* ,i ?9k 9 t conception1 9 ord] to discov] ?is pr$icate 9 x3 x is !re=e an analytical judgem5t4 ,on ! o!r h&1 :5 ,i say1 8,all bodies are heavy10 ! pr$icate is some?+ totally diff]5t f t :i* ,i ?9k 9 ! m]e conception ( a body4 ,by ! addition ( su* a pr$icate1 !re=e1 x becomes a syn!tical judgem5t4 ,judgem5ts ( exp]i5ce1 z su*1 are always syn!tical4 ,= x w\ld be absurd to ?9k ( gr\nd+ an analytical judgem5t on exp]i5ce1 because 9 =m+ su* a judgem5t ,i ne$ n g out ( ! sph]e ( my conceptions1 & !re=e rec\rse to ! te/imony ( exp]i5ce is q unnecess>y4 ,t 8bodies are ext5d$0 is n an empirical judgem5t1 b a proposition :i* /&s firm priori4 ,= be=e address+ myself to exp]i5ce1 ,i already h 9 my conception all ! requisite conditions = ! judgem5t1 & ,i h only to extract ! pr$icate f ! conception1 accord+ to ! pr9ciple ( contradiction1 & !reby at ! same "t become consci\s ( ! necessity ( ! judgem5t1 a necessity :i* ,i c\ld nev] le>n f exp]i5ce4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ?\gh at fir/ ,i d n at all include ! pr$icate ( weight 9 my conception ( body 9 g5]al1 t conception /ill indicates an object ( exp]i5ce1 a "p ( ! totality ( exp]i5ce1 to :i* ,i c /ill add o!r p>ts2 & ?is ,i d :5 ,i recognize by obs]vation t bodies are heavy4 ,i c cognize be=eh& by analysis ! conception ( body ?r\gh ! *>act]i/ics ( ext5sion1 imp5etrability1 %ape1 etc41 all :i* are cogitat$ 9 ?is conception4 ,b n[ ,i ext5d my k1 & look+ back on exp]i5ce f :i* ,i _h d]iv$ ?is conception ( body1 ,i f9d weight at all times connect$ ) ! above *>act]i/ics1 & !re=e ,i syn!tically add to my conceptions ?is z a pr$icate1 & say1 8,all bodies are heavy40 ,?us x is exp]i5ce ^u :i* re/s ! possibility ( ! syn!sis ( ! pr$icate ( weight ) ! conception ( body1 because bo? conceptions1 al?\gh ! "o is n conta9$ 9 ! o!r1 /ill belong to "o ano!r 7only cont+5tly1 h[ev]71 z p>ts ( a :ole1 namely1 ( exp]i5ce1 :i* is itself a syn!sis ( intuitions4 ,b to syn!tical judgem5ts priori1 su* aid is entirely want+4 ,if ,i g out ( & beyond ! conception ,a1 9 ord] to recognize ano!r ,b z connect$ ) x1 :at f\ndation h ,i to re/ on1 :]eby to r5d] ! syn!sis possible8 ,i h "h no long] ! advantage ( look+ out 9 ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce = :at ,i want4 ,let u take1 = example1 ! proposition1 8,ev]y?+ t happ5s has a cause40 ,9 ! conception ( 8some?+ t happ5s10 ,i inde$ ?9k an exi/5ce :i* a c]ta9 "t antec$es1 & f ?is ,i c d]ive analytical judgem5ts4 ,b ! conception ( a cause lies q out ( ! above conception1 & indicates some?+ entirely diff]5t f 8t :i* happ5s10 & is consequ5tly n conta9$ 9 t conception4 ,h[ !n am ,i able to ass]t conc]n+ ! g5]al conception--8t :i* happ5s0--some?+ entirely diff]5t f t conception1 & to recognize ! conception ( cause al?\gh n conta9$ 9 x1 yet z belong+ to x1 & ev5 necess>ily8 :at is "h ! unkn[n ,x1 ^u :i* ! und]/&+ re/s :5 x believes x has f\nd1 out ( ! conception ,a a =eign pr$icate ,b1 :i* x nev]!less consid]s to be connect$ ) x8 ,x _c be exp]i5ce1 because ! pr9ciple adduc$ annexes ! two repres5tations1 cause & effect1 to ! repres5tation exi/5ce1 n only ) univ]sality1 :i* exp]i5ce _c give1 b also ) ! expression ( necessity1 !re=e completely priori & f pure conceptions4 ,^u su* syn!tical1 t is augm5tative propositions1 dep5ds ! :ole aim ( our speculative k priori2 = al?\gh analytical judgem5ts are inde$ highly important & necess>y1 !y are s1 only to arrive at t cle>ness ( conceptions :i* is requisite = a sure & ext5d$ syn!sis1 & ?is alone is a real acquisition4 ,v4 ,9 all ,!oretical ,sci5ces ( ,reason1 ,syn!tical ,judgem5ts 8 priori0 are conta9$ z ,pr9ciples4 #a4 ,ma!matical judgem5ts are always syn!tical4 ,hi!rto ?is fact1 ?\gh inconte/ably true & v important 9 its consequ5ces1 seems to h escap$ ! analy/s ( ! human m9d1 nay1 to be 9 complete opposition to all _! conjectures4 ,= z x 0 f\nd t ma!matical conclusions all proce$ accord+ to ! pr9ciple ( contradiction 7:i* ! nature ( e apodeictic c]ta9ty requires71 p became p]suad$ t ! fundam5tal pr9ciples ( ! sci5ce also 7 recogniz$ & admitt$ 9 ! same way4 ,b ! notion is fallaci\s2 = al?\gh a syn!tical proposition c c]ta9ly be disc]n$ by means ( ! pr9ciple ( contradiction1 ?is is possible only :5 ano!r syn!tical proposition prec$es1 f :i* ! latt] is d$uc$1 b nev] ( itself4 ,be=e all1 be x obs]v$1 t prop] ma!matical propositions are always judgem5ts priori1 & n empirical1 because !y c>ry along ) !m ! conception ( necessity1 :i* _c be giv5 by exp]i5ce4 ,if ?is be demurr$ to1 x matt]s n2 ,i w !n limit my ass]tion to pure ma!matics1 ! v conception ( :i* implies t x consi/s ( k altoge!r non-empirical & priori4 ,we might1 inde$ at fir/ suppose t ! proposition #g #e #ab is a m]ely analytical proposition1 foll[+ 7accord+ to ! pr9ciple ( contradiction7 f ! conception ( a sum ( sev5 & five4 ,b if we reg>d x m n>r[ly1 we f9d t our conception ( ! sum ( sev5 & five conta9s no?+ m ?an ! unit+ ( bo? sums into "o1 :]eby x _c at all be cogitat$ :at ?is s+le numb] is :i* embraces bo?4 ,! conception ( twelve is by no means obta9$ by m]ely cogitat+ ! union ( sev5 & five2 & we may analyse our conception ( su* a possible sum z long z we w1 /ill we %all nev] discov] 9 x ! notion ( twelve4 ,we mu/ g beyond ^! conceptions1 & h rec\rse to an intuition :i* corresponds to "o ( ! two--our five f+]s1 = example1 or l ,segn] 9 8 ,ari?metic five po9ts1 & s by degrees1 add ! units conta9$ 9 ! five giv5 9 ! intuition1 to ! conception ( sev54 ,= ,i fir/ take ! numb] #g1 &1 = ! conception ( #e call+ 9 ! aid ( ! f+]s ( my h& z objects ( intuition1 ,i add ! units1 :i* ,i be=e took toge!r to make up ! numb] #e1 gradually n[ by means ( ! mat]ial image my h&1 to ! numb] #g1 & by ?is process1 ,i at l5g? see ! numb] #ab arise4 ,t #g %\ld be add$ to #e1 ,i h c]ta9ly cogitat$ 9 my conception ( a sum #g #e1 b n t ?is sum 0 equal to #ab4 ,ari?metical propositions are !re=e always syn!tical1 ( :i* we may become m cle>ly conv9c$ by try+ l>ge numb]s4 ,= x w ?us become q evid5t t1 turn & twi/ our conceptions z we may1 x is impossible1 )\t hav+ rec\rse to intuition1 to arrive at ! sum total or product by means ( ! m]e analysis ( our conceptions4 ,j z little is any pr9ciple ( pure geometry analytical4 8,a /raight l9e betwe5 two po9ts is ! %orte/10 is a syn!tical proposition4 ,= my conception ( /raight conta9s no notion ( quantity1 b is m]ely qualitative4 ,! conception ( ! %orte/ is !re=e =e :olly an addition1 & by no analysis c x be extract$ f our conception ( a /raight l9e4 ,intuition mu/ !re=e "h l5d its aid1 by means ( :i*1 & ?us only1 our syn!sis is possible4 ,"s few pr9ciples preposit$ by geometricians are1 inde$1 really analytical1 & dep5d on ! pr9ciple ( contradiction4 ,!y s]ve1 h[ev]1 l id5tical propositions1 z l9ks 9 ! *a9 ( me?od1 n z pr9ciples--= example1 a a1 ! :ole is equal to itself1 or 7ab7 -- a1 ! :ole is great] ?an its "p4 ,& yet ev5 ^! pr9ciples !mselves1 ?\gh !y d]ive _! validity f pure conceptions1 are only admitt$ 9 ma!matics because !y c be pres5t$ 9 intuition4 ,:at causes u "h commonly to believe t ! pr$icate ( su* apodeictic judgem5ts is already conta9$ 9 our conception1 & t ! judgem5t is !re=e analytical1 is m]ely ! equivocal nature ( ! expression4 ,we mu/ jo9 9 ?\ght a c]ta9 pr$icate to a giv5 conception1 & ?is necessity cleaves already to ! conception4 ,b ! "q is1 n :at we mu/ jo9 9 ?\ght to ! giv5 conception1 b :at we really ?9k !re91 ?\gh only obscurely1 & !n x becomes manife/ t ! pr$icate p]ta9s to ^! conceptions1 necess>ily inde$1 yet n z ?\ght 9 ! conception itself1 b by virtue ( an intuition1 :i* mu/ be add$ to ! conception4 #b4 ,! sci5ce ( natural philosophy 7physics7 conta9s 9 itself syn!tical judgem5ts priori1 z pr9ciples4 ,i %all adduce two propositions4 ,= in/ance1 ! proposition1 8,9 all *anges ( ! mat]ial _w1 ! quantity ( matt] rema9s un*ang$02 or1 t1 8,9 all communication ( motion1 action & reaction mu/ always be equal40 ,9 bo? ( ^!1 n only is ! necessity1 & !re=e _! orig9 priori cle>1 b also t !y are syn!tical propositions4 ,= 9 ! conception ( matt]1 ,i d n cogitate its p]man5cy1 b m]ely its pres5ce 9 space1 :i* x fills4 ,i !re=e really g out ( & beyond ! conception ( matt]1 9 ord] to ?9k on to x some?+ priori1 :i* ,i did n ?9k 9 x4 ,! proposition is !re=e n analytical1 b syn!tical1 & nev]!less conceiv$ priori2 & s x is ) reg>d to ! o!r propositions ( ! pure "p ( natural philosophy4 #c4 ,z to metaphysics1 ev5 if we look ^u x m]ely z an attempt$ sci5ce1 yet1 f ! nature ( human reason1 an indisp5sable "o1 we f9d t x mu/ conta9 syn!tical propositions priori4 ,x is n m]ely ! duty ( metaphysics to dissect1 & !reby analytically to illu/rate ! conceptions :i* we =m priori ( ?+s2 b we seek to wid5 ! range ( our priori k4 ,= ?is purpose1 we mu/ avail ourselves ( su* pr9ciples z add some?+ to ! orig9al conception--some?+ n id5tical )1 nor conta9$ 9 x1 & by means ( syn!tical judgem5ts priori1 leave f> beh9d u ! limits ( exp]i5ce2 = example1 9 ! proposition1 8! _w mu/ h a beg9n+10 & su* l4 ,?us metaphysics1 accord+ to ! prop] aim ( ! sci5ce1 consi/s m]ely ( syn!tical propositions priori4 ,,vi4 ,! ,univ]sal ,problem ( ,pure ,reason4 ,x is extremely advantage\s to be able to br+ a numb] ( inve/igations "u ! =mula ( a s+le problem4 ,= 9 ?is mann]1 we n only facilitate our own lab\r1 inasmu* z we def9e x cle>ly to ourselves1 b also r5d] x m easy = o!rs to decide :e!r we h done ju/ice to our und]tak+4 ,! prop] problem ( pure reason1 !n1 is conta9$ 9 ! "q3 8,h[ are syn!tical judgem5ts priori possible80 ,t metaphysical sci5ce has hi!rto rema9$ 9 s vacillat+ a /ate ( unc]ta9ty & contradiction1 is only to be attribut$ to ! fact t ?is great problem1 & p]haps ev5 ! diff]5ce betwe5 analytical & syn!tical judgem5ts1 did n soon] sugge/ itself to philosoph]s4 ,^u ! solution ( ?is problem1 or ^u suffici5t pro( ( ! impossibility ( syn!tical k priori1 dep5ds ! exi/5ce or d[nfall ( ! sci5ce ( metaphysics4 ,among philosoph]s1 ,david ,hume came ! ne>e/ ( all to ?is problem2 yet x nev] acquir$ 9 8 m9d suffici5t precision1 nor did he reg>d ! "q 9 its univ]sality4 ,on ! contr>y1 he /opp$ %ort at ! syn!tical proposition ( ! connection ( an effect ) its cause 7pr9cipium causalitatis71 insi/+ t su* proposition priori 0 impossible4 ,accord+ to 8 conclusions1 !n1 all t we t]m metaphysical sci5ce is a m]e delusion1 aris+ f ! fanci$ insight ( reason into t :i* is 9 tru? borr[$ f exp]i5ce1 & to :i* habit has giv5 ! appe>ance ( necessity4 ,aga9/ ?is ass]tion1 de/ructive to all pure philosophy1 he w\ld h be5 gu>d$1 _h he _h our problem be=e 8 eyes 9 its univ]sality4 ,= he w\ld !n h p]ceiv$ t1 accord+ to 8 own argum5t1 !re likewise c\ld n be any pure ma!matical sci5ce1 :i* assur$ly _c exi/ )\t syn!tical propositions priori--an absurdity f :i* 8 good und]/&+ mu/ h sav$ him4 ,9 ! solution ( ! above problem is at ! same "t compreh5d$ ! possibility ( ! use ( pure reason 9 ! f\ndation & con/ruction ( all sci5ces :i* conta9 !oretical k priori ( objects1 t is to say1 ! answ] to ! foll[+ que/ions3 ,h[ is pure ma!matical sci5ce possible8 ,h[ is pure natural sci5ce possible8 ,respect+ ^! sci5ces1 z !y d c]ta9ly exi/1 x may ) propriety be ask$1 h[ !y are possible8--= t !y mu/ be possible is %[n by ! fact ( _! really exi/+4#i ,b z to metaphysics1 ! mis]able progress x has hi!rto made1 & ! fact t ( no "o sy/em yet br\ght =w>d1 f> z reg>ds its true aim1 c x be said t ?is sci5ce really exi/s1 leaves any "o at lib]ty to d\bt ) reason ! v possibility ( its exi/5ce4 #i ,z to ! exi/5ce ( pure natural sci5ce1 or physics1 p]haps _m may /ill express d\bts4 ,b we h only to look at ! diff]5t propositions :i* are commonly treat$ ( at ! comm5cem5t ( prop] 7empirical7 physical sci5ce--^?1 = example1 relat+ to ! p]man5ce ( ! same quantity ( matt]1 ! vis in]tiae1 ! equality ( action & reaction1 etc4--to be soon conv9c$ t !y =m a sci5ce ( pure physics 7physica pura1 or rationalis71 :i* well des]ves to be sep>ately expos$ z a special sci5ce1 9 its :ole ext5t1 :e!r t be great or conf9$4 ,yet1 9 a c]ta9 s5se1 ?is k9d ( k mu/ unque/ionably be look$ ^u z giv52 9 o!r words1 metaphysics mu/ be consid]$ z really exi/+1 if n z a sci5ce1 nev]!less z a natural disposition ( ! human m9d 7metaphysica naturalis74 ,= human reason1 )\t any in/igations imputable to ! m]e vanity ( great k1 unceas+ly progresses1 urg$ on by its own feel+ ( ne$1 t[>ds su* que/ions z _c be answ]$ by any empirical application ( reason1 or pr9ciples d]iv$ !refrom2 & s !re has ev] really exi/$ 9 e man "s sy/em ( metaphysics4 ,x w always exi/1 s soon z reason awakes to ! ex]cise ( its p[] ( speculation4 ,& n[ ! "q arises3 8,h[ is metaphysics1 z a natural disposition1 possible80 ,9 o!r words1 h[1 f ! nature ( univ]sal human reason1 d ^? que/ions arise :i* pure reason proposes to itself1 & :i* x is impell$ by its own feel+ ( ne$ to answ] z well z x c8 ,b z 9 all ! attempts hi!rto made to answ] ! que/ions :i* reason is prompt$ by its v nature to propose to itself1 = example1 :e!r ! _w _h a beg9n+1 or has exi/$ f et]nity1 x has always met ) unavoidable contradictions1 we mu/ n re/ satisfi$ ) ! m]e natural disposition ( ! m9d to metaphysics1 t is1 ) ! exi/5ce ( ! faculty ( pure reason1 :5ce1 inde$1 "s sort ( metaphysical sy/em always arises2 b x mu/ be possible to arrive at c]ta9ty 9 reg>d to ! "q :e!r we "k or d n "k ! ?+s ( :i* metaphysics treats4 ,we mu/ be able to arrive at a decision on ! subjects ( its que/ions1 or on ! ability or inability ( reason to =m any judgem5t respect+ !m2 & !re=e ei!r to ext5d ) confid5ce ! b\nds ( our pure reason1 or to set /rictly def9$ & safe limits to its action4 ,?is la/ "q1 :i* arises out ( ! above univ]sal problem1 w\ld prop]ly run ?us3 8,h[ is metaphysics possible z a sci5ce80 ,?us1 ! critique ( reason leads at la/1 naturally & necess>ily1 to sci5ce2 &1 on ! o!r h&1 ! dogmatical use ( reason )\t criticism leads to gr\ndless ass]tions1 aga9/ :i* o!rs equally speci\s c always be set1 ?us end+ unavoidably 9 scepticism4 ,besides1 ?is sci5ce _c be ( great & =midable prolixity1 because x has n to d ) objects ( reason1 ! v>iety ( :i* is inexhau/ible1 b m]ely ) ,reason h]self & h] problems2 problems :i* arise out ( h] own bosom1 & are n propos$ to h] by ! nature ( outw>d ?+s1 b by h] own nature4 ,& :5 once ,reason has previ\sly become able completely to und]/& h] own p[] 9 reg>d to objects :i* %e meets ) 9 exp]i5ce1 x w be easy to det]m9e securely ! ext5t & limits ( h] attempt$ application to objects beyond ! conf9es ( exp]i5ce4 ,we may & mu/1 !re=e1 reg>d ! attempts hi!rto made to e/abli% metaphysical sci5ce dogmatically z non-exi/5t4 ,= :at ( analysis1 t is1 m]e dissection ( conceptions1 is conta9$ 9 "o or o!r1 is n ! aim (1 b only a prep>ation = metaphysics prop]1 :i* has = its object ! ext5sion1 by means ( syn!sis1 ( our priori k4 ,& = ?is purpose1 m]e analysis is ( c\rse useless1 because x only %[s :at is conta9$ 9 ^! conceptions1 b n h[ we arrive1 priori1 at !m2 & ?is x is h] duty to %[1 9 ord] to be able aft]w>ds to det]m9e _! valid use 9 reg>d to all objects ( exp]i5ce1 to all k 9 g5]al4 ,b little self-d5ial1 inde$1 is ne$$ to give up ^! pret5sions1 see+ ! und5iable1 & 9 ! dogmatic mode ( proc$ure1 inevitable contradictions ( ,reason ) h]self1 h long s9ce ru9$ ! reputation ( e sy/em ( metaphysics t has appe>$ up to ?is "t4 ,x w require m firmness to rema9 undet]r$ by difficulty f )91 & opposition f )\t1 f endeav\r+1 by a me?od q oppos$ to all ^? hi!rto foll[$1 to fur!r ! gr[? & fruitfulness ( a sci5ce indisp5sable to human reason--a sci5ce f :i* e bran* x has borne may be cut away1 b ^: roots rema9 inde/ructible4 ,,vii4 ,idea & ,division ( a ,p>ticul> ,sci5ce1 "u ! ,"n ( a ,critique ( ,pure ,reason4 ,f all t has be5 said1 !re results ! idea ( a p>ticul> sci5ce1 :i* may be call$ ! ,critique ( ,pure ,reason4 ,= reason is ! faculty :i* furni%es u ) ! pr9ciples ( k priori4 ,h5ce1 pure reason is ! faculty :i* conta9s ! pr9ciples ( cogniz+ any?+ absolutely priori4 ,an organon ( pure reason w\ld be a comp5dium ( ^? pr9ciples accord+ to :i* alone all pure cognitions priori c be obta9$4 ,! completely ext5d$ application ( su* an organon w\ld af=d u a sy/em ( pure reason4 ,z ?is1 h[ev]1 is dem&+ a great deal1 & x is yet d\btful :e!r any ext5sion ( our k be "h possible1 or1 if s1 9 :at cases2 we c reg>d a sci5ce ( ! m]e criticism ( pure reason1 its s\rces & limits1 z ! propdeutic to a sy/em ( pure reason4 ,su* a sci5ce mu/ n be call$ a doctr9e1 b only a critique ( pure reason2 & its use1 9 reg>d to speculation1 w\ld be only negative1 n to enl>ge ! b\nds (1 b to purify1 our reason1 & to %ield x aga9/ error--:i* alone is no little ga94 ,i apply ! t]m transc5d5tal to all k :i* is n s mu* occupi$ ) objects z ) ! mode ( our cognition ( ^! objects1 s f> z ?is mode ( cognition is possible priori4 ,a sy/em ( su* conceptions w\ld be call$ transc5d5tal philosophy4 ,b ?is1 aga91 is /ill beyond ! b\nds ( our pres5t essay4 ,= z su* a sci5ce mu/ conta9 a complete exposition n only ( our syn!tical priori1 b ( our analytical priori k1 x is ( too wide a range = our pres5t purpose1 because we d n require to c>ry our analysis any f>!r ?an is necess>y to und]/&1 9 _! full ext5t1 ! pr9ciples ( syn!sis priori1 ) :i* alone we h to d4 ,?is inve/igation1 :i* we _c prop]ly call a doctr9e1 b only a transc5d5tal critique1 because x aims n at ! enl>gem5t1 b at ! correction & guidance1 ( our k1 & is to s]ve z a t\*/one ( ! wor? or wor?lessness ( all k priori1 is ! sole object ( our pres5t essay4 ,su* a critique is consequ5tly1 z f> z possible1 a prep>ation = an organon2 & if ?is new organon %\ld be f\nd to fail1 at lea/ = a canon ( pure reason1 accord+ to :i* ! complete sy/em ( ! philosophy ( pure reason1 :e!r x ext5d or limit ! b\nds ( t reason1 might "o day be set =? bo? analytically & syn!tically4 ,= t ?is is possible1 nay1 t su* a sy/em is n ( s great ext5t z to preclude ! hope ( its ev] be+ complet$1 is evid5t4 ,= we h n "h to d ) ! nature ( outw>d objects1 :i* is inf9ite1 b solely ) ! m9d1 :i* judges ( ! nature ( objects1 &1 aga91 ) ! m9d only 9 respect ( its cognition priori4 ,& ! object ( our inve/igations1 z x is n to be s\ght )\t1 b1 altoge!r )91 ourselves1 _c rema9 conceal$1 & 9 all probability is limit$ en\gh to be completely survey$ & fairly e/imat$1 accord+ to its wor? or wor?lessness4 ,/ill less let ! read] "h expect a critique ( books & sy/ems ( pure reason2 our pres5t object is exclusively a critique ( ! faculty ( pure reason itself4 ,only :5 we make ?is critique our f\ndation1 d we possess a pure t\*/one = e/imat+ ! philosophical value ( anci5t & mod]n writ+s on ?is subject2 & )\t ?is crit]ion1 ! incompet5t hi/orian or judge decides ^u & corrects ! gr\ndless ass]tions ( o!rs ) 8 own1 :i* h !mselves j z little f\ndation4 ,transc5d5tal philosophy is ! idea ( a sci5ce1 = :i* ! ,critique ( ,pure ,reason mu/ sket* ! :ole plan ar*itectonically1 t is1 f pr9ciples1 ) a full gu>antee = ! validity & /ability ( all ! p>ts :i* ent] into ! build+4 ,x is ! sy/em ( all ! pr9ciples ( pure reason4 ,if ?is ,critique itself does n assume ! title ( transc5d5tal philosophy1 x is only because1 to be a complete sy/em1 x ought to conta9 a full analysis ( all human k priori4 ,our critique mu/1 inde$1 lay be=e u a complete enum]ation ( all ! radical conceptions :i* con/itute ! said pure k4 ,b f ! complete analysis ( ^! conceptions !mselves1 z also f a complete inve/igation ( ^? d]iv$ f !m1 x ab/a9s ) reason2 p>tly because x w\ld be deviat+ f ! end 9 view to occupy itself ) ?is analysis1 s9ce ?is process is n att5d$ ) ! difficulty & insecurity to be f\nd 9 ! syn!sis1 to :i* our critique is entirely devot$1 & p>tly because x w\ld be inconsi/5t ) ! unity ( our plan to burd5 ?is essay ) ! v9dication ( ! complet5ess ( su* an analysis & d$uction1 ) :i*1 aft] all1 we h at pres5t no?+ to d4 ,?is complet5ess ( ! analysis ( ^! radical conceptions1 z well z ( ! d$uction f ! conceptions priori :i* may be giv5 by ! analysis1 we c1 h[ev]1 easily atta91 provid$ only t we are 9 possession ( all ^! radical conceptions1 :i* are to s]ve z pr9ciples ( ! syn!sis1 & t 9 respect ( ?is ma9 purpose no?+ is want+4 ,to ! ,critique ( ,pure ,reason1 !re=e1 belongs all t con/itutes transc5d5tal philosophy2 & x is ! complete idea ( transc5d5tal philosophy1 b /ill n ! sci5ce itself2 because x only proce$s s f> ) ! analysis z is necess>y to ! p[] ( judg+ completely ( our syn!tical k priori4 ,! pr9cipal ?+ we mu/ att5d to1 9 ! division ( ! p>ts ( a sci5ce l ?is1 is t no conceptions mu/ ent] x :i* conta9 aught empirical2 9 o!r words1 t ! k priori mu/ be completely pure4 ,h5ce1 al?\gh ! highe/ pr9ciples & fundam5tal conceptions ( morality are c]ta9ly cognitions priori1 yet !y d n belong to transc5d5tal philosophy2 because1 ?\gh !y c]ta9ly d n lay ! conceptions ( pa91 pleasure1 desires1 incl9ations1 etc4 7:i* are all ( empirical orig971 at ! f\ndation ( its precepts1 yet /ill into ! conception ( duty--z an ob/acle to be ov]come1 or z an incitem5t :i* %\ld n be made into a motive--^! empirical conceptions mu/ necess>ily ent]1 9 ! con/ruction ( a sy/em ( pure morality4 ,transc5d5tal philosophy is consequ5tly a philosophy ( ! pure & m]ely speculative reason4 ,= all t is practical1 s f> z x conta9s motives1 relates to feel+s1 & ^! belong to empirical s\rces ( cognition4 ,if we wi% to divide ?is sci5ce f ! univ]sal po9t ( view ( a sci5ce 9 g5]al1 x ought to compreh5d1 fir/1 a ,doctr9e ( ! ,elem5ts1 &1 secondly1 a ,doctr9e ( ! ,me?od ( pure reason4 ,ea* ( ^! ma9 divisions w h its subdivisions1 ! sep>ate reasons = :i* we _c "h p>ticul>ize4 ,only s mu* seems necess>y1 by way ( introduction ( premonition1 t !re are two s\rces ( human k 7:i* probably spr+ f a common1 b to u unkn[n root71 namely1 s5se & und]/&+4 ,by ! =m]1 objects are giv5 to u2 by ! latt]1 ?\ght4 ,s f> z ! faculty ( s5se may conta9 repres5tations priori1 :i* =m ! conditions "u :i* objects are giv51 9 s f> x belongs to transc5d5tal philosophy4 ,! transc5d5tal doctr9e ( s5se mu/ =m ! fir/ "p ( our sci5ce ( elem5ts1 because ! conditions "u :i* alone ! objects ( human k are giv5 mu/ prec$e ^? "u :i* !y are ?\ght4 ,i4 ,,transc5d5tal ,,doctr9e ,,( ,,elem5ts4 ,,fir/ ,,"p4 ,,transc5d5tal ,,/hetic4 ,i4 ,introductory4 ,9 :atsoev] mode1 or by :atsoev] means1 our k may relate to objects1 x is at lea/ q cle> t ! only mann] 9 :i* x imm$iately relates to !m is by means ( an intuition4 ,to ?is z ! indisp5sable gr\ndwork1 all ?\ght po9ts4 ,b an intuition c take place only 9 s f> z ! object is giv5 to u4 ,?is1 aga91 is only possible1 to man at lea/1 on condition t ! object affect ! m9d 9 a c]ta9 mann]4 ,! capacity = receiv+ repres5tations 7receptivity7 ?r\gh ! mode 9 :i* we are affect$ by objects1 objects1 is call$ s5sibility4 ,by means ( s5sibility1 !re=e1 objects are giv5 to u1 & x alone furni%es u ) intuitions2 by ! und]/&+ !y are ?\ght1 & f x arise conceptions4 ,b an ?\ght mu/ directly1 or indirectly1 by means ( c]ta9 signs1 relate ultimately to intuitions2 consequ5tly1 ) u1 to s5sibility1 because 9 no o!r way c an object be giv5 to u4 ,! effect ( an object ^u ! faculty ( repres5tation1 s f> z we are affect$ by ! said object1 is s5sation4 ,t sort ( intuition :i* relates to an object by means ( s5sation is call$ an empirical intuition4 ,! undet]m9$ object ( an empirical intuition is call$ ph5om5on4 ,t :i* 9 ! ph5om5on corresponds to ! s5sation1 ,i t]m its matt]2 b t :i* effects t ! cont5t ( ! ph5om5on c be arrang$ "u c]ta9 relations1 ,i call its =m4 ,b t 9 :i* our s5sations are m]ely arrang$1 & by :i* !y are susceptible ( assum+ a c]ta9 =m1 _c be itself s5sation4 ,x is1 !n1 ! matt] ( all ph5om5a t is giv5 to u po/]iori2 ! =m mu/ lie ready priori = !m 9 ! m9d1 & consequ5tly c be reg>d$ sep>ately f all s5sation4 ,i call all repres5tations pure1 9 ! transc5d5tal mean+ ( ! ^w1 :]e9 no?+ is met ) t belongs to s5sation4 ,& accord+ly we f9d exi/+ 9 ! m9d priori1 ! pure =m ( s5su\s intuitions 9 g5]al1 9 :i* all ! manifold cont5t ( ! ph5om5al _w is arrang$ & view$ "u c]ta9 relations4 ,?is pure =m ( s5sibility ,i %all call pure intuition4 ,?us1 if ,i take away f our repres5tation ( a body all t ! und]/&+ ?9ks z belong+ to x1 z sub/ance1 =ce1 divisibility1 etc41 & also :atev] belongs to s5sation1 z imp5etrability1 h>dness1 col\r1 etc42 yet !re is /ill some?+ left u f ?is empirical intuition1 namely1 ext5sion & %ape4 ,^! belong to pure intuition1 :i* exi/s priori 9 ! m9d1 z a m]e =m ( s5sibility1 & )\t any real object ( ! s5ses or any s5sation4 ,! sci5ce ( all ! pr9ciples ( s5sibility priori1 ,i call transc5d5tal /hetic4#aj ,!re mu/1 !n1 be su* a sci5ce =m+ ! fir/ "p ( ! transc5d5tal doctr9e ( elem5ts1 9 contradi/9ction to t "p :i* conta9s ! pr9ciples ( pure ?\ght1 & :i* is call$ transc5d5tal logic4 #aj ,! ,g]mans are ! only p :o at pres5t use ?is ^w to indicate :at o!rs call ! critique ( ta/e4 ,at ! f\ndation ( ?is t]m lies ! disappo9t$ hope1 :i* ! em95t analy/1 ,baumg>t51 conceiv$1 ( subject+ ! criticism ( ! beautiful to pr9ciples ( reason1 & s ( elevat+ its rules into a sci5ce4 ,b 8 endeav\rs 7 va94 ,= ! said rules or crit]ia are1 9 respect to _! *ief s\rces1 m]ely empirical1 consequ5tly nev] c s]ve z det]m9ate laws priori1 by :i* our judgem5t 9 matt]s ( ta/e is to be direct$4 ,x is r our judgem5t :i* =ms ! prop] te/ z to ! correctness ( ! pr9ciples4 ,on ?is acc\nt x is advisable to give up ! use ( ! t]m z designat+ ! critique ( ta/e1 & to apply x solely to t doctr9e1 :i* is true sci5ce--! sci5ce ( ! laws ( s5sibility--& ?us come ne>] to ! language & ! s5se ( ! anci5ts 9 _! well-kn[n division ( ! objects ( cognition into aio!ta kai noeta1 or to %>e x ) speculative philosophy1 & employ x p>tly 9 a transc5d5tal1 p>tly 9 a psy*ological signification4 ,9 ! sci5ce ( transc5d5tal /hetic accord+ly1 we %all fir/ isolate s5sibility or ! s5su\s faculty1 by sep>at+ f x all t is annex$ to its p]ceptions by ! conceptions ( und]/&+1 s t no?+ be left b empirical intuition4 ,9 ! next place we %all take away f ?is intuition all t belongs to s5sation1 s t no?+ may rema9 b pure intuition1 & ! m]e =m ( ph5om5a1 :i* is all t ! s5sibility c af=d priori4 ,f ?is inve/igation x w be f\nd t !re are two pure =ms ( s5su\s intuition1 z pr9ciples ( k priori1 namely1 space & "t4 ,to ! consid]ation ( ^! we %all n[ proce$4 ,,section ,i4 ,( ,space4 #b4 ,metaphysical ,exposition ( ?is ,conception4 ,by means ( ! ext]nal s5se 7a prop]ty ( ! m9d71 we repres5t to ourselves objects z )\t u1 & ^! all 9 space4 ,h]e9 alone are _! %ape1 dim5sions1 & relations to ea* o!r det]m9$ or det]m9able4 ,! int]nal s5se1 by means ( :i* ! m9d contemplates itself or its int]nal /ate1 gives1 inde$1 no intuition ( ! s\l z an object2 yet !re is nev]!less a det]m9ate =m1 "u :i* alone ! contemplation ( our int]nal /ate is possible1 s t all :i* relates to ! inw>d det]m9ations ( ! m9d is repres5t$ 9 relations ( "t4 ,( "t we _c h any ext]nal intuition1 any m ?an we c h an int]nal intuition ( space4 ,:at !n are "t & space8 ,are !y real exi/5ces8 ,or1 are !y m]ely relations or det]m9ations ( ?+s1 su*1 h[ev]1 z w\ld equally belong to ^! ?+s 9 !mselves1 ?\gh !y %\ld nev] become objects ( intuition2 or1 are !y su* z belong only to ! =m ( intuition1 & consequ5tly to ! subjective con/itution ( ! m9d1 )\t :i* ^! pr$icates ( "t & space c\ld n be atta*$ to any object8 ,9 ord] to become in=m$ on ^! po9ts1 we %all fir/ give an exposition ( ! conception ( space4 ,by exposition1 ,i mean ! cle>1 ?\gh n detail$1 repres5tation ( t :i* belongs to a conception2 & an exposition is metaphysical :5 x conta9s t :i* repres5ts ! conception z giv5 priori4 #a4 ,space is n a conception :i* has be5 d]iv$ f outw>d exp]i5ces4 ,=1 9 ord] t c]ta9 s5sations may relate to some?+ )\t me 7t is1 to some?+ :i* occupies a diff]5t "p ( space f t 9 :i* ,i am72 9 l mann]1 9 ord] t ,i may repres5t !m n m]ely z )\t1 (1 & ne> to ea* o!r1 b also 9 sep>ate places1 ! repres5tation ( space mu/ already exi/ z a f\ndation4 ,consequ5tly1 ! repres5tation ( space _c be borr[$ f ! relations ( ext]nal ph5om5a ?r\gh exp]i5ce2 b1 on ! contr>y1 ?is ext]nal exp]i5ce is itself only possible ?r\gh ! said antec$5t repres5tation4 #b4 ,space !n is a necess>y repres5tation priori1 :i* s]ves = ! f\ndation ( all ext]nal intuitions4 ,we nev] c imag9e or make a repres5tation to ourselves ( ! non-exi/5ce ( space1 ?\gh we may easily en\gh ?9k t no objects are f\nd 9 x4 ,x mu/1 !re=e1 be consid]$ z ! condition ( ! possibility ( ph5om5a1 & by no means z a det]m9ation dep5d5t on !m1 & is a repres5tation priori1 :i* necess>ily supplies ! basis = ext]nal ph5om5a4 #c4 ,space is no discursive1 or z we say1 g5]al conception ( ! relations ( ?+s1 b a pure intuition4 ,=1 9 ! fir/ place1 we c only repres5t to ourselves "o space1 &1 :5 we talk ( div]s spaces1 we mean only p>ts ( "o & ! same space4 ,moreov]1 ^! p>ts _c antec$e ?is "o all-embrac+ space1 z ! compon5t p>ts f :i* ! aggregate c be made up1 b c be cogitat$ only z exi/+ 9 x4 ,space is ess5tially "o1 & multiplicity 9 x1 consequ5tly ! g5]al notion ( spaces1 ( ?is or t space1 dep5ds solely ^u limitations4 ,h5ce x foll[s t an priori intuition 7:i* is n empirical7 lies at ! root ( all our conceptions ( space4 ,?us1 moreov]1 ! pr9ciples ( geometry--= example1 t 89 a triangle1 two sides toge!r are great] ?an ! ?ird10 are nev] d$uc$ f g5]al conceptions ( l9e & triangle1 b f intuition1 & ?is priori1 ) apodeictic c]ta9ty4 #d4 ,space is repres5t$ z an inf9ite giv5 quantity4 ,n[ e conception mu/ inde$ be consid]$ z a repres5tation :i* is conta9$ 9 an inf9ite multitude ( diff]5t possible repres5tations1 :i*1 !re=e1 comprises ^! "u itself2 b no conception1 z su*1 c be s conceiv$1 z if x conta9$ )9 itself an inf9ite multitude ( repres5tations4 ,nev]!less1 space is s conceiv$ (1 = all p>ts ( space are equally capable ( be+ produc$ to inf9ity4 ,consequ5tly1 ! orig9al repres5tation ( space is an intuition priori1 & n a conception4 #c4 ,transc5d5tal ,exposition ( ! ,conception ( ,space4 ,by a transc5d5tal exposition1 ,i mean ! explanation ( a conception1 z a pr9ciple1 :5ce c be disc]n$ ! possibility ( o!r syn!tical priori cognitions4 ,= ?is purpose1 x is requisite1 fir/ly1 t su* cognitions d really fl[ f ! giv5 conception2 &1 secondly1 t ! said cognitions are only possible "u ! presupposition ( a giv5 mode ( expla9+ ?is conception4 ,geometry is a sci5ce :i* det]m9es ! prop]ties ( space syn!tically1 & yet priori4 ,:at1 !n1 mu/ be our repres5tation ( space1 9 ord] t su* a cognition ( x may be possible8 ,x mu/ be orig9ally intuition1 = f a m]e conception1 no propositions c be d$uc$ :i* g out beyond ! conception1 & yet ?is happ5s 9 geometry4 7,introd4 ,v47 ,b ?is intuition mu/ be f\nd 9 ! m9d priori1 t is1 be=e any p]ception ( objects1 consequ5tly mu/ be pure1 n empirical1 intuition4 ,= geometrical pr9ciples are always apodeictic1 t is1 unit$ ) ! consci\sness ( _! necessity1 z3 8,space has only ?ree dim5sions40 ,b propositions ( ?is k9d _c be empirical judgem5ts1 nor conclusions f !m4 7,introd4 ,,ii47 ,n[1 h[ c an ext]nal intuition ant]ior to objects !mselves1 & 9 :i* our conception ( objects c be det]m9$ priori1 exi/ 9 ! human m9d8 ,obvi\sly n o!rwise ?an 9 s f> z x has its seat 9 ! subject only1 z ! =mal capacity ( ! subject's be+ affect$ by objects1 & !reby ( obta9+ imm$iate repres5tation1 t is1 intuition2 consequ5tly1 only z ! =m ( ! ext]nal s5se 9 g5]al4 ,?us x is only by means ( our explanation t ! possibility ( geometry1 z a syn!tical sci5ce priori1 becomes compreh5sible4 ,e mode ( explanation :i* does n %[ u ?is possibility1 al?\gh 9 appe>ance x may be simil> to ours1 c ) ! utmo/ c]ta9ty be di/+ui%$ f x by ^! m>ks4 #d4 ,conclusions f ! =ego+ ,conceptions4 7a7 ,space does n repres5t any prop]ty ( objects z ?+s 9 !mselves1 nor does x repres5t !m 9 _! relations to ea* o!r2 9 o!r words1 space does n repres5t to u any det]m9ation ( objects su* z atta*es to ! objects !mselves1 & w\ld rema91 ev5 ?\gh all subjective conditions ( ! intuition 7 ab/ract$4 ,= nei!r absolute nor relative det]m9ations ( objects c be intuit$ prior to ! exi/5ce ( ! ?+s to :i* !y belong1 & !re=e n priori4 7b7 ,space is no?+ else ?an ! =m ( all ph5om5a ( ! ext]nal s5se1 t is1 ! subjective condition ( ! s5sibility1 "u :i* alone ext]nal intuition is possible4 ,n[1 because ! receptivity or capacity ( ! subject to be affect$ by objects necess>ily antec$es all intuitions ( ^! objects1 x is easily und]/ood h[ ! =m ( all ph5om5a c be giv5 9 ! m9d previ\s to all actual p]ceptions1 !re=e priori1 & h[ x1 z a pure intuition1 9 :i* all objects mu/ be det]m9$1 c conta9 pr9ciples ( ! relations ( ^! objects prior to all exp]i5ce4 ,x is !re=e f ! human po9t ( view only t we c speak ( space1 ext5d$ objects1 etc4 ,if we dep>t f ! subjective condition1 "u :i* alone we c obta9 ext]nal intuition1 or1 9 o!r words1 by means ( :i* we are affect$ by objects1 ! repres5tation ( space has no mean+ :atsoev]4 ,?is pr$icate is only applicable to ?+s 9 s f> z !y appe> to u1 t is1 are objects ( s5sibility4 ,! con/ant =m ( ?is receptivity1 :i* we call s5sibility1 is a necess>y condition ( all relations 9 :i* objects c be intuit$ z exi/+ )\t u1 & :5 ab/raction ( ^! objects is made1 is a pure intuition1 to :i* we give ! "n ( space4 ,x is cle> t we _c make ! special conditions ( s5sibility into conditions ( ! possibility ( ?+s1 b only ( ! possibility ( _! exi/5ce z f> z !y are ph5om5a4 ,& s we may correctly say t space conta9s all :i* c appe> to u ext]nally1 b n all ?+s consid]$ z ?+s 9 !mselves1 be !y intuit$ or n1 or by :atsoev] subject "o w4 ,z to ! intuitions ( o!r ?9k+ be+s1 we _c judge :e!r !y are or are n b\nd by ! same conditions :i* limit our own intuition1 & :i* = u are univ]sally valid4 ,if we jo9 ! limitation ( a judgem5t to ! conception ( ! subject1 !n ! judgem5t w possess uncondition$ validity4 ,= example1 ! proposition1 8,all objects are beside ea* o!r 9 space10 is valid only "u ! limitation t ^! ?+s are tak5 z objects ( our s5su\s intuition4 ,b if ,i jo9 ! condition to ! conception & say1 8,all ?+s1 z ext]nal ph5om5a1 are beside ea* o!r 9 space10 !n ! rule is valid univ]sally1 & )\t any limitation4 ,our expositions1 consequ5tly1 tea* ! reality 7i4e41 ! objective validity7 ( space 9 reg>d ( all :i* c be pres5t$ to u ext]nally z object1 & at ! same "t also ! ideality ( space 9 reg>d to objects :5 !y are consid]$ by means ( reason z ?+s 9 !mselves1 t is1 )\t ref]5ce to ! con/itution ( our s5sibility4 ,we ma9ta91 !re=e1 ! empirical reality ( space 9 reg>d to all possible ext]nal exp]i5ce1 al?\gh we mu/ admit its transc5d5tal ideality2 9 o!r words1 t x is no?+1 s soon z we )draw ! condition ^u :i* ! possibility ( all exp]i5ce dep5ds & look ^u space z some?+ t belongs to ?+s 9 !mselves4 ,b1 ) ! exception ( space1 !re is no repres5tation1 subjective & ref]r+ to some?+ ext]nal to u1 :i* c\ld be call$ objective priori4 ,= !re are no o!r subjective repres5tations f :i* we c d$uce syn!tical propositions priori1 z we c f ! intuition ( space4 7,see #c47 ,!re=e1 to speak accurately1 no ideality :atev] belongs to ^!1 al?\gh !y agree 9 ?is respect ) ! repres5tation ( space1 t !y belong m]ely to ! subjective nature ( ! mode ( s5su\s p]ception2 su* a mode1 = example1 z t ( sight1 ( he>+1 & ( feel+1 by means ( ! s5sations ( col\r1 s\nd1 & heat1 b :i*1 because !y are only s5sations & n intuitions1 d n ( !mselves give u ! cognition ( any object1 lea/ ( all1 an priori cognition4 ,my purpose1 9 ! above rem>k1 is m]ely ?is3 to gu>d any "o aga9/ illu/rat+ ! ass]t$ ideality ( space by examples q insuffici5t1 = example1 by col\r1 ta/e1 etc42 = ^! mu/ be contemplat$ n z prop]ties ( ?+s1 b only z *anges 9 ! subject1 *anges :i* may be diff]5t 9 diff]5t m54 ,=1 9 su* a case1 t :i* is orig9ally a m]e ph5om5on1 a rose1 = example1 is tak5 by ! empirical und]/&+ = a ?+ 9 itself1 ?\gh to e diff]5t eye1 9 respect ( its col\r1 x may appe> diff]5t4 ,on ! contr>y1 ! transc5d5tal conception ( ph5om5a 9 space is a critical admonition1 t1 9 g5]al1 no?+ :i* is intuit$ 9 space is a ?+ 9 itself1 & t space is n a =m :i* belongs z a prop]ty to ?+s2 b t objects are q unkn[n to u 9 !mselves1 & :at we call outw>d objects1 are no?+ else b m]e repres5tations ( our s5sibility1 ^: =m is space1 b ^: real correlate1 ! ?+ 9 itself1 is n kn[n by means ( ^! repres5tations1 nor ev] c be1 b respect+ :i*1 9 exp]i5ce1 no inquiry is ev] made4 ,,section ,,ii4 ,( ,"t4 #e4 ,metaphysical ,exposition ( ?is ,conception4 #a4 ,"t is n an empirical conception4 ,= nei!r coexi/5ce nor succession w\ld be p]ceiv$ by u1 if ! repres5tation ( "t did n exi/ z a f\ndation priori4 ,)\t ?is presupposition we c\ld n repres5t to ourselves t ?+s exi/ toge!r at "o & ! same "t1 or at diff]5t times1 t is1 contemporane\sly1 or 9 succession4 #b4 ,"t is a necess>y repres5tation1 ly+ at ! f\ndation ( all our intuitions4 ,) reg>d to ph5om5a 9 g5]al1 we _c ?9k away "t f !m1 & repres5t !m to ourselves z out ( & unconnect$ ) "t1 b we c q well repres5t to ourselves "t void ( ph5om5a4 ,"t is !re=e giv5 priori4 ,9 x alone is all reality ( ph5om5a possible4 ,^! may all be annihilat$ 9 ?\ght1 b "t itself1 z ! univ]sal condition ( _! possibility1 _c be s annull$4 #c4 ,on ?is necessity priori is also f\nd$ ! possibility ( apodeictic pr9ciples ( ! relations ( "t1 or axioms ( "t 9 g5]al1 su* z3 8,"t has only "o dim5sion10 8,diff]5t times are n coexi/5t b successive0 7z diff]5t spaces are n successive b coexi/5t74 ,^! pr9ciples _c be d]iv$ f exp]i5ce1 = x w\ld give nei!r /rict univ]sality1 nor apodeictic c]ta9ty4 ,we %\ld only be able to say1 8s common exp]i5ce tea*es u10 b n 8x mu/ be s40 ,!y are valid z rules1 ?r\gh :i*1 9 g5]al1 exp]i5ce is possible2 & !y in/ruct u respect+ exp]i5ce1 & n by means ( x4 #d4 ,"t is n a discursive1 or z x is call$1 g5]al conception1 b a pure =m ( ! s5su\s intuition4 ,diff]5t times are m]ely p>ts ( "o & ! same "t4 ,b ! repres5tation :i* c only be giv5 by a s+le object is an intuition4 ,besides1 ! proposition t diff]5t times _c be coexi/5t c\ld n be d]iv$ f a g5]al conception4 ,= ?is proposition is syn!tical1 & !re=e _c spr+ out ( conceptions alone4 ,x is !re=e conta9$ imm$iately 9 ! intuition & repres5tation ( "t4 #e4 ,! inf9ity ( "t signifies no?+ m ?an t e det]m9$ quantity ( "t is possible only ?r\gh limitations ( "o "t ly+ at ! f\ndation4 ,consequ5tly1 ! orig9al repres5tation1 "t1 mu/ be giv5 z unlimit$4 ,b z ! det]m9ate repres5tation ( ! p>ts ( "t & ( e quantity ( an object c only be obta9$ by limitation1 ! complete repres5tation ( "t mu/ n be furni%$ by means ( conceptions1 = ^! conta9 only p>tial repres5tations4 ,conceptions1 on ! contr>y1 mu/ h imm$iate intuition = _! basis4 #f ,transc5d5tal ,exposition ( ! ,conception ( ,"t4 ,i may "h ref] to :at is said above 7 #e1 #c71 :]e1 = or sake ( brevity1 ,i h plac$ "u ! head ( metaphysical exposition1 t :i* is prop]ly transc5d5tal4 ,"h ,i %all add t ! conception ( *ange1 & ) x ! conception ( motion1 z *ange ( place1 is possible only ?r\gh & 9 ! repres5tation ( "t2 t if ?is repres5tation 7 n an intuition 7int]nal7 priori1 no conception1 ( :atev] k9d1 c\ld r5d] compreh5sible ! possibility ( *ange1 9 o!r words1 ( a conjunction ( contradictorily oppos$ pr$icates 9 "o & ! same object1 = example1 ! pres5ce ( a ?+ 9 a place & ! non-pres5ce ( ! same ?+ 9 ! same place4 ,x is only 9 "t t x is possible to meet ) two contradictorily oppos$ det]m9ations 9 "o ?+1 t is1 aft] ea* o!r4 ,?us our conception ( "t expla9s ! possibility ( s mu* syn!tical k priori1 z is exhibit$ 9 ! g5]al doctr9e ( motion1 :i* is n a little fruitful4 #g4 ,conclusions f ! above ,conceptions4 7a7 ,"t is n some?+ :i* subsi/s ( itself1 or :i* inh]es 9 ?+s z an objective det]m9ation1 & !re=e rema9s1 :5 ab/raction is made ( ! subjective conditions ( ! intuition ( ?+s4 ,= 9 ! =m] case1 x w\ld be some?+ real1 yet )\t pres5t+ to any p[] ( p]ception any real object4 ,9 ! latt] case1 z an ord] or det]m9ation inh]5t 9 ?+s !mselves1 x c\ld n be antec$5t to ?+s1 z _! condition1 nor disc]n$ or intuit$ by means ( syn!tical propositions priori4 ,b all ?is is q possible :5 we reg>d "t z m]ely ! subjective condition "u :i* all our intuitions take place4 ,= 9 t case1 ?is =m ( ! inw>d intuition c be repres5t$ prior to ! objects1 & consequ5tly priori4 7b7 ,"t is no?+ else ?an ! =m ( ! int]nal s5se1 t is1 ( ! intuitions ( self & ( our int]nal /ate4 ,= "t _c be any det]m9ation ( outw>d ph5om5a4 ,x has to d nei!r ) %ape nor position2 on ! contr>y1 x det]m9es ! relation ( repres5tations 9 our int]nal /ate4 ,& precisely because ?is int]nal intuition pres5ts to u no %ape or =m1 we endeav\r to supply ?is want by analogies1 & repres5t ! c\rse ( "t by a l9e progress+ to inf9ity1 ! cont5t ( :i* con/itutes a s]ies :i* is only ( "o dim5sion2 & we conclude f ! prop]ties ( ?is l9e z to all ! prop]ties ( "t1 ) ?is s+le exception1 t ! p>ts ( ! l9e are coexi/5t1 :il/ ^? ( "t are successive4 ,f ?is x is cle> also t ! repres5tation ( "t is itself an intuition1 because all its relations c be express$ 9 an ext]nal intuition4 7c7 ,"t is ! =mal condition priori ( all ph5om5a :atsoev]4 ,space1 z ! pure =m ( ext]nal intuition1 is limit$ z a condition priori to ext]nal ph5om5a alone4 ,on ! o!r h&1 because all repres5tations1 :e!r !y h or h n ext]nal ?+s = _! objects1 /ill 9 !mselves1 z det]m9ations ( ! m9d1 belong to our int]nal /ate2 & because ?is int]nal /ate is subject to ! =mal condition ( ! int]nal intuition1 t is1 to "t--"t is a condition priori ( all ph5om5a :atsoev]--! imm$iate condition ( all int]nal1 & !reby ! m$iate condition ( all ext]nal ph5om5a4 ,if ,i c say priori1 8,all outw>d ph5om5a are 9 space1 & det]m9$ priori accord+ to ! relations ( space10 ,i c also1 f ! pr9ciple ( ! int]nal s5se1 affirm univ]sally1 8,all ph5om5a 9 g5]al1 t is1 all objects ( ! s5ses1 are 9 "t & /& necess>ily 9 relations ( "t40 ,if we ab/ract our int]nal intuition ( ourselves & all ext]nal intuitions1 possible only by virtue ( ?is int]nal intuition & pres5t$ to u by our faculty ( repres5tation1 & consequ5tly take objects z !y are 9 !mselves1 !n "t is no?+4 ,x is only ( objective validity 9 reg>d to ph5om5a1 because ^! are ?+s :i* we reg>d z objects ( our s5ses4 ,x no long] objective we1 make ab/raction ( ! s5su\sness ( our intuition1 9 o!r words1 ( t mode ( repres5tation :i* is peculi> to u1 & speak ( ?+s 9 g5]al4 ,"t is !re=e m]ely a subjective condition ( our 7human7 intuition 7:i* is always s5su\s1 t is1 s f> z we are affect$ by objects71 & 9 itself1 indep5d5tly ( ! m9d or subject1 is no?+4 ,nev]!less1 9 respect ( all ph5om5a1 consequ5tly ( all ?+s :i* come )9 ! sph]e ( our exp]i5ce1 x is necess>ily objective4 ,we _c say1 8,all ?+s are 9 "t10 because 9 ?is conception ( ?+s 9 g5]al1 we ab/ract & make no m5tion ( any sort ( intuition ( ?+s4 ,b ?is is ! prop] condition "u :i* "t belongs to our repres5tation ( objects4 ,if we add ! condition to ! conception1 & say1 8,all ?+s1 z ph5om5a1 t is1 objects ( s5su\s intuition1 are 9 "t10 !n ! proposition has its s\nd objective validity & univ]sality priori4 ,:at we h n[ set =? tea*es1 !re=e1 ! empirical reality ( "t2 t is1 its objective validity 9 ref]5ce to all objects :i* c ev] be pres5t$ to our s5ses4 ,& z our intuition is always s5su\s1 no object ev] c be pres5t$ to u 9 exp]i5ce1 :i* does n come "u ! conditions ( "t4 ,on ! o!r h&1 we d5y to "t all claim to absolute reality2 t is1 we d5y t x1 )\t hav+ reg>d to ! =m ( our s5su\s intuition1 absolutely inh]es 9 ?+s z a condition or prop]ty4 ,su* prop]ties z belong to objects z ?+s 9 !mselves nev] c be pres5t$ to u ?r\gh ! m$ium ( ! s5ses4 ,h]e9 consi/s1 !re=e1 ! transc5d5tal ideality ( "t1 accord+ to :i*1 if we ab/ract ! subjective conditions ( s5su\s intuition1 x is no?+1 & _c be reckon$ z subsi/+ or inh]+ 9 objects z ?+s 9 !mselves1 indep5d5tly ( its relation to our intuition4 ,?is ideality1 l t ( space1 is n to be prov$ or illu/rat$ by fallaci\s analogies ) s5sations1 = ?is reason--t 9 su* argum5ts or illu/rations1 we make ! presupposition t ! ph5om5on1 9 :i* su* & su* pr$icates inh]e1 has objective reality1 :ile 9 ?is case we c only f9d su* an objective reality z is itself empirical1 t is1 reg>ds ! object z a m]e ph5om5on4 ,9 ref]5ce to ?is subject1 see ! rem>k 9 ,section ,i 7 #d7 #h4 ,elucidation4 ,aga9/ ?is !ory1 :i* grants empirical reality to "t1 b d5ies to x absolute & transc5d5tal reality1 ,i h he>d f intellig5t m5 an objection s unanim\sly urg$ t ,i conclude t x mu/ naturally pres5t itself to e read] to :om ^! consid]ations are novel4 ,x runs ?us3 8,*anges are real0 7?is ! cont9ual *ange 9 our own repres5tations demon/rates1 ev5 ?\gh ! exi/5ce ( all ext]nal ph5om5a1 toge!r ) _! *anges1 is d5i$74 ,n[1 *anges are only possible 9 "t1 & !re=e "t mu/ be some?+ real4 ,b !re is no difficulty 9 answ]+ ?is4 ,i grant ! :ole argum5t4 ,"t1 no d\bt1 is some?+ real1 t is1 x is ! real =m ( our int]nal intuition4 ,x !re=e has subjective reality1 9 ref]5ce to our int]nal exp]i5ce1 t is1 ,i h really ! repres5tation ( "t & ( my det]m9ations !re94 ,"t1 !re=e1 is n to be reg>d$ z an object1 b z ! mode ( repres5tation ( myself z an object4 ,b if ,i c\ld intuite myself1 or be intuit$ by ano!r be+1 )\t ?is condition ( s5sibility1 !n ^? v det]m9ations :i* we n[ repres5t to ourselves z *anges1 w\ld pres5t to u a k 9 :i* ! repres5tation ( "t1 & consequ5tly ( *ange1 w\ld n appe>4 ,! empirical reality ( "t1 !re=e1 rema9s1 z ! condition ( all our exp]i5ce4 ,b absolute reality1 accord+ to :at has be5 said above1 _c be grant$ x4 ,"t is no?+ b ! =m ( our int]nal intuition4#aa ,if we take away f x ! special condition ( our s5sibility1 ! conception ( "t also vani%es2 & x inh]es n 9 ! objects !mselves1 b solely 9 ! subject 7or m9d7 :i* intuites !m4 #aa ,i c inde$ say 8my repres5tations foll[ "o ano!r1 or are successive02 b ?is means only t we are consci\s ( !m z 9 a succession1 t is1 accord+ to ! =m ( ! int]nal s5se4 ,"t1 !re=e1 is n a ?+ 9 itself1 nor is x any objective det]m9ation p]ta9+ to1 or inh]5t 9 ?+s4 ,b ! reason :y ?is objection is s unanim\sly br\ght aga9/ our doctr9e ( "t1 & t too by disputants :o _c />t any intelligible argum5ts aga9/ ! doctr9e ( ! ideality ( space1 is ?is--!y h no hope ( demon/rat+ apodeictically ! absolute reality ( space1 because ! doctr9e ( idealism is aga9/ !m1 accord+ to :i* ! reality ( ext]nal objects is n capable ( any /rict pro(4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ! reality ( ! object ( our int]nal s5se 7t is1 myself & my int]nal /ate7 is cle> imm$iately ?r\gh consci\sness4 ,! =m]--ext]nal objects 9 space--might be a m]e delusion1 b ! latt]--! object ( my int]nal p]ception--is und5iably real4 ,!y d n1 h[ev]1 reflect t bo?1 )\t "q ( _! reality z repres5tations1 belong only to ! g5us ph5om5on1 :i* has always two aspects1 ! "o1 ! object consid]$ z a ?+ 9 itself1 )\t reg>d to ! mode ( intuit+ x1 & ! nature ( :i* rema9s = ?is v reason problematical1 ! o!r1 ! =m ( our intuition ( ! object1 :i* mu/ be s\ght n 9 ! object z a ?+ 9 itself1 b 9 ! subject to :i* x appe>s--:i* =m ( intuition nev]!less belongs really & necess>ily to ! ph5om5al object4 ,"t & space are1 !re=e1 two s\rces ( k1 f :i*1 priori1 v>i\s syn!tical cognitions c be drawn4 ,( ?is we f9d a /rik+ example 9 ! cognitions ( space & its relations1 :i* =m ! f\ndation ( pure ma!matics4 ,!y are ! two pure =ms ( all intuitions1 & !reby make syn!tical propositions priori possible4 ,b ^! s\rces ( k be+ m]ely conditions ( our s5sibility1 d !re=e1 & z su*1 /rictly det]m9e _! own range & purpose1 9 t !y d n & _c pres5t objects z ?+s 9 !mselves1 b are applicable to !m solely 9 s f> z !y are consid]$ z s5su\s ph5om5a4 ,! sph]e ( ph5om5a is ! only sph]e ( _! validity1 & if we v5ture out ( ?is1 no fur!r objective use c be made ( !m4 ,= ! re/1 ?is =mal reality ( "t & space leaves ! validity ( our empirical k un%ak52 = our c]ta9ty 9 t respect is equally firm1 :e!r ^! =ms necess>ily inh]e 9 ! ?+s !mselves1 or only 9 our intuitions ( !m4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ^? :o ma9ta9 ! absolute reality ( "t & space1 :e!r z ess5tially subsi/+1 or only inh]+1 z modifications1 9 ?+s1 mu/ f9d !mselves at utt] v>iance ) ! pr9ciples ( exp]i5ce itself4 ,=1 if !y decide = ! fir/ view1 & make space & "t into sub/ances1 ?is be+ ! side tak5 by ma!matical natural philosoph]s1 !y mu/ admit two self-subsi/+ non5tities1 inf9ite & et]nal1 :i* exi/ 7yet )\t !re be+ any?+ real7 = ! purpose ( conta9+ 9 !mselves ev]y?+ t is real4 ,if !y adopt ! second view ( inh]5ce1 :i* is pref]r$ by "s metaphysical natural philosoph]s1 & reg>d space & "t z relations 7contiguity 9 space or succession 9 "t71 ab/ract$ f exp]i5ce1 ?\gh repres5t$ confus$ly 9 ?is /ate ( sep>ation1 !y f9d !mselves 9 t case necessitat$ to d5y ! validity ( ma!matical doctr9es priori 9 ref]5ce to real ?+s 7= example1 9 space7--at all ev5ts _! apodeictic c]ta9ty4 ,= su* c]ta9ty _c be f\nd 9 an po/]iori proposition2 & ! conceptions priori ( space & "t are1 accord+ to ?is op9ion1 m]e creations ( ! imag9ation1 hav+ _! s\rce really 9 exp]i5ce1 inasmu* z1 out ( relations ab/ract$ f exp]i5ce1 imag9ation has made up some?+ :i* conta9s1 inde$1 g5]al /atem5ts ( ^! relations1 yet ( :i* no application c be made )\t ! re/rictions atta*$ !reto by nature4 ,! =m] ( ^! p>ties ga9s ?is advantage1 t !y keep ! sph]e ( ph5om5a free = ma!matical sci5ce4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ^! v conditions 7space & "t7 emb>rass !m greatly1 :5 ! und]/&+ endeav\rs to pass ! limits ( t sph]e4 ,! latt] has1 inde$1 ?is advantage1 t ! repres5tations ( space & "t d n come 9 _! way :5 !y wi% to judge ( objects1 n z ph5om5a1 b m]ely 9 _! relation to ! und]/&+4 ,devoid1 h[ev]1 ( a true & objectively valid priori intuition1 !y c nei!r furni% any basis = ! possibility ( ma!matical cognitions priori1 nor br+ ! propositions ( exp]i5ce into necess>y accordance ) ^? ( ma!matics4 ,9 our !ory ( ! true nature ( ^! two orig9al =ms ( ! s5sibility1 bo? difficulties are surm\nt$4 ,9 conclusion1 t transc5d5tal /hetic _c conta9 any m ?an ^! two elem5ts--space & "t1 is suffici5tly obvi\s f ! fact t all o!r conceptions app]ta9+ to s5sibility1 ev5 t ( motion1 :i* unites 9 itself bo? elem5ts1 presuppose some?+ empirical4 ,motion1 = example1 presupposes ! p]ception ( some?+ movable4 ,b space consid]$ 9 itself conta9s no?+ movable1 consequ5tly motion mu/ be some?+ :i* is f\nd 9 space only ?r\gh exp]i5ce--9 o!r words1 an empirical datum4 ,9 l mann]1 transc5d5tal /hetic _c numb] ! conception ( *ange among its data priori2 = "t itself does n *ange1 b only some?+ :i* is 9 "t4 ,to acquire ! conception ( *ange1 !re=e1 ! p]ception ( "s exi/+ object & ( ! succession ( its det]m9ations1 9 "o ^w1 exp]i5ce1 is necess>y4 #i4 ,g5]al ,rem>ks on ,transc5d5tal /hetic4 ,i4 ,9 ord] to prev5t any misund]/&+1 x w be requisite1 9 ! fir/ place1 to recapitulate1 z cle>ly z possible1 :at our op9ion is ) respect to ! fundam5tal nature ( our s5su\s cognition 9 g5]al4 ,we h int5d$1 !n1 to say t all our intuition is no?+ b ! repres5tation ( ph5om5a2 t ! ?+s :i* we intuite1 are n 9 !mselves ! same z our repres5tations ( !m 9 intuition1 nor are _! relations 9 !mselves s con/itut$ z !y appe> to u2 & t if we take away ! subject1 or ev5 only ! subjective con/itution ( our s5ses 9 g5]al1 !n n only ! nature & relations ( objects 9 space & "t1 b ev5 space & "t !mselves disappe>2 & t ^!1 z ph5om5a1 _c exi/ 9 !mselves1 b only 9 u4 ,:at may be ! nature ( objects consid]$ z ?+s 9 !mselves & )\t ref]5ce to ! receptivity ( our s5sibility is q unkn[n to u4 ,we "k no?+ m ?an our mode ( p]ceiv+ !m1 :i* is peculi> to u1 & :i*1 ?\gh n ( necessity p]ta9+ to e animat$ be+1 is s to ! :ole human race4 ,) ?is alone we h to d4 ,space & "t are ! pure =ms !re(2 s5sation ! matt]4 ,! =m] alone c we cognize priori1 t is1 antec$5t to all actual p]ception2 & = ?is reason su* cognition is call$ pure intuition4 ,! latt] is t 9 our cognition :i* is call$ cognition po/]iori1 t is1 empirical intuition4 ,! =m] app]ta9 absolutely & necess>ily to our s5sibility1 ( :atsoev] k9d our s5sations may be2 ! latt] may be ( v div]sifi$ "*4 ,suppos+ t we %\ld c>ry our empirical intuition ev5 to ! v highe/ degree ( cle>ness1 we %\ld n !reby advance "o /ep ne>] to a k ( ! con/itution ( objects z ?+s 9 !mselves4 ,= we c\ld only1 at be/1 arrive at a complete cognition ( our own mode ( intuition1 t is ( our s5sibility1 & ?is always "u ! conditions orig9ally atta*+ to ! subject1 namely1 ! conditions ( space & "t2 :ile ! "q3 8,:at are objects consid]$ z ?+s 9 !mselves80 rema9s unansw]able ev5 aft] ! mo/ ?or\gh exam9ation ( ! ph5om5al _w4 ,to say1 !n1 t all our s5sibility is no?+ b ! confus$ repres5tation ( ?+s conta9+ exclusively t :i* belongs to !m z ?+s 9 !mselves1 & ?is "u an accumulation ( *>act]i/ic m>ks & p>tial repres5tations :i* we _c di/+ui% 9 consci\sness1 is a falsification ( ! conception ( s5sibility & ph5om5ization1 :i* r5d]s our :ole doctr9e !re( empty & useless4 ,! diff]5ce betwe5 a confus$ & a cle> repres5tation is m]ely logical & has no?+ to d ) cont5t4 ,no d\bt ! conception ( "r1 z employ$ by a s\nd und]/&+1 conta9s all t ! mo/ subtle inve/igation c\ld unfold f x1 al?\gh1 9 ! ord9>y practical use ( ! ^w1 we are n consci\s ( ! manifold repres5tations compris$ 9 ! conception4 ,b we _c = ?is reason ass]t t ! ord9>y conception is a s5su\s "o1 conta9+ a m]e ph5om5on1 = "r _c appe> z a ph5om5on2 b ! conception ( x lies 9 ! und]/&+1 & repres5ts a prop]ty 7! moral prop]ty7 ( actions1 :i* belongs to !m 9 !mselves4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ! repres5tation 9 intuition ( a body conta9s no?+ :i* c\ld belong to an object consid]$ z a ?+ 9 itself1 b m]ely ! ph5om5on or appe>ance ( some?+1 & ! mode 9 :i* we are affect$ by t appe>ance2 & ?is receptivity ( our faculty ( cognition is call$ s5sibility1 & rema9s toto caelo diff]5t f ! cognition ( an object 9 itself1 ev5 ?\gh we %\ld exam9e ! cont5t ( ! ph5om5on to ! v bottom4 ,x mu/ be admitt$ t ! ,leibnitz-,wolfian philosophy has assign$ an entirely errone\s po9t ( view to all inve/igations into ! nature & orig9 ( our cognitions1 inasmu* z x reg>ds ! di/9ction betwe5 ! s5su\s & ! intellectual z m]ely logical1 :]eas x is pla9ly transc5d5tal1 & conc]ns n m]ely ! cle>ness or obscurity1 b ! cont5t & orig9 ( bo?4 ,= ! faculty ( s5sibility n only does n pres5t u ) an indi/9ct & confus$ cognition ( objects z ?+s 9 !mselves1 b1 9 fact1 gives u no k ( ^! at all4 ,on ! contr>y1 s soon z we ab/ract 9 ?\ght our own subjective nature1 ! object repres5t$1 ) ! prop]ties ascrib$ to x by s5su\s intuition1 entirely disappe>s1 because x 0 only ?is subjective nature t det]m9$ ! =m ( ! object z a ph5om5on4 ,9 ph5om5a1 we commonly1 inde$1 di/+ui% t :i* ess5tially belongs to ! intuition ( !m1 & is valid = ! s5su\s faculty ( e human be+1 f t :i* belongs to ! same intuition accid5tally1 z valid n = ! s5su\s faculty 9 g5]al1 b = a p>ticul> /ate or organization ( ?is or t s5se4 ,accord+ly1 we are accu/om$ to say t ! =m] is a cognition :i* repres5ts ! object itself1 :il/ ! latt] pres5ts only a p>ticul> appe>ance or ph5om5on !re(4 ,?is di/9ction1 h[ev]1 is only empirical4 ,if we /op "h 7z is usual71 & d n reg>d ! empirical intuition z itself a m]e ph5om5on 7z we ought to d71 9 :i* no?+ t c app]ta9 to a ?+ 9 itself is to be f\nd1 our transc5d5tal di/9ction is lo/1 & we believe t we cognize objects z ?+s 9 !mselves1 al?\gh 9 ! :ole range ( ! s5su\s _w1 inve/igate ! nature ( its objects z pr(\ndly z we may1 we h to d ) no?+ b ph5om5a4 ,?us1 we call ! ra9b[ a m]e appe>ance ( ph5om5on 9 a sunny %[]1 & ! ra91 ! reality or ?+ 9 itself2 & ?is is "r en\gh1 if we und]/& ! latt] conception 9 a m]ely physical s5se1 t is1 z t :i* 9 univ]sal exp]i5ce1 & "u :atev] conditions ( s5su\s p]ception1 is kn[n 9 intuition to be s & s det]m9$1 & n o!rwise4 ,b if we consid] ?is empirical datum g5]ally1 & inquire1 )\t ref]5ce to its accordance ) all our s5ses1 :e!r !re c be discov]$ 9 x aught :i* repres5ts an object z a ?+ 9 itself 7! ra9drops ( c\rse are n su*1 = !y are1 z ph5om5a1 empirical objects71 ! "q ( ! relation ( ! repres5tation to ! object is transc5d5tal2 & n only are ! ra9drops m]e ph5om5a1 b ev5 _! circul> =m1 nay1 ! space itself ?r\gh :i* !y fall1 is no?+ 9 itself1 b bo? are m]e modifications or fundam5tal dispositions ( our s5su\s intuition1 :il/ ! transc5d5tal object rema9s = u utt]ly unkn[n4 ,! second important conc]n ( our /hetic is t x does n obta9 fav\r m]ely z a plausible hypo!sis1 b possess z und\bt$ a "* ( c]ta9ty z c be dem&$ ( any !ory :i* is to s]ve = an organon4 ,9 ord] fully to conv9ce ! read] ( ?is c]ta9ty1 we %all select a case :i* w s]ve to make its validity app>5t1 & also to illu/rate :at has be5 said 9 #c4 ,suppose1 !n1 t space & "t are 9 !mselves objective1 & conditions ( !--possibility ( objects z ?+s 9 !mselves4 ,9 ! fir/ place1 x is evid5t t bo? pres5t u1 ) v _m apodeictic & syn!tic propositions priori1 b especially space--& = ?is reason we %all pref] x = inve/igation at pres5t4 ,z ! propositions ( geometry are cogniz$ syn!tically priori1 & ) apodeictic c]ta9ty1 ,i inquire3 ,:5ce d y obta9 propositions ( ?is k9d1 & on :at basis does ! und]/&+ re/1 9 ord] to arrive at su* absolutely necess>y & univ]sally valid tru?s8 ,!re is no o!r way ?an ?r\gh intuitions or conceptions1 z su*2 & ^! are giv5 ei!r priori or po/]iori4 ,! latt]1 namely1 empirical conceptions1 toge!r ) ! empirical intuition on :i* !y are f\nd$1 _c af=d any syn!tical proposition1 except su* z is itself also empirical1 t is1 a proposition ( exp]i5ce4 ,b an empirical proposition _c possess ! qualities ( necessity & absolute univ]sality1 :i*1 nev]!less1 are ! *>act]i/ics ( all geometrical propositions4 ,z to ! fir/ & only means to arrive at su* cognitions1 namely1 ?r\gh m]e conceptions or intuitions priori1 x is q cle> t f m]e conceptions no syn!tical cognitions1 b only analytical ones1 c be obta9$4 ,take1 = example1 ! proposition3 8,two /raight l9es _c enclose a space1 & ) ^! alone no figure is possible10 & try to d$uce x f ! conception ( a /raight l9e & ! numb] two2 or take ! proposition3 8,x is possible to con/ruct a figure ) ?ree /raight l9es10 & endeav\r1 9 l mann]1 to d$uce x f ! m]e conception ( a /raight l9e & ! numb] ?ree4 ,all y\r endeav\rs are 9 va91 & y f9d y\rself =c$ to h rec\rse to intuition1 z1 9 fact1 geometry always does4 ,y !re=e give y\rself an object 9 intuition4 ,b ( :at k9d is ?is intuition8 ,is x a pure priori1 or is x an empirical intuition8 ,if ! latt]1 !n nei!r an univ]sally valid1 mu* less an apodeictic proposition c arise f x1 = exp]i5ce nev] c give u any su* proposition4 ,y mu/1 !re=e1 give y\rself an object priori 9 intuition1 & ^u t gr\nd y\r syn!tical proposition4 ,n[ if !re did n exi/ )9 y a faculty ( intuition priori2 if ?is subjective condition 7 n 9 respect to its =m also ! univ]sal condition priori "u :i* alone ! object ( ?is ext]nal intuition is itself possible2 if ! object 7t is1 ! triangle7 7 some?+ 9 itself1 )\t relation to y ! subject2 h[ c\ld y affirm t t :i* lies necess>ily 9 y\r subjective conditions 9 ord] to con/ruct a triangle1 mu/ also necess>ily belong to ! triangle 9 itself8 ,= to y\r conceptions ( ?ree l9es1 y c\ld n add any?+ new 7t is1 ! figure72 :i*1 !re=e1 mu/ necess>ily be f\nd 9 ! object1 because ! object is giv5 be=e y\r cognition1 & n by means ( x4 ,if1 !re=e1 space 7& "t also7 7 n a m]e =m ( y\r intuition1 :i* conta9s conditions priori1 "u :i* alone ?+s c become ext]nal objects = y1 & )\t :i* subjective conditions ! objects are 9 !mselves no?+1 y c\ld n con/ruct any syn!tical proposition :atsoev] reg>d+ ext]nal objects4 ,x is !re=e n m]ely possible or probable1 b indubitably c]ta91 t space & "t1 z ! necess>y conditions ( all our ext]nal & int]nal exp]i5ce1 are m]ely subjective conditions ( all our intuitions1 9 relation to :i* all objects are !re=e m]e ph5om5a1 & n ?+s 9 !mselves1 pres5t$ to u 9 ?is p>ticul> mann]4 ,& = ?is reason1 9 respect to ! =m ( ph5om5a1 mu* may be said priori1 :il/ ( ! ?+ 9 itself1 :i* may lie at ! f\ndation ( ^! ph5om5a1 x is impossible to say any?+4 ,,ii4 ,9 confirmation ( ?is !ory ( ! ideality ( ! ext]nal z well z int]nal s5se1 consequ5tly ( all objects ( s5se1 z m]e ph5om5a1 we may especially rem>k t all 9 our cognition t belongs to intuition conta9s no?+ m ?an m]e relations4 7,! feel+s ( pa9 & pleasure1 & ! w1 :i* are n cognitions1 are except$47 ,! relations1 to wit1 ( place 9 an intuition 7ext5sion71 *ange ( place 7motion71 & laws accord+ to :i* ?is *ange is det]m9$ 7mov+ =ces74 ,t1 h[ev]1 :i* is pres5t 9 ?is or t place1 or any op]ation go+ on1 or result tak+ place 9 ! ?+s !mselves1 ) ! exception ( *ange ( place1 is n giv5 to u by intuition4 ,n[ by means ( m]e relations1 a ?+ _c be kn[n 9 itself2 & x may !re=e be fairly conclud$1 t1 z ?r\gh ! ext]nal s5se no?+ b m]e repres5tations ( relations are giv5 u1 ! said ext]nal s5se 9 its repres5tation c conta9 only ! relation ( ! object to ! subject1 b n ! ess5tial nature ( ! object z a ?+ 9 itself4 ,! same is ! case ) ! int]nal intuition1 n only because1 9 ! int]nal intuition1 ! repres5tation ( ! ext]nal s5ses con/itutes ! mat]ial ) :i* ! m9d is occupi$2 b because "t1 9 :i* we place1 & :i* itself antec$es ! consci\sness (1 ^! repres5tations 9 exp]i5ce1 & :i*1 z ! =mal condition ( ! mode accord+ to :i* objects are plac$ 9 ! m9d1 lies at ! f\ndation ( !m1 conta9s relations ( ! successive1 ! coexi/5t1 & ( t :i* always mu/ be coexi/5t ) succession1 ! p]man5t4 ,n[ t :i*1 z repres5tation1 c antec$e e ex]cise ( ?\ght 7( an object71 is intuition2 & :5 x conta9s no?+ b relations1 x is ! =m ( ! intuition1 :i*1 z x pres5ts u ) no repres5tation1 except 9 s f> z some?+ is plac$ 9 ! m9d1 c be no?+ else ?an ! mode 9 :i* ! m9d is affect$ by its own activity1 to wit--its pres5t+ to itself repres5tations1 consequ5tly ! mode 9 :i* ! m9d is affect$ by itself2 t is1 x c be no?+ b an int]nal s5se 9 respect to its =m4 ,ev]y?+ t is repres5t$ ?r\gh ! m$ium ( s5se is s f> ph5om5al2 consequ5tly1 we mu/ ei!r refuse altoge!r to admit an int]nal s5se1 or ! subject1 :i* is ! object ( t s5se1 c\ld only be repres5t$ by x z ph5om5on1 & n z x w\ld judge ( itself1 if its intuition 7 pure spontane\s activity1 t is1 7 intellectual4 ,! difficulty "h lies :olly 9 ! "q3 ,h[ c ! subject h an int]nal intuition ( itself8 ,b ?is difficulty is common to e !ory4 ,! consci\sness ( self 7app]ception7 is ! simple repres5tation ( ! 8ego02 & if by means ( t repres5tation alone1 all ! manifold repres5tations 9 ! subject 7 spontane\sly giv51 !n our int]nal intuition w\ld be intellectual4 ,?is consci\sness 9 man requires an int]nal p]ception ( ! manifold repres5tations :i* are previ\sly giv5 9 ! subject2 & ! mann] 9 :i* ^! repres5tations are giv5 9 ! m9d )\t spontaneity1 mu/1 on acc\nt ( ?is diff]5ce 7! want ( spontaneity71 be call$ s5sibility4 ,if ! faculty ( self-consci\sness is to appreh5d :at lies 9 ! m9d1 x mu/ all act t & c 9 ?is way alone produce an intuition ( self4 ,b ! =m ( ?is intuition1 :i* lies 9 ! orig9al con/itution ( ! m9d1 det]m9es1 9 ! repres5tation ( "t1 ! mann] 9 :i* ! manifold repres5tations are to comb9e !mselves 9 ! m9d2 s9ce ! subject intuites itself1 n z x w\ld repres5t itself imm$iately & spontane\sly1 b accord+ to ! mann] 9 :i* ! m9d is int]nally affect$1 consequ5tly1 z x appe>s1 & n z x is4 ,,iii4 ,:5 we say t ! intuition ( ext]nal objects1 & also ! self-intuition ( ! subject1 repres5t bo?1 objects & subject1 9 space & "t1 z !y affect our s5ses1 t is1 z !y appe>--?is is by no means equival5t to ass]t+ t ^! objects are m]e illusory appe>ances4 ,= :5 we speak ( ?+s z ph5om5a1 ! objects1 nay1 ev5 ! prop]ties :i* we ascribe to !m1 are look$ ^u z really giv52 only t1 9 s f> z ?is or t prop]ty dep5ds ^u ! mode ( intuition ( ! subject1 9 ! relation ( ! giv5 object to ! subject1 ! object z ph5om5on is to be di/+ui%$ f ! object z a ?+ 9 itself4 ,?us ,i d n say t bodies seem or appe> to be ext]nal to me1 or t my s\l seems m]ely to be giv5 9 my self-consci\sness1 al?\gh ,i ma9ta9 t ! prop]ties ( space & "t1 9 con=mity to :i* ,i set bo?1 z ! condition ( _! exi/5ce1 abide 9 my mode ( intuition1 & n 9 ! objects 9 !mselves4 ,x w\ld be my own fault1 if out ( t :i* ,i %\ld reckon z ph5om5on1 ,i made m]e illusory appe>ance4#ab ,b ?is w n happ51 because ( our pr9ciple ( ! ideality ( all s5su\s intuitions4 ,on ! contr>y1 if we ascribe objective reality to ^! =ms ( repres5tation1 x becomes impossible to avoid *ang+ ev]y?+ into m]e appe>ance4 ,= if we reg>d space & "t z prop]ties1 :i* mu/ be f\nd 9 objects z ?+s 9 !mselves1 z s9e quibus non ( ! possibility ( _! exi/5ce1 & reflect on ! absurdities 9 :i* we !n f9d ourselves involv$1 inasmu* z we are compell$ to admit ! exi/5ce ( two inf9ite ?+s1 :i* are nev]!less n sub/ances1 nor any?+ really inh]+ 9 sub/ances1 nay1 to admit t !y are ! necess>y conditions ( ! exi/5ce ( all ?+s1 & moreov]1 t !y mu/ cont9ue to exi/1 al?\gh all exi/+ ?+s 7 annihilat$--we _c blame ! good ,b]keley = degrad+ bodies to m]e illusory appe>ances4 ,nay1 ev5 our own exi/5ce1 :i* w\ld 9 ?is case dep5d ^u ! self-exi/5t reality ( su* a m]e non5tity z "t1 w\ld necess>ily be *ang$ ) x into m]e appe>ance--an absurdity :i* no "o has z yet be5 guilty (4 #ab ,! pr$icates ( ! ph5om5on c be affix$ to ! object itself 9 relation to our s5su\s faculty2 = example1 ! r$ col\r or ! p]fume to ! rose4 ,b 7illusory7 appe>ance nev] c be attribut$ z a pr$icate to an object1 = ?is v reason1 t x attributes to ?is object 9 itself t :i* belongs to x only 9 relation to our s5su\s faculty1 or to ! subject 9 g5]al1 e4g41 ! two h&les :i* 7 =m]ly ascrib$ to ,saturn4 ,t :i* is nev] to be f\nd 9 ! object itself1 b always 9 ! relation ( ! object to ! subject1 & :i* moreov] is insep>able f our repres5tation ( ! object1 we d5om9ate ph5om5on4 ,?us ! pr$icates ( space & "t are rightly attribut$ to objects ( ! s5ses z su*1 & 9 ?is !re is no illusion4 ,on ! contr>y1 if ,i ascribe r$ness ( ! rose z a ?+ 9 itself1 or to ,saturn 8 h&les1 or ext5sion to all ext]nal objects1 consid]$ z ?+s 9 !mselves1 )\t reg>d+ ! det]m9ate relation ( ^! objects to ! subject1 & )\t limit+ my judgem5t to t relation--!n1 & !n only1 arises illusion4 ,,iv4 ,9 natural !ology1 :]e we ?9k ( an object--,god--:i* nev] c be an object ( intuition to u1 & ev5 to himself c nev] be an object ( s5su\s intuition1 we c>efully avoid attribut+ to 8 intuition ! conditions ( space & "t--& intuition all 8 cognition mu/ be1 & n ?\ght1 :i* always includes limitation4 ,b ) :at "r c we d ?is if we make !m =ms ( objects z ?+s 9 !mselves1 & su*1 moreov]1 z w\ld cont9ue to exi/ z priori conditions ( ! exi/5ce ( ?+s1 ev5 ?\gh ! ?+s !mselves 7 annihilat$8 ,= z conditions ( all exi/5ce 9 g5]al1 space & "t mu/ be conditions ( ! exi/5ce ( ! ,supreme ,be+ also4 ,b if we d n ?us make !m objective =ms ( all ?+s1 !re is no o!r way left ?an to make !m subjective =ms ( our mode ( intuition--ext]nal & int]nal2 :i* is call$ s5su\s1 because x is n primitive1 t is1 is n su* z gives 9 itself ! exi/5ce ( ! object ( ! intuition 7a mode ( intuition :i*1 s f> z we c judge1 c belong only to ! ,creator71 b is dep5d5t on ! exi/5ce ( ! object1 is possible1 !re=e1 only on condition t ! repres5tative faculty ( ! subject is affect$ by ! object4 ,x is1 moreov]1 n necess>y t we %\ld limit ! mode ( intuition 9 space & "t to ! s5su\s faculty ( man4 ,x may well be t all f9ite ?9k+ be+s mu/ necess>ily 9 ?is respect agree ) man 7?\gh z to ?is we _c decide71 b s5sibility does n on acc\nt ( ?is univ]sality cease to be s5sibility1 = ?is v reason1 t x is a d$uc$ 7intuitus d]ivativus71 & n an orig9al 7intuitus orig9>ius71 consequ5tly n an intellectual intuition1 & ?is intuition1 z su*1 = reasons above m5tion$1 seems to belong solely to ! ,supreme ,be+1 b nev] to a be+ dep5d5t1 quoad its exi/5ce1 z well z its intuition 7:i* its exi/5ce det]m9es & limits relatively to giv5 objects74 ,?is latt] rem>k1 h[ev]1 mu/ be tak5 only z an illu/ration1 & n z any pro( ( ! tru? ( our /hetical !ory4 #aj4 ,conclusion ( ! ,transc5d5tal /hetic4 ,we h n[ completely be=e u "o "p ( ! solution ( ! gr& g5]al problem ( transc5d5tal philosophy1 namely1 ! "q3 8,h[ are syn!tical propositions priori possible80 ,t is to say1 we h %[n t we are 9 possession ( pure priori intuitions1 namely1 space & "t1 9 :i* we f9d1 :5 9 a judgem5t priori we pass out beyond ! giv5 conception1 some?+ :i* is n discov]able 9 t conception1 b is c]ta9ly f\nd priori 9 ! intuition :i* corresponds to ! conception1 & c be unit$ syn!tically ) x4 ,b ! judgem5ts :i* ^! pure intuitions enable u to make1 nev] rea* f>!r ?an to objects ( ! s5ses1 & are valid only = objects ( possible exp]i5ce4 ,second ,"p--,,transc5d5tal ,,logic ,,introduction4 ,idea ( a ,transc5d5tal ,logic4 ,i4 ,( ,logic 9 ,g5]al4 ,our k spr+s f two ma9 s\rces 9 ! m9d1 fir/ ( :i* is ! faculty or p[] ( receiv+ repres5tations 7receptivity = impressions72 ! second is ! p[] ( cogniz+ by means ( ^! repres5tations 7spontaneity 9 ! production ( conceptions74 ,?r\gh ! fir/ an object is giv5 to u2 ?r\gh ! second1 x is1 9 relation to ! repres5tation 7:i* is a m]e det]m9ation ( ! m9d71 ?\ght4 ,intuition & conceptions con/itute1 !re=e1 ! elem5ts ( all our k1 s t nei!r conceptions )\t an intuition 9 "s way correspond+ to !m1 nor intuition )\t conceptions1 c af=d u a cognition4 ,bo? are ei!r pure or empirical4 ,!y are empirical1 :5 s5sation 7:i* presupposes ! actual pres5ce ( ! object7 is conta9$ 9 !m2 & pure1 :5 no s5sation is mix$ ) ! repres5tation4 ,s5sations we may call ! matt] ( s5su\s cognition4 ,pure intuition consequ5tly conta9s m]ely ! =m "u :i* some?+ is intuit$1 & pure conception only ! =m ( ! ?\ght ( an object4 ,only pure intuitions & pure conceptions are possible priori2 ! empirical only po/]iori4 ,we apply ! t]m s5sibility to ! receptivity ( ! m9d = impressions1 9 s f> z x is 9 "s way affect$2 &1 on ! o!r h&1 we call ! faculty ( spontane\sly produc+ repres5tations1 or ! spontaneity ( cognition1 und]/&+4 ,our nature is s con/itut$ t intuition ) u nev] c be o!r ?an s5su\s1 t is1 x conta9s only ! mode 9 :i* we are affect$ by objects4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ! faculty ( ?9k+ ! object ( s5su\s intuition is ! und]/&+4 ,nei!r ( ^! faculties has a pref]5ce ov] ! o!r4 ,)\t ! s5su\s faculty no object w\ld be giv5 to u1 & )\t ! und]/&+ no object w\ld be ?\ght4 ,?\ghts )\t cont5t are void2 intuitions )\t conceptions1 bl9d4 ,h5ce x is z necess>y = ! m9d to make its conceptions s5su\s 7t is1 to jo9 to !m ! object 9 intuition71 z to make its intuitions intelligible 7t is1 to br+ !m "u conceptions74 ,nei!r ( ^! faculties c ex*ange its prop] function4 ,und]/&+ _c intuite1 & ! s5su\s faculty _c ?9k4 ,9 no o!r way ?an f ! unit$ op]ation ( bo?1 c k arise4 ,b no "o ought1 on ?is acc\nt1 to ov]look ! diff]5ce ( ! elem5ts contribut$ by ea*2 we h r great reason c>efully to sep>ate & di/+ui% !m4 ,we !re=e di/+ui% ! sci5ce ( ! laws ( s5sibility1 t is1 /hetic1 f ! sci5ce ( ! laws ( ! und]/&+1 t is1 logic4 ,n[1 logic 9 its turn may be consid]$ z tw(old--namely1 z logic ( ! g5]al1 or ( ! p>ticul> use ( ! und]/&+4 ,! fir/ conta9s ! absolutely necess>y laws ( ?\ght1 )\t :i* no use :atsoev] ( ! und]/&+ is possible1 & gives laws !re=e to ! und]/&+1 )\t reg>d to ! diff]5ce ( objects on :i* x may be employ$4 ,! logic ( ! p>ticul> use ( ! und]/&+ conta9s ! laws ( correct ?9k+ ^u a p>ticul> class ( objects4 ,! =m] may be call$ elem5tal logic--! latt]1 ! organon ( ?is or t p>ticul> sci5ce4 ,! latt] is = ! mo/ "p employ$ 9 ! s*ools1 z a propdeutic to ! sci5ces1 al?\gh1 inde$1 accord+ to ! c\rse ( human reason1 x is ! la/ ?+ we arrive at1 :5 ! sci5ce has be5 already matur$1 & ne$s only ! f9i%+ t\*es t[>ds its correction & completion2 = our k ( ! objects ( our attempt$ sci5ce mu/ be tol]ably ext5sive & complete be=e we c indicate ! laws by :i* a sci5ce ( ^! objects c be e/abli%$4 ,g5]al logic is aga9 ei!r pure or appli$4 ,9 ! =m]1 we ab/ract all ! empirical conditions "u :i* ! und]/&+ is ex]cis$2 = example1 ! influ5ce ( ! s5ses1 ! play ( ! fantasy or imag9ation1 ! laws ( ! memory1 ! =ce ( habit1 ( incl9ation1 etc41 consequ5tly also1 ! s\rces ( prejudice--9 a ^w1 we ab/ract all causes f :i* p>ticul> cognitions arise1 because ^! causes reg>d ! und]/&+ "u c]ta9 circum/ances ( its application1 &1 to ! k ( !m exp]i5ce is requir$4 ,pure g5]al logic has to d1 !re=e1 m]ely ) pure priori pr9ciples1 & is a canon ( und]/&+ & reason1 b only 9 respect ( ! =mal "p ( _! use1 be ! cont5t :at x may1 empirical or transc5d5tal4 ,g5]al logic is call$ appli$1 :5 x is direct$ to ! laws ( ! use ( ! und]/&+1 "u ! subjective empirical conditions :i* psy*ology tea*es u4 ,x has !re=e empirical pr9ciples1 al?\gh1 at ! same "t1 x is 9 s f> g5]al1 t x applies to ! ex]cise ( ! und]/&+1 )\t reg>d to ! diff]5ce ( objects4 ,on ?is acc\nt1 moreov]1 x is nei!r a canon ( ! und]/&+ 9 g5]al1 nor an organon ( a p>ticul> sci5ce1 b m]ely a ca?>tic ( ! human und]/&+4 ,9 g5]al logic1 !re=e1 t "p :i* con/itutes pure logic mu/ be c>efully di/+ui%$ f t :i* con/itutes appli$ 7?\gh /ill g5]al7 logic4 ,! =m] alone is prop]ly sci5ce1 al?\gh %ort & dry1 z ! me?odical exposition ( an elem5tal doctr9e ( ! und]/&+ ought to be4 ,9 ?is1 !re=e1 logicians mu/ always be> 9 m9d two rules3 #a4 ,z g5]al logic1 x makes ab/raction ( all cont5t ( ! cognition ( ! und]/&+1 & ( ! diff]5ce ( objects1 & has to d ) no?+ b ! m]e =m ( ?\ght4 #b4 ,z pure logic1 x has no empirical pr9ciples1 & consequ5tly draws no?+ 7contr>y to ! common p]suasion7 f psy*ology1 :i* !re=e has no influ5ce on ! canon ( ! und]/&+4 ,x is a demon/rat$ doctr9e1 & ev]y?+ 9 x mu/ be c]ta9 completely priori4 ,:at ,i call$ appli$ logic 7contr>y to ! common acceptation ( ?is t]m1 accord+ to :i* x %\ld conta9 c]ta9 ex]cises = ! s*ol>1 = :i* pure logic gives ! rules71 is a repres5tation ( ! und]/&+1 & ( ! rules ( its necess>y employm5t 9 concreto1 t is to say1 "u ! accid5tal conditions ( ! subject1 :i* may ei!r h9d] or promote ?is employm5t1 & :i* are all giv5 only empirically4 ,?us appli$ logic treats ( att5tion1 its imp$im5ts & consequ5ces1 ( ! orig9 ( error1 ( ! /ate ( d\bt1 hesitation1 conviction1 etc41 & to x is relat$ pure g5]al logic 9 ! same way t pure morality1 :i* conta9s only ! necess>y moral laws ( a free w1 is relat$ to practical e?ics1 :i* consid]s ^! laws "u all ! imp$im5ts ( feel+s1 incl9ations1 & passions to :i* m5 are m or less subject$1 & :i* nev] c furni% u ) a true & demon/rat$ sci5ce1 because x1 z well z appli$ logic1 requires empirical & psy*ological pr9ciples4 ,,ii4 ,( ,transc5d5tal ,logic4 ,g5]al logic1 z we h se51 makes ab/raction ( all cont5t ( cognition1 t is1 ( all relation ( cognition to its object1 & reg>ds only ! logical =m 9 ! relation ( cognitions to ea* o!r1 t is1 ! =m ( ?\ght 9 g5]al4 ,b z we h bo? pure & empirical intuitions 7z transc5d5tal /hetic proves71 9 l mann] a di/9ction might be drawn betwe5 pure & empirical ?\ght 7( objects74 ,9 ?is case1 !re w\ld exi/ a k9d ( logic1 9 :i* we %\ld n make ab/raction ( all cont5t ( cognition2 = or logic :i* %\ld comprise m]ely ! laws ( pure ?\ght 7( an object71 w\ld ( c\rse exclude all ^? cognitions :i* 7 ( empirical cont5t4 ,?is k9d ( logic w\ld also exam9e ! orig9 ( our cognitions ( objects1 s f> z t orig9 _c be ascrib$ to ! objects !mselves2 :ile1 on ! contr>y1 g5]al logic has no?+ to d ) ! orig9 ( our cognitions1 b contemplates our repres5tations1 be !y giv5 primitively priori 9 ourselves1 or be !y only ( empirical orig91 solely accord+ to ! laws :i* ! und]/&+ obs]ves 9 employ+ !m 9 ! process ( ?\ght1 9 relation to ea* o!r4 ,consequ5tly1 g5]al logic treats ( ! =m ( ! und]/&+ only1 :i* c be appli$ to repres5tations1 f :atev] s\rce !y may h aris54 ,& "h ,i %all make a rem>k1 :i* ! read] mu/ be> well 9 m9d 9 ! c\rse ( ! foll[+ consid]ations1 to wit1 t n e cognition priori1 b only ^? ?r\gh :i* we cognize t & h[ c]ta9 repres5tations 7intuitions or conceptions7 are appli$ or are possible only priori2 t is to say1 ! priori possibility ( cognition & ! priori use ( x are transc5d5tal4 ,!re=e nei!r is space1 nor any priori geometrical det]m9ation ( space1 a transc5d5tal ,repres5tation1 b only ! k t su* a repres5tation is n ( empirical orig91 & ! possibility ( its relat+ to objects ( exp]i5ce1 al?\gh itself priori1 c be call$ transc5d5tal4 ,s also1 ! application ( space to objects 9 g5]al w\ld be transc5d5tal2 b if x be limit$ to objects ( s5se x is empirical4 ,?us1 ! di/9ction ( ! transc5d5tal & empirical belongs only to ! critique ( cognitions1 & does n conc]n ! relation ( ^! to _! object4 ,accord+ly1 9 ! expectation t !re may p]haps be conceptions :i* relate priori to objects1 n z pure or s5su\s intuitions1 b m]ely z acts ( pure ?\ght 7:i* are !re=e conceptions1 b nei!r ( empirical nor /hetical orig97--9 ?is expectation1 ,i say1 we =m to ourselves1 by anticipation1 ! idea ( a sci5ce ( pure und]/&+ & rational cognition1 by means ( :i* we may cogitate objects entirely priori4 ,a sci5ce ( ?is k9d1 :i* %\ld det]m9e ! orig91 ! ext5t1 & ! objective validity ( su* cognitions1 mu/ be call$ transc5d5tal logic1 because x has n1 l g5]al logic1 to d ) ! laws ( und]/&+ & reason 9 relation to empirical z well z pure rational cognitions )\t di/9ction1 b conc]ns itself ) ^! only 9 an priori relation to objects4 ,,iii4 ,( ! ,division ( ,g5]al ,logic into ,analytic & ,dialectic4 ,! old "q ) :i* p s\ght to pu% logicians into a corn]1 s t !y mu/ ei!r h rec\rse to pitiful sophisms or confess _! ignorance1 & consequ5tly ! vanity ( _! :ole art1 is ?is3 8,:at is tru?80 ,! def9ition ( ! ^w tru?1 to wit1 8! accordance ( ! cognition ) its object10 is presuppos$ 9 ! "q2 b we desire to be told1 9 ! answ] to x1 :at is ! univ]sal & secure crit]ion ( ! tru? ( e cognition4 ,to "k :at que/ions we may reasonably propose is 9 itself a /rong evid5ce ( sagacity & intellig5ce4 ,= if a "q be 9 itself absurd & unsusceptible ( a rational answ]1 x is att5d$ ) ! dang]--n to m5tion ! %ame t falls ^u ! p]son :o proposes x--( s$uc+ ! ungu>d$ li/5] into mak+ absurd answ]s1 & we are pres5t$ ) ! ridicul\s spectacle ( "o 7z ! anci5ts said7 8milk+ ! he-goat1 & ! o!r hold+ a sieve40 ,if tru? consi/s 9 ! accordance ( a cognition ) its object1 ?is object mu/ be1 ipso facto1 di/+ui%$ f all o!rs2 = a cognition is false if x does n accord ) ! object to :i* x relates1 al?\gh x conta9s some?+ :i* may be affirm$ ( o!r objects4 ,n[ an univ]sal crit]ion ( tru? w\ld be t :i* is valid = all cognitions1 )\t di/9ction ( _! objects4 ,b x is evid5t t s9ce1 9 ! case ( su* a crit]ion1 we make ab/raction ( all ! cont5t ( a cognition 7t is1 ( all relation to its object71 & tru? relates precisely to ?is cont5t1 x mu/ be utt]ly absurd to ask = a m>k ( ! tru? ( ?is cont5t ( cognition2 & t1 accord+ly1 a suffici5t1 & at ! same "t univ]sal1 te/ ( tru? _c possibly be f\nd4 ,z we h already t]m$ ! cont5t ( a cognition its matt]1 we %all say3 8,( ! tru? ( our cognitions 9 respect ( _! matt]1 no univ]sal te/ c be dem&$1 because su* a dem& is self-contradictory40 ,on ! o!r h&1 ) reg>d to our cognition 9 respect ( its m]e =m 7exclud+ all cont5t71 x is equally manife/ t logic1 9 s f> z x exhibits ! univ]sal & necess>y laws ( ! und]/&+1 mu/ 9 ^! v laws pres5t u ) crit]ia ( tru?4 ,:atev] contradicts ^! rules is false1 because !reby ! und]/&+ is made to contradict its own univ]sal laws ( ?\ght2 t is1 to contradict itself4 ,^! crit]ia1 h[ev]1 apply solely to ! =m ( tru?1 t is1 ( ?\ght 9 g5]al1 & 9 s f> !y are p]fectly accurate1 yet n suffici5t4 ,= al?\gh a cognition may be p]fectly accurate z to logical =m1 t is1 n self-contradictory1 x is not)/&+ q possible t x may n /& 9 agreem5t ) its object4 ,consequ5tly1 ! m]ely logical crit]ion ( tru?1 namely1 ! accordance ( a cognition ) ! univ]sal & =mal laws ( und]/&+ & reason1 is no?+ m ?an ! conditio s9e qua non1 or negative condition ( all tru?4 ,f>!r ?an ?is logic _c g1 & ! error :i* dep5ds n on ! =m1 b on ! cont5t ( ! cognition1 x has no te/ to discov]4 ,g5]al logic1 !n1 resolves ! :ole =mal bus9ess ( und]/&+ & reason into its elem5ts1 & exhibits !m z pr9ciples ( all logical judg+ ( our cognitions4 ,?is "p ( logic may1 !re=e1 be call$ analytic1 & is at lea/ ! negative te/ ( tru?1 because all cognitions mu/ fir/ ( an be e/imat$ & tri$ accord+ to ^! laws be=e we proce$ to inve/igate !m 9 respect ( _! cont5t1 9 ord] to discov] :e!r !y conta9 positive tru? 9 reg>d to _! object4 ,because1 h[ev]1 ! m]e =m ( a cognition1 accurately z x may accord ) logical laws1 is insuffici5t to supply u ) mat]ial 7objective7 tru?1 no "o1 by means ( logic alone1 c v5ture to pr$icate any?+ ( or decide conc]n+ objects1 unless he has obta9$1 indep5d5tly ( logic1 well-gr\nd$ in=mation ab\t !m1 9 ord] aft]w>ds to exam9e1 accord+ to logical laws1 into ! use & connection1 9 a coh]+ :ole1 ( t in=mation1 or1 :at is /ill bett]1 m]ely to te/ x by !m4 ,not)/&+1 !re lies s s$uctive a *>m 9 ! possession ( a speci\s art l ?is--an art :i* gives to all our cognitions ! =m ( ! und]/&+1 al?\gh ) respect to ! cont5t !re( we may be sadly defici5t--t g5]al logic1 :i* is m]ely a canon ( judgem5t1 has be5 employ$ z an organon = ! actual production1 or r = ! semblance ( production1 ( objective ass]tions1 & has ?us be5 grossly misappli$4 ,n[ g5]al logic1 9 its assum$ "* ( organon1 is call$ dialectic4 ,diff]5t z are ! significations 9 :i* ! anci5ts us$ ?is t]m = a sci5ce or an art1 we may safely inf]1 f _! actual employm5t ( x1 t ) !m x 0 no?+ else ?an a logic ( illusion--a sophi/ical art = giv+ ignorance1 nay1 ev5 int5tional sophi/ries1 ! col\r+ ( tru?1 9 :i* ! ?or\ghness ( proc$ure :i* logic requires 0 imitat$1 & _! topic employ$ to cloak ! empty pret5sions4 ,n[ x may be tak5 z a safe & useful w>n+1 t g5]al logic1 consid]$ z an organon1 mu/ always be a logic ( illusion1 t is1 be dialectical1 =1 z x tea*es u no?+ :atev] respect+ ! cont5t ( our cognitions1 b m]ely ! =mal conditions ( _! accordance ) ! und]/&+1 :i* d n relate to & are q indiff]5t 9 respect ( objects1 any attempt to employ x z an in/rum5t 7organon7 9 ord] to ext5d & enl>ge ! range ( our k mu/ end 9 m]e prat+2 any "o be+ able to ma9ta9 or oppose1 ) "s appe>ance ( tru?1 any s+le ass]tion :atev]4 ,su* in/ruction is q unbecom+ ! dignity ( philosophy4 ,= ^! reasons we h *os5 to d5om9ate ?is "p ( logic dialectic1 9 ! s5se ( a critique ( dialectical illusion1 & we wi% ! t]m to be s und]/ood 9 ?is place4 ,,iv4 ,( ! ,division ( ,transc5d5tal ,logic into ,transc5d5tal ,analytic & ,dialectic4 ,9 transc5d5tal logic we isolate ! und]/&+ 7z 9 transc5d5tal /hetic ! s5sibility7 & select f our cognition m]ely t "p ( ?\ght :i* has its orig9 9 ! und]/&+ alone4 ,! ex]cise ( ?is pure cognition1 h[ev]1 dep5ds ^u ?is z its condition1 t objects to :i* x may be appli$ be giv5 to u 9 intuition1 = )\t intuition ! :ole ( our cognition is )\t objects1 & is !re=e q void4 ,t "p ( transc5d5tal logic1 !n1 :i* treats ( ! elem5ts ( pure cognition ( ! und]/&+1 & ( ! pr9ciples )\t :i* no object at all c be ?\ght1 is transc5d5tal analytic1 & at ! same "t a logic ( tru?4 ,= no cognition c contradict x1 )\t los+ at ! same "t all cont5t1 t is1 los+ all ref]5ce to an object1 & !re=e all tru?4 ,b because we are v easily s$uc$ into employ+ ^! pure cognitions & pr9ciples ( ! und]/&+ by !mselves1 & t ev5 beyond ! b\nd>ies ( exp]i5ce1 :i* yet is ! only s\rce :5ce we c obta9 matt] 7objects7 on :i* ^? pure conceptions may be employ$--und]/&+ runs ! risk ( mak+1 by means ( empty sophisms1 a mat]ial & objective use ( ! m]e =mal pr9ciples ( ! pure und]/&+1 & ( pass+ judgem5ts on objects )\t di/9ction--objects :i* are n giv5 to u1 nay1 p]haps _c be giv5 to u 9 any way4 ,n[1 z x ought prop]ly to be only a canon = judg+ ( ! empirical use ( ! und]/&+1 ?is k9d ( logic is misus$ :5 we seek to employ x z an organon ( ! univ]sal & unlimit$ ex]cise ( ! und]/&+1 & attempt ) ! pure und]/&+ alone to judge syn!tically1 affirm1 & det]m9e respect+ objects 9 g5]al4 ,9 ?is case ! ex]cise ( ! pure und]/&+ becomes dialectical4 ,! second "p ( our transc5d5tal logic mu/ !re=e be a critique ( dialectical illusion1 & ?is critique we %all t]m transc5d5tal dialectic--n mean+ x z an art ( produc+ dogmatically su* illusion 7an art :i* is un=tunately too curr5t among ! practition]s ( metaphysical juggl+71 b z a critique ( und]/&+ & reason 9 reg>d to _! hyp]physical use4 ,?is critique w expose ! gr\ndless nature ( ! pret5sions ( ^! two faculties1 & invalidate _! claims to ! discov]y & enl>gem5t ( our cognitions m]ely by means ( transc5d5tal pr9ciples1 & %[ t ! prop] employm5t ( ^! faculties is to te/ ! judgem5ts made by ! pure und]/&+1 & to gu>d x f sophi/ical delusion4 ,,fir/ ,,division4 ,,transc5d5tal ,,logic4 ,,transc5d5tal ,,analytic4 #a ,transc5d5tal analytic is ! dissection ( ! :ole ( our priori k into ! elem5ts ( ! pure cognition ( ! und]/&+4 ,9 ord] to effect our purpose1 x is necess>y3 7#a7 ,t ! conceptions be pure & n empirical2 7#b7 ,t !y belong n to intuition & s5sibility1 b to ?\ght & und]/&+2 7#c7 ,t !y be elem5t>y conceptions1 & z su*1 q diff]5t f d$uc$ or comp\nd conceptions2 7#d7 ,t our table ( ^! elem5t>y conceptions be complete1 & fill up ! :ole sph]e ( ! pure und]/&+4 ,n[ ?is complet5ess ( a sci5ce _c be accept$ ) confid5ce on ! gu>antee ( a m]e e/imate ( its exi/5ce 9 an aggregate =m$ only by means ( repeat$ exp]im5ts & attempts4 ,! complet5ess :i* we require is possible only by means ( an idea ( ! totality ( ! priori cognition ( ! und]/&+1 & ?r\gh ! !reby det]m9$ division ( ! conceptions :i* =m ! said :ole2 consequ5tly1 only by means ( _! connection 9 a sy/em4 ,pure und]/&+ di/+ui%es itself n m]ely f ev]y?+ empirical1 b also completely f all s5sibility4 ,x is a unity self-subsi/5t1 self-suffici5t1 & n to be enl>g$ by any additions f )\t4 ,h5ce ! sum ( its cognition con/itutes a sy/em to be det]m9$ by & compris$ "u an idea2 & ! complet5ess & articulation ( ?is sy/em c at ! same "t s]ve z a te/ ( ! correctness & g5u95ess ( all ! p>ts ( cognition t belong to x4 ,! :ole ( ?is "p ( transc5d5tal logic consi/s ( two books1 ( :i* ! "o conta9s ! conceptions1 & ! o!r ! pr9ciples ( pure und]/&+4 ,,book ,i4 ,analytic ( ,conceptions4 #b ,by ! t]m ,analytic ( ,conceptions1 ,i d n und]/& ! analysis ( ^!1 or ! usual process 9 philosophical inve/igations ( dissect+ ! conceptions :i* pres5t !mselves1 accord+ to _! cont5t1 & s mak+ !m cle>2 b ,i mean ! hi!rto little attempt$ dissection ( ! faculty ( und]/&+ itself1 9 ord] to inve/igate ! possibility ( conceptions priori1 by look+ = !m 9 ! und]/&+ alone1 z _! bir?place1 & analys+ ! pure use ( ?is faculty4 ,= ?is is ! prop] duty ( a transc5d5tal philosophy2 :at rema9s is ! logical treatm5t ( ! conceptions 9 philosophy 9 g5]al4 ,we %all !re=e foll[ up ! pure conceptions ev5 to _! g]ms & beg9n+s 9 ! human und]/&+1 9 :i* !y lie1 until !y are develop$ on occasions pres5t$ by exp]i5ce1 &1 fre$ by ! same und]/&+ f ! empirical conditions atta*+ to !m1 are set =? 9 _! unalloy$ purity4 ,*apt] ,i4 ,( ! ,transc5d5tal ,clue to ! ,discov]y ( all ,pure ,conceptions ( ! ,und]/&+ ,introductory #c ,:5 we call into play a faculty ( cognition1 diff]5t conceptions manife/ !mselves accord+ to ! diff]5t circum/ances1 & make kn[n ?is faculty1 & assemble !mselves into a m or less ext5sive collection1 accord+ to ! "t or p5etration t has be5 appli$ to ! consid]ation ( !m4 ,:]e ?is process1 conduct$ z x is me*anically1 s to speak1 w end1 _c be det]m9$ ) c]ta9ty4 ,besides1 ! conceptions :i* we discov] 9 ?is haphaz>d mann] pres5t !mselves by no means 9 ord] & sy/ematic unity1 b are at la/ c\pl$ toge!r only accord+ to resemblances to ea* o!r1 & arrang$ 9 s]ies1 accord+ to ! quantity ( _! cont5t1 f ! simpl] to ! m complex--s]ies :i* are any?+ b sy/ematic1 ?\gh n altoge!r )\t a c]ta9 k9d ( me?od 9 _! con/ruction4 ,transc5d5tal philosophy has ! advantage1 & moreov] ! duty1 ( se>*+ = its conceptions accord+ to a pr9ciple2 because ^! conceptions spr+ pure & unmix$ out ( ! und]/&+ z an absolute unity1 & !re=e mu/ be connect$ ) ea* o!r accord+ to "o conception or idea4 ,a connection ( ?is k9d1 h[ev]1 furni%es u ) a ready prep>$ rule1 by :i* its prop] place may be assign$ to e pure conception ( ! und]/&+1 & ! complet5ess ( ! sy/em ( all be det]m9$ priori--bo? :i* w\ld o!rwise h be5 dep5d5t on m]e *oice or *ance4 ,section ,i4 ,( ! ,logical ,use ( ! ,und]/&+ 9 ,g5]al #d ,! und]/&+ 0 def9$ above only negatively1 z a non-s5su\s faculty ( cognition4 ,n[1 indep5d5tly ( s5sibility1 we _c possibly h any intuition2 consequ5tly1 ! und]/&+ is no faculty ( intuition4 ,b besides intuition !re is no o!r mode ( cognition1 except ?r\gh conceptions2 consequ5tly1 ! cognition ( e1 at lea/ ( e human1 und]/&+ is a cognition ?r\gh conceptions--n intuitive1 b discursive4 ,all intuitions1 z s5su\s1 dep5d on affections2 conceptions1 !re=e1 ^u functions4 ,by ! ^w function ,i und]/& ! unity ( ! act ( arrang+ div]se repres5tations "u "o common repres5tation4 ,conceptions1 !n1 are bas$ on ! spontaneity ( ?\ght1 z s5su\s intuitions are on ! receptivity ( impressions4 ,n[1 ! und]/&+ _c make any o!r use ( ^! conceptions ?an to judge by means ( !m4 ,z no repres5tation1 except an intuition1 relates imm$iately to its object1 a conception nev] relates imm$iately to an object1 b only to "s o!r repres5tation !re(1 be t an intuition or itself a conception4 ,a judgem5t1 !re=e1 is ! m$iate cognition ( an object1 consequ5tly ! repres5tation ( a repres5tation ( x4 ,9 e judgem5t !re is a conception :i* applies to1 & is valid = _m o!r conceptions1 & :i* among ^! compreh5ds also a giv5 repres5tation1 ?is la/ be+ imm$iately connect$ ) an object4 ,= example1 9 ! judgem5t--8,all bodies are divisible10 our conception ( divisible applies to v>i\s o!r conceptions2 among ^!1 h[ev]1 x is "h p>ticul>ly appli$ to ! conception ( body1 & ?is conception ( body relates to c]ta9 ph5om5a :i* occur to u4 ,^! objects1 !re=e1 are m$iately repres5t$ by ! conception ( divisibility4 ,all judgem5ts1 accord+ly1 are functions ( unity 9 our repres5tations1 inasmu* z1 in/ead ( an imm$iate1 a high] repres5tation1 :i* comprises ?is & v>i\s o!rs1 is us$ = our cognition ( ! object1 & !reby _m possible cognitions are collect$ into "o4 ,b we c r$uce all acts ( ! und]/&+ to judgem5ts1 s t und]/&+ may be repres5t$ z ! faculty ( judg+4 ,= x is1 accord+ to :at has be5 said above1 a faculty ( ?\ght4 ,n[ ?\ght is cognition by means ( conceptions4 ,b conceptions1 z pr$icates ( possible judgem5ts1 relate to "s repres5tation ( a yet undet]m9$ object4 ,?us ! conception ( body indicates some?+--= example1 metal--:i* c be cogniz$ by means ( t conception4 ,x is !re=e a conception1 = ! reason alone t o!r repres5tations are conta9$ "u x1 by means ( :i* x c relate to objects4 ,x is !re=e ! pr$icate to a possible judgem5t2 = example3 8,e metal is a body40 ,all ! functions ( ! und]/&+ !re=e c be discov]$1 :5 we c completely exhibit ! functions ( unity 9 judgem5ts4 ,& t ?is may be effect$ v easily1 ! foll[+ section w %[4 ,section ,,ii4 ,( ! ,logical ,function ( ! ,und]/&+ 9 ,judgem5ts #e ,if we ab/ract all ! cont5t ( a judgem5t1 & consid] only ! intellectual =m !re(1 we f9d t ! function ( ?\ght 9 a judgem5t c be br\ght "u f\r heads1 ( :i* ea* conta9s ?ree mom5ta4 ,^! may be conv5i5tly repres5t$ 9 ! foll[+ table3 #a ,quantity ( judgem5ts ,univ]sal ,p>ticul> ,s+ul> #b #c ,quality ,relation ,affirmative ,categorical ,negative ,hypo!tical ,inf9ite ,disjunctive #d ,modality ,problematical ,ass]torical ,apodeictical ,z ?is division appe>s to diff] 9 "s1 ?\gh n ess5tial po9ts1 f ! usual te*nique ( logicians1 ! foll[+ obs]vations1 = ! prev5tion ( o!rwise possible misund]/&+1 w n be )\t _! use4 #a4 ,logicians say1 ) ju/ice1 t 9 ! use ( judgem5ts 9 syllogisms1 s+ul> judgem5ts may be treat$ l univ]sal ones4 ,=1 precisely because a s+ul> judgem5t has no ext5t at all1 its pr$icate _c ref] to a "p ( t :i* is conta9$ 9 ! conception ( ! subject & be exclud$ f ! re/4 ,! pr$icate is valid = ! :ole conception j z if x 7 a g5]al conception1 & _h ext5t1 to ! :ole ( :i* ! pr$icate appli$4 ,on ! o!r h&1 let u comp>e a s+ul> ) a g5]al judgem5t1 m]ely z a cognition1 9 reg>d to quantity4 ,! s+ul> judgem5t relates to ! g5]al "o1 z unity to inf9ity1 & is !re=e 9 itself ess5tially diff]5t4 ,?us1 if we e/imate a s+ul> judgem5t 7judicium s+ul>e7 n m]ely accord+ to its intr9sic validity z a judgem5t1 b also z a cognition g5]ally1 accord+ to its quantity 9 comp>ison ) t ( o!r cognitions1 x is !n entirely diff]5t f a g5]al judgem5t 7judicium commune71 & 9 a complete table ( ! mom5ta ( ?\ght des]ves a sep>ate place--?\gh1 inde$1 ?is w\ld n be necess>y 9 a logic limit$ m]ely to ! consid]ation ( ! use ( judgem5ts 9 ref]5ce to ea* o!r4 #b4 ,9 l mann]1 9 transc5d5tal logic1 inf9ite mu/ be di/+ui%$ f affirmative judgem5ts1 al?\gh 9 g5]al logic !y are rightly en\gh class$ "u affirmative4 ,g5]al logic ab/racts all cont5t ( ! pr$icate 7?\gh x be negative71 & only consid]s :e!r ! said pr$icate be affirm$ or d5i$ ( ! subject4 ,b transc5d5tal logic consid]s also ! wor? or cont5t ( ?is logical affirmation--an affirmation by means ( a m]ely negative pr$icate1 & inquires h[ mu* ! sum total ( our cognition ga9s by ?is affirmation4 ,= example1 if ,i say ( ! s\l1 8,x is n mortal0--by ?is negative judgem5t ,i %\ld at lea/ w>d (f error4 ,n[1 by ! proposition1 8,! s\l is n mortal10 ,i h1 9 respect ( ! logical =m1 really affirm$1 inasmu* z ,i !reby place ! s\l 9 ! unlimit$ sph]e ( immortal be+s4 ,n[1 because ( ! :ole sph]e ( possible exi/5ces1 ! mortal occupies "o "p1 & ! immortal ! o!r1 nei!r m nor less is affirm$ by ! proposition ?an t ! s\l is "o among ! inf9ite multitude ( ?+s :i* rema9 ov]1 :5 ,i take away ! :ole mortal "p4 ,b by ?is proce$+ we accompli% only ?is mu*1 t ! inf9ite sph]e ( all possible exi/5ces is 9 s f> limit$ t ! mortal is exclud$ f x1 & ! s\l is plac$ 9 ! rema9+ "p ( ! ext5t ( ?is sph]e4 ,b ?is "p rema9s1 not)/&+ ?is exception1 inf9ite1 & m & m p>ts may be tak5 away f ! :ole sph]e1 )\t 9 ! slighte/ degree !reby augm5t+ or affirmatively det]m9+ our conception ( ! s\l4 ,^! judgem5ts1 !re=e1 inf9ite 9 respect ( _! logical ext5t1 are1 9 respect ( ! cont5t ( _! cognition1 m]ely limitative2 & are consequ5tly entitl$ to a place 9 our transc5d5tal table ( all ! mom5ta ( ?\ght 9 judgem5ts1 because ! function ( ! und]/&+ ex]cis$ by !m may p]haps be ( importance 9 ! field ( its pure priori cognition4 #c4 ,all relations ( ?\ght 9 judgem5ts are ^? 7a7 ( ! pr$icate to ! subject2 7b7 ( ! pr9ciple to its consequ5ce2 7c7 ( ! divid$ cognition & all ! memb]s ( ! division to ea* o!r4 ,9 ! fir/ ( ^! ?ree classes1 we consid] only two conceptions2 9 ! second1 two judgem5ts2 9 ! ?ird1 sev]al judgem5ts 9 relation to ea* o!r4 ,! hypo!tical proposition1 8,if p]fect ju/ice exi/s1 ! ob/9ately wick$ are puni%$10 conta9s prop]ly ! relation to ea* o!r ( two propositions1 namely1 8,p]fect ju/ice exi/s10 & 8,! ob/9ately wick$ are puni%$40 ,:e!r ^! propositions are 9 !mselves true is a "q n "h decid$4 ,no?+ is cogitat$ by means ( ?is judgem5t except a c]ta9 consequ5ce4 ,f9ally1 ! disjunctive judgem5t conta9s a relation ( two or m propositions to ea* o!r--a relation n ( consequ5ce1 b ( logical opposition1 9 s f> z ! sph]e ( ! "o proposition excludes t ( ! o!r4 ,b x conta9s at ! same "t a relation ( community1 9 s f> z all ! propositions tak5 toge!r fill up ! sph]e ( ! cognition4 ,! disjunctive judgem5t conta9s1 !re=e1 ! relation ( ! p>ts ( ! :ole sph]e ( a cognition1 s9ce ! sph]e ( ea* "p is a complem5tal "p ( ! sph]e ( ! o!r1 ea* contribut+ to =m ! sum total ( ! divid$ cognition4 ,take1 = example1 ! proposition1 8,! _w exi/s ei!r ?r\gh bl9d *ance1 or ?r\gh int]nal necessity1 or ?r\gh an ext]nal cause40 ,ea* ( ^! propositions embraces a "p ( ! sph]e ( our possible cognition z to ! exi/5ce ( a _w2 all ( !m tak5 toge!r1 ! :ole sph]e4 ,to take ! cognition out ( "o ( ^! sph]es1 is equival5t to plac+ x 9 "o ( ! o!rs2 &1 on ! o!r h&1 to place x 9 "o sph]e is equival5t to tak+ x out ( ! re/4 ,!re is1 !re=e1 9 a disjunctive judgem5t a c]ta9 community ( cognitions1 :i* consi/s 9 ?is1 t !y mutually exclude ea* o!r1 yet !reby det]m9e1 z a :ole1 ! true cognition1 inasmu* z1 tak5 toge!r1 !y make up ! complete cont5t ( a p>ticul> giv5 cognition4 ,& ?is is all t ,i f9d necess>y1 = ! sake ( :at foll[s1 to rem>k 9 ?is place4 #d4 ,! modality ( judgem5ts is a q peculi> function1 ) ?is di/+ui%+ *>act]i/ic1 t x contributes no?+ to ! cont5t ( a judgem5t 7= besides quantity1 quality1 & relation1 !re is no?+ m t con/itutes ! cont5t ( a judgem5t71 b conc]ns itself only ) ! value ( ! copula 9 relation to ?\ght 9 g5]al4 ,problematical judgem5ts are ^? 9 :i* ! affirmation or negation is accept$ z m]ely possible 7ad libitum74 ,9 ! ass]torical1 we reg>d ! proposition z real 7true72 9 ! apodeictical1 we look on x z necess>y4#ac ,?us ! two judgem5ts 7antec$5s et consequ5s71 ! relation ( :i* con/itutes a hypo!tical judgem5t1 likewise ^? 7! memb]s ( ! division7 9 ^: reciprocity ! disjunctive consi/s1 are only problematical4 ,9 ! example above giv5 ! proposition1 8,!re exi/s p]fect ju/ice10 is n /at$ ass]torically1 b z an ad libitum judgem5t1 :i* someone may *oose to adopt1 & ! consequ5ce alone is ass]torical4 ,h5ce su* judgem5ts may be obvi\sly false1 & yet1 tak5 problematically1 be conditions ( our cognition ( ! tru?4 ,?us ! proposition1 8,! _w exi/s only by bl9d *ance10 is 9 ! disjunctive judgem5t ( problematical import only3 t is to say1 "o may accept x = ! mom5t1 & x helps u 7l ! indication ( ! wrong road among all ! roads t "o c take7 to f9d out ! true proposition4 ,! problematical proposition is1 !re=e1 t :i* expresses only logical possibility 7:i* is n objective72 t is1 x expresses a free *oice to admit ! validity ( su* a proposition--a m]ely arbitr>y reception ( x into ! und]/&+4 ,! ass]torical speaks ( logical reality or tru?2 z1 = example1 9 a hypo!tical syllogism1 ! antec$5s pres5ts itself 9 a problematical =m 9 ! major1 9 an ass]torical =m 9 ! m9or1 & x %[s t ! proposition is 9 h>mony ) ! laws ( ! und]/&+4 ,! apodeictical proposition cogitates ! ass]torical z det]m9$ by ^! v laws ( ! und]/&+1 consequ5tly z affirm+ priori1 & 9 ?is mann] x expresses logical necessity4 ,n[ because all is "h gradually incorporat$ ) ! und]/&+--inasmu* z 9 ! fir/ place we judge problematically2 !n accept ass]torically our judgem5t z true2 la/ly1 affirm x z insep>ably unit$ ) ! und]/&+1 t is1 z necess>y & apodeictical--we may safely reckon ^! ?ree functions ( modality z s _m mom5ta ( ?\ght4 #ac ,j z if ?\ght 7 9 ! fir/ in/ance a function ( ! und]/&+2 9 ! second1 ( judgem5t2 9 ! ?ird1 ( reason4 ,a rem>k :i* w be expla9$ 9 ! sequel4 ,section ,,iii4 ,( ! ,pure ,conceptions ( ! ,und]/&+1 or ,categories #f ,g5]al logic1 z has be5 repeat$ly said1 makes ab/raction ( all cont5t ( cognition1 & expects to receive repres5tations f "s o!r qu>t]1 9 ord]1 by means ( analysis1 to conv]t !m into conceptions4 ,on ! contr>y1 transc5d5tal logic has ly+ be=e x ! manifold cont5t ( priori s5sibility1 :i* transc5d5tal /hetic pres5ts to x 9 ord] to give matt] to ! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 )\t :i* transc5d5tal logic w\ld h no cont5t1 & be !re=e utt]ly void4 ,n[ space & "t conta9 an inf9ite div]sity ( det]m9ations ( pure priori intuition1 b are nev]!less ! condition ( ! m9d's receptivity1 "u :i* alone x c obta9 repres5tations ( objects1 & :i*1 consequ5tly1 mu/ always affect ! conception ( ^! objects4 ,b ! spontaneity ( ?\ght requires t ?is div]sity be exam9$ aft] a c]ta9 mann]1 receiv$ into ! m9d1 & connect$1 9 ord] aft]w>ds to =m a cognition out ( x4 ,?is ,process ,i call syn!sis4 ,by ! ^w syn!sis1 9 its mo/ g5]al signification1 ,i und]/& ! process ( jo9+ diff]5t repres5tations to ea* o!r & ( compreh5d+ _! div]sity 9 "o cognition4 ,?is syn!sis is pure :5 ! div]sity is n giv5 empirically b priori 7z t 9 space & "t74 ,our repres5tations mu/ be giv5 previ\sly to any analysis ( !m2 & no conceptions c arise1 quoad _! cont5t1 analytically4 ,b ! syn!sis ( a div]sity 7be x giv5 priori or empirically7 is ! fir/ requisite = ! production ( a cognition1 :i* 9 its beg9n+1 inde$1 may be crude & confus$1 & !re=e 9 ne$ ( analysis--/ill1 syn!sis is t by :i* alone ! elem5ts ( our cognitions are collect$ & unit$ into a c]ta9 cont5t1 consequ5tly x is ! fir/ ?+ on :i* we mu/ fix our att5tion1 if we wi% to inve/igate ! orig9 ( our k4 ,syn!sis1 g5]ally speak+1 is1 z we %all aft]w>ds see1 ! m]e op]ation ( ! imag9ation--a bl9d b indisp5sable function ( ! s\l1 )\t :i* we %\ld h no cognition :atev]1 b ( ! work+ ( :i* we are seldom ev5 consci\s4 ,b to r$uce ?is syn!sis to conceptions is a function ( ! und]/&+1 by means ( :i* we atta9 to cognition1 9 ! prop] mean+ ( ! t]m4 ,pure syn!sis1 repres5t$ g5]ally1 gives u ! pure conception ( ! und]/&+4 ,b by ?is pure syn!sis1 ,i mean t :i* re/s ^u a basis ( priori syn!tical unity4 ,?us1 our num]ation 7& ?is is m obs]vable 9 l>ge numb]s7 is a syn!sis accord+ to conceptions1 because x takes place accord+ to a common basis ( unity 7= example1 ! decade74 ,by means ( ?is conception1 !re=e1 ! unity 9 ! syn!sis ( ! manifold becomes necess>y4 ,by means ( analysis diff]5t repres5tations are br\ght "u "o conception--an op]ation ( :i* g5]al logic treats4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ! duty ( transc5d5tal logic is to r$uce to conceptions1 n repres5tations1 b ! pure syn!sis ( repres5tations4 ,! fir/ ?+ :i* mu/ be giv5 to u = ! sake ( ! priori cognition ( all objects1 is ! div]sity ( ! pure intuition2 ! syn!sis ( ?is div]sity by means ( ! imag9ation is ! second2 b ?is gives1 z yet1 no cognition4 ,! conceptions :i* give unity to ?is pure syn!sis1 & :i* consi/ solely 9 ! repres5tation ( ?is necess>y syn!tical unity1 furni% ! ?ird requisite = ! cognition ( an object1 & ^! conceptions are giv5 by ! und]/&+4 ,! same function :i* gives unity to ! diff]5t repres5tation 9 a judgem5t1 gives also unity to ! m]e syn!sis ( diff]5t repres5tations 9 an intuition2 & ?is unity we call ! pure conception ( ! und]/&+4 ,?us1 ! same und]/&+1 & by ! same op]ations1 :]eby 9 conceptions1 by means ( analytical unity1 x produc$ ! logical =m ( a judgem5t1 introduces1 by means ( ! syn!tical unity ( ! manifold 9 intuition1 a transc5d5tal cont5t into its repres5tations1 on :i* acc\nt !y are call$ pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 & !y apply priori to objects1 a result n )9 ! p[] ( g5]al logic4 ,9 ?is mann]1 !re arise exactly s _m pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 apply+ priori to objects ( intuition 9 g5]al1 z !re are logical functions 9 all possible judgem5ts4 ,= !re is no o!r function or faculty exi/+ 9 ! und]/&+ besides ^? enum]at$ 9 t table4 ,^! conceptions we %all1 ) ,ari/otle1 call categories1 our purpose be+ orig9ally id5tical ) 81 not)/&+ ! great diff]5ce 9 ! execution4 ,,table ,,( ,,! ,,categories #a #b ,( ,quantity ,( ,quality ,unity ,reality ,plurality ,negation ,totality ,limitation #c ,( ,relation ,( ,inh]5ce & ,subsi/5ce 7sub/antia et accid5s7 ,( ,causality & ,dep5d5ce 7cause & effect7 ,( ,community 7reciprocity betwe5 ! ag5t & pati5t7 #d ,( ,modality ,possibilitymda%2,impossibility ,exi/5cemda%2,non-exi/5ce ,necessitymda%2,cont+5ce ,?is1 !n1 is a catalogue ( all ! orig9ally pure conceptions ( ! syn!sis :i* ! und]/&+ conta9s priori1 & ^! conceptions alone entitle x to be call$ a pure und]/&+2 inasmu* z only by !m x c r5d] ! manifold ( intuition conceivable1 9 o!r words1 ?9k an object ( intuition4 ,?is division is made sy/ematically f a common pr9ciple1 namely ! faculty ( judgem5t 7:i* is j ! same z ! p[] ( ?\ght71 & has n aris5 rhapsodically f a se>* at haphaz>d aft] pure conceptions1 respect+ ! full numb] ( :i* we nev] c\ld be c]ta91 inasmu* z we employ induction alone 9 our se>*1 )\t consid]+ t 9 ?is way we c nev] und]/& :]e=e precisely ^! conceptions1 & none o!rs1 abide 9 ! pure und]/&+4 ,x 0 a design wor?y ( an acute ?9k] l ,ari/otle1 to se>* = ^! fundam5tal conceptions4 ,de/itute1 h[ev]1 ( any guid+ pr9ciple1 he pick$ !m up j z !y occurr$ to him1 & at fir/ hunt$ out t51 :i* he call$ categories 7pr$icam5ts74 ,aft]w>ds be believ$ t he _h discov]$ five o!rs1 :i* 7 add$ "u ! "n ( po/ pr$icam5ts4 ,b 8 catalogue /ill rema9$ defective4 ,besides1 !re are to be f\nd among !m "s ( ! modes ( pure s5sibility 7qu&o1 ubi1 situs1 also prius1 simul71 & likewise an empirical conception 7motus7--:i* c by no means belong to ?is g5ealogical regi/] ( ! pure und]/&+4 ,moreov]1 !re are d$uc$ conceptions 7actio1 passio7 enum]at$ among ! orig9al conceptions1 &1 ( ! latt]1 "s are entirely want+4 ,) reg>d to ^!1 x is to be rem>k$1 t ! categories1 z ! true primitive conceptions ( ! pure und]/&+1 h also _! pure d$uc$ conceptions1 :i*1 9 a complete sy/em ( transc5d5tal philosophy1 mu/ by no means be pass$ ov]2 ?\gh 9 a m]ely critical essay we mu/ be cont5t$ ) ! simple m5tion ( ! fact4 ,let x be all[$ me to call ^! pure1 b d$uc$ conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 ! pr$icables ( ! pure und]/&+1 9 contradi/9ction to pr$icam5ts4 ,if we are 9 possession ( ! orig9al & primitive1 ! d$uc$ & subsidi>y conceptions c easily be add$1 & ! g5ealogical tree ( ! und]/&+ completely del9eat$4 ,z my pres5t aim is n to set =? a complete sy/em1 b m]ely ! pr9ciples ( "o1 ,i res]ve ?is task = ano!r "t4 ,x may be easily execut$ by any "o :o w ref] to ! ontological manuals1 & subord9ate to ! category ( causality1 = example1 ! pr$icables ( =ce1 action1 passion2 to t ( community1 ^? ( pres5ce & resi/ance2 to ! categories ( modality1 ^? ( orig9ation1 ext9ction1 *ange2 & s ) ! re/4 ,! categories comb9$ ) ! modes ( pure s5sibility1 or ) "o ano!r1 af=d a great numb] ( d$uc$ priori conceptions2 a complete enum]ation ( :i* w\ld be a useful & n unpleasant1 b 9 ?is place a p]fectly disp5sable1 occupation4 ,i purposely omit ! def9itions ( ! categories 9 ?is treatise4 ,i %all analyse ^! conceptions only s f> z is necess>y = ! doctr9e ( me?od1 :i* is to =m a "p ( ?is critique4 ,9 a sy/em ( pure reason1 def9itions ( !m w\ld be ) ju/ice dem&$ ( me1 b to give !m "h w\ld only bide f our view ! ma9 aim ( our inve/igation1 at ! same "t rais+ d\bts & objections1 ! consid]ation ( :i*1 )\t inju/ice to our ma9 purpose1 may be v well po/pon$ till ano!r opportunity4 ,mean:ile1 x ought to be suffici5tly cle>1 f ! little we h already said on ?is subject1 t ! =mation ( a complete vocabul>y ( pure conceptions1 accompani$ by all ! requisite explanations1 is n only a possible1 b an easy und]tak+4 ,! comp>tm5ts already exi/2 x is only necess>y to fill !m up2 & a sy/ematic topic l ! pres5t1 indicates ) p]fect precision ! prop] place to :i* ea* conception belongs1 :ile x readily po9ts out any t h n yet be5 fill$ up4 #g ,our table ( ! categories sugge/s consid]ations ( "s importance1 :i* may p]haps h significant results 9 reg>d to ! sci5tific =m ( all rational cognitions4 ,=1 t ?is table is useful 9 ! !oretical "p ( philosophy1 nay1 indisp5sable = ! sket*+ ( ! complete plan ( a sci5ce1 s f> z t sci5ce re/s ^u conceptions priori1 & = divid+ x ma!matically1 accord+ to fix$ pr9ciples1 is mo/ manife/ f ! fact t x conta9s all ! elem5t>y conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 nay1 ev5 ! =m ( a sy/em ( ^! 9 ! und]/&+ itself1 & consequ5tly indicates all ! mom5ta1 & also ! int]nal arrangem5t ( a project$ speculative sci5ce1 z ,i h else:]e %[n4#ad ,"h foll[ "s ( ^! obs]vations4 #ad ,9 ! 8,metaphysical ,pr9ciples ( ,natural ,sci5ce40 ,i4 ,?is table1 :i* conta9s f\r classes ( conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 may1 9 ! fir/ in/ance1 be divid$ into two classes1 ! fir/ ( :i* relates to objects ( intuition--pure z well z empirical2 ! second1 to ! exi/5ce ( ^! objects1 ei!r 9 relation to "o ano!r1 or to ! und]/&+4 ,! =m] ( ^! classes ( categories ,i w\ld entitle ! ma!matical1 & ! latt] ! dynamical categories4 ,! =m]1 z we see1 has no correlates2 ^! are only to be f\nd 9 ! second class4 ,?is diff]5ce mu/ h a gr\nd 9 ! nature ( ! human und]/&+4 ,,ii4 ,! numb] ( ! categories 9 ea* class is always ! same1 namely1 ?ree--a fact :i* also dem&s "s consid]ation1 because 9 all o!r cases division priori ?r\gh conceptions is necess>ily di*otomy4 ,x is to be add$1 t ! ?ird category 9 ea* triad always arises f ! comb9ation ( ! second ) ! fir/4 ,?us totality is no?+ else b plurality contemplat$ z unity2 limitation is m]ely reality conjo9$ ) negation2 community is ! causality ( a sub/ance1 reciprocally det]m9+1 & det]m9$ by o!r sub/ances2 & f9ally1 necessity is no?+ b exi/5ce1 :i* is giv5 ?r\gh ! possibility itself4 ,let x n be suppos$1 h[ev]1 t ! ?ird category is m]ely a d$uc$1 & n a primitive conception ( ! pure und]/&+4 ,= ! conjunction ( ! fir/ & second1 9 ord] to produce ! ?ird conception1 requires a p>ticul> function ( ! und]/&+1 :i* is by no means id5tical ) ^? :i* are ex]cis$ 9 ! fir/ & second4 ,?us1 ! conception ( a numb] 7:i* belongs to ! category ( totality7 is n always possible1 :]e ! conceptions ( multitude & unity exi/ 7= example1 9 ! repres5tation ( ! inf9ite74 ,or1 if ,i conjo9 ! conception ( a cause ) t ( a sub/ance1 x does n foll[ t ! conception ( influ5ce1 t is1 h[ "o sub/ance c be ! cause ( some?+ 9 ano!r sub/ance1 w be und]/ood f t4 ,?us x is evid5t t a p>ticul> act ( ! und]/&+ is "h necess>y2 & s 9 ! o!r in/ances4 ,,iii4 ,) respect to "o category1 namely1 t ( community1 :i* is f\nd 9 ! ?ird class1 x is n s easy z ) ! o!rs to detect its accordance ) ! =m ( ! disjunctive judgem5t :i* corresponds to x 9 ! table ( ! logical functions4 ,9 ord] to assure ourselves ( ?is accordance1 we mu/ obs]ve t 9 e disjunctive judgem5t1 ! sph]e ( ! judgem5t 7t is1 ! complex ( all t is conta9$ 9 x7 is repres5t$ z a :ole divid$ into p>ts2 &1 s9ce "o "p _c be conta9$ 9 ! o!r1 !y are cogitat$ z co-ord9at$ )1 n subord9at$ to ea* o!r1 s t !y d n det]m9e ea* o!r unilat]ally1 z 9 a l9e> s]ies1 b reciprocally1 z 9 an aggregate--7if "o memb] ( ! division is posit$1 all ! re/ are exclud$2 & conv]sely74 ,n[ a l connection is cogitat$ 9 a :ole ( ?+s2 = "o ?+ is n subord9at$1 z effect1 to ano!r z cause ( its exi/5ce1 b1 on ! contr>y1 is co-ord9at$ contemporane\sly & reciprocally1 z a cause 9 relation to ! det]m9ation ( ! o!rs 7= example1 9 a body--! p>ts ( :i* mutually attract & repel ea* o!r74 ,& ?is is an entirely diff]5t k9d ( connection f t :i* we f9d 9 ! m]e relation ( ! cause to ! effect 7! pr9ciple to ! consequ5ce71 = 9 su* a connection ! consequ5ce does n 9 its turn det]m9e ! pr9ciple1 & !re=e does n con/itute1 ) ! latt]1 a :ole--j z ! ,creator does n ) ! _w make up a :ole4 ,! process ( und]/&+ by :i* x repres5ts to itself ! sph]e ( a divid$ conception1 is employ$ also :5 we ?9k ( a ?+ z divisible2 & 9 ! same mann] z ! memb]s ( ! division 9 ! =m] exclude "o ano!r1 & yet are connect$ 9 "o sph]e1 s ! und]/&+ repres5ts to itself ! p>ts ( ! latt]1 z hav+--ea* ( !m--an exi/5ce 7z sub/ances71 indep5d5tly ( ! o!rs1 & yet z unit$ 9 "o :ole4 #h ,9 ! transc5d5tal philosophy ( ! anci5ts !re exi/s "o m lead+ division1 :i* conta9s pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 & :i*1 al?\gh n numb]$ among ! categories1 ought1 accord+ to !m1 z conceptions priori1 to be valid ( objects4 ,b 9 ?is case !y w\ld augm5t ! numb] ( ! categories2 :i* _c be4 ,^! are set =? 9 ! proposition1 s r5[n$ among ! s*oolm5--#8,quodlibet ens e/ ,,unum1 ,,v]um1 ,,bonum4' ,n[1 ?\gh ! inf]5ces f ?is pr9ciple 7 m]e tautological propositions1 & ?\gh x is all[$ only by c\rtesy to reta9 a place 9 mod]n metaphysics1 yet a ?\ght :i* ma9ta9$ itself = su* a l5g? ( "t1 h[ev] empty x seems to be1 des]ves an inve/igation ( its orig91 & ju/ifies ! conjecture t x mu/ be gr\nd$ 9 "s law ( ! und]/&+1 :i*1 z is (t5 ! case1 has only be5 errone\sly int]pret$4 ,^! pret5d$ transc5d5tal pr$icates are1 9 fact1 no?+ b logical requisites & crit]ia ( all cognition ( objects1 & !y employ1 z ! basis = ?is cognition1 ! categories ( quantity1 namely1 unity1 plurality1 & totality4 ,b ^!1 :i* mu/ be tak5 z mat]ial conditions1 t is1 z belong+ to ! possibility ( ?+s !mselves1 !y employ$ m]ely 9 a =mal signification1 z belong+ to ! logical requisites ( all cognition1 & yet mo/ ungu>d$ly *ang$ ^! crit]ia ( ?\ght into prop]ties ( objects1 z ?+s 9 !mselves4 ,n[1 9 e cognition ( an object1 !re is unity ( conception1 :i* may be call$ qualitative unity1 s f> z by ?is t]m we und]/& only ! unity 9 our connection ( ! manifold2 = example1 unity ( ! !me 9 a play1 an oration1 or a /ory4 ,secondly1 !re is tru? 9 respect ( ! d$uctions f x4 ,! m true d$uctions we h f a giv5 conception1 ! m crit]ia ( its objective reality4 ,?is we might call ! qualitative plurality ( *>act]i/ic m>ks1 :i* belong to a conception z to a common f\ndation1 b are n cogitat$ z a quantity 9 x4 ,?irdly1 !re is p]fection--:i* consi/s 9 ?is1 t ! plurality falls back ^u ! unity ( ! conception1 & accords completely ) t conception & ) no o!r4 ,?is we may d5om9ate qualitative complet5ess4 ,h5ce x is evid5t t ^! logical crit]ia ( ! possibility ( cognition are m]ely ! ?ree categories ( quantity modifi$ & trans=m$ to suit an unau?oriz$ mann] ( apply+ !m4 ,t is to say1 ! ?ree categories1 9 :i* ! unity 9 ! production ( ! quantum mu/ be homog5e\s ?r\gh\t1 are trans=m$ solely ) a view to ! connection ( het]og5e\s p>ts ( cognition 9 "o act ( consci\sness1 by means ( ! quality ( ! cognition1 :i* is ! pr9ciple ( t connection4 ,?us ! crit]ion ( ! possibility ( a conception 7n ( its object7 is ! def9ition ( x1 9 :i* ! unity ( ! conception1 ! tru? ( all t may be imm$iately d$uc$ f x1 & f9ally1 ! complet5ess ( :at has be5 ?us d$uc$1 con/itute ! requisites = ! reproduction ( ! :ole conception4 ,?us also1 ! crit]ion or te/ ( an hypo!sis is ! intelligibility ( ! receiv$ pr9ciple ( explanation1 or its unity 7)\t help f any subsidi>y hypo!sis7--! tru? ( our d$uctions f x 7consi/5cy ) ea* o!r & ) exp]i5ce7--& la/ly1 ! complet5ess ( ! pr9ciple ( ! explanation ( ^! d$uctions1 :i* ref] to nei!r m nor less ?an :at 0 admitt$ 9 ! hypo!sis1 re/or+ analytically & po/]iori1 :at 0 cogitat$ syn!tically & priori4 ,by ! conceptions1 !re=e1 ( unity1 tru?1 & p]fection1 we h made no addition to ! transc5d5tal table ( ! categories1 :i* is complete )\t !m4 ,we h1 on ! contr>y1 m]ely employ$ ! ?ree categories ( quantity1 sett+ aside _! application to objects ( exp]i5ce1 z g5]al logical laws ( ! consi/5cy ( cognition ) itself4 ,*apt] ,,ii4 ,( ! ,d$uction ( ! ,pure ,conceptions ( ! ,und]/&+ ,section ,i4 ,( ! ,pr9ciples ( a ,transc5d5tal ,d$uction 9 g5]al #i ,tea*]s ( jurisprud5ce1 :5 speak+ ( rights & claims1 di/+ui% 9 a cause ! "q ( "r 7quid juris7 f ! "q ( fact 7quid facti71 & :ile !y dem& pro( ( bo?1 !y give to ! pro( ( ! =m]1 :i* goes to e/abli% "r or claim 9 law1 ! "n ( d$uction4 ,n[ we make use ( a great numb] ( empirical conceptions1 )\t opposition f any "o2 & consid] ourselves1 ev5 )\t any attempt at d$uction1 ju/ifi$ 9 atta*+ to !m a s5se1 & a supposititi\s signification1 because we h always exp]i5ce at h& to demon/rate _! objective reality4 ,!re exi/ also1 h[ev]1 usurp$ conceptions1 su* z =tune1 fate1 :i* circulate ) almo/ univ]sal indulg5ce1 & yet are occasionally *all5g$ by ! "q1 8quid juris80 ,9 su* cases1 we h great difficulty 9 discov]+ any d$uction = ^! t]ms1 inasmu* z we _c produce any manife/ gr\nd ( "r1 ei!r f exp]i5ce or f reason1 on :i* ! claim to employ !m c be f\nd$4 ,among ! _m conceptions1 :i* make up ! v v>iegat$ web ( human cognition1 "s are de/9$ = pure use priori1 indep5d5t ( all exp]i5ce2 & _! title to be s employ$ always requires a d$uction1 inasmu* z1 to ju/ify su* use ( !m1 pro(s f exp]i5ce are n suffici5t2 b x is necess>y to "k h[ ^! conceptions c apply to objects )\t be+ d]iv$ f exp]i5ce4 ,i t]m1 !re=e1 an exam9ation ( ! mann] 9 :i* conceptions c apply priori to objects1 ! transc5d5tal d$uction ( conceptions1 & ,i di/+ui% x f ! empirical d$uction1 :i* indicates ! mode 9 :i* conception is obta9$ ?r\gh exp]i5ce & reflection !reon2 consequ5tly1 does n conc]n itself ) ! "r1 b only ) ! fact ( our obta9+ conceptions 9 su* & su* a mann]4 ,we h already se5 t we are 9 possession ( two p]fectly diff]5t k9ds ( conceptions1 :i* nev]!less agree ) ea* o!r 9 ?is1 t !y bo? apply to objects completely priori4 ,^! are ! conceptions ( space & "t z =ms ( s5sibility1 & ! categories z pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+4 ,to attempt an empirical d$uction ( ei!r ( ^! classes w\ld be lab\r 9 va91 because ! di/+ui%+ *>act]i/ic ( _! nature consi/s 9 ?is1 t !y apply to _! objects1 )\t hav+ borr[$ any?+ f exp]i5ce t[>ds ! repres5tation ( !m4 ,consequ5tly1 if a d$uction ( ^! conceptions is necess>y1 x mu/ always be transc5d5tal4 ,mean:ile1 ) respect to ^! conceptions1 z ) respect to all our cognition1 we c]ta9ly may discov] 9 exp]i5ce1 if n ! pr9ciple ( _! possibility1 yet ! occasion+ causes ( _! production4 ,x w be f\nd t ! impressions ( s5se give ! fir/ occasion = br++ into action ! :ole faculty ( cognition1 & = ! production ( exp]i5ce1 :i* conta9s two v dissimil> elem5ts1 namely1 a matt] = cognition1 giv5 by ! s5ses1 & a c]ta9 =m = ! arrangem5t ( ?is matt]1 aris+ out ( ! inn] f\nta9 ( pure intuition & ?\ght2 & ^!1 on occasion giv5 by s5su\s impressions1 are call$ into ex]cise & produce conceptions4 ,su* an inve/igation into ! fir/ ef=ts ( our faculty ( cognition to m\nt f p>ticul> p]ceptions to g5]al conceptions is und\bt$ly ( great utility2 & we h to ?ank ! celebrat$ ,locke = hav+ fir/ op5$ ! way = ?is inquiry4 ,b a d$uction ( ! pure priori conceptions ( c\rse nev] c be made 9 ?is way1 see+ t1 9 reg>d to _! future employm5t1 :i* mu/ be entirely indep5d5t ( exp]i5ce1 !y mu/ h a f> diff]5t c]tificate ( bir? to %[ f t ( a desc5t f exp]i5ce4 ,?is attempt$ physiological d]ivation1 :i* _c prop]ly be call$ d$uction1 because x relates m]ely to a quae/io facti1 ,i %all entitle an explanation ( ! possession ( a pure cognition4 ,x is !re=e manife/ t !re c only be a transc5d5tal d$uction ( ^! conceptions & by no means an empirical "o2 also1 t all attempts at an empirical d$uction1 9 reg>d to pure priori conceptions1 are va91 & c only be made by "o :o does n und]/& ! altoge!r peculi> nature ( ^! cognitions4 ,b al?\gh x is admitt$ t ! only possible d$uction ( pure priori cognition is a transc5d5tal d$uction1 x is n1 = t reason1 p]fectly manife/ t su* a d$uction is absolutely necess>y4 ,we h already trac$ to _! s\rces ! conceptions ( space & "t1 by means ( a transc5d5tal d$uction1 & we h expla9$ & det]m9$ _! objective validity priori4 ,geometry1 nev]!less1 advances /eadily & securely 9 ! prov9ce ( pure priori cognitions1 )\t ne$+ to ask f philosophy any c]tificate z to ! pure & legitimate orig9 ( its fundam5tal conception ( space4 ,b ! use ( ! conception 9 ?is sci5ce ext5ds only to ! ext]nal _w ( s5se1 ! pure =m ( ! intuition ( :i* is space2 & 9 ?is _w1 !re=e1 all geometrical cognition1 because x is f\nd$ ^u priori intuition1 possesses imm$iate evid5ce1 & ! objects ( ?is cognition are giv5 priori 7z reg>ds _! =m7 9 intuition by & ?r\gh ! cognition itself4 ,) ! pure conceptions ( und]/&+1 on ! contr>y1 comm5ces ! absolute necessity ( seek+ a transc5d5tal d$uction1 n only ( ^! conceptions !mselves1 b likewise ( space1 because1 inasmu* z !y make affirmations conc]n+ objects n by means ( ! pr$icates ( intuition & s5sibility1 b ( pure ?\ght priori1 !y apply to objects )\t any ( ! conditions ( s5sibility4 ,besides1 n be+ f\nd$ on exp]i5ce1 !y are n pres5t$ ) any object 9 priori intuition ^u :i*1 antec$5tly to exp]i5ce1 !y might base _! syn!sis4 ,h5ce results1 n only d\bt z to ! objective validity & prop] limits ( _! use1 b t ev5 our conception ( space is r5d]$ equivocal2 inasmu* z we are v ready ) ! aid ( ! categories1 to c>ry ! use ( ?is conception beyond ! conditions ( s5su\s intuition--&1 = ?is reason1 we h already f\nd a transc5d5tal d$uction ( x ne$ful4 ,! read]1 !n1 mu/ be q conv9c$ ( ! absolute necessity ( a transc5d5tal d$uction1 be=e tak+ a s+le /ep 9 ! field ( pure reason2 because o!rwise he goes to "w bl9dly1 & aft] he has wond]$ ab\t 9 all directions1 returns to ! /ate ( utt] ignorance f :i* he />t$4 ,he ought1 moreov]1 cle>ly to recognize be=eh& ! unavoidable difficulties 9 8 und]tak+1 s t he may n aft]w>ds compla9 ( ! obscurity 9 :i* ! subject itself is deeply involv$1 or become too soon impati5t ( ! ob/acles 9 8 pa?2 because we h a *oice ( only two ?+s--ei!r at once to give up all pret5sions to k beyond ! limits ( possible exp]i5ce1 or to br+ ?is critical inve/igation to completion4 ,we h be5 able1 ) v little tr\ble1 to make x compreh5sible h[ ! conceptions ( space & "t1 al?\gh priori cognitions1 mu/ necess>ily apply to ext]nal objects1 & r5d] a syn!tical cognition ( ^! possible1 indep5d5tly ( all exp]i5ce4 ,= inasmu* z only by means ( su* pure =m ( s5sibility an object c appe> to u1 t is1 be an object ( empirical intuition1 space & "t are pure intuitions1 :i* conta9 priori ! condition ( ! possibility ( objects z ph5om5a1 & an priori syn!sis 9 ^! intuitions possesses objective validity4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ! categories ( ! und]/&+ d n repres5t ! conditions "u :i* objects are giv5 to u 9 intuition2 objects c consequ5tly appe> to u )\t necess>ily connect+ !mselves ) ^!1 & consequ5tly )\t any necessity b9d+ on ! und]/&+ to conta9 priori ! conditions ( ^! objects4 ,?us we f9d ourselves involv$ 9 a difficulty :i* did n pres5t itself 9 ! sph]e ( s5sibility1 t is to say1 we _c discov] h[ ! subjective conditions ( ?\ght c h objective validity1 9 o!r words1 c become conditions ( ! possibility ( all cognition ( objects2 = ph5om5a may c]ta9ly be giv5 to u 9 intuition )\t any help f ! functions ( ! und]/&+4 ,let u take1 = example1 ! conception ( cause1 :i* indicates a peculi> k9d ( syn!sis1 namely1 t ) some?+1 ,a1 some?+ entirely diff]5t1 ,b1 is connect$ accord+ to a law4 ,x is n priori manife/ :y ph5om5a %\ld conta9 any?+ ( ?is k9d 7we are ( c\rse deb>r$ f appeal+ = pro( to exp]i5ce1 = ! objective validity ( ?is conception mu/ be demon/rat$ priori71 & x h5ce rema9s d\btful priori1 :e!r su* a conception be n q void & )\t any correspond+ object among ph5om5a4 ,= t objects ( s5su\s intuition mu/ correspond to ! =mal conditions ( s5sibility exi/+ priori 9 ! m9d is q evid5t1 f ! fact t )\t ^! !y c\ld n be objects = u2 b t !y mu/ also correspond to ! conditions :i* und]/&+ requires = ! syn!tical unity ( ?\ght is an ass]tion1 ! gr\nds = :i* are n s easily to be discov]$4 ,= ph5om5a might be s con/itut$ z n to correspond to ! conditions ( ! unity ( ?\ght2 & all ?+s might lie 9 su* confusion t1 = example1 no?+ c\ld be met ) 9 ! sph]e ( ph5om5a to sugge/ a law ( syn!sis1 & s correspond to ! conception ( cause & effect2 s t ?is conception w\ld be q void1 null1 & )\t significance4 ,ph5om5a w\ld nev]!less cont9ue to pres5t objects to our intuition2 = m]e intuition does n 9 any respect /& 9 ne$ ( ! functions ( ?\ght4 ,if we ?\ght to free ourselves f ! lab\r ( ^! inve/igations by say+3 8,exp]i5ce is con/antly (f]+ u examples ( ! relation ( cause & effect 9 ph5om5a1 & pres5ts u ) abundant opportunity ( ab/ract+ ! conception ( cause1 & s at ! same "t ( corroborat+ ! objective validity ( ?is conception02 we %\ld 9 ?is case be ov]look+ ! fact1 t ! conception ( cause _c arise 9 ?is way at all2 t1 on ! contr>y1 x mu/ ei!r h an priori basis 9 ! und]/&+1 or be reject$ z a m]e *im]a4 ,= ?is conception dem&s t some?