,,fundam5tal ,,philosophy4 ,,by ,,rev4 ,,james ,,balmes4 ,,translat$ ,,f ,,! ,,spani% ,,by ,,h5ry ,f4 ,,br[nson1 ,m4,a4 ,,9 ,,two ,,volumes4 ,,vol4 ,i4 ,new ,york3 ,d4 ,j4 ,,sadli] ,,co41 #afd ,,william ,,/reet1 ,,bo/on3--#abh ,,f$]al ,,/reet4 ,,montreal3--,,cor4 ,,( ,,notre ,,dame ,,& ,,/4 ,,francis ,,xavi] ,,/s4 #ahef4 ,ent]$ accord+ to ,act ( ,congress1 9 ! ye> #ahef1 ,by ,d4 ,j4 ,,sadli] ,,co41 ,9 ! ,cl]k's ,(fice ( ! ,di/rict ,c\rt ( ! ,unit$ ,/ates = ! ,s\!rn ,di/rict ( ,new ,york4 ,,new ,,york3 ,,bill9 ,,bro!r1 ,,pr9t]s1 ,,xx ,,nor? ,,william ,,/4 ,,cont5ts ,,( ,,vol4 ,,ii4 ,,book ,,f\r?4 ,,on ,,ideas4 ,,*apt] ,,page ,i4 ,cursory ,view ( ,s5sism #c ,,ii4 ,condillac's ,/atue #f ,,iii4 ,diff]5ce betwe5 ,geometrical ,ideas & ! ,s5sible ,repres5tations :i* accompany !m #ab ,,iv4 ,! ,idea & ! ,intellectual ,act #ae ,v4 ,comp>ison ( ,geometrical ) ,non-,geometrical ,ideas #bj ,,vi4 ,9 :at ! ,geometrical ,idea consi/s2 & :at are its ,relations ) ,s5sible ,intuition #be ,,vii4 ,! ,act+ ,intellect ( ! ,ari/otelians #bi ,,viii4 ,kant & ! ,ari/otelians #cc ,,ix4 ,hi/orical ,view ( ! ,value ( ,pure ,ideas #db ,x4 ,s5sible ,intuition #ej ,,xi4 ,two ,cognitions3 ,intuitive & ,discursive #ed ,,xii4 ,! ,s5sism ( ,kant #eg ,,xiii4 ,exi/5ce ( ,pure ,intellectual ,intuition #ei ,,xiv4 ,value ( ,intellectual ,conceptions4--,ab/raction made f ,intellectual ,intuition #fb ,,xv4 ,illu/rations ( ! ,value ( ,g5]al ,conceptions #fe ,,xvi4 ,value ( ,pr9ciples1 indep5d5tly ( ,s5sible ,intuition #fh ,,xvii4 ,relations ( ,intuition ) ! rank ( ! ,p]ceptive ,be+ #ga ,,xviii4 ,aspirations ( ! ,human ,s\l #gd ,,xix4 ,elem5ts & v>iety ( ! *>act]s ( ,s5sible ,repres5tation #gf ,,xx4 ,int]m$iate ,repres5tations betwe5 ,s5sible ,intuition & ! ,intellectual ,act #ha ,,xxi4 ,det]m9ate & ,indet]m9ate ,ideas #hd ,,xxii4 ,limits ( our ,intuition #hh ,,xxiii4 ,( ! ,necessity involv$ 9 ,ideas #ib ,,xxiv4 ,exi/5ce ( ,univ]sal ,reason #if ,,xxv4 ,9 :at does ,univ]sal ,reason consi/8 #ii ,,xxvi4 ,rem>ks on ! ,real ,f\ndation ( ,pure ,possibility #ajb ,,xxvii4 ,individual & ,intellectual ,ph5om5a expla9$ by ! ,univ]sal ,subsi/+ ,reason #aje ,,xxviii4 ,obs]vations on ! ,relation ( ,language to ,ideas #ajh ,,xxix4 ,orig9 & ,"* ( ! relation betwe5 ,language & ,ideas #aab ,,xxx4 ,innate ,ideas #aae ,,book ,,fif?4 ,,idea ,,( ,,be+4 ,i4 ,idea ( ,be+ #abe ,,ii4 ,simplicity & ,indet]m9at5ess ( ! ,idea ( ,be+ #abg ,,iii4 ,sub/antive & ,copulative ,be+ #abi ,,iv4 ,be+1 ! ,object ( ! ,und]/&+1 is n ! ,possible1 ,inasmu* z ,possible #acd ,v4 ,a ,difficulty ,solv$ #ach ,,vi4 ,9 :at ,s5se ! ,idea ( ,be+ is ! ,=m ( ! ,und]/&+ #ada ,,vii4 ,all ,sci5ce is f\nd$ 9 ! ,po/ulate ( ,exi/5ce #adc ,,viii4 ,! f\ndation ( ,pure ,possibility1 & ! ,condition ( its ,exi/5ce #adg ,,ix4 ,idea ( ,negation #aej ,x4 ,id5tity2 ,di/9ction2 ,unity2 ,multiplicity #aec ,,xi4 ,orig9 ( ! ,idea ( ,be+ #aee ,,xii4 ,di/9ction betwe5 ,ess5ce & ,exi/5ce #afa ,,xiii4 ,kant's ,op9ion ( ,reality & ,negation #afd ,,xiv4 ,recapitulation & ,consequ5ces ( ! ,doctr9e conc]n+ ! ,idea ( ,be+ #afh ,,book ,,six?4 ,,unity ,,& ,,numb]4 ,i4 ,prelim9>y ,consid]ations on ! ,idea ( ,unity #age ,,ii4 ,:at is ,unity8 #agf ,,iii4 ,unity & ,simplicity #ahj ,,iv4 ,orig9 ( ! ,t5d5cy ( our ,m9d to ,unity #ahc ,v4 ,g5]ation ( ! ,idea ( ,numb] #ahg ,,vi4 ,connection ( ! ,ideas ( ,numb] ) _! ,signs #aia ,,vii4 ,analysis ( ! ,idea ( ,numb] 9 ,itself & its ,relations ) ,signs #aid ,,book ,,sev5?4 ,,on ,,"t4 ,i4 ,importance & ,difficulty ( ! ,subject #bja ,,ii4 ,is ,"t ! ,measure ( ,movem5t8 #bjc ,,iii4 ,simil>ities & ,diff]5ces betwe5 ,"t & ,space #bjf ,,iv4 ,def9ition ( ,"t #baa ,v4 ,"t is ,no?+ ,absolute #bac ,,vi4 ,difficulties 9 ! explanation ( ,velocity #bae ,,vii4 ,fundam5tal ,explanation ( ,succession #bai ,,viii4 ,:at is ,co-exi/5ce8 #bbc ,,ix4 ,pres5t1 ,pa/1 & ,future #bbf ,x4 ,application ( ! prec$+ ,doctr9e to sev]al important ,que/ions #bca ,,xi4 ,! ,analysis ( ! ,idea ( ,"t confirms its resemblance to ! ,idea ( ,space #bcd ,,xii4 ,relations ( ! ,idea ( ,"t to ,exp]i5ce #bcf ,,xiii4 ,kant's ,op9ion #bci ,,xiv4 ,fundam5tal ,explanation ( ! ,objective ,possibility & ( ! ,necessity ( ! ,idea ( ,"t #bdb ,,xv4 ,important ,coroll>ies #bdc ,,xvi4 ,pure ,ideal ,"t & ,empirical ,"t #bde ,,xvii4 ,relations ( ! ,idea ( ,"t & ! ,pr9ciple ( ,contradiction #bdg ,,xviii4 ,summ+ up #bed ,,xix4 ,a glance at ! ,ideas ( ,space1 ,numb]1 & ,"t #beg ,,book ,,eigh?4 ,,! ,,inf9ite4 ,i4 ,transitory ,view ( ! ,actual ,/ate ( ,philosophy #bfc ,,ii4 ,importance & ,anomaly ( ! ,que/ions on ! ,idea ( ! ,inf9ite #bfh ,,iii4 ,h we ! ,idea ( ! ,inf9ite8 #bfi ,,iv4 ,! ,limit #bgb ,v4 ,consid]ations on ! ,application ( ! ,idea ( ! ,inf9ite to cont9u\s quantities1 & to ,discrete ,quantities1 9 s f> z ^! la/ are express$ 9 ,s]ies #bgd ,,vi4 ,orig9 ( ! ,vagu5ess & ,app>5t ,contradictions 9 ! ,application ( ! ,idea ( ! ,inf9ite #bgh ,,vii4 ,fundam5tal ,explanation ( ! ,ab/ract ,idea ( ! ,inf9ite #bha ,,viii4 ,! ,def9ition ( ,inf9ity confirm$ by ,application to ,ext5sion #bhe ,,ix4 ,conception ( an ,inf9ite ,numb] #bhi ,x4 ,conception ( ,inf9ite ,ext5sion #bib ,,xi4 ,possibility ( ,inf9ite ,ext5sion #bid ,,xii4 ,solution ( ,v>i\s ,objections aga9/ ! ,possibility ( an ,inf9ite ,ext5sion #bif ,,xiii4 ,exi/5ce ( ,inf9ite ,ext5sion #cjb ,,xiv4 ,possibility ( an ,actual ,inf9ite ,numb] #cjd ,,xv4 ,idea ( ,absolutely ,inf9ite ,be+ #caa ,,xvi4 ,all ! ,reality conta9$ 9 ,indet]m9ate ,conceptions is affirm$ ( ,god #cae ,,xvii4 ,all t is n contradictory 9 ,intuitive ,ideas is affirm$ ( ,god #cag ,,xviii4 ,intellig5ce & ! ,absolutely ,inf9ite ,be+ #cba ,,xix4 ,summ+ up #cbd ,,book ,,n9?4 ,,on ,,sub/ance4 ,i4 ,"n & ,g5]al ,idea ( ,sub/ance #cca ,,ii4 ,application ( ! ,idea ( ,sub/ance to ,corporeal ,objects #ccc ,,iii4 ,def9ition ( ,corporeal ,sub/ance #cch ,,iv4 ,relation ( ,corporeal ,sub/ance to its ,accid5ts #cdj ,v4 ,consid]ations on ,corporeal ,sub/ance 9 ,itself #cdd ,,vi4 ,sub/antiality ( ! ,human ,me #cdg ,,vii4 ,relation ( ! ,proposition1 ,i ,?9k1 to ! ,sub/antiality ( ! ,me #cdi ,,viii4 ,rem>ks on ! ,s\l's ,intuition ( ,itself #ceb ,,ix4 ,kant's ,op9ion ( ! ,argum5ts prov+ ! ,sub/antiality ( ! ,s\l #cee ,x4 ,kant's ,op9ion ( ! ,argum5t :i* he calls ,p>alogism ( ,p]sonality #cff ,,xi4 ,simplicity ( ! ,s\l #cgg ,,xii4 ,kant's ,op9ion ( ! ,argum5t prov+ ! ,simplicity ( ! ,s\l #cha ,,xiii4 ,9 :at mann] ! ,idea ( ,sub/ance may be appli$ to ,god #cid ,,xiv4 ,an important ,rem>k1 & ,summ>y #cig ,,xv4 ,pan!ism exam9$ 9 ! ,ord] ( ,ideas #cii ,,xvi4 ,pan!ism exam9$ 9 ! ,ord] ( ,ext]nal ,facts #djc ,,xvii4 ,pan!ism exam9$ 9 ! ,ord] ( ,int]nal ,facts #djf ,,xviii4 ,fi*te's ,pan!i/ic ,sy/em #dji ,,xix4 ,relations ( ,fi*te's ,sy/em to ! ,doctr9es ( ,kant #dbd ,,xx4 ,contradiction ( ,pan!ism to ! ,prim>y ,facts ( ! ,human ,m9d #dbi ,,xxi4 ,rapid glances at ! ,pr9cipal ,argum5ts ( ,pan!i/s #dcd ,,book ,,t5?4 ,,necessity ,,& ,,causality4 ,i4 ,necessity #dci ,,ii4 ,! ,uncondition$ #ddb ,,iii4 ,immutability ( ,necess>y & ,uncondition$ ,be+ #dde ,,iv4 ,ideas ( ,cause & ,effect #ddh ,v4 ,orig9 ( ! ,notion ( ,causality #dea ,,vi4 ,=mula & ,demon/ration ( ! ,pr9ciple ( ,causality #ded ,,vii4 ,! ,pr9ciple ( ,prec$5cy #deg ,,viii4 ,causality 9 ,itself4--,insuffici5cy & ,error ( "s ,explanations #dfg ,,ix4 ,necess>y & suffici5t ,conditions ( true ,absolute ,causality #dgd ,x4 ,second>y ,causality #dgf ,,xi4 ,fundam5tal ,explanation ( ! ,orig9 ( ! ,obscurity ( ,ideas 9 :at relates to ,causality #dgi ,,xii4 ,causality ( ,pure ,=ce ( ! ,w #dhc ,,xiii4 ,activity #dhf ,,xiv4 ,possibility ( ! ,activity ( ,bodies #dic ,,xv4 ,conjectures z to ! ,exi/5ce ( ,corporeal ,activity #dif ,,xvi4 ,int]nal ,causality #ejj ,,xvii4 ,rem>ks on ,spontaneity #ejh ,,xviii4 ,f9al ,causality2--,morality #eac ,,xix4 ,v>i\s ,explanations ( ,morality #ebj ,,xx4 ,fundam5tal ,explanation ( ! ,moral ,ord] #ebg ,,xxi4 ,a ,glance at ! ,"w #edc ,,book ,,f\r?4 ,,on ,,ideas4 ,,fundam5tal ,,philosophy4 ,,*apt] ,i4 ,,cursory ,,view ,,( ,,s5sism4 #a4 ,hav+ spok5 ( s5sations1 we come n[ to ideas4 ,we mu/1 h[ev]1 be=e mak+ ?is transition1 inquire if !re be 9 our m9d ought else ?an s5sation1 if all ! inw>d ph5om5a :i* we exp]i5ce be ought else ?an s5sations trans=m$4 ,man1 :5 he rises f ! sph]e ( s5sations1 f ^? ph5om5a :i* place him 9 relation ) ! ext]nal _w1 meets a new ord] ( ph5om5a1 ( ^: pres5ce he is equally consci\s4 ,he _c reflect ^u s5sations )\t be+ consci\s ( some?+ m ?an s5sation2 nor on ! recollection or ! inw>d repres5tation ( s5sations1 )\t discov]+ some?+ di/9ct bo? f ! recollection & f ! repres5tation4 #b4 ,accord+ to ,ari/otle1 !re is no?+ 9 ! und]/&+ :i* has n fir/ be5 9 ! s5ses2 & ! s*ools h = long ages re-e*o$ ?is ?\ght ( ! philosoph]3 nihil e/ 9 intellectu quod prius non fu]it 9 s5su4 ,! ord]1 !re=e1 ( human k1 is f ! ext]nal to ! int]nal4 ,desc>tes pret5d$ t we ought to inv]t ?is ord]1 & proce$ f ! int]nal to ! ext]nal4 ,malebran*e1 8 disciple1 w5t f>!r1 & 0 ( op9ion t ! und]/&+1 enfold$ 9 itself1 %\ld hold only ! lea/ possible int]c\rse ) ! ext]nal _w4 ,accord+ to him1 no atmosph]e is s fatal to intellectual heal? z t ( ! _w ( ! s5ses2 s5sations are an inexhau/ible f\nta9 ( error1 & ! imag9ation is an en*antress only ! m dang]\s because %e has fix$ h] dwell+ at ! v portal ( ! intellect1 :i*1 ) h] s$uctive beauty & gorge\s ornam5ts1 %e hopes to rule at h] pleasure4 #c4 ,locke /rove to rehabilitate ! old ,ari/otelian maxim1 jo9$1 h[ev]1 to ! crit]ion ( obs]vation3 besides s5sation he admitt$ only reflection1 b he taught t ! m9d 0 end[$ ) innate faculties4 ,8 disciple1 ,condillac1 n satisfi$ ) ?is1 taught t all ! actions ( our m9d 7 simply s5sations trans=m$3 in/ead ( di/+ui%+ ) ,locke two s\rces ( our ideas1 ! s5ses & reflection1 he ?\ght x m exact to admit only "o1 z well because reflection is 9 its root only s5sation1 z because x is r ! *annel by :i* ideas orig9at+ 9 ! s5ses pass1 ?an _! s\rce4 ,judgm5t1 reflection1 desires1 & passions are 9 ,condillac's e/imation no?+ else ?an s5sation trans=m$ 9 v>i\s modes4 ,x seem$ to him1 !re=e1 v idle to suppose ! m9d to h receiv$ imm$iately f nature ! faculties ) :i* x is end[$4 ,nature has giv5 u organs :i* %[ u by pleasure or pa9 :at we ought to seek or to avoid2 b "h %e /ops1 & leaves to exp]i5ce ! task ( lead+ u to contract habits & f9i% ! "w %e has comm5c$4#a #a ,trait des ,s5sations4 ,prface4 #d4 ,9 view ( ?is sy/em1 9 :i* n ev5 natural faculties are conc$$ to ! s\l1 & ^? :i* x does possess are consid]$ z only simple effects ( s5sation1 x is wor?y ( rem>k h[ soon its au?or contradicts himself2 =1 almo/ 9 ! same brea?1 he pr(esses to be an occasionali/1 & pret5ds t ! impressions ( our organization are no?+ m ?an ! occasion ( our s5sations4 ,c !re be a natural faculty m inexplicable ?an t ( plac+ "o's self 9 relation ) objects :i* d n produce s5sations1 b are only ! occasion ( _! production4 ,if su* a faculty z ?is be conc$$ to ! m9d1 :y may we n admit o!rs8 ,is n t a v s+ul> natural faculty :i* p]ceives by means ( causes op]at+ only occasionally8 ,9 ?is case1 is !re n attribut$ to ! m9d a natural faculty ( produc+ s5sations on occasion ( organic impressions1 or is x n suppos$ to be an imm$iate relation ) ano!r & sup]ior be+ :i* produces !m8 ,:y may n ?is int]nal activity1 ?is receptivity1 apply itself to ideas8 ,:y mu/ n o!r innate faculties be conc$$ to ! m9d8 ,& :y does he pret5d n to suppose !m1 :5 8 :ole argum5t is bas$ ^u ! supposition ( _! exi/5ce8 ,ho/ile z he pr(esses to be to hypo!ses & sy/ems1 ,condillac is em95tly addict$ bo? to sy/ems & hypo!ses4 ,he imag9es an orig9 & a nature ( ideas ( 8 own1 & to !m he insi/s t e ?+ mu/ con=m4 ,to give a bett] idea ( ,condillac's op9ions1 & to combat !m at once successfully & loyally1 we w briefly analyze ! gr\ndwork ( 8 ,treatise on ,s5sations1 ! book on :i* he mo/ prides himself1 & 9 :i* he flatt]s himself to h giv5 to 8 doctr9e its highe/ degree ( cle>ness & c]ta9ty4 ,,*apt] ,,ii4 ,,condillac',s ,,/atue4 #e4 ,condillac supposes a /atue1 :i* he animates successively ) ea* ( ! s5ses3 !n beg9n+ ) ! s5se ( smell1 he says2 ,s long z our /atue is limit$ to ! s5se ( smell1 its k _c g beyond odors2 x c nei!r h any idea ( ext5sion1 ( space1 or ( any ?