+1 ,a1 %\ld be ( su* a nature t some?+ else1 ,b1 %\ld foll[ f x necess>ily1 & accord+ to an absolutely univ]sal law4 ,we may c]ta9ly collect f ph5om5a a law1 accord+ to :i* ?is or t usually happ5s1 b ! elem5t ( necessity is n to be f\nd 9 x4 ,h5ce x is evid5t t to ! syn!sis ( cause & effect belongs a dignity1 :i* is utt]ly want+ 9 any empirical syn!sis2 = x is no m]e me*anical syn!sis1 by means ( addition1 b a dynamical "o2 t is to say1 ! effect is n to be cogitat$ z m]ely annex$ to ! cause1 b z posit$ by & ?r\gh ! cause1 & result+ f x4 ,! /rict univ]sality ( ?is law nev] c be a *>act]i/ic ( empirical laws1 :i* obta9 ?r\gh induction only a comp>ative univ]sality1 t is1 an ext5d$ range ( practical application4 ,b ! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+ w\ld entirely lose all _! peculi> "*1 if we treat$ !m m]ely z ! productions ( exp]i5ce4 ,transition to ! ,transc5d5tal ,d$uction ( ! ,categories #aj ,!re are only two possible ways 9 :i* syn!tical repres5tation & its objects c co9cide ) & relate necess>ily to ea* o!r1 &1 z x 71 meet toge!r4 ,ei!r ! object alone makes ! repres5tation possible1 or ! repres5tation alone makes ! object possible4 ,9 ! =m] case1 ! relation betwe5 !m is only empirical1 & an priori repres5tation is impossible4 ,& ?is is ! case ) ph5om5a1 z reg>ds t 9 !m :i* is ref]able to m]e s5sation4 ,9 ! latt] case--al?\gh repres5tation alone 7= ( its causality1 by means ( ! w1 we d n "h speak7 does n produce ! object z to its exi/5ce1 x mu/ nev]!less be priori det]m9ative 9 reg>d to ! object1 if x is only by means ( ! repres5tation t we c cognize any?+ z an object4 ,n[ !re are only two conditions ( ! possibility ( a cognition ( objects2 fir/ly1 intuition1 by means ( :i* ! object1 ?\gh only z ph5om5on1 is giv52 secondly1 conception1 by means ( :i* ! object :i* corresponds to ?is intuition is ?\ght4 ,b x is evid5t f :at has be5 said on /hetic t ! fir/ condition1 "u :i* alone objects c be intuit$1 mu/ 9 fact exi/1 z a =mal basis = !m1 priori 9 ! m9d4 ,) ?is =mal condition ( s5sibility1 !re=e1 all ph5om5a necess>ily correspond1 because x is only ?r\gh x t !y c be ph5om5a at all2 t is1 c be empirically intuit$ & giv54 ,n[ ! "q is :e!r !re d n exi/1 priori 9 ! m9d1 conceptions ( und]/&+ also1 z conditions "u :i* alone some?+1 if n intuit$1 is yet ?\ght z object4 ,if ?is "q be answ]$ 9 ! affirmative1 x foll[s t all empirical cognition ( objects is necess>ily con=mable to su* conceptions1 s9ce1 if !y are n presuppos$1 x is impossible t any?+ c be an object ( exp]i5ce4 ,n[ all exp]i5ce conta9s1 besides ! intuition ( ! s5ses ?r\gh :i* an object is giv51 a conception also ( an object t is giv5 9 intuition4 ,accord+ly1 conceptions ( objects 9 g5]al mu/ lie z priori conditions at ! f\ndation ( all empirical cognition2 & consequ5tly1 ! objective validity ( ! categories1 z priori conceptions1 w re/ ^u ?is1 t exp]i5ce 7z f> z reg>ds ! =m ( ?\ght7 is possible only by _! means4 ,= 9 t case !y apply necess>ily & priori to objects ( exp]i5ce1 because only ?r\gh !m c an object ( exp]i5ce be ?\ght4 ,! :ole aim ( ! transc5d5tal d$uction ( all priori conceptions is to %[ t ^! conceptions are priori conditions ( ! possibility ( all exp]i5ce4 ,conceptions :i* af=d u ! objective f\ndation ( ! possibility ( exp]i5ce are = t v reason necess>y4 ,b ! analysis ( ! exp]i5ces 9 :i* !y are met ) is n d$uction1 b only an illu/ration ( !m1 because f exp]i5ce !y c\ld nev] d]ive ! attribute ( necessity4 ,)\t _! orig9al applicability & relation to all possible exp]i5ce1 9 :i* all objects ( cognition pres5t !mselves1 ! relation ( ! categories to objects1 ( :atev] nature1 w\ld be q incompreh5sible4 ,! celebrat$ ,locke1 = want ( due reflection on ^! po9ts1 & because he met ) pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+ 9 exp]i5ce1 s\ght also to d$uce !m f exp]i5ce1 & yet proce$$ s inconsequ5tly z to attempt1 ) _! aid1 to arrive x cognitions :i* lie f> beyond ! limits ( all exp]i5ce4 ,david ,hume p]ceiv$ t1 to r5d] ?is possible1 x 0 necess>y t ! conceptions %\ld h an priori orig94 ,b z he c\ld n expla9 h[ x 0 possible t conceptions :i* are n connect$ ) ea* o!r 9 ! und]/&+ mu/ nev]!less be ?\ght z necess>ily connect$ 9 ! object--& x nev] occurr$ to him t ! und]/&+ itself might1 p]haps1 by means ( ^! conceptions1 be ! au?or ( ! exp]i5ce 9 :i* its objects 7 pres5t$ to x--he 0 =c$ to drive ^! conceptions f exp]i5ce1 t is1 f a subjective necessity aris+ f repeat$ association ( exp]i5ces errone\sly consid]$ to be objective--9 "o ^w1 f habit4 ,b he proce$$ ) p]fect consequ5ce & decl>$ x to be impossible1 ) su* conceptions & ! pr9ciples aris+ f !m1 to ov]/ep ! limits ( exp]i5ce4 ,! empirical d]ivation1 h[ev]1 :i* bo? ( ^! philosoph]s attribut$ to ^! conceptions1 _c possibly be reconcil$ ) ! fact t we d possess sci5tific priori cognitions1 namely1 ^? ( pure ma!matics & g5]al physics4 ,! =m] ( ^! two celebrat$ m5 op5$ a wide door to extravagance--7= if reason has once und\bt$ "r on its side1 x w n all[ itself to be conf9$ to set limits1 by vague recomm5dations ( mod]ation72 ! latt] gave himself up entirely to scepticism--a natural consequ5ce1 aft] hav+ discov]$1 z he ?\ght1 t ! faculty ( cognition 0 n tru/wor?y4 ,we n[ int5d to make a trial :e!r x be n possible safely to conduct reason betwe5 ^! two rocks1 to assign h] det]m9ate limits1 & yet leave op5 = h] ! entire sph]e ( h] legitimate activity4 ,i %all m]ely premise an explanation ( :at ! categories are4 ,!y are conceptions ( an object 9 g5]al1 by means ( :i* its intuition is contemplat$ z det]m9$ 9 relation to "o ( ! logical functions ( judgem5t4 ,! foll[+ w make ?is pla94 ,! function ( ! categorical judgem5t is t ( ! relation ( subject to pr$icate2 = example1 9 ! proposition3 8,all bodies are divisible40 ,b 9 reg>d to ! m]ely logical use ( ! und]/&+1 x /ill rema9s undet]m9$ to :i* ,( ^! two conceptions belongs ! function ,( subject & to :i* t ( pr$icate4 ,= we c\ld also say3 8,"s divisible is a body40 ,b ! category ( sub/ance1 :5 ! conception ( a body is br\ght "u x1 det]m9es t2 & its empirical intuition 9 exp]i5ce mu/ be contemplat$ always z subject & nev] z m]e pr$icate4 ,& s ) all ! o!r categories4 ,section ,,ii ,transc5d5tal ,d$uction ( ! pure ,conceptions ( ! ,und]/&+ ,( ! ,possibility ( a ,conjunction ( ! manifold repres5tations giv5 by ,s5se #aa4 ,! manifold cont5t 9 our repres5tations c be giv5 9 an intuition :i* is m]ely s5su\s--9 o!r words1 is no?+ b susceptibility2 & ! =m ( ?is intuition c exi/ priori 9 our faculty ( repres5tation1 )\t be+ any?+ else b ! mode 9 :i* ! subject is affect$4 ,b ! conjunction 7conjunctio7 ( a manifold 9 intuition nev] c be giv5 u by ! s5ses2 x _c !re=e be conta9$ 9 ! pure =m ( s5su\s intuition1 = x is a spontane\s act ( ! faculty ( repres5tation4 ,& z we mu/1 to di/+ui% x f s5sibility1 entitle ?is faculty und]/&+2 s all conjunction :e!r consci\s or unconsci\s1 be x ( ! manifold 9 intuition1 s5su\s or non-s5su\s1 or ( sev]al conceptions--is an act ( ! und]/&+4 ,to ?is act we %all give ! g5]al appellation ( syn!sis1 !reby to indicate1 at ! same "t1 t we _c repres5t any?+ z conjo9$ 9 ! object )\t hav+ previ\sly conjo9$ x ourselves4 ,( all m5tal notions1 t ( conjunction is ! only "o :i* _c be giv5 ?r\gh objects1 b c be orig9at$ only by ! subject itself1 because x is an act ( its purely spontane\s activity4 ,! read] w easily en\gh p]ceive t ! possibility ( conjunction mu/ be gr\nd$ 9 ! v nature ( ?is act1 & t x mu/ be equally valid = all conjunction1 & t analysis1 :i* appe>s to be its contr>y1 mu/1 nev]!less1 always presuppose x2 = :]e ! und]/&+ has n previ\sly conjo9$1 x _c dissect or analyse1 because only z conjo9$ by x1 mu/ t :i* is to be analys$ h be5 giv5 to our faculty ( repres5tation4 ,b ! conception ( conjunction includes1 besides ! conception ( ! manifold & ( ! syn!sis ( x1 t ( ! unity ( x also4 ,conjunction is ! repres5tation ( ! syn!tical unity ( ! manifold4#ae ,?is idea ( unity1 !re=e1 _c arise out ( t ( conjunction2 mu* r does t idea1 by comb9+ itself ) ! repres5tation ( ! manifold1 r5d] ! conception ( conjunction possible4 ,?is unity1 :i* priori prec$es all conceptions ( conjunction1 is n ! category ( unity 7 #f72 = all ! categories are bas$ ^u logical functions ( judgem5t1 & 9 ^! functions we already h conjunction1 & consequ5tly unity ( giv5 conceptions4 ,x is !re=e evid5t t ! category ( unity presupposes conjunction4 ,we mu/ !re=e look /ill high] = ?is unity 7z qualitative1 #h71 9 t1 namely1 :i* conta9s ! gr\nd ( ! unity ( div]se conceptions 9 judgem5ts1 ! gr\nd1 consequ5tly1 ( ! possibility ( ! exi/5ce ( ! und]/&+1 ev5 9 reg>d to its logical use4 #ae ,:e!r ! repres5tations are 9 !mselves id5tical1 & consequ5tly :e!r "o c be ?\ght analytically by means ( & ?r\gh ! o!r1 is a "q :i* we ne$ n at pres5t consid]4 ,our ,consci\sness ( ! "o1 :5 we speak ( ! manifold1 is always di/+ui%able f our consci\sness ( ! o!r2 & x is only respect+ ! syn!sis ( ?is 7possible7 consci\sness t we "h treat4 ,( ! ,orig9ally ,syn!tical ,unity ( ,app]ception #ab ,! 8,i ?9k0 mu/ accompany all my repres5tations1 = o!rwise some?+ w\ld be repres5t$ 9 me :i* c\ld n be ?\ght2 9 o!r words1 ! repres5tation w\ld ei!r be impossible1 or at lea/ be1 9 relation to me1 no?+4 ,t repres5tation :i* c be giv5 previ\sly to all ?\ght is call$ intuition4 ,all ! div]sity or manifold cont5t ( intuition1 has1 !re=e1 a necess>y relation to ! 8,i ?9k10 9 ! subject 9 :i* ?is div]sity is f\nd4 ,b ?is repres5tation1 8,i ?9k10 is an act ( spontaneity2 t is to say1 x _c be reg>d$ z belong+ to m]e s5sibility4 ,i call x pure app]ception1 9 ord] to di/+ui% x f empirical2 or primitive app]ception1 because x is self-consci\sness :i*1 :il/ x gives bir? to ! repres5tation 8,i ?9k10 mu/ necess>ily be capable ( accompany+ all our repres5tations4 ,x is 9 all acts ( consci\sness "o & ! same1 & unaccompani$ by x1 no repres5tation c exi/ = me4 ,! unity ( ?is app]ception ,i call ! transc5d5tal unity ( self-consci\sness1 9 ord] to indicate ! possibility ( priori cognition aris+ f x4 ,= ! manifold repres5tations :i* are giv5 9 an intuition w\ld n all ( !m be my repres5tations1 if !y did n all belong to "o self-consci\sness1 t is1 z my repres5tations 7ev5 al?\gh ,i am n consci\s ( !m z su*71 !y mu/ con=m to ! condition "u :i* alone !y c exi/ toge!r 9 a common self-consci\sness1 because o!rwise !y w\ld n all )\t exception belong to me4 ,f ?is primitive conjunction foll[ _m important results4 ,= example1 ?is univ]sal id5tity ( ! app]ception ( ! manifold giv5 9 intuition conta9s a syn!sis ( repres5tations & is possible only by means ( ! consci\sness ( ?is syn!sis4 ,= ! empirical consci\sness :i* accompanies diff]5t repres5tations is 9 itself fragm5t>y & disunit$1 & )\t relation to ! id5tity ( ! subject4 ,?is relation1 !n1 does n exi/ because ,i accompany e repres5tation ) consci\sness1 b because ,i jo9 "o repres5tation to ano!r1 & am consci\s ( ! syn!sis ( !m4 ,consequ5tly1 only because ,i c connect a v>iety ( giv5 repres5tations 9 "o consci\sness1 is x possible t ,i c repres5t to myself ! id5tity ( consci\sness 9 ^! repres5tations2 9 o!r words1 ! analytical unity ( app]ception is possible only "u ! presupposition ( a syn!tical unity4#af ,! ?\ght1 8,^! repres5tations giv5 9 intuition belong all ( !m to me10 is accord+ly j ! same z1 8,i unite !m 9 "o self-consci\sness1 or c at lea/ s unite !m02 & al?\gh ?is ?\ght is n itself ! consci\sness ( ! syn!sis ( repres5tations1 x presupposes ! possibility ( x2 t is to say1 = ! reason alone t ,i c compreh5d ! v>iety ( my repres5tations 9 "o consci\sness1 d ,i call !m my repres5tations1 = o!rwise ,i mu/ h z _m-col\r$ & v>i\s a self z are ! repres5tations ( :i* ,i am consci\s4 ,syn!tical unity ( ! manifold 9 intuitions1 z giv5 priori1 is !re=e ! f\ndation ( ! id5tity ( app]ception itself1 :i* antec$es priori all det]m9ate ?\ght4 ,b ! conjunction ( repres5tations into a conception is n to be f\nd 9 objects !mselves1 nor c x be1 z x 71 borr[$ f !m & tak5 up into ! und]/&+ by p]ception1 b x is on ! contr>y an op]ation ( ! und]/&+ itself1 :i* is no?+ m ?an ! faculty ( conjo9+ priori & ( br++ ! v>iety ( giv5 repres5tations "u ! unity ( app]ception4 ,?is pr9ciple is ! highe/ 9 all human cognition4 #af ,all g5]al conceptions--z su*--dep5d1 = _! exi/5ce1 on ! analytical unity ( consci\sness4 ,= example1 :5 ,i ?9k ( r$ 9 g5]al1 ,i !reby ?9k to myself a prop]ty :i* 7z a *>act]i/ic m>k7 c be discov]$ some:]e1 or c be unit$ ) o!r repres5tations2 consequ5tly1 x is only by means ( a =e?\ght possible syn!tical unity t ,i c ?9k to myself ! analytical4 ,a repres5tation :i* is cogitat$ z common to diff]5t repres5tations1 is reg>d$ z belong+ to su* z1 besides ?is common repres5tation1 conta9 some?+ diff]5t2 consequ5tly x mu/ be previ\sly ?\ght 9 syn!tical unity ) o!r al?\gh only possible repres5tations1 be=e ,i c ?9k 9 x ! analytical unity ( consci\sness :i* makes x a conceptas communis4 ,& ?us ! syn!tical unity ( app]ception is ! highe/ po9t ) :i* we mu/ connect e op]ation ( ! und]/&+1 ev5 ! :ole ( logic1 & aft] x our transc5d5tal philosophy2 inde$1 ?is faculty is ! und]/&+ itself4 ,?is fundam5tal pr9ciple ( ! necess>y unity ( app]ception is inde$ an id5tical1 & !re=e analytical1 proposition2 b x nev]!less expla9s ! necessity = a syn!sis ( ! manifold giv5 9 an intuition1 )\t :i* ! id5tity ( self-consci\sness w\ld be incogitable4 ,= ! ego1 z a simple repres5tation1 pres5ts u ) no manifold cont5t2 only 9 intuition1 :i* is q diff]5t f ! repres5tation ego1 c x be giv5 u1 & by means ( conjunction x is cogitat$ 9 "o self-consci\sness4 ,an und]/&+1 9 :i* all ! manifold %\ld be giv5 by means ( consci\sness itself1 w\ld be intuitive2 our und]/&+ c only ?9k & mu/ look = its intuition to s5se4 ,i am1 !re=e1 consci\s ( my id5tical self1 9 relation to all ! v>iety ( repres5tations giv5 to me 9 an intuition1 because ,i call all ( !m my repres5tations4 ,9 o!r words1 ,i am consci\s myself ( a necess>y priori syn!sis ( my repres5tations1 :i* is call$ ! orig9al syn!tical unity ( app]ception1 "u :i* rank all ! repres5tations pres5t$ to me1 b t only by means ( a syn!sis4 ,! ,pr9ciple ( ! ,syn!tical ,unity ( ,app]ception is ! highe/ ,pr9ciple ( all ex]cise ( ! ,und]/&+ #ac ,! supreme pr9ciple ( ! possibility ( all intuition 9 relation to s5sibility 01 accord+ to our transc5d5tal /hetic1 t all ! manifold 9 intuition be subject to ! =mal conditions ( space & "t4 ,! supreme pr9ciple ( ! possibility ( x 9 relation to ! und]/&+ is t all ! manifold 9 x be subject to conditions ( ! orig9ally syn!tical unity or app]ception4#ag ,to ! =m] ( ^! two pr9ciples are subject all ! v>i\s repres5tations ( intuition1 9 s f> z !y are giv5 to u2 to ! latt]1 9 s f> z !y mu/ be capable ( conjunction 9 "o consci\sness2 = )\t ?is no?+ c be ?\ght or cogniz$1 because ! giv5 repres5tations w\ld n h 9 common ! act ,( ! app]ception 8,i ?9k0 & !re=e c\ld n be connect$ 9 "o self-consci\sness4 #ag ,space & "t1 & all portions !re(1 are intuitions2 consequ5tly are1 ) a manifold = _! cont5t1 s+le repres5tations4 7,see ! ,transc5d5tal /hetic47 ,consequ5tly1 !y are n pure conceptions1 by means ( :i* ! same consci\sness is f\nd 9 a great numb] ( repres5tations2 b1 on ! contr>y1 !y are _m repres5tations conta9$ 9 "o1 ! consci\sness ( :i* is1 s to speak1 comp\nd$4 ,! unity ( consci\sness is nev]!less syn!tical &1 !re=e1 primitive4 ,f ?is peculi> "* ( consci\sness foll[ _m important consequ5ces4 7,see #ba47 ,und]/&+ is1 to speak g5]ally1 ! faculty ,( cognitions4 ,^! consi/ 9 ! det]m9$ relation ( giv5 repres5tation to an object4 ,b an object is t1 9 ! conception ( :i* ! manifold 9 a giv5 intuition is unit$4 ,n[ all union ( repres5tations requires unity ( consci\sness 9 ! syn!sis ( !m4 ,consequ5tly1 x is ! unity ( consci\sness alone t con/itutes ! possibility ( repres5tations relat+ to an object1 & !re=e ( _! objective validity1 & ( _! becom+ cognitions1 & consequ5tly1 ! possibility ( ! exi/5ce ( ! und]/&+ itself4 ,! fir/ pure cognition ( und]/&+1 !n1 ^u :i* is f\nd$ all its o!r ex]cise1 & :i* is at ! same "t p]fectly indep5d5t ( all conditions ( m]e s5su\s intuition1 is ! pr9ciple ( ! orig9al syn!tical unity ( app]ception4 ,?us ! m]e =m ( ext]nal s5su\s intuition1 namely1 space1 af=ds u1 p] se1 no cognition2 x m]ely contributes ! manifold 9 priori intuition to a possible cognition4 ,b1 9 ord] to cognize some?+ 9 space 7= example1 a l9e71 ,i mu/ draw x1 & ?us produce syn!tically a det]m9$ conjunction ( ! giv5 manifold1 s t ! unity ( ?is act is at ! same "t ! unity ( consci\sness 79 ! conception ( a l9e71 & by ?is means alone is an object 7a det]m9ate space7 cogniz$4 ,! syn!tical unity ( consci\sness is1 !re=e1 an objective condition ( all cognition1 :i* ,i d n m]ely require 9 ord] to cognize an object1 b to :i* e intuition mu/ necess>ily be subject1 9 ord] to become an object = me2 because 9 any o!r way1 & )\t ?is syn!sis1 ! manifold 9 intuition c\ld n be unit$ 9 "o consci\sness4 ,?is proposition is1 z already said1 itself analytical1 al?\gh x con/itutes ! syn!tical unity1 ! condition ( all ?\ght2 = x /ates no?+ m ?an t all my repres5tations 9 any giv5 intuition mu/ be subject to ! condition :i* alone enables me to connect !m1 z my repres5tation ) ! id5tical self1 & s to unite !m syn!tically 9 "o app]ception1 by means ( ! g5]al expression1 8,i ?9k40 ,b ?is pr9ciple is n to be reg>d$ z a pr9ciple = e possible und]/&+1 b only = ! und]/&+ by means ( ^: pure app]ception 9 ! ?\ght ,i am1 no manifold cont5t is giv54 ,! und]/&+ or m9d :i* conta9$ ! manifold 9 intuition1 9 & ?r\gh ! act itself ( its own self-consci\sness1 9 o!r words1 an und]/&+ by & 9 ! repres5tation ( :i* ! objects ( ! repres5tation %\ld at ! same "t exi/1 w\ld n require a special act ( syn!sis ( ! manifold z ! condition ( ! unity ( its consci\sness1 an act ( :i* ! human und]/&+1 :i* ?9ks only & _c intuite1 has absolute ne$4 ,b ?is pr9ciple is ! fir/ pr9ciple ( all ! op]ations ( our und]/&+1 s t we _c =m ! lea/ conception ( any o!r possible und]/&+1 ei!r ( "o su* z %\ld be itself intuition1 or possess a s5su\s intuition1 b ) =ms diff]5t f ^? ( space & "t4 ,:at ,objective ,unity ( ,self-consci\sness is #ad ,x is by means ( ! transc5d5tal unity ( app]ception t all ! manifold1 giv5 9 an intuition is unit$ into a conception ( ! object4 ,on ?is acc\nt x is call$ objective1 & mu/ be di/+ui%$ f ! subjective unity ( consci\sness1 :i* is a det]m9ation ( ! int]nal s5se1 by means ( :i* ! said manifold 9 intuition is giv5 empirically to be s unit$4 ,:e!r ,i c be empirically consci\s ( ! manifold z coexi/5t or z successive1 dep5ds ^u circum/ances1 or empirical conditions4 ,h5ce ! empirical unity ( consci\sness by means ( association ( repres5tations1 itself relates to a ph5om5al _w & is :olly cont+5t4 ,on ! contr>y1 ! pure =m ( intuition 9 "t1 m]ely z an intuition1 :i* conta9s a giv5 manifold1 is subject to ! orig9al unity ( consci\sness1 & t solely by means ( ! necess>y relation ( ! manifold 9 intuition to ! 8,i ?9k10 consequ5tly by means ( ! pure syn!sis ( ! und]/&+1 :i* lies priori at ! f\ndation ( all empirical syn!sis4 ,! transc5d5tal unity ( app]ception is alone objectively valid2 ! empirical :i* we d n consid] 9 ?is essay1 & :i* is m]ely a unity d$uc$ f ! =m] "u giv5 conditions 9 concreto1 possesses only subjective validity4 ,"o p]son connects ! notion convey$ 9 a ^w ) "o ?+1 ano!r ) ano!r ?+2 & ! unity ( consci\sness 9 t :i* is empirical1 is1 9 relation to t :i* is giv5 by exp]i5ce1 n necess>ily & univ]sally valid4 ,! ,logical ,=m ( all ,judgem5ts consi/s 9 ! ,objective ,unity ( ,app]ception ( ! ,conceptions conta9$ !re9 #ae ,i c\ld nev] satisfy myself ) ! def9ition :i* logicians give ( a judgem5t4 ,x is1 accord+ to !m1 ! repres5tation ( a relation betwe5 two conceptions4 ,i %all n dwell "h on ! fault9ess ( ?is def9ition1 9 t x suits only = categorical & n = hypo!tical or disjunctive judgem5ts1 ^! latt] conta9+ a relation n ( conceptions b ( judgem5ts !mselves--a blund] f :i* _m evil results h foll[$4#ah ,x is m important = our pres5t purpose to obs]ve1 t ?is def9ition does n det]m9e 9 :at ! said relation consi/s4 #ah ,! t$i\s doctr9e ( ! f\r syllogi/ic figures conc]ns only categorical syllogisms2 & al?\gh x is no?+ m ?an an artifice by surreptiti\sly introduc+ imm$iate conclusions 7consequ5tiae imm$iatae7 among ! premises ( a pure syllogism1 to give rise to an appe>ance ( m modes ( draw+ a conclusion ?an t 9 ! fir/ figure1 ! artifice w\ld n h _h mu* success1 _h n its au?ors succe$$ 9 br++ categorical judgem5ts into exclusive respect1 z ^? to :i* all o!rs mu/ be ref]r$--a doctr9e1 h[ev]1 :i*1 accord+ to #e1 is utt]ly false4 ,b if ,i inve/igate m closely ! relation ( giv5 cognitions 9 e judgem5t1 & di/+ui% x1 z belong+ to ! und]/&+1 f ! relation :i* is produc$ accord+ to laws ( ! reproductive imag9ation 7:i* has only subjective validity71 ,i f9d t judgem5t is no?+ b ! mode ( br++ giv5 cognitions "u ! objective unit ( app]ception4 ,?is is pla9 f our use ( ! t]m ( relation is 9 judgem5ts1 9 ord] to di/+ui% ! objective unity ( giv5 repres5tations f ! subjective unity4 ,= ?is t]m indicates ! relation ( ^! repres5tations to ! orig9al app]ception1 & also _! necess>y unity1 ev5 al?\gh ! judgem5t is empirical1 !re=e cont+5t1 z 9 ! judgem5t3 8,all bodies are heavy40 ,i d n mean by ?is1 t ^! repres5tations d necess>ily belong to ea* o!r 9 empirical intuition1 b t by means ( ! necess>y unity ( appreciation !y belong to ea* o!r 9 ! syn!sis ( intuitions1 t is to say1 !y belong to ea* o!r accord+ to pr9ciples ( ! objective det]m9ation ( all our repres5tations1 9 s f> z cognition c arise f !m1 ^! pr9ciples be+ all d$uc$ f ! ma9 pr9ciple ( ! transc5d5tal unity ( app]ception4 ,9 ?is way alone c !re arise f ?is relation a judgem5t1 t is1 a relation :i* has objective validity1 & is p]fectly di/9ct f t relation ( ! v same repres5tations :i* has only subjective validity--a relation1 to wit1 :i* is produc$ accord+ to laws ( association4 ,accord+ to ^! laws1 ,i c\ld only say3 8,:5 ,i hold 9 my h& or c>ry a body1 ,i feel an impression ( weight02 b ,i c\ld n say3 8,x1 ! body1 is heavy02 = ?is is tantam\nt to say+ bo? ^! repres5tations are conjo9$ 9 ! object1 t is1 )\t di/9ction z to ! condition ( ! subject1 & d n m]ely /& toge!r 9 my p]ception1 h[ev] frequ5tly ! p]ceptive act may be repeat$4 ,all ,s5su\s ,intuitions are subject to ! ,categories1 z ,conditions "u :i* alone ! manifold ,cont5t ( !m c be unit$ 9 "o ,consci\sness #af ,! manifold cont5t giv5 9 a s5su\s intuition comes necess>ily "u ! orig9al syn!tical unity ( app]ception1 because !reby alone is ! unity ( intuition possible 7 #ac74 ,b t act ( ! und]/&+1 by :i* ! manifold cont5t ( giv5 repres5tations 7:e!r intuitions or conceptions7 is br\ght "u "o app]ception1 is ! logical function ( judgem5ts 7 #ae74 ,all ! manifold1 !re=e1 9 s f> z x is giv5 9 "o empirical intuition1 is det]m9$ 9 relation to "o ( ! logical functions ( judgem5t1 by means ( :i* x is br\ght into union 9 "o consci\sness4 ,n[ ! categories are no?+ else ?an ^! functions ( judgem5t s f> z ! manifold 9 a giv5 intuition is det]m9$ 9 relation to !m 7 #i74 ,consequ5tly1 ! manifold 9 a giv5 intuition is necess>ily subject to ! categories ( ! und]/&+4 ,obs]vation #ag ,! manifold 9 an intuition1 :i* ,i call m9e1 is repres5t$ by means ( ! syn!sis ( ! und]/&+1 z belong+ to ! necess>y unity ( self-consci\sness1 & ?is takes place by means ( ! category4#ai ,! category indicates accord+ly t ! empirical consci\sness ( a giv5 manifold 9 an intuition is subject to a pure self-consci\sness priori1 9 ! same mann] z an empirical intuition is subject to a pure s5su\s intuition1 :i* is also priori4 ,9 ! above proposition1 !n1 lies ! beg9n+ ( a d$uction ( ! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+4 ,n[1 z ! categories h _! orig9 9 ! und]/&+ alone1 indep5d5tly ( s5sibility1 ,i mu/ 9 my d$uction make ab/raction ( ! mode 9 :i* ! manifold ( an empirical intuition is giv51 9 ord] to fix my att5tion exclusively on ! unity :i* is br\ght by ! und]/&+ into ! intuition by means ( ! category4 ,9 :at foll[s 7 #bb71 x w be %[n1 f ! mode 9 :i* ! empirical intuition is giv5 9 ! faculty ( s5sibility1 t ! unity :i* belongs to x is no o!r ?an t :i* ! category 7accord+ to #af7 imposes on ! manifold 9 a giv5 intuition1 & ?us1 its priori validity 9 reg>d to all objects ( s5se be+ e/abli%$1 ! purpose ( our d$uction w be fully atta9$4 #ai ,! pro( ( ?is re/s on ! repres5t$ unity ( intuition1 by means ( :i* an object is giv51 & :i* always includes 9 itself a syn!sis ( ! manifold to be intuit$1 & also ! relation ( ?is latt] to unity ( app]ception4 ,b !re is "o ?+ 9 ! above demon/ration ( :i* ,i c\ld n make ab/raction1 namely1 t ! manifold to be intuit$ mu/ be giv5 previ\sly to ! syn!sis ( ! und]/&+1 & indep5d5tly ( x4 ,h[ ?is takes place rema9s "h undet]m9$4 ,= if ,i cogitate an und]/&+ :i* 0 itself intuitive 7z1 = example1 a div9e und]/&+ :i* %\ld n repres5t giv5 objects1 b by ^: repres5tation ! objects !mselves %\ld be giv5 or produc$71 ! categories w\ld possess no significance 9 relation to su* a faculty ( cognition4 ,!y are m]ely rules = an und]/&+1 ^: :ole p[] consi/s 9 ?\ght1 t is1 9 ! act ( submitt+ ! syn!sis ( ! manifold :i* is pres5t$ to x 9 intuition f a v diff]5t qu>t]1 to ! unity ( app]ception2 a faculty1 !re=e1 :i* cognizes no?+ p] se1 b only connects & arranges ! mat]ial ( cognition1 ! intuition1 namely1 :i* mu/ be pres5t$ to x by means ( ! object4 ,b to %[ reasons = ?is peculi> "* ( our und]/&+s1 t x produces unity ( app]ception priori only by means ( categories1 & a c]ta9 k9d & numb] !re(1 is z impossible z to expla9 :y we are end[$ ) precisely s _m functions ( judgem5t & no m1 or :y "t & space are ! only =ms ( our intuition4 ,9 ,cognition1 its ,application to ,objects ( ,exp]i5ce is ! only legitimate use ( ! ,category #ah ,to ?9k an object & to cognize an object are by no means ! same ?+4 ,9 cognition !re are two elem5ts3 fir/ly1 ! conception1 :]eby an object is cogitat$ 7! category72 &1 secondly1 ! intuition1 :]eby ! object is giv54 ,= suppos+ t to ! conception a correspond+ intuition c\ld n be giv51 x w\ld /ill be a ?\ght z reg>ds its =m1 b )\t any object1 & no cognition ( any?+ w\ld be possible by means ( x1 inasmu* z1 s f> z ,i knew1 !re exi/$ & c\ld exi/ no?+ to :i* my ?\ght c\ld be appli$4 ,n[ all intuition possible to u is s5su\s2 consequ5tly1 our ?\ght ( an object by means ( a pure conception ( ! und]/&+1 c become cognition = u only 9 s f> z ?is conception is appli$ to objects ( ! s5ses4 ,s5su\s intuition is ei!r pure intuition 7space & "t7 or empirical intuition--( t :i* is imm$iately repres5t$ 9 space & "t by means ( s5sation z real4 ,?r\gh ! det]m9ation ( pure intuition we obta9 priori cognitions ( objects1 z 9 ma!matics1 b only z reg>ds _! =m z ph5om5a2 :e!r !re c exi/ ?+s :i* mu/ be intuit$ 9 ?is =m is n !reby e/abli%$4 ,all ma!matical conceptions1 !re=e1 are n p] se cognition1 except 9 s f> z we presuppose t !re exi/ ?+s :i* c only be repres5t$ con=mably to ! =m ( our pure s5su\s intuition4 ,b ?+s 9 space & "t are giv5 only 9 s f> z !y are p]ceptions 7repres5tations accompani$ ) s5sation71 !re=e only by empirical repres5tation4 ,consequ5tly ! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 ev5 :5 !y are appli$ to intuitions priori 7z 9 ma!matics71 produce cognition only 9 s f> z ^! 7& !re=e ! conceptions ( ! und]/&+ by means ( !m7 c be appli$ to empirical intuitions4 ,consequ5tly ! categories d n1 ev5 by means ( pure intuition af=d u any cognition ( ?+s2 !y c only d s 9 s f> z !y c be appli$ to empirical intuition4 ,t is to say1 ! categories s]ve only to r5d] empirical cognition possible4 ,b ?is is :at we call exp]i5ce4 ,consequ5tly1 9 cognition1 _! application to objects ( exp]i5ce is ! only legitimate use ( ! categories4 #ai ,! =ego+ proposition is ( ! utmo/ importance1 = x det]m9es ! limits ( ! ex]cise ( ! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+ 9 reg>d to objects1 j z transc5d5tal /hetic det]m9$ ! limits ( ! ex]cise ( ! pure =m ( our s5su\s intuition4 ,space & "t1 z conditions ( ! possibility ( ! pres5tation ( objects to u1 are valid no fur!r ?an = objects ( s5se1 consequ5tly1 only = exp]i5ce4 ,beyond ^! limits !y repres5t to u no?+1 = !y belong only to s5se1 & h no reality ap>t f x4 ,! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+ are free f ?is limitation1 & ext5d to objects ( intuition 9 g5]al1 be ! intuition l or unlike to ours1 provid$ only x be s5su\s1 & n intellectual4 ,b ?is ext5sion ( conceptions beyond ! range ( our intuition is ( no advantage2 = !y are !n m]e empty conceptions ( objects1 z to ! possibility or impossibility ( ! exi/5ce ( :i* !y furni% u ) no means ( discov]y4 ,!y are m]e =ms ( ?\ght1 )\t objective reality1 because we h no intuition to :i* ! syn!tical unity ( app]ception1 :i* alone ! categories conta91 c\ld be appli$1 = ! purpose ( det]m9+ an object4 ,our s5su\s & empirical intuition c alone give !m significance & mean+4 ,if1 !n1 we suppose an object ( a non-s5su\s intuition to be giv5 we c 9 t case repres5t x by all ^? pr$icates :i* are impli$ 9 ! presupposition t no?+ app]ta9+ to s5su\s intuition belongs to x2 = example1 t x is n ext5d$1 or 9 space2 t its duration is n "t2 t 9 x no *ange 7! effect ( ! det]m9ations 9 "t7 is to be met )1 & s on4 ,b x is no prop] k if ,i m]ely indicate :at ! intuition ( ! object is n1 )\t be+ able to say :at is conta9$ 9 x1 = ,i h n %[n ! possibility ( an object to :i* my pure conception ( und]/&+ c\ld be applicable1 because ,i h n be5 able to furni% any intuition correspond+ to x1 b am only able to say t our intuition is n valid = x4 ,b ! mo/ important po9t is ?is1 t to a some?+ ( ?is k9d n "o category c be f\nd applicable4 ,take1 = example1 ! conception ( sub/ance1 t is1 some?+ t c exi/ z subject1 b nev] z m]e pr$icate2 9 reg>d to ?is conception ,i am q ignorant :e!r !re c really be any?+ to correspond to su* a det]m9ation ( ?\ght1 if empirical intuition did n af=d me ! occasion = its application4 ,b ( ?is m 9 ! sequel4 ,( ! ,application ( ! ,categories to ,objects ( ! ,s5ses 9 g5]al #bj ,! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+ apply to objects ( intuition 9 g5]al1 ?r\gh ! und]/&+ alone1 :e!r ! intuition be our own or "s o!r1 provid$ only x be s5su\s1 b are1 = ?is v reason1 m]e =ms ( ?\ght1 by means ( :i* alone no det]m9$ object c be cogniz$4 ,! syn!sis or conjunction ( ! manifold 9 ^! conceptions relates1 we h said1 only to ! unity ( app]ception1 & is = ?is reason ! gr\nd ( ! possibility ( priori cognition1 9 s f> z ?is cognition is dep5d5t on ! und]/&+4 ,?is syn!sis is1 !re=e1 n m]ely transc5d5tal1 b also purely intellectual4 ,b because a c]ta9 =m ( s5su\s intuition exi/s 9 ! m9d priori :i* re/s on ! receptivity ( ! repres5tative faculty 7s5sibility71 ! und]/&+1 z a spontaneity1 is able to det]m9e ! int]nal s5se by means ( ! div]sity ( giv5 repres5tations1 con=mably to ! syn!tical unity ( app]ception1 & ?us to cogitate ! syn!tical unity ( ! app]ception ( ! manifold ( s5su\s intuition priori1 z ! condition to :i* mu/ necess>ily be submitt$ all objects ( human intuition4 ,& 9 ?is mann] ! categories z m]e =ms ( ?\ght receive objective reality1 t is1 application to objects :i* are giv5 to u 9 intuition1 b t only z ph5om5a1 = x is only ( ph5om5a t we are capable ( priori intuition4 ,?is syn!sis ( ! manifold ( s5su\s intuition1 :i* is possible & necess>y priori1 may be call$ figurative 7syn!sis speciosa71 9 contradi/9ction to t :i* is cogitat$ 9 ! m]e category 9 reg>d to ! manifold ( an intuition 9 g5]al1 & is call$ connection or conjunction ( ! und]/&+ 7syn!sis intellectualis74 ,bo? are transc5d5tal1 n m]ely because !y !mselves prec$e priori all exp]i5ce1 b also because !y =m ! basis = ! possibility ( o!r cognition priori4 ,b ! figurative syn!sis1 :5 x has relation only to ! orig9ally syn!tical unity ( app]ception1 t is to ! transc5d5tal unity cogitat$ 9 ! categories1 mu/1 to be di/+ui%$ f ! purely intellectual conjunction1 be entitl$ ! transc5d5tal syn!sis ( imag9ation4 ,imag9ation is ! faculty ( repres5t+ an object ev5 )\t its pres5ce 9 intuition4 ,n[1 z all our intuition is s5su\s1 imag9ation1 by reason ( ! subjective condition "u :i* alone x c give a correspond+ intuition to ! conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 belongs to s5sibility4 ,b 9 s f> z ! syn!sis ( ! imag9ation is an act ( spontaneity1 :i* is det]m9ative1 & n1 l s5se1 m]ely det]m9able1 & :i* is consequ5tly able to det]m9e s5se priori1 accord+ to its =m1 con=mably to ! unity ( app]ception1 9 s f> is ! imag9ation a faculty ( det]m9+ s5sibility priori1 & its syn!sis ( intuitions accord+ to ! categories mu/ be ! transc5d5tal syn!sis ( ! imag9ation4 ,x is an op]ation ( ! und]/&+ on s5sibility1 & ! fir/ application ( ! und]/&+ to objects ( possible intuition1 & at ! same "t ! basis = ! ex]cise ( ! o!r functions ( t faculty4 ,z figurative1 x is di/+ui%$ f ! m]ely intellectual syn!sis1 :i* is produc$ by ! und]/&+ alone1 )\t ! aid ( imag9ation4 ,n[1 9 s f> z imag9ation is spontaneity1 ,i sometimes call x also ! productive imag9ation1 & di/+ui% x f ! reproductive1 ! syn!sis ( :i* is subject entirely to empirical laws1 ^? ( association1 namely1 & :i*1 !re=e1 contributes no?+ to ! explanation ( ! possibility ( priori cognition1 & = ?is reason belongs n to transc5d5tal philosophy1 b to psy*ology4 ,we h n[ arriv$ at ! prop] place = expla9+ ! p>adox :i* mu/ h /ruck e "o 9 our exposition ( ! int]nal s5se 7 #f71 namely--h[ ?is s5se repres5ts u to our own consci\sness1 only z we appe> to ourselves1 n z we are 9 ourselves1 because1 to wit1 we intuite ourselves only z we are inw>dly affect$4 ,n[ ?is appe>s to be contradictory1 inasmu* z we ?us /& 9 a passive relation to ourselves2 & !re=e 9 ! sy/ems ( psy*ology1 ! int]nal s5se is commonly held to be "o ) ! faculty ( app]ception1 :ile we1 on ! contr>y1 c>efully di/+ui% !m4 ,t :i* det]m9es ! int]nal s5se is ! und]/&+1 & its orig9al p[] ( conjo9+ ! manifold ( intuition1 t is1 ( br++ ?is "u an app]ception 7^u :i* re/s ! possibility ( ! und]/&+ itself74 ,n[1 z ! human und]/&+ is n 9 itself a faculty ( intuition1 & is unable to ex]cise su* a p[]1 9 ord] to conjo91 z x 71 ! manifold ( its own intuition1 ! syn!sis ( und]/&+ is1 consid]$ p] se1 no?+ b ! unity ( action1 ( :i*1 z su*1 x is self-consci\s1 ev5 ap>t f s5sibility1 by :i*1 moreov]1 x is able to det]m9e our int]nal s5se 9 respect ( ! manifold :i* may be pres5t$ to x accord+ to ! =m ( s5su\s intuition4 ,?us1 "u ! "n ( a transc5d5tal syn!sis ( imag9ation1 ! und]/&+ ex]cises an activity ^u ! passive subject1 ^: faculty x is2 & s we are "r 9 say+ t ! int]nal s5se is affect$ !reby4 ,app]ception & its syn!tical unity are by no means "o & ! same ) ! int]nal s5se4 ,! =m]1 z ! s\rce ( all our syn!tical conjunction1 applies1 "u ! "n ( ! categories1 to ! manifold ( intuition 9 g5]al1 prior to all s5su\s intuition ( objects4 ,! int]nal s5se1 on ! contr>y1 conta9s m]ely ! =m ( intuition1 b )\t any syn!tical conjunction ( ! manifold !re91 & consequ5tly does n conta9 any det]m9$ intuition1 :i* is possible only ?r\gh consci\sness ( ! det]m9ation ( ! manifold by ! transc5d5tal act ( ! imag9ation 7syn!tical influ5ce ( ! und]/&+ on ! int]nal s5se71 :i* ,i h nam$ figurative syn!sis4 ,?is we c inde$ always p]ceive 9 ourselves4 ,we _c cogitate a geometrical l9e )\t draw+ x 9 ?\ght1 nor a circle )\t describ+ x1 nor repres5t ! ?ree dim5sions ( space )\t draw+ ?ree l9es f ! same po9t p]p5dicul> to "o ano!r4 ,we _c ev5 cogitate "t1 unless1 9 draw+ a /raight l9e 7:i* is to s]ve z ! ext]nal figurative repres5tation ( "t71 we fix our att5tion on ! act ( ! syn!sis ( ! manifold1 :]eby we det]m9e successively ! int]nal s5se1 & ?us att5d also to ! succession ( ?is det]m9ation4 ,motion z an act ( ! subject 7n z a det]m9ation ( an object71#bj consequ5tly ! syn!sis ( ! manifold 9 space1 if we make ab/raction ( space & att5d m]ely to ! act by :i* we det]m9e ! int]nal s5se accord+ to its =m1 is t :i* produces ! conception ( succession4 ,! und]/&+1 !re=e1 does by no means f9d 9 ! int]nal s5se any su* syn!sis ( ! manifold1 b produces x1 9 t x affects ?is s5se4 ,at ! same "t1 h[ 8,i :o ?9k0 is di/9ct f ! 8i0 :i* intuites itself 7o!r modes ( intuition be+ cogitable z at lea/ possible71 & yet "o & ! same ) ?is latt] z ! same subject2 h[1 !re=e1 ,i am able to say3 8,i1 z an intellig5ce & ?9k+ subject1 cognize myself z an object ?\ght1 s f> z ,i am1 moreov]1 giv5 to myself 9 intuition--only1 l o!r ph5om5a1 n z ,i am 9 myself1 & z consid]$ by ! und]/&+1 b m]ely z ,i appe>0--is a "q t has 9 x nei!r m nor less difficulty ?an ! "q--8,h[ c ,i be an object to myself80 or ?is--8,h[ ,i c be an object ( my own intuition & int]nal p]ceptions80 ,b t su* mu/ be ! fact1 if we admit t space is m]ely a pure =m ( ! ph5om5a ( ext]nal s5se1 c be cle>ly prov$ by ! consid]ation t we _c repres5t "t1 :i* is n an object ( ext]nal intuition1 9 any o!r way ?an "u ! image ( a l9e1 :i* we draw 9 ?\ght1 a mode ( repres5tation )\t :i* we c\ld n cognize ! unity ( its dim5sion1 & also t we are necessitat$ to take our det]m9ation ( p]iods ( "t1 or ( po9ts ( "t1 = all our int]nal p]ceptions f ! *anges :i* we p]ceive 9 outw>d ?+s4 ,x foll[s t we mu/ arrange ! det]m9ations ( ! int]nal s5se1 z ph5om5a 9 "t1 exactly 9 ! same mann] z we arrange ^? ( ! ext]nal s5ses 9 space4 ,& consequ5tly1 if we grant1 respect+ ?is latt]1 t by means ( !m we "k objects only 9 s f> z we are affect$ ext]nally1 we mu/ also confess1 ) reg>d to ! int]nal s5se1 t by means ( x we intuite ourselves only z we are int]nally affect$ by ourselves2 9 o!r words1 z reg>ds int]nal intuition1 we cognize our own subject only z ph5om5on1 & n z x is 9 itself4#ba #bj ,motion ( an object 9 space does n belong to a pure sci5ce1 consequ5tly n to geometry2 because1 t a ?+ is movable _c be kn[n priori1 b only f exp]i5ce4 ,b motion1 consid]$ z ! description ( a space1 is a pure act ( ! successive syn!sis ( ! manifold 9 ext]nal intuition by means ( productive imag9ation1 & belongs n only to geometry1 b ev5 to transc5d5tal philosophy4 #ba ,i d n see :y s mu* difficulty %\ld be f\nd 9 admitt+ t our int]nal s5se is affect$ by ourselves4 ,e act ( att5tion exemplifies x4 ,9 su* an act ! und]/&+ det]m9es ! int]nal s5se by ! syn!tical conjunction :i* x cogitates1 con=mably to ! int]nal intuition :i* corresponds to ! manifold 9 ! syn!sis ( ! und]/&+4 ,h[ mu* ! m9d is usually affect$ !reby e "o w be able to p]ceive 9 himself4 #ba ,on ! o!r h&1 9 ! transc5d5tal syn!sis ( ! manifold cont5t ( repres5tations1 consequ5tly 9 ! syn!tical unity ( app]ception1 ,i am consci\s ( myself1 n z ,i appe> to myself1 nor z ,i am 9 myself1 b only t 8,i am40 ,?is repres5tation is a ?\ght1 n an intuition4 ,n[1 z 9 ord] to cognize ourselves1 9 addition to ! act ( ?9k+1 :i* subjects ! manifold ( e possible intuition to ! unity ( app]ception1 !re is necess>y a det]m9ate mode ( intuition1 :]eby ?is manifold is giv52 al?\gh my own exi/5ce is c]ta9ly n m]e ph5om5on 7mu* less m]e illusion71 ! det]m9ation ( my exi/5ce#bb ,c only take place con=mably to ! =m ( ! int]nal s5se1 accord+ to ! p>ticul> mode 9 :i* ! manifold :i* ,i conjo9 is giv5 9 int]nal intuition1 & ,i h !re=e no k ( myself z ,i am1 b m]ely z ,i appe> to myself4 ,! consci\sness ( self is ?us v f> f a k ( self1 9 :i* ,i d n use ! categories1 :]eby ,i cogitate an object1 by means ( ! conjunction ( ! manifold 9 "o app]ception4 ,9 ! same way z ,i require1 = ! sake ( ! cognition ( an object di/9ct f myself1 n only ! ?\ght ( an object 9 g5]al 79 ! category71 b also an intuition by :i* to det]m9e t g5]al conception1 9 ! same way d ,i require1 9 ord] to ! cognition ( myself1 n only ! consci\sness ( myself or ! ?\ght t ,i ?9k myself1 b 9 addition an intuition ( ! manifold 9 myself1 by :i* to det]m9e ?is ?\ght4 ,x is true t ,i exi/ z an intellig5ce :i* is consci\s only ( its faculty ( conjunction or syn!sis1 b subject$ 9 relation to ! manifold :i* ?is intellig5ce has to conjo9 to a limitative conjunction call$ ! int]nal s5se4 ,my intellig5ce 7t is1 ,i7 c r5d] t conjunction or syn!sis p]ceptible only accord+ to ! relations ( "t1 :i* are q beyond ! prop] sph]e ( ! conceptions ( ! und]/&+ & consequ5tly cognize itself 9 respect to an intuition 7:i* _c possibly be intellectual1 nor giv5 by ! und]/&+71 only z x appe>s to itself1 & n z x w\ld cognize itself1 if its intuition 7 intellectual4 #bb ,! 8,i ?9k0 expresses ! act ( det]m9+ my own exi/5ce4 ,my exi/5ce is ?us already giv5 by ! act ( consci\sness2 b ! mode 9 :i* ,i mu/ det]m9e my exi/5ce1 t is1 ! mode 9 :i* ,i mu/ place ! manifold belong+ to my exi/5ce1 is n !reby giv54 ,= ?is purpose intuition ( self is requir$1 & ?is intuition possesses a =m giv5 priori1 namely1 "t1 :i* is s5su\s1 & belongs to our receptivity ( ! det]m9able4 ,n[1 z ,i d n possess ano!r intuition ( self :i* gives ! det]m9+ 9 me 7( ! spontaneity ( :i* ,i am consci\s71 prior to ! act ( det]m9ation1 9 ! same mann] z "t gives ! det]m9able1 x is cle> t ,i am unable to det]m9e my own exi/5ce z t ( a spontane\s be+1 b ,i am only able to repres5t to myself ! spontaneity ( my ?\ght1 t is1 ( my det]m9ation1 & my exi/5ce rema9s ev] det]m9able 9 a purely s5su\s mann]1 t is to say1 l ! exi/5ce ( a ph5om5on4 ,b x is because ( ?is spontaneity t ,i call myself an intellig5ce4 ,transc5d5tal ,d$uction ( ! univ]sally possible employm5t 9 exp]i5ce ( ! ,pure ,conceptions ( ! ,und]/&+ #bb ,9 ! metaphysical d$uction1 ! priori orig9 ( categories 0 prov$ by _! complete accordance ) ! g5]al logical ( ?\ght2 9 ! transc5d5tal d$uction 0 exhibit$ ! possibility ( ! categories z priori cognitions ( objects ( an intuition 9 g5]al 7 #af & #ag74;,at pres5t we are ab\t to expla9 ! possibility ( cogniz+1 priori1 by means ( ! categories1 all objects :i* c possibly be pres5t$ to our s5ses1 n1 inde$1 accord+ to ! =m ( _! intuition1 b accord+ to ! laws ( _! conjunction or syn!sis1 & ?us1 z x 71 ( prescrib+ laws to nature & ev5 ( r5d]+ nature possible4 ,= if ! categories 7 inadequate to ?is task1 x w\ld n be evid5t to u :y ev]y?+ t is pres5t$ to our s5ses mu/ be subject to ^? laws :i* h an priori orig9 9 ! und]/&+ itself4 ,i premise t by ! t]m syn!sis ( appreh5sion ,i und]/& ! comb9ation ( ! manifold 9 an empirical intuition1 :]eby p]ception1 t is1 empirical consci\sness ( ! intuition 7z ph5om5on71 is possible4 ,we h priori =ms ( ! ext]nal & int]nal s5su\s intuition 9 ! repres5tations ( space & "t1 & to ^! mu/ ! syn!sis ( appreh5sion ( ! manifold 9 a ph5om5on be always com=mable1 because ! syn!sis itself c only take place accord+ to ^! =ms4 ,b space & "t are n m]ely =ms ( s5su\s intuition1 b intuitions !mselves 7:i* conta9 a manifold71 & !re=e conta9 priori ! det]m9ation ( ! unity ( ?is manifold4#bc 7,see ! ,transc5d5t /hetic47 ,!re=e is unity ( ! syn!sis ( ! manifold )\t or )9 u1 consequ5tly also a conjunction to :i* all t is to be repres5t$ z det]m9$ 9 space or "t mu/ correspond1 giv5 priori along ) 7n 97 ^! intuitions1 z ! condition ( ! syn!sis ( all appreh5sion ( !m4 ,b ?is syn!tical unity c be no o!r ?an t ( ! conjunction ( ! manifold ( a giv5 intuition 9 g5]al1 9 a primitive act ( consci\sness1 accord+ to ! categories1 b appli$ to our s5su\s intuition4 ,consequ5tly all syn!sis1 :]eby alone is ev5 p]ception possible1 is subject to ! categories4 ,&1 z exp]i5ce is cognition by means ( conjo9$ p]ceptions1 ! categories are conditions ( ! possibility ( exp]i5ce & are !re=e valid priori = all objects ( exp]i5ce4 #bc ,space repres5t$ z an object 7z geometry really requires x to be7 conta9s m ?an ! m]e =m ( ! intuition2 namely1 a comb9ation ( ! manifold giv5 accord+ to ! =m ( s5sibility into a repres5tation t c be intuit$2 s t ! =m ( ! intuition gives u m]ely ! manifold1 b ! =mal intuition gives unity ( repres5tation4 ,9 ! /hetic1 ,i reg>d$ ?is unity z belong+ entirely to s5sibility1 = ! purpose ( indicat+ t x antec$es all conceptions1 al?\gh x presupposes a syn!sis :i* does n belong to s5se1 ?r\gh :i* alone1 h[ev]1 all our conceptions ( space & "t are possible4 ,= z by means ( ?is unity alone 7! und]/&+ det]m9+ ! s5sibility7 space & "t are giv5 z intuitions1 x foll[s t ! unity ( ?is intuition priori belongs to space & "t1 & n to ! conception ( ! und]/&+ 7 #bj74 ,:51 !n1 = example1 ,i make ! empirical intuition ( a h\se by appreh5sion ( ! manifold conta9$ !re9 into a p]ception1 ! necess>y unity ( space & ( my ext]nal s5su\s intuition lies at ! f\ndation ( ?is act1 & ,i1 z x 71 draw ! =m ( ! h\se con=mably to ?is syn!tical unity ( ! manifold 9 space4 ,b ?is v syn!tical unity rema9s1 ev5 :5 ,i ab/ract ! =m ( space1 & has its seat 9 ! und]/&+1 & is 9 fact ! category ( ! syn!sis ( ! homog5e\s 9 an intuition2 t is to say1 ! category ( quantity1 to :i* ! a=esaid syn!sis ( appreh5sion1 t is1 ! p]ception1 mu/ be completely con=mable4#bd #bd ,9 ?is mann] x is prov$1 t ! syn!sis ( appreh5sion1 :i* is empirical1 mu/ necess>ily be con=mable to ! syn!sis ( app]ception1 :i* is intellectual1 & conta9$ priori 9 ! category4 ,x is "o & ! same spontaneity :i* at "o "t1 "u ! "n ( imag9ation1 at ano!r "u t ( und]/&+1 produces conjunction 9 ! manifold ( intuition4 ,to take ano!r example1 :5 ,i p]ceive ! freez+ ( wat]1 ,i appreh5d two /ates 7fluidity & solidity71 :i*1 z su*1 /& t[>d ea* o!r mutually 9 a relation ( "t4 ,b 9 ! "t1 :i* ,i place z an int]nal intuition1 at ! f\ndation ( ?is ph5om5on1 ,i repres5t to myself syn!tical unity ( ! manifold1 )\t :i* ! a=esaid relation c\ld n be giv5 9 an intuition z det]m9$ 79 reg>d to ! succession ( "t74 ,n[ ?is syn!tical unity1 z ! priori condition "u :i* ,i conjo9 ! manifold ( an intuition1 is1 if ,i make ab/raction ( ! p]man5t =m ( my int]nal intuition 7t is to say1 ( "t71 ! category ( cause1 by means ( :i*1 :5 appli$ to my s5sibility1 ,i det]m9e ev]y?+ t occurs accord+ to relations ( "t4 ,consequ5tly appreh5sion 9 su* an ev5t1 & ! ev5t itself1 z f> z reg>ds ! possibility ( its p]ception1 /&s "u ! conception ( ! relation ( cause & effect3 & s 9 all o!r cases4 ,categories are conceptions :i* prescribe laws priori to ph5om5a1 consequ5tly to nature z ! complex ( all ph5om5a 7natura mat]ialit] spectata74 ,& n[ ! "q arises--inasmu* z ^! categories are n d]iv$ f nature1 & d n regulate !mselves accord+ to h] z _! model 7= 9 t case !y w\ld be empirical7--h[ x is conceivable t nature mu/ regulate h]self accord+ to !m1 9 o!r words1 h[ ! categories c det]m9e priori ! syn!sis ( ! manifold ( nature1 & yet n d]ive _! orig9 f h]4 ,! foll[+ is ! solution ( ?is enigma4 ,x is n 9 ! lea/ m difficult to conceive h[ ! laws ( ! ph5om5a ( nature mu/ h>monize ) ! und]/&+ & ) its priori =m--t is1 its faculty ( conjo9+ ! manifold--?an x is to und]/& h[ ! ph5om5a !mselves mu/ correspond ) ! priori =m ( our s5su\s intuition4 ,= laws d n exi/ 9 ! ph5om5a any m ?an ! ph5om5a exi/ z ?+s 9 !mselves4 ,laws d n exi/ except by relation to ! subject 9 :i* ! ph5om5a inh]e1 9 s f> z x possesses und]/&+1 j z ph5om5a h no exi/5ce except by relation to ! same exi/+ subject 9 s f> z x has s5ses4 ,to ?+s z ?+s 9 !mselves1 con=mability to law mu/ necess>ily belong indep5d5tly ( an und]/&+ to cognize !m4 ,b ph5om5a are only repres5tations ( ?+s :i* are utt]ly unkn[n 9 respect to :at !y are 9 !mselves4 ,b z m]e repres5tations1 !y /& "u no law ( conjunction except t :i* ! conjo9+ faculty prescribes4 ,n[ t :i* conjo9s ! manifold ( s5su\s intuition is imag9ation1 a m5tal act to :i* und]/&+ contributes unity ( intellectual syn!sis1 & s5sibility1 manifoldness ( appreh5sion4 ,n[ z all possible p]ception dep5ds on ! syn!sis ( appreh5sion1 & ?is empirical syn!sis itself on ! transc5d5tal1 consequ5tly on ! categories1 x is evid5t t all possible p]ceptions1 & !re=e ev]y?+ t c atta9 to empirical consci\sness1 t is1 all ph5om5a ( nature1 mu/1 z reg>ds _! conjunction1 be subject to ! categories4 ,& nature 7consid]$ m]ely z nature 9 g5]al7 is dep5d5t on !m1 z ! orig9al gr\nd ( h] necess>y con=mability to law 7z natura =malit] spectata74 ,b ! pure faculty 7( ! und]/&+7 ( prescrib+ laws priori to ph5om5a by means ( m]e categories1 is n compet5t to en\nce o!r or m laws ?an ^? on :i* a nature 9 g5]al1 z a con=mability to law ( ph5om5a ( space & "t1 dep5ds4 ,p>ticul> laws1 inasmu* z !y conc]n empirically det]m9$ ph5om5a1 _c be entirely d$uc$ f pure laws1 al?\gh !y all /& "u !m4 ,exp]i5ce mu/ be sup]add$ 9 ord] to "k ^! p>ticul> laws2 b 9 reg>d to exp]i5ce 9 g5]al1 & ev]y?+ t c be cogniz$ z an object !re(1 ^! priori laws are our only rule & guide4 ,result ( ?is ,d$uction ( ! ,conceptions ( ! ,und]/&+ #bc ,we _c ?9k any object except by means ( ! categories2 we _c cognize any ?\ght except by means ( intuitions correspond+ to ^! conceptions4 ,n[ all our intuitions are s5su\s1 & our cognition1 9 s f> z ! object ( x is giv51 is empirical4 ,b empirical cognition is exp]i5ce2 consequ5tly no priori cognition is possible = u1 except ( objects ( possible exp]i5ce4#be #be ,le/ my read]s %\ld /umble at ?is ass]tion1 & ! conclusions t may be too ra%ly drawn f x1 ,i mu/ rem9d !m t ! categories 9 ! act ( ?\ght are by no means limit$ by ! conditions ( our s5su\s intuition1 b h an unb\nd$ sph]e ( action4 ,x is only ! cognition ( ! object ( ?\ght1 ! det]m9+ ( ! object1 :i* requires intuition4 ,9 ! abs5ce ( intuition1 our ?\ght ( an object may /ill h true & useful consequ5ces 9 reg>d to ! ex]cise ( reason by ! subject4 ,b z ?is ex]cise ( reason is n always direct$ on ! det]m9ation ( ! object1 9 o!r words1 on cognition !re(1 b also on ! det]m9ation ( ! subject & its volition1 ,i d n int5d to treat ( x 9 ?is place4 ,b ?is cognition1 :i* is limit$ to objects ( exp]i5ce1 is n = t reason d]iv$ entirely1 f1 exp]i5ce1 b--& ?is is ass]t$ ( ! pure intuitions & ! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+--!re are1 unque/ionably1 elem5ts ( cognition1 :i* exi/ 9 ! m9d priori4 ,n[ !re are only two ways 9 :i* a necess>y h>mony ( exp]i5ce ) ! conceptions ( its objects c be cogitat$4 ,ei!r exp]i5ce makes ^! conceptions possible1 or ! conceptions make exp]i5ce possible4 ,! =m] ( ^! /atem5ts w n hold good ) respect to ! categories 7nor 9 reg>d to pure s5su\s intuition71 = !y are priori conceptions1 & !re=e indep5d5t ( exp]i5ce4 ,! ass]tion ( an empirical orig9 w\ld attribute to !m a sort ( g5]atio aequivoca4 ,consequ5tly1 no?+ rema9s b to adopt ! second alt]native 7:i* pres5ts u ) a sy/em1 z x 71 ( ! epig5esis ( pure reason71 namely1 t on ! "p ( ! und]/&+ ! categories d conta9 ! gr\nds ( ! possibility ( all exp]i5ce4 ,b ) respect to ! que/ions h[ !y make exp]i5ce possible1 & :at are ! pr9ciples ( ! possibility !re( ) :i* !y pres5t u 9 _! application to ph5om5a1 ! foll[+ section on ! transc5d5tal ex]cise ( ! faculty ( judgem5t w in=m ! read]4 ,x is q possible t someone may propose a species ( pre=mation-sy/em ( pure reason--a middle way betwe5 ! two--to wit1 t ! categories are nei!r innate & fir/ priori pr9ciples ( cognition1 nor d]iv$ f exp]i5ce1 b are m]ely subjective aptitudes = ?\ght implant$ 9 u contemporane\sly ) our exi/5ce1 :i* 7 s ord]$ & dispos$ by our ,creator1 t _! ex]cise p]fectly h>monizes ) ! laws ( nature :i* regulate exp]i5ce4 ,n[1 n to m5tion t ) su* an hypo!sis x is impossible to say at :at po9t we mu/ /op 9 ! employm5t ( pr$et]m9$ aptitudes1 ! fact t ! categories w\ld 9 ?is case entirely lose t "* ( necessity :i* is ess5tially involv$ 9 ! v conception ( !m1 is a conclusive objection to x4 ,! conception ( cause1 = example1 :i* expresses ! necessity ( an effect "u a presuppos$ condition1 w\ld be false1 if x re/$ only ^u su* an arbitr>y subjective necessity ( unit+ c]ta9 empirical repres5tations accord+ to su* a rule ( relation4 ,i c\ld n !n say--8,! effect is connect$ ) its cause 9 ! object 7t is1 necess>ily710 b only1 8,i am s con/itut$ t ,i c ?9k ?is repres5tation z s connect$1 & n o!rwise40 ,n[ ?is is j :at ! sceptic wants4 ,= 9 ?is case1 all our k1 dep5d+ on ! suppos$ objective validity ( our judgem5t1 is no?+ b m]e illusion2 nor w\ld !re be want+ p :o w\ld d5y any su* subjective necessity 9 respect to !mselves1 ?\gh !y mu/ feel x4 ,at all ev5ts1 we c\ld n dispute ) any "o on t :i* m]ely dep5ds on ! mann] 9 :i* 8 subject is organiz$4 ,%ort view ( ! above ,d$uction4 ,! =ego+ d$uction is an exposition ( ! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+ 7& ) !m ( all !oretical priori cognition71 z pr9ciples ( ! possibility ( exp]i5ce1 b ( exp]i5ce z ! det]m9ation ( all ph5om5a 9 space & "t 9 g5]al--( exp]i5ce1 f9ally1 f ! pr9ciple ( ! orig9al syn!tical unity ( app]ception1 z ! =m ( ! und]/&+ 9 relation to "t & space z orig9al =ms ( s5sibility4 ,i consid] ! division by p>agraphs to be necess>y only up to ?is po9t1 because we _h to treat ( ! elem5t>y conceptions4 ,z we n[ proce$ to ! exposition ( ! employm5t ( ^!1 ,i %all n designate ! *apt]s 9 ?is mann] any fur!r4 ,,book ,,ii4 ,analytic ( ,pr9ciples ,g5]al logic is con/ruct$ ^u a plan :i* co9cides exactly ) ! division ( ! high] faculties ( cognition4 ,^! are1 und]/&+1 judgem5t1 & reason4 ,?is sci5ce1 accord+ly1 treats 9 its analytic ( conceptions1 judgem5ts1 & conclusions 9 exact correspond5ce ) ! functions & ord] ( ^? m5tal p[]s :i* we include g5]ally "u ! g5]ic d5om9ation ( und]/&+4 ,z ?is m]ely =mal logic makes ab/raction ( all cont5t ( cognition1 :e!r pure or empirical1 & occupies itself ) ! m]e =m ( ?\ght 7discursive cognition71 x mu/ conta9 9 its analytic a canon = reason4 ,= ! =m ( reason has its law1 :i*1 )\t tak+ into consid]ation ! p>ticul> nature ( ! cognition ab\t :i* x is employ$1 c be discov]$ priori1 by ! simple analysis ( ! action ( reason into its mom5ta4 ,transc5d5tal logic1 limit$ z x is to a det]m9ate cont5t1 t ( pure priori cognitions1 to wit1 _c imitate g5]al logic 9 ?is division4 ,= x is evid5t t ! transc5d5tal employm5t ( reason is n objectively valid1 & !re=e does n belong to ! logic ( tru? 7t is1 to analytic71 b z a logic ( illusion1 occupies a p>ticul> dep>tm5t 9 ! s*ola/ic sy/em "u ! "n ( transc5d5tal dialectic4 ,und]/&+ & judgem5t accord+ly possess 9 transc5d5tal logic a canon ( objectively valid1 & !re=e true ex]cise1 & are compreh5d$ 9 ! analytical dep>tm5t ( t logic4 ,b reason1 9 h] endeav\rs to arrive by priori means at "s true /atem5t conc]n+ objects & to ext5d cognition beyond ! b\nds ( possible exp]i5ce1 is altoge!r dialectic1 & h] illusory ass]tions _c be con/ruct$ into a canon su* z an analytic ought to conta94 ,accord+ly1 ! analytic ( pr9ciples w be m]ely a canon = ! faculty ( judgem5t1 = ! in/ruction ( ?is faculty 9 its application to ph5om5a ( ! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 :i* conta9 ! necess>y condition = ! e/abli%m5t ( priori laws4 ,on ?is acc\nt1 al?\gh ! subject ( ! foll[+ *apt]s is ! especial pr9ciples ( und]/&+1 ,i %all make use ( ! t]m ,doctr9e ( ! faculty ( judgem5t1 9 ord] to def9e m p>ticul>ly my pres5t purpose4 ,,introduction4 ,( ! ,transc5d5tal ,faculty ( judgem5t 9 ,g5]al ,if und]/&+ 9 g5]al be def9$ z ! faculty ( laws or rules1 ! faculty ( judgem5t may be t]m$ ! faculty ( subsumption "u ^! rules2 t is1 ( di/+ui%+ :e!r ?is or t does or does n /& "u a giv5 rule 7casus datae legis74 ,g5]al logic conta9s no directions or precepts = ! faculty ( judgem5t1 nor c x conta9 any su*4 ,= z x makes ab/raction ( all cont5t ( cognition1 no duty is left = x1 except t ( expos+ analytically ! m]e =m ( cognition 9 conceptions1 judgem5ts1 & conclusions1 & ( !reby e/abli%+ =mal rules = all ex]cise ( ! und]/&+4 ,n[ if ?is logic wi%$ to give "s g5]al direction h[ we %\ld subsume "u ^! rules1 t is1 h[ we %\ld di/+ui% :e!r ?is or t did or did n /& "u !m1 ?is aga9 c\ld n be done o!rwise ?an by means ( a rule4 ,b ?is rule1 precisely because x is a rule1 requires = itself direction f ! faculty ( judgem5t4 ,?us1 x is evid5t t ! und]/&+ is capable ( be+ in/ruct$ by rules1 b t ! judgem5t is a peculi> tal5t1 :i* does n1 & _c require tuition1 b only ex]cise4 ,?is faculty is !re=e ! specific quality ( ! s-call$ "m wit1 ! want ( :i* no s*ola/ic discipl9e c comp5sate4 ,= al?\gh education may furni%1 &1 z x 71 engraft ^u a limit$ und]/&+ rules borr[$ f o!r m9ds1 yet ! p[] ( employ+ ^! rules correctly mu/ belong to ! pupil himself2 & no rule :i* we c prescribe to him ) ?is purpose is1 9 ! abs5ce or defici5cy ( ?is gift ( nature1 secure f misuse4#bf ,a physician !re=e1 a judge or a /atesman1 may h 9 8 head _m admirable pa?ological1 juridical1 or political rules1 9 a degree t may enable him to be a pr(\nd tea*] 9 8 p>ticul> sci5ce1 & yet 9 ! application ( ^! rules he may v possibly blund]--ei!r because he is want+ 9 natural judgem5t 7?\gh n 9 und]/&+7 &1 :il/ he c compreh5d ! g5]al 9 ab/racto1 _c di/+ui% :e!r a p>ticul> case 9 concreto ought to rank "u ! =m]2 or because 8 faculty ( judgem5t has n be5 suffici5tly ex]cis$ by examples & real practice4 ,inde$1 ! gr& & only use ( examples1 is to %>p5 ! judgem5t4 ,= z reg>ds ! correctness & precision ( ! insight ( ! und]/&+1 examples are commonly injuri\s r ?an o!rwise1 because1 z casus 9 t]m9is !y seldom adequately fulfil ! conditions ( ! rule4 ,besides1 !y (t5 weak5 ! p[] ( our und]/&+ to appreh5d rules or laws 9 _! univ]sality1 indep5d5tly ( p>ticul> circum/ances ( exp]i5ce2 & h5ce1 accu/om u to employ !m m z =mulae ?an z pr9ciples4 ,examples are ?us ! g-c>t ( ! judgem5t1 :i* he :o is naturally defici5t 9 t faculty _c af=d to disp5se )4 #bf ,defici5cy 9 judgem5t is prop]ly t :i* is call$ /upidity2 & = su* a fail+ we "k no rem$y4 ,a dull or n>r[-m9d$ p]son1 to :om no?+ is want+ b a prop] degree ( und]/&+1 may be improv$ by tuition1 ev5 s f> z to des]ve ! epi!t ( le>n$4 ,b z su* p]sons frequ5tly lab\r "u a defici5cy 9 ! faculty ( judgem5t1 x is n uncommon to f9d m5 extremely le>n$ :o 9 ! application ( _! sci5ce betray a lam5table degree ?is irrem$iable want4 ,b al?\gh g5]al logic _c give directions to ! faculty ( judgem5t1 ! case is v diff]5t z reg>ds transc5d5tal logic1 insomu* t x appe>s to be ! especial duty ( ! latt] to secure & direct1 by means ( det]m9ate rules1 ! faculty ( judgem5t 9 ! employm5t ( ! pure und]/&+4 ,=1 z a doctr9e1 t is1 z an endeav\r to enl>ge ! sph]e ( ! und]/&+ 9 reg>d to pure priori cognitions1 philosophy is worse ?an useless1 s9ce f all ! attempts hi!rto made1 little or no gr\nd has be5 ga9$4 ,b1 z a critique1 9 ord] to gu>d aga9/ ! mi/akes ( ! faculty ( judgem5t 7lapsus judicii7 9 ! employm5t ( ! few pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+ :i* we possess1 al?\gh its use is 9 ?is case purely negative1 philosophy is call$ ^u to apply all its acut5ess & p5etration4 ,b transc5d5tal philosophy has ?is peculi>ity1 t besides indicat+ ! rule1 or r ! g5]al condition = rules1 :i* is giv5 9 ! pure conception ( ! und]/&+1 x c1 at ! same "t1 indicate priori ! case to :i* ! rule mu/ be appli$4 ,! cause ( ! sup]iority :i*1 9 ?is respect1 transc5d5tal philosophy possesses above all o!r sci5ces except ma!matics1 lies 9 ?is3 x treats ( conceptions :i* mu/ relate priori to _! objects1 ^: objective validity consequ5tly _c be demon/rat$ po/]iori1 & is1 at ! same "t1 "u ! obligation ( pres5t+ 9 g5]al b suffici5t te/s1 ! conditions "u :i* objects c be giv5 9 h>mony ) ^? conceptions2 o!rwise !y w\ld be m]e logical =ms1 )\t cont5t1 & n pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+4 ,our transc5d5tal doctr9e ( ! faculty ( judgem5t w conta9 two *apt]s4 ,! fir/ w treat ( ! s5su\s condition "u :i* alone pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+ c be employ$--t is1 ( ! s*ematism ( ! pure und]/&+4 ,! second w treat ( ^? syn!tical judgem5ts :i* are d]iv$ priori f pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+ "u ^? conditions1 & :i* lie priori at ! f\ndation ( all o!r cognitions1 t is to say1 x w treat ( ! pr9ciples ( ! pure und]/&+4 ,,transc5d5tal ,,doctr9e ,,( ,,! ,,faculty ,,( ,,judgem5t ,,or1 ,,analytic ,,( ,,pr9ciples ,*apt] ,i4 ,( ! ,s*ematism at ( ! ,pure ,conceptions ( ! ,und]/&+ ,9 all subsumptions ( an object "u a conception1 ! repres5tation ( ! object mu/ be homog5e\s ) ! conception2 9 o!r words1 ! conception mu/ conta9 t :i* is repres5t$ 9 ! object to be subsum$ "u x4 ,= ?is is ! mean+ ( ! expression3 8,an object is conta9$ "u a conception40 ,?us ! empirical conception ( a plate is homog5e\s ) ! pure geometrical conception ( a circle1 inasmu* z ! r\ndness :i* is cogitat$ 9 ! =m] is intuit$ 9 ! latt]4 ,b pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 :5 comp>$ ) empirical intuitions1 or ev5 ) s5su\s intuitions 9 g5]al1 are q het]og5e\s1 & nev] c be discov]$ 9 any intuition4 ,h[ !n is ! subsumption ( ! latt] "u ! =m]1 & consequ5tly ! application ( ! categories to ph5om5a1 possible8--,= x is impossible to say1 = example3 8,causality c be intuit$ ?r\gh ! s5ses & is conta9$ 9 ! ph5om5on40--,?is natural & important "q =ms ! real cause ( ! necessity ( a transc5d5tal doctr9e ( ! faculty ( judgem5t1 ) ! purpose1 to wit1 ( %[+ h[ pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+ c be appli$ to ph5om5a4 ,9 all o!r sci5ces1 :]e ! conceptions by :i* ! object is ?\ght 9 ! g5]al are n s diff]5t & het]og5e\s f ^? :i* repres5t ! object 9 concreto--z x is giv51 x is q unnecess>y to in/itute any special inquiries conc]n+ ! application ( ! =m] to ! latt]4 ,n[ x is q cle> t !re mu/ be "s ?ird ?+1 :i* on ! "o side is homog5e\s ) ! category1 & ) ! ph5om5on on ! o!r1 & s makes ! application ( ! =m] to ! latt] possible4 ,?is m$iat+ repres5tation mu/ be pure 7)\t any empirical cont5t71 & yet mu/ on ! "o side be intellectual1 on ! o!r s5su\s4 ,su* a repres5tation is ! transc5d5tal s*ema4 ,! conception ( ! und]/&+ conta9s pure syn!tical unity ( ! manifold 9 g5]al4 ,"t1 z ! =mal condition ( ! manifold ( ! int]nal s5se1 consequ5tly ( ! conjunction ( all repres5tations1 conta9s priori a manifold 9 ! pure intuition4 ,n[ a transc5d5tal det]m9ation ( "t is s f> homog5e\s ) ! category1 :i* con/itutes ! unity !re(1 t x is univ]sal & re/s ^u a rule priori4 ,on ! o!r h&1 x is s f> homog5e\s ) ! ph5om5on1 inasmu* z "t is conta9$ 9 e empirical repres5tation ( ! manifold4 ,?us an application ( ! category to ph5om5a becomes possible1 by means ( ! transc5d5tal det]m9ation ( "t1 :i*1 z ! s*ema ( ! conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 m$iates ! subsumption ( ! latt] "u ! =m]4 ,aft] :at has be5 prov$ 9 our d$uction ( ! categories1 no "o1 x is to be hop$1 c hesitate z to ! prop] decision ( ! "q1 :e!r ! employm5t ( ^! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+ ought to be m]ely empirical or also transc5d5tal2 9 o!r words1 :e!r ! categories1 z conditions ( a possible exp]i5ce1 relate priori solely to ph5om5a1 or :e!r1 z conditions ( ! possibility ( ?+s 9 g5]al1 _! application c be ext5d$ to objects z ?+s 9 !mselves4 ,= we h !re se5 t conceptions are q impossible1 & utt]ly )\t signification1 unless ei!r to !m1 or at lea/ to ! elem5ts ( :i* !y consi/1 an object be giv52 & t1 consequ5tly1 !y _c possibly apply to objects z ?+s 9 !mselves )\t reg>d to ! "q :e!r & h[ ^! may be giv5 to u2 &1 fur!r1 t ! only mann] 9 :i* objects c be giv5 to u is by means ( ! modification ( our s5sibility2 &1 f9ally1 t pure priori conceptions1 9 addition to ! function ( ! und]/&+ 9 ! category1 mu/ conta9 priori =mal conditions ( s5sibility 7( ! int]nal s5se1 namely71 :i* aga9 conta9 ! g5]al condition "u :i* alone ! category c be appli$ to any object4 ,?is =mal & pure condition ( s5sibility1 to :i* ! conception ( ! und]/&+ is re/rict$ 9 its employm5t1 we %all "n ! s*ema ( ! conception ( ! und]/&+1 & ! proc$ure ( ! und]/&+ ) ^! s*emata we %all call ! s*ematism ( ! pure und]/&+4 ,! s*ema is1 9 itself1 always a m]e product ( ! imag9ation4 ,b1 z ! syn!sis ( imag9ation has = its aim no s+le intuition1 b m]ely unity 9 ! det]m9ation ( s5sibility1 ! s*ema is cle>ly di/+ui%able f ! image4 ,?us1 if ,i place five po9ts "o aft] ano!r4444 ?is is an image ( ! numb] five4 ,on ! o!r h&1 if ,i only ?9k a numb] 9 g5]al1 :i* may be ei!r five or a hundr$1 ?is ?\ght is r ! repres5tation ( a me?od ( repres5t+ 9 an image a sum 7e4g41 a ?\s&7 9 con=mity ) a conception1 ?an ! image itself1 an image :i* ,i %\ld f9d "s little difficulty 9 review+1 & comp>+ ) ! conception4 ,n[ ?is repres5tation ( a g5]al proc$ure ( ! imag9ation to pres5t its image to a conception1 ,i call ! s*ema ( ?is conception4 ,9 tru?1 x is n images ( objects1 b s*emata1 :i* lie at ! f\ndation ( our pure s5su\s conceptions4 ,no image c\ld ev] be adequate to our conception ( a triangle 9 g5]al4 ,= ! g5]alness ( ! conception x nev] c\ld atta9 to1 z ?is includes "u itself all triangles1 :e!r "r-angl$1 acute-angl$1 etc41 :il/ ! image w\ld always be limit$ to a s+le "p ( ?is sph]e4 ,! s*ema ( ! triangle c exi/ n[h]e else ?an 9 ?\ght1 & x indicates a rule ( ! syn!sis ( ! imag9ation 9 reg>d to pure figures 9 space4 ,/ill less is an object ( exp]i5ce1 or an image ( ! object1 ev] to ! empirical conception4 ,on ! contr>y1 ! conception always relates imm$iately to ! s*ema ( ! imag9ation1 z a rule = ! det]m9ation ( our intuition1 9 con=mity ) a c]ta9 g5]al conception4 ,! conception ( a dog indicates a rule1 accord+ to :i* my imag9ation c del9eate ! figure ( a f\r-foot$ animal 9 g5]al1 )\t be+ limit$ to any p>ticul> individual =m :i* exp]i5ce pres5ts to me1 or inde$ to any possible image t ,i c repres5t to myself 9 concreto4 ,?is s*ematism ( our und]/&+ 9 reg>d to ph5om5a & _! m]e =m1 is an art1 hidd5 9 ! dep?s ( ! human s\l1 ^: true modes ( action we %all only ) difficulty discov] & unveil4 ,?us mu* only c we say3 8,! image is a product ( ! empirical faculty ( ! productive imag9ation--! s*ema ( s5su\s conceptions 7( figures 9 space1 = example7 is a product1 &1 z x 71 a monogram ( ! pure imag9ation priori1 :]eby & accord+ to :i* images fir/ become possible1 :i*1 h[ev]1 c be connect$ ) ! conception only m$iately by means ( ! s*ema :i* !y indicate1 & are 9 !mselves nev] fully adequate to x40 ,on ! o!r h&1 ! s*ema ( a pure conception ( ! und]/&+ is some?+ t _c be r$uc$ into any image--x is no?+ else ?an ! pure syn!sis express$ by ! category1 con=mably1 to a rule ( unity accord+ to conceptions4 ,x is a transc5d5tal product ( ! imag9ation1 a product :i* conc]ns ! det]m9ation ( ! int]nal s5se1 accord+ to conditions ( its =m 7"t7 9 respect to all repres5tations1 9 s f> z ^! repres5tations mu/ be conjo9$ priori 9 "o conception1 con=mably to ! unity ( app]ception4 ,)\t ent]+ ^u a dry & t$i\s analysis ( ! ess5tial requisites ( transc5d5tal s*emata ( ! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 we %all r proce$ at once to give an explanation ( !m accord+ to ! ord] ( ! categories1 & 9 connection !re)4 ,= ! ext]nal s5se ! pure image ( all quantities 7quantorum7 is space2 ! pure image ( all objects ( s5se 9 g5]al1 is "t4 ,b ! pure s*ema ( quantity 7quantitatis7 z a conception ( ! und]/&+1 is numb]1 a repres5tation :i* compreh5ds ! successive addition ( "o to "o 7homog5e\s quantities74 ,?us1 numb] is no?+ else ?an ! unity ( ! syn!sis ( ! manifold 9 a homog5e\s intuition1 by means ( my g5]at+ "t itself 9 my appreh5sion ( ! intuition4 ,reality1 9 ! pure conception ( ! und]/&+1 is t :i* corresponds to a s5sation 9 g5]al2 t1 consequ5tly1 ! conception ( :i* indicates a be+ 79 "t74 ,negation is t ! conception ( :i* repres5ts a n-be+ 79 "t74 ,! opposition ( ^! two consi/s !re=e 9 ! diff]5ce ( "o & ! same "t1 z a "t fill$ or a "t empty4 ,n[ z "t is only ! =m ( intuition1 consequ5tly ( objects z ph5om5a1 t :i* 9 objects corresponds to s5sation is ! transc5d5tal matt] ( all objects z ?+s 9 !mselves 7,sa*heit1 reality74 ,n[ e s5sation has a degree or quantity by :i* x c fill "t1 t is to say1 ! int]nal s5se 9 respect ( ! repres5tation ( an object1 m or less1 until x vani%es into no?+ 7 #j negatio74 ,?us !re is a relation & connection betwe5 reality & negation1 or r a transition f ! =m] to ! latt]1 :i* makes e reality repres5table to u z a quantum2 & ! s*ema ( a reality z ! quantity ( some?+ 9 s f> z x fills "t1 is exactly ?is cont9u\s & uni=m g5]ation ( ! reality 9 "t1 z we desc5d 9 "t f ! s5sation :i* has a c]ta9 degree1 d[n to ! vani%+ !re(1 or gradually asc5d f negation to ! quantity !re(4 ,! s*ema ( sub/ance is ! p]man5ce ( ! real 9 "t2 t is1 ! repres5tation ( x z a sub/ratum ( ! empirical det]m9ation ( "t2 a sub/ratum :i* !re=e rema9s1 :il/ all else *anges4 7,"t passes n1 b 9 x passes ! exi/5ce ( ! *angeable4 ,to "t1 !re=e1 :i* is itself un*angeable & p]man5t1 corresponds t :i* 9 ! ph5om5on is un*angeable 9 exi/5ce1 t is1 sub/ance1 & x is only by x t ! succession & coexi/5ce ( ph5om5a c be det]m9$ 9 reg>d to "t47 ,! s*ema ( cause & ( ! causality ( a ?+ is ! real :i*1 :5 posit$1 is always foll[$ by some?+ else4 ,x consi/s1 !re=e1 9 ! succession ( ! manifold1 9 s f> z t succession is subject$ to a rule4 ,! s*ema ( community 7reciprocity ( action & reaction71 or ! reciprocal causality ( sub/ances 9 respect ( _! accid5ts1 is ! coexi/5ce ( ! det]m9ations ( ! "o ) ^? ( ! o!r1 accord+ to a g5]al rule4 ,! s*ema ( possibility is ! accordance ( ! syn!sis ( diff]5t repres5tations ) ! conditions ( "t 9 g5]al 7z1 = example1 opposites _c exi/ toge!r at ! same "t 9 ! same ?+1 b only aft] ea* o!r71 & is !re=e ! det]m9ation ( ! repres5tation ( a ?+ at any "t4 ,! s*ema ( reality is exi/5ce 9 a det]m9$ "t4 ,! s*ema ( necessity is ! exi/5ce ( an object 9 all "t4 ,x is cle>1 f all ?is1 t ! s*ema ( ! category ( quantity conta9s & repres5ts ! g5]ation 7syn!sis7 ( "t itself1 9 ! successive appreh5sion ( an object2 ! s*ema ( quality ! syn!sis ( s5sation ) ! repres5tation ( "t1 or ! fill+ up ( "t2 ! s*ema ( relation ! relation ( p]ceptions to ea* o!r 9 all "t 7t is1 accord+ to a rule ( ! det]m9ation ( "t73 & f9ally1 ! s*ema ( modality & its categories1 "t itself1 z ! correlative ( ! det]m9ation ( an object--:e!r x does belong to "t1 & h[4 ,! s*emata1 !re=e1 are no?+ b priori det]m9ations ( "t accord+ to rules1 & ^!1 9 reg>d to all possible objects1 foll[+ ! arrangem5t ( ! categories1 relate to ! s]ies 9 "t1 ! cont5t 9 "t1 ! ord] 9 "t1 & f9ally1 to ! complex or totality 9 "t4 ,h5ce x is app>5t t ! s*ematism ( ! und]/&+1 by means ( ! transc5d5tal syn!sis ( ! imag9ation1 am\nts to no?+ else ?an ! unity ( ! manifold ( intuition 9 ! int]nal s5se1 & ?us indirectly to ! unity ( app]ception1 z a function correspond+ to ! int]nal s5se 7a receptivity74 ,?us1 ! s*emata ( ! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+ are ! true & only conditions :]eby our und]/&+ receives an application to objects1 & consequ5tly significance4 ,f9ally1 !re=e1 ! categories are only capable ( empirical use1 inasmu* z !y s]ve m]ely to subject ph5om5a to ! univ]sal rules ( syn!sis1 by means ( an priori necess>y unity 7on acc\nt ( ! necess>y union ( all consci\sness 9 "o orig9al app]ception72 & s to r5d] !m susceptible ( a complete connection 9 "o exp]i5ce4 ,b )9 ?is :ole ( possible exp]i5ce lie all our cognitions1 & 9 ! univ]sal relation to ?is exp]i5ce consi/s transc5d5tal tru?1 :i* antec$es all empirical tru?1 & r5d]s ! latt] possible4 ,x is1 h[ev]1 evid5t at fir/ sight1 t al?\gh ! s*emata ( s5sibility are ! sole ag5ts 9 realiz+ ! categories1 !y d1 nev]!less1 also re/rict !m1 t is1 !y limit ! categories by conditions :i* lie beyond ! sph]e ( und]/&+--namely1 9 s5sibility4 ,h5ce ! s*ema is prop]ly only ! ph5om5on1 or ! s5su\s conception ( an object 9 h>mony ) ! category4 7,num]us e/ quantitas pha5om5on--s5satio realitas pha5om5on2 con/ans et p]durabile r]um sub/antia pha5om5on--aet]nitas1 necessitas1 pha5om5a1 etc47 ,n[1 if we remove a re/rictive condition1 we !reby amplify1 x appe>s1 ! =m]ly limit$ conception4 ,9 ?is way1 ! categories 9 _! pure signification1 free f all conditions ( s5sibility1 ought to be valid ( ?+s z !y are1 & n1 z ! s*emata repres5t !m1 m]ely z !y appe>2 & consequ5tly ! categories mu/ h a significance f> m ext5d$1 & :olly indep5d5t ( all s*emata4 ,9 tru?1 !re does always rema9 to ! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 aft] ab/ract+ e s5su\s condition1 a value & significance1 :i* is1 h[ev]1 m]ely logical4 ,b 9 ?is case1 no object is giv5 !m1 & !re=e !y h no mean+ suffici5t to af=d u a conception ( an object4 ,! notion ( sub/ance1 = example1 if we leave out ! s5su\s det]m9ation ( p]man5ce1 w\ld mean no?+ m ?an a some?+ :i* c be cogitat$ z subject1 )\t ! possibility ( becom+ a pr$icate to any?+ else4 ,( ?is repres5tation ,i c make no?+1 inasmu* z x does n indicate to me :at det]m9ations ! ?+ possesses :i* mu/ ?us be valid z premi] subject4 ,consequ5tly1 ! categories1 )\t s*emata are m]ely functions ( ! und]/&+ = ! production ( conceptions1 b d n repres5t any object4 ,?is significance !y d]ive f s5sibility1 :i* at ! same "t realizes ! und]/&+ & re/ricts x4 ,*apt] ,,ii4 ,sy/em ( all ,pr9ciples ( ! ,pure ,und]/&+ ,9 ! =ego+ *apt] we h m]ely consid]$ ! g5]al conditions "u :i* alone ! transc5d5tal faculty ( judgem5t is ju/ifi$ 9 us+ ! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+ = syn!tical judgem5ts4 ,our duty at pres5t is to exhibit 9 sy/ematic connection ^? judgem5ts :i* ! und]/&+ really produces priori4 ,= ?is purpose1 our table ( ! categories w c]ta9ly af=d u ! natural & safe guidance4 ,= x is precisely ! categories ^: application to possible exp]i5ce mu/ con/itute all pure priori cognition ( ! und]/&+2 & ! relation ( :i* to s5sibility w1 on t v acc\nt1 pres5t u ) a complete & sy/ematic catalogue ( all ! transc5d5tal pr9ciples ( ! use ( ! und]/&+4 ,pr9ciples priori are s call$1 n m]ely because !y conta9 9 !mselves ! gr\nds ( o!r judgem5ts1 b also because !y !mselves are n gr\nd$ 9 high] & m g5]al cognitions4 ,?is peculi>ity1 h[ev]1 does n raise !m altoge!r above ! ne$ ( a pro(4 ,= al?\gh !re c\ld be f\nd no high] cognition1 & !re=e no objective pro(1 & al?\gh su* a pr9ciple r s]ves z ! f\ndation = all cognition ( ! object1 ?is by no means h9d]s u f draw+ a pro( f ! subjective s\rces ( ! possibility ( ! cognition ( an object4 ,su* a pro( is necess>y1 moreov]1 because )\t x ! pr9ciple might be liable to ! imputation ( be+ a m]e gratuit\s ass]tion4 ,9 ! second place1 we %all limit our inve/igations to ^? pr9ciples :i* relate to ! categories4 ,= z to ! pr9ciples ( transc5d5tal /hetic1 accord+ to :i* space & "t are ! conditions ( ! possibility ( ?+s z ph5om5a1 z also ! re/riction ( ^! pr9ciples1 namely1 t !y _c be appli$ to objects z ?+s 9 !mselves--^!1 ( c\rse1 d n fall )9 ! scope ( our pres5t inquiry4 ,9 l mann]1 ! pr9ciples ( ma!matical sci5ce =m no "p ( ?is sy/em1 because !y are all drawn f intuition1 & n f ! pure conception ( ! und]/&+4 ,! possibility ( ^! pr9ciples1 h[ev]1 w necess>ily be consid]$ "h1 inasmu* z !y are syn!tical judgem5ts priori1 n inde$ = ! purpose ( prov+ _! accuracy & apodeictic c]ta9ty1 :i* is unnecess>y1 b m]ely to r5d] conceivable & d$uce ! possibility ( su* evid5t priori cognitions4 ,b we %all h also to speak ( ! pr9ciple ( analytical judgem5ts1 9 opposition to syn!tical judgem5ts1 :i* is ! prop] subject ( our inquiries1 because ?is v opposition w free ! !ory ( ! latt] f all ambiguity1 & place x cle>ly be=e our eyes 9 its true nature4 ,,sy/em ,,( ,,! ,,pr9ciples ,,( ,,! ,,pure ,,und]/&+ ,section ,i4 ,( ! ,supreme ,pr9ciple ( all ,analytical ,judgem5ts ,:atev] may be ! cont5t ( our cognition1 & 9 :atev] mann] our cognition may be relat$ to its object1 ! univ]sal1 al?\gh only negative conditions ( all our judgem5ts is t !y d n contradict !mselves2 o!rwise ^! judgem5ts are 9 !mselves 7ev5 )\t respect to ! object7 no?+4 ,b al?\gh !re may exi/ no contradiction 9 our judgem5t1 x may nev]!less connect conceptions 9 su* a mann] t !y d n correspond to ! object1 or )\t any gr\nds ei!r priori or po/]iori = arriv+ at su* a judgem5t1 & ?us1 )\t be+ self-contradictory1 a judgem5t may nev]!less be ei!r false or gr\ndless4 ,n[1 ! proposition3 8,no subject c h a pr$icate t contradicts x10 is call$ ! pr9ciple ( contradiction1 & is a univ]sal b purely negative crit]ion ( all tru?4 ,b x belongs to logic alone1 because x is valid ( cognitions1 m]ely z cognitions & )\t respect to _! cont5t1 & decl>es t ! contradiction entirely nullifies !m4 ,we c also1 h[ev]1 make a positive use ( ?is pr9ciple1 t is1 n m]ely to bani% falsehood & error 79 s f> z x re/s ^u contradiction71 b also = ! cognition ( tru?4 ,= if ! judgem5t is analytical1 be x affirmative or negative1 its tru? mu/ always be recognizable by means ( ! pr9ciple ( contradiction4 ,= ! contr>y ( t :i* lies & is cogitat$ z conception 9 ! cognition ( ! object w be always prop]ly negativ$1 b ! conception itself mu/ always be affirm$ ( ! object1 inasmu* z ! contr>y !re( w\ld be 9 contradiction to ! object4 ,we mu/ !re=e hold ! pr9ciple ( contradiction to be ! univ]sal & fully suffici5t ,pr9ciple ( all analytical cognition4 ,b z a suffici5t crit]ion ( tru?1 x has no fur!r utility or au?ority4 ,= ! fact t no cognition c be at v>iance ) ?is pr9ciple )\t nullify+ itself1 con/itutes ?is pr9ciple ! s9e qua non1 b n ! det]m9+ gr\nd ( ! tru? ( our cognition4 ,z our bus9ess at pres5t is prop]ly ) ! syn!tical "p ( our k only1 we %all always be on our gu>d n to transgress ?is inviolable pr9ciple2 b at ! same "t n to expect f x any direct assi/ance 9 ! e/abli%m5t ( ! tru? ( any syn!tical proposition4 ,!re exi/s1 h[ev]1 a =mula ( ?is celebrat$ pr9ciple--a pr9ciple m]ely =mal & entirely )\t cont5t--:i* conta9s a syn!sis t has be5 inadv]t5tly & q unnecess>ily mix$ up ) x4 ,x is ?is3 8,x is impossible = a ?+ to be & n to be at ! same "t40 ,n to m5tion ! sup]flu\sness ( ! addition ( ! ^w impossible to indicate ! apodeictic c]ta9ty1 :i* ought to be self-evid5t f ! proposition itself1 ! proposition is affect$ by ! condition ( "t1 & z x 7 says3 8,a ?+ ,a1 :i* is some?+ ,b1 _c at ! same "t be non-,b40 ,b bo?1 ,b z well z non-,b1 may q well exi/ 9 succession4 ,= example1 a man :o is "y _c at ! same "t be old2 b ! same man c v well be at "o "t "y1 & at ano!r n "y1 t is1 old4 ,n[ ! pr9ciple ( contradiction z a m]ely logical proposition mu/ n by any means limit its application m]ely to relations ( "t1 & consequ5tly a =mula l ! prec$+ is q =eign to its true purpose4 ,! misund]/&+ arises 9 ?is way4 ,we fir/ ( all sep>ate a pr$icate ( a ?+ f ! conception ( ! ?+1 & aft]w>ds connect ) ?is pr$icate its opposite1 & h5ce d n e/abli% any contradiction ) ! subject1 b only ) its pr$icate1 :i* has be5 conjo9$ ) ! subject syn!tically--a contradiction1 moreov]1 :i* obta9s only :5 ! fir/ & second pr$icate are affirm$ 9 ! same "t4 ,if ,i say3 8,a man :o is ignorant is n le>n$10 ! condition 8at ! same "t0 mu/ be add$1 = he :o is at "o "t ignorant1 may at ano!r be le>n$4 ,b if ,i say3 8,no ignorant man is a le>n$ man10 ! proposition is analytical1 because ! *>act]i/ic ignorance is n[ a con/itu5t "p ( ! conception ( ! subject2 & 9 ?is case ! negative proposition is evid5t imm$iately f ! proposition ( contradiction1 )\t ! necessity ( add+ ! condition 8! same "t40 ,?is is ! reason :y ,i h alt]$ ! =mula ( ?is pr9ciple--an alt]ation :i* %[s v cle>ly ! nature ( an analytical proposition4 ,section ,,ii4 ,( ! ,supreme ,pr9ciple ( all ,syn!tical ,judgem5ts ,! explanation ( ! possibility ( syn!tical judgem5ts is a task ) :i* g5]al logic has no?+ to d2 inde$ %e ne$s n ev5 be acqua9t$ ) its "n4 ,b 9 transc5d5tal logic x is ! mo/ important matt] to be dealt )--inde$ ! only "o1 if ! "q is ( ! possibility ( syn!tical judgem5ts priori1 ! conditions & ext5t ( _! validity4 ,= :5 ?is "q is fully decid$1 x c rea* its aim ) p]fect ease1 ! det]m9ation1 to wit1 ( ! ext5t & limits ( ! pure und]/&+4 ,9 an analytical judgem5t ,i d n g beyond ! giv5 conception1 9 ord] to arrive at "s decision respect+ x4 ,if ! judgem5t is affirmative1 ,i pr$icate ( ! conception only t :i* 0 already cogitat$ 9 x2 if negative1 ,i m]ely exclude f ! conception its contr>y4 ,b 9 syn!tical judgem5ts1 ,i mu/ g beyond ! giv5 conception1 9 ord] to cogitate1 9 relation ) x1 some?+ q diff]5t f t :i* 0 cogitat$ 9 x1 a relation :i* is consequ5tly nev] "o ei!r ( id5tity or contradiction1 & by means ( :i* ! tru? or error ( ! judgem5t _c be disc]n$ m]ely f ! judgem5t itself4 ,grant$1 !n1 t we mu/ g out beyond a giv5 conception1 9 ord] to comp>e x syn!tically ) ano!r1 a ?ird ?+ is necess>y1 9 :i* alone ! syn!sis ( two conceptions c orig9ate4 ,n[ :at is ?is t]tium quid t is to be ! m$ium ( all syn!tical judgem5ts8 ,x is only a complex 9 :i* all our repres5tations are conta9$1 ! int]nal s5se to wit1 & its =m priori1 "t4 ,! syn!sis ( our repres5tations re/s ^u ! imag9ation2 _! syn!tical unity 7:i* is requisite to a judgem5t71 ^u ! unity ( app]ception4 ,9 ?is1 !re=e1 is to be s\ght ! possibility ( syn!tical judgem5ts1 & z all ?ree conta9 ! s\rces ( priori repres5tations1 ! possibility ( pure syn!tical judgem5ts also2 nay1 !y are necess>y ^u ^! gr\nds1 if we are to possess a k ( objects1 :i* re/s solely ^u ! syn!sis ( repres5tations4 ,if a cognition is to h objective reality1 t is1 to relate to an object1 & possess s5se & mean+ 9 respect to x1 x is necess>y t ! object be giv5 9 "s way or ano!r4 ,)\t ?is1 our conceptions are empty1 & we may inde$ h ?\ght by means ( !m1 b by su* ?9k+ we h n1 9 fact1 cogniz$ any?+1 we h m]ely play$ ) repres5tation4 ,to give an object1 if ?is expression be und]/ood 9 ! s5se ( 8to pres5t0 ! object1 n m$iately b imm$iately 9 intuition1 means no?+ else ?an to apply ! repres5tation ( x to exp]i5ce1 be t exp]i5ce real or only possible4 ,space & "t !mselves1 pure z ^! conceptions are f all t is empirical1 & c]ta9 z x is t !y are repres5t$ fully priori 9 ! m9d1 w\ld be completely )\t objective validity1 & )\t s5se & significance1 if _! necess>y use 9 ! objects ( exp]i5ce 7 n %[n4 ,nay1 ! repres5tation ( !m is a m]e s*ema1 t always relates to ! reproductive imag9ation1 :i* calls up ! objects ( exp]i5ce1 )\t :i* !y h no mean+4 ,& s x is ) all conceptions )\t di/9ction4 ,! possibility ( exp]i5ce is1 !n1 t :i* gives objective reality to all our priori cognitions4 ,n[ exp]i5ce dep5ds ^u ! syn!tical unity ( ph5om5a1 t is1 ^u a syn!sis accord+ to conceptions ( ! object ( ph5om5a 9 g5]al1 a syn!sis )\t :i* exp]i5ce nev] c\ld become k1 b w\ld be m]ely a rhapsody ( p]ceptions1 nev] fitt+ toge!r into any connect$ text1 accord+ to rules ( a ?or\ghly unit$ 7possible7 consci\sness1 & !re=e nev] subject$ to ! transc5d5tal & necess>y unity ( app]ception4 ,exp]i5ce has !re=e = a f\ndation1 priori pr9ciples ( its =m1 t is to say1 g5]al rules ( unity 9 ! syn!sis ( ph5om5a1 ! objective reality ( :i* rules1 z necess>y conditions ev5 ( ! possibility ( exp]i5ce c :i* rules1 z necess>y conditions--ev5 ( ! possibility ( exp]i5ce--c always be %[n 9 exp]i5ce4 ,b ap>t f ?is relation1 priori syn!tical propositions are absolutely impossible1 because !y h no ?ird t]m1 t is1 no pure object1 9 :i* ! syn!tical unity c exhibit ! objective reality ( its conceptions4 ,al?\gh1 !n1 respect+ space1 or ! =ms :i* productive imag9ation describes !re91 we d cognize mu* priori 9 syn!tical judgem5ts1 & are really 9 no ne$ ( exp]i5ce = ?is purpose1 su* k w\ld nev]!less am\nt to no?+ b a busy trifl+ ) a m]e *im]a1 7 n space to be consid]$ z ! condition ( ! ph5om5a :i* con/itute ! mat]ial ( ext]nal exp]i5ce4 ,h5ce ^? pure syn!tical judgem5ts d relate1 ?\gh b m$iately1 to possible exp]i5ce1 or r to ! possibility ( exp]i5ce1 & ^u t alone is f\nd$ ! objective validity ( _! syn!sis4 ,:ile !n1 on ! "o h&1 exp]i5ce1 z empirical syn!sis1 is ! only possible mode ( cognition :i* gives reality to all o!r syn!sis2 on ! o!r h&1 ?is latt] syn!sis1 z cognition priori1 possesses tru?1 t is1 accordance ) its object1 only 9 s f> z x conta9s no?+ m ?an :at is necess>y to ! syn!tical unity ( exp]i5ce4 ,accord+ly1 ! supreme pr9ciple ( all syn!tical judgem5ts is3 8,e object is subject to ! necess>y conditions ( ! syn!tical unity ( ! manifold ( intuition 9 a possible exp]i5ce40 priori syn!tical judgem5ts are possible :5 we apply ! =mal conditions ( ! priori intuition1 ! syn!sis ( ! imag9ation1 & ! necess>y unity ( t syn!sis 9 a transc5d5tal app]ception1 to a possible cognition ( exp]i5ce1 & say3 8,! conditions ( ! possibility ( exp]i5ce 9 g5]al are at ! same "t conditions ( ! possibility ( ! objects ( exp]i5ce1 & h1 = t reason1 objective validity 9 an priori syn!tical judgem5t40 ,section ,,iii4 ,sy/ematic ,repres5tation ( all ,syn!tical ,pr9ciples ( ! ,pure ,und]/&+ ,t pr9ciples exi/ at all is to be ascrib$ solely to ! pure und]/&+1 :i* is n only ! faculty ( rules 9 reg>d to t :i* happ5s1 b is ev5 ! s\rce ( pr9ciples accord+ to :i* ev]y?+ t c be pres5t$ to u z an object is necess>ily subject to rules1 because )\t su* rules we nev] c\ld atta9 to cognition ( an object4 ,ev5 ! laws ( nature1 if !y are contemplat$ z pr9ciples ( ! empirical use ( ! und]/&+1 possess also a *>act]i/ic ( necessity1 & we may !re=e at lea/ expect !m to be det]m9$ ^u gr\nds :i* are valid priori & antec$5t to all exp]i5ce4 ,b all laws ( nature1 )\t di/9ction1 are subject to high] pr9ciples ( ! und]/&+1 inasmu* z ! =m] are m]ely applications ( ! latt] to p>ticul> cases ( exp]i5ce4 ,^! high] pr9ciples alone !re=e give ! conception1 :i* conta9s ! necess>y condition1 &1 z x 71 ! expon5t ( a rule2 exp]i5ce1 on ! o!r h&1 gives ! case :i* comes "u ! rule4 ,!re is no dang] ( our mi/ak+ m]ely empirical pr9ciples = pr9ciples ( ! pure und]/&+1 or conv]sely2 = ! "* ( necessity1 accord+ to conceptions :i* di/+ui% ! latt]1 & ! abs5ce ( ?is 9 e empirical proposition1 h[ ext5sively valid soev] x may be1 is a p]fect safegu>d aga9/ conf\nd+ !m4 ,!re are1 h[ev]1 pure pr9ciples priori1 :i* nev]!less ,i %\ld n ascribe to ! pure und]/&+--= ?is reason1 t !y are n d]iv$ f pure conceptions1 b 7al?\gh by ! m$iation ( ! und]/&+7 f pure intuitions4 ,b und]/&+ is ! faculty ( conceptions4 ,su* pr9ciples ma!matical sci5ce possesses1 b _! application to exp]i5ce1 consequ5tly _! objective validity1 nay ! possibility ( su* priori syn!tical cognitions 7! d$uction !re(7 re/s entirely ^u ! pure und]/&+4 ,on ?is acc\nt1 ,i %all n reckon among my pr9ciples ^? ( ma!matics2 ?\gh ,i %all include ^? ^u ! possibility & objective validity priori1 ( pr9ciples ( ! ma!matical sci5ce1 :i*1 consequ5tly1 are to be look$ ^u z ! pr9ciple ( ^!1 & :i* proce$ f conceptions to intuition1 & n f intuition to conceptions4 ,9 ! application ( ! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+ to possible exp]i5ce1 ! employm5t ( _! syn!sis is ei!r ma!matical or dynamical1 = x is direct$ p>tly on ! intuition alone1 p>tly on ! exi/5ce ( a ph5om5on4 ,b ! priori conditions ( intuition are 9 relation to a possible exp]i5ce absolutely necess>y1 ^? ( ! exi/5ce ( objects ( a possible empirical intuition are 9 !mselves cont+5t4 ,h5ce ! pr9ciples ( ! ma!matical use ( ! categories w possess a "* ( absolute necessity1 t is1 w be apodeictic2 ^?1 on ! o!r h&1 ( ! dynamical use1 ! "* ( an priori necessity inde$1 b only "u ! condition ( empirical ?\ght 9 an exp]i5ce1 !re=e only m$iately & indirectly4 ,consequ5tly !y w n possess t imm$iate evid5ce :i* is peculi> to ! =m]1 al?\gh _! application to exp]i5ce does n1 = t reason1 lose its tru? & c]titude4 ,b ( ?is po9t we %all be bett] able to judge at ! conclusion ( ?is sy/em ( pr9ciples4 ,! table ( ! categories is naturally our guide to ! table ( pr9ciples1 because ^! are no?+ else ?an rules = ! objective employm5t ( ! =m]4 ,accord+ly1 all pr9ciples ( ! pure und]/&+ are3 #a ,axioms ( ,intuition #b #c ,anticipations ,analogies ( ,p]ception ( ,exp]i5ce #d ,po/ulates ( ,empirical ,?\ght 9 g5]al ,^! appellations ,i h *os5 advis$ly1 9 ord] t we might n lose sight ( ! di/9ctions 9 respect ( ! evid5ce & ! employm5t ( ^! pr9ciples4 ,x w1 h[ev]1 soon appe> t--a fact :i* conc]ns bo? ! evid5ce ( ^! pr9ciples1 & ! priori det]m9ation ( ph5om5a--accord+ to ! categories ( quantity & quality 7if we att5d m]ely to ! =m ( ^!71 ! pr9ciples ( ^! categories are di/+ui%able f ^? ( ! two o!rs1 9 z mu* z ! =m] are possess$ ( an intuitive1 b ! latt] ( a m]ely discursive1 ?\gh 9 bo? in/ances a complete1 c]titude4 ,i %all !re=e call ! =m] ma!matical1 & ! latt] dynamical pr9ciples4#bg ,x mu/ be obs]v$1 h[ev]1 t by ^! t]ms ,i mean j z little 9 ! "o case ! pr9ciples ( ma!matics z ^? ( g5]al 7physical7 dynamics 9 ! o!r4 ,i h "h 9 view m]ely ! pr9ciples ( ! pure und]/&+1 9 _! application to ! int]nal s5se 7)\t di/9ction ( ! repres5tations giv5 !re971 by means ( :i* ! sci5ces ( ma!matics & dynamics become possible4 ,accord+ly1 ,i h nam$ ^! pr9ciples r ) ref]5ce to _! application ?an _! cont5t2 & ,i %all n[ proce$ to consid] !m 9 ! ord] 9 :i* !y /& 9 ! table4 #bg ,all comb9ation 7conjunctio7 is ei!r composition 7compositio7 or connection 7nexus74 ,! =m] is ! syn!sis ( a manifold1 ! p>ts ( :i* d n necess>ily belong to ea* o!r4 ,= example1 ! two triangles into :i* a squ>e is divid$ by a diagonal1 d n necess>ily belong to ea* o!r1 & ( ?is k9d is ! syn!sis ( ! homog5e\s 9 ev]y?+ t c be ma!matically consid]$4 ,?is syn!sis c be divid$ into ^? ( aggregation & coalition1 ! =m] ( :i* is appli$ to ext5sive1 ! latt] to int5sive quantities4 ,! second sort ( comb9ation 7nexus7 is ! syn!sis ( a manifold1 9 s f> z its p>ts d belong necess>ily to ea* o!r2 = example1 ! accid5t to a sub/ance1 or ! effect to ! cause4 ,consequ5tly x is a syn!sis ( t :i* ?\gh het]og5e\s1 is repres5t$ z connect$ priori4 ,?is comb9ation--n an arbitr>y "o--,i entitle dynamical because x conc]ns ! connection ( ! exi/5ce ( ! manifold4 ,?is1 aga91 may be divid$ into ! physical syn!sis1 ( ! ph5om5a divid$ among ea* o!r1 & ! metaphysical syn!sis1 or ! connection ( ph5om5a priori 9 ! faculty ( cognition4 #a4 ,,axioms ,,( ,,intuition4 ,! pr9ciple ( ^! is3 ,all ,intuitions are ,ext5sive ,quantities4 ,,pro(4 ,all ph5om5a conta91 z reg>ds _! =m1 an intuition 9 space & "t1 :i* lies priori at ! f\ndation ( all )\t exception4 ,ph5om5a1 !re=e1 _c be appreh5d$1 t is1 receiv$ into empirical consci\sness o!rwise ?an ?r\gh ! syn!sis ( a manifold1 ?r\gh :i* ! repres5tations ( a det]m9ate space or "t are g5]at$2 t is to say1 ?r\gh ! composition ( ! homog5e\s & ! consci\sness ( ! syn!tical unity ( ?is manifold 7homog5e\s74 ,n[ ! consci\sness ( a homog5e\s manifold 9 intuition1 9 s f> z !reby ! repres5tation ( an object is r5d]$ possible1 is ! conception ( a quantity 7quanti74 ,consequ5tly1 ev5 ! p]ception ( an object z ph5om5on is possible only ?r\gh ! same syn!tical unity ( ! manifold ( ! giv5 s5su\s intuition1 ?r\gh :i* ! unity ( ! composition ( ! homog5e\s manifold 9 ! conception ( a quantity is cogitat$2 t is to say1 all ph5om5a are quantities1 & ext5sive quantities1 because z intuitions 9 space or "t !y mu/ be repres5t$ by means ( ! same syn!sis ?r\gh :i* space & "t !mselves are det]m9$4 ,an ext5sive quantity ,i call t :]e9 ! repres5tation ( ! p>ts r5d]s possible 7& !re=e necess>ily antec$es7 ! repres5tation ( ! :ole4 ,i _c repres5t to myself any l9e1 h[ev] small1 )\t draw+ x 9 ?\ght1 t is1 )\t g5]at+ f a po9t all its p>ts "o aft] ano!r1 & 9 ?is way alone produc+ ?is intuition4 ,precisely ! same is ! case ) e1 ev5 ! smalle/1 portion ( "t4 ,i cogitate !re9 only ! successive progress f "o mom5t to ano!r1 & h5ce1 by means ( ! diff]5t portions ( "t & ! addition ( !m1 a det]m9ate quantity ( "t is produc$4 ,z ! pure intuition 9 all ph5om5a is ei!r "t or space1 s is e ph5om5on 9 its "* ( intuition an ext5sive quantity1 inasmu* z x c only be cogniz$ 9 our appreh5sion by successive syn!sis 7f "p to "p74 ,all ph5om5a are1 accord+ly1 to be consid]$ z aggregates1 t is1 z a collection ( previ\sly giv5 p>ts2 :i* is n ! case ) e sort ( quantities1 b only ) ^? :i* are repres5t$ & appreh5d$ by u z ext5sive4 ,on ?is successive syn!sis ( ! productive imag9ation1 9 ! g5]ation ( figures1 is f\nd$ ! ma!matics ( ext5sion1 or geometry1 ) its axioms1 :i* express ! conditions ( s5su\s intuition priori1 "u :i* alone ! s*ema ( a pure conception ( ext]nal intuition c exi/2 = example1 8be twe5 two po9ts only "o /raight l9e is possible10 8two /raight l9es _c enclose a space10 etc4 ,^! are ! axioms :i* prop]ly relate only to quantities 7quanta7 z su*4 ,b1 z reg>ds ! quantity ( a ?+ 7quantitas71 t is to say1 ! answ] to ! "q3 8,h[ l>ge is ?is or t object80 al?\gh1 9 respect to ?is "q1 we h v>i\s propositions syn!tical & imm$iately c]ta9 7indemon/rabilia72 we h1 9 ! prop] s5se ( ! t]m1 no axioms4 ,= example1 ! propositions3 8,if equals be add$ to equals1 ! :oles are equal02 8,if equals be tak5 f equals1 ! rema9d]s are equal02 are analytical1 because ,i am imm$iately consci\s ( ! id5tity ( ! production ( ! "o quantity ) ! production ( ! o!r2 :]eas axioms mu/ be priori syn!tical propositions4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ! self-evid5t propositions z to ! relation ( numb]s1 are c]ta9ly syn!tical b n univ]sal1 l ^? ( geometry1 & = ?is reason _c be call$ axioms1 b num]ical =mulae4 ,t #g #e #ab is n an analytical proposition4 ,= nei!r 9 ! repres5tation ( sev51 nor ( five1 nor ( ! composition ( ! two numb]s1 d ,i cogitate ! numb] twelve4 7,:e!r ,i cogitate ! numb] 9 ! addition ( bo?1 is n at pres5t ! "q2 = 9 ! case ( an analytical proposition1 ! only po9t is :e!r ,i really cogitate ! pr$icate 9 ! repres5tation ( ! subject47 ,b al?\gh ! proposition is syn!tical1 x is nev]!less only a s+ul> proposition4 ,9 s f> z reg>d is "h _h m]ely to ! syn!sis ( ! homog5e\s 7! units71 x _c take place except 9 "o mann]1 al?\gh our use ( ^! numb]s is aft]w>ds g5]al4 ,if ,i say3 8,a triangle c be con/ruct$ ) ?ree l9es1 any two ( :i* tak5 toge!r are great] ?an ! ?ird10 ,i ex]cise m]ely ! pure function ( ! productive imag9ation1 :i* may draw ! l9es long] or %ort] & con/ruct ! angles at its pleasure4 ,on ! contr>y1 ! numb] sev5 is possible only 9 "o mann]1 & s is likewise ! numb] twelve1 :i* results f ! syn!sis ( sev5 & five4 ,su* propositions1 !n1 _c be t]m$ axioms 7= 9 t case we %\ld h an inf9ity ( ^!71 b num]ical =mulae4 ,?is transc5d5tal pr9ciple ( ! ma!matics ( ph5om5a greatly enl>ges our priori cognition4 ,= x is by ?is pr9ciple alone t pure ma!matics is r5d]$ applicable 9 all its precision to objects ( exp]i5ce1 & )\t x ! validity ( ?is application w\ld n be s self-evid5t2 on ! contr>y1 contradictions & confusions h (t5 aris5 on ?is v po9t4 ,ph5om5a are n ?+s 9 !mselves4 ,empirical intuition is possible only ?r\gh pure intuition 7( space & "t72 consequ5tly1 :at geometry affirms ( ! latt]1 is indisputably valid ( ! =m]4 ,all evasions1 su* z ! /atem5t t objects ( s5se d n con=m to ! rules ( con/ruction 9 space 7= example1 to ! rule ( ! inf9ite divisibility ( l9es or angles71 mu/ fall to ! gr\nd4 ,=1 if ^! objections hold good1 we d5y to space1 & ) x to all ma!matics1 objective validity1 & no long] "k :]e=e1 & h[ f>1 ma!matics c be appli$ to ph5om5a4 ,! syn!sis ( spaces & times z ! ess5tial =m ( all intuition1 is t :i* r5d]s possible ! appreh5sion ( a ph5om5on1 & !re=e e ext]nal exp]i5ce1 consequ5tly all cognition ( ! objects ( exp]i5ce2 & :atev] ma!matics 9 its pure use proves ( ! =m]1 mu/ necess>ily hold good ( ! latt]4 ,all objections are b ! *ican]ies ( an ill-in/ruct$ reason1 :i* errone\sly ?9ks to lib]ate ! objects ( s5se f ! =mal conditions ( our s5sibility1 & repres5ts ^!1 al?\gh m]e ph5om5a1 z ?+s 9 !mselves1 pres5t$ z su* to our und]/&+4 ,b 9 ?is case1 no priori syn!tical cognition ( !m c\ld be possible1 consequ5tly n ?r\gh pure conceptions ( space & ! sci5ce :i* det]m9es ^! conceptions1 t is to say1 geometry1 w\ld itself be impossible4 #b4 ,,anticipations ,,( ,,p]ception4 ,! pr9ciple ( ^! is3 ,9 all ph5om5a ! ,real1 t :i* is an object ( s5sation1 has ,int5sive ,quantity1 t is1 has a ,degree4 ,,pro(4 ,p]ception is empirical consci\sness1 t is to say1 a consci\sness :i* conta9s an elem5t ( s5sation4 ,ph5om5a z objects ( p]ception are n pure1 t is1 m]ely =mal intuitions1 l space & "t1 = !y _c be p]ceiv$ 9 !mselves4#bh ,!y conta91 !n1 ov] & above ! intuition1 ! mat]ials = an object 7?r\gh :i* is repres5t$ some?+ exi/+ 9 space or "t71 t is to say1 !y conta9 ! real ( s5sation1 z a repres5tation m]ely subjective1 :i* gives u m]ely ! consci\sness t ! subject is affect$1 & :i* we ref] to "s ext]nal object4 ,n[1 a gradual transition f empirical consci\sness to pure consci\sness is possible1 inasmu* z ! real 9 ?is consci\sness entirely vani%es1 & !re rema9s a m]ely =mal consci\sness 7 priori7 ( ! manifold 9 "t & space2 consequ5tly !re is possible a syn!sis also ( ! production ( ! quantity ( a s5sation f its comm5cem5t1 t is1 f ! pure intuition #j onw>ds up to a c]ta9 quantity ( ! s5sation4 ,n[ z s5sation 9 itself is n an objective repres5tation1 & 9 x is to be f\nd nei!r ! intuition ( space nor ( "t1 x _c possess any ext5sive quantity1 & yet !re does belong to x a quantity 7& t by means ( its appreh5sion1 9 :i* empirical consci\sness c )9 a c]ta9 "t rise f no?+ #j up to its giv5 am\nt71 consequ5tly an int5sive quantity4 ,& ?us we mu/ ascribe int5sive quantity1 t is1 a degree ( influ5ce on s5se to all objects ( p]ception1 9 s f> z ?is p]ception conta9s s5sation4 #bh ,!y c be p]ceiv$ only z ph5om5a1 & "s "p ( !m mu/ always belong to ! non-ego2 :]eas pure intuitions are entirely ! products ( ! m9d itself1 & z su* are cogniz$ 9 !mselves4--,tr ,all cognition1 by means ( :i* ,i am enabl$ to cognize & det]m9e priori :at belongs to empirical cognition1 may be call$ an anticipation2 & )\t d\bt ?is is ! s5se 9 :i* ,epicurus employ$ 8 expression prholepsis4 ,b z !re is 9 ph5om5a some?+ :i* is nev] cogniz$ priori1 :i* on ?is acc\nt con/itutes ! prop] diff]5ce betwe5 pure & empirical cognition1 t is to say1 s5sation 7z ! matt] ( p]ception71 x foll[s1 t s5sation is j t elem5t 9 cognition :i* _c be at all anticipat$4 ,on ! o!r h&1 we might v well t]m ! pure det]m9ations 9 space & "t1 z well 9 reg>d to figure z to quantity1 anticipations ( ph5om5a1 because !y repres5t priori t :i* may always be giv5 po/]iori 9 exp]i5ce4 ,b suppose t 9 e s5sation1 z s5sation 9 g5]al1 )\t any p>ticul> s5sation be+ ?\ght (1 !re exi/$ some?+ :i* c\ld be cogniz$ priori1 ?is w\ld des]ve to be call$ anticipation 9 a special s5se--special1 because x may seem surpris+ to =e/all exp]i5ce1 9 t :i* conc]ns ! matt] ( exp]i5ce1 & :i* we c only d]ive f itself4 ,yet su* really is ! case "h4 ,appreh5sion#bi1 by means ( s5sation alone1 fills only "o mom5t1 t is1 if ,i d n take into consid]ation a succession ( _m s5sations4 ,z t 9 ! ph5om5on1 ! appreh5sion ( :i* is n a successive syn!sis advanc+ f p>ts to an entire repres5tation1 s5sation has !re=e no ext5sive quantity2 ! want ( s5sation 9 a mom5t ( "t w\ld repres5t x z empty1 consequ5tly #j4 ,t :i* 9 ! empirical intuition corresponds to s5sation is reality 7realitas pha5om5on72 t :i* corresponds to ! abs5ce ( x1 negation #j4 ,n[ e s5sation is capable ( a dim9ution1 s t x c decrease1 & ?us gradually disappe>4 ,!re=e1 betwe5 reality 9 a ph5om5on & negation1 !re exi/s a cont9u\s concat5ation ( _m possible int]m$iate s5sations1 ! diff]5ce ( :i* f ea* o!r is always small] ?an t betwe5 ! giv5 s5sation & z]o1 or complete negation4 ,t is to say1 ! real 9 a ph5om5on has always a quantity1 :i* h[ev] is n discov]able 9 appreh5sion1 inasmu* z appreh5sion take place by means ( m]e s5sation 9 "o in/ant1 & n by ! successive syn!sis ( _m s5sations1 & !re=e does n progress f p>ts to ! :ole4 ,consequ5tly1 x has a quantity1 b n an ext5sive quantity4 #bi ,appreh5sion is ! ,kantian ^w = preception1 9 ! l>ge/ s5se 9 :i* we employ t t]m4 ,x is ! g5us :i* includes "u i1 z species1 p]ception prop] & s5sation prop]--,tr ,n[ t quantity :i* is appreh5d$ only z unity1 & 9 :i* plurality c be repres5t$ only by approximation to negation #j1 ,i t]m int5sive quantity4 ,consequ5tly1 reality 9 a ph5om5on has int5sive quantity1 t is1 a degree4 ,if we consid] ?is reality z cause 7be x ( s5sation or ( ano!r reality 9 ! ph5om5on1 = example1 a *ange71 we call ! degree ( reality 9 its "* ( cause a mom5tum1 = example1 ! mom5tum ( weight2 & = ?is reason1 t ! degree only indicates t quantity ! appreh5sion ( :i* is n successive1 b in/antane\s4 ,?is1 h[ev]1 ,i t\* ^u only 9 pass+1 = ) causality ,i h at pres5t no?+ to d4 ,accord+ly1 e s5sation1 consequ5tly e reality 9 ph5om5a1 h[ev] small x may be1 has a degree1 t is1 an int5sive quantity1 :i* may always be less5$1 & betwe5 reality & negation !re exi/s a cont9u\s connection ( possible realities1 & possible small] p]ceptions4 ,e col\r--= example1 r$--has a degree1 :i*1 be x ev] s small1 is nev] ! smalle/1 & s is x always ) heat1 ! mom5tum ( weight1 etc4 ,?is prop]ty ( quantities1 accord+ to :i* no "p ( !m is ! smalle/ possible 7no "p simple71 is call$ _! cont9uity4 ,space & "t are quanta cont9ua1 because no "p ( !m c be giv51 )\t enclos+ x )9 b\nd>ies 7po9ts & mom5ts71 consequ5tly1 ?is giv5 "p is itself a space or a "t4 ,space1 !re=e1 consi/s only ( spaces1 & "t ( times4 ,po9ts & mom5ts are only b\nd>ies1 t is1 ! m]e places or positions ( _! limitation4 ,b places always presuppose intuitions :i* are to limit or det]m9e !m2 & we _c conceive ei!r space or "t compos$ ( con/itu5t p>ts :i* are giv5 be=e space or "t4 ,su* quantities may also be call$ fl[+1 because syn!sis 7( ! productive imag9ation7 9 ! production ( ^! quantities is a progression 9 "t1 ! cont9uity ( :i* we are accu/om$ to indicate by ! expression fl[+4 ,all ph5om5a1 !n1 are cont9u\s quantities1 9 respect bo? to intuition & m]e p]ception 7s5sation1 & ) x reality74 ,9 ! =m] case !y are ext5sive quantities2 9 ! latt]1 int5sive4 ,:5 ! syn!sis ( ! manifold ( a ph5om5on is int]rupt$1 !re results m]ely an aggregate ( sev]al ph5om5a1 & n prop]ly a ph5om5on z a quantity1 :i* is n produc$ by ! m]e cont9uation ( ! productive syn!sis ( a c]ta9 k9d1 b by ! repetition ( a syn!sis always ceas+4 ,= example1 if ,i call ?irte5 doll>s a sum or quantity ( money1 ,i employ ! t]m q correctly1 inasmu* z ,i und]/& by ?irte5 doll>s ! value ( a m>k 9 /&>d silv]1 :i* is1 to be sure1 a cont9u\s quantity1 9 :i* no "p is ! smalle/1 b e "p might con/itute a piece ( money1 :i* w\ld conta9 mat]ial = /ill small] pieces4 ,if1 h[ev]1 by ! words ?irte5 doll>s ,i und]/& s _m co9s 7be _! value 9 silv] :at x may71 x w\ld be q errone\s to use ! expression a quantity ( doll>s2 on ! contr>y1 ,i mu/ call !m aggregate1 t is1 a numb] ( co9s4 ,& z 9 e numb] we mu/ h unity z ! f\ndation1 s a ph5om5on tak5 z unity is a quantity1 & z su* always a cont9u\s quantity 7quantum cont9uum74 ,n[1 see+ all ph5om5a1 :e!r consid]$ z ext5sive or int5sive1 are cont9u\s quantities1 ! proposition3 8,all *ange 7transition ( a ?+ f "o /ate into ano!r7 is cont9u\s10 might be prov$ "h easily1 & ) ma!matical evid5ce1 7 x n t ! causality ( a *ange lies1 entirely beyond ! b\nds ( a transc5d5tal philosophy1 & presupposes empirical pr9ciples4 ,= ( ! possibility ( a cause :i* *anges ! condition ( ?+s1 t is1 :i* det]m9es !m to ! contr>y to a c]ta9 giv5 /ate1 ! und]/&+ gives u priori no k2 n m]ely because x has no insight into ! possibility ( x 7= su* insight is abs5t 9 sev]al priori cognitions71 b because ! notion ( *ange conc]ns only c]ta9 det]m9ations ( ph5om5a1 :i* exp]i5ce alone c acqua9t u )1 :ile _! cause lies 9 ! un*angeable4 ,b see+ t we h no?+ :i* we c\ld "h employ b ! pure fundam5tal conceptions ( all possible exp]i5ce1 among :i* ( c\rse no?+ empirical c be admitt$1 we d>e n1 )\t injur+ ! unity ( our sy/em1 anticipate g5]al physical sci5ce1 :i* is built ^u c]ta9 fundam5tal exp]i5ces4 ,nev]!less1 we are 9 no want ( pro(s ( ! great influ5ce :i* ! pr9ciple above develop$ ex]cises 9 ! anticipation ( p]ceptions1 & ev5 9 supply+ ! want ( !m1 s f> z to %ield u aga9/ ! false conclusions :i* o!rwise we might ra%ly draw4 ,if all reality 9 p]ception has a degree1 betwe5 :i* & negation !re is an endless sequ5ce ( ev] small] degrees1 & if1 nev]!less1 e s5se mu/ h a det]m9ate degree ( receptivity = s5sations2 no p]ception1 & consequ5tly no exp]i5ce is possible1 :i* c prove1 ei!r imm$iately or m$iately1 an entire abs5ce ( all reality 9 a ph5om5on2 9 o!r words1 x is impossible ev] to draw f exp]i5ce a pro( ( ! exi/5ce ( empty space or ( empty "t4 ,= 9 ! fir/ place1 an entire abs5ce ( reality 9 a s5su\s intuition _c ( c\rse be an object ( p]ception2 secondly1 su* abs5ce _c be d$uc$ f ! contemplation ( any s+le ph5om5on1 & ! diff]5ce ( ! degrees 9 its reality2 nor ought x ev] to be admitt$ 9 explanation ( any ph5om5on4 ,= if ev5 ! complete intuition ( a det]m9ate space or "t is ?or\ghly real1 t is1 if no "p !re( is empty1 yet because e reality has its degree1 :i*1 ) ! ext5sive quantity ( ! ph5om5on un*ang$1 c dim9i% ?r\gh endless gradations d[n to no?+ 7! void71 !re mu/ be inf9itely graduat$ degrees1 ) :i* space or "t is fill$1 & ! int5sive quantity 9 diff]5t ph5om5a may be small] or great]1 al?\gh ! ext5sive quantity ( ! intuition rema9s equal & unalt]$4 ,we %all give an example ( ?is4 ,almo/ all natural philosoph]s1 rem>k+ a great diff]5ce 9 ! quantity ( ! matt] ( diff]5t k9ds 9 bodies ) ! same volume 7p>tly on acc\nt ( ! mom5tum ( gravity or weight1 p>tly on acc\nt ( ! mom5tum ( resi/ance to o!r bodies 9 motion71 conclude unanim\sly t ?is volume 7ext5sive quantity ( ! ph5om5on7 mu/ be void 9 all bodies1 al?\gh 9 diff]5t proportion4 ,b :o w\ld suspect t ^! = ! mo/ "p ma!matical & me*anical inquir]s into nature %\ld gr\nd ?is conclusion solely on a metaphysical hypo!sis--a sort ( hypo!sis :i* !y pr(ess to disp>age & avoid8 ,yet ?is !y d1 9 assum+ t ! real 9 space 7,i mu/ n "h call x imp5etrability or weight1 because ^! are empirical conceptions7 is always id5tical1 & c only be di/+ui%$ accord+ to its ext5sive quantity1 t is1 multiplicity4 ,n[ to ?is presupposition1 = :i* !y c h no gr\nd 9 exp]i5ce1 & :i* consequ5tly is m]ely metaphysical1 ,i oppose a transc5d5tal demon/ration1 :i* x is true w n expla9 ! diff]5ce 9 ! fill+ up ( spaces1 b :i* nev]!less completely does away ) ! suppos$ necessity ( ! above-m5tion$ presupposition t we _c expla9 ! said diff]5ce o!rwise ?an by ! hypo!sis ( empty spaces4 ,?is demon/ration1 moreov]1 has ! m]it ( sett+ ! und]/&+ at lib]ty to conceive ?is di/9ction 9 a diff]5t mann]1 if ! explanation ( ! fact requires any su* hypo!sis4 ,= we p]ceive t al?\gh two equal spaces may be completely fill$ by matt]s altoge!r diff]5t1 s t 9 nei!r ( !m is !re left a s+le po9t :]e9 matt] is n pres5t1 nev]!less1 e reality has its degree 7( resi/ance or ( weight71 :i*1 )\t dim9ution ( ! ext5sive quantity1 c become less & less ad inf9itum1 be=e x passes into no?+ness & disappe>s4 ,?us an expansion :i* fills a space--= example1 caloric1 or any o!r reality 9 ! ph5om5al _w--c decrease 9 its degrees to inf9ity1 yet )\t leav+ ! smalle/ "p ( ! space empty2 on ! contr>y1 fill+ x ) ^? less] degrees z completely z ano!r ph5om5on c\ld ) great]4 ,my int5tion "h is by no means to ma9ta9 t ?is is really ! case ) ! diff]5ce ( matt]s1 9 reg>d to _! specific gravity2 ,i wi% only to prove1 f a pr9ciple ( ! pure und]/&+1 t ! nature ( our p]ceptions makes su* a mode ( explanation possible1 & t x is errone\s to reg>d ! real 9 a ph5om5on z equal quoad its degree1 & diff]5t only quoad its aggregation & ext5sive quantity1 & ?is1 too1 on ! pret5d$ au?ority ( an priori pr9ciple ( ! und]/&+4 ,nev]!less1 ?is pr9ciple ( ! anticipation ( p]ception mu/ some:at />tle an inquir] :om initiation into transc5d5tal philosophy has r5d]$ cauti\s4 ,we mu/ naturally ent]ta9 "s d\bt :e!r or n ! und]/&+ c en\nce any su* syn!tical proposition z t respect+ ! degree ( all reality 9 ph5om5a1 & consequ5tly ! possibility ( ! int]nal diff]5ce ( s5sation itself--ab/raction be+ made ( its empirical quality4 ,?us x is a "q n unwor?y ( solution3 8,h[ ! und]/&+ c pron\nce syn!tically & priori respect+ ph5om5a1 & ?us anticipate ^!1 ev5 9 t :i* is peculi>ly & m]ely empirical1 t1 namely1 :i* conc]ns s5sation itself80 ,! quality ( s5sation is 9 all cases m]ely empirical1 & _c be repres5t$ priori 7= example1 col\rs1 ta/e1 etc474 ,b ! real--t :i* corresponds to s5sation--9 opposition to negation #j1 only repres5ts some?+ ! conception ( :i* 9 itself conta9s a be+ 7e9 seyn71 & signifies no?+ b ! syn!sis 9 an empirical consci\sness4 ,t is to say1 ! empirical consci\sness 9 ! int]nal s5se c be rais$ f #j to e high] degree1 s t ! v same ext5sive quantity ( intuition1 an illum9at$ surface1 = example1 excites z great a s5sation z an aggregate ( _m o!r surfaces less illum9at$4 ,we c !re=e make complete ab/raction ( ! ext5sive quantity ( a ph5om5on1 & repres5t to ourselves 9 ! m]e s5sation 9 a c]ta9 mom5tum1 a syn!sis ( homog5e\s asc5sion f #j up to ! giv5 empirical consci\sness1 ,all s5sations !re=e z su* are giv5 only po/]iori1 b ?is prop]ty !re(1 namely1 t !y h a degree1 c be kn[n priori4 ,x is wor?y ( rem>k1 t 9 respect to quantities 9 g5]al1 we c cognize priori only a s+le quality1 namely1 cont9uity2 b 9 respect to all quality 7! real 9 ph5om5a71 we _c cognize priori any?+ m ?an ! int5sive quantity !re(1 namely1 t !y h a degree4 ,all else is left to exp]i5ce4 #c4 ,,analogies ,,( ,,exp]i5ce4 ,! pr9ciple ( ^! is3 ,exp]i5ce is possible only ?r\gh ! repres5tation ( a necess>y connection ( ,p]ceptions4 ,,pro(4 ,exp]i5ce is an empirical cognition2 t is to say1 a cognition :i* det]m9es an object by means ( p]ceptions4 ,x is !re=e a syn!sis ( p]ceptions1 a syn!sis :i* is n itself conta9$ 9 p]ception1 b :i* conta9s ! syn!tical unity ( ! manifold ( p]ception 9 a consci\sness2 & ?is unity con/itutes ! ess5tial ( our cognition ( objects ( ! s5ses1 t is1 ( exp]i5ce 7n m]ely ( intuition or s5sation74 ,n[ 9 exp]i5ce our p]ceptions come toge!r cont+5tly1 s t no "* ( necessity 9 _! connection appe>s1 or c appe> f ! p]ceptions !mselves1 because appreh5sion is only a plac+ toge!r ( ! manifold ( empirical intuition1 & no repres5tation ( a necessity 9 ! connect$ exi/5ce ( ! ph5om5a :i* appreh5sion br+s toge!r1 is to be discov]$ !re94 ,b z exp]i5ce is a cognition ( objects by means ( p]ceptions1 x foll[s t ! relation ( ! exi/5ce ( ! exi/5ce ( ! manifold mu/ be repres5t$ 9 exp]i5ce n z x is put toge!r 9 "t1 b z x is objectively 9 "t4 ,& z "t itself _c be p]ceiv$1 ! det]m9ation ( ! exi/5ce ( objects 9 "t c only take place by means ( _! connection 9 "t 9 g5]al1 consequ5tly only by means ( priori connect+ conceptions4 ,n[ z ^! conceptions always possess ! "* ( necessity1 exp]i5ce is possible only by means ( a repres5tation ( ! necess>y connection ( p]ception4 ,! ?ree modi ( "t are p]man5ce1 succession1 & coexi/5ce4 ,accord+ly1 !re are ?ree rules ( all relations ( "t 9 ph5om5a1 accord+ to :i* ! exi/5ce ( e ph5om5on is det]m9$ 9 respect ( ! unity ( all "t1 & ^! antec$e all exp]i5ce & r5d] x possible4 ,! g5]al pr9ciple ( all ?ree analogies re/s on ! necess>y unity ( app]ception 9 relation to all possible empirical consci\sness 7p]ception7 at e "t1 consequ5tly1 z ?is unity lies priori at ! f\ndation ( all m5tal op]ations1 ! pr9ciple re/s on ! syn!tical unity ( all ph5om5a accord+ to _! relation 9 "t4 ,= ! orig9al app]ception relates to our int]nal s5se 7! complex ( all repres5tations71 & inde$ relates priori to its =m1 t is to say1 ! relation ( ! manifold empirical consci\sness 9 "t4 ,n[ ?is manifold mu/ be comb9$ 9 orig9al app]ception accord+ to relations ( "t--a necessity impos$ by ! priori transc5d5tal unity ( app]ception1 to :i* is subject$ all t c belong to my 7i4e41 my own7 cognition1 & !re=e all t c become an object = me4 ,?is syn!tical & priori det]m9$ unity 9 relation ( p]ceptions 9 "t is !re=e ! rule3 8,all empirical det]m9ations ( "t mu/ be subject to rules ( ! g5]al det]m9ation ( "t02 & ! analogies ( exp]i5ce1 ( :i* we are n[ ab\t to treat1 mu/ be rules ( ?is nature4 ,^! pr9ciples h ?is peculi>ity1 t !y d n conc]n ph5om5a1 & ! syn!sis ( ! empirical intuition !re(1 b m]ely ! exi/5ce ( ph5om5a & _! relation to ea* o!r 9 reg>d to ?is exi/5ce4 ,n[ ! mode 9 :i* we appreh5d a ?+ 9 a ph5om5on c be det]m9$ priori 9 su* a mann] t ! rule ( its syn!sis c give1 t is to say1 c produce ?is priori intuition 9 e empirical example4 ,b ! exi/5ce ( ph5om5a _c be kn[n priori1 & al?\gh we c\ld arrive by ?is pa? at a conclusion ( ! fact ( "s exi/5ce1 we c\ld n cognize t exi/5ce det]m9ately1 t is to say1 we %\ld be incapable ( anticipat+ 9 :at respect ! empirical intuition ( x w\ld be di/+ui%able f t ( o!rs4 ,! two pr9ciples above m5tion$1 :i* ,i call$ ma!matical1 9 consid]ation ( ! fact ( _! au?oriz+ ! application ( ma!matic ph5om5a1 relate to ^! ph5om5a only 9 reg>d to _! possibility1 & in/ruct u h[ ph5om5a1 z f> z reg>ds _! intuition or ! real 9 _! p]ception1 c be g5]at$ accord+ to ! rules ( a ma!matical syn!sis4 ,consequ5tly1 num]ical quantities1 & ) !m ! det]m9ation ( a ph5om5on z a quantity1 c be employ$ 9 ! "o case z well z 9 ! o!r4 ,?us1 = example1 out ( #bjj1jjj illum9ations by ! moon1 ,i might compose & give priori1 t is con/ruct1 ! degree ( our s5sations ( ! sun-light4#cj ,we may !re=e entitle ^! two pr9ciples con/itutive4 #cj ,kant's mean+ is3 ,! two pr9ciples enunciat$ "u ! heads ( 8,axioms ( ,intuition10 & 8,anticipations ( ,p]ception10 au?orize ! application to ph5om5a ( det]m9ations ( size & numb]1 t is ( ma!matic4 ,= example1 ,i may compute ! light ( ! sun1 & say t its quantity is a c]ta9 numb] ( times great] ?an t ( ! moon4 ,9 ! same way1 heat is measur$ by ! comp>ison ( its diff]5t effects on wat]1 c41 & on m]cury 9 a !rmomet]4--,tr ,! case is v diff]5t ) ^? pr9ciples ^: prov9ce x is to subject ! exi/5ce ( ph5om5a to rules priori4 ,= z exi/5ce does n admit ( be+ con/ruct$1 x is cle> t !y mu/ only conc]n ! relations ( exi/5ce & be m]ely regulative pr9ciples4 ,9 ?is case1 !re=e1 nei!r axioms nor anticipations are to be ?\ght (4 ,?us1 if a p]ception is giv5 u1 9 a c]ta9 relation ( "t to o!r 7al?\gh undet]m9$7 p]ceptions1 we _c !n say priori1 :at & h[ great 79 quantity7 ! o!r p]ception necess>ily connect$ ) ! =m] is1 b only h[ x is connect$1 quoad its exi/5ce1 9 ?is giv5 modus ( "t4 ,analogies 9 philosophy mean some?+ v diff]5t f t :i* !y repres5t 9 ma!matics4 ,9 ! latt] !y are =mulae1 :i* en\nce ! equality ( two relations ( quantity1 & are always con/itutive1 s t if two t]ms ( ! proportion are giv51 ! ?ird is also giv51 t is1 c be con/ruct$ by ! aid ( ^! =mulae4 ,b 9 philosophy1 analogy is n ! equality ( two quantitative b ( two qualitative relations4 ,9 ?is case1 f ?ree giv5 t]ms1 ,i c give priori & cognize ! relation to a f\r? memb]1 b n ?is f\r? t]m itself1 al?\gh ,i c]ta9ly possess a rule to guide me 9 ! se>* = ?is f\r? t]m 9 exp]i5ce1 & a m>k to assi/ me 9 discov]+ x4 ,an analogy ( exp]i5ce is !re=e only a rule accord+ to :i* unity ( exp]i5ce mu/ arise out ( p]ceptions 9 respect to objects 7ph5om5a7 n z a con/itutive1 b m]ely z a regulative pr9ciple4 ,! same holds good also ( ! po/ulates ( empirical ?\ght 9 g5]al1 :i* relate to ! syn!sis ( m]e intuition 7:i* conc]ns ! =m ( ph5om5a71 ! syn!sis ( p]ception 7:i* conc]ns ! matt] ( ph5om5a71 & ! syn!sis ( exp]i5ce 7:i* conc]ns ! relation ( ^! p]ceptions74 ,= !y are only regulative pr9ciples1 & cle>ly di/+ui%able f ! ma!matical1 :i* are con/itutive1 n inde$ 9 reg>d to ! c]ta9ty :i* bo? possess priori1 b 9 ! mode ( evid5ce !re(1 consequ5tly also 9 ! mann] ( demon/ration4 ,b :at has be5 obs]v$ ( all syn!tical propositions1 & mu/ be p>ticul>ly rem>k$ 9 ?is place1 is ?is1 t ^! analogies possess significance & validity1 n z pr9ciples ( ! transc5d5tal1 b only z pr9ciples ( ! empirical use ( ! und]/&+1 & _! tru? c !re=e be prov$ only z su*1 & t consequ5tly ! ph5om5a mu/ n be subjo9$ directly "u ! categories1 b only "u _! s*emata4 ,= if ! objects to :i* ^? pr9ciples mu/ be appli$ 7 ?+s 9 !mselves1 x w\ld be q impossible to cognize aught conc]n+ !m syn!tically priori4 ,b !y are no?+ b ph5om5a2 a complete k ( :i*--a k to :i* all pr9ciples priori mu/ at la/ relate--is ! only possible exp]i5ce4 ,x foll[s t ^! pr9ciples c h no?+ else = _! aim ?an ! conditions ( ! empirical cognition 9 ! unity ( syn!sis ( ph5om5a4 ,b ?is syn!sis is cogitat$ only 9 ! s*ema ( ! pure conception ( ! und]/&+1 ( ^: unity1 z t ( a syn!sis 9 g5]al1 ! category conta9s ! function unre/rict$ by any s5su\s condition4 ,^! pr9ciples w !re=e au?orize u to connect ph5om5a accord+ to an analogy1 ) ! logical & univ]sal unity ( conceptions1 & consequ5tly to employ ! categories 9 ! pr9ciples !mselves2 b 9 ! application ( !m to exp]i5ce1 we %all use only _! s*emata1 z ! key to _! prop] application1 in/ead ( ! categories1 or r ! latt] z re/rict+ conditions1 "u ! title ( 8=mulae0 ( ! =m]4 ,a4 ,,fir/ ,,analogy4 ,pr9ciple ( ! ,p]man5ce ( ,sub/ance4 ,9 all *anges ( ph5om5a1 sub/ance is p]man5t1 & ! quantum !re( 9 nature is nei!r increas$ nor dim9i%$4 ,,pro(4 ,all ph5om5a exi/ 9 "t1 :]e9 alone z sub/ratum1 t is1 z ! p]man5t =m ( ! int]nal intuition1 coexi/5ce & succession c be repres5t$4 ,consequ5tly "t1 9 :i* all *anges ( ph5om5a mu/ be cogitat$1 rema9s & *anges n1 because x is t 9 :i* succession & coexi/5ce c be repres5t$ only z det]m9ations !re(4 ,n[1 "t 9 itself _c be an object ( p]ception4 ,x foll[s t 9 objects ( p]ception1 t is1 9 ph5om5a1 !re mu/ be f\nd a sub/ratum :i* repres5ts "t 9 g5]al1 & 9 :i* all *ange or coexi/5ce c be p]ceiv$ by means ( ! relation ( ph5om5a to x4 ,b ! sub/ratum ( all reality1 t is1 ( all t p]ta9s to ! exi/5ce ( ?+s1 is sub/ance2 all t p]ta9s to exi/5ce c be cogitat$ only z a det]m9ation ( sub/ance4 ,consequ5tly1 ! p]man5t1 9 relation to :i* alone c all relations ( "t 9 ph5om5a be det]m9$1 is sub/ance 9 ! _w ( ph5om5a1 t is1 ! real 9 ph5om5a1 t :i*1 z ! sub/ratum ( all *ange1 rema9s ev] ! same4 ,accord+ly1 z ?is _c *ange 9 exi/5ce1 its quantity 9 nature c nei!r be increas$ nor dim9i%$4 ,our appreh5sion ( ! manifold 9 a ph5om5on is always successive1 is ,consequ5tly always *ang+4 ,by x alone we c\ld1 !re=e1 nev] det]m9e :e!r ?is manifold1 z an object ( exp]i5ce1 is coexi/5t or successive1 unless x _h = a f\ndation some?+ fix$ & p]man5t1 ( ! exi/5ce ( :i* all succession & coexi/5ce are no?+ b s _m modes 7modi ( "t74 ,only 9 ! p]man5t1 !n1 are relations ( "t possible 7= simultaneity & succession are ! only relations 9 "t72 t is to say1 ! p]man5t is ! sub/ratum ( our empirical repres5tation ( "t itself1 9 :i* alone all det]m9ation ( "t is possible4 ,p]man5ce is1 9 fact1 j ano!r expression = "t1 z ! abid+ correlate ( all exi/5ce ( ph5om5a1 & ( all *ange1 & ( all coexi/5ce4 ,= *ange does n affect "t itself1 b only ! ph5om5a 9 "t 7j z coexi/5ce _c be reg>d$ z a modus ( "t itself1 see+ t 9 "t no p>ts are coexi/5t1 b all successive74 ,if we 7 to attribute succession to "t itself1 we %\ld be oblig$ to cogitate ano!r "t1 9 :i* ?is succession w\ld be possible4 ,x is only by means ( ! p]man5t t exi/5ce 9 diff]5t p>ts ( ! successive s]ies ( "t receives a quantity1 :i* we entitle duration4 ,= 9 m]e succession1 exi/5ce is p]petually vani%+ & recomm5c+1 & !re=e nev] has ev5 ! lea/ quantity4 ,)\t ! p]man5t1 !n1 no relation 9 "t is possible4 ,n[1 "t 9 itself is n an object ( p]ception2 consequ5tly ! p]man5t 9 ph5om5a mu/ be reg>d$ z ! sub/ratum ( all det]m9ation ( "t1 & consequ5tly also z ! condition ( ! possibility ( all syn!tical unity ( p]ceptions1 t is1 ( exp]i5ce2 & all exi/5ce & all *ange 9 "t c only be reg>d$ z a mode 9 ! exi/5ce ( t :i* abides un*angeably4 ,!re=e1 9 all ph5om5a1 ! p]man5t is ! object 9 itself1 t is1 ! sub/ance 7ph5om5on72 b all t *anges or c *ange belongs only to ! mode ( ! exi/5ce ( ?is sub/ance or sub/ances1 consequ5tly to its det]m9ations4 ,i f9d t 9 all ages n only ! philosoph]1 b ev5 ! common und]/&+1 has preposit$ ?is p]man5ce z a sub/ratum ( all *ange 9 ph5om5a2 inde$1 ,i am compell$ to believe t !y w always accept ?is z an indubitable fact4 ,only ! philosoph] expresses himself 9 a m precise & def9ite mann]1 :5 he says3 8,9 all *anges 9 ! _w1 ! sub/ance rema9s1 & ! accid5ts alone are *angeable40 ,b ( ?is decid$ly syn!tical proposition1 ,i n[h]e meet ) ev5 an attempt at pro(2 nay1 x v r>ely has ! good =tune to /&1 z x des]ves to d1 at ! head ( ! pure & entirely priori laws ( nature4 ,9 tru?1 ! /atem5t t sub/ance is p]man5t1 is tautological4 ,= ?is v p]man5ce is ! gr\nd on :i* we apply ! category ( sub/ance to ! ph5om5on2 & we %\ld h be5 oblig$ to prove t 9 all ph5om5a !re is some?+ p]man5t1 ( ! exi/5ce ( :i* ! *angeable is no?+ b a det]m9ation4 ,b because a pro( ( ?is nature _c be dogmatical1 t is1 _c be drawn f conceptions1 inasmu* z x conc]ns a syn!tical proposition priori1 & z philosoph]s nev] reflect$ t su* propositions are valid only 9 relation to possible exp]i5ce1 & !re=e _c be prov$ except by means ( a d$uction ( ! possibility ( exp]i5ce1 x is no wond] t :ile x has s]v$ z ! f\ndation ( all exp]i5ce 7= we feel ! ne$ ( x 9 empirical cognition71 x has nev] be5 support$ by pro(4 ,a philosoph] 0 ask$3 8,:at is ! weight ( smoke80 ,he answ]$3 8,subtract f ! weight ( ! burnt wood ! weight ( ! rema9+ a%es1 & y w h ! weight ( ! smoke40 ,?us he presum$ x to be incontrov]tible t ev5 9 fire ! matt] 7sub/ance7 does n p]i%1 b t only ! =m ( x und]goes a *ange4 ,9 l mann] 0 ! say+3 8,f no?+ comes no?+10 only ano!r inf]5ce f ! pr9ciple or p]man5ce1 or r ( ! ev]-abid+ exi/5ce ( ! true subject 9 ph5om5a4 ,= if t 9 ! ph5om5on :i* we call sub/ance is to be ! prop] sub/ratum ( all det]m9ation ( "t1 x foll[s t all exi/5ce 9 pa/ z well z 9 future "t1 mu/ be det]m9able by means ( x alone4 ,h5ce we are entitl$ to apply ! t]m sub/ance to a ph5om5on1 only because we suppose its exi/5ce 9 all "t1 a notion :i* ! ^w p]man5ce does n fully express1 z x seems r to be ref]able to future "t4 ,h[ev]1 ! int]nal necessity p]petually to be1 is insep>ably connect$ ) ! necessity always to h be51 & s ! expression may /& z x is4 8,gigni de nihilo nihil2 9 nihilum nil posse rev]ti10#ca are two propositions :i* ! anci5ts nev] p>t$1 & :i* p n[adays sometimes mi/ak5ly disjo91 because !y imag9e t ! propositions apply to objects z ?+s 9 !mselves1 & t ! =m] might be inimical to ! dep5d5ce 7ev5 9 respect ( its sub/ance also7 ( ! _w ^u a supreme cause4 ,b ?is appreh5sion is entirely ne$less1 = ! "q 9 ?is case is only ( ph5om5a 9 ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce1 ! unity ( :i* nev] c\ld be possible1 if we admitt$ ! possibility t new ?+s 79 respect ( _! sub/ance7 %\ld arise4 ,= 9 t case1 we %\ld lose altoge!r t :i* alone c repres5t ! unity ( "t1 to wit1 ! id5tity ( ! sub/ratum1 z t ?r\gh :i* alone all *ange possesses complete & ?or\gh unity4 ,?is p]man5ce is1 h[ev]1 no?+ b ! mann] 9 :i* we repres5t to ourselves ! exi/5ce ( ?+s 9 ! ph5om5al _w4 #ca ,p]sius1 ,satirae1 iii4#hc-hd4 ,! det]m9ations ( a sub/ance1 :i* are only p>ticul> modes ( its exi/5ce1 are call$ accid5ts4 ,!y are always real1 because !y conc]n ! exi/5ce ( sub/ance 7negations are only det]m9ations1 :i* express ! non-exi/5ce ( some?+ 9 ! sub/ance74 ,n[1 if to ?is real 9 ! sub/ance we ascribe a p>ticul> exi/5ce 7= example1 to motion z an accid5t ( matt]71 ?is exi/5ce is call$ inh]5ce1 9 contradi/9ction to ! exi/5ce ( sub/ance1 :i* we call subsi/5ce4 ,b h5ce arise _m misconceptions1 & x w\ld be a m accurate & j mode ( expression to designate ! accid5t only z ! mode 9 :i* ! exi/5ce ( a sub/ance is positively det]m9$4 ,mean:ile1 by reason ( ! conditions ( ! logical ex]cise ( our und]/&+1 x is impossible to avoid sep>at+1 z x 71 t :i* 9 ! exi/5ce ( a sub/ance is subject to *ange1 :il/ ! sub/ance rema9s1 & reg>d+ x 9 relation to t :i* is prop]ly p]man5t & radical4 ,on ?is acc\nt1 ?is category ( sub/ance /&s "u ! title ( relation1 r because x is ! condition !re( ?an because x conta9s 9 itself any relation4 ,n[1 ^u ?is notion ( p]man5ce re/s ! prop] notion ( ! conception *ange4 ,orig9 & ext9ction are n *anges ( t :i* orig9ates or becomes ext9ct4 ,*ange is b a mode ( exi/5ce1 :i* foll[s on ano!r mode ( exi/5ce ( ! same object2 h5ce all t *anges is p]man5t1 & only ! condition !re( *anges4 ,n[ s9ce ?is mutation affects only det]m9ations1 :i* c h a beg9n+ or an end1 we may say1 employ+ an expression :i* seems some:at p>adoxical3 8,only ! p]man5t 7sub/ance7 is subject to *ange2 ! mutable suff]s no *ange1 b r alt]nation1 t is1 :5 c]ta9 det]m9ations cease1 o!rs beg940 ,*ange1 :51 _c be p]ceiv$ by u except 9 sub/ances1 & orig9 or ext9ction 9 an absolute s5se1 t does n conc]n m]ely a det]m9ation ( ! p]man5t1 _c be a possible p]ception1 = x is ?is v notion ( ! p]man5t :i* r5d]s possible ! repres5tation ( a transition f "o /ate into ano!r1 & f non-be+ to be+1 :i*1 consequ5tly1 c be empirically cogniz$ only z alt]nat+ det]m9ations ( t :i* is p]man5t4 ,grant t a ?+ absolutely beg9s to be2 we mu/ !n h a po9t ( "t 9 :i* x 0 n4 ,b h[ & by :at c we fix & det]m9e ?is po9t ( "t1 unless by t :i* already exi/s8 ,= a void "t--prec$+--is n an object ( p]ception2 b if we connect ?is beg9n+ ) objects :i* exi/$ previ\sly1 & :i* cont9ue to exi/ till ! object 9 "q 9 "q beg9s to be1 !n ! latt] c only be a det]m9ation ( ! =m] z ! p]man5t4 ,! same holds good ( ! notion ( ext9ction1 = ?is presupposes ! empirical repres5tation ( a "t1 9 :i* a ph5om5on no long] exi/s4 ,sub/ances 79 ! _w ( ph5om5a7 are ! sub/ratum ( all det]m9ations ( "t4 ,! beg9n+ ( "s1 & ! ceas+ to be ( o!r sub/ances1 w\ld utt]ly d away ) ! only condition ( ! empirical unity ( "t2 & 9 t case ph5om5a w\ld relate to two diff]5t times1 9 :i*1 side by side1 exi/5ce w\ld pass2 :i* is absurd4 ,= !re is only "o "t 9 :i* all diff]5t times mu/ be plac$1 n z coexi/5t1 b z successive4 ,accord+ly1 p]man5ce is a necess>y condition "u :i* alone ph5om5a1 z ?+s or objects1 are det]m9able 9 a possible exp]i5ce4 ,b z reg>ds ! empirical crit]ion ( ?is necess>y p]man5ce1 & ) x ( ! sub/antiality ( ph5om5a1 we %all f9d suffici5t opportunity to speak 9 ! sequel4 ,b4 ,,second ,,analogy4 ,pr9ciple ( ! ,succession ( ,"t ,accord+ to ! ,law ( ,causality4 ,all *anges take place accord+ to ! law ( ! connection ( ,cause & ,effect4 ,,pro(4 7,t all ph5om5a 9 ! succession ( "t are only *anges1 t is1 a successive be+ & non-be+ ( ! det]m9ations ( sub/ance1 :i* is p]man5t2 consequ5tly t a be+ ( sub/ance itself :i* foll[s on ! non-be+ !re(1 or a non-be+ ( sub/ance :i* foll[s on ! be+ !re(1 9 o!r words1 t ! orig9 or ext9ction ( sub/ance itself1 is impossible--all ?is has be5 fully e/abli%$ 9 treat+ ( ! =ego+ pr9ciple4 ,?is pr9ciple might h be5 express$ z foll[s3 8,all alt]ation 7succession7 ( ph5om5a is m]ely *ange02 = ! *anges ( sub/ance are n orig9 or ext9ction1 because ! conception ( *ange presupposes ! same subject z exi/+ ) two opposite det]m9ations1 & consequ5tly z p]man5t4 ,aft] ?is premonition1 we %all proce$ to ! pro(47 ,i p]ceive t ph5om5a succe$ "o ano!r1 t is to say1 a /ate ( ?+s exi/s at "o "t1 ! opposite ( :i* exi/$ 9 a =m] /ate4 ,9 ?is case1 !n1 ,i really connect toge!r two p]ceptions 9 "t4 ,n[ connection is n an op]ation ( m]e s5se & intuition1 b is ! product ( a syn!tical faculty ( imag9ation1 :i* det]m9es ! int]nal s5se 9 respect ( a relation ( "t4 ,b imag9ation c connect ^! two /ates 9 two ways1 s t ei!r ! "o or ! o!r may antec$e 9 "t2 = "t 9 itself _c be an object ( p]ception1 & :at 9 an object prec$es & :at foll[s _c be empirically det]m9$ 9 relation to x4 ,i am only consci\s1 !n1 t my imag9ation places "o /ate be=e & ! o!r aft]2 n t ! "o /ate antec$es ! o!r 9 ! object4 ,9 o!r words1 ! objective relation ( ! successive ph5om5a rema9s q undet]m9$ by means ( m]e p]ception4 ,n[ 9 ord] t ?is relation may be cogniz$ z det]m9$1 ! relation betwe5 ! two /ates mu/ be s cogitat$ t x is !reby det]m9$ z necess>y1 :i* ( !m mu/ be plac$ be=e & :i* aft]1 & n conv]sely4 ,b ! conception :i* c>ries ) x a necessity ( syn!tical unity1 c be none o!r ?an a pure conception ( ! und]/&+ :i* does n lie 9 m]e p]ception2 & 9 ?is case x is ! conception ( 8! relation ( cause & effect10 ! =m] ( :i* det]m9es ! latt] 9 "t1 z its necess>y consequ5ce1 & n z some?+ :i* might possibly antec$e 7or :i* might 9 "s cases n be p]ceiv$ to foll[74 ,x foll[s t x is only because we subject ! sequ5ce ( ph5om5a1 & consequ5tly all *ange1 to ! law ( causality1 t exp]i5ce itself1 t is1 empirical cognition ( ph5om5a1 becomes possible2 & consequ5tly1 t ph5om5a !mselves1 z objects ( exp]i5ce1 are possible only by virtue ( ?is law4 ,our appreh5sion ( ! manifold ( ph5om5a is always successive4 ,! repres5tations ( p>ts succe$ "o ano!r4 ,:e!r !y succe$ "o ano!r 9 ! object also1 is a second po9t = reflection1 :i* 0 n conta9$ 9 ! =m]4 ,n[ we may c]ta9ly give ! "n ( object to ev]y?+1 ev5 to e repres5tation1 s f> z we are consci\s !re(2 b :at ?is ^w may mean 9 ! case ( ph5om5a1 n m]ely 9 s f> z !y 7z repres5tations7 are objects1 b only 9 s f> z !y indicate an object1 is a "q requir+ deep] consid]ation4 ,9 s f> z !y1 reg>d$ m]ely z repres5tations1 are at ! same "t objects ( consci\sness1 !y are n to be di/+ui%$ f appreh5sion1 t is1 reception into ! syn!sis ( imag9ation1 & we mu/ !re=e say3 8,! manifold ( ph5om5a is always produc$ successively 9 ! m9d40 ,if ph5om5a 7 ?+s 9 !mselves1 no man w\ld be able to conjecture f ! succession ( our repres5tations h[ ?is manifold is connect$ 9 ! object2 = we h to d only ) our repres5tations4 ,h[ ?+s may be 9 !mselves1 )\t reg>d to ! repres5tations ?r\gh :i* !y affect u1 is utt]ly beyond ! sph]e ( our cognition4 ,n[ al?\gh ph5om5a are n ?+s 9 !mselves1 & are nev]!less ! only ?+ giv5 to u to be cogniz$1 x is my duty to %[ :at sort ( connection 9 "t belongs to ! manifold 9 ph5om5a !mselves1 :ile ! repres5tation ( ?is manifold 9 appreh5sion is always successive4 ,= example1 ! appreh5sion ( ! manifold 9 ! ph5om5on ( a h\se :i* /&s be=e me1 is successive4 ,n[ comes ! "q :e!r ! manifold ( ?is h\se is 9 itself successive--:i* no "o w be at all will+ to grant4 ,b1 s soon z ,i raise my conception ( an object to ! transc5d5tal signification !re(1 ,i f9d t ! h\se is n a ?+ 9 itself1 b only a ph5om5on1 t is1 a repres5tation1 ! transc5d5tal object ( :i* rema9s utt]ly unkn[n4 ,:at !n am ,i to und]/& by ! "q3 8,h[ c ! manifold be connect$ 9 ! ph5om5on itself--n consid]$ z a ?+ 9 itself1 b m]ely z a ph5om5on80 ,"h t :i* lies 9 my successive appreh5sion is reg>d$ z repres5tation1 :il/ ! ph5om5on :i* is giv5 me1 not)/&+ t x is no?+ m ?an a complex ( ^! repres5tations1 is reg>d$ z ! object !re(1 ) :i* my conception1 drawn f ! repres5tations ( appreh5sion1 mu/ h>monize4 ,x is v soon se5 t1 z accordance ( ! cognition ) its object con/itutes tru?1 ! "q n[ be=e u c only relate to ! =mal conditions ( empirical tru?2 & t ! ph5om5on1 9 opposition to ! repres5tations ( appreh5sion1 c only be di/+ui%$ !refrom z ! object ( !m1 if x is subject to a rule :i* di/+ui%es x f e o!r appreh5sion1 & :i* r5d]s necess>y a mode ( connection ( ! manifold4 ,t 9 ! ph5om5on :i* conta9s ! condition ( ?is necess>y rule ( appreh5sion1 is ! object4 ,let u n[ proce$ to our task4 ,t some?+ happ5s1 t is to say1 t some?+ or "s /ate exi/s :i* be=e 0 n1 _c be empirically p]ceiv$1 unless a ph5om5on prec$es1 :i* does n conta9 9 itself ?is /ate4 ,= a reality :i* %\ld foll[ ^u a void "t1 9 o!r words1 a beg9n+1 :i* no /ate ( ?+s prec$es1 c j z little be appreh5d$ z ! void "t itself4 ,e appreh5sion ( an ev5t is !re=e a p]ception :i* foll[s ^u ano!r p]ception4 ,b z ?is is ! case ) all syn!sis ( appreh5sion1 z ,i h %[n above 9 ! example ( a h\se1 my appreh5sion ( an ev5t is n yet suffici5tly di/+ui%$ f o!r appreh5sions4 ,b ,i rem>k also t if 9 a ph5om5on :i* conta9s an occurr5ce1 ,i call ! antec$5t /ate ( my p]ception1 ,a1 & ! foll[+ /ate1 ,b1 ! p]ception ,b c only foll[ ,a 9 appreh5sion1 & ! p]ception ,a _c foll[ ,b1 b only prec$e x4 ,= example1 ,i see a %ip float d[n ! /ream ( a riv]4 ,my p]ception ( its place l[] d[n foll[s ^u my p]ception ( its place high] up ! c\rse ( ! riv]1 & x is impossible t1 9 ! appreh5sion ( ?is ph5om5on1 ! vessel %\ld be p]ceiv$ fir/ bel[ & aft]w>ds high] up ! /ream4 ,"h1 !re=e1 ! ord] 9 ! sequ5ce ( p]ceptions 9 appreh5sion is det]m9$2 & by ?is ord] appreh5sion is regulat$4 ,9 ! =m] example1 my p]ceptions 9 ! appreh5sion ( a h\se might beg9 at ! ro( & end at ! f\ndation1 or vice v]sa2 or ,i might appreh5d ! manifold 9 ?is empirical intuition1 by go+ f left to "r1 & f "r to left4 ,accord+ly1 9 ! s]ies ( ^! p]ceptions1 !re 0 no det]m9$ ord]1 :i* necessitat$ my beg9n+ at a c]ta9 po9t1 9 ord] empirically to connect ! manifold4 ,b ?is rule is always to be met ) 9 ! p]ception ( t :i* happ5s1 & x makes ! ord] ( ! successive p]ceptions 9 ! appreh5sion ( su* a ph5om5on necess>y4 ,i mu/1 !re=e1 9 ! pres5t case1 d$uce ! subjective sequ5ce ( appreh5sion f ! objective sequ5ce ( ph5om5a1 = o!rwise ! =m] is q undet]m9$1 & "o ph5om5on is n di/+ui%able f ano!r4 ,! =m] alone proves no?+ z to ! connection ( ! manifold 9 an object1 = x is q arbitr>y4 ,! latt] mu/ consi/ 9 ! ord] ( ! manifold 9 a ph5om5on1 accord+ to :i* ord] ! appreh5sion ( "o ?+ 7t :i* happ5s7 foll[s t ( ano!r ?+ 7:i* prec$es71 9 con=mity ) a rule4 ,9 ?is way alone c ,i be au?oriz$ to say ( ! ph5om5on itself1 & n m]ely ( my own appreh5sion1 t a c]ta9 ord] or sequ5ce is to be f\nd !re94 ,t is1 9 o!r words1 ,i _c arrange my appreh5sion o!rwise ?an 9 ?is ord]4 ,9 con=mity ) ?is rule1 !n1 x is necess>y t 9 t :i* antec$es an ev5t !re be f\nd ! condition ( a rule1 accord+ to :i* 9 ?is ev5t foll[s always & necess>ily2 b ,i _c rev]se ?is & g back f ! ev5t1 & det]m9e 7by appreh5sion7 t :i* antec$es x4 ,= no ph5om5on goes back f ! succe$+ po9t ( "t to ! prec$+ po9t1 al?\gh x does c]ta9ly relate to a prec$+ po9t ( "t2 f a giv5 "t1 on ! o!r h&1 !re is always a necess>y progression to ! det]m9$ succe$+ "t4 ,!re=e1 because !re c]ta9ly is some?+ t foll[s1 ,i mu/ ( necessity connect x ) some?+ else1 :i* antec$es1 & ^u :i* x foll[s1 9 con=mity ) a rule1 t is necess>ily1 s t ! ev5t1 z condition$1 af=ds c]ta9 indication ( a condition1 & ?is condition det]m9es ! ev5t4 ,let u suppose t no?+ prec$es an ev5t1 ^u :i* ?is ev5t mu/ foll[ 9 con=mity ) a rule4 ,all sequ5ce ( p]ception w\ld !n exi/ only 9 appreh5sion1 t is to say1 w\ld be m]ely subjective1 & x c\ld n !reby be objectively det]m9$ :at ?+ ought to prec$e1 & :at ought to foll[ 9 p]ception4 ,9 su* a case1 we %\ld h no?+ b a play ( repres5tations1 :i* w\ld possess no application to any object4 ,t is to say1 x w\ld n be possible ?r\gh p]ception to di/+ui% "o ph5om5on f ano!r1 z reg>ds relations ( "t2 because ! succession 9 ! act ( appreh5sion w\ld always be ( ! same sort1 & !re=e !re w\ld be no?+ 9 ! ph5om5on to det]m9e ! succession1 & to r5d] a c]ta9 sequ5ce objectively necess>y4 ,&1 9 ?is case1 ,i _c say t two /ates 9 a ph5om5on foll[ "o ^u ! o!r1 b only t "o appreh5sion foll[s ^u ano!r4 ,b ?is is m]ely subjective1 & does n det]m9e an object1 & consequ5tly _c be held to be cognition ( an object--n ev5 9 ! ph5om5al _w4 ,accord+ly1 :5 we "k 9 exp]i5ce t some?+ happ5s1 we always presuppose t some?+ prec$es1 :]eupon x foll[s 9 con=mity ) a rule4 ,= o!rwise ,i c\ld n say ( ! object t x foll[s2 because ! m]e succession 9 my appreh5sion1 if x be n det]m9$ by a rule 9 relation to some?+ prec$+1 does n au?orize succession 9 ! object4 ,only1 !re=e1 9 ref]5ce to a rule1 accord+ to :i* ph5om5a are det]m9$ 9 _! sequ5ce1 t is1 z !y happ51 by ! prec$+ /ate1 c ,i make my subjective syn!sis 7( appreh5sion7 objective1 & x is only "u ?is presupposition t ev5 ! exp]i5ce ( an ev5t is possible4 ,no d\bt x appe>s z if ?is 7 9 ?or\gh contradiction to all ! notions :i* p h hi!rto ent]ta9$ 9 reg>d to ! proc$ure ( ! human und]/&+4 ,accord+ to ^! op9ions1 x is by means ( ! p]ception & comp>ison ( simil> consequ5ces foll[+ ^u c]ta9 antec$5t ph5om5a t ! und]/&+ is l$ to ! discov]y ( a rule1 accord+ to :i* c]ta9 ev5ts always foll[ c]ta9 ph5om5a1 & x is only by ?is process t we atta9 to ! conception ( cause4 ,^u su* a basis1 x is cle> t ?is conception mu/ be m]ely empirical1 & ! rule :i* x furni%es u )--8,ev]y?+ t happ5s mu/ h a cause0--w\ld be j z cont+5t z exp]i5ce itself4 ,! univ]sality & necessity ( ! rule or law w\ld be p]fectly spuri\s attributes ( x4 ,inde$1 x c\ld n possess univ]sal validity1 inasmu* z x w\ld n 9 ?is case be priori1 b f\nd$ on d$uction4 ,b ! same is ! case ) ?is law z ) o!r pure priori repres5tations 7e4g41 space & "t71 :i* we c draw 9 p]fect cle>ness & complet5ess f exp]i5ce1 only because we _h already plac$ !m !re91 & by t means1 & by t alone1 _h r5d]$ exp]i5ce possible4 ,inde$1 ! logical cle>ness ( ?is repres5tation ( a rule1 det]m9+ ! s]ies ( ev5ts1 is possible only :5 we h made use !re( 9 exp]i5ce4 ,nev]!less1 ! recognition ( ?is rule1 z a condition ( ! syn!tical unity ( ph5om5a 9 "t1 0 ! gr\nd ( exp]i5ce itself & consequ5tly prec$$ x priori4 ,x is n[ our duty to %[ by an example t we nev]1 ev5 9 exp]i5ce1 attribute to an object ! notion ( succession or effect 7( an ev5t--t is1 ! happ5+ ( some?+ t did n exi/ be=e71 & di/+ui% x f ! subjective succession ( appreh5sion1 unless :5 a rule lies at ! f\ndation1 :i* compels u to obs]ve ?is ord] ( p]ception 9 pref]5ce to any o!r1 & t1 inde$1 x is ?is necessity :i* fir/ r5d]s possible ! repres5tation ( a succession 9 ! object4 ,we h repres5tations )9 u1 ( :i* also we c be consci\s4 ,b1 h[ev] widely ext5d$1 h[ev] accurate & ?or\ghgo+ ?is consci\sness may be1 ^! repres5tations are /ill no?+ m ?an repres5tations1 t is1 int]nal det]m9ations ( ! m9d 9 ?is or t relation ( "t4 ,n[ h[ happ5s x t to ^! repres5tations we %\ld set an object1 or t1 9 addition to _! subjective reality1 z modifications1 we %\ld /ill fur!r attribute to !m a c]ta9 unkn[n objective reality8 ,x is cle> t objective significancy _c consi/ 9 a relation to ano!r repres5tation 7( t :i* we desire to t]m object71 = 9 t case ! "q aga9 arises3 8,h[ does ?is o!r repres5tation g out ( itself1 & obta9 objective significancy ov] & above ! subjective1 :i* is prop] to x1 z a det]m9ation ( a /ate ( m9d80 ,if we try to discov] :at sort ( new prop]ty ! relation to an object gives to our subjective repres5tations1 & :at new importance !y !reby receive1 we %all f9d t ?is relation has no o!r effect ?an t ( r5d]+ necess>y ! connection ( our repres5tations 9 a c]ta9 mann]1 & ( subject+ !m to a rule2 & t conv]sely1 x is only because a c]ta9 ord] is necess>y 9 ! relations ( "t ( our repres5tations1 t objective significancy is ascrib$ to !m4 ,9 ! syn!sis ( ph5om5a1 ! manifold ( our repres5tations is always successive4 ,n[ h]eby is n repres5t$ an object1 = by means ( ?is succession1 :i* is common to all appreh5sion1 no "o ?+ is di/+ui%$ f ano!r4 ,b s soon z ,i p]ceive or assume t 9 ?is succession !re is a relation to a /ate antec$5t1 f :i* ! repres5tation foll[s 9 accordance ) a rule1 s soon d ,i repres5t some?+ z an ev5t1 or z a ?+ t happ5s2 9 o!r words1 ,i cognize an object to :i* ,i mu/ assign a c]ta9 det]m9ate position 9 "t1 :i* _c be alt]$1 because ( ! prec$+ /ate 9 ! object4 ,:51 !re=e1 ,i p]ceive t some?+ happ5s1 !re is conta9$ 9 ?is repres5tation1 9 ! fir/ place1 ! fact1 t some?+ antec$es2 because1 x is only 9 relation to ?is t ! ph5om5on obta9s its prop] relation ( "t1 9 o!r words1 exi/s aft] an antec$5t "t1 9 :i* x did n exi/4 ,b x c receive its det]m9$ place 9 "t only by ! presupposition t some?+ exi/$ 9 ! =ego+ /ate1 ^u :i* x foll[s inevitably & always1 t is1 9 con=mity ) a rule4 ,f all ?is x is evid5t t1 9 ! fir/ place1 ,i _c rev]se ! ord] ( succession1 & make t :i* happ5s prec$e t ^u :i* x foll[s2 & t1 9 ! second place1 if ! antec$5t /ate be posit$1 a c]ta9 det]m9ate ev5t inevitably & necess>ily foll[s4 ,h5ce x foll[s t !re exi/s a c]ta9 ord] 9 our repres5tations1 :]eby ! pres5t gives a sure indication ( "s previ\sly exi/+ /ate1 z a correlate1 ?\gh /ill undet]m9$1 ( ! exi/+ ev5t :i* is giv5--a correlate :i* itself relates to ! ev5t z its consequ5ce1 conditions x1 & connects x necess>ily ) itself 9 ! s]ies ( "t4 ,if !n x be admitt$ z a necess>y law ( s5sibility1 & consequ5tly a =mal condition ( all p]ception1 t ! prec$+ necess>ily det]m9es ! succe$+ "t 7inasmu* z ,i _c arrive at ! succe$+ except ?r\gh ! prec$+71 x mu/ likewise be an indisp5sable law ( empirical repres5tation ( ! s]ies ( "t t ! ph5om5a ( ! pa/ det]m9e all ph5om5a 9 ! succe$+ "t1 & t ! latt]1 z ev5ts1 _c take place1 except 9 s f> z ! =m] det]m9e _! exi/5ce 9 "t1 t is to say1 e/abli% x accord+ to a rule4 ,= x is ( c\rse only 9 ph5om5a t we c empirically cognize ?is cont9uity 9 ! connection ( times4 ,= all exp]i5ce & = ! possibility ( exp]i5ce1 und]/&+ is indisp5sable1 & ! fir/ /ep :i* x takes 9 ?is sph]e is n to r5d] ! repres5tation ( objects cle>1 b to r5d] ! repres5tation ( an object 9 g5]al1 possible4 ,x does ?is by apply+ ! ord] ( "t to ph5om5a1 & _! exi/5ce4 ,9 o!r words1 x assigns to ea* ph5om5on1 z a consequ5ce1 a place 9 relation to prec$+ ph5om5a1 det]m9$ priori 9 "t1 )\t :i* x c\ld n h>monize ) "t itself1 :i* det]m9es a place priori to all its p>ts4 ,?is det]m9ation ( place _c be d]iv$ f ! relation ( ph5om5a to absolute "t 7= x is n an object ( p]ception72 b1 on ! contr>y1 ph5om5a mu/ reciprocally det]m9e ! places 9 "t ( "o ano!r1 & r5d] ^! necess>y 9 ! ord] ( "t4 ,9 o!r words1 :atev] foll[s or happ5s1 mu/ foll[ 9 con=mity ) a univ]sal rule ^u t :i* 0 conta9$ 9 ! =ego+ /ate4 ,h5ce arises a s]ies ( ph5om5a1 :i*1 by means ( ! und]/&+1 produces & r5d]s necess>y exactly ! same ord] & cont9u\s connection 9 ! s]ies ( our possible p]ceptions1 z is f\nd priori 9 ! =m ( int]nal intuition 7"t71 9 :i* all our p]ceptions mu/ h place4 ,t some?+ happ5s1 !n1 is a p]ception :i* belongs to a possible exp]i5ce1 :i* becomes real only because ,i look ^u ! ph5om5on z det]m9$ 9 reg>d to its place 9 "t1 consequ5tly z an object1 :i* c always be f\nd by means ( a rule 9 ! connect$ s]ies ( my p]ceptions4 ,b ?is rule ( ! det]m9ation ( a ?+ accord+ to succession 9 "t is z foll[s3 8,9 :at prec$es may be f\nd ! condition1 "u :i* an ev5t always 7t is1 necess>ily7 foll[s40 ,f all ?is x is obvi\s t ! pr9ciple ( cause & effect is ! pr9ciple ( possible exp]i5ce1 t is1 ( objective cognition ( ph5om5a1 9 reg>d to _! relations 9 ! succession ( "t4 ,! pro( ( ?is fundam5tal proposition re/s entirely on ! foll[+ mom5ta ( argum5t4 ,to all empirical cognition belongs ! syn!sis ( ! manifold by ! imag9ation1 a syn!sis :i* is always successive1 t is1 9 :i* ! repres5tations !re9 always foll[ "o ano!r4 ,b ! ord] ( succession 9 imag9ation is n det]m9$1 & ! s]ies ( successive repres5tations may be tak5 retrogressively z well z progressively4 ,b if ?is syn!sis is a syn!sis ( appreh5sion 7( ! manifold ( a giv5 ph5om5on71 !n ! ord] is det]m9$ 9 ! object1 or to speak m accurately1 !re is !re9 an ord] ( successive syn!sis :i* det]m9es an object1 & accord+ to :i* some?+ necess>ily prec$es1 & :5 ?is is posit$1 some?+ else necess>ily foll[s4 ,if1 !n1 my p]ception is to conta9 ! cognition ( an ev5t1 t is1 ( some?+ :i* really happ5s1 x mu/ be an empirical judgem5t1 :]e9 we ?9k t ! succession is det]m9$2 t is1 x presupposes ano!r ph5om5on1 ^u :i* ?is ev5t foll[s necess>ily1 or 9 con=mity ) a rule4 ,if1 on ! contr>y1 :5 ,i posit$ ! antec$5t1 ! ev5t did n necess>ily foll[1 ,i %\ld be oblig$ to consid] x m]ely z a subjective play ( my imag9ation1 & if 9 ?is ,i repres5t$ to myself any?+ z objective1 ,i mu/ look ^u x z a m]e dream4 ,?us1 ! relation ( ph5om5a 7z possible p]ceptions71 accord+ to :i* t :i* happ5s is1 z to its exi/5ce1 necess>ily det]m9$ 9 "t by some?+ :i* antec$es1 9 con=mity ) a rule--9 o!r words1 ! relation ( cause & effect--is ! condition ( ! objective validity ( our empirical judgem5ts 9 reg>d to ! sequ5ce ( p]ceptions1 consequ5tly ( _! empirical tru?1 & !re=e ( exp]i5ce4 ,! pr9ciple ( ! relation ( causality 9 ! succession ( ph5om5a is !re=e valid = all objects ( exp]i5ce1 because x is itself ! gr\nd ( ! possibility ( exp]i5ce4 ,"h1 h[ev]1 a difficulty arises1 :i* mu/ be resolv$4 ,! pr9ciple ( ! connection ( causality among ph5om5a is limit$ 9 our =mula to ! succession !re(1 al?\gh 9 practice we f9d t ! pr9ciple applies also :5 ! ph5om5a exi/ toge!r 9 ! same "t1 & t cause & effect may be simultane\s4 ,= example1 !re is heat 9 a room1 :i* does n exi/ 9 ! op5 air4 ,i look ab\t = ! cause1 & f9d x to be ! fire1 ,n[ ! fire z ! cause is simultane\s ) its effect1 ! heat ( ! room4 ,9 ?is case1 !n1 !re is no succession z reg>ds "t1 betwe5 cause & effect1 b !y are simultane\s2 & /ill ! law holds good4 ,! great] "p ( op]at+ causes 9 nature are simultane\s ) _! effects1 & ! succession 9 "t ( ! latt] is produc$ only because ! cause _c a*ieve ! total ( its effect 9 "o mom5t4 ,b at ! mom5t :5 ! effect fir/ arises1 x is always simultane\s ) ! causality ( its cause1 because1 if ! cause _h b a mom5t be=e ceas$ to be1 ! effect c\ld n h aris54 ,"h x mu/ be specially rememb]$ t we mu/ consid] ! ord] ( "t & n ! lapse !re(4 ,! relation rema9s1 ev5 ?\gh no "t has elaps$4 ,! "t betwe5 ! causality ( ! cause & its imm$iate effect may entirely vani%1 & ! cause & effect be ?us simultane\s1 b ! relation ( ! "o to ! o!r rema9s always det]m9able accord+ to "t4 ,if1 = example1 ,i consid] a lead5 ball1 :i* lies ^u a cu%ion & makes a holl[ 9 x1 z a cause1 !n x is simultane\s ) ! effect4 ,b ,i di/+ui% ! two ?r\gh ! relation ( "t ( ! dynamical connection ( bo?4 ,= if ,i lay ! ball ^u ! cu%ion1 !n ! holl[ foll[s ^u ! be=e smoo? surface2 b suppos+ ! cu%ion has1 f "s cause or ano!r1 a holl[1 !re does n !reupon foll[ a lead5 ball4 ,?us1 ! law ( succession ( "t is 9 all in/ances ! only empirical crit]ion ( effect 9 relation to ! causality ( ! antec$5t cause4 ,! glass is ! cause ( ! ris+ ( ! wat] above its horizontal surface1 al?\gh ! two ph5om5a are contemporane\s4 ,=1 z soon z ,i draw "s wat] ) ! glass f a l>g] vessel1 an effect foll[s !reupon1 namely1 ! *ange ( ! horizontal /ate :i* ! wat] _h 9 ! l>ge vessel into a concave1 :i* x assumes 9 ! glass4 ,?is conception ( causality leads u to ! conception ( action2 t ( action1 to ! conception ( =ce2 & ?r\gh x1 to ! conception ( sub/ance4 ,z ,i d n wi% ?is critical essay1 ! sole purpose ( :i* is to treat ( ! s\rces ( our syn!tical cognition priori1 to be cr[d$ ) analyses :i* m]ely expla91 b d n enl>ge ! sph]e ( our conceptions1 ,i res]ve ! detail$ explanation ( ! above conceptions = a future sy/em ( pure reason4 ,su* an analysis1 inde$1 execut$ ) great p>ticul>ity1 may already be f\nd 9 well-kn[n works on ?is subject4 ,b ,i _c at pres5t refra9 f mak+ a few rem>ks on ! empirical crit]ion ( a sub/ance1 9 s f> z x seems to be m evid5t & m easily recogniz$ ?r\gh ! conception ( action ?an ?r\gh t ( ! p]man5ce ( a ph5om5on4 ,:]e action 7consequ5tly activity & =ce7 exi/s1 sub/ance also mu/ exi/1 & 9 x alone mu/ be s\ght ! seat ( t fruitful s\rce ( ph5om5a4 ,v well4 ,b if we are call$ ^u to expla9 :at we mean by sub/ance1 & wi% to avoid ! vice ( reason+ 9 a circle1 ! answ] is by no means s easy4 ,h[ %all we conclude imm$iately f ! action to ! p]man5ce ( t :i* acts1 ?is be+ nev]!less an ess5tial & peculi> crit]ion ( sub/ance 7ph5om5on78 ,b aft] :at has be5 said above1 ! solution ( ?is "q becomes easy en\gh1 al?\gh by ! common mode ( proc$ure--m]ely analys+ our conceptions--x w\ld be q impossible4 ,! conception ( action indicates ! relation ( ! subject ( causality to ! effect4 ,n[ because all effect consi/s 9 t :i* happ5s1 !re=e 9 ! *angeable1 ! la/ subject !re( is ! p]man5t1 z ! sub/ratum ( all t *anges1 t is1 sub/ance4 ,= accord+ to ! pr9ciple ( causality1 actions are always ! fir/ gr\nd ( all *ange 9 ph5om5a &1 consequ5tly1 _c be a prop]ty ( a subject :i* itself *anges1 because if ?is 7 ! case1 o!r actions & ano!r subject w\ld be necess>y to det]m9e ?is *ange4 ,f all ?is x results t action alone1 z an empirical crit]ion1 is a suffici5t pro( ( ! pres5ce ( sub/antiality1 )\t any necessity on my "p ( endeav\r+ to discov] ! p]man5ce ( sub/ance by a comp>ison4 ,besides1 by ?is mode ( induction we c\ld n atta9 to ! complet5ess :i* ! magnitude & /rict univ]sality ( ! conception requires4 ,= t ! prim>y subject ( ! causality ( all aris+ & pass+ away1 all orig9 & ext9ction1 _c itself 79 ! sph]e ( ph5om5a7 arise & pass away1 is a s\nd & safe conclusion1 a conclusion :i* leads u to ! conception ( empirical necessity & p]man5ce 9 exi/5ce1 & consequ5tly to ! conception ( a sub/ance z ph5om5on4 ,:5 some?+ happ5s1 ! m]e fact ( ! occurr5ce1 )\t reg>d to t :i* occurs1 is an object requir+ inve/igation4 ,! transition f ! non-be+ ( a /ate into ! exi/5ce ( x1 suppos+ t ?is /ate conta9s no quality :i* previ\sly exi/$ 9 ! ph5om5on1 is a fact ( itself dem&+ inquiry4 ,su* an ev5t1 z has be5 %[n 9 ,no4 ,a1 does n conc]n sub/ance 7= sub/ance does n ?us orig9ate71 b its condition or /ate4 ,x is !re=e only *ange1 & n orig9 f no?+4 ,if ?is orig9 be reg>d$ z ! effect ( a =eign cause1 x is t]m$ creation1 :i* _c be admitt$ z an ev5t among ph5om5a1 because ! v possibility ( x w\ld annihilate ! unity ( exp]i5ce4 ,if1 h[ev]1 ,i reg>d all ?+s n z ph5om5a1 b z ?+s 9 !mselves & objects ( und]/&+ alone1 !y1 al?\gh sub/ances1 may be consid]$ z dep5d5t1 9 respect ( _! exi/5ce1 on a =eign cause4 ,b ?is w\ld require a v diff]5t mean+ 9 ! words1 a mean+ :i* c\ld n apply to ph5om5a z objects ( possible exp]i5ce4 ,h[ a ?+ c be *ang$1 h[ x is possible t ^u "o /ate exi/+ 9 "o po9t ( "t1 an opposite /ate %\ld foll[ 9 ano!r po9t ( "t--( ?is we h n ! smalle/ conception priori4 ,!re is requisite = ?is ! k ( real p[]s1 :i* c only be giv5 empirically2 = example1 k ( mov+ =ces1 or1 9 o!r words1 ( c]ta9 successive ph5om5a 7z movem5ts7 :i* indicate ! pres5ce ( su* =ces4 ,b ! =m ( e *ange1 ! condition "u :i* alone x c take place z ! com+ into exi/5ce ( ano!r /ate 7be ! cont5t ( ! *ange1 t is1 ! /ate :i* is *ang$1 :at x may71 & consequ5tly ! succession ( ! /ates !mselves c v well be consid]$ priori1 9 relation to ! law ( causality & ! conditions ( "t4#cb #cb ,x mu/ be rem>k$ t ,i d n speak ( ! *ange ( c]ta9 relations1 b ( ! *ange ( ! /ate4 ,?us1 :5 a body moves 9 a uni=m mann]1 x does n *ange its /ate 7( motion72 b only :5 all motion increases or decreases4 ,:5 a sub/ance passes f "o /ate1 a1 into ano!r /ate1 b1 ! po9t ( "t 9 :i* ! latt] exi/s is diff]5t f1 & subsequ5t to t 9 :i* ! =m] exi/$4 ,9 l mann]1 ! second /ate1 z reality 79 ! ph5om5on71 diff]s f ! fir/1 9 :i* ! reality ( ! second did n exi/1 z b f z]o4 ,t is to say1 if ! /ate1 b1 diff]s f ! /ate1 a1 only 9 respect to quantity1 ! *ange is a com+ into exi/5ce ( b -a1 :i* 9 ! =m] /ate did n exi/1 & 9 relation to :i* t /ate is ,o4 ,n[ ! "q arises h[ a ?+ passes f "o /ate a1 into ano!r /ate b4 ,betwe5 two mom5ts !re is always a c]ta9 "t1 & betwe5 two /ates exi/+ 9 ^! mom5ts !re is always a diff]5ce hav+ a c]ta9 quantity 7= all p>ts ( ph5om5a are 9 _! turn quantities74 ,consequ5tly1 e transition f "o /ate into ano!r1 is always effect$ 9 a "t conta9$ betwe5 two mom5ts1 ( :i* ! fir/ det]m9es ! /ate :i* ! ?+ leaves1 & ! second det]m9es ! /ate into :i* ! ?+ passes4 ,bo? mom5ts1 !n1 are limitations ( ! "t ( a *ange1 consequ5tly ( ! int]m$iate /ate betwe5 bo?1 & z su* !y belong to ! total ( ! *ange4 ,n[ e *ange has a cause1 :i* evid5ces its causality 9 ! :ole "t dur+ :i* ! *>ge takes place4 ,! cause1 !re=e1 does n produce ! *ange all at once or 9 "o mom5t1 b 9 a "t1 s t1 z ! "t gradually increases f ! comm5c+ in/ant1 a1 to its completion at b1 9 l mann] also1 ! quantity ( ! reality 7b - a7 is g5]at$ ?r\gh ! less] degrees :i* are conta9$ betwe5 ! fir/ & la/4 ,all *ange is !re=e possible only ?r\gh a cont9u\s action ( ! causality1 :i*1 9 s f> z x is uni=m1 we call a mom5tum4 ,! *ange does n consi/ ( ^! mom5ta1 b is g5]at$ or produc$ by !m z _! effect4 ,su* is ! law ( ! cont9uity ( all *ange1 ! gr\nd ( :i* is t nei!r "t itself nor any ph5om5on 9 "t consi/s ( p>ts :i* are ! smalle/ possible1 b t1 not)/&+1 ! /ate ( a ?+ passes 9 ! process ( a *ange ?r\gh all ^! p>ts1 z elem5ts1 to its second /ate4 ,!re is no smalle/ degree ( reality 9 a ph5om5on1 j z !re is no smalle/ degree 9 ! quantity ( "t2 & s ! new /ate ( reality gr[s up out ( ! =m] /ate1 ?r\gh all ! inf9ite degrees !re(1 ! diff]5ces ( :i* "o f ano!r1 tak5 all toge!r1 are less ?an ! diff]5ce betwe5 #j & a4 ,x is n our bus9ess to inquire "h into ! utility ( ?is pr9ciple 9 ! inve/igation ( nature4 ,b h[ su* a proposition1 :i* appe>s s greatly to ext5d our k ( nature1 is possible completely priori1 is inde$ a "q :i* des]ves inve/igation1 al?\gh ! fir/ view seems to demon/rate ! tru? & reality ( ! pr9ciple1 & ! "q1 h[ x is possible1 may be consid]$ sup]flu\s4 ,= !re are s _m gr\ndless pret5sions to ! enl>gem5t ( our k by pure reason t we mu/ take x z a g5]al rule to be mi/ru/ful ( all su*1 & )\t a ?or\ghgo+ & radical d$uction1 to believe no?+ ( ! sort ev5 on ! cle>e/ dogmatical evid5ce4 ,e addition to our empirical k1 & e advance made 9 ! ex]cise ( our p]ception1 is no?+ m ?an an ext5sion ( ! det]m9ation ( ! int]nal s5se1 t is to say1 a progression 9 "t1 be objects !mselves :at !y may1 ph5om5a1 or pure intuitions4 ,?is progression 9 "t det]m9es ev]y?+1 & is itself det]m9$ by no?+ else4 ,t is to say1 ! p>ts ( ! progression exi/ only 9 "t1 & by means ( ! syn!sis !re(1 & are n giv5 antec$5tly to x4 ,= ?is reason1 e transition 9 p]ception to any?+ :i* foll[s ^u ano!r 9 "t1 is a det]m9ation ( "t by means ( ! production ( ?is p]ception4 ,& z ?is det]m9ation ( "t is1 always & 9 all its p>ts1 a quantity1 ! p]ception produc$ is to be consid]$ z a quantity :i* proce$s ?r\gh all its degrees--no "o ( :i* is ! smalle/ possible--f z]o up to its det]m9$ degree4 ,f ?is we p]ceive ! possibility ( cogniz+ priori a law ( *anges--a law1 h[ev]1 :i* conc]ns _! =m m]ely4 ,we m]ely anticipate our own appreh5sion1 ! =mal condition ( :i*1 inasmu* z x is itself to be f\nd 9 ! m9d antec$5tly to all giv5 ph5om5a1 mu/ c]ta9ly be capable ( be+ cogniz$ priori4 ,?us1 z "t conta9s ! s5su\s condition priori ( ! possibility ( a cont9u\s progression ( t :i* exi/s to t :i* foll[s x1 ! und]/&+1 by virtue ( ! unity ( app]ception1 conta9s ! condition priori ( ! possibility ( a cont9u\s det]m9ation ( ! position 9 "t ( all ph5om5a1 & ?is by means ( ! s]ies ( causes & effects1 ! =m] ( :i* necessitate ! sequ5ce ( ! latt]1 & !reby r5d] univ]sally & = all "t1 & by consequ5ce1 objectively1 valid ! empirical cognition ( ! relations ( "t4 ,c4 ,,?ird ,,analogy4 ,pr9ciple ( ,coexi/5ce1 ,accord+ to ! ,law ( ,reciprocity or ,community4 ,all sub/ances1 9 s f> z !y c be p]ceiv$ 9 space at ! same "t1 exi/ 9 a /ate ( complete reciprocity ( action4 ,,pro(4 ,?+s are coexi/5t1 :5 9 empirical intuition ! p]ception ( ! "o c foll[ ^u ! p]ception ( ! o!r1 & vice v]sa--:i* _c occur 9 ! succession ( ph5om5a1 z we h %[n 9 ! explanation ( ! second pr9ciple4 ,?us ,i c p]ceive ! moon & !n ! e>?1 or conv]sely1 fir/ ! e>? & !n ! moon2 & = ! reason t my p]ceptions ( ^! objects c reciprocally foll[ ea* o!r1 ,i say1 !y exi/ contemporane\sly4 ,n[ coexi/5ce is ! exi/5ce ( ! manifold 9 ! same "t4 ,b "t itself is n an object ( p]ception2 & !re=e we _c conclude f ! fact t ?+s are plac$ 9 ! same "t1 ! o!r fact1 t ! p]ception ( ^! ?+s c foll[ ea* o!r reciprocally4 ,! syn!sis ( ! imag9ation 9 appreh5sion w\ld only pres5t to u ea* ( ^! p]ceptions z pres5t 9 ! subject :5 ! o!r is n pres5t1 & contr>iwise2 b w\ld n %[ t ! objects are coexi/5t1 t is to say1 t1 if ! "o exi/s1 ! o!r also exi/s 9 ! same "t1 & t ?is is necess>ily s1 9 ord] t ! p]ceptions may be capable ( foll[+ ea* o!r reciprocally4 ,x foll[s t a conception ( ! und]/&+ or category ( ! reciprocal sequ5ce ( ! det]m9ations ( ph5om5a 7exi/+1 z !y d1 ap>t f ea* o!r1 & yet contemporane\sly71 is requisite to ju/ify u 9 say+ t ! reciprocal succession ( p]ceptions has its f\ndation 9 ! object1 & to enable u to repres5t coexi/5ce z objective4 ,b t relation ( sub/ances 9 :i* ! "o conta9s det]m9ations ! gr\nd ( :i* is 9 ! o!r sub/ance1 is ! relation ( influ5ce4 ,&1 :5 ?is influ5ce is reciprocal1 x is ! relation ( community or reciprocity4 ,consequ5tly ! coexi/5ce ( sub/ances 9 space _c be cogniz$ 9 exp]i5ce o!rwise ?an "u ! precondition ( _! reciprocal action4 ,?is is !re=e ! condition ( ! possibility ( ?+s !mselves z objects ( exp]i5ce4 ,?+s are coexi/5t1 9 s f> z !y exi/ 9 "o & ! same "t4 ,b h[ c we "k t !y exi/ 9 "o & ! same "t8 ,only by obs]v+ t ! ord] 9 ! syn!sis ( appreh5sion ( ! manifold is arbitr>y & a matt] ( indiff]5ce1 t is to say1 t x c proce$ f ,a1 ?r\gh ,b1 ,c1 ,d1 to ,e1 or contr>iwise f ,e to ,a4 ,= if !y 7 successive 9 "t 7& 9 ! ord]1 let u suppose1 :i* beg9s ) ,a71 x is q impossible = ! appreh5sion 9 p]ception to beg9 ) ,e & g backw>ds to ,a1 inasmu* z ,a belongs to pa/ "t &1 !re=e1 _c be an object ( appreh5sion4 ,let u assume t 9 a numb] ( sub/ances consid]$ z ph5om5a ea* is completely isolat$1 t is1 t no "o acts ^u ano!r4 ,!n ,i say t ! coexi/5ce ( ^! _c be an object ( possible p]ception & t ! exi/5ce ( "o _c1 by any mode ( empirical syn!sis1 lead u to ! exi/5ce ( ano!r4 ,= we imag9e !m 9 ?is case to be sep>at$ by a completely void space1 & ?us p]ception1 :i* proce$s f ! "o to ! o!r 9 "t1 w\ld inde$ det]m9e _! exi/5ce by means ( a foll[+ p]ception1 b w\ld be q unable to di/+ui% :e!r ! "o ph5om5on foll[s objectively ^u ! fir/1 or is coexi/5t ) x4 ,besides ! m]e fact ( exi/5ce1 !n1 !re mu/ be some?+ by means ( :i* ,a det]m9es ! position ( ,b 9 "t &1 conv]sely1 ,b ! position ( ,a2 because only "u ?is condition c sub/ances be empirically repres5t$ z exi/+ contemporane\sly4 ,n[ t alone det]m9es ! position ( ano!r ?+ 9 "t :i* is ! cause ( x or ( its det]m9ations4 ,consequ5tly e sub/ance 7inasmu* z x c h succession pr$icat$ ( x only 9 respect ( its det]m9ations7 mu/ conta9 ! causality ( c]ta9 det]m9ations 9 ano!r sub/ance1 & at ! same "t ! effects ( ! causality ( ! o!r 9 itself4 ,t is to say1 sub/ances mu/ /& 7m$iately or imm$iately7 9 dynamical community ) ea* o!r1 if coexi/5ce is to be cogniz$ 9 any possible exp]i5ce4 ,b1 9 reg>d to objects ( exp]i5ce1 t is absolutely necess>y )\t :i* ! exp]i5ce ( ^! objects w\ld itself be impossible4 ,consequ5tly x is absolutely necess>y t all sub/ances 9 ! _w ( ph5om5a1 9 s f> z !y are coexi/5t1 /& 9 a relation ( complete community ( reciprocal action to ea* o!r4 ,! ^w community has 9 our language#cc two mean+s1 & conta9s ! two notions convey$ 9 ! ,lat9 communio & comm]cium4 ,we employ x 9 ?is place 9 ! latt] s5se--t ( a dynamical community1 )\t :i* ev5 ! community ( place 7communio spatii7 c\ld n be empirically cogniz$4 ,9 our exp]i5ces x is easy to obs]ve t x is only ! cont9u\s influ5ces 9 all p>ts ( space t c conduct our s5ses f "o object to ano!r2 t ! light :i* plays betwe5 our eyes & ! heav5ly bodies produces a m$iat+ community betwe5 !m & u1 & !reby evid5ces _! coexi/5ce ) u2 t we _c empirically *ange our position 7p]ceive ?is *ange71 unless ! exi/5ce ( matt] ?r\gh\t ! :ole ( space r5d]$ possible ! p]ception ( ! positions we occupy2 & t ?is p]ception c prove ! contemporane\s exi/5ce ( ^! places only ?r\gh _! reciprocal influ5ce1 & !reby also ! coexi/5ce ( ev5 ! mo/ remote objects--al?\gh 9 ?is case ! pro( is only m$iate4 ,)\t community1 e p]ception 7( a ph5om5on 9 space7 is sep>at$ f e o!r & isolat$1 & ! *a9 ( empirical repres5tations1 t is1 ( exp]i5ce1 mu/1 ) ! appe>ance ( a new object1 beg9 entirely de novo1 )\t ! lea/ connection ) prec$+ repres5tations1 & )\t /&+ t[>ds ^! ev5 9 ! relation ( "t4 ,my int5tion "h is by no means to combat ! notion ( empty space2 = x may exi/ :]e our p]ceptions _c exi/1 inasmu* z !y _c rea* !reto1 & :]e1 !re=e1 no empirical p]ception ( coexi/5ce takes place4 ,b 9 ?is case x is n an object ( possible exp]i5ce4 #cc ,g]man ,! foll[+ rem>ks may be useful 9 ! way ( explanation4 ,9 ! m9d1 all ph5om5a1 z cont5ts ( a possible exp]i5ce1 mu/ exi/ 9 community 7communio7 ( app]ception or consci\sness1 & 9 s f> z x is requisite t objects be repres5t$ z coexi/5t & connect$1 9 s f> mu/ !y reciprocally det]m9e ! position 9 "t ( ea* o!r & !reby con/itute a :ole4 ,if ?is subjective community is to re/ ^u an objective basis1 or to be appli$ to sub/ances z ph5om5a1 ! p]ception ( "o sub/ance mu/ r5d] possible ! p]ception ( ano!r1 & conv]sely4 ,= o!rwise succession1 :i* is always f\nd 9 p]ceptions z appreh5sions1 w\ld be pr$icat$ ( ext]nal objects1 & _! repres5tation ( _! coexi/5ce be ?us impossible4 ,b ?is is a reciprocal influ5ce1 t is to say1 a real community 7comm]cium7 ( sub/ances1 )\t :i* !re=e ! empirical relation ( coexi/5ce w\ld be a notion beyond ! rea* ( our m9ds4 ,by virtue ( ?is comm]cium1 ph5om5a1 9 s f> z !y are ap>t f1 & nev]!less 9 connection ) ea* o!r1 con/itute a compositum reale4 ,su* composita are possible 9 _m diff]5t ways4 ,! ?ree dynamical relations !n1 f :i* all o!rs spr+1 are ^? ( inh]5ce1 consequ5ce1 & composition4 ,^!1 !n1 are ! ?ree analogies ( exp]i5ce4 ,!y are no?+ m ?an pr9ciples ( ! det]m9ation ( ! exi/5ce ( ph5om5a 9 "t1 accord+ to ! ?ree modi ( ?is det]m9ation2 to wit1 ! relation to "t itself z a quantity 7! quantity ( exi/5ce1 t is1 duration71 ! relation 9 "t z a s]ies or succession1 f9ally1 ! relation 9 "t z ! complex ( all exi/5ce 7simultaneity74 ,?is unity ( det]m9ation 9 reg>d to "t is ?or\ghly dynamical2 t is to say1 "t is n consid]$ z t 9 :i* exp]i5ce det]m9es imm$iately to e exi/5ce its position2 = ?is is impossible1 inasmu* z absolute "t is n an object ( p]ception1 by means ( :i* ph5om5a c be connect$ ) ea* o!r4 ,on ! contr>y1 ! rule ( ! und]/&+1 ?r\gh :i* alone ! exi/5ce ( ph5om5a c receive syn!tical unity z reg>ds relations ( "t1 det]m9es = e ph5om5on its position 9 "t1 & consequ5tly priori1 & ) validity = all & e "t4 ,by nature1 9 ! empirical s5se ( ! ^w1 we und]/& ! totality ( ph5om5a connect$1 9 respect ( _! exi/5ce1 accord+ to necess>y rules1 t is1 laws4 ,!re are !re=e c]ta9 laws 7:i* are moreov] priori7 :i* make nature possible2 & all empirical laws c exi/ only by means ( exp]i5ce1 & by virtue ( ^? primitive laws ?r\gh :i* exp]i5ce itself becomes possible4 ,! purpose ( ! analogies is !re=e to repres5t to u ! unity ( nature 9 ! connection ( all ph5om5a "u c]ta9 expon5ts1 ! only bus9ess ( :i* is to express ! relation ( "t 79 s f> z x conta9s all exi/5ce 9 itself7 to ! unity ( app]ception1 :i* c exi/ 9 syn!sis only accord+ to rules4 ,! comb9$ expression ( all is ?is3 8,all ph5om5a exi/ 9 "o nature1 & mu/ s exi/1 inasmu* z )\t ?is priori unity1 no unity ( exp]i5ce1 & consequ5tly no det]m9ation ( objects 9 exp]i5ce1 is possible40 ,z reg>ds ! mode ( pro( :i* we h employ$ 9 treat+ ( ^! transc5d5tal laws ( nature1 & ! peculi> "* ( x we mu/ make "o rem>k1 :i* w at ! same "t be important z a guide 9 e o!r attempt to demon/rate ! tru? ( intellectual & likewise syn!tical propositions priori4 ,_h we endeav\r$ to prove ^! analogies dogmatically1 t is1 f conceptions2 t is to say1 _h we employ$ ?is me?od 9 attempt+ to %[ t ev]y?+ :i* exi/s1 exi/s only 9 t :i* is p]man5t--t e ?+ or ev5t presupposes ! exi/5ce ( some?+ 9 a prec$+ /ate1 ^u :i* x foll[s 9 con=mity ) a rule--la/ly1 t 9 ! manifold1 :i* is coexi/5t1 ! /ates coexi/ 9 connection ) ea* o!r accord+ to a rule1 all our lab\r w\ld h be5 utt]ly 9 va94 ,= m]e conceptions ( ?+s1 analyse !m z we may1 _c enable u to conclude f ! exi/5ce ( "o object to ! exi/5ce ( ano!r4 ,:at o!r c\rse 0 left = u to pursue8 ,?is only1 to demon/rate ! possibility ( exp]i5ce z a cognition 9 :i* at la/ all objects mu/ be capable ( be+ pres5t$ to u1 if ! repres5tation ( !m is to possess any objective reality4 ,n[ 9 ?is ?ird1 ?is m$iat+ t]m1 ! ess5tial =m ( :i* consi/s 9 ! syn!tical unity ( ! app]ception ( all ph5om5a1 we f\nd priori conditions ( ! univ]sal & necess>y det]m9ation z to "t ( all exi/5ces 9 ! _w ( ph5om5a1 )\t :i* ! empirical det]m9ation !re( z to "t w\ld itself be impossible1 & we also discov]$ rules ( syn!tical unity priori1 by means ( :i* we c\ld anticipate exp]i5ce4 ,= want ( ?is me?od1 & f ! fancy t x 0 possible to discov] a dogmatical pro( ( ! syn!tical propositions :i* are requisite 9 ! empirical employm5t ( ! und]/&+1 has x happ5$ t a pro( ( ! pr9ciple ( suffici5t reason has be5 s (t5 attempt$1 & always 9 va94 ,! o!r two analogies nobody has ev] ?\ght (1 al?\gh !y h always be5 sil5tly employ$ by ! m9d1#cd because ! guid+ ?read furni%$ by ! categories 0 want+1 ! guide :i* alone c enable u to discov] e hiatus1 bo? 9 ! sy/em ( conceptions & ( pr9ciples4 #cd ,! unity ( ! univ]se1 9 :i* all ph5om5a to be connect$1 is evid5tly a m]e consequ5ce ( ! admitt$ pr9ciple ( ! community ( all sub/ances :i* are coexi/5t4 ,= 7 sub/ances isolat$1 !y c\ld n z p>ts con/itute a :ole1 & 7 _! connection 7reciprocal action ( ! manifold7 n necess>y f ! v fact ( coexi/5ce1 we c\ld n conclude f ! fact ( ! latt] z a m]ely ideal relation to ! =m] z a real "o4 ,we h1 h[ev]1 %[n 9 its place t community is ! prop] gr\nd ( ! possibility ( an empirical cognition ( coexi/5ce1 & t we may !re=e prop]ly reason f ! latt] to ! =m] z its condition4 #d4 ,,! ,,po/ulates ,,( ,,empirical ,,?\ght4 #a4 ,t :i* agrees ) ! =mal conditions 7intuition & conception7 ( exp]i5ce1 is possible4 #b4 ,t :i* coh]es ) ! mat]ial conditions ( exp]i5ce 7s5sation71 is real4 #c4 ,t ^: coh]5ce ) ! real is det]m9$ accord+ to univ]sal conditions ( exp]i5ce is 7exi/s7 necess>y4 ,explanation4 ,! categories ( modality possess ?is peculi>ity1 t !y d n 9 ! lea/ det]m9e ! object1 or enl>ge ! conception to :i* !y are annex$ z pr$icates1 b only express its relation to ! faculty ( cognition4 ,?\gh my conception ( a ?+ is 9 itself complete1 ,i am /ill entitl$ to ask :e!r ! object ( x is m]ely possible1 or :e!r x is also real1 or1 if ! latt]1 :e!r x is also necess>y4 ,b h]eby ! object itself is n m def9itely det]m9$ 9 ?\ght1 b ! "q is only 9 :at relation x1 includ+ all its det]m9ations1 /&s to ! und]/&+ & its employm5t 9 exp]i5ce1 to ! empirical faculty ( judgem5t1 & to ! reason ( its application to exp]i5ce4 ,= ?is v reason1 too1 ! categories ( modality are no?+ m ?an explanations ( ! conceptions ( possibility1 reality1 & necessity1 z employ$ 9 exp]i5ce1 & at ! same "t1 re/rictions ( all ! categories to empirical use alone1 n au?oriz+ ! transc5d5tal employm5t ( !m4 ,= if !y are to h some?+ m ?an a m]ely logical significance1 & to be some?+ m ?an a m]e analytical expression ( ! =m ( ?\ght1 & to h a relation to ?+s & _! possibility1 reality1 or necessity1 !y mu/ conc]n possible exp]i5ce & its syn!tical unity1 9 :i* alone objects ( cognition c be giv54 ,! po/ulate ( ! possibility ( ?+s requires also1 t ! conception ( ! ?+s agree ) ! =mal conditions ( our exp]i5ce 9 g5]al4 ,b ?is1 t is to say1 ! objective =m ( exp]i5ce1 conta9s all ! k9ds ( syn!sis :i* are requisite = ! cognition ( objects4 ,a conception :i* conta9s a syn!sis mu/ be reg>d$ z empty &1 )\t ref]5ce to an object1 if its syn!sis does n belong to exp]i5ce--ei!r z borr[$ f x1 & 9 ?is case x is call$ an empirical conception1 or su* z is ! gr\nd & priori condition ( exp]i5ce 7its =m71 & 9 ?is case x is a pure conception1 a conception :i* nev]!less belongs to exp]i5ce1 inasmu* z its object c be f\nd 9 ?is alone4 ,= :]e %all we f9d ! crit]ion or "* ( ! possibility ( an object :i* is cogitat$ by means ( an priori syn!tical conception1 if n 9 ! syn!sis :i* con/itutes ! =m ( empirical cognition ( objects8 ,t 9 su* a conception no contradiction exi/s is inde$ a necess>y logical condition1 b v f> f be+ suffici5t to e/abli% ! objective reality ( ! conception1 t is1 ! possibility ( su* an object z is ?\ght 9 ! conception4 ,?us1 9 ! conception ( a figure :i* is conta9$ )9 two /raight l9es1 !re is no contradiction1 = ! conceptions ( two /raight l9es & ( _! junction conta9 no negation ( a figure4 ,! impossibility 9 su* a case does n re/ ^u ! conception 9 itself1 b ^u ! con/ruction ( x 9 space1 t is to say1 ^u ! conditions ( space & its det]m9ations4 ,b ^! h !mselves objective reality1 t is1 !y apply to possible ?+s1 because !y conta9 priori ! =m ( exp]i5ce 9 g5]al4 ,& n[ we %all proce$ to po9t out ! ext5sive utility & influ5ce ( ?is po/ulate ( possibility4 ,:5 ,i repres5t to myself a ?+ t is p]man5t1 s t ev]y?+ 9 x :i* *anges belongs m]ely to its /ate or condition1 f su* a conception alone ,i nev] c cognize t su* a ?+ is possible4 ,or1 if ,i repres5t to myself some?+ :i* is s con/itut$ t1 :5 x is posit$1 some?+ else foll[s always & infallibly1 my ?\ght conta9s no self-contradiction2 b :e!r su* a prop]ty z causality is to be f\nd 9 any possible ?+1 my ?\ght alone af=ds no means ( judg+4 ,f9ally1 ,i c repres5t to myself diff]5t ?+s 7sub/ances7 :i* are s con/itut$ t ! /ate or condition ( "o causes a *ange 9 ! /ate ( ! o!r1 & reciprocally2 b :e!r su* a relation is a prop]ty ( ?+s _c be p]ceiv$ f ^! conceptions1 :i* conta9 a m]ely arbitr>y syn!sis4 ,only f ! fact1 !re=e1 t ^! conceptions express priori ! relations ( p]ceptions 9 e exp]i5ce1 d we "k t !y possess objective reality1 t is1 transc5d5tal tru?2 & t indep5d5t ( exp]i5ce1 ?\gh n indep5d5t ( all relation to =m ( an exp]i5ce 9 g5]al & its syn!tical unity1 9 :i* alone objects c be empirically cogniz$4 ,b :5 we fa%ion to ourselves new conceptions ( sub/ances1 =ces1 action1 & reaction1 f ! mat]ial pres5t$ to u by p]ception1 )\t foll[+ ! example ( exp]i5ce 9 _! connection1 we create m]e *im]as1 ( ! possibility ( :i* we _c discov] any crit]ion1 because we h n tak5 exp]i5ce = our in/ructress1 ?\gh we h borr[$ ! conceptions f h]4 ,su* fictiti\s conceptions d]ive _! "* ( possibility n1 l ! categories1 priori1 z conceptions on :i* all exp]i5ce dep5ds1 b only1 po/]iori1 z conceptions giv5 by means ( exp]i5ce itself1 & _! possibility mu/ ei!r be cogniz$ po/]iori & empirically1 or x _c be cogniz$ at all4 ,a sub/ance :i* is p]man5tly pres5t 9 space1 yet )\t fill+ x 7l t t]tium quid betwe5 matt] & ! ?9k+ subject :i* "s h tri$ to introduce into metaphysics71 or a peculi> fundam5tal p[] ( ! m9d ( intuit+ ! future by anticipation 7in/ead ( m]ely inf]r+ f pa/ & pres5t ev5ts71 or1 f9ally1 a p[] ( ! m9d to place itself 9 community ( ?\ght ) o!r m51 h[ev] di/ant !y may be--^! are conceptions ! possibility ( :i* has no gr\nd to re/ ^u4 ,= !y are n bas$ ^u exp]i5ce & its kn[n laws2 &1 )\t exp]i5ce1 !y are a m]ely arbitr>y conjunction ( ?\ghts1 :i*1 ?\gh conta9+ no int]nal contradiction1 has no claim to objective reality1 nei!r1 consequ5tly1 to ! possibility ( su* an object z is ?\ght 9 ^! conceptions4 ,z f> z conc]ns reality1 x is self-evid5t t we _c cogitate su* a possibility 9 concreto )\t ! aid ( exp]i5ce2 because reality is conc]n$ only ) s5sation1 z ! matt] ( exp]i5ce1 & n ) ! =m ( ?\ght1 ) :i* we c no d\bt indulge 9 %ap+ fancies4 ,b ,i pass by ev]y?+ :i* d]ives its possibility f reality 9 exp]i5ce1 & ,i purpose treat+ "h m]ely ( ! possibility ( ?+s by means ( priori conceptions4 ,i ma9ta91 !n1 t ! possibility ( ?+s is n d]iv$ f su* conceptions p] se1 b only :5 consid]$ z =mal & objective conditions ( an exp]i5ce 9 g5]al4 ,x seems1 inde$1 z if ! possibility ( a triangle c\ld be cogniz$ f ! conception ( x alone 7:i* is c]ta9ly indep5d5t ( exp]i5ce72 = we c c]ta9ly give to ! conception a correspond+ object completely priori1 t is to say1 we c con/ruct x4 ,b z a triangle is only ! =m ( an object1 x mu/ rema9 a m]e product ( ! imag9ation1 & ! possibility ( ! exi/5ce ( an object correspond+ to x mu/ rema9 d\btful1 unless we c discov] "s o!r gr\nd1 unless we "k t ! figure c be cogitat$ "u ! conditions ^u :i* all objects ( exp]i5ce re/4 ,n[1 ! facts t space is a =mal condition priori ( ext]nal exp]i5ce1 t ! =mative syn!sis1 by :i* we con/ruct a triangle 9 imag9ation1 is ! v same z t we employ 9 ! appreh5sion ( a ph5om5on = ! purpose ( mak+ an empirical conception ( x1 are :at alone connect ! notion ( ! possibility ( su* a ?+1 ) ! conception ( x4 ,9 ! same mann]1 ! possibility ( cont9u\s quantities1 inde$ ( quantities 9 g5]al1 = ! conceptions ( !m are )\t exception syn!tical1 is nev] evid5t f ! conceptions 9 !mselves1 b only :5 !y are consid]$ z ! =mal conditions ( ! det]m9ation ( objects 9 exp]i5ce4 ,& :]e1 inde$1 %\ld we look = objects to correspond to our conceptions1 if n 9 exp]i5ce1 by :i* alone objects are pres5t$ to u8 ,x is1 h[ev]1 true t )\t antec$5t exp]i5ce we c cognize & *>act]ize ! possibility ( ?+s1 relatively to ! =mal conditions1 "u :i* some?+ is det]m9$ 9 exp]i5ce z an object1 consequ5tly1 completely priori4 ,b /ill ?is is possible only 9 relation to exp]i5ce & )9 its limits4 ,! po/ulate conc]n+ ! cognition ( ! reality ( ?+s requires p]ception1 consequ5tly consci\s s5sation1 n inde$ imm$iately1 t is1 ( ! object itself1 ^: exi/5ce is to be cogniz$1 b /ill t ! object h "s connection ) a real p]ception1 9 accordance ) ! analogies ( exp]i5ce1 :i* exhibit all k9ds ( real connection 9 exp]i5ce4 ,f ! m]e conception ( a ?+ x is impossible to conclude its exi/5ce4 ,=1 let ! conception be ev] s complete1 & conta9+ a /atem5t ( all ! det]m9ations ( ! ?+1 ! exi/5ce ( x has no?+ to d ) all ?is1 b only ) ! "q :e!r su* a ?+ is giv51 s t ! p]ception ( x c 9 e case prec$e ! conception4 ,= ! fact t ! conception ( x prec$es ! p]ception1 m]ely indicates ! possibility ( its exi/5ce2 x is p]ception :i* pres5ts matt] to ! conception1 t is ! sole crit]ion ( reality4 ,prior to ! p]ception ( ! ?+1 h[ev]1 & !re=e comp>atively priori1 we are able to cognize its exi/5ce1 provid$ x /&s 9 connection ) "s p]ceptions accord+ to ! pr9ciples ( ! empirical conjunction ( ^!1 t is1 9 con=mity ) ! analogies ( p]ception4 ,=1 9 ?is case1 ! exi/5ce ( ! suppos$ ?+ is connect$ ) our p]ception 9 a possible exp]i5ce1 & we are able1 ) ! guidance ( ^! analogies1 to reason 9 ! s]ies ( possible p]ceptions f a ?+ :i* we d really p]ceive to ! ?+ we d n p]ceive4 ,?us1 we cognize ! exi/5ce ( a magnetic matt] p5etrat+ all bodies f ! p]ception ( ! attraction ( ! /eel-fil+s by ! magnet1 al?\gh ! con/itution ( our organs r5d]s an imm$iate p]ception ( ?is matt] impossible = u4 ,=1 accord+ to ! laws ( s5sibility & ! connect$ context ( our p]ceptions1 we %\ld 9 an exp]i5ce come also on an imm$iate empirical intuition ( ?is matt]1 if our s5ses 7 m acute--b ?is obtus5ess has no influ5ce ^u & _c alt] ! =m ( possible exp]i5ce 9 g5]al4 ,our k ( ! exi/5ce ( ?+s rea*es z f> z our p]ceptions1 & :at may be inf]r$ f !m accord+ to empirical laws1 ext5d4 ,if we d n set out f exp]i5ce1 or d n proce$ accord+ to ! laws ( ! empirical connection ( ph5om5a1 our pret5sions to discov] ! exi/5ce ( a ?+ :i* we d n imm$iately p]ceive are va94 ,idealism1 h[ev]1 br+s =w>d p[]ful objections to ^! rules = prov+ exi/5ce m$iately4 ,?is is1 !re=e1 ! prop] place = its refutation4 ,,refutation ,,( ,,idealism4 ,idealism--,i mean mat]ial idealism--is ! !ory :i* decl>es ! exi/5ce ( objects 9 space )\t u to be ei!r 77 d\btful & indemon/rable1 or 7#b7 false & impossible4 ,! fir/ is ! problematical idealism ( ,desc>tes1 :o admits ! und\bt$ c]ta9ty ( only "o empirical ass]tion 7ass]tio71 to wit1 8,i am40 ,! second is ! dogmatical idealism ( ,b]keley1 :o ma9ta9s t space1 toge!r ) all ! objects ( :i* x is ! insep>able condition1 is a ?+ :i* is 9 itself impossible1 & t consequ5tly ! objects 9 space are m]e products ( ! imag9ation4 ,! dogmatical !ory ( idealism is unavoidable1 if we reg>d space z a prop]ty ( ?+s 9 !mselves2 = 9 t case x is1 ) all to :i* x s]ves z condition1 a non5tity4 ,b ! f\ndation = ?is k9d ( idealism we h already de/roy$ 9 ! transc5d5tal /hetic4 ,problematical idealism1 :i* makes no su* ass]tion1 b only alleges our incapacity to prove ! exi/5ce ( any?+ besides ourselves by means ( imm$iate exp]i5ce1 is a !ory rational & evid5c+ a ?or\gh & philosophical mode ( ?9k+1 = x obs]ves ! rule n to =m a decisive judgem5t be=e suffici5t pro( be %[n4 ,! desir$ pro( mu/ !re=e demon/rate t we h exp]i5ce ( ext]nal ?+s1 & n m]e fancies4 ,= ?is purpose1 we mu/ prove1 t our int]nal &1 to ,desc>tes1 indubitable exp]i5ce is itself possible only "u ! previ\s assumption ( ext]nal exp]i5ce4 ,,!orem4 ,! simple b empirically det]m9$ consci\sness ( my own exi/5ce proves ! exi/5ce ( ext]nal objects 9 space4 ,,pro( ,i am consci\s ( my own exi/5ce z det]m9$ 9 "t4 ,all det]m9ation 9 reg>d to "t presupposes ! exi/5ce ( some?+ p]man5t 9 p]ception4 ,b ?is p]man5t some?+ _c be some?+ 9 me1 = ! v reason t my exi/5ce 9 "t is itself det]m9$ by ?is p]man5t some?+4 ,x foll[s t ! p]ception ( ?is p]man5t exi/5ce is possible only ?r\gh a ?+ )\t me & n ?r\gh ! m]e repres5tation ( a ?+ )\t me4 ,consequ5tly1 ! det]m9ation ( my exi/5ce 9 "t is possible only ?r\gh ! exi/5ce ( real ?+s ext]nal to me4 ,n[1 consci\sness 9 "t is necess>ily connect$ ) ! consci\sness ( ! possibility ( ?is det]m9ation 9 "t4 ,h5ce x foll[s t consci\sness 9 "t is necess>ily connect$ also ) ! exi/5ce ( ?+s )\t me1 inasmu* z ! exi/5ce ( ^! ?+s is ! condition ( det]m9ation 9 "t4 ,t is to say1 ! consci\sness ( my own exi/5ce is at ! same "t an imm$iate consci\sness ( ! exi/5ce ( o!r ?+s )\t me4 ,rem>k ,i4 ,! read] w obs]ve1 t 9 ! =ego+ pro( ! game :i* idealism plays is retort$ ^u itself1 & ) m ju/ice4 ,x assum$ t ! only imm$iate exp]i5ce is int]nal & t f ?is we c only inf] ! exi/5ce ( ext]nal ?+s4 ,b1 z always happ5s1 :5 we reason f giv5 effects to det]m9$ causes1 idealism has reason$ ) too mu* ha/e & unc]ta9ty1 = x is q possible t ! cause ( our repres5tations may lie 9 ourselves1 & t we ascribe x falsely to ext]nal ?+s4 ,b our pro( %[s t ext]nal exp]i5ce is prop]ly imm$iate1#ce t only by virtue ( x--n1 inde$1 ! consci\sness ( our own exi/5ce1 b c]ta9ly ! det]m9ation ( our exi/5ce 9 "t1 t is1 int]nal exp]i5ce--is possible4 ,x is true1 t ! repres5tation 8,i am10 :i* is ! expression ( ! consci\sness :i* c accompany all my ?\ghts1 is t :i* imm$iately includes ! exi/5ce ( a subject4 ,b 9 ?is repres5tation we _c f9d any k ( ! subject1 & !re=e also no empirical k1 t is1 exp]i5ce4 ,= exp]i5ce conta9s1 9 addition to ! ?\ght ( some?+ exi/+1 intuition1 & 9 ?is case x mu/ be int]nal intuition1 t is1 "t1 9 relation to :i* ! subject mu/ be det]m9$4 ,b ! exi/5ce ( ext]nal ?+s is absolutely requisite = ?is purpose1 s t x foll[s t int]nal exp]i5ce is itself possible only m$iately & ?r\gh ext]nal exp]i5ce4 #ce ,! imm$iate consci\sness ( ! exi/5ce ( ext]nal ?+s is1 9 ! prec$+ !orem1 n presuppos$1 b prov$1 by ! possibility ( ?is consci\sness und]/ood by u or n4 ,! "q z to ! possibility ( x w\ld /& ?us3 8,h we an int]nal s5se1 b no ext]nal s5se1 & is our belief 9 ext]nal p]ception a m]e delusion80 ,b x is evid5t t1 9 ord] m]ely to fancy to ourselves any?+ z ext]nal1 t is1 to pres5t x to ! s5se 9 intuition we mu/ already possess an ext]nal s5se1 & mu/ !reby di/+ui% imm$iately ! m]e receptivity ( an ext]nal intuition f ! spontaneity :i* *>act]izes e act ( imag9ation4 ,= m]ely to imag9e also an ext]nal s5se1 w\ld annihilate ! faculty ( intuition itself :i* is to be det]m9$ by ! imag9ation4 ,rem>k ,,ii4 ,n[ ) ?is view all empirical use ( our faculty ( cognition 9 ! det]m9ation ( "t is 9 p]fect accordance4 ,its tru? is support$ by ! fact t x is possible to p]ceive a det]m9ation ( "t only by means ( a *ange 9 ext]nal relations 7motion7 to ! p]man5t 9 space 7= example1 we become aw>e ( ! sun's motion by obs]v+ ! *anges ( 8 relation to ! objects ( ?is e>?74 ,b ?is is n all4 ,we f9d t we possess no?+ p]man5t t c correspond & be submitt$ to ! conception ( a sub/ance z intuition1 except matt]4 ,?is idea ( p]man5ce is n itself d]iv$ f ext]nal exp]i5ce1 b is an priori necess>y condition ( all det]m9ation ( "t1 consequ5tly also ( ! int]nal s5se 9 ref]5ce to our own exi/5ce1 & t ?r\gh ! exi/5ce ( ext]nal ?+s4 ,9 ! repres5tation 8,i10 ! consci\sness ( myself is n an intuition1 b a m]ely intellectual repres5tation produc$ by ! spontane\s activity ( a ?9k+ subject4 ,x foll[s1 t ?is 8i0 has n any pr$icate ( intuition1 :i*1 9 its "* ( p]man5ce1 c\ld s]ve z correlate to ! det]m9ation ( "t 9 ! int]nal s5se--9 ! same way z imp5etrability is ! correlate ( matt] z an empirical intuition4 ,rem>k ,,iii4 ,f ! fact t ! exi/5ce ( ext]nal ?+s is a necess>y condition ( ! possibility ( a det]m9$ consci\sness ( ourselves1 x does n foll[ t e intuitive repres5tation ( ext]nal ?+s involves ! exi/5ce ( ^! ?+s1 = _! repres5tations may v well be ! m]e products ( ! imag9ation 79 dreams z well z 9 madness72 ?\gh1 inde$1 ^! are !mselves creat$ by ! reproduction ( previ\s ext]nal p]ceptions1 :i*1 z has be5 %[n1 are possible only ?r\gh ! reality ( ext]nal objects4 ,! sole aim ( our rem>ks has1 h[ev]1 be5 to prove t int]nal exp]i5ce 9 g5]al is possible only ?r\gh ext]nal exp]i5ce 9 g5]al4 ,:e!r ?is or t suppos$ exp]i5ce be purely imag9>y mu/ be discov]$ f its p>ticul> det]m9ations & by comp>+ ^! ) ! crit]ia ( all real exp]i5ce4 ,f9ally1 z reg>ds ! ?ird po/ulate1 x applies to mat]ial necessity 9 exi/5ce1 & n to m]ely =mal & logical necessity 9 ! connection ( conceptions4 ,n[ z we _c cognize completely priori ! exi/5ce ( any object ( s5se1 ?\gh we c d s comp>atively priori1 t is1 relatively to "s o!r previ\sly giv5 exi/5ce--a cognition1 h[ev]1 :i* c only be ( su* an exi/5ce z mu/ be conta9$ 9 ! complex ( exp]i5ce1 ( :i* ! previ\sly giv5 p]ception is a "p--! necessity ( exi/5ce c nev] be cogniz$ f conceptions1 b always1 on ! contr>y1 f its connection ) t :i* is an object ( p]ception4 ,b ! only exi/5ce cogniz$1 "u ! condition ( o!r giv5 ph5om5a1 z necess>y1 is ! exi/5ce ( effects f giv5 causes 9 con=mity ) ! laws ( causality4 ,x is consequ5tly n ! necessity ( ! exi/5ce ( ?+s 7z sub/ances71 b ! necessity ( ! /ate ( ?+s t we cognize1 & t n imm$iately1 b by means ( ! exi/5ce ( o!r /ates giv5 9 p]ception1 accord+ to empirical laws ( causality4 ,h5ce x foll[s t ! crit]ion ( necessity is to be f\nd only 9 ! law ( possible exp]i5ce--t ev]y?+ :i* happ5s is det]m9$ priori 9 ! ph5om5on by its cause4 ,?us we cognize only ! necessity ( effects 9 nature1 ! causes ( :i* are giv5 u4 ,moreov]1 ! crit]ion ( necessity 9 exi/5ce possesses no application beyond ! field ( possible exp]i5ce1 & ev5 9 ?is x is n valid ( ! exi/5ce ( ?+s z sub/ances1 because ^! c nev] be consid]$ z empirical effects1 or z some?+ t happ5s & has a beg9n+4 ,necessity1 !re=e1 reg>ds only ! relations ( ph5om5a accord+ to ! dynamical law ( causality1 & ! possibility gr\nd$ !reon1 ( reason+ f "s giv5 exi/5ce 7( a cause7 priori to ano!r exi/5ce 7( an effect74 8,ev]y?+ t happ5s is hypo!tically necess>y10 is a pr9ciple :i* subjects ! *anges t take place 9 ! _w to a law1 t is1 to a rule ( necess>y exi/5ce1 )\t :i* nature h]self c\ld n possibly exi/4 ,h5ce ! proposition1 8,no?+ happ5s by bl9d *ance 79 mundo non datur casus710 is an priori law ( nature4 ,! case is ! same ) ! proposition1 8,necessity 9 nature is n bl9d10 t is1 x is condition$1 consequ5tly intelligible necessity 7non datur fatum74 ,bo? laws subject ! play ( *ange to 8a nature ( ?+s 7z ph5om5a710 or1 :i* is ! same ?+1 to ! unity ( ! und]/&+1 & ?r\gh ! und]/&+ alone c *anges belong to an exp]i5ce1 z ! syn!tical unity ( ph5om5a4 ,bo? belong to ! class ( dynamical pr9ciples4 ,! =m] is prop]ly a consequ5ce ( ! pr9ciple ( causality--"o ( ! analogies ( exp]i5ce4 ,! latt] belongs to ! pr9ciples ( modality1 :i* to ! det]m9ation ( causality adds ! conception ( necessity1 :i* is itself1 h[ev]1 subject to a rule ( ! und]/&+4 ,! pr9ciple ( cont9uity =bids any leap 9 ! s]ies ( ph5om5a reg>d$ z *anges 79 mundo non datur saltus72 & likewise1 9 ! complex ( all empirical intuitions 9 space1 any break or hiatus betwe5 two ph5om5a 7non datur hiatus7--= we c s express ! pr9ciple1 t exp]i5ce c admit no?+ :i* proves ! exi/5ce ( a vacuum1 or :i* ev5 admits x z a "p ( an empirical syn!sis4 ,=1 z reg>ds a vacuum or void1 :i* we may cogitate z out & beyond ! field ( possible exp]i5ce 7! _w71 su* a "q _c come be=e ! tribunal ( m]e und]/&+1 :i* decides only ^u que/ions t conc]n ! employm5t ( giv5 ph5om5a = ! con/ruction ( empirical cognition4 ,x is r a problem = ideal reason1 :i* passes beyond ! sph]e ( a possible exp]i5ce & aims at =m+ a judgem5t ( t :i* surr\nds & circumscribes x1 & ! prop] place = ! consid]ation ( x is ! transc5d5tal dialectic4 ,^! f\r propositions1 8,9 mundo non datur hiatus1 non datur saltus1 non datur casus1 non datur fatum10 z well z all pr9ciples ( transc5d5tal orig91 we c\ld v easily exhibit 9 _! prop] ord]1 t is1 9 con=mity ) ! ord] ( ! categories1 & assign to ea* its prop] place4 ,b ! already practis$ read] w d ?is = himself1 or discov] ! clue to su* an arrangem5t4 ,b ! comb9$ result ( all is simply ?is1 to admit into ! empirical syn!sis no?+ :i* might cause a break 9 or be =eign to ! und]/&+ & ! cont9u\s connection ( all ph5om5a1 t is1 ! unity ( ! conceptions ( ! und]/&+4 ,= 9 ! und]/&+ alone is ! unity ( exp]i5ce1 9 :i* all p]ceptions mu/ h _! assign$ place1 possible4 ,:e!r ! field ( possibility be great] ?an t ( reality1 & :e!r ! field ( ! latt] be itself great] ?an t ( necessity1 are int]e/+ en\gh que/ions1 & q capable ( syn!tic solution1 que/ions1 h[ev]1 :i* come "u ! jurisdiction ( reason alone4 ,= !y are tantam\nt to ask+ :e!r all ?+s z ph5om5a d )\t exception belong to ! complex & connect$ :ole ( a s+le exp]i5ce1 ( :i* e giv5 p]ception is a "p :i* !re=e _c be conjo9$ ) any o!r ph5om5a--or1 :e!r my p]ceptions c belong to m ?an "o possible exp]i5ce8 ,! und]/&+ gives to exp]i5ce1 accord+ to ! subjective & =mal conditions1 ( s5sibility z well z ( app]ception1 ! rules :i* alone make ?is exp]i5ce possible4 ,o!r =ms ( intuition besides ^? ( space & "t1 o!r =ms ( und]/&+ besides ! discursive =ms ( ?\ght1 or ( cognition by means ( conceptions1 we c nei!r imag9e nor make intelligible to ourselves2 & ev5 if we c\ld1 !y w\ld /ill n belong to exp]i5ce1 :i* is ! only mode ( cognition by :i* objects are pres5t$ to u4 ,:e!r o!r p]ceptions besides ^? :i* belong to ! total ( our possible exp]i5ce1 & consequ5tly :e!r "s o!r sph]e ( matt] exi/s1 ! und]/&+ has no p[] to decide1 its prop] occupation be+ ) ! syn!sis ( t :i* is giv54 ,moreov]1 ! pov]ty ( ! usual argum5ts :i* g to prove ! exi/5ce ( a va/ sph]e ( possibility1 ( :i* all t is real 7e object ( exp]i5ce7 is b a small "p1 is v rem>kable4 8,all real is possible02 f ?is foll[s naturally1 accord+ to ! logical laws ( conv]sion1 ! p>ticul> proposition3 8,"s possible is real40 ,n[ ?is seems to be equival5t to3 8,mu* is possible t is n real40 ,no d\bt x does seem z if we ought to consid] ! sum ( ! possible to be great] ?an t ( ! real1 f ! fact t some?+ mu/ be add$ to ! =m] to con/itute ! latt]4 ,b ?is notion ( add+ to ! possible is absurd4 ,= t :i* is n 9 ! sum ( ! possible1 & consequ5tly requires to be add$ to x1 is manife/ly impossible4 ,9 addition to accordance ) ! =mal conditions ( exp]i5ce1 ! und]/&+ requires a connection ) "s p]ception2 b t :i* is connect$ ) ?is p]ception is real1 ev5 al?\gh x is n imm$iately p]ceiv$4 ,b t ano!r s]ies ( ph5om5a1 9 complete coh]5ce ) t :i* is giv5 9 p]ception1 consequ5tly m ?an "o all-embrac+ exp]i5ce is possible1 is an inf]5ce :i* _c be conclud$ f ! data giv5 u by exp]i5ce1 & /ill less )\t any data at all4 ,t :i* is possible only "u conditions :i* are !mselves m]ely possible1 is n possible 9 any respect4 ,& yet we c f9d no m c]ta9 gr\nd on :i* to base ! discussion ( ! "q :e!r ! sph]e ( possibility is wid] ?an t ( exp]i5ce4 ,i h m]ely m5tion$ ^! que/ions1 t 9 treat+ ( ! conception ( ! und]/&+1 !re might be no omission ( any?+ t1 9 ! common op9ion1 belongs to !m4 ,9 reality1 h[ev]1 ! notion ( absolute possibility 7possibility :i* is valid 9 e respect7 is n a m]e conception ( ! und]/&+1 :i* c be employ$ empirically1 b belongs to reason alone1 :i* passes ! b\nds ( all empirical use ( ! und]/&+4 ,we h1 !re=e1 cont5t$ ourselves ) a m]ely critical rem>k1 leav+ ! subject to be expla9$ 9 ! sequel4 ,be=e conclud+ ?is f\r? section1 & at ! same "t ! sy/em ( all pr9ciples ( ! pure und]/&+1 x seems prop] to m5tion ! reasons :i* induc$ me to t]m ! pr9ciples ( modality po/ulates4 ,?is expression ,i d n "h use 9 ! s5se :i* "s m rec5t philosoph]s1 contr>y to its mean+ ) ma!maticians1 to :om ! ^w prop]ly belongs1 atta* to x--t ( a proposition1 namely1 imm$iately c]ta91 requir+ nei!r d$uction nor pro(4 ,= if1 9 ! case ( syn!tical propositions1 h[ev] evid5t !y may be1 we accord to !m )\t d$uction1 & m]ely on ! /r5g? ( _! own pret5sions1 unqualifi$ belief1 all critique ( ! und]/&+ is entirely lo/2 &1 z !re is no want ( bold pret5sions1 :i* ! common belief 7?\gh = ! philosoph] ?is is no cr$5tial7 does n reject1 ! und]/&+ lies expos$ to e delusion & conceit1 )\t ! p[] ( refus+ its ass5t to ^? ass]tions1 :i*1 ?\gh illegitimate1 dem& acceptance z v]itable axioms4 ,:51 !re=e1 to ! conception ( a ?+ an priori det]m9ation is syn!tically add$1 su* a proposition mu/ obta91 if n a pro(1 at lea/ a d$uction ( ! legitimacy ( its ass]tion4 ,! pr9ciples ( modality are1 h[ev]1 n objectively syn!tical1 = ! pr$icates ( possibility1 reality1 & necessity d n 9 ! lea/ augm5t ! conception ( t ( :i* !y are affirm$1 inasmu* z !y contribute no?+ to ! repres5tation ( ! object4 ,b z !y are1 nev]!less1 always syn!tical1 !y are s m]ely subjectively4 ,t is to say1 !y h a reflective p[]1 & apply to ! conception ( a ?+1 ( :i*1 9 o!r respects1 !y affirm no?+1 ! faculty ( cognition 9 :i* ! conception orig9ates & has its seat4 ,s t if ! conception m]ely agree ) ! =mal conditions ( exp]i5ce1 its object is call$ possible2 if x is 9 connection ) p]ception1 & det]m9$ !reby1 ! object is real2 if x is det]m9$ accord+ to conceptions by means ( ! connection ( p]ceptions1 ! object is call$ necess>y4 ,! pr9ciples ( modality !re=e pr$icate ( a conception no?+ m ?an ! proc$ure ( ! faculty ( cognition :i* g5]at$ x4 ,n[ a po/ulate 9 ma!matics is a practical proposition :i* conta9s no?+ b ! syn!sis by :i* we pres5t an object to ourselves1 & produce ! conception ( x1 = example--8,) a giv5 l9e1 to describe a circle ^u a plane1 f a giv5 po9t02 & su* a proposition does n admit ( pro(1 because ! proc$ure1 :i* x requires1 is exactly t by :i* alone x is possible to g5]ate ! conception ( su* a figure4 ,) ! same "r1 accord+ly1 c we po/ulate ! pr9ciples ( modality1 because !y d n augm5t#cf ! conception ( a ?+ b m]ely indicate ! mann] 9 :i* x is connect$ ) ! faculty ( cognition4 #cf ,:5 ,i ?9k ! reality ( a ?+1 ,i d really ?9k m ?an ! possibility1 b n 9 ! ?+2 = t c nev] conta9 m 9 reality ?an 0 conta9$ 9 its complete possibility4 ,b :ile ! notion ( possibility is m]ely ! notion ( a position ( ?+ 9 relation to ! und]/&+ 7its empirical use71 reality is ! conjunction ( ! ?+ ) p]ception4 ,,g5]al ,,rem>k ,,on ,,! ,,sy/em ,,( ,,pr9ciples4 ,x is v rem>kable t we _c p]ceive ! possibility ( a ?+ f ! category alone1 b mu/ always h an intuition1 by :i* to make evid5t ! objective reality ( ! pure conception ( ! und]/&+4 ,take1 = example1 ! categories ( relation4 ,h[ 7#a7 a ?+ c exi/ only z a subject1 & n z a m]e det]m9ation ( o!r ?+s1 t is1 c be sub/ance2 or h[ 7#b71 because some?+ exi/s1 "s o!r ?+ mu/ exi/1 consequ5tly h[ a ?+ c be a cause2 or h[ 7#c71 :5 sev]al ?+s exi/1 f ! fact t "o ( ^! ?+s exi/s1 "s consequ5ce to ! o!rs foll[s1 & reciprocally1 & 9 ?is way a community ( sub/ances c be possible--are que/ions ^: solution _c be obta9$ f m]e conceptions4 ,! v same is ! case ) ! o!r categories2 = example1 h[ a ?+ c be ( ! same sort ) _m o!rs1 t is1 c be a quantity1 & s on4 ,s long z we h n intuition we _c "k :e!r we d really ?9k an object by ! categories1 & :]e an object c any:]e be f\nd to coh]e ) !m1 & ?us ! tru? is e/abli%$1 t ! categories are n 9 !mselves cognitions1 b m]e =ms ( ?\ght = ! con/ruction ( cognitions f giv5 intuitions4 ,= ! same reason is x true t f categories alone no syn!tical proposition c be made4 ,= example3 8,9 e exi/5ce !re is sub/ance10 t is1 some?+ t c exi/ only z a subject & n z m]e pr$icate2 or1 8,ev]y?+ is a quantity0--to con/ruct propositions su* z ^!1 we require some?+ to enable u to g out beyond ! giv5 conception & connect ano!r ) x4 ,= ! same reason ! attempt to prove a syn!tical proposition by means ( m]e conceptions1 = example3 8,ev]y?+ t exi/s cont+5tly has a cause10 has nev] succe$$4 ,we c\ld nev] get fur!r ?an prov+ t1 )\t ?is relation to conceptions1 we c\ld n conceive ! exi/5ce ( ! cont+5t1 t is1 c\ld n priori ?r\gh ! und]/&+ cognize ! exi/5ce ( su* a ?+2 b x does n h5ce foll[ t ?is is also ! condition ( ! possibility ( ! ?+ itself t is said to be cont+5t4 ,if1 accord+ly2 we look back to our pro( ( ! pr9ciple ( causality1 we %all f9d t we 7 able to prove x z valid only ( objects ( possible exp]i5ce1 &1 inde$1 only z itself ! pr9ciple ( ! possibility ( exp]i5ce1 ,consequ5tly ( ! cognition ( an object giv5 9 empirical intuition1 & n f m]e conceptions4 ,t1 h[ev]1 ! proposition3 8,ev]y?+ t is cont+5t mu/ h a cause10 is evid5t to e "o m]ely f conceptions1 is n to be d5i$4 ,b 9 ?is case ! conception ( ! cont+5t is cogitat$ z involv+ n ! category ( modality 7z t ! non-exi/5ce ( :i* c be conceiv$7 b t ( relation 7z t :i* c exi/ only z ! consequ5ce ( some?+ else71 & s x is really an id5tical proposition3 8,t :i* c exi/ only z a consequ5ce1 has a cause40 ,9 fact1 :5 we h to give examples ( cont+5t exi/5ce1 we always ref] to *anges1 & n m]ely to ! possibility ( conceiv+ ! opposite4#cg ,b *ange is an ev5t1 :i*1 z su*1 is possible only ?r\gh a cause1 & consid]$ p] se its non-exi/5ce is !re=e possible1 & we become cognizant ( its cont+5cy f ! fact t x c exi/ only z ! effect ( a cause4 ,h5ce1 if a ?+ is assum$ to be cont+5t1 x is an analytical proposition to say1 x has a cause4 #cg ,we c easily conceive ! non-exi/5ce ( matt]2 b ! anci5ts did n !nce inf] its cont+5cy4 ,b ev5 ! alt]nation ( ! exi/5ce & non-exi/5ce ( a giv5 /ate 9 a ?+1 9 :i* all *ange consi/s1 by no means proves ! cont+5cy ( t /ate--! gr\nd ( pro( be+ ! reality ( its opposite4 ,= example1 a body is 9 a /ate ( re/ aft] motion1 b we _c inf] ! cont+5cy ( ! motion f ! fact t ! =m] is ! opposite ( ! latt]4 ,= ?is opposite is m]ely a logical & n a real opposite to ! o!r4 ,if we wi% to demon/rate ! cont+5cy ( ! motion1 :at we ought to prove is t1 in/ead ( ! motion :i* took place 9 ! prec$+ po9t ( "t1 x 0 possible = ! body to h be5 !n 9 re/1 n1 t x is aft]w>ds 9 re/2 = 9 ?is case1 bo? opposites are p]fectly consi/5t ) ea* o!r4 ,b x is /ill m rem>kable t1 to und]/& ! possibility ( ?+s accord+ to ! categories & ?us to demon/rate ! objective reality ( ! latt]1 we require n m]ely intuitions1 b ext]nal intuitions4 ,if1 = example1 we take ! pure conceptions ( relation1 we f9d t 7#a7 = ! purpose ( pres5t+ to ! conception ( sub/ance some?+ p]man5t 9 intuition correspond+ !reto & ?us ( demon/rat+ ! objective reality ( ?is conception1 we require an intuition 7( matt]7 9 space1 because space alone is p]man5t & det]m9es ?+s z su*1 :ile "t1 & ) x all t is 9 ! int]nal s5se1 is 9 a /ate ( cont9ual fl[2 7#b7 9 ord] to repres5t *ange z ! intuition correspond+ to ! conception ( causality1 we require ! repres5tation ( motion z *ange 9 space2 9 fact1 x is ?r\gh x alone t *anges1 ! possibility ( :i* no pure und]/&+ c p]ceive1 are capable ( be+ intuit$4 ,*ange is ! connection ( det]m9ations contradictorily oppos$ to ea* o!r 9 ! exi/5ce ( "o & ! same ?+4 ,n[1 h[ x is possible t out ( a giv5 /ate "o q opposite to x 9 ! same ?+ %\ld foll[1 reason )\t an example c n only n conceive1 b _c ev5 make intelligible )\t intuition2 & ?is intuition is ! motion ( a po9t 9 space2 ! exi/5ce ( :i* 9 diff]5t spaces 7z a consequ5ce ( opposite det]m9ations7 alone makes ! intuition ( *ange possible4 ,=1 9 ord] to make ev5 int]nal *ange cognitable1 we require to repres5t "t1 z ! =m ( ! int]nal s5se1 figuratively by a l9e1 & ! int]nal *ange by ! draw+ ( t l9e 7motion71 & consequ5tly are oblig$ to employ ext]nal intuition to be able to repres5t ! successive exi/5ce ( ourselves 9 diff]5t /ates4 ,! prop] gr\nd ( ?is fact is t all *ange to be p]ceiv$ z *ange presupposes some?+ p]man5t 9 intuition1 :ile 9 ! int]nal s5se no p]man5t intuition is to be f\nd4 ,la/ly1 ! objective possibility ( ! category ( community _c be conceiv$ by m]e reason1 & consequ5tly its objective reality _c be demon/rat$ )\t an intuition1 & t ext]nal 9 space4 ,= h[ c we conceive ! possibility ( community1 t is1 :5 sev]al sub/ances exi/1 t "s effect on ! exi/5ce ( ! "o foll[s f ! exi/5ce ( ! o!r1 & reciprocally1 & !re=e t1 because some?+ exi/s 9 ! latt]1 some?+ else mu/ exi/ 9 ! =m]1 :i* c\ld n be und]/ood f its own exi/5ce alone8 ,= ?is is ! v ess5ce ( community--:i* is inconceivable z a prop]ty ( ?+s :i* are p]fectly isolat$4 ,h5ce1 ,leibnitz1 9 attribut+ to ! sub/ances ( ! _w--z cogitat$ by ! und]/&+ alone--a community1 requir$ ! m$iat+ aid ( a div9ity2 =1 f _! exi/5ce1 su* a prop]ty seem$ to him ) ju/ice inconceivable4 ,b we c v easily conceive ! possibility ( community 7( sub/ances z ph5om5a7 if we repres5t !m to ourselves z 9 space1 consequ5tly 9 ext]nal intuition4 ,= ext]nal intuition conta9s 9 itself priori =mal ext]nal relations1 z ! conditions ( ! possibility ( ! real relations ( action & reaction1 & !re=e ( ! possibility ( community4 ,) ! same ease c x be demon/rat$1 t ! possibility ( ?+s z quantities1 & consequ5tly ! objective reality ( ! category ( quantity1 c be gr\nd$ only 9 ext]nal intuition1 & t by its means alone is ! notion ( quantity appropriat$ by ! int]nal s5se4 ,b ,i mu/ avoid prolixity1 & leave ! task ( illu/rat+ ?is by examples to ! read]'s own reflection4 ,! above rem>ks are ( ! greate/ importance1 n only = ! confirmation ( our previ\s confutation ( idealism1 b /ill m :5 ! subject ( self-cognition by m]e int]nal consci\sness & ! det]m9ation ( our own nature )\t ! aid ( ext]nal empirical intuitions is "u discussion1 = ! indication ( ! gr\nds ( ! possibility ( su* a cognition4 ,! result ( ! :ole ( ?is "p ( ! analytic ( pr9ciples is1 !re=e3 8,all pr9ciples ( ! pure und]/&+ are no?+ m ?an priori pr9ciples ( ! possibility ( exp]i5ce1 & to exp]i5ce alone d all priori syn!tical propositions apply & relate02 inde$1 _! possibility itself re/s entirely on ?is relation4 ,*apt] ,,iii ,( ! ,gr\nd ( ! ,division ( all ,objects into ,ph5om5a & ,n\m5a ,we h n[ n only trav]s$ ! region ( ! pure und]/&+ & c>efully survey$ e "p ( x1 b we h also measur$ x1 & assign$ to ev]y?+ !re9 its prop] place4 ,b ?is l& is an isl&1 & enclos$ by nature h]self )9 un*angeable limits4 ,x is ! l& ( tru? 7an attractive ^w71 surr\nd$ by a wide & /ormy ocean1 ! region ( illusion1 :]e _m a fog-bank1 _m an iceb]g1 seems to ! m>9]1 on 8 voyage ( discov]y1 a new c\ntry1 &1 :ile con/antly delud+ him ) va9 hopes1 engages him 9 dang]\s adv5tures1 f :i* he nev] c desi/1 & :i* yet he nev] c br+ to a t]m9ation4 ,b be=e v5tur+ ^u ?is sea1 9 ord] to explore x 9 its :ole ext5t1 & to arrive at a c]ta9ty :e!r any?+ is to be discov]$ !re1 x w n be )\t advantage if we ca/ our eyes ^u ! *>t ( ! l& t we are ab\t to leave1 & to ask ourselves1 fir/ly1 :e!r we _c re/ p]fectly cont5t$ ) :at x conta9s1 or :e!r we mu/ n ( necessity be cont5t$ ) x1 if we c f9d n[h]e else a solid f\ndation to build ^u2 &1 secondly1 by :at title we possess ?is l& itself1 & h[ we hold x secure aga9/ all ho/ile claims8 ,al?\gh1 9 ! c\rse ( our analytic1 we h already giv5 suffici5t answ]s to ^! que/ions1 yet a summ>y recapitulation ( ^! solutions may be useful 9 /r5g!n+ our conviction1 by unit+ 9 "o po9t ! mom5ta ( ! argum5ts4 ,we h se5 t ev]y?+ :i* ! und]/&+ draws f itself1 )\t borr[+ f exp]i5ce1 x nev]!less possesses only = ! beho( & use ( exp]i5ce4 ,! pr9ciples ( ! pure und]/&+1 :e!r con/itutive priori 7z ! ma!matical pr9ciples71 or m]ely regulative 7z ! dynamical71 conta9 no?+ b ! pure s*ema1 z x 71 ( possible exp]i5ce4 ,= exp]i5ce possesses its unity f ! syn!tical unity :i* ! und]/&+1 orig9ally & f itself1 imp>ts to ! syn!sis ( ! imag9ation 9 relation to app]ception1 & 9 priori relation to & agreem5t ) :i* ph5om5a1 z data = a possible cognition1 mu/ /&4 ,b al?\gh ^! rules ( ! und]/&+ are n only priori true1 b ! v s\rce ( all tru?1 t is1 ( ! accordance ( our cognition ) objects1 & on ?is gr\nd1 t !y conta9 ! basis ( ! possibility ( exp]i5ce1 z ! ensemble ( all cognition1 x seems to u n en\gh to prop\nd :at is true--we desire also to be told :at we want to "k4 ,if1 !n1 we le>n no?+ m by ?is critical exam9ation ?an :at we %\ld h practis$ 9 ! m]ely empirical use ( ! und]/&+1 )\t any su* subtle inquiry1 ! presumption is t ! advantage we reap f x is n wor? ! lab\r be/[$ ^u x4 ,x may c]ta9ly be answ]$ t no ra% curiosity is m prejudicial to ! enl>gem5t ( our k ?an t :i* mu/ "k be=eh& ! utility ( ?is or t piece ( in=mation :i* we seek1 be=e we h ent]$ on ! ne$ful inve/igations1 & be=e "o c\ld =m ! lea/ conception ( its utility1 ev5 ?\gh x 7 plac$ be=e our eyes4 ,b !re is "o advantage 9 su* transc5d5tal inquiries :i* c be made compreh5sible to ! dulle/ & mo/ reluctant le>n]--?is1 namely1 t ! und]/&+ :i* is occupi$ m]ely ) empirical ex]cise1 & does n reflect on ! s\rces ( its own cognition1 may ex]cise its functions v well & v successfully1 b is q unable to d "o ?+1 & t ( v great importance1 to det]m9e1 namely1 ! b\nds t limit its employm5t1 & to "k :at lies )9 or )\t its own sph]e4 ,?is purpose c be obta9$ only by su* pr(\nd inve/igations z we h in/itut$4 ,b if x _c di/+ui% :e!r c]ta9 que/ions lie )9 its horizon or n1 x c nev] be sure ei!r z to its claims or possessions1 b mu/ lay its acc\nt ) _m humiliat+ corrections1 :5 x transgresses1 z x unavoidably w1 ! limits ( its own t]ritory1 & loses itself 9 fanciful op9ions & bl9d+ illusions4 ,t ! und]/&+1 !re=e1 _c make ( its priori pr9ciples1 or ev5 ( its conceptions1 o!r ?an an empirical use1 is a proposition :i* leads to ! mo/ important results4 ,a transc5d5tal use is made ( a conception 9 a fundam5tal proposition or pr9ciple1 :5 x is ref]r$ to ?+s 9 g5]al & consid]$ z ?+s 9 !mselves2 an empirical use1 :5 x is ref]r$ m]ely to ph5om5a1 t is1 to objects ( a possible exp]i5ce4 ,t ! latt] use ( a conception is ! only admissible "o is evid5t f ! reasons foll[+4 ,= e conception are requisite1 fir/ly1 ! logical =m ( a conception 7( ?\ght7 g5]al2 &1 secondly1 ! possibility ( pres5t+ to ?is an object to :i* x may apply4 ,fail+ ?is latt]1 x has no s5se1 & utt]ly void ( cont5t1 al?\gh x may conta9 ! logical function = con/ruct+ a conception f c]ta9 data4 ,n[1 object _c be giv5 to a conception o!rwise ?an by intuition1 &1 ev5 if a pure intuition antec$5t to ! object is priori possible1 ?is pure intuition c itself obta9 objective validity only f empirical intuition1 ( :i* x is itself b ! =m4 ,all conceptions1 !re=e1 & ) !m all pr9ciples1 h[ev] high ! degree ( _! priori possibility1 relate to empirical intuitions1 t is1 to data t[>ds a possible exp]i5ce4 ,)\t ?is !y possess no objective validity1 b are m]e play ( imag9ation or ( und]/&+ ) images or notions4 ,let u take1 = example1 ! conceptions ( ma!matics1 & fir/ 9 its pure intuitions4 8,space has ?ree dim5sions0--8,betwe5 two po9ts !re c be only "o /raight l9e10 etc4 ,al?\gh all ^! pr9ciples1 & ! repres5tation ( ! object ) :i* ?is sci5ce occupies itself1 are g5]at$ 9 ! m9d entirely priori1 !y w\ld nev]!less h no significance if we 7 n always able to exhibit _! significance 9 & by means ( ph5om5a 7empirical objects74 ,h5ce x is requisite t an ab/ract conception be made s5su\s1 t is1 t an object correspond+ to x 9 intuition be =?com+1 o!rwise ! conception rema9s1 z we say1 )\t s5se1 t is1 )\t mean+4 ,ma!matics fulfils ?is requirem5t by ! con/ruction ( ! figure1 :i* is a ph5om5on evid5t to ! s5ses4 ,! same sci5ce f9ds support & significance 9 numb]2 ?is 9 its turn f9ds x 9 ! f+]s1 or 9 c\nt]s1 or 9 l9es & po9ts4 ,! conception itself is always produc$ priori1 toge!r ) ! syn!tical pr9ciples or =mulas f su* conceptions2 b ! prop] employm5t ( !m1 & _! application to objects1 c exi/ n[h]e b 9 exp]i5ce1 ! possibility ( :i*1 z reg>ds its =m1 !y conta9 priori4 ,t ?is is also ! case ) all ( ! categories & ! pr9ciples bas$ ^u !m is evid5t f ! fact t we _c r5d] intelligible ! possibility ( an object correspond+ to !m )\t hav+ rec\rse to ! conditions ( s5sibility1 consequ5tly1 to ! =m ( ph5om5a1 to :i*1 z _! only prop] objects1 _! use mu/ !re=e be conf9$1 inasmu* z1 if ?is condition is remov$1 all significance1 t is1 all relation to an object1 disappe>s1 & no example c be f\nd to make x compreh5sible :at sort ( ?+s we ought to ?9k "u su* conceptions4 ,! conception ( quantity _c be expla9$ except by say+ t x is ! det]m9ation ( a ?+ :]eby x c be cogitat$ h[ _m times "o is plac$ 9 x4 ,b ?is 8h[ _m times0 is bas$ ^u successive repetition1 consequ5tly ^u "t & ! syn!sis ( ! homog5e\s !re94 ,reality1 9 contradi/9ction to negation1 c be expla9$ only by cogitat+ a "t :i* is ei!r fill$ !re) or is void4 ,if ,i leave out ! notion ( p]man5ce 7:i* is exi/5ce 9 all "t71 !re rema9s 9 ! conception ( sub/ance no?+ b ! logical notion ( subject1 a notion ( :i* ,i endeav\r to realize by repres5t+ to myself some?+ t c exi/ only z a subject4 ,b n only am ,i p]fectly ignorant ( any conditions "u :i* ?is logical pr]ogative c belong to a ?+1 ,i c make no?+ out ( ! notion1 & draw no inf]5ce f x1 because no object to :i* to apply ! conception is det]m9$1 & we consequ5tly d n "k :e!r x has any mean+ at all4 ,9 l mann]1 if ,i leave out ! notion ( "t1 9 :i* some?+ foll[s ^u "s o!r ?+ 9 con=mity ) a rule1 ,i c f9d no?+ 9 ! pure category1 except t !re is a some?+ ( su* a sort t f x a conclusion may be drawn z to ! exi/5ce ( "s o!r ?+4 ,b 9 ?is case x w\ld n only be impossible to di/+ui% betwe5 a cause & an effect1 b1 z ?is p[] to draw conclusions requires conditions ( :i* ,i am q ignorant1 ! conception is n det]m9$ z to ! mode 9 :i* x ought to apply to an object4 ,! s-call$ pr9ciple3 8,ev]y?+ t is cont+5t has a cause10 comes ) a gravity & self-assum$ au?ority t seems to require no support f )\t4 ,b1 ,i ask1 :at is meant by cont+5t8 ,! answ] is t ! non-exi/5ce ( :i* is possible4 ,b ,i %\ld l v well to "k by :at means ?is possibility ( non-exi/5ce is to be cogniz$1 if we d n repres5t to ourselves a succession 9 ! s]ies ( ph5om5a1 & 9 ?is succession an exi/5ce :i* foll[s a non-exi/5ce1 or conv]sely1 consequ5tly1 *ange4 ,= to say1 t ! non-exi/5ce ( a ?+ is n self-contradictory is a lame appeal to a logical condition1 :i* is no d\bt a necess>y condition ( ! exi/5ce ( ! conception1 b is f> f be+ suffici5t = ! real objective possibility ( non-exi/5ce4 ,i c annihilate 9 ?\ght e exi/+ sub/ance )\t self-contradiction1 b ,i _c inf] f ?is _! objective cont+5cy 9 exi/5ce1 t is to say1 ! possibility ( _! non-exi/5ce 9 itself4 ,z reg>ds ! category ( community1 x may easily be inf]r$ t1 z ! pure categories ( sub/ance & causality are incapable ( a def9ition & explanation suffici5t to det]m9e _! object )\t ! aid ( intuition1 ! category ( reciprocal causality 9 ! relation ( sub/ances to ea* o!r 7comm]cium7 is j z little susceptible !re(4 ,possibility1 exi/5ce1 & necessity nobody has ev] yet be5 able to expla9 )\t be+ guilty ( manife/ tautology1 :5 ! def9ition has be5 drawn entirely f ! pure und]/&+4 ,= ! sub/itution ( ! logical possibility ( ! conception--! condition ( :i* is t x be n self-contradictory1 = ! transc5d5tal possibility ( ?+s--! condition ( :i* is t !re be an object correspond+ to ! conception1 is a trick :i* c only deceive ! inexp]i5c$4#ch #ch ,9 "o ^w1 to none ( ^! conceptions belongs a correspond+ object1 & consequ5tly _! real possibility _c be demon/rat$1 if we take away s5su\s intuition--! only intuition :i* we possess--& !re !n rema9s no?+ b ! logical possibility1 t is1 ! fact t ! conception or ?\ght is possible--:i*1 h[ev]1 is n ! "q2 :at we want to "k be+1 :e!r x relates to an object & ?us possesses any mean+4 ,x foll[s inconte/ably1 t ! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+ are incapable ( transc5d5tal1 & mu/ always be ( empirical use alone1 & t ! pr9ciples ( ! pure und]/&+ relate only to ! g5]al conditions ( a possible exp]i5ce1 to objects ( ! s5ses1 & nev] to ?+s 9 g5]al1 ap>t f ! mode 9 :i* we intuite !m4 ,transc5d5tal analytic has accord+ly ?is important result1 to wit1 t ! und]/&+ is compet5t effect no?+ priori1 except ! anticipation ( ! =m ( a possible exp]i5ce 9 g5]al1 & t1 z t :i* is n ph5om5on _c be an object ( exp]i5ce1 x c nev] ov]/ep ! limits ( s5sibility1 )9 :i* alone objects are pres5t$ to u4 ,its pr9ciples are m]ely pr9ciples ( ! exposition ( ph5om5a1 & ! pr\d "n ( an ontology1 :i* pr(esses to pres5t syn!tical cognitions priori ( ?+s 9 g5]al 9 a sy/ematic doctr9e1 mu/ give place to ! mode/ title ( analytic ( ! pure und]/&+4 ,?\ght is ! act ( ref]r+ a giv5 intuition to an object4 ,if ! mode ( ?is intuition is unkn[n to u1 ! object is m]ely transc5d5tal1 & ! conception ( ! und]/&+ is employ$ only transc5d5tally1 t is1 to produce unity 9 ! ?\ght ( a manifold 9 g5]al4 ,n[ a pure category1 9 :i* all conditions ( s5su\s intuition--z ! only intuition we possess--are ab/ract$1 does n det]m9e an object1 b m]ely expresses ! ?\ght ( an object 9 g5]al1 accord+ to diff]5t modes4 ,n[1 to employ a conception1 ! function ( judgem5t is requir$1 by :i* an object is subsum$ "u ! conception1 consequ5tly ! at lea/ =mal condition1 "u :i* some?+ c be giv5 9 intuition4 ,fail+ ?is condition ( judgem5t 7s*ema71 subsumption is impossible2 = !re is 9 su* a case no?+ giv51 :i* may be subsum$ "u ! conception4 ,! m]ely transc5d5tal use ( ! categories is !re=e1 9 fact1 no use at all & has no det]m9$1 or ev51 z reg>ds its =m1 det]m9able object4 ,h5ce x foll[s t ! pure category is incompet5t to e/abli% a syn!tical priori pr9ciple1 & t ! pr9ciples ( ! pure und]/&+ are only ( empirical & nev] ( transc5d5tal use1 & t beyond ! sph]e ( possible exp]i5ce no syn!tical priori pr9ciples are possible4 ,x may be advisable1 !re=e1 to express ourselves ?us4 ,! pure categories1 ap>t f ! =mal conditions ( s5sibility1 h a m]ely transc5d5tal mean+1 b are nev]!less n ( transc5d5tal use1 because ?is is 9 itself impossible1 inasmu* z all ! conditions ( any employm5t or use ( !m 79 judgem5ts7 are abs5t1 to wit1 ! =mal conditions ( ! subsumption ( an object "u ^! conceptions4 ,z1 !re=e1 9 ! "* ( pure categories1 !y mu/ be employ$ empirically1 & _c be employ$ transc5d5tally1 !y are ( no use at all1 :5 sep>at$ f s5sibility1 t is1 !y _c be appli$ to an object4 ,!y are m]ely ! pure =m ( ! employm5t ( ! und]/&+ 9 respect ( objects 9 g5]al & ( ?\ght1 )\t its be+ at ! same "t possible to ?9k or to det]m9e any object by _! means4 ,b !re lurks at ! f\ndation ( ?is subject an illusion :i* x is v difficult to avoid4 ,! categories are n bas$1 z reg>ds _! orig91 ^u s5sibility1 l ! =ms ( intuition1 space1 & "t2 !y seem1 !re=e1 to be capable ( an application beyond ! sph]e ( s5su\s objects4 ,b ?is is n ! case4 ,!y are no?+ b m]e =ms ( ?\ght1 :i* conta9 only ! logical faculty ( unit+ priori 9 consci\sness ! manifold giv5 9 intuition4 ,ap>t1 !n1 f ! only intuition possible = u1 !y h /ill less mean+ ?an ! pure s5su\s =ms1 space & "t1 = ?r\gh !m an object is at lea/ giv51 :ile a mode ( connection ( ! manifold1 :5 ! intuition :i* alone gives ! manifold is want+1 has no mean+ at all4 ,at ! same "t1 :5 we designate c]ta9 objects z ph5om5a or s5su\s exi/5ces1 ?us di/+ui%+ our mode ( intuit+ !m f _! own nature z ?+s 9 !mselves1 x is evid5t t by ?is v di/9ction we z x 7 place ! latt]1 consid]$ 9 ?is _! own nature1 al?\gh we d n s intuite !m1 9 opposition to ! =m]1 or1 on ! o!r h&1 we d s place o!r possible ?+s1 :i* are n objects ( our s5ses1 b are cogitat$ by ! und]/&+ alone1 & call !m intelligible exi/5ces 7n\m5a74 ,n[ ! "q arises :e!r ! pure conceptions ( our und]/&+ d possess significance 9 respect ( ^! latt]1 & may possibly be a mode ( cogniz+ !m4 ,b we are met at ! v comm5cem5t ) an ambiguity1 :i* may easily occasion great misappreh5sion4 ,! und]/&+1 :5 x t]ms an object 9 a c]ta9 relation ph5om5on1 at ! same "t =ms out ( ?is relation a repres5tation or notion ( an object 9 itself1 & h5ce believes t x c =m also conceptions ( su* objects4 ,n[ z ! und]/&+ possesses no o!r fundam5tal conceptions besides ! categories1 x takes = grant$ t an object consid]$ z a ?+ 9 itself mu/ be capable ( be+ ?\ght by means ( ^! pure conceptions1 & is !reby l$ to hold ! p]fectly undet]m9$ conception ( an intelligible exi/5ce1 a some?+ out ( ! sph]e ( our s5sibility1 = a det]m9ate conception ( an exi/5ce :i* we c cognize 9 "s way or o!r by means ( ! und]/&+4 ,if1 by ! t]m n\m5on1 we und]/& a ?+ s f> z x is n an object ( our s5su\s intuition1 ?us mak+ ab/raction ( our mode ( intuit+ x1 ?is is a n\m5on 9 ! negative s5se ( ! ^w4 ,b if we und]/& by x an object ( a non-s5su\s intuition1 we 9 ?is case assume a peculi> mode ( intuition1 an intellectual intuition1 to wit1 :i* does n1 h[ev]1 belong to u1 ( ! v possibility ( :i* we h no notion--& ?is is a n\m5on 9 ! positive s5se4 ,! doctr9e ( s5sibility is also ! doctr9e ( n\m5a 9 ! negative s5se1 t is1 ( ?+s :i* ! und]/&+ is oblig$ to cogitate ap>t f any relation to our mode ( intuition1 consequ5tly n z m]e ph5om5a1 b z ?+s 9 !mselves4 ,b ! und]/&+ at ! same "t compreh5ds t x _c employ its categories = ! consid]ation ( ?+s 9 !mselves1 because ^! possess significance only 9 relation to ! unity ( intuitions 9 space & "t1 & t !y are compet5t to det]m9e ?is unity by means ( g5]al priori connect+ conceptions only on acc\nt ( ! pure ideality ( space & "t4 ,:]e ?is unity ( "t is n to be met )1 z is ! case ) n\m5a1 ! :ole use1 inde$ ! :ole mean+ ( ! categories is entirely lo/1 = ev5 ! possibility ( ?+s to correspond to ! categories is 9 ?is case incompreh5sible4 ,on ?is po9t1 ,i ne$ only ref] ! read] to :at ,i h said at ! comm5cem5t ( ! ,g5]al ,rem>k app5d$ to ! =ego+ *apt]4 ,n[1 ! possibility ( a ?+ c nev] be prov$ f ! fact t ! conception ( x is n self-contradictory1 b only by means ( an intuition correspond+ to ! conception4 ,if1 !re=e1 we wi% to apply ! categories to objects :i* _c be reg>d$ z ph5om5a1 we mu/ h an intuition diff]5t f ! s5su\s1 & 9 ?is case ! objects w\ld be a n\m5a 9 ! positive s5se ( ! ^w4 ,n[1 z su* an intuition1 t is1 an intellectual intuition1 is no "p ( our faculty ( cognition1 x is absolutely impossible = ! categories to possess any application beyond ! limits ( exp]i5ce4 ,x may be true t !re are intelligible exi/5ces to :i* our faculty ( s5su\s intuition has no relation1 & _c be appli$1 b our conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 z m]e =ms ( ?\ght = our s5su\s intuition1 d n ext5d to ^!4 ,:at1 !re=e1 we call n\m5on mu/ be und]/ood by u z su* 9 a negative s5se4 ,if ,i take away f an empirical intuition all ?\ght 7by means ( ! categories71 !re rema9s no cognition ( any object2 = by means ( m]e intuition no?+ is cogitat$1 &1 f ! exi/5ce ( su* or su* an affection ( s5sibility 9 me1 x does n foll[ t ?is affection or repres5tation has any relation to an object )\t me4 ,b if ,i take away all intuition1 !re /ill rema9s ! =m ( ?\ght1 t is1 ! mode ( det]m9+ an object = ! manifold ( a possible intuition4 ,?us ! categories d 9 "s measure really ext5d fur!r ?an s5su\s intuition1 inasmu* z !y ?9k objects 9 g5]al1 )\t reg>d to ! mode 7( s5sibility7 9 :i* ^! objects are giv54 ,b !y d n = ?is reason apply to & det]m9e a wid] sph]e ( objects1 because we _c assume t su* c be giv51 )\t presuppos+ ! possibility ( ano!r ?an ! s5su\s mode ( intuition1 a supposition we are n ju/ifi$ 9 mak+4 ,i call a conception problematical :i* conta9s 9 itself no contradiction1 & :i* is connect$ ) o!r cognitions z a limitation ( giv5 conceptions1 b ^: objective reality _c be cogniz$ 9 any mann]4 ,! conception ( a n\m5on1 t is1 ( a ?+ :i* mu/ be cogitat$ n z an object ( s5se1 b z a ?+ 9 itself 7solely ?r\gh ! pure und]/&+71 is n self-contradictory1 = we are n entitl$ to ma9ta9 t s5sibility is ! only possible mode ( intuition4 ,nay1 fur!r1 ?is conception is necess>y to re/ra9 s5su\s intuition )9 ! b\nds ( ph5om5a1 & ?us to limit ! objective validity ( s5su\s cognition2 = ?+s 9 !mselves1 :i* lie beyond its prov9ce1 are call$ n\m5a = ! v purpose ( indicat+ t ?is cognition does n ext5d its application to all t ! und]/&+ ?9ks4 ,b1 aft] all1 ! possibility ( su* n\m5a is q incompreh5sible1 & beyond ! sph]e ( ph5om5a1 all is = u a m]e void2 t is to say1 we possess an und]/&+ ^: prov9ce does problematically ext5d beyond ?is sph]e1 b we d n possess an intuition1 inde$1 n ev5 ! conception ( a possible intuition1 by means ( :i* objects beyond ! region ( s5sibility c\ld be giv5 u1 & 9 ref]5ce to :i* ! und]/&+ might be employ$ ass]torically4 ,! conception ( a n\m5on is !re=e m]ely a limitative conception & !re=e only ( negative use4 ,b x is n an arbitr>y or fictiti\s notion1 b is connect$ ) ! limitation ( s5sibility1 )\t1 h[ev]1 be+ capable ( pres5t+ u ) any positive datum beyond ?is sph]e4 ,! division ( objects into ph5om5a & n\m5a1 & ( ! _w into a mundus s5sibilis & intelligibilis is !re=e q inadmissible 9 a positive s5se1 al?\gh conceptions d c]ta9ly admit ( su* a division2 = ! class ( n\m5a h no det]m9ate object correspond+ to !m1 & _c !re=e possess objective validity4 ,if we ab&on ! s5ses1 h[ c x be made conceivable t ! categories 7:i* are ! only conceptions t c\ld s]ve z conceptions = n\m5a7 h any s5se or mean+ at all1 inasmu* z some?+ m ?an ! m]e unity ( ?\ght1 namely1 a possible intuition1 is requisite = _! application to an object8 ,! conception ( a n\m5on1 consid]$ z m]ely problematical1 is1 h[ev]1 n only admissible1 b1 z a limitative conception ( s5sibility1 absolutely necess>y4 ,b1 9 ?is case1 a n\m5on is n a p>ticul> intelligible object = our und]/&+2 on ! contr>y1 ! k9d ( und]/&+ to :i* x c\ld belong is itself a problem1 = we _c =m ! mo/ di/ant conception ( ! possibility ( an und]/&+ :i* %\ld cognize an object1 n discursively by means ( categories1 b intuitively 9 a non-s5su\s intuition4 ,our und]/&+ atta9s 9 ?is way a sort ( negative ext5sion4 ,t is to say1 x is n limit$ by1 b r limits1 s5sibility1 by giv+ ! "n ( n\m5a to ?+s1 n consid]$ z ph5om5a1 b z ?+s 9 !mselves4 ,b x at ! same "t prescribes limits to itself1 = x confesses itself unable to cognize ^! by means ( ! categories1 & h5ce is compell$ to cogitate !m m]ely z an unkn[n some?+4 ,i f9d1 h[ev]1 9 ! writ+s ( mod]n au?ors1 an entirely diff]5t use ( ! expressions1 mundus s5sibilis & intelligibilis1 :i* q dep>ts f ! mean+ ( ! anci5ts--an acceptation 9 :i*1 inde$1 !re is to be f\nd no difficulty1 b :i* at ! same "t dep5ds on m]e v]bal quibbl+4 ,accord+ to ?is mean+1 "s h *os5 to call ! complex ( ph5om5a1 9 s f> z x is intuit$1 mundus s5sibilis1 b 9 s f> z ! connection !re( is cogitat$ accord+ to g5]al laws ( ?\ght1 mundus intelligibilis4 ,a/ronomy1 9 s f> z we mean by ! ^w ! m]e obs]vation ( ! />ry heav51 may repres5t ! =m]2 a sy/em ( a/ronomy1 su* z ! ,cop]nican or ,newtonian1 ! latt]4 ,b su* twi/+ ( words is a m]e sophi/ical subt]fuge1 to avoid a difficult "q1 by modify+ its mean+ to suit our own conv5i5ce4 ,to be sure1 und]/&+ & reason are employ$ 9 ! cognition ( ph5om5a2 b ! "q is1 :e!r ^! c be appli$ :5 ! object is n a ph5om5on & 9 ?is s5se we reg>d x if x is cogitat$ z giv5 to ! und]/&+ alone1 & n to ! s5ses4 ,! "q !re=e is :e!r1 ov] & above ! empirical use ( ! und]/&+1 a transc5d5tal use is possible1 :i* applies to ! n\m5on z an object4 ,?is "q we h answ]$ 9 ! negative4 ,:5 !re=e we say1 ! s5ses repres5t objects z !y appe>1 ! und]/&+ z !y are1 ! latt] /atem5t mu/ n be und]/ood 9 a transc5d5tal1 b only 9 an empirical signification1 t is1 z !y mu/ be repres5t$ 9 ! complete connection ( ph5om5a1 & n accord+ to :at !y may be1 ap>t f _! relation to possible exp]i5ce1 consequ5tly n z objects ( ! pure und]/&+4 ,= ?is mu/ ev] rema9 unkn[n to u4 ,nay1 x is also q unkn[n to u :e!r any su* transc5d5tal or extraord9>y cognition is possible "u any circum/ances1 at lea/1 :e!r x is possible by means ( our categories4 ,und]/&+ & s5sibility1 ) u1 c det]m9e objects only 9 conjunction4 ,if we sep>ate !m1 we h intuitions )\t conceptions1 or conceptions )\t intuitions2 9 bo? cases1 repres5tations1 :i* we _c apply to any det]m9ate object4 ,if1 aft] all our inquiries & explanations1 any "o /ill hesitates to ab&on ! m]e transc5d5tal use ( ! categories1 let him attempt to con/ruct ) !m a syn!tical proposition4 ,x w\ld1 ( c\rse1 be unnecess>y = ?is purpose to con/ruct an analytical proposition1 = t does n ext5d ! sph]e ( ! und]/&+1 b1 be+ conc]n$ only ab\t :at is cogitat$ 9 ! conception itself1 x leaves x q undecid$ :e!r ! conception has any relation to objects1 or m]ely indicates ! unity ( ?\ght--complete ab/raction be+ made ( ! modi 9 :i* an object may be giv53 9 su* a proposition1 x is suffici5t = ! und]/&+ to "k :at lies 9 ! conception--to :at x applies is to x indiff]5t4 ,! attempt mu/ !re=e be made ) a syn!tical & s-call$ transc5d5tal pr9ciple1 = example3 8,ev]y?+ t exi/s1 exi/s z sub/ance10 or1 8,ev]y?+ t is cont+5t exi/s z an effect ( "s o!r ?+1 viz41 ( its cause40 ,n[ ,i ask1 :5ce c ! und]/&+ draw ^! syn!tical propositions1 :5 ! conceptions conta9$ !re9 d n relate to possible exp]i5ce b to ?+s 9 !mselves 7n\m5a78 ,:]e is to be f\nd ! ?ird t]m1 :i* is always requisite ,,pure site 9 a syn!tical proposition1 :i* may connect 9 ! same proposition conceptions :i* h no logical 7analytical7 connection ) ea* o!r8 ,! proposition nev] w be demon/rat$1 nay1 m1 ! possibility ( any su* pure ass]tion nev] c be %[n1 )\t mak+ ref]5ce to ! empirical use ( ! und]/&+1 & ?us1 ipso facto1 completely r5\nc+ pure & non-s5su\s judgem5t4 ,?us ! conception ( pure & m]ely intelligible objects is completely void ( all pr9ciples ( its application1 because we _c imag9e any mode 9 :i* !y might be giv51 & ! problematical ?\ght :i* leaves a place op5 = !m s]ves only1 l a void space1 to limit ! use ( empirical pr9ciples1 )\t conta9+ at ! same "t any o!r object ( cognition beyond _! sph]e4 ,,app5dix ,( ! ,equivocal ,nature or ,amphiboly ( ! ,conceptions ( ,reflection f ! ,confusion ( ! ,transc5d5tal ) ! ,empirical use ( ! ,und]/&+4 ,reflection 7reflexio7 is n occupi$ ab\t objects !mselves1 = ! purpose ( directly obta9+ conceptions ( !m1 b is t /ate ( ! m9d 9 :i* we set ourselves to discov] ! subjective conditions "u :i* we obta9 conceptions4 ,x is ! consci\sness ( ! relation ( giv5 repres5tations to ! diff]5t s\rces or faculties ( cognition1 by :i* alone _! relation to ea* o!r c be rightly det]m9$4 ,! fir/ "q :i* occurs 9 consid]+ our repres5tations is to :at faculty ( cognition d !y belong8 ,to ! und]/&+ or to ! s5ses8 ,_m judgem5ts are admitt$ to be true f m]e habit or incl9ation2 b1 because reflection nei!r prec$es nor foll[s1 x is held to be a judgem5t t has its orig9 9 ! und]/&+4 ,all judgem5ts d n require exam9ation1 t is1 inve/igation into ! gr\nds ( _! tru?4 ,=1 :5 !y are imm$iately c]ta9 7= example3 8,betwe5 two po9ts !re c be only "o /raight l9e071 no bett] or less m$iate te/ ( _! tru? c be f\nd ?an t :i* !y !mselves conta9 & express4 ,b all judgem5t1 nay1 all comp>isons require reflection1 t is1 a di/9ction ( ! faculty ( cognition to :i* ! giv5 conceptions belong4 ,! act :]eby ,i comp>e my repres5tations ) ! faculty ( cognition :i* orig9ates !m1 & :]eby ,i di/+ui% :e!r !y are comp>$ ) ea* o!r z belong+ to ! pure und]/&+ or to s5su\s intuition1 ,i t]m transc5d5tal reflection4 ,n[1 ! relations 9 :i* conceptions c /& to ea* o!r are ^? ( id5tity & diff]5ce1 agreem5t & opposition1 ( ! int]nal & ext]nal1 f9ally1 ( ! det]m9able & ! det]m9+ 7matt] & =m74 ,! prop] det]m9ation ( ^! relations re/s on ! "q1 to :at faculty ( cognition !y subjectively belong1 :e!r to s5sibility or und]/&+8 ,=1 on ! mann] 9 :i* we solve ?is "q dep5ds ! mann] 9 :i* we mu/ cogitate ^! relations4 ,be=e con/ruct+ any objective judgem5t1 we comp>e ! conceptions t are to be plac$ 9 ! judgem5t1 & obs]ve :e!r !re exi/s id5tity 7( _m repres5tations 9 "o conception71 if a g5]al judgem5t is to be con/ruct$1 or diff]5ce1 if a p>ticul>2 :e!r !re is agreem5t :5 affirmative2 & opposition :5 negative judgem5ts are to be con/ruct$1 & s on4 ,= ?is reason we ought to call ^! conceptions1 conceptions ( comp>ison 7conceptus comp>ationis74 ,b z1 :5 ! "q is n z to ! logical =m1 b z to ! cont5t ( conceptions1 t is to say1 :e!r ! ?+s !mselves are id5tical or diff]5t1 9 agreem5t or opposition1 & s on1 ! ?+s c h a tw(old relation to our faculty ( cognition1 to wit1 a relation ei!r to s5sibility or to ! und]/&+1 & z on ?is relation dep5ds _! relation to ea* o!r1 transc5d5tal reflection1 t is1 ! relation ( giv5 repres5tations to "o or ! o!r faculty ( cognition1 c alone det]m9e ?is latt] relation4 ,?us we %all n be able to discov] :e!r ! ?+s are id5tical or diff]5t1 9 agreem5t or opposition1 etc41 f ! m]e conception ( ! ?+s by means ( comp>ison 7comp>atio71 b only by di/+ui%+ ! mode ( cognition to :i* !y belong1 9 o!r words1 by means ( transc5d5tal reflection4 ,we may1 !re=e1 ) ju/ice say1 t logical reflection is m]e comp>ison1 = 9 x no acc\nt is tak5 ( ! faculty ( cognition to :i* ! giv5 conceptions belong1 & !y are consequ5tly1 z f> z reg>ds _! orig91 to be treat$ z homog5e\s2 :ile transc5d5tal reflection 7:i* applies to ! objects !mselves7 conta9s ! gr\nd ( ! possibility ( objective comp>ison ( repres5tations ) ea* o!r1 & is !re=e v diff]5t f ! =m]1 because ! faculties ( cognition to :i* !y belong are n ev5 ! same4 ,transc5d5tal reflection is a duty :i* no "o c neglect :o wi%es to e/abli% an priori judgem5t ^u ?+s4 ,we %all n[ proce$ to fulfil ?is duty1 & !reby ?r[ n a little light on ! "q z to ! det]m9ation ( ! prop] bus9ess ( ! und]/&+4 #a4 ,id5tity & ,diff]5ce4 ,:5 an object is pres5t$ to u sev]al times1 b always ) ! same int]nal det]m9ations 7qualitas et quantitas71 x1 if an object ( pure und]/&+1 is always ! same1 n sev]al ?+s1 b only "o ?+ 7num]ica id5titas72 b if a ph5om5on1 we d n conc]n ourselves ) comp>+ ! conception ( ! ?+ ) ! conception ( "s o!r1 b1 al?\gh !y may be 9 ?is respect p]fectly ! same1 ! diff]5ce ( place at ! same "t is a suffici5t gr\nd = ass]t+ ! num]ical diff]5ce ( ^! objects 7( s5se74 ,?us1 9 ! case ( two drops ( wat]1 we may make complete ab/raction ( all int]nal diff]5ce 7quality & quantity71 &1 ! fact t !y are intuit$ at ! same "t 9 diff]5t places1 is suffici5t to ju/ify u 9 hold+ !m to be num]ically diff]5t4 ,leibnitz reg>d$ ph5om5a z ?+s 9 !mselves1 consequ5tly z intelligibilia1 t is1 objects ( pure und]/&+ 7al?\gh1 on acc\nt ( ! confus$ nature ( _! repres5tations1 he gave !m ! "n ( ph5om5a71 & 9 ?is case 8 pr9ciple ( ! indisc]nible 7pr9cipium id5tatis indisc]nibilium7 is n to be impugn$4 ,b1 z ph5om5a are objects ( s5sibility1 &1 z ! und]/&+1 9 respect ( !m1 mu/ be employ$ empirically & n purely or transc5d5tally1 plurality & num]ical diff]5ce are giv5 by space itself z ! condition ( ext]nal ph5om5a4 ,= "o "p ( space1 al?\gh x may be p]fectly simil> & equal to ano!r "p1 is /ill )\t x1 & = ?is reason alone is diff]5t f ! latt]1 :i* is add$ to x 9 ord] to make up a great] space4 ,x foll[s t ?is mu/ hold good ( all ?+s t are 9 ! diff]5t p>ts ( space at ! same "t1 h[ev] simil> & equal "o may be to ano!r4 #b4 ,agreem5t & ,opposition4 ,:5 reality is repres5t$ by ! pure und]/&+ 7realitas n\m5on71 opposition betwe5 realities is incogitable--su* a relation1 t is1 t :5 ^! realities are connect$ 9 "o subject1 !y annihilate ! effects ( ea* o!r & may be repres5t$ 9 ! =mula #c -#c #j4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ! real 9 a ph5om5on 7realitas pha5om5on7 may v well be 9 mutual opposition1 &1 :5 unit$ 9 ! same subject1 ! "o may completely or 9 "p annihilate ! effect or consequ5ce ( ! o!r2 z 9 ! case ( two mov+ =ces 9 ! same /raight l9e draw+ or impell+ a po9t 9 opposite directions1 or 9 ! case ( a pleasure c\nt]balanc+ a c]ta9 am\nt ( pa94 #c4 ,! ,int]nal & ,ext]nal4 ,9 an object ( ! pure und]/&+1 only t is int]nal :i* has no relation 7z reg>ds its exi/5ce7 to any?+ diff]5t f itself4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ! int]nal det]m9ations ( a sub/antia pha5om5on 9 space are no?+ b relations1 & x is itself no?+ m ?an a complex ( m]e relations4 ,sub/ance 9 space we are cognizant ( only ?r\gh =ces op]ative 9 x1 ei!r draw+ o!rs t[>ds itself 7attraction71 or prev5t+ o!rs f =c+ into itself 7repulsion & imp5etrability74 ,we "k no o!r prop]ties t make up ! conception ( sub/ance ph5om5al 9 space1 & :i* we t]m matt]4 ,on ! o!r h&1 z an object ( ! pure und]/&+1 e sub/ance mu/ h int]nal det]m9ation & =ces4 ,b :at o!r int]nal attributes ( su* an object c ,i ?9k ?an ^? :i* my int]nal s5se pres5ts to me8 ,t1 to wit1 :i* 9 ei!r itself ?\ght1 or some?+ analog\s to x4 ,h5ce ,leibnitz1 :o look$ ^u ?+s z n\m5a1 aft] d5y+ !m ev]y?+ l ext]nal relation1 & !re=e also composition or comb9ation1 decl>$ t all sub/ances1 ev5 ! compon5t p>ts ( matt]1 7 simple sub/ances ) p[]s ( repres5tation1 9 "o ^w1 monads4 #d4 ,matt] & ,=m4 ,^! two conceptions lie at ! f\ndation ( all o!r reflection1 s insep>ably are !y connect$ ) e mode ( ex]cis+ ! und]/&+4 ,! =m] d5otes ! det]m9able 9 g5]al1 ! second its det]m9ation1 bo? 9 a transc5d5tal s5se1 ab/raction be+ made ( e diff]5ce 9 t :i* is giv51 & ( ! mode 9 :i* x is det]m9$4 ,logicians =m]ly t]m$ ! univ]sal1 matt]1 ! specific diff]5ce ( ?is or t "p ( ! univ]sal1 =m4 ,9 a judgem5t "o may call ! giv5 conceptions logical matt] 7= ! judgem5t71 ! relation ( ^! to ea* o!r 7by means ( ! copula71 ! =m ( ! judgem5t4 ,9 an object1 ! composite p>ts !re( 7ess5tialia7 are ! matt]2 ! mode 9 :i* !y are connect$ 9 ! object1 ! =m4 ,9 respect to ?+s 9 g5]al1 unlimit$ reality 0 reg>d$ z ! matt] ( all possibility1 ! limitation !re( 7negation7 z ! =m1 by :i* "o ?+ is di/+ui%$ f ano!r accord+ to transc5d5tal conceptions4 ,! und]/&+ dem&s t some?+ be giv5 7at lea/ 9 ! conception71 9 ord] to be able to det]m9e x 9 a c]ta9 mann]4 ,h5ce1 9 a conception ( ! pure und]/&+1 ! matt] prec$es ! =m1 & = ?is reason ,leibnitz fir/ assum$ ! exi/5ce ( ?+s 7monads7 & ( an int]nal p[] ( repres5tation 9 !m1 9 ord] to f\nd ^u ?is _! ext]nal relation & ! community _! /ate 7t is1 ( _! repres5tations74 ,h5ce1 ) him1 space & "t 7 possible--! =m] ?r\gh ! relation ( sub/ances1 ! latt] ?r\gh ! connection ( _! det]m9ations ) ea* o!r1 z causes & effects4 ,& s w\ld x really be1 if ! pure und]/&+ 7 capable ( an imm$iate application to objects1 & if space & "t 7 det]m9ations ( ?+s 9 !mselves4 ,b be+ m]ely s5su\s intuitions1 9 :i* we det]m9e all objects solely z ph5om5a1 ! =m ( intuition 7z a subjective prop]ty ( s5sibility7 mu/ antec$e all matt] 7s5sations71 consequ5tly space & "t mu/ antec$e all ph5om5a & all data ( exp]i5ce1 & r make exp]i5ce itself possible4 ,b ! intellectual philosoph] c\ld n endure t ! =m %\ld prec$e ! ?+s !mselves & det]m9e _! possibility2 an objection p]fectly correct1 if we assume t we intuite ?+s z !y are1 al?\gh ) confus$ repres5tation4 ,b z s5su\s intuition is a peculi> subjective condition1 :i* is priori at ! f\ndation ( all p]ception1 & ! =m ( :i* is primitive1 ! =m mu/ be giv5 p] se1 & s f> f matt] 7or ! ?+s !mselves :i* appe>7 ly+ at ! f\ndation ( exp]i5ce 7z we mu/ conclude1 if we judge by m]e conceptions71 ! v possibility ( itself presupposes1 on ! contr>y1 a giv5 =mal intuition 7space & "t74 ,,rem>k ,,on ,,! ,,amphiboly ,,( ,,! ,,conceptions ,,( ,,reflection4 ,let me be all[$ to t]m ! position :i* we assign to a conception ei!r 9 ! s5sibility or 9 ! pure und]/&+1 ! transc5d5tal place4 ,9 ?is mann]1 ! appo9tm5t ( ! position :i* mu/ be tak5 by ea* conception accord+ to ! diff]5ce 9 its use1 & ! directions = det]m9+ ?is place to all conceptions accord+ to rules1 w\ld be a transc5d5tal topic1 a doctr9e :i* w\ld ?or\ghly %ield u f ! surreptiti\s devices ( ! pure und]/&+ & ! delusions :i* !nce arise1 z x w\ld always di/+ui% to :at faculty ( cognition ea* conception prop]ly belong$4 ,e conception1 e title1 "u :i* _m cognitions rank toge!r1 may be call$ a logical place4 ,^u ?is is bas$ ! logical topic ( ,ari/otle1 ( :i* tea*]s & rhetoricians c\ld avail !mselves1 9 ord]1 "u c]ta9 titles ( ?\ght1 to obs]ve :at w\ld be/ suit ! matt] !y _h to treat1 & ?us enable !mselves to quibble & talk ) flu5cy & an appe>ance ( pr(undity4 ,transc5d5tal topic1 on ! contr>y1 conta9s no?+ m ?an ! above-m5tion$ f\r titles ( all comp>ison & di/9ction1 :i* diff] f categories 9 ?is respect1 t !y d n repres5t ! object accord+ to t :i* con/itutes its conception 7quantity1 reality71 b set =? m]ely ! comp>ison ( repres5tations1 :i* prec$es our conceptions ( ?+s4 ,b ?is comp>ison requires a previ\s reflection1 t is1 a det]m9ation ( ! place to :i* ! repres5tations ( ! ?+s :i* are comp>$ belong1 :e!r1 to wit1 !y are cogitat$ by ! pure und]/&+1 or giv5 by s5sibility4 ,conceptions may be logically comp>$ )\t ! tr\ble ( inquir+ to :at faculty _! objects belong1 :e!r z n\m5a1 to ! und]/&+1 or z ph5om5a1 to s5sibility4 ,if1 h[ev]1 we wi% to employ ^! conceptions 9 respect ( objects1 previ\s transc5d5tal reflection is necess>y4 ,)\t ?is reflection ,i %\ld make a v unsafe use ( ^! conceptions1 & con/ruct pret5d$ syn!tical propositions :i* critical reason _c ackn[l$ge & :i* are bas$ solely ^u a transc5d5tal amphiboly1 t is1 ^u a sub/itution ( an object ( pure und]/&+ = a ph5om5on4 ,= want ( ?is doctr9e ( transc5d5tal topic1 & consequ5tly deceiv$ by ! amphiboly ( ! conceptions ( reflection1 ! celebrat$ ,leibnitz con/ruct$ an intellectual sy/em ( ! _w1 or r1 believ$ himself compet5t to cognize ! int]nal nature ( ?+s1 by comp>+ all objects m]ely ) ! und]/&+ & ! ab/ract =mal conceptions ( ?\ght4 ,our table ( ! conceptions ( reflection gives u ! unexpect$ advantage ( be+ able to exhibit ! di/9ctive peculi>ities ( 8 sy/em 9 all its p>ts1 & at ! same "t ( expos+ ! fundam5tal pr9ciple ( ?is peculi> mode ( ?\ght1 :i* re/$ ^u naught b a misconception4 ,he comp>$ all ?+s ) ea* o!r m]ely by means ( conceptions1 & naturally f\nd no o!r diff]5ces ?an ^? by :i* ! und]/&+ di/+ui%es its pure conceptions "o f ano!r4 ,! conditions ( s5su\s intuition1 :i* conta9 9 !mselves _! own means ( di/9ction1 he did n look ^u z primitive1 because s5sibility 0 to him b a confus$ mode ( repres5tation & n any p>ticul> s\rce ( repres5tations4 ,a ph5om5on 0 = him ! repres5tation ( ! ?+ 9 itself1 al?\gh di/+ui%$ f cognition by ! und]/&+ only 9 respect ( ! logical =m--! =m] ) its usual want ( analysis conta9+1 accord+ to him1 a c]ta9 mixture ( collat]al repres5tations 9 its conception ( a ?+1 :i* x is ! duty ( ! und]/&+ to sep>ate & di/+ui%4 ,9 "o ^w1 ,leibnitz intellectualiz$ ph5om5a1 j z ,locke1 9 8 sy/em ( noogony 7if ,i may be all[$ to make use ( su* expressions71 s5sualiz$ ! conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 t is to say1 decl>$ !m to be no?+ m ?an empirical or ab/ract conceptions ( reflection4 ,in/ead ( seek+ 9 ! und]/&+ & s5sibility two diff]5t s\rces ( repres5tations1 :i*1 h[ev]1 c pres5t u ) objective judgem5ts ( ?+s only 9 conjunction1 ea* ( ^! great m5 recogniz$ b "o ( ^! faculties1 :i*1 9 _! op9ion1 appli$ imm$iately to ?+s 9 !mselves1 ! o!r hav+ no duty b t ( confus+ or arrang+ ! repres5tations ( ! =m]4 ,accord+ly1 ! objects ( s5se 7 comp>$ by ,leibnitz z ?+s 9 g5]al m]ely 9 ! und]/&+4 #a/4 ,he comp>es !m 9 reg>d to _! id5tity or diff]5ce--z judg$ by ! und]/&+4 ,z1 !re=e1 he consid]$ m]ely ! conceptions ( objects1 & n _! position 9 intuition1 9 :i* alone objects c be giv51 & left q out ( sight ! transc5d5tal locale ( ^! conceptions--:e!r1 t is1 _! object ought to be class$ among ph5om5a1 or among ?+s 9 !mselves1 x 0 to be expect$ t he %\ld ext5d ! application ( ! pr9ciple ( indisc]nibles1 :i* is valid solely ( conceptions ( ?+s 9 g5]al1 to objects ( s5se 7mundus pha5om5on71 & t he %\ld believe t he _h !reby contribut$ 9 no small degree to ext5d our k ( nature4 ,9 tru?1 if ,i cognize 9 all its inn] det]m9ations a drop ( wat] z a ?+ 9 itself1 ,i _c look ^u "o drop z diff]5t f ano!r1 if ! conception ( ! "o is completely id5tical ) t ( ! o!r4 ,b if x is a ph5om5on 9 space1 x has a place n m]ely 9 ! und]/&+ 7among conceptions71 b also 9 s5su\s ext]nal intuition 79 space71 & 9 ?is case1 ! physical locale is a matt] ( indiff]5ce 9 reg>d to ! int]nal det]m9ations ( ?+s1 & "o place1 ,b1 may conta9 a ?+ :i* is p]fectly simil> & equal to ano!r 9 a place1 ,a1 j z well z if ! two ?+s 7 9 e respect diff]5t f ea* o!r4 ,diff]5ce ( place )\t any o!r conditions1 makes ! plurality & di/9ction ( objects z ph5om5a1 n only possible 9 itself1 b ev5 necess>y4 ,consequ5tly1 ! above s-call$ law is n a law ( nature4 ,x is m]ely an analytical rule = ! comp>ison ( ?+s by means ( m]e conceptions4 #bnd4 ,! pr9ciple3 8,realities 7z simple affirmations7 nev] logically contradict ea* o!r10 is a proposition p]fectly true respect+ ! relation ( conceptions1 b1 :e!r z reg>ds nature1 or ?+s 9 !mselves 7( :i* we h n ! slighte/ conception71 is )\t any ! lea/ mean+4 ,= real opposition1 9 :i* ,a -,b is #j1 exi/s ev]y:]e1 an opposition1 t is1 9 :i* "o reality unit$ ) ano!r 9 ! same subject annihilates ! effects ( ! o!r--a fact :i* is con/antly br\ght be=e our eyes by ! diff]5t antagoni/ic actions & op]ations 9 nature1 :i*1 nev]!less1 z dep5d+ on real =ces1 mu/ be call$ realitates pha5om5a4 ,g5]al me*anics c ev5 pres5t u ) ! empirical condition ( ?is opposition 9 an priori rule1 z x directs its att5tion to ! opposition 9 ! direction ( =ces--a condition ( :i* ! transc5d5tal conception ( reality c tell u no?+4 ,al?\gh ,m4 ,leibnitz did n ann\nce ?is proposition ) precisely ! pomp ( a new pr9ciple1 he yet employ$ x = ! e/abli%m5t ( new propositions1 & 8 foll[]s introduc$ x into _! ,leibnitzio-,wolfian sy/em ( philosophy4 ,accord+ to ?is pr9ciple1 = example1 all evils are b consequ5ces ( ! limit$ nature ( creat$ be+s1 t is1 negations1 because ^! are ! only opposite ( reality4 7,9 ! m]e conception ( a ?+ 9 g5]al ?is is really ! case1 b n 9 ?+s z ph5om5a47 ,9 l mann]1 ! uphold]s ( ?is sy/em deem x n only possible1 b natural also1 to connect & unite all reality 9 "o be+1 because !y ackn[l$ge no o!r sort ( opposition ?an t ( contradiction 7by :i* ! conception itself ( a ?+ is annihilat$71 & f9d !mselves unable to conceive an opposition ( reciprocal de/ruction1 s to speak1 9 :i* "o real cause de/roys ! effect ( ano!r1 & ! conditions ( ^: repres5tation we meet ) only 9 s5sibility4 #crd4 ,! ,leibnitzian monadology has really no bett] f\ndation ?an on ?is philosoph]'s mode ( falsely repres5t+ ! diff]5ce ( ! int]nal & ext]nal solely 9 relation to ! und]/&+4 ,sub/ances1 9 g5]al1 mu/ h some?+ inw>d1 :i* is !re=e free f ext]nal relations1 consequ5tly f t ( composition also4 ,! simple--t :i* c be repres5t$ by a unit--is !re=e ! f\ndation ( t :i* is int]nal 9 ?+s 9 !mselves4 ,! int]nal /ate ( sub/ances _c !re=e consi/ 9 place1 %ape1 contact1 or motion1 det]m9ations :i* are all ext]nal relations1 & we c ascribe to !m no o!r ?an t :]eby we int]nally det]m9e our faculty ( s5se itself1 t is to say1 ! /ate ( repres5tation4 ,?us1 !n1 7 con/ruct$ ! monads1 :i* 7 to =m ! elem5ts ( ! univ]se1 ! active =ce ( :i* consi/s 9 repres5tation1 ! effects ( ?is =ce be+ ?us entirely conf9$ to !mselves4 ,= ! same reason1 8 view ( ! possible community ( sub/ances c\ld n repres5t x b z a pr$et]m9$ h>mony1 & by no means z a physical influ5ce4 ,= inasmu* z ev]y?+ is occupi$ only int]nally1 t is1 ) its own repres5tations1 ! /ate ( ! repres5tations ( "o sub/ance c\ld n /& 9 active & liv+ connection ) t ( ano!r1 b "s ?ird cause op]at+ on all )\t exception 0 necess>y to make ! diff]5t /ates correspond ) "o ano!r4 ,& ?is did n happ5 by means ( assi/ance appli$ 9 ea* p>ticul> case 7sy/ema assi/5tiae71 b ?r\gh ! unity ( ! idea ( a cause occupi$ & connect$ ) all sub/ances1 9 :i* !y necess>ily receive1 accord+ to ! ,leibnitzian s*ool1 _! exi/5ce & p]man5ce1 consequ5tly also reciprocal correspond5ce1 accord+ to univ]sal laws4 #d?4 ,?is philosoph]'s celebrat$ doctr9e ( space & "t1 9 :i* he intellectualiz$ ^! =ms ( s5sibility1 orig9at$ 9 ! same delusion ( transc5d5tal reflection4 ,if ,i attempt to repres5t by ! m]e und]/&+1 ! ext]nal relations ( ?+s1 ,i c d s only by employ+ ! conception ( _! reciprocal action1 & if ,i wi% to connect "o /ate ( ! same ?+ ) ano!r /ate1 ,i mu/ avail myself ( ! notion ( ! ord] ( cause & effect4 ,& ?us ,leibnitz reg>d$ space z a c]ta9 ord] 9 ! community ( sub/ances1 & "t z ! dynamical sequ5ce ( _! /ates4 ,t :i* space & "t possess prop] to !mselves & indep5d5t ( ?+s1 he ascrib$ to a necess>y confusion 9 our conceptions ( !m1 :]eby t :i* is a m]e =m ( dynamical relations is held to be a self-exi/5t intuition1 antec$5t ev5 to ?+s !mselves4 ,?us space & "t 7 ! intelligible =m ( ! connection ( ?+s 7sub/ances & _! /ates7 9 !mselves4 ,b ?+s 7 intelligible sub/ances 7sub/antiae n\m5a74 ,at ! same "t1 he made ^! conceptions valid ( ph5om5a1 because he did n all[ to s5sibility a peculi> mode ( intuition1 b s\ght all1 ev5 ! empirical repres5tation ( objects1 9 ! und]/&+1 & left to s5se naught b ! despicable task ( confus+ & dis>rang+ ! repres5tations ( ! =m]4 ,b ev5 if we c\ld frame any syn!tical proposition conc]n+ ?+s 9 !mselves by means ( ! pure und]/&+ 7:i* is impossible71 x c\ld n apply to ph5om5a1 :i* d n repres5t ?+s 9 !mselves4 ,9 su* a case ,i %\ld be oblig$ 9 transc5d5tal reflection to comp>e my conceptions only "u ! conditions ( s5sibility1 & s space & "t w\ld n be det]m9ations ( ?+s 9 !mselves1 b ( ph5om5a4 ,:at ?+s may be 9 !mselves1 ,i "k n & ne$ n "k1 because a ?+ is nev] pres5t$ to me o!rwise ?an z a ph5om5on4 ,i mu/ adopt ! same mode ( proc$ure ) ! o!r conceptions ( reflection4 ,matt] is sub/antia pha5om5on4 ,t 9 x :i* is int]nal ,i seek to discov] 9 all p>ts ( space :i* x occupies1 & 9 all ! functions & op]ations x p]=ms1 & :i* are inde$ nev] any?+ b ph5om5a ( ! ext]nal s5se4 ,i _c !re=e f9d any?+ t is absolutely1 b only :at is comp>atively int]nal1 & :i* itself consi/s ( ext]nal relations4 ,! absolutely int]nal 9 matt]1 & z x %\ld be accord+ to ! pure und]/&+1 is a m]e *im]a1 = matt] is n an object = ! pure und]/&+4 ,b ! transc5d5tal object1 :i* is ! f\ndation ( ! ph5om5on :i* we call matt]1 is a m]e nescio quid1 ! nature ( :i* we c\ld n und]/&1 ev5 ?\gh someone 7 f\nd able to tell u4 ,= we c und]/& no?+ t does n br+ ) x some?+ 9 intuition correspond+ to ! expressions employ$4 ,if1 by ! compla9t ( be+ unable to p]ceive ! int]nal nature ( ?+s1 x is meant t we d n compreh5d by ! pure und]/&+ :at ! ?+s :i* appe> to u may be 9 !mselves1 x is a silly & unreasonable compla9t2 = ^? :o talk ?us really desire t we %\ld be able to cognize1 consequ5tly to intuite1 ?+s )\t s5ses1 & !re=e wi% t we possess$ a faculty ( cognition p]fectly diff]5t f ! human faculty1 n m]ely 9 degree1 b ev5 z reg>ds intuition & ! mode !re(1 s t ?us we %\ld n be m51 b belong to a class ( be+s1 ! possibility ( ^: exi/5ce1 mu* less _! nature & con/itution1 we h no means ( cogniz+4 ,by obs]vation & analysis ( ph5om5a we p5etrate into ! int]ior ( nature1 & no "o c say :at progress ?is k may make 9 "t4 ,b ^? transc5d5tal que/ions :i* pass beyond ! limits ( nature1 we c\ld nev] answ]1 ev5 al?\gh all nature 7 laid op5 to u1 because we h n ! p[] ( obs]v+ our own m9d ) any o!r intuition ?an t ( our int]nal s5se4 ,= h]e9 lies ! my/]y ( ! orig9 & s\rce ( our faculty ( s5sibility4 ,its application to an object1 & ! transc5d5tal gr\nd ( ?is unity ( subjective & objective1 lie too deeply conceal$ = u1 :o cognize ourselves only ?r\gh ! int]nal s5se1 consequ5tly z ph5om5a1 to be able to discov] 9 our exi/5ce any?+ b ph5om5a1 ! non-s5su\s cause ( :i* we at ! same "t e>ne/ly desire to p5etrate to4 ,! great utility ( ?is critique ( conclusions arriv$ at by ! processes ( m]e reflection consi/s 9 its cle> demon/ration ( ! nullity ( all conclusions respect+ objects :i* are comp>$ ) ea* o!r 9 ! und]/&+ alone1 :ile x at ! same "t confirms :at we p>ticul>ly insi/$ on1 namely1 t1 al?\gh ph5om5a are n includ$ z ?+s 9 !mselves among ! objects ( ! pure und]/&+1 !y are nev]!less ! only ?+s by :i* our cognition c possess objective reality1 t is to say1 :i* give u intuitions to correspond ) our conceptions4 ,:5 we reflect 9 a purely logical mann]1 we d no?+ m ?an comp>e conceptions 9 our und]/&+1 to discov] :e!r bo? h ! same cont5t1 :e!r !y are self-contradictory or n1 :e!r any?+ is conta9$ 9 ei!r conception1 :i* ( ! two is giv51 & :i* is m]ely a mode ( ?9k+ t giv54 ,b if ,i apply ^! conceptions to an object 9 g5]al 79 ! transc5d5tal s5se71 )\t fir/ det]m9+ :e!r x is an object ( s5su\s or intellectual intuition1 c]ta9 limitations pres5t !mselves1 :i* =bid u to pass beyond ! conceptions & r5d] all empirical use ( !m impossible4 ,& ?us ^! limitations prove t ! repres5tation ( an object z a ?+ 9 g5]al is n only insuffici5t1 b1 )\t s5su\s det]m9ation & indep5d5tly ( empirical conditions1 self-contradictory2 t we mu/ !re=e make ab/raction ( all objects1 z 9 logic1 or1 admitt+ !m1 mu/ ?9k !m "u conditions ( s5su\s intuition2 t1 consequ5tly1 ! intelligible requires an altoge!r peculi> intuition1 :i* we d n possess1 & 9 ! abs5ce ( :i* x is = u no?+2 :ile1 on ! o!r h& ph5om5a _c be objects 9 !mselves4 ,=1 :5 ,i m]ely ?9k ?+s 9 g5]al1 ! diff]5ce 9 _! ext]nal relations _c con/itute a diff]5ce 9 ! ?+s !mselves2 on ! contr>y1 ! =m] presupposes ! latt]1 & if ! conception ( "o ( two ?+s is n int]nally diff]5t f t ( ! o!r1 ,i am m]ely ?9k+ ! same ?+ 9 diff]5t relations4 ,fur!r1 by ! addition ( "o affirmation 7reality7 to ! o!r1 ! positive !re9 is really augm5t$1 & no?+ is ab/ract$ or )drawn f x2 h5ce ! real 9 ?+s _c be 9 contradiction ) or opposition to itself--& s on4 ,! true use ( ! conceptions ( reflection 9 ! employm5t ( ! und]/&+ has1 z we h %[n1 be5 s misconceiv$ by ,leibnitz1 "o ( ! mo/ acute philosoph]s ( ei!r anci5t or mod]n times1 t he has be5 misl$ into ! con/ruction ( a baseless sy/em ( intellectual cognition1 :i* pr(esses to det]m9e its objects )\t ! int]v5tion ( ! s5ses4 ,= ?is reason1 ! exposition ( ! cause ( ! amphiboly ( ^! conceptions1 z ! orig9 ( ^! false pr9ciples1 is ( great utility 9 det]m9+ ) c]ta9ty ! prop] limits ( ! und]/&+4 ,x is "r to say :atev] is affirm$ or d5i$ ( ! :ole ( a conception c be affirm$ or d5i$ ( any "p ( x 7dictum de omni et nullo72 b x w\ld be absurd s to alt] ?is logical proposition z to say :atev] is n conta9$ 9 a g5]al conception is likewise n conta9$ 9 ! p>ticul> conceptions :i* rank "u x2 = ! latt] are p>ticul> conceptions1 = ! v reason t _! cont5t is great] ?an t :i* is cogitat$ 9 ! g5]al conception4 ,& yet ! :ole intellectual sy/em ( ,leibnitz is bas$ ^u ?is false pr9ciple1 & ) x mu/ necess>ily fall to ! gr\nd1 toge!r ) all ! ambigu\s pr9ciples 9 ref]5ce to ! employm5t ( ! und]/&+ :i* h !nce orig9at$4 ,leibnitz's pr9ciple ( ! id5tity ( indisc]nibles or indi/+ui%ables is really bas$ on ! presupposition t1 if 9 ! conception ( a ?+ a c]ta9 di/9ction is n to be f\nd1 x is also n to be met ) 9 ?+s !mselves2 t1 consequ5tly1 all ?+s are completely id5tical 7num]o eadem7 :i* are n di/+ui%able f ea* o!r 7z to quality or quantity7 9 our conceptions ( !m4 ,b1 z 9 ! m]e conception ( any?+ ab/raction has be5 made ( _m necess>y conditions ( intuition1 t ( :i* ab/raction has be5 made is ra%ly held to be non-exi/5t1 & no?+ is attribut$ to ! ?+ b :at is conta9$ 9 its conception4 ,! conception ( a cubic foot ( space1 h[ev] ,i may ?9k x1 is 9 itself completely id5tical4 ,b two cubic feet 9 space are nev]!less di/9ct f ea* o!r f ! sole fact ( _! be+ 9 diff]5t places 7!y are num]o div]sa72 & ^! places are conditions ( intuition1 :]e9 ! object ( ?is conception is giv51 & :i* d n belong to ! conception1 b to ! faculty ( s5sibility4 ,9 l mann]1 !re is 9 ! conception ( a ?