+ beyond itself1 nor ( o!r s5sations1 su* z color1 s\nd1 ta/e4#b ,if1 accord+ to ! conditions ( ! supposition1 all activity & e faculty be d5i$ to ?is /atue1 x c]ta9ly c h no o!r idea or s5sation1 & x may be add$ t ev5 its s5sation ( smell w be = x no idea4 #b ,*ap4 ,i4 ,if we pres5t x a rose1 cont9ues ,condillac1 to u x w be a /atue :i* smells a rose2 b = itself x w be only ! smell ( a rose4 ,x w !n be ! smell ( ! rose1 ! p9k1 ! jasm9e1 or ! violet1 accord+ to ! objects :i* op]ate ^u its organ2 9 a ^w1 ) respect to x1 ^! odors are only its own modifications & mann]s ( be+1 & x _c believe itself any ?+ else1 s9ce ^! are ! only s5sations ( :i* x is susceptible4 #f4 ,x is v obvi\s t at ! fir/ /ep1 ! /atue mu/ take a great leap4 ,close ^u ! app>5t simplicity ( ! s5sible ph5om5on1 reflection1 "o ( ^? acts :i* suppose ! intellect already well develop$1 is introduc$4 ,fir/ ! /atue believes itself some?+2 x believes itself ! odor2 next consci\sness ( itself 9 relation to ! impression x has j receiv$1 is attribut$ to x2 !n x is made to =m a k9d ( judgm5t1 :]eby x affirms ! id5tity ( itself ) ! s5sation4 ,?is1 h[ev]1 is impossible1 unless we h some?+ besides b>e s5sation2 b we nei!r h nor c h at ?is /age any ?+ beyond ?is purely passive impression1 an isolat$ ph5om5on1 ^u :i* !re c be no reflection ( any k9d :atev]2 & ! /atue c h no o!r reflection ( itself ?an ?is s5sation1 :i* 9 ! reflective ord] has no title to be s call$4 ,condillac's hypo!sis rigor\sly appli$1 pres5ts only a ph5om5on lead+ to no?+2 & ! mom5t he leaves s5sation to develop x1 he admits an activity 9 ! m9d di/9ct & v diff]5t f s5sation1 :i* de/roys 8 :ole sy/em4 ,! /atue conf9$ to ! s5sation ( smell w nev] believe itself smell2 su* a belief is a judgm5t1 & supposes comp>ison1 no trace ( :i* c be discov]$ 9 ! s5sible ph5om5on1 consid]$ 9 all its purity1 z ,condillac requires 9 8 hypo!sis4 ,he beg9s 8 analytical inve/igations by introduc+ conditions :i* he at ! same "t supposes to be elim9at$4 ,he und]takes to expla9 e ?+ by s5sation alone1 & 8 fir/ /ep is to amalgamate s5sation ) op]ations ( a v diff]5t ord]4 #g4 ,condillac calls ! capacity ( feel+1 :5 appli$ to ! impression receiv$1 att5tion4 ,s if !re be b "o s5sation1 !re c be b "o att5tion4 ,if v>i\s s5sations succe$+ ea* o!r leave "s trace 9 ! memory ( ! /atue1 ! att5tion w1 :5 a new s5sation is pres5t$1 be divid$ betwe5 ! pres5t & ! pa/4 ,! att5tion direct$ at "o & ! same "t to two s5sations becomes comp>ison4 ,simil>ities & diff]5ces are p]ceiv$ by comp>ison1 & ?is p]ception is a judgm5t4 ,all ?is is done ) s5sations alone2 !re=e att5tion1 memory1 comp>ison1 & judgm5t are no?+ b s5sations trans=m$4 ,9 appe>ance no?+ cle>]1 m simple1 or m +5u\s2 9 reality no?+ m confus$ or false4 #h4 ,fir/ ( all1 ?is def9ition ( att5tion is n exact4 ,! capacity ( feel+1 by ! v fact ( be+ 9 ex]cise1 is appli$ to ! impression4 ,x does n feel :5 ! s5sitive faculty is n 9 ex]cise1 & ?is is n 9 ex]cise except :5 appli$ to ! impression4 ,consequ5tly1 att5tion w\ld be no?+ b ! act ( feel+2 all s5sation w\ld be att5tion1 & all att5tion s5sation2 a mean+ :i* no "o ev] yet gave to ^! words4 #i4 ,att5tion is ! application ( ! m9d to some?+2 & ?is application supposes ! ex]cise ( an activity conc5trat$ ^u its object4 ,prop]ly speak+1 :5 ! m9d holds itself entirely passive1 x is n att5tive2 & ) respect to s5sations x is att5tive :5 by a reflex act we "k t we feel4 ,)\t ?is cognition !re c be no att5tion1 b only s5sation m or less active1 accord+ to ! degree 9 :i* x affects our s5sibility4 ,if ,condillac means to call ! m vivid s5sation att5tion1 ! ^w is improp]ly us$2 = x ord9>ily happ5s t !y :o feel ) ! greate/ vividness are precisely ^? :o are di/+ui%$ = _! want ( att5tion4 ,s5sation is ! affection ( a passive faculty2 att5tion is ! ex]cise ( an activity2 & h5ce x is t brutes d n p>ticipate ( x except inasmu* z !y possess a pr9ciple ( activity to direct _! s5sitive faculties to a det]m9ate object4 #aj4 ,is ! p]ception ( ! diff]5ce ( ! smell ( ! rose & t ( ! p9k a s5sation8 ,if we are answ]$ t x is n1 we inf] t ! judgm5t is n ! s5sation trans=m$2 = x is n ev5 a s5sation4 ,if we are told t x is "o s5sation1 we !n obs]ve t if x be ei!r t ( ! rose or t ( ! p9k1 x foll[s t ) "o alone ( ^! s5sations we %all h comp>ative p]ception1 :i* is absurd4 ,if we are answ]$ t x is bo? toge!r1 we mu/ ei!r int]pret ?is expression rigor\sly1 & !n we %all h a s5sation :i* w at once be t ( ! p9k & t ( ! rose1 ! "o rema9+ di/9ct f ! o!r s z to satisfy ! conditions ( comp>ison2 or we mu/ int]pret x s z to mean t ! two s5sations are unit$2 9 :i* case we ga9 no?+1 = ! difficulty w be to %[ h[ co-exi/5ce produces comp>ison1 & judgm5t1 or ! p]ception ( ! diff]5ce4 ,! s5sation ( ! p9k is only t ( ! p9k1 & t ( ! rose only t ( ! rose4 ,! in/ant y attempt to comp>e !m1 y suppose 9 ! m9d an act by :i* x p]ceives ! diff]5ce2 & if y attribute to x any ?+ m ?an pure s5sation1 y add a faculty di/9ct f s5sation1 namely t ( comp>+ s5sations1 & appreciat+ _! simil>ities & diff]5ces4 #aa4 ,?is comp>ison1 ?is intellectual =ce1 :i* calls ! two extremes into a common ar5a1 )\t conf\nd+ !m1 discov]s ! po9ts 9 :i* !y are alike or unlike ea* o!r1 &1 z x 71 comes 9 & decides betwe5 !m1 is di/9ct f ! s5sation2 x is ! effect ( an activity ( a diff]5t ord]1 & its developm5t mu/ dep5d on s5sations z excit+ causes1 z a condition s9e qua non2 b ?is is all x has to d ) s5sations !mselves2 x is ess5tially di/9ct f !m1 & _c be conf\nd$ ) !m )\t de/roy+ ! idea ( comp>ison1 & r5d]+ x impossible4 ,no judgm5t is possible )\t ! ideas ( id5tity or simil>ity1 & ^! ideas are n s5sations4 ,s5sations are p>ticul> facts :i* nev] leave _! own sph]e1 nor c be appli$ f "o ?+ to ano!r4 ,! ideas ( simil>ity & id5tity h some?+ 9 common applicable to _m facts4 #ab4 ,:at next happ5s to a be+ limit$ to ! faculty ( exp]i5c+ v>i\s s5sations8 ,x w receive )\t comp>+ !m4 ,x is c]ta9 t :5 x feels 9 "o mann] x w n feel 9 ano!r1 t "o s5sation is n ano!r2 b ?is s5sitive be+ w take no notice ( ! v>iety4 ,s5sations w succe$ s5sations1 b w n be comp>$ ) ea* o!r4 ,ev5 suppos+ !m to be rememb]$1 ! memory ( !m w be no?+ m ?an a less int5se repetition ( ! same s5sations4 ,if x be admitt$ t ?is s5sitive be+ comp>es !m1 & p]ceives _! relations ( id5tity or di/9ction1 ( simil>ity or diff]5ce1 a s]ies ( reflex acts are admitt$ :i* are n s5sations4 #ac4 ,nor c ! memory1 prop]ly s call$1 ( s5sations1 be expla9$ by !m alone2 & "h aga9 ,condillac is wrong4 ,! /atue may recollect to-day ! s5sation ( ! smell ( ! rose :i* x receiv$ ye/]day1 & ?is recollection may exi/ 9 two ways3 fir/1 by ! int]nal reproduction ( ! s5sation )\t any ext]nal cause1 or relation to "t pa/1 & consequ5tly )\t any relation to ! prior exi/5ce ( a simil> s5sation2 & !n ?is recollection is n = ! /atue a recollection prop]ly s call$1 b only a s5sation m or less vivid3 secondly1 by an int]nal reproduction ) relation to ! exi/5ce ( ! same or ano!r simil> s5sation at a prec$+ "t1 9 :i* recollection ess5tially consi/s2 & "h !re is some?+ m ?an s5sation2 "h are ! ideas ( succession1 "t1 priority1 & id5tity1 or simil>ity1 all di/9ct & sep>able f s5sation4 ,two entirely di/9ct s5sations may be ref]r$ to ! same "t 9 ! memory2 & !n ! "t w be id5tical1 & ! s5sations di/9ct4 ,! s5sation may exi/ )\t any recollection ( ! "t x be=e exi/$1 or ev5 )\t any recollection ( hav+ ev] exi/$2 consequ5tly1 s5sation involves no relation ( "t2 !y are di/9ct & v diff]5t matt]s1 & ,condillac deceives himself :5 he und]takes to expla9 ! memory ( s5sations by m]e s5sations4 #ad4 ,^! reflections utt]ly refute ,condillac's sy/em4 ,ei!r he admits some?+ besides s5sation or he does n2 if he does1 he violates 8 own orig9al supposition2 if he does n1 he _c expla9 any ab/ract idea1 nor ev5 ! s5sitive memory3 he w !re=e be oblig$ to admit ) ,locke reflection ^u s5sations1 & = ! same reason1 o!r faculties ( ! s\l4 #ae4 ,x is easy to compreh5d :y c]ta9 philosoph]s h ma9ta9$ t all our ideas come f ! s5ses1 if we und]/& !m to mean t s5sations awak5 our int]nal activity1 &1 s to speak1 supply ! intellect ) mat]ials3 b x is n s easy to see h[ x c be advanc$ z a c]ta91 cle>1 & exce$+ly simple tru? t !re is 9 our m9d no?+ b ^! mat]ials1 ^! s5sations4 ,we h only to fix our att5tion = a mom5t ^u :at passes )9 u to discov] _m ph5om5a di/9ct f s5sation1 & v>i\s faculties :i* h no?+ to d ) s5sation4 ,if ,condillac _h be5 satisfi$ ) ma9ta9+ t ^! faculties ne$$ s5sation z a k9d ( excitem5t 9 ord] to be develop$1 he w\ld h advanc$ no?+ contr>y to s\nd philosophy3 b = him to pret5d t all t is excit$ & all t is develop$ is only ! pr9ciple :i* excites1 & to insi/ t ?is is confirm$ by actual obs]vation1 is op5ly to contradict obs]vation itself1 & to r5d] x absolutely impossible = him to make ! lea/ progress 9 ! explanation ( intellectual activity1 unless he ab&ons ! supposition ^u :i* 8 :ole sy/em is f\nd$4 ,nev]!less1 ! au?or ( ! ,treatise on ,s5sations seems to be p]fectly satisfi$ ) 8 sy/em3 ! actual impression is ! s5sation2 ! recollection ( ! s5sation is ! intellectual idea4 ,if ?is is n s\nd1 x is at lea/ deceptive3 ) ! appe>ance ( nice obs]vation he /ops at ! surface ( ?+s1 & does n fatigue ! pupil4 ,e ?+ comes f s5sation2 b ?is is because ,condillac makes 8 /atue talk z he pleases1 )\t pay+ ! lea/ att5tion to 8 hypo!sis ( s5sation alone4 #af4 ,?is sy/em1 by reason ( its philosophical meag]ness1 is fatal to all moral ideas4 ,:at becomes ( morality if !re are no ideas1 except s5sations8 ,:at becomes ( duty if e ?+ is r$uc$ to s5sible necessity1 to pleasure or pa98 ,& :at becomes ( ,god1 & ( all man's relations to ,god8 ,,*apt] ,,iii4 ,,diff]5ce ,,betwe5 ,,geometrical ,,ideas ,,& ,,! ,,s5sible ,,repres5tations ,,:i* ,,accompany ,,!m4 #ag4 ,s5sible repres5tations always accompany our intellectual ideas4 ,?is is :y 9 reflect+ ^u ! latt] we are apt to conf\nd !m ) ! =m]4 ,we say1 9 reflect+ ^u !m1 n 9 mak+ use ( !m4 ,we none ( u1 h any tr\ble 9 mak+ use ( ideas accord+ to circum/ances2 ! error lies 9 ! reflex1 n 9 ! direct act4 ,x w be well to be> ?is la/ obs]vation 9 m9d4 #ah4 ,x is next to impossible = ! geometrician to m$itate ^u ! triangle )\t revolv+ 9 8 imag9ation1 ! image ( a triangle z he has se5 x drawn a ?\s& times2 & he w1 = ?is reason1 be dispos$ to believe t ! idea ( ! triangle is no?+ else ?an ?is s5sible repres5tation4 ,7 x ?us1 ,condillac's ass]tion t ! idea is only ! recollection ( ! s5sation w\ld be v]ifi$ 9 ! idea ( ! triangle4 ,9 fact1 ?is repres5tation is ! s5sation repeat$3 ! only diff]5ce betwe5 ! two affections ( ! m9d is t ! actual s5sation is caus$ by ! actual pres5ce ( its object1 :]e=e x is m fix$ & vivid4 ,to prove t ! diff]5ce is n ess5tial1 b consi/s only 9 degree1 x is suffici5t to obs]ve1 t if ! imag9>y repres5tation atta9 a high degree ( vividness we _c di/+ui% x f s5sation1 z x happ5s to ! vision>y1 & z we h all exp]i5c$ 9 our dreams4 #ai4 ,by notic+ ! foll[+ facts1 we %all readily p]ceive h[ diff]5t ! idea ( ! triangle is f its imag9>y repres5tation4 ,i4 ,! idea ( ! triangle is "o1 & is common to all triangles ( e size & k9d2 ! repres5tation ( x is multiple1 & v>ies 9 size & =m4 ,,ii4 ,:5 we reason ^u ! prop]ties ( ! triangle1 we proce$ f a fix$ & necess>y idea2 ! repres5tation *anges at e in/ant1 n s1 h[ev]1 ! unity ( ! idea4 ,,iii4 ,! idea ( a triangle ( any k9d 9 p>ticul> is cle> & evid5t2 we see its prop]ties 9 ! cle>e/ mann]2 ! repres5tation on ! contr>y is vague & confus$1 ?us x is difficult to di/+ui% a "r-angl$ f an acute-angl$ triangle1 or ev5 a slightly incl9$ obtuse-angl$ triangle4 ,! idea corrects ^! errors or r ab/racts !m2 x makes use ( ! imag9>y figure only z an auxili>y1 9 ! same mann] z we give our demon/rations :5 we draw figures ^u pap]1 ab/ract+ _! exactness or inexactness1 (t5 :5 we "k t !y are n exact1 :i* !y _c always be4 ,,iv4 ,! idea ( ! triangle is ! same to ! man born bl9d & to him :o has sight2 & ! pro( ( ?is is t bo?1 9 _! argum5ts & geometrical uses1 develop x 9 precisely ! same mann]4 ,! repres5tation is diff]5t1 = u x is a picture1 :i* x _c be = ! bl9d man4 ,:5 he m$itates ^u ! triangle he nei!r has1 nor c h1 9 8 imag9ation1 ! same s5sible repres5tation z we1 s9ce he wants all t c relate to ! s5sation ( sight4 ,if ! bl9d man exp]i5ces any accompany+ repres5tation ( ! idea1 he c h receiv$ x only f ! s5se ( t\*2 & 9 ! case ( l>ge triangles1 ! ?ree sides ( :i* _c be t\*$ at ! same "t1 ! repres5tation mu/ be a successive s]ies ( s5sations ( t\*1 j z ! recollection ( a piece ( music is ess5tially a successive repres5tation4 ,) u ! repres5tation ( ! triangle is almo/ always simultane\s1 except+ ! case ( exce$+ly l>ge triangles1 mu* l>g] ?an we usually see1 9 :i* case1 especially :5 we are unaccu/om$ to consid] su*1 x seems necess>y to g on ext5d+ ! l9es successively4 #bj4 ,:at has be5 said ( ! triangle1 ! simple/ ( all figures1 may ) /ill great] reason be said ( all o!rs1 _m ( :i* _c be di/9ctly repres5t$ by ! imag9ation1 z we see 9 _m-sid$ figures2 & ev5 ! circle1 :i* = facility ( repres5tation rivals ! triangle1 we _c s p]fectly imag9e z to di/+ui% x f an ellipse ^: foci are only at a trifl+ di/ance f ea* o!r4 ,,*apt] ,,iv4 ,,! ,,idea ,,& ,,! ,,intellectual ,,act4 #ba4 ,hav+ %[n t geometrical ideas are n s5sible repres5tations1 we c safely conclude t no k9d ( ideas are4 ,c\ld !re be a difficulty conc]n+ any1 x w\ld be conc]n+ geometrical ideas1 = ! objects ( ! latt] c be s5sibly repres5t$4 ,:5 objects h no figure1 !y _c be p]ceiv$ by any ( ! s5ses2 to speak 9 su* a case ( s5sible repres5tations is to fall into a contradiction4 #bb4 ,^! consid]ations draw a divid+ l9e betwe5 ! intellect & ! imag9ation2 a l9e :i* all ! s*ola/ics drew1 :i* ,desc>tes & ,malebran*e respect$ & made /ill m prom95t1 b :i* ,locke began to efface1 & ,condillac entirely oblit]at$4 ,all ! s*ola/ics recogniz$ ?is l9e2 b !y1 l _m o!rs1 us$ a language :i*1 unless well und]/ood1 0 ( a "* to obscure x4 ,!y call$ e idea an image ( ! object1 & expla9$ ! act ( ! und]/&+ z if !re 7 a k9d ( =m 9 ! und]/&+ :i* express$ ! object1 j z a picture pres5t$ to ! eyes (f]s !m ! image ( ! ?+ pictur$4 ,?is language arose f ! cont9ual comp>ison :i* is v naturally made betwe5 see+ & und]/&+4 ,:5 objects are n pres5t we make use ( _! pictures1 & ?us1 s9ce objects !mselves _c be pres5t to our und]/&+1 we conceive an int]ior =m :i* p]=ms ! "p ( a picture4 ,on ! o!r h&1 s5sible ?+s are ! only ones :i* are /rictly susceptible ( repres5tation2 we nev] discov] )9 ourselves ! =m 9 :i* ! objects are portray$1 except 9 ! case ( imag9>y repres5tations2 & !re=e x 0 ra% to call ?is an idea1 & e idea an imag9>y repres5tation1 9 :i* ! :ole sy/em ( ,condillac consi/s4 #bc4 ,/4 ,?omas calls ! repres5tations ( ! imag9ation phantasmata1 & says t s long z ! s\l is unit$ to ! body we _c und]/& except p] conv]sionem ad phantasmata2 t is1 unless ! repres5tation ( ! imag9ation1 :i* s]ves z mat]ial = ! =mation ( ! idea1 & assi/s 9 cle>+ x up1 & height5+ its colors1 prec$es & accompanies ! intellectual act4 ,exp]i5ce tea*es t :5ev] we und]/&1 c]ta9 s5sible =ms relative to ! object :i* occupies u1 exi/ 9 our imag9ation4 ,n[1 !y are ! images ( ! figure & color ( ! object1 if x h any2 n[1 ! images ( ^? ) :i* !y are comp>$1 or ! words :i* d5ote !m 9 ! language we habitually speak4 ,?us1 ev5 :5 ?9k+ ( ,god1 ! v act by :i* we affirm t he is mo/ pure _s1 (f]s a k9d ( repres5tation to ! imag9ation "u a s5sible =m4 ,:5 we speak ( et]nity1 we see ! ,anci5t ( days1 z we h (t5 se5 him repres5t$ 9 our *ur*es2 :5 we speak ( ! inf9ite intellig5ce1 we imag9e p]haps a sea ( light2 inf9ite m]cy1 we picture to ourselves z a pity+ lik5ess2 ju/ice1 ) angry c\nt5ance4 ,to =ce ourselves to =m "s conception ( ! creation1 we fancy a spr+ :5ce light & life bo? fl[1 & ?us also we endeavor to r5d] imm5sity s5sible by imag9+ unlimit$ ext5sion4 ,! imag9ation always accompanies ! idea1 b is n itself ! idea2 & we p]ceive ! evid5t & unimpea*able pro( ( ! di/9ction betwe5 ! two1 if we ask ourselves1 :ile 9 ! v act ( imag9+ a sea ( light1 an old man1 an angry or placid c\nt5ance1 a f\nta9 or ext5sion1 if ,god is any "o ( ^!1 or any ?+ resembl+ !m2 =1 we v promptly answ]1 no1 t ?is w\ld be impossible4 ,all ?is demon/rates ! exi/5ce ( an idea :i* has no connection ) ^! repres5tations1 b ess5tially excludes :at is conta9$ 9 !m4 #bd4 ,:at we h said ( ! idea ( ,god1 may be said ( _m o!r ideas4 ,r>ely d we und]/& any ?+ into :i* ! idea ( relation does n ent] z an indisp5sable elem5t4 ,h[ !n is relation repres5t$8 ,9 ! imag9ation1 9 a ?\s& diff]5t mann]s2 z ! po9t ( contact ( two objects2 z ! l9k :i* unites !m4 ,b is relation any "o ( ^!8 ,no6 ,:5 we inquire 9 :at x does consi/1 is !re ! slighte/ %ad[ ( d\bt t x is no "o ( ^!8 ,c]ta9ly n4 #be4 ,x is an error to call e idea an image1 if y mean to consid] ideas z some?+ di/9ct f ! intellectual act1 :i* places itself be=e ! und]/&+ :5 x is 9 ! ex]cise ( its functions4 ,an image is t :i* repres5ts1 z a lik5ess3 & h[1 ,i ask1 d we "k t ?is repres5tation or lik5ess exi/s8 ,& h[ d we "k t 9 ord] to reason we ne$ an int]nal =m1 :i* is1 z x 71 a picture ( ! object8 ,:at is a picture beyond ! s5sible ord]8 ,!re are1 x is true1 simil>ities 9 ! intellectual ord]1 b n 9 ! s5se 9 :i* we p]ceive !m 9 ! mat]ial ord]4 ,i ?9k2 s does my neighbor3 "h is a simil>ity1 s9ce ! same ?+ is f\nd 9 bo? "o & ! o!r1 id5tical 9 species1 b n 9 numb]4 ,b ?is simil>ity is ( a diff]5t ord] f t ( s5sible simil>ities4 #bf4 ,:5 we und]/&1 we "k t :i* is 9 ! object und]/ood2 b :e!r ?is be und]/ood by a simple act ( ! intellect1 or a m$ium be requir$ to repres5t ! simil>ity1 we d n "k4 ,we und]/& ! ?+1 n ! idea2 & x is z difficult to say h[ ! intellect p]ceives )\t ! idea1 z x is to say h[ ! suppos$ repres5tation ref]s to its object4 ,h[ does our idea ref] to an object8 ,if by itself1 !n by itself alone1 s9ce x is purely int]nal1 x ref]s to ! ext]nal1 & requires no int]m$i>y to place ! subject 9 relation ) ext]nal objects4 ,:at x does1 ! intellectual act ( itself alone c also d4 ,if we p]ceive ! relation ( ! idea ) ! object by means ( ano!r idea1 ?is int]m$iate idea pres5ts ! same difficulty z ! prec$+ idea2 & s at la/ we mu/ come to a case 9 :i* !re is a transition f ! intellect to ! object )\t any int]m$i>y4 ,if we see an object :i* is ! image ( ano!r n kn[n1 we %all see ! object 9 itself1 b we %all n "k t x has ! relation ( image1 unless in=m$ t x has3 we %all "k its reality1 b n its repres5tation4 ,! same w happ5 9 ideas :i* are images2 ^!1 !re=e1 d n at all expla9 h[ ! transition f ! int]nal act to ! object is made2 = ?is w\ld require !m to d = ! und]/&+ t :i* we f9d !m unable to d = !mselves4 #bg4 ,!re is some?+ my/]i\s 9 ! intellectual act1 :i* m5 seek to expla9 9 a ?\s& diff]5t ways1 by r5d]+ s5sible :at !y inw>dly exp]i5ce4 ,h5ce s _m metaphorical expressions1 useful only s long z !y s]ve m]ely to call & fix ! att5tion1 & give an acc\nt ( ! ph5om5on1 b hurtful to sci5ce if !y g beyond ^! limits1 if x be =gott5 t !y are metaphors1 & are nev] to be conf\nd$ ) ! reality4 ,by intellig5ce we see :at !re is 9 ?+s1 we exp]i5ce ! act ( p]ception2 b :5 we reflect ^u x we grope 9 ! d>k1 z if !re 7 a d5se cl\d ab\t ! v s\rce ( light1 prev5t+ u f see+ x ) cle>ness4 ,?us ! firmam5t is at times flood$ ) ! light ( ! sun1 al?\gh ! sun is encircl$ ) cl\ds & hidd5 f our view1 s t we _c ev5 det]m9e its position ^u ! horizon4 #bh4 ,"o cause ( obscurity 9 ?is matt] is ! v ef=t to cle> x up4 ,! act ( ! und]/&+ is1 9 its objective "p1 exce$+ly lum9\s1 s9ce by x we see :at !re is 9 objects2 b 9 its subjective nature1 or 9 itself1 x is an int]nal fact1 simple inde$1 b incapable ( be+ expla9$ by words4 ,?is is n a peculi>ity ( ! intellectual act1 x is common to all int]nal ph5om5a4 ,:at is x to see1 to ta/e1 to he>8 ,:at is a s5sation1 or feel+ ( any k9d :atsoev]8 ,x is an inw>d ph5om5on1 ( :i* we are consci\s1 b :i* we _c decompose into p>ts2 nor c we expla9 ) words ! comb9ation ( ^! p>ts4 ,a ^w is en\gh to indicate ! ph5om5on1 b ?is ^w has no mean+ = him :o does n n[ exp]i5ce ?is ph5om5on1 or has n oat "s =m] "t exp]i5c$ x4 ,no possible explanations w\ld ev] enable a man born bl9d to und]/& color1 or a deaf man s\nd4 ,! act ( und]/&+ belongs to ?is class2 x is a simple fact :i* we c po9t out1 b n expla94 ,an explanation supposes v>i\s notions1 ! comb9ation ( :i* may be express$ by language2 9 ! intellectual act !re are none ( ^!4 ,:5 we h said1 ,i ?9k1 or1 ,i und]/&1 we h said all4 ,?is simplicity is n de/roy$ by objective multiplicity2 ! act by :i* we comp>e two or m objects is j z simple z ! act by :i* we p]ceive a s+le object4 ,if "o act be n en\gh1 m w foll[2 & f9ally "o act w unite or sum !m all up2 b x w n be a composite act4 ,,*apt] ,v4 ,,comp>ison ,,( ,,geometrical ,,) ,,non-,,geometrical ,,ideas4 #bi4 ,! idea is a v diff]5t ?+ f ! s5sible repres5tation1 b x has c]ta9 necess>y relations ) x :i* x w be well to exam9e4 ,:5 we say necess>y1 we speak only ( ! mann] 9 :i* our m9d1 9 its actual /ate1 und]/&s1 ab/ract+ ! intellig5ce ( o!r spirits1 & ev5 t ( ! human m9d :5 subject to o!r conditions ?an ^? impos$ by its pres5t union ) ! body4 ,s soon z we quit ! sph]e 9 :i* our exp]i5ce op]ates1 we mu/ be v cauti\s h[ we lay d[n g5]al propositions1 & take c>e n to ext5d to all intellig5ces qualities :i* are possibly peculi> to our own1 & :i*1 ev5 ) respect to x1 w p]haps be entirely *ang$ 9 ano!r life4 ,hav+ made ^! previ\s obs]vations1 :i* w be f\nd ( great utility to m>k ! limits ( ?+s !re is dang] ( conf\nd+1 we n[ proce$ to exam9e ! relations ( our ideas ) s5sible repres5tations4 #cj4 ,a classification ( our ideas into geometrical & non-geometrical naturally occurs :5 we fix our att5tion ^u ! diff]5ce ( objects to :i* our ideas may ref]4 ,! =m] embrace ! :ole s5sible _w s f> z x c be p]ceiv$ 9 ! repres5tation ( space2 ! latt] include e k9d ( be+1 :e!r s5sible or n1 & suppose a primitive elem5t :i* is ! repres5tation ( ext5sion4 ,9 _! divisions & subdivisions ! latt] pres5t simply ! idea ( ext5sion1 limit$ & comb9$ 9 diff]5t ways2 b !y (f] no?+ 9 relation to ! repres5tation ( space1 & ev5 :5 !y ref] to x1 !y only consid] x inasmu* z numb]$ by ! v>i\s p>ts into :i* x may be divid$4 ,h5ce ! l9e :i* 9 ma!matics sep>ates geometry f univ]sal ari?metic2 ! =m] is f\nd$ ^u ! idea ( ext5sion1 :]eas ! latt] consid]s only numb]s1 :e!r det]m9ate1 z 9 ari?metic prop]ly s call$1 or indet]m9ate1 z 9 algebra4 #ca4 ,"h we h to note ! sup]iority ( non-geometrical to geometrical ideas1--a sup]iority pla9ly visible 9 ! two bran*es ( ma!matics1 univ]sal ari?metic & geometry4 ,ari?metic nev] requires ! aid ( geometry1 b geometry at e /ep ne$s t ( ari?metic4 ,ari?metic & algebra may bo? be /udi$ f _! simple/ elem5t>y notions to _! highe/ complications )\t ev] once involv+ ! idea ( ext5sion1 & consequ5tly )\t mak+ use ( "o s+le geometrical idea4 ,ev5 inf9itesimal calculus1 9 a mann] orig9at+ 9 geometrical consid]ations1 has be5 emancipat$ f !m & =m$ into a sci5ce p]fectly indep5d5t ( ! idea ( ext5sion4 ,on ! contr>y1 geometry _c take a s+le /ep )\t ! aid ( ari?metic4 ,! comp>ison ( angles is a fundam5tal po9t 9 ! sci5ce ( geometry1 b x _c be made except by measur+ !m2 & _! measure is an arc ( ! circumf]5ce divid$ into a c]ta9 numb] ( degrees1 :i* mu/ be c\nt$2 & ?us we come to ! idea ( numb]1 ! op]ation ( c\nt+1 t is1 into ! field ( ari?metic4 ,! v pro( by sup]position1 not)/&+ its em95tly geometrical "*1 /&s 9 ne$ ( num]ation1 inasmu* z ! sup]position is repeat$4 ,we d n require ! idea ( numb] to demon/rate by means ( sup]position ! equality ( two arcs p]fectly equal2 b 9 ord] to appreciate ! relation ( _! quantity we comp>e two unequal arcs & foll[ ! me?od ( plac+ ! less ^u ! great] sev]al times1 we c\nt1 we make use ( ! idea ( numb]1 & f9d we h ent]$ ^u ! gr\nd ( ari?metic4 ,we discov] ! equality ( two radii ( a circle1 :5 we comp>e !m by sup]position1 ab/ract+ ! idea ( numb]2 b if we w\ld "k ! relation ( ! diamet] to ! radii1 we employ ! idea ( two2 we say ! diamet] is twice ! radius1 & aga9 ent] ! doma9s ( ari?metic4 ,z we proce$ 9 ! comb9ation ( geometrical ideas1 we make use ( m & m ari?metical ideas4 ,?us ! idea ( ! numb] ?ree necess>ily ent]s into ! triangle2 & ! sum ( ?ree & ! sum ( two bo? ent] into "o ( its mo/ ess5tial prop]ties2 ! sum ( ! ?ree angles ( a triangle is equal to two "r angles4 #cb4 ,! idea ( numb] _c be replac$ by ! s5sible intuition ( ! figure ^: prop]ties & relations are "u discussion4 ,9 _m cases ?is intuition is impossible1 z1 = example1 9 _m-sid$ figures4 ,we h little difficulty 9 repres5t+ to our imag9ation a triangle1 or ev5 a quadrilat]al figure1 b ! difficulty is great] 9 ! case ( ! p5tagon1 & great] /ill 9 ! hexagon & heptagon2 & :5 ! figure atta9s a great numb] ( sides1 "o aft] ano!r escapes ! s5sible intuition1 until x becomes utt]ly impossible to appreciate x by m]e intuition4 ,:o c di/9ctly imag9e a ?