+ no contradiction :5 a negative is n connect$ ) an affirmative2 & m]ely affirmative conceptions _c1 9 conjunction1 produce any negation4 ,b 9 s5su\s intuition1 :]e9 reality 7take = example1 motion7 is giv51 we f9d conditions 7opposite directions7--( :i* ab/raction has be5 made 9 ! conception ( motion 9 g5]al--:i* r5d] possible a contradiction or opposition 7n inde$ ( a logical k9d7--& :i* f pure positives produce z]o #j4 ,we are !re=e n ju/ifi$ 9 say+ t all reality is 9 p]fect agreem5t & h>mony1 because no contradiction is discov]able among its conceptions4#ci ,accord+ to m]e conceptions1 t :i* is int]nal is ! sub/ratum ( all relations or ext]nal det]m9ations4 ,:51 !re=e1 ,i ab/ract all conditions ( intuition1 & conf9e myself solely to ! conception ( a ?+ 9 g5]al1 ,i c make ab/raction ( all ext]nal relations1 & !re mu/ nev]!less rema9 a conception ( t :i* indicates no relation1 b m]ely int]nal det]m9ations4 ,n[ x seems to foll[ t 9 ev]y?+ 7sub/ance7 !re is some?+ :i* is absolutely int]nal & :i* antec$es all ext]nal det]m9ations1 inasmu* z x r5d]s !m possible2 & t !re=e ?is sub/ratum is some?+ :i* does n conta9 any ext]nal relations & is consequ5tly simple 7= corporeal ?+s are nev] any?+ b relations1 at lea/ ( _! p>ts ext]nal to ea* o!r72 &1 inasmu* z we "k ( no o!r absolutely int]nal det]m9ations ?an ^? ( ! int]nal s5se1 ?is sub/ratum is n only simple1 b also1 analog\sly ) our int]nal s5se1 det]m9$ ?r\gh repres5tations1 t is to say1 all ?+s are prop]ly monads1 or simple be+s end[$ ) ! p[] ( repres5tation4 ,n[ all ?is w\ld be p]fectly correct1 if ! conception ( a ?+ 7 ! only necess>y condition ( ! pres5tation ( objects ( ext]nal intuition4 ,x is1 on ! contr>y1 manife/ t a p]man5t ph5om5on 9 space 7imp5etrable ext5sion7 c conta9 m]e relations1 & no?+ t is absolutely int]nal1 & yet be ! prim>y sub/ratum ( all ext]nal p]ception4 ,by m]e conceptions ,i _c ?9k any?+ ext]nal1 )\t1 at ! same "t1 ?9k+ some?+ int]nal1 = ! reason t conceptions ( relations presuppose giv5 ?+s1 & )\t ^! are impossible4 ,b1 z an intuition !re is some?+ 7t is1 space1 :i*1 ) all x conta9s1 consi/s ( purely =mal1 or1 inde$1 real relations7 :i* is n f\nd 9 ! m]e conception ( a ?+ 9 g5]al1 & ?is pres5ts to u ! sub/ratum :i* c\ld n be cogniz$ ?r\gh conceptions alone1 ,i _c say3 because a ?+ _c be repres5t$ by m]e conceptions )\t some?+ absolutely int]nal1 !re is also1 9 ! ?+s !mselves :i* are conta9$ "u ^! conceptions1 & 9 _! intuition no?+ ext]nal to :i* some?+ absolutely int]nal does n s]ve z ! f\ndation4 ,=1 :5 we h made ab/raction ( all ! conditions ( intuition1 !re c]ta9ly rema9s 9 ! m]e conception no?+ b ! int]nal 9 g5]al1 ?r\gh :i* alone ! ext]nal is possible4 ,b ?is necessity1 :i* is gr\nd$ ^u ab/raction alone1 does n obta9 9 ! case ( ?+s !mselves1 9 s f> z !y are giv5 9 intuition ) su* det]m9ations z express m]e relations1 )\t hav+ any?+ int]nal z _! f\ndation2 = !y are n ?+s 9 !mselves1 b only ph5om5a4 ,:at we cognize 9 matt] is no?+ b relations 7:at we call its int]nal det]m9ations are b comp>atively int]nal74 ,b !re are "s self-subsi/5t & p]man5t1 ?r\gh :i* a det]m9$ object is giv54 ,t ,i1 :5 ab/raction is made ( ^! relations1 h no?+ m to ?9k1 does n de/roy ! conception ( a ?+ z ph5om5on1 nor ! conception ( an object 9 ab/racto1 b x does away ) ! possibility ( an object t is det]m9able accord+ to m]e conceptions1 t is1 ( a n\m5on4 ,x is c]ta9ly />tl+ to he> t a ?+ consi/s solely ( relations2 b ?is ?+ is simply a ph5om5on1 & _c be cogitat$ by means ( ! m]e categories3 x does itself consi/ 9 ! m]e relation ( some?+ 9 g5]al to ! s5ses4 ,9 ! same way1 we _c cogitate relations ( ?+s 9 ab/racto1 if we comm5ce ) conceptions alone1 9 any o!r mann] ?an t "o is ! cause ( det]m9ations 9 ! o!r2 = t is itself ! conception ( ! und]/&+ or category ( relation4 ,b1 z 9 ?is case we make ab/raction ( all intuition1 we lose altoge!r ! mode 9 :i* ! manifold det]m9es to ea* ( its p>ts its place1 t is1 ! =m ( s5sibility 7space72 & yet ?is mode antec$es all empirical causality4 #ci ,if any "o wi%es "h to h rec\rse to ! usual subt]fuge1 & to say1 t at lea/ realitates n\m5a _c be 9 opposition to ea* o!r1 x w be requisite = him to adduce an example ( ?is pure & non-s5su\s reality1 t x may be und]/ood :e!r ! notion repres5ts some?+ or no?+4 ,b an example _c be f\nd except 9 exp]i5ce1 :i* nev] pres5ts to u any?+ m ?an ph5om5a2 & ?us ! proposition means no?+ m ?an t ! conception :i* conta9s only affirmatives does n conta9 any?+ negative--a proposition nobody ev] d\bt$4 ,if by intelligible objects we und]/& ?+s :i* c be ?\ght by means ( ! pure categories1 )\t ! ne$ ( ! s*emata ( s5sibility1 su* objects are impossible4 ,= ! condition ( ! objective use ( all our conceptions ( und]/&+ is ! mode ( our s5su\s intuition1 :]eby objects are giv52 &1 if we make ab/raction ( ! latt]1 ! =m] c h no relation to an object4 ,& ev5 if we %\ld suppose a diff]5t k9d ( intuition f our own1 /ill our functions ( ?\ght w\ld h no use or signification 9 respect !re(4 ,b if we und]/& by ! t]m1 objects ( a non-s5su\s intuition1 9 respect ( :i* our categories are n valid1 & ( :i* we c accord+ly h no k 7nei!r intuition nor conception71 9 ?is m]ely negative s5se n\m5a mu/ be admitt$4 ,= ?is is no m ?an say+ t our mode ( intuition is n applicable to all ?+s1 b only to objects ( our s5ses1 t consequ5tly its objective validity is limit$1 & t room is !re=e left = ano!r k9d ( intuition1 & ?us also = ?+s t may be objects ( x4 ,b 9 ?is s5se ! conception ( a n\m5on is problematical1 t is to say1 x is ! notion ( a ?+ ( :i* we c nei!r say t x is possible1 nor t x is impossible1 inasmu* z we d n "k ( any mode ( intuition besides ! s5su\s1 or ( any o!r sort ( conceptions ?an ! categories--a mode ( intuition & a k9d ( conception nei!r ( :i* is applicable to a non-s5su\s object4 ,we are on ?is acc\nt incompet5t to ext5d ! sph]e ( our objects ( ?\ght beyond ! conditions ( our s5sibility1 & to assume ! exi/5ce ( objects ( pure ?\ght1 t is1 ( n\m5a1 inasmu* z ^! h no true positive signification4 ,= x mu/ be confess$ ( ! categories t !y are n ( !mselves suffici5t = ! cognition ( ?+s 9 !mselves &1 )\t ! data ( s5sibility1 are m]e subjective =ms ( ! unity ( ! und]/&+4 ,?\ght is c]ta9ly n a product ( ! s5ses1 & 9 s f> is n limit$ by !m1 b x does n !re=e foll[ t x may be employ$ purely & )\t ! int]v5tion ( s5sibility1 = x w\ld !n be )\t ref]5ce to an object4 ,& we _c call a n\m5on an object ( pure ?\ght2 = ! repres5tation !re( is b ! problematical conception ( an object = a p]fectly diff]5t intuition & a p]fectly diff]5t und]/&+ f ours1 bo? ( :i* are consequ5tly !mselves problematical4 ,! conception ( a n\m5on is !re=e n ! conception ( an object1 b m]ely a problematical conception insep>ably connect$ ) ! limitation ( our s5sibility4 ,t is to say1 ?is conception conta9s ! answ] to ! "q3 8,are !re objects q unconnect$ )1 & indep5d5t (1 our intuition80--a "q to :i* only an indet]m9ate answ] c be giv54 ,t answ] is3 8,inasmu* z s5su\s intuition does n apply to all ?+s )\t di/9ction1 !re rema9s room = o!r & diff]5t objects40 ,! exi/5ce ( ^! problematical objects is !re=e n absolutely d5i$1 9 ! abs5ce ( a det]m9ate conception ( !m1 b1 z no category is valid 9 respect ( !m1 nei!r mu/ !y be admitt$ z objects = our und]/&+4 ,und]/&+ accord+ly limits s5sibility1 )\t at ! same "t enl>g+ its own field4 ,:ile1 moreov]1 x =bids s5sibility to apply its =ms & modes to ?+s 9 !mselves & re/ricts x to ! sph]e ( ph5om5a1 x cogitates an object 9 itself1 only1 h[ev]1 z a transc5d5tal object1 :i* is ! cause ( a ph5om5on 7consequ5tly n itself a ph5om5on71 & :i* _c be ?\ght ei!r z a quantity or z reality1 or z sub/ance 7because ^! conceptions always require s5su\s =ms 9 :i* to det]m9e an object7--an object1 !re=e1 ( :i* we are q unable to say :e!r x c be met ) 9 ourselves or out ( u1 :e!r x w\ld be annihilat$ toge!r ) s5sibility1 or1 if ?is 7 tak5 away1 w\ld cont9ue to exi/4 ,if we wi% to call ?is object a n\m5on1 because ! repres5tation ( x is non-s5su\s1 we are at lib]ty to d s4 ,b z we c apply to x none ( ! conceptions ( our und]/&+1 ! repres5tation is = u q void1 & is available only = ! indication ( ! limits ( our s5su\s intuition1 !reby leav+ at ! same "t an empty space1 :i* we are compet5t to fill by ! aid nei!r ( possible exp]i5ce1 nor ( ! pure und]/&+4 ,! critique ( ! pure und]/&+1 accord+ly1 does n p]mit u to create = ourselves a new field ( objects beyond ^? :i* are pres5t$ to u z ph5om5a1 & to /ray into intelligible worlds2 nay1 x does n ev5 all[ u to endeav\r to =m s mu* z a conception ( !m4 ,! speci\s error :i* leads to ?is--& :i* is a p]fectly excusable "o--lies 9 ! fact t ! employm5t ( ! und]/&+1 contr>y to its prop] purpose & de/9ation1 is made transc5d5tal1 & objects1 t is1 possible intuitions1 are made to regulate !mselves accord+ to conceptions1 in/ead ( ! conceptions arrang+ !mselves accord+ to ! intuitions1 on :i* alone _! own objective validity re/s4 ,n[ ! reason ( ?is aga9 is t app]ception1 & ) x ?\ght1 antec$es all possible det]m9ate arrangem5t ( repres5tations4 ,accord+ly we ?9k some?+ 9 g5]al & det]m9e x on ! "o h& s5su\sly1 b1 on ! o!r1 di/+ui% ! g5]al & 9 ab/racto repres5t$ object f ?is p>ticul> mode ( intuit+ x4 ,9 ?is case !re rema9s a mode ( det]m9+ ! object by m]e ?\ght1 :i* is really b a logical =m )\t cont5t1 :i*1 h[ev]1 seems to u to be a mode ( ! exi/5ce ( ! object 9 itself 7n\m5on71 )\t reg>d to intuition :i* is limit$ to our s5ses4 ,be=e end+ ?is transc5d5tal analytic1 we mu/ make an addition1 :i*1 al?\gh 9 itself ( no p>ticul> importance1 seems to be necess>y to ! complet5ess ( ! sy/em4 ,! highe/ conception1 ) :i* a transc5d5tal philosophy commonly beg9s1 is ! division into possible & impossible4 ,b z all division presupposes a divid$ conception1 a /ill high] "o mu/ exi/1 & ?is is ! conception ( an object 9 g5]al--problematically und]/ood & )\t its be+ decid$ :e!r x is some?+ or no?+4 ,z ! categories are ! only conceptions :i* apply to objects 9 g5]al1 ! di/+ui%+ ( an object1 :e!r x is some?+ or no?+1 mu/ proce$ accord+ to ! ord] & direction ( ! categories4 #a4 ,to ! categories ( quantity1 t is1 ! conceptions ( all1 _m1 & "o1 ! conception :i* annihilates all1 t is1 ! conception ( none1 is oppos$4 ,& ?us ! object ( a conception1 to :i* no intuition c be f\nd to correspond1 is no?+4 ,t is1 x is a conception )\t an object 7ens rationis71 l n\m5a1 :i* _c be consid]$ possible 9 ! sph]e ( reality1 ?\gh !y mu/ n !re=e be held to be impossible--or l c]ta9 new fundam5tal =ces 9 matt]1 ! exi/5ce ( :i* is cogitable )\t contradiction1 ?\gh1 z examples f exp]i5ce are n =?com+1 !y mu/ n be reg>d$ z possible4 #b4 ,reality is some?+2 negation is no?+1 t is1 a conception ( ! abs5ce ( an object1 z cold1 a %ad[ 7nihil privativum74 #c4 ,! m]e =m ( intuition1 )\t sub/ance1 is 9 itself no object1 b ! m]ely =mal condition ( an object 7z ph5om5on71 z pure space & pure "t4 ,^! are c]ta9ly some?+1 z =ms ( intuition1 b are n !mselves objects :i* are intuit$ 7ens imag9>ium74 #d4 ,! object ( a conception :i* is self-contradictory1 is no?+1 because ! conception is no?+--is impossible1 z a figure compos$ ( two /raight l9es 7nihil negativum74 ,! table ( ?is division ( ! conception ( no?+ 7! correspond+ division ( ! conception ( some?+ does n require special description7 mu/ !re=e be arrang$ z foll[s3 ,,no?+ ,,z #a ,z ,empty ,conception )\t object1 ens rationis #b #c ,empty object ( ,empty intuition a conception1 )\t object1 nihil privativum ens imag9>ium #d ,empty object )\t conception1 nihil negativum ,we see t ! ens rationis is di/+ui%$ f ! nihil negativum or pure no?+ by ! consid]ation t ! =m] mu/ n be reckon$ among possibilities1 because x is a m]e fiction--?\gh n self-contradictory1 :ile ! latt] is completely oppos$ to all possibility1 inasmu* z ! conception annihilates itself4 ,bo?1 h[ev]1 are empty conceptions4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ! nihil privativum & ens imag9>ium are empty data = conceptions4 ,if light be n giv5 to ! s5ses1 we _c repres5t to ourselves d>kness1 & if ext5d$ objects are n p]ceiv$1 we _c repres5t space4 ,nei!r ! negation1 nor ! m]e =m ( intuition c1 )\t some?+ real1 be an object4 ,,second ,,division--,,transc5d5tal ,,logic ,,transc5d5tal ,,dialectic4 ,,introduction4 ,i4 ,( ,transc5d5tal ,illusory ,appe>ance ,we t]m$ dialectic 9 g5]al a logic ( appe>ance4 ,?is does n signify a doctr9e ( probability2 = probability is tru?1 only cogniz$ ^u insuffici5t gr\nds1 & ?\gh ! in=mation x gives u is imp]fect1 x is n !re=e deceitful4 ,h5ce x mu/ n be sep>at$ f ! analytical "p ( logic4 ,/ill less mu/ ph5om5on & appe>ance be held to be id5tical4 ,= tru? or illusory appe>ance does n reside 9 ! object1 9 s f> z x is intuit$1 b 9 ! judgem5t ^u ! object1 9 s f> z x is ?\ght4 ,x is1 !re=e1 q correct to say t ! s5ses d n err1 n because !y always judge correctly1 b because !y d n judge at all4 ,h5ce tru? & error1 consequ5tly also1 illusory appe>ance z ! cause ( error1 are only to be f\nd 9 a judgem5t1 t is1 9 ! relation ( an object to our und]/&+4 ,9 a cognition :i* completely h>monizes ) ! laws ( ! und]/&+1 no error c exi/4 ,9 a repres5tation ( ! s5ses--z n conta9+ any judgem5t--!re is also no error4 ,b no p[] ( nature c ( itself deviate f its own laws4 ,h5ce nei!r ! und]/&+ p] se 7)\t ! influ5ce ( ano!r cause71 nor ! s5ses p] se1 w\ld fall into error2 ! =m] c\ld n1 because1 if x acts only accord+ to its own laws1 ! effect 7! judgem5t7 mu/ necess>ily accord ) ^! laws4 ,b 9 accordance ) ! laws ( ! und]/&+ consi/s ! =mal elem5t 9 all tru?4 ,9 ! s5ses !re is no judgem5t--nei!r a true nor a false "o4 ,b1 z we h no s\rce ( cognition besides ^! two1 x foll[s t error is caus$ solely by ! unobs]v$ influ5ce ( ! s5sibility ^u ! und]/&+4 ,& ?us x happ5s t ! subjective gr\nds ( a judgem5t bl5d & are conf\nd$ ) ! objective1 & cause !m to deviate f _! prop] det]m9ation1#dj j z a body 9 motion w\ld always ( itself proce$ 9 a /raight l9e1 b if ano!r impetus gives to x a diff]5t direction1 x w !n />t (f into a curvil9e> l9e ( motion4 ,to di/+ui% ! peculi> action ( ! und]/&+ f ! p[] :i* m+les ) x1 x is necess>y to consid] an errone\s judgem5t z ! diagonal betwe5 two =ces1 t det]m9e ! judgem5t 9 two diff]5t directions1 :i*1 z x 71 =m an angle1 & to resolve ?is composite op]ation into ! simple ones ( ! und]/&+ & ! s5sibility4 ,9 pure priori judgem5ts ?is mu/ be done by means ( transc5d5tal reflection1 :]eby1 z has be5 already %[n1 ea* repres5tation has its place appo9t$ 9 ! correspond+ faculty ( cognition1 & consequ5tly ! influ5ce ( ! "o faculty ^u ! o!r is made app>5t4 #dj ,s5sibility1 subject$ to ! und]/&+1 z ! object ^u :i* ! und]/&+ employs its functions1 is ! s\rce ( real cognitions4 ,b1 9 s f> z x ex]cises an influ5ce ^u ! action ( ! und]/&+ & det]m9es x to judgem5t1 s5sibility is itself ! cause ( error4 ,x is n at pres5t our bus9ess to treat ( empirical illusory appe>ance 7= example1 optical illusion71 :i* occurs 9 ! empirical application ( o!rwise correct rules ( ! und]/&+1 & 9 :i* ! judgem5t is misl$ by ! influ5ce ( imag9ation4 ,our purpose is to speak ( transc5d5tal illusory appe>ance1 :i* influ5ces pr9ciples--t are n ev5 appli$ to exp]i5ce1 = 9 ?is case we %\ld possess a sure te/ ( _! correctness--b :i* leads u1 9 disreg>d ( all ! w>n+s ( criticism1 completely beyond ! empirical employm5t ( ! categories & deludes u ) ! *im]a ( an ext5sion ( ! sph]e ( ! pure und]/&+4 ,we %all t]m ^? pr9ciples ! application ( :i* is conf9$ entirely )9 ! limits ( possible exp]i5ce1 imman5t2 ^?1 on ! o!r h&1 :i* transgress ^! limits1 we %all call transc5d5t pr9ciples4 ,b by ^! latt] ,i d n und]/& pr9ciples ( ! transc5d5tal use or misuse ( ! categories1 :i* is 9 reality a m]e fault ( ! judgem5t :5 n "u due re/ra9t f criticism1 & !re=e n pay+ suffici5t att5tion to ! limits ( ! sph]e 9 :i* ! pure und]/&+ is all[$ to ex]cise its functions2 b real pr9ciples :i* exhort u to break d[n all ^? b>ri]s1 & to lay claim to a p]fectly new field ( cognition1 :i* recognizes no l9e ( dem>cation4 ,?us transc5d5tal & transc5d5t are n id5tical t]ms4 ,! pr9ciples ( ! pure und]/&+1 :i* we h already prop\nd$1 ought to be ( empirical & n ( transc5d5tal use1 t is1 !y are n applicable to any object beyond ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce4 ,a pr9ciple :i* removes ^! limits1 nay1 :i* au?orizes u to ov]/ep !m1 is call$ transc5d5t4 ,if our criticism c succe$ 9 expos+ ! illusion 9 ^! pret5d$ pr9ciples1 ^? :i* are limit$ 9 _! employm5t to ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce may be call$1 9 opposition to ! o!rs1 imman5t pr9ciples ( ! pure und]/&+4 ,logical illusion1 :i* consi/s m]ely 9 ! imitation ( ! =m ( reason 7! illusion 9 sophi/ical syllogisms71 arises entirely f a want ( due att5tion to logical rules4 ,s soon z ! att5tion is awak5$ to ! case be=e u1 ?is illusion totally disappe>s4 ,transc5d5tal illusion1 on ! contr>y1 does n cease to exi/1 ev5 aft] x has be5 expos$1 & its no?+ness cle>ly p]ceiv$ by means ( transc5d5tal criticism4 ,take1 = example1 ! illusion 9 ! proposition3 8,! _w mu/ h a beg9n+ 9 "t40 ,! cause ( ?is is z foll[s4 ,9 our reason1 subjectively consid]$ z a faculty ( human cognition1 !re exi/ fundam5tal rules & maxims ( its ex]cise1 :i* h completely ! appe>ance ( objective pr9ciples4 ,n[ f ?is cause x happ5s t ! subjective necessity ( a c]ta9 connection ( our conceptions1 is reg>d$ z an objective necessity ( ! det]m9ation ( ?+s 9 !mselves4 ,?is illusion x is impossible to avoid1 j z we _c avoid p]ceiv+ t ! sea appe>s to be high] at a di/ance ?an x is ne> ! %ore1 because we see ! =m] by means ( high] rays ?an ! latt]1 or1 :i* is a /ill /rong] case1 z ev5 ! a/ronom] _c prev5t himself f see+ ! moon l>g] at its ris+ ?an "s "t aft]w>ds1 al?\gh he is n deceiv$ by ?is illusion4 ,transc5d5tal dialectic w !re=e cont5t itself ) expos+ ! illusory appe>ance 9 transc5d5tal judgem5ts1 & gu>d+ u aga9/ x2 b to make x1 z 9 ! case ( logical illusion1 entirely disappe> & cease to be illusion is utt]ly beyond its p[]4 ,= we h "h to d ) a natural & unavoidable illusion1 :i* re/s ^u subjective pr9ciples & imposes ^! ^u u z objective1 :ile logical dialectic1 9 ! detection ( sophisms1 has to d m]ely ) an error 9 ! logical consequ5ce ( ! propositions1 or ) an artificially con/ruct$ illusion1 9 imitation ( ! natural error4 ,!re is1 !re=e1 a natural & unavoidable dialectic ( pure reason--n t 9 :i* ! bungl]1 f want ( ! requisite k1 involves himself1 nor t :i* ! sophi/ devises = ! purpose ( mislead+1 b t :i* is an insep>able adjunct ( human reason1 & :i*1 ev5 aft] its illusions h be5 expos$1 does n cease to deceive1 & cont9ually to lead reason into mom5t>y errors1 :i* x becomes necess>y cont9ually to remove4 ,,ii4 ,( ,pure ,reason z ! ,seat ( ,transc5d5tal ,illusory ,appe>ance ,a4 ,,( ,,reason ,,9 ,,g5]al4 ,all our k beg9s ) s5se1 proce$s !nce to und]/&+1 & ends ) reason1 beyond :i* no?+ high] c be discov]$ 9 ! human m9d = elaborat+ ! matt] ( intuition & subject+ x to ! highe/ unity ( ?\ght4 ,at ?is /age ( our inquiry x is my duty to give an explanation ( ?is1 ! highe/ faculty ( cognition1 & ,i confess ,i f9d myself "h 9 "s difficulty4 ,( reason1 z ( ! und]/&+1 !re is a m]ely =mal1 t is1 logical use1 9 :i* x makes ab/raction ( all cont5t ( cognition2 b !re is also a real use1 inasmu* z x conta9s 9 itself ! s\rce ( c]ta9 conceptions & pr9ciples1 :i* x does n borr[ ei!r f ! s5ses or ! und]/&+4 ,! =m] faculty has be5 long def9$ by logicians z ! faculty ( m$iate conclusion 9 contradi/9ction to imm$iate conclusions 7consequ5tiae imm$iatae72 b ! nature ( ! latt]1 :i* itself g5]ates conceptions1 is n to be und]/ood f ?is def9ition4 ,n[ z a division ( reason into a logical & a transc5d5tal faculty pres5ts itself "h1 x becomes necess>y to seek = a high] conception ( ?is s\rce ( cognition :i* %all compreh5d bo? conceptions4 ,9 ?is we may expect1 accord+ to ! analogy ( ! conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 t ! logical conception w give u ! key to ! transc5d5tal1 & t ! table ( ! functions ( ! =m] w pres5t u ) ! clue to ! conceptions ( reason4 ,9 ! =m] "p ( our transc5d5tal logic1 we def9$ ! und]/&+ to be ! faculty ( rules2 reason may be di/+ui%$ f und]/&+ z ! faculty ( pr9ciples4 ,! t]m pr9ciple is ambigu\s1 & commonly signifies m]ely a cognition t may be employ$ z a pr9ciple1 al?\gh x is n 9 itself1 & z reg>ds its prop] orig91 entitl$ to ! di/9ction4 ,e g5]al proposition1 ev5 if d]iv$ f exp]i5ce by ! process ( induction1 may s]ve z ! major 9 a syllogism2 b x is n = t reason a pr9ciple4 ,ma!matical axioms 7= example1 !re c be only "o /raight l9e betwe5 two po9ts7 are g5]al priori cognitions1 & are !re=e rightly d5om9at$ pr9ciples1 relatively to ! cases :i* c be subsum$ "u !m4 ,b ,i _c = ?is reason say t ,i cognize ?is prop]ty ( a /raight l9e f pr9ciples--,i cognize x only 9 pure intuition4 ,cognition f pr9ciples1 !n1 is t cognition 9 :i* ,i cognize ! p>ticul> 9 ! g5]al by means ( conceptions4 ,?us e syllogism is a =m ( ! d$uction ( a cognition f a pr9ciple4 ,= ! major always gives a conception1 ?r\gh :i* ev]y?+ t is subsum$ "u ! condition !re( is cogniz$ accord+ to a pr9ciple4 ,n[ z e g5]al cognition may s]ve z ! major 9 a syllogism1 & ! und]/&+ pres5ts u ) su* g5]al priori propositions1 !y may be t]m$ pr9ciples1 9 respect ( _! possible use4 ,b if we consid] ^! pr9ciples ( ! pure und]/&+ 9 relation to _! orig91 we %all f9d !m to be any?+ r ?an cognitions f conceptions4 ,= !y w\ld n ev5 be possible priori1 if we c\ld n rely on ! assi/ance ( pure intuition 79 ma!matics71 or on t ( ! conditions ( a possible exp]i5ce4 ,t ev]y?+ t happ5s has a cause1 _c be conclud$ f ! g5]al conception ( t :i* happ5s2 on ! contr>y ! pr9ciple ( causality in/ructs u z to ! mode ( obta9+ f t :i* happ5s a det]m9ate empirical conception4 ,syn!tical cognitions f conceptions ! und]/&+ _c supply1 & !y alone are entitl$ to be call$ pr9ciples4 ,at ! same "t1 all g5]al propositions may be t]m$ comp>ative pr9ciples4 ,x has be5 a long-*]i%$ wi%--t 7:o kn[s h[ late71 may "o day1 be happily accompli%$--t ! pr9ciples ( ! endless v>iety ( civil laws %\ld be inve/igat$ & expos$2 = 9 ?is way alone c we f9d ! secret ( simplify+ legislation4 ,b 9 ?is case1 laws are no?+ m ?an limitations ( our fre$om ^u conditions "u :i* x subsi/s 9 p]fect h>mony ) itself2 !y consequ5tly h = _! object t :i* is completely our own "w1 & ( :i* we ourselves may be ! cause by means ( ^! conceptions4 ,b h[ objects z ?+s 9 !mselves--h[ ! nature ( ?+s is subord9at$ to pr9ciples & is to be det]m9$1 accord+ to conceptions1 is a "q :i* x seems well nigh impossible to answ]4 ,be ?is1 h[ev]1 z x may--= on ?is po9t our inve/igation is yet to be made--x is at lea/ manife/ f :at we h said t cognition f pr9ciples is some?+ v diff]5t f cognition by means ( ! und]/&+1 :i* may inde$ prec$e o!r cognitions 9 ! =m ( a pr9ciple1 b 9 itself--9 s f> z x is syn!tical--is nei!r bas$ ^u m]e ?\ght1 nor conta9s a g5]al proposition drawn f conceptions alone4 ,! und]/&+ may be a faculty = ! production ( unity ( ph5om5a by virtue ( rules2 ! reason is a faculty = ! production ( unity ( rules 7( ! und]/&+7 "u pr9ciples4 ,reason1 !re=e1 nev] applies directly to exp]i5ce1 or to any s5su\s object2 its object is1 on ! contr>y1 ! und]/&+1 to ! manifold cognition ( :i* x gives a unity priori by means ( conceptions--a unity :i* may be call$ rational unity1 & :i* is ( a nature v diff]5t f t ( ! unity produc$ by ! und]/&+4 ,! above is ! g5]al conception ( ! faculty ( reason1 9 s f> z x has be5 possible to make x compreh5sible 9 ! abs5ce ( examples4 ,^! w be giv5 9 ! sequel4 ,b4 ,,( ,,! ,,logical ,,use ,,( ,,reason4 ,a di/9ction is commonly made betwe5 t :i* is imm$iately cogniz$ & t :i* is inf]r$ or conclud$4 ,t 9 a figure :i* is b\nd$ by ?ree /raight l9es !re are ?ree angles1 is an imm$iate cognition2 b t ^! angles are toge!r equal to two "r angles1 is an inf]5ce or conclusion4 ,n[1 z we are con/antly employ+ ?is mode ( ?\ght & h ?us become q accu/om$ to x1 we no long] rem>k ! above di/9ction1 &1 z 9 ! case ( ! s-call$ deceptions ( s5se1 consid] z imm$iately p]ceiv$1 :at has really be5 inf]r$4 ,9 e reason+ or syllogism1 !re is a fundam5tal proposition1 aft]w>ds a second drawn f x1 & f9ally ! conclusion1 :i* connects ! tru? 9 ! fir/ ) ! tru? 9 ! second--& t infallibly4 ,if ! judgem5t conclud$ is s conta9$ 9 ! fir/ proposition t x c be d$uc$ f x )\t ! m$itation ( a ?ird notion1 ! conclusion is call$ imm$iate 7consequ5tia imm$iata72 ,i pref] ! t]m conclusion ( ! und]/&+4 ,b if1 9 addition to ! fundam5tal cognition1 a second judgem5t is necess>y = ! production ( ! conclusion1 x is call$ a conclusion ( ! reason4 ,9 ! proposition3 ,all m5 are mortal1 are conta9$ ! propositions3 ,"s m5 are mortal1 ,no?+ t is n mortal is a man1 & ^! are !re=e imm$iate conclusions f ! fir/4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ! proposition3 all ! le>n$ are mortal1 is n conta9$ 9 ! ma9 proposition 7= ! conception ( a le>n$ man does n occur 9 x71 & x c be d$uc$ f ! ma9 proposition only by means ( a m$iat+ judgem5t4 ,9 e syllogism ,i fir/ cogitate a rule 7! major7 by means ( ! und]/&+4 ,9 ! next place ,i subsume a cognition "u ! condition ( ! rule 7& ?is is ! m9or7 by means ( ! judgem5t4 ,& f9ally ,i det]m9e my cognition by means ( ! pr$icate ( ! rule 7?is is ! conclusio71 consequ5tly1 ,i det]m9e x priori by means ( ! reason4 ,! relations1 !re=e1 :i* ! major proposition1 z ! rule1 repres5ts betwe5 a cognition & its condition1 con/itute ! diff]5t k9ds ( syllogisms4 ,^! are j ?reefold--analog\sly ) all judgem5ts1 9 s f> z !y diff] 9 ! mode ( express+ ! relation ( a cognition 9 ! und]/&+--namely1 categorical1 hypo!tical1 & disjunctive4 ,:5 z (t5 happ5s1 ! conclusion is a judgem5t :i* may foll[ f o!r giv5 judgem5ts1 ?r\gh :i* a p]fectly diff]5t object is cogitat$1 ,i endeav\r to discov] 9 ! und]/&+ :e!r ! ass]tion 9 ?is conclusion does n /& "u c]ta9 conditions accord+ to a g5]al rule4 ,if ,i f9d su* a condition1 & if ! object m5tion$ 9 ! conclusion c be subsum$ "u ! giv5 condition1 !n ?is conclusion foll[s f a rule :i* is also valid = o!r objects ( cognition4 ,f ?is we see t reason endeav\rs to subject ! great v>iety ( ! cognitions ( ! und]/&+ to ! smalle/ possible numb] ( pr9ciples 7g5]al conditions71 & ?us to produce 9 x ! highe/ unity4 ,c4 ,,( ,,! ,,pure ,,use ,,( ,,reason4 ,c we isolate reason1 &1 if s1 is x 9 ?is case a peculi> s\rce ( conceptions & judgem5ts :i* spr+ f x alone1 & ?r\gh :i* x c be appli$ to objects2 or is x m]ely a subord9ate faculty1 ^: duty x is to give a c]ta9 =m to giv5 cognitions--a =m :i* is call$ logical1 & ?r\gh :i* ! cognitions ( ! und]/&+ are subord9at$ to ea* o!r1 & l[] rules to high] 7^?1 to wit1 ^: condition comprises 9 its sph]e ! condition ( ! o!rs71 9 s f> z ?is c be done by comp>ison8 ,?is is ! "q :i* we h at pres5t to answ]4 ,manifold v>iety ( rules & unity ( pr9ciples is a requirem5t ( reason1 = ! purpose ( br++ ! und]/&+ into complete accordance ) itself1 j z und]/&+ subjects ! manifold cont5t ( intuition to conceptions1 & !reby introduces connection into x4 ,b ?is pr9ciple prescribes no law to objects1 & does n conta9 any gr\nd ( ! possibility ( cogniz+ or ( det]m9+ !m z su*1 b is m]ely a subjective law = ! prop] arrangem5t ( ! cont5t ( ! und]/&+4 ,! purpose ( ?is law is1 by a comp>ison ( ! conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 to r$uce !m to ! smalle/ possible numb]1 al?\gh1 at ! same "t1 x does n ju/ify u 9 dem&+ f objects !mselves su* a uni=mity z might contribute to ! conv5i5ce & ! enl>gem5t ( ! sph]e ( ! und]/&+1 or 9 expect+ t x w itself ?us receive f !m objective validity4 ,9 "o ^w1 ! "q is3 8does reason 9 itself1 t is1 does pure reason conta9 priori syn!tical pr9ciples & rules1 & :at are ^? pr9ciples80 ,! =mal & logical proc$ure ( reason 9 syllogisms gives u suffici5t in=mation 9 reg>d to ! gr\nd on :i* ! transc5d5tal pr9ciple ( reason 9 its pure syn!tical cognition w re/4 #a4 ,reason1 z obs]v$ 9 ! syllogi/ic process1 is n applicable to intuitions1 = ! purpose ( subject+ !m to rules--= ?is is ! prov9ce ( ! und]/&+ ) its categories--b to conceptions & judgem5ts4 ,if pure reason does apply to objects & ! intuition ( !m1 x does s n imm$iately1 b m$iately--?r\gh ! und]/&+ & its judgem5ts1 :i* h a direct relation to ! s5ses & _! intuition1 = ! purpose ( det]m9+ _! objects4 ,! unity ( reason is !re=e n ! unity ( a possible exp]i5ce1 b is ess5tially diff]5t f ?is unity1 :i* is t ( ! und]/&+4 ,t ev]y?+ :i* happ5s has a cause1 is n a pr9ciple cogniz$ & prescrib$ by reason4 ,?is pr9ciple makes ! unity ( exp]i5ce possible & borr[s no?+ f reason1 :i*1 )\t a ref]5ce to possible exp]i5ce1 c\ld nev] h produc$ by means ( m]e conceptions any su* syn!tical unity4 #b4 ,reason1 9 its logical use1 endeav\rs to discov] ! g5]al condition ( its judgem5t 7! conclusion71 & a syllogism is itself no?+ b a judgem5t by means ( ! subsumption ( its condition "u a g5]al rule 7! major74 ,n[ z ?is rule may itself be subject$ to ! same process ( reason1 & ?us ! condition ( ! condition be s\ght 7by means ( a prosyllogism7 z long z ! process c be cont9u$1 x is v manife/ t ! peculi> pr9ciple ( reason 9 its logical use is to f9d = ! condition$ cognition ( ! und]/&+ ! uncondition$ :]eby ! unity ( ! =m] is complet$4 ,b ?is logical maxim _c be a pr9ciple ( pure reason1 unless we admit t1 if ! condition$ is giv51 ! :ole s]ies ( conditions subord9at$ to "o ano!r--a s]ies :i* is consequ5tly itself uncondition$--is also giv51 t is1 conta9$ 9 ! object & its connection4 ,b ?is pr9ciple ( pure reason is evid5tly syn!tical2 =1 analytically1 ! condition$ c]ta9ly relates to "s condition1 b n to ! uncondition$4 ,f ?is pr9ciple also !re mu/ orig9ate diff]5t syn!tical propositions1 ( :i* ! pure und]/&+ is p]fectly ignorant1 = x has to d only ) objects ( a possible exp]i5ce1 ! cognition & syn!sis ( :i* is always condition$4 ,! uncondition$1 if x does really exi/1 mu/ be especially consid]$ 9 reg>d to ! det]m9ations :i* di/+ui% x f :atev] is condition$1 & w ?us af=d u mat]ial = _m priori syn!tical propositions4 ,! pr9ciples result+ f ?is highe/ pr9ciple ( pure reason w1 h[ev]1 be transc5d5t 9 relation to ph5om5a1 t is to say1 x w be impossible to make any adequate empirical use ( ?is pr9ciple4 ,x is !re=e completely diff]5t f all pr9ciples ( ! und]/&+1 ! use made ( :i* is entirely imman5t1 _! object & purpose be+ m]ely ! possibility ( exp]i5ce4 ,n[ our duty 9 ! transc5d5tal dialectic is z foll[s4 ,to discov] :e!r ! pr9ciple t ! s]ies ( conditions 79 ! syn!sis ( ph5om5a1 or ( ?\ght 9 g5]al7 ext5ds to ! uncondition$ is objectively true1 or n2 :at consequ5ces result !refrom affect+ ! empirical use ( ! und]/&+1 or r :e!r !re exi/s any su* objectively valid proposition ( reason1 & :e!r x is n1 on ! contr>y1 a m]ely logical precept :i* directs u to asc5d p]petually to /ill high] conditions1 to approa* complet5ess 9 ! s]ies ( !m1 & ?us to introduce into our cognition ! highe/ possible unity ( reason4 ,we mu/ asc]ta91 ,i say1 :e!r ?is requirem5t ( reason has n be5 reg>d$1 by a misund]/&+1 z a transc5d5tal pr9ciple ( pure reason1 :i* po/ulates a ?or\gh complet5ess 9 ! s]ies ( conditions 9 objects !mselves4 ,we mu/ %[1 moreov]1 ! misconceptions & illusions t intrude into syllogisms1 ! major proposition ( :i* pure reason has suppli$--a proposition :i* has p]haps m ( ! "* ( a petitio ?an ( a po/ulatum--& t proce$ f exp]i5ce upw>ds to its conditions4 ,! solution ( ^! problems is our task 9 transc5d5tal dialectic1 :i* we are ab\t to expose ev5 at its s\rce1 t lies deep 9 human reason4 ,we %all divide x into two p>ts1 ! fir/ ( :i* w treat ( ! transc5d5t conceptions ( pure reason1 ! second ( transc5d5t & dialectical syllogisms4 ,,transc5d5tal ,,dialectic--,,book ,i--,,( ,,! ,,conceptions ,,( ,,pure ,,reason4 ,! conceptions ( pure reason--we d n "h speak ( ! possibility ( !m--are n obta9$ by reflection1 b by inf]5ce or conclusion4 ,! conceptions ( und]/&+ are also cogitat$ priori antec$5tly to exp]i5ce1 & r5d] x possible2 b !y conta9 no?+ b ! unity ( reflection ^u ph5om5a1 9 s f> z ^! mu/ necess>ily belong to a possible empirical consci\sness4 ,?r\gh !m alone are cognition & ! det]m9ation ( an object possible4 ,x is f !m1 accord+ly1 t we receive mat]ial = reason+1 & antec$5tly to !m we possess no priori conceptions ( objects f :i* !y might be d$uc$1 ,on ! o!r h&1 ! sole basis ( _! objective reality consi/s 9 ! necessity impos$ on !m1 z conta9+ ! intellectual =m ( all exp]i5ce1 ( re/rict+ _! application & influ5ce to ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce4 ,b ! t]m1 conception ( reason1 or rational conception1 itself indicates t x does n conf9e itself )9 ! limits ( exp]i5ce1 because its object-matt] is a cognition1 ( :i* e empirical cognition is b a "p--nay1 ! :ole ( possible exp]i5ce may be itself b a "p ( x--a cognition to :i* no actual exp]i5ce ev] fully atta9s1 al?\gh x does always p]ta9 to x4 ,! aim ( rational conceptions is ! compreh5sion1 z t ( ! conceptions ( und]/&+ is ! und]/&+ ( p]ceptions4 ,if !y conta9 ! uncondition$1 !y relate to t to :i* all exp]i5ce is subord9ate1 b :i* is nev] itself an object ( exp]i5ce--t t[>ds :i* reason t5ds 9 all its conclusions f exp]i5ce1 & by ! /&>d ( :i* x e/imates ! degree ( _! empirical use1 b :i* is nev] itself an elem5t 9 an empirical syn!sis4 ,if1 not)/&+1 su* conceptions possess objective validity1 !y may be call$ conceptus ratioc9ati 7conceptions legitimately conclud$72 9 cases :]e !y d n1 !y h be5 admitt$ on acc\nt ( hav+ ! appe>ance ( be+ correctly conclud$1 & may be call$ conceptus ratioc9antes 7sophi/ical conceptions74 ,b z ?is c only be suffici5tly demon/rat$ 9 t "p ( our treatise :i* relates to ! dialectical conclusions ( reason1 we %all omit any consid]ation ( x 9 ?is place4 ,z we call$ ! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+ categories1 we %all also di/+ui% ^? ( pure reason by a new "n & call !m transc5d5tal ideas4 ,^! t]ms1 h[ev]1 we mu/ 9 ! fir/ place expla9 & ju/ify4 ,section ,i--,( ,ideas 9 ,g5]al ,despite ! great weal? ( words :i* ,european languages possess1 ! ?9k] f9ds himself (t5 at a loss = an expression exactly suit$ to 8 conception1 = want ( :i* he is unable to make himself intelligible ei!r to o!rs or to himself4 ,to co9 new words is a pret5sion to legislation 9 language :i* is seldom successful2 &1 be=e rec\rse is tak5 to s desp]ate an exp$i5t1 x is advisable to exam9e ! dead & le>n$ languages1 ) ! hope & ! probability t we may !re meet ) "s adequate expression ( ! notion we h 9 our m9ds4 ,9 ?is case1 ev5 if ! orig9al mean+ ( ! ^w has become some:at unc]ta91 f c>elessness or want ( caution on ! "p ( ! au?ors ( x1 x is always bett] to adh]e to & confirm its prop] mean+--ev5 al?\gh x may be d\btful :e!r x 0 =m]ly us$ 9 exactly ?is s5se--?an to make our lab\r va9 by want ( suffici5t c>e to r5d] ourselves intelligible4 ,= ?is reason1 :5 x happ5s t !re exi/s only a s+le ^w to express a c]ta9 conception1 & ?is ^w1 9 its usual acceptation1 is ?or\ghly adequate to ! conception1 ! accurate di/9ction ( :i* f relat$ conceptions is ( great importance1 we ought n to employ ! expression improvid5tly1 or1 = ! sake ( v>iety & elegance ( /yle1 use x z a synonym = o!r cognate words4 ,x is our duty1 on ! contr>y1 c>efully to pres]ve its peculi> signification1 z o!rwise x easily happ5s t :5 ! att5tion ( ! read] is no long] p>ticul>ly attract$ to ! expression1 & x is lo/ amid ! multitude ( o!r words ( v diff]5t import1 ! ?\ght :i* x convey$1 & :i* x alone convey$1 is lo/ ) x4 ,plato employ$ ! expression idea 9 a way t pla9ly %[$ he meant by x some?+ :i* is nev] d]iv$ f ! s5ses1 b :i* f> transc5ds ev5 ! conceptions ( ! und]/&+ 7) :i* ,ari/otle occupi$ himself71 inasmu* z 9 exp]i5ce no?+ p]fectly correspond+ to !m c\ld be f\nd4 ,ideas are1 accord+ to him1 ar*etypes ( ?+s !mselves1 & n m]ely keys to possible exp]i5ces1 l ! categories4 ,9 8 view !y fl[ f ! highe/ reason1 by :i* !y h be5 imp>t$ to human reason1 :i*1 h[ev]1 exi/s no long] 9 its orig9al /ate1 b is oblig$ ) great lab\r to recall by rem9isc5ce--:i* is call$ philosophy--! old b n[ sadly obscur$ ideas4 ,i w n "h ent] ^u any lit]>y inve/igation ( ! s5se :i* ?is sublime philosoph] atta*$ to ?is expression4 ,i %all cont5t myself ) rem>k+ t x is no?+ unusual1 9 common conv]sation z well z 9 writt5 works1 by comp>+ ! ?\ghts :i* an au?or has deliv]$ ^u a subject1 to und]/& him bett] ?an he und]/ood himself inasmu* z he may n h suffici5tly det]m9$ 8 conception1 & ?us h sometimes spok51 nay ev5 ?\ght1 9 opposition to 8 own op9ions4 ,plato p]ceiv$ v cle>ly t our faculty ( cognition has ! feel+ ( a mu* high] vocation ?an t ( m]ely spell+ out ph5om5a accord+ to syn!tical unity1 = ! purpose ( be+ able to read !m z exp]i5ce1 & t our reason naturally raises itself to cognitions f> too elevat$ to admit ( ! possibility ( an object giv5 by exp]i5ce correspond+ to !m--cognitions :i* are nev]!less real1 & are n m]e phantoms ( ! bra94 ,?is philosoph] f\nd 8 ideas especially 9 all t is practical1#da t is1 :i* re/s ^u fre$om1 :i* 9 its turn ranks "u cognitions t are ! peculi> product ( reason4 ,he :o w\ld d]ive f exp]i5ce ! conceptions ( virtue1 :o w\ld make 7z _m h really done7 t1 :i* at be/ c b s]ve z an imp]fectly illu/rative example1 a model = or ! =mation ( a p]fectly adequate idea on ! subject1 w\ld 9 fact trans=m virtue into a non5tity *angeable accord+ to "t & circum/ance & utt]ly incapable ( be+ employ$ z a rule4 ,on ! contr>y1 e "o is consci\s t1 :5 any "o is held up to him z a model ( virtue1 he comp>es ?is s-call$ model ) ! true orig9al :i* he possesses 9 8 own m9d & values him accord+ to ?is /&>d4 ,b ?is /&>d is ! idea ( virtue1 9 relation to :i* all possible objects ( exp]i5ce are inde$ s]viceable z examples--pro(s ( ! practicability 9 a c]ta9 degree ( t :i* ! conception ( virtue dem&s--b c]ta9ly n z ar*etypes4 ,t ! actions ( man w nev] be 9 p]fect accordance ) all ! requirem5ts ( ! pure ideas ( reason1 does n prove ! ?\ght to be *im]ical4 ,= only ?r\gh ?is idea are all judgem5ts z to moral m]it or dem]it possible2 x consequ5tly lies at ! f\ndation ( e approa* to moral p]fection1 h[ev] f> remov$ f x ! ob/acles 9 human nature--indet]m9able z to degree--may keep u4 #da ,he c]ta9ly ext5d$ ! application ( 8 conception to speculative cognitions also1 provid$ !y 7 giv5 pure & completely priori1 nay1 ev5 to ma!matics1 al?\gh ?is sci5ce _c possess an object o!r:]e ?an 9 ,possible exp]i5ce4 ,i _c foll[ him 9 ?is1 & z little c ,i foll[ him 9 8 my/ical d$uction ( ^! ideas1 or 9 8 hypo/atization ( !m2 al?\gh1 9 tru?1 ! elevat$ & exagg]at$ language :i* he employ$ 9 describ+ !m is q capable ( an int]pretation m subdu$ & m 9 accordance ) fact & ! nature ( ?+s4 ,! ,platonic ,republic has become prov]bial z an example--& a /rik+ "o--( imag9>y p]fection1 su* z c exi/ only 9 ! bra9 ( ! idle ?9k]2 & ,bruck] ridicules ! philosoph] = ma9ta9+ t a pr9ce c nev] gov]n well1 unless he is p>ticipant 9 ! ideas4 ,b we %\ld d bett] to foll[ up ?is ?\ght &1 :]e ?is admirable ?9k] leaves u )\t assi/ance1 employ new ef=ts to place x 9 cle>] light1 r ?an c>elessly fl+ x aside z useless1 "u ! v mis]able & p]nici\s pretext ( impracticability4 ,a con/itution ( ! greate/ possible human fre$om accord+ to laws1 by :i* ! lib]ty ( e individual c consi/ ) ! lib]ty ( e o!r 7n ( ! greate/ possible happ9ess1 = ?is foll[s necess>ily f ! =m]71 is1 to say ! lea/1 a necess>y idea1 :i* mu/ be plac$ at ! f\ndation n only ( ! fir/ plan ( ! con/itution ( a /ate1 b ( all its laws4 ,&1 9 ?is1 x n necess>y at ! outset to take acc\nt ( ! ob/acles :i* lie 9 our way--ob/acles :i* p]haps d n necess>ily arise f ! "* ( human nature1 b r f ! previ\s neglect ( true ideas 9 legislation4 ,= !re is no?+ m p]nici\s & m unwor?y ( a philosoph]1 ?an ! vulg> appeal to a s-call$ adv]se exp]i5ce1 :i* inde$ w\ld n h exi/$1 if ^? in/itutions _h be5 e/abli%$ at ! prop] "t & 9 accordance ) ideas2 :ile1 in/ead ( ?is1 conceptions1 crude = ! v reason t !y h be5 drawn f exp]i5ce1 h m>r$ & fru/rat$ all our bett] views & int5tions4 ,! m legislation & gov]nm5t are 9 h>mony ) ?is idea1 ! m r>e d puni%m5ts become & ?us x is q reasonable to ma9ta91 z ,plato did1 t 9 a p]fect /ate no puni%m5ts at all w\ld be necess>y4 ,n[ al?\gh a p]fect /ate may nev] exi/1 ! idea is n on t acc\nt ! less j1 :i* holds up ?is maximum z ! ar*etype or /&>d ( a con/itution1 9 ord] to br+ legislative gov]nm5t always ne>] & ne>] to ! greate/ possible p]fection4 ,= at :at precise degree human nature mu/ /op 9 its progress1 & h[ wide mu/ be ! *asm :i* mu/ necess>ily exi/ betwe5 ! idea & its realization1 are problems :i* no "o c or ought to det]m9e--& = ?is reason1 t x is ! de/9ation ( fre$om to ov]/ep all assign$ limits betwe5 itself & ! idea4 ,b n only 9 t :]e9 human reason is a real causal ag5t & :]e ideas are op]ative causes 7( actions & _! objects71 t is to say1 9 ! region ( e?ics1 b also 9 reg>d to nature h]self1 ,plato saw cle> pro(s ( an orig9 f ideas4 ,a plant1 & animal1 ! regul> ord] ( nature--probably also ! disposition ( ! :ole univ]se--give manife/ evid5ce t !y are possible only by means ( & accord+ to ideas2 t1 inde$1 no "o creature1 "u ! individual conditions ( its exi/5ce1 p]fectly h>monizes ) ! idea ( ! mo/ p]fect ( its k9d--j z little z man ) ! idea ( humanity1 :i* nev]!less he be>s 9 8 s\l z ! ar*etypal /&>d ( 8 actions2 t1 not)/&+1 ^! ideas are 9 ! highe/ s5se individually1 un*angeably1 & completely det]m9$1 & are ! orig9al causes ( ?+s2 & t ! totality ( connect$ objects 9 ! univ]se is alone fully adequate to t idea4 ,sett+ aside ! exagg]ations ( expression 9 ! writ+s ( ?is philosoph]1 ! m5tal p[] exhibit$ 9 ?is asc5t f ! ectypal mode ( reg>d+ ! physical _w to ! ar*itectonic connection !re( accord+ to ends1 t is1 ideas1 is an ef=t :i* des]ves imitation & claims respect4 ,b z reg>ds ! pr9ciples ( e?ics1 ( legislation1 & ( religion1 sph]es 9 :i* ideas alone r5d] exp]i5ce possible1 al?\gh !y nev] atta9 to full expression !re91 he has v9dicat$ = himself a position ( peculi> m]it1 :i* is n appreciat$ only because x is judg$ by ! v empirical rules1 ! validity ( :i* z pr9ciples is de/roy$ by ideas4 ,= z reg>ds nature1 exp]i5ce pres5ts u ) rules & is ! s\rce ( tru?1 b 9 relation to e?ical laws exp]i5ce is ! p>5t ( illusion1 & x is 9 ! highe/ degree repreh5sible to limit or to d$uce ! laws :i* dictate :at ,i ought to d1 f :at is done4 ,we mu/1 h[ev]1 omit ! consid]ation ( ^! important subjects1 ! developm5t ( :i* is 9 reality ! peculi> duty & dignity ( philosophy1 & conf9e ourselves = ! pres5t to ! m humble b n less useful task ( prep>+ a firm f\ndation = ^? maje/ic edifices ( moral sci5ce4 ,= ?is f\ndation has be5 hi!rto insecure f ! _m subt]ranean passages :i* reason 9 its confid5t b va9 se>* = treasures has made 9 all directions4 ,our pres5t duty is to make ourselves p]fectly acqua9t$ ) ! transc5d5tal use made ( pure reason1 its pr9ciples & ideas1 t we may be able prop]ly to det]m9e & value its influ5ce & real wor?4 ,b be=e br++ ^! introductory rem>ks to a close1 ,i beg ^? :o really h philosophy at he>t--& _! numb] is b small--if !y %all f9d !mselves conv9c$ by ! consid]ations foll[+ z well z by ^? above1 to ex]t !mselves to pres]ve to ! expression idea its orig9al signification1 & to take c>e t x be n lo/ among ^? o!r expressions by :i* all sorts ( repres5tations are loosely designat$--t ! int]e/s ( sci5ce may n !reby suff]4 ,we are 9 no want ( words to d5om9ate adequately e mode ( repres5tation1 )\t ! necessity ( encroa*+ ^u t]ms :i* are prop] to o!rs4 ,! foll[+ is a graduat$ li/ ( !m4 ,! g5us is repres5tation 9 g5]al 7repres5tatio74 ,"u x /&s repres5tation ) consci\sness 7p]ceptio74 ,a p]ception :i* relates solely to ! subject z a modification ( its /ate1 is a s5sation 7s5satio71 an objective p]ception is a cognition 7cognitio74 ,a cognition is ei!r an intuition or a conception 7intuitus vel conceptus74 ,! =m] has an imm$iate relation to ! object & is s+ul> & individual2 ! latt] has b a m$iate relation1 by means ( a *>act]i/ic m>k :i* may be common to sev]al ?+s4 ,a conception is ei!r empirical or pure4 ,a pure conception1 9 s f> z x has its orig9 9 ! und]/&+ alone1 & is n ! conception ( a pure s5su\s image1 is call$ notio4 ,a conception =m$ f notions1 :i* transc5ds ! possibility ( exp]i5ce1 is an idea1 or a conception ( reason4 ,to "o :o has accu/om$ himself to ^! di/9ctions1 x mu/ be q intol]able to he> ! repres5tation ( ! col\r r$ call$ an idea4 ,x ought n ev5 to be call$ a notion or conception ( und]/&+4 ,section ,,ii4 ,( ,transc5d5tal ,ideas ,transc5d5tal analytic %[$ u h[ ! m]e logical =m ( our cognition c conta9 ! orig9 ( pure conceptions priori1 conceptions :i* repres5t objects antec$5tly to all exp]i5ce1 or r1 indicate ! syn!tical unity :i* alone r5d]s possible an empirical cognition ( objects4 ,! =m ( judgem5ts--conv]t$ into a conception ( ! syn!sis ( intuitions--produc$ ! categories :i* direct ! employm5t ( ! und]/&+ 9 exp]i5ce4 ,?is consid]ation w>rants u to expect t ! =m ( syllogisms1 :5 appli$ to syn!tical unity ( intuitions1 foll[+ ! rule ( ! categories1 w conta9 ! orig9 ( p>ticul> priori conceptions1 :i* we may call pure conceptions ( reason or transc5d5tal ideas1 & :i* w det]m9e ! use ( ! und]/&+ 9 ! totality ( exp]i5ce accord+ to pr9ciples4 ,! function ( reason 9 argum5ts consi/s 9 ! univ]sality ( a cognition accord+ to conceptions1 & ! syllogism itself is a judgem5t :i* is det]m9$ priori 9 ! :ole ext5t ( its condition4 ,! proposition3 8,caius is mortal10 is "o :i* may be obta9$ f exp]i5ce by ! aid ( ! und]/&+ alone2 b my wi% is to f9d a conception :i* conta9s ! condition "u :i* ! pr$icate ( ?is judgem5t is giv5--9 ?is case1 ! conception ( man--& aft] subsum+ "u ?is condition1 tak5 9 its :ole ext5t 7all m5 are mortal71 ,i det]m9e accord+ to x ! cognition ( ! object ?\ght1 & say3 8,caius is mortal40 ,h5ce1 9 ! conclusion ( a syllogism we re/rict a pr$icate to a c]ta9 object1 aft] hav+ ?\ght x 9 ! major 9 its :ole ext5t "u a c]ta9 condition4 ,?is complete quantity ( ! ext5t 9 relation to su* a condition is call$ univ]sality 7univ]salitas74 ,to ?is corresponds totality 7univ]sitas7 ( conditions 9 ! syn!sis ( intuitions4 ,! transc5d5tal conception ( reason is !re=e no?+ else ?an ! conception ( ! totality ( ! conditions ( a giv5 condition$4 ,n[ z ! uncondition$ alone r5d]s possible totality ( conditions1 &1 conv]sely1 ! totality ( conditions is itself always uncondition$2 a pure rational conception 9 g5]al c be def9$ & expla9$ by means ( ! conception ( ! uncondition$1 9 s f> z x conta9s a basis = ! syn!sis ( ! condition$4 ,to ! numb] ( modes ( relation :i* ! und]/&+ cogitates by means ( ! categories1 ! numb] ( pure rational conceptions w correspond4 ,we mu/ !re=e seek =1 fir/1 an uncondition$ ( ! categorical syn!sis 9 a subject2 secondly1 ( ! hypo!tical syn!sis ( ! memb]s ( a s]ies2 ?irdly1 ( ! disjunctive syn!sis ( p>ts 9 a sy/em4 ,!re are exactly ! same numb] ( modes ( syllogisms1 ea* ( :i* proce$s ?r\gh prosyllogisms to ! uncondition$--"o to ! subject :i* _c be employ$ z pr$icate1 ano!r to ! presupposition :i* supposes no?+ high] ?an itself1 & ! ?ird to an aggregate ( ! memb]s ( ! complete division ( a conception4 ,h5ce ! pure rational conceptions ( totality 9 ! syn!sis ( conditions h a necess>y f\ndation 9 ! nature ( human reason--at lea/ z modes ( elevat+ ! unity ( ! und]/&+ to ! uncondition$4 ,!y may h no valid application1 correspond+ to _! transc5d5tal employm5t1 9 concreto1 & be ?us ( no great] utility ?an to direct ! und]/&+ h[1 :ile ext5d+ !m z widely z possible1 to ma9ta9 its ex]cise & application 9 p]fect consi/5ce & h>mony4 ,b1 :ile speak+ "h ( ! totality ( conditions & ( ! uncondition$ z ! common title ( all conceptions ( reason1 we aga9 light ^u an expression :i* we f9d x impossible to disp5se )1 & :i* nev]!less1 ow+ to ! ambiguity atta*+ to x f long abuse1 we _c employ ) safety4 ,! ^w absolute is "o ( ! few words :i*1 9 its orig9al signification1 0 p]fectly adequate to ! conception x 0 int5d$ to convey--a conception :i* no o!r ^w 9 ! same language exactly suits1 & ! loss--or1 :i* is ! same ?+1 ! incauti\s & loose employm5t--( :i* mu/ be foll[$ by ! loss ( ! conception itself4 ,&1 z x is a conception :i* occupies mu* ( ! att5tion ( reason1 its loss w\ld be greatly to ! detrim5t ( all transc5d5tal philosophy4 ,! ^w absolute is at pres5t frequ5tly us$ to d5ote t some?+ c be pr$icat$ ( a ?+ consid]$ 9 itself & intr9sically4 ,9 ?is s5se absolutely possible w\ld signify t :i* is possible 9 itself 7int]ne7--:i* is1 9 fact1 ! lea/ t "o c pr$icate ( an object4 ,on ! o!r h&1 x is sometimes employ$ to indicate t a ?+ is valid 9 all respects--= example1 absolute sov]eignty4 ,absolutely possible w\ld 9 ?is s5se signify t :i* is possible 9 all relations & 9 e respect2 & ?is is ! mo/ t c be pr$icat$ ( ! possibility ( a ?+4 ,n[ ^! significations d 9 tru? frequ5tly co9cide4 ,?us1 = example1 t :i* is intr9sically impossible1 is also impossible 9 all relations1 t is1 absolutely impossible4 ,b 9 mo/ cases !y diff] f ea* o!r toto caelo1 & ,i c by no means conclude t1 because a ?+ is 9 itself possible1 x is also possible 9 all relations1 & !re=e absolutely4 ,nay1 m1 ,i %all 9 ! sequel %[ t absolute necessity does n by any means dep5d on int]nal necessity1 & t1 !re=e1 x mu/ n be consid]$ z synonym\s ) x4 ,( an opposite :i* is intr9sically impossible1 we may affirm t x is 9 all respects impossible1 & t1 consequ5tly1 ! ?+ itself1 ( :i* ?is is ! opposite1 is absolutely necess>y2 b ,i _c reason conv]sely & say1 ! opposite ( t :i* is absolutely necess>y is intr9sically impossible1 t is1 t ! absolute necessity ( ?+s is an int]nal necessity4 ,= ?is int]nal necessity is 9 c]ta9 cases a m]e empty ^w ) :i* ! lea/ conception _c be connect$1 :ile ! conception ( ! necessity ( a ?+ 9 all relations possesses v peculi> det]m9ations4 ,n[ z ! loss ( a conception ( great utility 9 speculative sci5ce _c be a matt] ( indiff]5ce to ! philosoph]1 ,i tru/ t ! prop] det]m9ation & c>eful pres]vation ( ! expression on :i* ! conception dep5ds w likewise be n indiff]5t to him4 ,9 ?is enl>g$ signification1 !n1 %all ,i employ ! ^w absolute1 9 opposition to t :i* is valid only 9 "s p>ticul> respect2 = ! latt] is re/rict$ by conditions1 ! =m] is valid )\t any re/riction :atev]4 ,n[ ! transc5d5tal conception ( reason has = its object no?+ else ?an absolute totality 9 ! syn!sis ( conditions & does n re/ satisfi$ till x has atta9$ to ! absolutely1 t is1 9 all respects & relations1 uncondition$4 ,= pure reason leaves to ! und]/&+ ev]y?+ t imm$iately relates to ! object ( intuition or r to _! syn!sis 9 imag9ation4 ,! =m] re/ricts itself to ! absolute totality 9 ! employm5t ( ! conceptions ( ! und]/&+ & aims at c>ry+ out ! syn!tical unity :i* is cogitat$ 9 ! category1 ev5 to ! uncondition$4 ,?is unity may h5ce be call$ ! rational unity ( ph5om5a1 z ! o!r1 :i* ! category expresses1 may be t]m$ ! unity ( ! und]/&+4 ,reason1 !re=e1 has an imm$iate relation to ! use ( ! und]/&+1 n inde$ 9 s f> z ! latt] conta9s ! gr\nd ( possible exp]i5ce 7= ! conception ( ! absolute totality ( conditions is n a conception t c be employ$ 9 exp]i5ce1 because no exp]i5ce is uncondition$71 b solely = ! purpose ( direct+ x to a c]ta9 unity1 ( :i* ! und]/&+ has no conception1 & ! aim ( :i* is to collect into an absolute :ole all acts ( ! und]/&+4 ,h5ce ! objective employm5t ( ! pure conceptions ( reason is always transc5d5t1 :ile t ( ! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+ mu/1 accord+ to _! nature1 be always imman5t1 inasmu* z !y are limit$ to possible exp]i5ce4 ,i und]/& by idea a necess>y conception ( reason1 to :i* no correspond+ object c be discov]$ 9 ! _w ( s5se4 ,accord+ly1 ! pure conceptions ( reason at pres5t "u consid]ation are transc5d5tal ideas4 ,!y are conceptions ( pure reason1 = !y reg>d all empirical cognition z det]m9$ by means ( an absolute totality ( conditions4 ,!y are n m]e fictions1 b natural & necess>y products ( reason1 & h h5ce a necess>y relation to ! :ole sph]e ( ! ex]cise ( ! und]/&+4 ,&1 f9ally1 !y are transc5d5t1 & ov]/ep ! limits ( all exp]i5ces1 9 :i*1 consequ5tly1 no object c ev] be pres5t$ t w\ld be p]fectly adequate to a transc5d5tal idea4 ,:5 we use ! ^w idea1 we say1 z reg>ds its object 7an object ( ! pure und]/&+71 a great deal1 b z reg>ds its subject 7t is1 9 respect ( its reality "u conditions ( exp]i5ce71 exce$+ly little1 because ! idea1 z ! conception ( a maximum1 c nev] be completely & adequately pres5t$ 9 concreto4 ,n[1 z 9 ! m]ely speculative employm5t ( reason ! latt] is prop]ly ! sole aim1 & z 9 ?is case ! approximation to a conception1 :i* is nev] atta9$ 9 practice1 is ! same ?+ z if ! conception 7 non-exi/5t--x is commonly said ( ! conception ( ?is k9d1 8x is only an idea40 ,s we might v well say1 8! absolute totality ( all ph5om5a is only an idea10 =1 z we nev] c pres5t an adequate repres5tation ( x1 x rema9s = u a problem incapable ( solution4 ,on ! o!r h&1 z 9 ! practical use ( ! und]/&+ we h only to d ) action & practice accord+ to rules1 an idea ( pure reason c always be giv5 really 9 concreto1 al?\gh only p>tially1 nay1 x is ! indisp5sable condition ( all practical employm5t ( reason4 ,! practice or execution ( ! idea is always limit$ & defective1 b nev]!less )9 indet]m9able b\nd>ies1 consequ5tly always "u ! influ5ce ( ! conception ( an absolute p]fection4 ,& ?us ! practical idea is always 9 ! highe/ degree fruitful1 & 9 relation to real actions indisp5sably necess>y4 ,9 ! idea1 pure reason possesses ev5 causality & ! p[] ( produc+ t :i* its conception conta9s4 ,h5ce we _c say ( wisdom1 9 a disp>ag+ way1 8x is only an idea40 ,=1 = ! v reason t x is ! idea ( ! necess>y unity ( all possible aims1 x mu/ be = all practical ex]tions & endeav\rs ! primitive condition & rule--a rule :i*1 if n con/itutive1 is at lea/ limitative4 ,n[1 al?\gh we mu/ say ( ! transc5d5tal conceptions ( reason1 8!y are only ideas10 we mu/ n1 on ?is acc\nt1 look ^u !m z sup]flu\s & nugatory4 ,=1 al?\gh no object c be det]m9$ by !m1 !y c be ( great utility1 unobs]v$ & at ! basis ( ! edifice ( ! und]/&+1 z ! canon = its ext5d$ & self-consi/5t ex]cise--a canon :i*1 inde$1 does n enable x to cognize m 9 an object ?an x w\ld cognize by ! help ( its own conceptions1 b :i* guides x m securely 9 its cognition4 ,n to m5tion t !y p]haps r5d] possible a transition f our conceptions ( nature & ! non-ego to ! practical conceptions1 & ?us produce = ev5 e?ical ideas keep+1 s to speak1 & connection ) ! speculative cognitions ( reason4 ,! explication ( all ?is mu/ be look$ = 9 ! sequel4 ,b sett+ aside1 9 con=mity ) our orig9al purpose1 ! consid]ation ( ! practical ideas1 we proce$ to contemplate reason 9 its speculative use alone1 nay1 9 a /ill m re/rict$ sph]e1 to wit1 9 ! transc5d5tal use2 & "h mu/ /rike into ! same pa? :i* we foll[$ 9 our d$uction ( ! categories4 ,t is to say1 we %all consid] ! logical =m ( ! cognition ( reason1 t we may see :e!r reason may n be !reby a s\rce ( conceptions :i* enables u to reg>d objects 9 !mselves z det]m9$ syn!tically priori1 9 relation to "o or o!r ( ! functions ( reason4 ,reason1 consid]$ z ! faculty ( a c]ta9 logical =m ( cognition1 is ! faculty ( conclusion1 t is1 ( m$iate judgem5t--by means ( ! subsumption ( ! condition ( a possible judgem5t "u ! condition ( a giv5 judgem5t4 ,! giv5 judgem5t is ! g5]al rule 7major74 ,! subsumption ( ! condition ( ano!r possible judgem5t "u ! condition ( ! rule is ! m9or4 ,! actual judgem5t1 :i* en\nces ! ass]tion ( ! rule 9 ! subsum$ case1 is ! conclusion 7conclusio74 ,! rule pr$icates some?+ g5]ally "u a c]ta9 condition4 ,! condition ( ! rule is satisfi$ 9 "s p>ticul> case4 ,x foll[s t :at 0 valid 9 g5]al "u t condition mu/ also be consid]$ z valid 9 ! p>ticul> case :i* satisfies ?is condition4 ,x is v pla9 t reason atta9s to a cognition1 by means ( acts ( ! und]/&+ :i* con/itute a s]ies ( conditions4 ,:5 ,i arrive at ! proposition1 8,all bodies are *angeable10 by beg9n+ ) ! m remote cognition 79 :i* ! conception ( body does n appe>1 b :i* nev]!less conta9s ! condition ( t conception71 8,all comp\nd is *angeable10 by proce$+ f ?is to a less remote cognition1 :i* /&s "u ! condition ( ! =m]1 8,bodies are comp\nd10 & h5ce to a ?ird1 :i* at l5g? connects = me ! remote cognition 7*angeable7 ) ! "o be=e me1 8,consequ5tly1 bodies are *angeable0--,i h arriv$ at a cognition 7conclusion7 ?r\gh a s]ies ( conditions 7premisses74 ,n[ e s]ies1 ^: expon5t 7( ! categorical or hypo!tical judgem5t7 is giv51 c be cont9u$2 consequ5tly ! same proc$ure ( reason conducts u to ! ratioc9atio polysyllogi/ica1 :i* is a s]ies ( syllogisms1 t c be cont9u$ ei!r on ! side ( ! conditions 7p] prosyllogismos7 or ( ! condition$ 7p] episyllogismos7 to an indef9ite ext5t4 ,b we v soon p]ceive t ! *a9 or s]ies ( prosyllogisms1 t is1 ( d$uc$ cognitions on ! side ( ! gr\nds or conditions ( a giv5 cognition1 9 o!r words1 ! asc5d+ s]ies ( syllogisms mu/ h a v diff]5t relation to ! faculty ( reason f t ( ! desc5d+ s]ies1 t is1 ! progressive proc$ure ( reason on ! side ( ! condition$ by means ( episyllogisms4 ,=1 z 9 ! =m] case ! cognition 7conclusio7 is giv5 only z condition$1 reason c atta9 to ?is cognition only "u ! presupposition t all ! memb]s ( ! s]ies on ! side ( ! conditions are giv5 7totality 9 ! s]ies ( premisses71 because only "u ?is supposition is ! judgem5t we may be consid]+ possible priori2 :ile on ! side ( ! condition$ or ! inf]5ces1 only an incomplete & becom+1 & n a presuppos$ or giv5 s]ies1 consequ5tly only a pot5tial progression1 is cogitat$4 ,h5ce1 :5 a cognition is contemplat$ z condition$1 reason is compell$ to consid] ! s]ies ( conditions 9 an asc5d+ l9e z complet$ & giv5 9 _! totality4 ,b if ! v same condition is consid]$ at ! same "t z ! condition ( o!r cognitions1 :i* toge!r con/itute a s]ies ( inf]5ces or consequ5ces 9 a desc5d+ l9e1 reason may pres]ve a p]fect indiff]5ce1 z to h[ f> ?is progression may ext5d a p>te po/]iori1 & :e!r ! totality ( ?is s]ies is possible1 because x /&s 9 no ne$ ( su* a s]ies = ! purpose ( arriv+ at ! conclusion be=e x1 inasmu* z ?is conclusion is suffici5tly gu>ante$ & det]m9$ on gr\nds a p>te priori4 ,x may be ! case1 t ^u ! side ( ! conditions ! s]ies ( premisses has a fir/ or highe/ condition1 or x may n possess ?is1 & s be a p>te priori unlimit$2 b x mu/1 nev]!less1 conta9 totality ( conditions1 ev5 admitt+ t we nev] c\ld succe$ 9 completely appreh5d+ x2 & ! :ole s]ies mu/ be unconditionally true1 if ! condition$1 :i* is consid]$ z an inf]5ce result+ f x1 is to be held z true4 ,?is is a requirem5t ( reason1 :i* ann\nces its cognition z det]m9$ priori & z necess>y1 ei!r 9 itself--& 9 ?is case x ne$s no gr\nds to re/ ^u--or1 if x is d$uc$1 z a memb] ( a s]ies ( gr\nds1 :i* is itself unconditionally true4 ,section ,,iii4 ,sy/em ( ,transc5d5tal ,ideas ,we are n at pres5t engag$ ) a logical dialectic1 :i* makes complete ab/raction ( ! cont5t ( cognition & aims only at unveil+ ! illusory appe>ance 9 ! =m ( syllogisms4 ,our subject is transc5d5tal dialectic1 :i* mu/ conta91 completely priori1 ! orig9 ( c]ta9 cognitions drawn f pure reason1 & ! orig9 ( c]ta9 d$uc$ conceptions1 ! object ( :i* _c be giv5 empirically & :i* !re=e lie beyond ! sph]e ( ! faculty ( und]/&+4 ,we h obs]v$1 f ! natural relation :i* ! transc5d5tal use ( our cognition1 9 syllogisms z well z 9 judgem5ts1 mu/ h to ! logical1 t !re are ?ree k9ds ( dialectical argum5ts1 correspond+ to ! ?ree modes ( conclusion1 by :i* reason atta9s to cognitions on pr9ciples2 & t 9 all x is ! bus9ess ( reason to asc5d f ! condition$ syn!sis1 beyond :i* ! und]/&+ nev] proce$s1 to ! uncondition$ :i* ! und]/&+ nev] c rea*4 ,n[ ! mo/ g5]al relations :i* c exi/ 9 our repres5tations are3 #a/1 ! relation to ! subject2 #bnd1 ! relation to objects1 ei!r z ph5om5a1 or z objects ( ?\ght 9 g5]al4 ,if we connect ?is subdivision ) ! ma9 division1 all ! relations ( our repres5tations1 ( :i* we c =m ei!r a conception or an idea1 are ?reefold3 #a4 ,! relation to ! subject2 #b4 ,! relation to ! manifold ( ! object z a ph5om5on2 #c4 ,! relation to all ?+s 9 g5]al4 ,n[ all pure conceptions h to d 9 g5]al ) ! syn!tical unity ( repres5tations2 conceptions ( pure reason 7transc5d5tal ideas71 on ! o!r h&1 ) ! unconditional syn!tical unity ( all conditions4 ,x foll[s t all transc5d5tal ideas arrange !mselves 9 ?ree classes1 ! fir/ ( :i* conta9s ! absolute 7uncondition$7 unity ( ! ?9k+ subject1 ! second ! absolute unity ( ! s]ies ( ! conditions ( a ph5om5on1 ! ?ird ! absolute unity ( ! condition ( all objects ( ?\ght 9 g5]al4 ,! ?9k+ subject is ! object-matt] ( ,psy*ology2 ! sum total ( all ph5om5a 7! _w7 is ! object-matt] ( ,cosmology2 & ! ?+ :i* conta9s ! highe/ condition ( ! possibility ( all t is cogitable 7! be+ ( all be+s7 is ! object-matt] ( all ,!ology4 ,?us pure reason pres5ts u ) ! idea ( a transc5d5tal doctr9e ( ! s\l 7psy*ologia rationalis71 ( a transc5d5tal sci5ce ( ! _w 7cosmologia rationalis71 & f9ally ( a transc5d5tal doctr9e ( ,god 7!ologia transc5d5talis74 ,und]/&+ _c orig9ate ev5 ! outl9e ( any ( ^! sci5ces1 ev5 :5 connect$ ) ! highe/ logical use ( reason1 t is1 all cogitable syllogisms--= ! purpose ( proce$+ f "o object 7ph5om5on7 to all o!rs1 ev5 to ! utmo/ limits ( ! empirical syn!sis4 ,!y are1 on ! contr>y1 pure & g5u9e products1 or problems1 ( pure reason4 ,:at modi ( ! pure conceptions ( reason ^! transc5d5tal ideas are w be fully expos$ 9 ! foll[+ *apt]4 ,!y foll[ ! guid+ ?read ( ! categories4 ,= pure reason nev] relates imm$iately to objects1 b to ! conceptions ( ^! conta9$ 9 ! und]/&+4 ,9 l mann]1 x w be made manife/ 9 ! detail$ explanation ( ^! ideas--h[ reason1 m]ely ?r\gh ! syn!tical use ( ! same function :i* x employs 9 a categorical syllogism1 necess>ily atta9s to ! conception ( ! absolute unity ( ! ?9k+ subject--h[ ! logical proc$ure 9 hypo!tical ideas necess>ily produces ! idea ( ! absolutely uncondition$ 9 a s]ies ( giv5 conditions1 & f9ally--h[ ! m]e =m ( ! disjunctive syllogism involves ! highe/ conception ( a be+ ( all be+s3 a ?\ght :i* at fir/ sight seems 9 ! highe/ degree p>adoxical4 ,an objective d$uction1 su* z we 7 able to pres5t 9 ! case ( ! categories1 is impossible z reg>ds ^! transc5d5tal ideas4 ,= !y h1 9 tru?1 no relation to any object1 9 exp]i5ce1 = ! v reason t !y are only ideas4 ,b a subjective d$uction ( !m f ! nature ( our reason is possible1 & has be5 giv5 9 ! pres5t *apt]4 ,x is easy to p]ceive t ! sole aim ( pure reason is ! absolute totality ( ! syn!sis on ! side ( ! conditions1 & t x does n conc]n itself ) ! absolute complet5ess on ! ,"p ( ! condition$4 ,= ( ! =m] alone does %e /& 9 ne$1 9 ord] to preposit ! :ole s]ies ( conditions1 & ?us pres5t !m to ! und]/&+ priori4 ,b if we once h a completely 7& unconditionally7 giv5 condition1 !re is no fur!r necessity1 9 proce$+ ) ! s]ies1 = a conception ( reason2 = ! und]/&+ takes ( itself e /ep d[nw>d1 f ! condition to ! condition$4 ,?us ! transc5d5tal ideas are available only = asc5d+ 9 ! s]ies ( conditions1 till we rea* ! uncondition$1 t is1 pr9ciples4 ,z reg>ds desc5d+ to ! condition$1 on ! o!r h&1 we f9d t !re is a widely ext5sive logical use :i* reason makes ( ! laws ( ! und]/&+1 b t a transc5d5tal use !re( is impossible2 & t :5 we =m an idea ( ! absolute totality ( su* a syn!sis1 = example1 ( ! :ole s]ies ( all future *anges 9 ! _w1 ?is idea is a m]e ens rationis1 an arbitr>y fiction ( ?\ght1 & n a necess>y presupposition ( reason4 ,= ! possibility ( ! condition$ presupposes ! totality ( its conditions1 b n ( its consequ5ces4 ,consequ5tly1 ?is conception is n a transc5d5tal idea--& x is ) ^! alone t we are at pres5t occupi$4 ,f9ally1 x is obvi\s t !re exi/s among ! transc5d5tal ideas a c]ta9 connection & unity1 & t pure reason1 by means ( !m1 collects all its cognitions into "o sy/em4 ,f ! cognition ( self to ! cognition ( ! _w1 & ?r\gh ^! to ! supreme be+1 ! progression is s natural1 t x seems to resemble ! logical m>* ( reason f ! premisses to ! conclusion4#db ,n[ :e!r !re lies unobs]v$ at ! f\ndation ( ^! ideas an analogy ( ! same k9d z exi/s betwe5 ! logical & transc5d5tal proc$ure ( reason1 is ano!r ( ^? que/ions1 ! answ] to :i* we mu/ n expect till we arrive at a m advanc$ /age 9 our inquiries4 ,9 ?is cursory & prelim9>y view1 we h1 mean:ile1 rea*$ our aim4 ,= we h dispell$ ! ambiguity :i* atta*$ to ! transc5d5tal conceptions ( reason1 f _! be+ commonly mix$ up ) o!r conceptions 9 ! sy/ems ( philosoph]s1 & n prop]ly di/+ui%$ f ! conceptions ( ! und]/&+2 we h expos$ _! orig9 &1 !reby1 at ! same "t _! det]m9ate numb]1 & pres5t$ !m 9 a sy/ematic connection1 & h ?us m>k$ out & enclos$ a def9ite sph]e = pure reason4 #db ,! sci5ce ( ,metaphysics has = ! prop] object ( its inquiries only ?ree gr& ideas3 ,,god1 ,,fre$om1 & ,,immortality1 & x aims at %[+1 t ! second conception1 conjo9$ ) ! fir/1 mu/ lead to ! ?ird1 z a necess>y conclusion4 ,all ! o!r subjects ) :i* x occupies itself1 are m]ely means = ! atta9m5t & realization ( ^! ideas4 ,x does n require ^! ideas = ! con/ruction ( a sci5ce ( nature1 b1 on ! contr>y1 = ! purpose ( pass+ beyond ! sph]e ( nature4 ,a complete insight into & compreh5sion ( !m w\ld r5d] ,!ology1 ,e?ics1 &1 ?r\gh ! conjunction ( bo?1 ,religion1 solely dep5d5t on ! speculative faculty ( reason4 ,9 a sy/ematic repres5tation ( ^! ideas ! above-m5tion$ arrangem5t--! syn!tical "o--w\ld be ! mo/ suitable2 b 9 ! inve/igation :i* mu/ necess>ily prec$e x1 ! analytical1 :i* rev]ses ?is arrangem5t1 w\ld be bett] adapt$ to our purpose1 z 9 x we %\ld proce$ f t :i* exp]i5ce imm$iately pres5ts to u--psy*ology1 to cosmology1 & !nce to !ology4 ,,transc5d5tal ,,dialectic--,,book ,,ii--,,( ,,! ,,dialectical ,,proc$ure ,,( ,,pure ,,reason ,x may be said t ! object ( a m]ely transc5d5tal idea is some?+ ( :i* we h no conception1 al?\gh ! idea may be a necess>y product ( reason accord+ to its orig9al laws4 ,=1 9 fact1 a conception ( an object t is adequate to ! idea giv5 by reason1 is impossible4 ,= su* an object mu/ be capable ( be+ pres5t$ & intuit$ 9 a ,possible exp]i5ce4 ,b we %\ld express our mean+ bett]1 & ) less risk ( be+ misund]/ood1 if we said t we c h no k ( an object1 :i* p]fectly corresponds to an idea1 al?\gh we may possess a problematical conception !re(4 ,n[ ! transc5d5tal 7subjective7 reality at lea/ ( ! pure conceptions ( reason re/s ^u ! fact t we are l$ to su* ideas by a necess>y proc$ure ( reason4 ,!re mu/ !re=e be syllogisms :i* conta9 no empirical premisses1 & by means ( :i* we conclude f some?+ t we d "k1 to some?+ ( :i* we d n ev5 possess a conception1 to :i* we1 nev]!less1 by an unavoidable illusion1 ascribe objective reality4 ,su* argum5ts are1 z reg>ds _! result1 r to be t]m$ sophisms ?an syllogisms1 al?\gh inde$1 z reg>ds _! orig91 !y are v well entitl$ to ! latt] "n1 inasmu* z !y are n fictions or accid5tal products ( reason1 b are necessitat$ by its v nature4 ,!y are sophisms1 n ( m51 b ( pure reason h]self1 f :i* ! ,wise/ _c free himself4 ,aft] long lab\r he may be able to gu>d aga9/ ! error1 b he c nev] be ?or\ghly rid ( ! illusion :i* cont9ually mocks & misleads him4 ,( ^! dialectical argum5ts !re are ?ree k9ds1 correspond+ to ! numb] ( ! ideas :i* _! conclusions pres5t4 ,9 ! argum5t or syllogism ( ! fir/ class1 ,i conclude1 f ! transc5d5tal conception ( ! subject :i* conta9s no manifold1 ! absolute unity ( ! subject itself1 ( :i* ,i _c 9 ?is mann] atta9 to a conception4 ,?is dialectical argum5t ,i %all call ! transc5d5tal p>alogism4 ,! second class ( sophi/ical argum5ts is occupi$ ) ! transc5d5tal conception ( ! absolute totality ( ! s]ies ( conditions = a giv5 ph5om5on1 & ,i conclude1 f ! fact t ,i h always a self-contradictory conception ( ! uncondition$ syn!tical unity ( ! s]ies ^u "o side1 ! tru? ( ! opposite unity1 ( :i* ,i h nev]!less no conception4 ,! condition ( reason 9 ^! dialectical argum5ts1 ,i %all t]m ! ant9omy ( pure reason4 ,f9ally1 accord+ to ! ?ird k9d ( sophi/ical argum5t1 ,i conclude1 f ! totality ( ! conditions ( ?9k+ objects 9 g5]al1 9 s f> z !y c be giv51 ! absolute syn!tical unity ( all conditions ( ! possibility ( ?+s 9 g5]al2 t is1 f ?+s :i* ,i d n "k 9 _! m]e transc5d5tal conception1 ,i conclude a be+ ( all be+s :i* ,i "k /ill less by means ( a transc5d5tal conception1 & ( ^: uncondition$ necessity ,i c =m no conception :atev]4 ,?is dialectical argum5t ,i %all call ! ideal ( pure reason4 ,*apt] ,i4 ,( ! ,p>alogisms ( ,pure ,reason ,! logical p>alogism consi/s 9 ! falsity ( an argum5t 9 respect ( its =m1 be ! cont5t :at x may4 ,b a transc5d5tal p>alogism has a transc5d5tal f\ndation1 & concludes falsely1 :ile ! =m is correct & unexceptionable4 ,9 ?is mann] ! p>alogism has its f\ndation 9 ! nature ( human reason1 & is ! p>5t ( an unavoidable1 ?\gh n insoluble1 m5tal illusion4 ,we n[ come to a conception :i* 0 n ins]t$ 9 ! g5]al li/ ( transc5d5tal conceptions1 & yet mu/ be reckon$ ) !m1 b at ! same "t )\t 9 ! lea/ alt]+1 or indicat+ a defici5cy 9 t table4 ,?is is ! conception1 or1 if ! t]m is pref]r$1 ! judgem5t1 8,i ?9k40 ,b x is readily p]ceiv$ t ?is ?\ght is z x 7 ! vehicle ( all conceptions 9 g5]al1 & consequ5tly ( transc5d5tal conceptions also1 & t x is !re=e reg>d$ z a transc5d5tal conception1 al?\gh x c h no peculi> claim to be s rank$1 inasmu* z its only use is to indicate t all ?\ght is accompani$ by consci\sness4 ,at ! same "t1 pure z ?is conception is f empirical cont5t 7impressions ( ! s5ses71 x enables u to di/+ui% two diff]5t k9ds ( objects4 8,i10 z ?9k+1 am an object ( ! int]nal s5se1 & am call$ s\l4 ,t :i* is an object ( ! ext]nal s5ses is call$ body4 ,?us ! expression1 8,i10 z a ?9k+ be+1 designates ! object-matt] ( psy*ology1 :i* may be call$ 8! rational doctr9e ( ! s\l10 inasmu* z 9 ?is sci5ce ,i desire to "k no?+ ( ! s\l b :at1 indep5d5tly ( all exp]i5ce 7:i* det]m9es me 9 concreto71 may be conclud$ f ?is conception 8,i10 9 s f> z x appe>s 9 all ?\ght4 ,n[1 ! rational doctr9e ( ! s\l is really an und]tak+ ( ?is k9d4 ,= if ! smalle/ empirical elem5t ( ?\ght1 if any p>ticul> p]ception ( my int]nal /ate1 7 to be introduc$ among ! gr\nds ( cognition ( ?is sci5ce1 x w\ld n be a rational1 b an empirical doctr9e ( ! s\l4 ,we h ?us be=e u a pret5d$ sci5ce1 rais$ ^u ! s+le proposition1 8,i ?9k10 ^: f\ndation or want ( f\ndation we may v prop]ly1 & agreeably ) ! nature ( a transc5d5tal philosophy1 "h exam9e4 ,x ought n to be object$ t 9 ?is proposition1 :i* expresses ! p]ception ( "o's self1 an int]nal exp]i5ce is ass]t$1 & t consequ5tly ! rational doctr9e ( ! s\l :i* is f\nd$ ^u x1 is n pure1 b p>tly f\nd$ ^u an empirical pr9ciple4 ,= ?is int]nal p]ception is no?+ m ?an ! m]e app]ception1 8,i ?9k10 :i* 9 fact r5d]s all transc5d5tal conceptions possible1 9 :i* we say1 8,i ?9k sub/ance1 cause1 etc40 ,= int]nal exp]i5ce 9 g5]al & its possibility1 or p]ception 9 g5]al1 & its relation to o!r p]ceptions1 unless "s p>ticul> di/9ction or det]m9ation !re( is empirically giv51 _c be reg>d$ z empirical cognition1 b z cognition ( ! empirical1 & belongs to ! inve/igation ( ! possibility ( e exp]i5ce1 :i* is c]ta9ly transc5d5tal4 ,! smalle/ object ( exp]i5ce 7= example1 only pleasure or pa971 t %\ld be includ$ 9 ! g5]al repres5tation ( self-consci\sness1 w\ld imm$iately *ange ! rational into an empirical psy*ology4 8,i ?9k0 is !re=e ! only text ( rational psy*ology1 f :i* x mu/ develop its :ole sy/em4 ,x is manife/ t ?is ?\ght1 :5 appli$ to an object 7myself71 c conta9 no?+ b transc5d5tal pr$icates !re(2 because ! lea/ empirical pr$icate w\ld de/roy ! purity ( ! sci5ce & its indep5d5ce ( all exp]i5ce4 ,b we %all h to foll[ "h ! guidance ( ! categories--only1 z 9 ! pres5t case a ?+1 8,i10 z ?9k+ be+1 is at fir/ giv51 we %all--n inde$ *ange ! ord] ( ! categories z x /&s 9 ! table--b beg9 at ! category ( sub/ance1 by :i* at ! a ?+ 9 itself is repres5t$ & proce$s backw>ds ?r\gh ! s]ies4 ,! topic ( ! rational doctr9e ( ! s\l1 f :i* ev]y?+ else x may conta9 mu/ be d$uc$1 is accord+ly z foll[s3 #a #b ,! ,s\l is ,,sub/ance ,z reg>ds its quality x is ,,simple #c ,z reg>ds ! diff]5t times 9 :i* x exi/s1 x is num]ically id5tical1 t is ,,unity1 n ,plurality4 #d ,x is 9 relation to possible objects 9 space#dc #dc ,! read]1 :o may n s easily p]ceive ! psy*ological s5se ( ^! expressions1 tak5 "h 9 _! transc5d5tal ab/raction1 & _c guess :y ! latt] attribute ( ! s\l belongs to ! category ( exi/5ce1 w f9d ! expressions suffici5tly expla9$ & ju/ifi$ 9 ! sequel4 ,i h1 moreov]1 to apologize = ! ,lat9 t]ms :i* h be5 employ$1 in/ead ( _! ,g]man synonyms1 contr>y to ! rules ( correct writ+4 ,b ,i judg$ x bett] to sacrifice elegance to p]spicuity4 ,f ^! elem5ts orig9ate all ! conceptions ( pure psy*ology1 by comb9ation alone1 )\t ! aid ( any o!r pr9ciple4 ,?is sub/ance1 m]ely z an object ( ! int]nal s5se1 gives ! conception ( ,immat]iality2 z simple sub/ance1 t ( ,incorruptibility2 its id5tity1 z intellectual sub/ance1 gives ! conception ( ,p]sonality2 all ^! ?ree toge!r1 ,spirituality4 ,its relation to objects 9 space gives u ! conception ( connection 7comm]cium7 ) bodies4 ,?us x repres5ts ?9k+ sub/ance z ! pr9ciple ( life 9 matt]1 t is1 z a s\l 7anima71 & z ! gr\nd ( ,animality2 & ?is1 limit$ & det]m9$ by ! conception ( spirituality1 gives u t ( ,immortality4 ,n[ to ^! conceptions relate f\r p>alogisms ( a transc5d5tal psy*ology1 :i* is falsely held to be a sci5ce ( pure reason1 t\*+ ! nature ( our ?9k+ be+4 ,we c1 h[ev]1 lay at ! f\ndation ( ?is sci5ce no?+ b ! simple & 9 itself p]fectly cont5tless repres5tation 8i0 :i* _c ev5 be call$ a conception1 b m]ely a consci\sness :i* accompanies all conceptions4 ,by ?is 8,i10 or 8,he10 or 8,x10 :o or :i* ?9ks1 no?+ m is repres5t$ ?an a transc5d5tal subject ( ?\ght x1 :i* is cogniz$ only by means ( ! ?\ghts t are its pr$icates1 & ( :i*1 ap>t f ^!1 we _c =m ! lea/ conception4 ,h5ce 9 a p]petual circle1 inasmu* z we mu/ always employ x1 9 ord] to frame any judgem5t respect+ x4 ,& ?is inconv5i5ce we f9d x impossible to rid ourselves (1 because consci\sness 9 itself is n s mu* a repres5tation di/+ui%+ a p>ticul> object1 z a =m ( repres5tation 9 g5]al1 9 s f> z x may be t]m$ cognition2 = 9 & by cognition alone d ,i ?9k any?+4 ,x mu/1 h[ev]1 appe> extraord9>y at fir/ sight t ! condition "u :i* ,i ?9k1 & :i* is consequ5tly a prop]ty ( my subject1 %\ld be held to be likewise valid = e exi/5ce :i* ?9ks1 & t we c presume to base ^u a seem+ly empirical proposition a judgem5t :i* is apodeictic & univ]sal1 to wit1 t ev]y?+ :i* ?9ks is con/itut$ z ! voice ( my consci\sness decl>es x to be1 t is1 z a self-consci\s be+4 ,! cause ( ?is belief is to be f\nd 9 ! fact t we necess>ily attribute to ?+s priori all ! prop]ties :i* con/itute conditions "u :i* alone we c cogitate !m4 ,n[ ,i _c obta9 ! lea/ repres5tation ( a ?9k+ be+ by means ( ext]nal exp]i5ce1 b solely ?r\gh self-consci\sness4 ,su* objects are consequ5tly no?+ m ?an ! transf]5ce ( ?is consci\sness ( m9e to o!r ?+s :i* c only ?us be repres5t$ z ?9k+ be+s4 ,! proposition1 8,i ?9k10 is1 9 ! pres5t case1 und]/ood 9 a problematical s5se1 n 9 s f> z x conta9s a p]ception ( an exi/5ce 7l ! ,c>tesian 8,cogito1 ergo sum071 b 9 reg>d to its m]e possibility--= ! purpose ( discov]+ :at prop]ties may be inf]r$ f s simple a proposition & pr$icat$ ( ! subject ( x4 ,if at ! f\ndation ( our pure rational cognition ( ?9k+ be+s !re lay m ?an ! m]e ,cogito--if we c\ld likewise call 9 aid obs]vations on ! play ( our ?\ghts1 & ! !nce d]iv$ natural laws ( ! ?9k+ self1 !re w\ld arise an empirical psy*ology :i* w\ld be a k9d ( physiology ( ! int]nal s5se & might possibly be capable ( expla9+ ! ph5om5a ( t s5se4 ,b x c\ld nev] be available = discov]+ ^? prop]ties :i* d n belong to possible exp]i5ce 7su* z ! quality ( simplicity71 nor c\ld x make any apodeictic enunciation on ! nature ( ?9k+ be+s3 x w\ld !re=e n be a rational psy*ology4 ,n[1 z ! proposition 8,i ?9k0 79 ! problematical s5se7 conta9s ! =m ( e judgem5t 9 g5]al & is ! con/ant accompanim5t ( all ! categories1 x is manife/ t conclusions are drawn f x only by a transc5d5tal employm5t ( ! und]/&+4 ,?is use ( ! und]/&+ excludes all empirical elem5ts2 & we _c1 z has be5 %[n above1 h any fav\rable conception be=eh& ( its proc$ure4 ,we %all !re=e foll[ ) a critical eye ?is proposition ?r\gh all ! pr$icam5ts ( pure psy*ology2 b we %all1 = brevity's sake1 all[ ?is exam9ation to proce$ 9 an un9t]rupt$ connection4 ,be=e ent]+ on ?is task1 h[ev]1 ! foll[+ g5]al rem>k may help to quick5 our att5tion to ?is mode ( argum5t4 ,x is n m]ely ?r\gh my ?9k+ t ,i cognize an object1 b only ?r\gh my det]m9+ a giv5 intuition 9 relation to ! unity ( consci\sness 9 :i* all ?9k+ consi/s4 ,x foll[s t ,i cognize myself1 n ?r\gh my be+ consci\s ( myself z ?9k+1 b only :5 ,i am consci\s ( ! intuition ( myself z det]m9$ 9 relation to ! function ( ?\ght4 ,all ! modi ( self-consci\sness 9 ?\ght are h5ce n conceptions ( objects 7conceptions ( ! und]/&+--categories72 !y are m]e logical functions1 :i* d n pres5t to ?\ght an object to be cogniz$1 & _c !re=e pres5t my ,self z an object4 ,n ! consci\sness ( ! det]m9+1 b only t ( ! det]m9able self1 t is1 ( my int]nal intuition 79 s f> z ! manifold conta9$ 9 x c be connect$ con=mably ) ! g5]al condition ( ! unity ( app]ception 9 ?\ght71 is ! object4 #a4 ,9 all judgem5ts ,i am ! det]m9+ subject ( t relation :i* con/itutes a judgem5t4 ,b t ! ,i :i* ?9ks1 mu/ be consid]$ z 9 ?\ght always a subject1 & z a ?+ :i* _c be a pr$icate to ?\ght1 is an apodeictic & id5tical proposition4 ,b ?is proposition does n signify t ,i1 z an object1 am1 = myself1 a self-subsi/5t be+ or sub/ance4 ,?is latt] /atem5t--an ambiti\s "o--requires to be support$ by data :i* are n to be discov]$ 9 ?\ght2 & are p]haps 79 s f> z ,i consid] ! ?9k+ self m]ely z su*7 n to be discov]$ 9 ! ?9k+ self at all4 #b4 ,t ! ,i or ,ego ( app]ception1 & consequ5tly 9 all ?\ght1 is s+ul> or simple1 & _c be resolv$ into a plurality ( subjects1 & !re=e indicates a logically simple subject--?is is self-evid5t f ! v conception ( an ,ego1 & is consequ5tly an analytical proposition4 ,b ?is is n tantam\nt to decl>+ t ! ?9k+ ,ego is a simple sub/ance--= ?is w\ld be a syn!tical proposition4 ,! conception ( sub/ance always relates to intuitions1 :i* ) me _c be o!r ?an s5su\s1 & :i* consequ5tly lie completely out ( ! sph]e ( ! und]/&+ & its ?\ght3 b to ?is sph]e belongs ! affirmation t ! ,ego is simple 9 ?\ght4 ,x w\ld inde$ be surpris+1 if ! conception ( 8sub/ance10 :i* 9 o!r cases requires s mu* lab\r to di/+ui% f ! o!r elem5ts pres5t$ by intuition--s mu* tr\ble1 too1 to discov] :e!r x c be simple 7z 9 ! case ( ! p>ts ( matt]7--%\ld be pres5t$ imm$iately to me1 z if by revelation1 9 ! poore/ m5tal repres5tation ( all4 #c4 ,! proposition ( ! id5tity ( my ,self amid/ all ! manifold repres5tations ( :i* ,i am consci\s1 is likewise a proposition ly+ 9 ! conceptions !mselves1 & is consequ5tly analytical4 ,b ?is id5tity ( ! subject1 ( :i* ,i am consci\s 9 all its repres5tations1 does n relate to or conc]n ! intuition ( ! subject1 by :i* x is giv5 z an object4 ,?is proposition _c !re=e en\nce ! id5tity ( ! p]son1 by :i* is und]/ood ! consci\sness ( ! id5tity ( its own sub/ance z a ?9k+ be+ 9 all *ange & v>iation ( circum/ances4 ,to prove ?is1 we %\ld require n a m]e analysis ( ! proposition1 b syn!tical judgem5ts bas$ ^u a giv5 intuition4 #d4 ,i di/+ui% my own exi/5ce1 z t ( a ?9k+ be+1 f t ( o!r ?+s ext]nal to me--among :i* my body also is reckon$4 ,?is is also an analytical proposition1 = o!r ?+s are exactly ^? :i* ,i ?9k z diff]5t or di/+ui%$ f myself4 ,b :e!r ?is consci\sness ( myself is possible )\t ?+s ext]nal to me2 & :e!r !re=e ,i c exi/ m]ely z a ?9k+ be+ 7)\t be+ man7--_c be kn[n or inf]r$ f ?is proposition4 ,?us we h ga9$ no?+ z reg>ds ! cognition ( myself z object1 by ! analysis ( ! consci\sness ( my ,self 9 ?\ght4 ,! logical exposition ( ?\ght 9 g5]al is mi/ak5 = a metaphysical det]m9ation ( ! object4 ,our ,critique w\ld be an inve/igation utt]ly sup]flu\s1 if !re exi/$ a possibility ( prov+ priori1 t all ?9k+ be+s are 9 !mselves simple sub/ances1 z su*1 !re=e1 possess ! insep>able attribute ( p]sonality1 & are consci\s ( _! exi/5ce ap>t f & unconnect$ ) matt]4 ,= we %\ld ?us h tak5 a /ep beyond ! _w ( s5se1 & h p5etrat$ into ! sph]e ( n\m5a2 & 9 ?is case ! "r c\ld n be d5i$ u ( ext5d+ our k 9 ?is sph]e1 ( e/abli%+ ourselves1 &1 "u a fav\r+ />1 appropriat+ to ourselves possessions 9 x4 ,= ! proposition3 8,e ?9k+ be+1 z su*1 is simple sub/ance10 is an priori syn!tical proposition2 because 9 ! fir/ place x goes beyond ! conception :i* is ! subject ( x1 & adds to ! m]e notion ( a ?9k+ be+ ! mode ( its exi/5ce1 & 9 ! second place annexes a pr$icate 7t ( simplicity7 to ! latt] conception--a pr$icate :i* x c\ld n h discov]$ 9 ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce4 ,x w\ld foll[ t priori syn!tical propositions are possible & legitimate1 n only1 z we h ma9ta9$1 9 relation to objects ( possible exp]i5ce1 & z pr9ciples ( ! possibility ( ?is exp]i5ce itself1 b are applicable to ?+s 9 !mselves--an inf]5ce :i* makes an end ( ! :ole ( ?is ,critique1 & obliges u to fall back on ! old mode ( metaphysical proc$ure4 ,b inde$ ! dang] is n s great1 if we look a little clos] into ! "q4 ,!re lurks 9 ! proc$ure ( rational ,psy*ology a p>alogism1 :i* is repres5t$ 9 ! foll[+ syllogism3 ,t :i* _c be cogitat$ o!rwise ?an z subject1 does n exi/ o!rwise ?an z subject1 & is !re=e sub/ance4 ,a ?9k+ be+1 consid]$ m]ely z su*1 _c be cogitat$ o!rwise ?an z subject4 ,!re=e x exi/s also z su*1 t is1 z sub/ance4 ,9 ! major we speak ( a be+ t c be cogitat$ g5]ally & 9 e relation1 consequ5tly z x may be giv5 9 intuition4 ,b 9 ! m9or we speak ( ! same be+ only 9 s f> z x reg>ds itself z subject1 relatively to ?\ght & ! unity ( consci\sness1 b n 9 relation to intuition1 by :i* x is pres5t$ z an object to ?\ght4 ,?us ! conclusion is "h arriv$ at by a ,sophisma figurae dictionis4#dd #dd ,?\ght is tak5 9 ! two premisses 9 two totally diff]5t s5ses4 ,9 ! major x is consid]$ z relat+ & apply+ to objects 9 g5]al1 consequ5tly to objects ( intuition also4 ,9 ! m9or1 we und]/& x z relat+ m]ely to self-consci\sness4 ,9 ?is s5se1 we d n cogitate an object1 b m]ely ! relation to ! self-consci\sness ( ! subject1 z ! =m ( ?\ght4 ,9 ! =m] premiss we speak ( ?+s :i* _c be cogitat$ o!rwise ?an z subjects4 ,9 ! second1 we d n speak ( ?+s1 b ( ?\ght 7all objects be+ ab/ract$71 9 :i* ! ,ego is always ! subject ( consci\sness4 ,h5ce ! conclusion _c be1 8,i _c exi/ o!rwise ?an z subject02 b only 8,i c1 9 cogitat+ my exi/5ce1 employ my ,ego only z ! subject ( ! judgem5t40 ,b ?is is an id5tical proposition1 & ?r[s no light on ! mode ( my exi/5ce4 ,t ?is fam\s argum5t is a m]e p>alogism1 w be pla9 to any "o :o w consid] ! g5]al rem>k :i* prec$es our exposition ( ! pr9ciples ( ! pure und]/&+1 & ! section on n\m5a4 ,= x 0 !re prov$ t ! conception ( a ?+1 :i* c exi/ p] se--only z a subject & nev] z a pr$icate1 possesses no objective reality2 t is to say1 we c nev] "k :e!r !re exi/s any object to correspond to ! conception2 consequ5tly1 ! conception is no?+ m ?an a conception1 & f x we d]ive no prop] k4 ,if ?is conception is to indicate by ! t]m sub/ance1 an object t c be giv51 if x is to become a cognition1 we mu/ h at ! f\ndation ( ! cognition a p]man5t intuition1 z ! indisp5sable condition ( its objective reality4 ,= ?r\gh intuition alone c an object be giv54 ,b 9 int]nal intuition !re is no?+ p]man5t1 = ! ,ego is b ! consci\sness ( my ?\ght4 ,if !n1 we appeal m]ely to ?\ght1 we _c discov] ! necess>y condition ( ! application ( ! conception ( sub/ance--t is1 ( a subject exi/+ p] se--to ! subject z a ?9k+ be+4 ,& ?us ! conception ( ! simple nature ( sub/ance1 :i* is connect$ ) ! objective reality ( ?is conception1 is %[n to be also invalid1 & to be1 9 fact1 no?+ m ?an ! logical qualitative unity ( self-consci\sness 9 ?\ght2 :il/ we rema9 p]fectly ignorant :e!r ! subject is composite or n4 ,refutation ( ! ,argum5t ( ,m5delssohn = ! ,sub/antiality or ,p]man5ce ( ! ,s\l4 ,?is acute philosoph] easily p]ceiv$ ! insuffici5cy ( ! common argum5t :i* attempts to prove t ! s\l--x be+ grant$ t x is a simple be+--_c p]i% by dissolution or decomposition2 he saw x is n impossible = x to cease to be by ext9ction1 or disappe>ance4 ,he endeav\r$ to prove 9 8 ,pha$o1 t ! s\l _c be annihilat$1 by %[+ t a simple be+ _c cease to exi/4 ,inasmu* z1 he said1 a simple exi/5ce _c dim9i%1 nor gradually lose portions ( its be+1 & ?us be by degrees r$uc$ to no?+ 7= x possesses no p>ts1 & !re=e no multiplicity71 betwe5 ! mom5t 9 :i* x is1 & ! mom5t 9 :i* x is n1 no "t c be discov]$--:i* is impossible4 ,b ?is philosoph] did n consid] t1 grant+ ! s\l to possess ?is simple nature1 :i* conta9s no p>ts ext]nal to ea* o!r & consequ5tly no ext5sive quantity1 we _c refuse to x any less ?an to any o!r be+1 int5sive quantity1 t is1 a degree ( reality 9 reg>d to all its faculties1 nay1 to all t con/itutes its exi/5ce4 ,b ?is degree ( reality c become less & less ?r\gh an inf9ite s]ies ( small] degrees4 ,x foll[s1 !re=e1 t ?is suppos$ sub/ance--?is ?+1 ! p]man5ce ( :i* is n assur$ 9 any o!r way1 may1 if n by decomposition1 by gradual loss 7remissio7 ( its p[]s 7consequ5tly by elanguesc5ce1 if ,i may employ ?is expression71 be *ang$ into no?+4 ,= consci\sness itself has always a degree1 :i* may be less5$4#de ,consequ5tly ! faculty ( be+ consci\s may be dim9i%$2 & s ) all o!r faculties4 ,! p]man5ce ( ! s\l1 !re=e1 z an object ( ! int]nal s5se1 rema9s undemon/rat$1 nay1 ev5 indemon/rable4 ,its p]man5ce 9 life is evid5t1 p] se1 inasmu* z ! ?9k+ be+ 7z man7 is to itself1 at ! same "t1 an object ( ! ext]nal s5ses4 ,b ?is does n au?orize ! rational psy*ologi/ to affirm1 f m]e conceptions1 its p]man5ce beyond life4#df #de ,cle>ness is n1 z logicians ma9ta91 ! consci\sness ( a repres5tation4 ,= a c]ta9 degree ( consci\sness1 :i* may n1 h[ev]1 be suffici5t = recollection1 is to be met ) 9 _m dim repres5tations4 ,= )\t any consci\sness at all1 we %\ld n be able to recognize any diff]5ce 9 ! obscure repres5tations we connect2 z we really c d ) _m conceptions1 su* z ^? ( "r & ju/ice1 & ^? ( ! musician1 :o /rikes at once sev]al notes 9 improvis+ a piece ( music4 ,b a repres5tation is cle>1 9 :i* our consci\sness is suffici5t = ! consci\sness ( ! diff]5ce ( ?is repres5tation f o!rs4 ,if we are only consci\s t !re is a diff]5ce1 b are n consci\s ( ! diff]5ce--t is1 :at ! diff]5ce is--! repres5tation mu/ be t]m$ obscure4 ,!re is1 consequ5tly1 an inf9ite s]ies ( degrees ( consci\sness d[n to its entire disappe>ance4 #df ,!re are "s :o ?9k !y h done en\gh to e/abli% a new possibility 9 ! mode ( ! exi/5ce ( s\ls1 :5 !y h %[n t !re is no contradiction 9 _! hypo!ses on ?is subject4 ,su* are ^? :o affirm ! possibility ( ?\ght--( :i* !y h no o!r k ?an :at !y d]ive f its use 9 connect+ empirical intuitions pres5t$ 9 ?is our human life--aft] ?is life has ceas$4 ,b x is v easy to emb>rass !m by ! introduction ( c\nt]-possibilities1 :i* re/ ^u q z good a f\ndation4 ,su*1 = example1 is ! possibility ( ! division ( a simple sub/ance into sev]al sub/ances2 & conv]sely1 ( ! coalition ( sev]al into "o simple sub/ance4 ,=1 al?\gh divisibility presupposes composition1 x does n necess>ily require a composition ( sub/ances1 b only ( ! degrees 7( ! sev]al faculties7 ( "o & ! same sub/ance4 ,n[ we c cogitate all ! p[]s & faculties ( ! s\l--ev5 t ( consci\sness--z dim9i%$ by "o half1 ! sub/ance /ill rema9+4 ,9 ! same way we c repres5t to ourselves )\t contradiction1 ?is oblit]at$ half z pres]v$1 n 9 ! s\l1 b )\t x2 & we c believe t1 z 9 ?is case e ?+ t is real 9 ! s\l1 & has a degree--consequ5tly its entire exi/5ce--has be5 halv$1 a p>ticul> sub/ance w\ld arise out ( ! s\l4 ,= ! multiplicity1 :i* has be5 divid$1 =m]ly exi/$1 b n z a multiplicity ( sub/ances1 b ( e reality z ! quantum ( exi/5ce 9 x2 & ! unity ( sub/ance 0 m]ely a mode ( exi/5ce1 :i* by ?is division alone has be5 trans=m$ into a plurality ( subsi/5ce4 ,9 ! same mann] sev]al simple sub/ances might coalesce into "o1 )\t any?+ be+ lo/ except ! plurality ( subsi/5ce1 inasmu* z ! "o sub/ance w\ld conta9 ! degree ( reality ( all ! =m] sub/ances4 ,p]haps1 inde$1 ! simple sub/ances1 :i* appe> "u ! =m ( matt]1 might 7n inde$ by a me*anical or *emical influ5ce ^u ea* o!r1 b by an unkn[n influ5ce1 ( :i* ! =m] w\ld be b ! ph5om5al appe>ance71 by means ( su* a dynamical division ( ! p>5t-s\ls1 z int5sive quantities1 produce o!r s\ls1 :ile ! =m] repair$ ! loss ?us su/a9$ ) new matt] ( ! same sort4 ,i am f> f all[+ any value to su* *im]as2 & ! pr9ciples ( our analytic h cle>ly prov$ t no o!r ?an an empirical use ( ! categories--t ( sub/ance1 = example--is possible4 ,b if ! rationali/ is bold en\gh to con/ruct1 on ! m]e au?ority ( ! faculty ( ?\ght--)\t any intuition1 :]eby an object is giv5--a self-subsi/5t be+1 m]ely because ! unity ( app]ception 9 ?\ght _c all[ him to believe x a composite be+1 in/ead ( decl>+1 z he ought to d1 t he is unable to expla9 ! possibility ( a ?9k+ nature2 :at ought to h9d] ! mat]iali/1 ) z complete an indep5d5ce ( exp]i5ce1 to employ ! pr9ciple ( ! rationali/ 9 a directly opposite mann]--/ill pres]v+ ! =mal unity requir$ by 8 oppon5t8 ,if1 n[1 we take ! above propositions--z !y mu/ be accept$ z valid = all ?9k+ be+s 9 ! sy/em ( rational psy*ology--9 syn!tical connection1 & proce$1 f ! category ( relation1 ) ! proposition3 8,all ?9k+ be+s are1 z su*1 sub/ances10 backw>ds ?r\gh ! s]ies1 till ! circle is complet$2 we come at la/ to _! exi/5ce1 ( :i*1 9 ?is sy/em ( rational psy*ology1 sub/ances are held to be consci\s1 indep5d5tly ( ext]nal ?+s2 nay1 x is ass]t$ t1 9 relation to ! p]man5ce :i* is a necess>y *>act]i/ic ( sub/ance1 !y c ( !mselves det]m9e ext]nal ?+s4 ,x foll[s t idealism--at lea/ problematical idealism1 is p]fectly unavoidable 9 ?is rationali/ic sy/em4 ,&1 if ! exi/5ce ( outw>d ?+s is n held to be requisite to ! det]m9ation ( ! exi/5ce ( a sub/ance 9 "t1 ! exi/5ce ( ^! outw>d ?+s at all1 is a gratuit\s assumption :i* rema9s )\t ! possibility ( a pro(4 ,b if we proce$ analytically--! 8,i ?9k0 z a proposition conta9+ 9 itself an exi/5ce z giv51 consequ5tly modality be+ ! pr9ciple--& dissect ?is proposition1 9 ord] to asc]ta9 its cont5t1 & discov] :e!r & h[ ?is ,ego det]m9es its exi/5ce 9 "t & space )\t ! aid ( any?+ ext]nal2 ! propositions ( rationali/ic psy*ology w\ld n beg9 ) ! conception ( a ?9k+ be+1 b ) a reality1 & ! prop]ties ( a ?9k+ be+ 9 g5]al w\ld be d$uc$ f ! mode 9 :i* ?is reality is cogitat$1 aft] ev]y?+ empirical _h be5 ab/ract$2 z is %[n 9 ! foll[+ table3 #a ,i ?9k1 #b #c z ,subject1 z simple ,subject1 #d z id5tical ,subject1 9 e /ate ( my ?\ght4 ,n[1 inasmu* z x is n det]m9$ 9 ?is second proposition1 :e!r ,i c exi/ & be cogitat$ only z subject1 & n also z a pr$icate ( ano!r be+1 ! conception ( a subject is "h tak5 9 a m]ely logical s5se2 & x rema9s undet]m9$1 :e!r sub/ance is to be cogitat$ "u ! conception or n4 ,b 9 ! ?ird proposition1 ! absolute unity ( app]ception--! simple ,ego 9 ! repres5tation to :i* all connection & sep>ation1 :i* con/itute ?\ght1 relate1 is ( itself important2 ev5 al?\gh x pres5ts u ) no in=mation ab\t ! con/itution or subsi/5ce ( ! subject4 ,app]ception is some?+ real1 & ! simplicity ( its nature is giv5 9 ! v fact ( its possibility4 ,n[ 9 space !re is no?+ real t is at ! same "t simple2 = po9ts1 :i* are ! only simple ?+s 9 space1 are m]ely limits1 b n con/itu5t p>ts ( space4 ,f ?is foll[s ! impossibility ( a def9ition on ! basis ( mat]ialism ( ! con/itution ( my ,ego z a m]ely ?9k+ subject4 ,b1 because my exi/5ce is consid]$ 9 ! fir/ proposition z giv51 = x does n mean1 8,e ?9k+ be+ exi/s0 7= ?is w\ld be pr$icat+ ( !m absolute necessity71 b only1 8,i exi/ ?9k+02 ! proposition is q empirical1 & conta9s ! det]m9ability ( my exi/5ce m]ely 9 relation to my repres5tations 9 "t4 ,b z ,i require = ?is purpose some?+ t is p]man5t1 su* z is n giv5 9 int]nal intuition2 ! mode ( my exi/5ce1 :e!r z sub/ance or z accid5t1 _c be det]m9$ by means ( ?is simple self-consci\sness4 ,?us1 if mat]ialism is inadequate to expla9 ! mode 9 :i* ,i exi/1 spiritualism is likewise z insuffici5t2 & ! conclusion is t we are utt]ly unable to atta9 to any k ( ! con/itution ( ! s\l1 9 s f> z relates to ! possibility ( its exi/5ce ap>t f ext]nal objects4 ,&1 inde$1 h[ %\ld x be possible1 m]ely by ! aid ( ! unity ( consci\sness--:i* we cognize only = ! reason t x is indisp5sable to ! possibility ( exp]i5ce--to pass ! b\nds ( exp]i5ce 7our exi/5ce 9 ?is life72 & to ext5d our cognition to ! nature ( all ?9k+ be+s by means ( ! empirical--b 9 relation to e sort ( intuition1 p]fectly undet]m9$--proposition1 8,i ?9k08 ,!re does n !n exi/ any rational psy*ology z a doctr9e furni%+ any addition to our k ( ourselves4 ,x is no?+ m ?an a discipl9e1 :i* sets impassable limits to speculative reason 9 ?is region ( ?\ght1 to prev5t x1 on ! "o h&1 f ?r[+ itself into ! arms ( a s\lless mat]ialism1 &1 on ! o!r1 f los+ itself 9 ! mazes ( a baseless spiritualism4 ,x tea*es u to consid] ?is refusal ( our reason to give any satisfactory answ] to que/ions :i* rea* beyond ! limits ( ?is our human life1 z a h9t to ab&on fruitless speculation2 & to direct1 to a practical use1 our k ( ourselves--:i*1 al?\gh applicable only to objects ( exp]i5ce1 receives its pr9ciples f a high] s\rce1 & regulates its proc$ure z if our de/9y rea*$ f> beyond ! b\nd>ies ( exp]i5ce & life4 ,f all ?is x is evid5t t rational psy*ology has its orig9 9 a m]e misund]/&+4 ,! unity ( consci\sness1 :i* lies at ! basis ( ! categories1 is consid]$ to be an intuition ( ! subject z an object2 & ! category ( sub/ance is appli$ to ! intuition4 ,b ?is unity is no?+ m ?an ! unity 9 ?\ght1 by :i* no object is giv52 to :i* !re=e ! category ( sub/ance--:i* always presupposes a giv5 intuition--_c be appli$4 ,consequ5tly1 ! subject _c be cogniz$4 ,! subject ( ! categories _c1 !re=e1 = ! v reason t x cogitates ^!1 frame any conception ( itself z an object ( ! categories2 =1 to cogitate ^!1 x mu/ lay at ! f\ndation its own pure self-consci\sness--! v ?+ t x wi%es to expla9 & describe4 ,9 l mann]1 ! subject1 9 :i* ! repres5tation ( "t has its basis1 _c det]m9e1 = ?is v reason1 its own exi/5ce 9 "t4 ,n[1 if ! latt] is impossible1 ! =m]1 z an attempt to det]m9e itself by means ( ! categories z a ?9k+ be+ 9 g5]al1 is no less s4#dg #dg ,! 8,i ?9k0 is1 z has be5 already /at$1 an empirical proposition1 & conta9s ! proposition1 8,i exi/40 ,b ,i _c say1 8,ev]y?+1 :i* ?9ks1 exi/s02 = 9 ?is case ! prop]ty ( ?\ght w\ld con/itute all be+s possess+ x1 necess>y be+s4 ,h5ce my exi/5ce _c be consid]$ z an inf]5ce f ! proposition1 8,i ?9k10 z ,desc>tes ma9ta9$--because 9 ?is case ! major premiss1 8,ev]y?+1 :i* ?9ks1 exi/s10 mu/ prec$e--b ! two propositions are id5tical4 ,! proposition1 8,i ?9k10 expresses an undet]m9$ empirical intuition1 t p]ception 7prov+ consequ5tly t s5sation1 :i* mu/ belong to s5sibility1 lies at ! f\ndation ( ?is proposition72 b x prec$es exp]i5ce1 ^: prov9ce x is to det]m9e an object ( p]ception by means ( ! categories 9 relation to "t2 & exi/5ce 9 ?is proposition is n a category1 z x does n apply to an undet]m9$ giv5 object1 b only to "o ( :i* we h a conception1 & ab\t :i* we wi% to "k :e!r x does or does n exi/1 out (1 & ap>t f ?is conception4 ,an undet]m9$ p]ception signifies "h m]ely some?+ real t has be5 giv51 only1 h[ev]1 to ?\ght 9 g5]al--b n z a ph5om5on1 nor z a ?+ 9 itself 7n\m5on71 b only z some?+ t really exi/s1 & is designat$ z su* 9 ! proposition1 8,i ?9k40 ,= x mu/ be rem>k$ t1 :5 ,i call ! proposition1 8,i ?9k10 an empirical proposition1 ,i d n !reby mean t ! ,ego 9 ! proposition is an empirical repres5tation2 on ! contr>y1 x is purely intellectual1 because x belongs to ?\ght 9 g5]al4 ,b )\t "s empirical repres5tation1 :i* pres5ts to ! m9d mat]ial = ?\ght1 ! m5tal act1 8,i ?9k10 w\ld n take place2 & ! empirical is only ! condition ( ! application or employm5t ( ! pure intellectual faculty4 ,?us1 !n1 appe>s ! vanity ( ! hope ( e/abli%+ a cognition :i* is to ext5d its rule beyond ! limits ( exp]i5ce--a cognition :i* is "o ( ! highe/ int]e/s ( humanity2 & ?us is prov$ ! futility ( ! attempt ( speculative philosophy 9 ?is region ( ?\ght4 ,b1 9 ?is int]e/ ( ?\ght1 ! sev]ity ( criticism has r5d]$ to reason a n unimportant s]vice1 by ! demon/ration ( ! impossibility ( mak+ any dogmatical affirmation conc]n+ an object ( exp]i5ce beyond ! b\nd>ies ( exp]i5ce4 ,%e has ?us =tifi$ reason aga9/ all affirmations ( ! contr>y4 ,n[1 ?is c be accompli%$ 9 only two ways4 ,ei!r our proposition mu/ be prov$ apodeictically2 or1 if ?is is unsuccessful1 ! s\rces ( ?is inability mu/ be s\ght =1 &1 if ^! are discov]$ to exi/ 9 ! natural & necess>y limitation ( our reason1 our oppon5ts mu/ submit to ! same law ( r5unciation & refra9 f advanc+ claims to dogmatic ass]tion4 ,b ! "r1 say r ! necessity to admit a future life1 ^u pr9ciples ( ! practical conjo9$ ) ! speculative use ( reason1 has lo/ no?+ by ?is r5unciation2 = ! m]ely speculative pro( has nev] _h any influ5ce ^u ! common reason ( m54 ,x /&s ^u ! po9t ( a hair1 s t ev5 ! s*ools h be5 able to pres]ve x f fall+ only by incessantly discuss+ x & sp9n+ x l a top2 & ev5 9 _! eyes x has nev] be5 able to pres5t any safe f\ndation = ! erection ( a !ory4 ,! pro(s :i* h be5 curr5t among m51 pres]ve _! value undim9i%$2 nay1 r ga9 9 cle>ness & unsophi/icat$ p[]1 by ! rejection ( ! dogmatical assumptions ( speculative reason4 ,= reason is ?us conf9$ )9 h] own peculi> prov9ce--! arrangem5t ( ends or aims1 :i* is at ! same "t ! arrangem5t ( nature2 &1 z a practical faculty1 )\t limit+ itself to ! latt]1 x is ju/ifi$ 9 ext5d+ ! =m]1 & ) x our own exi/5ce1 beyond ! b\nd>ies ( exp]i5ce & life4 ,if we turn our att5tion to ! analogy ( ! nature ( liv+ be+s 9 ?is _w1 9 ! consid]ation ( :i* reason is oblig$ to accept z a pr9ciple t no organ1 no faculty1 no appetite is useless1 & t no?+ is sup]flu\s1 no?+ disproportionate to its use1 no?+ unsuit$ to its end2 b t1 on ! contr>y1 ev]y?+ is p]fectly con=m$ to its de/9ation 9 life--we %all f9d t man1 :o alone is ! f9al end & aim ( ?is ord]1 is /ill ! only animal t seems to be except$ f x4 ,= 8 natural gifts--n m]ely z reg>ds ! tal5ts & motives t may incite him to employ !m1 b especially ! moral law 9 him--/ret* s f> beyond all m]e e>?ly utility & advantage1 t he feels himself b\nd to prize ! m]e consci\sness ( probity1 ap>t f all advantage\s consequ5ces--ev5 ! %ad[y gift ( po/hum\s fame--above ev]y?+2 & he is consci\s ( an inw>d call to con/itute himself1 by 8 conduct 9 ?is _w--)\t reg>d to m]e sublun>y int]e/s--! citiz5 ( a bett]4 ,?is mighty1 irresi/ible pro(--accompani$ by an ev]-increas+ k ( ! con=mability to a purpose 9 ev]y?+ we see ar\nd u1 by ! conviction ( ! b\ndless imm5sity ( creation1 by ! consci\sness ( a c]ta9 illimitabl5ess 9 ! possible ext5sion ( our k1 & by a desire comm5surate !re)--rema9s to humanity1 ev5 aft] ! !oretical cognition ( ourselves has fail$ to e/abli% ! necessity ( an exi/5ce aft] dea?4 ,conclusion ( ! ,solution ( ! ,psy*ological ,p>alogism4 ,! dialectical illusion 9 rational psy*ology arises f our conf\nd+ an idea ( reason 7( a pure intellig5ce7 ) ! conception--9 e respect undet]m9$--( a ?9k+ be+ 9 g5]al4 ,i cogitate myself 9 behalf ( a possible exp]i5ce1 at ! same "t mak+ ab/raction ( all actual exp]i5ce2 & inf] !refrom t ,i c be consci\s ( myself ap>t f exp]i5ce & its empirical conditions4 ,i consequ5tly conf\nd ! possible ab/raction ( my empirically det]m9$ exi/5ce ) ! suppos$ consci\sness ( a possible sep>ate exi/5ce ( my ?9k+ self2 & ,i believe t ,i cognize :at is sub/antial 9 myself z a transc5d5tal subject1 :5 ,i h no?+ m 9 ?\ght ?an ! unity ( consci\sness1 :i* lies at ! basis ( all det]m9ation ( cognition4 ,! task ( expla9+ ! community ( ! s\l ) ! body does n prop]ly belong to ! psy*ology ( :i* we are "h speak+2 because x proposes to prove ! p]sonality ( ! s\l ap>t f ?is communion 7aft] dea?71 & is !re=e transc5d5t 9 ! prop] s5se ( ! ^w1 al?\gh occupy+ itself ) an object ( exp]i5ce--only 9 s f>1 h[ev]1 z x ceases to be an object ( exp]i5ce4 ,b a suffici5t answ] may be f\nd to ! "q 9 our sy/em4 ,! difficulty :i* lies 9 ! execution ( ?is task consi/s1 z is well kn[n1 9 ! presuppos$ het]og5eity ( ! object ( ! int]nal s5se 7! s\l7 & ! objects ( ! ext]nal s5ses2 inasmu* z ! =mal condition ( ! intuition ( ! "o is "t1 & ( t ( ! o!r space also4 ,b if we consid] t bo? k9ds ( objects d n diff] int]nally1 b only 9 s f> z ! "o appe>s ext]nally to ! o!r--consequ5tly1 t :at lies at ! basis ( ph5om5a1 z a ?+ 9 itself1 may n be het]og5e\s2 ?is difficulty disappe>s4 ,!re !n rema9s no o!r difficulty ?an is to be f\nd 9 ! "q--h[ a community ( sub/ances is possible2 a "q :i* lies out ( ! region ( psy*ology1 & :i* ! read]1 aft] :at 9 our analytic has be5 said ( primitive =ces & faculties1 w easily judge to be also beyond ! region ( human cognition4 ,,g5]al ,,rem>k ,on ! ,transition f ,rational ,psy*ology to ,cosmology4 ,! proposition1 8,i ?9k10 or1 8,i exi/ ?9k+10 is an empirical proposition4 ,b su* a proposition mu/ be bas$ on empirical intuition1 & ! object cogitat$ z a ph5om5on2 & ?us our !ory appe>s to ma9ta9 t ! s\l1 ev5 9 ?\ght1 is m]ely a ph5om5on2 & 9 ?is way our consci\sness itself1 9 fact1 abuts ^u no?+4 ,?\ght1 p] se1 is m]ely ! purely spontane\s logical function :i* op]ates to connect ! manifold ( a possible intuition2 & x does n repres5t ! subject ( consci\sness z a ph5om5on--= ?is reason alone1 t x pays no att5tion to ! "q :e!r ! mode ( intuit+ x is s5su\s or intellectual4 ,i !re=e d n repres5t myself 9 ?\ght ei!r z ,i am1 or z ,i appe> to myself2 ,i m]ely cogitate myself z an object 9 g5]al1 ( ! mode ( intuit+ :i* ,i make ab/raction4 ,:5 ,i repres5t myself z ! subject ( ?\ght1 or z ! gr\nd ( ?\ght1 ^! modes ( repres5tation are n relat$ to ! categories ( sub/ance or ( cause2 = ^! are functions ( ?\ght applicable only to our s5su\s intuition4 ,! application ( ^! categories to ! ,ego w\ld1 h[ev]1 be necess>y1 if ,i wi%$ to make myself an object ( k4 ,b ,i wi% to be consci\s ( myself only z ?9k+2 9 :at mode my ,self is giv5 9 intuition1 ,i d n consid]1 & x may be t ,i1 :o ?9k1 am a ph5om5on--al?\gh n 9 s f> z ,i am a ?9k+ be+2 b 9 ! consci\sness ( myself 9 m]e ?\ght ,i am a be+1 ?\gh ?is consci\sness does n pres5t to me any prop]ty ( ?is be+ z mat]ial = ?\ght4 ,b ! proposition1 8,i ?9k10 9 s f> z x decl>es1 8,i exi/ ?9k+10 is n ! m]e repres5tation ( a logical function4 ,x det]m9es ! subject 7:i* is 9 ?is case an object also7 9 relation to exi/5ce2 & x _c be giv5 )\t ! aid ( ! int]nal s5se1 ^: intuition pres5ts to u an object1 n z a ?+ 9 itself1 b always z a ph5om5on4 ,9 ?is proposition !re is !re=e some?+ m to be f\nd ?an ! m]e spontaneity ( ?\ght2 !re is also ! receptivity ( intuition1 t is1 my ?\ght ( myself appli$ to ! empirical intuition ( myself4 ,n[1 9 ?is intuition ! ?9k+ self mu/ seek ! conditions ( ! employm5t ( its logical functions z categories ( sub/ance1 cause1 & s =?2 n m]ely = ! purpose ( di/+ui%+ itself z an object 9 itself by means ( ! repres5tation 8,i10 b also = ! purpose ( det]m9+ ! mode ( its exi/5ce1 t is1 ( cogniz+ itself z n\m5on4 ,b ?is is impossible1 = ! int]nal empirical intuition is s5su\s1 & pres5ts u ) no?+ b ph5om5al data1 :i* d n assi/ ! object ( pure consci\sness 9 its attempt to cognize itself z a sep>ate exi/5ce1 b are useful only z contributions to exp]i5ce4 ,b1 let x be grant$ t we c\ld discov]1 n 9 exp]i5ce1 b 9 c]ta9 firmly-e/abli%$ priori laws ( ! use ( pure reason--laws relat+ to our exi/5ce1 au?ority to consid] ourselves z legislat+ priori 9 relation to our own exi/5ce & z det]m9+ ?is exi/5ce2 we %\ld1 on ?is supposition1 f9d ourselves possess$ ( a spontaneity1 by :i* our actual exi/5ce w\ld be det]m9able1 )\t ! aid ( ! conditions ( empirical intuition4 ,we %\ld also become aw>e t 9 ! consci\sness ( our exi/5ce !re 0 an priori cont5t1 :i* w\ld s]ve to det]m9e our own exi/5ce--an exi/5ce only s5su\sly det]m9able--relatively1 h[ev]1 to a c]ta9 int]nal faculty 9 relation to an intelligible _w4 ,b ?is w\ld n give ! lea/ help to ! attempts ( rational psy*ology4 ,= ?is wond]ful faculty1 :i* ! consci\sness ( ! moral law 9 me reveals1 w\ld pres5t me ) a pr9ciple ( ! det]m9ation ( my own exi/5ce :i* is purely intellectual--b by :at pr$icates8 ,by none o!r ?an ^? :i* are giv5 9 s5su\s intuition4 ,?us ,i %\ld f9d myself 9 ! same position 9 rational psy*ology :i* ,i =m]ly occupi$1 t is to say1 ,i %\ld f9d myself /ill 9 ne$ ( s5su\s intuitions1 9 ord] to give significance to my conceptions ( sub/ance & cause1 by means ( :i* alone ,i c possess a k ( myself3 b ^! intuitions c nev] raise me above ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce4 ,i %\ld be ju/ifi$1 h[ev]1 9 apply+ ^! conceptions1 9 reg>d to _! practical use1 :i* is always direct$ to objects ( exp]i5ce--9 con=mity ) _! analogical significance :5 employ$ !oretically--to fre$om & its subject4 ,at ! same "t1 ,i %\ld und]/& by !m m]ely ! logical functions ( subject & pr$icate1 ( pr9ciple & consequ5ce1 9 con=mity ) :i* all actions are s det]m9$1 t !y are capable ( be+ expla9$ along ) ! laws ( nature1 con=mably to ! categories ( sub/ance & cause1 al?\gh !y orig9ate f a v diff]5t pr9ciple4 ,we h made ^! obs]vations = ! purpose ( gu>d+ aga9/ misund]/&+1 to :i* ! doctr9e ( our intuition ( self z a ph5om5on is expos$4 ,we %all h occasion to p]ceive _! utility 9 ! sequel4 ,*apt] ,,ii4 ,! ,ant9omy ( ,pure ,reason ,we %[$ 9 ! introduction to ?is "p ( our "w1 t all transc5d5tal illusion ( pure reason arose f dialectical argum5ts1 ! s*ema ( :i* logic gives u 9 its ?ree =mal species ( syllogisms--j z ! categories f9d _! logical s*ema 9 ! f\r functions ( all judgem5ts4 ,! fir/ k9d ( ^! sophi/ical argum5ts relat$ to ! uncondition$ unity ( ! subjective conditions ( all repres5tations 9 g5]al 7( ! subject or s\l71 9 correspond5ce ) ! categorical syllogisms1 ! major ( :i*1 z ! pr9ciple1 en\nces ! relation ( a pr$icate to a subject4 ,! second k9d ( dialectical argum5t w !re=e be conc]n$1 foll[+ ! analogy ) hypo!tical syllogisms1 ) ! uncondition$ unity ( ! objective conditions 9 ! ph5om5on2 &1 9 ?is way1 ! !me ( ! ?ird k9d to be treat$ ( 9 ! foll[+ *apt] w be ! uncondition$ unity ( ! objective conditions ( ! possibility ( objects 9 g5]al4 ,b x is wor?y ( rem>k t ! transc5d5tal p>alogism produc$ 9 ! m9d only a "o-?ird illusion1 9 reg>d to ! idea ( ! subject ( our ?\ght2 & ! conceptions ( reason gave no gr\nd to ma9ta9 ! contr>y proposition4 ,! advantage is completely on ! side ( ,pneumatism2 al?\gh ?is !ory itself passes into naught1 9 ! crucible ( pure reason4 ,v diff]5t is ! case :5 we apply reason to ! objective syn!sis ( ph5om5a4 ,"h1 c]ta9ly1 reason e/abli%es1 ) mu* plausibility1 its pr9ciple ( uncondition$ unity2 b x v soon falls into su* contradictions t x is compell$1 9 relation to cosmology1 to r5\nce its pret5sions4 ,= "h a new ph5om5on ( human reason meets u--a p]fectly natural anti!tic1 :i* does n require to be s\ght = by subtle sophi/ry1 b into :i* reason ( itself unavoidably falls4 ,x is !reby pres]v$1 to be sure1 f ! slumb] ( a fanci$ conviction--:i* a m]ely "o-sid$ illusion produces2 b x is at ! same "t compell$1 ei!r1 on ! "o h&1 to ab&on itself to a despair+ scepticism1 or1 on ! o!r1 to assume a dogmatical confid5ce & ob/9ate p]si/5ce 9 c]ta9 ass]tions1 )\t grant+ a fair he>+ to ! o!r side ( ! "q4 ,ei!r is ! dea? ( a s\nd philosophy1 al?\gh ! =m] might p]haps des]ve ! title ( ! eu?anasia ( pure reason4 ,be=e ent]+ ?is region ( discord & confusion1 :i* ! conflict ( ! laws ( pure reason 7ant9omy7 produces1 we %all pres5t ! read] ) "s consid]ations1 9 explanation & ju/ification ( ! me?od we int5d to foll[ 9 our treatm5t ( ?is subject4 ,i t]m all transc5d5tal ideas1 9 s f> z !y relate to ! absolute totality 9 ! syn!sis ( ph5om5a1 cosmical conceptions2 p>tly on acc\nt ( ?is uncondition$ totality1 on :i* ! conception ( ! _w-:ole is bas$--a conception1 :i* is itself an idea--p>tly because !y relate solely to ! syn!sis ( ph5om5a--! empirical syn!sis2 :ile1 on ! o!r h&1 ! absolute totality 9 ! syn!sis ( ! conditions ( all possible ?+s gives rise to an ideal ( pure reason1 :i* is q di/9ct f ! cosmical conception1 al?\gh x /&s 9 relation ) x4 ,h5ce1 z ! p>alogisms ( pure reason laid ! f\ndation = a dialectical psy*ology1 ! ant9omy ( pure reason w pres5t u ) ! transc5d5tal pr9ciples ( a pret5d$ pure 7rational7 cosmology--n1 h[ev]1 to decl>e x valid & to appropriate x1 b--z ! v t]m ( a conflict ( reason suffici5tly indicates1 to pres5t x z an idea :i* _c be reconcil$ ) ph5om5a & exp]i5ce4 ,section ,i4 ,sy/em ( ,cosmological ,ideas ,t we may be able to enum]ate ) sy/ematic precision ^! ideas accord+ to a pr9ciple1 we mu/ rem>k1 9 ! fir/ place1 t x is f ! und]/&+ alone t pure & transc5d5tal conceptions take _! orig92 t ! reason does n prop]ly give bir? to any conception1 b only frees ! conception ( ! und]/&+ f ! unavoidable limitation ( a possible exp]i5ce1 & ?us endeav\rs to raise x above ! empirical1 ?\gh x mu/ /ill be 9 connection ) x4 ,?is happ5s f ! fact t1 = a giv5 condition$1 reason dem&s absolute totality on ! side ( ! conditions 7to :i* ! und]/&+ submits all ph5om5a71 & ?us makes ( ! category a transc5d5tal idea4 ,?is x does t x may be able to give absolute complet5ess to ! empirical syn!sis1 by cont9u+ x to ! uncondition$ 7:i* is n to be f\nd 9 exp]i5ce1 b only 9 ! idea74 ,reason requires ?is accord+ to ! pr9ciple3 ,if ! condition$ is giv5 ! :ole ( ! conditions1 & consequ5tly ! absolutely uncondition$1 is also giv51 :]eby alone ! =m] 0 possible4 ,fir/1 !n1 ! transc5d5tal ideas are prop]ly no?+ b categories elevat$ to ! uncondition$2 & !y may be arrang$ 9 a table accord+ to ! titles ( ! latt]4 ,b1 secondly1 all ! categories are n available = ?is purpose1 b only ^? 9 :i* ! syn!sis con/itutes a s]ies--( conditions subord9at$ to1 n co-ord9at$ )1 ea* o!r4 ,absolute totality is requir$ ( reason only 9 s f> z conc]ns ! asc5d+ s]ies ( ! conditions ( a condition$2 n1 consequ5tly1 :5 ! "q relates to ! desc5d+ s]ies ( consequ5ces1 or to ! aggregate ( ! co-ord9at$ conditions ( ^! consequ5ces4 ,=1 9 relation to a giv5 condition$1 conditions are presuppos$ & consid]$ to be giv5 along ) x4 ,on ! o!r h&1 z ! consequ5ces d n r5d] possible _! conditions1 b r presuppose !m--9 ! consid]ation ( ! procession ( consequ5ces 7or 9 ! desc5t f ! giv5 condition to ! condition$71 we may be q unconc]n$ :e!r ! s]ies ceases or n2 & _! totality is n a necess>y dem& ( reason4 ,?us we cogitate--& necess>ily--a giv5 "t completely elaps$ up to a giv5 mom5t1 al?\gh t "t is n det]m9able by u4 ,b z reg>ds "t future1 :i* is n ! condition ( arriv+ at ! pres5t1 9 ord] to conceive x2 x is q indiff]5t :e!r we consid] future "t z ceas+ at "s po9t1 or z prolong+ itself to inf9ity4 ,take1 = example1 ! s]ies m1 n1 o1 9 :i* n is giv5 z condition$ 9 relation to m1 b at ! same "t z ! condition ( o1 & let ! s]ies proce$ upw>ds f ! condition$ n to m 7l1 k1 i1 etc471 & also d[nw>ds f ! condition n to ! condition$ o 7p1 q1 r1 etc47--,i mu/ presuppose ! =m] s]ies1 to be able to consid] n z giv51 & n is accord+ to reason 7! totality ( conditions7 possible only by means ( t s]ies4 ,b its possibility does n re/ on ! foll[+ s]ies o1 p1 q1 r1 :i* = ?is reason _c be reg>d$ z giv51 b only z capable ( be+ giv5 7dabilis74 ,i %all t]m ! syn!sis ( ! s]ies on ! side ( ! conditions--f t ne>e/ to ! giv5 ph5om5on up to ! m remote--regressive2 t :i* proce$s on ! side ( ! condition$1 f ! imm$iate consequ5ce to ! m remote1 ,i %all call ! progressive syn!sis4 ,! =m] proce$s 9 antec$5tia1 ! latt] 9 consequ5tia4 ,! cosmological ideas are !re=e occupi$ ) ! totality ( ! regressive syn!sis1 & proce$ 9 antec$5tia1 n 9 consequ5tia4 ,:5 ! latt] takes place1 x is an arbitr>y & n a necess>y problem ( pure reason2 = we require1 = ! complete und]/&+ ( :at is giv5 9 a ph5om5on1 n ! consequ5ces :i* succe$1 b ! gr\nds or pr9ciples :i* prec$e4 ,9 ord] to con/ruct ! table ( ideas 9 correspond5ce ) ! table ( categories1 we take fir/ ! two primitive quanta ( all our intuitions1 "t & space4 ,"t is 9 itself a s]ies 7& ! =mal condition ( all s]ies71 & h5ce1 9 relation to a giv5 pres5t1 we mu/ di/+ui% priori 9 x ! antec$5tia z conditions 7"t pa/7 f ! consequ5tia 7"t future74 ,consequ5tly1 ! transc5d5tal idea ( ! absolute totality ( ! s]ies ( ! conditions ( a giv5 condition$1 relates m]ely to all pa/ "t4 ,accord+ to ! idea ( reason1 ! :ole pa/ "t1 z ! condition ( ! giv5 mom5t1 is necess>ily cogitat$ z giv54 ,b1 z reg>ds space1 !re exi/s 9 x no di/9ction betwe5 progressus & regressus2 = x is an aggregate & n a s]ies--its p>ts exi/+ toge!r at ! same "t4 ,i c consid] a giv5 po9t ( "t 9 relation to pa/ "t only z condition$1 because ?is giv5 mom5t comes into exi/5ce only ?r\gh ! pa/ "t r ?r\gh ! pass+ ( ! prec$+ "t4 ,b z ! p>ts ( space are n subord9at$1 b co-ord9at$ to ea* o!r1 "o "p _c be ! condition ( ! possibility ( ! o!r2 & space is n 9 itself1 l "t1 a s]ies4 ,b ! syn!sis ( ! manifold p>ts ( space--7! syn!ses :]eby we appreh5d space7--is nev]!less successive2 x takes place1 !re=e1 9 "t1 & conta9s a s]ies4 ,& z 9 ?is s]ies ( aggregat$ spaces 7= example1 ! feet 9 a rood71 beg9n+ ) a giv5 portion ( space1 ^? :i* cont9ue to be annex$ =m ! condition ( ! limits ( ! =m]--! measurem5t ( a space mu/ also be reg>d$ z a syn!sis ( ! s]ies ( ! conditions ( a giv5 condition$4 ,x diff]s1 h[ev]1 9 ?is respect f t ( "t1 t ! side ( ! condition$ is n 9 itself di/+ui%able f ! side ( ! condition2 &1 consequ5tly1 regressus & progressus 9 space seem to be id5tical4 ,b1 inasmu* z "o "p ( space is n giv51 b only limit$1 by & ?r\gh ano!r1 we mu/ also consid] e limit$ space z condition$1 9 s f> z x presupposes "s o!r space z ! condition ( its limitation1 & s on4 ,z reg>ds limitation1 !re=e1 our proc$ure 9 space is also a regressus1 & ! transc5d5tal idea ( ! absolute totality ( ! syn!sis 9 a s]ies ( conditions applies to space also2 & ,i am entitl$ to dem& ! absolute totality ( ! ph5om5al syn!sis 9 space z well z 9 "t4 ,:e!r my dem& c be satisfi$ is a "q to be answ]$ 9 ! sequel4 ,secondly1 ! real 9 space--t is1 matt]--is condition$4 ,its int]nal conditions are its p>ts1 & ! p>ts ( p>ts its remote conditions2 s t 9 ?is case we f9d a regressive syn!sis1 ! absolute totality ( :i* is a dem& ( reason4 ,b ?is _c be obta9$ o!rwise ?an by a complete division ( p>ts1 :]eby ! real 9 matt] becomes ei!r no?+ or t :i* is n matt]1 t is to say1 ! simple4 ,consequ5tly we f9d "h also a s]ies ( conditions & a progress to ! uncondition$4 ,?irdly1 z reg>ds ! categories ( a real relation betwe5 ph5om5a1 ! category ( sub/ance & its accid5ts is n suitable = ! =mation ( a transc5d5tal idea2 t is to say1 reason has no gr\nd1 9 reg>d to x1 to proce$ regressively ) conditions4 ,= accid5ts 79 s f> z !y inh]e 9 a sub/ance7 are co-ord9at$ ) ea* o!r1 & d n con/itute a s]ies4 ,&1 9 relation to sub/ance1 !y are n prop]ly subord9at$ to x1 b are ! mode ( exi/5ce ( ! sub/ance itself4 ,! conception ( ! sub/antial might nev]!less seem to be an idea ( ! transc5d5tal reason4 ,b1 z ?is signifies no?+ m ?an ! conception ( an object 9 g5]al1 :i* subsi/s 9 s f> z we cogitate 9 x m]ely a transc5d5tal subject )\t any pr$icates2 & z ! "q "h is ( an uncondition$ 9 ! s]ies ( ph5om5a--x is cle> t ! sub/antial c =m no memb] !re(4 ,! same holds good ( sub/ances 9 community1 :i* are m]e aggregates & d n =m a s]ies4 ,= !y are n subord9at$ to ea* o!r z conditions ( ! possibility ( ea* o!r2 :i*1 h[ev]1 may be affirm$ ( spaces1 ! limits ( :i* are nev] det]m9$ 9 !mselves1 b always by "s o!r space4 ,x is1 !re=e1 only 9 ! category ( causality t we c f9d a s]ies ( causes to a giv5 effect1 & 9 :i* we asc5d f ! latt]1 z ! condition$1 to ! =m] z ! conditions1 & ?us answ] ! "q ( reason4 ,f\r?ly1 ! conceptions ( ! possible1 ! actual1 & ! necess>y d n conduct u to any s]ies--except+ only 9 s f> z ! cont+5t 9 exi/5ce mu/ always be reg>d$ z condition$1 & z indicat+1 accord+ to a law ( ! und]/&+1 a condition1 "u :i* x is necess>y to rise to a high]1 till 9 ! totality ( ! s]ies1 reason arrives at uncondition$ necessity4 ,!re are1 accord+ly1 only f\r cosmological ideas1 correspond+ ) ! f\r titles ( ! categories4 ,= we c select only su* z necess>ily furni% u ) a s]ies 9 ! syn!sis ( ! manifold4 #a ,! absolute ,complet5ess ( ! ,,composition ( ! giv5 totality ( all ph5om5a4 #b ,! absolute ,complet5ess ( ! ,,division ( giv5 totality 9 a ph5om5on4 #c ,! absolute ,complet5ess ( ! ,,orig9ation ( a ph5om5on4 #d ,! absolute ,complet5ess ( ! ,,dep5d5ce ( ! ,,exi/5ce ( :at is *angeable 9 a ph5om5on4 ,we mu/ "h rem>k1 9 ! fir/ place1 t ! idea ( absolute totality relates to no?+ b ! exposition ( ph5om5a1 & !re=e n to ! pure conception ( a totality ( ?+s4 ,ph5om5a are "h1 !re=e1 reg>d$ z giv51 & reason requires ! absolute complet5ess ( ! conditions ( _! possibility1 9 s f> z ^! conditions con/itute a s]ies--consequ5tly an absolutely 7t is1 9 e respect7 complete syn!sis1 :]eby a ph5om5on c be expla9$ accord+ to ! laws ( ! und]/&+4 ,secondly1 x is prop]ly ! uncondition$ alone t reason seeks 9 ?is s]ially & regressively conduct$ syn!sis ( conditions4 ,x wi%es1 to speak 9 ano!r way1 to atta9 to complet5ess 9 ! s]ies ( premisses1 s z to r5d] x unnecess>y to presuppose o!rs4 ,?is uncondition$ is always conta9$ 9 ! absolute totality ( ! s]ies1 :5 we endeav\r to =m a repres5tation ( x 9 ?\ght4 ,b ?is absolutely complete syn!sis is itself b an idea2 = x is impossible1 at lea/ be=e h&1 to "k :e!r any su* syn!sis is possible 9 ! case ( ph5om5a4 ,:5 we repres5t all exi/5ce 9 ?\ght by means ( pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 )\t any conditions ( s5su\s intuition1 we may say ) ju/ice t = a giv5 condition$ ! :ole s]ies ( conditions subord9at$ to ea* o!r is also giv52 = ! =m] is only giv5 ?r\gh ! latt]4 ,b we f9d 9 ! case ( ph5om5a a p>ticul> limitation ( ! mode 9 :i* conditions are giv51 t is1 ?r\gh ! successive syn!sis ( ! manifold ( intuition1 :i* mu/ be complete 9 ! regress4 ,n[ :e!r ?is complet5ess is s5su\sly possible1 is a problem4 ,b ! idea ( x lies 9 ! reason--be x possible or impossible to connect ) ! idea adequate empirical conceptions4 ,!re=e1 z 9 ! absolute totality ( ! regressive syn!sis ( ! manifold 9 a ph5om5on 7foll[+ ! guidance ( ! categories1 :i* repres5t x z a s]ies ( conditions to a giv5 condition$7 ! uncondition$ is necess>ily conta9$--x be+ /ill left unasc]ta9$ :e!r & h[ ?is totality exi/s2 reason sets out f ! idea ( totality1 al?\gh its prop] & f9al aim is ! uncondition$--( ! :ole s]ies1 or ( a "p !re(4 ,?is uncondition$ may be cogitat$--ei!r z exi/+ only 9 ! entire s]ies1 all ! memb]s ( :i* !re=e w\ld be )\t exception condition$ & only ! totality absolutely uncondition$--& 9 ?is case ! regressus is call$ inf9ite2 or ! absolutely uncondition$ is only a "p ( ! s]ies1 to :i* ! o!r memb]s are subord9at$1 b :i* ,is n itself submitt$ to any o!r condition4#dh ,9 ! =m] case ! s]ies is a p>te priori unlimit$ 7)\t beg9n+71 t is1 inf9ite1 & nev]!less completely giv54 ,b ! regress 9 x is nev] complet$1 & c only be call$ pot5tially inf9ite4 ,9 ! second case !re exi/s a fir/ 9 ! s]ies4 ,?is fir/ is call$1 9 relation to pa/ "t1 ! beg9n+ ( ! _w2 9 relation to space1 ! limit ( ! _w2 9 relation to ! p>ts ( a giv5 limit$ :ole1 ! simple2 9 relation to causes1 absolute spontaneity 7lib]ty72 & 9 relation to ! exi/5ce ( *angeable ?+s1 absolute physical necessity4 #dh ,! absolute totality ( ! s]ies ( conditions to a giv5 condition$ is always uncondition$2 because beyond x !re exi/ no o!r conditions1 on :i* x might dep5d4 ,b ! absolute totality ( su* a s]ies is only an idea1 or r a problematical conception1 ! possibility ( :i* mu/ be inve/igat$--p>ticul>ly 9 relation to ! mode 9 :i* ! uncondition$1 z ! transc5d5tal idea :i* is ! real subject ( inquiry1 may be conta9$ !re94 ,we possess two expressions1 _w & nature1 :i* are g5]ally int]*ang$4 ,! fir/ d5otes ! ma!matical total ( all ph5om5a & ! totality ( _! syn!sis--9 its progress by means ( composition1 z well z by division4 ,& ! _w is t]m$ nature1#di :5 x is reg>d$ z a dynamical :ole--:5 our att5tion is n direct$ to ! aggregation 9 space & "t1 = ! purpose ( cogitat+ x z a quantity1 b to ! unity 9 ! exi/5ce ( ph5om5a4 ,9 ?is case ! condition ( t :i* happ5s is call$ a cause2 ! uncondition$ causality ( ! cause 9 a ph5om5on is t]m$ lib]ty2 ! condition$ cause is call$ 9 a m limit$ s5se a natural cause4 ,! condition$ 9 exi/5ce is t]m$ cont+5t1 & ! uncondition$ necess>y4 ,! uncondition$ necessity ( ph5om5a may be call$ natural necessity4 #di ,nature1 und]/ood adjective 7=malit]71 signifies ! complex ( ! det]m9ations ( a ?+1 connect$ accord+ to an int]nal pr9ciple ( causality4 ,on ! o!r h&1 we und]/& by nature1 sub/antive 7mat]ialit]71 ! sum total ( ph5om5a1 9 s f> z !y1 by virtue ( an int]nal pr9ciple ( causality1 are connect$ ) ea* o!r ?r\gh\t4 ,9 ! =m] s5se we speak ( ! nature ( liquid matt]1 ( fire1 etc41 & employ ! ^w only adjective2 :ile1 if speak+ ( ! objects ( nature1 we h 9 our m9ds ! idea ( a subsi/+ :ole4 ,! ideas :i* we are at pres5t engag$ 9 discuss+ ,i h call$ cosmological ideas2 p>tly because by ! t]m _w is und]/ood ! entire cont5t ( all ph5om5a1 & our ideas are direct$ solely to ! uncondition$ among ph5om5a2 p>tly also1 because _w1 9 ! transc5d5tal s5se1 signifies ! absolute totality ( ! cont5t ( exi/+ ?+s1 & we are direct+ our att5tion only to ! complet5ess ( ! syn!sis--al?\gh1 prop]ly1 only 9 regression4 ,9 reg>d to ! fact t ^! ideas are all transc5d5t1 &1 al?\gh !y d n transc5d ph5om5a z reg>ds _! mode1 b are conc]n$ solely ) ! _w ( s5se 7& n ) n\m5a71 nev]!less c>ry _! syn!sis to a degree f> above all possible exp]i5ce--x /ill seems to me t we c1 ) p]fect propriety1 designate !m cosmical conceptions4 ,z reg>ds ! di/9ction betwe5 ! ma!matically & ! dynamically uncondition$ :i* is ! aim ( ! regression ( ! syn!sis1 ,i %\ld call ! two =m]1 9 a m limit$ signification1 cosmical conceptions1 ! rema9+ two transc5d5t physical conceptions4 ,?is di/9ction does n at pres5t seem to be ( p>ticul> importance1 b we %all aft]w>ds f9d x to be ( "s value4 ,section ,,ii4 ,anti!tic ( ,pure ,reason ,!tic is ! t]m appli$ to e collection ( dogmatical propositions4 ,by anti!tic ,i d n und]/& dogmatical ass]tions ( ! opposite1 b ! self-contradiction ( seem+ly dogmatical cognitions 7!sis cum anti!sis71 9 none ( :i* we c discov] any decid$ sup]iority4 ,anti!tic is n1 !re=e1 occupi$ ) "o-sid$ /atem5ts1 b is engag$ 9 consid]+ ! contradictory nature ( ! g5]al cognitions ( reason & its causes4 ,transc5d5tal anti!tic is an inve/igation into ! ant9omy ( pure reason1 its causes & result4 ,if we employ our reason n m]ely 9 ! application ( ! pr9ciples ( ! und]/&+ to objects ( exp]i5ce1 b v5ture ) x beyond ^! b\nd>ies1 !re arise c]ta9 sophi/ical propositions or !orems4 ,^! ass]tions h ! foll[+ peculi>ities3 ,!y c f9d nei!r confirmation nor confutation 9 exp]i5ce2 & ea* is 9 itself n only self-consi/5t1 b possesses conditions ( its necessity 9 ! v nature ( reason--only t1 unluckily1 !re exi/ j z valid & necess>y gr\nds = ma9ta9+ ! contr>y proposition4 ,! que/ions :i* naturally arise 9 ! consid]ation ( ?is dialectic ( pure reason1 are !re=e3 #a/4 ,9 :at propositions is pure reason unavoidably subject to an ant9omy8 #bnd4 ,:at are ! causes ( ?is ant9omy8 #crd4 ,:e!r & 9 :at way c reason free itself f ?is self-contradiction8 ,a dialectical proposition or !orem ( pure reason mu/1 accord+ to :at has be5 said1 be di/+ui%able f all sophi/ical propositions1 by ! fact t x is n an answ] to an arbitr>y "q1 :i* may be rais$ at ! m]e pleasure ( any p]son1 b to "o :i* human reason mu/ necess>ily enc\nt] 9 its progress4 ,9 ! second place1 a dialectical proposition1 ) its opposite1 does n c>ry ! appe>ance ( a m]ely artificial illusion1 :i* disappe>s z soon z x is inve/igat$1 b a natural & unavoidable illusion1 :i*1 ev5 :5 we are no long] deceiv$ by x1 cont9ues to mock u &1 al?