\s&-sid$ figure8 #cc4 ,?is sup]iority ( non-geometrical ov] geometrical ideas is v rem>kable1 s9ce x %[s t ! sph]e ( intellectual activity exp&s 9 proportion z x rises above s5sible intuition4 ,ext5sion1 z we h be=e se51#c s]ves z ! basis n only ( geometry1 b also ( ! natural sci5ces1 inasmu* z x repres5ts 9 a s5sible mann] ! int5sity ( c]ta9 ph5om5a2 b x c by no means enable u to p5etrate _! inmo/ nature1 & guide u f t :i* appe>s to t :i* is4 ,?is & o!r subord9ate ideas are1 s to speak1 in]t1 & f !m spr+s no vital pr9ciple to fecundate our und]/&+1 & /ill less ! reality2 !y are an unfa?omable dep? 9 :i* our intellectual activity may toil1 p]fectly c]ta9 ( nev] f9d+ any ?+ 9 x :i* we ourselves h n plac$ !re2 !y are a lifeless object :i* l5ds itself to all imag9able comb9ations )\t ev] be+ capable ( produc+ any ?+1 or ( conta9+ any ?+ n giv5 to x4 ,! naturali/s 9 consid]+ in]tness z a prop]ty ( matt]1 h p]haps reg>d$ m ?an !y are aw>e ! idea ( ext5sion1 :i* pres5ts ! in]tness mo/ completely4 #c ,book ,,iii4 #cd4 ,! ideas ( numb]1 cause1 & sub/ance ab\nd 9 results1 & are applicable to all bran*es ( sci5ce4 ,we c sc>cely speak )\t express+ !m2 x might almo/ be said t !y are con/itu5t elem5ts ( intellig5ce1 s9ce )\t !m x vani%es l a pass+ illusion4 ,!y ext5d to e ?+1 apply to e ?+1 & are necess>y1 :5ev] objects are (f]$ to ! intellectual activity1 9 ord] t ! intellect c p]ceive & comb9e !m4 ,x makes no diff]5ce :e!r ! objects be s5sible or ins5sible1 :e!r !re be "q ( our intellig5ce or ( o!rs subject to diff]5t laws2 :5ev] we conceive ! act ( und]/&+ we conceive also ^! primitive ideas z elem5ts indisp5sable to ! realization ( ! intellectual act4 ,!y exi/ & are comb9$ indep5d5tly ( ! exi/5ce1 & ev5 ( ! possibility1 ( ! s5sible _w2 & !y w\ld also exi/ 9 a _w ( pure intellig5ces1 ev5 if ! s5sible univ]se 7 no?+ b an illusion or an absurd *im]a4 ,on ! o!r h&1 take geometrical ideas & remove !m f ! s5sible sph]e2 & all t y base ^u !m w be only unmean+ words4 ,! ideas ( sub/ance1 cause1 & relation d n fl[ f geometrical ideas2 if we reg>d !m alone1 we see an imm5se field ext5d+ into regions ( unb\nd$ space2 b ! coldness & sil5ce ( dea? reign !re4 ,if we w\ld introduce be+s1 life1 & motion into ?is field we mu/ seek !m else:]e2 we mu/ use o!r ideas1 & comb9e !m1 s t life1 activity1 & motion may result f _! comb9ation1 9 ord] t geometrical ideas may conta9 some?+ besides ?is in]t1 immovable1 & vacant mass1 su* z we imag9e ! regions ( space to be beyond ! conf9es ( ! _w4 #ce4 ,geometrical ideas1 prop]ly s call$1 z di/+ui%$ f s5sible repres5tations1 are n simple ideas1 s9ce !y necess>ily involve ! ideas ( relation & numb]4 ,geometry _c advance "o /ep )\t comp>+ !m2 & ?is comp>ison almo/ always takes place by ! int]v5tion ( ! idea ( numb]4 ,h5ce x is t geometrical ideas1 app>5tly s unlike purely ari?metical ideas1 are really id5tical ) !m s f> z _! =m or purely ideal "* is conc]n$2 & are only di/+ui%able f !m :5 !y ref] to a det]m9ate matt]1 su* z ext5sion z pres5t$ 9 its s5sible repres5tation4 ,! inf]iority !re=e ( geometrical ideas already m5tion$1 only ref]s to _! matt]1 or to _! s5sible repres5tations1 :i* are presuppos$ to be an indisp5sable elem5t4 #cf4 ,ano!r consequ5ce ( ?is doctr9e1 is ! unity ( ! pure und]/&+1 & its di/9ction f ! s5sitive faculties4 ,=1 ! v fact t ! same ideas apply alike to s5sible & to ins5sible objects1 ) no o!r diff]5ce ?an t aris+ f ! div]sity ( ! matt] p]ceiv$1 proves t above ! s5sitive faculties !re is ano!r faculty ) an activity ( its own1 & elem5ts di/9ct f s5sible repres5tations4 ,?is is ! c5tre :]e all intellectual p]ceptions unite1 & :]e t intr9sic =ce resides1 :i*1 al?\gh excit$ by s5sible repres5tations1 develops itself by its own p[]1 makes itself ma/] ( ^! impressions1 & conv]ts !m1 s to speak1 by a my/]i\s assimilation1 into its own sub/ance4 #cg4 ,"h we repeat :at we h already rem>k$1 conc]n+ ! pr(\nd ideological mean+ involv$ 9 ! act+ intellect ( ! ,ari/otelians1 s ridicul$ because n und]/ood4 ,b we leave ?is po9t & proce$ to ! c>eful analysis ( geometrical ideas1 to discov]1 if possible1 a glimpse ( "s ray ( light amid ! pr(\nd d>kness :i* envelops ! nature & orig9 ( our ideas4 ,,*apt] ,,vi4 ,,9 ,,:at ,,! ,,geometrical ,,idea ,,consi/s2 ,,& ,,:at ,,are ,,its ,,relations ,,) ,,s5sible ,,intuition4 #ch4 ,9 ! prec$+ *apt]s we h di/+ui%$ betwe5 pure ideas & s5sible repres5tations1 & we seem to h suffici5tly demon/rat$ ! diff]5ce betwe5 !m1 al?\gh we limit$ ourselves to ! geometrical ord]4 ,b we h n expla9$ ! idea 9 itself2 we h said :at x is n1 b n :at x is2 & al?\gh we h %[n ! impossibility ( expla9+ simple ideas1 & ! necessity ( our be+ satisfi$ ) indicat+ !m1 we d n wi% to be conf9$ to ?is obs]vation1 :i* may seem to elude ! difficulty r ?an to solve x4 ,only aft] due inve/igations1 by :i* we %all be bett] able to und]/& :at is meant by designate1 w x be all[able to conf9e ourselves to _! designation1 = x w !n be se5 t we h n elud$ ! difficulty4 ,let u beg9 ) geometrical ideas4 #ci4 ,is a geometrical idea1 )\t any accompany+ or prec$+ s5sible repres5tation1 possible8 ,x w\ld seem t we c h none4 ,:at mean+ has ! idea ( ! triangle if n ref]r$ to l9es =m+ angles & enclos+ a space8 ,& :at d l9es1 angles1 & space mean1 )\t s5sible intuition8 ,a l9e is a s]ies ( po9ts1 b x repres5ts no?+ det]m9ate1 no?+ susceptible ( geometrical comb9ations1 except x be ref]r$ to t s5sible intuition 9 :i* ! po9t appe>s to u z an elem5t g5]at+ by its movem5t t cont9uity :i* we call a l9e4 ,:at w\ld become ( angles )\t ! real or possible repres5tation ( ^! l9es8 ,:at w\ld become ( ! area ( ! triangle 7 we to ab/ract a space1 a surface :i* is or may be repres5t$8 ,we might *all5ge all ! ideologi/s 9 ! _w to assign any s5se to ! words us$ 9 geometry if absolute ab/raction be made all s5sible repres5tation4 #dj4 ,geometrical ideas1 su* z we conceive !m1 h a necess>y relation to s5sible intuition4 ,9 ord] ! bett] to und]/& ?is relation1 let u def9e ! triangle to be ! figure enclos$ by ?ree "r l9es4 ,?is def9ition involves ! foll[+ ideas3 space1 enclos$1 ?ree1 l9es4 ,) a space & ?ree l9es :i* d n enclose ! figure1 we h no triangle2 ! ^w enclos$ _c !re=e be omitt$4 ,if y enclose a space1 b ) m ?an ?ree l9es1 ! result w n be a triangle2 & if y take less ?an ?ree l9es y c h no enclosure4 ,! idea ( ?ree is !re=e necess>y to ! idea ( ! triangle4 ,x is useless to add t ! idea ( l9e is z necess>y z ! o!rs1 s9ce )\t x no triangle c be conceiv$4 ,diff]5t & di/9ct ideas1 x is true1 are "h comb9$1 b !y are all ref]r$ to "o s5sible intuition1 al?\gh 9 an indet]m9ate mann]4 ,we "h ab/ract ! longness or %ortness ( ! l9es & _! =m+ l>g] or small] angles4 ,b we _c ?us ab/ract 9 ! case ( det]m9ate intuitions2 = e det]m9ate intuition has its own peculi> qualities2 o!rwise x w\ld n be a det]m9ate repres5tation1 & consequ5tly n s5sible z x is suppos$ to be4 ,b al?\gh ! ref]5ce be to an indet]m9ate intuition1 x always supposes "s intuition ei!r actual or possible1 s9ce o!rwise ! mat]ial ( comb9ation w\ld be want+ to ! und]/&+2 & ! f\r ideas involv$ 9 ! triangle w\ld be empty & unmean+ =ms1 & _! comb9ation extravagant if n absurd4 #da4 ,! idea !n ( ! triangle seems to be simply ! intellectual p]ception ( ! relation betwe5 ! l9es pres5t$ to ! s5sible intuition1 consid]$ 9 all its g5]ality1 )\t any det]m9+ circum/ance limit+ x to p>ticul> cases or species4 ,?is explanation admits no?+ int]m$iate betwe5 ! s5sible repres5tation & ! intellectual act1 :i*1 ex]cis+ its activity ^u ! mat]ials pres5t$ by s5sible intuition1 p]ceives _! relations1 & ?is pure & simple p]ception con/itutes ! idea4 #db4 ,we %all und]/& ?is bett] if1 in/ead ( ! triangle1 we take a _m-sid$ figure1 su* z a polygon ( a million sides1 :i* _c be cle>ly pres5t$ to ! s5sible intuition4 ,! idea ( ?is figure is z simple z t ( ! triangle2 we p]ceive x by an intellectual act1 express x by a s+le ^w1 & c calculate its prop]ties & relations ) ! same exactness & c]ta9ty z we c ^? ( ! triangle1 al?\gh x is absolutely impossible to repres5t x di/9ctly to our imag9ation4 ,:5 we reflect ^u :at x (f]s to ! intellectual act1 we notice ! same elem5ts z 9 ! idea ( ! triangle1 ) ?is s+le diff]5ce t ! numb] ?ree is *ang$ into million4 ,we c h no s5sible repres5tation ( all ^! l9es2 b ! und]/&+ has suffici5tly comb9$ ! idea ( l9e ) t ( numb] to p]ceive its object1 a million4 ,"h1 !n1 we p]ceive ! same elem5ts z 9 ! triangle2 b x is ^u ^! elem5ts1 consid]$ 9 g5]al )\t any o!r det]m9ation ?an results f ! fix$ numb]1 t ! p]ceptive act op]ates4 #dc4 ,! idea ( a polygon 9 g5]al1 ab/ract+ ! numb] ( its sides1 (f]s 9 its s5sible repres5tation1 no?+ det]m9ate to ! m9d1 no?+ b ! ab/ract idea ( a "r l9e1 ! g5]al idea ( an enclos$ space4 ,! relation :i* ^! objects ( ! intellectual1 act ev5 9 ! mid/ ( _! indet]m9at5ess1 h among/ !mselves1 is p]ceiv$ by ! intellectual act4 ,?is p]ceptive act is ! idea4 ,e ?+ beyond ?is is useless1 & n only useless b affirm$ )\t reason4 #dd4 ,x w p]haps be ask$ h[ ! und]/&+ c p]ceive :at passes )\t x1 s9ce s5sible intuition is a function ( a faculty di/9ct f ! und]/&+8 ,9 reply1 we %all ab/ract ! que/ions discuss$ 9 ! s*ools conc]n+ ! p[]s ( ! m9d1 & be cont5t to rem>k t :e!r ^! be really di/9ct among !mselves1 or only "o p[] ex]cis+ its activity ^u diff]5t objects & 9 diff]5t mann]s1 x w be alike necess>y to admit a consci\sness common to all ! faculties4 ,! s\l :i* feels1 ?9ks1 recollects1 desires1 is "o & ! same1 & is alike consci\s ( all ^! acts4 ,:atev] be ! nature ( ! faculties by :i* %e p]=ms ^! acts1 %e x is t p]=ms !m & kn[s t %e p]=ms !m4 ,!re is !n 9 ! s\l a s+le consci\sness1 ! common c5tre :]e dwells ! inw>d s5se ( e activity ex]cis$1 & ( e affection receiv$1 to :atev] ord] !y may belong4 ,h[ev]1 suppos+ ! case ! mo/ unfavorable to our !ory1 t ! faculty to :i* s5sible intuition corresponds1 is really di/9ct f ! faculty :i* p]ceives ! relations ( ! objects (f]$ by s5sible intuition2 does x !re=e foll[ t ! und]/&+ _c )\t some?+ int]m$iate ex]cise its activity ^u objects pres5t$ by ?is intuition8 ,c]ta9ly n4 ,! act ( pure und]/&+ & t ( s5sible intuition1 are inde$ diff]5t1 b !y meet 9 consci\sness1 z 9 a common field2 & !re !y come 9 contact1 ! "o ex]cis+ its p]ceptive activity ^u ! mat]ial suppli$ by ! o!r4 ,,*apt] ,,vii4 ,,! ,,act+ ,,intellect ,,( ,,! ,,ari/otelians4 #de4 ,i %all n[ briefly expla9 ! s*ola/ic !ory ( ! mann] 9 :i* ! und]/&+ kn[s mat]ial ?+s4 ,?is explanation w %[ h[ mu* reason we _h to ass]t t ?is doctr9e ( ! s*ools c be ridicul$ only :5 n und]/ood1 & t1 :atev] its f\ndation1 x _c be d5i$ to possess an ideological importance4 #df4 ,! s*oolm5 began ) ?is pr9ciple ( ,ari/otle1 nihil e/ 9 intellectu quod prius non fu]it 9 s5su2 ,!re is no?+ 9 ! und]/&+ :i* has n previ\sly be5 9 ! s5ses4 ,con=mably to ?is pr9ciple !y ma9ta9$ t be=e ! s\l receiv$ impressions f ! s5ses1 ! und]/&+ 0 l a clean table ^u :i* no?+ _h be5 writt53 sicut tabula rasa 9 qua nihil e/ scriptum4 ,accord+ to ?is doctr9e all our k fl[s f ! s5ses2 & at fir/ sight ! sy/em ( ! s*ools might seem to be v simil> to1 if n id5tical )1 t ( ,condillac4 ,bo? seek ! orig9 ( our cognitions 9 s5sation2 bo? tea* t !re is no idea 9 our und]/&+ prior to s5sation4 ,b ! two sy/ems are1 not)/&+ ^! app>5t simil>ities1 v diff]5t1 & ev5 diametrically oppos$4 #dg4 ,! fundam5tal pr9ciple ( ,condillac's !ory is1 t s5sation is ! sole op]ation ( ! m9d2 & t :atev] exi/s 9 our m9d is no?+ m ?an ! s5sation trans=m$ 9 v>i\s ways4 ,prior to s5sible impressions1 ?is philosoph] admits no faculty2 ! developm5t ( s5sation is all t fecundates ! s\l1 n by excit+ its faculties1 b by g5]at+ !m4 ,! s*ool ( ! ,ari/otelians took1 inde$1 s5sations = ! />t+-po9t1 b did n consid] !m z produc+ intellig5ce2 on ! contr>y1 !y 7 v c>eful to m>k ! limits ( ! s5sitive faculties1 & ( ! und]/&+ 9 :i* !y recogniz$ a peculi> & innate activity altoge!r sup]ior to ! faculties ( ! s5sible ord]4 ,we h only to op5 any "o ( ! innum]able works ( ?is s*ool1 to meet on e page su* words z intellectual =ce1 light ( reason1 p>ticipation 9 ! div9e light1 & o!rs 9 ! same /yle1 9 :i* a prim>y activity ( our m9d1 n communicat$ by s5sations1 b prior to !m all1 is expressly recogniz$4 ,! act+ intellect1 intellectus ag5s1 :i* figures s mu* 9 ?is ideological sy/em1 0 a /&+ condemnation ( ! sy/em ( trans=m$ s5sation advocat$ by ,condillac4 #dh4 ,! ,ari/otelians1 gov]n$ by _! favorite idea ( expla9+ e ?