\gh r5d]$ h>mless1 c nev] be completely remov$4 ,?is dialectical doctr9e w n relate to ! unity ( und]/&+ 9 empirical conceptions1 b to ! unity ( reason 9 pure ideas4 ,! conditions ( ?is doctr9e are--inasmu* z x mu/1 z a syn!sis accord+ to rules1 be con=mable to ! und]/&+1 & at ! same "t z ! absolute unity ( ! syn!sis1 to ! reason--t1 if x is adequate to ! unity ( reason1 x is too great = ! und]/&+1 if accord+ ) ! und]/&+1 x is too small = ! reason4 ,h5ce arises a mutual opposition1 :i* _c be avoid$1 d :at we w4 ,^! sophi/ical ass]tions ( dialectic op51 z x 71 a battle-field1 :]e t side obta9s ! victory :i* has be5 p]mitt$ to make ! attack1 & he is compell$ to yield :o has be5 un=tunately oblig$ to /& on ! def5sive4 ,& h5ce1 *ampions ( ability1 :e!r on ! "r or on ! wrong side1 are c]ta9 to c>ry away ! cr[n ( victory1 if !y only take c>e to h ! "r to make ! la/ attack1 & are n oblig$ to su/a9 ano!r onset f _! oppon5t4 ,we c easily believe t ?is ar5a has be5 (t5 trampl$ by ! feet ( combatants1 t _m victories h be5 obta9$ on bo? sides1 b t ! la/ victory1 decisive ( ! affair betwe5 ! cont5d+ p>ties1 0 won by him :o f\ght = ! "r1 only if 8 adv]s>y 0 =bidd5 to cont9ue ! t\rney4 ,z imp>tial umpires1 we mu/ lay aside entirely ! consid]ation :e!r ! combatants are fight+ = ! "r or = ! wrong side1 = ! true or = ! false1 & all[ ! combat to be fir/ decid$4 ,p]haps1 aft] !y h we>i$ m ?an injur$ ea* o!r1 !y w discov] ! no?+ness ( _! cause ( qu>rel & "p good fri5ds4 ,?is me?od ( wat*+1 or r ( orig9at+1 a conflict ( ass]tions1 n = ! purpose ( f9ally decid+ 9 fav\r ( ei!r side1 b to discov] :e!r ! object ( ! /ruggle is n a m]e illusion1 :i* ea* /rives 9 va9 to rea*1 b :i* w\ld be no ga9 ev5 :5 rea*$--?is proc$ure1 ,i say1 may be t]m$ ! sceptical me?od4 ,x is ?or\ghly di/9ct f scepticism--! pr9ciple ( a te*nical & sci5tific ignorance1 :i* und]m9es ! f\ndations ( all k1 9 ord]1 if possible1 to de/roy our belief & confid5ce !re94 ,= ! sceptical me?od aims at c]ta9ty1 by endeav\r+ to discov] 9 a conflict ( ?is k9d1 conduct$ hone/ly & intellig5tly on bo? sides1 ! po9t ( misund]/&+2 j z wise legislators d]ive1 f ! emb>rassm5t ( judges 9 lawsuits1 in=mation 9 reg>d to ! defective & ill-def9$ p>ts ( _! /atutes4 ,! ant9omy :i* reveals itself 9 ! application ( laws1 is = our limit$ wisdom ! be/ crit]ion ( legislation4 ,= ! att5tion ( reason1 :i* 9 ab/ract speculation does n easily become consci\s ( its errors1 is ?us r\s$ to ! mom5ta 9 ! det]m9ation ( its pr9ciples4 ,b ?is sceptical me?od is ess5tially peculi> to transc5d5tal philosophy1 & c p]haps be disp5s$ ) 9 e o!r field ( inve/igation4 ,9 ma!matics its use w\ld be absurd2 because 9 x no false ass]tions c long rema9 hidd51 inasmu* z its demon/rations mu/ always proce$ "u ! guidance ( pure intuition1 & by means ( an always evid5t syn!sis4 ,9 exp]im5tal philosophy1 d\bt & delay may be v useful2 b no misund]/&+ is possible1 :i* _c be easily remov$2 & 9 exp]i5ce means ( solv+ ! difficulty & putt+ an end to ! diss5sion mu/ at la/ be f\nd1 :e!r soon] or lat]4 ,moral philosophy c always exhibit its pr9ciples1 ) _! practical consequ5ces1 9 concreto--at lea/ 9 possible exp]i5ces1 & ?us escape ! mi/akes & ambiguities ( ab/raction4 ,b transc5d5tal propositions1 :i* lay claim to insight beyond ! region ( possible exp]i5ce1 _c1 on ! "o h&1 exhibit _! ab/ract syn!sis 9 any priori intuition1 nor1 on ! o!r1 expose a lurk+ error by ! help ( exp]i5ce4 ,transc5d5tal reason1 !re=e1 pres5ts u ) no o!r crit]ion ?an t ( an attempt to reconcile su* ass]tions1 & = ?is purpose to p]mit a free & unre/ra9$ conflict betwe5 !m4 ,& ?is we n[ proce$ to arrange4#ej #ej ,! ant9omies /& 9 ! ord] ( ! f\r transc5d5tal ideas above detail$4 ,,fir/ ,,conflict ,,( ,,! ,,transc5d5tal ,,ideas4 ,,!sis4 ,! _w has a beg9n+ 9 "t1 & is also limit$ 9 reg>d to space4 ,,pro(4 ,grant$ t ! _w has no beg9n+ 9 "t2 up to e giv5 mom5t ( "t1 an et]nity mu/ h elaps$1 & !re) pass$ away an inf9ite s]ies ( successive conditions or /ates ( ?+s 9 ! _w4 ,n[ ! inf9ity ( a s]ies consi/s 9 ! fact t x nev] c be complet$ by means ( a successive syn!sis4 ,x foll[s t an inf9ite s]ies already elaps$ is impossible & t1 consequ5tly1 a beg9n+ ( ! _w is a necess>y condition ( its exi/5ce4 ,& ?is 0 ! fir/ ?+ to be prov$4 ,z reg>ds ! second1 let u take ! opposite = grant$4 ,9 ?is case1 ! _w mu/ be an inf9ite giv5 total ( coexi/5t ?+s4 ,n[ we _c cogitate ! dim5sions ( a quantity1 :i* is n giv5 )9 c]ta9 limits ( an intuition1#ea 9 any o!r way ?an by means ( ! syn!sis ( its p>ts1 & ! total ( su* a quantity only by means ( a complet$ syn!sis1 or ! repeat$ addition ( unity to itself4 ,accord+ly1 to cogitate ! _w1 :i* fills all spaces1 z a :ole1 ! successive syn!sis ( ! p>ts ( an inf9ite _w mu/ be look$ ^u z complet$1 t is to say1 an inf9ite "t mu/ be reg>d$ z hav+ elaps$ 9 ! enum]ation ( all co-exi/+ ?+s2 :i* is impossible4 ,= ?is reason an inf9ite aggregate ( actual ?+s _c be consid]$ z a giv5 :ole1 consequ5tly1 n z a contemporane\sly giv5 :ole4 ,! _w is consequ5tly1 z reg>ds ext5sion 9 space1 n inf9ite1 b enclos$ 9 limits4 ,& ?is 0 ! second ?+ to be prov$4 #ea ,we may consid] an undet]m9$ quantity z a :ole1 :5 x is enclos$ )9 limits1 al?\gh we _c con/ruct or asc]ta9 its totality by measurem5t1 t is1 by ! successive syn!sis ( its p>ts4 ,= its limits ( !mselves det]m9e its complet5ess z a :ole4 ,,anti!sis4 ,! _w has no beg9n+1 & no limits 9 space1 b is1 9 relation bo? to "t & space1 inf9ite4 ,,pro(4 ,= let x be grant$ t x has a beg9n+4 ,a beg9n+ is an exi/5ce :i* is prec$$ by a "t 9 :i* ! ?+ does n exi/4 ,on ! above supposition1 x foll[s t !re mu/ h be5 a "t 9 :i* ! _w did n exi/1 t is1 a void "t4 ,b 9 a void "t ! orig9ation ( a ?+ is impossible2 because no "p ( any su* "t conta9s a di/9ctive condition ( be+1 9 pref]5ce to t ( non-be+ 7:e!r ! suppos$ ?+ orig9ate ( itself1 or by means ( "s o!r cause74 ,consequ5tly1 _m s]ies ( ?+s may h a beg9n+ 9 ! _w1 b ! _w itself _c h a beg9n+1 & is1 !re=e1 9 relation to pa/ "t1 inf9ite4 ,z reg>ds ! second /atem5t1 let u fir/ take ! opposite = grant$--t ! _w is f9ite & limit$ 9 space2 x foll[s t x mu/ exi/ 9 a void space1 :i* is n limit$4 ,we %\ld !re=e meet n only ) a relation ( ?+s 9 space1 b also a relation ( ?+s to space4 ,n[1 z ! _w is an absolute :ole1 out ( & beyond :i* no object ( intuition1 & consequ5tly no correlate to :i* c be discov]$1 ?is relation ( ! _w to a void space is m]ely a relation to no object4 ,b su* a relation1 & consequ5tly ! limitation ( ! _w by void space1 is no?+4 ,consequ5tly1 ! _w1 z reg>ds space1 is n limit$1 t is1 x is inf9ite 9 reg>d to ext5sion4#eb #eb ,space is m]ely ! =m ( ext]nal intuition 7=mal intuition71 & n a real object :i* c be ext]nally p]ceiv$4 ,space1 prior to all ?+s :i* det]m9e x 7fill or limit x71 or1 r1 :i* pres5t an empirical intuition con=mable to x1 is1 "u ! title ( absolute space1 no?+ b ! m]e possibility ( ext]nal ph5om5a1 9 s f> z !y ei!r exi/ 9 !mselves1 or c annex !mselves to giv5 intuitions4 ,empirical intuition is !re=e n a composition ( ph5om5a & space 7( p]ception & empty intuition74 ,! "o is n ! correlate ( ! o!r 9 a syn!sis1 b !y are vitally connect$ 9 ! same empirical intuition1 z matt] & =m4 ,if we wi% to set "o ( ^! two ap>t f ! o!r--space f ph5om5a--!re arise all sorts ( empty det]m9ations ( ext]nal intuition1 :i* are v f> f be+ possible p]ceptions4 ,= example1 motion or re/ ( ! _w 9 an inf9ite empty space1 or a det]m9ation ( ! mutual relation ( bo?1 _c possibly be p]ceiv$1 & is !re=e m]ely ! pr$icate ( a notional entity4 ,,obs]vations ,,on ,,! ,,fir/ ,,ant9omy4 ,,on ,,! ,,!sis4 ,9 br++ =w>d ^! conflict+ argum5ts1 ,i h n be5 on ! se>* = sophisms1 = ! purpose ( avail+ myself ( special plead+1 :i* takes advantage ( ! c>elessness ( ! opposite p>ty1 appeals to a misund]/ood /atute1 & erects its unrighte\s claims ^u an unfair int]pretation4 ,bo? pro(s orig9ate fairly f ! nature ( ! case1 & ! advantage pres5t$ by ! mi/akes ( ! dogmati/s ( bo? p>ties has be5 completely set aside4 ,! !sis might also h be5 unfairly demon/rat$1 by ! introduction ( an errone\s conception ( ! inf9ity ( a giv5 quantity4 ,a quantity is inf9ite1 if a great] ?an itself _c possibly exi/4 ,! quantity is measur$ by ! numb] ( giv5 units--:i* are tak5 z a /&>d--conta9$ 9 x4 ,n[ no numb] c be ! greate/1 because "o or m units c always be add$4 ,x foll[s t an inf9ite giv5 quantity1 consequ5tly an inf9ite _w 7bo? z reg>ds "t & ext5sion7 is impossible4 ,x is1 !re=e1 limit$ 9 bo? respects4 ,9 ?is mann] ,i might h conduct$ my pro(2 b ! conception giv5 9 x does n agree ) ! true conception ( an inf9ite :ole4 ,9 ?is !re is no repres5tation ( its quantity1 x is n said h[ l>ge x is2 consequ5tly its conception is n ! conception ( a maximum4 ,we cogitate 9 x m]ely its relation to an arbitr>ily assum$ unit1 9 relation to :i* x is great] ?an any numb]4 ,n[1 j z ! unit :i* is tak5 is great] or small]1 ! inf9ite w be great] or small]2 b ! inf9ity1 :i* consi/s m]ely 9 ! relation to ?is giv5 unit1 mu/ rema9 always ! same1 al?\gh ! absolute quantity ( ! :ole is n !reby cogniz$4 ,! true 7transc5d5tal7 conception ( inf9ity is3 t ! successive syn!sis ( unity 9 ! measurem5t ( a giv5 quantum c nev] be complet$4#ec ,h5ce x foll[s1 )\t possibility ( mi/ake1 t an et]nity ( actual successive /ates up to a giv5 7! pres5t7 mom5t _c h elaps$1 & t ! _w mu/ !re=e h a beg9n+4 #ec ,! quantum 9 ?is s5se conta9s a cong]ies ( giv5 units1 :i* is great] ?an any numb]--& ?is is ! ma!matical conception ( ! inf9ite4 ,9 reg>d to ! second "p ( ! !sis1 ! difficulty z to an inf9ite & yet elaps$ s]ies disappe>s2 = ! manifold ( a _w inf9ite 9 ext5sion is contemporane\sly giv54 ,b1 9 ord] to cogitate ! total ( ?is manifold1 z we _c h ! aid ( limits con/itut+ by !mselves ?is total 9 intuition1 we are oblig$ to give "s acc\nt ( our conception1 :i* 9 ?is case _c proce$ f ! :ole to ! det]m9$ quantity ( ! p>ts1 b mu/ demon/rate ! possibility ( a :ole by means ( a successive syn!sis ( ! p>ts4 ,b z ?is syn!sis mu/ con/itute a s]ies t _c be complet$1 x is impossible = u to cogitate prior to x1 & consequ5tly n by means ( x1 a totality4 ,= ! conception ( totality itself is 9 ! pres5t case ! repres5tation ( a complet$ syn!sis ( ! p>ts2 & ?is completion1 & consequ5tly its conception1 is impossible4 ,,on ,,! ,,anti!sis4 ,! pro( 9 fav\r ( ! inf9ity ( ! cosmical succession & ! cosmical cont5t is bas$ ^u ! consid]ation t1 9 ! opposite case1 a void "t & a void space mu/ con/itute ! limits ( ! _w4 ,n[ ,i am n unaw>e1 t !re are "s ways ( escap+ ?is conclusion4 ,x may1 = example1 be alleg$1 t a limit to ! _w1 z reg>ds bo? space & "t1 is q possible1 )\t at ! same "t hold+ ! exi/5ce ( an absolute "t be=e ! beg9n+ ( ! _w1 or an absolute space ext5d+ beyond ! actual _w--:i* is impossible4 ,i am q well satisfi$ ) ! latt] "p ( ?is op9ion ( ! philosoph]s ( ! ,leibnitzian s*ool4 ,space is m]ely ! =m ( ext]nal intuition1 b n a real object :i* c itself be ext]nally intuit$2 x is n a correlate ( ph5om5a1 x is ! =m ( ph5om5a itself4 ,space1 !re=e1 _c be reg>d$ z absolutely & 9 itself some?+ det]m9ative ( ! exi/5ce ( ?+s1 because x is n itself an object1 b only ! =m ( possible objects4 ,consequ5tly1 ?+s1 z ph5om5a1 det]m9e space2 t is to say1 !y r5d] x possible t1 ( all ! possible pr$icates ( space 7size & relation71 c]ta9 may belong to reality4 ,b we _c affirm ! conv]se1 t space1 z some?+ self-subsi/5t1 c det]m9e real ?+s 9 reg>d to size or %ape1 = x is 9 itself n a real ?+4 ,space 7fill$ or void7#ed may !re=e be limit$ by ph5om5a1 b ph5om5a _c be limit$ by an empty space )\t !m4 ,?is is true ( "t also4 ,all ?is be+ grant$1 x is nev]!less indisputable1 t we mu/ assume ^! two non5tities1 void space )\t & void "t be=e ! _w1 if we assume ! exi/5ce ( cosmical limits1 relatively to space or "t4 #ed ,x is evid5t t :at is meant "h is1 t empty space1 9 s f> z x is limit$ by ph5om5a--space1 t is1 )9 ! _w--does n at lea/ contradict transc5d5tal pr9ciples1 & may !re=e1 z reg>ds !m1 be admitt$1 al?\gh its possibility _c on t acc\nt be affirm$4 ,=1 z reg>ds ! subt]fuge adopt$ by ^? :o endeav\r to evade ! consequ5ce--t1 if ! _w is limit$ z to space & "t1 ! inf9ite void mu/ det]m9e ! exi/5ce ( actual ?+s 9 reg>d to _! dim5sions--x arises solely f ! fact t in/ead ( a s5su\s _w1 an intelligible _w--( :i* no?+ is kn[n--is cogitat$2 in/ead ( a real beg9n+ 7an exi/5ce1 :i* is prec$$ by a p]iod 9 :i* no?+ exi/s71 an exi/5ce :i* presupposes no o!r condition ?an t ( "t2 &1 in/ead ( limits ( ext5sion1 b\nd>ies ( ! univ]se4 ,b ! "q relates to ! mundus pha5om5on1 & its quantity2 & 9 ?is case we _c make ab/raction ( ! conditions ( s5sibility1 )\t do+ away ) ! ess5tial reality ( ?is _w itself4 ,! _w ( s5se1 if x is limit$1 mu/ necess>ily lie 9 ! inf9ite void4 ,if ?is1 & ) x space z ! priori condition ( ! possibility ( ph5om5a1 is left out ( view1 ! :ole _w ( s5se disappe>s4 ,9 our problem is ?is alone consid]$ z giv54 ,! mundus intelligibilis is no?+ b ! g5]al conception ( a _w1 9 :i* ab/raction has be5 made ( all conditions ( intuition1 & 9 relation to :i* no syn!tical proposition--ei!r affirmative or negative--is possible4 ,,second ,,conflict ,,( ,,transc5d5tal ,,ideas4 ,,!sis4 ,e composite sub/ance 9 ! _w consi/s ( simple p>ts2 & !re exi/s no?+ t is n ei!r itself simple1 or compos$ ( simple p>ts4 ,,pro(4 ,=1 grant t composite sub/ances d n consi/ ( simple p>ts2 9 ?is case1 if all comb9ation or composition 7 annihilat$ 9 ?\ght1 no composite "p1 & 7z1 by ! supposition1 !re d n exi/ simple p>ts7 no simple "p w\ld exi/4 ,consequ5tly1 no sub/ance2 consequ5tly1 no?+ w\ld exi/4 ,ei!r1 !n1 x is impossible to annihilate composition 9 ?\ght2 or1 aft] su* annihilation1 !re mu/ rema9 some?+ t subsi/s )\t composition1 t is1 some?+ t is simple4 ,b 9 ! =m] case ! composite c\ld n itself consi/ ( sub/ances1 because ) sub/ances composition is m]ely a cont+5t relation1 ap>t f :i* !y mu/ /ill exi/ z self-subsi/5t be+s4 ,n[1 z ?is case contradicts ! supposition1 ! second mu/ conta9 ! tru?--t ! sub/antial composite 9 ! _w consi/s ( simple p>ts4 ,x foll[s1 z an imm$iate inf]5ce1 t ! ?+s 9 ! _w are all1 )\t exception1 simple be+s--t composition is m]ely an ext]nal condition p]ta9+ to !m--& t1 al?\gh we nev] c sep>ate & isolate ! elem5t>y sub/ances f ! /ate ( composition1 reason mu/ cogitate ^! z ! prim>y subjects ( all composition1 & consequ5tly1 z prior !reto--& z simple sub/ances4 ,,anti!sis4 ,no composite ?+ 9 ! _w consi/s ( simple p>ts2 & !re does n exi/ 9 ! _w any simple sub/ance4 ,,pro(4 ,let x be suppos$ t a composite ?+ 7z sub/ance7 consi/s ( simple p>ts4 ,inasmu* z all ext]nal relation1 consequ5tly all composition ( sub/ances1 is possible only 9 space2 ! space1 occupi$ by t :i* is composite1 mu/ consi/ ( ! same numb] ( p>ts z is conta9$ 9 ! composite4 ,b space does n consi/ ( simple p>ts1 b ( spaces4 ,!re=e1 e "p ( ! composite mu/ occupy a space4 ,b ! absolutely prim>y p>ts ( :at is composite are simple4 ,x foll[s t :at is simple occupies a space4 ,n[1 z ev]y?+ real t occupies a space1 conta9s a manifold ! p>ts ( :i* are ext]nal to ea* o!r1 & is consequ5tly composite--& a real composite1 n ( accid5ts 7= ^! _c exi/ ext]nal to ea* o!r ap>t f sub/ance71 b ( sub/ances--x foll[s t ! simple mu/ be a sub/antial composite1 :i* is self-contradictory4 ,! second proposition ( ! anti!sis--t !re exi/s 9 ! _w no?+ t is simple--is "h equival5t to ! foll[+3 ,! exi/5ce ( ! absolutely simple _c be demon/rat$ f any exp]i5ce or p]ception ei!r ext]nal or int]nal2 & ! absolutely simple is a m]e idea1 ! objective reality ( :i* _c be demon/rat$ 9 any possible exp]i5ce2 x is consequ5tly1 9 ! exposition ( ph5om5a1 )\t application & object4 ,=1 let u take = grant$ t an object may be f\nd 9 exp]i5ce = ?is transc5d5tal idea2 ! empirical intuition ( su* an object mu/ !n be recogniz$ to conta9 absolutely no manifold ) its p>ts ext]nal to ea* o!r1 & connect$ into unity4 ,n[1 z we _c reason f ! non-consci\sness ( su* a manifold to ! impossibility ( its exi/5ce 9 ! intuition ( an object1 & z ! pro( ( ?is impossibility is necess>y = ! e/abli%m5t & pro( ( absolute simplicity2 x foll[s t ?is simplicity _c be inf]r$ f any p]ception :atev]4 ,z1 !re=e1 an absolutely simple object _c be giv5 9 any exp]i5ce1 & ! _w ( s5se mu/ be consid]$ z ! sum total ( all possible exp]i5ces3 no?+ simple exi/s 9 ! _w4 ,?is second proposition 9 ! anti!sis has a m ext5d$ aim ?an ! fir/4 ,! fir/ m]ely bani%es ! simple f ! intuition ( ! composite2 :ile ! second drives x entirely out ( nature4 ,h5ce we 7 unable to demon/rate x f ! conception ( a giv5 object ( ext]nal intuition 7( ! composite71 b we 7 oblig$ to prove x f ! relation ( a giv5 object to a possible exp]i5ce 9 g5]al4 ,,obs]vations ,,on ,,! ,,second ,,ant9omy4 ,,!sis4 ,:5 ,i speak ( a :ole1 :i* necess>ily consi/s ( simple p>ts1 ,i und]/& !reby only a sub/antial :ole1 z ! true composite2 t is to say1 ,i und]/& t cont+5t unity ( ! manifold :i* is giv5 z p]fectly isolat$ 7at lea/ 9 ?\ght71 plac$ 9 reciprocal connection1 & ?us con/itut$ a unity4 ,space ought n to be call$ a compositum b a totum1 = its p>ts are possible 9 ! :ole1 & n ! :ole by means ( ! p>ts4 ,x might p]haps be call$ a compositum ideale1 b n a compositum reale4 ,b ?is is ( no importance4 ,z space is n a composite ( sub/ances 7& n ev5 ( real accid5ts71 if ,i ab/ract all composition !re9--no?+1 n ev5 a po9t1 rema9s2 = a po9t is possible only z ! limit ( a space--consequ5tly ( a composite4 ,space & "t1 !re=e1 d n consi/ ( simple p>ts4 ,t :i* belongs only to ! condition or /ate ( a sub/ance1 ev5 al?\gh x possesses a quantity 7motion or *ange1 = example71 likewise does n consi/ ( simple p>ts4 ,t is to say1 a c]ta9 degree ( *ange does n orig9ate f ! addition ( _m simple *anges4 ,our inf]5ce ( ! simple f ! composite is valid only ( self-subsi/+ ?+s4 ,b ! accid5ts ( a /ate are n self-subsi/5t4 ,! pro(1 !n1 = ! necessity ( ! simple1 z ! compon5t "p ( all t is sub/antial & composite1 may prove a failure1 & ! :ole case ( ?is !sis be lo/1 if we c>ry ! proposition too f>1 & wi% to make x valid ( ev]y?+ t is composite )\t di/9ction--z inde$ has really n[ & !n happ5$4 ,besides1 ,i am "h speak+ only ( ! simple1 9 s f> z x is necess>ily giv5 9 ! composite--! latt] be+ capable ( solution into ! =m] z its compon5t p>ts4 ,! prop] signification ( ! ^w monas 7z employ$ by ,leibnitz7 ought to relate to ! simple1 giv5 imm$iately z simple sub/ance 7= example1 9 consci\sness71 & n z an elem5t ( ! composite4 ,z an elem5t1 ! t]m atomus w\ld be m appropriate4 ,& z ,i wi% to prove ! exi/5ce ( simple sub/ances1 only 9 relation to1 & z ! elem5ts (1 ! composite1 ,i might t]m ! anti!sis ( ! second ,ant9omy1 transc5d5tal ,atomi/ic4 ,b z ?is ^w has long be5 employ$ to designate a p>ticul> !ory ( corporeal ph5om5a 7moleculae71 & ?us presupposes a basis ( empirical conceptions1 ,i pref] call+ x ! dialectical pr9ciple ( ,monadology4 ,,anti!sis4 ,aga9/ ! ass]tion ( ! inf9ite subdivisibility ( matt] ^: gr\nd ( pro( is purely ma!matical1 objections h be5 alleg$ by ! ,monadi/s4 ,^! objections lay !mselves op51 at fir/ sight1 to suspicion1 f ! fact t !y d n recognize ! cle>e/ ma!matical pro(s z propositions relat+ to ! con/itution ( space1 9 s f> z x is really ! =mal condition ( ! possibility ( all matt]1 b reg>d !m m]ely z inf]5ces f ab/ract b arbitr>y conceptions1 :i* _c h any application to real ?+s4 ,j z if x 7 possible to imag9e ano!r mode ( intuition ?an t giv5 9 ! primitive intuition ( space2 & j z if its priori det]m9ations did n apply to ev]y?+1 ! exi/5ce ( :i* is possible1 f ! fact alone ( its fill+ space4 ,if we li/5 to !m1 we %all f9d ourselves requir$ to cogitate1 9 addition to ! ma!matical po9t1 :i* is simple--n1 h[ev]1 a "p1 b a m]e limit ( space--physical po9ts1 :i* are inde$ likewise simple1 b possess ! peculi> prop]ty1 z p>ts ( space1 ( fill+ x m]ely by _! aggregation4 ,i %all n repeat "h ! common & cle> refutations ( ?is absurdity1 :i* are to be f\nd ev]y:]e 9 numb]s3 e "o kn[s t x is impossible to und]m9e ! evid5ce ( ma!matics by m]e discursive conceptions2 ,i %all only rem>k t1 if 9 ?is case philosophy endeav\rs to ga9 an advantage ov] ma!matics by sophi/ical artifices1 x is because x =gets t ! discussion relates solely to ,ph5om5a & _! conditions4 ,x is n suffici5t to f9d ! conception ( ! simple = ! pure conception ( ! composite1 b we mu/ discov] = ! intuition ( ! composite 7matt]71 ! intuition ( ! simple4 ,n[ ?is1 accord+ to ! laws ( s5sibility1 & consequ5tly 9 ! case ( objects ( s5se1 is utt]ly impossible4 ,9 ! case ( a :ole compos$ ( sub/ances1 :i* is cogitat$ solely by ! pure und]/&+1 x may be necess>y to be 9 possession ( ! simple be=e composition is possible4 ,b ?is does n hold good ( ! ,totum sub/antiale pha5om5on1 :i*1 z an empirical intuition 9 space1 possesses ! necess>y prop]ty ( conta9+ no simple "p1 = ! v reason t no "p ( space is simple4 ,mean:ile1 ! ,monadi/s h be5 subtle en\gh to escape f ?is difficulty1 by presuppos+ intuition & ! dynamical relation ( sub/ances z ! condition ( ! possibility ( space1 in/ead ( reg>d+ space z ! condition ( ! possibility ( ! objects ( ext]nal intuition1 t is1 ( bodies4 ,n[ we h a conception ( bodies only z ph5om5a1 &1 z su*1 !y necess>ily presuppose space z ! condition ( all ext]nal ph5om5a4 ,! evasion is !re=e 9 va92 z1 inde$1 we h suffici5tly %[n 9 our /hetic4 ,if bodies 7 ?+s 9 !mselves1 ! pro( ( ! ,monadi/s w\ld be unexceptionable4 ,! second dialectical ass]tion possesses ! peculi>ity ( hav+ oppos$ to x a dogmatical proposition1 :i*1 among all su* sophi/ical /atem5ts1 is ! only "o t und]takes to prove 9 ! case ( an object ( exp]i5ce1 t :i* is prop]ly a transc5d5tal idea--! absolute simplicity ( sub/ance4 ,! proposition is t ! object ( ! int]nal s5se1 ! ?9k+ ,ego1 is an absolute simple sub/ance4 ,)\t at pres5t ent]+ ^u ?is subject--z x has be5 consid]$ at l5g? 9 a =m] *apt]--,i %all m]ely rem>k t1 if some?+ is cogitat$ m]ely z an object1 )\t ! addition ( any syn!tical det]m9ation ( its intuition--z happ5s 9 ! case ( ! b>e repres5tation1 ,i--x is c]ta9 t no manifold & no composition c be p]ceiv$ 9 su* a repres5tation4 ,z1 moreov]1 ! pr$icates :]eby ,i cogitate ?is object are m]ely intuitions ( ! int]nal s5se1 !re _c be discov]$ 9 !m any?+ to prove ! exi/5ce ( a manifold ^: p>ts are ext]nal to ea* o!r1 &1 consequ5tly1 no?+ to prove ! exi/5ce ( real composition4 ,consci\sness1 !re=e1 is s con/itut$ t1 inasmu* z ! ?9k+ subject is at ! same "t its own object1 x _c divide itself--al?\gh x c divide its inh]+ det]m9ations4 ,= e object 9 relation to itself is absolute unity4 ,nev]!less1 if ! subject is reg>d$ ext]nally1 z an object ( intuition1 x mu/1 9 its "* ( ph5om5on1 possess ! prop]ty ( composition4 ,& x mu/ always be reg>d$ 9 ?is mann]1 if we wi% to "k :e!r !re is or is n conta9$ 9 x a manifold ^: p>ts are ext]nal to ea* o!r4 ,,?ird ,,conflict ,,( ,,! ,,transc5d5tal ,,ideas4 ,,!sis4 ,causality accord+ to ! laws ( nature1 is n ! only causality op]at+ to orig9ate ! ph5om5a ( ! _w4 ,a causality ( fre$om is also necess>y to acc\nt fully = ^! ph5om5a4 ,,pro(4 ,let x be suppos$1 t !re is no o!r k9d ( causality ?an t accord+ to ! laws ( nature4 ,consequ5tly1 ev]y?+ t happ5s presupposes a previ\s condition1 :i* x foll[s ) absolute c]ta9ty1 9 con=mity ) a rule4 ,b ?is previ\s condition mu/ itself be some?+ t has happ5$ 7t has aris5 9 "t1 z x did n exi/ be=e71 =1 if x has always be5 9 exi/5ce1 its consequ5ce or effect w\ld n ?us orig9ate = ! fir/ "t1 b w\ld likewise h always exi/$4 ,! causality1 !re=e1 ( a cause1 :]eby some?+ happ5s1 is itself a ?+ t has happ5$4 ,n[ ?is aga9 presupposes1 9 con=mity ) ! law ( nature1 a previ\s condition & its causality1 & ?is ano!r ant]ior to ! =m]1 & s on4 ,if1 !n1 ev]y?+ happ5s solely 9 accordance ) ! laws ( nature1 !re _c be any real fir/ beg9n+ ( ?+s1 b only a subalt]n or comp>ative beg9n+4 ,!re _c1 !re=e1 be a complet5ess ( s]ies on ! side ( ! causes :i* orig9ate ! "o f ! o!r4 ,b ! law ( nature is t no?+ c happ5 )\t a suffici5t priori det]m9$ cause4 ,! proposition !re=e--if all causality is possible only 9 accordance ) ! laws ( nature--is1 :5 /at$ 9 ?is unlimit$ & g5]al mann]1 self-contradictory4 ,x foll[s t ?is _c be ! only k9d ( causality4 ,f :at has be5 said1 x foll[s t a causality mu/ be admitt$1 by means ( :i* some?+ happ5s1 )\t its cause be+ det]m9$ accord+ to necess>y laws by "s o!r cause prec$+4 ,t is to say1 !re mu/ exi/ an absolute spontaneity ( cause1 :i* ( itself orig9ates a s]ies ( ph5om5a :i* proce$s accord+ to natural laws--consequ5tly transc5d5tal fre$om1 )\t :i* ev5 9 ! c\rse ( nature ! succession ( ph5om5a on ! side ( causes is nev] complete4 ,,anti!sis4 ,!re is no su* ?+ z fre$om1 b ev]y?+ 9 ! _w happ5s solely accord+ to ! laws ( nature4 ,,pro(4 ,grant$1 t !re does exi/ fre$om 9 ! transc5d5tal s5se1 z a peculi> k9d ( causality1 op]at+ to produce ev5ts 9 ! _w--a faculty1 t is to say1 ( orig9at+ a /ate1 & consequ5tly a s]ies ( consequ5ces f t /ate4 ,9 ?is case1 n only ! s]ies orig9at$ by ?is spontaneity1 b ! det]m9ation ( ?is spontaneity itself to ! production ( ! s]ies1 t is to say1 ! causality itself mu/ h an absolute comm5cem5t1 su* t no?+ c prec$e to det]m9e ?is action accord+ to unv>y+ laws4 ,b e beg9n+ ( action presupposes 9 ! act+ cause a /ate ( inaction2 & a dynamically primal beg9n+ ( action presupposes a /ate1 :i* has no connection--z reg>ds causality--) ! prec$+ /ate ( ! cause--:i* does n1 t is1 9 any wise result f x4 ,transc5d5tal fre$om is !re=e oppos$ to ! natural law ( cause & effect1 & su* a conjunction ( successive /ates 9 effective causes is de/ructive ( ! possibility ( unity 9 exp]i5ce & = t reason n to be f\nd 9 exp]i5ce--is consequ5tly a m]e fiction ( ?\ght4 ,we h1 !re=e1 no?+ b nature to :i* we mu/ look = connection & ord] 9 cosmical ev5ts4 ,fre$om--indep5d5ce ( ! laws ( nature--is c]ta9ly a deliv]ance f re/ra9t1 b x is also a rel9qui%+ ( ! guidance ( law & rule4 ,= x _c be alleg$ t1 in/ead ( ! laws ( nature1 laws ( fre$om may be introduc$ into ! causality ( ! c\rse ( nature4 ,=1 if fre$om 7 det]m9$ accord+ to laws1 x w\ld be no long] fre$om1 b m]ely nature4 ,nature1 !re=e1 & transc5d5tal fre$om are di/+ui%able z con=mity to law & lawlessness4 ,! =m] imposes ^u und]/&+ ! difficulty ( seek+ ! orig9 ( ev5ts ev] high] & high] 9 ! s]ies ( causes1 inasmu* z causality is always condition$ !reby2 :ile x comp5sates ?is lab\r by ! gu>antee ( a unity complete & 9 con=mity ) law4 ,! latt]1 on ! contr>y1 holds out to ! und]/&+ ! promise ( a po9t ( re/ 9 ! *a9 ( causes1 by conduct+ x to an uncondition$ causality1 :i* pr(esses to h ! p[] ( spontane\s orig9ation1 b :i*1 9 its own utt] bl9dness1 deprives x ( ! guidance ( rules1 by :i* alone a completely connect$ exp]i5ce is possible4 ,,obs]vations ,,on ,,! ,,?ird ,,ant9omy4 ,,on ,,! ,,!sis4 ,! transc5d5tal idea ( fre$om is f> f con/itut+ ! entire cont5t ( ! psy*ological conception s t]m$1 :i* is = ! mo/ "p empirical4 ,x m]ely pres5ts u ) ! conception ( spontaneity ( action1 z ! prop] gr\nd = imput+ fre$om to ! cause ( a c]ta9 class ( objects4 ,x is1 h[ev]1 ! true /umbl+-/one to philosophy1 :i* meets ) unconqu]able difficulties 9 ! way ( its admitt+ ?is k9d ( uncondition$ causality4 ,t elem5t 9 ! "q ( ! fre$om ( ! w1 :i* has = s long a "t plac$ speculative reason 9 su* p]plexity1 is prop]ly only transc5d5tal1 & conc]ns ! "q1 :e!r !re mu/ be held to exi/ a faculty ( spontane\s orig9ation ( a s]ies ( successive ?+s or /ates4 ,h[ su* a faculty is possible is n a necess>y inquiry2 = 9 ! case ( natural causality itself1 we are oblig$ to cont5t ourselves ) ! priori k t su* a causality mu/ be presuppos$1 al?\gh we are q incapable ( compreh5d+ h[ ! be+ ( "o ?+ is possible ?r\gh ! be+ ( ano!r1 b mu/ = ?is in=mation look entirely to exp]i5ce4 ,n[ we h demon/rat$ ?is necessity ( a free fir/ beg9n+ ( a s]ies ( ph5om5a1 only 9 s f> z x is requir$ = ! compreh5sion ( an orig9 ( ! _w1 all foll[+ /ates be+ reg>d$ z a succession accord+ to laws ( nature alone4 ,b1 z !re has ?us be5 prov$ ! exi/5ce ( a faculty :i* c ( itself orig9ate a s]ies 9 "t--al?\gh we are unable to expla9 h[ x c exi/--we feel ourselves au?oriz$ to admit1 ev5 9 ! mid/ ( ! natural c\rse ( ev5ts1 a beg9n+1 z reg>ds causality1 ( diff]5t successions ( ph5om5a1 & at ! same "t to attribute to all sub/ances a faculty ( free action4 ,b we ought 9 ?is case n to all[ ourselves to fall into a common misund]/&+1 & to suppose t1 because a successive s]ies 9 ! _w c only h a comp>atively fir/ beg9n+--ano!r /ate or condition ( ?+s always prec$+--an absolutely fir/ beg9n+ ( a s]ies 9 ! c\rse ( nature is impossible4 ,= we are n speak+ "h ( an absolutely fir/ beg9n+ 9 relation to "t1 b z reg>ds causality alone4 ,:51 = example1 ,i1 completely ( my own free w1 & indep5d5tly ( ! necess>ily det]m9ative influ5ce ( natural causes1 rise f my *air1 !re comm5ces ) ?is ev5t1 includ+ its mat]ial consequ5ces 9 inf9itum1 an absolutely new s]ies2 al?\gh1 9 relation to "t1 ?is ev5t is m]ely ! cont9uation ( a prec$+ s]ies4 ,= ?is resolution & act ( m9e d n =m "p ( ! succession ( effects 9 nature1 & are n m]e cont9uations ( x2 on ! contr>y1 ! det]m9+ causes ( nature cease to op]ate 9 ref]5ce to ?is ev5t1 :i* c]ta9ly succe$s ! acts ( nature1 b does n proce$ f !m4 ,= ^! reasons1 ! action ( a free ag5t mu/ be t]m$1 9 reg>d to causality1 if n 9 relation to "t1 an absolutely primal beg9n+ ( a s]ies ( ph5om5a4 ,! ju/ification ( ?is ne$ ( reason to re/ ^u a free act z ! fir/ beg9n+ ( ! s]ies ( natural causes is evid5t f ! fact1 t all philosoph]s ( antiquity 7) ! exception ( ! ,epicurean s*ool7 felt !mselves oblig$1 :5 con/ruct+ a !ory ( ! motions ( ! univ]se1 to accept a prime mov]1 t is1 a freely act+ cause1 :i* spontane\sly & prior to all o!r causes evolv$ ?is s]ies ( /ates4 ,!y always felt ! ne$ ( go+ beyond m]e nature1 = ! purpose ( mak+ a fir/ beg9n+ compreh5sible4 ,,on ,,! ,,anti!sis4 ,! ass]tor ( ! all-suffici5cy ( nature 9 reg>d to causality 7transc5d5tal ,physiocracy71 9 opposition to ! doctr9e ( fre$om1 w\ld def5d 8 view ( ! "q some:at 9 ! foll[+ mann]4 ,he w\ld say1 9 answ] to ! sophi/ical argum5ts ( ! opposite p>ty3 ,if y d n accept a ma!matical fir/1 9 relation to "t1 y h no ne$ to seek a dynamical fir/1 9 reg>d to causality4 ,:o compell$ y to imag9e an absolutely primal condition ( ! _w1 & !re) an absolute beg9n+ ( ! gradually progress+ successions ( ph5om5a--&1 z "s f\ndation = ?is fancy ( y\rs1 to set b\nds to unlimit$ nature8 ,inasmu* z ! sub/ances 9 ! _w h always exi/$--at lea/ ! unity ( exp]i5ce r5d]s su* a supposition q necess>y--!re is no difficulty 9 believ+ also1 t ! *anges 9 ! conditions ( ^! sub/ances h always exi/$2 &1 consequ5tly1 t a fir/ beg9n+1 ma!matical or dynamical1 is by no means requir$4 ,! possibility ( su* an inf9ite d]ivation1 )\t any initial memb] f :i* all ! o!rs result1 is c]ta9ly q incompreh5sible4 ,b1 if y are ra% en\gh to d5y ! enigmatical secrets ( nature = ?is reason1 y w f9d y\rselves oblig$ to d5y also ! exi/5ce ( _m fundam5tal prop]ties ( natural objects 7su* z fundam5tal =ces71 :i* y c j z little compreh5d2 & ev5 ! possibility ( s simple a conception z t ( *ange mu/ pres5t to y insup]able difficulties4 ,= if exp]i5ce did n tea* y t x 0 real1 y nev] c\ld conceive priori ! possibility ( ?is ceaseless sequ5ce ( be+ & non-be+4 ,b if ! exi/5ce ( a transc5d5tal faculty ( fre$om is grant$--a faculty ( orig9at+ *anges 9 ! _w--?is faculty mu/ at lea/ exi/ out ( & ap>t f ! _w2 al?\gh x is c]ta9ly a bold assumption1 t1 ov] & above ! complete cont5t ( all possible intuitions1 !re /ill exi/s an object :i* _c be pres5t$ 9 any possible p]ception4 ,b1 to attribute to sub/ances 9 ! _w itself su* a faculty1 is q inadmissible2 =1 9 ?is case2 ! connection ( ph5om5a reciprocally det]m9+ & det]m9$ accord+ to g5]al laws1 :i* is t]m$ nature1 & along ) x ! crit]ia ( empirical tru?1 :i* enable u to di/+ui% exp]i5ce f m]e vision>y dream+1 w\ld almo/ entirely disappe>4 ,9 proximity ) su* a lawless faculty ( fre$om1 a sy/em ( nature is h>dly cogitable2 = ! laws ( ! latt] w\ld be cont9ually subject to ! intrusive influ5ces ( ! =m]1 & ! c\rse ( ph5om5a1 :i* w\ld o!rwise proce$ regul>ly & uni=mly1 w\ld become !reby confus$ & disconnect$4 ,,f\r? ,,conflict ,,( ,,! ,,transc5d5tal ,,ideas4 ,,!sis4 ,!re exi/s ei!r 91 or 9 connection ) ! _w--ei!r z a "p ( x1 or z ! cause ( x--an absolutely necess>y be+4 ,,pro(4 ,! _w ( s5se1 z ! sum total ( all ph5om5a1 conta9s a s]ies ( *anges4 ,=1 )\t su* a s]ies1 ! m5tal repres5tation ( ! s]ies ( "t itself1 z ! condition ( ! possibility ( ! s5su\s _w1 c\ld n be pres5t$ to u4#ee ,b e *ange /&s "u its condition1 :i* prec$es x 9 "t & r5d]s x necess>y4 ,n[ ! exi/5ce ( a giv5 condition presupposes a complete s]ies ( conditions up to ! absolutely uncondition$1 :i* alone is absolutely necess>y4 ,x foll[s t some?+ t is absolutely necess>y mu/ exi/1 if *ange exi/s z its consequ5ce4 ,b ?is necess>y ?+ itself belongs to ! s5su\s _w4 ,= suppose x to exi/ out ( & ap>t f x1 ! s]ies ( cosmical *anges w\ld receive f x a beg9n+1 & yet ?is necess>y cause w\ld n itself belong to ! _w ( s5se4 ,b ?is is impossible4 ,=1 z ! beg9n+ ( a s]ies 9 "t is det]m9$ only by t :i* prec$es x 9 "t1 ! supreme condition ( ! beg9n+ ( a s]ies ( *anges mu/ exi/ 9 ! "t 9 :i* ?is s]ies itself did n exi/2 = a beg9n+ supposes a "t prec$+1 9 :i* ! ?+ t beg9s to be 0 n 9 exi/5ce4 ,! causality ( ! necess>y cause ( *anges1 & consequ5tly ! cause itself1 mu/ = ^! reasons belong to "t--& to ph5om5a1 "t be+ possible only z ! =m ( ph5om5a4 ,consequ5tly1 x _c be cogitat$ z sep>at$ f ! _w ( s5se--! sum total ( all ph5om5a4 ,!re is1 !re=e1 conta9$ 9 ! _w1 some?+ t is absolutely necess>y--:e!r x be ! :ole cosmical s]ies itself1 or only a "p ( x4 #ee ,objectively1 "t1 z ! =mal condition ( ! possibility ( *ange1 prec$es all *anges2 b subjectively1 & 9 consci\sness1 ! repres5tation ( "t1 l e o!r1 is giv5 solely by occasion ( p]ception4 ,,anti!sis4 ,an absolutely necess>y be+ does n exi/1 ei!r 9 ! _w1 or out ( x--z its cause4 ,,pro(4 ,grant t ei!r ! _w itself is necess>y1 or t !re is conta9$ 9 x a necess>y exi/5ce4 ,two cases are possible4 ,fir/1 !re mu/ ei!r be 9 ! s]ies ( cosmical *anges a beg9n+1 :i* is unconditionally necess>y1 & !re=e uncaus$--:i* is at v>iance ) ! dynamical law ( ! det]m9ation ( all ph5om5a 9 "t2 or1 secondly1 ! s]ies itself is )\t beg9n+1 &1 al?\gh cont+5t & condition$ 9 all its p>ts1 is nev]!less absolutely necess>y & uncondition$ z a :ole--:i* is self-contradictory4 ,= ! exi/5ce ( an aggregate _c be necess>y1 if no s+le "p ( x possesses necess>y exi/5ce4 ,grant1 on ! o!r h&1 t an absolutely necess>y cause exi/s out ( & ap>t f ! _w4 ,?is cause1 z ! highe/ memb] 9 ! s]ies ( ! causes ( cosmical *anges1 mu/ orig9ate or beg9#ef ! exi/5ce ( ! latt] & _! s]ies4 ,9 ?is case x mu/ also beg9 to act1 & its causality w\ld !re=e belong to "t1 & consequ5tly to ! sum total ( ph5om5a1 t is1 to ! _w4 ,x foll[s t ! cause _c be out ( ! _w2 :i* is contradictory to ! hypo!sis4 ,!re=e1 nei!r 9 ! _w1 nor out ( x 7b 9 causal connection ) x71 does !re exi/ any absolutely necess>y be+4 #ef ,! ^w beg9 is tak5 9 two s5ses4 ,! fir/ is active--! cause be+ reg>d$ z beg9n+ a s]ies ( conditions z its effect 7infit74 ,! second is passive--! causality 9 ! cause itself beg9n+ to op]ate 7fit74 ,i reason "h f ! fir/ to ! second4 ,,obs]vations ,,on ,,! ,,f\r? ,,ant9omy4 ,,on ,,! ,,!sis4 ,to demon/rate ! exi/5ce ( a necess>y be+1 ,i _c be p]mitt$ 9 ?is place to employ any o!r ?an ! cosmological argum5t1 :i* asc5ds f ! condition$ 9 ph5om5a to ! uncondition$ 9 conception--! uncondition$ be+ consid]$ ! necess>y condition ( ! absolute totality ( ! s]ies4 ,! pro(1 f ! m]e idea ( a supreme be+1 belongs to ano!r pr9ciple ( reason & requires sep>ate discussion4 ,! pure cosmological pro( demon/rates ! exi/5ce ( a necess>y be+1 b at ! same "t leaves x q unsettl$1 :e!r ?is be+ is ! _w itself1 or q di/9ct f x4 ,to e/abli% ! tru? ( ! latt] view1 pr9ciples are requisite1 :i* are n cosmological & d n proce$ 9 ! s]ies ( ph5om5a4 ,we %\ld require to introduce into our pro( conceptions ( cont+5t be+s--reg>d$ m]ely z objects ( ! und]/&+1 & also a pr9ciple :i* enables u to connect ^!1 by means ( m]e conceptions1 ) a necess>y be+4 ,b ! prop] place = all su* argum5ts is a transc5d5t philosophy1 :i* has unhappily n yet be5 e/abli%$4 ,b1 if we beg9 our pro( cosmologically1 by lay+ at ! f\ndation ( x ! s]ies ( ph5om5a1 & ! regress 9 x accord+ to empirical laws ( causality1 we are n at lib]ty to break (f f ?is mode ( demon/ration & to pass ov] to some?+ :i* is n itself a memb] ( ! s]ies4 ,! condition mu/ be tak5 9 exactly ! same signification z ! relation ( ! condition$ to its condition 9 ! s]ies has be5 tak51 = ! s]ies mu/ conduct u 9 an unbrok5 regress to ?is supreme condition4 ,b if ?is relation is s5su\s1 & belongs to ! possible empirical employm5t ( und]/&+1 ! supreme condition or cause mu/ close ! regressive s]ies accord+ to ! laws ( s5sibility & consequ5tly1 mu/ belong to ! s]ies ( "t4 ,x foll[s t ?is necess>y exi/5ce mu/ be reg>d$ z ! highe/ memb] ( ! cosmical s]ies4 ,c]ta9 philosoph]s h1 nev]!less1 all[$ !mselves ! lib]ty ( mak+ su* a saltus 7metabasis eis allo gonos74 ,f ! *anges 9 ! _w !y h conclud$ _! empirical cont+5cy1 t is1 _! dep5d5ce on empirically-det]m9$ causes1 & !y ?us admitt$ an asc5d+ s]ies ( empirical conditions3 & 9 ?is !y are q "r4 ,b z !y c\ld n f9d 9 ?is s]ies any primal beg9n+ or any highe/ memb]1 !y pass$ sudd5ly f ! empirical conception ( cont+5cy to ! pure category1 :i* pres5ts u ) a s]ies--n s5su\s1 b intellectual--^: complet5ess does c]ta9ly re/ ^u ! exi/5ce ( an absolutely necess>y cause4 ,nay1 m1 ?is intellectual s]ies is n ti$ to any s5su\s conditions2 & is !re=e free f ! condition ( "t1 :i* requires x spontane\sly to beg9 its causality 9 "t4 ,b su* a proc$ure is p]fectly inadmissible1 z w be made pla9 f :at foll[s4 ,9 ! pure s5se ( ! categories1 t is cont+5t ! contradictory opposite ( :i* is possible4 ,n[ we _c reason f empirical cont+5cy to intellectual4 ,! opposite ( t :i* is *ang$--! opposite ( its /ate--is actual at ano!r "t1 & is !re=e possible4 ,consequ5tly1 x is n ! contradictory opposite ( ! =m] /ate4 ,to be t1 x is necess>y t1 9 ! same "t 9 :i* ! prec$+ /ate exi/$1 its opposite c\ld h exi/$ 9 its place2 b su* a cognition is n giv5 u 9 ! m]e ph5om5on ( *ange4 ,a body t 0 9 motion ,a1 comes into a /ate ( re/ non-,a4 ,n[ x _c be conclud$ f ! fact t a /ate opposite to ! /ate ,a foll[s x1 t ! contradictory opposite ( ,a is possible2 & t ,a is !re=e cont+5t4 ,to prove ?is1 we %\ld require to "k t ! /ate ( re/ c\ld h exi/$ 9 ! v same "t 9 :i* ! motion took place4 ,n[ we "k no?+ m ?an t ! /ate ( re/ 0 actual 9 ! "t t foll[$ ! /ate ( motion2 consequ5tly1 t x 0 also possible4 ,b motion at "o "t1 & re/ at ano!r "t1 are n contradictorily oppos$ to ea* o!r4 ,x foll[s f :at has be5 said t ! succession ( opposite det]m9ations1 t is1 *ange1 does n demon/rate ! fact ( cont+5cy z repres5t$ 9 ! conceptions ( ! pure und]/&+2 & t x _c1 !re=e1 conduct u to ! fact ( ! exi/5ce ( a necess>y be+4 ,*ange proves m]ely empirical cont+5cy1 t is to say1 t ! new /ate c\ld n h exi/$ )\t a cause1 :i* belongs to ! prec$+ "t4 ,?is cause--ev5 al?\gh x is reg>d$ z absolutely necess>y--mu/ be pres5t$ to u 9 "t1 & mu/ belong to ! s]ies ( ph5om5a4 ,,on ,,! ,,anti!sis4 ,! difficulties :i* meet u1 9 our attempt to rise ?r\gh ! s]ies ( ph5om5a to ! exi/5ce ( an absolutely necess>y supreme cause1 mu/ n orig9ate f our inability to e/abli% ! tru? ( our m]e conceptions ( ! necess>y exi/5ce ( a ?+4 ,t is to say1 our objections n be ontological1 b mu/ be direct$ aga9/ ! causal connection ) a s]ies ( ph5om5a ( a condition :i* is itself uncondition$4 ,9 "o ^w1 !y mu/ be cosmological & relate to empirical laws4 ,we mu/ %[ t ! regress 9 ! s]ies ( causes 79 ! _w ( s5se7 _c conclude ) an empirically uncondition$ condition1 & t ! cosmological argum5t f ! cont+5cy ( ! cosmical /ate--a cont+5cy alleg$ to arise f *ange--does n ju/ify u 9 accept+ a fir/ cause1 t is1 a prime orig9ator ( ! cosmical s]ies4 ,! read] w obs]ve 9 ?is ant9omy a v rem>kable contra/4 ,! v same gr\nds ( pro( :i* e/abli%$ 9 ! !sis ! exi/5ce ( a supreme be+1 demon/rat$ 9 ! anti!sis--& ) equal /rictness--! non-exi/5ce ( su* a be+4 ,we f\nd1 fir/1 t a necess>y be+ exi/s1 because ! :ole "t pa/ conta9s ! s]ies ( all conditions1 & ) x1 !re=e1 ! uncondition$ 7! necess>y72 secondly1 t !re does n exi/ any necess>y be+1 = ! same reason1 t ! :ole "t pa/ conta9s ! s]ies ( all conditions--:i* are !mselves1 !re=e1 9 ! aggregate1 condition$4 ,! cause ( ?is seem+ incongruity is z foll[s4 ,we att5d1 9 ! fir/ argum5t1 solely to ! absolute totality ( ! s]ies ( conditions1 ! "o ( :i* det]m9es ! o!r 9 "t1 & ?us arrive at a necess>y uncondition$4 ,9 ! second1 we consid]1 on ! contr>y1 ! cont+5cy ( ev]y?+ t is det]m9$ 9 ! s]ies ( "t--= e ev5t is prec$$ by a "t1 9 :i* ! condition itself mu/ be det]m9$ z condition$--& ?us ev]y?+ t is uncondition$ or absolutely necess>y disappe>s4 ,9 bo?1 ! mode ( pro( is q 9 accordance ) ! common proc$ure ( human reason1 :i* (t5 falls into discord ) itself1 f consid]+ an object f two diff]5t po9ts ( view4 ,h]r von ,mairan reg>d$ ! controv]sy betwe5 two celebrat$ a/ronom]s1 :i* arose f a simil> difficulty z to ! *oice ( a prop] /&po9t1 z a ph5om5on ( suffici5t importance to w>rant a sep>ate treatise on ! subject4 ,! "o conclud$3 ! moon revolves on its own axis1 because x con/antly pres5ts ! same side to ! e>?2 ! o!r decl>$ t ! moon does n revolve on its own axis1 = ! same reason4 ,bo? conclusions 7 p]fectly correct1 accord+ to ! po9t ( view f :i* ! motions ( ! moon 7 consid]$4 ,section ,,iii4 ,( ! ,int]e/ ( ,reason 9 ^! ,self-contradictions ,we h ?us completely be=e u ! dialectical proc$ure ( ! cosmological ideas4 ,no possible exp]i5ce c pres5t u ) an object adequate to !m 9 ext5t4 ,nay1 m1 reason itself _c cogitate !m z accord+ ) ! g5]al laws ( exp]i5ce4 ,& yet !y are n arbitr>y fictions ( ?\ght4 ,on ! contr>y1 reason1 9 its un9t]rupt$ progress 9 ! empirical syn!sis1 is necess>ily conduct$ to !m1 :5 x endeav\rs to free f all conditions & to compreh5d 9 its uncondition$ totality t :i* c only be det]m9$ conditionally 9 accordance ) ! laws ( exp]i5ce4 ,^! dialectical propositions are s _m attempts to solve f\r natural & unavoidable problems ( reason4 ,!re are nei!r m1 nor c !re be less1 ?an ?is numb]1 because !re are no o!r s]ies ( syn!tical hypo!ses1 limit+ priori ! empirical syn!sis4 ,! brilliant claims ( reason /riv+ to ext5d its dom9ion beyond ! limits ( exp]i5ce1 h be5 repres5t$ above only 9 dry =mulae1 :i* conta9 m]ely ! gr\nds ( its pret5sions4 ,!y h1 besides1 9 con=mity ) ! "* ( a transc5d5tal philosophy1 be5 fre$ f e empirical elem5t2 al?\gh ! full spl5d\r ( ! promises !y hold out1 & ! anticipations !y excite1 manife/s itself only :5 9 connection ) empirical cognitions4 ,9 ! application ( !m1 h[ev]1 & 9 ! advanc+ enl>gem5t ( ! employm5t ( reason1 :ile /ruggl+ to rise f ! region ( exp]i5ce & to so> to ^? sublime ideas1 philosophy discov]s a value & a dignity1 :i*1 if x c\ld b make good its ass]tions1 w\ld raise x f> above all o!r dep>tm5ts ( human k--pr(ess+1 z x does1 to pres5t a sure f\ndation = our highe/ hopes & ! ultimate aims ( all ! ex]tions ( reason4 ,! que/ions3 :e!r ! _w has a beg9n+ & a limit to its ext5sion 9 space2 :e!r !re exi/s any:]e1 or p]haps1 9 my own ?9k+ ,self1 an indivisible & inde/ructible unity--or :e!r no?+ b :at is divisible & transitory exi/s2 :e!r ,i am a free ag5t1 or1 l o!r be+s1 am b\nd 9 ! *a9s ( nature & fate2 :e!r1 f9ally1 !re is a supreme cause ( ! _w1 or all our ?\ght & speculation mu/ end ) nature & ! ord] ( ext]nal ?+s--are que/ions = ! solution ( :i* ! ma!matician w\ld will+ly ex*ange 8 :ole sci5ce2 = 9 x !re is no satisfaction = ! highe/ aspirations & mo/ ard5t desires ( humanity4 ,nay1 x may ev5 be said t ! true value ( ma!matics--t pride ( human reason--consi/s 9 ?is3 t %e guides reason to ! k ( nature--9 h] great] z well z 9 h] less manife/ations--9 h] beautiful ord] & regul>ity--guides h]1 moreov]1 to an insight into ! wond]ful unity ( ! mov+ =ces 9 ! op]ations ( nature1 f> beyond ! expectations ( a philosophy build+ only on exp]i5ce2 & t %e ?us enc\rages philosophy to ext5d ! prov9ce ( reason beyond all exp]i5ce1 & at ! same "t provides x ) ! mo/ excell5t mat]ials = support+ its inve/igations1 9 s f> z _! nature admits1 by adequate & accordant intuitions4 ,un=tunately = speculation--b p]haps =tunately = ! practical int]e/s ( humanity--reason1 9 ! mid/ ( h] highe/ anticipations1 f9ds h]self hemm$ 9 by a press ( opposite & contradictory conclusions1 f :i* nei!r h] hon\r nor h] safety w p]mit h] to draw back4 ,nor c %e reg>d ^! conflict+ tra9s ( reason+ ) indiff]5ce z m]e passages at arms1 /ill less c %e comm& peace2 = 9 ! subject ( ! conflict %e has a deep int]e/4 ,!re is no o!r c\rse left op5 to h] ?an to reflect ) h]self ^u ! orig9 ( ?is disunion 9 reason--:e!r x may n arise f a m]e misund]/&+4 ,aft] su* an inquiry1 arrogant claims w\ld h to be giv5 up on bo? sides2 b ! sov]eignty ( reason ov] und]/&+ & s5se w\ld be bas$ ^u a sure f\ndation4 ,we %all at pres5t def] ?is radical inquiry &1 9 ! meantime1 consid] = a little :at side 9 ! controv]sy we %\ld mo/ will+ly take1 if we 7 oblig$ to become p>tisans at all4 ,z1 9 ?is case1 we leave out ( sight altoge!r ! logical crit]ion ( tru?1 & m]ely consult our own int]e/ 9 ref]5ce to ! "q1 ^! consid]ations1 al?\gh inadequate to settle ! "q ( "r 9 ei!r p>ty1 w enable u to compreh5d h[ ^? :o h tak5 "p 9 ! /ruggle1 adopt ! "o view r ?an ! o!r--no special insight into ! subject1 h[ev]1 hav+ influ5c$ _! *oice4 ,!y w1 at ! same "t1 expla9 to u _m o!r ?+s by ! way--= example1 ! fi]y zeal on ! "o side & ! cold ma9t5ance ( _! cause on ! o!r2 :y ! "o p>ty has met ) ! w>me/ approbations1 & ! o!r has always be5 repuls$ by irreconcilable prejudices4 ,!re is "o ?+1 h[ev]1 t det]m9es ! prop] po9t ( view1 f :i* alone ?is prelim9>y inquiry c be in/itut$ & c>ri$ on ) ! prop] complet5ess--& t is ! comp>ison ( ! pr9ciples f :i* bo? sides1 !sis & anti!sis1 proce$4 ,my read]s w\ld rem>k 9 ! propositions ( ! anti!sis a complete uni=mity 9 ! mode ( ?\ght & a p]fect unity ( pr9ciple4 ,its pr9ciple 0 t ( pure empiricism1 n only 9 ! explication ( ! ph5om5a 9 ! _w1 b also 9 ! solution ( ! transc5d5tal ideas1 ev5 ( t ( ! univ]se itself4 ,! affirmations ( ! !sis1 on ! contr>y1 7 bas$1 9 addition to ! empirical mode ( explanation employ$ 9 ! s]ies ( ph5om5a1 on intellectual propositions2 & its pr9ciples 7 9 s f> n simple4 ,i %all t]m ! !sis1 9 view ( its ess5tial *>act]i/ic1 ! dogmatism ( pure reason4 ,on ! side ( ,dogmatism1 or ( ! !sis1 !re=e1 9 ! det]m9ation ( ! cosmological ideas1 we f9d3 #a4 ,a practical int]e/1 :i* mu/ be v de> to e "r-?9k+ man4 ,t ! ^w has a beg9n+--t ! nature ( my ?9k+ self is simple1 & !re=e inde/ructible--t ,i am a free ag5t1 & rais$ above ! compulsion ( nature & h] laws--&1 f9ally1 t ! entire ord] ( ?+s1 :i* =m ! _w1 is dep5d5t ^u a ,supreme ,be+1 f :om ! :ole receives unity & connection--^! are s _m f\ndation-/ones ( morality & religion4 ,! anti!sis deprives u ( all ^! supports--or1 at lea/1 seems s to deprive u4 #b4 ,a speculative int]e/ ( reason manife/s itself on ?is side4 ,=1 if we take ! transc5d5tal ideas & employ !m 9 ! mann] :i* ! !sis directs1 we c exhibit completely priori ! entire *a9 ( conditions1 & und]/& ! d]ivation ( ! condition$--beg9n+ f ! uncondition$4 ,?is ! anti!sis does n d2 & = ?is reason does n meet ) s welcome a reception4 ,= x c give no answ] to our "q respect+ ! conditions ( its syn!sis--except su* z mu/ be supplem5t$ by ano!r "q1 & s on to inf9ity4 ,accord+ to x1 we mu/ rise f a giv5 beg9n+ to "o /ill high]2 e "p conducts u to a /ill small] "o2 e ev5t is prec$$ by ano!r ev5t :i* is its cause2 & ! conditions ( exi/5ce re/ always ^u o!r & /ill high] conditions1 & f9d nei!r end nor basis 9 "s self-subsi/5t ?+ z ! primal be+4 #c4 ,?is side has also ! advantage ( popul>ity2 & ?is con/itutes no small "p ( its claim to fav\r4 ,! common und]/&+ does n f9d ! lea/ difficulty 9 ! idea ( ! uncondition$ beg9n+ ( all syn!sis--accu/om$1 z x is1 r to foll[ our consequ5ces ?an to seek = a prop] basis = cognition4 ,9 ! conception ( an absolute fir/1 moreov]--! possibility ( :i* x does n inquire into--x is highly gratifi$ to f9d a firmly-e/abli%$ po9t ( dep>ture = its attempts at !ory2 :ile 9 ! re/less & cont9u\s asc5t f ! condition$ to ! condition1 always ) "o foot 9 ! air1 x c f9d no satisfaction4 ,on ! side ( ! anti!sis1 or ,empiricism1 9 ! det]m9ation ( ! cosmological ideas3 #a4 ,we _c discov] any su* practical int]e/ aris+ f pure pr9ciples ( reason z morality & religion pres5t4 ,on ! contr>y1 pure empiricism seems to empty !m ( all _! p[] & influ5ce4 ,if !re does n exi/ a ,supreme ,be+ di/9ct f ! _w--if ! _w is )\t beg9n+1 consequ5tly )\t a ,creator--if our wills are n free1 & ! s\l is divisible & subject to corruption j l matt]--! ideas & pr9ciples ( morality lose all validity & fall ) ! transc5d5tal ideas :i* con/itut$ _! !oretical support4 #b4 ,b empiricism1 9 comp5sation1 holds out to reason1 9 its speculative int]e/s1 c]ta9 important advantages1 f> exce$+ any t ! dogmati/ c promise u4 ,=1 :5 employ$ by ! empirici/1 und]/&+ is always ^u its prop] gr\nd ( inve/igation--! field ( possible exp]i5ce1 ! laws ( :i* x c explore1 & ?us ext5d its cognition securely & ) cle> intellig5ce )\t be+ /opp$ by limits 9 any direction4 ,"h c x & ought x to f9d & pres5t to intuition its prop] object--n only 9 itself1 b 9 all its relations2 or1 if x employ conceptions1 ^u ?is gr\nd x c always pres5t ! correspond+ images 9 cle> & unmi/akable intuitions4 ,x is q unnecess>y = x to r5\nce ! guidance ( nature1 to atta* itself to ideas1 ! objects ( :i* x _c "k2 because1 z m]e intellectual entities1 !y _c be pres5t$ 9 any intuition4 ,on ! contr>y1 x is n ev5 p]mitt$ to ab&on its prop] occupation1 "u ! pret5ce t x has be5 br\ght to a conclusion 7= x nev] c be71 & to pass into ! region ( idealiz+ reason & transc5d5t conceptions1 :i* x is n requir$ to obs]ve & explore ! laws ( nature1 b m]ely to ?9k & to imag9e--secure f be+ contradict$ by facts1 because !y h n be5 call$ z witnesses1 b pass$ by1 or p]haps subord9at$ to ! s-call$ high] int]e/s & consid]ations ( pure reason4 ,h5ce ! empirici/ w nev] all[ himself to accept any epo* ( nature = ! fir/--! absolutely primal /ate2 he w n believe t !re c be limits to 8 outlook into h] wide doma9s1 nor pass f ! objects ( nature1 :i* he c satisfactorily expla9 by means ( obs]vation & ma!matical ?\ght--:i* he c det]m9e syn!tically 9 intuition1 to ^? :i* nei!r s5se nor imag9ation c ev] pres5t 9 concreto2 he w n conc$e ! exi/5ce ( a faculty 9 nature1 op]at+ indep5d5tly ( ! laws ( nature--a concession :i* w\ld introduce unc]ta9ty into ! proc$ure ( ! und]/&+1 :i* is guid$ by necess>y laws to ! obs]vation ( ph5om5a2 nor1 f9ally1 w he p]mit himself to seek a cause beyond nature1 inasmu* z we "k no?+ b x1 & f x alone receive an objective basis = all our conceptions & in/ruction 9 ! unv>y+ laws ( ?+s4 ,9 tru?1 if ! empirical philosoph] _h no o!r purpose 9 ! e/abli%m5t ( 8 anti!sis ?an to *eck ! presumption ( a reason :i* mi/akes its true de/9ation1 :i* boa/s ( its insight & its k1 j :]e all insight & k cease to exi/1 & reg>ds t :i* is valid only 9 relation to a practical int]e/1 z an advancem5t ( ! speculative int]e/s ( ! m9d 79 ord]1 :5 x is conv5i5t = itself1 to break ! ?read ( our physical inve/igations1 &1 "u pret5ce ( ext5d+ our cognition1 connect !m ) transc5d5tal ideas1 by means ( :i* we really "k only t we "k no?+7--if1 ,i say1 ! empirici/ re/$ satisfi$ ) ?is b5efit1 ! pr9ciple advanc$ by him w\ld be a maxim recomm5d+ mod]ation 9 ! pret5sions ( reason & mode/y 9 its affirmations1 & at ! same "t w\ld direct u to ! "r mode ( ext5d+ ! prov9ce ( ! und]/&+1 by ! help ( ! only true tea*]1 exp]i5ce4 ,9 ob$i5ce to ?is advice1 intellectual hypo!ses & fai? w\ld n be call$ 9 aid ( our practical int]e/s2 nor %\ld we introduce !m "u ! pomp\s titles ( sci5ce & insight4 ,= speculative cognition _c f9d an objective basis any o!r :]e ?an 9 exp]i5ce2 &1 :5 we ov]/ep its limits our syn!sis1 :i* requires ev] new cognitions indep5d5t ( exp]i5ce1 has no sub/ratum ( intuition ^u :i* to build4 ,b if--z (t5 happ5s--empiricism1 9 relation to ideas1 becomes itself dogmatic & boldly d5ies t :i* is above ! sph]e ( its ph5om5al cognition1 x falls itself into ! error ( intemp]ance--an error :i* is "h all ! m repreh5sible1 z !reby ! practical int]e/ ( reason receives an irrep>able injury4 ,& ?is con/itutes ! opposition betwe5 ,epicureanism#eg & ,platonism4 #eg ,x is1 h[ev]1 /ill a matt] ( d\bt :e!r ,epicurus ev] prop\nd$ ^! pr9ciples z directions = ! objective employm5t ( ! und]/&+4 ,if1 inde$1 !y 7 no?+ m ?an maxims = ! speculative ex]cise ( reason1 he gives evid5ce !re9 a m g5u9e philosophic _s ?an any ( ! philosoph]s ( antiquity4 ,t1 9 ! explanation ( ph5om5a1 we mu/ proce$ z if ! field ( inquiry _h nei!r limits 9 space nor comm5cem5t 9 "t2 t we mu/ be satisfi$ ) ! tea*+ ( exp]i5ce 9 ref]5ce to ! mat]ial ( :i* ! _w is pos$2 t we mu/ n look = any o!r mode ( ! orig9ation ( ev5ts ?an t :i* is det]m9$ by ! unalt]able laws ( nature2 & f9ally1 t we n employ ! hypo!sis ( a cause di/9ct f ! _w to acc\nt = a ph5om5on or = ! _w itself--are pr9ciples = ! ext5sion ( speculative philosophy1 & ! discov]y ( ! true s\rces ( ! pr9ciples ( morals1 :i*1 h[ev] little con=m$ to 9 ! pres5t day1 are und\bt$ly correct4 ,at ! same "t1 any "o desir\s ( ignor+1 9 m]e speculation1 ^! dogmatical propositions1 ne$ n = t reason be accus$ ( d5y+ !m4 ,bo? ,epicurus & ,plato ass]t m 9 _! sy/ems ?an !y "k4 ,! =m] enc\rages & advances sci5ce--al?\gh to ! prejudice ( ! practical2 ! latt] pres5ts u ) excell5t pr9ciples = ! inve/igation ( ! practical1 b1 9 relation to ev]y?+ reg>d+ :i* we c atta9 to speculative cognition1 p]mits reason to app5d ideali/ic explanations ( natural ph5om5a1 to ! great injury ( physical inve/igation4 #c4 ,9 reg>d to ! ?ird motive = ! prelim9>y *oice ( a p>ty 9 ?is w> ( ass]tions1 x seems v extraord9>y t empiricism %\ld be utt]ly unpopul>4 ,we %\ld be incl9$ to believe t ! common und]/&+ w\ld receive x ) pleasure--promis+ z x does to satisfy x )\t pass+ ! b\nds ( exp]i5ce & its connect$ ord]2 :ile transc5d5tal dogmatism obliges x to rise to conceptions :i* f> surpass ! intellig5ce & ability ( ! mo/ practis$ ?9k]s4 ,b 9 ?is1 9 tru?1 is to be f\nd its real motive4 ,= ! common und]/&+ ?us f9ds itself 9 a situation :]e n ev5 ! mo/ le>n$ c h ! advantage ( x4 ,if x und]/&s little or no?+ ab\t ^! transc5d5tal conceptions1 no "o c boa/ ( und]/&+ any m2 & al?\gh x may n express itself 9 s s*ola/ically correct a mann] z o!rs1 x c busy itself ) reason+ & argum5ts )\t end1 w&]+ among m]e ideas1 ab\t :i* "o c always be v eloqu5t1 because we "k no?+ ab\t !m2 :ile1 9 ! obs]vation & inve/igation ( nature1 x w\ld be =c$ to rema9 dumb & to confess its utt] ignorance4 ,?us indol5ce & vanity =m ( !mselves /rong recomm5dations ( ^! pr9ciples4 ,besides1 al?\gh x is a h>d ?+ = a philosoph] to assume a pr9ciple1 ( :i* he c give to himself no reasonable acc\nt1 & /ill m to employ conceptions1 ! objective reality ( :i* _c be e/abli%$1 no?+ is m usual ) ! common und]/&+4 ,x wants some?+ :i* w all[ x to g to "w ) confid5ce4 ,! difficulty ( ev5 compreh5d+ a supposition does n disquiet x1 because--n kn[+ :at compreh5d+ means--x nev] ev5 ?9ks ( ! supposition x may be adopt+ z a pr9ciple2 & reg>ds z kn[n t ) :i* x has become famili> f con/ant use4 ,&1 at la/1 all speculative int]e/s disappe> be=e ! practical int]e/s :i* x holds de>2 & x fancies t x und]/&s & kn[s :at its necessities & hopes incite x to assume or to believe4 ,?us ! empiricism ( transc5d5tally idealiz+ reason is robb$ ( all popul>ity2 &1 h[ev] prejudicial x may be to ! highe/ practical pr9ciples1 !re is no fe> t x w ev] pass ! limits ( ! s*ools1 or acquire any fav\r or influ5ce 9 society or ) ! multitude4 ,human reason is by nature ar*itectonic4 ,t is to say1 x reg>ds all cognitions z p>ts ( a possible sy/em1 & h5ce accepts only su* pr9ciples z at lea/ d n incapacitate a cognition to :i* we may h atta9$ f be+ plac$ along ) o!rs 9 a g5]al sy/em4 ,b ! propositions ( ! anti!sis are ( a "* :i* r5d]s ! completion ( an edifice ( cognitions impossible4 ,accord+ to ^!1 beyond "o /ate or epo* ( ! _w !re is always to be f\nd "o m anci5t2 9 e "p always o!r p>ts !mselves divisible2 prec$+ e ev5t ano!r1 ! orig9 ( :i* mu/ itself be s\ght /ill high]2 & ev]y?+ 9 exi/5ce is condition$1 & /ill n dep5d5t on an uncondition$ & primal exi/5ce4 ,z1 !re=e1 ! anti!sis w n conc$e ! exi/5ce ( a fir/ beg9n+ :i* might be available z a f\ndation1 a complete edifice ( cognition1 9 ! pres5ce ( su* hypo!sis1 is utt]ly impossible4 ,?us ! ar*itectonic int]e/ ( reason1 :i* requires a unity--n empirical1 b priori & rational--=ms a natural recomm5dation = ! ass]tions ( ! !sis 9 our ant9omy4 ,b if any "o c\ld free himself entirely f all consid]ations ( int]e/1 & weigh )\t p>tiality ! ass]tions ( reason1 att5d+ only to _! cont5t1 irrespective ( ! consequ5ces :i* foll[ f !m2 su* a p]son1 on ! supposition t he knew no o!r way out ( ! confusion ?an to settle ! tru? ( "o or o!r ( ! conflict+ doctr9es1 w\ld live 9 a /ate ( cont9ual hesitation4 ,today1 he w\ld feel conv9c$ t ! human w is free2 to-morr[1 consid]+ ! indissoluble *a9 ( nature1 he w\ld look on fre$om z a m]e illusion & decl>e nature to be all-9-all4 ,b1 if he 7 call$ to action1 ! play ( ! m]ely speculative reason w\ld disappe> l ! %apes ( a dream1 & practical int]e/ w\ld dictate 8 *oice ( pr9ciples4 ,b1 z x well befits a reflective & inquir+ be+ to devote c]ta9 p]iods ( "t to ! exam9ation ( its own reason--to dive/ itself ( all p>tiality1 & frankly to communicate its obs]vations = ! judgem5t & op9ion ( o!rs2 s no "o c be blam$ =1 mu* less prev5t$ f1 plac+ bo? p>ties on _! trial1 ) p]mission to end !mselves1 free f intimidation1 be=e intimidation1 be=e a sworn jury ( equal condition ) !mselves--! condition ( weak & fallible m54 ,section ,,iv4 ,( ! necessity impos$ ^u ,pure ,reason ( pres5t+ a ,solution ( its ,transc5d5tal ,problems ,to av[ an ability to solve all problems & to answ] all que/ions w\ld be a pr(ession c]ta9 to convict any philosoph] ( extravagant boa/+ & self-conceit1 & at once to de/roy ! confid5ce t might o!rwise h be5 repos$ 9 him4 ,!re are1 h[ev]1 sci5ces s con/itut$ t e "q aris+ )9 _! sph]e mu/ necess>ily be capable ( receiv+ an answ] f ! k already possess$1 = ! answ] mu/ be receiv$ f ! same s\rces :5ce ! "q arose4 ,9 su* sci5ces x is n all[able to excuse ourselves on ! plea ( necess>y & unavoidable ignorance2 a solution is absolutely requisite4 ,! rule ( "r & wrong mu/ help u to ! k ( :at is "r or wrong 9 all possible cases2 o!rwise1 ! idea ( obligation or duty w\ld be utt]ly null1 = we _c h any obligation to t :i* we _c "k4 ,on ! o!r h&1 9 our inve/igations ( ! ph5om5a ( nature1 mu* mu/ rema9 unc]ta91 & _m que/ions cont9ue insoluble2 because :at we "k ( nature is f> f be+ suffici5t to expla9 all ! ph5om5a t are pres5t$ to our obs]vation4 ,n[ ! "q is3 ,:e!r !re is 9 transc5d5tal philosophy any "q1 relat+ to an object pres5t$ to pure reason1 :i* is unansw]able by ?is reason2 & :e!r we mu/ reg>d ! subject ( ! "q z q unc]ta91 s f> z our k ext5ds1 & mu/ give x a place among ^? subjects1 ( :i* we h j s mu* conception z is suffici5t to enable u to raise a "q--faculty or mat]ials fail+ u1 h[ev]1 :5 we attempt an answ]4 ,n[ ,i ma9ta9 t1 among all speculative cognition1 ! peculi>ity ( transc5d5tal philosophy is t !re is no "q1 relat+ to an object pres5t$ to pure reason1 :i* is insoluble by ?is reason2 & t ! pr(ession ( unavoidable ignorance--! problem be+ alleg$ to be beyond ! rea* ( our faculties--_c free u f ! obligation to pres5t a complete & satisfactory answ]4 ,= ! v conception :i* enables u to raise ! "q mu/ give u ! p[] ( answ]+ x2 inasmu* z ! object1 z 9 ! case ( "r & wrong1 is n to be discov]$ out ( ! conception4 ,b1 9 transc5d5tal philosophy1 x is only ! cosmological que/ions to :i* we c dem& a satisfactory answ] 9 relation to ! con/itution ( _! object2 & ! philosoph] is n p]mitt$ to avail himself ( ! pretext ( necess>y ignorance & imp5etrable obscurity4 ,^! que/ions relate solely to ! cosmological ideas4 ,= ! object mu/ be giv5 9 exp]i5ce1 & ! "q relates to ! adequat5ess ( ! object to an idea4 ,if ! object is transc5d5tal & !re=e itself unkn[n2 if ! "q1 = example1 is :e!r ! object--! some?+1 ! ph5om5on ( :i* 7int]nal--9 ourselves7 is ?\ght--t is to say1 ! s\l1 is 9 itself a simple be+2 or :e!r !re is a cause ( all ?+s1 :i* is absolutely necess>y--9 su* cases we are seek+ = our idea an object1 ( :i* we may confess t x is unkn[n to u1 ?\gh we mu/ n on t acc\nt ass]t t x is impossible4#eh ,! cosmological ideas alone posses ! peculi>ity t we c presuppose ! object ( !m & ! empirical syn!sis requisite = ! conception ( t object to be giv52 & ! "q1 :i* arises f ^! ideas1 relates m]ely to ! progress ( ?is syn!sis1 9 s f> z x mu/ conta9 absolute totality--:i*1 h[ev]1 is n empirical1 z x _c be giv5 9 any exp]i5ce4 ,n[1 z ! "q "h is solely 9 reg>d to a ?+ z ! object ( a possible exp]i5ce & n z a ?+ 9 itself1 ! answ] to ! transc5d5tal cosmological "q ne$ n be s\ght out ( ! idea1 = ! "q does n reg>d an object 9 itself4 ,! "q 9 relation to a possible exp]i5ce is n1 8,:at c be giv5 9 an exp]i5ce 9 concreto0 b 8:at is conta9$ 9 ! idea1 to :i* ! empirical syn!sis mu/ approximate40 ,! "q mu/ !re=e be capable ( solution f ! idea alone4 ,= ! idea is a creation ( reason itself1 :i* !re=e _c disclaim ! obligation to answ] or ref] u to ! unkn[n object4 #eh ,! "q1 8,:at is ! con/itution ( a transc5d5tal object80 is unansw]able--we are unable to say :at x is2 b we c p]ceive t ! "q itself is no?+2 because x does n relate to any object t c be pres5t$ to u4 ,= ?is reason1 we mu/ consid] all ! que/ions rais$ 9 transc5d5tal psy*ology z answ]able & z really answ]$2 = !y relate to ! transc5d5tal subject ( all int]nal ph5om5a1 :i* is n itself ph5om5on & consequ5tly n giv5 z an object1 9 :i*1 moreov]1 none ( ! categories--& x is to !m t ! "q is prop]ly direct$--f9d any conditions ( its application4 ,"h1 !re=e1 is a case :]e no answ] is ! only prop] answ]4 ,= a "q reg>d+ ! con/itution ( a some?+ :i* _c be cogitat$ by any det]m9$ pr$icate1 be+ completely beyond ! sph]e ( objects & exp]i5ce1 is p]fectly null & void4 ,x is n s extraord9>y1 z x at fir/ sight appe>s1 t a sci5ce %\ld dem& & expect satisfactory answ]s to all ! que/ions t may arise )9 its own sph]e 7que/iones dome/icae71 al?\gh1 up to a c]ta9 "t1 ^! answ]s may n h be5 discov]$4 ,!re are1 9 addition to transc5d5tal philosophy1 only two pure sci5ces ( reason2 ! "o ) a speculative1 ! o!r ) a practical cont5t--pure ma!matics & pure e?ics4 ,has any "o ev] he>d x alleg$ t1 f our complete & necess>y ignorance ( ! conditions1 x is unc]ta9 :at exact relation ! diamet] ( a circle be>s to ! circle 9 rational or irrational numb]s8 ,by ! =m] ! sum _c be giv5 exactly1 by ! latt] only approximately2 & !re=e we decide t ! impossibility ( a solution ( ! "q is evid5t4 ,lamb]t pres5t$ u ) a demon/ration ( ?is4 ,9 ! g5]al pr9ciples ( morals !re c be no?+ unc]ta91 = ! propositions are ei!r utt]ly )\t mean+1 or mu/ orig9ate solely 9 our rational conceptions4 ,on ! o!r h&1 !re mu/ be 9 physical sci5ce an inf9ite numb] ( conjectures1 :i* c nev] become c]ta9ties2 because ! ph5om5a ( nature are n giv5 z objects dep5d5t on our conceptions4 ,! key to ! solution ( su* que/ions _c1 !re=e1 be f\nd 9 our conceptions1 or 9 pure ?\ght1 b mu/ lie )\t u & = t reason is 9 _m cases n to be discov]$2 & consequ5tly a satisfactory explanation _c be expect$4 ,! que/ions ( transc5d5tal analytic1 :i* relate to ! d$uction ( our pure cognition1 are n to be reg>d$ z ( ! same k9d z ^? m5tion$ above2 = we are n at pres5t treat+ ( ! c]ta9ty ( judgem5ts 9 relation to ! orig9 ( our conceptions1 b only ( t c]ta9ty 9 relation to objects4 ,we _c1 !re=e1 escape ! responsibility ( at lea/ a critical solution ( ! que/ions ( reason1 by compla9ts ( ! limit$ nature ( our faculties1 & ! seem+ly humble confession t x is beyond ! p[] ( our reason to decide1 :e!r ! _w has exi/$ f all et]nity or _h a beg9n+--:e!r x is inf9itely ext5d$1 or enclos$ )9 c]ta9 limits--:e!r any?+ 9 ! _w is simple1 or :e!r ev]y?+ mu/ be capable ( inf9ite divisibility--:e!r fre$om c orig9ate ph5om5a1 or :e!r ev]y?+ is absolutely dep5d5t on ! laws & ord] ( nature--&1 f9ally1 :e!r !re exi/s a be+ t is completely uncondition$ & necess>y1 or :e!r ! exi/5ce ( ev]y?+ is condition$ & consequ5tly dep5d5t on some?+ ext]nal to itself1 & !re=e 9 its own nature cont+5t4 ,= all ^! que/ions relate to an object1 :i* c be giv5 n[h]e else ?an 9 ?\ght4 ,?is object is ! absolutely uncondition$ totality ( ! syn!sis ( ph5om5a4 ,if ! conceptions 9 our m9ds d n assi/ u to "s c]ta9 result 9 reg>d to ^! problems1 we mu/ n def5d ourselves on ! plea t ! object itself rema9s hidd5 f & unkn[n to u4 ,= no su* ?+ or object c be giv5--x is n to be f\nd out ( ! idea 9 our m9ds4 ,we mu/ seek ! cause ( our failure 9 our idea itself1 :i* is an insoluble problem & 9 reg>d to :i* we ob/9ately assume t !re exi/s a real object correspond+ & adequate to x4 ,a cle> explanation ( ! dialectic :i* lies 9 our conception1 w v soon enable u to come to a satisfactory decision 9 reg>d to su* a "q4 ,! pretext t we are unable to arrive at c]ta9ty 9 reg>d to ^! problems may be met ) ?is "q1 :i* requires at lea/ a pla9 answ]3 8,f :at s\rce d ! ideas orig9ate1 ! solution ( :i* involves y 9 su* difficulties8 ,are y seek+ = an explanation ( c]ta9 ph5om5a2 & d y expect ^! ideas to give y ! pr9ciples or ! rules ( ?is explanation80 ,let x be grant$1 t all nature 0 laid op5 be=e y2 t no?+ 0 hid f y\r s5ses & y\r consci\sness4 ,/ill1 y c\ld n cognize 9 concreto ! object ( y\r ideas 9 any exp]i5ce4 ,= :at is dem&$ is n only ?is full & complete intuition1 b also a complete syn!sis & ! consci\sness ( its absolute totality2 & ?is is n possible by means ( any empirical cognition4 ,x foll[s t y\r "q--y\r idea--is by no means necess>y = ! explanation ( any ph5om5on2 & ! idea _c h be5 9 any s5se giv5 by ! object itself4 ,= su* an object c nev] be pres5t$ to u1 because x _c be giv5 by any possible exp]i5ce4 ,:atev] p]ceptions y may atta9 to1 y are /ill surr\nd$ by conditions--9 space1 or 9 "t--& y _c discov] any?+ uncondition$2 nor c y decide :e!r ?is uncondition$ is to be plac$ 9 an absolute beg9n+ ( ! syn!sis1 or 9 an absolute totality ( ! s]ies )\t beg9n+4 ,a :ole1 9 ! empirical signification ( ! t]m1 is always m]ely comp>ative4 ,! absolute :ole ( quantity 7! univ]se71 ( division1 ( d]ivation1 ( ! condition ( exi/5ce1 ) ! "q--:e!r x is to be produc$ by f9ite or inf9ite syn!sis1 no possible exp]i5ce c in/ruct u conc]n+4 ,y w n1 = example1 be able to expla9 ! ph5om5a ( a body 9 ! lea/ degree bett]1 :e!r y believe x to consi/ ( simple1 or ( composite p>ts2 = a simple ph5om5on--& j z little an inf9ite s]ies ( composition--c nev] be pres5t$ to y\r p]ception4 ,ph5om5a require & admit ( explanation1 only 9 s f> z ! conditions ( t explanation are giv5 9 p]ception2 b ! sum total ( t :i* is giv5 9 ph5om5a1 consid]$ z an absolute :ole1 is itself a p]ception--& we _c !re=e seek = explanations ( ?is :ole beyond itself1 9 o!r p]ceptions4 ,! explanation ( ?is :ole is ! prop] object ( ! transc5d5tal problems ( pure reason4 ,al?\gh1 !re=e1 ! solution ( ^! problems is unatta9able ?r\gh exp]i5ce1 we mu/ n p]mit ourselves to say t x is unc]ta9 h[ ! object ( our inquiries is con/itut$4 ,= ! object is 9 our own m9d & _c be discov]$ 9 exp]i5ce2 & we h only to take c>e t our ?\ghts are consi/5t ) ea* o!r1 & to avoid fall+ into ! amphiboly ( reg>d+ our idea z a repres5tation ( an object empirically giv51 & !re=e to be cogniz$ accord+ to ! laws ( exp]i5ce4 ,a dogmatical solution is !re=e n only unsatisfactory b impossible4 ,! critical solution1 :i* may be a p]fectly c]ta9 "o1 does n consid] ! "q objectively1 b proce$s by inquir+ into ! basis ( ! cognition ^u :i* ! "q re/s4 ,section ,v4 ,sceptical ,exposition ( ! ,cosmological ,problems pres5t$ 9 ! f\r ,transc5d5tal ,ideas ,we %\ld be q will+ to desi/ f ! dem& ( a dogmatical answ] to our que/ions1 if we und]/ood be=eh& t1 be ! answ] :at x may1 x w\ld only s]ve to increase our ignorance1 to ?r[ u f "o incompreh5sibility into ano!r1 f "o obscurity into ano!r /ill great]1 & p]haps lead u into irreconcilable contradictions4 ,if a dogmatical affirmative or negative answ] is dem&$1 is x at all prud5t to set aside ! probable gr\nds ( a solution :i* lie be=e u & to take into consid]ation :at advantage we %all ga91 if ! answ] is to fav\r ! "o side or ! o!r8 ,if x happ5s t 9 bo? cases ! answ] is m]e nons5se1 we h 9 ?is an irresi/ible summons to in/itute a critical inve/igation ( ! "q1 = ! purpose ( discov]+ :e!r x is bas$ on a gr\ndless presupposition & relates to an idea1 ! falsity ( :i* w\ld be m easily expos$ 9 its application & consequ5ces ?an 9 ! m]e repres5tation ( its cont5t4 ,?is is ! great utility ( ! sceptical mode ( treat+ ! que/ions address$ by pure reason to itself4 ,by ?is me?od we easily rid ourselves ( ! confusions ( dogmatism1 & e/abli% 9 its place a temp]ate criticism1 :i*1 z a g5u9e ca?>tic1 w successfully remove ! presumptu\s notions ( philosophy & _! consequ5ce--! va9 pret5sion to univ]sal sci5ce4 ,if1 !n1 ,i c\ld und]/& ! nature ( a cosmological idea & p]ceive1 be=e ,i ent]$ on ! discussion ( ! subject at all1 t1 :atev] side ( ! "q reg>d+ ! uncondition$ ( ! regressive syn!sis ( ph5om5a x fav\r$--x mu/ ei!r be too great or too small = e conception ( ! und]/&+--,i w\ld be able to compreh5d h[ ! idea1 :i* relates to an object ( exp]i5ce--an exp]i5ce :i* mu/ be adequate to & 9 accordance ) a possible conception ( ! und]/&+--mu/ be completely void & )\t significance1 inasmu* z its object is inadequate1 consid] x z we may4 ,& ?is is actually ! case ) all cosmological conceptions1 :i*1 = ! reason above m5tion$1 involve reason1 s long z x rema9s atta*$ to !m1 9 an unavoidable ant9omy4 ,= suppose3 ,fir/1 t ! _w has no beg9n+--9 ?is case x is too l>ge = our conception2 = ?is conception1 :i* consi/s 9 a successive regress1 _c ov]take ! :ole et]nity t has elaps$4 ,grant t x has a beg9n+1 x is !n too small = ! conception ( ! und]/&+4 ,=1 z a beg9n+ presupposes a "t prec$+1 x _c be uncondition$2 & ! law ( ! empirical employm5t ( ! und]/&+ imposes ! necessity ( look+ = a high] condition ( "t2 & ! _w is1 !re=e1 evid5tly too small = ?is law4 ,! same is ! case ) ! d\ble answ] to ! "q reg>d+ ! ext5t1 9 space1 ( ! _w4 ,=1 if x is inf9ite & unlimit$1 x mu/ be too l>ge = e possible empirical conception4 ,if x is f9ite & limit$1 we h a "r to ask3 8,:at det]m9es ^! limits80 ,void space is n a self-subsi/5t correlate ( ?+s1 & _c be a f9al condition--& /ill less an empirical condition1 =m+ a "p ( a possible exp]i5ce4 ,= h[ c we h any exp]i5ce or p]ception ( an absolute void8 ,b ! absolute totality ( ! empirical syn!sis requires t ! uncondition$ be an empirical conception4 ,consequ5tly1 a f9ite _w is too small = our conception4 ,secondly1 if e ph5om5on 7matt]7 9 space consi/s ( an inf9ite numb] ( p>ts1 ! regress ( ! division is always too great = our conception2 & if ! division ( space mu/ cease ) "s memb] ( ! division 7! simple71 x is too small = ! idea ( ! uncondition$4 ,= ! memb] at :i* we h discont9u$ our division /ill admits a regress to _m m p>ts conta9$ 9 ! object4 ,?irdly1 suppose t e ev5t 9 ! _w happ5s 9 accordance ) ! laws ( nature2 ! causality ( a cause mu/ itself be an ev5t & necessitates a regress to a /ill high] cause1 & consequ5tly ! unceas+ prolongation ( ! s]ies ( conditions a p>te priori4 ,op]ative nature is !re=e too l>ge = e conception we c =m 9 ! syn!sis ( cosmical ev5ts4 ,if we admit ! exi/5ce ( spontane\sly produc$ ev5ts1 t is1 ( free ag5cy1 we are driv51 9 our se>* = suffici5t reasons1 on an unavoidable law ( nature & are compell$ to appeal to ! empirical law ( causality1 & we f9d t any su* totality ( connection 9 our syn!sis is too small = our necess>y empirical conception4 ,f\r?ly1 if we assume ! exi/5ce ( an absolutely necess>y be+--:e!r x be ! _w or some?+ 9 ! _w1 or ! cause ( ! _w--we mu/ place x 9 a "t at an inf9ite di/ance f any giv5 mom5t2 =1 o!rwise1 x mu/ be dep5d5t on "s o!r & high] exi/5ce4 ,su* an exi/5ce is1 9 ?is case1 too l>ge = our empirical conception1 & unatta9able by ! cont9u$ regress ( any syn!sis4 ,b if we believe t ev]y?+ 9 ! _w--be x condition or condition$--is cont+5t2 e giv5 exi/5ce is too small = our conception4 ,= 9 ?is case we are compell$ to seek = "s o!r exi/5ce ^u :i* ! =m] dep5ds4 ,we h said t 9 all ^! cases ! cosmological idea is ei!r too great or too small = ! empirical regress 9 a syn!sis1 & consequ5tly = e possible conception ( ! und]/&+4 ,:y did we n express ourselves 9 a mann] exactly ! rev]se ( ?is &1 in/ead ( accus+ ! cosmological idea ( ov] /epp+ or ( fall+ %ort ( its true aim1 possible exp]i5ce1 say t1 9 ! fir/ case1 ! empirical conception is always too small = ! idea1 & 9 ! second too great1 & ?us atta* ! blame ( ^! contradictions to ! empirical regress8 ,! reason is ?is4 ,possible exp]i5ce c alone give reality to our conceptions2 )\t x a conception is m]ely an idea1 )\t tru? or relation to an object4 ,h5ce a possible empirical conception mu/ be ! /&>d by :i* we are to judge :e!r an idea is any?+ m ?an an idea & fiction ( ?\ght1 or :e!r x relates to an object 9 ! _w4 ,if we say ( a ?+ t 9 relation to "s o!r ?+ x is too l>ge or too small1 ! =m] is consid]$ z exi/+ = ! sake ( ! latt]1 & requir+ to be adapt$ to x4 ,among ! trivial subjects ( discussion 9 ! old s*ools ( dialectics 0 ?is "q3 8,if a ball _c pass ?r\gh a hole1 %all we say t ! ball is too l>ge or ! hole too small80 ,9 ?is case x is indiff]5t :at expression we employ2 = we d n "k :i* exi/s = ! sake ( ! o!r4 ,on ! o!r h&1 we _c say3 8,! man is too long = 8 coat02 b3 8,! coat is too %ort = ! man40 ,we are ?us l$ to ! well-f\nd$ suspicion t ! cosmological ideas1 & all ! conflict+ sophi/ical ass]tions connect$ ) !m1 are bas$ ^u a false & fictiti\s conception ( ! mode 9 :i* ! object ( ^! ideas is pres5t$ to u2 & ?is suspicion w probably direct u h[ to expose ! illusion t has s long l$ u a/ray f ! tru?4 ,section ,,vi4 ,transc5d5tal ,idealism z ! ,key to ! ,solution ( ,pure ,cosmological ,dialectic ,9 ! transc5d5tal /hetic we prov$ t ev]y?+ intuit$ 9 space & "t1 all objects ( a possible exp]i5ce1 are no?+ b ph5om5a1 t is1 m]e repres5tations2 & t ^!1 z pres5t$ to u--z ext5d$ bodies1 or z s]ies ( *anges--h no self-subsi/5t exi/5ce ap>t f human ?\ght4 ,?is doctr9e ,i call ,transc5d5tal ,idealism4#ei ,! reali/ 9 ! transc5d5tal s5se reg>ds ^! modifications ( our s5sibility1 ^! m]e repres5tations1 z ?+s subsi/+ 9 !mselves4 #ei ,i h else:]e t]m$ ?is !ory =mal idealism1 to di/+ui% x f mat]ial idealism1 :i* d\bts or d5ies ! exi/5ce ( ext]nal ?+s4 ,to avoid ambiguity1 x seems advisable 9 _m cases to employ ?is t]m in/ead ( t m5tion$ 9 ! text4 ,x w\ld be unju/ to accuse u ( hold+ ! long-decri$ !ory ( empirical idealism1 :i*1 :ile admitt+ ! reality ( space1 d5ies1 or at lea/ d\bts1 ! exi/5ce ( bodies ext5d$ 9 x1 & ?us leaves u )\t a suffici5t crit]ion ( reality & illusion4 ,! support]s ( ?is !ory f9d no difficulty 9 admitt+ ! reality ( ! ph5om5a ( ! int]nal s5se 9 "t2 nay1 !y g ! l5g? ( ma9ta9+ t ?is int]nal exp]i5ce is ( itself a suffici5t pro( ( ! real exi/5ce ( its object z a ?+ 9 itself4 ,transc5d5tal idealism all[s t ! objects ( ext]nal intuition--z intuit$ 9 space1 & all *anges 9 "t--z repres5t$ by ! int]nal s5se1 are real4 ,=1 z space is ! =m ( t intuition :i* we call ext]nal1 &1 )\t objects 9 space1 no empirical repres5tation c\ld be giv5 u1 we c & ought to reg>d ext5d$ bodies 9 x z real4 ,! case is ! same ) repres5tations 9 "t4 ,b "t & space1 ) all ph5om5a !re91 are n 9 !mselves ?+s4 ,!y are no?+ b repres5tations & _c exi/ out ( & ap>t f ! m9d4 ,nay1 ! s5su\s int]nal intuition ( ! m9d 7z ! object ( consci\sness71 ! det]m9ation ( :i* is repres5t$ by ! succession ( diff]5t /ates 9 "t1 is n ! real1 prop] self1 z x exi/s 9 itself--n ! transc5d5tal subject--b only a ph5om5on1 :i* is pres5t$ to ! s5sibility ( ?is1 to u1 unkn[n be+4 ,?is int]nal ph5om5on _c be admitt$ to be a self-subsi/+ ?+2 = its condition is "t1 & "t _c be ! condition ( a ?+ 9 itself4 ,b ! empirical tru? ( ph5om5a 9 space & "t is gu>ante$ beyond ! possibility ( d\bt1 & suffici5tly di/+ui%$ f ! illusion ( dreams or fancy--al?\gh bo? h a prop] & ?or\gh connection 9 an exp]i5ce accord+ to empirical laws4 ,! objects ( exp]i5ce !n are n ?+s 9 !mselves1 b are giv5 only 9 exp]i5ce1 & h no exi/5ce ap>t f & indep5d5tly ( exp]i5ce4 ,t !re may be inhabitants 9 ! moon1 al?\gh no "o has ev] obs]v$ !m1 mu/ c]ta9ly be admitt$2 b ?is ass]tion means only1 t we may 9 ! possible progress ( exp]i5ce discov] !m at "s future "t4 ,= t :i* /&s 9 connection ) a p]ception accord+ to ! laws ( ! progress ( exp]i5ce is real4 ,!y are !re=e really exi/5t1 if !y /& 9 empirical connection ) my actual or real consci\sness1 al?\gh !y are n 9 !mselves real1 t is1 ap>t f ! progress ( exp]i5ce4 ,!re is no?+ actually giv5--we c be consci\s ( no?+ z real1 except a p]ception & ! empirical progression f x to o!r possible p]ceptions4 ,= ph5om5a1 z m]e repres5tations1 are real only 9 p]ception2 & p]ception is1 9 fact1 no?+ b ! reality ( an empirical repres5tation1 t is1 a ph5om5on4 ,to call a ph5om5on a real ?+ prior to p]ception means ei!r t we mu/ meet ) ?is ph5om5on 9 ! progress ( exp]i5ce1 or x means no?+ at all4 ,= ,i c say only ( a ?+ 9 itself t x exi/s )\t relation to ! s5ses & exp]i5ce4 ,b we are speak+ "h m]ely ( ph5om5a 9 space & "t1 bo? ( :i* are det]m9ations ( s5sibility1 & n ( ?+s 9 !mselves4 ,x foll[s t ph5om5a are n ?+s 9 !mselves1 b are m]e repres5tations1 :i* if n giv5 9 u--9 p]ception--are non-exi/5t4 ,! faculty ( s5su\s intuition is prop]ly a receptivity--a capacity ( be+ affect$ 9 a c]ta9 mann] by repres5tations1 ! relation ( :i* to ea* o!r is a pure intuition ( space & "t--! pure =ms ( s5sibility4 ,^! repres5tations1 9 s f> z !y are connect$ & det]m9able 9 ?is relation 79 space & "t7 accord+ to laws ( ! unity ( exp]i5ce1 are call$ objects4 ,! non-s5su\s cause ( ^! repres5tations is completely unkn[n to u & h5ce _c be intuit$ z an object4 ,= su* an object c\ld n be repres5t$ ei!r 9 space or 9 "t2 & )\t ^! conditions intuition or repres5tation is impossible4 ,we may1 at ! same "t1 t]m ! non-s5su\s cause ( ph5om5a ! transc5d5tal object--b m]ely z a m5tal correlate to s5sibility1 consid]$ z a receptivity4 ,to ?is transc5d5tal object we may attribute ! :ole connection & ext5t ( our possible p]ceptions1 & say t x is giv5 & exi/s 9 itself prior to all exp]i5ce4 ,b ! ph5om5a1 correspond+ to x1 are n giv5 z ?+s 9 !mselves1 b 9 exp]i5ce alone4 ,= !y are m]e repres5tations1 receiv+ f p]ceptions alone significance & relation to a real object1 "u ! condition t ?is or t p]ception--indicat+ an object--is 9 complete connection ) all o!rs 9 accordance ) ! rules ( ! unity ( exp]i5ce4 ,?us we c say3 8,! ?+s t really exi/$ 9 pa/ "t are giv5 9 ! transc5d5tal object ( exp]i5ce40 ,b ^! are to me real objects1 only 9 s f> z ,i c repres5t to my own m9d1 t a regressive s]ies ( possible p]ceptions--foll[+ ! indications ( hi/ory1 or ! foot/eps ( cause & effect--9 accordance ) empirical laws--t1 9 "o ^w1 ! c\rse ( ! _w conducts u to an elaps$ s]ies ( "t z ! condition ( ! pres5t "t4 ,?is s]ies 9 pa/ "t is repres5t$ z real1 n 9 itself1 b only 9 connection ) a possible exp]i5ce4 ,?us1 :5 ,i say t c]ta9 ev5ts occurr$ 9 pa/ "t1 ,i m]ely ass]t ! possibility ( prolong+ ! *a9 ( exp]i5ce1 f ! pres5t p]ception1 upw>ds to ! conditions t det]m9e x accord+ to "t4 ,if ,i repres5t to myself all objects exi/+ 9 all space & "t1 ,i d n !reby place ^! 9 space & "t prior to all exp]i5ce2 on ! contr>y1 su* a repres5tation is no?+ m ?an ! notion ( a possible exp]i5ce1 9 its absolute complet5ess4 ,9 exp]i5ce alone are ^? objects1 :i* are no?+ b repres5tations1 giv54 ,b1 :5 ,i say !y exi/$ prior to my exp]i5ce1 ?is means only t ,i mu/ beg9 ) ! p]ception pres5t to me & foll[ ! track indicat$ until ,i discov] !m 9 "s "p or region ( exp]i5ce4 ,! cause ( ! empirical condition ( ?is progression--& consequ5tly at :at memb] !re9 ,i mu/ /op1 & at :at po9t 9 ! regress ,i am to f9d ?is memb]--is transc5d5tal1 & h5ce necess>ily incognizable4 ,b ) ?is we h n to d2 our conc]n is only ) ! law ( progression 9 exp]i5ce1 9 :i* objects1 t is1 ph5om5a1 are giv54 ,x is a matt] ( indiff]5ce1 :e!r ,i say1 8,i may 9 ! progress ( exp]i5ce discov] />s1 at a hundr$ times great] di/ance ?an ! mo/ di/ant ( ^? n[ visible10 or1 8,/>s at ?is di/ance may be met 9 space1 al?\gh no "o has1 or ev] w discov] !m40 ,=1 if !y are giv5 z ?+s 9 !mselves1 )\t any relation to possible exp]i5ce1 !y are = me non-exi/5t1 consequ5tly1 are n objects1 = !y are n conta9$ 9 ! regressive s]ies ( exp]i5ce4 ,b1 if ^! ph5om5a mu/ be employ$ 9 ! con/ruction or support ( ! cosmological idea ( an absolute :ole1 & :5 we are discuss+ a "q t ov]/eps ! limits ( possible exp]i5ce1 ! prop] di/9ction ( ! diff]5t !ories ( ! reality ( s5su\s objects is ( great importance1 9 ord] to avoid ! illusion :i* mu/ necess>ily arise f ! mis9t]pretation ( our empirical conceptions4 ,section ,,vii4 ,critical ,solution ( ! ,cosmological ,problem ,! ant9omy ( pure reason is bas$ ^u ! foll[+ dialectical argum5t3 8,if t :i* is condition$ is giv51 ! :ole s]ies ( its conditions is also giv52 b s5su\s objects are giv5 z condition$2 consequ5tly4440 ,?is syllogism1 ! major ( :i* seems s natural & evid5t1 introduces z _m cosmological ideas z !re are diff]5t k9ds ( conditions 9 ! syn!sis ( ph5om5a1 9 s f> z ^! conditions con/itute a s]ies4 ,^! ideas require absolute totality 9 ! s]ies1 & ?us place reason 9 inextricable emb>rassm5t4 ,be=e proce$+ to expose ! fallacy 9 ?is dialectical argum5t1 x w be necess>y to h a correct und]/&+ ( c]ta9 conceptions t appe> 9 x4 ,9 ! fir/ place1 ! foll[+ proposition is evid5t1 & indubitably c]ta93 8,if ! condition$ is giv51 a regress 9 ! s]ies ( all its conditions is !reby imp]atively requir$40 ,= ! v conception ( a condition$ is a conception ( some?+ relat$ to a condition1 &1 if ?is condition is itself condition$1 to ano!r condition--& s on ?r\gh all ! memb]s ( ! s]ies4 ,?is proposition is1 !re=e1 analytical & has no?+ to fe> f transc5d5tal criticism4 ,x is a logical po/ulate ( reason3 to pursue1 z f> z possible1 ! connection ( a conception ) its conditions4 ,if1 9 ! second place1 bo? ! condition$ & ! condition are ?+s 9 !mselves1 & if ! =m] is giv51 n only is ! regress to ! latt] requisite1 b ! latt] is really giv5 ) ! =m]4 ,n[1 z ?is is true ( all ! memb]s ( ! s]ies1 ! entire s]ies ( conditions1 & ) !m ! uncondition$1 is at ! same "t giv5 9 ! v fact ( ! condition$1 ! exi/5ce ( :i* is possible only 9 & ?r\gh t s]ies1 be+ giv54 ,9 ?is case1 ! syn!sis ( ! condition$ ) its condition1 is a syn!sis ( ! und]/&+ m]ely1 :i* repres5ts ?+s z !y are1 )\t reg>d+ :e!r & h[ we c cognize !m4 ,b if ,i h to d ) ph5om5a1 :i*1 9 _! "* ( m]e repres5tations1 are n giv51 if ,i d n atta9 to a cognition ( !m 79 o!r words1 to !mselves1 = !y are no?+ m ?an empirical cognitions71 ,i am n entitl$ to say3 8,if ! condition$ is giv51 all its conditions 7z ph5om5a7 are also giv540 ,i _c1 !re=e1 f ! fact ( a condition$ be+ giv51 inf] ! absolute totality ( ! s]ies ( its conditions4 ,= ph5om5a are no?+ b an empirical syn!sis 9 appreh5sion or p]ception1 & are !re=e giv5 only 9 x4 ,n[1 9 speak+ ( ph5om5a x does n foll[ t1 if ! condition$ is giv51 ! syn!sis :i* con/itutes its empirical condition is also !reby giv5 & presuppos$2 su* a syn!sis c be e/abli%$ only by an actual regress 9 ! s]ies ( conditions4 ,b we are entitl$ to say 9 ?is case t a regress to ! conditions ( a condition$1 9 o!r words1 t a cont9u\s empirical syn!sis is enjo9$2 t1 if ! conditions are n giv51 !y are at lea/ requir$2 & t we are c]ta9 to discov] ! conditions 9 ?is regress4 ,we c n[ see t ! major1 9 ! above cosmological syllogism1 takes ! condition$ 9 ! transc5d5tal signification :i* x has 9 ! pure category1 :ile ! m9or speaks ( x 9 ! empirical signification :i* x has 9 ! category z appli$ to ph5om5a4 ,!re is1 !re=e1 a dialectical fallacy 9 ! syllogism--a sophisma figurae dictionis4 ,b ?is fallacy is n a consci\sly devis$ "o1 b a p]fectly natural illusion ( ! common reason ( man4 ,=1 :5 a ?+ is giv5 z condition$1 we presuppose 9 ! major its conditions & _! s]ies1 unp]ceiv$1 z x 71 & unse52 because ?is is no?+ m ?an ! logical requirem5t ( complete & satisfactory premisses = a giv5 conclusion4 ,9 ?is case1 "t is altoge!r left out 9 ! connection ( ! condition$ ) ! condition2 !y are suppos$ to be giv5 9 !mselves1 & contemporane\sly4 ,x is1 moreov]1 j z natural to reg>d ph5om5a 79 ! m9or7 z ?+s 9 !mselves & z objects pres5t$ to ! pure und]/&+1 z 9 ! major1 9 :i* complete ab/raction 0 made ( all conditions ( intuition4 ,b x is "u ^! conditions alone t objects are giv54 ,n[ we ov]look$ a rem>kable di/9ction betwe5 ! conceptions4 ,! syn!sis ( ! condition$ ) its condition1 & ! complete s]ies ( ! latt] 79 ! major7 are n limit$ by "t1 & d n conta9 ! conception ( succession4 ,on ! contr>y1 ! empirical syn!sis & ! s]ies ( conditions 9 ! ph5om5al _w--subsum$ 9 ! m9or--are necess>ily successive & giv5 9 "t alone4 ,x foll[s t ,i _c presuppose 9 ! m9or1 z ,i did 9 ! major1 ! absolute totality ( ! syn!sis & ( ! s]ies !re9 repres5t$2 = 9 ! major all ! memb]s ( ! s]ies are giv5 z ?+s 9 !mselves--)\t any limitations or conditions ( "t1 :ile 9 ! m9or !y are possible only 9 & ?r\gh a successive regress1 :i* _c exi/1 except x be actually c>ri$ into execution 9 ! _w ( ph5om5a4 ,aft] ?is pro( ( ! vici\sness ( ! argum5t commonly employ$ 9 ma9ta9+ cosmological ass]tions1 bo? p>ties may n[ be ju/ly dismiss$1 z advanc+ claims )\t gr\nds or title4 ,b ! process has n be5 end$ by conv9c+ !m t "o or bo? 7 9 ! wrong & _h ma9ta9$ an ass]tion :i* 0 )\t valid gr\nds ( pro(4 ,no?+ seems to be cle>] ?an t1 if "o ma9ta9s3 8,! _w has a beg9n+10 & ano!r3 8,! _w has no beg9n+10 "o ( ! two mu/ be "r4 ,b x is likewise cle> t1 if ! evid5ce on bo? sides is equal1 x is impossible to discov] on :at side ! tru? lies2 & ! controv]sy cont9ues1 al?\gh ! p>ties h be5 recomm5d$ to peace be=e ! tribunal ( reason4 ,!re rema9s1 !n1 no o!r means ( settl+ ! "q ?an to conv9ce ! p>ties1 :o refute ea* o!r ) su* conclusiv5ess & ability1 t !y are disput+ ab\t no?+1 & t a transc5d5tal illusion has be5 mock+ !m ) visions ( reality :]e !re is none4 ,! mode ( adju/+ a dispute :i* _c be decid$ ^u its own m]its1 we %all n[ proce$ to lay be=e our read]s4 ,z5o ( ,elea1 a subtle dialectician1 0 sev]ely reprim&$ by ,plato z a sophi/1 :o1 m]ely f ! base motive ( exhibit+ 8 skill 9 discussion1 ma9ta9$ & subv]t$ ! same proposition by argum5ts z p[]ful & conv9c+ on ! "o side z on ! o!r4 ,he ma9ta9$1 = example1 t ,god 7:o 0 probably no?+ m1 9 8 view1 ?an ! _w7 is nei!r f9ite nor inf9ite1 nei!r 9 motion nor 9 re/1 nei!r simil> nor dissimil> to any o!r ?+4 ,x seem$ to ^? philosoph]s :o criticiz$ 8 mode ( discussion t 8 purpose 0 to d5y completely bo? ( two self-contradictory propositions--:i* is absurd4 ,b ,i _c believe t !re is any ju/ice 9 ?is accusation4 ,! fir/ ( ^! propositions ,i %all pres5tly consid] 9 a m detail$ mann]4 ,) reg>d to ! o!rs1 if by ! ^w ( ,god he und]/ood m]ely ! ,univ]se1 8 mean+ mu/ h be5--t x _c be p]man5tly pres5t 9 "o place--t is1 at re/--nor be capable ( *ang+ its place--t is1 ( mov+--because all places are 9 ! univ]se1 & ! univ]se itself is1 !re=e1 9 no place4 ,aga91 if ! univ]se conta9s 9 itself ev]y?+ t exi/s1 x _c be simil> or dissimil> to any o!r ?+1 because !re is1 9 fact1 no o!r ?+ ) :i* x c be comp>$4 ,if two opposite judgem5ts presuppose a cont+5t impossible1 or arbitr>y condition1 bo?--9 spite ( _! opposition 7:i* is1 h[ev]1 n prop]ly or really a contradiction7--fall away2 because ! condition1 :i* ensur$ ! validity ( bo?1 has itself disappe>$4 ,if we say3 8,ev]ybody has ei!r a good or a bad smell10 we h omitt$ a ?ird possible judgem5t--x has no smell at all2 & ?us bo? conflict+ /atem5ts may be false4 ,if we say3 8,x is ei!r good-smell+ or n good-smell+ 7vel suaveol5s vel non-suaveol5s710 bo? judgem5ts are contradictorily oppos$2 & ! contradictory opposite ( ! =m] judgem5t--"s bodies are n good-smell+--embraces also ^? bodies :i* h no smell at all4 ,9 ! prec$+ pair ( oppos$ judgem5ts 7p] disp>ata71 ! cont+5t condition ( ! conception ( body 7smell7 atta*$ to bo? conflict+ /atem5ts1 in/ead ( hav+ be5 omitt$ 9 ! latt]1 :i* is consequ5tly n ! contradictory opposite ( ! =m]4 ,if1 accord+ly1 we say3 8,! _w is ei!r inf9ite 9 ext5sion1 or x is n inf9ite 7non e/ inf9itus702 & if ! =m] proposition is false1 its contradictory opposite--! _w is n inf9ite--mu/ be true4 ,& ?us ,i %\ld d5y ! exi/5ce ( an inf9ite1 )\t1 h[ev] affirm+ ! exi/5ce ( a f9ite _w4 ,b if we con/ruct our proposition ?us3 8,! _w is ei!r inf9ite or f9ite 7non-inf9ite710 bo? /atem5ts may be false4 ,=1 9 ?is case1 we consid] ! _w z p] se det]m9$ 9 reg>d to quantity1 & :ile1 9 ! "o judgem5t1 we d5y its inf9ite & consequ5tly1 p]haps1 its indep5d5t exi/5ce2 9 ! o!r1 we app5d to ! _w1 reg>d$ z a ?+ 9 itself1 a c]ta9 det]m9ation--t ( f9itude2 & ! latt] may be false z well z ! =m]1 if ! _w is n giv5 z a ?+ 9 itself1 & ?us nei!r z f9ite nor z inf9ite 9 quantity4 ,?is k9d ( opposition ,i may be all[$ to t]m dialectical2 t ( contradictories may be call$ analytical opposition4 ,?us !n1 ( two dialectically oppos$ judgem5ts bo? may be false1 f ! fact1 t ! "o is n a m]e contradictory ( ! o!r1 b actually en\nces m ?an is requisite = a full & complete contradiction4 ,:5 we reg>d ! two propositions--8,! _w is inf9ite 9 quantity10 &1 8,! _w is f9ite 9 quantity10 z contradictory opposites1 we are assum+ t ! _w--! complete s]ies ( ph5om5a--is a ?+ 9 itself4 ,= x rema9s z a p]man5t quantity1 :e!r ,i d5y ! inf9ite or ! f9ite regress 9 ! s]ies ( its ph5om5a4 ,b if we dismiss ?is assumption--?is transc5d5tal illusion--& d5y t x is a ?+ 9 itself1 ! contradictory opposition is metamorphos$ into a m]ely dialectical "o2 & ! _w1 z n exi/+ 9 itself--indep5d5tly ( ! regressive s]ies ( my repres5tations--exi/s 9 l mann] nei!r z a :ole :i* is inf9ite nor z a :ole :i* is f9ite 9 itself4 ,! univ]se exi/s = me only 9 ! empirical regress ( ! s]ies ( ph5om5a & n p] se4 ,if1 !n1 x is always condition$1 x is nev] completely or z a :ole2 & x is1 !re=e1 n an uncondition$ :ole & does n exi/ z su*1 ei!r ) an inf9ite1 or ) a f9ite quantity4 ,:at we h "h said ( ! fir/ cosmological idea--t ( ! absolute totality ( quantity 9 ph5om5a--applies also to ! o!rs4 ,! s]ies ( conditions is discov]able only 9 ! regressive syn!sis itself1 & n 9 ! ph5om5on consid]$ z a ?+ 9 itself--giv5 prior to all regress4 ,h5ce ,i am compell$ to say3 8,! aggregate ( p>ts 9 a giv5 ph5om5on is 9 itself nei!r f9ite nor inf9ite2 & ^! p>ts are giv5 only 9 ! regressive syn!sis ( decomposition--a syn!sis :i* is nev] giv5 9 absolute complet5ess1 ei!r z f9ite1 or z inf9ite40 ,! same is ! case ) ! s]ies ( subord9at$ causes1 or ( ! condition$ up to ! uncondition$ & necess>y exi/5ce1 :i* c nev] be reg>d$ z 9 itself1 & 9 its totality1 ei!r z f9ite or z inf9ite2 because1 z a s]ies ( subord9ate repres5tations1 x subsi/s only 9 ! dynamical regress & _c be reg>d$ z exi/+ previ\sly to ?is regress1 or z a self-subsi/5t s]ies ( ?+s4 ,?us ! ant9omy ( pure reason 9 its cosmological ideas disappe>s4 ,= ! above demon/ration has e/abli%$ ! fact t x is m]ely ! product ( a dialectical & illusory opposition1 :i* arises f ! application ( ! idea ( absolute totality--admissible only z a condition ( ?+s 9 !mselves--to ph5om5a1 :i* exi/ only 9 our repres5tations1 &--:5 con/itut+ a s]ies--9 a successive regress4 ,?is ant9omy ( reason may1 h[ev]1 be really pr(itable to our speculative int]e/s1 n 9 ! way ( contribut+ any dogmatical addition1 b z pres5t+ to u ano!r mat]ial support 9 our critical inve/igations4 ,= x furni%es u ) an indirect pro( ( ! transc5d5tal ideality ( ph5om5a1 if our m9ds 7 n completely satisfi$ ) ! direct pro( set =? 9 ! ,tranc5d5tal /hetic4 ,! pro( w\ld proce$ 9 ! foll[+ dilemma4 ,if ! _w is a :ole exi/+ 9 itself1 x mu/ be ei!r f9ite or inf9ite4 ,b x is nei!r f9ite nor inf9ite--z has be5 %[n1 on ! "o side1 by ! !sis1 on ! o!r1 by ! anti!sis4 ,!re=e ! _w--! cont5t ( all ph5om5a--is n a :ole exi/+ 9 itself4 ,x foll[s t ph5om5a are no?+1 ap>t f our repres5tations4 ,& ?is is :at we mean by transc5d5tal ideality4 ,?is rem>k is ( "s importance4 ,x enables u to see t ! pro(s ( ! f\rfold ant9omy are n m]e sophi/ries--are n fallaci\s1 b gr\nd$ on ! nature ( reason1 & valid--"u ! supposition t ph5om5a are ?+s 9 !mselves4 ,! opposition ( ! judgem5ts :i* foll[ makes x evid5t t a fallacy lay 9 ! initial supposition1 & ?us helps u to discov] ! true con/itution ( objects ( s5se4 ,?is transc5d5tal dialectic does n fav\r scepticism1 al?\gh x pres5ts u ) a triumphant demon/ration ( ! advantages ( ! sceptical me?od1 ! great utility ( :i* is app>5t 9 ! ant9omy1 :]e ! argum5ts ( reason 7 all[$ to confront ea* o!r 9 undim9i%$ =ce4 ,& al?\gh ! result ( ^! conflicts ( reason is n :at we expect$--al?\gh we h obta9$ no positive dogmatical addition to metaphysical sci5ce--we h /ill reap$ a great advantage 9 ! correction ( our judgem5ts on ^! subjects ( ?\ght4 ,section ,,viii4 ,regulative ,pr9ciple ( ,pure ,reason 9 relation to ! ,cosmological ,ideas ,! cosmological pr9ciple ( totality c\ld n give u any c]ta9 k 9 reg>d to ! maximum 9 ! s]ies ( conditions 9 ! _w ( s5se1 consid]$ z a ?+ 9 itself4 ,! actual regress 9 ! s]ies is ! only means ( approa*+ ?is maximum4 ,?is pr9ciple ( pure reason1 !re=e1 may /ill be consid]$ z valid--n z an axiom enabl+ u to cogitate totality 9 ! object z actual1 b z a problem = ! und]/&+1 :i* requires x to in/itute & to cont9ue1 9 con=mity ) ! idea ( totality 9 ! m9d1 ! regress 9 ! s]ies ( ! conditions ( a giv5 condition$4 ,= 9 ! _w ( s5se1 t is1 9 space & "t1 e condition :i* we discov] 9 our inve/igation ( ph5om5a is itself condition$2 because s5su\s objects are n ?+s 9 !mselves 79 :i* case an absolutely uncondition$ might be rea*$ 9 ! progress ( cognition71 b are m]ely empirical repres5tations ! conditions ( :i* mu/ always be f\nd 9 intuition4 ,! pr9ciple ( reason is !re=e prop]ly a m]e rule--prescrib+ a regress 9 ! s]ies ( conditions = giv5 ph5om5a1 & prohibit+ any pause or re/ on an absolutely uncondition$4 ,x is1 !re=e1 n a pr9ciple ( ! possibility ( exp]i5ce or ( ! empirical cognition ( s5su\s objects--consequ5tly n a pr9ciple ( ! und]/&+2 = e exp]i5ce is conf9$ )9 c]ta9 prop] limits det]m9$ by ! giv5 intuition4 ,/ill less is x a con/itutive pr9ciple ( reason au?oriz+ u to ext5d our conception ( ! s5su\s _w beyond all possible exp]i5ce4 ,x is m]ely a pr9ciple = ! enl>gem5t & ext5sion ( exp]i5ce z f> z is possible = human faculties4 ,x =bids u to consid] any empirical limits z absolute4 ,x is1 h5ce1 a pr9ciple ( reason1 :i*1 z a rule1 dictates h[ we ought to proce$ 9 our empirical regress1 b is unable to anticipate or indicate prior to ! empirical regress :at is giv5 9 ! object itself4 ,i h t]m$ x = ?is reason a regulative pr9ciple ( reason2 :ile ! pr9ciple ( ! absolute totality ( ! s]ies ( conditions1 z exi/+ 9 itself & giv5 9 ! object1 is a con/itutive cosmological pr9ciple4 ,?is di/9ction w at once demon/rate ! falsehood ( ! con/itutive pr9ciple1 & prev5t u f attribut+ 7by a transc5d5tal subreptio7 objective reality to an idea1 :i* is valid only z a rule4 ,9 ord] to und]/& ! prop] mean+ ( ?is rule ( pure reason1 we mu/ notice fir/ t x _c tell u :at ! object is1 b only h[ ! empirical regress is to be proce$$ ) 9 ord] to atta9 to ! complete conception ( ! object4 ,if x gave u any in=mation 9 respect to ! =m] /atem5t1 x w\ld be a con/itutive pr9ciple--a pr9ciple impossible f ! nature ( pure reason4 ,x w n !re=e enable u to e/abli% any su* conclusions z3 8,! s]ies ( conditions = a giv5 condition$ is 9 itself f9ite10 or1 8,x is inf9ite40 ,=1 9 ?is case1 we %\ld be cogitat+ 9 ! m]e idea ( absolute totality1 an object :i* is n & _c be giv5 9 exp]i5ce2 inasmu* z we %\ld be attribut+ a reality objective & indep5d5t ( ! empirical syn!sis1 to a s]ies ( ph5om5a4 ,?is idea ( reason _c !n be reg>d$ z valid--except z a rule = ! regressive syn!sis 9 ! s]ies ( conditions1 accord+ to :i* we mu/ proce$ f ! condition$1 ?r\gh all int]m$iate & subord9ate conditions1 up to ! uncondition$2 al?\gh ?is goal is unatta9$ & unatta9able4 ,= ! absolutely uncondition$ _c be discov]$ 9 ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce4 ,we n[ proce$ to det]m9e cle>ly our notion ( a syn!sis :i* c nev] be complete4 ,!re are two t]ms commonly employ$ = ?is purpose4 ,^! t]ms are reg>d$ z expressions ( diff]5t & di/+ui%able notions1 al?\gh ! gr\nd ( ! di/9ction has nev] be5 cle>ly expos$4 ,! t]m employ$ by ! ma!maticians is progressus 9 inf9itum4 ,! philosoph]s pref] ! expression progressus 9 indef9itum4 ,)\t deta9+ ! read] ) an exam9ation ( ! reasons = su* a di/9ction1 or ) rem>ks on ! "r or wrong use ( ! t]ms1 ,i %all endeav\r cle>ly to det]m9e ^! conceptions1 s f> z is necess>y = ! purpose 9 ?is ,critique4 ,we may1 ) propriety1 say ( a /raight l9e1 t x may be produc$ to inf9ity4 ,9 ?is case ! di/9ction betwe5 a progressus 9 inf9itum & a progressus 9 indef9itum is a m]e piece ( subtlety4 ,=1 al?\gh :5 we say1 8,produce a /raight l9e10 x is m correct to say 9 indef9itum ?an 9 inf9itum2 because ! =m] means1 8,produce x z f> z y please10 ! second1 8,y mu/ n cease to produce x02 ! expression 9 inf9itum is1 :5 we are speak+ ( ! p[] to d x1 p]fectly correct1 = we c always make x long] if we please--on to inf9ity4 ,& ?is rem>k holds good 9 all cases1 :5 we speak ( a progressus1 t is1 an advancem5t f ! condition to ! condition$2 ?is possible advancem5t always proce$s to inf9ity4 ,we may proce$ f a giv5 pair 9 ! desc5d+ l9e ( g5]ation f fa!r to son1 & cogitate a nev]-end+ l9e ( desc5dants f x4 ,= 9 su* a case reason does n dem& absolute totality 9 ! s]ies1 because x does n presuppose x z a condition & z giv5 7datum71 b m]ely z condition$1 & z capable ( be+ giv5 7dabile74 ,v diff]5t is ! case ) ! problem3 8,h[ f> ! regress1 :i* asc5ds f ! giv5 condition$ to ! conditions1 mu/ ext5d02 :e!r ,i c say3 8,x is a regress 9 inf9itum10 or only 89 indef9itum02 & :e!r1 = example1 sett+ out f ! human be+s at pres5t alive 9 ! _w1 ,i may asc5d 9 ! s]ies ( _! ance/ors1 9 inf9itum--or :e!r all t c be said is1 t s f> z ,i h proce$$1 ,i h discov]$ no empirical gr\nd = consid]+ ! s]ies limit$1 s t ,i am ju/ifi$1 & inde$1 compell$ to se>* = ance/ors /ill fur!r back1 al?\gh ,i am n oblig$ by ! idea ( reason to presuppose !m4 ,my answ] to ?is "q is3 8,if ! s]ies is giv5 9 empirical intuition z a :ole1 ! regress 9 ! s]ies ( its int]nal conditions proce$s 9 inf9itum2 b1 if only "o memb] ( ! s]ies is giv51 f :i* ! regress is to proce$ to absolute totality1 ! regress is possible only 9 indef9itum40 ,= example1 ! division ( a portion ( matt] giv5 )9 c]ta9 limits--( a body1 t is--proce$s 9 inf9itum4 ,=1 z ! condition ( ?is :ole is its "p1 & ! condition ( ! "p a "p ( ! "p1 & s on1 & z 9 ?is regress ( decomposition an uncondition$ indivisible memb] ( ! s]ies ( conditions is n to be f\nd2 !re are no reasons or gr\nds 9 exp]i5ce = /opp+ 9 ! division1 b1 on ! contr>y1 ! m remote memb]s ( ! division are actually & empirically giv5 prior to ?is division4 ,t is to say1 ! division proce$s to inf9ity4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ! s]ies ( ance/ors ( any giv5 human be+ is n giv51 9 its absolute totality1 9 any exp]i5ce1 & yet ! regress proce$s f e g5ealogical memb] ( ?is s]ies to "o /ill high]1 & does n meet ) any empirical limit pres5t+ an absolutely uncondition$ memb] ( ! s]ies4 ,b z ! memb]s ( su* a s]ies are n conta9$ 9 ! empirical intuition ( ! :ole1 prior to ! regress1 ?is regress does n proce$ to inf9ity1 b only 9 indef9itum1 t is1 we are call$ ^u to discov] o!r & high] memb]s1 :i* are !mselves always condition$4 ,9 nei!r case--! regressus 9 inf9itum1 nor ! regressus 9 indef9itum1 is ! s]ies ( conditions to be consid]$ z actually inf9ite 9 ! object itself4 ,?is might be true ( ?+s 9 !mselves1 b x _c be ass]t$ ( ph5om5a1 :i*1 z conditions ( ea* o!r1 are only giv5 9 ! empirical regress itself4 ,h5ce1 ! "q no long] is1 8,:at is ! quantity ( ?is s]ies ( conditions 9 itself--is x f9ite or inf9ite80 = x is no?+ 9 itself2 b1 8,h[ is ! empirical regress to be comm5c$1 & h[ f> ought we to proce$ ) x80 ,& "h a signal di/9ction 9 ! application ( ?is rule becomes app>5t4 ,if ! :ole is giv5 empirically1 x is possible to rec$e 9 ! s]ies ( its int]nal conditions to inf9ity4 ,b if ! :ole is n giv51 & c only be giv5 by & ?r\gh ! empirical regress1 ,i c only say3 8,x is possible to inf9ity1 to proce$ to /ill high] conditions 9 ! s]ies40 ,9 ! fir/ case1 ,i am ju/ifi$ 9 ass]t+ t m memb]s are empirically giv5 9 ! object ?an ,i atta9 to 9 ! regress 7( decomposition74 ,9 ! second case1 ,i am ju/ifi$ only 9 say+1 t ,i c always proce$ fur!r 9 ! regress1 because no memb] ( ! s]ies is giv5 z absolutely condition$1 & ?us a high] memb] is possible1 & an inquiry ) reg>d to x is necess>y4 ,9 ! "o case x is necess>y to f9d o!r memb]s ( ! s]ies1 9 ! o!r x is necess>y to inquire = o!rs1 inasmu* z exp]i5ce pres5ts no absolute limitation ( ! regress4 ,=1 ei!r y d n possess a p]ception :i* absolutely limits y\r empirical regress1 & 9 ?is case ! regress _c be reg>d$ z complete2 or1 y d possess su* a limitative p]ception1 9 :i* case x is n a "p ( y\r s]ies 7= t :i* limits mu/ be di/9ct f t :i* is limit$ by x71 & x is incumb5t on y to cont9ue y\r regress up to ?is condition1 & s on4 ,^! rem>ks w be plac$ 9 _! prop] light by _! application 9 ! foll[+ section4 ,section ,,ix4 ,( ! ,empirical ,use ( ! ,regulative ,pr9ciple ( ,reason ) reg>d to ! ,cosmological ,ideas ,we h %[n t no transc5d5tal use c be made ei!r ( ! conceptions ( reason or ( und]/&+4 ,we h %[n1 likewise1 t ! dem& ( absolute totality 9 ! s]ies ( conditions 9 ! _w ( s5se arises f a transc5d5tal employm5t ( reason1 re/+ on ! op9ion t ph5om5a are to be reg>d$ z ?+s 9 !mselves4 ,x foll[s t we are n requir$ to answ] ! "q respect+ ! absolute quantity ( a s]ies--:e!r x is 9 itself limit$ or unlimit$4 ,we are only call$ ^u to det]m9e h[ f> we mu/ proce$ 9 ! empirical regress f condition to condition1 9 ord] to discov]1 9 con=mity ) ! rule ( reason1 a full & correct answ] to ! que/ions propos$ by reason itself4 ,?is pr9ciple ( reason is h5ce valid only z a rule = ! ext5sion ( a possible exp]i5ce--its invalidity z a pr9ciple con/itutive ( ph5om5a 9 !mselves hav+ be5 suffici5tly demon/rat$4 ,& ?us1 too1 ! ant9omial conflict ( reason ) itself is completely put an end to2 inasmu* z we h n only pres5t$ a critical solution ( ! fallacy lurk+ 9 ! opposite /atem5ts ( reason1 b h %[n ! true mean+ ( ! ideas :i* gave rise to ^! /atem5ts4 ,! dialectical pr9ciple ( reason has1 !re=e1 be5 *ang$ into a doctr9al pr9ciple4 ,b 9 fact1 if ?is pr9ciple1 9 ! subjective signification :i* we h %[n to be its only true s5se1 may be gu>ante$ z a pr9ciple ( ! unceas+ ext5sion ( ! employm5t ( our und]/&+1 its influ5ce & value are j z great z if x 7 an axiom = ! priori det]m9ation ( objects4 ,= su* an axiom c\ld n ex]t a /rong] influ5ce on ! ext5sion & rectification ( our k1 o!rwise ?an by procur+ = ! pr9ciples ( ! und]/&+ ! mo/ widely exp&$ employm5t 9 ! field ( exp]i5ce4 ,i4 ,solution ( ! ,cosmological ,idea ( ! ,totality ( ! ,composition ( ,ph5om5a 9 ! ,univ]se ,"h1 z well z 9 ! case ( ! o!r cosmological problems1 ! gr\nd ( ! regulative pr9ciple ( reason is ! proposition t 9 our empirical regress no exp]i5ce ( an absolute limit1 & consequ5tly no exp]i5ce ( a condition1 :i* is itself absolutely uncondition$1 is discov]able4 ,& ! tru? ( ?is proposition itself re/s ^u ! consid]ation t su* an exp]i5ce mu/ repres5t to u ph5om5a z limit$ by no?+ or ! m]e void1 on :i* our cont9u$ regress by means ( p]ception mu/ abut--:i* is impossible4 ,n[ ?is proposition1 :i* decl>es t e condition atta9$ 9 ! empirical regress mu/ itself be consid]$ empirically condition$1 conta9s ! rule 9 t]m9is1 :i* requires me1 to :atev] ext5t ,i may h proce$$ 9 ! asc5d+ s]ies1 always to look = "s high] memb] 9 ! s]ies--:e!r ?is memb] is to become kn[n to me ?r\gh exp]i5ce1 or n4 ,no?+ fur!r is necess>y1 !n1 = ! solution ( ! fir/ cosmological problem1 ?an to decide1 :e!r1 9 ! regress to ! uncondition$ quantity ( ! univ]se 7z reg>ds space & "t71 ?is nev] limit$ asc5t ought to be call$ a regressus 9 inf9itum or indef9itum4 ,! g5]al repres5tation :i* we =m 9 our m9ds ( ! s]ies ( all pa/ /ates or conditions ( ! _w1 or ( all ! ?+s :i* at pres5t exi/ 9 x1 is itself no?+ m ?an a possible empirical regress1 :i* is cogitat$--al?\gh 9 an undet]m9$ mann]--9 ! m9d1 & :i* gives rise to ! conception ( a s]ies ( conditions = a giv5 object4#fj ,n[ ,i h a conception ( ! univ]se1 b n an intuition--t is1 n an intuition ( x z a :ole4 ,?us ,i _c inf] ! magnitude ( ! regress f ! quantity or magnitude ( ! _w1 & det]m9e ! =m] by means ( ! latt]2 on ! contr>y1 ,i mu/ fir/ ( all =m a conception ( ! quantity or magnitude ( ! _w f ! magnitude ( ! empirical regress4 ,b ( ?is regress ,i "k no?+ m ?an t ,i ought to proce$ f e giv5 memb] ( ! s]ies ( conditions to "o /ill high]4 ,b ! quantity ( ! univ]se is n !reby det]m9$1 & we _c affirm t ?is regress proce$s 9 inf9itum4 ,su* an affirmation w\ld anticipate ! memb]s ( ! s]ies :i* h n yet be5 rea*$1 & repres5t ! numb] ( !m z beyond ! grasp ( any empirical syn!sis2 x w\ld consequ5tly det]m9e ! cosmical quantity prior to ! regress 7al?\gh only 9 a negative mann]7--:i* is impossible4 ,= ! _w is n giv5 9 its totality 9 any intuition3 consequ5tly1 its quantity _c be giv5 prior to ! regress4 ,x foll[s t we are unable to make any decl>ation respect+ ! cosmical quantity 9 itself--n ev5 t ! regress 9 x is a regress 9 inf9itum2 we mu/ only endeav\r to atta9 to a conception ( ! quantity ( ! univ]se1 9 con=mity ) ! rule :i* det]m9es ! empirical regress 9 x4 ,b ?is rule m]ely requires u nev] to admit an absolute limit to our s]ies--h[ f> soev] we may h proce$$ 9 x1 b always1 on ! contr>y1 to subord9ate e ph5om5on to "s o!r z its condition1 & consequ5tly to proce$ to ?is high] ph5om5on4 ,su* a regress is1 !re=e1 ! regressus 9 indef9itum1 :i*1 z n det]m9+ a quantity 9 ! object1 is cle>ly di/+ui%able f ! regressus 9 inf9itum4 #fj ,! cosmical s]ies c nei!r be great] nor small] ?an ! possible empirical regress1 ^u :i* its conception is bas$4 ,& z ?is regress _c be a det]m9ate inf9ite regress1 /ill less a det]m9ate f9ite 7absolutely limit$71 x is evid5t t we _c reg>d ! _w z ei!r f9ite or inf9ite1 because ! regress1 :i* gives u ! repres5tation ( ! _w1 is nei!r f9ite nor inf9ite4 ,x foll[s f :at we h said t we are n ju/ifi$ 9 decl>+ ! _w to be inf9ite 9 space1 or z reg>ds pa/ "t4 ,= ?is conception ( an inf9ite giv5 quantity is empirical2 b we _c apply ! conception ( an inf9ite quantity to ! _w z an object ( ! s5ses4 ,i _c say1 8,! regress f a giv5 p]ception to ev]y?+ limit$ ei!r 9 space or "t1 proce$s 9 inf9itum10 = ?is presupposes an inf9ite cosmical quantity2 nei!r c ,i say1 8,x is f9ite10 = an absolute limit is likewise impossible 9 exp]i5ce4 ,x foll[s t ,i am n entitl$ to make any ass]tion at all respect+ ! :ole object ( exp]i5ce--! _w ( s5se2 ,i mu/ limit my decl>ations to ! rule accord+ to :i* exp]i5ce or empirical k is to be atta9$4 ,to ! "q1 !re=e1 respect+ ! cosmical quantity1 ! fir/ & negative answ] is3 8,! _w has no beg9n+ 9 "t1 & no absolute limit 9 space40 ,=1 9 ! contr>y case1 x w\ld be limit$ by a void "t on ! "o h&1 & by a void space on ! o!r4 ,n[1 s9ce ! _w1 z a ph5om5on1 _c be ?us limit$ 9 itself = a ph5om5on is n a ?+ 9 itself2 x mu/ be possible = u to h a p]ception ( ?is limitation by a void "t & a void space4 ,b su* a p]ception--su* an exp]i5ce is impossible2 because x has no cont5t4 ,consequ5tly1 an absolute cosmical limit is empirically1 & !re=e absolutely1 impossible4#fa #fa ,! read] w rem>k t ! pro( pres5t$ above is v diff]5t f ! dogmatical demon/ration giv5 9 ! anti!sis ( ! fir/ ant9omy4 ,9 t demon/ration1 x 0 tak5 = grant$ t ! _w is a ?+ 9 itself--giv5 9 its totality prior to all regress1 & a det]m9$ position 9 space & "t 0 d5i$ to x--if x 0 n consid]$ z occupy+ all "t & all space4 ,h5ce our conclusion diff]$ f t giv5 above2 = we inf]r$ 9 ! anti!sis ! actual inf9ity ( ! _w4 ,f ?is foll[s ! affirmative answ]3 8,! regress 9 ! s]ies ( ph5om5a--z a det]m9ation ( ! cosmical quantity1 proce$s 9 indef9itum40 ,?is is equival5t to say+3 8,! _w ( s5se has no absolute quantity1 b ! empirical regress 7?r\gh :i* alone ! _w ( s5se is pres5t$ to u on ! side ( its conditions7 re/s ^u a rule1 :i* requires x to proce$ f e memb] ( ! s]ies1 z condition$1 to "o /ill m remote 7:e!r ?r\gh p]sonal exp]i5ce1 or by means ( hi/ory1 or ! *a9 ( cause & effect71 & n to cease at any po9t 9 ?is ext5sion ( ! possible empirical employm5t ( ! und]/&+40 ,& ?is is ! prop] & only use :i* reason c make ( its pr9ciples4 ,! above rule does n prescribe an unceas+ regress 9 "o k9d ( ph5om5a4 ,x does n1 = example1 =bid u1 9 our asc5t f an individual human be+ ?r\gh ! l9e ( 8 ance/ors1 to expect t we %all discov] at "s po9t ( ! regress a primeval pair1 or to admit1 9 ! s]ies ( heav5ly bodies1 a sun at ! f>!/ possible di/ance f "s c5tre4 ,all t x dem&s is a p]petual progress f ph5om5a to ph5om5a1 ev5 al?\gh an actual p]ception is n pres5t$ by !m 7z 9 ! case ( our p]ceptions be+ s weak z t we are unable to become consci\s ( !m71 s9ce !y1 nev]!less1 belong to possible exp]i5ce4 ,e beg9n+ is 9 "t1 & all limits to ext5sion are 9 space4 ,b space & "t are 9 ! _w ( s5se4 ,consequ5tly ph5om5a 9 ! _w are conditionally limit$1 b ! _w itself is n limit$1 ei!r conditionally or unconditionally4 ,= ?is reason1 & because nei!r ! _w nor ! cosmical s]ies ( conditions to a giv5 condition$ c be completely giv51 our conception ( ! cosmical quantity is giv5 only 9 & ?r\gh ! regress & n prior to x--9 a collective intuition4 ,b ! regress itself is really no?+ m ?an ! det]m9+ ( ! cosmical quantity1 & _c !re=e give u any det]m9$ conception ( x--/ill less a conception ( a quantity :i* is1 9 relation to a c]ta9 /&>d1 inf9ite4 ,! regress does n1 !re=e1 proce$ to inf9ity 7an inf9ity giv571 b only to an indef9ite ext5t1 = or ! ( pres5t+ to u a quantity--realiz$ only 9 & ?r\gh ! regress itself4 ,,ii4 ,solution ( ! ,cosmological ,idea ( ! ,totality ( ! ,division ( a ,:ole giv5 9 ,intuition ,:5 ,i divide a :ole :i* is giv5 9 intuition1 ,i proce$ f a condition$ to its conditions4 ,! division ( ! p>ts ( ! :ole 7subdivisio or decompositio7 is a regress 9 ! s]ies ( ^! conditions4 ,! absolute totality ( ?is s]ies w\ld be actually atta9$ & giv5 to ! m9d1 if ! regress c\ld arrive at simple p>ts4 ,b if all ! p>ts 9 a cont9u\s decomposition are !mselves divisible1 ! division1 t is to say1 ! regress1 proce$s f ! condition$ to its conditions 9 inf9itum2 because ! conditions 7! p>ts7 are !mselves conta9$ 9 ! condition$1 &1 z ! latt] is giv5 9 a limit$ intuition1 ! =m] are all giv5 along ) x4 ,?is regress _c1 !re=e1 be call$ a regressus 9 indef9itum1 z happ5$ 9 ! case ( ! prec$+ cosmological idea1 ! regress 9 :i* proce$$ f ! condition$ to ! conditions n giv5 contemporane\sly & along ) x1 b discov]able only ?r\gh ! empirical regress4 ,we are n1 h[ev]1 entitl$ to affirm ( a :ole ( ?is k9d1 :i* is divisible 9 inf9itum1 t x consi/s ( an inf9ite numb] ( p>ts4 ,=1 al?\gh all ! p>ts are conta9$ 9 ! intuition ( ! :ole1 ! :ole division is n conta9$ !re94 ,! division is conta9$ only 9 ! progress+ decomposition--9 ! regress itself1 :i* is ! condition ( ! possibility & actuality ( ! s]ies4 ,n[1 z ?is regress is inf9ite1 all ! memb]s 7p>ts7 to :i* x atta9s mu/ be conta9$ 9 ! giv5 :ole z an aggregate4 ,b ! complete s]ies ( division is n conta9$ !re94 ,= ?is s]ies1 be+ inf9ite 9 succession & always incomplete1 _c repres5t an inf9ite numb] ( memb]s1 & /ill less a composition ( ^! memb]s into a :ole4 ,to apply ?is rem>k to space4 ,e limit$ "p ( space pres5t$ to intuition is a :ole1 ! p>ts ( :i* are always spaces--to :atev] ext5t subdivid$4 ,e limit$ space is h5ce divisible to inf9ity4 ,let u aga9 apply ! rem>k to an ext]nal ph5om5on enclos$ 9 limits1 t is1 a body4 ,! divisibility ( a body re/s ^u ! divisibility ( space1 :i* is ! condition ( ! possibility ( ! body z an ext5d$ :ole4 ,a body is consequ5tly divisible to inf9ity1 ?\gh x does n1 = t reason1 consi/ ( an inf9ite numb] ( p>ts4 ,x c]ta9ly seems t1 z a body mu/ be cogitat$ z sub/ance 9 space1 ! law ( divisibility w\ld n be applicable to x z sub/ance4 ,= we may & ought to grant1 9 ! case ( space1 t division or decomposition1 to any ext5t1 nev] c utt]ly annihilate composition 7t is to say1 ! smalle/ "p ( space mu/ /ill consi/ ( spaces72 o!rwise space w\ld entirely cease to exi/--:i* is impossible4 ,b1 ! ass]tion on ! o!r h& t :5 all composition 9 matt] is annihilat$ 9 ?\ght1 no?+ rema9s1 does n seem to h>monize ) ! conception ( sub/ance1 :i* mu/ be prop]ly ! subject ( all composition & mu/ rema91 ev5 aft] ! conjunction ( its attributes 9 space--:i* con/itut$ a body--is annihilat$ 9 ?\ght4 ,b ?is is n ! case ) sub/ance 9 ! ph5om5al _w1 :i* is n a ?+ 9 itself cogitat$ by ! pure category4 ,ph5om5al sub/ance is n an absolute subject2 x is m]ely a p]man5t s5su\s image1 & no?+ m ?an an intuition1 9 :i* ! uncondition$ is n to be f\nd4 ,b1 al?\gh ?is rule ( progress to inf9ity is legitimate & applicable to ! subdivision ( a ph5om5on1 z a m]e occupation or fill+ ( space1 x is n applicable to a :ole consi/+ ( a numb] ( di/9ct p>ts & con/itut+ a quantum discretum--t is to say1 an organiz$ body4 ,x _c be admitt$ t e "p 9 an organiz$ :ole is itself organiz$1 & t1 9 analys+ x to inf9ity1 we mu/ always meet ) organiz$ p>ts2 al?\gh we may all[ t ! p>ts ( ! matt] :i* we decompose 9 inf9itum1 may be organiz$4 ,= ! inf9ity ( ! division ( a ph5om5on 9 space re/s altoge!r on ! fact t ! divisibility ( a ph5om5on is giv5 only 9 & ?r\gh ?is inf9ity1 t is1 an undet]m9$ numb] ( p>ts is giv51 :ile ! p>ts !mselves are giv5 & det]m9$ only 9 & ?r\gh ! subdivision2 9 a ^w1 ! inf9ity ( ! division necess>ily presupposes t ! :ole is n already divid$ 9 se4 ,h5ce our division det]m9es a numb] ( p>ts 9 ! :ole--a numb] :i* ext5ds j z f> z ! actual regress 9 ! division2 :ile1 on ! o!r h&1 ! v notion ( a body organiz$ to inf9ity repres5ts ! :ole z already & 9 itself divid$4 ,we expect1 !re=e1 to f9d 9 x a det]m9ate1 b at ! same "t1 inf9ite1 numb] ( p>ts--:i* is self-contradictory4 ,= we %\ld ?us h a :ole conta9+ a s]ies ( memb]s :i* c\ld n be complet$ 9 any regress--:i* is inf9ite1 & at ! same "t complete 9 an organiz$ composite4 ,inf9ite divisibility is applicable only to a quantum cont9uum1 & is bas$ entirely on ! inf9ite divisibility ( space1 ,b 9 a quantum discretum ! multitude ( p>ts or units is always det]m9$1 & h5ce always equal to "s numb]4 ,to :at ext5t a body may be organiz$1 exp]i5ce alone c in=m u2 & al?\gh1 s f> z our exp]i5ce ( ?is or t body has ext5d$1 we may n h discov]$ any inorganic "p1 su* p>ts mu/ exi/ 9 possible exp]i5ce4 ,b h[ f> ! transc5d5tal division ( a ph5om5on mu/ ext5d1 we _c "k f exp]i5ce--x is a "q :i* exp]i5ce _c answ]2 x is answ]$ only by ! pr9ciple ( reason :i* =bids u to consid] ! empirical regress1 9 ! analysis ( ext5d$ body1 z ev] absolutely complete4 ,conclud+ ,rem>k on ! ,solution ( ! ,transc5d5tal ,ma!matical ,ideas--& ,introductory to ! ,solution ( ! ,dynamical ,ideas4 ,we pres5t$ ! ant9omy ( pure reason 9 a tabul> =m1 & we endeav\r$ to %[ ! gr\nd ( ?is self-contradiction on ! "p ( reason1 & ! only means ( br++ x to a conclusion--namely1 by decl>+ bo? contradictory /atem5ts to be false4 ,we repres5t$ 9 ^! ant9omies ! conditions ( ph5om5a z belong+ to ! condition$ accord+ to relations ( space & "t--:i* is ! usual supposition ( ! common und]/&+4 ,9 ?is respect1 all dialectical repres5tations ( totality1 9 ! s]ies ( conditions to a giv5 condition$1 7 p]fectly homog5e\s4 ,! condition 0 always a memb] ( ! s]ies along ) ! condition$1 & ?us ! homog5eity ( ! :ole s]ies 0 assur$4 ,9 ?is case ! regress c\ld nev] be cogitat$ z complete2 or1 if ?is 0 ! case1 a memb] really condition$ 0 falsely reg>d$ z a primal memb]1 consequ5tly z uncondition$4 ,9 su* an ant9omy1 !re=e1 we did n consid] ! object1 t is1 ! condition$1 b ! s]ies ( conditions belong+ to ! object1 & ! magnitude ( t s]ies4 ,& ?us arose ! difficulty--a difficulty n to be settl$ by any decision reg>d+ ! claims ( ! two p>ties1 b simply by cutt+ ! knot--by decl>+ ! s]ies propos$ by reason to be ei!r too long or too %ort = ! und]/&+1 :i* c\ld 9 nei!r case make its conceptions adequate ) ! ideas4 ,b we h ov]look$1 up to ?is po9t1 an ess5tial diff]5ce exi/+ betwe5 ! conceptions ( ! und]/&+ :i* reason endeav\rs to raise to ! rank ( ideas--two ( ^! indicat+ a ma!matical1 & two a dynamical syn!sis ( ph5om5a4 ,hi!rto1 x 0 necess>y to signalize ?is di/9ction2 =1 j z 9 our g5]al repres5tation ( all transc5d5tal ideas1 we consid]$ !m "u ph5om5al conditions1 s1 9 ! two ma!matical ideas1 our discussion is conc]n$ solely ) an object 9 ! _w ( ph5om5a4 ,b z we are n[ ab\t to proce$ to ! consid]ation ( ! dynamical conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 & _! adequat5ess ) ideas1 we mu/ n lose sight ( ?is di/9ction4 ,we %all f9d t x op5s up to u an entirely new view ( ! conflict 9 :i* reason is involv$4 ,=1 :ile 9 ! fir/ two ant9omies1 bo? p>ties 7 dismiss$1 on ! gr\nd ( hav+ advanc$ /atem5ts bas$ ^u false hypo!sis2 9 ! pres5t case ! hope appe>s ( discov]+ a hypo!sis :i* may be consi/5t ) ! dem&s ( reason1 &1 ! judge complet+ ! /atem5t ( ! gr\nds ( claim1 :i* bo? p>ties _h left 9 an unsatisfactory /ate1 ! "q may be settl$ on its own m]its1 n by dismiss+ ! claimants1 b by a comp>ison ( ! argum5ts on bo? sides4 ,if we consid] m]ely _! ext5sion1 & :e!r !y are adequate ) ideas1 ! s]ies ( conditions may be reg>d$ z all homog5e\s4 ,b ! conception ( ! und]/&+ :i* lies at ! basis ( ^! ideas1 conta9s ei!r a syn!sis ( ! homog5e\s 7presuppos$ 9 e quantity--9 its composition z well z 9 its division7 or ( ! het]og5e\s1 :i* is ! case 9 ! dynamical syn!sis ( cause & effect1 z well z ( ! necess>y & ! cont+5t4 ,?us x happ5s t 9 ! ma!matical s]ies ( ph5om5a no o!r ?an a s5su\s condition is admissible--a condition :i* is itself a memb] ( ! s]ies2 :ile ! dynamical s]ies ( s5su\s conditions admits a het]og5e\s condition1 :i* is n a memb] ( ! s]ies1 b1 z purely intelligible1 lies out ( & beyond x4 ,& ?us reason is satisfi$1 & an uncondition$ plac$ at ! head ( ! s]ies ( ph5om5a1 )\t introduc+ confusion into or discont9u+ x1 contr>y to ! pr9ciples ( ! und]/&+4 ,n[1 f ! fact t ! dynamical ideas admit a condition ( ph5om5a :i* does n =m a "p ( ! s]ies ( ph5om5a1 arises a result :i* we %\ld n h expect$ f an ant9omy4 ,9 =m] cases1 ! result 0 t bo? contradictory dialectical /atem5ts 7 decl>$ to be false4 ,9 ! pres5t case1 we f9d ! condition$ 9 ! dynamical s]ies connect$ ) an empirically uncondition$1 b non-s5su\s condition2 & ?us satisfaction is done to ! und]/&+ on ! "o h& & to ! reason on ! o!r4#fb ,:ile1 moreov]1 ! dialectical argum5ts = uncondition$ totality 9 m]e ph5om5a fall to ! gr\nd1 bo? propositions ( reason may be %[n to be true 9 _! prop] signification4 ,?is c\ld n happ5 9 ! case ( ! cosmological ideas :i* dem&$ a ma!matically uncondition$ unity2 = no condition c\ld be plac$ at ! head ( ! s]ies ( ph5om5a1 except "o :i* 0 itself a ph5om5on & consequ5tly a memb] ( ! s]ies4 #fb ,= ! und]/&+ _c admit among ph5om5a a condition :i* is itself empirically uncondition$4 ,b if x is possible to cogitate an intelligible condition--"o :i* is n a memb] ( ! s]ies ( ph5om5a--= a condition$ ph5om5on1 )\t break+ ! s]ies ( empirical conditions1 su* a condition may be admissible z empirically uncondition$1 & ! empirical regress cont9ue regul>1 unceas+1 & intact4 ,,iii4 ,solution ( ! ,cosmological ,idea ( ! ,totality ( ! ,d$uction ( ,cosmical ,ev5ts f _! ,causes ,!re are only two modes ( causality cogitable--! causality ( nature or ( fre$om4 ,! fir/ is ! conjunction ( a p>ticul> /ate ) ano!r prec$+ x 9 ! _w ( s5se1 ! =m] foll[+ ! latt] by virtue ( a law4 ,n[1 z ! causality ( ph5om5a is subject to conditions ( "t1 & ! prec$+ /ate1 if x _h always exi/$1 c\ld n h produc$ an effect :i* w\ld make its fir/ appe>ance at a p>ticul> "t1 ! causality ( a cause mu/ itself be an effect--mu/ itself h begun to be1 & !re=e1 accord+ to ! pr9ciple ( ! und]/&+1 itself requires a cause4 ,we mu/ und]/&1 on ! contr>y1 by ! t]m fre$om1 9 ! cosmological s5se1 a faculty ( ! spontane\s orig9ation ( a /ate2 ! causality ( :i*1 !re=e1 is n subord9at$ to ano!r cause det]m9+ x 9 "t4 ,fre$om is 9 ?is s5se a pure transc5d5tal idea1 :i*1 9 ! fir/ place1 conta9s no empirical elem5t2 ! object ( :i*1 9 ! second place1 _c be giv5 or det]m9$ 9 any exp]i5ce1 because x is a univ]sal law ( ! v possibility ( exp]i5ce1 t ev]y?+ :i* happ5s mu/ h a cause1 t consequ5tly ! causality ( a cause1 be+ itself some?+ t has happ5$1 mu/ also h a cause4 ,9 ?is view ( ! case1 ! :ole field ( exp]i5ce1 h[ f> soev] x may ext5d1 conta9s no?+ t is n subject to ! laws ( nature4 ,b1 z we _c by ?is means atta9 to an absolute totality ( conditions 9 ref]5ce to ! s]ies ( causes & effects1 reason creates ! idea ( a spontaneity1 :i* c beg9 to act ( itself1 & )\t any ext]nal cause det]m9+ x to action1 accord+ to ! natural law ( causality4 ,x is especially rem>kable t ! practical conception ( fre$om is bas$ ^u ! transc5d5tal idea1 & t ! "q ( ! possibility ( ! =m] is difficult only z x involves ! consid]ation ( ! tru? ( ! latt]4 ,fre$om1 9 ! practical s5se1 is ! indep5d5ce ( ! w ( co]cion by s5su\s impulses4 ,a w is s5su\s1 9 s f> z x is pa?ologically affect$ 7by s5su\s impulses72 x is t]m$ animal 7arbitrium brutum71 :5 x is pa?ologically necessitat$4 ,! human w is c]ta9ly an arbitrium s5sitivum1 n brutum1 b lib]um2 because s5su\sness does n necessitate its action1 a faculty exi/+ 9 man ( self-det]m9ation1 indep5d5tly ( all s5su\s co]cion4 ,x is pla9 t1 if all causality 9 ! _w ( s5se 7 natural--& natural only--e ev5t w\ld be det]m9$ by ano!r accord+ to necess>y laws1 & t1 consequ5tly1 ph5om5a1 9 s f> z !y det]m9e ! w1 mu/ necessitate e action z a natural effect f !mselves2 & ?us all practical fre$om w\ld fall to ! gr\nd ) ! transc5d5tal idea4 ,= ! latt] presupposes t al?\gh a c]ta9 ?+ has n happ5$1 x ought to h happ5$1 & t1 consequ5tly1 its ph5om5al cause 0 n s p[]ful & det]m9ative z to exclude ! causality ( our w--a causality capable ( produc+ effects indep5d5tly ( & ev5 9 opposition to ! p[] ( natural causes1 & capable1 consequ5tly1 ( spontane\sly orig9at+ a s]ies ( ev5ts4 ,"h1 too1 we f9d x to be ! case1 z we g5]ally f\nd 9 ! self-contradictions & p]plexities ( a reason :i* /rives to pass ! b\nds ( possible exp]i5ce1 t ! problem is prop]ly n physiological1 b transc5d5tal4 ,! "q ( ! possibility ( fre$om does inde$ conc]n psy*ology2 b1 z x re/s ^u dialectical argum5ts ( pure reason1 its solution mu/ engage ! att5tion ( transc5d5tal philosophy4 ,be=e attempt+ ?is solution1 a task :i* transc5d5tal philosophy _c decl9e1 x w be advisable to make a rem>k ) reg>d to its proc$ure 9 ! settlem5t ( ! "q4 ,if ph5om5a 7 ?+s 9 !mselves1 & "t & space =ms ( ! exi/5ce ( ?+s1 condition & condition$ w\ld always be memb]s ( ! same s]ies2 & ?us w\ld arise 9 ! pres5t case ! ant9omy common to all transc5d5tal ideas--t _! s]ies is ei!r too great or too small = ! und]/&+4 ,! dynamical ideas1 :i* we are ab\t to discuss 9 ?is & ! foll[+ section1 possess ! peculi>ity ( relat+ to an object1 n consid]$ z a quantity1 b z an exi/5ce2 & ?us1 9 ! discussion ( ! pres5t "q1 we may make ab/raction ( ! quantity ( ! s]ies ( conditions1 & consid] m]ely ! dynamical relation ( ! condition to ! condition$4 ,! "q1 !n1 sugge/s itself1 :e!r fre$om is possible2 &1 if x is1 :e!r x c consi/ ) ! univ]sality ( ! natural law ( causality2 &1 consequ5tly1 :e!r we en\nce a prop] disjunctive proposition :5 we say3 8,e effect mu/ h its orig9 ei!r 9 nature or 9 fre$om10 or :e!r bo? _c exi/ toge!r 9 ! same ev5t 9 diff]5t relations4 ,! pr9ciple ( an unbrok5 connection betwe5 all ev5ts 9 ! ph5om5al _w1 9 accordance ) ! un*angeable laws ( nature1 is a well-e/abli%$ pr9ciple ( transc5d5tal analytic :i* admits ( no exception4 ,! "q1 !re=e1 is3 8,:e!r an effect1 det]m9$ accord+ to ! laws ( nature1 c at ! same "t be produc$ by a free ag5t1 or :e!r fre$om & nature mutually exclude ea* o!r80 ,& "h1 ! common b fallaci\s hypo!sis ( ! absolute reality ( ph5om5a manife/s its injuri\s influ5ce 9 emb>rass+ ! proc$ure ( reason4 ,= if ph5om5a are ?+s 9 !mselves1 fre$om is impossible4 ,9 ?is case1 nature is ! complete & all-suffici5t cause ( e ev5t2 & condition & condition$1 cause & effect are conta9$ 9 ! same s]ies1 & necessitat$ by ! same law4 ,if1 on ! contr>y1 ph5om5a are held to be1 z !y are 9 fact1 no?+ m ?an m]e repres5tations1 connect$ ) ea* o!r 9 accordance ) empirical laws1 !y mu/ h a gr\nd :i* is n ph5om5al4 ,b ! causality ( su* an intelligible cause is n det]m9$ or det]m9able by ph5om5a2 al?\gh its effects1 z ph5om5a1 mu/ be det]m9$ by o!r ph5om5al exi/5ces4 ,?is cause & its causality exi/ !re=e out ( & ap>t f ! s]ies ( ph5om5a2 :ile its effects d exi/ & are discov]able 9 ! s]ies ( empirical conditions4 ,su* an effect may !re=e be consid]$ to be free 9 relation to its intelligible cause1 & necess>y 9 relation to ! ph5om5a f :i* x is a necess>y consequ5ce--a di/9ction :i*1 /at$ 9 ?is p]fectly g5]al & ab/ract mann]1 mu/ appe> 9 ! highe/ degree subtle & obscure4 ,! sequel w expla94 ,x is suffici5t1 at pres5t1 to rem>k t1 z ! complete & unbrok5 connection ( ph5om5a is an unalt]able law ( nature1 fre$om is impossible--on ! supposition t ph5om5a are absolutely real4 ,h5ce ^? philosoph]s :o adh]e to ! common op9ion on ?is subject c nev] succe$ 9 reconcil+ ! ideas ( nature & fre$om4 ,possibility ( ,fre$om 9 ,h>mony ) ! ,univ]sal ,law ( ,natural ,necessity4 ,t elem5t 9 a s5su\s object :i* is n itself s5su\s1 ,i may be all[$ to t]m intelligible4 ,if1 accord+ly1 an object :i* mu/ be reg>d$ z a s5su\s ph5om5on possesses a faculty :i* is n an object ( s5su\s intuition1 b by means ( :i* x is capable ( be+ ! cause ( ph5om5a1 ! causality ( an object or exi/5ce ( ?is k9d may be reg>d$ f two diff]5t po9ts ( view4 ,x may be consid]$ to be intelligible1 z reg>ds its action--! action ( a ?+ :i* is a ?+ 9 itself1 & s5su\s1 z reg>ds its effects--! effects ( a ph5om5on belong+ to ! s5su\s _w4 ,we %\ld accord+ly1 h to =m bo? an empirical & an intellectual conception ( ! causality ( su* a faculty or p[]--bo?1 h[ev]1 hav+ ref]5ce to ! same effect4 ,?is tw(old mann] ( cogitat+ a p[] resid+ 9 a s5su\s object does n run c\nt] to any ( ! conceptions :i* we ought to =m ( ! _w ( ph5om5a or ( a possible exp]i5ce4 ,ph5om5a--n be+ ?+s 9 !mselves--mu/ h a transc5d5tal object z a f\ndation1 :i* det]m9es !m z m]e repres5tations2 & !re seems to be no reason :y we %\ld n ascribe to ?is transc5d5tal object1 9 addition to ! prop]ty ( self-ph5om5ization1 a causality ^: effects are to be met ) 9 ! _w ( ph5om5a1 al?\gh x is n itself a ph5om5on4 ,b e effective cause mu/ possess a "*1 t is to say1 a law ( its causality1 )\t :i* x w\ld cease to be a cause4 ,9 ! above case1 !n1 e s5su\s object w\ld possess an empirical "*1 :i* gu>ante$ t its actions1 z ph5om5a1 /& 9 complete & h>moni\s connection1 con=mably to unv>y+ natural laws1 ) all o!r ph5om5a1 & c be d$uc$ f ^!1 z conditions1 & t !y d ?us1 9 connection ) ^!1 con/itute a s]ies 9 ! ord] ( nature4 ,?is s5su\s object mu/1 9 ! second place1 possess an intelligible "*1 :i* gu>antees x to be ! cause ( ^? actions1 z ph5om5a1 al?\gh x is n itself a ph5om5on nor subord9ate to ! conditions ( ! _w ( s5se4 ,! =m] may be t]m$ ! "* ( ! ?+ z a ph5om5on1 ! latt] ! "* ( ! ?+ z a ?+ 9 itself4 ,n[ ?is active subject w\ld1 9 its "* ( intelligible subject1 be subord9ate to no conditions ( "t1 = "t is only a condition ( ph5om5a1 & n ( ?+s 9 !mselves4 ,no action w\ld beg9 or cease to be 9 ?is subject2 x w\ld consequ5tly be free f ! law ( all det]m9ation ( "t--! law ( *ange1 namely1 t ev]y?+ :i* happ5s mu/ h a cause 9 ! ph5om5a ( a prec$+ /ate4 ,9 "o ^w1 ! causality ( ! subject1 9 s f> z x is intelligible1 w\ld n =m "p ( ! s]ies ( empirical conditions :i* det]m9e & necessitate an ev5t 9 ! _w ( s5se4 ,aga91 ?is intelligible "* ( a ?+ _c be imm$iately cogniz$1 because we c p]ceive no?+ b ph5om5a1 b x mu/ be capable ( be+ cogitat$ 9 h>mony ) ! empirical "*2 = we always f9d ourselves compell$ to place1 9 ?\ght1 a transc5d5tal object at ! basis ( ph5om5a al?\gh we c nev] "k :at ?is object is 9 itself4 ,9 virtue ( its empirical "*1 ?is subject w\ld at ! same "t be subord9ate to all ! empirical laws ( causality1 &1 z a ph5om5on & memb] ( ! s5su\s _w1 its effects w\ld h to be acc\nt$ = by a ref]5ce to prec$+ ph5om5a4 ,et]nal ph5om5a mu/ be capable ( influ5c+ x2 & its actions1 9 accordance ) natural laws1 mu/ expla9 to u h[ its empirical "*1 t is1 ! law ( its causality1 is to be cogniz$ 9 & by means ( exp]i5ce4 ,9 a ^w1 all requisites = a complete & necess>y det]m9ation ( ^! actions mu/ be pres5t$ to u by exp]i5ce4 ,9 virtue ( its intelligible "*1 on ! o!r h& 7al?\gh we possess only a g5]al conception ( ?is "*71 ! subject mu/ be reg>d$ z free f all s5su\s influ5ces1 & f all ph5om5al det]m9ation4 ,moreov]1 z no?+ happ5s 9 ?is subject--= x is a n\m5on1 & !re does n consequ5tly exi/ 9 x any *ange1 dem&+ ! dynamical det]m9ation ( "t1 & = ! same reason no connection ) ph5om5a z causes--?is active exi/5ce mu/ 9 its actions be free f & indep5d5t ( natural necessity1 = ?is necessity exi/s only 9 ! _w ( ph5om5a4 ,x w\ld be q correct to say t x orig9ates or beg9s its effects 9 ! _w ( s5se f itself1 al?\gh ! action productive ( ^! effects does n beg9 9 itself4 ,we %\ld n be 9 ?is case affirm+ t ^! s5su\s effects began to exi/ ( !mselves1 because !y are always det]m9$ by prior empirical conditions--by virtue ( ! empirical "*1 :i* is ! ph5om5on ( ! intelligible "*--& are possible only z con/itut+ a cont9uation ( ! s]ies ( natural causes4 ,& ?us nature & fre$om1 ea* 9 ! complete & absolute signification ( ^! t]ms1 c exi/1 )\t contradiction or disagreem5t1 9 ! same action4 ,exposition ( ! ,cosmological ,idea ( ,fre$om 9 ,h>mony ) ! ,univ]sal ,law ( ,natural ,necessity4 ,i h ?\ght x advisable to lay be=e ! read] at fir/ m]ely a sket* ( ! solution ( ?is transc5d5tal problem1 9 ord] to enable him to =m ) great] ease a cle> conception ( ! c\rse :i* reason mu/ adopt 9 ! solution4 ,i %all n[ proce$ to exhibit ! sev]al mom5ta ( ?is solution1 & to consid] !m 9 _! ord]4 ,! natural law t ev]y?+ :i* happ5s mu/ h a cause1 t ! causality ( ?is cause1 t is1 ! action ( ! cause 7:i* _c always h exi/$1 b mu/ be itself an ev5t1 = x prec$es 9 "t "s effect :i* x has orig9at$71 mu/ h itself a ph5om5al cause1 by :i* x is det]m9$ &1 &1 consequ5tly1 all ev5ts are empirically det]m9$ 9 an ord] ( nature--?is law1 ,i say1 :i* lies at ! f\ndation ( ! possibility ( exp]i5ce1 & ( a connect$ sy/em ( ph5om5a or nature is a law ( ! und]/&+1 f :i* no dep>ture1 & to :i* no exception1 c be admitt$4 ,= to except ev5 a s+le ph5om5on f its op]ation is to exclude x f ! sph]e ( possible exp]i5ce & ?us to admit x to be a m]e fiction ( ?\ght or phantom ( ! bra94 ,?us we are oblig$ to ackn[l$ge ! exi/5ce ( a *a9 ( causes1 9 :i*1 h[ev]1 absolute totality _c be f\nd4 ,b we ne$ n deta9 ourselves ) ?is "q1 = x has already be5 suffici5tly answ]$ 9 our discussion ( ! ant9omies into :i* reason falls1 :5 x attempts to rea* ! uncondition$ 9 ! s]ies ( ph5om5a4 ,if we p]mit ourselves to be deceiv$ by ! illusion ( transc5d5tal idealism1 we %all f9d t nei!r nature nor fre$om exi/s4 ,n[ ! "q is3 8,:e!r1 admitt+ ! exi/5ce ( natural necessity 9 ! _w ( ph5om5a1 x is possible to consid] an effect z at ! same "t an effect ( nature & an effect ( fre$om--or1 :e!r ^! two modes ( causality are contradictory & incompatible80 ,no ph5om5al cause c absolutely & ( itself beg9 a s]ies4 ,e action1 9 s f> z x is productive ( an ev5t1 is itself an ev5t or occurr5ce1 & presupposes ano!r prec$+ /ate1 9 :i* its cause exi/$4 ,?us ev]y?+ t happ5s is b a cont9uation ( a s]ies1 & an absolute beg9n+ is impossible 9 ! s5su\s _w4 ,! actions ( natural causes are1 accord+ly1 !mselves effects1 & presuppose causes prec$+ !m 9 "t4 ,a primal action :i* =ms an absolute beg9n+1 is beyond ! causal p[] ( ph5om5a4 ,n[1 is x absolutely necess>y t1 grant+ t all effects are ph5om5a1 ! causality ( ! cause ( ^! effects mu/ also be a ph5om5on & belong to ! empirical _w8 ,is x n r possible t1 al?\gh e effect 9 ! ph5om5al _w mu/ be connect$ ) an empirical cause1 accord+ to ! univ]sal law ( nature1 ?is empirical causality may be itself ! effect ( a non-empirical & intelligible causality--its connection ) natural causes rema9+ nev]!less intact8 ,su* a causality w\ld be consid]$1 9 ref]5ce to ph5om5a1 z ! primal action ( a cause1 :i* is 9 s f>1 !re=e1 n ph5om5al1 b1 by reason ( ?is faculty or p[]1 intelligible2 al?\gh x mu/1 at ! same "t1 z a l9k 9 ! *a9 ( nature1 be reg>d$ z belong+ to ! s5su\s _w4 ,a belief 9 ! reciprocal causality ( ph5om5a is necess>y1 if we are requir$ to look = & to pres5t ! natural conditions ( natural ev5ts1 t is to say1 _! causes4 ,?is be+ admitt$ z unexceptionably valid1 ! requirem5ts ( ! und]/&+1 :i* recognizes no?+ b nature 9 ! region ( ph5om5a1 are satisfi$1 & our physical explanations ( physical ph5om5a may proce$ 9 _! regul> c\rse1 )\t h9drance & )\t opposition4 ,b x is no /umbl+-block 9 ! way1 ev5 assum+ ! idea to be a pure fiction1 to admit t !re are "s natural causes 9 ! possession ( a faculty :i* is n empirical1 b intelligible1 inasmu* z x is n det]m9$ to action by empirical conditions1 b purely & solely ^u gr\nds br\ght =w>d by ! und]/&+--?is action be+ /ill1 :5 ! cause is ph5om5iz$1 9 p]fect accordance ) ! laws ( empirical causality4 ,?us ! act+ subject1 z a causal ph5om5on1 w\ld cont9ue to pres]ve a complete connection ) nature & natural conditions2 & ! ph5om5on only ( ! subject 7) all its ph5om5al causality7 w\ld conta9 c]ta9 conditions1 :i*1 if we asc5d f ! empirical to ! transc5d5tal object1 mu/ necess>ily be reg>d$ z intelligible4 ,=1 if we att5d1 9 our inquiries ) reg>d to causes 9 ! _w ( ph5om5a1 to ! directions ( nature alone1 we ne$ n tr\ble ourselves ab\t ! relation 9 :i* ! transc5d5tal subject1 :i* is completely unkn[n to u1 /&s to ^! ph5om5a & _! connection 9 nature4 ,! intelligible gr\nd ( ph5om5a 9 ?is subject does n conc]n empirical que/ions4 ,x has to d only ) pure ?\ght2 &1 al?\gh ! effects ( ?is ?\ght & action ( ! pure und]/&+ are discov]able 9 ph5om5a1 ^! ph5om5a mu/ nev]!less be capable ( a full & complete explanation1 ^u purely physical gr\nds & 9 accordance ) natural laws4 ,& 9 ?is case we att5d solely to _! empirical & omit all consid]ation ( _! intelligible "* 7:i* is ! transc5d5tal cause ( ! =m]7 z completely unkn[n1 except 9 s f> z x is exhibit$ by ! latt] z its empirical symbol4 ,n[ let u apply ?is to exp]i5ce4 ,man is a ph5om5on ( ! s5su\s _w &1 at ! same "t1 !re=e1 a natural cause1 ! causality ( :i* mu/ be regulat$ by empirical laws4 ,z su*1 he mu/ possess an empirical "*1 l all o!r natural ph5om5a4 ,we rem>k ?is empirical "* 9 8 actions1 :i* reveal ! pres5ce ( c]ta9 p[]s & faculties4 ,if we consid] inanimate or m]ely animal nature1 we c discov] no reason = ascrib+ to ourselves any o!r ?an a faculty :i* is det]m9$ 9 a purely s5su\s mann]4 ,b man1 to :om nature reveals h]self only ?r\gh s5se1 cognizes himself n only by 8 s5ses1 b also ?r\gh pure app]ception2 & ?is 9 actions & int]nal det]m9ations1 :i* he _c reg>d z s5su\s impressions4 ,he is ?us to himself1 on ! "o h&1 a ph5om5on1 b on ! o!r h&1 9 respect ( c]ta9 faculties1 a purely intelligible object--intelligible1 because its action _c be ascrib$ to s5su\s receptivity4 ,^! faculties are und]/&+ & reason4 ,! latt]1 especially1 is 9 a peculi> mann] di/9ct f all empirically-condition$ faculties1 = x employs ideas alone 9 ! consid]ation ( its objects1 & by means ( ^! det]m9es ! und]/&+1 :i* !n proce$s to make an empirical use ( its own conceptions1 :i*1 l ! ideas ( reason1 are pure & non-empirical4 ,t reason possesses ! faculty ( causality1 or t at lea/ we are compell$ s to repres5t x1 is evid5t f ! imp]atives1 :i* 9 ! sph]e ( ! practical we impose on _m ( our executive p[]s4 ,! words ,i ought express a species ( necessity1 & imply a connection ) gr\nds :i* nature does n & _c pres5t to ! m9d ( man4 ,und]/&+ kn[s no?+ 9 nature b t :i* is1 or has be51 or w be4 ,x w\ld be absurd to say t any?+ 9 nature ought to be o!r ?an x is 9 ! relations ( "t 9 :i* x /&s2 inde$1 ! ought1 :5 we consid] m]ely ! c\rse ( nature1 has nei!r application nor mean+4 ,! "q1 8,:at ought to happ5 9 ! sph]e ( nature80 is j z absurd z ! "q1 8,:at ought to be ! prop]ties ( a circle80 ,all t we are entitl$ to ask is1 8,:at takes place 9 nature80 or1 9 ! latt] case1 8,:at are ! prop]ties ( a circle80 ,b ! idea ( an ought or ( duty indicates a possible action1 ! gr\nd ( :i* is a pure conception2 :ile ! gr\nd ( a m]ely natural action is1 on ! contr>y1 always a ph5om5on4 ,?is action mu/ c]ta9ly be possible "u physical conditions1 if x is prescrib$ by ! moral imp]ative ought2 b ^! physical or natural conditions d n conc]n ! det]m9ation ( ! w itself1 !y relate to its effects alone1 & ! consequ5ces ( ! effect 9 ! _w ( ph5om5a4 ,:atev] numb] ( motives nature may pres5t to my w1 :atev] s5su\s impulses--! moral ought x is beyond _! p[] to produce4 ,!y may produce a volition1 :i*1 s f> f be+ necess>y1 is always condition$--a volition to :i* ! ought enunciat$ by reason1 sets an aim & a /&>d1 gives p]mission or prohibition4 ,be ! object :at x may1 purely s5su\s--z pleasure1 or pres5t$ by pure reason--z good1 reason w n yield to gr\nds :i* h an empirical orig94 ,reason w n foll[ ! ord] ( ?+s pres5t$ by exp]i5ce1 b1 ) p]fect spontaneity1 re>ranges !m accord+ to ideas1 ) :i* x compels empirical conditions to agree4 ,x decl>es1 9 ! "n ( ^! ideas1 c]ta9 actions to be necess>y :i* nev]!less h n tak5 place & :i* p]haps nev] w take place2 & yet presupposes t x possesses ! faculty ( causality 9 relation to ^! actions4 ,=1 9 ! abs5ce ( ?is supposition1 x c\ld n expect its ideas to produce c]ta9 effects 9 ! _w ( exp]i5ce4 ,n[1 let u /op "h & admit x to be at lea/ possible t reason does /& 9 a really causal relation to ph5om5a4 ,9 ?is case x mu/--pure reason z x is--exhibit an empirical "*4 ,= e cause supposes a rule1 accord+ to :i* c]ta9 ph5om5a foll[ z effects f ! cause1 & e rule requires uni=mity 9 ^! effects2 & ?is is ! prop] gr\nd ( ! conception ( a cause--z a faculty or p[]4 ,n[ ?is conception 7( a cause7 may be t]m$ ! empirical "* ( reason2 & ?is "* is a p]man5t "o1 :ile ! effects produc$ appe>1 9 con=mity ) ! v>i\s conditions :i* accompany & p>tly limit !m1 9 v>i\s =ms4 ,?us ! volition ( e man has an empirical "*1 :i* is no?+ m ?an ! causality ( 8 reason1 9 s f> z its effects 9 ! ph5om5al _w manife/ ! pres5ce ( a rule1 accord+ to :i* we are enabl$ to exam9e1 9 _! sev]al k9ds & degrees1 ! actions ( ?is causality & ! rational gr\nds = ^! actions1 & 9 ?is way to decide ^u ! subjective pr9ciples ( ! volition4 ,n[ we le>n :at ?is empirical "* is only f ph5om5al effects1 & f ! rule ( ^! :i* is pres5t$ by exp]i5ce2 & = ?is reason all ! actions ( man 9 ! _w ( ph5om5a are det]m9$ by 8 empirical "*1 & ! co-op]ative causes ( nature4 ,if1 !n1 we c\ld inve/igate all ! ph5om5a ( human volition to _! l[e/ f\ndation 9 ! m9d1 !re w\ld be no action :i* we c\ld n anticipate ) c]ta9ty1 & recognize to be absolutely necess>y f its prec$+ conditions4 ,s f> z relates to ?is empirical "*1 !re=e1 !re c be no fre$om2 & x is only 9 ! light ( ?is "* t we c consid] ! human w1 :5 we conf9e ourselves to simple obs]vation &1 z is ! case 9 an?ropology1 in/itute a physiological inve/igation ( ! motive causes ( human actions4 ,b :5 we consid] ! same actions 9 relation to reason--n = ! purpose ( expla9+ _! orig91 t is1 9 relation to speculative reason1 b to practical reason1 z ! produc+ cause ( ^! actions--we %all discov] a rule & an ord] v diff]5t f ^? ( nature & exp]i5ce4 ,= ! decl>ation ( ?is m5tal faculty may be t :at has & c\ld n b take place 9 ! c\rse ( nature1 ought n to h tak5 place4 ,sometimes1 too1 we discov]1 or believe t we discov]1 t ! ideas ( reason did actually /& 9 a causal relation to c]ta9 actions ( man2 & t ^! actions h tak5 place because !y 7 det]m9$1 n by empirical causes1 b by ! act ( ! w ^u gr\nds ( reason4 ,n[1 grant+ t reason /&s 9 a causal relation to ph5om5a2 c an action ( reason be call$ free1 :5 we "k t1 s5su\sly1 9 its empirical "*1 x is completely det]m9$ & absolutely necess>y8 ,b ?is empirical "* is itself det]m9$ by ! intelligible "*4 ,! latt] we _c cognize2 we c only indicate x by means ( ph5om5a1 :i* enable u to h an imm$iate cognition only ( ! empirical "*4#fc ,an action1 !n1 9 s f> z x is to be ascrib$ to an intelligible cause1 does n result f x 9 accordance ) empirical laws4 ,t is to say1 n ! conditions ( pure reason1 b only _! effects 9 ! int]nal s5se1 prec$e ! act4 ,pure reason1 z a purely intelligible faculty1 is n subject to ! conditions ( "t4 ,! causality ( reason 9 its intelligible "* does n beg9 to be2 x does n make its appe>ance at a c]ta9 "t1 = ! purpose ( produc+ an effect4 ,if ?is 7 n ! case1 ! causality ( reason w\ld be subs]vi5t to ! natural law ( ph5om5a1 :i* det]m9es !m accord+ to "t1 & z a s]ies ( causes & effects 9 "t2 x w\ld consequ5tly cease to be fre$om & become a "p ( nature4 ,we are !re=e ju/ifi$ 9 say+3 8,if reason /&s 9 a causal relation to ph5om5a1 x is a faculty :i* orig9ates ! s5su\s condition ( an empirical s]ies ( effects40 ,= ! condition1 :i* resides 9 ! reason1 is non-s5su\s1 & !re=e _c be orig9at$1 or beg9 to be4 ,& ?us we f9d--:at we c\ld n discov] 9 any empirical s]ies--a condition ( a successive s]ies ( ev5ts itself empirically uncondition$4 ,=1 9 ! pres5t case1 ! condition /&s out ( & beyond ! s]ies ( ph5om5a--x is intelligible1 & x consequ5tly _c be subject$ to any s5su\s condition1 or to any "t-det]m9ation by a prec$+ cause4 #fc ,! real morality ( actions--_! m]it or dem]it1 & ev5 t ( our own conduct1 is completely unkn[n to u4 ,our e/imates c relate only to _! empirical "*4 ,h[ mu* is ! result ( ! action ( free w1 h[ mu* is to be ascrib$ to nature & to blameless error1 or to a happy con/itution ( temp]am5t 7m]ito =tunae71 no "o c discov]1 nor1 = ?is reason1 det]m9e ) p]fect ju/ice4 ,b1 9 ano!r respect1 ! same cause belongs also to ! s]ies ( ph5om5a4 ,man is himself a ph5om5on4 ,8 w has an empirical "*1 :i* is ! empirical cause ( all 8 actions4 ,!re is no condition--det]m9+ man & 8 volition 9 con=mity ) ?is "*--:i* does n itself =m "p ( ! s]ies ( effects 9 nature1 & is subject to _! law--! law accord+ to :i* an empirically undet]m9$ cause ( an ev5t 9 "t _c exi/4 ,= ?is reason no giv5 action c h an absolute & spontane\s orig9ation1 all actions be+ ph5om5a1 & belong+ to ! _w ( exp]i5ce4 ,b x _c be said ( reason1 t ! /ate 9 :i* x det]m9es ! w is always prec$$ by "s o!r /ate det]m9+ x4 ,= reason is n a ph5om5on1 & !re=e n subject to s5su\s conditions2 &1 consequ5tly1 ev5 9 relation to its causality1 ! sequ5ce or conditions ( "t d n influ5ce reason1 nor c ! dynamical law ( nature1 :i* det]m9es ! sequ5ce ( "t accord+ to c]ta9 rules1 be appli$ to x4 ,reason is consequ5tly ! p]man5t condition ( all actions ( ! human w4 ,ea* ( ^! is det]m9$ 9 ! empirical "* ( ! man1 ev5 be=e x has tak5 place4 ,! intelligible "*1 ( :i* ! =m] is b ! s5su\s s*ema1 kn[s no be=e or aft]2 & e action1 irrespective ( ! "t-relation 9 :i* x /&s ) o!r ph5om5a1 is ! imm$iate effect ( ! intelligible "* ( pure reason1 :i*1 consequ5tly1 enjoys fre$om ( action1 & is n dynamically det]m9$ ei!r by int]nal or ext]nal prec$+ conditions4 ,?is fre$om mu/ n be describ$1 9 a m]ely negative mann]1 z indep5d5ce ( empirical conditions1 = 9 ?is case ! faculty ( reason w\ld cease to be a cause ( ph5om5a2 b x mu/ be reg>d$1 positively1 z a faculty :i* c spontane\sly orig9ate a s]ies ( ev5ts4 ,at ! same "t1 x mu/ n be suppos$ t any beg9n+ c take place 9 reason2 on ! contr>y1 reason1 z ! uncondition$ condition ( all action ( ! w1 admits ( no "t-conditions1 al?\gh its effect does really beg9 9 a s]ies ( ph5om5a--a beg9n+ :i* is n1 h[ev]1 absolutely primal4 ,i %all illu/rate ?is regulative pr9ciple ( reason by an example1 f its employm5t 9 ! _w ( exp]i5ce2 prov$ x _c be by any am\nt ( exp]i5ce1 or by any numb] ( facts1 = su* argum5ts _c e/abli% ! tru? ( transc5d5tal propositions4 ,let u take a volunt>y action--= example1 a falsehood--by means ( :i* a man has introduc$ a c]ta9 degree ( confusion into ! social life ( humanity1 :i* is judg$ accord+ to ! motives f :i* x orig9at$1 & ! blame ( :i* & ( ! evil consequ5ces aris+ f x1 is imput$ to ! (f5d]4 ,we at fir/ proce$ to exam9e ! empirical "* ( ! (f5ce1 & = ?is purpose we endeav\r to p5etrate to ! s\rces ( t "*1 su* z a defective education1 bad company1 a %ameless & wick$ disposition1 frivolity1 & want ( reflection--n =gett+ also ! occasion+ causes :i* prevail$ at ! mom5t ( ! transgression4 ,9 ?is ! proc$ure is exactly ! same z t pursu$ 9 ! inve/igation ( ! s]ies ( causes :i* det]m9e a giv5 physical effect4 ,n[1 al?\gh we believe ! action to h be5 det]m9$ by all ^! circum/ances1 we d n ! less blame ! (f5d]4 ,we d n blame him = 8 unhappy disposition1 nor = ! circum/ances :i* influ5c$ him1 nay1 n ev5 = 8 =m] c\rse ( life2 = we presuppose t all ^! consid]ations may be set aside1 t ! s]ies ( prec$+ conditions may be reg>d$ z hav+ nev] exi/$1 & t ! action may be consid]$ z completely uncondition$ 9 relation to any /ate prec$+1 j z if ! ag5t comm5c$ ) x an entirely new s]ies ( effects4 ,our blame ( ! (f5d] is gr\nd$ ^u a law ( reason1 :i* requires u to reg>d ?is faculty z a cause1 :i* c\ld h & ought to h o!rwise det]m9$ ! behavi\r ( ! culprit1 indep5d5tly ( all empirical conditions4 ,?is causality ( reason we d n reg>d z a co-op]at+ ag5cy1 b z complete 9 itself4 ,x matt]s n :e!r ! s5su\s impulses fav\r$ or oppos$ ! action ( ?is causality1 ! (f5ce is e/imat$ accord+ to its intelligible "*--! (f5d] is decid$ly wor?y ( blame1 ! mom5t he utt]s a falsehood4 ,x foll[s t we reg>d reason1 9 spite ( ! empirical conditions ( ! act1 z completely free1 & !re=e1 z 9 ! pres5t case1 culpable4 ,! above judgem5t is complete evid5ce t we are accu/om$ to ?9k t reason is n affect$ by s5su\s conditions1 t 9 x no *ange takes place--al?\gh its ph5om5a1 9 o!r words1 ! mode 9 :i* x appe>s 9 its effects1 are subject to *ange--t 9 x no prec$+ /ate det]m9es ! foll[+1 &1 consequ5tly1 t x does n =m a memb] ( ! s]ies ( s5su\s conditions :i* necessitate ph5om5a accord+ to natural laws4 ,reason is pres5t & ! same 9 all human actions & at all times2 b x does n itself exi/ 9 "t1 & !re=e does n ent] ^u any /ate 9 :i* x did n =m]ly exi/4 ,x is1 relatively to new /ates or conditions1 det]m9+1 b n det]m9able4 ,h5ce we _c ask3 8,:y did n reason det]m9e itself 9 a diff]5t mann]80 ,! "q ought to be ?us /at$3 8,:y did n reason employ its p[] ( causality to det]m9e c]ta9 ph5om5a 9 a diff]5t mann]80 ,b ?is is a "q :i* admits ( no answ]4 ,= a diff]5t intelligible "* w\ld h exhibit$ a diff]5t empirical "*2 &1 :5 we say t1 9 spite ( ! c\rse :i* 8 :ole =m] life has tak51 ! (f5d] c\ld h refra9$ f utt]+ ! falsehood1 ?is means m]ely t ! act 0 subject to ! p[] & au?ority--p]missive or prohibitive--( reason4 ,n[1 reason is n subject 9 its causality to any conditions ( ph5om5a or ( "t2 & a diff]5ce 9 "t may produce a diff]5ce 9 ! relation ( ph5om5a to ea* o!r--= ^! are n ?+s & !re=e n causes 9 !mselves--b x _c produce any diff]5ce 9 ! relation 9 :i* ! action /&s to ! faculty ( reason4 ,?us1 !n1 9 our inve/igation into free actions & ! causal p[] :i* produc$ !m1 we arrive at an intelligible cause1 beyond :i*1 h[ev]1 we _c g2 al?\gh we c recognize t x is free1 t is1 indep5d5t ( all s5su\s conditions1 & t1 9 ?is way1 x may be ! s5su\sly uncondition$ condition ( ph5om5a4 ,b = :at reason ! intelligible "* g5]ates su* & su* ph5om5a & exhibits su* & su* an empirical "* "u c]ta9 circum/ances1 x is beyond ! p[] ( our reason to decide4 ,! "q is z mu* above ! p[] & ! sph]e ( reason z ! foll[+ w\ld be3 8,:y does ! transc5d5tal object ( our ext]nal s5su\s intuition all[ ( no o!r =m ?an t ( intuition 9 space80 ,b ! problem1 :i* we 7 call$ ^u to solve1 does n require u to ent]ta9 any su* que/ions4 ,! problem 0 m]ely ?is--:e!r fre$om & natural necessity c exi/ )\t opposition 9 ! same action4 ,to ?is "q we h giv5 a suffici5t answ]2 = we h %[n t1 z ! =m] /&s 9 a relation to a diff]5t k9d ( condition f ^? ( ! latt]1 ! law ( ! "o does n affect ! law ( ! o!r & t1 consequ5tly1 bo? c exi/ toge!r 9 indep5d5ce ( & )\t int]f]5ce ) ea* o!r4 ,! read] mu/ be c>eful to rem>k t my int5tion 9 ! above rem>ks has n be5 to prove ! actual exi/5ce ( fre$om1 z a faculty 9 :i* resides ! cause ( c]ta9 s5su\s ph5om5a4 ,=1 n to m5tion t su* an argum5t w\ld n h a transc5d5tal "*1 nor h be5 limit$ to ! discussion ( pure conceptions--all attempts at inf]r+ f exp]i5ce :at _c be cogitat$ 9 accordance ) its laws1 mu/ ev] be unsuccessful4 ,nay1 m1 ,i h n ev5 aim$ at demon/rat+ ! possibility ( fre$om2 = ?is too w\ld h be5 a va9 endeav\r1 inasmu* z x is beyond ! p[] ( ! m9d to cognize ! possibility ( a reality or ( a causal p[] by ! aid ( m]e priori conceptions4 ,fre$om has be5 consid]$ 9 ! =ego+ rem>ks only z a transc5d5tal idea1 by means ( :i* reason aims at orig9at+ a s]ies ( conditions 9 ! _w ( ph5om5a ) ! help ( t :i* is s5su\sly uncondition$1 involv+ itself1 h[ev]1 9 an ant9omy ) ! laws :i* itself prescribes = ! conduct ( ! und]/&+4 ,t ?is ant9omy is bas$ ^u a m]e illusion1 & t nature & fre$om are at lea/ n oppos$--?is 0 ! only ?+ 9 our p[] to prove1 & ! "q :i* x 0 our task to solve4 ,,iv4 ,solution ( ! ,cosmological ,idea ( ! ,totality ( ! ,dep5d5ce ( ,ph5om5al ,exi/5ces ,9 ! prec$+ rem>ks1 we consid]$ ! *anges 9 ! _w ( s5se z con/itut+ a dynamical s]ies1 9 :i* ea* memb] is subord9at$ to ano!r--z its cause4 ,our pres5t purpose is to avail ourselves ( ?is s]ies ( /ates or conditions z a guide to an exi/5ce :i* may be ! highe/ condition ( all *angeable ph5om5a1 t is1 to a necess>y be+4 ,our endeav\r to rea*1 n ! uncondition$ causality1 b ! uncondition$ exi/5ce1 ( sub/ance4 ,! s]ies be=e u is !re=e a s]ies ( conceptions1 & n ( intuitions 79 :i* ! "o intuition is ! condition ( ! o!r74 ,b x is evid5t t1 z all ph5om5a are subject to *ange & condition$ 9 _! exi/5ce1 ! s]ies ( dep5d5t exi/5ces _c embrace an uncondition$ memb]1 ! exi/5ce ( :i* w\ld be absolutely necess>y4 ,x foll[s t1 if ph5om5a 7 ?+s 9 !mselves1 &--z an imm$iate consequ5ce f ?is supposition--condition & condition$ belong$ to ! same s]ies ( ph5om5a1 ! exi/5ce ( a necess>y be+1 z ! condition ( ! exi/5ce ( s5su\s ph5om5a1 w\ld be p]fectly impossible4 ,an important di/9ction1 h[ev]1 exi/s betwe5 ! dynamical & ! ma!matical regress4 ,! latt] is engag$ solely ) ! comb9ation ( p>ts into a :ole1 or ) ! division ( a :ole into its p>ts2 & !re=e are ! conditions ( its s]ies p>ts ( ! s]ies1 & to be consequ5tly reg>d$ z homog5e\s1 & = ?is reason1 z consi/+1 )\t exception1 ( ph5om5a4 ,if ! =m] regress1 on ! contr>y1 ! aim ( :i* is n to e/abli% ! possibility ( an uncondition$ :ole consi/+ ( giv5 p>ts1 or ( an uncondition$ "p ( a giv5 :ole1 b to demon/rate ! possibility ( ! d$uction ( a c]ta9 /ate f its cause1 or ( ! cont+5t exi/5ce ( sub/ance f t :i* exi/s necess>ily1 x is n requisite t ! condition %\ld =m "p ( an empirical s]ies along ) ! condition$4 ,9 ! case ( ! app>5t ant9omy ) :i* we are at pres5t deal+1 !re exi/s a way ( escape f ! difficulty2 = x is n impossible t bo? ( ! contradictory /atem5ts may be true 9 diff]5t relations4 ,all s5su\s ph5om5a may be cont+5t1 & consequ5tly possess only an empirically condition$ exi/5ce1 & yet !re may also exi/ a non-empirical condition ( ! :ole s]ies1 or1 9 o!r words1 a necess>y be+4 ,= ?is necess>y be+1 z an intelligible condition1 w\ld n =m a memb]--n ev5 ! highe/ memb]--( ! s]ies2 ! :ole _w ( s5se w\ld be left 9 its empirically det]m9$ exi/5ce un9t]f]$ ) & un9flu5c$4 ,?is w\ld also =m a gr\nd ( di/9ction betwe5 ! modes ( solution employ$ = ! ?ird & f\r? ant9omies4 ,=1 :ile 9 ! consid]ation ( fre$om 9 ! =m] ant9omy1 ! ?+ itself--! cause 7sub/antia pha5om5on7--0 reg>d$ z belong+ to ! s]ies ( conditions1 & only its causality to ! intelligible _w--we are oblig$ 9 ! pres5t case to cogitate ?is necess>y be+ z purely intelligible & z exi/+ entirely ap>t f ! _w ( s5se 7z an ens extramundanum72 = o!rwise x w\ld be subject to ! ph5om5al law ( cont+5cy & dep5d5ce4 ,9 relation to ! pres5t problem1 !re=e1 ! regulative pr9ciple ( reason is t ev]y?+ 9 ! s5su\s _w possesses an empirically condition$ exi/5ce--t no prop]ty ( ! s5su\s _w possesses uncondition$ necessity--t we are b\nd to expect1 &1 s f> z is possible1 to seek = ! empirical condition ( e memb] 9 ! s]ies ( conditions--& t !re is no suffici5t reason to ju/ify u 9 d$uc+ any exi/5ce f a condition :i* lies out ( & beyond ! empirical s]ies1 or 9 reg>d+ any exi/5ce z indep5d5t & self-subsi/5t2 al?\gh ?is %\ld n prev5t u f recogniz+ ! possibility ( ! :ole s]ies be+ bas$ ^u a be+ :i* is intelligible1 & = ?is reason free f all empirical conditions4 ,b x has be5 f> f my int5tion1 9 ^! rem>ks1 to prove ! exi/5ce ( ?is uncondition$ & necess>y be+1 or ev5 to evid5ce ! possibility ( a purely intelligible condition ( ! exi/5ce ( all s5su\s ph5om5a4 ,z b\nds 7 set to reason1 to prev5t x f leav+ ! guid+ ?read ( empirical conditions & los+ itself 9 transc5d5t !ories :i* are incapable ( concrete pres5tation2 s x 0 my purpose1 on ! o!r h&1 to set b\nds to ! law ( ! purely empirical und]/&+1 & to prote/ aga9/ any attempts on its "p at decid+ on ! possibility ( ?+s1 or decl>+ ! exi/5ce ( ! intelligible to be impossible1 m]ely on ! gr\nd t x is n available = ! explanation & exposition ( ph5om5a4 ,x has be5 %[n1 at ! same "t1 t ! cont+5cy ( all ! ph5om5a ( nature & _! empirical conditions is q consi/5t ) ! arbitr>y hypo!sis ( a necess>y1 al?\gh purely intelligible condition1 t no real contradiction exi/s betwe5 !m & t1 consequ5tly1 bo? may be true4 ,! exi/5ce ( su* an absolutely necess>y be+ may be impossible2 b ?is c nev] be demon/rat$ f ! univ]sal cont+5cy & dep5d5ce ( s5su\s ph5om5a1 nor f ! pr9ciple :i* =bids u to discont9ue ! s]ies at "s memb] ( x1 or to seek = its cause 9 "s sph]e ( exi/5ce beyond ! _w ( nature4 ,reason goes its way 9 ! empirical _w1 & foll[s1 too1 its peculi> pa? 9 ! sph]e ( ! transc5d5tal4 ,! s5su\s _w conta9s no?+ b ph5om5a1 :i* are m]e repres5tations1 & always s5su\sly condition$2 ?+s 9 !mselves are n1 & _c be1 objects to u4 ,x is n to be wond]$ at1 !re=e1 t we are n ju/ifi$ 9 leap+ f "s memb] ( an empirical s]ies beyond ! _w ( s5se1 z if empirical repres5tations 7 ?+s 9 !mselves1 exi/+ ap>t f _! transc5d5tal gr\nd 9 ! human m9d1 & ! cause ( ^: exi/5ce may be s\ght out ( ! empirical s]ies4 ,?is w\ld c]ta9ly be ! case ) cont+5t ?+s2 b x _c be ) m]e repres5tations ( ?+s1 ! cont+5cy ( :i* is itself m]ely a ph5om5on & c relate to no o!r regress ?an t :i* det]m9es ph5om5a1 t is1 ! empirical4 ,b to cogitate an intelligible gr\nd ( ph5om5a1 z free1 moreov]1 f ! cont+5cy ( ! latt]1 conflicts nei!r ) ! unlimit$ nature ( ! empirical regress1 nor ) ! complete cont+5cy ( ph5om5a4 ,& ! demon/ration ( ?is 0 ! only ?+ necess>y = ! solution ( ?is app>5t ant9omy4 ,= if ! condition ( e condition$--z reg>ds its exi/5ce--is s5su\s1 & = ?is reason a "p ( ! same s]ies1 x mu/ be itself condition$1 z 0 %[n 9 ! anti!sis ( ! f\r? ant9omy4 ,! emb>rassm5ts into :i* a reason1 :i* po/ulates ! uncondition$1 necess>ily falls1 mu/1 !re=e1 cont9ue to exi/2 or ! uncondition$ mu/ be plac$ 9 ! sph]e ( ! intelligible4 ,9 ?is way1 its necessity does n require1 nor does x ev5 p]mit1 ! pres5ce ( an empirical condition3 & x is1 consequ5tly1 unconditionally necess>y4 ,! empirical employm5t ( reason is n affect$ by ! assumption ( a purely intelligible be+2 x cont9ues its op]ations on ! pr9ciple ( ! cont+5cy ( all ph5om5a1 proce$+ f empirical conditions to /ill high] & high] conditions1 !mselves empirical4 ,j z little does ?is regulative pr9ciple exclude ! assumption ( an intelligible cause1 :5 ! "q reg>ds m]ely ! pure employm5t ( reason--9 relation to ends or aims4 ,=1 9 ?is case1 an intelligible cause signifies m]ely ! transc5d5tal & to u unkn[n gr\nd ( ! possibility ( s5su\s ph5om5a1 & its exi/5ce1 necess>y & indep5d5t ( all s5su\s conditions1 is n inconsi/5t ) ! cont+5cy ( ph5om5a1 or ) ! unlimit$ possibility ( regress :i* exi/s 9 ! s]ies ( empirical conditions4 ,conclud+ ,rem>ks on ! ,ant9omy ( ,pure ,reason4 ,s long z ! object ( our rational conceptions is ! totality ( conditions 9 ! _w ( ph5om5a1 & ! satisfaction1 f ?is s\rce1 ( ! requirem5ts ( reason1 s long are our ideas transc5d5tal & cosmological4 ,b :5 we set ! uncondition$--:i* is ! aim ( all our inquiries--9 a sph]e :i* lies out ( ! _w ( s5se & possible exp]i5ce1 our ideas become transc5d5t4 ,!y are !n n m]ely s]viceable t[>ds ! completion ( ! ex]cise ( reason 7:i* rema9s an idea1 nev] execut$1 b always to be pursu$72 !y deta* !mselves completely f exp]i5ce & con/ruct = !mselves objects1 ! mat]ial ( :i* has n be5 pres5t$ by exp]i5ce1 & ! objective reality ( :i* is n bas$ ^u ! completion ( ! empirical s]ies1 b ^u pure priori conceptions4 ,! intelligible object ( ^! transc5d5t ideas may be conc$$1 z a transc5d5tal object4 ,b we _c cogitate x z a ?+ det]m9able by c]ta9 di/9ct pr$icates relat+ to its int]nal nature1 = x has no connection ) empirical conceptions2 nor are we ju/ifi$ 9 affirm+ ! exi/5ce ( any su* object4 ,x is1 consequ5tly1 a m]e product ( ! m9d alone4 ,( all ! cosmological ideas1 h[ev]1 x is t occasion+ ! f\r? ant9omy :i* compels u to v5ture ^u ?is /ep4 ,= ! exi/5ce ( ph5om5a1 always condition$ & nev] self-subsi/5t1 requires u to look = an object diff]5t f ph5om5a--an intelligible object1 ) :i* all cont+5cy mu/ cease4 ,b1 z we h all[$ ourselves to assume ! exi/5ce ( a self-subsi/5t reality out ( ! field ( exp]i5ce1 & are !re=e oblig$ to reg>d ph5om5a z m]ely a cont+5t mode ( repres5t+ intelligible objects employ$ by be+s :i* are !mselves intellig5ces--no o!r c\rse rema9s = u ?an to foll[ analogy & employ ! same mode 9 =m+ "s conception ( intelligible ?+s1 ( :i* we h n ! lea/ k1 :i* nature taught u to use 9 ! =mation ( empirical conceptions4 ,exp]i5ce made u acqua9t$ ) ! cont+5t4 ,b we are at pres5t engag$ 9 ! discussion ( ?+s :i* are n objects ( exp]i5ce2 & mu/1 !re=e1 d$uce our k ( !m f t :i* is necess>y absolutely & 9 itself1 t is1 f pure conceptions4 ,h5ce ! fir/ /ep :i* we take out ( ! _w ( s5se obliges u to beg9 our sy/em ( new cognition ) ! inve/igation ( a necess>y be+1 & to d$uce f our conceptions ( x all our conceptions ( intelligible ?+s4 ,?is we propose to attempt 9 ! foll[+ *apt]4 ,*apt] ,,iii4 ,! ,ideal ( ,pure ,reason ,section ,i4 ,( ! ,ideal 9 ,g5]al ,we h se5 t pure conceptions d n pres5t objects to ! m9d1 except "u s5su\s conditions2 because ! conditions ( objective reality d n exi/ 9 ^! conceptions1 :i* conta91 9 fact1 no?+ b ! m]e =m ( ?\ght4 ,!y may1 h[ev]1 :5 appli$ to ph5om5a1 be pres5t$ 9 concreto2 = x is ph5om5a t pres5t to !m ! mat]ials = ! =mation ( empirical conceptions1 :i* are no?+ m ?an concrete =ms ( ! conceptions ( ! und]/&+4 ,b ideas are /ill fur!r remov$ f objective reality ?an categories2 = no ph5om5on c ev] pres5t !m to ! human m9d 9 concreto4 ,!y conta9 a c]ta9 p]fection1 atta9able by no possible empirical cognition2 & !y give to reason a sy/ematic unity1 to :i* ! unity ( exp]i5ce attempts to approximate1 b c nev] completely atta94 ,b /ill fur!r remov$ ?an ! idea f objective reality is ! ,ideal1 by :i* t]m ,i und]/& ! idea1 n 9 concreto1 b 9 individuo--z an individual ?+1 det]m9able or det]m9$ by ! idea alone4 ,! idea ( humanity 9 its complete p]fection supposes n only ! advancem5t ( all ! p[]s & faculties1 :i* con/itute our conception ( human nature1 to a complete atta9m5t ( _! f9al aims1 b also ev]y?+ :i* is requisite = ! complete det]m9ation ( ! idea2 = ( all contradictory pr$icates1 only "o c con=m ) ! idea ( ! p]fect man4 ,:at ,i h t]m$ an ideal 0 9 ,plato's philosophy an idea ( ! div9e m9d--an individual object pres5t to its pure intuition1 ! mo/ p]fect ( e k9d ( possible be+s1 & ! ar*etype ( all ph5om5al exi/5ces4 ,)\t ris+ to ^! speculative heights1 we are b\nd to confess t human reason conta9s n only ideas1 b ideals1 :i* possess1 n1 l ^? ( ,plato1 creative1 b c]ta9ly practical p[]--z regulative pr9ciples1 & =m ! basis ( ! p]fectibility ( c]ta9 actions4 ,moral conceptions are n p]fectly pure conceptions ( reason1 because an empirical elem5t--( pleasure or pa9--lies at ! f\ndation ( !m4 ,9 relation1 h[ev]1 to ! pr9ciple1 :]eby reason sets b\nds to a fre$om :i* is 9 itself )\t law1 & consequ5tly :5 we att5d m]ely to _! =m1 !y may be consid]$ z pure conceptions ( reason4 ,virtue & wisdom 9 _! p]fect purity are ideas4 ,b ! wise man ( ! ,/oics is an ideal1 t is to say1 a human be+ exi/+ only 9 ?\ght & 9 complete con=mity ) ! idea ( wisdom4 ,z ! idea provides a rule1 s ! ideal s]ves z an ar*etype = ! p]fect & complete det]m9ation ( ! copy4 ,?us ! conduct ( ?is wise & div9e man s]ves u z a /&>d ( action1 ) :i* we may comp>e & judge ourselves1 :i* may help u to re=m ourselves1 al?\gh ! p]fection x dem&s c nev] be atta9$ by u4 ,al?\gh we _c conc$e objective reality to ^! ideals1 !y are n to be consid]$ z *im]as2 on ! contr>y1 !y provide reason ) a /&>d1 :i* enables x to e/imate1 by comp>ison1 ! degree ( incomplet5ess 9 ! objects pres5t$ to x4 ,b to aim at realiz+ ! ideal 9 an example 9 ! _w ( exp]i5ce--to describe1 = in/ance1 ! "* ( ! p]fectly wise man 9 a romance--is impracticable4 ,nay m1 !re is some?+ absurd 9 ! attempt2 & ! result mu/ be little edify+1 z ! natural limitations1 :i* are cont9ually break+ 9 ^u ! p]fection & complet5ess ( ! idea1 de/roy ! illusion 9 ! /ory & ?r[ an air ( suspicion ev5 on :at is good 9 ! idea1 :i* h5ce appe>s fictiti\s & unreal4 ,su* is ! con/itution ( ! ideal ( reason1 :i* is always bas$ ^u det]m9ate conceptions1 & s]ves z a rule & a model = limitation or ( criticism4 ,v diff]5t is ! nature ( ! ideals ( ! imag9ation4 ,( ^! x is impossible to pres5t an intelligible conception2 !y are a k9d ( monogram1 drawn accord+ to no det]m9ate rule1 & =m+ r a vague picture--! production ( _m div]se exp]i5ces--?an a det]m9ate image4 ,su* are ! ideals :i* pa9t]s & physiognomi/s pr(ess to h 9 _! m9ds1 & :i* c s]ve nei!r z a model = production nor z a /&>d = appreciation4 ,!y may be t]m$1 ?\gh improp]ly1 s5su\s ideals1 z !y are decl>$ to be models ( c]ta9 possible empirical intuitions4 ,!y _c1 h[ev]1 furni% rules or /&>ds = explanation or exam9ation4 ,9 its ideals1 reason aims at complete & p]fect det]m9ation accord+ to priori rules2 & h5ce x cogitates an object1 :i* mu/ be completely det]m9able 9 con=mity ) pr9ciples1 al?\gh all empirical conditions are abs5t1 & ! conception ( ! object is on ?is acc\nt transc5d5t4 ,section ,,ii4 ,( ! ,transc5d5tal ,ideal 7,prototypon ,tranc5d5tale7 ,e conception is1 9 relation to t :i* is n conta9$ 9 x1 undet]m9$ & subject to ! pr9ciple ( det]m9ability4 ,?is pr9ciple is t1 ( e two contradictorily oppos$ pr$icates1 only "o c belong to a conception4 ,x is a purely logical pr9ciple1 itself bas$ ^u ! pr9ciple ( contradiction2 inasmu* z x makes complete ab/raction ( ! cont5t & att5ds m]ely to ! logical =m ( ! cognition4 ,b aga91 ev]y?+1 z reg>ds its possibility1 is also subject to ! pr9ciple ( complete det]m9ation1 accord+ to :i* "o ( all ! possible contradictory pr$icates ( ?+s mu/ belong to x4 ,?is pr9ciple is n bas$ m]ely ^u t ( contradiction2 =1 9 addition to ! relation betwe5 two contradictory pr$icates1 x reg>ds ev]y?+ z /&+ 9 a relation to ! sum ( possibilities1 z ! sum total ( all pr$icates ( ?+s1 &1 :ile presuppos+ ?is sum z an priori condition1 pres5ts to ! m9d ev]y?+ z receiv+ ! possibility ( its individual exi/5ce f ! relation x be>s to1 & ! %>e x possesses 91 ! a=esaid sum ( possibilities4#fd ,! pr9ciple ( complete det]m9ation relates ! cont5t & n to ! logical =m4 ,x is ! pr9ciple ( ! syn!sis ( all ! pr$icates :i* are requir$ to con/itute ! complete conception ( a ?+1 & n a m]e pr9ciple analytical repres5tation1 :i* en\nces t "o ( two contradictory pr$icates mu/ belong to a conception4 ,x conta9s1 moreov]1 a transc5d5tal presupposition--t1 namely1 ( ! mat]ial = all possibility1 :i* mu/ conta9 priori ! data = ?is or t p>ticul> possibility4 #fd ,?us ?is pr9ciple decl>es ev]y?+ to possess a relation to a common correlate--! sum-total ( possibility1 :i*1 if discov]$ to exi/ 9 ! idea ( "o individual ?+1 w\ld e/abli% ! aff9ity ( all possible ?+s1 f ! id5tity ( ! gr\nd ( _! complete det]m9ation4 ,! det]m9ability ( e conception is subord9ate to ! univ]sality 7,allgeme9heit1 univ]salitas7 ( ! pr9ciple ( exclud$ middle2 ! det]m9ation ( a ?+ to ! totality 7,allheit1 univ]sitas7 ( all possible pr$icates4 ,! proposition1 ev]y?+ :i* exi/s is completely det]m9$1 means n only t "o ( e pair ( giv5 contradictory attributes1 b t "o ( all possible attributes1 is always pr$icable ( ! ?+2 9 x ! pr$icates are n m]ely comp>$ logically ) ea* o!r1 b ! ?+ itself is transc5d5tally comp>$ ) ! sum-total ( all possible pr$icates4 ,! proposition is equival5t to say+3 8,to atta9 to a complete k ( a ?+1 x is necess>y to possess a k ( ev]y?+ t is possible1 & to det]m9e x !reby 9 a positive or negative mann]40 ,! conception ( complete det]m9ation is consequ5tly a conception :i* _c be pres5t$ 9 its totality 9 concreto1 & is !re=e bas$ ^u an idea1 :i* has its seat 9 ! reason--! faculty :i* prescribes to ! und]/&+ ! laws ( its h>moni\s & p]fect ex]cise4 ,n[1 al?\gh ?is idea ( ! sum-total ( all possibility1 9 s f> z x =ms ! condition ( ! complete det]m9ation ( ev]y?+1 is itself undet]m9$ 9 relation to ! pr$icates :i* may con/itute ?is sum-total1 & we cogitate 9 x m]ely ! sum-total ( all possible pr$icates--we nev]!less f9d1 ^u clos] exam9ation1 t ?is idea1 z a primitive conception ( ! m9d1 excludes a l>ge numb] ( pr$icates--^? d$uc$ & ^? irreconcilable ) o!rs1 & t x is evolv$ z a conception completely det]m9$ priori4 ,?us x becomes ! conception ( an individual object1 :i* is completely det]m9$ by & ?r\gh ! m]e idea1 & mu/ consequ5tly be t]m$ an ideal ( pure reason4 ,:5 we consid] all possible pr$icates1 n m]ely logically1 b transc5d5tally1 t is to say1 ) ref]5ce to ! cont5t :i* may be cogitat$ z exi/+ 9 !m priori1 we %all f9d t "s indicate a be+1 o!rs m]ely a non-be+4 ,! logical negation express$ 9 ! ^w n does n prop]ly belong to a conception1 b only to ! relation ( "o conception to ano!r 9 a judgem5t1 & is consequ5tly q insuffici5t to pres5t to ! m9d ! cont5t ( a conception4 ,! expression n mortal does n indicate t a non-be+ is cogitat$ 9 ! object2 x does n conc]n ! cont5t at all4 ,a transc5d5tal negation1 on ! contr>y1 indicates non-be+ 9 itself1 & is oppos$ to transc5d5tal affirmation1 ! conception ( :i* ( itself expresses a be+4 ,h5ce ?is affirmation indicates a reality1 because 9 & ?r\gh x objects are consid]$ to be some?+--to be ?+s2 :ile ! opposite negation1 on ! o!r h&1 indicates a m]e want1 or privation1 or abs5ce1 &1 :]e su* negations alone are atta*$ to a repres5tation1 ! non-exi/5ce ( any?+ correspond+ to ! repres5tation4 ,n[ a negation _c be cogitat$ z det]m9$1 )\t cogitat+ at ! same "t ! opposite affirmation4 ,! man born bl9d has n ! lea/ notion ( d>kness1 because he has none ( light2 ! vagabond kn[s no?+ ( pov]ty1 because he has nev] kn[n :at x is to be 9 com=t2#fe ! ignorant man has no conception ( 8 ignorance1 because he has no conception ( k4 ,all conceptions ( negatives are accord+ly d]iv$ or d$uc$ conceptions2 & realities conta9 ! data1 &1 s to speak1 ! mat]ial or transc5d5tal cont5t ( ! possibility & complete det]m9ation ( all ?+s4 #fe ,! inve/igations & calculations ( a/ronom]s h taught u mu* t is wond]ful2 b ! mo/ important lesson we h receiv$ f !m is ! discov]y ( ! abyss ( our ignorance 9 relation to ! univ]se--an ignorance ! magnitude ( :i* reason1 )\t ! in=mation ?us d]iv$1 c\ld nev] h conceiv$4 ,?is discov]y ( our defici5cies mu/ produce a great *ange 9 ! det]m9ation ( ! aims ( human reason4 ,if1 !re=e1 a transc5d5tal sub/ratum lies at ! f\ndation ( ! complete det]m9ation ( ?+s--a sub/ratum :i* is to =m ! fund f :i* all possible pr$icates ( ?+s are to be suppli$1 ?is sub/ratum _c be any?+ else ?an ! idea ( a sum-total ( reality 7omnitudo realitatis74 ,9 ?is view1 negations are no?+ b limitations--a t]m :i* c\ld n1 ) propriety1 be appli$ to !m1 if ! unlimit$ 7! all7 did n =m ! true basis ( our conception4 ,?is conception ( a sum-total ( reality is ! conception ( a ?+ 9 itself1 reg>d$ z completely det]m9$2 & ! conception ( an ens realissimum is ! conception ( an individual be+1 inasmu* z x is det]m9$ by t pr$icate ( all possible contradictory pr$icates1 :i* indicates & belongs to be+4 ,x is1 !re=e1 a transc5d5tal ideal :i* =ms ! basis ( ! complete det]m9ation ( ev]y?+ t exi/s1 & is ! highe/ mat]ial condition ( its possibility--a condition on :i* mu/ re/ ! cogitation ( all objects ) respect to _! cont5t4 ,nay1 m1 ?is ideal is ! only prop] ideal ( :i* ! human m9d is capable2 because 9 ?is case alone a g5]al conception ( a ?+ is completely det]m9$ by & ?r\gh itself1 & cogniz$ z ! repres5tation ( an individuum4 ,! logical det]m9ation ( a conception is bas$ ^u a disjunctive syllogism1 ! major ( :i* conta9s ! logical division ( ! ext5t ( a g5]al conception1 ! m9or limits ?is ext5t to a c]ta9 "p1 :ile ! conclusion det]m9es ! conception by ?is "p4 ,! g5]al conception ( a reality _c be divid$ priori1 because1 )\t ! aid ( exp]i5ce1 we _c "k any det]m9ate k9ds ( reality1 /&+ "u ! =m] z ! g5us4 ,! transc5d5tal pr9ciple ( ! complete det]m9ation ( all ?+s is !re=e m]ely ! repres5tation ( ! sum-total ( all reality2 x is n a conception :i* is ! g5us ( all pr$icates "u itself1 b "o :i* compreh5ds !m all )9 itself4 ,! complete det]m9ation ( a ?+ is consequ5tly bas$ ^u ! limitation ( ?is total ( reality1 s mu* be+ pr$icat$ ( ! ?+1 :ile all t rema9s ov] is exclud$--a proc$ure :i* is 9 exact agreem5t ) t ( ! disjunctive syllogism & ! det]m9ation ( ! objects 9 ! conclusion by "o ( ! memb]s ( ! division4 ,x foll[s t reason1 9 lay+ ! transc5d5tal ideal at ! f\ndation ( its det]m9ation ( all possible ?+s1 takes a c\rse 9 exact analogy ) t :i* x pursues 9 disjunctive syllogisms--a proposition :i* =m$ ! basis ( ! sy/ematic division ( all transc5d5tal ideas1 accord+ to :i* !y are produc$ 9 complete p>allelism ) ! ?ree modes ( syllogi/ic reason+ employ$ by ! human m9d4 ,x is self-evid5t t reason1 9 cogitat+ ! necess>y complete det]m9ation ( ?+s1 does n presuppose ! exi/5ce ( a be+ correspond+ to its ideal1 b m]ely ! idea ( ! ideal--= ! purpose ( d$uc+ f ! unconditional totality ( complete det]m9ation1 ,! ideal is !re=e ! prototype ( all ?+s1 :i*1 z defective copies 7ectypa71 receive f x ! mat]ial ( _! possibility1 & approximate to x m or less1 ?\gh x is impossible t !y c ev] atta9 to its p]fection4 ,! possibility ( ?+s mu/ !re=e be reg>d$ z d]iv$--except t ( ! ?+ :i* conta9s 9 itself all reality1 :i* mu/ be consid]$ to be primitive & orig9al4 ,= all negations--& !y are ! only pr$icates by means ( :i* all o!r ?+s c be di/+ui%$ f ! ens realissimum--are m]e limitations ( a great] & a high]--nay1 ! highe/ reality2 & !y consequ5tly presuppose ?is reality1 & are1 z reg>ds _! cont5t1 d]iv$ f x4 ,! manifold nature ( ?+s is only an inf9itely v>i\s mode ( limit+ ! conception ( ! highe/ reality1 :i* is _! common sub/ratum2 j z all figures are possible only z diff]5t modes ( limit+ inf9ite space4 ,! object ( ! ideal ( reason--an object exi/+ only 9 reason itself--is also t]m$ ! primal be+ 7ens orig9>ium72 z hav+ no exi/5ce sup]ior to him1 ! supreme be+ 7ens summum72 & z be+ ! condition ( all o!r be+s1 :i* rank "u x1 ! be+ ( all be+s 7ens entium74 ,b none ( ^! t]ms indicate ! objective relation ( an actually exi/+ object to o!r ?+s1 b m]ely t ( an idea to conceptions2 & all our inve/igations into ?is subject /ill leave u 9 p]fect unc]ta9ty ) reg>d to ! exi/5ce ( ?is be+4 ,a primal be+ _c be said to consi/ ( _m o!r be+s ) an exi/5ce :i* is d]ivative1 = ! latt] presuppose ! =m]1 & !re=e _c be con/itutive p>ts ( x4 ,x foll[s t ! ideal ( ! primal be+ mu/ be cogitat$ z simple4 ,! d$uction ( ! possibility ( all o!r ?+s f ?is primal be+ _c1 /rictly speak+1 be consid]$ z a limitation1 or z a k9d ( division ( its reality2 = ?is w\ld be reg>d+ ! primal be+ z a m]e aggregate--:i* has be5 %[n to be impossible1 al?\gh x 0 s repres5t$ 9 our fir/ r\gh sket*4 ,! highe/ reality mu/ be reg>d$ r z ! gr\nd ?an z ! sum-total ( ! possibility ( all ?+s1 & ! manifold nature ( ?+s be bas$1 n ^u ! limitation ( ! primal be+ itself1 b ^u ! complete s]ies ( effects :i* fl[ f x4 ,& ?us all our p[]s ( s5se1 z well z all ph5om5al reality1 may be ) propriety reg>d$ z belong+ to ?is s]ies ( effects1 :ile !y c\ld n h =m$ p>ts ( ! idea1 consid]$ z an aggregate4 ,pursu+ ?is track1 & hypo/atiz+ ?is idea1 we %all f9d ourselves au?oriz$ to det]m9e our notion ( ! ,supreme ,be+ by means ( ! m]e conception ( a highe/ reality1 z "o1 simple1 all-suffici5t1 et]nal1 & s on--9 "o ^w1 to det]m9e x 9 its uncondition$ complet5ess by ! aid ( e possible pr$icate4 ,! conception ( su* a be+ is ! conception ( ,god 9 its transc5d5tal s5se1 & ?us ! ideal ( pure reason is ! object-matt] ( a transc5d5tal !ology4 ,b1 by su* an employm5t ( ! transc5d5tal idea1 we %\ld be ov] /epp+ ! limits ( its validity & purpose4 ,= reason plac$ x1 z ! conception ( all reality1 at ! basis ( ! complete det]m9ation ( ?+s1 )\t requir+ t ?is conception be reg>d$ z ! conception ( an objective exi/5ce4 ,su* an exi/5ce w\ld be purely fictiti\s1 & ! hypo/atiz+ ( ! cont5t ( ! idea into an ideal1 z an individual be+1 is a /ep p]fectly unau?oriz$4 ,nay1 m1 we are n ev5 call$ ^u to assume ! possibility ( su* an hypo!sis1 z none ( ! d$uctions drawn f su* an ideal w\ld affect ! complete det]m9ation ( ?+s 9 g5]al--= ! sake ( :i* alone is ! idea necess>y4 ,x is n suffici5t to circumscribe ! proc$ure & ! dialectic ( reason2 we mu/ also endeav\r to discov] ! s\rces ( ?is dialectic1 t we may h x 9 our p[] to give a rational explanation ( ?is illusion1 z a ph5om5on ( ! human m9d4 ,= ! ideal1 ( :i* we are at pres5t speak+1 is bas$1 n ^u an arbitr>y1 b ^u a natural1 idea4 ,! "q h5ce arises3 ,h[ happ5s x t reason reg>ds ! possibility ( all ?+s z d$uc$ f a s+le possibility1 t1 to wit1 ( ! highe/ reality1 & presupposes ?is z exi/+ 9 an individual & primal be+8 ,! answ] is ready2 x is at once pres5t$ by ! proc$ure ( transc5d5tal analytic4 ,! possibility ( s5su\s objects is a relation ( ^! objects to ?\ght1 9 :i* some?+ 7! empirical =m7 may be cogitat$ priori2 :ile t :i* con/itutes ! matt]--! reality ( ! ph5om5on 7t elem5t :i* corresponds to s5sation7--mu/ be giv5 f )\t1 z o!rwise x c\ld n ev5 be cogitat$ by1 nor c\ld its possibility be pres5table to ! m9d4 ,n[1 a s5su\s object is completely det]m9$1 :5 x has be5 comp>$ ) all ph5om5al pr$icates1 & repres5t$ by means ( ^! ei!r positively or negatively4 ,b1 z t :i* con/itutes ! ?+ itself--! real 9 a ph5om5on1 mu/ be giv51 & t1 9 :i* ! real ( all ph5om5a is giv51 is exp]i5ce1 "o1 sole1 & all-embrac+--! mat]ial ( ! possibility ( all s5su\s objects mu/ be presuppos$ z giv5 9 a :ole1 & x is ^u ! limitation ( ?is :ole t ! possibility ( all empirical objects1 _! di/9ction f ea* o!r & _! complete det]m9ation1 are bas$4 ,n[1 no o!r objects are pres5t$ to u besides s5su\s objects1 & ^! c be giv5 only 9 connection ) a possible exp]i5ce2 x foll[s t a ?+ is n an object to u1 unless x presupposes ! :ole or sum-total ( empirical reality z ! condition ( its possibility4 ,n[1 a natural illusion leads u to consid] ?is pr9ciple1 :i* is valid only ( s5su\s objects1 z valid ) reg>d to ?+s 9 g5]al4 ,& ?us we are induc$ to hold ! empirical pr9ciple ( our conceptions ( ! possibility ( ?+s1 z ph5om5a1 by leav+ out ?is limitative condition1 to be a transc5d5tal pr9ciple ( ! possibility ( ?+s 9 g5]al4 ,we proce$ aft]w>ds to hypo/atize ?is idea ( ! sum-total ( all reality1 by *ang+ ! di/ributive unity ( ! empirical ex]cise ( ! und]/&+ into ! collective unity ( an empirical :ole--a dialectical illusion1 & by cogitat+ ?is :ole or sum ( exp]i5ce z an individual ?+1 conta9+ 9 itself all empirical reality4 ,?is individual ?+ or be+ is !n1 by means ( ! above-m5tion$ transc5d5tal subreption1 sub/itut$ = our notion ( a ?+ :i* /&s at ! head ( ! possibility ( all ?+s1 ! real conditions ( ^: complete det]m9ation x pres5ts4#ff #ff ,?is ideal ( ! ens realissimum--al?\gh m]ely a m5tal repres5tation--is fir/ objectiviz$1 t is1 has an objective exi/5ce attribut$ to x1 !n hypo/atiz$1 & f9ally1 by ! natural progress ( reason to ! completion ( unity1 p]sonifi$1 z we %all %[ pres5tly4 ,= ! regulative unity ( exp]i5ce is n bas$ ^u ph5om5a !mselves1 b ^u ! connection ( ! v>iety ( ph5om5a by ! und]/&+ 9 a consci\sness1 & ?us ! unity ( ! supreme reality & ! complete det]m9ability ( all ?+s1 seem to reside 9 a supreme und]/&+1 &1 consequ5tly1 9 a consci\s intellig5ce4 ,section ,,iii4 ,( ! ,argum5ts employ$ by ,speculative ,reason 9 ,pro( ( ! ,exi/5ce ( a ,supreme ,be+ ,not)/&+ ! press+ necessity :i* reason feels1 to =m "s presupposition t %all s]ve ! und]/&+ z a prop] basis = ! complete det]m9ation ( its conceptions1 ! ideali/ic & factiti\s nature ( su* a presupposition is too evid5t to all[ reason = a mom5t to p]suade itself into a belief ( ! objective exi/5ce ( a m]e creation ( its own ?\ght4 ,b !re are o!r consid]ations :i* compel reason to seek out "s re/+ place 9 ! regress f ! condition$ to ! uncondition$1 :i* is n giv5 z an actual exi/5ce f ! m]e conception ( x1 al?\gh x alone c give complet5ess to ! s]ies ( conditions4 ,& ?is is ! natural c\rse ( e human reason1 ev5 ( ! mo/ un$ucat$1 al?\gh ! pa? at fir/ ent]$ x does n always cont9ue to foll[4 ,x does n beg9 f conceptions1 b f common exp]i5ce1 & requires a basis 9 actual exi/5ce4 ,b ?is basis is insecure1 unless x re/s ^u ! immovable rock ( ! absolutely necess>y4 ,& ?is f\ndation is itself unwor?y ( tru/1 if x leave "u & above x empty space1 if x d n fill all1 & leave no room = a :y or a :]e=e1 if x be n1 9 "o ^w1 inf9ite 9 its reality4 ,if we admit ! exi/5ce ( "s "o ?+1 :atev] x may be1 we mu/ also admit t !re is some?+ :i* exi/s necess>ily4 ,= :at is cont+5t exi/s only "u ! condition ( "s o!r ?+1 :i* is its cause2 & f ?is we mu/ g on to conclude ! exi/5ce ( a cause :i* is n cont+5t1 & :i* consequ5tly exi/s necess>ily & unconditionally4 ,su* is ! argum5t by :i* reason ju/ifies its advances t[>ds a primal be+4 ,n[ reason looks r\nd = ! conception ( a be+ t may be admitt$1 )\t inconsi/5cy1 to be wor?y ( ! attribute ( absolute necessity1 n = ! purpose ( inf]r+ priori1 f ! conception ( su* a be+1 its objective exi/5ce 7= if reason all[$ itself to take ?is c\rse1 x w\ld n require a basis 9 giv5 & actual exi/5ce1 b m]ely ! support ( pure conceptions71 b = ! purpose ( discov]+1 among all our conceptions ( possible ?+s1 t conception :i* possesses no elem5t inconsi/5t ) ! idea ( absolute necessity4 ,= t !re mu/ be "s absolutely necess>y exi/5ce1 x reg>ds z a tru? already e/abli%$4 ,n[1 if x c remove e exi/5ce incapable ( support+ ! attribute ( absolute necessity1 except+ "o--?is mu/ be ! absolutely necess>y be+1 :e!r its necessity is compreh5sible by u1 t is1 d$ucible f ! conception ( x alone1 or n4 ,n[ t1 ! conception ( :i* conta9s a !re=e to e :]e=e1 :i* is n defective 9 any respect :atev]1 :i* is all-suffici5t z a condition1 seems to be ! be+ ( :i* we c ju/ly pr$icate absolute necessity--= ?is reason1 t1 possess+ ! conditions ( all t is possible1 x does n & _c itself require any condition4 ,& ?us x satisfies1 9 "o respect at lea/1 ! requirem5ts ( ! conception ( absolute necessity4 ,9 ?is view1 x is sup]ior to all o!r conceptions1 :i*1 z defici5t & incomplete1 d n possess ! *>act]i/ic ( indep5d5ce ( all high] conditions4 ,x is true t we _c inf] f ?is t :at does n conta9 9 itself ! supreme & complete condition--! condition ( all o!r ?+s--mu/ possess only a condition$ exi/5ce2 b z little c we ass]t ! contr>y1 = ?is suppos$ be+ does n possess ! only *>act]i/ic :i* c enable reason to cognize by means ( an priori conception ! uncondition$ & necess>y nature ( its exi/5ce4 ,! conception ( an ens realissimum is t :i* be/ agrees ) ! conception ( an uncondition$ & necess>y be+4 ,! =m] conception does n satisfy all ! requirem5ts ( ! latt]2 b we h no *oice1 we are oblig$ to adh]e to x1 = we f9d t we _c d )\t ! exi/5ce ( a necess>y be+2 & ev5 al?\gh we admit x1 we f9d x out ( our p[] to discov] 9 ! :ole sph]e ( possibility any be+ t c advance well-gr\nd$ claims to su* a di/9ction4 ,! foll[+ is1 !re=e1 ! natural c\rse ( human reason4 ,x beg9s by p]suad+ itself ( ! exi/5ce ( "s necess>y be+4 ,9 ?is be+ x recognizes ! *>act]i/ics ( uncondition$ exi/5ce4 ,x !n seeks ! conception ( t :i* is indep5d5t ( all conditions1 & f9ds x 9 t :i* is itself ! suffici5t condition ( all o!r ?+s--9 o!r words1 9 t :i* conta9s all reality4 ,b ! unlimit$ all is an absolute unity1 & is conceiv$ by ! m9d z a be+ "o & supreme2 & ?us reason concludes t ! ,supreme ,be+1 z ! primal basis ( all ?+s1 possesses an exi/5ce :i* is absolutely necess>y4 ,?is conception mu/ be reg>d$ z 9 "s degree satisfactory1 if we admit ! exi/5ce ( a necess>y be+1 & consid] t !re exi/s a necessity = a def9ite & f9al answ] to ^! que/ions4 ,9 su* a case1 we _c make a bett] *oice1 or r we h no *oice at all1 b feel ourselves oblig$ to decl>e 9 fav\r ( ! absolute unity ( complete reality1 z ! highe/ s\rce ( ! possibility ( ?+s4 ,b if !re exi/s no motive = com+ to a def9ite conclusion1 & we may leave ! "q unansw]$ till we h fully weigh$ bo? sides--9 o!r words1 :5 we are m]ely call$ ^u to decide h[ mu* we happ5 to "k ab\t ! "q1 & h[ mu* we m]ely flatt] ourselves t we "k--! above conclusion does n appe> to be s great advantage1 b1 on ! contr>y1 seems defective 9 ! gr\nds ^u :i* x is support$4 ,=1 admitt+ ! tru? ( all t has be5 said1 t1 namely1 ! inf]5ce f a giv5 exi/5ce 7my own1 = example7 to ! exi/5ce ( an uncondition$ & necess>y be+ is valid & unassailable2 t1 9 ! second place1 we mu/ consid] a be+ :i* conta9s all reality1 & consequ5tly all ! conditions ( o!r ?+s1 to be absolutely uncondition$2 & admitt+ too1 t we h ?us discov]$ ! conception ( a ?+ to :i* may be attribut$1 )\t inconsi/5cy1 absolute necessity--x does n foll[ f all ?is t ! conception ( a limit$ be+1 9 :i* ! supreme reality does n reside1 is !re=e incompatible ) ! idea ( absolute necessity4 ,=1 al?\gh ,i d n discov] ! elem5t ( ! uncondition$ 9 ! conception ( su* a be+--an elem5t :i* is manife/ly exi/5t 9 ! sum-total ( all conditions--,i am n entitl$ to conclude t its exi/5ce is !re=e condition$2 j z ,i am n entitl$ to affirm1 9 a hypo!tical syllogism1 t :]e a c]ta9 condition does n exi/ 79 ! pres5t1 complet5ess1 z f> z pure conceptions are conc]n$71 ! condition$ does n exi/ ei!r4 ,on ! contr>y1 we are free to consid] all limit$ be+s z likewise unconditionally necess>y1 al?\gh we are unable to inf] ?is f ! g5]al conception :i* we h ( !m4 ,?us conduct$1 ?is argum5t is incapable ( giv+ u ! lea/ notion ( ! prop]ties ( a necess>y be+1 & mu/ be 9 e respect )\t result4 ,?is argum5t cont9ues1 h[ev]1 to possess a weight & an au?ority1 :i*1 9 spite ( its objective insuffici5cy1 x has nev] be5 dive/$ (4 ,=1 grant+ t c]ta9 responsibilities lie ^u u1 :i*1 z bas$ on ! ideas ( reason1 des]ve to be respect$ & submitt$ to1 al?\gh !y are incapable ( a real or practical application to our nature1 or1 9 o!r words1 w\ld be responsibilities )\t motives1 except ^u ! supposition ( a ,supreme ,be+ to give effect & influ5ce to ! practical laws3 9 su* a case we %\ld be b\nd to obey our conceptions1 :i*1 al?\gh objectively insuffici5t1 d1 accord+ to ! /&>d ( reason1 prepond]ate ov] & are sup]ior to any claims t may be advanc$ f any o!r qu>t]4 ,! equilibrium ( d\bt w\ld 9 ?is case be de/roy$ by a practical addition2 inde$1 ,reason w\ld be compell$ to condemn h]self1 if %e refus$ to comply ) ! dem&s ( ! judgem5t1 no sup]ior to :i* we "k--h[ev] defective h] und]/&+ ( ! gr\nds ( ^! dem&s might be4 ,?is argum5t1 al?\gh 9 fact transc5d5tal1 inasmu* z x re/s ^u ! intr9sic insuffici5cy ( ! cont+5t1 is s simple & natural1 t ! commone/ und]/&+ c appreciate its value4 ,we see ?+s ar\nd u *ange1 arise1 & pass away2 !y1 or _! condition1 mu/ !re=e h a cause4 ,! same dem& mu/ aga9 be made ( ! cause itself--z a datum ( exp]i5ce4 ,n[ x is natural t we %\ld place ! highe/ causality j :]e we place supreme causality1 9 t be+1 :i* conta9s ! conditions ( all possible effects1 & ! conception ( :i* is s simple z t ( an all-embrac+ reality4 ,?is highe/ cause1 !n1 we reg>d z absolutely necess>y1 because we f9d x absolutely necess>y to rise to x1 & d n discov] any reason = proce$+ beyond x4 ,?us1 among all nations1 ?r\gh ! d>ke/ poly!ism glimm] "s fa9t sp>ks ( mono!ism1 to :i* ^! idolat]s h be5 l$1 n f reflection & pr(\nd ?\ght1 b by ! /udy & natural progress ( ! common und]/&+4 ,!re are only ?ree modes ( prov+ ! exi/5ce ( a ,deity1 on ! gr\nds ( speculative reason4 ,all ! pa?s conduct+ to ?is end beg9 ei!r f det]m9ate exp]i5ce & ! peculi> con/itution ( ! _w ( s5se1 & rise1 accord+ to ! laws ( causality1 f x to ! highe/ cause exi/+ ap>t f ! _w--or f a purely indet]m9ate exp]i5ce1 t is1 "s empirical exi/5ce--or ab/raction is made ( all exp]i5ce1 & ! exi/5ce ( a supreme cause is conclud$ f priori conceptions alone4 ,! fir/ is ! physico-!ological argum5t1 ! second ! cosmological1 ! ?ird ! ontological4 ,m !re are n1 & m !re _c be4 ,i %all %[ x is z unsuccessful on ! "o pa?--! empirical--z on ! o!r--! transc5d5tal1 & t x /ret*es its w+s 9 va91 to so> beyond ! _w ( s5se by ! m]e might ( speculative ?\ght4 ,z reg>ds ! ord] 9 :i* we mu/ discuss ^? argum5ts1 x w be exactly ! rev]se ( t 9 :i* reason1 9 ! progress ( its developm5t1 atta9s to !m--! ord] 9 :i* !y are plac$ above4 ,= x w be made manife/ to ! read] t1 al?\gh exp]i5ce pres5ts ! occasion & ! />t+-po9t1 x is ! transc5d5tal idea ( reason :i* guides x 9 its pilgrimage & is ! goal ( all its /ruggles4 ,i %all !re=e beg9 ) an exam9ation ( ! transc5d5tal argum5t1 & aft]w>ds inquire :at additional /r5g? has accru$ to ?is mode ( pro( f ! addition ( ! empirical elem5t4 ,section ,,iv4 ,( ! ,impossibility ( an ,ontological ,pro( ( ! ,exi/5ce ( ,god ,x is evid5t f :at has be5 said t ! conception ( an absolutely necess>y be+ is a m]e idea1 ! objective reality ( :i* is f> f be+ e/abli%$ by ! m]e fact t x is a ne$ ( reason4 ,on ! contr>y1 ?is idea s]ves m]ely to indicate a c]ta9 unatta9able p]fection1 & r limits ! op]ations ?an1 by ! pres5tation ( new objects1 ext5ds ! sph]e ( ! und]/&+4 ,b a /range anomaly meets u at ! v ?re%old2 = ! inf]5ce f a giv5 exi/5ce 9 g5]al to an absolutely necess>y exi/5ce seems to be correct & unavoidable1 :ile ! conditions ( ! und]/&+ refuse to aid u 9 =m+ any conception ( su* a be+4 ,philosoph]s h always talk$ ( an absolutely necess>y be+1 & h nev]!less decl9$ to take ! tr\ble ( conceiv+ :e!r--& h[--a be+ ( ?is nature is ev5 cogitable1 n to m5tion t its exi/5ce is actually demon/rable4 ,a v]bal def9ition ( ! conception is c]ta9ly easy en\gh3 x is some?+ ! non-exi/5ce ( :i* is impossible4 ,b does ?is def9ition ?r[ any light ^u ! conditions :i* r5d] x impossible to cogitate ! non-exi/5ce ( a ?+--conditions :i* we wi% to asc]ta91 t we may discov] :e!r we ?9k any?+ 9 ! conception ( su* a be+ or n8 ,= ! m]e fact t ,i ?r[ away1 by means ( ! ^w uncondition$1 all ! conditions :i* ! und]/&+ habitually requires 9 ord] to reg>d any?+ z necess>y1 is v f> f mak+ cle> :e!r by means ( ! conception ( ! unconditionally necess>y ,i ?9k ( some?+1 or really ( no?+ at all4 ,nay1 m1 ?is *ance-conception1 n[ become s curr5t1 _m h endeav\r$ to expla9 by examples :i* seem$ to r5d] any inquiries reg>d+ its intelligibility q ne$less4 ,e geometrical proposition--a triangle has ?ree angles--x 0 said1 is absolutely necess>y2 & ?us p talk$ ( an object :i* lay out ( ! sph]e ( our und]/&+ z if x 7 p]fectly pla9 :at ! conception ( su* a be+ meant4 ,all ! examples adduc$ h be5 drawn1 )\t exception1 f judgem5ts1 & n f ?+s4 ,b ! uncondition$ necessity ( a judgem5t does n =m ! absolute necessity ( a ?+4 ,on ! contr>y1 ! absolute necessity ( a judgem5t is only a condition$ necessity ( a ?+1 or ( ! pr$icate 9 a judgem5t4 ,! proposition above-m5tion$ does n en\nce t ?ree angles necess>ily exi/1 b1 ^u condition t a triangle exi/s1 ?ree angles mu/ necess>ily exi/--9 x4 ,& ?us ?is logical necessity has be5 ! s\rce ( ! greate/ delusions4 ,hav+ =m$ an priori conception ( a ?+1 ! cont5t ( :i* 0 made to embrace exi/5ce1 we believ$ ourselves safe 9 conclud+ t1 because exi/5ce belongs necess>ily to ! object ( ! conception 7t is1 "u ! condition ( my posit+ ?is ?+ z giv571 ! exi/5ce ( ! ?+ is also posit$ necess>ily1 & t x is !re=e absolutely necess>y--m]ely because its exi/5ce has be5 cogitat$ 9 ! conception4 ,if1 9 an id5tical judgem5t1 ,i annihilate ! pr$icate 9 ?\ght1 & reta9 ! subject1 a contradiction is ! result2 & h5ce ,i say1 ! =m] belongs necess>ily to ! latt]4 ,b if ,i suppress bo? subject & pr$icate 9 ?\ght1 no contradiction arises2 = !re is no?+ at all1 & !re=e no means ( =m+ a contradiction4 ,to suppose ! exi/5ce ( a triangle & n t ( its ?ree angles1 is self-contradictory2 b to suppose ! non-exi/5ce ( bo? triangle & angles is p]fectly admissible4 ,& s is x ) ! conception ( an absolutely necess>y be+4 ,annihilate its exi/5ce 9 ?\ght1 & y annihilate ! ?+ itself ) all its pr$icates2 h[ !n c !re be any room = contradiction8 ,ext]nally1 !re is no?+ to give rise to a contradiction1 = a ?+ _c be necess>y ext]nally2 nor int]nally1 =1 by ! annihilation or suppression ( ! ?+ itself1 its int]nal prop]ties are also annihilat$4 ,god is omnipot5t--t is a necess>y judgem5t4 ,8 omnipot5ce _c be d5i$1 if ! exi/5ce ( a ,deity is posit$--! exi/5ce1 t is1 ( an inf9ite be+1 ! two conceptions be+ id5tical4 ,b :5 y say1 ,god does n exi/1 nei!r omnipot5ce nor any o!r pr$icate is affirm$2 !y mu/ all disappe> ) ! subject1 & 9 ?is judgem5t !re _c exi/ ! lea/ self-contradiction4 ,y h ?us se5 t :5 ! pr$icate ( a judgem5t is annihilat$ 9 ?\ght along ) ! subject1 no int]nal contradiction c arise1 be ! pr$icate :at x may4 ,!re is no possibility ( evad+ ! conclusion--y f9d y\rselves compell$ to decl>e3 ,!re are c]ta9 subjects :i* _c be annihilat$ 9 ?\ght4 ,b ?is is no?+ m ?an say+3 ,!re exi/ subjects :i* are absolutely necess>y--! v hypo!sis :i* y are call$ ^u to e/abli%4 ,= ,i f9d myself unable to =m ! slighte/ conception ( a ?+ :i* :5 annihilat$ 9 ?\ght ) all its pr$icates1 leaves beh9d a contradiction2 & contradiction is ! only crit]ion ( impossibility 9 ! sph]e ( pure priori conceptions4 ,aga9/ ^! g5]al consid]ations1 ! ju/ice ( :i* no "o c dispute1 "o argum5t is adduc$1 :i* is reg>d$ z furni%+ a satisfactory demon/ration f ! fact4 ,x is affirm$ t !re is "o & only "o conception1 9 :i* ! non-be+ or annihilation ( ! object is self-contradictory1 & ?is is ! conception ( an ens realissimum4 ,x possesses1 y say1 all reality1 & y feel y\rselves ju/ifi$ 9 admitt+ ! possibility ( su* a be+4 7,?is ,i am will+ to grant = ! pres5t1 al?\gh ! exi/5ce ( a conception :i* is n self-contradictory is f> f be+ suffici5t to prove ! possibility ( an object47#fg ,n[ ! notion ( all reality embraces 9 x t ( exi/5ce2 ! notion ( exi/5ce lies1 !re=e1 9 ! conception ( ?is possible ?+4 ,if ?is ?+ is annihilat$ 9 ?\ght1 ! int]nal possibility ( ! ?+ is also annihilat$1 :i* is self-contradictory4 #fg ,a conception is always possible1 if x is n self-contradictory4 ,?is is ! logical crit]ion ( possibility1 di/+ui%+ ! object ( su* a conception f ! nihil negativum4 ,b x may be1 not)/&+1 an empty conception1 unless ! objective reality ( ?is syn!sis1 b :i* x is g5]at$1 is demon/rat$2 & a pro( ( ?is k9d mu/ be bas$ ^u pr9ciples ( possible exp]i5ce1 & n ^u ! pr9ciple ( analysis or contradiction4 ,?is rem>k may be s]viceable z a w>n+ aga9/ conclud+1 f ! possibility ( a conception--:i* is logical--! possibility ( a ?+--:i* is real4 ,i answ]3 ,x is absurd to introduce--"u :atev] t]m disguis$--into ! conception ( a ?+1 :i* is to be cogitat$ solely 9 ref]5ce to its possibility1 ! conception ( its exi/5ce4 ,if ?is is admitt$1 y w h app>5tly ga9$ ! day1 b 9 reality h en\nc$ no?+ b a m]e tautology4 ,i ask1 is ! proposition1 ?is or t ?+ 7:i* ,i am admitt+ to be possible7 exi/s1 an analytical or a syn!tical proposition8 ,if ! =m]1 !re is no addition made to ! subject ( y\r ?\ght by ! affirmation ( its exi/5ce2 b !n ! conception 9 y\r m9ds is id5tical ) ! ?+ itself1 or y h suppos$ ! exi/5ce ( a ?+ to be possible1 & !n inf]r$ its exi/5ce f its int]nal possibility--:i* is b a mis]able tautology4 ,! ^w reality 9 ! conception ( ! ?+1 & ! ^w exi/5ce 9 ! conception ( ! pr$icate1 w n help y out ( ! difficulty4 ,=1 suppos+ y 7 to t]m all posit+ ( a ?+ reality1 y h !reby posit$ ! ?+ ) all its pr$icates 9 ! conception ( ! subject & assum$ its actual exi/5ce1 & ?is y m]ely repeat 9 ! pr$icate4 ,b if y confess1 z e reasonable p]son mu/1 t e exi/5tial proposition is syn!tical1 h[ c x be ma9ta9$ t ! pr$icate ( exi/5ce _c be d5i$ )\t contradiction8--a prop]ty :i* is ! *>act]i/ic ( analytical propositions1 alone4 ,i %\ld h a reasonable hope ( putt+ an end = ev] to ?is sophi/ical mode ( argum5tation1 by a /rict def9ition ( ! conception ( exi/5ce1 did n my own exp]i5ce tea* me t ! illusion aris+ f our conf\nd+ a logical ) a real pr$icate 7a pr$icate :i* aids 9 ! det]m9ation ( a ?+7 resi/s almo/ all ! endeav\rs ( explanation & illu/ration4 ,a logical pr$icate may be :at y please1 ev5 ! subject may be pr$icat$ ( itself2 = logic pays no reg>d to ! cont5t ( a judgem5t4 ,b ! det]m9ation ( a conception is a pr$icate1 :i* adds to & enl>ges ! conception4 ,x mu/ n1 !re=e1 be conta9$ 9 ! conception4 ,be+ is evid5tly n a real pr$icate1 t is1 a conception ( some?+ :i* is add$ to ! conception ( "s o!r ?+4 ,x is m]ely ! posit+ ( a ?+1 or ( c]ta9 det]m9ations 9 x4 ,logically1 x is m]ely ! copula ( a judgem5t4 ,! proposition1 ,god is omnipot5t1 conta9s two conceptions1 :i* h a c]ta9 object or cont5t2 ! ^w is1 is no additional pr$icate--x m]ely indicates ! relation ( ! pr$icate to ! subject4 ,n[1 if ,i take ! subject 7,god7 ) all its pr$icates 7omnipot5ce be+ "o71 & say3 ,god is1 or1 ,!re is a ,god1 ,i add no new pr$icate to ! conception ( ,god1 ,i m]ely posit or affirm ! exi/5ce ( ! subject ) all its pr$icates--,i posit ! object 9 relation to my conception4 ,! cont5t ( bo? is ! same2 & !re is no addition made to ! conception1 :i* expresses m]ely ! possibility ( ! object1 by my cogitat+ ! object--9 ! expression1 x is--z absolutely giv5 or exi/+4 ,?us ! real conta9s no m ?an ! possible4 ,a hundr$ real doll>s conta9 no m ?an a hundr$ possible doll>s4 ,=1 z ! latt] indicate ! conception1 & ! =m] ! object1 on ! supposition t ! cont5t ( ! =m] 0 great] ?an t ( ! latt]1 my conception w\ld n be an expression ( ! :ole object1 & w\ld consequ5tly be an inadequate conception ( x4 ,b 9 reckon+ my weal? !re may be said to be m 9 a hundr$ real doll>s ?an 9 a hundr$ possible doll>s--t is1 9 ! m]e conception ( !m4 ,= ! real object--! doll>s--is n analytically conta9$ 9 my conception1 b =ms a syn!tical addition to my conception 7:i* is m]ely a det]m9ation ( my m5tal /ate71 al?\gh ?is objective reality--?is exi/5ce--ap>t f my conceptions1 does n 9 ! lea/ degree increase ! a=esaid hundr$ doll>s4 ,by :atev] & by :atev] numb] ( pr$icates--ev5 to ! complete det]m9ation ( x--,i may cogitate a ?+1 ,i d n 9 ! lea/ augm5t ! object ( my conception by ! addition ( ! /atem5t3 ,?is ?+ exi/s4 ,o!rwise1 n exactly ! same1 b some?+ m ?an :at 0 cogitat$ 9 my conception1 w\ld exi/1 & ,i c\ld n affirm t ! exact object ( my conception _h real exi/5ce4 ,if ,i cogitate a ?+ z conta9+ all modes ( reality except "o1 ! mode ( reality :i* is abs5t is n add$ to ! conception ( ! ?+ by ! affirmation t ! ?+ exi/s2 on ! contr>y1 ! ?+ exi/s--if x exi/ at all--) ! same defect z t cogitat$ 9 its conception2 o!rwise n t :i* 0 cogitat$1 b some?+ diff]5t1 exi/s4 ,n[1 if ,i cogitate a be+ z ! highe/ reality1 )\t defect or imp]fection1 ! "q /ill rema9s--:e!r ?is be+ exi/s or n8 ,=1 al?\gh no elem5t is want+ 9 ! possible real cont5t ( my conception1 !re is a defect 9 its relation to my m5tal /ate1 t is1 ,i am ignorant :e!r ! cognition ( ! object indicat$ by ! conception is possible po/]iori4 ,& "h ! cause ( ! pres5t difficulty becomes app>5t4 ,if ! "q reg>d$ an object ( s5se m]ely1 x w\ld be impossible = me to conf\nd ! conception ) ! exi/5ce ( a ?+4 ,= ! conception m]ely enables me to cogitate an object z accord+ ) ! g5]al conditions ( exp]i5ce2 :ile ! exi/5ce ( ! object p]mits me to cogitate x z conta9$ 9 ! sph]e ( actual exp]i5ce4 ,at ! same "t1 ?is connection ) ! _w ( exp]i5ce does n 9 ! lea/ augm5t ! conception1 al?\gh a possible p]ception has be5 add$ to ! exp]i5ce ( ! m9d4 ,b if we cogitate exi/5ce by ! pure category alone1 x is n to be wond]$ at1 t we %\ld f9d ourselves unable to pres5t any crit]ion suffici5t to di/+ui% x f m]e possibility4 ,:atev] be ! cont5t ( our conception ( an object1 x is necess>y to g beyond x1 if we wi% to pr$icate exi/5ce ( ! object4 ,9 ! case ( s5su\s objects1 ?is is atta9$ by _! connection accord+ to empirical laws ) "s "o ( my p]ceptions2 b !re is no means ( cogniz+ ! exi/5ce ( objects ( pure ?\ght1 because x mu/ be cogniz$ completely priori4 ,b all our k ( exi/5ce 7be x imm$iately by p]ception1 or by inf]5ces connect+ "s object ) a p]ception7 belongs entirely to ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce--:i* is 9 p]fect unity ) itself2 & al?\gh an exi/5ce out ( ?is sph]e _c be absolutely decl>$ to be impossible1 x is a hypo!sis ! tru? ( :i* we h no means ( asc]ta9+4 ,! notion ( a ,supreme ,be+ is 9 _m respects a highly useful idea2 b = ! v reason t x is an idea1 x is incapable ( enl>g+ our cognition ) reg>d to ! exi/5ce ( ?+s4 ,x is n ev5 suffici5t to in/ruct u z to ! possibility ( a be+ :i* we d n "k to exi/4 ,! analytical crit]ion ( possibility1 :i* consi/s 9 ! abs5ce ( contradiction 9 propositions1 _c be d5i$ x4 ,b ! connection ( real prop]ties 9 a ?+ is a syn!sis ( ! possibility ( :i* an priori judgem5t _c be =m$1 because ^! realities are n pres5t$ to u specifically2 & ev5 if ?is 7 to happ51 a judgem5t w\ld /ill be impossible1 because ! crit]ion ( ! possibility ( syn!tical cognitions mu/ be s\ght = 9 ! _w ( exp]i5ce1 to :i* ! object ( an idea _c belong4 ,& ?us ! celebrat$ ,leibnitz has utt]ly fail$ 9 8 attempt to e/abli% ^u priori gr\nds ! possibility ( ?is sublime ideal be+4 ,! celebrat$ ontological or ,c>tesian argum5t = ! exi/5ce ( a ,supreme ,be+ is !re=e insuffici5t2 & we may z well hope to increase our /ock ( k by ! aid ( m]e ideas1 z ! m]*ant to augm5t 8 weal? by ! addition ( n\ghts to 8 ca% acc\nt4 ,section ,v4 ,( ! ,impossibility ( a ,cosmological ,pro( ( ! ,exi/5ce ( ,god ,x 0 by no means a natural c\rse ( proce$+1 b1 on ! contr>y1 an inv5tion entirely due to ! subtlety ( ! s*ools1 to attempt to draw f a m]e idea a pro( ( ! exi/5ce ( an object correspond+ to x4 ,su* a c\rse w\ld nev] h be5 pursu$1 7 x n = t ne$ ( reason :i* requires x to suppose ! exi/5ce ( a necess>y be+ z a basis = ! empirical regress1 & t1 z ?is necessity mu/ be uncondition$ & priori1 reason is b\nd to discov] a conception :i* %all satisfy1 if possible1 ?is requirem5t1 & enable u to atta9 to ! priori cognition ( su* a be+4 ,?is conception 0 ?\ght to be f\nd 9 ! idea ( an ens realissimum1 & ?us ?is idea 0 employ$ = ! atta9m5t ( a bett] def9$ k ( a necess>y be+1 ( ! exi/5ce ( :i* we 7 conv9c$1 or p]suad$1 on o!r gr\nds4 ,?us reason 0 s$uc$ f h] natural c\rage2 &1 in/ead ( conclud+ ) ! conception ( an ens realissimum1 an attempt 0 made to beg9 ) x1 = ! purpose ( inf]r+ f x t idea ( a necess>y exi/5ce :i* x 0 9 fact call$ 9 to complete4 ,?us arose t un=tunate ontological argum5t1 :i* nei!r satisfies ! heal?y common s5se ( humanity1 nor su/a9s ! sci5tific exam9ation ( ! philosoph]4 ,! cosmological pro(1 :i* we are ab\t to exam9e1 reta9s ! connection betwe5 absolute necessity & ! highe/ reality2 b1 in/ead ( reason+ f ?is highe/ reality to a necess>y exi/5ce1 l ! prec$+ argum5t1 x concludes f ! giv5 uncondition$ necessity ( "s be+ its unlimit$ reality4 ,! track x pursues1 :e!r rational or sophi/ical1 is at lea/ natural1 & n only goes f> to p]suade ! common und]/&+1 b %[s itself des]v+ ( respect f ! speculative intellect2 :ile x conta9s1 at ! same "t1 ! outl9es ( all ! argum5ts employ$ 9 natural !ology--argum5ts :i* always h be51 & /ill w be1 9 use & au?ority4 ,^!1 h[ev] adorn$1 & hid "u :atev] embelli%m5ts ( rhetoric & s5tim5t1 are at bottom id5tical ) ! argum5ts we are at pres5t to discuss4 ,?is pro(1 t]m$ by ,leibnitz ! argum5tum a cont+5tia mundi1 ,i %all n[ lay be=e ! read]1 & subject to a /rict exam9ation4 ,x is fram$ 9 ! foll[+ mann]3 ,if some?+ exi/s1 an absolutely necess>y be+ mu/ likewise exi/4 ,n[ ,i1 at lea/1 exi/4 ,consequ5tly1 !re exi/s an absolutely necess>y be+4 ,! m9or conta9s an exp]i5ce1 ! major reasons f a g5]al exp]i5ce to ! exi/5ce ( a necess>y be+4#fh ,?us ?is argum5t really beg9s at exp]i5ce1 & is n completely priori1 or ontological4 ,! object ( all possible exp]i5ce be+ ! _w1 x is call$ ! cosmological pro(4 ,x conta9s no ref]5ce to any peculi> prop]ty ( s5su\s objects1 by :i* ?is _w ( s5se might be di/+ui%$ f o!r possible worlds2 & 9 ?is respect x diff]s f ! physico-!ological pro(1 :i* is bas$ ^u ! consid]ation ( ! peculi> con/itution ( our s5su\s _w4 #fh ,?is inf]5ce is too well kn[n to require m detail$ discussion4 ,x is bas$ ^u ! spuri\s transc5d5tal law ( causality1 t ev]y?+ :i* is cont+5t has a cause1 :i*1 if itself cont+5t1 mu/ also h a cause2 & s on1 till ! s]ies ( subord9at$ causes mu/ end ) an absolutely necess>y cause1 )\t :i* x w\ld n possess complet5ess4 ,! pro( proce$s ?us3 ,a necess>y be+ c be det]m9$ only 9 "o way1 t is1 x c be det]m9$ by only "o ( all possible oppos$ pr$icates2 consequ5tly1 x mu/ be completely det]m9$ 9 & by its conception4 ,b !re is only a s+le conception ( a ?+ possible1 :i* completely det]m9es ! ?+ priori3 t is1 ! conception ( ! ens realissimum4 ,x foll[s t ! conception ( ! ens realissimum is ! only conception by & 9 :i* we c cogitate a necess>y be+4 ,consequ5tly1 a ,supreme ,be+ necess>ily exi/s4 ,9 ?is cosmological argum5t are assembl$ s _m sophi/ical propositions t speculative reason seems to h ex]t$ 9 x all h] dialectical skill to produce a transc5d5tal illusion ( ! mo/ extreme "*4 ,we %all po/pone an inve/igation ( ?is argum5t = ! pres5t1 & conf9e ourselves to expos+ ! /ratagem by :i* x imposes ^u u an old argum5t 9 a new dress1 & appeals to ! agreem5t ( two witnesses1 ! "o ) ! cr$5tials ( pure reason1 & ! o!r ) ^? ( empiricism2 :ile1 9 fact1 x is only ! =m] :o has *ang$ 8 dress & voice1 = ! purpose ( pass+ himself (f = an additional witness4 ,t x may possess a secure f\ndation1 x bases its conclusions ^u exp]i5ce1 & ?us appe>s to be completely di/9ct f ! ontological argum5t1 :i* places its confid5ce entirely 9 pure priori conceptions4 ,b ?is exp]i5ce m]ely aids reason 9 mak+ "o /ep--to ! exi/5ce ( a necess>y be+4 ,:at ! prop]ties ( ?is be+ are _c be le>n$ f exp]i5ce2 & !re=e reason ab&ons x altoge!r1 & pursues its inquiries 9 ! sph]e ( pure conception1 = ! purpose ( discov]+ :at ! prop]ties ( an absolutely necess>y be+ ought to be1 t is1 :at among all possible ?+s conta9 ! conditions 7requisita7 ( absolute necessity4 ,reason believes t x has discov]$ ^! requisites 9 ! conception ( an ens realissimum--& 9 x alone1 & h5ce concludes3 ,! ens realissimum is an absolutely necess>y be+4 ,b x is evid5t t reason has "h presuppos$ t ! conception ( an ens realissimum is p]fectly adequate to ! conception ( a be+ ( absolute necessity1 t is1 t we may inf] ! exi/5ce ( ! latt] f t ( ! =m]--a proposition :i* =m$ ! basis ( ! ontological argum5t1 & :i* is n[ employ$ 9 ! support ( ! cosmological argum5t1 contr>y to ! wi% & pr(essions ( its inv5tors4 ,= ! exi/5ce ( an absolutely necess>y be+ is giv5 9 conceptions alone4 ,b if ,i say3 8,! conception ( ! ens realissimum is a conception ( ?is k9d1 & 9 fact ! only conception :i* is adequate to our idea ( a necess>y be+10 ,i am oblig$ to admit1 t ! latt] may be inf]r$ f ! =m]4 ,?us x is prop]ly ! ontological argum5t :i* figures 9 ! cosmological1 & con/itutes ! :ole /r5g? ( ! latt]2 :ile ! spuri\s basis ( exp]i5ce has be5 ( no fur!r use ?an to conduct u to ! conception ( absolute necessity1 be+ utt]ly insuffici5t to demon/rate ! pres5ce ( ?is attribute 9 any det]m9ate exi/5ce or ?+4 ,= :5 we propose to ourselves an aim ( ?is "*1 we mu/ ab&on ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce1 & rise to t ( pure conceptions1 :i* we exam9e ) ! purpose ( discov]+ :e!r any "o conta9s ! conditions ( ! possibility ( an absolutely necess>y be+4 ,b if ! possibility ( su* a be+ is ?us demon/rat$1 its exi/5ce is also prov$2 = we may !n ass]t t1 ( all possible be+s !re is "o :i* possesses ! attribute ( necessity--9 o!r words1 ?is be+ possesses an absolutely necess>y exi/5ce4 ,all illusions 9 an argum5t are m easily detect$ :5 !y are pres5t$ 9 ! =mal mann] employ$ by ! s*ools1 :i* we n[ proce$ to d4 ,if ! proposition3 8,e absolutely necess>y be+ is likewise an ens realissimum10 is correct 7& x is ?is :i* con/itutes ! n]vus prob&i ( ! cosmological argum5t71 x mu/1 l all affirmative judgem5ts1 be capable ( conv]sion--! conv]sio p] accid5s1 at lea/4 ,x foll[s1 !n1 t "s entia realissima are absolutely necess>y be+s4 ,b no ens realissimum is 9 any respect diff]5t f ano!r1 & :at is valid ( "s is valid ( all4 ,9 ?is pres5t case1 !re=e1 ,i may employ simple conv]sion1 & say3 8,e ens realissimum is a necess>y be+40 ,b z ?is proposition is det]m9$ priori by ! conceptions conta9$ 9 x1 ! m]e conception ( an ens realissimum mu/ possess ! additional attribute ( absolute necessity4 ,b ?is is exactly :at 0 ma9ta9$ 9 ! ontological argum5t1 & n recogniz$ by ! cosmological1 al?\gh x =m$ ! real gr\nd ( its disguis$ & illusory reason+4 ,?us ! second mode employ$ by speculative reason ( demon/rat+ ! exi/5ce ( a ,supreme ,be+1 is n only1 l ! fir/1 illusory & inadequate1 b possesses ! additional blemi% ( an ignoratio el5*i--pr(ess+ to conduct u by a new road to ! desir$ goal1 b br++ u back1 aft] a %ort circuit1 to ! old pa? :i* we _h des]t$ at its call4 ,i m5tion$ above t ?is cosmological argum5t conta9s a p]fect ne/ ( dialectical assumptions1 :i* transc5d5tal criticism does n f9d x difficult to expose & to dissipate4 ,i %all m]ely enum]ate ^!1 leav+ x to ! read]1 :o mu/ by ?is "t be well practis$ 9 su* matt]s1 to inve/igate ! fallacies resid+ !re94 ,! foll[+ fallacies1 = example1 are discov]able 9 ?is mode ( pro(3 #a4 ,! transc5d5tal pr9ciple3 8,ev]y?+ t is cont+5t mu/ h a cause0--a pr9ciple )\t significance1 except 9 ! s5su\s _w4 ,= ! purely intellectual conception ( ! cont+5t _c produce any syn!tical proposition1 l t ( causality1 :i* is itself )\t significance or di/+ui%+ *>act]i/ic except 9 ! ph5om5al _w4 ,b 9 ! pres5t case x is employ$ to help u beyond ! limits ( its sph]e4 #b4 8,f ! impossibility ( an inf9ite asc5d+ s]ies ( causes 9 ! _w ( s5se a fir/ cause is inf]r$02 a conclusion :i* ! pr9ciples ( ! employm5t ( reason d n ju/ify ev5 9 ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce1 & /ill less :5 an attempt is made to pass ! limits ( ?is sph]e4 #c4 ,reason all[s itself to be satisfi$ ^u insuffici5t gr\nds1 ) reg>d to ! completion ( ?is s]ies4 ,x removes all conditions 7)\t :i*1 h[ev]1 no conception ( ,necessity c take place72 &1 z aft] ?is x is beyond our p[] to =m any o!r conceptions1 x accepts ?is z a completion ( ! conception x wi%es to =m ( ! s]ies4 #d4 ,! logical possibility ( a conception ( ! total ( reality 7! crit]ion ( ?is possibility be+ ! abs5ce ( contradiction7 is conf\nd$ ) ! transc5d5tal1 :i* requires a pr9ciple ( ! practicability ( su* a syn!sis--a pr9ciple :i* aga9 ref]s u to ! _w ( exp]i5ce4 ,& s on4 ,! aim ( ! cosmological argum5t is to avoid ! necessity ( prov+ ! exi/5ce ( a necess>y be+ priori f m]e conceptions--a pro( :i* mu/ be ontological1 & ( :i* we feel ourselves q incapable4 ,) ?is purpose1 we reason f an actual exi/5ce--an exp]i5ce 9 g5]al1 to an absolutely necess>y condition ( t exi/5ce4 ,x is 9 ?is case unnecess>y to demon/rate its possibility4 ,= aft] hav+ prov$ t x exi/s1 ! "q reg>d+ its possibility is sup]flu\s4 ,n[1 :5 we wi% to def9e m /rictly ! nature ( ?is necess>y be+1 we d n look out = "s be+ ! conception ( :i* w\ld enable u to compreh5d ! necessity ( its be+--= if we c\ld d ?is1 an empirical presupposition w\ld be unnecess>y2 no1 we try to discov] m]ely ! negative condition 7conditio s9e qua non71 )\t :i* a be+ w\ld n be absolutely necess>y4 ,n[ ?is w\ld be p]fectly admissible 9 e sort ( reason+1 f a consequ5ce to its pr9ciple2 b 9 ! pres5t case x un=tunately happ5s t ! condition ( absolute necessity c be discov]$ 9 b a s+le be+1 ! conception ( :i* mu/ consequ5tly conta9 all t is requisite = demon/rat+ ! pres5ce ( absolute necessity1 & ?us entitle me to inf] ?is absolute necessity priori4 ,t is1 x mu/ be possible to reason conv]sely1 & say3 ,! ?+1 to :i* ! conception ( ! highe/ reality belongs1 is absolutely necess>y4 ,b if ,i _c reason ?us--& ,i _c1 unless ,i believe 9 ! suffici5cy ( ! ontological argum5t--,i f9d insurm\ntable ob/acles 9 my new pa?1 & am really no f>!r ?an ! po9t f :i* ,i set out4 ,! conception ( a ,supreme ,be+ satisfies all que/ions priori reg>d+ ! int]nal det]m9ations ( a ?+1 & is = ?is reason an ideal )\t equal or p>allel1 ! g5]al conception ( x indicat+ x z at ! same "t an ens individuum among all possible ?+s4 ,b ! conception does n satisfy ! "q reg>d+ its exi/5ce--:i* 0 ! purpose ( all our inquiries2 &1 al?\gh ! exi/5ce ( a necess>y be+ 7 admitt$1 we %\ld f9d x impossible to answ] ! "q3 ,:at ( all ?+s 9 ! _w mu/ be reg>d$ z su*8 ,x is c]ta9ly all[able to admit ! exi/5ce ( an all-suffici5t be+--a cause ( all possible effects--= ! purpose ( enabl+ reason to introduce unity into its mode & gr\nds ( explanation ) reg>d to ph5om5a4 ,b to ass]t t su* a be+ necess>ily exi/s1 is no long] ! mode/ enunciation ( an admissible hypo!sis1 b ! bolde/ decl>ation ( an apodeictic c]ta9ty2 = ! cognition ( t :i* is absolutely necess>y mu/ itself possess t "*4 ,! aim ( ! transc5d5tal ideal =m$ by ! m9d is ei!r to discov] a conception :i* %all h>monize ) ! idea ( absolute necessity1 or a conception :i* %all conta9 t idea4 ,if ! "o is possible1 s is ! o!r2 = reason recognizes t alone z absolutely necess>y :i* is necess>y f its conception4 ,b bo? attempts are equally beyond our p[]--we f9d x impossible to satisfy ! und]/&+ ^u ?is po9t1 & z impossible to induce x to rema9 at re/ 9 relation to ?is incapacity4 ,uncondition$ necessity1 :i*1 z ! ultimate support & /ay ( all exi/+ ?+s1 is an indisp5sable requirem5t ( ! m9d1 is an abyss on ! v]ge ( :i* human reason trembles 9 dismay4 ,ev5 ! idea ( et]nity1 t]rible & sublime z x is1 z depict$ by ,hall]1 does n produce ^u ! m5tal vision su* a feel+ ( awe & t]ror2 =1 al?\gh x measures ! duration ( ?+s1 x does n support !m4 ,we _c be>1 nor c we rid ourselves ( ! ?\ght t a be+1 :i* we reg>d z ! greate/ ( all possible exi/5ces1 %\ld say to himself3 ,i am f et]nity to et]nity2 beside me !re is no?+1 except t :i* exi/s by my w2 :5ce !n am ,i8 ,"h all s9ks away f "u u2 & ! greate/1 z ! smalle/1 p]fection1 hov]s )\t /ay or foot+ 9 pres5ce ( ! speculative reason1 :i* f9ds x z easy to "p ) ! "o z ) ! o!r4 ,_m physical p[]s1 :i* evid5ce _! exi/5ce by _! effects1 are p]fectly inscrutable 9 _! nature2 !y elude all our p[]s ( obs]vation4 ,! transc5d5tal object :i* =ms ! basis ( ph5om5a1 &1 9 connection ) x1 ! reason :y our s5sibility possesses ?is r ?an t p>ticul> k9d ( conditions1 are & mu/ ev] rema9 hidd5 f our m5tal vision2 ! fact is !re1 ! reason ( ! fact we _c see4 ,b an ideal ( pure reason _c be t]m$ my/]i\s or inscrutable1 because ! only cr$5tial ( its reality is ! ne$ ( x felt by reason1 = ! purpose ( giv+ complet5ess to ! _w ( syn!tical unity4 ,an ideal is n ev5 giv5 z a cogitable object1 & !re=e _c be inscrutable2 on ! contr>y1 x mu/1 z a m]e idea1 be bas$ on ! con/itution ( reason itself1 & on ?is acc\nt mu/ be capable ( explanation & solution4 ,= ! v ess5ce ( reason consi/s 9 its ability to give an acc\nt1 ( all our conceptions1 op9ions1 & ass]tions--^u objective1 or1 :5 !y happ5 to be illusory & fallaci\s1 ^u subjective gr\nds4 ,detection & ,explanation ( ! ,dialectical ,illusion 9 all ,transc5d5tal ,argum5ts = ! ,exi/5ce ( a ,necess>y ,be+4 ,bo? ( ! above argum5ts are transc5d5tal2 9 o!r words1 !y d n proce$ ^u empirical pr9ciples4 ,=1 al?\gh ! cosmological argum5t pr(ess$ to lay a basis ( exp]i5ce = its edifice ( reason+1 x did n gr\nd its proc$ure ^u ! peculi> con/itution ( exp]i5ce1 b ^u pure pr9ciples ( reason--9 relation to an exi/5ce giv5 by empirical consci\sness2 utt]ly ab&on+ its guidance1 h[ev]1 = ! purpose ( support+ its ass]tions entirely ^u pure conceptions4 ,n[ :at is ! cause1 9 ^! transc5d5tal argum5ts1 ( ! dialectical1 b natural1 illusion1 :i* connects ! conceptions ( necessity & supreme reality1 & hypo/atizes t :i* _c be any?+ b an idea8 ,:at is ! cause ( ?is unavoidable /ep on ! "p ( reason1 ( admitt+ t "s "o among all exi/+ ?+s mu/ be necess>y1 :ile x falls back f ! ass]tion ( ! exi/5ce ( su* a be+ z f an abyss8 ,& h[ does reason proce$ to expla9 ?is anomaly to itself1 & f ! wav]+ condition ( a timid & reluctant approbation--always aga9 )drawn--arrive at a calm & settl$ insight into its cause8 ,x is some?+ v rem>kable t1 on ! supposition t some?+ exi/s1 ,i _c avoid ! inf]5ce t some?+ exi/s necess>ily4 ,^u ?is p]fectly natural--b n on t acc\nt reliable--inf]5ce does ! cosmological argum5t re/4 ,b1 let me =m any conception :atev] ( a ?+1 ,i f9d t ,i _c cogitate ! exi/5ce ( ! ?+ z absolutely necess>y1 & t no?+ prev5ts me--be ! ?+ or be+ :at x may--f cogitat+ its non-exi/5ce4 ,i may ?us be oblig$ to admit t all exi/+ ?+s h a necess>y basis1 :ile ,i _c cogitate any s+le or individual ?+ z necess>y4 ,9 o!r words1 ,i c nev] complete ! regress ?r\gh ! conditions ( exi/5ce1 )\t admitt+ ! exi/5ce ( a necess>y be+2 b1 on ! o!r h&1 ,i _c make a comm5cem5t f ?is be+4 ,if ,i mu/ cogitate some?+ z exi/+ necess>ily z ! basis ( exi/+ ?+s1 & yet am n p]mitt$ to cogitate any individual ?+ z 9 itself necess>y1 ! inevitable inf]5ce is t necessity & cont+5cy are n prop]ties ( ?+s !mselves--o!rwise an int]nal contradiction w\ld result2 t consequ5tly nei!r ( ^! pr9ciples are objective1 b m]ely subjective pr9ciples ( reason--! "o requir+ u to seek = a necess>y gr\nd = ev]y?+ t exi/s1 t is1 to be satisfi$ ) no o!r explanation ?an t :i* is complete priori1 ! o!r =bidd+ u ev] to hope = ! atta9m5t ( ?is complet5ess1 t is1 to reg>d no memb] ( ! empirical _w z uncondition$4 ,9 ?is mode ( view+ !m1 bo? pr9ciples1 9 _! purely heuri/ic & regulative "*1 & z conc]n+ m]ely ! =mal int]e/ ( reason1 are q consi/5t ) ea* o!r4 ,! "o says3 8,y mu/ philosophize ^u nature10 z if !re exi/$ a necess>y primal basis ( all exi/+ ?+s1 solely = ! purpose ( introduc+ sy/ematic unity into y\r k1 by pursu+ an idea ( ?is "*--a f\ndation :i* is arbitr>ily admitt$ to be ultimate2 :ile ! o!r w>ns y to consid] no individual det]m9ation1 conc]n+ ! exi/5ce ( ?+s1 z su* an ultimate f\ndation1 t is1 z absolutely necess>y1 b to keep ! way always op5 = fur!r progress 9 ! d$uction1 & to treat e det]m9ation z det]m9$ by "s o!r4 ,b if all t we p]ceive mu/ be reg>d$ z conditionally necess>y1 x is impossible t any?+ :i* is empirically giv5 %\ld be absolutely necess>y4 ,x foll[s f ?is t y mu/ accept ! absolutely necess>y z out ( & beyond ! _w1 inasmu* z x is useful only z a pr9ciple ( ! highe/ possible unity 9 exp]i5ce1 & y _c discov] any su* necess>y exi/5ce 9 ! w\ld1 ! second rule requir+ y to reg>d all empirical causes ( unity z !mselves d$uc$4 ,! philosoph]s ( antiquity reg>d$ all ! =ms ( nature z cont+5t2 :ile matt] 0 consid]$ by !m1 9 accordance ) ! judgem5t ( ! common reason ( mank9d1 z primal & necess>y4 ,b if !y _h reg>d$ matt]1 n relatively--z ! sub/ratum ( ph5om5a1 b absolutely & 9 itself--z an indep5d5t exi/5ce1 ?is idea ( absolute necessity w\ld h imm$iately disappe>$4 ,= !re is no?+ absolutely connect+ reason ) su* an exi/5ce2 on ! contr>y1 x c annihilate x 9 ?\ght1 always & )\t self-contradiction4 ,b 9 ?\ght alone lay ! idea ( absolute necessity4 ,a regulative pr9ciple mu/1 !re=e1 h be5 at ! f\ndation ( ?is op9ion4 ,9 fact1 ext5sion & imp5etrability--:i* toge!r con/itute our conception ( matt]--=m ! supreme empirical pr9ciple ( ! unity ( ph5om5a1 & ?is pr9ciple1 9 s f> z x is empirically uncondition$1 possesses ! prop]ty ( a regulative pr9ciple4 ,b1 z e det]m9ation ( matt] :i* con/itutes :at is real 9 x--& consequ5tly imp5etrability--is an effect1 :i* mu/ h a cause1 & is = ?is reason always d]iv$1 ! notion ( matt] _c h>monize ) ! idea ( a necess>y be+1 9 its "* ( ! pr9ciple ( all d]iv$ unity4 ,= e "o ( its real prop]ties1 be+ d]iv$1 mu/ be only conditionally necess>y1 & c !re=e be annihilat$ 9 ?\ght2 & ?us ! :ole exi/5ce ( matt] c be s annihilat$ or suppress$4 ,if ?is 7 n ! case1 we %\ld h f\nd 9 ! _w ( ph5om5a ! highe/ gr\nd or condition ( unity--:i* is impossible1 accord+ to ! second regulative pr9ciple4 ,x foll[s t matt]1 &1 9 g5]al1 all t =ms "p ( ! _w ( s5se1 _c be a necess>y primal be+1 nor ev5 a pr9ciple ( empirical unity1 b t ?is be+ or pr9ciple mu/ h its place assign$ )\t ! _w4 ,&1 9 ?is way1 we c proce$ 9 p]fect confid5ce to d$uce ! ph5om5a ( ! _w & _! exi/5ce f o!r ph5om5a1 j z if !re exi/$ no necess>y be+2 & we c at ! same "t1 /rive )\t ceas+ t[>ds ! atta9m5t ( complet5ess = our d$uction1 j z if su* a be+--! supreme condition ( all exi/5ces--7 presuppos$ by ! m9d4 ,^! rem>ks w h made x evid5t to ! read] t ! ideal ( ! ,supreme ,be+1 f> f be+ an en\ncem5t ( ! exi/5ce ( a be+ 9 itself necess>y1 is no?+ m ?an a regulative pr9ciple ( reason1 requir+ u to reg>d all connection exi/+ betwe5 ph5om5a z if x _h its orig9 f an all-suffici5t necess>y cause1 & bas+ ^u ?is ! rule ( a sy/ematic & necess>y unity 9 ! explanation ( ph5om5a4 ,we _c1 at ! same "t1 avoid reg>d+1 by a transc5d5tal subreptio1 ?is =mal pr9ciple z con/itutive1 & hypo/atiz+ ?is unity4 ,precisely simil> is ! case ) our notion ( space4 ,space is ! primal condition ( all =ms1 :i* are prop]ly j s _m diff]5t limitations ( x2 & ?us1 al?\gh x is m]ely a pr9ciple ( s5sibility1 we _c help reg>d+ x z an absolutely necess>y & self-subsi/5t ?+--z an object giv5 priori 9 itself4 ,9 ! same way1 x is q natural t1 z ! sy/ematic unity ( nature _c be e/abli%$ z a pr9ciple = ! empirical employm5t ( reason1 unless x is bas$ ^u ! idea ( an ens realissimum1 z ! supreme cause1 we %\ld reg>d ?is idea z a real object1 & ?is object1 9 its "* ( supreme condition1 z absolutely necess>y1 & t 9 ?is way a regulative %\ld be trans=m$ into a con/itutive pr9ciple4 ,?is int]*ange becomes evid5t :5 ,i reg>d ?is supreme be+1 :i*1 relatively to ! _w1 0 absolutely 7unconditionally7 necess>y1 z a ?+ p] se4 ,9 ?is case1 ,i f9d x impossible to repres5t ?is necessity 9 or by any conception1 & x exi/s m]ely 9 my own m9d1 z ! =mal condition ( ?\ght1 b n z a mat]ial & hypo/atic condition ( exi/5ce4 ,section ,,vi4 ,( ! ,impossibility ( a ,physico-,!ological ,pro( ,if1 !n1 nei!r a pure conception nor ! g5]al exp]i5ce ( an exi/+ be+ c provide a suffici5t basis = ! pro( ( ! exi/5ce ( ! ,deity1 we c make ! attempt by ! only o!r mode--t ( gr\nd+ our argum5t ^u a det]m9ate exp]i5ce ( ! ph5om5a ( ! pres5t _w1 _! con/itution & disposition1 & discov] :e!r we c ?us atta9 to a s\nd conviction ( ! exi/5ce ( a ,supreme ,be+4 ,?is argum5t we %all t]m ! physico-!ological argum5t4 ,if x is %[n to be insuffici5t1 speculative reason _c pres5t u ) any satisfactory pro( ( ! exi/5ce ( a be+ correspond+ to our transc5d5tal idea4 ,x is evid5t f ! rem>ks t h be5 made 9 ! prec$+ sections1 t an answ] to ?is "q w be f> f be+ difficult or unconv9c+4 ,= h[ c any exp]i5ce be adequate ) an idea8 ,! v ess5ce ( an idea consi/s 9 ! fact t no exp]i5ce c ev] be discov]$ congru5t or adequate ) x4 ,! transc5d5tal idea ( a necess>y & all-suffici5t be+ is s immeasurably great1 s high above all t is empirical1 :i* is always condition$1 t we hope 9 va9 to f9d mat]ials 9 ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce suffici5tly ample = our conception1 & 9 va9 seek ! uncondition$ among ?+s t are condition$1 :ile examples1 nay1 ev5 guidance is d5i$ u by ! laws ( empirical syn!sis4 ,if ! ,supreme ,be+ =ms a l9k 9 ! *a9 ( empirical conditions1 x mu/ be a memb] ( ! empirical s]ies1 &1 l ! l[] memb]s :i* x prec$es1 h its orig9 9 "s high] memb] ( ! s]ies4 ,if1 on ! o!r h&1 we dis5gage x f ! *a91 & cogitate x z an intelligible be+1 ap>t f ! s]ies ( natural causes--h[ %all reason bridge ! abyss t sep>ates ! latt] f ! =m]8 ,all laws respect+ ! regress f effects to causes1 all syn!tical additions to our k relate solely to possible exp]i5ce & ! objects ( ! s5su\s _w1 &1 ap>t f !m1 are )\t significance4 ,! _w ar\nd u op5s be=e our view s magnific5t a spectacle ( ord]1 v>iety1 beauty1 & con=mity to ends1 t :e!r we pursue our obs]vations into ! inf9ity ( space 9 ! "o direction1 or into its illimitable divisions 9 ! o!r1 :e!r we reg>d ! _w 9 its greate/ or its lea/ manife/ations--ev5 aft] we h atta9$ to ! highe/ summit ( k :i* our weak m9ds c rea*1 we f9d t language 9 ! pres5ce ( wond]s s inconceivable has lo/ its =ce1 & numb] its p[] to reckon1 nay1 ev5 ?\ght fails to conceive adequately1 & our conception ( ! :ole dissolves into an a/oni%m5t )\t p[] ( expression--all ! m eloqu5t t x is dumb4 ,ev]y:]e ar\nd u we obs]ve a *a9 ( causes & effects1 ( means & ends1 ( dea? & bir?2 &1 z no?+ has ent]$ ( itself into ! condition 9 :i* we f9d x1 we are con/antly ref]r$ to "s o!r ?+1 :i* itself sugge/s ! same inquiry reg>d+ its cause1 & ?us ! univ]se mu/ s9k into ! abyss ( no?+ness1 unless we admit t1 besides ?is inf9ite *a9 ( cont+5cies1 !re exi/s some?+ t is primal & self-subsi/5t--some?+ :i*1 z ! cause ( ?is ph5om5al _w1 secures its cont9uance & pres]vation4 ,?is highe/ cause--:at magnitude %all we attribute to x8 ,( ! cont5t ( ! _w we are ignorant2 /ill less c we e/imate its magnitude by comp>ison ) ! sph]e ( ! possible4 ,b ?is supreme cause be+ a necessity ( ! human m9d1 :at is !re to prev5t u f attribut+ to x su* a degree ( p]fection z to place x above ! sph]e ( all t is possible8 ,?is we c easily d1 al?\gh only by ! aid ( ! fa9t outl9e ( an ab/ract conception1 by repres5t+ ?is be+ to ourselves z conta9+ 9 itself1 z an individual sub/ance1 all possible p]fection--a conception :i* satisfies t requirem5t ( reason :i* dem&s p>simony 9 pr9ciples1 :i* is free f self-contradiction1 :i* ev5 contributes to ! ext5sion ( ! employm5t ( reason 9 exp]i5ce1 by means ( ! guidance af=d$ by ?is idea to ord] & sy/em1 & :i* 9 no respect conflicts ) any law ( exp]i5ce4 ,?is argum5t always des]ves to be m5tion$ ) respect4 ,x is ! olde/1 ! cle>e/1 & t mo/ 9 con=mity ) ! common reason ( humanity4 ,x animates ! /udy ( nature1 z x itself d]ives its exi/5ce & draws ev] new /r5g? f t s\rce4 ,x introduces aims & ends into a sph]e 9 :i* our obs]vation c\ld n ( itself h discov]$ !m1 & ext5ds our k ( nature1 by direct+ our att5tion to a unity1 ! pr9ciple ( :i* lies beyond nature4 ,?is k ( nature aga9 reacts ^u ?is idea--its cause2 & ?us our belief 9 a div9e au?or ( ! univ]se rises to ! p[] ( an irresi/ible conviction4 ,= ^! reasons x w\ld be utt]ly hopeless to attempt to rob ?is argum5t ( ! au?ority x has always enjoy$4 ,! m9d1 unceas+ly elevat$ by ^! consid]ations1 :i*1 al?\gh empirical1 are s rem>kably p[]ful1 & cont9ually add+ to _! =ce1 w n suff] itself to be depress$ by ! d\bts sugge/$ by subtle speculation2 x te>s itself out ( ?is /ate ( unc]ta9ty1 ! mom5t x ca/s a look ^u ! wondr\s =ms ( nature & ! maje/y ( ! univ]se1 & rises f height to height1 f condition to condition1 till x has elevat$ itself to ! supreme & uncondition$ au?or ( all4 ,b al?\gh we h no?+ to object to ! reasonabl5ess & utility ( ?is proc$ure1 b h r to comm5d & enc\rage x1 we _c approve ( ! claims :i* ?is argum5t advances to demon/rative c]ta9ty & to a reception ^u its own m]its1 ap>t f fav\r or support by o!r argum5ts4 ,nor c x injure ! cause ( morality to endeav\r to l[] ! tone ( ! arrogant sophi/1 & to tea* him t mode/y & mod]ation :i* are ! prop]ties ( a belief t br+s calm & cont5t into ! m9d1 )\t prescrib+ to x an unwor?y subjection4 ,i ma9ta91 !n1 t ! physico-!ological argum5t is insuffici5t ( itself to prove ! exi/5ce ( a ,supreme ,be+1 t x mu/ entru/ ?is to ! ontological argum5t--to :i* x s]ves m]ely z an introduction1 & t1 consequ5tly1 ?is argum5t conta9s ! only possible gr\nd ( pro( 7possess$ by speculative reason7 = ! exi/5ce ( ?is be+4 ,! *ief mom5ta 9 ! physico-!ological argum5t are z foll[3 #a4 ,we obs]ve 9 ! _w manife/ signs ( an arrangem5t full ( purpose1 execut$ ) great wisdom1 & argum5t 9 :ole ( a cont5t indescribably v>i\s1 & ( an ext5t )\t limits4 #b4 ,?is arrangem5t ( means & ends is entirely =eign to ! ?+s exi/+ 9 ! _w--x belongs to !m m]ely z a cont+5t attribute2 9 o!r words1 ! nature ( diff]5t ?+s c\ld n ( itself1 :atev] means 7 employ$1 h>moni\sly t5d t[>ds c]ta9 purposes1 7 !y n *os5 & direct$ = ^! purposes by a rational & dispos+ pr9ciple1 9 accordance ) c]ta9 fundam5tal ideas4 #c4 ,!re exi/s1 !re=e1 a sublime & wise cause 7or sev]al71 :i* is n m]ely a bl9d1 all-p[]ful nature1 produc+ ! be+s & ev5ts :i* fill ! _w 9 unconsci\s fecundity1 b a free & intellig5t cause ( ! _w4 #d4 ,! unity ( ?is cause may be inf]r$ f ! unity ( ! reciprocal relation exi/+ betwe5 ! p>ts ( ! _w1 z portions ( an arti/ic edifice--an inf]5ce :i* all our obs]vation fav\rs1 & all pr9ciples ( analogy support4 ,9 ! above argum5t1 x is inf]r$ f ! analogy ( c]ta9 products ( nature ) ^? ( human art1 :5 x compels ,nature to b5d h]self to its purposes1 z 9 ! case ( a h\se1 a %ip1 or a wat*1 t ! same k9d ( causality--namely1 und]/&+ & w--resides 9 nature4 ,x is also decl>$ t ! int]nal possibility ( ?is freely-act+ nature 7:i* is ! s\rce ( all art1 & p]haps also ( human reason7 is d]ivable f ano!r & sup]human art--a conclusion :i* w\ld p]haps be f\nd incapable ( /&+ ! te/ ( subtle transc5d5tal criticism4 ,b to nei!r ( ^! op9ions %all we at pres5t object4 ,we %all only rem>k t x mu/ be confess$ t1 if we are to discuss ! subject ( cause at all1 we _c proce$ m securely ?an ) ! guidance ( ! analogy subsi/+ betwe5 nature & su* products ( design--^! be+ ! only products ^: causes & modes ( organization are completely kn[n to u4 ,reason w\ld be unable to satisfy h] own requirem5ts1 if %e pass$ f a causality :i* %e does "k1 to obscure & indemon/rable pr9ciples ( explanation :i* %e does n "k4 ,accord+ to ! physico-!ological argum5t1 ! connection & h>mony exi/+ 9 ! _w evid5ce ! cont+5cy ( ! =m m]ely1 b n ( ! matt]1 t is1 ( ! sub/ance ( ! _w4 ,to e/abli% ! tru? ( ! latt] op9ion1 x w\ld be necess>y to prove t all ?+s w\ld be 9 !mselves incapable ( ?is h>mony & ord]1 unless !y 71 ev5 z reg>ds _! sub/ance1 ! product ( a supreme wisdom4 ,b ?is w\ld require v diff]5t gr\nds ( pro( f ^? pres5t$ by ! analogy ) human art4 ,?is pro( c at mo/1 !re=e1 demon/rate ! exi/5ce ( an ar*itect ( ! _w1 ^: ef=ts are limit$ by ! capabilities ( ! mat]ial ) :i* he works1 b n ( a creator ( ! _w1 to :om all ?+s are subject4 ,?us ?is argum5t is utt]ly insuffici5t = ! task be=e u--a demon/ration ( ! exi/5ce ( an all-suffici5t be+4 ,if we wi% to prove ! cont+5cy ( matt]1 we mu/ h rec\rse to a transc5d5tal argum5t1 :i* ! physico-!ological 0 con/ruct$ expressly to avoid4 ,we inf]1 f ! ord] & design visible 9 ! univ]se1 z a disposition ( a ?or\ghly cont+5t "*1 ! exi/5ce ( a cause proportionate !reto4 ,! conception ( ?is cause mu/ conta9 c]ta9 det]m9ate qualities1 & x mu/ !re=e be reg>d$ z ! conception ( a be+ :i* possesses all p[]1 wisdom1 & s on1 9 "o ^w1 all p]fection--! conception1 t is1 ( an all-suffici5t be+4 ,= ! pr$icates ( v great1 a/oni%+1 or immeasurable p[] & excell5ce1 give u no det]m9ate conception ( ! ?+1 nor d !y in=m u :at ! ?+ may be 9 itself4 ,!y m]ely indicate ! relation exi/+ betwe5 ! magnitude ( ! object & ! obs]v]1 :o comp>es x ) himself & ) 8 own p[] ( compreh5sion1 & are m]e expressions ( praise & rev]5ce1 by :i* ! object is ei!r magnifi$1 or ! obs]v+ subject depreciat$ 9 relation to ! object4 ,:]e we h to d ) ! magnitude 7( ! p]fection7 ( a ?+1 we c discov] no det]m9ate conception1 except t :i* compreh5ds all possible p]fection or complet5ess1 & x is only ! total 7omnitudo7 ( reality :i* is completely det]m9$ 9 & ?r\gh its conception alone4 ,n[ x _c be expect$ t any "o w be bold en\gh to decl>e t he has a p]fect insight into ! relation :i* ! magnitude ( ! _w he contemplates be>s 79 its ext5t z well z 9 its cont5t7 to omnipot5ce1 into t ( ! ord] & design 9 ! _w to ! highe/ wisdom1 & t ( ! unity ( ! _w to ! absolute unity ( a ,supreme ,be+4 ,physico-!ology is !re=e incapable ( pres5t+ a det]m9ate conception ( a supreme cause ( ! _w1 & is !re=e insuffici5t z a pr9ciple ( !ology--a !ology :i* is itself to be ! basis ( religion4 ,! atta9m5t ( absolute totality is completely impossible on ! pa? ( empiricism4 ,& yet ?is is ! pa? pursu$ 9 ! physico-!ological argum5t4 ,:at means %all we employ to bridge ! abyss8 ,aft] elevat+ ourselves to admiration ( ! magnitude ( ! p[]1 wisdom1 & o!r attributes ( ! au?or ( ! _w1 & f9d+ we c advance no fur!r1 we leave ! argum5t on empirical gr\nds1 & proce$ to inf] ! cont+5cy ( ! _w f ! ord] & con=mity to aims t are obs]vable 9 x4 ,f ?is cont+5cy we inf]1 by ! help ( transc5d5tal conceptions alone1 ! exi/5ce ( some?+ absolutely necess>y2 &1 /ill advanc+1 proce$ f ! conception ( ! absolute necessity ( ! fir/ cause to ! completely det]m9$ or det]m9+ conception !re(--! conception ( an all-embrac+ reality4 ,?us ! physico-!ological1 fail+ 9 its und]tak+1 recurs 9 its emb>rassm5t to ! cosmological argum5t2 &1 z ?is is m]ely ! ontological argum5t 9 disguise1 x executes its design solely by ! aid ( pure reason1 al?\gh x at fir/ pr(ess$ to h no connection ) ?is faculty & to base its entire proc$ure ^u exp]i5ce alone4 ,! physico-!ologians h !re=e no reason to reg>d ) su* contempt ! transc5d5tal mode ( argum5t1 & to look d[n ^u x1 ) ! conceit ( cle>-sight$ obs]v]s ( nature1 z ! bra9-cobweb ( obscure speculati/s4 ,=1 if !y reflect ^u & exam9e _! own argum5ts1 !y w f9d t1 aft] foll[+ = "s "t ! pa? ( nature & exp]i5ce1 & discov]+ !mselves no ne>] _! object1 !y sudd5ly leave ?is pa? & pass into ! region ( pure possibility1 :]e !y hope to rea* ^u ! w+s ( ideas :at _h elud$ all _! empirical inve/igations4 ,ga9+1 z !y ?9k1 a firm foot+ aft] ?is imm5se leap1 !y ext5d _! det]m9ate conception--into ! possession ( :i* !y h come1 !y "k n h[--ov] ! :ole sph]e ( creation1 & expla9 _! ideal1 :i* is entirely a product ( pure reason1 by illu/rations drawn f exp]i5ce--?\gh 9 a degree mis]ably unwor?y ( ! gr&eur ( ! object1 :ile !y refuse to ackn[l$ge t !y h arriv$ at ?is cognition or hypo!sis by a v diff]5t road f t ( exp]i5ce4 ,?us ! physico-!ological is bas$ ^u ! cosmological1 & ?is ^u ! ontological pro( ( ! exi/5ce ( a ,supreme ,be+2 & z besides ^! ?ree !re is no o!r pa? op5 to speculative reason1 ! ontological pro(1 on ! gr\nd ( pure conceptions ( reason1 is ! only possible "o1 if any pro( ( a proposition s f> transc5d+ ! empirical ex]cise ( ! und]/&+ is possible at all4 ,section ,,vii4 ,critique ( all ,!ology bas$ ^u ,speculative ,pr9ciples ( ,reason ,if by ! t]m !ology ,i und]/& ! cognition ( a primal be+1 t cognition is bas$ ei!r ^u reason alone 7!ologia rationalis7 or ^u revelation 7!ologia revelata74 ,! =m] cogitates its object ei!r by means ( pure transc5d5tal conceptions1 z an ens orig9>ium1 realissimum1 ens entium1 & is t]m$ transc5d5tal !ology2 or1 by means ( a conception d]iv$ f ! nature ( our own m9d1 z a supreme intellig5ce1 & mu/ !n be entitl$ natural !ology4 ,! p]son :o believes 9 a transc5d5tal !ology alone1 is t]m$ a dei/2 he :o ackn[l$ges ! possibility ( a natural !ology also1 a !i/4 ,! =m] admits t we c cognize by pure reason alone ! exi/5ce ( a ,supreme ,be+1 b at ! same "t ma9ta9s t our conception ( ?is be+ is purely transc5d5tal1 & t all we c say ( x is t x possesses all reality1 )\t be+ able to def9e x m closely4 ,! second ass]ts t reason is capable ( pres5t+ u1 f ! analogy ) nature1 ) a m def9ite conception ( ?is be+1 & t its op]ations1 z ! cause ( all ?+s1 are ! results ( intellig5ce & free w4 ,! =m] reg>ds ! ,supreme ,be+ z ! cause ( ! _w--:e!r by ! necessity ( 8 nature1 or z a free ag5t1 is left undet]m9$2 ! latt] consid]s ?is be+ z ! au?or ( ! _w4 ,transc5d5tal !ology aims ei!r at inf]r+ ! exi/5ce ( a ,supreme ,be+ f a g5]al exp]i5ce1 )\t any clos] ref]5ce to ! _w to :i* ?is exp]i5ce belongs1 & 9 ?is case x is call$ cosmo!ology2 or x endeav\rs to cognize ! exi/5ce ( su* a be+1 ?r\gh m]e conceptions1 )\t ! aid ( exp]i5ce1 & is !n t]m$ onto!ology4 ,natural !ology inf]s ! attributes & ! exi/5ce ( an au?or ( ! _w1 f ! con/itution (1 ! ord] & unity obs]vable 91 ! _w1 9 :i* two modes ( causality mu/ be admitt$ to exi/--^? ( nature & fre$om4 ,?us x rises f ?is _w to a supreme intellig5ce1 ei!r z ! pr9ciple ( all natural1 or ( all moral ord] & p]fection4 ,9 ! =m] case x is t]m$ physico-!ology1 9 ! latt]1 e?ical or moral-!ology4#fi #fi ,n !ological e?ics2 = ?is sci5ce conta9s e?ical laws1 :i* presuppose ! exi/5ce ( a ,supreme ,gov]nor ( ! _w2 :ile moral-!ology1 on ! contr>y1 is ! expression ( a conviction ( ! exi/5ce ( a ,supreme ,be+1 f\nd$ ^u e?ical laws4 ,z we are wont to und]/& by ! t]m ,god n m]ely an et]nal nature1 ! op]ations ( :i* are ins5sate & bl9d1 b a ,supreme ,be+1 :o is ! free & intellig5t au?or ( all ?+s1 & z x is ?is latt] view alone t c be ( int]e/ to humanity1 we might1 9 /rict rig\r1 d5y to ! dei/ any belief 9 ,god at all1 & reg>d him m]ely z a ma9ta9] ( ! exi/5ce ( a primal be+ or ?+--! supreme cause ( all o!r ?+s4 ,b1 z no "o ought to be blam$1 m]ely because he does n feel himself ju/ifi$ 9 ma9ta9+ a c]ta9 op9ion1 z if he altoge!r d5i$ its tru? & ass]t$ ! opposite1 x is m correct--z x is less h>%--to say1 ! dei/ believes 9 a ,god1 ! !i/ 9 a liv+ ,god 7summa intellig5tia74 ,we %all n[ proce$ to inve/igate ! s\rces ( all ^! attempts ( reason to e/abli% ! exi/5ce ( a ,supreme ,be+4 ,x may be suffici5t 9 ?is place to def9e !oretical k or cognition z k ( t :i* is1 & practical k z k ( t :i* ought to be4 ,9 ?is view1 ! !oretical employm5t ( reason is t by :i* ,i cognize priori 7z necess>y7 t some?+ is1 :ile ! practical is t by :i* ,i cognize priori :at ought to happ54 ,n[1 if x is an indubitably c]ta91 ?\gh at ! same "t an entirely condition$ tru?1 t some?+ is1 or ought to happ51 ei!r a c]ta9 det]m9ate condition ( ?is tru? is absolutely necess>y1 or su* a condition may be arbitr>ily presuppos$4 ,9 ! =m] case ! condition is po/ulat$ 7p] !s971 9 ! latt] suppos$ 7p] hypo!s974 ,!re are c]ta9 practical laws--^? ( morality--:i* are absolutely necess>y4 ,n[1 if ^! laws necess>ily presuppose ! exi/5ce ( "s be+1 z ! condition ( ! possibility ( _! obligatory p[]1 ?is be+ mu/ be po/ulat$1 because ! condition$1 f :i* we reason to ?is det]m9ate condition1 is itself cogniz$ priori z absolutely necess>y4 ,we %all at "s future "t %[ t ! moral laws n m]ely presuppose ! exi/5ce ( a ,supreme ,be+1 b also1 z !mselves absolutely necess>y 9 a diff]5t relation1 dem& or po/ulate x--al?\gh only f a practical po9t ( view4 ,! discussion ( ?is argum5t we po/pone = ! pres5t4 ,:5 ! "q relates m]ely to t :i* is1 n to t :i* ought to be1 ! condition$ :i* is pres5t$ 9 exp]i5ce is always cogitat$ z cont+5t4 ,= ?is reason its condition _c be reg>d$ z absolutely necess>y1 b m]ely z relatively necess>y1 or r z ne$ful2 ! condition is 9 itself & priori a m]e arbitr>y presupposition 9 aid ( ! cognition1 by reason1 ( ! condition$4 ,if1 !n1 we are to possess a !oretical cognition ( ! absolute necessity ( a ?+1 we _c atta9 to ?is cognition o!rwise ?an priori by means ( conceptions2 :ile x is impossible 9 ?is way to cognize ! exi/5ce ( a cause :i* be>s any relation to an exi/5ce giv5 9 exp]i5ce4 ,!oretical cognition is speculative :5 x relates to an object or c]ta9 conceptions ( an object :i* is n giv5 & _c be discov]$ by means ( exp]i5ce4 ,x is oppos$ to ! cognition ( nature1 :i* conc]ns only ^? objects or pr$icates :i* c be pres5t$ 9 a possible exp]i5ce4 ,! pr9ciple t ev]y?+ :i* happ5s 7! empirically cont+5t7 mu/ h a cause1 is a pr9ciple ( ! cognition ( nature1 b n ( speculative cognition4 ,=1 if we *ange x into an ab/ract pr9ciple1 & deprive x ( its ref]5ce to exp]i5ce & ! empirical1 we %all f9d t x _c ) ju/ice be reg>d$ any long] z a syn!tical proposition1 & t x is impossible to discov] any mode ( transition f t :i* exi/s to some?+ entirely diff]5t--t]m$ cause4 ,nay1 m1 ! conception ( a cause likewise t ( ! cont+5t--loses1 9 ?is speculative mode ( employ+ x1 all significance1 = its objective reality & mean+ are compreh5sible f exp]i5ce alone4 ,:5 f ! exi/5ce ( ! univ]se & ! ?+s 9 x ! exi/5ce ( a cause ( ! univ]se is inf]r$1 reason is proce$+ n 9 ! natural1 b 9 ! speculative me?od4 ,= ! pr9ciple ( ! =m] en\nces1 n t ?+s !mselves or sub/ances1 b only t :i* happ5s or _! /ates--z empirically cont+5t1 h a cause3 ! ass]tion t ! exi/5ce ( sub/ance itself is cont+5t is n ju/ifi$ by exp]i5ce1 x is ! ass]tion ( a reason employ+ its pr9ciples 9 a speculative mann]4 ,if1 aga91 ,i inf] f ! =m ( ! univ]se1 f ! way 9 :i* all ?+s are connect$ & act & react ^u ea* o!r1 ! exi/5ce ( a cause entirely di/9ct f ! univ]se--?is w\ld aga9 be a judgem5t ( purely speculative reason2 because ! object 9 ?is case--! cause--c nev] be an object ( possible exp]i5ce4 ,9 bo? ^! cases ! pr9ciple ( causality1 :i* is valid only 9 ! field ( exp]i5ce--useless & ev5 mean+less beyond ?is region1 w\ld be div]t$ f its prop] de/9ation4 ,n[ ,i ma9ta9 t all attempts ( reason to e/abli% a !ology by ! aid ( speculation alone are fruitless1 t ! pr9ciples ( reason z appli$ to nature d n conduct u to any !ological tru?s1 &1 consequ5tly1 t a rational !ology c h no exi/5ce1 unless x is f\nd$ ^u ! laws ( morality4 ,= all syn!tical pr9ciples ( ! und]/&+ are valid only z imman5t 9 exp]i5ce2 :ile ! cognition ( a ,supreme ,be+ necessitates _! be+ employ$ transc5d5tally1 & ( ?is ! und]/&+ is q incapable4 ,if ! empirical law ( causality is to conduct u to a ,supreme ,be+1 ?is be+ mu/ belong to ! *a9 ( empirical objects--9 :i* case x w\ld be1 l all ph5om5a1 itself condition$4 ,if ! possibility ( pass+ ! limits ( exp]i5ce be admitt$1 by means ( ! dynamical law ( ! relation ( an effect to its cause1 :at k9d ( conception %all we obta9 by ?is proc$ure8 ,c]ta9ly n ! conception ( a ,supreme ,be+1 because exp]i5ce nev] pres5ts u ) ! greate/ ( all possible effects1 & x is only an effect ( ?is "* t c\ld witness to ! exi/5ce ( a correspond+ cause4 ,if1 = ! purpose ( fully satisfy+ ! requirem5ts ( ,reason1 we recognize h] "r to ass]t ! exi/5ce ( a p]fect & absolutely necess>y be+1 ?is c be admitt$ only f fav\r1 & _c be reg>d$ z ! result ( irresi/ible demon/ration4 ,! physico-!ological pro( may add weight to o!rs--if o!r pro(s !re are--by connect+ speculation ) exp]i5ce2 b 9 itself x r prep>es ! m9d = !ological cognition1 & gives x a "r & natural direction1 ?an e/abli%es a sure f\ndation = !ology4 ,x is n[ p]fectly evid5t t transc5d5tal que/ions admit only ( transc5d5tal answ]s--^? pres5t$ priori by pure conceptions )\t ! lea/ empirical admixture4 ,b ! "q 9 ! pres5t case is evid5tly syn!tical--x aims at ! ext5sion ( our cognition beyond ! b\nds ( exp]i5ce--x requires an assurance respect+ ! exi/5ce ( a be+ correspond+ ) ! idea 9 our m9ds1 to :i* no exp]i5ce c ev] be adequate4 ,n[ x has be5 abundantly prov$ t all priori syn!tical cognition is possible only z ! expression ( ! =mal conditions ( a possible exp]i5ce2 & t ! validity ( all pr9ciples dep5ds ^u _! imman5ce 9 ! field ( exp]i5ce1 t is1 _! relation to objects ( empirical cognition or ph5om5a4 ,?us all transc5d5tal proc$ure 9 ref]5ce to speculative !ology is )\t result4 ,if any "o pref]s d\bt+ ! conclusiv5ess ( ! pro(s ( our analytic to los+ ! p]suasion ( ! validity ( ^! old & "t hon\r$ argum5ts1 he at lea/ _c decl9e answ]+ ! "q--h[ he c pass ! limits ( all possible exp]i5ce by ! help ( m]e ideas4 ,if he talks ( new argum5ts1 or ( improvem5ts ^u old argum5ts1 ,i reque/ him to sp>e me4 ,!re is c]ta9ly no great *oice 9 ?is sph]e ( discussion1 z all speculative argum5ts mu/ at la/ look = support to ! ontological1 & ,i h1 !re=e1 v little to fe> f ! argum5tative fecundity ( ! dogmatical def5d]s ( a non-s5su\s reason4 ,)\t look+ ^u myself z a rem>kably combative p]son1 ,i %all n decl9e ! *all5ge to detect ! fallacy & de/roy ! pret5sions ( e attempt ( speculative !ology4 ,& yet ! hope ( bett] =tune nev] des]ts ^? :o are accu/om$ to ! dogmatical mode ( proc$ure4 ,i %all1 !re=e1 re/rict myself to ! simple & equitable dem& t su* reason]s w demon/rate1 f ! nature ( ! human m9d z well z f t ( ! o!r s\rces ( k1 h[ we are to proce$ to ext5d our cognition completely priori1 & to c>ry x to t po9t :]e exp]i5ce ab&ons u1 & no means exi/ ( gu>antee+ ! objective reality ( our conceptions4 ,9 :atev] way ! und]/&+ may h atta9$ to a conception1 ! exi/5ce ( ! object ( ! conception _c be discov]$ 9 x by analysis1 because ! cognition ( ! exi/5ce ( ! object dep5ds ^u ! object's be+ posit$ & giv5 9 itself ap>t f ! conception4 ,b x is utt]ly impossible to g beyond our conception1 )\t ! aid ( exp]i5ce--:i* pres5ts to ! m9d no?+ b ph5om5a1 or to atta9 by ! help ( m]e conceptions to a conviction ( ! exi/5ce ( new k9ds ( objects or sup]natural be+s4 ,b al?\gh pure speculative reason is f> f suffici5t to demon/rate ! exi/5ce ( a ,supreme ,be+1 x is ( ! highe/ utility 9 correct+ our conception ( ?is be+--on ! supposition t we c atta9 to ! cognition ( x by "s o!r means--9 mak+ x consi/5t ) itself & ) all o!r conceptions ( intelligible objects1 cle>+ x f all t is incompatible ) ! conception ( an ens summun1 & elim9at+ f x all limitations or admixtures ( empirical elem5ts4 ,transc5d5tal !ology is /ill !re=e1 not)/&+ its objective insuffici5cy1 ( importance 9 a negative respect2 x is useful z a te/ ( ! proc$ure ( reason :5 engag$ ) pure ideas1 no o!r ?an a transc5d5tal /&>d be+ 9 ?is case admissible4 ,= if1 f a practical po9t ( view1 ! hypo!sis ( a ,supreme & ,all-suffici5t ,be+ is to ma9ta9 its validity )\t opposition1 x mu/ be ( ! highe/ importance to def9e ?is conception 9 a correct & rigor\s mann]--z ! transc5d5tal conception ( a necess>y be+1 to elim9ate all ph5om5al elem5ts 7an?ropomorphism 9 its mo/ ext5d$ signification71 & at ! same "t to ov]fl[ all contradictory ass]tions--be !y a!i/ic1 dei/ic1 or an?ropomorphic4 ,?is is ( c\rse v easy2 z ! same argum5ts :i* demon/rat$ ! inability ( human reason to affirm ! exi/5ce ( a ,supreme ,be+ mu/ be alike suffici5t to prove ! invalidity ( its d5ial4 ,= x is impossible to ga9 f ! pure speculation ( reason demon/ration t !re exi/s no ,supreme ,be+1 z ! gr\nd ( all t exi/s1 or t ?is be+ possesses none ( ^? prop]ties :i* we reg>d z analogical ) ! dynamical qualities ( a ?9k+ be+1 or t1 z ! an?ropomorphi/s w\ld h u believe1 x is subject to all ! limitations :i* s5sibility imposes ^u ^? intellig5ces :i* exi/ 9 ! _w ( exp]i5ce4 ,a ,supreme ,be+ is1 !re=e1 = ! speculative reason1 a m]e ideal1 ?\gh a faultless "o--a conception :i* p]fects & cr[ns ! sy/em ( human cognition1 b ! objective reality ( :i* c nei!r be prov$ nor disprov$ by pure reason4 ,if ?is defect is ev] suppli$ by a moral !ology1 ! problematic transc5d5tal !ology :i* has prec$$1 w h be5 at lea/ s]viceable z demon/rat+ ! m5tal necessity exi/+ = ! conception1 by ! complete det]m9ation ( x :i* x has furni%$1 & ! ceaseless te/+ ( ! conclusions ( a reason (t5 deceiv$ by s5se1 & n always 9 h>mony ) its own ideas4 ,! attributes ( necessity1 inf9itude1 unity1 exi/5ce ap>t f ! _w 7& n z a _w s\l71 et]nity 7free f conditions ( "t71 omnipres5ce 7free f conditions ( space71 omnipot5ce1 & o!rs1 are pure transc5d5tal pr$icates2 & ?us ! accurate conception ( a ,supreme ,be+1 :i* e !ology requires1 is furni%$ by transc5d5tal !ology alone4 ,,app5dix4 ,( ! ,regulative ,employm5t ( ! ,ideas ( ,pure ,reason ,! result ( all ! dialectical attempts ( pure reason n only confirms ! tru? ( :at we h already prov$ 9 our ,transc5d5tal ,analytic1 namely1 t all inf]5ces :i* w\ld lead u beyond ! limits ( exp]i5ce are fallaci\s & gr\ndless1 b x at ! same "t tea*es u ?is important lesson1 t human reason has a natural incl9ation to ov]/ep ^! limits1 & t transc5d5tal ideas are z mu* ! natural prop]ty ( ! reason z categories are ( ! und]/&+4 ,!re exi/s ?is diff]5ce1 h[ev]1 t :ile ! categories nev] mislead u1 outw>d objects be+ always 9 p]fect h>mony !re)1 ideas are ! p>5ts ( irresi/ible illusions1 ! sev]e/ & mo/ subtle criticism be+ requir$ to save u f ! fallacies :i* !y induce4 ,:atev] is gr\nd$ 9 ! nature ( our p[]s w be f\nd to be 9 h>mony ) ! f9al purpose & prop] employm5t ( ^! p[]s1 :5 once we h discov]$ _! true direction & aim4 ,we are entitl$ to suppose1 !re=e1 t !re exi/s a mode ( employ+ transc5d5tal ideas :i* is prop] & imman5t2 al?