+ by matt] & =m1 modifi$ ! mean+ ( ^! words accord+ to ! exig5cies ( ! objects to :i* !y appli$ !m1 & consid]$ ! faculties ( ! s\l z a class ( =ces incapable ( act+ unless unit$ to a =m :i* br\ght !m into action4 ,?us !y expla9$ s5sations by species1 or =ms1 :i* plac$ ! s5sitive p[] 9 act4 ,! imag9ation 0 a =ce :i*1 al?\gh x sometimes rose above ! ext]nal s5ses1 conta9$ no?+ b species ( ! s5sible ord]1 subject also to ! necess>y conditions ( ?is faculty4 ,^! species 7 ! =ms :i* plac$ ! imag9ative =ce 9 act1 & )\t :i* x c\ld n ex]cise its functions4 ,! ,ari/otelians1 aft] hav+ ?us expla9$ ! ph5om5a ( ! ext]nal s5ses1 & ( ! imag9ation1 und]took to expla9 ^? ( ! intellectual ord]2 & 9 ?is !y display$ _! g5ius by inv5t+ an auxili>y :i* !y nam$ ! act+ intellect4 ,! necessity ( mak+ two pr9ciples 9 seem+ contradiction accord1 0 ! reason ( ?is inv5tion4 ,on ! "o h& ! ,ari/otelians held t our cognitions all fl[$ f ! s5ses2 & on ! o!r !y ass]t$ t !re 0 an ess5tial & intr9sic diff]5ce betwe5 feel+ & und]/&+4 ,hav+ drawn ?is divid+ l9e1 ! s5sitive & intellectual ord]s 7 sep>at$2 b z x 0 on ! o!r side requisite to e/abli% "s communication betwe5 ^! two ord]s1 x 0 necess>y = !m1 if !y wi%$ to save ! pr9ciple1 t all our ideas come f ! s5ses1 to discov] "s po9t :]e ! two *annels might unite4 ,! cognition ( mat]ial ?+s c\ld n be d5i$ to ! pure und]/&+2 b z ?is 0 n an innate cognition & c\ld n be acquir$ by x1 !y 7 "u ! necessity ( e/abli%+ "s communication by means ( :i* ! und]/&+ might compreh5d objects )\t soil+ its purity by s5sible species4 ,! imag9ation conta9$ !m1 already purifi$ f ! grossness ( ! ext]nal s5ses2 9 x !y exi/$ m a]ial1 pur]1 & less remote f immat]iality2 b !y 7 /ill at an imm5se di/ance f ! intellectual ord]1 & _h !mselves to support ! burd5 ( ^? mat]ial conditions :i* nev] all[$ !m to atta9 ! altitude necess>y to be put 9 communication ) ! pure und]/&+4 ,9 ord] to "k1 ! und]/&+ requires =ms to unite !mselves to x intimately2 & al?\gh x be true t x disc]n$ !m f> d[n 9 ! l[] regions ( ! s5sitive faculties1 yet x c\ld desc5d to !m )\t compromis+ its dignity1 & d5y+ its own nature4 ,9 ?is conflict !y requir$ a m$iator2 x 0 ! act+ intellect4 ,we w n[ proce$ to expla9 ! attributes ( ?is faculty4 #di4 ,! s5sible species conta9$ 9 ! imag9ation1 ! true picture ( ! ext]nal _w1 7 n ( !mselves intelligible1 because envelop$1 n ) matt] prop]ly s call$1 b ) mat]ial =ms1 to :i* ! intellectual act c\ld only indirectly ref]4 ,if !y c\ld h discov]$ a faculty capable ( r5d]+ intelligible :at is n intelligible1 ?is difficult problem w\ld h be5 satisfactorily solv$2 z 9 ?is case ! my/]i\s trans=m] by apply+ its activity to ! s5sible species1 w\ld elevate !m f ! category ( imag9>y species1 phantasmata1 to t ( pure ideas or s5sible species1 & ?us make !m s]ve ! intellectual act4 ,?is faculty is ! act+ intellect2 a real magician :i* possesses ! wond]ful secret ( /ripp+ s5sible species ( _! mat]ial conditions1 ( smoo?+ e r\ghness :i* prev5ts !m f com+ 9 contact ) ! pure und]/&+1 & trans=ms ! gross food ( ! s5sitive faculties into ! pure/ ambrosia1 fit to be s]v$ at ! repa/ ( spirits4 #ej4 ,?is inv5tion m]its to be call$ +5i\s r ?an extravagant1 poetical r ?an ridicul\s4 ,b its mo/ rem>kable feature is1 t x involves a pr(\nd philosophical s5se1 z well because x m>ks an ideological fact ( ! highe/ importance1 z because x indicates ! true way ( expla9+ ! ph5om5a ( intellig5ce 9 _! relations to ! s5sible _w4 ,?is rem>kable fact is ! diff]5ce1 ev5 ) respect to mat]ial objects1 betwe5 s5sible repres5tations & pure ideas4 ,! indication ( ! true way consi/s 9 pres5t+ ! intellectual activity z op]at+ ^u s5sible species1 & conv]t+ !m into food = ! m9d4 ,let u leave ! poetical "p to ! explanation ( ! s*ools1 & see if :at x involves be wor? z mu*1 to say ! lea/1 z :at ,kant advanc$ :51 combat+ s5sism1 he di/+ui%$ betwe5 ! pure und]/&+ & s5sible intuitions4 ,,*apt] ,,viii4 ,,kant ,,& ,,! ,,ari/otelians4 #ea4 ,le/ ,i be accus$ ( levity 9 comp>+ ,kant's philosophy ) t ( ! s*ools1 9 :at relates to ! di/9ction betwe5 ! s5sitive & intellectual faculties1 ,i %all give a rapid exam9ation ( ?is philosoph]'s doctr9e s f> z ! pres5t matt] is conc]n$4 ,s9ce ! ,g]man philosoph] is 9 ! habit ( express+ himself ) great obscurity1 & ( us+ an obsolete language liable to diff]5t int]pretations1 ,i %all ins]t 8 own words1 s t ! read] may judge = himself1 & rectify any inaccuracies into :i* ,i may fall1 9 comp>+ ,kant's doctr9e ) t ( ! ,ari/otelians4 ,9 :atev] mann]1 says ,kant1 & by :atev] means a cognition may be ref]r$ to objects1 t :i* makes ! cognition ref] imm$iately to ?+s1 & to :i* all ?\ght is a means1 is intuition4 ,?is intuition exi/s only inasmu* z ! object is giv5 u1 :i* is n possible1 at lea/ = u m51 except s f> z x affects ! m9d 9 "s way4 ,! capacity ( receiv+ impressions by ! mann] 9 :i* objects affect u is call$ s5sibility4 ,by means ( s5sibility objects are giv5 to u3 x alone supplies u ) intuitions3 b !y are ?\ght by ! und]/&+1 & f x arise conceptions4 ,all ?\ght mu/ ultimately be ref]r$1 ei!r directly1 or indirectly by means ( c]ta9 signs1 to intuitions1 & consequ5tly to s5sibility1 s9ce no object c be giv5 to u 9 any o!r4 ,! action ( an object ^u ! repres5tative faculty1 s f> z we are affect$ by x1 is s5sation4 ,! intuition1 :i* is ref]r$ to an object by means ( s5sation1 is call$ empirical4 ,! imm$iate object ( an empirical intuition is call$ a ph5om5on4#d #d ,transc5d5tal /hetics1 #a4 ,! di/9ction betwe5 ! faculty ( feel+ & t ( conceiv+ is fundam5tal 9 ,kant's sy/em3 & we see t he gives x a ha/y exposition be=e beg9n+ 8 inve/igations on /hetics or ! !ory ( s5sibility4 ,fur!r on1 9 treat+ ( ! op]ations ( ! und]/&+1 he has m fully develop$ 8 doctr9e3 & by ! emphasis he puts ^u x1 x w\ld seem evid5t t he reg>d$ x z ( high importance1 & p]haps z a discov]y ( a region entirely unkn[n to ! philosophical _w4 ,?us he speaks ( x 9 8 ,transc5d5tal ,logic3 ,our k proce$s f two intellectual s\rces2 ! fir/ is ! capacity ( receiv+ repres5tations1 7! receptivity ( impressions17 ! second is ! faculty ( kn[+ an object by ^! repres5tations1 7! spontaneity ( conceptions47 ,by ! =m] ! object is giv5 to u2 by ! latt]1 x is ?\ght 9 relation to ?is repres5tation 7z m]e det]m9ation ( ! m9d47 ,intuition & conception con/itute ! elem5ts ( all our k2 s t nei!r conceptions )\t an intuition 9 "s mann] correspond+ to !m1 nor an intuition )\t conceptions1 c give k4 99 99 99 99 99 ,we call s5sibility ! capacity 7receptivity7 ( our m9d to receive repres5tations1 s f> z affect$ 9 any way :atev]3 on ! contr>y1 ! faculty ( produc+ repres5tations1 or ! spontaneity ( k1 is call$ und]/&+4 ,our nature is su* t !re c be no intuition n s5sible1 t is to say1 :i* only compreh5ds ! mann] 9 :i* we are affect$ by objects4 ,! und]/&+ is ! faculty ( ?9k+ ! object ( s5sible intuition4 ,nei!r ( ^! prop]ties ( ! s\l is pref]able to ! o!r4 ,)\t s5sibility no object c\ld be giv5 to u2 )\t ! und]/&+ none c\ld be ?\ght4 ,?\ghts )\t cont5ts are empty2 intuitions )\t conceptions are bl9d4 ,x is1 !n1 j z necess>y to make conceptions s5sible1--t is1 to give !m an object 9 intuition1 z to make intuitions intelligible1 by subject+ !m to conceptions4 ,^! two faculties or capacities _c int]*ange _! functions4 ,! und]/&+ c p]ceive no?+1#e & ! s5ses c ?9k no?+4 ,k results only f _! union4 ,_! attributes1 !re=e1 ought n to be conf\nd$2 on ! contr>y1 !re is e reason to di/+ui% !m1 & to sep>ate !m ) great c>e4 ,we di/+ui% !n ! sci5ce ( ! laws ( s5sibility 9 g5]al1 t is to say1 /hetics1 f ! sci5ce ( ! laws ( ! und]/&+ 9 g5]al1 t is1 f ,logic4#f #e ,he speaks ( intuitive p]ception1 n ( p]ception 9 g5]al4 #f ,transc5d5tal ,logic4 ,introduction4 ,m>k well ! mean+ ( ?is doctr9e4 ,two facts are e/abli%$2 s5sible intuition1 & ! conception ( x2 consequ5tly ! exi/5ce ( two faculties1 s5sibility1 & ! und]/&+1 is affirm$4 ,to ! fir/ correspond s5sible repres5tations2 to ! latt] conceptions4 ,^! two faculties1 ?\gh diff]5t1 are closely int]l9k$2 & !y are mutually necess>y 9 ord] to produce cognitions4 ,b h[ d !y give ea* o!r t mutual aid !y /& 9 ne$ (8 ,! und]/&+1 ,kant else:]e says1 has be5 ?us f> def9$ only negatively1 z a n-s5sible faculty ( kn[+4 ,b z we c h no intuition indep5d5tly ( s5sibility1 x foll[s t ! und]/&+ is n a faculty ( intuition4 ,except+ intuition1 !re rema9s no way ( kn[+ o!r ?an by conceptions2 :]e=e we inf] t ! k ( e intellect1 at lea/ e human intellect1 is a k by conceptions2 n intuitive1 b discursive4 ,all intuitions1 z s5sible1 re/ ^u affections1 & consequ5tly1 all conceptions ^u functions4 ,i und]/& by functions1 ! unity ( action necess>y to arrange diff]5t repres5tations "u "o common repres5tation4 ,conceptions1 !n1 are gr\nd$ on ! spontaneity ( ?\ght1 z s5sible intuitions on ! receptivity ( impressions4 ,! und]/&+ c make no use ( ^! conceptions except to judge by means ( !m1 & z intuition is ! only repres5tation :i* has an imm$iate object1 no conception c ev] be imm$iately ref]r$ to an object1 b only to "s o!r repres5tation ( ?is object1 :e!r ?is be an intuition1 or ev5 a conception4 ,judgm5t is ! m$iate cognition ( an object1 & consequ5tly ! repres5tation ( a repres5tation ( ! object4 ,9 e judgm5t !re is a conception applicable to _m ?+s1 & "u ?is plurality x comprises also a giv5 repres5tation1 imm$iately ref]able to ! object4 ,?us1 9 ! judgm5t3 all bodies are divisible2 ! conception ( divisible is common to diff]5t conceptions1 among :i* t ( body is ! "o x "h p>ticul>ly ref]s to4 ,b ?is conception ( body relates to c]ta9 ph5om5a we h 9 view2 ^! objects are !n m$iately repres5t$ by ! conception ( divisibility4 ,all judgm5ts are functions ( unity 9 our repres5tations1 s9ce in/ead ( "o imm$iate repres5tation1 !re comes 9 ano!r m elevat$1 :i* includes ! fir/ & _m o!rs1 & conduces to ! cognition ( ! object2 & a great numb] ( possible cognitions are r$uc$ to "o alone4 ,b we may r$uce all ! op]ations ( ! und]/&+ to judgm5t2 s t ! und]/&+ 9 g5]al may be repres5t$ z a faculty ( judg+2 because1 f :at has be5 said1 x is ! faculty ( ?9k+4 ,?\ght is cognition by conceptions2 b conceptions1 z pr$icates ( possible judgm5ts1 may be ref]r$ to any repres5tation :atev] ( an object1 h[ev] indet]m9ate4 ,?us ! conception ( body signifies some?+1 = example1 a metal1 :i* may be kn[n by ?is conception4 ,x is !n a conception only because x conta9s 9 itself o!r repres5tations by means ( :i* x may be ref]r$ to objects4 ,x is !n ! attribute ( a possible judgm5t1 = in/ance1 ( ?is3 e metal is a body4#g #g ,transc4 ,log4 ,transc4 ,anal4 ,book ,i41 ,*ap4 ,i41 ,sec4 ,i4 #eb4 ,!re are 9 ?is doctr9e ( ,kant1 two ?+s to be di/+ui%$3 fir/1 ! facts ^u :i* x is bas$2 & secondly1 ! mann] 9 :i* he exam9es & applies !m1 & ! consequ5ces he d$uces f !m4 ,we detect at once a radical diff]5ce1 z f> z ! obs]vation ( ideological facts is conc]n$1 betwe5 ,kant's sy/em & t ( ,condillac4 ,:ile ! latt] discov]s 9 ! m9d no fact b s5sation1 no imm$iate faculty m noble ?an t ( feel+1 ! =m] upholds z a fundam5tal pr9ciple ! di/9ction betwe5 s5sibility & ! und]/&+4 ,& "h ! ,g]man triumphs ov] ! ,fr5* philosoph]1 = 9 8 support /& bo? obs]vation & exp]i5ce4 ,b ?is triumph ov] s5sism _h already be5 obta9$ by _m philosoph]s1 ! s*ola/ics 9 p>ticul>4 ,) ,kant & ,condillac !y admitt$ t all our cognitions came f ! s5ses2 b !y _h also not$ :at ,kant aft]w>ds saw1 b ,condillac did n discov] t s5sations by !mselves alone c\ld nev] suffice to expla9 all ! ph5om5a ( our s\l1 & t1 besides ! s5sitive faculty1 x 0 necess>y to admit ano!r v diff]5t1 call$ und]/&+4 ,kant reg>d$ s5sations z mat]ials furni%$ to ! und]/&+1 :i* x comb9$ 9 v>i\s ways1 & r$uc$ to conceptions4 ,?\ghts )\t cont5ts1 he said1 are empty2 intuitions )\t conceptions are bl9d4 ,x is !n j z necess>y to make conceptions s5sible1 t is1 to give !m an object 9 intuition1 z to make intuitions intelligible by subject+ !m to conceptions4 ,:o does n p]ceive 9 ?is passage1 ! act+ intellect ( ! ,ari/otelians1 al?\gh express$ 9 o!r words8 ,sub/itute s5sible species = s5sible intuition1 intelligible species = conception & we recognize a doctr9e v l t ( ! s*ola/ics4 ,let u see4 ,kant says3 to enable u to acquire k1 ! action ( ! s5ses1 or s5sible exp]i5ce is necess>y4 ,! s*ola/ics said3 !re is no?