\gh1 :5 we mi/ake _! mean+1 & reg>d !m z conceptions ( actual ?+s1 _! mode ( application is transc5d5t & delusive4 ,= x is n ! idea itself1 b only ! employm5t ( ! idea 9 relation to possible exp]i5ce1 t is transc5d5t or imman5t4 ,an idea is employ$ transc5d5tly1 :5 x is appli$ to an object falsely believ$ to be adequate ) & to correspond to x2 imman5tly1 :5 x is appli$ solely to ! employm5t ( ! und]/&+ 9 ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce4 ,?us all errors ( subreptio--( misapplication1 are to be ascrib$ to defects ( judgem5t1 & n to und]/&+ or reason4 ,reason nev] has an imm$iate relation to an object2 x relates imm$iately to ! und]/&+ alone4 ,x is only ?r\gh ! und]/&+ t x c be employ$ 9 ! field ( exp]i5ce4 ,x does n =m conceptions ( objects1 x m]ely arranges !m & gives to !m t unity :i* !y are capable ( possess+ :5 ! sph]e ( _! application has be5 ext5d$ z widely z possible4 ,reason avails itself ( ! conception ( ! und]/&+ = ! sole purpose ( produc+ totality 9 ! diff]5t s]ies4 ,?is totality ! und]/&+ does n conc]n itself )2 its only occupation is ! connection ( exp]i5ces1 by :i* s]ies ( conditions 9 accordance ) conceptions are e/abli%$4 ,! object ( reason is1 !re=e1 ! und]/&+ & its prop] de/9ation4 ,z ! latt] br+s unity into ! div]sity ( objects by means ( its conceptions1 s ! =m] br+s unity into ! div]sity ( conceptions by means ( ideas2 z x sets ! f9al aim ( a collective unity to ! op]ations ( ! und]/&+1 :i* )\t ?is occupies itself ) a di/ributive unity alone4 ,i accord+ly ma9ta9 t transc5d5tal ideas c nev] be employ$ z con/itutive ideas1 t !y _c be conceptions ( objects1 & t1 :5 ?us consid]$1 !y assume a fallaci\s & dialectical "*4 ,b1 on ! o!r h&1 !y are capable ( an admirable & indisp5sably necess>y application to objects--z regulative ideas1 direct+ ! und]/&+ to a c]ta9 aim1 ! guid+ l9es t[>ds :i* all its laws foll[1 & 9 :i* !y all meet 9 "o po9t4 ,?is po9t--?\gh a m]e idea 7focus imag9>ius71 t is1 n a po9t f :i* ! conceptions ( ! und]/&+ d really proce$1 = x lies beyond ! sph]e ( possible exp]i5ce--s]ves1 not)/&+1 to give to ^! conceptions ! greate/ possible unity comb9$ ) ! greate/ possible ext5sion4 ,h5ce arises ! natural illusion :i* induces u to believe t ^! l9es proce$ f an object :i* lies out ( ! sph]e ( empirical cognition1 j z objects reflect$ 9 a mirror appe> to be beh9d x4 ,b ?is illusion--:i* we may h9d] f impos+ ^u u--is necess>y & unavoidable1 if we desire to see1 n only ^? objects :i* lie be=e u1 b ^? :i* are at a great di/ance beh9d u2 t is to say1 :51 9 ! pres5t case1 we direct ! aims ( ! und]/&+1 beyond e giv5 exp]i5ce1 t[>ds an ext5sion z great z c possibly be atta9$4 ,if we review our cognitions 9 _! entire ext5t1 we %all f9d t ! peculi> bus9ess ( reason is to arrange !m into a sy/em1 t is to say1 to give !m connection accord+ to a pr9ciple4 ,?is unity presupposes an idea--! idea ( ! =m ( a :ole 7( cognition71 prec$+ ! det]m9ate cognition ( ! p>ts1 & conta9+ ! conditions :i* det]m9e priori to e "p its place & relation to ! o!r p>ts ( ! :ole sy/em4 ,?is idea1 accord+ly1 dem&s complete unity 9 ! cognition ( ! und]/&+--n ! unity ( a cont+5t aggregate1 b t ( a sy/em connect$ accord+ to necess>y laws4 ,x _c be affirm$ ) propriety t ?is idea is a conception ( an object2 x is m]ely a conception ( ! complete unity ( ! conceptions ( objects1 9 s f> z ?is unity is available to ! und]/&+ z a rule4 ,su* conceptions ( reason are n d]iv$ f nature2 on ! contr>y1 we employ !m = ! int]rogation & inve/igation ( nature1 & reg>d our cognition z defective s long z x is n adequate to !m4 ,we admit t su* a ?+ z pure e>?1 pure wat]1 or pure air1 is n to be discov]$4 ,& yet we require ^! conceptions 7:i* h _! orig9 9 ! reason1 s f> z reg>ds _! absolute purity & complet5ess7 = ! purpose ( det]m9+ ! %>e :i* ea* ( ^! natural causes has 9 e ph5om5on4 ,?us ! diff]5t k9ds ( matt] are all ref]r$ to e>?s1 z m]e weight2 to salts & inflammable bodies1 z pure =ce2 & f9ally1 to wat] & air1 z ! vehicula ( ! =m]1 or ! ma*9es employ$ by !m 9 _! op]ations--= ! purpose ( expla9+ ! *emical action & reaction ( bodies 9 accordance ) ! idea ( a me*anism4 ,=1 al?\gh n actually s express$1 ! influ5ce ( su* ideas ( reason is v obs]vable 9 ! proc$ure ( natural philosoph]s4 ,if reason is ! faculty ( d$uc+ ! p>ticul> f ! g5]al1 & if ! g5]al be c]ta9 9 se & giv51 x is only necess>y t ! judgem5t %\ld subsume ! p>ticul> "u ! g5]al1 ! p>ticul> be+ ?us necess>ily det]m9$4 ,i %all t]m ?is ! demon/rative or apodeictic employm5t ( reason4 ,if1 h[ev]1 ! g5]al is admitt$ z problematical only1 & is a m]e idea1 ! p>ticul> case is c]ta91 b ! univ]sality ( ! rule :i* applies to ?is p>ticul> case rema9s a problem4 ,sev]al p>ticul> cases1 ! c]ta9ty ( :i* is beyond d\bt1 are !n tak5 & exam9$1 = ! purpose ( discov]+ :e!r ! rule is applicable to !m2 & if x appe>s t all ! p>ticul> cases :i* c be collect$ foll[ f ! rule1 its univ]sality is inf]r$1 & at ! same "t1 all ! causes :i* h n1 or _c be pres5t$ to our obs]vation1 are conclud$ to be ( ! same "* ) ^? :i* we h obs]v$4 ,?is ,i %all t]m ! hypo!tical employm5t ( ! reason4 ,! hypo!tical ex]cise ( reason by ! aid ( ideas employ$ z problematical conceptions is prop]ly n con/itutive4 ,t is to say1 if we consid] ! subject /rictly1 ! tru? ( ! rule1 :i* has be5 employ$ z an hypo!sis1 does n foll[ f ! use t is made ( x by reason4 ,= h[ c we "k all ! possible cases t may arise8 "s ( :i* may1 h[ev]1 prove exceptions to ! univ]sality ( ! rule4 ,?is employm5t ( reason is m]ely regulative1 & its sole aim is ! introduction ( unity into ! aggregate ( our p>ticul> cognitions1 & !reby ! approximat+ ( ! rule to univ]sality4 ,! object ( ! hypo!tical employm5t ( reason is !re=e ! sy/ematic unity ( cognitions2 & ?is unity is ! crit]ion ( ! tru? ( a rule4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ?is sy/ematic unity--z a m]e idea--is 9 fact m]ely a unity project$1 n to be reg>d$ z giv51 b only 9 ! light ( a problem--a problem :i* s]ves1 h[ev]1 z a pr9ciple = ! v>i\s & p>ticul> ex]cise ( ! und]/&+ 9 exp]i5ce1 directs x ) reg>d to ^? cases :i* are n pres5t$ to our obs]vation1 & introduces h>mony & consi/5cy into all its op]ations4 ,all t we c be c]ta9 ( f ! above consid]ations is t ?is sy/ematic unity is a logical pr9ciple1 ^: aim is to assi/ ! und]/&+1 :]e x _c ( itself atta9 to rules1 by means ( ideas1 to br+ all ^! v>i\s rules "u "o pr9ciple1 & ?us to ensure ! mo/ complete consi/5cy & connection t c be atta9$4 ,b ! ass]tion t objects & ! und]/&+ by :i* !y are cogniz$ are s con/itut$ z to be det]m9$ to sy/ematic unity1 t ?is may be po/ulat$ priori1 )\t any ref]5ce to ! int]e/ ( reason1 & t we are ju/ifi$ 9 decl>+ all possible cognitions--empirical & o!rs--to possess sy/ematic unity1 & to be subject to g5]al pr9ciples f :i*1 not)/&+ _! v>i\s "*1 !y are all d]ivable1--su* an ass]tion c be f\nd$ only ^u a transc5d5tal pr9ciple ( reason1 :i* w\ld r5d] ?is sy/ematic unity n subjectively & logically--9 its "* ( a me?od1 b objectively necess>y4 ,we %all illu/rate ?is by an example4 ,! conceptions ( ! und]/&+ make u acqua9t$1 among _m o!r k9ds ( unity1 ) t ( ! causality ( a sub/ance1 :i* is t]m$ p[]4 ,! diff]5t ph5om5al manife/ations ( ! same sub/ance appe> at fir/ view to be s v dissimil> t we are incl9$ to assume ! exi/5ce ( j z _m diff]5t p[]s z !re are diff]5t effects--z1 9 ! case ( ! human m9d1 we h feel+1 consci\sness1 imag9ation1 memory1 wit1 analysis1 pleasure1 desire & s on4 ,n[ we are requir$ by a logical maxim to r$uce ^! diff]5ces to z small a numb] z possible1 by comp>+ !m & discov]+ ! hidd5 id5tity :i* exi/s4 ,we mu/ inquire1 = example1 :e!r or n imag9ation 7connect$ ) consci\sness71 memory1 wit1 & analysis are n m]ely diff]5t =ms ( und]/&+ & reason4 ,! idea ( a fundam5tal p[]1 ! exi/5ce ( :i* no ef=t ( logic c assure u (1 is ! problem to be solv$1 = ! sy/ematic repres5tation ( ! exi/+ v>iety ( p[]s4 ,! logical pr9ciple ( reason requires u to produce z great a unity z is possible 9 ! sy/em ( our cognitions2 & ! m ! ph5om5a ( ?is & ! o!r p[] are f\nd to be id5tical1 ! m probable does x become1 t !y are no?+ b diff]5t manife/ations ( "o & ! same p[]1 :i* may be call$1 relatively speak+1 a fundam5tal p[]4 ,& s ) o!r cases4 ,^! relatively fundam5tal p[]s mu/ aga9 be comp>$ ) ea* o!r1 to discov]1 if possible1 ! "o radical & absolutely fundam5tal p[] ( :i* !y are b ! manife/ations4 ,b ?is unity is purely hypo!tical4 ,x is n ma9ta9$1 t ?is unity does really exi/1 b t we mu/1 9 ! int]e/ ( reason1 t is1 = ! e/abli%m5t ( pr9ciples = ! v>i\s rules pres5t$ by exp]i5ce1 try to discov] & introduce x1 s f> z is practicable1 into ! sph]e ( our cognitions4 ,b ! transc5d5tal employm5t ( ! und]/&+ w\ld lead u to believe t ?is idea ( a fundam5tal p[] is n problematical1 b t x possesses objective reality1 & ?us ! sy/ematic unity ( ! v>i\s p[]s or =ces 9 a sub/ance is dem&$ by ! und]/&+ & erect$ into an apodeictic or necess>y pr9ciple4 ,=1 )\t hav+ attempt$ to discov] ! unity ( ! v>i\s p[]s exi/+ 9 nature1 nay1 ev5 aft] all our attempts h fail$1 we not)/&+ presuppose t x does exi/1 & may be1 soon] or lat]1 discov]$4 ,& ?is reason does1 n only1 z 9 ! case above adduc$1 ) reg>d to ! unity ( sub/ance1 b :]e _m sub/ances1 al?\gh all to a c]ta9 ext5t homog5e\s1 are discov]able1 z 9 ! case ( matt] 9 g5]al4 ,"h also does reason presuppose ! exi/5ce ( ! sy/ematic unity ( v>i\s p[]s--inasmu* z p>ticul> laws ( nature are subord9ate to g5]al laws2 & p>simony 9 pr9ciples is n m]ely an economical pr9ciple ( reason1 b an ess5tial law ( nature4 ,we _c und]/&1 9 fact1 h[ a logical pr9ciple ( unity c ( "r exi/1 unless we presuppose a transc5d5tal pr9ciple1 by :i* su* a sy/ematic unit--z a prop]ty ( objects !mselves--is reg>d$ z necess>y priori4 ,= ) :at "r c reason1 9 its logical ex]cise1 require u to reg>d ! v>iety ( =ces :i* nature displays1 z 9 effect a disguis$ unity1 & to d$uce !m f "o fundam5tal =ce or p[]1 :5 %e is free to admit t x is j z possible t all =ces %\ld be diff]5t 9 k9d1 & t a sy/ematic unity is n con=mable to ! design ( nature8 ,9 ?is view ( ! case1 reason w\ld be proce$+ 9 direct opposition to h] own de/9ation1 by sett+ z an aim an idea :i* entirely conflicts ) ! proc$ure & arrangem5t ( nature4 ,nei!r c we ass]t t reason has previ\sly inf]r$ ?is unity f ! cont+5t nature ( ph5om5a4 ,= ! law ( reason :i* requires u to seek = ?is unity is a necess>y law1 inasmu* z )\t x we %\ld n possess a faculty ( reason1 nor )\t reason a consi/5t & self-accordant mode ( employ+ ! und]/&+1 nor1 9 ! abs5ce ( ?is1 any prop] & suffici5t crit]ion ( empirical tru?4 ,9 relation to ?is crit]ion1 !re=e1 we mu/ suppose ! idea ( ! sy/ematic unity ( nature to possess objective validity & necessity4 ,we f9d ?is transc5d5tal presupposition lurk+ 9 diff]5t =ms 9 ! pr9ciples ( philosoph]s1 al?\gh !y h nei!r recogniz$ x nor confess$ to !mselves its pres5ce4 ,t ! div]sities ( individual ?+s d n exclude id5tity ( species1 t ! v>i\s species mu/ be consid]$ z m]ely diff]5t det]m9ations ( a few g5]a1 & ^! aga9 z divisions ( /ill high] races1 & s on--t1 accord+ly1 a c]ta9 sy/ematic unity ( all possible empirical conceptions1 9 s f> z !y c be d$uc$ f high] & m g5]al conceptions1 mu/ be s\ght =1 is a s*ola/ic maxim or logical pr9ciple1 )\t :i* reason c\ld n be employ$ by u4 ,= we c inf] ! p>ticul> f ! g5]al1 only 9 s f> z g5]al prop]ties ( ?+s con/itute ! f\ndation ^u :i* ! p>ticul> re/4 ,t ! same unity exi/s 9 nature is presuppos$ by philosoph]s 9 ! well-kn[n s*ola/ic maxim1 :i* =bids u unnecess>ily to augm5t ! numb] ( entities or pr9ciples 7entia praet] necessitatem non esse multiplic&a74 ,?is maxim ass]ts t nature h]self assi/s 9 ! e/abli%m5t ( ?is unity ( reason1 & t ! seem+ly inf9ite div]sity ( ph5om5a %\ld n det] u f ! expectation ( discov]+ b5ea? ?is div]sity a unity ( fundam5tal prop]ties1 ( :i* ! a=esaid v>iety is b a m or less det]m9$ =m4 ,?is unity1 al?\gh a m]e idea1 ?9k]s h f\nd x necess>y r to mod]ate ! desire ?an to enc\rage x4 ,x 0 consid]$ a great /ep :5 *emi/s 7 able to r$uce all salts to two ma9 g5]a--acids & alkalis2 & !y reg>d ?is diff]5ce z itself a m]e v>iety1 or diff]5t manife/ation ( "o & ! same fundam5tal mat]ial4 ,! diff]5t k9ds ( e>?s 7/ones & ev5 metals7 *emi/s h endeav\r$ to r$uce to ?ree1 & aft]w>ds to two2 b /ill1 n cont5t ) ?is advance1 !y _c b ?9k t beh9d ^! div]sities !re lurks b "o g5us--nay1 t ev5 salts & e>?s h a common pr9ciple4 ,x might be conjectur$ t ?is is m]ely an economical plan ( reason1 = ! purpose ( sp>+ itself tr\ble1 & an attempt ( a purely hypo!tical "*1 :i*1 :5 successful1 gives an appe>ance ( probability to ! pr9ciple ( explanation employ$ by ! reason4 ,b a selfi% purpose ( ?is k9d is easily to be di/+ui%$ f ! idea1 accord+ to :i* e "o presupposes t ?is unity is 9 accordance ) ! laws ( nature1 & t reason does n 9 ?is case reque/1 b requires1 al?\gh we are q unable to det]m9e ! prop] limits ( ?is unity4 ,if ! div]sity exi/+ 9 ph5om5a--a div]sity n ( =m 7= 9 ?is !y may be simil>7 b ( cont5t--7 s great t ! subtle/ human reason c\ld nev] by comp>ison discov] 9 !m ! lea/ simil>ity 7:i* is n impossible71 9 ?is case ! logical law ( g5]a w\ld be )\t f\ndation1 ! conception ( a g5us1 nay1 all g5]al conceptions w\ld be impossible1 & ! faculty ( ! und]/&+1 ! ex]cise ( :i* is re/rict$ to ! _w ( conceptions1 c\ld n exi/4 ,! logical pr9ciple ( g5]a1 accord+ly1 if x is to be appli$ to nature 7by :i* ,i mean objects pres5t$ to our s5ses71 presupposes a transc5d5tal pr9ciple4 ,9 accordance ) ?is pr9ciple1 homog5eity is necess>ily presuppos$ 9 ! v>iety ( ph5om5a 7al?\gh we are unable to det]m9e priori ! degree ( ?is homog5eity71 because )\t x no empirical conceptions1 & consequ5tly no exp]i5ce1 w\ld be possible4 ,! logical pr9ciple ( g5]a1 :i* dem&s id5tity 9 ph5om5a1 is balanc$ by ano!r pr9ciple--t ( species1 :i* requires v>iety & div]sity 9 ?+s1 not)/&+ _! accordance 9 ! same g5us1 & directs ! und]/&+ to att5d to ! "o no less ?an to ! o!r4 ,?is pr9ciple 7( ! faculty ( di/9ction7 acts z a *eck ^u ! reason & reason exhibits 9 ?is respect a d\ble & conflict+ int]e/--on ! "o h&1 ! int]e/ 9 ! ext5t 7! int]e/ ( g5]ality7 9 relation to g5]a2 on ! o!r1 t ( ! cont5t 7! int]e/ ( individuality7 9 relation to ! v>iety ( species4 ,9 ! =m] case1 ! und]/&+ cogitates m "u its conceptions1 9 ! latt] x cogitates m 9 !m4 ,?is di/9ction manife/s itself likewise 9 ! habits ( ?\ght peculi> to natural philosoph]s1 "s ( :om--! rem>kably speculative heads--may be said to be ho/ile to het]og5eity 9 ph5om5a1 & h _! eyes always fix$ on ! unity ( g5]a1 :ile o!rs--) a /rong empirical t5d5cy--aim unceas+ly at ! analysis ( ph5om5a1 & almo/ de/roy 9 u ! hope ( ev] be+ able to e/imate ! "* ( ^! accord+ to g5]al pr9ciples4 ,! latt] mode ( ?\ght is evid5tly bas$ ^u a logical pr9ciple1 ! aim ( :i* is ! sy/ematic complet5ess ( all cognitions4 ,?is pr9ciple au?orizes me1 beg9n+ at ! g5us1 to desc5d to ! v>i\s & div]se conta9$ "u x2 & 9 ?is way ext5sion1 z 9 ! =m] case unity1 is assur$ to ! sy/em4 ,= if we m]ely exam9e ! sph]e ( ! conception :i* indicates a g5us1 we _c discov] h[ f> x is possible to proce$ 9 ! division ( t sph]e2 j z x is impossible1 f ! consid]ation ( ! space occupi$ by matt]1 to det]m9e h[ f> we c proce$ 9 ! division ( x4 ,h5ce e g5us mu/ conta9 diff]5t species1 & ^! aga9 diff]5t subspecies2 & z ea* ( ! latt] mu/ itself conta9 a sph]e 7mu/ be ( a c]ta9 ext5t1 z a conceptus communis71 reason dem&s t no species or sub-species is to be consid]$ z ! l[e/ possible4 ,= a species or sub-species1 be+ always a conception1 :i* conta9s only :at is common to a numb] ( diff]5t ?+s1 does n completely det]m9e any individual ?+1 or relate imm$iately to x1 & mu/ consequ5tly conta9 o!r conceptions1 t is1 o!r sub-species "u x4 ,?is law ( specification may be ?us express$3 entium v>ietates non tem]e sunt m9u5dae4 ,b x is easy to see t ?is logical law w\ld likewise be )\t s5se or application1 7 x n bas$ ^u a transc5d5tal law ( specification1 :i* c]ta9ly does n require t ! diff]5ces exi/+ 9 ph5om5a %\ld be inf9ite 9 numb]1 = ! logical pr9ciple1 :i* m]ely ma9ta9s ! indet]m9at5ess ( ! logical sph]e ( a conception1 9 relation to its possible division1 does n au?orize ?is /atem5t2 :ile x does impose ^u ! und]/&+ ! duty ( se>*+ = subspecies to e species1 & m9or diff]5ces 9 e diff]5ce4 ,=1 7 !re no l[] conceptions1 nei!r c\ld !re be any high]4 ,n[ ! und]/&+ cognizes only by means ( conceptions2 consequ5tly1 h[ f> soev] x may proce$ 9 division1 nev] by m]e intuition1 b always by l[] & l[] conceptions4 ,! cognition ( ph5om5a 9 _! complete det]m9ation 7:i* is possible only by means ( ! und]/&+7 requires an unceas+ly cont9u$ specification ( conceptions1 & a progression to ev] small] diff]5ces1 ( :i* ab/raction _h be5 made 9 ! conception ( ! species1 & /ill m 9 t ( ! g5us4 ,?is law ( specification _c be d$uc$ f exp]i5ce2 x c nev] pres5t u ) a pr9ciple ( s univ]sal an application4 ,empirical specification v soon /ops 9 its di/9ction ( div]sities1 & requires ! guidance ( ! transc5d5tal law1 z a pr9ciple ( ! reason--a law :i* imposes on u ! necessity ( nev] ceas+ 9 our se>* = diff]5ces1 ev5 al?\gh ^! may n pres5t !mselves to ! s5ses4 ,t absorb5t e>?s are ( diff]5t k9ds c\ld only be discov]$ by obey+ ! anticipatory law ( reason1 :i* imposes ^u ! und]/&+ ! task ( discov]+ ! diff]5ces exi/+ betwe5 ^! e>?s1 & supposes t nature is ri*] 9 sub/ances ?an our s5ses w\ld indicate4 ,! faculty ( ! und]/&+ belongs to u j z mu* "u ! presupposition ( diff]5ces 9 ! objects ( nature1 z "u ! condition t ^! objects are homog5e\s1 because we c\ld n possess conceptions1 nor make any use ( our und]/&+1 7 n ! ph5om5a includ$ "u ^! conceptions 9 "s respects dissimil>1 z well z simil>1 9 _! "*4 ,reason ?us prep>es ! sph]e ( ! und]/&+ = ! op]ations ( ?is faculty3 #a4 ,by ! pr9ciple ( ! homog5eity ( ! div]se 9 high] g5]a2 #b4 ,by ! pr9ciple ( ! v>iety ( ! homog5e\s 9 l[] species2 &1 to complete ! sy/ematic unity1 x adds1 #c4 ,a law ( ! aff9ity ( all conceptions :i* prescribes a cont9u\s transition f "o species to e o!r by ! gradual increase ( div]sity4 ,we may t]m ^! ! pr9ciples ( ! homog5eity1 ! specification1 & ! cont9uity ( =ms4 ,! latt] results f ! union ( ! two =m]1 inasmu* z we reg>d ! sy/ematic connection z complete 9 ?\ght1 9 ! asc5t to high] g5]a1 z well z 9 ! desc5t to l[] species4 ,= all div]sities mu/ be relat$ to ea* o!r1 z !y all spr+ f "o highe/ g5us1 desc5d+ ?r\gh ! diff]5t gradations ( a m & m ext5d$ det]m9ation4 ,we may illu/rate ! sy/ematic unity produc$ by ! ?ree logical pr9ciples 9 ! foll[+ mann]4 ,e conception may be reg>d$ z a po9t1 :i*1 z ! /&po9t ( a spectator1 has a c]ta9 horizon1 :i* may be said to enclose a numb] ( ?+s t may be view$1 s to speak1 f t c5tre4 ,)9 ?is horizon !re mu/ be an inf9ite numb] ( o!r po9ts1 ea* ( :i* has its own horizon1 small] & m circumscrib$2 9 o!r words1 e species conta9s sub-species1 accord+ to ! pr9ciple ( specification1 & ! logical horizon consi/s ( small] horizons 7subspecies71 b n ( po9ts 7individuals71 :i* possess no ext5t4 ,b diff]5t horizons or g5]a1 :i* include "u !m s _m conceptions1 may h "o common horizon1 f :i*1 z f a mid-po9t1 !y may be survey$2 & we may proce$ ?us1 till we arrive at ! highe/ g5us1 or univ]sal & true horizon1 :i* is det]m9$ by ! highe/ conception1 & :i* conta9s "u itself all diff]5ces & v>ieties1 z g5]a1 species1 & subspecies4 ,to ?is highe/ /&po9t ,i am conduct$ by ! law ( homog5eity1 z to all l[] & m v>i\sly-det]m9$ conceptions by ! law ( specification4 ,n[ z 9 ?is way !re exi/s no void 9 ! :ole ext5t ( all possible conceptions1 & z out ( ! sph]e ( ^! ! m9d c discov] no?+1 !re arises f ! presupposition ( ! univ]sal horizon above m5tion$1 & its complete division1 ! pr9ciple3 ,non datur vacuum =m>um4 ,?is pr9ciple ass]ts t !re are n diff]5t primitive & highe/ g5]a1 :i* /& isolat$1 s to speak1 f ea* o!r1 b all ! v>i\s g5]a are m]e divisions & limitations ( "o highe/ & univ]sal g5us2 & h5ce foll[s imm$iately ! pr9ciple3 ,datur cont9uum =m>um4 ,?is pr9ciple indicates t all diff]5ces ( species limit ea* o!r1 & d n admit ( transition f "o to ano!r by a saltus1 b only ?r\gh small] degrees ( ! diff]5ce betwe5 ! "o species & ! o!r4 ,9 "o ^w1 !re are no species or sub-species :i* 79 ! view ( reason7 are ! ne>e/ possible to ea* o!r2 int]m$iate species or sub-species be+ always possible1 ! diff]5ce ( :i* f ea* ( ! =m] is always small] ?an ! diff]5ce exi/+ betwe5 ^!4 ,! fir/ law1 !re=e1 directs u to avoid ! notion t !re exi/ diff]5t primal g5]a1 & en\nces ! fact ( p]fect homog5eity2 ! second imposes a *eck ^u ?is t5d5cy to unity & prescribes ! di/9ction ( sub-species1 be=e proce$+ to apply our g5]al conceptions to individuals4 ,! ?ird unites bo? ! =m]1 by en\nc+ ! fact ( homog5eity z exi/+ ev5 9 ! mo/ v>i\s div]sity1 by means ( ! gradual transition f "o species to ano!r4 ,?us x indicates a relation%ip betwe5 ! diff]5t bran*es or species1 9 s f> z !y all spr+ f ! same /em4 ,b ?is logical law ( ! cont9uum speci]um 7=m>um logic>um7 presupposes a transc5d5tal pr9ciple 7lex cont9ui 9 natura71 )\t :i* ! und]/&+ might be l$ into error1 by foll[+ ! guidance ( ! =m]1 & ?us p]haps pursu+ a pa? contr>y to t prescrib$ by nature4 ,?is law mu/1 consequ5tly1 be bas$ ^u pure transc5d5tal1 & n ^u empirical1 consid]ations4 ,=1 9 ! latt] case1 x w\ld come lat] ?an ! sy/em2 :]eas x is really itself ! p>5t ( all t is sy/ematic 9 our cognition ( nature4 ,^! pr9ciples are n m]e hypo!ses employ$ = ! purpose ( exp]im5t+ ^u nature2 al?\gh :5 any su* connection is discov]$1 x =ms a solid gr\nd = reg>d+ ! hypo!tical unity z valid 9 ! sph]e ( nature--& ?us !y are 9 ?is respect n )\t _! use4 ,b we g f>!r1 & ma9ta9 t x is manife/ t ^! pr9ciples ( p>simony 9 fundam5tal causes1 v>iety 9 effects1 & aff9ity 9 ph5om5a1 are 9 accordance bo? ) reason & nature1 & t !y are n m]e me?ods or plans devis$ = ! purpose ( assi/+ u 9 our obs]vation ( ! ext]nal _w4 ,b x is pla9 t ?is cont9uity ( =ms is a m]e idea1 to :i* no adequate object c be discov]$ 9 exp]i5ce4 ,& ?is = two reasons4 ,fir/1 because ! species 9 nature are really divid$1 & h5ce =m quanta discreta2 &1 if ! gradual progression ?r\gh _! aff9ity 7 cont9u\s1 ! int]m$iate memb]s ly+ betwe5 two giv5 species mu/ be inf9ite 9 numb]1 :i* is impossible4 ,secondly1 because we _c make any det]m9ate empirical use ( ?is law1 inasmu* z x does n pres5t u ) any crit]ion ( aff9ity :i* c\ld aid u 9 det]m9+ h[ f> we ought to pursue ! graduation ( diff]5ces3 x m]ely conta9s a g5]al indication t x is our duty to seek = &1 if possible1 to discov] !m4 ,:5 we arrange ^! pr9ciples ( sy/ematic unity 9 ! ord] con=mable to _! employm5t 9 exp]i5ce1 !y w /& ?us3 ,v>iety1 ,aff9ity1 ,unity1 ea* ( !m1 z ideas1 be+ tak5 9 ! highe/ degree ( _! complet5ess4 ,reason presupposes ! exi/5ce ( cognitions ( ! und]/&+1 :i* h a direct relation to exp]i5ce1 & aims at ! ideal unity ( ^! cognitions--a unity :i* f> transc5ds all exp]i5ce or empirical notions4 ,! aff9ity ( ! div]se1 not)/&+ ! diff]5ces exi/+ betwe5 its p>ts1 has a relation to ?+s1 b a /ill clos] "o to ! m]e prop]ties & p[]s ( ?+s4 ,= example1 imp]fect exp]i5ce may repres5t ! orbits ( ! planets z circul>4 ,b we discov] v>iations f ?is c\rse1 & we proce$ to suppose t ! planets revolve 9 a pa? :i*1 if n a circle1 is ( a "* v simil> to x4 ,t is to say1 ! movem5ts ( ^? planets :i* d n =m a circle w approximate m or less to ! prop]ties ( a circle1 & probably =m an ellipse4 ,! pa?s ( comets exhibit /ill great] v>iations1 =1 s f> z our obs]vation ext5ds1 !y d n return ^u _! own c\rse 9 a circle or ellipse4 ,b we proce$ to ! conjecture t comets describe a p>abola1 a figure :i* is closely alli$ to ! ellipse4 ,9 fact1 a p>abola is m]ely an ellipse1 ) its long] axis produc$ to an indef9ite ext5t4 ,?us ^! pr9ciples conduct u to a unity 9 ! g5]a ( ! =ms ( ^! orbits1 &1 proce$+ f>!r1 to a unity z reg>ds ! cause ( ! motions ( ! heav5ly bodies--t is1 gravitation4 ,b we g on ext5d+ our conque/s ov] nature1 & endeav\r to expla9 all seem+ deviations f ^! rules1 & ev5 make additions to our sy/em :i* no exp]i5ce c ev] sub/antiate--= example1 ! !ory1 9 aff9ity ) t ( ellipses1 ( hyp]bolic pa?s ( comets1 pursu+ :i*1 ^! bodies leave our sol> sy/em &1 pass+ f sun to sun1 unite ! mo/ di/ant p>ts ( ! inf9ite univ]se1 :i* is held toge!r by ! same mov+ p[]4 ,! mo/ rem>kable circum/ance connect$ ) ^! pr9ciples is t !y seem to be transc5d5tal1 &1 al?\gh only conta9+ ideas = ! guidance ( ! empirical ex]cise ( reason1 & al?\gh ?is empirical employm5t /&s to ^! ideas 9 an asymptotic relation alone 7to use a ma!matical t]m71 t is1 cont9ually approximate1 )\t ev] be+ able to atta9 to !m1 !y possess1 not)/&+1 z priori syn!tical propositions1 objective ?\gh undet]m9$ validity1 & are available z rules = possible exp]i5ce4 ,9 ! elaboration ( our exp]i5ce1 !y may also be employ$ ) great advantage1 z heuri/ic#gj pr9ciples4 ,a transc5d5tal d$uction ( !m _c be made2 su* a d$uction be+ always impossible 9 ! case ( ideas1 z has be5 already %[n4 #gj ,f ! ,greek1 eurhioko4 ,we di/+ui%$1 9 ! ,transc5d5tal ,analytic1 ! dynamical pr9ciples ( ! und]/&+1 :i* are regulative pr9ciples ( intuition1 f ! ma!matical1 :i* are con/itutive pr9ciples ( intuition4 ,^! dynamical laws are1 h[ev]1 con/itutive 9 relation to exp]i5ce1 inasmu* z !y r5d] ! conceptions )\t :i* exp]i5ce c\ld n exi/ possible priori4 ,b ! pr9ciples ( pure reason _c be con/itutive ev5 9 reg>d to empirical conceptions1 because no s5su\s s*ema correspond+ to !m c be discov]$1 & !y _c !re=e h an object 9 concreto4 ,n[1 if ,i grant t !y _c be employ$ 9 ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce1 z con/itutive pr9ciples1 h[ %all ,i secure = !m employm5t & objective validity z regulative pr9ciples1 & 9 :at way c !y be s employ$8 ,! und]/&+ is ! object ( reason1 z s5sibility is ! object ( ! und]/&+4 ,! production ( sy/ematic unity 9 all ! empirical op]ations ( ! und]/&+ is ! prop] occupation ( reason2 j z x is ! bus9ess ( ! und]/&+ to connect ! v>i\s cont5t ( ph5om5a by means ( conceptions1 & subject !m to empirical laws4 ,b ! op]ations ( ! und]/&+ are1 )\t ! s*emata ( s5sibility1 undet]m9$2 &1 9 ! same mann]1 ! unity ( reason is p]fectly undet]m9$ z reg>ds ! conditions "u :i*1 & ! ext5t to :i*1 ! und]/&+ ought to c>ry ! sy/ematic connection ( its conceptions4 ,b1 al?\gh x is impossible to discov] 9 intuition a s*ema = ! complete sy/ematic unity ( all ! conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 !re mu/ be "s analogon ( ?is s*ema4 ,?is analogon is ! idea ( ! maximum ( ! division & ! connection ( our cognition 9 "o pr9ciple4 ,= we may h a det]m9ate notion ( a maximum & an absolutely p]fect1 all ! re/rictive conditions :i* are connect$ ) an indet]m9ate & v>i\s cont5t hav+ be5 ab/ract$4 ,?us ! idea ( reason is analog\s ) a s5su\s s*ema1 ) ?is diff]5ce1 t ! application ( ! categories to ! s*ema ( reason does n pres5t a cognition ( any object 7z is ! case ) ! application ( ! categories to s5su\s s*emata71 b m]ely provides u ) a rule or pr9ciple = ! sy/ematic unity ( ! ex]cise ( ! und]/&+4 ,n[1 z e pr9ciple :i* imposes ^u ! ex]cise ( ! und]/&+ priori compliance ) ! rule ( sy/ematic unity also relates1 al?\gh only 9 an indirect mann]1 to an object ( exp]i5ce1 ! pr9ciples ( pure reason w also possess objective reality & validity 9 relation to exp]i5ce4 ,b !y w n aim at det]m9+ our k 9 reg>d to any empirical object2 !y w m]ely indicate ! proc$ure1 foll[+ :i* ! empirical & det]m9ate ex]cise ( ! und]/&+ may be 9 complete h>mony & connection ) itself--a result :i* is produc$ by its be+ br\ght into h>mony ) ! pr9ciple ( sy/ematic unity1 s f> z t is possible1 & d$uc$ f x4 ,i t]m all subjective pr9ciples1 :i* are n d]iv$ f obs]vation ( ! con/itution ( an object1 b f ! int]e/ :i* ,reason has 9 produc+ a c]ta9 complet5ess 9 h] cognition ( t object1 maxims ( reason4 ,?us !re are maxims ( speculative reason1 :i* are bas$ solely ^u its speculative int]e/1 al?\gh !y appe> to be objective pr9ciples4 ,:5 pr9ciples :i* are really regulative are reg>d$ z con/itutive1 & employ$ z objective pr9ciples1 contradictions mu/ arise2 b if !y are consid]$ z m]e maxims1 !re is no room = contradictions ( any k9d1 z !y !n m]ely indicate ! diff]5t int]e/s ( reason1 :i* occasion diff]5ces 9 ! mode ( ?\ght4 ,9 effect1 ,reason has only "o s+le int]e/1 & ! seem+ contradiction exi/+ betwe5 h] maxims m]ely indicates a diff]5ce 91 & a reciprocal limitation (1 ! me?ods by :i* ?is int]e/ is satisfi$4 ,?is reason] has at he>t ! int]e/ ( div]sity--9 accordance ) ! pr9ciple ( specification2 ano!r1 ! int]e/ ( unity--9 accordance ) ! pr9ciple ( aggregation4 ,ea* believes t 8 judgem5t re/s ^u a ?or\gh insight into ! subject he is exam9+1 & yet x has be5 influ5c$ solely by a great] or less degree ( adh]5ce to "s "o ( ! two pr9ciples1 nei!r ( :i* are objective1 b orig9ate solely f ! int]e/ ( reason1 & on ?is acc\nt to be t]m$ maxims r ?an pr9ciples4 ,:5 ,i obs]ve intellig5t m5 disput+ ab\t ! di/9ctive *>act]i/ics ( m51 animals1 or plants1 & ev5 ( m9]als1 ^? on ! "o side assum+ ! exi/5ce ( c]ta9 national *>act]i/ics1 c]ta9 well-def9$ & h]$it>y di/9ctions ( family1 race1 & s on1 :ile ! o!r side ma9ta9 t nature has end[$ all races ( m5 ) ! same faculties & dispositions1 & t all diff]5ces are b ! result ( ext]nal & accid5tal circum/ances--,i h only to consid] = a mom5t ! real nature ( ! subject ( discussion1 to arrive at ! conclusion t x is a subject f> too deep = u to judge (1 & t !re is little probability ( ei!r p>ty be+ able to speak f a p]fect insight into & und]/&+ ( ! nature ( ! subject itself4 ,bo? h1 9 reality1 be5 /ruggl+ = ! tw(old int]e/ ( reason2 ! "o ma9ta9+ ! "o int]e/1 ! o!r ! o!r4 ,b ?is diff]5ce betwe5 ! maxims ( div]sity & unity may easily be reconcil$ & adju/$2 al?\gh1 s long z !y are reg>d$ z objective pr9ciples1 !y mu/ occasion n only contradictions & polemic1 b place h9d]ances 9 ! way ( ! advancem5t ( tru?1 until "s means is discov]$ ( reconcil+ ^! conflict+ int]e/s1 & br++ reason into union & h>mony ) itself4 ,! same is ! case ) ! s-call$ law discov]$ by ,leibnitz1 & support$ ) rem>kable ability by ,bonnet--! law ( ! cont9u\s gradation ( creat$ be+s1 :i* is no?+ m ?an an inf]5ce f ! pr9ciple ( aff9ity2 = obs]vation & /udy ( ! ord] ( nature c\ld nev] pres5t x to ! m9d z an objective tru?4 ,! /eps ( ?is ladd]1 z !y appe> 9 exp]i5ce1 are too f> ap>t f ea* o!r1 & ! s-call$ petty diff]5ces betwe5 diff]5t k9ds ( animals are 9 nature commonly s wide sep>ations t no confid5ce c be plac$ 9 su* views 7p>ticul>ly :5 we reflect on ! great v>iety ( ?+s1 & ! ease ) :i* we c discov] resemblances71 & no fai? 9 ! laws :i* are said to express ! aims & purposes ( nature4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ! me?od ( inve/igat+ ! ord] ( nature 9 ! light ( ?is pr9ciple1 & ! maxim :i* requires u to reg>d ?is ord]--x be+ /ill undet]m9$ h[ f> x ext5ds--z really exi/+ 9 nature1 is beyond d\bt a legitimate & excell5t pr9ciple ( reason--a pr9ciple :i* ext5ds f>!r ?an any exp]i5ce or obs]vation ( ours & :i*1 )\t giv+ u any positive k ( any?+ 9 ! region ( exp]i5ce1 guides u to ! goal ( sy/ematic unity4 ,( ! ,ultimate ,end ( ! ,natural ,dialectic ( ,human ,reason4 ,! ideas ( pure reason _c be1 ( !mselves & 9 _! own nature1 dialectical2 x is f _! misemploym5t alone t fallacies & illusions arise4 ,= !y orig9ate 9 ! nature ( reason itself1 & x is impossible t ?is supreme tribunal = all ! rights & claims ( speculation %\ld be itself undes]v+ ( confid5ce & promotive ( error4 ,x is to be expect$1 !re=e1 t ^! ideas h a g5u9e & legitimate aim4 ,x is true1 ! mob ( sophi/s raise aga9/ reason ! cry ( inconsi/5cy & contradiction1 & affect to despise ! gov]nm5t ( t faculty1 because !y _c und]/& its con/itution1 :ile x is to its b5eficial influ5ces alone t !y owe ! position & ! intellig5ce :i* enable !m to criticize & to blame its proc$ure4 ,we _c employ an priori conception ) c]ta9ty1 until we h made a transc5d5tal d$uction !re=e4 ,! ideas ( pure reason d n admit ( ! same k9d ( d$uction z ! categories4 ,b if !y are to possess ! lea/ objective validity1 & to repres5t any?+ b m]e creations ( ?\ght 7entia rationis ratioc9antis71 a d$uction ( !m mu/ be possible4 ,?is d$uction w complete ! critical task impos$ ^u pure reason2 & x is to ?is "p ,( our lab\rs t we n[ proce$4 ,!re is a great diff]5ce betwe5 a ?+'s be+ pres5t$ to ! m9d z an object 9 an absolute s5se1 or m]ely z an ideal object4 ,9 ! =m] case ,i employ my conceptions to det]m9e ! object2 9 ! latt] case no?+ is pres5t to ! m9d b a m]e s*ema1 :i* does n relate directly to an object1 n ev5 9 a hypo!tical s5se1 b :i* is useful only = ! purpose ( repres5t+ o!r objects to ! m9d1 9 a m$iate & indirect mann]1 by means ( _! relation to ! idea 9 ! intellect4 ,?us ,i say ! conception ( a supreme intellig5ce is a m]e idea2 t is to say1 its objective reality does n consi/ 9 ! fact t x has an imm$iate relation to an object 7= 9 ?is s5se we h no means ( e/abli%+ its objective validity71 x is m]ely a s*ema con/ruct$ accord+ to ! necess>y conditions ( ! unity ( reason--! s*ema ( a ?+ 9 g5]al1 :i* is useful t[>ds ! production ( ! highe/ degree ( sy/ematic unity 9 ! empirical ex]cise ( reason1 9 :i* we d$uce ?is or t object ( exp]i5ce f ! imag9>y object ( ?is idea1 z ! gr\nd or cause ( ! said object ( exp]i5ce4 ,9 ?is way1 ! idea is prop]ly a heuri/ic1 & n an o/5sive1 conception2 x does n give u any in=mation respect+ ! con/itution ( an object1 x m]ely indicates h[1 "u ! guidance ( ! idea1 we ought to inve/igate ! con/itution & ! relations ( objects 9 ! _w ( exp]i5ce4 ,n[1 if x c be %[n t ! ?ree k9ds ( transc5d5tal ideas 7psy*ological1 cosmological1 & !ological71 al?\gh n relat+ directly to any object nor det]m9+ x1 d nev]!less1 on ! supposition ( ! exi/5ce ( an ideal object1 produce sy/ematic unity 9 ! laws ( ! empirical employm5t ( ! reason1 & ext5d our empirical cognition1 )\t ev] be+ inconsi/5t or 9 opposition ) x--x mu/ be a necess>y maxim ( reason to regulate its proc$ure accord+ to ^! ideas4 ,& ?is =ms ! transc5d5tal d$uction ( all speculative ideas1 n z con/itutive pr9ciples ( ! ext5sion ( our cognition beyond ! limits ( our exp]i5ce1 b z regulative pr9ciples ( ! sy/ematic unity ( empirical cognition1 :i* is by ! aid ( ^! ideas arrang$ & em5d$ )9 its own prop] limits1 to an ext5t unatta9able by ! op]ation ( ! pr9ciples ( ! und]/&+ alone4 ,i %all make ?is pla9]4 ,guid$ by ! pr9ciples involv$ 9 ^! ideas1 we mu/1 9 ! fir/ place1 s connect all ! ph5om5a1 actions1 & feel+s ( ! m9d1 z if x 7 a simple sub/ance1 :i*1 end[$ ) p]sonal id5tity1 possesses a p]man5t exi/5ce 79 ?is life at lea/71 :ile its /ates1 among :i* ^? ( ! body are to be includ$ z ext]nal conditions1 are 9 cont9ual *ange4 ,secondly1 9 cosmology1 we mu/ inve/igate ! conditions ( all natural ph5om5a1 int]nal z well z ext]nal1 z if !y belong$ to a *a9 inf9ite & )\t any prime or supreme memb]1 :ile we d n1 on ?is acc\nt1 d5y ! exi/5ce ( intelligible gr\nds ( ^! ph5om5a1 al?\gh we nev] employ !m to expla9 ph5om5a1 = ! simple reason t !y are n objects ( our cognition4 ,?irdly1 9 ! sph]e ( !ology1 we mu/ reg>d ! :ole sy/em ( possible exp]i5ce z =m+ an absolute1 b dep5d5t & s5su\sly-condition$ unity1 & at ! same "t z bas$ ^u a sole1 supreme1 & all-suffici5t gr\nd exi/+ ap>t f ! _w itself--a gr\nd :i* is a self-subsi/5t1 primeval & creative reason1 9 relation to :i* we s employ our reason 9 ! field ( exp]i5ce1 z if all objects drew _! orig9 f t ar*etype ( all reason4 ,9 o!r words1 we ought n to d$uce ! int]nal ph5om5a ( ! m9d f a simple ?9k+ sub/ance1 b d$uce !m f ea* o!r "u ! guidance ( ! regulative idea ( a simple be+2 we ought n to d$uce ! ph5om5a1 ord]1 & unity ( ! univ]se f a supreme intellig5ce1 b m]ely draw f ?is idea ( a supremely wise cause ! rules :i* mu/ guide reason 9 its connection ( causes & effects4 ,n[ !re is no?+ to h9d] u f admitt+ ^! ideas to possess an objective & hyp]bolic exi/5ce1 except ! cosmological ideas1 :i* lead reason into an ant9omy3 ! psy*ological & !ological ideas are n ant9omial4 ,!y conta9 no contradiction2 & h[1 !n1 c any "o dispute _! objective reality1 s9ce he :o d5ies x kn[s z little ab\t _! possibility z we :o affirm8 ,& yet1 :5 we wi% to admit ! exi/5ce ( a ?+1 x is n suffici5t to conv9ce ourselves t !re is no positive ob/acle 9 ! way2 = x _c be all[able to reg>d m]e creations ( ?\ght1 :i* transc5d1 ?\gh !y d n contradict1 all our conceptions1 z real & det]m9ate objects1 solely ^u ! au?ority ( a speculative reason /riv+ to compass its own aims4 ,!y _c1 !re=e1 be admitt$ to be real 9 !mselves2 !y c only possess a comp>ative reality--t ( a s*ema ( ! regulative pr9ciple ( ! sy/ematic unity ( all cognition4 ,!y are to be reg>d$ n z actual ?+s1 b z 9 "s measure analog\s to !m4 ,we ab/ract f ! object ( ! idea all ! conditions :i* limit ! ex]cise ( our und]/&+1 b :i*1 on ! o!r h&1 are ! sole conditions ( our possess+ a det]m9ate conception ( any giv5 ?+4 ,& ?us we cogitate a some?+1 ( ! real nature ( :i* we h n ! lea/ conception1 b :i* we repres5t to ourselves z /&+ 9 a relation to ! :ole sy/em ( ph5om5a1 analog\s to t 9 :i* ph5om5a /& to ea* o!r4 ,by admitt+ ^! ideal be+s1 we d n really ext5d our cognitions beyond ! objects ( possible exp]i5ce2 we ext5d m]ely ! empirical unity ( our exp]i5ce1 by ! aid ( sy/ematic unity1 ! s*ema ( :i* is furni%$ by ! idea1 :i* is !re=e valid--n z a con/itutive1 b z a regulative pr9ciple4 ,= al?\gh we posit a ?+ correspond+ to ! idea--a some?+1 an actual exi/5ce--we d n on t acc\nt aim at ! ext5sion ( our cognition by means ( transc5d5t conceptions4 ,?is exi/5ce is purely ideal1 & n objective2 x is ! m]e expression ( ! sy/ematic unity :i* is to be ! guide ( reason 9 ! field ( exp]i5ce4 ,!re are no attempts made at decid+ :at ! gr\nd ( ?is unity may be1 or :at ! real nature ( ?is imag9>y be+4 ,?us ! transc5d5tal & only det]m9ate conception ( ,god1 :i* is pres5t$ to u by speculative reason1 is 9 ! /ricte/ s5se dei/ic4 ,9 o!r words1 reason does n assure u ( ! objective validity ( ! conception2 x m]ely gives u ! idea ( some?+1 on :i* ! supreme & necess>y unity ( all exp]i5ce is bas$4 ,?is some?+ we _c1 foll[+ ! analogy ( a real sub/ance1 cogitate o!rwise ?an z ! cause ( all ?+s op]at+ 9 accordance ) rational laws1 if we reg>d x z an individual object2 al?\gh we %\ld re/ cont5t$ ) ! idea alone z a regulative pr9ciple ( reason1 & make no attempt at complet+ ! sum ( ! conditions impos$ by ?\ght4 ,?is attempt is1 inde$1 inconsi/5t ) ! gr& aim ( complete sy/ematic unity 9 ! sph]e ( cognition--a unity to :i* no b\nds are set by reason4 ,h5ce x happ5s t1 admitt+ a div9e be+1 ,i c h no conception ( ! int]nal possibility ( its p]fection1 or ( ! necessity ( its exi/5ce4 ,! only advantage ( ?is admission is t x enables me to answ] all o!r que/ions relat+ to ! cont+5t1 & to give reason ! mo/ complete satisfaction z reg>ds ! unity :i* x aims at atta9+ 9 ! _w ( exp]i5ce4 ,b ,i _c satisfy reason ) reg>d to ?is hypo!sis itself2 & ?is proves t x is n its intellig5ce & insight into ! subject1 b its speculative int]e/ alone :i* induces x to proce$ f a po9t ly+ f> beyond ! sph]e ( our cognition1 = ! purpose ( be+ able to consid] all objects z p>ts ( a sy/ematic :ole4 ,"h a di/9ction pres5ts itself1 9 reg>d to ! way 9 :i* we may cogitate a presupposition--a di/9ction :i* is some:at subtle1 b ( great importance 9 transc5d5tal philosophy4 ,i may h suffici5t gr\nds to admit some?+1 or ! exi/5ce ( some?+1 9 a relative po9t ( view 7suppositio relativa71 )\t be+ ju/ifi$ 9 admitt+ x 9 an absolute s5se 7suppositio absoluta74 ,?is di/9ction is und\bt$ly requisite1 9 ! case ( a regulative pr9ciple1 ! necessity ( :i* we recognize1 ?\gh we are ignorant ( ! s\rce & cause ( t necessity1 & :i* we assume to be bas$ ^u "s ultimate gr\nd1 = ! purpose ( be+ able to cogitate ! univ]sality ( ! pr9ciple 9 a m det]m9ate way4 ,= example1 ,i cogitate ! exi/5ce ( a be+ correspond+ to a pure transc5d5tal idea4 ,b ,i _c admit t ?is be+ exi/s absolutely & 9 itself1 because all ( ! conceptions by :i* ,i c cogitate an object 9 a det]m9ate mann] fall %ort ( assur+ me ( its exi/5ce2 nay1 ! conditions ( ! objective validity ( my conceptions are exclud$ by ! idea--by ! v fact ( its be+ an idea4 ,! conceptions ( reality1 sub/ance1 causality1 nay1 ev5 t ( necessity 9 exi/5ce1 h no significance out ( ! sph]e ( empirical cognition1 & _c1 beyond t sph]e1 det]m9e any object4 ,!y may1 accord+ly1 be employ$ to expla9 ! possibility ( ?+s 9 ! _w ( s5se1 b !y are utt]ly inadequate to expla9 ! possibility ( ! univ]se itself consid]$ z a :ole2 because 9 ?is case ! gr\nd ( explanation mu/ lie out ( & beyond ! _w1 & _c1 !re=e1 be an object ( possible exp]i5ce4 ,n[1 ,i may admit ! exi/5ce ( an incompreh5sible be+ ( ?is nature--! object ( a m]e idea1 relatively to ! _w ( s5se2 al?\gh ,i h no gr\nd to admit its exi/5ce absolutely & 9 itself4 ,= if an idea 7t ( a sy/ematic & complete unity1 ( :i* ,i %all pres5tly speak m p>ticul>ly7 lies at ! f\ndation ( ! mo/ ext5d$ empirical employm5t ( reason1 & if ?is idea _c be adequately repres5t$ 9 concreto1 al?\gh x is indisp5sably necess>y = ! approximation ( empirical unity to ! highe/ possible degree--,i am n only au?oriz$1 b compell$1 to realize ?is idea1 t is1 to posit a real object correspond+ !reto4 ,b ,i _c pr(ess to "k ?is object2 x is to me m]ely a some?+1 to :i*1 z ! gr\nd ( sy/ematic unity 9 cognition1 ,i attribute su* prop]ties z are analog\s to ! conceptions employ$ by ! und]/&+ 9 ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce4 ,foll[+ ! analogy ( ! notions ( reality1 sub/ance1 causality1 & necessity1 ,i cogitate a be+1 :i* possesses all ^! attributes 9 ! highe/ degree2 &1 z ?is idea is ! (fspr+ ( my reason alone1 ,i cogitate ?is be+ z self-subsi/5t reason1 & z ! cause ( ! univ]se op]at+ by means ( ideas ( ! greate/ possible h>mony & unity4 ,?us ,i ab/ract all conditions t w\ld limit my idea1 solely = ! purpose ( r5d]+ sy/ematic unity possible 9 ! _w ( empirical div]sity1 & ?us secur+ ! wide/ possible ext5sion = ! ex]cise ( reason 9 t sph]e4 ,?is ,i am enabl$ to d1 by reg>d+ all connections & relations 9 ! _w ( s5se1 z if !y 7 ! dispositions ( a supreme reason1 ( :i* our reason is b a fa9t image4 ,i !n proce$ to cogitate ?is ,supreme ,be+ by conceptions :i* h1 prop]ly1 no mean+ or application1 except 9 ! _w ( s5se4 ,b z ,i am au?oriz$ to employ ! transc5d5tal hypo!sis ( su* a be+ 9 a relative respect alone1 t is1 z ! sub/ratum ( ! greate/ possible unity 9 exp]i5ce--,i may attribute to a be+ :i* ,i reg>d z di/9ct f ! _w1 su* prop]ties z belong solely to ! sph]e ( s5se & exp]i5ce4 ,= ,i d n desire1 & am n ju/ifi$ 9 desir+1 to cognize ?is object ( my idea1 z x exi/s 9 itself2 = ,i possess no conceptions suffici5t = ?is task1 ^? ( reality1 sub/ance1 causality1 nay1 ev5 t ( necessity 9 exi/5ce1 los+ all significance1 & becom+ m]ely ! signs ( conceptions1 )\t cont5t & )\t applicability1 :5 ,i attempt to c>ry !m beyond ! limits ( ! _w ( s5se4 ,i cogitate m]ely ! relation ( a p]fectly unkn[n be+ to ! greate/ possible sy/ematic unity ( exp]i5ce1 solely = ! purpose ( employ+ x z ! s*ema ( ! regulative pr9ciple :i* directs reason 9 its empirical ex]cise4 ,x is evid5t1 at ! fir/ view1 t we _c presuppose ! reality ( ?is transc5d5tal object1 by means ( ! conceptions ( reality1 sub/ance1 causality1 & s on1 because ^! conceptions _c be appli$ to any?+ t is di/9ct f ! _w ( s5se4 ,?us ! supposition ( a ,supreme ,be+ or cause is purely relative2 x is cogitat$ only 9 behalf ( ! sy/ematic unity ( exp]i5ce2 su* a be+ is b a some?+1 ( ^: exi/5ce 9 itself we h n ! lea/ conception4 ,?us1 too1 x becomes suffici5tly manife/ :y we requir$ ! idea ( a necess>y be+ 9 relation to objects giv5 by s5se1 al?\gh we c nev] h ! lea/ conception ( ?is be+1 or ( its absolute necessity4 ,& n[ we c cle>ly p]ceive ! result ( our transc5d5tal dialectic1 & ! prop] aim ( ! ideas ( pure reason--:i* become dialectical solely f misund]/&+ & inconsid]at5ess4 ,pure reason is1 9 fact1 occupi$ ) itself1 & n ) any object4 ,objects are n pres5t$ to x to be embrac$ 9 ! unity ( an empirical conception2 x is only ! cognitions ( ! und]/&+ t are pres5t$ to x1 = ! purpose ( receiv+ ! unity ( a rational conception1 t is1 ( be+ connect$ accord+ to a pr9ciple4 ,! unity ( reason is ! unity ( sy/em2 & ?is sy/ematic unity is n an objective pr9ciple1 ext5d+ its dom9ion ov] objects1 b a subjective maxim1 ext5d+ its au?ority ov] ! empirical cognition ( objects4 ,! sy/ematic connection :i* reason gives to ! empirical employm5t ( ! und]/&+ n only advances ! ext5sion ( t employm5t1 b ensures its correctness1 & ?us ! pr9ciple ( a sy/ematic unity ( ?is nature is also objective1 al?\gh only 9 an indef9ite respect 7pr9cipium vagum74 ,x is n1 h[ev]1 a con/itutive pr9ciple1 det]m9+ an object to :i* x directly relates2 x is m]ely a regulative pr9ciple or maxim1 advanc+ & /r5g!n+ ! empirical ex]cise ( reason1 by ! op5+ up ( new pa?s ( :i* ! und]/&+ is ignorant1 :ile x nev] conflicts ) ! laws ( its ex]cise 9 ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce4 ,b reason _c cogitate ?is sy/ematic unity1 )\t at ! same "t cogitat+ an object ( ! idea--an object t _c be pres5t$ 9 any exp]i5ce1 :i* conta9s no concrete example ( a complete sy/ematic unity4 ,?is be+ 7ens rationis ratioc9atae7 is !re=e a m]e idea & is n assum$ to be a ?+ :i* is real absolutely & 9 itself4 ,on ! contr>y1 x =ms m]ely ! problematical f\ndation ( ! connection :i* ! m9d introduces among ! ph5om5a ( ! s5su\s _w4 ,we look ^u ?is connection1 9 ! light ( ! above-m5tion$ idea1 z if x drew its orig9 f ! suppos$ be+ :i* corresponds to ! idea4 ,& yet all we aim at is ! possession ( ?is idea z a secure f\ndation = ! sy/ematic unity ( exp]i5ce--a unity indisp5sable to reason1 advantage\s to ! und]/&+1 & promotive ( ! int]e/s ( empirical cognition4 ,we mi/ake ! true mean+ ( ?is idea :5 we reg>d x z an en\ncem5t1 or ev5 z a hypo!tical decl>ation ( ! exi/5ce ( a real ?+1 :i* we are to reg>d z ! orig9 or gr\nd ( a sy/ematic con/itution ( ! univ]se4 ,on ! contr>y1 x is left completely undet]m9$ :at ! nature or prop]ties ( ?is s-call$ gr\nd may be4 ,! idea is m]ely to be adopt$ z a po9t ( view1 f :i* ?is unity1 s ess5tial to reason & s b5eficial to ! und]/&+1 may be reg>d$ z radiat+4 ,9 "o ^w1 ?is transc5d5tal ?+ is m]ely ! s*ema ( a regulative pr9ciple1 by means ( :i* ,reason1 s f> z 9 h] lies1 ext5ds ! dom9ion ( sy/ematic unity ov] ! :ole sph]e ( exp]i5ce4 ,! fir/ object ( an idea ( ?is k9d is ! ego1 consid]$ m]ely z a ?9k+ nature or s\l4 ,if ,i wi% to inve/igate ! prop]ties ( a ?9k+ be+1 ,i mu/ int]rogate exp]i5ce4 ,b ,i f9d t ,i c apply none ( ! categories to ?is object1 ! s*ema ( ^! categories1 :i* is ! condition ( _! application1 be+ giv5 only 9 s5su\s intuition4 ,b ,i _c ?us atta9 to ! cognition ( a sy/ematic unity ( all ! ph5om5a ( ! int]nal s5se4 ,in/ead1 !re=e1 ( an empirical conception ( :at ! s\l really is1 reason takes ! conception ( ! empirical unity ( all ?\ght1 &1 by cogitat+ ?is unity z uncondition$ & primitive1 con/ructs ! rational conception or idea ( a simple sub/ance :i* is 9 itself un*angeable1 possess+ p]sonal id5tity1 & 9 connection ) o!r real ?+s ext]nal to x2 9 "o ^w1 x con/ructs ! idea ( a simple self-subsi/5t intellig5ce4 ,b ! real aim ( reason 9 ?is proc$ure is ! atta9m5t ( pr9ciples ( sy/ematic unity = ! explanation ( ! ph5om5a ( ! s\l4 ,t is1 reason desires to be able to repres5t all ! det]m9ations ( ! int]nal s5se z exi/+ 9 "o subject1 all p[]s z d$uc$ f "o fundam5tal p[]1 all *anges z m]e v>ieties 9 ! condition ( a be+ :i* is p]man5t & always ! same1 & all ph5om5a 9 space z entirely diff]5t 9 _! nature f ! proc$ure ( ?\ght4 ,ess5tial simplicity 7) ! o!r attributes pr$icat$ ( ! ego7 is reg>d$ z ! m]e s*ema ( ?is regulative pr9ciple2 x is n assum$ t x is ! actual gr\nd ( ! prop]ties ( ! s\l4 ,= ^! prop]ties may re/ ^u q diff]5t gr\nds1 ( :i* we are completely ignorant2 j z ! above pr$icates c\ld n give u any k ( ! s\l z x is 9 itself1 ev5 if we reg>d$ !m z valid 9 respect ( x1 inasmu* z !y con/itute a m]e idea1 :i* _c be repres5t$ 9 concreto4 ,no?+ b good c result f a psy*ological idea ( ?is k9d1 if we only take prop] c>e n to consid] x z m ?an an idea2 t is1 if we reg>d x z valid m]ely 9 relation to ! employm5t ( reason1 9 ! sph]e ( ! ph5om5a ( ! s\l4 ,"u ! guidance ( ?is idea1 or pr9ciple1 no empirical laws ( corporeal ph5om5a are call$ 9 to expla9 t :i* is a ph5om5on ( ! int]nal s5se alone2 no w9dy hypo!ses ( ! g5]ation1 annihilation1 & pal+5esis ( s\ls are admitt$4 ,?us ! consid]ation ( ?is object ( ! int]nal s5se is kept pure1 & unmix$ ) het]og5e\s elem5ts2 :ile ! inve/igation ( reason aims at r$uc+ all ! gr\nds ( explanation employ$ 9 ?is sph]e ( k to a s+le pr9ciple4 ,all ?is is be/ effect$1 nay1 _c be effect$ o!rwise ?an by means ( su* a s*ema1 :i* requires u to reg>d ?is ideal ?+ z an actual exi/5ce4 ,! psy*ological idea is1 !re=e1 mean+less & inapplicable1 except z ! s*ema ( a regulative conception4 ,=1 if ,i ask :e!r ! s\l is n really ( a spiritual nature--x is a "q :i* has no mean+4 ,f su* a conception has be5 ab/ract$1 n m]ely all corporeal nature1 b all nature1 t is1 all ! pr$icates ( a possible exp]i5ce2 & consequ5tly1 all ! conditions :i* enable u to cogitate an object to ?is conception h disappe>$4 ,b1 if ^! conditions are abs5t1 x is evid5t t ! conception is mean+less4 ,! second regulative idea ( speculative reason is ! conception ( ! univ]se4 ,= nature is prop]ly ! only object pres5t$ to u1 9 reg>d to :i* reason requires regulative pr9ciples4 ,nature is tw(old--?9k+ & corporeal nature4 ,to cogitate ! latt] 9 reg>d to its int]nal possibility1 t is1 to det]m9e ! application ( ! categories to x1 no idea is requir$--no repres5tation :i* transc5ds exp]i5ce4 ,9 ?is sph]e1 !re=e1 an idea is impossible1 s5su\s intuition be+ our only guide2 :ile1 9 ! sph]e ( psy*ology1 we require ! fundam5tal idea 7,i71 :i* conta9s priori a c]ta9 =m ( ?\ght namely1 ! unity ( ! ego4 ,pure reason has1 !re=e1 no?+ left b nature 9 g5]al1 & ! complet5ess ( conditions 9 nature 9 accordance ) "s pr9ciple4 ,! absolute totality ( ! s]ies ( ^! conditions is an idea1 :i* c nev] be fully realiz$ 9 ! empirical ex]cise ( reason1 :ile x is s]viceable z a rule = ! proc$ure ( reason 9 relation to t totality4 ,x requires u1 9 ! explanation ( giv5 ph5om5a 79 ! regress or asc5t 9 ! s]ies71 to proce$ z if ! s]ies 7 inf9ite 9 itself1 t is1 7 prolong$ 9 indef9itum2 :ile on ! o!r h&1 :]e reason is reg>d$ z itself ! det]m9+ cause 79 ! region ( fre$om71 we are requir$ to proce$ z if we _h n be=e u an object ( s5se1 b ( ! pure und]/&+4 ,9 ?is latt] case1 ! conditions d n exi/ 9 ! s]ies ( ph5om5a1 b may be plac$ q out ( & beyond x1 & ! s]ies ( conditions may be reg>d$ z if x _h an absolute beg9n+ f an intelligible cause4 ,all ?is proves t ! cosmological ideas are no?+ b regulative pr9ciples1 & n con/itutive2 & t _! aim is n to realize an actual totality 9 su* s]ies4 ,! full discussion ( ?is subject w be f\nd 9 its prop] place 9 ! *apt] on ! ant9omy ( pure reason4 ,! ?ird idea ( pure reason1 conta9+ ! hypo!sis ( a be+ :i* is valid m]ely z a relative hypo!sis1 is t ( ! "o & all-suffici5t cause ( all cosmological s]ies1 9 o!r words1 ! idea ( ,god4 ,we h n ! slighte/ gr\nd absolutely to admit ! exi/5ce ( an object correspond+ to ?is idea2 = :at c emp[] or au?orize u to affirm ! exi/5ce ( a be+ ( ! highe/ p]fection--a be+ ^: exi/5ce is absolutely necess>y--m]ely because we possess ! conception ( su* a be+8 ,! answ] is3 ,x is ! exi/5ce ( ! _w :i* r5d]s ?is hypo!sis necess>y4 ,b ?is answ] makes x p]fectly evid5t t ! idea ( ?is be+1 l all o!r speculative ideas1 is ess5tially no?+ m ?an a dem& ^u reason t x %all regulate ! connection :i* x & its subord9ate faculties introduce into ! ph5om5a ( ! _w by pr9ciples ( sy/ematic unity &1 consequ5tly1 t x %all reg>d all ph5om5a z orig9at+ f "o all-embrac+ be+1 z ! supreme & all-suffici5t cause4 ,f ?is x is pla9 t ! only aim ( reason 9 ?is proc$ure is ! e/abli%m5t ( its own =mal rule = ! ext5sion ( its dom9ion 9 ! _w ( exp]i5ce2 t x does n aim at an ext5sion ( its cognition beyond ! limits ( exp]i5ce2 & t1 consequ5tly1 ?is idea does n conta9 any con/itutive pr9ciple4 ,! highe/ =mal unity1 :i* is bas$ ^u ideas alone1 is ! unity ( all ?+s--a unity 9 accordance ) an aim or purpose2 & ! speculative int]e/ ( reason r5d]s x necess>y to reg>d all ord] 9 ! _w z if x orig9at$ f ! int5tion & design ( a supreme reason4 ,?is pr9ciple unfolds to ! view ( reason 9 ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce new & enl>g$ prospects1 & invites x to connect ! ph5om5a ( ! _w accord+ to teleological laws1 & 9 ?is way to atta9 to ! highe/ possible degree ( sy/ematic unity4 ,! hypo!sis ( a supreme intellig5ce1 z ! sole cause ( ! univ]se--an intellig5ce :i* has = u no m ?an an ideal exi/5ce--is accord+ly always ( ! greate/ s]vice to reason4 ,?us1 if we presuppose1 9 relation to ! figure ( ! e>? 7:i* is r\nd1 b some:at flatt5$ at ! poles71#ga or t ( m\nta9s or seas1 wise designs on ! "p ( an au?or ( ! univ]se1 we _c fail to make1 by ! light ( ?is supposition1 a great numb] ( int]e/+ discov]ies4 ,if we keep to ?is hypo!sis1 z a pr9ciple :i* is purely regulative1 ev5 error _c be v detrim5tal4 ,=1 9 ?is case1 error c h no m s]i\s consequ5ces ?an t1 :]e we expect$ to discov] a teleological connection 7nexus f9alis71 only a me*anical or physical connection appe>s4 ,9 su* a case1 we m]ely fail to f9d ! additional =m ( unity we expect$1 b we d n lose ! rational unity :i* ! m9d requires 9 its proc$ure 9 exp]i5ce4 ,b ev5 a misc>riage ( ?is sort _c affect ! law 9 its g5]al & teleological relations4 ,= al?\gh we may convict an anatomi/ ( an error1 :5 he connects ! limb ( "s animal ) a c]ta9 purpose1 x is q impossible to prove 9 a s+le case t any arrangem5t ( nature1 be x :at x may1 is entirely )\t aim or design4 ,& ?us m$ical physiology1 by ! aid ( a pr9ciple pres5t$ to x by pure reason1 ext5ds its v limit$ empirical k ( ! purposes ( ! diff]5t p>ts ( an organiz$ body s f> t x may be ass]t$ ) ! utmo/ confid5ce1 & ) ! approbation ( all reflect+ m51 t e organ or bodily "p ( an animal has its use & answ]s a c]ta9 design4 ,n[1 ?is is a supposition :i*1 if reg>d$ z ( a con/itutive "*1 goes mu* f>!r ?an any exp]i5ce or obs]vation ( ours c ju/ify4 ,h5ce x is evid5t t x is no?+ m ?an a regulative pr9ciple ( reason1 :i* aims at ! highe/ degree ( sy/ematic unity1 by ! aid ( ! idea ( a causality accord+ to design 9 a supreme cause--a cause :i* x reg>ds z ! highe/ intellig5ce4 #ga ,! advantages :i* a circul> =m1 9 ! case ( ! e>?1 has ov] e o!r1 are well kn[n4 ,b few are aw>e t ! slight flatt5+ at ! poles1 :i* gives x ! figure ( a sph]oid1 is ! only cause :i* prev5ts ! elevations ( cont95ts or ev5 ( m\nta9s1 p]haps ?r[n up by "s int]nal convulsion1 f cont9ually alt]+ ! position ( ! axis ( ! e>?--& t to "s consid]able degree 9 a %ort "t4 ,! great protub]ance ( ! e>? "u ! ,equator s]ves to ov]balance ! impetus ( all o!r masses ( e>?1 & ?us to pres]ve ! axis ( ! e>?1 s f> z we c obs]ve1 9 its pres5t position4 ,& yet ?is wise arrangem5t has be5 un?9k+ly expla9$ f ! equilibrium ( ! =m]ly fluid mass4 ,if1 h[ev]1 we neglect ?is re/riction ( ! idea to a purely regulative influ5ce1 reason is betray$ into num]\s errors4 ,= x has !n left ! gr\nd ( exp]i5ce1 9 :i* alone are to be f\nd ! crit]ia ( tru?1 & has v5tur$ into ! region ( ! incompreh5sible & unse>*able1 on ! heights ( :i* x loses its p[] & collect$ness1 because x has completely sev]$ its connection ) exp]i5ce4 ,! fir/ error :i* arises f our employ+ ! idea ( a ,supreme ,be+ z a con/itutive 79 repugnance to ! v nature ( an idea71 & n z a regulative pr9ciple1 is ! error ( inactive reason 7ignava ratio74#gb ,we may s t]m e pr9ciple :i* requires u to reg>d our inve/igations ( nature z absolutely complete1 & all[s reason to cease its inquiries1 z if x _h fully execut$ its task4 ,?us ! psy*ological idea ( ! ego1 :5 employ$ z a con/itutive pr9ciple = ! explanation ( ! ph5om5a ( ! s\l1 & = ! ext5sion ( our k reg>d+ ?is subject beyond ! limits ( exp]i5ce--ev5 to ! condition ( ! s\l aft] dea?--is conv5i5t en\gh = ! purposes ( pure reason1 b detrim5tal & ev5 ru9\s to its int]e/s 9 ! sph]e ( nature & exp]i5ce4 ,! dogmatiz+ spirituali/ expla9s ! un*ang+ unity ( our p]sonality ?r\gh all *anges ( condition f ! unity ( a ?9k+ sub/ance1 ! int]e/ :i* we take 9 ?+s & ev5ts t c happ5 only aft] our dea?1 f a consci\sness ( ! immat]ial nature ( our ?9k+ subject1 & s on4 ,?us he disp5ses ) all empirical inve/igations into ! cause ( ^! int]nal ph5om5a1 & ) all possible explanations ( !m ^u purely natural gr\nds2 :ile1 at ! dictation ( a transc5d5t reason1 he passes by ! imman5t s\rces ( cognition 9 exp]i5ce1 greatly to 8 own ease & conv5i5ce1 b to ! sacrifice ( all1 g5u9e insight & intellig5ce4 ,^! prejudicial consequ5ces become /ill m evid5t1 9 ! case ( ! dogmatical treatm5t ( our idea ( a ,supreme ,intellig5ce1 & ! !ological sy/em ( nature 7physico-!ology7 :i* is falsely bas$ ^u x4 ,=1 9 ?is case1 ! aims :i* we obs]ve 9 nature1 & (t5 ^? :i* we m]ely fancy to exi/1 make ! inve/igation ( causes a v easy task1 by direct+ u to ref] su* & su* ph5om5a imm$iately to ! unse>*able w & c\nsel ( ! ,supreme ,wisdom1 :ile we ought to inve/igate _! causes 9 ! g5]al laws ( ! me*anism ( matt]4 ,we are ?us recomm5d$ to consid] ! lab\r ( reason z end$1 :5 we h m]ely disp5s$ ) its employm5t1 :i* is guid$ surely & safely only by ! ord] ( nature & ! s]ies ( *anges 9 ! _w--:i* are arrang$ accord+ to imman5t & g5]al laws4 ,?is error may be avoid$1 if we d n m]ely consid] f ! view-po9t ( f9al aims c]ta9 p>ts ( nature1 su* z ! division & /ructure ( a cont95t1 ! con/itution & direction ( c]ta9 m\nta9-*a9s1 or ev5 ! organization exi/+ 9 ! vegetable & animal k+doms1 b look ^u ?is sy/ematic unity ( nature 9 a p]fectly g5]al way1 9 relation to ! idea ( a ,supreme ,intellig5ce4 ,if we pursue ?is advice1 we lay z a f\ndation = all inve/igation ! con=mity to aims ( all ph5om5a ( nature 9 accordance ) univ]sal laws1 = :i* no p>ticul> arrangem5t ( nature is exempt1 b only cogniz$ by u ) m or less difficulty2 & we possess a regulative pr9ciple ( ! sy/ematic unity ( a teleological connection1 :i* we d n attempt to anticipate or pr$et]m9e4 ,all t we d1 & ought to d1 is to foll[ out ! physico-me*anical connection 9 nature accord+ to g5]al laws1 ) ! hope ( discov]+1 soon] or lat]1 ! teleological connection also4 ,?us1 & ?us only1 c ! pr9ciple ( f9al unity aid 9 ! ext5sion ( ! employm5t ( reason 9 ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce1 )\t be+ 9 any case detrim5tal to its int]e/s4 #gb ,?is 0 ! t]m appli$ by ! old dialecticians to a sophi/ical argum5t1 :i* ran ?us3 ,if x is y\r fate to die ( ?is disease1 y w die1 :e!r y employ a physician or n4 ,cic]o says t ?is mode ( reason+ has receiv$ ?is appellation1 because1 if foll[$1 x puts an end to ! employm5t ( reason 9 ! affairs ( life4 ,= a simil> reason1 ,i h appli$ ?is designation to ! sophi/ical argum5t ( pure reason4 ,! second error :i* arises f ! misconception ( ! pr9ciple ( sy/ematic unity is t ( p]v]t$ reason 7p]v]sa ratio1 u/]on rot]on rationis74 ,! idea ( sy/ematic unity is available z a regulative pr9ciple 9 ! connection ( ph5om5a accord+ to g5]al natural laws2 &1 h[ f> soev] we h to travel ^u ! pa? ( exp]i5ce to discov] "s fact or ev5t1 ?is idea requires u to believe t we h approa*$ all ! m ne>ly to ! completion ( its use 9 ! sph]e ( nature1 al?\gh t completion c nev] be atta9$4 ,b ?is error rev]ses ! proc$ure ( reason4 ,we beg9 by hypo/atiz+ ! pr9ciple ( sy/ematic unity1 & by giv+ an an?ropomorphic det]m9ation to ! conception ( a ,supreme ,intellig5ce1 & !n proce$ =cibly to impose aims ^u nature4 ,?us n only does teleology1 :i* ought to aid 9 ! completion ( unity 9 accordance ) g5]al laws1 op]ate to ! de/ruction ( its influ5ce1 b x h9d]s reason f atta9+ its prop] aim1 t is1 ! pro(1 ^u natural gr\nds1 ( ! exi/5ce ( a supreme intellig5t cause4 ,=1 if we _c presuppose supreme f9ality 9 nature priori1 t is1 z ess5tially belong+ to nature1 h[ c we be direct$ to endeav\r to discov] ?is unity &1 ris+ gradually ?r\gh its diff]5t degrees1 to approa* ! supreme p]fection ( an au?or ( all--a p]fection :i* is absolutely necess>y1 & !re=e cognizable priori8 ,! regulative pr9ciple directs u to presuppose sy/ematic unity absolutely &1 consequ5tly1 z foll[+ f ! ess5tial nature ( ?+s--b only z a unity ( nature1 n m]ely cogniz$ empirically1 b presuppos$ priori1 al?\gh only 9 an indet]m9ate mann]4 ,b if ,i insi/ on bas+ nature ^u ! f\ndation ( a supreme orda9+ ,be+1 ! unity ( nature is 9 effect lo/4 ,=1 9 ?is case1 x is q =eign & uness5tial to ! nature ( ?+s1 & _c be cogniz$ f ! g5]al laws ( nature4 ,& ?us arises a vici\s circul> argum5t1 :at ought to h be5 prov$ hav+ be5 presuppos$4 ,to take ! regulative pr9ciple ( sy/ematic unity 9 nature = a con/itutive pr9ciple1 & to hypo/atize & make a cause out ( t :i* is prop]ly ! ideal gr\nd ( ! consi/5t & h>moni\s ex]cise ( reason1 involves reason 9 inextricable emb>rassm5ts4 ,! inve/igation ( nature pursues its own pa? "u ! guidance ( ! *a9 ( natural causes1 9 accordance ) ! g5]al laws ( nature1 & ev] foll[s ! light ( ! idea ( an au?or ( ! univ]se--n = ! purpose ( d$uc+ ! f9ality1 :i* x con/antly pursues1 f ?is ,supreme ,be+1 b to atta9 to ! cognition ( 8 exi/5ce f ! f9ality :i* x seeks 9 ! exi/5ce ( ! ph5om5a ( nature1 &1 if possible1 9 t ( all ?+s to cognize ?is be+1 consequ5tly1 z absolutely necess>y4 ,:e!r ?is latt] purpose succe$ or n1 ! idea is & mu/ always be a true "o1 & its employm5t1 :5 m]ely regulative1 mu/ always be accompani$ by tru?ful & b5eficial results4 ,complete unity1 9 con=mity ) aims1 con/itutes absolute p]fection4 ,b if we d n f9d ?is unity 9 ! nature ( ! ?+s :i* g to con/itute ! _w ( exp]i5ce1 t is1 ( objective cognition1 consequ5tly 9 ! univ]sal & necess>y laws ( nature1 h[ c we inf] f ?is unity ! idea ( ! supreme & absolutely necess>y p]fection ( a primal be+1 :i* is ! orig9 ( all causality8 ,! greate/ sy/ematic unity1 & consequ5tly teleological unity1 con/itutes ! v f\ndation ( ! possibility ( ! mo/ ext5d$ employm5t ( human reason4 ,! idea ( unity is !re=e ess5tially & indissolubly connect$ ) ! nature ( our reason4 ,?is idea is a legislative "o2 & h5ce x is v natural t we %\ld assume ! exi/5ce ( a legislative reason correspond+ to x1 f :i* ! sy/ematic unity ( nature--! object ( ! op]ations ( reason--mu/ be d]iv$4 ,9 ! c\rse ( our discussion ( ! ant9omies1 we /at$ t x is always possible to answ] all ! que/ions :i* pure reason may raise2 & t ! plea ( ! limit$ nature ( our cognition1 :i* is unavoidable & prop] 9 _m que/ions reg>d+ natural ph5om5a1 _c 9 ?is case be admitt$1 because ! que/ions rais$ d n relate to ! nature ( ?+s1 b are necess>ily orig9at$ by ! nature ( reason itself1 & relate to its own int]nal con/itution4 ,we c n[ e/abli% ?is ass]tion1 :i* at fir/ sight appe>$ s ra%1 9 relation to ! two que/ions 9 :i* reason takes ! greate/ int]e/1 & ?us complete our discussion ( ! dialectic ( pure reason4 ,if1 !n1 ! "q is ask$1 9 relation to transc5d5tal !ology1#gc fir/1 :e!r !re is any?+ di/9ct f ! _w1 :i* conta9s ! gr\nd ( cosmical ord] & connection accord+ to g5]al laws8 ,! answ] is3 ,c]ta9ly4 ,= ! _w is a sum ( ph5om5a2 !re mu/1 !re=e1 be "s transc5d5tal basis ( ^! ph5om5a1 t is1 a basis cogitable by ! pure und]/&+ alone4 ,if1 secondly1 ! "q is ask$ :e!r ?is be+ is sub/ance1 :e!r x is ( ! greate/ reality1 :e!r x is necess>y1 & s =?8 ,i answ] t ?is "q is utt]ly )\t mean+4 ,= all ! categories :i* aid me 9 =m+ a conception ( an object _c be employ$ except 9 ! _w ( s5se1 & are )\t mean+ :5 n appli$ to objects ( actual or possible exp]i5ce4 ,out ( ?is sph]e1 !y are n prop]ly conceptions1 b ! m]e m>ks or indices ( conceptions1 :i* we may admit1 al?\gh !y _c1 )\t ! help ( exp]i5ce1 help u to und]/& any subject or ?+4 ,if1 ?irdly1 ! "q is :e!r we may n cogitate ?is be+1 :i* is di/9ct f ! _w1 9 analogy ) ! objects ( exp]i5ce8 ,! answ] is3 ,und\bt$ly1 b only z an ideal1 & n z a real object4 ,t is1 we mu/ cogitate x only z an unkn[n sub/ratum ( ! sy/ematic unity1 ord]1 & f9ality ( ! _w--a unity :i* reason mu/ employ z ! regulative pr9ciple ( its inve/igation ( nature4 ,nay1 m1 we may admit into ! idea c]ta9 an?ropomorphic elem5ts1 :i* are promotive ( ! int]e/s ( ?is regulative pr9ciple4 ,= x is no m ?an an idea1 :i* does n relate directly to a be+ di/9ct f ! _w1 b to ! regulative pr9ciple ( ! sy/ematic unity ( ! _w1 by means1 h[ev]1 ( a s*ema ( ?is unity--! s*ema ( a ,supreme ,intellig5ce1 :o is ! wisely-design+ au?or ( ! univ]se4 ,:at ?is basis ( cosmical unity may be 9 itself1 we "k n--we _c discov] f ! idea2 we m]ely "k h[ we ought to employ ! idea ( ?is unity1 9 relation to ! sy/ematic op]ation ( reason 9 ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce4 #gc ,aft] :at has be5 said ( ! psy*ological idea ( ! ego & its prop] employm5t z a regulative pr9ciple ( ! op]ations ( reason1 ,i ne$ n ent] into details reg>d+ ! transc5d5tal illusion by :i* ! sy/ematic unity ( all ! v>i\s ph5om5a ( ! int]nal s5se is hypo/atiz$4 ,! proc$ure is 9 ?is case v simil> to t :i* has be5 discuss$ 9 our rem>ks on ! !ological ideal4 ,b1 x w be ask$ aga91 c we on ^! gr\nds1 admit ! exi/5ce ( a wise & omnipot5t au?or ( ! _w8 ,)\t d\bt2 & n only s1 b we mu/ assume ! exi/5ce ( su* a be+4 ,b d we ?us ext5d ! limits ( our k beyond ! field ( possible exp]i5ce8 ,by no means4 ,= we h m]ely presuppos$ a some?+1 ( :i* we h no conception1 :i* we d n "k z x is 9 itself2 b1 9 relation to ! sy/ematic disposition ( ! univ]se1 :i* we mu/ presuppose 9 all our obs]vation ( nature1 we h cogitat$ ?is unkn[n be+ 9 analogy ) an intellig5t exi/5ce 7an empirical conception71 t is to say1 we h end[$ x ) ^? attributes1 :i*1 judg+ f ! nature ( our own reason1 may conta9 ! gr\nd ( su* a sy/ematic unity4 ,?is idea is !re=e valid only relatively to ! employm5t 9 exp]i5ce ( our reason4 ,b if we attribute to x absolute & objective validity1 we ov]look ! fact t x is m]ely an ideal be+ t we cogitate2 &1 by sett+ out f a basis :i* is n det]m9able by consid]ations drawn f exp]i5ce1 we place ourselves 9 a position :i* incapacitates u f apply+ ?is pr9ciple to ! empirical employm5t ( reason4 ,b1 x w be ask$ fur!r1 c ,i make any use ( ?is conception & hypo!sis 9 my inve/igations into ! _w & nature8 ,yes1 = ?is v purpose 0 ! idea e/abli%$ by reason z a fundam5tal basis4 ,b may ,i reg>d c]ta9 arrangem5ts1 :i* seem$ to h be5 made 9 con=mity ) "s fix$ aim1 z ! arrangem5ts ( design1 & look ^u !m z proce$+ f ! div9e w1 ) ! int]v5tion1 h[ev]1 ( c]ta9 o!r p>ticul> arrangem5ts dispos$ to t end8 ,yes1 y may d s2 b at ! same "t y mu/ reg>d x z indiff]5t1 :e!r x is ass]t$ t div9e wisdom has dispos$ all ?+s 9 con=mity ) 8 highe/ aims1 or t ! idea ( supreme wisdom is a regulative pr9ciple 9 ! inve/igation ( nature1 & at ! same "t a pr9ciple ( ! sy/ematic unity ( nature accord+ to g5]al laws1 ev5 9 ^? cases :]e we are unable to discov] t unity4 ,9 o!r words1 x mu/ be p]fectly indiff]5t to y :e!r y say1 :5 y h discov]$ ?is unity3 ,god has wisely will$ x s2 or3 ,nature has wisely arrang$ ?is4 ,= x 0 no?+ b ! sy/ematic unity1 :i* reason requires z a basis = ! inve/igation ( nature1 t ju/ifi$ y 9 accept+ ! idea ( a supreme intellig5ce z a s*ema = a regulative pr9ciple2 &1 ! f>!r y advance 9 ! discov]y ( design & f9ality1 ! m c]ta9 ! validity ( y\r idea4 ,b1 z ! :ole aim ( ?is regulative pr9ciple 0 ! discov]y ( a necess>y & sy/ematic unity 9 nature1 we h1 9 s f> z we atta9 ?is1 to attribute our success to ! idea ( a ,supreme ,be+2 :ile1 at ! same "t1 we _c1 )\t involv+ ourselves 9 contradictions1 ov]look ! g5]al laws ( nature1 z x 0 9 ref]5ce to !m alone t ?is idea 0 employ$4 ,we _c1 ,i say1 ov]look ! g5]al laws ( nature1 & reg>d ?is con=mity to aims obs]vable 9 nature z cont+5t or hyp]physical 9 its orig92 inasmu* z !re is no gr\nd :i* c ju/ify u 9 ! admission ( a be+ ) su* prop]ties di/9ct f & above nature4 ,all t we are au?oriz$ to ass]t is t ?is idea may be employ$ z a pr9ciple1 & t ! prop]ties ( ! be+ :i* is assum$ to correspond to x may be reg>d$ z sy/ematically connect$ 9 analogy ) ! causal det]m9ation ( ph5om5a4 ,= ! same reasons we are ju/ifi$ 9 introduc+ into ! idea ( ! supreme cause o!r an?ropomorphic elem5ts 7= )\t ^! we c\ld n pr$icate any?+ ( x72 we may reg>d x z all[able to cogitate ?is cause z a be+ ) und]/&+1 ! feel+s ( pleasure & displeasure1 & faculties ( desire & w correspond+ to ^!4 ,at ! same "t1 we may attribute to ?is be+ inf9ite p]fection--a p]fection :i* necess>ily transc5ds t :i* our k ( ! ord] & design 9 ! _w au?orize u to pr$icate ( x4 ,= ! regulative law ( sy/ematic unity requires u to /udy nature on ! supposition t sy/ematic & f9al unity 9 inf9itum is ev]y:]e discov]able1 ev5 9 ! highe/ div]sity4 ,=1 al?\gh we may discov] little ( ?is cosmical p]fection1 x belongs to ! legislative pr]ogative ( reason to require u always to seek = & to expect x2 :ile x mu/ always be b5eficial to in/itute all inquiries into nature 9 accordance ) ?is pr9ciple4 ,b x is evid5t t1 by ?is idea ( a supreme au?or ( all1 :i* ,i place z ! f\ndation ( all inquiries into nature1 ,i d n mean to ass]t ! exi/5ce ( su* a be+1 or t ,i h any k ( its exi/5ce2 &1 consequ5tly1 ,i d n really d$uce any?+ f ! exi/5ce ( ?is be+1 b m]ely f its idea1 t is to say1 f ! nature ( ?+s 9 ?is _w1 9 accordance ) ?is idea4 ,a c]ta9 dim consci\sness ( ! true use ( ?is idea seems to h dictat$ to ! philosoph]s ( all times ! mod]ate language us$ by !m reg>d+ ! cause ( ! _w4 ,we f9d !m employ+ ! expressions wisdom & c>e ( nature1 & div9e wisdom1 z synonym\s--nay1 9 purely speculative discussions1 pref]r+ ! =m]1 because x does n c>ry ! appe>ance ( great] pret5sions ?an su* z we are entitl$ to make1 & at ! same "t directs reason to its prop] field ( action--nature & h] ph5om5a4 ,?us1 pure reason1 :i* at fir/ seem$ to promise u no?+ less ?an ! ext5sion ( our cognition beyond ! limits ( exp]i5ce1 is f\nd1 :5 ?or\ghly exam9$1 to conta9 no?+ b regulative pr9ciples1 ! virtue & function ( :i* is to introduce into our cognition a high] degree ( unity ?an ! und]/&+ c\ld ( itself4 ,^! pr9ciples1 by plac+ ! goal ( all our /ruggles at s great a di/ance1 realize = u ! mo/ ?or\gh connection betwe5 ! diff]5t p>ts ( our cognition1 & ! highe/ degree ( sy/ematic unity4 ,b1 on ! o!r h&1 if misund]/ood & employ$ z con/itutive pr9ciples ( transc5d5t cognition1 !y become ! p>5ts ( illusions & contradictions1 :ile pret5d+ to introduce u to new regions ( k4 ,?us all human cognition beg9s ) intuitions1 proce$s f !nce to conceptions1 & ends ) ideas4 ,al?\gh x possesses1 9 relation to all ?ree elem5ts1 priori s\rces ( cognition1 :i* seem$ to transc5d ! limits ( all exp]i5ce1 a ?or\ghgo+ criticism demon/rates t speculative reason c nev]1 by ! aid ( ^! elem5ts1 pass ! b\nds ( possible exp]i5ce1 & t ! prop] de/9ation ( ?is highe/ faculty ( cognition is to employ all me?ods1 & all ! pr9ciples ( ^! me?ods1 = ! purpose ( p5etrat+ into ! inn]mo/ secrets ( nature1 by ! aid ( ! pr9ciples ( unity 7among all k9ds ( :i* teleological unity is ! highe/71 :ile x ought n to attempt to so> above ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce1 beyond :i* !re lies n\ght = u b ! void inane4 ,! critical exam9ation1 9 our ,transc5d5tal ,analytic1 ( all ! propositions :i* pr(ess$ to ext5d cognition beyond ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce1 completely demon/rat$ t !y c only conduct u to a possible exp]i5ce4 ,if we 7 n di/ru/ful ev5 ( ! cle>e/ ab/ract !orems1 if we 7 n allur$ by speci\s & invit+ prospects to escape f ! con/ra9+ p[] ( _! evid5ce1 we might sp>e ourselves ! labori\s exam9ation ( all ! dialectical argum5ts :i* a transc5d5t reason adduces 9 support ( its pret5sions2 = we %\ld "k ) ! mo/ complete c]ta9ty t1 h[ev] hone/ su* pr(essions might be1 !y are null & valueless1 because !y relate to a k9d ( k to :i* no man c by any possibility atta94 ,b1 z !re is no end to discussion1 if we _c discov] ! true cause ( ! illusions by :i* ev5 ! wise/ are deceiv$1 & z ! analysis ( all our transc5d5t cognition into its elem5ts is ( itself ( no slight value z a psy*ological /udy1 :ile x is a duty incumb5t on e philosoph]--x 0 f\nd necess>y to inve/igate ! dialectical proc$ure ( reason 9 its prim>y s\rces4 ,& z ! inf]5ces ( :i* ?is dialectic is ! p>5t are n only deceitful1 b naturally possess a pr(\nd int]e/ = humanity1 x 0 advisable at ! same "t1 to give a full acc\nt ( ! mom5ta ( ?is dialectical proc$ure1 & to deposit x 9 ! ar*ives ( human reason1 z a w>n+ to all future metaphysicians to avoid ^! causes ( speculative error4 ,,ii4 ,transc5d5tal ,doctr9e ( ,me?od ,if we reg>d ! sum ( ! cognition ( pure speculative reason z an edifice1 ! idea ( :i*1 at lea/1 exi/s 9 ! human m9d1 x may be said t we h 9 ! ,transc5d5tal ,doctr9e ( ,elem5ts exam9$ ! mat]ials & det]m9$ to :at edifice ^! belong1 & :at its height & /ability4 ,we h f\nd1 inde$1 t1 al?\gh we _h purpos$ to build = ourselves a t[] :i* %\ld rea* to ,heav51 ! supply ( mat]ials suffic$ m]ely = a habitation1 :i* 0 spaci\s en\gh = all t]re/rial purposes1 & high en\gh to enable u to survey ! level pla9 ( exp]i5ce1 b t ! bold und]tak+ design$ necess>ily fail$ = want ( mat]ials--n to m5tion ! confusion ( tongues1 :i* gave rise to endless disputes among ! lab\r]s on ! plan ( ! edifice1 & at la/ scatt]$ !m ov] all ! _w1 ea* to erect a sep>ate build+ = himself1 accord+ to 8 own plans & 8 own incl9ations4 ,our pres5t task relates n to ! mat]ials1 b to ! plan ( an edifice2 &1 z we h _h suffici5t w>n+ n to v5ture bl9dly ^u a design :i* may be f\nd to transc5d our natural p[]s1 :ile1 at ! same "t1 we _c give up ! int5tion ( erect+ a secure abode = ! m9d1 we mu/ proportion our design to ! mat]ial :i* is pres5t$ to u1 & :i* is1 at ! same "t1 suffici5t = all our wants4 ,i und]/&1 !n1 by ! transc5d5tal doctr9e ( me?od1 ! det]m9ation ( ! =mal conditions ( a complete sy/em ( pure reason4 ,we %all accord+ly h to treat ( ! discipl9e1 ! canon1 ! ar*itectonic1 &1 f9ally1 ! hi/ory ( pure reason4 ,?is "p ( our ,critique w accompli%1 f ! transc5d5tal po9t ( view1 :at has be5 usually attempt$1 b mis]ably execut$1 "u ! "n ( practical logic4 ,x has be5 badly execut$1 ,i say1 because g5]al logic1 n be+ limit$ to any p>ticul> k9d ( cognition 7n ev5 to ! pure cognition ( ! und]/&+7 nor to any p>ticul> objects1 x _c1 )\t borr[+ f o!r sci5ces1 d m ?an pres5t m]ely ! titles or signs ( possible me?ods & ! te*nical expressions1 :i* are employ$ 9 ! sy/ematic p>ts ( all sci5ces2 & ?us ! pupil is made acqua9t$ ) names1 ! mean+ & application ( :i* he is to le>n only at "s future "t4 ,*apt] ,i4 ,! ,discipl9e ( ,pure ,reason ,negative judgem5ts--^? :i* are s n m]ely z reg>ds _! logical =m1 b 9 respect ( _! cont5t--are n commonly held 9 especial respect4 ,!y are1 on ! contr>y1 reg>d$ z jeal\s enemies ( our insatiable desire = k2 & x almo/ requires an apology to induce u to tol]ate1 mu* less to prize & to respect !m4 ,all propositions1 inde$1 may be logically express$ 9 a negative =m2 b1 9 relation to ! cont5t ( our cognition1 ! peculi> prov9ce ( negative judgem5ts is solely to prev5t error4 ,= ?is reason1 too1 negative propositions1 :i* are fram$ = ! purpose ( correct+ false cognitions :]e error is absolutely impossible1 are und\bt$ly true1 b inane & s5seless2 t is1 !y are 9 reality purposeless &1 = ?is reason1 (t5 v ridicul\s4 ,su* is ! proposition ( ! s*oolman t ,alex&] c\ld n h subdu$ any c\ntries )\t an army4 ,b :]e ! limits ( our possible cognition are v mu* contract$1 ! attraction to new fields ( k great1 ! illusions to :i* ! m9d is subject ( ! mo/ deceptive "*1 & ! evil consequ5ces ( error ( no inconsid]able magnitude--! negative elem5t 9 k1 :i* is useful only to gu>d u aga9/ error1 is ( f> m importance ?an mu* ( t positive in/ruction :i* makes additions to ! sum ( our k4 ,! re/ra9t :i* is employ$ to repress1 & f9ally to extirpate ! con/ant incl9ation to dep>t f c]ta9 rules1 is t]m$ discipl9e4 ,x is di/+ui%$ f culture1 :i* aims at ! =mation ( a c]ta9 degree ( skill1 )\t attempt+ to repress or to de/roy any o!r m5tal p[]1 already exi/+4 ,9 ! cultivation ( a tal5t1 :i* has giv5 evid5ce ( an impulse t[>ds self-developm5t1 discipl9e takes a negative1#gd culture & doctr9e a positive1 "p4 #gd ,i am well aw>e t1 9 ! language ( ! s*ools1 ! t]m discipl9e is usually employ$ z synonym\s ) in/ruction4 ,b !re are s _m cases 9 :i* x is necess>y to di/+ui% ! notion ( ! =m]1 z a c\rse ( corrective tra9+1 f t ( ! latt]1 z ! communication ( k1 & ! nature ( ?+s itself dem&s ! appropriation ( ! mo/ suitable expressions = ?is di/9ction1 t x is my desire t ! =m] t]ms %\ld nev] be employ$ 9 any o!r ?an a negative signification4 ,t natural dispositions & tal5ts 7su* z imag9ation & wit71 :i* ask a free & unlimit$ developm5t1 require 9 _m respects ! corrective influ5ce ( discipl9e1 e "o w readily grant4 ,b x may well appe> /range t reason1 ^: prop] duty x is to prescribe rules ( discipl9e to all ! o!r p[]s ( ! m9d1 %\ld itself require ?is corrective4 ,x has1 9 fact1 hi!rto escap$ ?is humiliation1 only because1 9 pres5ce ( its magnific5t pret5sions & high position1 no "o c\ld readily suspect x to be capable ( sub/itut+ fancies = conceptions1 & words = ?+s4 ,reason1 :5 employ$ 9 ! field ( exp]i5ce1 does n /& 9 ne$ ( criticism1 because its pr9ciples are subject$ to ! cont9ual te/ ( empirical obs]vations4 ,nor is criticism requisite 9 ! sph]e ( ma!matics1 :]e ! conceptions ( reason mu/ always be pres5t$ 9 concreto 9 pure intuition1 & baseless or arbitr>y ass]tions are discov]$ )\t difficulty4 ,b :]e reason is n held 9 a pla9 track by ! influ5ce ( empirical or ( pure intuition1 t is1 :5 x is employ$ 9 ! transc5d5tal sph]e ( pure conceptions1 x /&s 9 great ne$ ( discipl9e1 to re/ra9 its prop5sity to ov]/ep ! limits ( possible exp]i5ce & to keep x f w&]+ into error4 ,9 fact1 ! utility ( ! philosophy ( pure reason is entirely ( ?is negative "*4 ,p>ticul> errors may be correct$ by p>ticul> animadv]sions1 & ! causes ( ^! errors may be eradicat$ by criticism4 ,b :]e we f9d1 z 9 ! case ( pure reason1 a complete sy/em ( illusions & fallacies1 closely connect$ ) ea* o!r & dep5d+ ^u gr& g5]al pr9ciples1 !re seems to be requir$ a peculi> & negative code ( m5tal legislation1 :i*1 "u ! d5om9ation ( a discipl9e1 & f\nd$ ^u ! nature ( reason & ! objects ( its ex]cise1 %all con/itute a sy/em ( ?or\gh exam9ation & te/+1 :i* no fallacy w be able to )/& or escape f1 "u :atev] disguise or concealm5t x may lurk4 ,b ! read] mu/ rem>k t1 9 ?is ! second division ( our transc5d5tal ,critique ! discipl9e ( pure reason is n direct$ to ! cont5t1 b to ! me?od ( ! cognition ( pure reason4 ,! =m] task has be5 complet$ 9 ! doctr9e ( elem5ts4 ,b !re is s mu* simil>ity 9 ! mode ( employ+ ! faculty ( reason1 :atev] be ! object to :i* x is appli$1 :ile1 at ! same "t1 its employm5t 9 ! transc5d5tal sph]e is s ess5tially diff]5t 9 k9d f e o!r1 t1 )\t ! w>n+ negative influ5ce ( a discipl9e specially direct$ to t end1 ! errors are unavoidable :i* spr+ f ! unskillful employm5t ( ! me?ods :i* are orig9at$ by reason b :i* are out ( place 9 ?is sph]e4 ,section ,i4 ,! ,discipl9e ( ,pure ,reason 9 ! ,sph]e ( ,dogmatism ,! sci5ce ( ma!matics pres5ts ! mo/ brilliant example ( ! ext5sion ( ! sph]e ( pure reason )\t ! aid ( exp]i5ce4 ,examples are always contagi\s2 & !y ex]t an especial influ5ce on ! same faculty1 :i* naturally flatt]s itself t x w h ! same good =tune 9 o!r case z fell to its lot 9 "o =tunate in/ance4 ,h5ce pure reason hopes to be able to ext5d its empire 9 ! transc5d5tal sph]e ) equal success & security1 especially :5 x applies ! same me?od :i* 0 att5d$ ) su* brilliant results 9 ! sci5ce ( ma!matics4 ,x is1 !re=e1 ( ! highe/ importance = u to "k :e!r ! me?od ( arriv+ at demon/rative c]ta9ty1 :i* is t]m$ ma!matical1 be id5tical ) t by :i* we endeav\r to atta9 ! same degree ( c]ta9ty 9 philosophy1 & :i* is t]m$ 9 t sci5ce dogmatical4 ,philosophical cognition is ! cognition ( reason by means ( conceptions2 ma!matical cognition is cognition by means ( ! con/ruction ( conceptions4 ,! con/ruction ( a conception is ! pres5tation priori ( ! intuition :i* corresponds to ! conception4 ,= ?is purpose a non-empirical intuition is requisite1 :i*1 z an intuition1 is an individual object2 :ile1 z ! con/ruction ( a conception 7a g5]al repres5tation71 x mu/ be se5 to be univ]sally valid = all ! possible intuitions :i* rank "u t conception4 ,?us ,i con/ruct a triangle1 by ! pres5tation ( ! object :i* corresponds to ?is conception1 ei!r by m]e imag9ation1 9 pure intuition1 or ^u pap]1 9 empirical intuition1 9 bo? cases completely priori1 )\t borr[+ ! type ( t figure f any exp]i5ce4 ,! individual figure drawn ^u pap] is empirical2 b x s]ves1 not)/&+1 to indicate ! conception1 ev5 9 its univ]sality1 because 9 ?is empirical intuition we keep our eye m]ely on ! act ( ! con/ruction ( ! conception1 & pay no att5tion to ! v>i\s modes ( det]m9+ x1 = example1 its size1 ! l5g? ( its sides1 ! size ( its angles1 ^! n 9 ! lea/ affect+ ! ess5tial "* ( ! conception4 ,philosophical cognition1 accord+ly1 reg>ds ! p>ticul> only 9 ! g5]al2 ma!matical ! g5]al 9 ! p>ticul>1 nay1 9 ! individual4 ,?is is done1 h[ev]1 entirely priori & by means ( pure reason1 s t1 z ?is individual figure is det]m9$ "u c]ta9 univ]sal conditions ( con/ruction1 ! object ( ! conception1 to :i* ?is individual figure corresponds z its s*ema1 mu/ be cogitat$ z univ]sally det]m9$4 ,! ess5tial diff]5ce ( ^! two modes ( cognition consi/s1 !re=e1 9 ?is =mal quality2 x does n reg>d ! diff]5ce ( ! matt] or objects ( bo?4 ,^? ?9k]s :o aim at di/+ui%+ philosophy f ma!matics by ass]t+ t ! =m] has to d ) quality m]ely1 & ! latt] ) quantity1 h mi/ak5 ! effect = ! cause4 ,! reason :y ma!matical cognition c relate only to quantity is to be f\nd 9 its =m alone4 ,= x is ! conception ( quantities only t is capable ( be+ con/ruct$1 t is1 pres5t$ priori 9 intuition2 :ile qualities _c be giv5 9 any o!r ?an an empirical intuition4 ,h5ce ! cognition ( qualities by reason is possible only ?r\gh conceptions4 ,no "o c f9d an intuition :i* %all correspond to ! conception ( reality1 except 9 exp]i5ce2 x _c be pres5t$ to ! m9d priori & antec$5tly to ! empirical consci\sness ( a reality4 ,we c =m an intuition1 by means ( ! m]e conception ( x1 ( a cone1 )\t ! aid ( exp]i5ce2 b ! col\r ( ! cone we _c "k except f exp]i5ce4 ,i _c pres5t an intuition ( a cause1 except 9 an example :i* exp]i5ce (f]s to me4 ,besides1 philosophy1 z well z ma!matics1 treats ( quantities2 z1 = example1 ( totality1 inf9ity1 & s on4 ,ma!matics1 too1 treats ( ! diff]5ce ( l9es & surfaces--z spaces ( diff]5t quality1 ( ! cont9uity ( ext5sion--z a quality !re(4 ,b1 al?\gh 9 su* cases !y h a common object1 ! mode 9 :i* reason consid]s t object is v diff]5t 9 philosophy f :at x is 9 ma!matics4 ,! =m] conf9es itself to ! g5]al conceptions2 ! latt] c d no?+ ) a m]e conception1 x ha/5s to intuition4 ,9 ?is intuition x reg>ds ! conception 9 concreto1 n empirically1 b 9 an priori intuition1 :i* x has con/ruct$2 & 9 :i*1 all ! results :i* foll[ f ! g5]al conditions ( ! con/ruction ( ! conception are 9 all cases valid = ! object ( ! con/ruct$ conception4 ,suppose t ! conception ( a triangle is giv5 to a philosoph] & t he is requir$ to discov]1 by ! philosophical me?od1 :at relation ! sum ( its angles be>s to a "r angle4 ,he has no?+ be=e him b ! conception ( a figure enclos$ )9 ?ree "r l9es1 &1 consequ5tly1 ) ! same numb] ( angles4 ,he may analyse ! conception ( a "r l9e1 ( an angle1 or ( ! numb] ?ree z long z he pleases1 b he w n discov] any prop]ties n conta9$ 9 ^! conceptions4 ,b1 if ?is "q is propos$ to a geometrician1 he at once beg9s by con/ruct+ a triangle4 ,he kn[s t two "r angles are equal to ! sum ( all ! contigu\s angles :i* proce$ f "o po9t 9 a /raight l9e2 & he goes on to produce "o side ( 8 triangle1 ?us =m+ two adjac5t angles :i* are toge!r equal to two "r angles4 ,he !n divides ! ext]ior ( ^! angles1 by draw+ a l9e p>allel ) ! opposite side ( ! triangle1 & imm$iately p]ceives t he has ?us got an ext]ior adjac5t angle :i* is equal to ! int]ior4 ,proce$+ 9 ?is way1 ?r\gh a *a9 ( inf]5ces1 & always on ! gr\nd ( intuition1 he arrives at a cle> & univ]sally valid solution ( ! "q4 ,b ma!matics does n conf9e itself to ! con/ruction ( quantities 7quanta71 z 9 ! case ( geometry2 x occupies itself ) pure quantity also 7quantitas71 z 9 ! case ( algebra1 :]e complete ab/raction is made ( ! prop]ties ( ! object indicat$ by ! conception ( quantity4 ,9 algebra1 a c]ta9 me?od ( notation by signs is adopt$1 & ^! indicate ! diff]5t possible con/ructions ( quantities1 ! extraction ( roots1 & s on4 ,aft] hav+ ?us d5ot$ ! g5]al conception ( quantities1 accord+ to _! diff]5t relations1 ! diff]5t op]ations by :i* quantity or numb] is increas$ or dim9i%$ are pres5t$ 9 intuition 9 accordance ) g5]al rules4 ,?us1 :5 "o quantity is to be divid$ by ano!r1 ! signs :i* d5ote bo? are plac$ 9 ! =m peculi> to ! op]ation ( division2 & ?us algebra1 by means ( a symbolical con/ruction ( quantity1 j z geometry1 ) its o/5sive or geometrical con/ruction 7a con/ruction ( ! objects !mselves71 arrives at results :i* discursive cognition _c hope to rea* by ! aid ( m]e conceptions4 ,n[1 :at is ! cause ( ?is diff]5ce 9 ! =tune ( ! philosoph] & ! ma!matician1 ! =m] ( :om foll[s ! pa? ( conceptions1 :ile ! latt] pursues t ( intuitions1 :i* he repres5ts1 priori1 9 correspond5ce ) 8 conceptions8 ,! cause is evid5t f :at has be5 already demon/rat$ 9 ! introduction to ?is ,critique4 ,we d n1 9 ! pres5t case1 want to discov] analytical propositions1 :i* may be produc$ m]ely by analys+ our conceptions--= 9 ?is ! philosoph] w\ld h ! advantage ov] 8 rival2 we aim at ! discov]y ( syn!tical propositions--su* syn!tical propositions1 moreov]1 z c be cogniz$ priori4 ,i mu/ n conf9e myself to t :i* ,i actually cogitate 9 my conception ( a triangle1 = ?is is no?+ m ?an ! m]e def9ition2 ,i mu/ try to g beyond t1 & to arrive at prop]ties :i* are n conta9$ 91 al?\gh !y belong to1 ! conception4 ,n[1 ?is is impossible1 unless ,i det]m9e ! object pres5t to my m9d accord+ to ! conditions1 ei!r ( empirical1 or ( pure1 intuition4 ,9 ! =m] case1 ,i %\ld h an empirical proposition 7arriv$ at by actual measurem5t ( ! angles ( ! triangle71 :i* w\ld possess nei!r univ]sality nor necessity2 b t w\ld be ( no value4 ,9 ! latt]1 ,i proce$ by geometrical con/ruction1 by means ( :i* ,i collect1 9 a pure intuition1 j z ,i w\ld 9 an empirical intuition1 all ! v>i\s prop]ties :i* belong to ! s*ema ( a triangle 9 g5]al1 & consequ5tly to its conception1 & ?us con/ruct syn!tical propositions :i* possess ! attribute ( univ]sality4 ,x w\ld be va9 to philosophize ^u ! triangle1 t is1 to reflect on x discursively2 ,i %\ld get no fur!r ?an ! def9ition ) :i* ,i _h be5 oblig$ to set out4 ,!re are c]ta9ly transc5d5tal syn!tical propositions :i* are fram$ by means ( pure conceptions1 & :i* =m ! peculi> di/9ction ( philosophy2 b ^! d n relate to any p>ticul> ?+1 b to a ?+ 9 g5]al1 & en\nce ! conditions "u :i* ! p]ception ( x may become a "p ( possible exp]i5ce4 ,b ! sci5ce ( ma!matics has no?+ to d ) su* que/ions1 nor ) ! "q ( exi/5ce 9 any fa%ion2 x is conc]n$ m]ely ) ! prop]ties ( objects 9 !mselves1 only 9 s f> z ^! are connect$ ) ! conception ( ! objects4 ,9 ! above example1 we m]ely attempt$ to %[ ! great diff]5ce :i* exi/s betwe5 ! discursive employm5t ( reason 9 ! sph]e ( conceptions1 & its intuitive ex]cise by means ( ! con/ruction ( conceptions4 ,! "q naturally arises3 ,:at is ! cause :i* necessitates ?is tw(old ex]cise ( reason1 & h[ are we to discov] :e!r x is ! philosophical or ! ma!matical me?od :i* reason is pursu+ 9 an argum5t8 ,all our k relates1 f9ally1 to possible intuitions1 = x is ^! alone t pres5t objects to ! m9d4 ,an priori or non-empirical conception conta9s ei!r a pure intuition--& 9 ?is case x c be con/ruct$2 or x conta9s no?+ b ! syn!sis ( possible intuitions1 :i* are n giv5 priori4 ,9 ?is latt] case1 x may help u to =m syn!tical priori judgem5ts1 b only 9 ! discursive me?od1 by conceptions1 n 9 ! intuitive1 by means ( ! con/ruction ( conceptions4 ,! only priori intuition is t ( ! pure =m ( ph5om5a--space & "t4 ,a conception ( space & "t z quanta may be pres5t$ priori 9 intuition1 t is1 con/ruct$1 ei!r alone ) _! quality 7figure71 or z pure quantity 7! m]e syn!sis ( ! homog5e\s71 by means ( numb]4 ,b ! matt] ( ph5om5a1 by :i* ?+s are giv5 9 space & "t1 c be pres5t$ only 9 p]ception1 po/]iori4 ,! only conception :i* repres5ts priori ?is empirical cont5t ( ph5om5a is ! conception ( a ?+ 9 g5]al2 & ! priori syn!tical cognition ( ?is conception c give u no?+ m ?an ! rule = ! syn!sis ( t :i* may be conta9$ 9 ! correspond+ po/]iori p]ception2 x is utt]ly inadequate to pres5t an priori intuition ( ! real object1 :i* mu/ necess>ily be empirical4 ,syn!tical propositions1 :i* relate to ?+s 9 g5]al1 an priori intuition ( :i* is impossible1 are transc5d5tal4 ,= ?is reason transc5d5tal propositions _c be fram$ by means ( ! con/ruction ( conceptions2 !y are priori1 & bas$ entirely on conceptions !mselves4 ,!y conta9 m]ely ! rule1 by :i* we are to seek 9 ! _w ( p]ception or exp]i5ce ! syn!tical unity ( t :i* _c be intuit$ priori4 ,b !y are incompet5t to pres5t any ( ! conceptions :i* appe> 9 !m 9 an priori intuition2 ^! c be giv5 only po/]iori1 9 exp]i5ce1 :i*1 h[ev]1 is itself possible only ?r\gh ^! syn!tical pr9ciples4 ,if we are to =m a syn!tical judgem5t reg>d+ a conception1 we mu/ g beyond x1 to ! intuition 9 :i* x is giv54 ,if we keep to :at is conta9$ 9 ! conception1 ! judgem5t is m]ely analytical--x is m]ely an explanation ( :at we h cogitat$ 9 ! conception4 ,b ,i c pass f ! conception to ! pure or empirical intuition :i* corresponds to x4 ,i c proce$ to exam9e my conception 9 concreto1 & to cognize1 ei!r priori or po/]iori1 :at ,i f9d 9 ! object ( ! conception4 ,! =m]-- priori cognition--is rational-ma!matical cognition by means ( ! con/ruction ( ! conception2 ! latt]-- po/]iori cognition--is purely empirical cognition1 :i* does n possess ! attributes ( necessity & univ]sality4 ,?us ,i may analyse ! conception ,i h ( gold2 b ,i ga9 no new in=mation f ?is analysis1 ,i m]ely enum]ate ! diff]5t prop]ties :i* ,i _h connect$ ) ! notion indicat$ by ! ^w4 ,my k has ga9$ 9 logical cle>ness & arrangem5t1 b no addition has be5 made to x4 ,b if ,i take ! matt] :i* is indicat$ by ?is "n1 & submit x to ! exam9ation ( my s5ses1 ,i am enabl$ to =m sev]al syn!tical--al?\gh /ill empirical--propositions4 ,! ma!matical conception ( a triangle ,i %\ld con/ruct1 t is1 pres5t priori 9 intuition1 & 9 ?is way atta9 to rational-syn!tical cognition4 ,b :5 ! transc5d5tal conception ( reality1 or sub/ance1 or p[] is pres5t$ to my m9d1 ,i f9d t x does n relate to or indicate ei!r an empirical or pure intuition1 b t x indicates m]ely ! syn!sis ( empirical intuitions1 :i* _c ( c\rse be giv5 priori4 ,! syn!sis 9 su* a conception _c proce$ priori--)\t ! aid ( exp]i5ce--to ! intuition :i* corresponds to ! conception2 &1 = ?is reason1 none ( ^! conceptions c produce a det]m9ative syn!tical proposition1 !y c nev] pres5t m ?an a pr9ciple ( ! syn!sis#ge ( possible empirical intuitions4 ,a transc5d5tal proposition is1 !re=e1 a syn!tical cognition ( reason by means ( pure conceptions & ! discursive me?od1 & x r5d]s possible all syn!tical unity 9 empirical cognition1 ?\gh x _c pres5t u ) any intuition priori4 #ge ,9 ! case ( ! conception ( cause1 ,i d really g beyond ! empirical conception ( an ev5t--b n to ! intuition :i* pres5ts ?is conception 9 concreto1 b only to ! "t-conditions1 :i* may be f\nd 9 exp]i5ce to correspond to ! conception4 ,my proc$ure is1 !re=e1 /rictly accord+ to conceptions2 ,i _c 9 a case ( ?is k9d employ ! con/ruction ( conceptions1 because ! conception is m]ely a rule = ! syn!sis ( p]ceptions1 :i* are n pure intuitions1 & :i*1 !re=e1 _c be giv5 priori4 ,!re is ?us a tw(old ex]cise ( reason4 ,bo? modes h ! prop]ties ( univ]sality & an priori orig9 9 common1 b are1 9 _! proc$ure1 ( widely diff]5t "*4 ,! reason ( ?is is t 9 ! _w ( ph5om5a1 9 :i* alone objects are pres5t$ to our m9ds1 !re are two ma9 elem5ts--! =m ( intuition 7space & "t71 :i* c be cogniz$ & det]m9$ completely priori1 & ! matt] or cont5t--t :i* is pres5t$ 9 space & "t1 & :i*1 consequ5tly1 conta9s a some?+--an exi/5ce correspond+ to our p[]s ( s5sation4 ,z reg>ds ! latt]1 :i* c nev] be giv5 9 a det]m9ate mode except by exp]i5ce1 !re are no priori notions :i* relate to x1 except ! undet]m9$ conceptions ( ! syn!sis ( possible s5sations1 9 s f> z ^! belong 79 a possible exp]i5ce7 to ! unity ( consci\sness4 ,z reg>ds ! =m]1 we c det]m9e our conceptions priori 9 intuition1 inasmu* z we are ourselves ! creators ( ! objects ( ! conceptions 9 space & "t--^! objects be+ reg>d$ simply z quanta4 ,9 ! "o case1 reason proce$s accord+ to conceptions & c d no?+ m ?an subject ph5om5a to ^!--:i* c only be det]m9$ empirically1 t is1 po/]iori--9 con=mity1 h[ev]1 ) ^? conceptions z ! rules ( all empirical syn!sis4 ,9 ! o!r case1 reason proce$s by ! con/ruction ( conceptions2 &1 z ^! conceptions relate to an priori intuition1 !y may be giv5 & det]m9$ 9 pure intuition priori1 & )\t ! aid ( empirical data4 ,! exam9ation & consid]ation ( ev]y?+ t exi/s 9 space or "t--:e!r x is a quantum or n1 9 h[ f> ! p>ticul> some?+ 7:i* fills space or "t7 is a prim>y sub/ratum1 or a m]e det]m9ation ( "s o!r exi/5ce1 :e!r x relates to any?+ else--ei!r z cause or effect1 :e!r its exi/5ce is isolat$ or 9 reciprocal connection ) & dep5d5ce ^u o!rs1 ! possibility ( ?is exi/5ce1 its reality & necessity or opposites--all ^! =m "p ( ! cognition ( reason on ! gr\nd ( conceptions1 & ?is cognition is t]m$ philosophical4 ,b to det]m9e priori an intuition 9 space 7its figure71 to divide "t into p]iods1 or m]ely to cognize ! quantity ( an intuition 9 space & "t1 & to det]m9e x by numb]--all ?is is an op]ation ( reason by means ( ! con/ruction ( conceptions1 & is call$ ma!matical4 ,! success :i* att5ds ! ef=ts ( reason 9 ! sph]e ( ma!matics naturally fo/]s ! expectation t ! same good =tune w be its lot1 if x applies ! ma!matical me?od 9 o!r regions ( m5tal endeav\r besides t ( quantities4 ,its success is ?us great1 because x c support all its conceptions by priori intuitions &1 9 ?is way1 make itself a ma/]1 z x 71 ov] nature2 :ile pure philosophy1 ) its priori discursive conceptions1 bungles ab\t 9 ! _w ( nature1 & _c accr$it or %[ any priori evid5ce ( ! reality ( ^! conceptions4 ,ma/]s 9 ! sci5ce ( ma!matics are confid5t ( ! success ( ?is me?od2 inde$1 x is a common p]suasion t x is capable ( be+ appli$ to any subject ( human ?\ght4 ,!y h h>dly ev] reflect$ or philosophiz$ on _! fav\rite sci5ce--a task ( great difficulty2 & ! specific diff]5ce betwe5 ! two modes ( employ+ ! faculty ( reason has nev] ent]$ _! ?\ghts4 ,rules curr5t 9 ! field ( common exp]i5ce1 & :i* common s5se /amps ev]y:]e ) its approval1 are reg>d$ by !m z axiomatic4 ,f :at s\rce ! conceptions ( space & "t1 ) :i* 7z ! only primitive quanta7 !y h to deal1 ent] _! m9ds1 is a "q :i* !y d n tr\ble !mselves to answ]2 & !y ?9k x j z unnecess>y to exam9e into ! orig9 ( ! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+ & ! ext5t ( _! validity4 ,all !y h to d ) !m is to employ !m4 ,9 all ?is !y are p]fectly "r1 if !y d n ov]/ep ! limits ( ! sph]e ( nature4 ,b !y pass1 unconsci\sly1 f ! _w ( s5se to ! insecure gr\nd ( pure transc5d5tal conceptions 7in/abilis tellus1 innabilis unda71 :]e !y c nei!r /& nor swim1 & :]e ! tracks ( _! foot/eps are oblit]at$ by "t2 :ile ! m>* ( ma!matics is pursu$ on a broad & magnific5t highway1 :i* ! late/ po/]ity %all frequ5t )\t fe> ( dang] or imp$im5t4 ,z we h tak5 ^u u ! task ( det]m9+1 cle>ly & c]ta9ly1 ! limits ( pure reason 9 ! sph]e ( transc5d5talism1 & z ! ef=ts ( reason 9 ?is direction are p]si/$ 91 ev5 aft] ! pla9e/ & mo/ expressive w>n+s1 hope /ill beckon+ u pa/ ! limits ( exp]i5ce into ! spl5d\rs ( ! intellectual _w--x becomes necess>y to cut away ! la/ an*or ( ?is fallaci\s & fanta/ic hope4 ,we %all1 accord+ly1 %[ t ! ma!matical me?od is unatt5d$ 9 ! sph]e ( philosophy by ! lea/ advantage--except1 p]haps1 t x m pla9ly exhibits its own inadequacy--t geometry & philosophy are two q diff]5t ?+s1 al?\gh !y g h& 9 h& 9 ! field ( natural sci5ce1 &1 consequ5tly1 t ! proc$ure ( ! "o c nev] be imitat$ by ! o!r4 ,! evid5ce ( ma!matics re/s ^u def9itions1 axioms1 & demon/rations4 ,i %all be satisfi$ ) %[+ t none ( ^! =ms c be employ$ or imitat$ 9 philosophy 9 ! s5se 9 :i* !y are und]/ood by ma!maticians2 & t ! geometrician1 if he employs 8 me?od 9 philosophy1 w succe$ only 9 build+ c>d-ca/les1 :ile ! employm5t ( ! philosophical me?od 9 ma!matics c result 9 no?+ b m]e v]biage4 ,! ess5tial bus9ess ( philosophy1 inde$1 is to m>k out ! limits ( ! sci5ce2 & ev5 ! ma!matician1 unless 8 tal5t is naturally circumscrib$ & limit$ to ?is p>ticul> dep>tm5t ( k1 _c turn a deaf e> to ! w>n+s ( philosophy1 or set himself above its direction4 ,i4 ,( ,def9itions4 ,a def9ition is1 z ! t]m itself indicates1 ! repres5tation1 ^u prim>y gr\nds1 ( ! complete conception ( a ?+ )9 its own limits4#gf ,accord+ly1 an empirical conception _c be def9$1 x c only be expla9$4 ,=1 z !re are 9 su* a conception only a c]ta9 numb] ( m>ks or signs1 :i* d5ote a c]ta9 class ( s5su\s objects1 we c nev] be sure t we d n cogitate "u ! ^w :i* indicates ! same object1 at "o "t a great]1 at ano!r a small] numb] ( signs4 ,?us1 "o p]son may cogitate 9 8 conception ( gold1 9 addition to its prop]ties ( weight1 col\r1 malleability1 t ( resi/+ ru/1 :ile ano!r p]son may be ignorant ( ?is quality4 ,we employ c]ta9 signs only s long z we require !m = ! sake ( di/9ction2 new obs]vations ab/ract "s & add new ones1 s t an empirical conception nev] rema9s )9 p]man5t limits4 ,x is1 9 fact1 useless to def9e a conception ( ?is k9d4 ,if1 = example1 we are speak+ ( wat] & its prop]ties1 we d n /op at :at we actually ?9k by ! ^w wat]1 b proce$ to obs]vation & exp]im5t2 & ! ^w1 ) ! few signs atta*$ to x1 is m prop]ly a designation ?an a conception ( ! ?+4 ,a def9ition 9 ?is case w\ld evid5tly be no?+ m ?an a det]m9ation ( ! ^w4 ,9 ! second place1 no priori conception1 su* z ^? ( sub/ance1 cause1 "r1 fitness1 & s on1 c be def9$4 ,= ,i c nev] be sure1 t ! cle> repres5tation ( a giv5 conception 7:i* is giv5 9 a confus$ /ate7 has be5 fully develop$1 until ,i "k t ! repres5tation is adequate ) its object4 ,b1 inasmu* z ! conception1 z x is pres5t$ to ! m9d1 may conta9 a numb] ( obscure repres5tations1 :i* we d n obs]ve 9 our analysis1 al?\gh we employ !m 9 our application ( ! conception1 ,i c nev] be sure t my analysis is complete1 :ile examples may make ?is probable1 al?\gh !y c nev] demon/rate ! fact4 ,in/ead ( ! ^w def9ition1 ,i %\ld r employ ! t]m exposition--a m mode/ expression1 :i* ! critic may accept )\t surr5d]+ 8 d\bts z to ! complet5ess ( ! analysis ( any su* conception4 ,z1 !re=e1 nei!r empirical nor priori conceptions are capable ( def9ition1 we h to see :e!r ! only o!r k9d ( conceptions--arbitr>y conceptions--c be subject$ to ?is m5tal op]ation4 ,su* a conception c always be def9$2 = ,i mu/ "k ?or\ghly :at ,i wi%$ to cogitate 9 x1 z x 0 ,i :o creat$ x1 & x 0 n giv5 to my m9d ei!r by ! nature ( my und]/&+ or by exp]i5ce4 ,at ! same "t1 ,i _c say t1 by su* a def9ition1 ,i h def9$ a real object4 ,if ! conception is bas$ ^u empirical conditions1 if1 = example1 ,i h a conception ( a clock = a %ip1 ?is arbitr>y conception does n assure me ( ! exi/5ce or ev5 ( ! possibility ( ! object4 ,my def9ition ( su* a conception w\ld ) m propriety be t]m$ a decl>ation ( a project ?an a def9ition ( an object4 ,!re are no o!r conceptions :i* c be> def9ition1 except ^? :i* conta9 an arbitr>y syn!sis1 :i* c be con/ruct$ priori4 ,consequ5tly1 ! sci5ce ( ma!matics alone possesses def9itions4 ,= ! object "h ?\ght is pres5t$ priori 9 intuition2 & ?us x c nev] conta9 m or less ?an ! conception1 because ! conception ( ! object has be5 giv5 by ! def9ition--& prim>ily1 t is1 )\t d]iv+ ! def9ition f any o!r s\rce4 ,philosophical def9itions are1 !re=e1 m]ely expositions ( giv5 conceptions1 :ile ma!matical def9itions are con/ructions ( conceptions orig9ally =m$ by ! m9d itself2 ! =m] are produc$ by analysis1 ! complet5ess ( :i* is nev] demon/ratively c]ta91 ! latt] by a syn!sis4 ,9 a ma!matical def9ition ! conception is =m$1 9 a philosophical def9ition x is only expla9$4 ,f ?is x foll[s3 #gf ,! def9ition mu/ describe ! conception completely t is1 omit none ( ! m>ks or signs ( :i* x compos$2 )9 its own limits1 t is1 x mu/ be precise1 & enum]ate no m signs ?an belong to ! conception2 & on prim>y gr\nds1 t is to say1 ! limitations ( ! b\nds ( ! conception mu/ n be d$uc$ f o!r conceptions1 z 9 ?is case a pro( w\ld be necess>y1 & ! s-call$ def9ition w\ld be incapable ( tak+ its place at ! head ( all ! judgem5ts we h to =m reg>d+ an object4 7a7 ,t we mu/ n imitate1 9 philosophy1 ! ma!matical usage ( comm5c+ ) def9itions--except by way ( hypo!sis or exp]im5t4 ,=1 z all s-call$ philosophical def9itions are m]ely analyses ( giv5 conceptions1 ^! conceptions1 al?\gh only 9 a confus$ =m1 mu/ prec$e ! analysis2 & ! incomplete exposition mu/ prec$e ! complete1 s t we may be able to draw c]ta9 inf]5ces f ! *>act]i/ics :i* an incomplete analysis has enabl$ u to discov]1 be=e we atta9 to ! complete exposition or def9ition ( ! conception4 ,9 "o ^w1 a full & cle> def9ition ought1 9 philosophy1 r to =m ! conclusion ?an ! comm5cem5t ( our lab\rs4#gg ,9 ma!matics1 on ! contr>y1 we _c h a conception prior to ! def9ition2 x is ! def9ition :i* gives u ! conception1 & x mu/ = ?is reason =m ! comm5cem5t ( e *a9 ( ma!matical reason+4 #gg ,philosophy ab\nds 9 faulty def9itions1 especially su* z conta9 "s ( ! elem5ts requisite to =m a complete def9ition4 ,if a conception c\ld n be employ$ 9 reason+ be=e x _h be5 def9$1 x w\ld f>e ill ) all philosophical ?\ght4 ,b1 z incompletely def9$ conceptions may always be employ$ )\t detrim5t to tru?1 s f> z our analysis ( ! elem5ts conta9$ 9 !m proce$s1 imp]fect def9itions1 t is1 propositions :i* are prop]ly n def9itions1 b m]ely approximations !reto1 may be us$ ) great advantage4 ,9 ma!matics1 def9ition belongs ad esse1 9 philosophy ad melius esse4 ,x is a difficult task to con/ruct a prop] def9ition4 ,juri/s are /ill )\t a complete def9ition ( ! idea ( "r4 7b7 ,ma!matical def9itions _c be errone\s4 ,= ! conception is giv5 only 9 & ?r\gh ! def9ition1 & ?us x conta9s only :at has be5 cogitat$ 9 ! def9ition4 ,b al?\gh a def9ition _c be incorrect1 z reg>ds its cont5t1 an error may sometimes1 al?\gh seldom1 creep into ! =m4 ,?is error consi/s 9 a want ( precision4 ,?us ! common def9ition ( a circle--t x is a curv$ l9e1 e po9t 9 :i* is equally di/ant f ano!r po9t call$ ! c5tre--is faulty1 f ! fact t ! det]m9ation indicat$ by ! ^w curv$ is sup]flu\s4 ,= !re ought to be a p>ticul> !orem1 :i* may be easily prov$ f ! def9ition1 to ! effect t e l9e1 :i* has all its po9ts at equal di/ances f ano!r po9t1 mu/ be a curv$ l9e--t is1 t n ev5 ! smalle/ "p ( x c be /raight4 ,analytical def9itions1 on ! o!r h&1 may be errone\s 9 _m respects1 ei!r by ! introduction ( signs :i* d n actually exi/ 9 ! conception1 or by want+ 9 t complet5ess :i* =ms ! ess5tial ( a def9ition4 ,9 ! latt] case1 ! def9ition is necess>ily defective1 because we c nev] be fully c]ta9 ( ! complet5ess ( our analysis4 ,= ^! reasons1 ! me?od ( def9ition employ$ 9 ma!matics _c be imitat$ 9 philosophy4 #b4 ,( ,axioms4 ,^!1 9 s f> z !y are imm$iately c]ta91 are priori syn!tical pr9ciples4 ,n[1 "o conception _c be connect$ syn!tically & yet imm$iately ) ano!r2 because1 if we wi% to proce$ out ( & beyond a conception1 a ?ird m$iat+ cognition is necess>y4 ,&1 z philosophy is a cognition ( reason by ! aid ( conceptions alone1 !re is to be f\nd 9 x no pr9ciple :i* des]ves to be call$ an axiom4 ,ma!matics1 on ! o!r h&1 may possess axioms1 because x c always connect ! pr$icates ( an object priori1 & )\t any m$iat+ t]m1 by means ( ! con/ruction ( conceptions 9 intuition4 ,su* is ! case ) ! proposition3 ,?ree po9ts c always lie 9 a plane4 ,on ! o!r h&1 no syn!tical pr9ciple :i* is bas$ ^u conceptions1 c ev] be imm$iately c]ta9 7= example1 ! proposition3 ,ev]y?+ t happ5s has a cause71 because ,i require a m$iat+ t]m to connect ! two conceptions ( ev5t & cause--namely1 ! condition ( "t-det]m9ation 9 an exp]i5ce1 & ,i _c cognize any su* pr9ciple imm$iately & f conceptions alone4 ,discursive pr9ciples are1 accord+ly1 v diff]5t f intuitive pr9ciples or axioms4 ,! =m] always require d$uction1 :i* 9 ! case ( ! latt] may be altoge!r disp5s$ )4 ,axioms are1 = ?is reason1 always self-evid5t1 :ile philosophical pr9ciples1 :atev] may be ! degree ( c]ta9ty !y possess1 _c lay any claim to su* a di/9ction4 ,no syn!tical proposition ( pure transc5d5tal reason c be s evid5t1 z is (t5 ra%ly en\gh decl>$1 z ! /atem5t1 twice two are f\r4 ,x is true t 9 ! ,analytic ,i introduc$ into ! li/ ( pr9ciples ( ! pure und]/&+1 c]ta9 axioms ( intuition2 b ! pr9ciple !re discuss$ 0 n itself an axiom1 b s]v$ m]ely to pres5t ! pr9ciple ( ! possibility ( axioms 9 g5]al1 :ile x 0 really no?+ m ?an a pr9ciple bas$ ^u conceptions4 ,= x is "o "p ( ! duty ( transc5d5tal philosophy to e/abli% ! possibility ( ma!matics itself4 ,philosophy possesses1 !n1 no axioms1 & has no "r to impose its priori pr9ciples ^u ?\ght1 until x has e/abli%$ _! au?ority & validity by a ?or\ghgo+ d$uction4 #c4 ,( ,demon/rations4 ,only an apodeictic pro(1 bas$ ^u intuition1 c be t]m$ a demon/ration4 ,exp]i5ce tea*es u :at is1 b x _c conv9ce u t x might n h be5 o!rwise4 ,h5ce a pro( ^u empirical gr\nds _c be apodeictic4 priori conceptions1 9 discursive cognition1 c nev] produce intuitive c]ta9ty or evid5ce1 h[ev] c]ta9 ! judgem5t !y pres5t may be4 ,ma!matics alone1 !re=e1 conta9s demon/rations1 because x does n d$uce its cognition f conceptions1 b f ! con/ruction ( conceptions1 t is1 f intuition1 :i* c be giv5 priori 9 accordance ) conceptions4 ,! me?od ( algebra1 9 equations1 f :i* ! correct answ] is d$uc$ by r$uction1 is a k9d ( con/ruction--n geometrical1 b by symbols--9 :i* all conceptions1 especially ^? ( ! relations ( quantities1 are repres5t$ 9 intuition by signs2 & ?us ! conclusions 9 t sci5ce are secur$ f errors by ! fact t e pro( is submitt$ to ocul> evid5ce4 ,philosophical cognition does n possess ?is advantage1 x be+ requir$ to consid] ! g5]al always 9 ab/racto 7by means ( conceptions71 :ile ma!matics c always consid] x 9 concreto 79 an individual intuition71 & at ! same "t by means ( priori repres5tation1 :]eby all errors are r5d]$ manife/ to ! s5ses4 ,! =m]--discursive pro(s--ought to be t]m$ acroamatic pro(s1 r ?an demon/rations1 z only words are employ$ 9 !m1 :ile demon/rations prop]1 z ! t]m itself indicates1 always require a ref]5ce to ! intuition ( ! object4 ,x foll[s f all ^! consid]ations t x is n consonant ) ! nature ( philosophy1 especially 9 ! sph]e ( pure reason1 to employ ! dogmatical me?od1 & to adorn itself ) ! titles & insignia ( ma!matical sci5ce4 ,x does n belong to t ord]1 & c only hope = a frat]nal union ) t sci5ce4 ,its attempts at ma!matical evid5ce are va9 pret5sions1 :i* c only keep x back f its true aim1 :i* is to detect ! illusory proc$ure ( reason :5 transgress+ its prop] limits1 & by fully expla9+ & analys+ our conceptions1 to conduct u f ! dim regions ( speculation to ! cle> region ( mode/ self-k4 ,reason mu/ n1 !re=e1 9 its transc5d5tal endeav\rs1 look =w>d ) su* confid5ce1 z if ! pa? x is pursu+ l$ /raight to its aim1 nor reckon ) su* security ^u its premisses1 z to consid] x unnecess>y to take a /ep back1 or to keep a /rict wat* = errors1 :i*1 ov]look$ 9 ! pr9ciples1 may be detect$ 9 ! argum5ts !mselves--9 :i* case x may be requisite ei!r to det]m9e ^! pr9ciples ) great] /rictness1 or to *ange !m entirely4 ,i divide all apodeictic propositions1 :e!r demon/rable or imm$iately c]ta91 into dogmata & ma!mata4 ,a direct syn!tical proposition1 bas$ on conceptions1 is a dogma2 a proposition ( ! same k9d1 bas$ on ! con/ruction ( conceptions1 is a ma!ma4 ,analytical judgem5ts d n tea* u any m ab\t an object ?an :at 0 conta9$ 9 ! conception we _h ( x2 because !y d n ext5d our cognition beyond our conception ( an object1 !y m]ely elucidate ! conception4 ,!y _c !re=e be ) propriety t]m$ dogmas4 ,( ! two k9ds ( priori syn!tical propositions above m5tion$1 only ^? :i* are employ$ 9 philosophy c1 accord+ to ! g5]al mode ( spee*1 be> ?is "n2 ^? ( ari?metic or geometry w\ld n be rightly s d5om9at$4 ,?us ! cu/om>y mode ( speak+ confirms ! explanation giv5 above1 & ! conclusion arriv$ at1 t only ^? judgem5ts :i* are bas$ ^u conceptions1 n on ! con/ruction ( conceptions1 c be t]m$ dogmatical4 ,?us1 pure reason1 9 ! sph]e ( speculation1 does n conta9 a s+le direct syn!tical judgem5t bas$ ^u conceptions4 ,by means ( ideas1 x is1 z we h %[n1 incapable ( produc+ syn!tical judgem5ts1 :i* are objectively valid2 by means ( ! conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 x e/abli%es c]ta9 indubitable pr9ciples1 n1 h[ev]1 directly on ! basis ( conceptions1 b only indirectly by means ( ! relation ( ^! conceptions to some?+ ( a purely cont+5t nature1 namely1 possible exp]i5ce4 ,:5 exp]i5ce is presuppos$1 ^! pr9ciples are apodeictically c]ta91 b 9 !mselves1 & directly1 !y _c ev5 be cogniz$ priori4 ,?us ! giv5 conceptions ( cause & ev5t w n be suffici5t = ! demon/ration ( ! proposition3 ,e ev5t has a cause4 ,= ?is reason1 x is n a dogma2 al?\gh f ano!r po9t ( view1 t ( exp]i5ce1 x is capable ( be+ prov$ to demon/ration4 ,! prop] t]m = su* a proposition is pr9ciple1 & n !orem 7al?\gh x does require to be prov$71 because x possesses ! rem>kable peculi>ity ( be+ ! condition ( ! possibility ( its own gr\nd ( pro(1 t is1 exp]i5ce1 & ( =m+ a necess>y presupposition 9 all empirical obs]vation4 ,if !n1 9 ! speculative sph]e ( pure reason1 no dogmata are to be f\nd2 all dogmatical me?ods1 :e!r borr[$ f ma!matics1 or inv5t$ by philosophical ?9k]s1 are alike inappropriate & ineffici5t4 ,!y only s]ve to conceal errors & fallacies1 & to deceive philosophy1 ^: duty x is to see t reason pursues a safe & /raight pa?4 ,a philosophical me?od may1 h[ev]1 be sy/ematical4 ,= our reason is1 subjectively consid]$1 itself a sy/em1 &1 9 ! sph]e ( m]e conceptions1 a sy/em ( inve/igation accord+ to pr9ciples ( unity1 ! mat]ial be+ suppli$ by exp]i5ce alone4 ,b ?is is n ! prop] place = discuss+ ! peculi> me?od ( transc5d5tal philosophy1 z our pres5t task is simply to exam9e :e!r our faculties are capable ( erect+ an edifice on ! basis ( pure reason1 & h[ f> !y may proce$ ) ! mat]ials at _! comm&4 ,section ,,ii4 ,! ,discipl9e ( ,pure ,reason 9 ,polemics ,reason mu/ be subject1 9 all its op]ations1 to criticism1 :i* mu/ always be p]mitt$ to ex]cise its functions )\t re/ra9t2 o!rwise its int]e/s are imp]ill$ & its influ5ce obnoxi\s to suspicion4 ,!re is no?+1 h[ev] useful1 h[ev] sacr$ x may be1 t c claim exemption f ! se>*+ exam9ation ( ?is supreme tribunal1 :i* has no respect ( p]sons4 ,! v exi/5ce ( reason dep5ds ^u ?is fre$om2 = ! voice ( reason is n t ( a dictatorial & despotic p[]1 x is r l ! vote ( ! citiz5s ( a free /ate1 e memb] ( :i* mu/ h ! privilege ( giv+ free expression to 8 d\bts1 & possess ev5 ! "r ( veto4 ,b :ile reason c nev] decl9e to submit itself to ! tribunal ( criticism1 x has n always cause to dread ! judgem5t ( ?is c\rt4 ,pure reason1 h[ev]1 :5 engag$ 9 ! sph]e ( dogmatism1 is n s ?or\ghly consci\s ( a /rict obs]vance ( its highe/ laws1 z to appe> be=e a high] judicial reason ) p]fect confid5ce4 ,on ! contr>y1 x mu/ r5\nce its magnific5t dogmatical pret5sions 9 philosophy4 ,v diff]5t is ! case :5 x has to def5d itself1 n be=e a judge1 b aga9/ an equal4 ,if dogmatical ass]tions are advanc$ on ! negative side1 9 opposition to ^? made by reason on ! positive side1 its ju/ification kat au?rhopon is complete1 al?\gh ! pro( ( its propositions is kat ale!ian unsatisfactory4 ,by ! polemic ( pure reason ,i mean ! def5ce ( its propositions made by reason1 9 opposition to ! dogmatical c\nt]-propositions advanc$ by o!r p>ties4 ,! "q "h is n :e!r its own /atem5ts may n also be false2 x m]ely reg>ds ! fact t reason proves t ! opposite _c be e/abli%$ ) demon/rative c]ta9ty1 nor ev5 ass]t$ ) a high] degree ( probability4 ,reason does n hold h] possessions ^u suff]ance2 =1 al?\gh %e _c %[ a p]fectly satisfactory title to !m1 no "o c prove t %e is n ! rightful possessor4 ,x is a melan*oly reflection t reason1 9 its highe/ ex]cise1 falls into an anti!tic2 & t ! supreme tribunal = ! settlem5t ( diff]5ces %\ld n be at union ) itself4 ,x is true t we _h to discuss ! "q ( an app>5t anti!tic1 b we f\nd t x 0 bas$ ^u a misconception4 ,9 con=mity ) ! common prejudice1 ph5om5a 7 reg>d$ z ?+s 9 !mselves1 & ?us an absolute complet5ess 9 _! syn!sis 0 requir$ 9 ! "o mode or 9 ! o!r 7x 0 %[n to be impossible 9 bo?72 a dem& entirely out ( place 9 reg>d to ph5om5a4 ,!re 01 !n1 no real self-contradiction ( reason 9 ! propositions3 ,! s]ies ( ph5om5a giv5 9 !mselves has an absolutely fir/ beg9n+2 &3 ,?is s]ies is absolutely & 9 itself )\t beg9n+4 ,! two propositions are p]fectly consi/5t ) ea* o!r1 because ph5om5a z ph5om5a are 9 !mselves no?+1 & consequ5tly ! hypo!sis t !y are ?+s 9 !mselves mu/ lead to self-contradictory inf]5ces4 ,b !re are cases 9 :i* a simil> misund]/&+ _c be provid$ aga9/1 & ! dispute mu/ rema9 unsettl$4 ,take1 = example1 ! !i/ic proposition3 ,!re is a ,supreme ,be+2 & on ! o!r h&1 ! a!i/ic c\nt]-/atem5t3 ,!re exi/s no ,supreme ,be+2 or1 9 psy*ology3 ,ev]y?+ t ?9ks possesses ! attribute ( absolute & p]man5t unity1 :i* is utt]ly diff]5t f ! transitory unity ( mat]ial ph5om5a2 & ! c\nt]-proposition3 ,! s\l is n an immat]ial unity1 & its nature is transitory1 l t ( ph5om5a4 ,! objects ( ^! que/ions conta9 no het]og5e\s or contradictory elem5ts1 = !y relate to ?+s 9 !mselves1 & n to ph5om5a4 ,!re w\ld arise1 inde$1 a real contradiction1 if reason came =w>d ) a /atem5t on ! negative side ( ^! que/ions alone4 ,z reg>ds ! criticism to :i* ! gr\nds ( pro( on ! affirmative side mu/ be subject$1 x may be freely admitt$1 )\t necessitat+ ! surr5d] ( ! affirmative propositions1 :i* h1 at lea/1 ! int]e/ ( reason 9 _! fav\r--an advantage :i* ! opposite p>ty _c lay claim to4 ,i _c agree ) ! op9ion ( sev]al admirable ?9k]s--,sulz] among ! re/--t1 9 spite ( ! weakness ( ! argum5ts hi!rto 9 use1 we may hope1 "o day1 to see suffici5t demon/rations ( ! two c>d9al propositions ( pure reason--! exi/5ce ( a ,supreme ,be+1 & ! immortality ( ! s\l4 ,i am c]ta91 on ! contr>y1 t ?is w nev] be ! case4 ,= on :at gr\nd c reason base su* syn!tical propositions1 :i* d n relate to ! objects ( exp]i5ce & _! int]nal possibility8 ,b x is also demon/ratively c]ta9 t no "o w ev] be able to ma9ta9 ! contr>y ) ! lea/ %[ ( probability4 ,=1 z he c attempt su* a pro( solely ^u ! basis ( pure reason1 he is b\nd to prove t a ,supreme ,be+1 & a ?9k+ subject 9 ! "* ( a pure intellig5ce1 are impossible4 ,b :]e w he f9d ! k :i* c enable him to en\nce syn!tical judgem5ts 9 reg>d to ?+s :i* transc5d ! region ( exp]i5ce8 ,we may1 !re=e1 re/ assur$ t ! opposite nev] w be demon/rat$4 ,we ne$ n1 !n1 h rec\rse to s*ola/ic argum5ts2 we may always admit ! tru? ( ^? propositions :i* are consi/5t ) ! speculative int]e/s ( reason 9 ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce1 & =m1 moreov]1 ! only means ( unit+ ! speculative ) ! practical int]e/4 ,our oppon5t1 :o mu/ n be consid]$ "h z a critic solely1 we c be ready to meet ) a non liquet :i* _c fail to disconc]t him2 :ile we _c d5y 8 "r to a simil> retort1 z we h on our side ! advantage ( ! support ( ! subjective maxim ( reason1 & c !re=e look ^u all 8 sophi/ical argum5ts ) calm indiff]5ce4 ,f ?is po9t ( view1 !re is prop]ly no anti!tic ( pure reason4 ,= ! only ar5a = su* a /ruggle w\ld be ^u ! field ( pure !ology & psy*ology2 b on ?is gr\nd !re c appe> no combatant :om we ne$ to fe>4 ,ridicule & boa/+ c be 8 only weapons2 & ^! may be laugh$ at1 z m]e *ild's play4 ,?is consid]ation re/ores to ,reason h] c\rage2 = :at s\rce ( confid5ce c\ld be f\nd1 if %e1 ^: vocation x is to de/roy error1 7 at v>iance ) h]self & )\t any reasonable hope ( ev] rea*+ a /ate ( p]man5t repose8 ,ev]y?+ 9 nature is good = "s purpose4 ,ev5 poisons are s]viceable2 !y de/roy ! evil effects ( o!r poisons g5]at$ 9 our sy/em1 & mu/ always f9d a place 9 e complete ph>macopoeia4 ,! objections rais$ aga9/ ! fallacies & sophi/ries ( speculative reason1 are objections giv5 by ! nature ( ?is reason itself1 & mu/ !re=e h a de/9ation & purpose :i* c only be = ! good ( humanity4 ,= :at purpose has ,provid5ce rais$ _m objects1 9 :i* we h ! deepe/ int]e/1 s f> above u1 t we va9ly try to cognize !m ) c]ta9ty1 & our p[]s ( m5tal vision are r excit$ ?an satisfi$ by ! glimpses we may *ance to seize8 ,x is v d\btful :e!r x is = our b5efit to advance bold affirmations reg>d+ subjects involv$ 9 su* obscurity2 p]haps x w\ld ev5 be detrim5tal to our be/ int]e/s4 ,b x is und\bt$ly always b5eficial to leave ! inve/igat+1 z well z ! critical reason1 9 p]fect fre$om1 & p]mit x to take *>ge ( its own int]e/s1 :i* are advanc$ z mu* by its limitation1 z by its ext5sion ( its views1 & :i* always suff] by ! int]f]5ce ( =eign p[]s =c+ x1 aga9/ its natural t5d5cies1 to b5d to c]ta9 preconceiv$ designs4 ,all[ y\r oppon5t to say :at he ?9ks reasonable1 & combat him only ) ! weapons ( reason4 ,h no anxiety = ! practical int]e/s ( humanity--^! are nev] imp]ill$ 9 a purely speculative dispute4 ,su* a dispute s]ves m]ely to disclose ! ant9omy ( reason1 :i*1 z x has its s\rce 9 ! nature ( reason1 ought to be ?or\ghly inve/igat$4 ,reason is b5efit$ by ! exam9ation ( a subject on bo? sides1 & its judgem5ts are correct$ by be+ limit$4 ,x is n ! matt] t may give occasion to dispute1 b ! mann]4 ,= x is p]fectly p]missible to employ1 9 ! pres5ce ( reason1 ! language ( a firmly root$ fai?1 ev5 aft] we h be5 oblig$ to r5\nce all pret5sions to k4 ,if we 7 to ask ! dispassionate ,david ,hume--a philosoph] end[$1 9 a degree t few are1 ) a well-balanc$ judgem5t3 ,:at motive induc$ y to sp5d s mu* lab\r & ?\ght 9 und]m9+ ! consol+ & b5eficial p]suasion t reason is capable ( assur+ u ( ! exi/5ce1 & pres5t+ u ) a det]m9ate conception ( a ,supreme ,be+8--8 answ] w\ld be3 ,no?+ b ! desire ( tea*+ reason to "k its own p[]s bett]1 &1 at ! same "t1 a dislike ( ! proc$ure by :i* t faculty 0 compell$ to support =egone conclusions1 & prev5t$ f confess+ ! int]nal weaknesses :i* x _c b feel :5 x ent]s ^u a rigid self-exam9ation4 ,if1 on ! o!r h&1 we 7 to ask ,prie/ley--a philosoph] :o _h no ta/e = transc5d5tal speculation1 b 0 entirely devot$ to ! pr9ciples ( empiricism--:at 8 motives 7 = ov]turn+ ^? two ma9 pill>s ( religion--! doctr9es ( ! fre$om ( ! w & ! immortality ( ! s\l 79 8 view ! hope ( a future life is b ! expectation ( ! miracle ( resurrection7--?is philosoph]1 himself a zeal\s & pi\s tea*] ( religion1 c\ld give no o!r answ] ?an ?is3 ,i act$ 9 ! int]e/ ( reason1 :i* always suff]s1 :5 c]ta9 objects are expla9$ & judg$ by a ref]5ce to o!r suppos$ laws ?an ^? ( mat]ial nature--! only laws :i* we "k 9 a det]m9ate mann]4 ,x w\ld be unfair to decry ! latt] philosoph]1 :o endeav\r$ to h>monize 8 p>adoxical op9ions ) ! int]e/s ( religion1 & to und]value an hone/ & reflect+ man1 because he f9ds himself at a loss ! mom5t he has left ! field ( natural sci5ce4 ,! same grace mu/ be accord$ to ,hume1 a man n less well-dispos$1 & q z blameless 9 8 moral "*1 & :o pu%$ 8 ab/ract speculations to an extreme l5g?1 because1 z he rightly believ$1 ! object ( !m lies entirely beyond ! b\nds ( natural sci5ce1 & )9 ! sph]e ( pure ideas4 ,:at is to be done to provide aga9/ ! dang] :i* seems 9 ! pres5t case to m5ace ! be/ int]e/s ( humanity8 ,! c\rse to be pursu$ 9 ref]5ce to ?is subject is a p]fectly pla9 & natural "o4 ,let ea* ?9k] pursue 8 own pa?2 if he %[s tal5t1 if he gives evid5ce ( pr(\nd ?\ght1 9 "o ^w1 if he %[s t he possesses ! p[] ( reason+--reason is always ! ga9]4 ,if y h rec\rse to o!r means1 if y attempt to co]ce reason1 if y raise ! cry ( treason to humanity1 if y excite ! feel+s ( ! cr[d1 :i* c nei!r und]/& nor sympa?ize ) su* subtle speculations--y w only make y\rselves ridicul\s4 ,= ! "q does n conc]n ! advantage or disadvantage :i* we are expect$ to reap f su* inquiries2 ! "q is m]ely h[ f> reason c advance 9 ! field ( speculation1 ap>t f all k9ds ( int]e/1 & :e!r we may dep5d ^u ! ex]tions ( speculative reason1 or mu/ r5\nce all reliance on x4 ,in/ead ( jo9+ ! combatants1 x is y\r "p to be a tranquil spectator ( ! /ruggle--a labori\s /ruggle = ! p>ties engag$1 b att5d$1 9 its progress z well z 9 its result1 ) ! mo/ advantage\s consequ5ces = ! int]e/s ( ?\ght & k4 ,x is absurd to expect to be enlight5$ by ,reason1 & at ! same "t to prescribe to h] :at side ( ! "q %e mu/ adopt4 ,moreov]1 reason is suffici5tly held 9 *eck by its own p[]1 ! limits impos$ on x by its own nature are suffici5t2 x is unnecess>y = y to place ov] x additional gu>ds1 z if its p[] 7 dang]\s to ! con/itution ( ! intellectual /ate4 ,9 ! dialectic ( reason !re is no victory ga9$ :i* ne$ 9 ! lea/ di/urb y\r tranquility4 ,! /rife ( dialectic is a necessity ( reason1 & we _c b wi% t x _h be5 conduct$ long ere ?is ) t p]fect fre$om :i* ought to be its ess5tial condition4 ,9 ?is case1 we %\ld h _h at an e>li] p]iod a matur$ & pr(\nd criticism1 :i* mu/ h put an end to all dialectical disputes1 by expos+ ! illusions & prejudices 9 :i* !y orig9at$4 ,!re is 9 human nature an unwor?y prop5sity--a prop5sity :i*1 l ev]y?+ t spr+s f nature1 mu/ 9 its f9al purpose be conducive to ! good ( humanity--to conceal our real s5tim5ts1 & to give expression only to c]ta9 receiv$ op9ions1 :i* are reg>d$ z at once safe & promotive ( ! common good4 ,x is true1 ?is t5d5cy1 n only to conceal our real s5tim5ts1 b to pr(ess ^? :i* may ga9 u fav\r 9 ! eyes ( society1 has n only civiliz$1 b1 9 a c]ta9 measure1 moraliz$ u2 z no "o c break ?r\gh ! outw>d cov]+ ( respectability1 hon\r1 & morality1 & ?us ! seem+ly-good examples :i* we see ar\nd u =m an excell5t s*ool = moral improvem5t1 s long z our belief 9 _! g5u95ess rema9s un%ak54 ,b ?is disposition to repres5t ourselves z bett] ?an we are1 & to utt] op9ions :i* are n our own1 c be no?+ m ?an a k9d ( provision>y arrangem5t ( nature to lead u f ! rud5ess ( an unciviliz$ /ate1 & to tea* u h[ to assume at lea/ ! appe>ance & mann] ( ! good we see4 ,b :5 true pr9ciples h be5 develop$1 & h obta9$ a sure f\ndation 9 our habit ( ?\ght1 ?is conv5tionalism mu/ be attack$ ) e>ne/ vig\r1 o!rwise x corrupts ! he>t1 & *ecks ! gr[? ( good dispositions ) ! mis*iev\s we$ ( fair appe>ances4 ,i am sorry to rem>k ! same t5d5cy to misrepres5tation & hypocrisy 9 ! sph]e ( speculative discussion1 :]e !re is less temptation to re/ra9 ! free expression ( ?