+ 9 ! und]/&+ :i* has n previ\sly be5 9 ! s5ses3 nihil e/ 9 intellectu quod prius non fu]it 9 s5su4 ,kant says3 s5sible intuitions ( !mselves are bl9d4 ,! s*ola/ics said3 s5sible species1 or ^? ( ! imag9ation1 also call$ phantasmata1 are n intelligible4 ,kant says3 x is necess>y to make conceptions s5sible by giv+ !m an object 9 intuition4 ,! s*ola/ics said3 x is impossible to und]/&1 ei!r by acquir+ sci5ce1 or by us+ t already acquir$1 unless ! und]/&+ directs itself to s5sible species1 s9e conv]sione ad phantasmata4 ,kant says3 x is indisp5sable to r5d] intuitions intelligible by subject+ !m to conceptions4 ,! s*ola/ics said3 x is necess>y to make s5sible species intelligible 9 ord] t !y may be ! object ( ! und]/&+4 ,kant says3 we judge by means ( conceptions2 & t judgm5t is ! m$iate cognition ( an object1 & consequ5tly its repres5tation4 ,! s*ola/ics said3 we "k objects by means ( an intelligible species1 :i* is d]iv$ f ! s5sible species1 & is its intelligible repres5tation4 ,kant says1 t 9 e judgm5t !re is a conception applicable to _m ?+s1 & t "u ?is plurality x comprises also a giv5 repres5tation :i* is ref]r$ imm$iately to its object4 ,! s*ola/ics said1 t ! intelligible species 0 applicable to _m ?+s1 because univ]sal2 t1 :5 sep>at$ f a s5sible & p>ticul> species1 x ab/racts f all mat]ial & individuat+ conditions1 & consequ5tly embraces all individual objects 9 "o common repres5tation4 ,kant uses ! words conception1 & to conceive1 to d5ote ! intellectual act1 =m1 or :atev] x may be1 by :i* ! und]/&+1 mak+ use ( s5sible intuitions1 comb9es ! mat]ials (f]$ by s5sibility con=mably to ! laws ( ! intellectual ord]4 ,! s*ola/ics likewise taught t ! intelligible species1 call$ also species impress$1 fecundat$ ! und]/&+ by produc+ 9 x an intellectual conception1 :5ce result$ ! ^w1 int]nal locution1 or species express$1 :i* !y also /yl$ conception4 ,kant says1 t ! cognition ( human intellig5ce is a cognition by conceptions1 n intuitive1 b discursive & g5]al1 & t out ( ! sph]e ( s5sibility !re is = u no true intuition4 ,! s*ola/ics said3 our und]/&+1 9 ?is life1 has a necess>y relation to ! nature ( mat]ial ?+s1 & = ?is reason x _c primo et p] se1 "k immat]ial sub/ances3 h5ce x happ5s t we "k !m p]fectly only by c]ta9 comp>isons ) mat]ial ?+s1 & *iefly by way ( removal1 p] viam remotionis1 9 a negative way4 #ec4 ,! sample we h j giv5 is exce$+ly int]e/+1 s9ce x enables u to appreciate z !y m]it ! po9ts ( simil>ity 9 ^! two sy/ems1 :i* occupy a prom95t place 9 ! hi/ory ( ideology1--a simil>ity :i* has n always hi!rto be5 suffici5tly notic$1 al?\gh app>5t ^u ! simple p]usal ( ! ,g]man philosoph]4 ,nor is ?is extraord9>y3 ! /udy ( ! s*ola/ics is exce$+ly difficult2 "o mu/ accommodate "o's self to ! language1 ! /yle1 ! op9ions1 & ! prejudices ( _! epo*1 & travel ov] mu* useless gr\nd to collect a little pure ore4 ,note well1 h[ev]1 t ,i d n pret5d to discov] ! ,critic ( ,pure ,reason 9 ! works ( ! s*ola/ics1 ,i w\ld only m>k a fact b little kn[n2 x is t :atev] is good1 fundam5tal1 & conclusive aga9/ ! s5sism ( ,condillac1 9 ! ,g]man philosoph]'s sy/em1 _h be5 said ages be=e by ! s*ola/ics4 ,are we h5ce to inf] t ,kant took 8 doctr9e f ^! au?ors8 ,we _c say2 b we believe x may1 ) "s reason1 be ass]t$1 t possibly ! ,g]man philosoph]1 a man ( va/ read+1 mo/ ret5tive memory1 & v labori\s1 may h receiv$ c]ta9 inspirations1 rem9isc5ces ( :i* glimm] ?r\gh 8 doctr9es4 ,a writ] is n a plagi>i/1 al?\gh he make ideas 8 own :i* h orig9at$ ) o!rs4 ,b x is (t5 true t man imag9es he creates1 :5 he only recollects4 #ed4 ,al?\gh ! ,g]man philosoph] agrees ) ! s*ola/ics 9 ! obs]vation ( ! primitive faculties ( our m9d1 he diff]s f !m 9 _! application2 & :il/ !y g on prep>+ a philosophical dogmatism1 he m>*es t[>ds a despair+ skepticism4 ,no?+ t all ! mo/ em95t philosoph]s h reg>d$ z indisputable1 c /& 9 ! eyes ( ! ,g]man philosoph]4 ,true1 he has di/+ui%$ ! s5sible f ! intelligible ord]2 he has recogniz$ two primitive faculties 9 our s\l2 s5sibility & ! und]/&+2 he has indicat$ ! l9e :i* divides !m1 & c>efully rem>k$ t x %\ld nev] be effac$2 b1 on ! o!r h&1 he has r$uc$ ! s5sible _w to a collection ( pure ph5om5a1 & expla9s space 9 su* a way z to r5d] x extremely difficult to avoid ! idealism ( ,b]keley4 ,he has also1 s to speak1 wall$ 9 ! und]/&+ by prev5t+ all communication ) x1 except+ by s5sible exp]i5ce1 & has resolv$ all ! elem5ts t meet 9 x into empty =ms1 :i* lead to no?+ :5 !re is "q ( apply+ !m to ! n-s5sible1 & :i* c tea* u no?+ conc]n+ ! great ontological1 psy*ological1 & cosmological problems :i* h be5 ! object ( ! m$itations ( ! pr(\nde/ metaphysicians1 :o1 to resolve !m1 h publi%$ a va/ am\nt ( sublime doctr9es1 j cause ( a noble pride 9 ! human m9d :i* kn[s ! dignity ( its nature1 v9dicates its l(ty orig91 & disc]ns f af> ! imm5sity ( its de/9y4 ,,*apt] ,,ix4 ,,hi/orical ,,view ,,( ,,! ,,value ,,( ,,pure ,,ideas4 #ee4 ,n[ t we h %[n ! po9ts ( simil>ity betwe5 ,kant's sy/em & t ( ! s*ola/ics1 we propose to note _! diff]5ces *iefly 9 :at conc]ns ! application ( ^! doctr9es4 ,to give an idea ( ! gravity & transc5d5talism ( ^! diff]5ces1 we h only to rem>k ! discrepancy ( _! results4 ,! ,ari/otelians built ^u _! pr9ciples a :ole sy/em ( metaphysical sci5ce1 :i* !y consid]$ ! noble/ ( sci5ces1 & :i*1 l a ri* & brilliant light1 fecundates & directs all o!rs2 :]eas ,kant1 />t+ ) ! same facts1 de/roys metaphysical sci5ce by tak+ f x all p[] to "k objects 9 !mselves4 #ef4 ,we "h f9d ,kant 9 opposition n only to ! s*ola/ics1 prop]ly s call$1 b also to all ! mo/ em95t metaphysicians :o _h prec$$ him4 ,on ! side ( ! s*ola/ics 9 ?is matt] may be cit$ ,plato1 ,ari/otle1 ,sa9t ,augu/9e1 ,sa9t ,anselm1 ,sa9t ,?omas1 ,desc>tes1 ,malebran*e1 ,f5elon1 & ,leibnitz4 #eg4 ,no "o c d5y ! transc5d5cy ( ^! que/ions1 if he be n totally ignorant h[ vital x is to ! human m9d to "k if a sci5ce sup]ior to ! purely s5sible ord] be possible1 :]eby man may ext5d 8 activity beyond ! ph5om5a (f]$ by matt]4 ,^! que/ions are exce$+ly pr(\nd1 & mu/ n be lightly treat$4 ,! difficulty & ! great ab/rus5ess ( ! objects treat$1 ! importance1 ! transc5d5cy ( ! consequ5ces to :i* !y lead1 accord+ to ! road foll[$1 dem& t no labor :atev] %\ld be sp>$ to p5etrate ^! matt]s4 ,x is easy to assure "o's self t ^u ^! que/ions dep5ds ! cons]vation ( s\nd ideas ( ,god & ( ! human m9d2 man's mo/ important & l(ty consid]ations4 ,to give ?is matt] a ?or\gh exam9ation1 let u g back to ! orig9 ( ! div]g5ce ( ^! philosophical op9ions1 & let u inve/igate ! reason :y1 />t+ ) ! same facts1 !y arrive at contradictory results4 ,?is requires a cle> exposition ( ! opposite doctr9es4 #eh4 ,all philosoph]s agree 9 admitt+ ! fact ( s5sibility2 conc]n+ x !re c be no d\bt2 x is a ph5om5on atte/$ by consci\sness 9 s palpable a mann]1 t n ev5 skeptics c\ld ev] d5y ! subjective reality ( ! appe>ance1 h[ev] mu* !y call$ 9 "q its objective reality4 ,ideali/s1 :5 !y d5y ! exi/5ce ( bodies1 d n d5y _! ph5om5al appe>ance1 _! appe>ance to ! m5tal eye "u a s5sible =m4 ,s5sibility !n1 & ! ph5om5a x exhibits1 h 9 all ages be5 prim>y data 9 ideological & psy*ological problems2 !re may be a discrepancy ) respect to ! nature & consequ5ces ( ^! data1 b !re c be none z to _! exi/5ce4 #ei4 ,! hi/ory ( ideological sci5ce %[s u two s*ools2 "o ( :i* admits no?+ b s5sation1 & expla9s all ! affections & op]ations ( ! m9d by ! trans=mation ( ! s5ses2 :ile ! o!r admits primitive facts di/9ct f s5sation2 o!r faculties ?an t ( feel+1 & recognizes 9 ! m9d a l9e divid+ ! s5sible f ! intellectual ord]4 #fj4 ,?is latt] s*ool is divid$ into two o!rs2 "o ( :i* reg>ds ! s5sible ord] z n only di/9ct1 b also sep>ate f ! intellectual ord]1 & 9 "s s5se at w> ) x2 & x !re=e ma9ta9s t ! intellectual c receive no?+ f ! s5sible ord]1 except malign exhortations :i* ei!r mislead x1 or en]vate its activity4 ,h5ce ! sy/em ( innate ideas 9 all its purity2 h5ce ! metaphysics ( an intellectual ord] entirely exempt f s5sible impressions1 metaphysics :i*1 cultivat$ by em95t g5iuses1 has 9 mod]n times be5 pr(ess$ by ! au?or ( ! ,inve/igation ( ,tru?1 ) sublime exagg]ation4 ,! o!r ramification ( ! s*ool also admits ! pure intellectual ord]1 b does n hold x to be contam9at$ by be+ br\ght into communication ) s5sible ph5om5a2 on ! contr>y1 x is r incl9$ to believe t ! problems ( human intellig5ce1 su* z x exi/s 9 ?is life1 _c be resolv$ )\t fix+ ! m9d ^u ! a=esaid communication4 #fa4 ,exp]i5ce tea*es t ?is communication exi/s1 con=mably to a law ( ! human m9d1 & t to cont5d aga9/ ! law is to /ruggle aga9/ a tru? atte/$ by consci\sness3 to attempt to de/roy x w\ld be a ra% und]tak+1 a k9d ( m5tal suicide4 ,= ?is reason1 ! s*ool ( :i* we h j spok51 accepts ! facts1 su* z int]nal exp]i5ce pres5ts !m1 & endeavors to expla9 !m by indicat+ ! po9ts :]e ! s5sible & intellectual ord]s may come into communication )\t be+ de/roy$ or conf\nd$4 #fb4 ,! s*ool t admits ! exi/5ce ( ! two ord]s1 ! s5sible & ! intellectual1 & at ! same "t admits ! possibility & ! reality ( _! reciprocal communication & influ5ce1 has1 = its fundam5tal pr9ciple1 t ! orig9 ( all cognition is 9 ! s5ses1 ^! be+ ! excit+ causes ( intellectual activity1 & a k9d ( labor]s :o supply x ) mat]ials1 :i* x !n comb9es 9 ! mann] necess>y to raise ! sci5tifical /ructure4 #fc4 ,?us f>1 ,kant & ! s*ola/ics agree2 b "h !y sep>ate at a po9t ( ! greate/ importance1 & ! result is t !y pass on to conflict+ consequ5ces4 ,! s*ola/ics believ$ t !re 7 9 ! und]/&+ true ideas hav+ true objects1 & t !y might discuss !m1 indep5d5tly ( ! s5sible ord]1 ) p]fect security4 ,!y ev5 admitt$ ! pr9ciple t !re c be no?+ 9 ! und]/&+ :i* 0 n previ\sly 9 ! s5ses2 b pret5d$1 nev]!less1 t !re really 0 some?+ 9 ! und]/&+1 :i* might conduce to ! k ( ! tru? ( immat]ial1 z well z ( mat]ial ?+s 9 !mselves4 ,! ideas ( ! purely intellectual ord] orig9ate 9 ! s5ses z mov]s ( ! intellectual activity2 b ?is activity1 by means ( ab/raction & o!r op]ations1 =ms to itself ideas ( its own1 by ^: aid x may g beyond ! s5sible ord] 9 its se>* = tru?4 #fd4 ,9 _! explanation ( ! purely intellectual ord]1 metaphysicians1 bo? s*ola/ics & anti-s*ola/ics agree1 s f> z !re is "q ( giv+ a real objective value to ideas1 & ( mak+ !m a sure means ( discov]+ tru? indep5d5tly ( s5sible ph5om5a4 ,h[ev] mu* ^! s*ools disagree z to ! orig9 ( ideas1 !y agree 9 all t relates to _! reality & value4 #fe4 ,kant1 at ! same "t t he admits ! pr9ciple ( ! s*ola/ics1 t all our cognitions come f ! s5ses1 & recognizes ) !m ! necessity ( ackn[l$g+ a purely intellectual ord]1 a s]ies ( conceptions diff]5t f s5sible intuition1 ma9ta9s t ^! conceptions are n pure cognitions1 b empty =ms1 :i* ( !mselves mean no?+1 tea* ! m9d no?+1 & _c1 9 ! lea/1 aid u to "k ! reality ( ?+s4 ,^! conceptions mean no?+ unless fill$1 s to speak1 ) s5sible intuitions4 ,if ^! intuitions are want+1 !y correspond to no?+1 & c be ( none b a purely logical use2 t is to say1 ! und]/&+ w ?9k ^u & comb9e !m1 )\t1 inde$1 fall+ into contradiction1 b also )\t ev] com+ to any conclusion4 ,t ! und]/&+1 ,kant says1 c nev] make a transc5d5tal1 b only an empirical use1 ei!r ( its a priori pr9ciples1 or ( its conceptions1 is a pr9ciple :i*1 if kn[n ) conviction1 leads to ! mo/ important consequ5ces4 ,! transc5d5tal use ( a conception 9 any pr9ciple1 consi/s 9 ref]r+ x to ?+s1 9 g5]al1 & 9 !mselves2 :il/ ! empirical use is 9 ref]r+ ! conception to ph5om5a alone1 t is1 to ! objects ( a possible exp]i5ce1 by :i* we may easily see t ?is latt] use is ! only "o t c /&4 ,to e conception is necess>y1 fir/ ( all1 a logical =m ( a conception 9 g5]al1 ( ! ?\ght3 & secondly1 ! possibility ( subject+ to x an object1 to :i* x may ref]2 b )\t ?is object x wants all s5se1 x conta9s no?+1 al?\gh x may involve ! logical function necess>y to =m a conception by means ( c]ta9 data4 ,! object _c be giv5 to a conception except 9 intuition2 & al?\gh pure intuition may be a priori possible be=e ! object1 x _c1 h[ev]1 receive its object1 & consequ5tly its objective value1 o!rwise ?an by ! empirical intuition ( :i* x is ! =m4 ,all conceptions & ) !m all pr9ciples1 al?\gh !y be possible a priori1 d1 not)/&+1 ref] to empirical intuitions1 t is1 to data ( possible exp]i5ce4 ,)\t ?is !y h no objective value2 !y are no?+ b a m]e play1 :e!r ( ! imag9ation or ( ! und]/&+1 ) ! respective repres5tations ( ! "o or ! o!r faculty4 99 99 99 99 99 ,t ! same is ! case ) all ! categories & pr9ciples =m$ f !m1 is app>5t f ?is1 t we _c really def9e a s+le "o ( !m2 t is to say1 we _c r5d] ! possibility ( _! object intelligible )\t att5d+ to ! conditions ( s5sibility1 & consequ5tly to ! =m ( ! appe>ances2 conditions to :i* ^! categories mu/ be conf9$ z to _! sole objects4 ,if ?is condition be tak5 away1 all mean+1 t is1 all relation to ! object is de/roy$1 & by no example c we be made to conceive :at is ! prop] mean+ ( ^! conceptions4 99 99 99 99 99 ,if no acc\nt be made ( all ! conditions ( s5sibility :i* d5ote !m 7he is speak+ ( ! categories7 z conceptions ( a possible empirical use1 if !y be tak5 to be conceptions ( ?+s 9 g5]al1 & consequ5tly1 ( transc5d5tal use1 no?+ rema9s to be done1 s f> z !y are conc]n$1 b to pres]ve ! logical functions 9 judgm5ts1 z ! condition ( ! possibility ( ! ?+s !mselves1 )\t be+ able to %[ 9 :at case1 _! application & _! object1 & consequ5tly !y !mselves1 may1 9 ! pure und]/&+1 & )\t ! int]v5tion ( s5sibility1 h a mean+ & an objective value4 99 99 99 99 99 ,x inconte/ably foll[s f :at has be5 said1 t pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+ c nev] h a transc5d5tal use1 b only an empirical use2 & t ! pr9ciples ( ! pure und]/&+ d n ref] to ! objects ( ! s5ses1 except :5 ! s5ses are 9 relation ) ! g5]al conditions ( a possible exp]i5ce2 b nev] to ?+s 9 g5]al1 )\t relation to ! way 9 :i* we may p]ceive !m4#h #h ,transc5d5tal ,logic4 ,book ,,ii41 ,*ap4 ,,iii4 #ff4 ,?us ,kant de/roys all metaphysical sci5ce1 &1 involv$ 9 its deplorable ru9s1 p]i% ! mo/ fundam5tal1 mo/ preci\s1 & mo/ sacr$ ideas ( ! human m9d4 ,accord+ to him1 transc5d5tal analysis makes u see t ! und]/&+ c nev] pass ! limits ( s5sibility1 ! only limits )9 :i* objects are giv5 to u 9 intuition4 ,^! pr9ciples :i* 7 reg>d$ z et]nal pill>s ( ! sci5tific edifice s9k into empty =ms1 into words )\t mean+1 s soon z !y rise f ! sph]e ( s5sibility4 ,ontology1 ) its transc5d5tal doctr9es1 avails n 9 ! eyes ( ! ,g]man philosoph] to expla9 ! nature & orig9 ( ?+s4 ,^! pr9ciples1 he says1 are simply pr9ciples ( ! exposition ( ph5om5a2 & ! pr\d "n ( an ontology :i* pret5ds to give an a priori1 syn!tic cognition ( ?+s1 9 a sy/ematic doctr9e1 = example1 ! pr9ciple ( causality1 ought to be replac$ by ! mode/ d5om9ation ( simple analysis ( ! pure und]/&+4 #fg4 ,x w\ld be h>d to f9d a m noxi\s doctr9e4 ,:at is left to ! human m9d :5 all means ( ris+ f ! s5sible sph]e are tak5 away8 ,to :at is our und]/&+ r$uc$1 if its mo/ fundam5tal ideas1 & its noble/ pr9ciples c tea* no?+ conc]n+ ! nature ( ?+s8 ,if ! corporeal _w is = u no?+ b a collection ( s5sible ph5om5a1 beyond :i* we c "k no?+1 our cognitions h no?+ real1 !y are all purely subjective2 ! s\l lives on illusions1 & vani%es ) its imag9>y creations1 to :i* !re is no?+ to correspond 9 reality4 ,space is b a subjective =m2 "t is b a subjective =m2 pure ideas are empty conceptions1 & all 9 u is subjective4 ,we "k no?+ ( objects1 we are totally ignorant ( :at is2 we "k only :at appe>s4 ,?is is pure skepticism2 assur$ly x 0 n necess>y to consume s mu* "t 9 analytical inve/igations to get ?us f>4 ,! doctr9e ( ,kant pres5ts no extravagance s outrage\s1 no error s hide\s1 z ! works ( ,fi*te1 ,s*ell+1 & ,hegel2 b x conta9s ! g]m ( ! greate/ extravagance1 & ( ! mo/ fatal errors4 ,he has made a philosophical revolution1 :i* "s h incauti\sly deem$ a progress2 b d\btless !y did n detect ! skepticism x conta9s1 :i* is ! m dang]\s1 ! m x is envelop$ 9 analytical =ms4 #fh4 ,not)/&+ ! importance ju/ly atta*$ to ! refutation ( ! ,g]man philosoph]'s errors1 ,i d n deem x necess>y to combat 8 doctr9es /ep by /ep2 ?is sy/em ( refutation labors "u ! s]i\s objection t x gives little satisfaction to ! read]1 :o seems to see "o edifice torn d[n1 b n replac$ by ano!r4 ,i consid] x m useful c>efully to exam9e que/ions z !y arise 9 ! ord] ( _! subjects1 to e/abli% my op9ion z be/ ,i c1 & !re to refute ,kant's errors z ,i f9d !m ob/ruct+ ! m>* ( tru?4 ,x is ord9>ily v easy to say :at a ?+ is n2 b x is n s easy to say :at x is2 & x is n prop] t ! advocates ( s\nd doctr9e %\ld be *>g$ ) impugn+ false doctr9es1 & n c>+ to expose _! own4 ,we believe t 9 ^! matt]s s\nd philosophy may be pres5t$ to ! light ( ! day /ruggl+ aga9/ error1 & t x ought n to re/ satisfi$ ) be+ ! in/rum5t ( w> to ov]?r[ its adv]s>y1 b t x %\ld aspire to f\nd a noble & endur+ edifice ^u ! v site ! o!r occupi$4 ,! m9ds ( m5 are n satisfi$ ) simple refutations2 !y desire to h a doctr9e sub/itut$ 9 ! place ( ! "o impugn$4 ,:oev] impugns1 d5ies2 & ! und]/&+ is n satisfi$ ) negations2 x wants affirmation1 = x _c live )\t positive tru?4 ,we h p]mitt$ ourselves ?is brief digression1 :i* is inde$ f> f be+ useless2 = at ! sight ( ! transc5d5cy ( ! ,g]man philosoph]'s errors ,i h recollect$ ! necessity ( c>eful1 assidu\s1 & pr(\nd labor to oppose ?is deluge ( errors :i* ?reat5s to inundate ! :ole field ( tru?2 & we c\ld n d less ?an insi/ ^u ?is po9t1 & obs]ve t x is n en\gh to te> d[n1 b t x is also necess>y to build up4 ,refutations w soon come2 b let positive doctr9es ab\nd4 ,x is n en\gh to cov] ! long l9e ( fronti]s :]e error makes its attacks1 ) light & active troops :i* may fall ^u ! enemy2 x is necess>y to f\nd colonies1 foci ( cultivation & civilization1 :o w def5d ! c\ntry1 at ! same "t t !y make x fl\ri% & prosp]4 ,,*apt] ,x4 ,,s5sible ,,intuition4 #fi4 ,intuition1 prop]ly s call$1 consi/s 9 ! act ( ! s\l by :i* x p]ceives an object t effects x3 ?is ! signification ( ! ,lat9 ^w d]iv$ f ! v]b intu]i1 to see a ?+ :i* is pres5t1 indicates4 #gj4 ,intuition belongs only to p]ceptive p[]s1 to ^? by :i* ! subject affect$ di/+ui%es betwe5 its affection & ! object caus+ x4 ,we d n pret5d to say t ?is mu/ be a reflex di/9ction1 b simply t ! int]nal act mu/ ref] to an object4 ,if we suppose a be+ to exp]i5ce v>i\s affections1 b to nei!r ref] !m to any object1 nor reflect ^u !m itself2 ?is be+ c nev] ) propriety be said to h true intuition1 = intuition seems to involve ! ex]cise ( an activity occupi$ ) a pres5t object4 ,! object ( intuition ne$ n always be an ext]nal be+2 x may be an affection or action ( ! s\l made objective by a reflex act4 #ga4 ,! s5sations :i* are ) ! greate/ propriety call$ intuitive1 are ^? ( sight & t\*2 =1 s9ce x is impossible = u1 :5 we p]ceive ext5sion1 to reg>d x z a purely subjective fact1 ! acts ( see+ & feel+ necess>ily involve relation to an object4 ,! o!r s5ses1 al?\gh !y may h a c]ta9 relation to ext5sion1 d n p]ceive x directly1 s t 7 !y to /& alone1 !y w\ld p>take m ( ! affective ?an ( ! intuitive2 t is1 ! s\l w\ld be affect$ by ! s5sations1 b w\ld be "u no necessity ( ref]r+ !m to ext]nal objects4 ,if reflection made ^u ^! s5sations come to tea*1 z 9 effect x w\ld tea* t _! cause is a be+ di/9ct f ^? t exp]i5ce !m1 !re w\ld be no true intuition2 n = ! s5ses1 because !y w\ld rema9 =eign to complex comb9ations2 nor = ! und]/&+1 because x w\ld !n "k ! cause ( ! s5sations1 n by intuition1 b by discursion4 #gb4 ,we inf] f ?is1 t n e s5sation is an intuition2 & t ! imag9>y reproductions ( pa/ s5sations1 or ! imag9>y production ( possible s5sations1 al?\gh repeat$ly /yl$ intuitions1 are1 s9ce !y d n ref] to an object1 unwor?y ( ! "n4 ,we ought1 nev]!less1 to obs]ve t ! ph5om5a ( purely int]nal s5sibility d1 p]haps1 owe to ! habit ( reflection _! non-ref]5ce to objects4 ,reflection p]ceives ! diff]5ce ( "t1 ! m or less vividness ( s5sations1 _! great] or less con/ant connection1 & also o!r circum/ances2 & x is enabl$ by ^! to di/+ui% betwe5 repres5tations :i* d really ref] to an object1 su* z ext]nal s5sations1 & ^? t h only a pa/ or possible object1 su* z purely int]nal repres5tations4 ,?us exp]i5ce tea*es u t ! purely int]nal s5sibility1 :olly ab&on$ to itself1 transf]s :atev] is pres5t$ to x to ! ext]nal _w1 )\t ! aid ( reflection1 & conv]ts imag9>y appe>ances into realities4 ,?is is v]ifi$ 9 sleep1 or ev5 9 our wak+ h\rs1 :5 by "s c]ebral inv]sion ! s5sibility works by itself alone1 & entirely free ( reflection4 #gc4 ,! reason :y ! s5sibility left to itself1 r5d]s all its impressions objective1 is to be look$ = 9 ! fact1 t be+ a non-reflective faculty1 x _c di/+ui% betwe5 a purely int]nal affection1 & "o com+ f )\t4 ,s9ce comp>ison1 h[ev] inconsid]able x may be1 always implies reflection1 s5sibility does n comp>e4 ,h5ce x happ5s t :5 ! subject does no?+ b feel1 x _c appreciate ! diff]5ces ( s5sations1 by calculat+ ! degrees ( _! vividness1 nor ev] p]ceive ! exi/5ce or want ( ord] & con/ancy 9 _! connection4 ,! faculty ( feel+ is p]fectly bl9d to all b its det]m9ate object2 :atev] x does n discov] 9 ?is s f> z x is its object1 does 9 no mann] exi/ = x4 ,we c n[ see :y1 :5 left to itself1 x w r5d] its impressions objective1 & believe itself intuitive by conv]t+ simple appe>ances into realities4 #gd4 ,x is wor?y ( notice1 t ( ! s5sitive faculties1 "s w\ld always be intuitive1 t is1 w\ld always ref] to an ext]nal object1 if reflection did n accompany !m2 :il/ o!rs w\ld nev] be intuitive1 n ev5 if sep>at$ f reflection1 or unaccompani$ by ^? :i* are by _! nature intuitive4 ,to ! =m] class belong ! repres5tative faculties1 prop]ly s call$1 t is1 ^? :i* affect ! s5sitive subject by pres5t+ to x a =m1 ! real or app>5t image ( an object4 ,su* are ^? ( sight & ( t\*1 :i* c nei!r exi/ nor be conceiv$ )\t ?is repres5tation4 ,o!r s5sations1 on ! contr>y1 (f] no =m to ! s5sitive subject2 !y are simple affections ( ! subject1 al?\gh !y proce$ f an ext]nal cause2 if we ref] !m to objects1 ?is we d by reflection2 & :5 ?is w>ns u t we h 9 attribut+ to ! object n only ! pr9ciple ( causality1 b also ! s5sation 9 itself1 c>ri$ ! ref]5ce too f>1 we easily recognize ! illusion1 & lay x aside4 ,?is does n occur 9 repres5tative s5sations2 no "o1 no matt] h[ great ef=ts he may make1 w ev] be able to p]suade himself t beyond himself !re is no?+ real1 no?+ resembl+ ! s5sible repres5tation 9 :i* objects are pres5t$ z ext5d$4 #ge4 ,:5 we say t "s s5sations w\ld n be intuitive 7 !y n accompani$ by reflection1 we d n mean to say t man ref]s !m to an object1 aft] explicit reflection1 = we _c =get :at we h already said :5 expla9+ at l5g? ! in/9ctive way 9 :i* our faculties develop !mselves prior to all reflection1 9 _! relations ) ! corporeal _w2 b only t no necess>y relation to an object z repres5t$ c be discov]$ 9 ^! s5sations consid]$ 9 !mselves1 & 9 p]fect isolation2 & t1 probably1 if a confus$ reflection be n m+l$ ) ! in/9ct :i* makes u r5d] !m objective1 !re at lea/ ent]s "s influ5ce ( o!r s5sations1 :i* are by _! prop] object repres5tative4 ,,*apt] ,,xi4 ,,two ,,cognitions3 ,,intuitive ,,& ,,discursive4 #gf4 ,n[ t ,i h expla9$ s5sible1 ,i pass to intellectual intuition4 ,!re are two modes ( kn[+2 ! "o is intuitive1 ! o!r discursive4 ,intuitive cognition is t 9 :i* ! object is pres5t$ to ! und]/&+1 su* z x is1 & ^u :i* ! p]ceptive faculty has to ex]cise no function b t ( contemplation2 x is !re=e call$ intuition1 f intu]i1 to see4 #gg4 ,?is intuition may take place 9 two ways4 ,x may ei!r pres5t ! object itself to ! p]ceptive faculty1 & unite !m )\t any int]m$iacy2 or by ! int]v5tion ( an idea or repres5tation1 capable ( putt+ ! p]ceptive faculty 9 action1 s t x may1 )\t ! necessity ( comb9ation1 see ! object 9 ?is repres5tation4 ,! fir/ requires ! object p]ceiv$ to be intelligible by itself1 s9ce o!rwise !re c\ld be no union ( ! object und]/ood ) ! subject und]/&+2 ! second ne$s a repres5tation to supply ! place ( ! object1 & consequ5tly x is n indisp5sable t ?is %\ld be imm$iately intelligible4#i #i ,see :at has be5 said conc]n+ repres5tation1 imm$iate intelligibility1 & repres5tation ( causality & ideality1 9 ,*apt]s ,x41 ,,xi41 ,,xii41 & ,,xiii41 ( ,book ,i4 ( ?is "w4 #gh4 ,discursive cognition is t 9 :i* ! und]/&+ does n h ! object itself pres5t1 b =ms x itself1 s to speak1 by unit+ 9 "o :ole conception sev]al p>tial conceptions1 ^: connection 9 "o subject x has f\nd out by ratioc9ation4 ,9 ord] to r5d] m app>5t ! diff]5ce betwe5 intuitive & discursive cognition1 ,i w illu/rate x by an example4 ,we see a man2 8 physiognomy is pres5t$ to u1 su* z x is2 no comb9ations are necess>y1 none c\ld possibly make him appe> diff]5tly4 ,we see 8 *>act]i/ic features1 su* z !y are2 b ! collection ( !m is n a ?+ produc$ by our comb9ations2 x is an object giv5 to ! p]ceptive faculty :i* has no?