\ght4 ,= :at c be m prejudicial to ! int]e/s ( intellig5ce ?an to falsify our real s5tim5ts1 to conceal ! d\bts :i* we feel 9 reg>d to our /atem5ts1 or to ma9ta9 ! validity ( gr\nds ( pro( :i* we well "k to be insuffici5t8 ,s long z m]e p]sonal vanity is ! s\rce ( ^! unwor?y artifices--& ?is is g5]ally ! case 9 speculative discussions1 :i* are mo/ly de/itute ( practical int]e/1 & are incapable ( complete demon/ration--! vanity ( ! opposite p>ty exagg]ates z mu* on ! o!r side2 & ?us ! result is ! same1 al?\gh x is n br\ght ab\t s soon z if ! dispute _h be5 conduct$ 9 a s9c]e & upright _s4 ,b :]e ! mass ent]ta9s ! notion t ! aim ( c]ta9 subtle speculators is no?+ less ?an to %ake ! v f\ndations ( public welf>e & morality--x seems n only prud5t1 b ev5 praise wor?y1 to ma9ta9 ! good cause by illusory argum5ts1 r ?an to give to our suppos$ oppon5ts ! advantage ( l[]+ our decl>ations to ! mod]ate tone ( a m]ely practical conviction1 & ( compell+ u to confess our inability to atta9 to apodeictic c]ta9ty 9 speculative subjects4 ,b we ought to reflect t !re is no?+1 9 ! _w m fatal to ! ma9t5ance ( a good cause ?an deceit1 misrepres5tation1 & falsehood4 ,t ! /ricte/ laws ( hone/y %\ld be obs]v$ 9 ! discussion ( a purely speculative subject is ! lea/ requirem5t t c be made4 ,if we c\ld reckon ) security ev5 ^u s little1 ! conflict ( speculative reason reg>d+ ! important que/ions ( ,god1 immortality1 & fre$om1 w\ld h be5 ei!r decid$ long ago1 or w\ld v soon be br\ght to a conclusion4 ,b1 9 g5]al1 ! uprightness ( ! def5ce /&s 9 an inv]se ratio to ! goodness ( ! cause2 & p]haps m hone/y & fairness are %[n by ^? :o d5y ?an by ^? :o uphold ^! doctr9es4 ,i %all p]suade myself1 !n1 t ,i h read]s :o d n wi% to see a righte\s cause def5d$ by unfair argum5ts4 ,su* w n[ recognize ! fact t1 accord+ to ! pr9ciples ( ?is ,critique1 if we consid] n :at is1 b :at ought to be ! case1 !re c be really no polemic ( pure reason4 ,= h[ c two p]sons dispute ab\t a ?+1 ! reality ( :i* nei!r c pres5t 9 actual or ev5 9 possible exp]i5ce8 ,ea* adopts ! plan ( m$itat+ on 8 idea = ! purpose ( draw+ f ! idea1 if he c1 :at is m ?an ! idea1 t is1 ! reality ( ! object :i* x indicates4 ,h[ %all !y settle ! dispute1 s9ce nei!r is able to make 8 ass]tions directly compreh5sible & c]ta91 b mu/ re/rict himself to attack+ & confut+ ^? ( 8 oppon5t8 ,all /atem5ts en\nc$ by pure reason transc5d ! conditions ( possible exp]i5ce1 beyond ! sph]e ( :i* we c discov] no crit]ion ( tru?1 :ile !y are at ! same "t fram$ 9 accordance ) ! laws ( ! und]/&+1 :i* are applicable only to exp]i5ce2 & ?us x is ! fate ( all su* speculative discussions t :ile ! "o p>ty attacks ! weak] side ( 8 oppon5t1 he infallibly lays op5 8 own weaknesses4 ,! critique ( pure reason may be reg>d$ z ! highe/ tribunal = all speculative disputes2 = x is n involv$ 9 ^! disputes1 :i* h an imm$iate relation to c]ta9 objects & n to ! laws ( ! m9d1 b is in/itut$ = ! purpose ( det]m9+ ! rights & limits ( reason4 ,)\t ! control ( criticism1 reason is1 z x 71 9 a /ate ( nature1 & c only e/abli% its claims & ass]tions by w>4 ,criticism1 on ! contr>y1 decid+ all que/ions accord+ to ! fundam5tal laws ( its own in/itution1 secures to u ! peace ( law & ord]1 & enables u to discuss all diff]5ces 9 ! m tranquil mann] ( a legal process4 ,9 ! =m] case1 disputes are end$ by victory1 :i* bo? sides may claim & :i* is foll[$ by a holl[ armi/ice2 9 ! latt]1 by a s5t5ce1 :i*1 z x /rikes at ! root ( all speculative diff]5ces1 ensures to all conc]n$ a la/+ peace4 ,! endless disputes ( a dogmatiz+ reason compel u to look = "s mode ( arriv+ at a settl$ decision by a critical inve/igation ( reason itself2 j z ,hobbes ma9ta9s t ! /ate ( nature is a /ate ( inju/ice & viol5ce1 & t we mu/ leave x & submit ourselves to ! con/ra9t ( law1 :i* inde$ limits individual fre$om1 b only t x may consi/ ) ! fre$om ( o!rs & ) ! common good ( all4 ,?is fre$om w1 among o!r ?+s1 p]mit ( our op5ly /at+ ! difficulties & d\bts :i* we are ourselves unable to solve1 )\t be+ decri$ on t acc\nt z turbul5t & dang]\s citiz5s4 ,?is privilege =ms "p ( ! native rights ( human reason1 :i* recognizes no o!r judge ?an ! univ]sal reason ( humanity2 & z ?is reason is ! s\rce ( all progress & improvem5t1 su* a privilege is to be held sacr$ & inviolable4 ,x is unwise1 moreov]1 to d5\nce z dang]\s any bold ass]tions aga9/1 or ra% attacks ^u1 an op9ion :i* is held by ! l>ge/ & mo/ moral class ( ! community2 = t w\ld be giv+ !m an importance :i* !y d n des]ve4 ,:5 ,i he> t ! fre$om ( ! w1 ! hope ( a future life1 & ! exi/5ce ( ,god h be5 ov]?r[n by ! argum5ts ( "s able writ]1 ,i feel a /rong desire to read 8 book2 = ,i expect t he w add to my k & imp>t great] cle>ness & di/9ctness to my views by ! argum5tative p[] %[n 9 8 writ+s4 ,b ,i am p]fectly c]ta91 ev5 be=e ,i h op5$ ! book1 t he has n succe$$ 9 a s+le po9t1 n because ,i believe ,i am 9 possession ( irrefutable demon/rations ( ^! important propositions1 b because ?is transc5d5tal critique1 :i* has disclos$ to me ! p[] & ! limits ( pure reason1 has fully conv9c$ me t1 z x is insuffici5t to e/abli% ! affirmative1 x is z p[]less1 & ev5 m s1 to assure u ( ! tru? ( ! negative answ] to ^! que/ions4 ,f :at s\rce does ?is free-?9k] d]ive 8 k t !re is1 = example1 no ,supreme ,be+8 ,?is proposition lies out ( ! field ( possible exp]i5ce1 &1 !re=e1 beyond ! limits ( human cognition4 ,b ,i w\ld n read at1 all ! answ] :i* ! dogmatical ma9ta9] ( ! good cause makes to 8 oppon5t1 because ,i "k well be=eh&1 t he w m]ely attack ! fallaci\s gr\nds ( 8 adv]s>y1 )\t be+ able to e/abli% 8 own ass]tions4 ,besides1 a new illusory argum5t1 9 ! con/ruction ( :i* tal5t & acut5ess are %[n1 is sugge/ive ( new ideas & new tra9s ( reason+1 & 9 ?is respect ! old & ev]yday sophi/ries are q useless4 ,aga91 ! dogmatical oppon5t ( religion gives employm5t to criticism1 & enables u to te/ & correct its pr9ciples1 :ile !re is no occasion = anxiety 9 reg>d to ! influ5ce & results ( 8 reason+4 ,b1 x w be said1 mu/ we n w>n ! y\? entru/$ to academical c>e aga9/ su* writ+s1 mu/ we n pres]ve !m f ! k ( ^! dang]\s ass]tions1 until _! judgem5t is rip5$1 or r until ! doctr9es :i* we wi% to inculcate are s firmly root$ 9 _! m9ds z to )/& all attempts at in/ill+ ! contr>y dogmas1 f :atev] qu>t] !y may come8 ,if we are to conf9e ourselves to ! dogmatical proc$ure 9 ! sph]e ( pure reason1 & f9d ourselves unable to settle su* disputes o!rwise ?an by becom+ a p>ty 9 !m1 & sett+ c\nt]-ass]tions aga9/ ! /atem5ts advanc$ by our oppon5ts1 !re is c]ta9ly no plan m advisable = ! mom5t1 b1 at ! same "t1 none m absurd & ineffici5t = ! future1 ?an ?is reta9+ ( ! y\?ful m9d "u gu>dian%ip = a "t1 & ?us pres]v+ x--= s long at lea/--f s$uction into error4 ,b :51 at a lat] p]iod1 ei!r curiosity1 or ! preval5t fa%ion ( ?\ght places su* writ+s 9 _! h&s1 w ! s-call$ convictions ( _! y\? /& firm8 ,! "y ?9k]1 :o has 9 8 arm\ry none b dogmatical weapons ) :i* to resi/ ! attacks ( 8 oppon5t1 & :o _c detect ! lat5t dialectic :i* lies 9 8 own op9ions z well z 9 ^? ( ! opposite p>ty1 sees ! advance ( illusory argum5ts & gr\nds ( pro( :i* h ! advantage ( novelty1 aga9/ z illusory gr\nds ( pro( de/itute ( ?is advantage1 & :i*1 p]haps1 excite ! suspicion t ! natural cr$ulity ( 8 y\? has be5 abus$ by 8 in/ructors4 ,he ?9ks he c f9d no bett] means ( %[+ t he has out gr[n ! discipl9e ( 8 m9ority ?an by despis+ ^? well-meant w>n+s1 &1 kn[+ no sy/em ( ?\ght b t ( dogmatism1 he dr9ks deep draughts ( ! poison t is to sap ! pr9ciples 9 :i* 8 e>ly ye>s 7 tra9$4 ,exactly ! opposite ( ! sy/em "h recomm5d$ ought to be pursu$ 9 academical in/ruction4 ,?is c only be effect$1 h[ev]1 by a ?or\gh tra9+ 9 ! critical inve/igation ( pure reason4 ,=1 9 ord] to br+ ! pr9ciples ( ?is critique into ex]cise z soon z possible1 & to demon/rate _! p]fect ev5 9 ! pres5ce ( ! highe/ degree ( dialectical illusion1 ! /ud5t ought to exam9e ! ass]tions made on bo? sides ( speculative que/ions /ep by /ep1 & to te/ !m by ^! pr9ciples4 ,x _c be a difficult task = him to %[ ! fallacies inh]5t 9 ^! propositions1 & ?us he beg9s e>ly to feel 8 own p[] ( secur+ himself aga9/ ! influ5ce ( su* sophi/ical argum5ts1 :i* mu/ f9ally lose1 = him1 all _! illusory p[]4 ,&1 al?\gh ! same bl[s :i* ov]turn ! edifice ( 8 oppon5t are z fatal to 8 own speculative /ructures1 if su* he has wi%$ to re>2 he ne$ n feel any sorr[ 9 reg>d to ?is seem+ mis=tune1 z he has n[ be=e him a fair prospect into ! practical region 9 :i* he may reasonably hope to f9d a m secure f\ndation = a rational sy/em4 ,!re is1 accord+ly1 no prop] polemic 9 ! sph]e ( pure reason4 ,bo? p>ties beat ! air & fight ) _! own %ad[s1 z !y pass beyond ! limits ( nature1 & c f9d no tangible po9t ( attack--no firm foot+ = _! dogmatical conflict4 ,fight z vigor\sly z !y may1 ! %ad[s :i* !y hew d[n1 imm$iately />t up aga91 l ! h]oes 9 ,walhalla1 & r5ew ! bloodless & unceas+ conte/4 ,b nei!r c we admit t !re is any prop] sceptical employm5t ( pure reason1 su* z might be bas$ ^u ! pr9ciple ( neutrality 9 all speculative disputes4 ,to excite reason aga9/ itself1 to place weapons 9 ! h&s ( ! p>ty on ! "o side z well z 9 ^? ( ! o!r1 & to rema9 an undi/urb$ & s>ca/ic spectator ( ! fi]ce /ruggle t ensues1 seems1 f ! dogmatical po9t ( view1 to be a "p fitt+ only a malevol5t disposition4 ,b1 :5 ! sophi/ evid5ces an inv9cible ob/9acy & bl9dness1 & a pride :i* no criticism c mod]ate1 !re is no o!r practicable c\rse ?an to oppose to ?is pride & ob/9acy simil> feel+s & pret5sions on ! o!r side1 equally well or ill f\nd$1 s t reason1 /agg]$ by ! reflections ?us =c$ ^u x1 f9ds x necess>y to mod]ate its confid5ce 9 su* pret5sions & to li/5 to ! advice ( criticism4 ,b we _c /op at ^! d\bts1 mu* less reg>d ! conviction ( our ignorance1 n only z a cure = ! conceit natural to dogmatism1 b z ! settlem5t ( ! disputes 9 :i* reason is involv$ ) itself4 ,on ! contr>y1 scepticism is m]ely a means ( awak5+ reason f its dogmatic dreams & excit+ x to a m c>eful inve/igation into its own p[]s & pret5sions4 ,b1 z scepticism appe>s to be ! %orte/ road to a p]man5t peace 9 ! doma9 ( philosophy1 & z x is ! track pursu$ by ! _m :o aim at giv+ a philosophical col\r+ to _! contemptu\s dislike ( all inquiries ( ?is k9d1 ,i ?9k x necess>y to pres5t to my read]s ?is mode ( ?\ght 9 its true light4 ,scepticism n a ,p]man5t ,/ate = ,human ,reason4 ,! consci\sness ( ignorance--unless ?is ignorance is recogniz$ to be absolutely necess>y ought1 in/ead ( =m+ ! conclusion ( my inquiries1 to be ! /ronge/ motive to ! pursuit ( !m4 ,all ignorance is ei!r ignorance ( ?+s or ( ! limits ( k4 ,if my ignorance is accid5tal & n necess>y1 x mu/ incite me1 9 ! fir/ case1 to a dogmatical inquiry reg>d+ ! objects ( :i* ,i am ignorant2 9 ! second1 to a critical inve/igation into ! b\nds ( all possible k4 ,b t my ignorance is absolutely necess>y & unavoidable1 & t x consequ5tly absolves f ! duty ( all fur!r inve/igation1 is a fact :i* _c be made out ^u empirical gr\nds--f obs]vation--b ^u critical gr\nds alone1 t is1 by a ?or\ghgo+ inve/igation into ! prim>y s\rces ( cognition4 ,x foll[s t ! det]m9ation ( ! b\nds ( reason c be made only on priori gr\nds2 :ile ! empirical limitation ( reason1 :i* is m]ely an indet]m9ate cognition ( an ignorance t c nev] be completely remov$1 c take place only po/]iori4 ,9 o!r words1 our empirical k is limit$ by t :i* yet rema9s = u to "k4 ,! =m] cognition ( our ignorance1 :i* is possible only on a rational basis1 is a sci5ce2 ! latt] is m]ely a p]ception1 & we _c say h[ f> ! inf]5ces drawn f x may ext5d4 ,if ,i reg>d ! e>?1 z x really appe>s to my s5ses1 z a flat surface1 ,i am ignorant h[ f> ?is surface ext5ds4 ,b exp]i5ce tea*es me t1 h[ f> soev] ,i g1 ,i always see be=e me a space 9 :i* ,i c proce$ f>!r2 & ?us ,i "k ! limits--m]ely visual--( my actual k ( ! e>?1 al?\gh ,i am ignorant ( ! limits ( ! e>? itself4 ,b if ,i h got s f> z to "k t ! e>? is a sph]e1 & t its surface is sph]ical1 ,i c cognize priori & det]m9e ^u pr9ciples1 f my k ( a small "p ( ?is surface--say to ! ext5t ( a degree--! diamet] & circumf]5ce ( ! e>?2 & al?\gh ,i am ignorant ( ! objects :i* ?is surface conta9s1 ,i h a p]fect k ( its limits & ext5t4 ,! sum ( all ! possible objects ( our cognition seems to u to be a level surface1 ) an app>5t horizon--t :i* =ms ! limit ( its ext5t1 & :i* has be5 t]m$ by u ! idea ( uncondition$ totality4 ,to rea* ?is limit by empirical means is impossible1 & all attempts to det]m9e x priori accord+ to a pr9ciple1 are alike 9 va94 ,b all ! que/ions rais$ by pure reason relate to t :i* lies beyond ?is horizon1 or1 at lea/1 9 its b\nd>y l9e4 ,! celebrat$ ,david ,hume 0 "o ( ^? geograph]s ( human reason :o believe t !y h giv5 a suffici5t answ] to all su* que/ions by decl>+ !m to lie beyond ! horizon ( our k--a horizon :i*1 h[ev]1 ,hume 0 unable to det]m9e4 ,8 att5tion especially 0 direct$ to ! pr9ciple ( causality2 & he rem>k$ ) p]fect ju/ice t ! tru? ( ?is pr9ciple1 & ev5 ! objective validity ( ! conception ( a cause1 0 n commonly bas$ ^u cle> insight1 t is1 ^u priori cognition4 ,h5ce he conclud$ t ?is law does n d]ive its au?ority f its univ]sality & necessity1 b m]ely f its g5]al applicability 9 ! c\rse ( exp]i5ce1 & a k9d ( subjective necessity !nce aris+1 :i* he t]m$ habit4 ,f ! inability ( reason to e/abli% ?is pr9ciple z a necess>y law = ! acquisition ( all exp]i5ce1 he inf]r$ ! nullity ( all ! attempts ( reason to pass ! region ( ! empirical4 ,?is proc$ure ( subject+ ! facta ( reason to exam9ation1 &1 if necess>y1 to disapproval1 may be t]m$ ! c5sura ( reason4 ,?is c5sura mu/ inevitably lead u to d\bts reg>d+ all transc5d5t employm5t ( pr9ciples4 ,b ?is is only ! second /ep 9 our inquiry4 ,! fir/ /ep 9 reg>d to ! subjects ( pure reason1 & :i* m>ks ! infancy ( t faculty1 is t ( dogmatism4 ,! second1 :i* we h j m5tion$1 is t ( scepticism1 & x gives evid5ce t our judgem5t has be5 improv$ by exp]i5ce4 ,b a ?ird /ep is necess>y--indicative ( ! maturity & manhood ( ! judgem5t1 :i* n[ lays a firm f\ndation ^u univ]sal & necess>y pr9ciples4 ,?is is ! p]iod ( criticism1 9 :i* we d n exam9e ! facta ( reason1 b reason itself1 9 ! :ole ext5t ( its p[]s1 & 9 reg>d to its capability ( priori cognition2 & ?us we det]m9e n m]ely ! empirical & ev]-%ift+ b\nds ( our k1 b its necess>y & et]nal limits4 ,we demon/rate f indubitable pr9ciples1 n m]ely our ignorance 9 respect to ?is or t subject1 b 9 reg>d to all possible que/ions ( a c]ta9 class4 ,?us scepticism is a re/+ place = reason1 9 :i* x may reflect on its dogmatical w&]+s & ga9 "s k ( ! region 9 :i* x happ5s to be1 t x may pursue its way ) great] c]ta9ty2 b x _c be its p]man5t dwell+-place4 ,x mu/ take up its abode only 9 ! region ( complete c]titude1 :e!r ?is relates to ! cognition ( objects !mselves1 or to ! limits :i* b\nd all our cognition4 ,reason is n to be consid]$ z an indef9itely ext5d$ plane1 ( ! b\nds ( :i* we h only a g5]al k2 x ought r to be comp>$ to a sph]e1 ! radius ( :i* may be f\nd f ! curvature ( its surface--t is1 ! nature ( priori syn!tical propositions--&1 consequ5tly1 its circumf]5ce & ext5t4 ,beyond ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce !re are no objects :i* x c cognize2 nay1 ev5 que/ions reg>d+ su* supposititi\s objects relate only to ! subjective pr9ciples ( a complete det]m9ation ( ! relations :i* exi/ betwe5 ! und]/&+-conceptions :i* lie )9 ?is sph]e4 ,we are actually 9 possession ( priori syn!tical cognitions1 z is prov$ by ! exi/5ce ( ! pr9ciples ( ! und]/&+1 :i* anticipate exp]i5ce4 ,if any "o _c compreh5d ! possibility ( ^! pr9ciples1 he may h "s reason to d\bt :e!r !y are really priori2 b he _c on ?is acc\nt decl>e !m to be impossible1 & affirm ! nullity ( ! /eps :i* reason may h tak5 "u _! guidance4 ,he c only say3 ,if we p]ceiv$ _! orig9 & _! au!nticity1 we %\ld be able to det]m9e ! ext5t & limits ( reason2 b1 till we c d ?is1 all propositions reg>d+ ! latt] are m]e r&om ass]tions4 ,9 ?is view1 ! d\bt respect+ all dogmatical philosophy1 :i* proce$s )\t ! guidance ( criticism1 is well gr\nd$2 b we _c !re=e d5y to reason ! ability to con/ruct a s\nd philosophy1 :5 ! way has be5 prep>$ by a ?or\gh critical inve/igation4 ,all ! conceptions produc$1 & all ! que/ions rais$1 by pure reason1 d n lie 9 ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce1 b 9 t ( reason itself1 & h5ce !y mu/ be solv$1 & %[n to be ei!r valid or inadmissible1 by t faculty4 ,we h no "r to decl9e ! solution ( su* problems1 on ! gr\nd t ! solution c be discov]$ only f ! nature ( ?+s1 & "u pret5ce ( ! limitation ( human faculties1 = reason is ! sole creator ( all ^! ideas1 & is !re=e b\nd ei!r to e/abli% _! validity or to expose _! illusory nature4 ,! polemic ( scepticism is prop]ly direct$ aga9/ ! dogmati/1 :o erects a sy/em ( philosophy )\t hav+ exam9$ ! fundam5tal objective pr9ciples on :i* x is bas$1 = ! purpose ( evid5c+ ! futility ( 8 designs1 & ?us br++ him to a k ( 8 own p[]s4 ,b1 9 itself1 scepticism does n give u any c]ta9 in=mation 9 reg>d to ! b\nds ( our k4 ,all unsuccessful dogmatical attempts ( reason are facia1 :i* x is always useful to submit to ! c5sure ( ! sceptic4 ,b ?is _c help u to any decision reg>d+ ! expectations :i* reason *]i%es ( bett] success 9 future endeav\rs2 ! inve/igations ( scepticism _c1 !re=e1 settle ! dispute reg>d+ ! rights & p[]s ( human reason4 ,hume is p]haps ! able/ & mo/ +5i\s ( all sceptical philosoph]s1 & 8 writ+s h1 und\bt$ly1 ex]t$ ! mo/ p[]ful influ5ce 9 awak5+ reason to a ?or\gh inve/igation into its own p[]s4 ,x w1 !re=e1 well repay our lab\rs to consid] = a little ! c\rse ( reason+ :i* he foll[$ & ! errors into :i* he /ray$1 al?\gh sett+ out on ! pa? ( tru? & c]titude4 ,hume 0 probably aw>e1 al?\gh he nev] cle>ly develop$ ! notion1 t we proce$ 9 judgem5ts ( a c]ta9 class beyond our conception ( ! object4 ,i h t]m$ ?is k9d ( judgem5t syn!tical4 ,z reg>d ! mann] 9 :i* ,i pass beyond my conception by ! aid ( exp]i5ce1 no d\bts c be ent]ta9$4 ,exp]i5ce is itself a syn!sis ( p]ceptions2 & x employs p]ceptions to increm5t ! conception1 :i* ,i obta9 by means ( ano!r p]ception4 ,b we feel p]suad$ t we are able to proce$ beyond a conception1 & to ext5d our cognition priori4 ,we attempt ?is 9 two ways--ei!r1 ?r\gh ! pure und]/&+1 9 relation to t :i* may become an object ( exp]i5ce1 or1 ?r\gh pure reason1 9 relation to su* prop]ties ( ?+s1 or ( ! exi/5ce ( ?+s1 z c nev] be pres5t$ 9 any exp]i5ce4 ,?is sceptical philosoph] did n di/+ui% ^! two k9ds ( judgem5ts1 z he ought to h done1 b reg>d$ ?is augm5tation ( conceptions1 &1 if we may s express ourselves1 ! spontane\s g5]ation ( und]/&+ & reason1 indep5d5tly ( ! impregnation ( exp]i5ce1 z altoge!r impossible4 ,! s-call$ priori pr9ciples ( ^! faculties he consequ5tly held to be invalid & imag9>y1 & reg>d$ !m z no?+ b subjective habits ( ?\ght orig9at+ 9 exp]i5ce1 & !re=e purely empirical & cont+5t rules1 to :i* we attribute a spuri\s necessity & univ]sality4 ,9 support ( ?is /range ass]tion1 he ref]r$ u to ! g5]ally ackn[l$g$ pr9ciple ( ! relation betwe5 cause & effect4 ,no faculty ( ! m9d c conduct u f ! conception ( a ?+ to ! exi/5ce ( some?+ else2 & h5ce he believ$ he c\ld inf] t1 )\t exp]i5ce1 we possess no s\rce f :i* we c augm5t a conception1 & no gr\nd suffici5t to ju/ify u 9 fram+ a judgem5t t is to ext5d our cognition priori4 ,t ! light ( ! sun1 :i* %9es ^u a piece ( wax1 at ! same "t melts x1 :ile x h>d5s clay1 no p[] ( ! und]/&+ c\ld inf] f ! conceptions :i* we previ\sly possess$ ( ^! sub/ances2 mu* less is !re any priori law t c\ld conduct u to su* a conclusion1 :i* exp]i5ce alone c c]tify4 ,on ! o!r h&1 we h se5 9 our discussion ( transc5d5tal logic1 t1 al?\gh we c nev] proce$ imm$iately beyond ! cont5t ( ! conception :i* is giv5 u1 we c always cognize completely priori--9 relation1 h[ev]1 to a ?ird t]m1 namely1 possible exp]i5ce--! law ( its connection ) o!r ?+s4 ,= example1 if ,i obs]ve t a piece ( wax melts1 ,i c cognize priori t !re mu/ h be5 some?+ 7! sun's heat7 prec$+1 :i* ?is law2 al?\gh1 )\t ! aid ( exp]i5ce1 ,i c\ld n cognize priori & 9 a det]m9ate mann] ei!r ! cause f ! effect1 or ! effect f ! cause4 ,hume 01 !re=e1 wrong 9 inf]r+1 f ! cont+5cy ( ! det]m9ation accord+ to law1 ! cont+5cy ( ! law itself2 & ! pass+ beyond ! conception ( a ?+ to possible exp]i5ce 7:i* is an priori proce$+1 con/itut+ ! objective reality ( ! conception71 he conf\nd$ ) our syn!sis ( objects 9 actual exp]i5ce1 :i* is always1 ( c\rse1 empirical4 ,?us1 too1 he reg>d$ ! pr9ciple ( aff9ity1 :i* has its seat 9 ! und]/&+ & indicates a necess>y connection1 z a m]e rule ( association1 ly+ 9 ! imitative faculty ( imag9ation1 :i* c pres5t only cont+5t1 & n objective connections4 ,! sceptical errors ( ?is rem>kably acute ?9k] arose pr9cipally f a defect1 :i* 0 common to him ) ! dogmati/s1 namely1 t he _h nev] made a sy/ematic review ( all ! diff]5t k9ds ( priori syn!sis p]=m$ by ! und]/&+4 ,_h he done s1 he w\ld h f\nd1 to take "o example among _m1 t ! pr9ciple ( p]man5ce 0 ( ?is "*1 & t x1 z well z ! pr9ciple ( causality1 anticipates exp]i5ce4 ,9 ?is way he might h be5 able to describe ! det]m9ate limits ( ! priori op]ations ( und]/&+ & reason4 ,b he m]ely decl>$ ! und]/&+ to be limit$1 in/ead ( %[+ :at its limits 72 he creat$ a g5]al mi/ru/ 9 ! p[] ( our faculties1 )\t giv+ u any det]m9ate k ( ! b\nds ( our necess>y & unavoidable ignorance2 he exam9$ & condemn$ "s ( ! pr9ciples ( ! und]/&+1 )\t inve/igat+ all its p[]s ) ! complet5ess necess>y to criticism4 ,he d5ies1 ) tru?1 c]ta9 p[]s to ! und]/&+1 b he goes fur!r1 & decl>es x to be utt]ly inadequate to ! priori ext5sion ( k1 al?\gh he has n fully exam9$ all ! p[]s :i* reside 9 ! faculty2 & ?us ! fate :i* always ov]takes scepticism meets him too4 ,t is to say1 8 own decl>ations are d\bt$1 = 8 objections 7 bas$ ^u facta1 :i* are cont+5t1 & n ^u pr9ciples1 :i* c alone demon/rate ! necess>y invalidity ( all dogmatical ass]tions4 ,z ,hume makes no di/9ction betwe5 ! well-gr\nd$ claims ( ! und]/&+ & ! dialectical pret5sions ( reason1 aga9/ :i*1 h[ev]1 8 attacks are ma9ly direct$1 reason does n feel itself %ut out f all attempts at ! ext5sion ( priori cognition1 & h5ce x refuses1 9 spite ( a few *ecks 9 ?is or t qu>t]1 to rel9qui% su* ef=ts4 ,= "o naturally arms oneself to resi/ an attack1 & becomes m ob/9ate 9 ! resolve to e/abli% ! claims he has advanc$4 ,b a complete review ( ! p[]s ( reason1 & ! conviction !nce aris+ t we are 9 possession ( a limit$ field ( action1 :ile we mu/ admit ! vanity ( high] claims1 puts an end to all d\bt & dispute1 & induces reason to re/ satisfi$ ) ! undi/urb$ possession ( its limit$ doma94 ,to ! uncritical dogmati/1 :o has n survey$ ! sph]e ( 8 und]/&+1 nor det]m9$1 9 accordance ) pr9ciples1 ! limits ( possible cognition1 :o1 consequ5tly1 is ignorant ( 8 own p[]s1 & believes he w discov] !m by ! attempts he makes 9 ! field ( cognition1 ^! attacks ( scepticism are n only dang]\s1 b de/ructive4 ,= if !re is "o proposition 9 8 *a9 ( reason+ :i* he _c prove1 or ! fallacy 9 :i* he _c evolve 9 accordance ) a pr9ciple1 suspicion falls on all 8 /atem5ts1 h[ev] plausible !y may appe>4 ,& ?us scepticism1 ! bane ( dogmatical philosophy1 conducts u to a s\nd inve/igation into ! und]/&+ & ! reason4 ,:5 we are ?us f> advanc$1 we ne$ fe> no fur!r attacks2 = ! limits ( our doma9 are cle>ly m>k$ out1 & we c make no claims nor become involv$ 9 any disputes reg>d+ ! region t lies beyond ^! limits4 ,?us ! sceptical proc$ure 9 philosophy does n pres5t any solution ( ! problems ( reason1 b x =ms an excell5t ex]cise = its p[]s1 awak5+ its circumspection1 & indicat+ ! means :]eby x may mo/ fully e/abli% its claims to its legitimate possessions4 ,section ,,iii4 ,! ,discipl9e ( ,pure ,reason 9 ,hypo!sis ,?is critique ( reason has n[ taught u t all its ef=ts to ext5d ! b\nds ( k1 by means ( pure speculation1 are utt]ly fruitless4 ,s mu* ! wid] field1 x may appe>1 lies op5 to hypo!sis2 z1 :]e we _c "k ) c]ta9ty1 we are at lib]ty to make guesses & to =m suppositions4 ,imag9ation may be all[$1 "u ! /rict surveillance ( reason1 to inv5t suppositions2 b1 ^! mu/ be bas$ on some?+ t is p]fectly c]ta9--& t is ! possibility ( ! object4 ,if we are well assur$ ^u ?is po9t1 x is all[able to h rec\rse to supposition 9 reg>d to ! reality ( ! object2 b ?is supposition mu/1 unless x is utt]ly gr\ndless1 be connect$1 z its gr\nd ( explanation1 ) t :i* is really giv5 & absolutely c]ta94 ,su* a supposition is t]m$ a hypo!sis4 ,x is beyond our p[] to =m ! lea/ conception priori ( ! possibility ( dynamical connection 9 ph5om5a2 & ! category ( ! pure und]/&+ w n enable u to excogitate any su* connection1 b m]ely helps u to und]/& x1 :5 we meet ) x 9 exp]i5ce4 ,= ?is reason we _c1 9 accordance ) ! categories1 imag9e or inv5t any object or any prop]ty ( an object n giv51 or t may n be giv5 9 exp]i5ce1 & employ x 9 a hypo!sis2 o!rwise1 we %\ld be bas+ our *a9 ( reason+ ^u m]e *im]ical fancies1 & n ^u conceptions ( ?+s4 ,?us1 we h no "r to assume ! exi/5ce ( new p[]s1 n exi/+ 9 nature--= example1 an und]/&+ ) a non-s5su\s intuition1 a =ce ( attraction )\t contact1 or "s new k9d ( sub/ances occupy+ space1 & yet )\t ! prop]ty ( imp5etrability--&1 consequ5tly1 we _c assume t !re is any o!r k9d ( community among sub/ances ?an t obs]vable 9 exp]i5ce1 any k9d ( pres5ce ?an t 9 space1 or any k9d ( duration ?an t 9 "t4 ,9 "o ^w1 ! conditions ( possible exp]i5ce are = reason ! only conditions ( ! possibility ( ?+s2 reason _c v5ture to =m1 indep5d5tly ( ^! conditions1 any conceptions ( ?+s1 because su* conceptions1 al?\gh n self-contradictory1 are )\t object & )\t application4 ,! conceptions ( reason are1 z we h already %[n1 m]e ideas1 & d n relate to any object 9 any k9d ( exp]i5ce4 ,at ! same "t1 !y d n indicate imag9>y or possible objects4 ,!y are purely problematical 9 _! nature &1 z aids to ! heuri/ic ex]cise ( ! faculties1 =m ! basis ( ! regulative pr9ciples = ! sy/ematic employm5t ( ! und]/&+ 9 ! field ( exp]i5ce4 ,if we leave ?is gr\nd ( exp]i5ce1 !y become m]e fictions ( ?\ght1 ! possibility ( :i* is q indemon/rable2 & !y _c1 consequ5tly1 be employ$ z hypo!ses 9 ! explanation ( real ph5om5a4 ,x is q admissible to cogitate ! s\l z simple1 = ! purpose ( enabl+ ourselves to employ ! idea ( a p]fect & necess>y unity ( all ! faculties ( ! m9d z ! pr9ciple ( all our inquiries into its int]nal ph5om5a1 al?\gh we _c cognize ?is unity 9 concreto4 ,b to assume t ! s\l is a simple sub/ance 7a transc5d5tal conception7 w\ld be en\nc+ a proposition :i* is n only indemon/rable--z _m physical hypo!ses are--b a proposition :i* is purely arbitr>y1 & 9 ! highe/ degree ra%4 ,! simple is nev] pres5t$ 9 exp]i5ce2 &1 if by sub/ance is "h meant ! p]man5t object ( s5su\s intuition1 ! possibility ( a simple ph5om5on is p]fectly inconceivable4 ,reason af=ds no good gr\nds = admitt+ ! exi/5ce ( intelligible be+s1 or ( intelligible prop]ties ( s5su\s ?+s1 al?\gh--z we h no conception ei!r ( _! possibility or ( _! impossibility--x w always be out ( our p[] to affirm dogmatically t !y d n exi/4 ,9 ! explanation ( giv5 ph5om5a1 no o!r ?+s & no o!r gr\nds ( explanation c be employ$ ?an ^? :i* /& 9 connection ) ! giv5 ph5om5a accord+ to ! kn[n laws ( exp]i5ce4 ,a transc5d5tal hypo!sis1 9 :i* a m]e idea ( reason is employ$ to expla9 ! ph5om5a ( nature1 w\ld n give u any bett] insight into a ph5om5on1 z we %\ld be try+ to expla9 :at we d n suffici5tly und]/& f kn[n empirical pr9ciples1 by :at we d n und]/& at all4 ,! pr9ciples ( su* a hypo!sis might conduce to ! satisfaction ( reason1 b x w\ld n assi/ ! und]/&+ 9 its application to objects4 ,ord] & con=mity to aims 9 ! sph]e ( nature mu/ be !mselves expla9$ ^u natural gr\nds & accord+ to natural laws2 & ! wilde/ hypo!ses1 if !y are only physical1 are "h m admissible ?an a hyp]physical hypo!sis1 su* z t ( a div9e au?or4 ,= su* a hypo!sis w\ld introduce ! pr9ciple ( ignava ratio1 :i* requires u to give up ! se>* = causes t might be discov]$ 9 ! c\rse ( exp]i5ce & to re/ satisfi$ ) a m]e idea4 ,z reg>ds ! absolute totality ( ! gr\nds ( explanation 9 ! s]ies ( ^! causes1 ?is c be no h9drance to ! und]/&+ 9 ! case ( ph5om5a2 because1 z !y are to u no?+ m ?an ph5om5a1 we h no "r to look = any?+ l complet5ess 9 ! syn!sis ( ! s]ies ( _! conditions4 ,transc5d5tal hypo!ses are !re=e inadmissible2 & we _c use ! lib]ty ( employ+1 9 ! abs5ce ( physical1 hyp]physical gr\nds ( explanation4 ,& ?is = two reasons2 fir/1 because su* hypo!sis d n advance reason1 b r /op x 9 its progress2 secondly1 because ?is lic5ce w\ld r5d] fruitless all its ex]tions 9 its own prop] sph]e1 :i* is t ( exp]i5ce4 ,=1 :5 ! explanation ( natural ph5om5a happ5s to be difficult1 we h con/antly at h& a transc5d5tal gr\nd ( explanation1 :i* lifts u above ! necessity ( inve/igat+ nature2 & our inquiries are br\ght to a close1 n because we h obta9$ all ! requisite k1 b because we abut ^u a pr9ciple :i* is incompreh5sible & :i*1 inde$1 is s f> back 9 ! track ( ?\ght z to conta9 ! conception ( ! absolutely primal be+4 ,! next requisite = ! admissibility ( a hypo!sis is its suffici5cy4 ,t is1 x mu/ det]m9e priori ! consequ5ces :i* are giv5 9 exp]i5ce & :i* are suppos$ to foll[ f ! hypo!sis itself4 ,if we require to employ auxili>y hypo!ses1 ! suspicion naturally arises t !y are m]e fictions2 because ! necessity = ea* ( !m requires ! same ju/ification z 9 ! case ( ! orig9al hypo!sis1 & ?us _! te/imony is invalid4 ,if we suppose ! exi/5ce ( an inf9itely p]fect cause1 we possess suffici5t gr\nds = ! explanation ( ! con=mity to aims1 ! ord] & ! greatness :i* we obs]ve 9 ! univ]se2 b we f9d ourselves oblig$1 :5 we obs]ve ! evil 9 ! _w & ! exceptions to ^! laws1 to employ new hypo!sis 9 support ( ! orig9al "o4 ,we employ ! idea ( ! simple nature ( ! human s\l z ! f\ndation ( all ! !ories we may =m ( its ph5om5a2 b :5 we meet ) difficulties 9 our way1 :5 we obs]ve 9 ! s\l ph5om5a simil> to ! *anges :i* take place 9 matt]1 we require to call 9 new auxili>y hypo!ses4 ,^! may1 inde$1 n be false1 b we d n "k !m to be true1 because ! only witness to _! c]titude is ! hypo!sis :i* !y !mselves h be5 call$ 9 to expla94 ,we are n discuss+ ! above-m5tion$ ass]tions reg>d+ ! immat]ial unity ( ! s\l & ! exi/5ce ( a ,supreme ,be+ z dogmata1 :i* c]ta9 philosoph]s pr(ess to demon/rate priori1 b purely z hypo!ses4 ,9 ! =m] case1 ! dogmati/ mu/ take c>e t 8 argum5ts possess ! apodeictic c]ta9ty ( a demon/ration4 ,= ! ass]tion t ! reality ( su* ideas is probable is z absurd z a pro( ( ! probability ( a proposition 9 geometry4 ,pure ab/ract reason1 ap>t f all exp]i5ce1 c ei!r cognize no?+ at all2 & h5ce ! judgem5ts x en\nces are nev] m]e op9ions1 !y are ei!r apodeictic c]ta9ties1 or decl>ations t no?+ c be kn[n on ! subject4 ,op9ions & probable judgem5ts on ! nature ( ?+s c only be employ$ to expla9 giv5 ph5om5a1 or !y may relate to ! effect1 9 accordance ) empirical laws1 ( an actually exi/+ cause4 ,9 o!r words1 we mu/ re/rict ! sph]e ( op9ion to ! _w ( exp]i5ce & nature4 ,beyond ?is region op9ion is m]e inv5tion2 unless we are grop+ ab\t = ! tru? on a pa? n yet fully kn[n1 & h "s hopes ( /umbl+ ^u x by *ance4 ,b1 al?\gh hypo!ses are inadmissible 9 answ]s to ! que/ions ( pure speculative reason1 !y may be employ$ 9 ! def5ce ( ^! answ]s4 ,t is to say1 hypo!ses are admissible 9 polemic1 b n 9 ! sph]e ( dogmatism4 ,by ! def5ce ( /atem5ts ( ?is "*1 ,i d n mean an attempt at discov]+ new gr\nds = _! support1 b m]ely ! refutation ( ! argum5ts ( oppon5ts4 ,all priori syn!tical propositions possess ! peculi>ity t1 al?\gh ! philosoph] :o ma9ta9s ! reality ( ! ideas conta9$ 9 ! proposition is n 9 possession ( suffici5t k to e/abli% ! c]ta9ty ( 8 /atem5ts1 8 oppon5t is z little able to prove ! tru? ( ! opposite4 ,?is equality ( =tune does n all[ ! "o p>ty to be sup]ior to ! o!r 9 ! sph]e ( speculative cognition2 & x is ?is sph]e1 accord+ly1 t is ! prop] ar5a ( ^! endless speculative conflicts4 ,b we %all aft]w>ds %[ t1 9 relation to its practical ex]cise1 ,reason has ! "r ( admitt+ :at1 9 ! field ( pure speculation1 %e w\ld n be ju/ifi$ 9 suppos+1 except ^u p]fectly suffici5t gr\nds2 because all su* suppositions de/roy ! necess>y complet5ess ( speculation--a condition :i* ! practical reason1 h[ev]1 does n consid] to be requisite4 ,9 ?is sph]e1 !re=e1 ,reason is mi/ress ( a possession1 h] title to :i* %e does n require to prove--:i*1 9 fact1 %e c\ld n d4 ,! burd5 ( pro( accord+ly re/s ^u ! oppon5t4 ,b z he has j z little k reg>d+ ! subject discuss$1 & is z little able to prove ! non-exi/5ce ( ! object ( an idea1 z ! philosoph] on ! o!r side is to demon/rate its reality1 x is evid5t t !re is an advantage on ! side ( ! philosoph] :o ma9ta9s 8 proposition z a practically necess>y supposition 7melior e/ conditio possid5tis74 ,= he is at lib]ty to employ1 9 self-def5ce1 ! same weapons z 8 oppon5t makes use ( 9 attack+ him2 t is1 he has a "r to use hypo!ses n = ! purpose ( support+ ! argum5ts 9 fav\r ( 8 own propositions1 b to %[ t 8 oppon5t kn[s no m ?an himself reg>d+ ! subject "u discussion & _c boa/ ( any speculative advantage4 ,hypo!ses are1 !re=e1 admissible 9 ! sph]e ( pure reason only z weapons = self-def5ce1 & n z supports to dogmatical ass]tions4 ,b ! oppos+ p>ty we mu/ always seek = 9 ourselves4 ,= speculative reason is1 9 ! sph]e ( transc5d5talism1 dialectical 9 its own nature4 ,! difficulties & objections we h to fe> lie 9 ourselves4 ,!y are l old b nev] sup]annuat$ claims2 & we mu/ seek !m out1 & settle !m once & = ev]1 if we are to expect a p]man5t peace4 ,ext]nal tranquility is holl[ & unreal4 ,! root ( ^! contradictions1 :i* lies 9 ! nature ( human reason1 mu/ be de/roy$2 & ?is c only be done by giv+ x1 9 ! fir/ in/ance1 fre$om to gr[1 nay1 by n\ri%+ x1 t x may s5d out %oots1 & ?us betray its own exi/5ce4 ,x is our duty1 !re=e1 to try to discov] new objections1 to put weapons 9 ! b&s ( our oppon5t1 & to grant him ! mo/ fav\rable position 9 ! ar5a t he c wi%4 ,we h no?+ to fe> f ^! concessions2 on ! contr>y1 we may r hope t we %all ?us make ourselves ma/] ( a possession :i* no "o w ev] v5ture to dispute4 ,! ?9k] requires1 to be fully equipp$1 ! hypo!ses ( pure reason1 :i*1 al?\gh b lead5 weapons 7= !y h n be5 /eel$ 9 ! arm\ry ( exp]i5ce71 are z useful z any t c be employ$ by 8 oppon5ts4 ,if1 accord+ly1 we h assum$1 f a non-speculative po9t ( view1 ! immat]ial nature ( ! s\l1 & are met by ! objection t exp]i5ce seems to prove t ! gr[? & decay ( our m5tal faculties are m]e modifications ( ! s5su\s organism--we c weak5 ! =ce ( ?is objection by ! assumption t ! body is no?+ b ! fundam5tal ph5om5on1 to :i*1 z a necess>y condition1 all s5sibility1 & consequ5tly all ?\ght1 relates 9 ! pres5t /ate ( our exi/5ce2 & t ! sep>ation ( s\l & body =ms ! conclusion ( ! s5su\s ex]cise ( our p[] ( cognition & ! beg9n+ ( ! intellectual4 ,! body w\ld1 9 ?is view ( ! "q1 be reg>d$1 n z ! cause ( ?\ght1 b m]ely z its re/rictive condition1 z promotive ( ! s5su\s & animal1 b z a h9drance to ! pure & spiritual life2 & ! dep5d5ce ( ! animal life on ! con/itution ( ! body1 w\ld n prove t ! :ole life ( man 0 also dep5d5t on ! /ate ( ! organism4 ,we might g /ill f>!r1 & discov] new objections1 or c>ry out to _! extreme consequ5ces ^? :i* h already be5 adduc$4 ,g5]ation1 9 ! human race z well z among ! irrational animals1 dep5ds on s _m accid5ts--( occasion1 ( prop] su/5ance1 ( ! laws enact$ by ! gov]nm5t ( a c\ntry ( vice ev51 t x is difficult to believe 9 ! et]nal exi/5ce ( a be+ ^: life has begun "u circum/ances s mean & trivial1 & s entirely dep5d5t ^u our own control4 ,z reg>ds ! cont9uance ( ! exi/5ce ( ! :ole race1 we ne$ h no difficulties1 = accid5t 9 s+le cases is subject to g5]al laws2 b1 9 ! case ( ea* individual1 x w\ld seem z if we c\ld h>dly expect s wond]ful an effect f causes s insignificant4 ,b1 9 answ] to ^! objections1 we may adduce ! transc5d5tal hypo!sis t all life is prop]ly intelligible1 & n subject to *anges ( "t1 & t x nei!r began 9 bir?1 nor w end 9 dea?4 ,we may assume t ?is life is no?+ m ?an a s5su\s repres5tation ( pure spiritual life2 t ! :ole _w ( s5se is b an image1 hov]+ be=e ! faculty ( cognition :i* we ex]cise 9 ?is sph]e1 & ) no m objective reality ?an a dream2 & t if we c\ld intuite ourselves & o!r ?+s z !y really are1 we %\ld see ourselves 9 a _w ( spiritual natures1 our connection ) :i* did n beg9 at our bir? & w n cease ) ! de/ruction ( ! body4 ,& s on4 ,we _c be said to "k :at has be5 above ass]t$1 nor d we s]i\sly ma9ta9 ! tru? ( ^! ass]tions2 & ! notions !re9 indicat$ are n ev5 ideas ( reason1 !y are purely fictiti\s conceptions4 ,b ?is hypo!tical proc$ure is 9 p]fect con=mity ) ! laws ( reason4 ,our oppon5t mi/akes ! abs5ce ( empirical conditions = a pro( ( ! complete impossibility ( all t we h ass]t$2 & we h to %[ him t he has n exhau/$ ! :ole sph]e ( possibility & t he c z little compass t sph]e by ! laws ( exp]i5ce & nature1 z we c lay a secure f\ndation = ! op]ations ( reason beyond ! region ( exp]i5ce4 ,su* hypo!tical def5ces aga9/ ! pret5sions ( an oppon5t mu/ n be reg>d$ z decl>ations ( op9ion4 ,! philosoph] ab&ons !m1 s soon z ! opposite p>ty r5\nces its dogmatical conceit4 ,to ma9ta9 a simply negative position 9 relation to propositions :i* re/ on an insecure f\ndation1 well befits ! mod]ation ( a true philosoph]2 b to uphold ! objections urg$ aga9/ an oppon5t z pro(s ( ! opposite /atem5t is a proce$+ j z unw>rantable & arrogant z x is to attack ! position ( a philosoph] :o advances affirmative propositions reg>d+ su* a subject4 ,x is evid5t1 !re=e1 t hypo!ses1 9 ! speculative sph]e1 are valid1 n z indep5d5t propositions1 b only relatively to opposite transc5d5t assumptions4 ,=1 to make ! pr9ciples ( possible exp]i5ce conditions ( ! possibility ( ?+s 9 g5]al is j z transc5d5t a proc$ure z to ma9ta9 ! objective reality ( ideas :i* c be appli$ to no objects except su* z lie )\t ! limits ( possible exp]i5ce4 ,! judgem5ts en\nc$ by pure reason mu/ be necess>y1 or !y mu/ n be en\nc$ at all4 ,reason _c tr\ble h]self ) op9ions4 ,b ! hypo!ses we h be5 discuss+ are m]ely problematical judgem5ts1 :i* c nei!r be confut$ nor prov$2 :ile1 !re=e1 !y are n p]sonal op9ions1 !y are indisp5sable z answ]s to objections :i* are liable to be rais$4 ,b we mu/ take c>e to conf9e !m to ?is function1 & gu>d aga9/ any assumption on _! "p ( absolute validity1 a proce$+ :i* w\ld involve reason 9 inextricable difficulties & contradictions4 ,section ,,iv4 ,! ,discipl9e ( ,pure ,reason 9 ,relation to ,pro(s ,x is a peculi>ity1 :i* di/+ui%es ! pro(s ( transc5d5tal syn!tical propositions f ^? ( all o!r priori syn!tical cognitions1 t reason1 9 ! case ( ! =m]1 does n apply its conceptions directly to an object1 b is fir/ oblig$ to prove1 priori1 ! objective validity ( ^! conceptions & ! possibility ( _! syn!ses4 ,?is is n m]ely a prud5tial rule1 x is ess5tial to ! v possibility ( ! pro( ( a transc5d5tal proposition4 ,if ,i am requir$ to pass1 priori1 beyond ! conception ( an object1 ,i f9d t x is utt]ly impossible )\t ! guidance ( some?+ :i* is n conta9$ 9 ! conception4 ,9 ma!matics1 x is priori intuition t guides my syn!sis2 &1 9 ?is case1 all our conclusions may be drawn imm$iately f pure intuition4 ,9 transc5d5tal cognition1 s long z we are deal+ only ) conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 we are guid$ by possible exp]i5ce4 ,t is to say1 a pro( 9 ! sph]e ( transc5d5tal cognition does n %[ t ! giv5 conception 7t ( an ev5t1 = example7 leads directly to ano!r conception 7t ( a cause7--= ?is w\ld be a saltus :i* no?+ c ju/ify2 b x %[s t exp]i5ce itself1 & consequ5tly ! object ( exp]i5ce1 is impossible )\t ! connection indicat$ by ^! conceptions4 ,x foll[s t su* a pro( mu/ demon/rate ! possibility ( arriv+1 syn!tically & priori1 at a c]ta9 k ( ?+s1 :i* 0 n conta9$ 9 our conceptions ( ^! ?+s4 ,unless we pay p>ticul> att5tion to ?is requirem5t1 our pro(s1 in/ead ( pursu+ ! /raight pa? indicat$ by reason1 foll[ ! tortu\s road ( m]e subjective association4 ,! illusory conviction1 :i* re/s ^u subjective causes ( association1 & :i* is consid]$ z result+ f ! p]ception ( a real & objective natural aff9ity1 is always op5 to d\bt & suspicion4 ,= ?is reason1 all ! attempts :i* h be5 made to prove ! pr9ciple ( suffici5t reason1 h1 accord+ to ! univ]sal admission ( philosoph]s1 be5 q unsuccessful2 &1 be=e ! appe>ance ( transc5d5tal criticism1 x 0 consid]$ bett]1 z ?is pr9ciple c\ld n be ab&on$1 to appeal boldly to ! common s5se ( mank9d 7a proce$+ :i* always proves t ! problem1 :i* reason ought to solve1 is "o 9 :i* philosoph]s f9d great difficulties71 r ?an attempt to discov] new dogmatical pro(s4 ,b1 if ! proposition to be prov$ is a proposition ( pure reason1 & if ,i aim at pass+ beyond my empirical conceptions by ! aid ( m]e ideas1 x is necess>y t ! pro( %\ld fir/ %[ t su* a /ep 9 syn!sis is possible 7:i* x is n71 be=e x proce$s to prove ! tru? ( ! proposition itself4 ,! s-call$ pro( ( ! simple nature ( ! s\l f ! unity ( app]ception1 is a v plausible "o4 ,b x conta9s no answ] to ! objection1 t1 z ! notion ( absolute simplicity is n a conception :i* is directly applicable to a p]ception1 b is an idea :i* mu/ be inf]r$--if at all--f obs]vation1 x is by no means evid5t h[ ! m]e fact ( consci\sness1 :i* is conta9$ 9 all ?\ght1 al?\gh 9 s f> a simple repres5tation1 c conduct me to ! consci\sness & cognition ( a ?+ :i* is purely a ?9k+ sub/ance4 ,:5 ,i repres5t to my m9d ! p[] ( my body z 9 motion1 my body 9 ?is ?\ght is s f> absolute unity1 & my repres5tation ( x is a simple "o2 & h5ce ,i c indicate ?is repres5tation by ! motion ( a po9t1 because ,i h made ab/raction ( ! size or volume ( ! body4 ,b ,i _c h5ce inf] t1 giv5 m]ely ! mov+ p[] ( a body1 ! body may be cogitat$ z simple sub/ance1 m]ely because ! repres5tation 9 my m9d takes no acc\nt ( its cont5t 9 space1 & is consequ5tly simple4 ,! simple1 9 ab/raction1 is v diff]5t f ! objectively simple2 & h5ce ! ,ego1 :i* is simple 9 ! fir/ s5se1 may1 9 ! second s5se1 z indicat+ ! s\l itself1 be a v complex conception1 ) a v v>i\s cont5t4 ,?us x is evid5t t 9 all su* argum5ts !re lurks a p>alogism4 ,we guess 7= )\t "s su* surmise our suspicion w\ld n be excit$ 9 ref]5ce to a pro( ( ?is "*7 at ! pres5ce ( ! p>alogism1 by keep+ ev] be=e u a crit]ion ( ! possibility ( ^? syn!tical propositions :i* aim at prov+ m ?an exp]i5ce c tea* u4 ,?is crit]ion is obta9$ f ! obs]vation t su* pro(s d n lead u directly f ! subject ( ! proposition to be prov$ to ! requir$ pr$icate1 b f9d x necess>y to presuppose ! possibility ( ext5d+ our cognition priori by means ( ideas4 ,we mu/1 accord+ly1 always use ! greate/ caution2 we require1 be=e attempt+ any pro(1 to consid] h[ x is possible to ext5d ! sph]e ( cognition by ! op]ations ( pure reason1 & f :at s\rce we are to d]ive k1 :i* is n obta9$ f ! analysis ( conceptions1 nor relates1 by anticipation1 to possible exp]i5ce4 ,we %all ?us sp>e ourselves mu* sev]e & fruitless lab\r1 by n expect+ f reason :at is beyond its p[]1 or r by subject+ x to discipl9e1 & tea*+ x to mod]ate its vehem5t desires = ! ext5sion ( ! sph]e ( cognition4 ,! fir/ rule = our guidance is1 !re=e1 n to attempt a transc5d5tal pro(1 be=e we h consid]$ f :at s\rce we are to d]ive ! pr9ciples ^u :i* ! pro( is to be bas$1 & :at "r we h to expect t our conclusions f ^! pr9ciples w be v]aci\s4 ,if !y are pr9ciples ( ! und]/&+1 x is va9 to expect t we %\ld atta9 by _! means to ideas ( pure reason2 = ^! pr9ciples are valid only 9 reg>d to objects ( possible exp]i5ce4 ,if !y are pr9ciples ( pure reason1 our lab\r is alike 9 va94 ,= ! pr9ciples ( reason1 if employ$ z objective1 are )\t exception dialectical & possess no validity or tru?1 except z regulative pr9ciples ( ! sy/ematic employm5t ( reason 9 exp]i5ce4 ,b :5 su* delusive pro( are pres5t$ to u1 x is our duty to meet !m ) ! non liquet ( a matur$ judgem5t2 &1 al?\gh we are unable to expose ! p>ticul> sophism ^u :i* ! pro( is bas$1 we h a "r to dem& a d$uction ( ! pr9ciples employ$ 9 x2 &1 if ^! pr9ciples h _! orig9 9 pure reason alone1 su* a d$uction is absolutely impossible4 ,& ?us x is unnecess>y t we %\ld tr\ble ourselves ) ! exposure & confutation ( e sophi/ical illusion2 we may1 at once1 br+ all dialectic1 :i* is inexhau/ible 9 ! production ( fallacies1 be=e ! b> ( critical reason1 :i* te/s ! pr9ciples ^u :i* all dialectical proc$ure is bas$4 ,! second peculi>ity ( transc5d5tal pro( is t a transc5d5tal proposition _c re/ ^u m ?an a s+le pro(4 ,if ,i am draw+ conclusions1 n f conceptions1 b f intuition correspond+ to a conception1 be x pure intuition1 z 9 ma!matics1 or empirical1 z 9 natural sci5ce1 ! intuition :i* =ms ! basis ( my inf]5ces pres5ts me ) mat]ials = _m syn!tical propositions1 :i* ,i c connect 9 v>i\s modes1 :ile1 z x is all[able to proce$ f diff]5t po9ts 9 ! int5tion1 ,i c arrive by diff]5t pa?s at ! same proposition4 ,b e transc5d5tal proposition sets out f a conception1 & posits ! syn!tical condition ( ! possibility ( an object accord+ to ?is conception4 ,!re mu/1 !re=e1 be b "o gr\nd ( pro(1 because x is ! conception alone :i* det]m9es ! object2 & ?us ! pro( _c conta9 any?+ m ?an ! det]m9ation ( ! object accord+ to ! conception4 ,9 our ,transc5d5tal ,analytic1 = example1 we inf]r$ ! pr9ciple3 ,e ev5t has a cause1 f ! only condition ( ! objective possibility ( our conception ( an ev5t4 ,?is is t an ev5t _c be det]m9$ 9 "t1 & consequ5tly _c =m a "p ( exp]i5ce1 unless x /&s "u ?is dynamical law4 ,?is is ! only possible gr\nd ( pro(2 = our conception ( an ev5t possesses objective validity1 t is1 is a true conception1 only because ! law ( causality det]m9es an object to :i* x c ref]4 ,o!r argum5ts 9 support ( ?is pr9ciple h be5 attempt$--su* z t f ! cont+5t nature ( a ph5om5on2 b :5 ?is argum5t is consid]$1 we c discov] no crit]ion ( cont+5cy1 except ! fact ( an ev5t--( some?+ happ5+1 t is to say1 ! exi/5ce :i* is prec$$ by ! non-exi/5ce ( an object1 & ?us we fall back on ! v ?+ to be prov$4 ,if ! proposition3 8,e ?9k+ be+ is simple10 is to be prov$1 we keep to ! conception ( ! ego1 :i* is simple1 & to :i* all ?\ght has a relation4 ,! same is ! case ) ! transc5d5tal pro( ( ! exi/5ce ( a ,deity1 :i* is bas$ solely ^u ! h>mony & reciprocal fitness ( ! conceptions ( an ens realissimum & a necess>y be+1 & _c be attempt$ 9 any o!r mann]4 ,?is caution s]ves to simplify v mu* ! criticism ( all propositions ( reason4 ,:5 reason employs conceptions alone1 only "o pro( ( its !sis is possible1 if any4 ,:51 !re=e1 ! dogmati/ advances ) t5 argum5ts 9 fav\r ( a proposition1 we may be sure t n "o ( !m is conclusive4 ,= if he possess$ "o :i* prov$ ! proposition he br+s =w>d to demon/ration--z mu/ always be ! case ) ! propositions ( pure reason--:at ne$ is !re = any m8 ,8 int5tion c only be simil> to t ( ! advocate :o _h diff]5t argum5ts = diff]5t judges2 ?is avail+ himself ( ! weakness ( ^? :o exam9e 8 argum5ts1 :o1 )\t go+ into any pr(\nd inve/igation1 adopt ! view ( ! case :i* seems mo/ probable at fir/ sight & decide accord+ to x4 ,! ?ird rule = ! guidance ( pure reason 9 ! conduct ( a pro( is t all transc5d5tal pro(s mu/ nev] be apagogic or indirect1 b always o/5sive or direct4 ,! direct or o/5sive pro( n only e/abli%es ! tru? ( ! proposition to be prov$1 b exposes ! gr\nds ( its tru?2 ! apagogic1 on ! o!r h&1 may assure u ( ! tru? ( ! proposition1 b x _c enable u to compreh5d ! gr\nds ( its possibility4 ,! latt] is1 accord+ly1 r an auxili>y to an argum5t1 ?an a /rictly philosophical & rational mode ( proc$ure4 ,9 "o respect1 h[ev]1 !y h an advantage ov] direct pro(s1 f ! fact t ! mode ( argu+ by contradiction1 :i* !y employ1 r5d]s our und]/&+ ( ! "q m cle>1 & approximates ! pro( to ! c]ta9ty ( an intuitional demon/ration4 ,! true reason :y indirect pro(s are employ$ 9 diff]5t sci5ces is ?is4 ,:5 ! gr\nds ^u :i* we seek to base a cognition are too v>i\s or too pr(\nd1 we try :e!r or n we may n discov] ! tru? ( our cognition f its consequ5ces4 ,! modus pon5s ( reason+ f ! tru? ( its inf]5ces to ! tru? ( a proposition w\ld be admissible if all ! inf]5ces t c be drawn f x are kn[n to be true2 = 9 ?is case !re c be only "o possible gr\nd = ^! inf]5ces1 & t is ! true "o4 ,b ?is is a q impracticable proc$ure1 z x surpasses all our p[]s to discov] all ! possible inf]5ces t c be drawn f a proposition4 ,b ?is mode ( reason+ is employ$1 "u fav\r1 :5 we wi% to prove ! tru? ( an hypo!sis2 9 :i* case we admit ! tru? ( ! conclusion--:i* is support$ by analogy--t1 if all ! inf]5ces we h drawn & exam9$ agree ) ! proposition assum$1 all o!r possible inf]5ces w also agree ) x4 ,b1 9 ?is way1 an hypo!sis c nev] be e/abli%$ z a demon/rat$ tru?4 ,! modus toll5s ( reason+ f kn[n inf]5ces to ! unkn[n proposition1 is n only a rigor\s1 b a v easy mode ( pro(4 ,=1 if x c be %[n t b "o inf]5ce f a proposition is false1 !n ! proposition mu/ itself be false4 ,in/ead1 !n1 ( exam9+1 9 an o/5sive argum5t1 ! :ole s]ies ( ! gr\nds on :i* ! tru? ( a proposition re/s1 we ne$ only take ! opposite ( ?is proposition1 & if "o inf]5ce f x be false1 !n mu/ ! opposite be itself false2 &1 consequ5tly1 ! proposition :i* we wi%$ to prove mu/ be true4 ,! apagogic me?od ( pro( is admissible only 9 ^? sci5ces :]e x is impossible to mi/ake a subjective repres5tation = an objective cognition4 ,:]e ?is is possible1 x is pla9 t ! opposite ( a giv5 proposition may contradict m]ely ! subjective conditions ( ?\ght1 & n ! objective cognition2 or x may happ5 t bo? propositions contradict ea* o!r only "u a subjective condition1 :i* is incorrectly consid]$ to be objective1 &1 z ! condition is itself false1 bo? propositions may be false1 & x w1 consequ5tly1 be impossible to conclude ! tru? ( ! "o f ! fals5ess ( ! o!r4 ,9 ma!matics su* subreptions are impossible2 & x is 9 ?is sci5ce1 accord+ly1 t ! indirect mode ( pro( has its true place4 ,9 ! sci5ce ( nature1 :]e all ass]tion is bas$ ^u empirical intuition1 su* subreptions may be gu>d$ aga9/ by ! repeat$ comp>ison ( obs]vations2 b ?is mode ( pro( is ( little value 9 ?is sph]e ( k4 ,b ! transc5d5tal ef=ts ( pure reason are all made 9 ! sph]e ( ! subjective1 :i* is ! real m$ium ( all dialectical illusion2 & ?us reason endeav\rs1 9 its premisses1 to impose ^u u subjective repres5tations = objective cognitions4 ,9 ! transc5d5tal sph]e ( pure reason1 !n1 & 9 ! case ( syn!tical propositions1 x is inadmissible to support a /atem5t by disprov+ ! c\nt]-/atem5t4 ,= only two cases are possible2 ei!r1 ! c\nt]-/atem5t is no?+ b ! en\ncem5t ( ! inconsi/5cy ( ! opposite op9ion ) ! subjective conditions ( reason1 :i* does n affect ! real case 7= example1 we _c compreh5d ! uncondition$ necessity ( ! exi/5ce ( a be+1 & h5ce e speculative pro( ( ! exi/5ce ( su* a be+ mu/ be oppos$ on subjective gr\nds1 :ile ! possibility ( ?is be+ 9 itself _c ) ju/ice be d5i$72 or1 bo? propositions1 be+ dialectical 9 _! nature1 are bas$ ^u an impossible conception4 ,9 ?is latt] case ! rule applies3 non entis nulla sunt pr$icata2 t is to say1 :at we affirm & :at we d5y1 respect+ su* an object1 are equally untrue1 & ! apagogic mode ( arriv+ at ! tru? is 9 ?is case impossible4 ,if1 = example1 we presuppose t ! _w ( s5se is giv5 9 itself 9 its totality1 x is false1 ei!r t x is inf9ite1 or t x is f9ite & limit$ 9 space4 ,bo? are false1 because ! hypo!sis is false4 ,= ! notion ( ph5om5a 7z m]e repres5tations7 :i* are giv5 9 !mselves 7z objects7 is self-contradictory2 & ! inf9itude ( ?is imag9>y :ole w\ld1 inde$1 be uncondition$1 b w\ld be inconsi/5t 7z ev]y?+ 9 ! ph5om5al _w is condition$7 ) ! uncondition$ det]m9ation & f9itude ( quantities :i* is presuppos$ 9 our conception4 ,! apagogic mode ( pro( is ! true s\rce ( ^? illusions :i* h always _h s /rong an attraction = ! admir]s ( dogmatical philosophy4 ,x may be comp>$ to a *ampion :o ma9ta9s ! hon\r & claims ( ! p>ty he has adopt$ by (f]+ battle to all :o d\bt ! validity ( ^! claims & ! purity ( t hon\r2 :ile no?+ c be prov$ 9 ?is way1 except ! respective /r5g? ( ! combatants1 & ! advantage1 9 ?is respect1 is always on ! side ( ! attack+ p>ty4 ,spectators1 obs]v+ t ea* p>ty is alt]nately conqu]or & conqu]$1 are l$ to reg>d ! subject ( dispute z beyond ! p[] ( man to decide ^u4 ,b su* an op9ion _c be ju/ifi$2 & x is suffici5t to apply to ^! reason]s ! rem>k3 ,non def5soribus i/is ,tempus eget4 ,ea* mu/ try to e/abli% 8 ass]tions by a transc5d5tal d$uction ( ! gr\nds ( pro( employ$ 9 8 argum5t1 & ?us enable u to see 9 :at way ! claims ( reason may be support$4 ,if an oppon5t bases 8 ass]tions ^u subjective gr\nds1 he may be refut$ ) ease2 n1 h[ev] to ! advantage ( ! dogmati/1 :o likewise dep5ds ^u subjective s\rces ( cognition & is 9 l mann] driv5 into a corn] by 8 oppon5t4 ,b1 if p>ties employ ! direct me?od ( proc$ure1 !y w soon discov] ! difficulty1 nay1 ! impossibility ( prov+ _! ass]tions1 & w be =c$ to appeal to prescription & prec$5ce2 or !y w1 by ! help ( criticism1 discov] ) ease ! dogmatical illusions by :i* !y _h be5 mock$1 & compel reason to r5\nce its exagg]at$ pret5sions to speculative insight & to conf9e itself )9 ! limits ( its prop] sph]e--t ( practical pr9ciples4 ,*apt] ,,ii4 ,! ,canon ( ,pure ,reason ,x is a humiliat+ consid]ation = human reason t x is incompet5t to discov] tru? by means ( pure speculation1 b1 on ! contr>y1 /&s 9 ne$ ( discipl9e to *eck its deviations f ! /raight pa? & to expose ! illusions :i* x orig9ates4 ,b1 on ! o!r h&1 ?is consid]ation ought to elevate & to give x confid5ce1 = ?is discipl9e is ex]cis$ by itself alone1 & x is subject to ! c5sure ( no o!r p[]4 ,! b\nds1 moreov]1 :i* x is =c$ to set to its speculative ex]cise1 =m likewise a *eck ^u ! fallaci\s pret5sions ( oppon5ts2 & ?us :at rema9s ( its possessions1 aft] ^! exagg]at$ claims h be5 disall[$1 is secure f attack or usurpation4 ,! greate/1 & p]haps ! only1 use ( all philosophy ( pure reason is1 accord+ly1 ( a purely negative "*4 ,x is n an organon = ! ext5sion1 b a discipl9e = ! det]m9ation1 ( ! limits ( its ex]cise2 & )\t lay+ claim to ! discov]y ( new tru?1 x has ! mode/ m]it ( gu>d+ aga9/ error4 ,at ! same "t1 !re mu/ be "s s\rce ( positive cognitions :i* belong to ! doma9 ( pure reason & :i* become ! causes ( error only f our mi/ak+ _! true "*1 :ile !y =m ! goal t[>ds :i* reason cont9ually /rives4 ,h[ else c we acc\nt = ! inext+ui%able desire 9 ! human m9d to f9d a firm foot+ 9 "s region beyond ! limits ( ! _w ( exp]i5ce8 ,x hopes to atta9 to ! possession ( a k 9 :i* x has ! deepe/ int]e/4 ,x ent]s ^u ! pa? ( pure speculation2 b 9 va94 ,we h "s reason1 h[ev]1 to expect t1 9 ! only o!r way t lies op5 to x--! pa? ( practical reason--x may meet ) bett] success4 ,i und]/& by a canon a li/ ( ! priori pr9ciples ( ! prop] employm5t ( c]ta9 faculties ( cognition4 ,?us g5]al logic1 9 its analytical dep>tm5t1 is a =mal canon = ! faculties ( und]/&+ & reason4 ,9 ! same way1 ,transc5d5tal ,analytic 0 se5 to be a canon ( ! pure und]/&+2 = x alone is compet5t to en\nce true priori syn!tical cognitions4 ,b1 :5 no prop] employm5t ( a faculty ( cognition is possible1 no canon c exi/4 ,b ! syn!tical cognition ( pure speculative reason is1 z has be5 %[n1 completely impossible4 ,!re _c1 !re=e1 exi/ any canon = ! speculative ex]cise ( ?is faculty--= its speculative ex]cise is entirely dialectical2 &1 consequ5tly1 transc5d5tal logic1 9 ?is respect1 is m]ely a discipl9e1 & n a canon4 ,if1 !n1 !re is any prop] mode ( employ+ ! faculty ( pure reason--9 :i* case !re mu/ be a canon = ?is faculty--?is canon w relate1 n to ! speculative1 b to ! practical use ( reason4 ,?is canon we n[ proce$ to inve/igate4 ,section ,i4 ,( ! ,ultimate ,end ( ! ,pure ,use ( ,reason ,!re exi/s 9 ! faculty ( reason a natural desire to v5ture beyond ! field ( exp]i5ce1 to attempt to rea* ! utmo/ b\nds ( all cognition by ! help ( ideas alone1 & n to re/ satisfi$ until x has fulfill$ its c\rse & rais$ ! sum ( its cognitions into a self-subsi/5t sy/ematic :ole4 ,is ! motive = ?is endeav\r to be f\nd 9 its speculative1 or 9 its practical int]e/s alone8 ,sett+ aside1 at pres5t1 ! results ( ! lab\rs ( pure reason 9 its speculative ex]cise1 ,i %all m]ely inquire reg>d+ ! problems ! solution ( :i* =ms its ultimate aim1 :e!r rea*$ or n1 & 9 relation to :i* all o!r aims are b p>tial & int]m$iate4 ,^! highe/ aims mu/1 f ! nature ( reason1 possess complete unity2 o!rwise ! highe/ int]e/ ( humanity c\ld n be successfully promot$4 ,! transc5d5tal speculation ( reason relates to ?ree ?+s3 ! fre$om ( ! w1 ! immortality ( ! s\l1 & ! exi/5ce ( ,god4 ,! speculative int]e/ :i* reason has 9 ^? que/ions is v small2 &1 = its sake alone1 we %\ld n und]take ! lab\r ( transc5d5tal inve/igation--a lab\r full ( toil & ceaseless /ruggle4 ,we %\ld be lo? to und]take ?is lab\r1 because ! discov]ies we might make w\ld n be ( ! smalle/ use 9 ! sph]e ( concrete or physical inve/igation4 ,we may f9d out t ! w is free1 b ?is k only relates to ! intelligible cause ( our volition4 ,z reg>ds ! ph5om5a or expressions ( ?is w1 t is1 our actions1 we are b\nd1 9 ob$i5ce to an inviolable maxim1 )\t :i* reason _c be employ$ 9 ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce1 to expla9 ^! 9 ! same way z we expla9 all ! o!r ph5om5a ( nature1 t is to say1 accord+ to its un*angeable laws4 ,we may h discov]$ ! spirituality & immortality ( ! s\l1 b we _c employ ?is k to expla9 ! ph5om5a ( ?is life1 nor ! peculi> nature ( ! future1 because our conception ( an incorporeal nature is purely negative & does n add any?+ to our k1 & ! only inf]5ces to be drawn f x are purely fictiti\s4 ,if1 aga91 we prove ! exi/5ce ( a supreme intellig5ce1 we %\ld be able f x to make ! con=mity to aims exi/+ 9 ! arrangem5t ( ! _w compreh5sible2 b we %\ld n be ju/ifi$ 9 d$uc+ f x any p>ticul> arrangem5t or disposition1 or inf]r+ any :]e x is n p]ceiv$4 ,= x is a necess>y rule ( ! speculative use ( reason t we mu/ n ov]look natural causes1 or refuse to li/5 to ! tea*+ ( exp]i5ce1 = ! sake ( d$uc+ :at we "k & p]ceive f some?+ t transc5ds all our k4 ,9 "o ^w1 ^! ?ree propositions are1 = ! speculative reason1 always transc5d5t1 & _c be employ$ z imman5t pr9ciples 9 relation to ! objects ( exp]i5ce2 !y are1 consequ5tly1 ( no use to u 9 ?is sph]e1 be+ b ! valueless results ( ! sev]e b unpr(itable ef=ts ( reason4 ,if1 !n1 ! actual cognition ( ^! ?ree c>d9al propositions is p]fectly useless1 :ile ,reason uses h] utmo/ endeav\rs to induce u to admit !m1 x is pla9 t _! real value & importance relate to our practical1 & n to our speculative int]e/4 ,i t]m all t is possible ?r\gh free w1 practical4 ,b if ! conditions ( ! ex]cise ( free volition are empirical1 reason c h only a regulative1 & n a con/itutive1 influ5ce ^u x1 & is s]viceable m]ely = ! introduction ( unity into its empirical laws4 ,9 ! moral philosophy ( prud5ce1 = example1 ! sole bus9ess ( reason is to br+ ab\t a union ( all ! ends1 :i* are aim$ at by our incl9ations1 into "o ultimate end--t ( happ9ess--& to %[ ! agreem5t :i* %\ld exi/ among ! means ( atta9+ t end4 ,9 ?is sph]e1 accord+ly1 reason _c pres5t to u any o!r ?an pragmatical laws ( free action1 = our guidance t[>ds ! aims set up by ! s5ses1 & is incompet5t to give u laws :i* are pure & det]m9$ completely priori4 ,on ! o!r h&1 pure practical laws1 ! ends ( :i* h be5 giv5 by reason entirely priori1 & :i* are n empirically condition$1 b are1 on ! contr>y1 absolutely imp]ative 9 _! nature1 w\ld be products ( pure reason4 ,su* are ! moral laws2 & ^! alone belong to ! sph]e ( ! practical ex]cise ( reason1 & admit ( a canon4 ,all ! p[]s ( reason1 9 ! sph]e ( :at may be t]m$ pure philosophy1 are1 9 fact1 direct$ to ! ?ree above-m5tion$ problems alone4 ,^! aga9 h a /ill high] end--! answ] to ! "q1 :at we ought to d1 if ! w is free1 if !re is a ,god & a future _w4 ,n[1 z ?is problem relates to our 9 ref]5ce to ! highe/ aim ( humanity1 x is evid5t t ! ultimate int5tion ( nature1 9 ! con/itution ( our reason1 has be5 direct$ to ! moral alone4 ,we mu/ take c>e1 h[ev]1 9 turn+ our att5tion to an object :i* is =eign#gh to ! sph]e ( transc5d5tal philosophy1 n to injure ! unity ( our sy/em by digressions1 nor1 on ! o!r h&1 to fail 9 cle>ness1 by say+ too little on ! new subject ( discussion4 ,i hope to avoid bo? extremes1 by keep+ z close z possible to ! transc5d5tal1 & exclud+ all psy*ological1 t is1 empirical1 elem5ts4 #gh ,all practical conceptions relate to objects ( pleasure & pa91 & consequ5tly--9 an indirect mann]1 at lea/--to objects ( feel+4 ,b z feel+ is n a faculty ( repres5tation1 b lies out ( ! sph]e ( our p[]s ( cognition1 ! elem5ts ( our judgem5ts1 9 s f> z !y relate to pleasure or pa91 t is1 ! elem5ts ( our practical judgem5ts1 d n belong to transc5d5tal philosophy1 :i* has to d ) pure priori cognitions alone4 ,i h to rem>k1 9 ! fir/ place1 t at pres5t ,i treat ( ! conception ( fre$om 9 ! practical s5se only1 & set aside ! correspond+ transc5d5tal conception1 :i* _c be employ$ z a gr\nd ( explanation 9 ! ph5om5al _w1 b is itself a problem = pure reason4 ,a w is purely animal 7arbitrium brutum7 :5 x is det]m9$ by s5su\s impulses or in/9cts only1 t is1 :5 x is det]m9$ 9 a pa?ological mann]4 ,a w1 :i* c be det]m9$ indep5d5tly ( s5su\s impulses1 consequ5tly by motives pres5t$ by reason alone1 is call$ a free w 7arbitrium lib]um72 & ev]y?+ :i* is connect$ ) ?is free w1 ei!r z pr9ciple or consequ5ce1 is t]m$ practical4 ,! exi/5ce ( practical fre$om c be prov$ f exp]i5ce alone4 ,= ! human w is n det]m9$ by t alone :i* imm$iately affects ! s5ses2 on ! contr>y1 we h ! p[]1 by call+ up ! notion ( :at is useful or hurtful 9 a m di/ant relation1 ( ov]com+ ! imm$iate impressions on our s5su\s faculty ( desire4 ,b ^! consid]ations ( :at is desirable 9 relation to our :ole /ate1 t is1 is 9 ! end good & useful1 are bas$ entirely ^u reason4 ,?is faculty1 accord+ly1 en\nces laws1 :i* are imp]ative or objective laws ( fre$om & :i* tell u :at ought to take place1 ?us di/+ui%+ !mselves f ! laws ( nature1 :i* relate to t :i* does take place4 ,! laws ( fre$om or ( free w are h5ce t]m$ practical laws4 ,:e!r reason is n itself1 9 ! actual deliv]y ( ^! laws1 det]m9$ 9 its turn by o!r influ5ces1 & :e!r ! action :i*1 9 relation to s5su\s impulses1 we call free1 may n1 9 relation to high] & m remote op]ative causes1 really =m a "p ( nature--^! are que/ions :i* d n "h conc]n u4 ,!y are purely speculative que/ions2 & all we h to d1 9 ! practical sph]e1 is to inquire into ! rule ( conduct :i* reason has to pres5t4 ,exp]i5ce demon/rates to u ! exi/5ce ( practical fre$om z "o ( ! causes :i* exi/ 9 nature1 t is1 x %[s ! causal p[] ( reason 9 ! det]m9ation ( ! w4 ,! idea ( transc5d5tal fre$om1 on ! contr>y1 requires t reason--9 relation to its causal p[] ( comm5c+ a s]ies ( ph5om5a--%\ld be indep5d5t ( all s5su\s det]m9+ causes2 & ?us x seems to be 9 opposition to ! law ( nature & to all possible exp]i5ce4 ,x !re=e rema9s a problem = ! human m9d4 ,b ?is problem does n conc]n reason 9 its practical use2 & we h1 !re=e1 9 a canon ( pure reason1 to d ) only two que/ions1 :i* relate to ! practical int]e/ ( pure reason3 ,is !re a ,god8 &1 ,is !re a future life8 ,! "q ( transc5d5tal fre$om is purely speculative1 & we may !re=e set x entirely aside :5 we come to treat ( practical reason4 ,besides1 we h already discuss$ ?is subject 9 ! ant9omy ( pure reason4 ,section ,,ii4 ,( ! ,ideal ( ! ,summum ,bonum z a ,det]m9+ ,gr\nd ( ! ,ultimate ,end ( ,pure ,reason ,reason conduct$ u1 9 its speculative use1 ?r\gh ! field ( exp]i5ce &1 z x c nev] f9d complete satisfaction 9 t sph]e1 f !nce to speculative ideas--:i*1 h[ev]1 9 ! end br\ght u back aga9 to exp]i5ce1 & ?us fulfill$ ! purpose ( reason1 9 a mann] :i*1 ?\gh useful1 0 n at all 9 accordance ) our expectations4 ,x n[ rema9s = u to consid] :e!r pure reason c be employ$ 9 a practical sph]e1 & :e!r x w "h conduct u to ^? ideas :i* atta9 ! highe/ ends ( pure reason1 z we h j /at$ !m4 ,we %all ?us asc]ta9 :e!r1 f ! po9t ( view ( its practical int]e/1 reason may n be able to supply u ) t :i*1 on ! speculative side1 x :olly d5ies u4 ,! :ole int]e/ ( reason1 speculative z well z practical1 is c5tr$ 9 ! ?ree foll[+ que/ions3 #a4 ,,:at ,,c ,i ,,"k8 #b4 ,,:at ,,ought ,i ,,to ,,d8 #c4 ,,:at ,,may ,i ,,hope8 ,! fir/ "q is purely speculative4 ,we h1 z ,i flatt] myself1 exhau/$ all ! replies ( :i* x is susceptible1 & h at la/ f\nd ! reply ) :i* reason mu/ cont5t itself1 & ) :i* x ought to be cont5t1 s long z x pays no reg>d to ! practical4 ,b f ! two great ends to ! atta9m5t ( :i* all ^! ef=ts ( pure reason 7 9 fact direct$1 we rema9 j z f> remov$ z if we _h consult$ our ease & decl9$ ! task at ! outset4 ,s f>1 !n1 z k is conc]n$1 ?us mu*1 at lea/1 is e/abli%$1 t1 9 reg>d to ^? two problems1 x lies beyond our rea*4 ,! second "q is purely practical4 ,z su* x may inde$ fall )9 ! prov9ce ( pure reason1 b /ill x is n transc5d5tal1 b moral1 & consequ5tly _c 9 itself =m ! subject ( our criticism4 ,! ?ird "q3 ,if ,i act z ,i ought to d1 :at may ,i !n hope8--is at once practical & !oretical4 ,! practical =ms a clue to ! answ] ( ! !oretical1 &--9 its highe/ =m--speculative "q4 ,= all hop+ has happ9ess = its object & /&s 9 precisely ! same relation to ! practical & ! law ( morality z kn[+ to ! !oretical cognition ( ?+s & ! law ( nature4 ,! =m] arrives f9ally at ! conclusion t some?+ is 7:i* det]m9es ! ultimate end71 because some?+ ought to take place2 ! latt]1 t some?+ is 7:i* op]ates z ! highe/ cause71 because some?+ does take place4 ,happ9ess is ! satisfaction ( all our desires2 ext5sive1 9 reg>d to _! multiplicity2 int5sive1 9 reg>d to _! degree2 & prot5sive1 9 reg>d to _! duration4 ,! practical law bas$ on ! motive ( happ9ess ,i t]m a pragmatical law 7or prud5tial rule72 b t law1 assum+ su* to exi/1 :i* has no o!r motive ?an ! wor?9ess ( be+ happy1 ,i t]m a moral or e?ical law4 ,! fir/ tells u :at we h to d1 if we wi% to become possess$ ( happ9ess2 ! second dictates h[ we ought to act1 9 ord] to des]ve happ9ess4 ,! fir/ is bas$ ^u empirical pr9ciples2 = x is only by exp]i5ce t ,i c le>n ei!r :at incl9ations exi/ :i* desire satisfaction1 or :at are ! natural means ( satisfy+ !m4 ,! second takes no acc\nt ( our desires or ! means ( satisfy+ !m1 & reg>ds only ! fre$om ( a rational be+1 & ! necess>y conditions "u :i* alone ?is fre$om c h>monize ) ! di/ribution ( happ9ess accord+ to pr9ciples4 ,?is second law may !re=e re/ ^u m]e ideas ( pure reason1 & may be cogniz$ priori4 ,i assume t !re are pure moral laws :i* det]m9e1 entirely priori 7)\t reg>d to empirical motives1 t is1 to happ9ess71 ! conduct ( a rational be+1 or 9 o!r words1 to use :i* x makes ( its fre$om1 & t ^! laws are absolutely imp]ative 7n m]ely hypo!tically1 on ! supposition ( o!r empirical ends71 & !re=e 9 all respects necess>y4 ,i am w>rant$ 9 assum+ ?is1 n only by ! argum5ts ( ! mo/ enlight5$ morali/s1 b by ! moral judgem5t ( e man :o w make ! attempt to =m a di/9ct conception ( su* a law4 ,pure reason1 !n1 conta9s1 n inde$ 9 its speculative1 b 9 its practical1 or1 m /rictly1 its moral use1 pr9ciples ( ! possibility ( exp]i5ce1 ( su* actions1 namely1 z1 9 accordance ) e?ical precepts1 might be met ) 9 ! hi/ory ( man4 ,= s9ce reason comm&s t su* actions %\ld take place1 x mu/ be possible = !m to take place2 & h5ce a p>ticul> k9d ( sy/ematic unity--! moral--mu/ be possible4 ,we h f\nd1 x is true1 t ! sy/ematic unity ( nature c\ld n be e/abli%$ accord+ to speculative pr9ciples ( reason1 because1 :ile reason possesses a causal p[] 9 relation to fre$om1 x has none 9 relation to ! :ole sph]e ( nature2 &1 :ile moral pr9ciples ( reason c produce free actions1 !y _c produce natural laws4 ,x is1 !n1 9 its practical1 b especially 9 its moral use1 t ! pr9ciples ( pure reason possess objective reality4 ,i call ! _w a moral _w1 9 s f> z x may be 9 accordance ) all ! e?ical laws--:i*1 by virtue ( ! fre$om ( reasonable be+s1 x c be1 & accord+ to ! necess>y laws ( morality x ought to be4 ,b ?is _w mu/ be conceiv$ only z an intelligible _w1 inasmu* z ab/raction is !re9 made ( all conditions 7ends71 & ev5 ( all imp$im5ts to morality 7! weakness or pravity ( human nature74 ,s f>1 !n1 x is a m]e idea--?\gh /ill a practical idea--:i* may h1 & ought to h1 an influ5ce on ! _w ( s5se1 s z to br+ x z f> z possible into con=mity ) itself4 ,! idea ( a moral _w has1 !re=e1 objective reality1 n z ref]r+ to an object ( intelligible intuition--= ( su* an object we c =m no conception :atev]--b to ! _w ( s5se--conceiv$1 h[ev]1 z an object ( pure reason 9 its practical use--& to a corpus my/icum ( rational be+s 9 x1 9 s f> z ! lib]um arbitrium ( ! individual is plac$1 "u & by virtue ( moral laws1 9 complete sy/ematic unity bo? ) itself & ) ! fre$om ( all o!rs4 ,t is ! answ] to ! fir/ ( ! two que/ions ( pure reason :i* relate to its practical int]e/3 ,d t :i* w r5d] !e wor?y ( happ9ess4 ,! second "q is ?is3 ,if ,i conduct myself s z n to be unwor?y ( happ9ess1 may ,i hope !reby to obta9 happ9ess8 ,9 ord] to arrive at ! solution ( ?is "q1 we mu/ inquire :e!r ! pr9ciples ( pure reason1 :i* prescribe priori ! law1 necess>ily also connect ?is hope ) x4 ,i say1 !n1 t j z ! moral pr9ciples are necess>y accord+ to reason 9 its practical use1 s x is equally necess>y accord+ to reason 9 its !oretical use to assume t e "o has gr\nd to hope = happ9ess 9 ! measure 9 :i* he has made himself wor?y ( x 9 8 conduct1 & t !re=e ! sy/em ( morality is insep>ably 7?\gh only 9 ! idea ( pure reason7 connect$ ) t ( happ9ess4 ,n[ 9 an intelligible1 t is1 9 ! moral _w1 9 ! conception ( :i* we make ab/raction ( all ! imp$im5ts to morality 7s5su\s desires71 su* a sy/em ( happ9ess1 connect$ ) & proportion$ to morality1 may be conceiv$ z necess>y1 because fre$om ( volition--p>tly incit$1 & p>tly re/ra9$ by moral laws--w\ld be itself ! cause ( g5]al happ9ess2 & ?us rational be+s1 "u ! guidance ( su* pr9ciples1 w\ld be !mselves ! au?ors bo? ( _! own endur+ welf>e & t ( o!rs4 ,b su* a sy/em ( self-rew>d+ morality is only an idea1 ! c>ry+ out ( :i* dep5ds ^u ! condition t e "o acts z he ought2 9 o!r words1 t all actions ( reasonable be+s be su* z !y w\ld be if !y sprung f a ,supreme ,w1 compreh5d+ 91 or "u1 itself all p>ticul> wills4 ,b s9ce ! moral law is b9d+ on ea* individual 9 ! use ( 8 fre$om ( volition1 ev5 if o!rs %\ld n act 9 con=mity ) ?is law1 nei!r ! nature ( ?+s1 nor ! causality ( actions & _! relation to morality1 det]m9e h[ ! consequ5ces ( ^! actions w be relat$ to happ9ess2 & ! necess>y connection ( ! hope ( happ9ess ) ! unceas+ endeav\r to become wor?y ( happ9ess1 _c be cogniz$ by reason1 if we take nature alone = our guide4 ,?is connection c be hop$ = only on ! assumption t ! cause ( nature is a supreme reason1 :i* gov]ns accord+ to moral laws4 ,i t]m ! idea ( an intellig5ce 9 :i* ! morally mo/ p]fect w1 unit$ ) supreme bless$ness1 is ! cause ( all happ9ess 9 ! _w1 s f> z happ9ess /&s 9 /rict relation to morality 7z ! wor?9ess ( be+ happy71 ! ideal ( ! supreme ,good4 ,x is only1 !n1 9 ! ideal ( ! supreme orig9al good1 t pure reason c f9d ! gr\nd ( ! practically necess>y connection ( bo? elem5ts ( ! highe/ d]ivative good1 & accord+ly ( an intelligible1 t is1 moral _w4 ,n[ s9ce we are necessitat$ by reason to conceive ourselves z belong+ to su* a _w1 :ile ! s5ses pres5t to u no?+ b a _w ( ph5om5a1 we mu/ assume ! =m] z a consequ5ce ( our conduct 9 ! _w ( s5se 7s9ce ! _w ( s5se gives u no h9t ( x71 & !re=e z future 9 relation to u4 ,?us ,god & a future life are two hypo!ses :i*1 accord+ to ! pr9ciples ( pure reason1 are insep>able f ! obligation :i* ?is reason imposes ^u u4 ,morality p] se con/itutes a sy/em4 ,b we c =m no sy/em ( happ9ess1 except 9 s f> z x is disp5s$ 9 /rict proportion to morality4 ,b ?is is only possible 9 ! intelligible _w1 "u a wise au?or & rul]4 ,su* a rul]1 toge!r ) life 9 su* a _w1 :i* we mu/ look ^u z future1 reason f9ds itself compell$ to assume2 or x mu/ reg>d ! moral laws z idle dreams1 s9ce ! necess>y consequ5ce :i* ?is same reason connects ) !m mu/1 )\t ?is hypo!sis1 fall to ! gr\nd4 ,h5ce also ! moral laws are univ]sally reg>d$ z comm&s1 :i* !y c\ld n be did !y n connect priori adequate consequ5ces ) _! dictates1 & ?us c>ry ) !m promises & ?reats4 ,b ?is1 aga91 !y c\ld n d1 did !y n reside 9 a necess>y be+1 z ! ,supreme ,good1 :i* alone c r5d] su* a teleological unity possible4 ,leibnitz t]m$ ! _w1 :5 view$ 9 relation to ! rational be+s :i* x conta9s1 & ! moral relations 9 :i* !y /& to ea* o!r1 "u ! gov]nm5t ( ! ,supreme ,good1 ! k+dom ( ,grace1 & di/+ui%$ x f ! k+dom ( ,nature1 9 :i* ^! rational be+s live1 "u moral laws1 inde$1 b expect no o!r consequ5ces f _! actions ?an su* z foll[ accord+ to ! c\rse ( nature 9 ! _w ( s5se4 ,to view ourselves1 !re=e1 z 9 ! k+dom ( grace1 9 :i* all happ9ess awaits u1 except 9 s f> z we ourselves limit our p>ticipation 9 x by actions :i* r5d] u unwor?y ( happ9ess1 is a practically necess>y idea ( reason4 ,practical laws1 9 s f> z !y are subjective gr\nds ( actions1 t is1 subjective pr9ciples1 are t]m$ maxims4 ,! judgem5ts ( moral accord+ to 9 its purity & ultimate results are fram$ accord+ ideas2 ! obs]vance ( its laws1 accord+ to maxims4 ,! :ole c\rse ( our life mu/ be subject to moral maxims2 b ?is is impossible1 unless ) ! moral law1 :i* is a m]e idea1 reason connects an effici5t cause :i* orda9s to all conduct :i* is 9 con=mity ) ! moral law an issue ei!r 9 ?is or 9 ano!r life1 :i* is 9 exact con=mity ) our highe/ aims4 ,?us1 )\t a ,god & )\t a _w1 invisible to u n[1 b hop$ =1 ! glori\s ideas ( morality are1 inde$1 objects ( approbation & ( admiration1 b _c be ! spr+s ( purpose & action4 ,= !y d n satisfy all ! aims :i* are natural to e rational be+1 & :i* are det]m9$ priori by pure reason itself1 & necess>y4 ,happ9ess alone is1 9 ! view ( reason1 f> f be+ ! complete good4 ,reason does n approve ( x 7h[ev] mu* incl9ation may desire x71 except z unit$ ) des]t4 ,on ! o!r h&1 morality alone1 & ) x1 m]e des]t1 is likewise f> f be+ ! complete good4 ,to make x complete1 he :o conducts himself 9 a mann] n unwor?y ( happ9ess1 mu/ be able to hope = ! possession ( happ9ess4 ,ev5 reason1 unbias$ by private ends1 or int]e/$ consid]ations1 _c judge o!rwise1 if x puts itself 9 ! place ( a be+ ^: bus9ess x is to disp5se all happ9ess to o!rs4 ,= 9 ! practical idea bo? po9ts are ess5tially comb9$1 ?\gh 9 su* a way t p>ticipation 9 happ9ess is r5d]$ possible by ! moral disposition1 z its condition1 & n conv]sely1 ! moral disposition by ! prospect ( happ9ess4 ,= a disposition :i* %\ld require ! prospect ( happ9ess z its necess>y condition w\ld n be moral1 & h5ce also w\ld n be wor?y ( complete happ9ess--a happ9ess :i*1 9 ! view ( reason1 recognizes no limitation b su* z arises f our own immoral conduct4 ,happ9ess1 !re=e1 9 exact proportion ) ! morality ( rational be+s 7:]eby !y are made wor?y ( happ9ess71 con/itutes alone ! supreme good ( a _w into :i* we absolutely mu/ transport ourselves accord+ to ! comm&s ( pure b practical reason4 ,?is _w is1 x is true1 only an intelligible _w2 = ( su* a sy/ematic unity ( ends z x requires1 ! _w ( s5se gives u no h9t4 ,its reality c be bas$ on no?+ else b ! hypo!sis ( a supreme orig9al good4 ,9 x indep5d5t reason1 equipp$ ) all ! suffici5cy ( a supreme cause1 f\nds1 ma9ta9s1 & fulfils ! univ]sal ord] ( ?+s1 ) ! mo/ p]fect teleological h>mony1 h[ev] mu* ?is ord] may be hidd5 f u 9 ! _w ( s5se4 ,?is moral !ology has ! peculi> advantage1 9 contra/ ) speculative !ology1 ( lead+ inevitably to ! conception ( a sole1 p]fect1 & rational ,fir/ ,cause1 :]e( speculative !ology does n give u any indication on objective gr\nds1 f> less any conv9c+ evid5ce4 ,= we f9d nei!r 9 transc5d5tal nor 9 natural !ology1 h[ev] f> reason may lead u 9 ^!1 any gr\nd to w>rant u 9 assum+ ! exi/5ce ( "o only ,be+1 :i* /&s at ! head ( all natural causes1 & on :i* ^! are entirely dep5d5t4 ,on ! o!r h&1 if we take our /& on moral unity z a necess>y law ( ! univ]se1 & f ?is po9t ( view consid] :at is necess>y to give ?is law adequate effici5cy &1 = u1 obligatory =ce1 we mu/ come to ! conclusion t !re is "o only supreme w1 :i* compreh5ds all ^! laws 9 itself4 ,= h[1 "u diff]5t wills1 %\ld we f9d complete unity ( ends8 ,?is w mu/ be omnipot5t1 t all nature & its relation to morality 9 ! _w may be subject to x2 omnisci5t1 t x may h k ( ! mo/ secret feel+s & _! moral wor?2 omnipres5t1 t x may be at h& to supply e necessity to :i* ! highe/ weal ( ! _w may give rise2 et]nal1 t ?is h>mony ( nature & lib]ty may nev] fail2 & s on4 ,b ?is sy/ematic unity ( ends 9 ?is _w ( intellig5ces--:i*1 z m]e nature1 is only a _w ( s5se1 b1 z a sy/em ( fre$om ( volition1 may be t]m$ an intelligible1 t is1 moral _w 7regnum gratiae7--leads inevitably also to ! teleological unity ( all ?+s :i* con/itute ?is great :ole1 accord+ to univ]sal natural laws--j z ! unity ( ! =m] is accord+ to univ]sal & necess>y moral laws--& unites ! practical ) ! speculative reason4 ,! _w mu/ be repres5t$ z hav+ orig9at$ f an idea1 if x is to h>monize ) t use ( reason )\t :i* we _c ev5 consid] ourselves z wor?y ( reason--namely1 ! moral use1 :i* re/s entirely on ! idea ( ! supreme good4 ,h5ce ! inve/igation ( nature receives a teleological direction1 & becomes1 9 its wide/ ext5sion1 physico-!ology4 ,b ?is1 tak+ its rise 9 moral ord] z a unity f\nd$ on ! ess5ce ( fre$om1 & n accid5tally in/itut$ by ext]nal comm&s1 e/abli%es ! teleological view ( nature on gr\nds :i* mu/ be insep>ably connect$ ) ! int]nal possibility ( ?+s4 ,?is gives rise to a transc5d5tal !ology1 :i* takes ! ideal ( ! highe/ ontological p]fection z a pr9ciple ( sy/ematic unity2 & ?is pr9ciple connects all ?+s accord+ to univ]sal & necess>y natural laws1 because all ?+s h _! orig9 9 ! absolute necessity ( ! "o only ,primal ,be+4 ,:at use c we make ( our und]/&+1 ev5 9 respect ( exp]i5ce1 if we d n propose ends to ourselves8 ,b ! highe/ ends are ^? ( morality1 & x is only pure reason t c give u ! k ( ^!4 ,?\gh suppli$ ) ^!1 & putt+ ourselves "u _! guidance1 we c make no teleological use ( ! k ( nature1 z reg>ds cognition1 unless nature itself has e/abli%$ teleological unity4 ,= )\t ?is unity we %\ld n ev5 possess reason1 because we %\ld h no s*ool = reason1 & no cultivation ?r\gh objects :i* af=d ! mat]ials = its conceptions4 ,b teleological unity is a necess>y unity1 & f\nd$ on ! ess5ce ( ! individual w itself4 ,h5ce ?is w1 :i* is ! condition ( ! application ( ?is unity 9 concreto1 mu/ be s likewise4 ,9 ?is way ! transc5d5tal enl>gem5t ( our rational cognition w\ld be1 n ! cause1 b m]ely ! effect ( ! practical teleology :i* pure reason imposes ^u u4 ,h5ce1 also1 we f9d 9 ! hi/ory ( human reason t1 be=e ! moral conceptions 7 suffici5tly purifi$ & det]m9$1 & be=e m5 _h atta9$ to a p]ception ( ! sy/ematic unity ( ends accord+ to ^! conceptions & f necess>y pr9ciples1 ! k ( nature1 & ev5 a consid]able am\nt ( intellectual culture 9 _m o!r sci5ces1 c\ld produce only rude & vague conceptions ( ! ,deity1 sometimes ev5 admitt+ ( an a/oni%+ indiff]5ce ) reg>d to ?is "q altoge!r4 ,b ! m enl>g$ treatm5t ( moral ideas1 :i* 0 r5d]$ necess>y by ! extreme pure moral law ( our religion1 awak5$ ! int]e/1 & !reby quick5$ ! p]ceptions ( reason 9 relation to ?is object4 ,9 ?is way1 & )\t ! help ei!r ( an ext5d$ acqua9tance ) nature1 or ( a reliable transc5d5tal insight 7= ^! h be5 want+ 9 all ages71 a conception ( ! ,div9e ,be+ 0 arriv$ at1 :i* we n[ hold to be ! correct "o1 n because speculative reason conv9ces u ( its correctness1 b because x accords ) ! moral pr9ciples ( reason4 ,?us x is to pure reason1 b only 9 its practical use1 t we mu/ ascribe ! m]it ( hav+ connect$ ) our highe/ int]e/ a cognition1 ( :i* m]e speculation 0 able only to =m a conjecture1 b ! validity ( :i* x 0 unable to e/abli%--& ( hav+ !reby r5d]$ x1 n inde$ a demon/rat$ dogma1 b a hypo!sis absolutely necess>y to ! ess5tial ends ( reason4 ,b if practical reason has rea*$ ?is elevation1 & has atta9$ to ! conception ( a sole ,primal ,be+ z ! supreme good1 x mu/ n1 !re=e1 imag9e t x has transc5d$ ! empirical conditions ( its application1 & ris5 to ! imm$iate cognition ( new objects2 x mu/ n presume to />t f ! conception :i* x has ga9$1 & to d$uce f x ! moral laws !mselves4 ,= x 0 ^! v laws1 ! int]nal practical necessity ( :i* l$ u to ! hypo!sis ( an indep5d5t cause1 or ( a wise rul] ( ! univ]se1 :o %\ld give !m effect4 ,h5ce we are n entitl$ to reg>d !m z accid5tal & d]iv$ f ! m]e w ( ! rul]1 especially z we h no conception ( su* a w1 except z =m$ 9 accordance ) ^! laws4 ,s f>1 !n1 z practical reason has ! "r to conduct u1 we %all n look ^u actions z b9d+ on u1 because !y are ! comm&s ( ,god1 b we %all reg>d !m z div9e comm&s1 because we are int]nally b\nd by !m4 ,we %all /udy fre$om "u ! teleological unity :i* accords ) pr9ciples ( reason2 we %all look ^u ourselves z act+ 9 con=mity ) ! div9e w only 9 s f> z we hold sacr$ ! moral law :i* reason tea*es u f ! nature ( actions !mselves1 & we %all believe t we c obey t w only by promot+ ! weal ( ! univ]se 9 ourselves & 9 o!rs4 ,moral !ology is1 !re=e1 only ( imman5t use4 ,x tea*es u to fulfil our de/9y "h 9 ! _w1 by plac+ ourselves 9 h>mony ) ! g5]al sy/em ( ends1 & w>ns u aga9/ ! fanaticism1 nay1 ! crime ( depriv+ reason ( its legislative au?ority 9 ! moral conduct ( life1 = ! purpose ( directly connect+ ?is au?ority ) ! idea ( ! ,supreme ,be+4 ,= ?is w\ld be1 n an imman5t1 b a transc5d5t use ( moral !ology1 &1 l ! transc5d5t use ( m]e speculation1 w\ld inevitably p]v]t & fru/rate ! ultimate ends ( reason4 ,section ,,iii4 ,( ,op9ion1 ,k1 & ,belief ,! hold+ ( a ?+ to be true is a ph5om5on 9 our und]/&+ :i* may re/ on objective gr\nds1 b requires1 also1 subjective causes 9 ! m9d ( ! p]son judg+4 ,if a judgem5t is valid = e rational be+1 !n its gr\nd is objectively suffici5t1 & x is t]m$ a conviction4 ,if1 on ! o!r h&1 x has its gr\nd 9 ! p>ticul> "* ( ! subject1 x is t]m$ a p]suasion4 ,p]suasion is a m]e illusion1 ! gr\nd ( ! judgem5t1 :i* lies solely 9 ! subject1 be+ reg>d$ z objective4 ,h5ce a judgem5t ( ?is k9d has only private validity--is only valid = ! individual :o judges1 & ! hold+ ( a ?+ to be true 9 ?is way _c be communicat$4 ,b tru? dep5ds ^u agreem5t ) ! object1 & consequ5tly ! judgem5ts ( all und]/&+s1 if true1 mu/ be 9 agreem5t ) ea* o!r 7cons5ti5tia uni t]tio cons5tiunt int] se74 ,conviction may1 !re=e1 be di/+ui%$1 f an ext]nal po9t ( view1 f p]suasion1 by ! possibility ( communicat+ x & by %[+ its validity = ! reason ( e man2 = 9 ?is case ! presumption1 at lea/1 arises t ! agreem5t ( all judgem5ts ) ea* o!r1 9 spite ( ! diff]5t *>act]s ( individuals1 re/s ^u ! common gr\nd ( ! agreem5t ( ea* ) ! object1 & ?us ! correctness ( ! judgem5t is e/abli%$4 ,p]suasion1 accord+ly1 _c be subjectively di/+ui%$ f conviction1 t is1 s long z ! subject views its judgem5t simply z a ph5om5on ( its own m9d4 ,b if we inquire :e!r ! gr\nds ( our judgem5t1 :i* are valid = u1 produce ! same effect on ! reason ( o!rs z on our own1 we h !n ! means1 ?\gh only subjective means1 n1 inde$1 ( produc+ conviction1 b ( detect+ ! m]ely private validity ( ! judgem5t2 9 o!r words1 ( discov]+ t !re is 9 x ! elem5t ( m]e p]suasion4 ,if we c1 9 addition to ?is1 develop ! subjective causes ( ! judgem5t1 :i* we h tak5 = its objective gr\nds1 & ?us expla9 ! deceptive judgem5t z a ph5om5on 9 our m9d1 ap>t altoge!r f ! objective "* ( ! object1 we c !n expose ! illusion & ne$ be no long] deceiv$ by x1 al?\gh1 if its subjective cause lies 9 our nature1 we _c hope altoge!r to escape its influ5ce4 ,i c only ma9ta91 t is1 affirm z necess>ily valid = e "o1 t :i* produces conviction4 ,p]suasion ,i may keep = myself1 if x is agreeable to me2 b ,i _c1 & ought n1 to attempt to impose x z b9d+ ^u o!rs4 ,hold+ = true1 or ! subjective validity ( a judgem5t 9 relation to conviction 7:i* is1 at ! same "t1 objectively valid71 has ! ?ree foll[+ degrees3 op9ion1 belief1 & k4 ,op9ion is a consci\sly insuffici5t judgem5t1 subjectively z well z objectively4 ,belief is subjectively suffici5t1 b is recogniz$ z be+ objectively insuffici5t4 ,k is bo? subjectively & objectively suffici5t4 ,subjective suffici5cy is t]m$ conviction 7= myself72 objective suffici5cy is t]m$ c]ta9ty 7= all74 ,i ne$ n dwell long] on ! explanation ( su* simple conceptions4 ,i mu/ nev] v5ture to be ( op9ion1 )\t kn[+ some?+1 at lea/1 by :i* my judgem5t1 9 itself m]ely problematical1 is br\ght into connection ) ! tru?--:i* connection1 al?\gh n p]fect1 is /ill some?+ m ?an an arbitr>y fiction4 ,moreov]1 ! law ( su* a connection mu/ be c]ta94 ,= if1 9 relation to ?is law1 ,i h no?+ m ?an op9ion1 my judgem5t is b a play ( ! imag9ation1 )\t ! lea/ relation to tru?4 ,9 ! judgem5ts ( pure reason1 op9ion has no place4 ,=1 z !y d n re/ on empirical gr\nds & z ! sph]e ( pure reason is t ( necess>y tru? & priori cognition1 ! pr9ciple ( connection 9 x requires univ]sality & necessity1 & consequ5tly p]fect c]ta9ty--o!rwise we %\ld h no guide to ! tru? at all4 ,h5ce x is absurd to h an op9ion 9 pure ma!matics2 we mu/ "k1 or ab/a9 f =m+ a judgem5t altoge!r4 ,! case is ! same ) ! maxims ( morality4 ,= we mu/ n haz>d an action on ! m]e op9ion t x is all[$1 b we mu/ "k x to be s4 ,9 ! transc5d5tal sph]e ( reason1 on ! o!r h&1 ! t]m op9ion is too weak1 :ile ! ^w k is too /rong4 ,f ! m]ely speculative po9t ( view1 !re=e1 we _c =m a judgem5t at all4 ,= ! subjective gr\nds ( a judgem5t1 su* z produce belief1 _c be admitt$ 9 speculative inquiries1 inasmu* z !y _c /& )\t empirical support & are incapable ( be+ communicat$ to o!rs 9 equal measure4 ,b x is only f ! practical po9t ( view t a !oretically insuffici5t judgem5t c be t]m$ belief4 ,n[ ! practical ref]5ce is ei!r to skill or to morality2 to ! =m]1 :5 ! end propos$ is arbitr>y & accid5tal1 to ! latt]1 :5 x is absolutely necess>y4 ,if we propose to ourselves any end :atev]1 ! conditions ( its atta9m5t are hypo!tically necess>y4 ,! necessity is subjectively1 b /ill only comp>atively1 suffici5t1 if ,i am acqua9t$ ) no o!r conditions "u :i* ! end c be atta9$4 ,on ! o!r h&1 x is suffici5t1 absolutely & = e "o1 if ,i "k = c]ta9 t no "o c be acqua9t$ ) any o!r conditions "u :i* ! atta9m5t ( ! propos$ end w\ld be possible4 ,9 ! =m] case my supposition--my judgem5t ) reg>d to c]ta9 conditions--is a m]ely accid5tal belief2 9 ! latt] x is a necess>y belief4 ,! physician mu/ pursue "s c\rse 9 ! case ( a pati5t :o is 9 dang]1 b is ignorant ( ! nature ( ! disease4 ,he obs]ves ! symptoms1 & concludes1 accord+ to ! be/ ( 8 judgem5t1 t x is a case ( ph?isis4 ,8 belief is1 ev5 9 8 own judgem5t1 only cont+5t3 ano!r man might1 p]haps come ne>] ! tru?4 ,su* a belief1 cont+5t inde$1 b /ill =m+ ! gr\nd ( ! actual use ( means = ! atta9m5t ( c]ta9 ends1 ,i t]m ,pragmatical belief4 ,! usual te/1 :e!r t :i* any "o ma9ta9s is m]ely 8 p]suasion1 or 8 subjective conviction at lea/1 t is1 8 firm belief1 is a bet4 ,x frequ5tly happ5s t a man deliv]s 8 op9ions ) s mu* boldness & assurance1 t he appe>s to be "u no appreh5sion z to ! possibility ( 8 be+ 9 error4 ,! (f] ( a bet />tles him1 & makes him pause4 ,sometimes x turns out t 8 p]suasion may be valu$ at a ducat1 b n at t54 ,= he does n hesitate1 p]haps1 to v5ture a ducat1 b if x is propos$ to /ake t51 he imm$iately becomes aw>e ( ! possibility ( 8 be+ mi/ak5--a possibility :i* has hi!rto escap$ 8 obs]vation4 ,if we imag9e to ourselves t we h to /ake ! happ9ess ( our :ole life on ! tru? ( any proposition1 our judgem5t drops its air ( triumph1 we take ! al>m1 & discov] ! actual /r5g? ( our belief4 ,?us pragmatical belief has degrees1 v>y+ 9 proportion to ! int]e/s at /ake4 ,n[1 9 cases :]e we _c ent] ^u any c\rse ( action 9 ref]5ce to "s object1 & :]e1 accord+ly1 our judgem5t is purely !oretical1 we c /ill repres5t to ourselves1 9 ?\ght1 ! possibility ( a c\rse ( action1 = :i* we suppose t we h suffici5t gr\nds1 if any means exi/$ ( asc]ta9+ ! tru? ( ! matt]4 ,?us we f9d 9 purely !oretical judgem5ts an analogon ( practical judgem5ts1 to :i* ! ^w belief may prop]ly be appli$1 & :i* we may t]m doctr9al belief4 ,i %\ld n hesitate to /ake my all on ! tru? ( ! proposition--if !re 7 any possibility ( br++ x to ! te/ ( exp]i5ce--t1 at lea/1 "s "o ( ! planets1 :i* we see1 is inhabit$4 ,h5ce ,i say t ,i h n m]ely ! op9ion1 b ! /rong belief1 on ! correctness ( :i* ,i w\ld /ake ev5 _m ( ! advantages ( life1 t !re are inhabitants 9 o!r worlds4 ,n[ we mu/ admit t ! doctr9e ( ! exi/5ce ( ,god belongs to doctr9al belief4 ,=1 al?\gh 9 respect to ! !oretical cognition ( ! univ]se ,i d n require to =m any !ory :i* necess>ily involves ?is idea1 z ! condition ( my explanation ( ! ph5om5a :i* ! univ]se pres5ts1 b1 on ! contr>y1 am r b\nd s to use my reason z if ev]y?+ 7 m]e nature1 /ill teleological unity is s important a condition ( ! application ( my reason to nature1 t x is impossible = me to ignore x--especially s9ce1 9 addition to ^! consid]ations1 abundant examples ( x are suppli$ by exp]i5ce4 ,b ! sole condition1 s f> z my k ext5ds1 "u :i* ?is unity c be my guide 9 ! inve/igation ( nature1 is ! assumption t a supreme intellig5ce has ord]$ all ?+s accord+ to ! wise/ ends4 ,consequ5tly1 ! hypo!sis ( a wise au?or ( ! univ]se is necess>y = my guidance 9 ! inve/igation ( nature--is ! condition "u :i* alone ,i c fulfil an end :i* is cont+5t inde$1 b by no means unimportant4 ,moreov]1 s9ce ! result ( my attempts s frequ5tly confirms ! utility ( ?is assumption1 & s9ce no?+ decisive c be adduc$ aga9/ x1 x foll[s t x w\ld be say+ f> too little to t]m my judgem5t1 9 ?is case1 a m]e op9ion1 & t1 ev5 9 ?is !oretical connection1 ,i may ass]t t ,i firmly believe 9 ,god4 ,/ill1 if we use words /rictly1 ?is mu/ n be call$ a practical1 b a doctr9al belief1 :i* ! !ology ( nature 7physico-!ology7 mu/ also produce 9 my m9d4 ,9 ! wisdom ( a ,supreme ,be+1 & 9 ! %ortness ( life1 s inadequate to ! developm5t ( ! glori\s p[]s ( human nature1 we may f9d equally suffici5t gr\nds = a doctr9al belief 9 ! future life ( ! human s\l4 ,! expression ( belief is1 9 su* cases1 an expression ( mode/y f ! objective po9t ( view1 b1 at ! same "t1 ( firm confid5ce1 f ! subjective4 ,if ,i %\ld v5ture to t]m ?is m]ely !oretical judgem5t ev5 s mu* z a hypo!sis :i* ,i am entitl$ to assume2 a m complete conception1 ) reg>d to ano!r _w & to ! cause ( ! _w1 might !n be ju/ly requir$ ( me ?an ,i am1 9 reality1 able to give4 ,=1 if ,i assume any?+1 ev5 z a m]e hypo!sis1 ,i mu/1 at lea/1 "k s mu* ( ! prop]ties ( su* a be+ z w enable me1 n to =m ! conception1 b to imag9e ! exi/5ce ( x4 ,b ! ^w belief ref]s only to ! guidance :i* an idea gives me1 & to its subjective influ5ce on ! conduct ( my reason1 :i* =ces me to hold x fa/1 ?\gh ,i may n be 9 a position to give a speculative acc\nt ( x4 ,b m]e doctr9al belief is1 to "s ext5t1 want+ 9 /ability4 ,we (t5 quit our hold ( x1 9 consequ5ce ( ! difficulties :i* occur 9 speculation1 ?\gh 9 ! end we inevitably return to x aga94 ,x is q o!rwise ) moral belief4 ,= 9 ?is sph]e action is absolutely necess>y1 t is1 ,i mu/ act 9 ob$i5ce to ! moral law 9 all po9ts4 ,! end is "h incontrov]tibly e/abli%$1 & !re is only "o condition possible1 accord+ to ! be/ ( my p]ception1 "u :i* ?is end c h>monize ) all o!r ends1 & s h practical validity--namely1 ! exi/5ce ( a ,god & ( a future _w4 ,i "k also1 to a c]ta9ty1 t no "o c be acqua9t$ ) any o!r conditions :i* conduct to ! same unity ( ends "u ! moral law4 ,b s9ce ! moral precept is1 at ! same "t1 my maxim 7z reason requires t x %\ld be71 ,i am irresi/ibly con/ra9$ to believe 9 ! exi/5ce ( ,god & 9 a future life2 & ,i am sure t no?+ c make me wav] 9 ?is belief1 s9ce ,i %\ld !reby ov]?r[ my moral maxims1 ! r5unciation ( :i* w\ld r5d] me hateful 9 my own eyes4 ,?us1 :ile all ! ambiti\s attempts ( reason to p5etrate beyond ! limits ( exp]i5ce end 9 disappo9tm5t1 !re is /ill en\gh left to satisfy u 9 a practical po9t ( view4 ,no "o1 x is true1 w be able to boa/ t he kn[s t !re is a ,god & a future life2 =1 if he kn[s ?is1 he is j ! man :om ,i h long wi%$ to f9d4 ,all k1 reg>d+ an object ( m]e reason1 c be communicat$2 & ,i %\ld ?us be enabl$ to hope t my own k w\ld receive ?is wond]ful ext5sion1 ?r\gh ! in/rum5tality ( 8 in/ruction4 ,no1 my conviction is n logical1 b moral c]ta9ty2 & s9ce x re/s on subjective gr\nds 7( ! moral s5tim5t71 ,i mu/ n ev5 say3 ,x is morally c]ta9 t !re is a ,god1 etc41 b3 ,i am morally c]ta91 t is1 my belief 9 ,god & 9 ano!r _w is s int]wov5 ) my moral nature t ,i am "u z little appreh5sion ( hav+ ! =m] torn f me z ( los+ ! latt]4 ,! only po9t 9 ?is argum5t t may appe> op5 to suspicion is t ?is rational belief presupposes ! exi/5ce ( moral s5tim5ts4 ,if we give up ?is assumption1 & take a man :o is entirely indiff]5t ) reg>d to moral laws1 ! "q :i* reason proposes1 becomes !n m]ely a problem = speculation & may1 inde$1 be support$ by /rong gr\nds f analogy1 b n by su* z w compel ! mo/ ob/9ate scepticism to give way4#gi ,b 9 ^! que/ions no man is free f all int]e/4 ,= ?\gh ! want ( good s5tim5ts may place him beyond ! influ5ce ( moral int]e/s1 /ill ev5 9 ?is case en\gh may be left to make him fe> ! exi/5ce ( ,god & a future life4 ,= he _c pret5d to any c]ta9ty ( ! non-exi/5ce ( ,god & ( a future life1 unless--s9ce x c\ld only be prov$ by m]e reason1 & !re=e apodeictically--he is prep>$ to e/abli% ! impossibility ( bo?1 :i* c]ta9ly no reasonable man w\ld und]take to d4 ,?is w\ld be a negative belief1 :i* c\ld n1 inde$1 produce morality & good s5tim5ts1 b /ill c\ld produce an analogon ( ^!1 by op]at+ z a p[]ful re/ra9t on ! outbreak ( evil dispositions4 #gi ,! human m9d 7z1 ,i believe1 e rational be+ mu/ ( necessity d7 takes a natural int]e/ 9 morality1 al?\gh ?is int]e/ is n undivid$1 & may n be practically 9 prepond]ance4 ,if y /r5g!n & increase x1 y w f9d ! reason become docile1 m enlight5$1 & m capable ( unit+ ! speculative int]e/ ) ! practical4 ,b if y d n take c>e at ! outset1 or at lea/ midway1 to make m5 good1 y w nev] =ce !m into an hone/ belief4 ,b1 x w be said1 is ?is all t pure reason c effect1 9 op5+ up prospects beyond ! limits ( exp]i5ce8 ,no?+ m ?an two articles ( belief8 ,common s5se c\ld h done z mu* z ?is1 )\t tak+ ! philosoph]s to c\nsel 9 ! matt]6 ,i %all n "h eulogize philosophy = ! b5efits :i* ! labori\s ef=ts ( its criticism h conf]r$ on human reason--ev5 grant+ t its m]it %\ld turn out 9 ! end to be only negative--= on ?is po9t some?+ m w be said 9 ! next section4 ,b1 ,i ask1 d y require t t k :i* conc]ns all m51 %\ld transc5d ! common und]/&+1 & %\ld only be reveal$ to y by philosoph]s8 ,! v circum/ance :i* has call$ =? y\r c5sure1 is ! be/ confirmation ( ! correctness ( our previ\s ass]tions1 s9ce x discloses1 :at c\ld n h be5 =ese51 t ,nature is n *>geable ) any p>tial di/ribution ( h] gifts 9 ^? matt]s :i* conc]n all m5 )\t di/9ction & t1 9 respect to ! ess5tial ends ( human nature1 we _c advance fur!r ) ! help ( ! highe/ philosophy1 ?an "u ! guidance :i* nature has v\*saf$ to ! meane/ und]/&+4 ,*apt] ,,iii4 ,! ,ar*itectonic ( ,pure ,reason ,by ! t]m ar*itectonic ,i mean ! art ( con/ruct+ a sy/em4 ,)\t sy/ematic unity1 our k _c become sci5ce2 x w be an aggregate1 & n a sy/em4 ,?us ar*itectonic is ! doctr9e ( ! sci5tific 9 cognition1 & !re=e necess>ily =ms "p ( our me?odology4 ,reason _c p]mit our k to rema9 9 an unconnect$ & rhapsodi/ic /ate1 b requires t ! sum ( our cognitions %\ld con/itute a sy/em4 ,x is ?us alone t !y c advance ! ends ( reason4 ,by a sy/em ,i mean ! unity ( v>i\s cognitions "u "o idea4 ,?is idea is ! conception--giv5 by reason--( ! =m ( a :ole1 9 s f> z ! conception det]m9es priori n only ! limits ( its cont5t1 b ! place :i* ea* ( its p>ts is to occupy4 ,! sci5tific idea conta9s1 !re=e1 ! end & ! =m ( ! :ole :i* is 9 accordance ) t end4 ,! unity ( ! end1 to :i* all ! p>ts ( ! sy/em relate1 & ?r\gh :i* all h a relation to ea* o!r1 communicates unity to ! :ole sy/em1 s t ! abs5ce ( any "p c be imm$iately detect$ f our k ( ! re/2 & x det]m9es priori ! limits ( ! sy/em1 ?us exclud+ all cont+5t or arbitr>y additions4 ,! :ole is ?us an organism 7articulatio71 & n an aggregate 7coac]vatio72 x may gr[ f )9 7p] intussusceptionem71 b x _c increase by ext]nal additions 7p] appositionem74 ,x is1 ?us1 l an animal body1 ! gr[? ( :i* does n add any limb1 b1 )\t *ang+ _! proportions1 makes ea* 9 its sph]e /rong] & m active4 ,we require1 = ! execution ( ! idea ( a sy/em1 a s*ema1 t is1 a cont5t & an arrangem5t ( p>ts det]m9$ priori by ! pr9ciple :i* ! aim ( ! sy/em prescribes4 ,a s*ema :i* is n project$ 9 accordance ) an idea1 t is1 f ! /&po9t ( ! highe/ aim ( reason1 b m]ely empirically1 9 accordance ) accid5tal aims & purposes 7! numb] ( :i* _c be pr$et]m9$71 c give u no?+ m ?an te*nical unity4 ,b ! s*ema :i* is orig9at$ f an idea 79 :i* case reason pres5ts u ) aims priori1 & does n look = !m to exp]i5ce71 =ms ! basis ( ar*itectonical unity4 ,a sci5ce1 9 ! prop] acceptation ( t t]m1 _c be =m$ te*nically1 t is1 f obs]vation ( ! simil>ity exi/+ betwe5 diff]5t objects1 & ! purely cont+5t use we make ( our k 9 concreto ) ref]5ce to all k9ds ( arbitr>y ext]nal aims2 its con/itution mu/ be fram$ on ar*itectonical pr9ciples1 t is1 its p>ts mu/ be %[n to possess an ess5tial aff9ity1 & be capable ( be+ d$uc$ f "o supreme & int]nal aim or end1 :i* =ms ! condition ( ! possibility ( ! sci5tific :ole4 ,! s*ema ( a sci5ce mu/ give priori ! plan ( x 7monogramma71 & ! division ( ! :ole into p>ts1 9 con=mity ) ! idea ( ! sci5ce2 & x mu/ also di/+ui% ?is :ole f all o!rs1 accord+ to c]ta9 und]/ood pr9ciples4 ,no "o w attempt to con/ruct a sci5ce1 unless he h "s idea to re/ on z a prop] basis4 ,b1 9 ! elaboration ( ! sci5ce1 he f9ds t ! s*ema1 nay1 ev5 ! def9ition :i* he at fir/ gave ( ! sci5ce1 r>ely corresponds ) 8 idea2 = ?is idea lies1 l a g]m1 9 our reason1 its p>ts undevelop$ & hid ev5 f microscopical obs]vation4 ,= ?is reason1 we ought to expla9 & def9e sci5ces1 n accord+ to ! description :i* ! orig9ator gives ( !m1 b accord+ to ! idea :i* we f9d bas$ 9 reason itself1 & :i* is sugge/$ by ! natural unity ( ! p>ts ( ! sci5ce already accumulat$4 ,= x w (t5 be f\nd t ! orig9ator ( a sci5ce & ev5 8 late/ successors rema9 atta*$ to an errone\s idea1 :i* !y _c r5d] cle> to !mselves1 & t !y ?us fail 9 det]m9+ ! true cont5t1 ! articulation or sy/ematic unity1 & ! limits ( _! sci5ce4 ,x is un=tunate t1 only aft] hav+ occupi$ ourselves = a long "t 9 ! collection ( mat]ials1 "u ! guidance ( an idea :i* lies undevelop$ 9 ! m9d1 b n accord+ to any def9ite plan ( arrangem5t--nay1 only aft] we h sp5t mu* "t & lab\r 9 ! te*nical disposition ( our mat]ials1 does x become possible to view ! idea ( a sci5ce 9 a cle> light1 & to project1 accord+ to ar*itectonical pr9ciples1 a plan ( ! :ole1 9 accordance ) ! aims ( reason4 ,sy/ems seem1 l c]ta9 worms1 to be =m$ by a k9d ( g5]atio aequivoca--by ! m]e conflu5ce ( conceptions1 & to ga9 complet5ess only ) ! progress ( "t4 ,b ! s*ema or g]m ( all lies 9 reason2 & ?us is n only e sy/em organiz$ accord+ to its own idea1 b all are unit$ into "o gr& sy/em ( human k1 ( :i* !y =m memb]s4 ,= ?is reason1 x is possible to frame an ar*itectonic ( all human cognition1 ! =mation ( :i*1 at ! pres5t "t1 consid]+ ! imm5se mat]ials collect$ or to be f\nd 9 ! ru9s ( old sy/ems1 w\ld n inde$ be v difficult4 ,our purpose at pres5t is m]ely to sket* ! plan ( ! ar*itectonic ( all cognition giv5 by pure reason2 & we beg9 f ! po9t :]e ! ma9 root ( human k divides into two1 "o ( :i* is reason4 ,by reason ,i und]/& "h ! :ole high] faculty ( cognition1 ! rational be+ plac$ 9 contradi/9ction to ! empirical4 ,if ,i make complete ab/raction ( ! cont5t ( cognition1 objectively consid]$1 all cognition is1 f a subjective po9t ( view1 ei!r hi/orical or rational4 ,hi/orical cognition is cognitio ex datis1 rational1 cognitio ex pr9cipiis4 ,:atev] may be ! orig9al s\rce ( a cognition1 x is1 9 relation to ! p]son :o possesses x1 m]ely hi/orical1 if he kn[s only :at has be5 giv5 him f ano!r qu>t]1 :e!r t k 0 communicat$ by direct exp]i5ce or by in/ruction4 ,?us ! p]son :o has le>n$ a sy/em ( philosophy--say ! ,wolfian--al?\gh he has a p]fect k ( all ! pr9ciples1 def9itions1 & argum5ts 9 t philosophy1 z well z ( ! divisions t h be5 made ( ! sy/em1 possesses really no m ?an an hi/orical k ( ! ,wolfian sy/em2 he kn[s only :at has be5 told him1 8 judgem5ts are only ^? :i* he has receiv$ f 8 tea*]s4 ,dispute ! validity ( a def9ition1 & he is completely at a loss to f9d ano!r4 ,he has =m$ 8 m9d on ano!r's2 b ! imitative faculty is n ! productive4 ,8 k has n be5 drawn f reason2 & al?\gh1 objectively consid]$1 x is rational k1 subjectively1 x is m]ely hi/orical4 ,he has le>n$ ?is or t philosophy & is m]ely a pla/] ca/ ( a liv+ man4 ,rational cognitions :i* are objective1 t is1 :i* h _! s\rce 9 reason1 c be s t]m$ f a subjective po9t ( view1 only :5 !y h be5 drawn by ! individual himself f ! s\rces ( reason1 t is1 f pr9ciples2 & x is 9 ?is way alone t criticism1 or ev5 ! rejection ( :at has be5 already le>n$1 c spr+ up 9 ! m9d4 ,all rational cognition is1 aga91 bas$ ei!r on conceptions1 or on ! con/ruction ( conceptions4 ,! =m] is t]m$ philosophical1 ! latt] ma!matical4 ,i h already %[n ! ess5tial diff]5ce ( ^! two me?ods ( cognition 9 ! fir/ *apt]4 ,a cognition may be objectively philosophical & subjectively hi/orical--z is ! case ) ! majority ( s*ol>s & ^? :o _c look beyond ! limits ( _! sy/em1 & :o rema9 9 a /ate ( pupilage all _! lives4 ,b x is rem>kable t ma!matical k1 :5 committ$ to memory1 is valid1 f ! subjective po9t ( view1 z rational k also1 & t ! same di/9ction _c be drawn "h z 9 ! case ( philosophical cognition4 ,! reason is t ! only way ( arriv+ at ?is k is ?r\gh ! ess5tial pr9ciples ( reason1 & ?us x is always c]ta9 & indisputable2 because reason is employ$ 9 concreto--b at ! same "t priori--t is1 9 pure &1 !re=e1 infallible intuition2 & ?us all causes ( illusion & error are exclud$4 ,( all ! priori sci5ces ( reason1 !re=e1 ma!matics alone c be le>n$4 ,philosophy--unless x be 9 an hi/orical mann]--_c be le>n$2 we c at mo/ le>n to philosophize4 ,philosophy is ! sy/em ( all philosophical cognition4 ,we mu/ use ?is t]m 9 an objective s5se1 if we und]/& by x ! ar*etype ( all attempts at philosophiz+1 & ! /&>d by :i* all subjective philosophies are to be judg$4 ,9 ?is s5se1 philosophy is m]ely ! idea ( a possible sci5ce1 :i* does n exi/ 9 concreto1 b to :i* we endeav\r 9 v>i\s ways to approximate1 until we h discov]$ ! "r pa? to pursue--a pa? ov]gr[n by ! errors & illusions ( s5se--& ! image we h hi!rto tri$ 9 va9 to %ape has become a p]fect copy ( ! great prototype4 ,until t "t1 we _c le>n philosophy--x does n exi/2 if x does1 :]e is x1 :o possesses x1 & h[ %all we "k x8 ,we c only le>n to philosophize2 9 o!r words1 we c only ex]cise our p[]s ( reason+ 9 accordance ) g5]al pr9ciples1 reta9+ at ! same "t1 ! "r ( inve/igat+ ! s\rces ( ^! pr9ciples1 ( te/+1 & ev5 ( reject+ !m4 ,until !n1 our conception ( philosophy is only a s*ola/ic conception--a conception1 t is1 ( a sy/em ( cognition :i* we are try+ to elaborate into a sci5ce2 all t we at pres5t "k be+ ! sy/ematic unity ( ?is cognition1 & consequ5tly ! logical complet5ess ( ! cognition = ! desir$ end4 ,b !re is also a cosmical conception 7conceptus cosmicus7 ( philosophy1 :i* has always =m$ ! true basis ( ?is t]m1 especially :5 philosophy 0 p]sonifi$ & pres5t$ to u 9 ! ideal ( a philosoph]4 ,9 ?is view philosophy is ! sci5ce ( ! relation ( all cognition to ! ultimate & ess5tial aims ( human reason 7teleologia rationis humanae71 & ! philosoph] is n m]ely an arti/--:o occupies himself ) conceptions--b a lawgiv]1 legislat+ = human reason4 ,9 ?is s5se ( ! ^w1 x w\ld be 9 ! highe/ degree arrogant to assume ! title ( philosoph]1 & to pret5d t we _h rea*$ ! p]fection ( ! prototype :i* lies 9 ! idea alone4 ,! ma!matician1 ! natural philosoph]1 & ! logician--h[ f> soev] ! fir/ may h advanc$ 9 rational1 & ! two latt] 9 philosophical k--are m]ely arti/s1 engag$ 9 ! arrangem5t & =mation ( conceptions2 !y _c be t]m$ philosoph]s4 ,above !m all1 !re is ! ideal tea*]1 :o employs !m z in/rum5ts = ! advancem5t ( ! ess5tial aims ( human reason4 ,him alone c we call philosoph]2 b he n[h]e exi/s4 ,b ! idea ( 8 legislative p[] resides 9 ! m9d ( e man1 & x alone tea*es u :at k9d ( sy/ematic unity philosophy dem&s 9 view ( ! ultimate aims ( reason4 ,?is idea is1 !re=e1 a cosmical conception4#hj #hj ,by a cosmical conception1 ,i mean "o 9 :i* all m5 necess>ily take an int]e/2 ! aim ( a sci5ce mu/ accord+ly be det]m9$ accord+ to s*ola/ic conceptions1 if x is reg>d$ m]ely z a means to c]ta9 arbitr>ily propos$ ends4 ,9 view ( ! complete sy/ematic unity ( reason1 !re c only be "o ultimate end ( all ! op]ations ( ! m9d4 ,to ?is all o!r aims are subord9ate1 & no?+ m ?an means = its atta9m5t4 ,?is ultimate end is ! de/9ation ( man1 & ! philosophy :i* relates to x is t]m$ moral philosophy4 ,! sup]ior position occupi$ by moral philosophy1 above all o!r sph]es = ! op]ations ( reason1 suffici5tly indicates ! reason :y ! anci5ts always includ$ ! idea--& 9 an especial mann]--( morali/ 9 t ( philosoph]4 ,ev5 at ! pres5t day1 we call a man :o appe>s to h ! p[] ( self-gov]nm5t1 ev5 al?\gh 8 k may be v limit$1 by ! "n ( philosoph]4 ,! legislation ( human reason1 or philosophy1 has two objects--nature & fre$om--& ?us conta9s n only ! laws ( nature1 b also ^? ( e?ics1 at fir/ 9 two sep>ate sy/ems1 :i*1 f9ally1 m]ge into "o gr& philosophical sy/em ( cognition4 ,! philosophy ( nature relates to t :i* is1 t ( e?ics to t :i* ought to be4 ,b all philosophy is ei!r cognition on ! basis ( pure reason1 or ! cognition ( reason on ! basis ( empirical pr9ciples4 ,! =m] is t]m$ pure1 ! latt] empirical philosophy4 ,! philosophy ( pure reason is ei!r propdeutic1 t is1 an inquiry into ! p[]s ( reason 9 reg>d to pure priori cognition1 & is t]m$ critical philosophy2 or x is1 secondly1 ! sy/em ( pure reason--a sci5ce conta9+ ! sy/ematic pres5tation ( ! :ole body ( philosophical k1 true z well z illusory1 giv5 by pure reason--& is call$ metaphysic4 ,?is "n may1 h[ev]1 be also giv5 to ! :ole sy/em ( pure philosophy1 critical philosophy includ$1 & may designate ! inve/igation into ! s\rces or possibility ( priori cognition1 z well z ! pres5tation ( ! priori cognitions :i* =m a sy/em ( pure philosophy--exclud+1 at ! same "t1 all empirical & ma!matical elem5ts4 ,metaphysic is divid$ into t ( ! speculative & t ( ! practical use ( pure reason1 & is1 accord+ly1 ei!r ! metaphysic ( nature1 or ! metaphysic ( e?ics4 ,! =m] conta9s all ! pure rational pr9ciples--bas$ ^u conceptions alone 7& ?us exclud+ ma!matics7--( all !oretical cognition2 ! latt]1 ! pr9ciples :i* det]m9e & necessitate priori all action4 ,n[ moral philosophy alone conta9s a code ( laws--= ! regulation ( our actions--:i* are d$uc$ f pr9ciples entirely priori4 ,h5ce ! metaphysic ( e?ics is ! only pure moral philosophy1 z x is n bas$ ^u an?ropological or o!r empirical consid]ations4 ,! metaphysic ( speculative reason is :at is commonly call$ metaphysic 9 ! m limit$ s5se4 ,b z pure moral philosophy prop]ly =ms a "p ( ?is sy/em ( cognition1 we mu/ all[ x to reta9 ! "n ( metaphysic1 al?\gh x is n requisite t we %\ld insi/ on s t]m+ x 9 our pres5t discussion4 ,x is ( ! highe/ importance to sep>ate ^? cognitions :i* diff] f o!rs bo? 9 k9d & 9 orig91 & to take great c>e t !y are n conf\nd$ ) ^? ) :i* !y are g5]ally f\nd connect$4 ,:at ! *emi/ does 9 ! analysis ( sub/ances1 :at ! ma!matician 9 pure ma!matics1 is1 9 a /ill high] degree1 ! duty ( ! philosoph]1 t ! value ( ea* diff]5t k9d ( cognition1 & ! "p x takes 9 ! op]ations ( ! m9d1 may be cle>ly def9$4 ,human reason has nev] want$ a metaphysic ( "s k9d1 s9ce x atta9$ ! p[] ( ?\ght1 or r ( reflection2 b x has nev] be5 able to keep ?is sph]e ( ?\ght & cognition pure f all admixture ( =eign elem5ts4 ,! idea ( a sci5ce ( ?is k9d is z old z speculation itself2 & :at m9d does n speculate--ei!r 9 ! s*ola/ic or 9 ! popul> fa%ion8 ,at ! same "t1 x mu/ be admitt$ t ev5 ?9k]s by pr(ession h be5 unable cle>ly to expla9 ! di/9ction betwe5 ! two elem5ts ( our cognition--! "o completely priori1 ! o!r po/]iori2 & h5ce ! prop] def9ition ( a peculi> k9d ( cognition1 & ) x ! j idea ( a sci5ce :i* has s long & s deeply engag$ ! att5tion ( ! human m9d1 has nev] be5 e/abli%$4 ,:5 x 0 said3 8,metaphysic is ! sci5ce ( ! fir/ pr9ciples ( human cognition10 ?is def9ition did n signalize a peculi>ity 9 k9d1 b only a diff]5ce 9 degree2 ^! fir/ pr9ciples 7 ?us decl>$ to be m g5]al ?an o!rs1 b no crit]ion ( di/9ction f empirical pr9ciples 0 giv54 ,( ^! "s are m g5]al1 & !re=e high]1 ?an o!rs2 &--z we _c di/+ui% :at is completely priori f t :i* is kn[n to be po/]iori--:]e %all we draw ! l9e :i* is to sep>ate ! high] & s-call$ fir/ pr9ciples1 f ! l[] & subord9ate pr9ciples ( cognition8 ,:at w\ld be said if we 7 ask$ to be satisfi$ ) a division ( ! epo*s ( ! _w into ! e>li] c5turies & ^? foll[+ !m8 8,does ! fif?1 or ! t5? c5tury belong to ! e>li] c5turies80 x w\ld be ask$4 ,9 ! same way ,i ask3 ,does ! conception ( ext5sion belong to metaphysics8 ,y answ]1 8,yes40 ,well1 t ( body too8 8,yes40 ,& t ( a fluid body8 ,y /op1 y are unprep>$ to admit ?is2 = if y d1 ev]y?+ w belong to metaphysics4 ,f ?is x is evid5t t ! m]e degree ( subord9ation--( ! p>ticul> to ! g5]al--_c det]m9e ! limits ( a sci5ce2 & t1 9 ! pres5t case1 we mu/ expect to f9d a diff]5ce 9 ! conceptions ( metaphysics bo? 9 k9d & 9 orig94 ,! fundam5tal idea ( metaphysics 0 obscur$ on ano!r side by ! fact t ?is k9d ( priori cognition %[$ a c]ta9 simil>ity 9 "* ) ! sci5ce ( ma!matics4 ,bo? h ! prop]ty 9 common ( possess+ an priori orig92 b1 9 ! "o1 our k is bas$ ^u conceptions1 9 ! o!r1 on ! con/ruction ( conceptions4 ,?us a decid$ dissimil>ity betwe5 philosophical & ma!matical cognition comes out--a dissimil>ity :i* 0 always felt1 b :i* c\ld n be made di/9ct = want ( an insight into ! crit]ia ( ! diff]5ce4 ,& ?us x happ5$ t1 z philosoph]s !mselves fail$ 9 ! prop] developm5t ( ! idea ( _! sci5ce1 ! elaboration ( ! sci5ce c\ld n proce$ ) a def9ite aim1 or "u tru/wor?y guidance4 ,?us1 too1 philosoph]s1 ignorant ( ! pa? !y ought to pursue & always disput+ ) ea* o!r reg>d+ ! discov]ies :i* ea* ass]t$ he _h made1 br\ght _! sci5ce into disrepute ) ! re/ ( ! _w1 & f9ally1 ev5 among !mselves4 ,all pure priori cognition =ms1 !re=e1 9 view ( ! peculi> faculty :i* orig9ates x1 a peculi> & di/9ct unity2 & metaphysic is ! t]m appli$ to ! philosophy :i* attempts to repres5t t cognition 9 ?is sy/ematic unity4 ,! speculative "p ( metaphysic1 :i* has especially appropriat$ ?is appellation--t :i* we h call$ ! metaphysic ( nature--& :i* consid]s ev]y?+1 z x is 7n z x ought to be71 by means ( priori conceptions1 is divid$ 9 ! foll[+ mann]4 ,metaphysic1 9 ! m limit$ acceptation ( ! t]m1 consi/s ( two p>ts--transc5d5tal philosophy & ! physiology ( pure reason4 ,! =m] pres5ts ! sy/em ( all ! conceptions & pr9ciples belong+ to ! und]/&+ & ! reason1 & :i* relate to objects 9 g5]al1 b n to any p>ticul> giv5 objects 7,ontologia72 ! latt] has nature = its subject-matt]1 t is1 ! sum ( giv5 objects--:e!r giv5 to ! s5ses1 or1 if we w1 to "s o!r k9d ( intuition--& is accord+ly physiology1 al?\gh only rationalis4 ,b ! use ( ! faculty ( reason 9 ?is rational mode ( reg>d+ nature is ei!r physical or hyp]physical1 or1 m prop]ly speak+1 imman5t or transc5d5t4 ,! =m] relates to nature1 9 s f> z our k reg>d+ x may be appli$ 9 exp]i5ce 79 concreto72 ! latt] to t connection ( ! objects ( exp]i5ce1 :i* transc5ds all exp]i5ce4 ,transc5d5t physiology has1 aga91 an int]nal & an ext]nal connection ) its object1 bo?1 h[ev]1 transc5d+ possible exp]i5ce2 ! =m] is ! physiology ( nature z a :ole1 or transc5d5tal cognition ( ! _w1 ! latt] ( ! connection ( ! :ole ( nature ) a be+ above nature1 or transc5d5tal cognition ( ,god4 ,imman5t physiology1 on ! contr>y1 consid]s nature z ! sum ( all s5su\s objects1 consequ5tly1 z x is pres5t$ to u--b /ill accord+ to priori conditions1 = x is "u ^! alone t nature c be pres5t$ to our m9ds at all4 ,! objects ( imman5t physiology are ( two k9ds3 #a4 ,^? ( ! ext]nal s5ses1 or corporeal nature2 #b4 ,! object ( ! int]nal s5se1 ! s\l1 or1 9 accordance ) our fundam5tal conceptions ( x1 ?9k+ nature4 ,! metaphysics ( corporeal nature is call$ physics2 b1 z x mu/ conta9 only ! pr9ciples ( an priori cognition ( nature1 we mu/ t]m x rational physics4 ,! metaphysics ( ?9k+ nature is call$ psy*ology1 & = ! same reason is to be reg>d$ z m]ely ! rational cognition ( ! s\l4 ,?us ! :ole sy/em ( metaphysics consi/s ( f\r pr9cipal p>ts3 #a4 ,ontology2 #b4 ,rational ,physiology2 #c4 ,rational cosmology2 & #d4 ,rational !ology4 ,! second "p--t ( ! rational doctr9e ( nature--may be subdivid$ into two1 physica rationalis#ha & psy*ologia rationalis4 #ha ,x mu/ n be suppos$ t ,i mean by ?is appellation :at is g5]ally call$ physica g5]al is1 & :i* is r ma!matics ?an a philosophy ( nature4 ,= ! metaphysic ( nature is completely diff]5t f ma!matics1 nor is x s ri* 9 results1 al?\gh x is ( great importance z a critical te/ ( ! application ( pure und]/&+--cognition to nature4 ,= want ( its guidance1 ev5 ma!maticians1 adopt+ c]ta9 common notions--:i* are1 9 fact1 metaphysical--h unconsci\sly cr[d$ _! !ories ( nature ) hypo!ses1 ! fallacy ( :i* becomes evid5t ^u ! application ( ! pr9ciples ( ?is metaphysic1 )\t detrim5t1 h[ev]1 to ! employm5t ( ma!matics 9 ?is sph]e ( cognition4 ,! fundam5tal idea ( a philosophy ( pure reason ( necessity dictates ?is division2 x is1 !re=e1 ar*itectonical--9 accordance ) ! highe/ aims ( reason1 & n m]ely te*nical1 or accord+ to c]ta9 accid5tally-obs]v$ simil>ities exi/+ betwe5 ! diff]5t p>ts ( ! :ole sci5ce4 ,= ?is reason1 also1 is ! division immutable & ( legislative au?ority4 ,b ! read] may obs]ve 9 x a few po9ts to :i* he ought to demur1 & :i* may weak5 8 conviction ( its tru? & legitimacy4 ,9 ! fir/ place1 h[ c ,i desire an priori cognition or metaphysic ( objects1 9 s f> z !y are giv5 po/]iori8 & h[ is x possible to cognize ! nature ( ?+s accord+ to priori pr9ciples1 & to atta9 to a rational physiology8 ,! answ] is ?is4 ,we take f exp]i5ce no?+ m ?an is requisite to pres5t u ) an object 79 g5]al7 ( ! ext]nal or ( ! int]nal s5se2 9 ! =m] case1 by ! m]e conception ( matt] 7imp5etrable & inanimate ext5sion71 9 ! latt]1 by ! conception ( a ?9k+ be+--giv5 9 ! int]nal empirical repres5tation1 ,i ?9k4 ,z to ! re/1 we mu/ n employ 9 our metaphysic ( ^! objects any empirical pr9ciples 7:i* add to ! cont5t ( our conceptions by means ( exp]i5ce71 = ! purpose ( =m+ by _! help any judgem5ts respect+ ^! objects4 ,secondly1 :at place %all we assign to empirical psy*ology1 :i* has always be5 consid]$ a "p ( metaphysics1 & f :i* 9 our "t su* important philosophical results h be5 expect$1 aft] ! hope ( con/ruct+ an priori sy/em ( k _h be5 ab&on$8 ,i answ]3 ,x mu/ be plac$ by ! side ( empirical physics or physics prop]2 t is1 mu/ be reg>d$ z =m+ a "p ( appli$ philosophy1 ! priori pr9ciples ( :i* are conta9$ 9 pure philosophy1 :i* is !re=e connect$1 al?\gh x mu/ n be conf\nd$1 ) psy*ology4 ,empirical psy*ology mu/ !re=e be bani%$ f ! sph]e ( metaphysics1 & is inde$ exclud$ by ! v idea ( t sci5ce4 ,9 con=mity1 h[ev]1 ) s*ola/ic usage1 we mu/ p]mit x to occupy a place 9 metaphysics--b only z an app5dix to x4 ,we adopt ?is c\rse f motives ( economy2 z psy*ology is n z yet full en\gh to occupy our att5tion z an indep5d5t /udy1 :ile x is1 at ! same "t1 ( too great importance to be entirely exclud$ or plac$ :]e x has /ill less aff9ity ?an x has ) ! subject ( metaphysics4 ,x is a /rang] :o has be5 long a gue/2 & we make x welcome to /ay1 until x c take up a m suitable abode 9 a complete sy/em ( an?ropology--! p5dant to empirical physics4 ,! above is ! g5]al idea ( metaphysics1 :i*1 z m 0 expect$ f x ?an c\ld be look$ = ) ju/ice1 & z ^! pleasant expectations 7 un=tunately nev] realiz$1 fell into g5]al disrepute4 ,our ,critique mu/ h fully conv9c$ ! read] t1 al?\gh metaphysics _c =m ! f\ndation ( religion1 x mu/ always be "o ( its mo/ important bulw>ks1 & t human reason1 :i* naturally pursues a dialectical c\rse1 _c d )\t ?is sci5ce1 :i* *ecks its t5d5cies t[>ds dialectic &1 by elevat+ reason to a sci5tific & cle> self-k1 prev5ts ! ravages :i* a lawless speculative reason w\ld infallibly commit 9 ! sph]e ( morals z well z 9 t ( religion4 ,we may be sure1 !re=e1 :atev] contempt may be ?r[n ^u metaphysics by ^? :o judge a sci5ce n by its own nature1 b accord+ to ! accid5tal effects x may h produc$1 t x c nev] be completely ab&on$1 t we mu/ always return to x z to a belov$ "o :o has be5 = a "t e/rang$1 because ! que/ions ) :i* x is engag$ relate to ! highe/ aims ( humanity1 & reason mu/ always lab\r ei!r to atta9 to settl$ views 9 reg>d to ^!1 or to de/roy ^? :i* o!rs h already e/abli%$4 ,metaphysic1 !re=e--t ( nature1 z well z t ( e?ics1 b 9 an especial mann] ! criticism :i* =ms ! propdeutic to all ! op]ations ( reason--=ms prop]ly t dep>tm5t ( k :i* may be t]m$1 9 ! true/ s5se ( ! ^w1 philosophy4 ,! pa? :i* x pursues is t ( sci5ce1 :i*1 :5 x has once be5 discov]$1 is nev] lo/1 & nev] misleads4 ,ma!matics1 natural sci5ce1 ! common exp]i5ce ( m51 h a high value z means1 = ! mo/ "p1 to accid5tal ends--b at la/ also1 to ^? :i* are necess>y & ess5tial to ! exi/5ce ( humanity4 ,b to guide !m to ?is high goal1 !y require ! aid ( rational cognition on ! basis ( pure conceptions1 :i*1 be x t]m$ z x may1 is prop]ly no?+ b metaphysics4 ,= ! same reason1 metaphysics =ms likewise ! completion ( ! culture ( human reason4 ,9 ?is respect1 x is indisp5sable1 sett+ aside altoge!r ! influ5ce :i* x ex]ts z a sci5ce4 ,= its subject-matt] is ! elem5ts & highe/ maxims ( reason1 :i* =m ! basis ( ! possibility ( "s sci5ces & ( ! use ( all4 ,t1 z a purely speculative sci5ce1 x is m useful 9 prev5t+ error ?an 9 ! ext5sion ( k1 does n detract f its value2 on ! contr>y1 ! supreme (fice ( c5sor :i* x occupies assures to x ! highe/ au?ority & importance4 ,?is (fice x adm9i/]s = ! purpose ( secur+ ord]1 h>mony1 & well-be+ to sci5ce1 & ( direct+ its noble & fruitful lab\rs to ! highe/ possible aim--! happ9ess ( all mank9d4 ,*apt] ,,iv4 ,! ,hi/ory ( ,pure ,reason ,?is title is plac$ "h m]ely = ! purpose ( designat+ a division ( ! sy/em ( pure reason ( :i* ,i d n int5d to treat at pres5t4 ,i %all cont5t myself ) ca/+ a cursory glance1 f a purely transc5d5tal po9t ( view--t ( ! nature ( pure reason--on ! lab\rs ( philosoph]s up to ! pres5t "t4 ,!y h aim$ at erect+ an edifice ( philosophy2 b to my eye ?is edifice appe>s to be 9 a v ru9\s condition4 ,x is v rem>kable1 al?\gh naturally x c\ld n h be5 o!rwise1 t1 9 ! infancy ( philosophy1 ! /udy ( ! nature ( ,god & ! con/itution ( a future _w =m$ ! comm5cem5t1 r ?an ! conclusion1 z we %\ld h x1 ( ! speculative ef=ts ( ! human m9d4 ,h[ev] rude ! religi\s conceptions g5]at$ by ! rema9s ( ! old mann]s & cu/oms ( a less cultivat$ "t1 ! intellig5t classes 7 n !reby prev5t$ f devot+ !mselves to free inquiry into ! exi/5ce & nature ( ,god2 & !y easily saw t !re c\ld be no sur] way ( pleas+ ! invisible rul] ( ! _w1 & ( atta9+ to happ9ess 9 ano!r _w at lea/1 ?an a good & hone/ c\rse ( life 9 ?is4 ,?us !ology & morals =m$ ! two *ief motives1 or r ! po9ts ( attraction 9 all ab/ract inquiries4 ,b x 0 ! =m] t especially occupi$ ! att5tion ( speculative reason1 & :i* aft]w>ds became s celebrat$ "u ! "n ( metaphysics4 ,i %all n at pres5t indicate ! p]iods ( "t at :i* ! greate/ *anges 9 metaphysics took place1 b %all m]ely give a ha/y sket* ( ! diff]5t ideas :i* occasion$ ! mo/ important revolutions 9 ?is sph]e ( ?\ght4 ,!re are ?ree diff]5t ends 9 relation to :i* ^! revolutions h tak5 place4 #a4 ,9 relation to ! object ( ! cognition ( reason1 philosoph]s may be divid$ into s5suali/s & intellectuali/s4 ,epicurus may be reg>d$ z ! head ( ! =m]1 ,plato ( ! latt]4 ,! di/9ction "h signaliz$1 subtle z x is1 dates f ! e>lie/ times1 & 0 long ma9ta9$4 ,! =m] ass]t$ t reality resides 9 s5su\s objects alone1 & t ev]y?+ else is m]ely imag9>y2 ! latt]1 t ! s5ses are ! p>5ts ( illusion & t tru? is to be f\nd 9 ! und]/&+ alone4 ,! =m] did n d5y to ! conceptions ( ! und]/&+ a c]ta9 k9d ( reality2 b ) !m x 0 m]ely logical1 ) ! o!rs x 0 my/ical4 ,! =m] admitt$ intellectual conceptions1 b decl>$ t s5su\s objects alone possess$ real exi/5ce4 ,! latt] ma9ta9$ t all real objects 7 intelligible1 & believ$ t ! pure und]/&+ possess$ a faculty ( intuition ap>t f s5se1 :i*1 9 _! op9ion1 s]v$ only to confuse ! ideas ( ! und]/&+4 #b4 ,9 relation to ! orig9 ( ! pure cognitions ( reason1 we f9d "o s*ool ma9ta9+ t !y are d]iv$ entirely f exp]i5ce1 & ano!r t !y h _! orig9 9 reason alone4 ,ari/otle may be reg>d$ z ! head ( ! empirici/s1 & ,plato ( ! noologi/s4 ,locke1 ! foll[] ( ,ari/otle 9 mod]n times1 & ,leibnitz ( ,plato 7al?\gh he _c be said to h imitat$ him 9 8 my/icism71 h n be5 able to br+ ?is "q to a settl$ conclusion4 ,! proc$ure ( ,epicurus 9 8 s5sual sy/em1 9 :i* he always re/rict$ 8 conclusions to ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce1 0 mu* m consequ5t ?an t ( ,ari/otle & ,locke4 ,! latt] especially1 aft] hav+ d]iv$ all ! conceptions & pr9ciples ( ! m9d f exp]i5ce1 goes s f>1 9 ! employm5t ( ^! conceptions & pr9ciples1 z to ma9ta9 t we c prove ! exi/5ce ( ,god & ! immortality ( ! s\l--bo? ( !m objects ly+ beyond ! limits ( possible exp]i5ce--) ! same =ce ( demon/ration1 z any ma!matical proposition4 #c4 ,9 relation to me?od4 ,me?od is proc$ure accord+ to pr9ciples4 ,we may divide ! me?ods at pres5t employ$ 9 ! field ( inquiry into ! naturali/ic & ! sci5tific4 ,! naturali/ ( pure reason lays x d[n z 8 pr9ciple t common reason1 )\t ! aid ( sci5ce--:i* he calls s\nd reason1 or common s5se--c give a m satisfactory answ] to ! mo/ important que/ions ( metaphysics ?an speculation is able to d4 ,he mu/ ma9ta91 !re=e1 t we c det]m9e ! cont5t & circumf]5ce ( ! moon m c]ta9ly by ! nak$ eye1 ?an by ! aid ( ma!matical reason+4 ,b ?is sy/em is m]e misology r$uc$ to pr9ciples2 &1 :at is ! mo/ absurd ?+ 9 ?is doctr9e1 ! neglect ( all sci5tific means is p>ad$ z a peculi> me?od ( ext5d+ our cognition4 ,z reg>ds ^? :o are naturali/s because !y "k no bett]1 !y are c]ta9ly n to be blam$4 ,!y foll[ common s5se1 )\t p>ad+ _! ignorance z a me?od :i* is to tea* u ! wond]ful secret1 h[ we are to f9d ! tru? :i* lies at ! bottom ( ! well ( ,democritus4 ,quod sapio satis e/ mihi1 non ego curo ,esse quod ,arcesilas a]umnosique ,solones4 ,,p]sius --,satirae1 iii4 #gh-gi4 is _! motto1 "u :i* !y may lead a pleasant & praisewor?y life1 )\t tr\bl+ !mselves ) sci5ce or tr\bl+ sci5ce ) !m4 ,z reg>ds ^? :o wi% to pursue a sci5tific me?od1 !y h n[ ! *oice ( foll[+ ei!r ! dogmatical or ! sceptical1 :ile !y are b\nd nev] to des]t ! sy/ematic mode ( proc$ure4 ,:5 ,i m5tion1 9 relation to ! =m]1 ! celebrat$ ,wolf1 & z reg>ds ! latt]1 ,david ,hume1 ,i may leave1 9 accordance ) my pres5t int5tion1 all o!rs unnam$4 ,! critical pa? alone is /ill op54 ,if my read] has be5 k9d & pati5t en\gh to accompany me on ?is hi!rto untravell$ r\te1 he c n[ judge :e!r1 if he & o!rs w contribute _! ex]tions t[>ds mak+ ?is n>r[ footpa? a high road ( ?\ght1 t :i* _m c5turies h fail$ to accompli% may n be execut$ be=e ! close ( ! pres5t--namely1 to br+ ,reason to p]fect cont5tm5t 9 reg>d to t :i* has always1 b )\t p]man5t results1 occupi$ h] p[]s & engag$ h] ard5t desire = k4