+ to d b to p]ceive x4 ,:5 an object is (f]$ to our und]/&+ 9 ?is way1 ! cognition we h ( x w be intuitive4 ,we h said t ! object ( intellectual intuition may be unit$ imm$iately to ! p]ceptive faculty1 or t x may be pres5t$ to x by a m$ium :i* acts ! "p ( ! object4 ,keep+ 9 view ! same example1 we might say t ^! two classes ( intuitions correspond to ^? ( ! man se5 by himself1 or 9 8 portrait4 ,!re w\ld be 9 bo? cases intuition ( 8 physiognomy1 b no comb9ation w\ld be necess>y1 & none c\ld possibly =m x4 ,b suppose "s "o to tell u ( a p]son :om we h nev] se51 & ^: portrait _c be %[n to u4 ,he w\ld be oblig$1 9 ord] to give u an idea ( 8 physiognomy1 to enum]ate "o by "o 8 *>act]i/ic features1 by ! union ( :i* we %all =m an idea ( ! lik5ess he has j describ$4 ,to ?is imag9>y repres5tation may be comp>$ discursive cognition1 by :i*1 al?\gh we d n see ! object1 we 9 "s s5se con/ruct x1 z x 71 f ! assemblage ( ^? ideas :i* we h by means ( discursion int]l9k$1 & =m$ into "o :ole conception repres5t+ ! object4 #gi4 ,kant1 9 8 ,critic ( ,pure ,reason1 speaks repeat$ly ( intuitive & discursive cognition2 b he does n expla9 ) p]fect cle>ness ! di/9ctive *>act]i/ics ( ^! two classes ( cognition4 ,let x n1 h[ev]1 be suppos$ t ! discov]y ( ^! two ways ( p]ceiv+ is due to ! ,g]man philosoph]4 ,_m ages be=e him1 ! !ologians _h kn[n !m2 nor c\ld x be o!rwise1 s9ce ! di/9ction betwe5 intuition & discursion is intimately connect$ ) "o ( ! fundam5tal dogmas ( ,*ri/ianity4 ,x is well kn[n t our religion admits ! possibility & reality ( a true cognition ( ,god1 ev5 9 ?is life4 ,! sacr$ text tells u t we may "k ,god by 8 works2 t ! invisible ?+s ( ,god are manife/$ to u by 8 visible creatures2 t ! heav5s n>rate 8 glory1 & ! firmam5t ann\nces ! works ( 8 h&s2 t !y :o h ?us kn[n ,god are inexcusable1 because !y h n glorifi$ him z !y ought2 b ?is same religion tea*es u t ! ,bless$1 9 ! life to come1 w "k him 9 a v diff]5t mann]1 w see him z he is1 face to face4 ,x 0 ,*ri/ianity !n t m>k$ ! diff]5ce betwe5 intuitive & discursive cognitions1 betwe5 ! cognition by :i* ! und]/&+1 proce$+ f effects to _! cause1 & unit+ 9 x ! ideas ( wisdom1 omnipot5ce1 goodness1 hol9ess1 & inf9ite p]fection1 rises to ,god2 & ! cognition 9 :i* ! m9d does n ne$ to advance1 draw+ its conclusions by aid ( discursion1 f v>i\s conceptions1 9 ord] to =ce f !m an idea ( ,god1 9 :i* ! ,inf9ite ,be+ w (f] himself cle>ly to ! eyes ( ! m9d1 n 9 a conception elaborat$ by reason1 nor "u ! sublime my/]ies ( fai?1 b su* z he is1 9 himself1 z an object giv5 imm$iately to ! p]ceptive faculty1 n z an object discov]$ by ! =ce ( discursion1 or pres5t$ "u augu/ %ad[s4 ,& "h we f9d ano!r pro( ( ! great pr(\ndness hidd5 "u ! dogmas ( ! ,*ri/ian religion4 ,?is di/9ction is to be met ) 9 ! cate*ism1 & yet :o w\ld h suspect$ t religion _h taught u a doctr9e s important to ideological sci5ce8 ,if ! *ild be ask$1 :o is ,god1 he replies by enum]at+ 8 p]fections1 & %[+ !reby t he kn[s him4 ,if y ask ?is same *ild1 to :at end man has be5 creat$1 he w answ]1 to see ,god1 etc4 ,"h aga9 is ! di/9ction betwe5 discursive cognition1 or by conceptions1 & intuitive cognitions2 ) ! =m] "o is said1 simply to "k1 ) ! latt] to see4 ,,*apt] ,,xii4 ,,! ,,s5sism ,,( ,,kant4 #hj4 ,kant ma9ta9$ t :ile 9 ! pres5t life1 we h only s5sible intuition2 & he consid]s ! possibility ( a purely intellectual intuition1 :e!r = our own or = o!r m9ds d\btful4 ,b z we h se5 else:]e 7*4 ,,ix47 t he does n attribute any value to conceptions sep>at$ f intuition1 we inf] t he is1 not)/&+ 8 long diss]tations ^u ! pure und]/&+1 a confirm$ s5si/2 & t ! au?ors ( ! ,critic ( ,pure ,reason1 & ( ! ,treatise on ,s5sations1 diff] mu* less ?an at fir/ sight might be suppos$4 ,if our m9d has no o!r intuition ?an ! s5sible1 & ! conceptions ( ! pure und]/&+ are1 if !y d n include "s "o ( ^! intuitions1 no?+ b empty =ms2 if :5 we ab/ract ^! intuitions1 !re are 9 ! und]/&+ only purely logical functions1 :i* mean no?+1 & 9 no s5se des]ve to be call$ cognitions2 x foll[s t !re is 9 our m9d no?+ b s5sations1 :i* may be me?odically di/ribut$ 9 conceptions1 z if pack$ away 9 a k9d ( hut1 :]e !y are regi/]$ & pres]v$4 ,accord+ to ?is philosoph]1 ! und]/&+ is r$uc$ s l[1 t ,condillac himself might admit x4 #ha4 ,inde$1 9 ! sy/em ( s5sations trans=m$1 ! m9d is suppos$ to possess a trans=m+ =ce1 s9ce o!rwise1 x w\ld be impossible to expla9 all ideological ph5om5a by m]e s5sation1 & ! v title ( ! sy/em w\ld be a contradiction4 ,?is be+ s1 w\ld any s5si/ic scruple h prev5t$ ,condillac f admitt+ ! syn!sis ( ! imag9ation1 ! relations ( all s5sible intuitions to ! unity ( app]ception1 & f9ally1 a v>iety ( logical functions1 to classify & comp>e s5sible intuitions8 ,s f> is ?is f be+ ! case1 x w\ld seem t ! root ( all ^! doctr9es might be f\nd 9 ! sy/em ( ! ,fr5* philosoph]1 ^: fundam5tal pr9ciples1 :5 summ$ up1 am\nt to ?is3 t no?+ c be se5 9 ! m9d besides s5sations2 b he does n !re=e d5y x a =ce capable ( trans=m+1 classify+1 & g5]aliz+ !m4 #hb4 ,"h1 !n1 is ano!r *eck to ! orig9ality ( ! ,g]man philosoph]2 he has1 to combat s5sism1 said 9 sub/ance j :at1 ages be=e1 all ! s*ools repeat$2 & n[ :5 he und]takes to foll[ a new road to ! explanation ( ! purely intellectual ord]1 he falls into ,condillac's sy/em4 ,8 empty conceptions1 )\t mean+1 )\t application1 beyond ! s5sible ord]1 am\nt to no m ?an :at ,condillac taught :5 analyz+ ! g5]ation ( ideas1 & %[+ h[ !y fl[$ f s5sations by means ( successive trans=mations4 ,c\ld !re be any difficulty1 x w\ld be conc]n+ words1 n ?+s3 no s5si/ ought to hesitate accept+ :ole & entire ! ,critic ( ,pure ,reason1 :5 once he has se5 :at applications ! ,g]man spirituali/ makes ( 8 doctr9es4 ,x w\ld be v desirable = ^? :o insi/ t ! spiritualism ( ,kant is decid$ly de/ructive ( ,condillac's s5sism1 to weigh well ^! obs]vations4 ,,*apt] ,,xiii4 ,,exi/5ce ,,( ,,pure ,,intellectual ,,intuition4 #hc4 ,x is n true t ! human m9d ev5 9 ?is life has no intuition o!r ?an ! s5sible4 ,!re are )9 u _m non-s5sible ph5om5a1 ( :i* we are cle>ly consci\s4 ,reflection1 comp>ison1 ab/raction1 election1 & all ! acts ( ! und]/&+ & w1 include no?+ ( ! s5sible4 ,we %\ld l to "k1 to :at species ( s5sibility1 ab/ract ideas1 & ! acts by :i* we p]ceive !m1 belong2 ^! among o!rs3 ,i desire1 ,i d n desire1 ,i *oose ?is1 ,i pref] ?is to t4 ,n "o ( ^! acts c be pres5t$ by s5sible intuition2 !y are facts ( an ord] sup]ior to ! sph]e ( s5sibility1 & yet we h 9 our m9d a cle> & lively consci\sness ( !m2 we reflect ^u !m1 make !m ! object ( our /udies1 di/+ui% !m "o f ano!r1 & classify !m 9 a ?\s& diff]5t ways4 ,^! facts are pres5t$ to u imm$iately2 we "k !m1 n by discursion1 b by intuition2 !re=e x is false t ! intuition ( ! s\l ref]s to none b s5sible ph5om5a1 = x enc\nt]s )9 itself an exp&$ s]ies ( non-s5sible ph5om5a1 :i* are giv5 to x 9 intuition4 #hd4 ,x is ( no use to say t ^! int]nal ph5om5a are empty =ms1 & mean no?+1 unless ref]r$ to a s5sible intuition4 ,:atev] !y may be1 !y are some?+ di/9ct f ?is same s5sible intuition2 & we p]ceive ?is some?+1 n by discursion1 b by intuition2 !re=e1 besides s5sible intuition1 !re is ano!r ( ! purely intellectual ord]4 ,! "q is n :e!r ^! pure conceptions h1 or h n1 a c]ta9 p[] to enable u to "k objects 9 !mselves2 b x is simply to asc]ta9 if !y d exi/1 & if !y are s5sible4 ,t !y exi/1 is c]ta92 consci\sness atte/s ?is fact1 & all ideologi/s admit x4 ,t !y are s5sible1 _c be ma9ta9$ )\t de/roy+ _! nature2 & lea/ ( all c ,kant ma9ta9 ?is1 s9ce he has s c>efully di/+ui%$ betwe5 s5sible intuition & ^! conceptions4 #he4 ,?is sea ( non-s5sible ph5om5a1 :i* we exp]i5ce )9 u1 is l a mirror :]e9 ! dep?s ( ! intellectual _w are reflect$4 ,m9ds1 x is true1 are n pres5t$ imm$iately to our p]ception1 & to "k !m we ne$ a discursive process2 b we %all1 ^u c>eful exam9ation1 f9d 9 ?is intuition ( our inw>d ph5om5a ! repres5tation1 imp]fect ?\gh x be1 ( :at is v]ifi$ 9 intellig5ces ( a sup]ior ord]4 ,?us we h 9 a c]ta9 mode idea-images1 s9ce !re c be no bett] image ( "o ?\ght ?an ano!r ?\ght1 nor ( "o act ( ! w ?an ano!r act ( ! w4 ,?us we "k m9ds di/9ct f our own1 by a k9d ( m$iate1 n imm$iate1 intuition1 9 s f> z !y are pres5t$ to our consci\sness z ! image 9 a mirror4 #hf4 ,! communication ( m9ds by means ( spee* & o!r natural or conv5tional signs1 is a fact ( exp]i5ce intimately connect$ ) all intellectual1 moral1 & physical necessities4 ,:5 a m9d is put into communication ) ano!r1 ! cognition x has ( :at passes 9 ! o!r is n by m]e g5]al conceptions1 b by a k9d ( intuition1 :i* al?\gh m$iate1 does n !re=e fail to be true4 ,! ?\ght1 or affection ( ano!r communicat$ to our m9d by means ( spee*1 excites 9 u a ?\ght1 or affection1 simil> to t ( ! m9d communicat+ !m4 ,we d1 !n1 n only "k1 b see1 9 our own consci\sness1 ! consci\sness ( ano!r2 & s p]fect is at times ! lik5ess1 t we anticipate all t he is ab\t to tell u1 & unroll )9 ourselves ! same s]ies ( ph5om5a t are v]ifi$ 9 ! m9d ( him ) :om we are 9 communication4 ,x happ5s ?us :5 we say3 ,i und]/& p]fectly :at ,n4 ?9ks1 :at he wants1 :at he is try+ to express4 #hg4 ,?is obs]vation seems to u ( great s]vice to place beyond all d\bt t !re are 9 our m9d1 indep5d5tly ( ! s5sible ord]1 conceptions1 n empty1 b ref]able to a det]m9ate object4 ,! cognition ( ! ph5om5a ( ! purely intellectual ord]1 transmitt$ to u by means ( spee*1 or o!r signs1 does n de/roy ! "* ( ! intuition1 s9ce we "h f9d all ! necess>y conditions assembl$2 int]nal repres5tation1 & its relation to a det]m9ate object affect+ u4 #hh4 ,?is analysis ( ideological facts1 ^: exi/5ce _c be d\bt$1 demon/rates ! fals5ess ( ,kant's doctr9e1 t !re are 9 our m9d none b s5sible intuitions2 z well z ! non-exi/5ce ( ! ,g]man philosoph]'s problem3 :e!r x is possible1 or n1 = objects to be giv5 to o!r m9ds 9 an intuition o!r ?an ! s5sible4 ,?is v problem is f\nd solv$ )9 u1 s9ce ! att5tive obs]vation ( ! int]nal ph5om5a1 & ! reciprocal communication ( m9ds1 has giv5 u to "k n only ! possibility1 b also ! exi/5ce ( intuitions diff]5t f ! s5sible4 ,,*apt] ,,xiv4 ,,value ,,( ,,intellectual ,,conceptions4--,,ab/raction ,,made ,,f ,,intellectual ,,intuition4 #hi4 ,al?\gh we %\ld admit t our m9d c h no intuition b ! s5sible1 x c\ld n !nce be inf]r$ t conceptions ( ! purely intellectual ord] are empty =ms1 & 9 n[ise conducive to ! k ( objects 9 !mselves4 ,x has always be5 und]/ood t g5]al ideas are n intuitive1 s9ce by ! v fact t !y are g5]al !y _c be ref]r$ imm$iately to a det]m9ate object2 & yet no "o ev] d\bt$ t !y c\ld s]ve to give u true cognitions4 #ij4 ,x is c]ta9 t g5]al ideas1 ( !mselves alone1 d n lead to any positive result2 or1 9 o!r words1 !y d n make u "k exi/+ be+s2 b if !y be jo9$ to o!r p>ticul> ones1 a reciprocal influ5ce is e/abli%$ betwe5 !m1 f :i* cognition results4 ,:5 we make ! g5]al affirmation3 ,e cont+5t be+ requires a cause2 ?is proposition1 al?\gh v true1 means no?+ 9 ! ord] ( facts1 if we ab/ract ! exi/5ce ( cont+5t be+s & causes ( e k9d4 ,9 su* a case1 ! proposition w express a relation ( ideas1 n ( facts3 ! cognition :i* results !refrom w be m]ely ideal1 n positive4 #ia4 ,?is relation ( ideas tacitly involves a condition1 :i* gives !m1 s f> z facts are conc]n$1 a hypo!tical value2 =1 :5 we affirm t e cont+5t be+ mu/ h a cause1 we are n to be und]/ood to affirm a relation ( ideas de/itute ( all possible application2 b r1 on ! contr>y1 to int5d t if any cont+5t be+ exi/s1 x mu/ h a cause4 #ib4 ,9 ord] t ?is hypo!tical value ( ideas may be conv]t$ into a positive value1 no?+ is necess>y b t ! condition involv$ 9 ! g5]al proposition3 ,e cont+5t be+ mu/ h a cause1 be v]ifi$4 ,( itself alone ?is tea*es u no?+ conc]n+ ! real _w2 b f ! mom5t t exp]i5ce %[s u a s+le cont+5t be+1 ! g5]al proposition1 be=e /]ile1 becomes exce$+ly fruitful4 ,s soon z exp]i5ce %[s u a cont+5t be+1 we "k ! necessity ( its cause2 we also inf] ! necessity ( ! proportions1 :i* ! activity produc+ mu/ pres]ve ) ! ?+ produc$2 kn[+ ! qualities ( ! latt]1 we inf] ^? :i* ought to be f\nd 9 ! =m]4 ,9 ?is mann]1 re/+ ^u two bases1 "o ( :i* is ideal tru? & ! o!r real tru?1 or data suppli$ by exp]i5ce1 we con/ruct a true positive sci5ce ref]r$ to det]m9ate facts4 #ic4 ,s9ce ! be+ t ?9ks necess>ily has consci\sness ( itself1 no ?9k+ be+ c be limit$ to ! cognition ( purely ideal tru?s4 ,ev5 if we 7 to suppose x p]fectly isolat$ f all o!r be+s1 9 absolute non-communication ) e ?+ n itself1 s z nei!r to ex]t any influ5ce ^u !m1 nor to be influ5c$ by !m1 x c\ld n be r$uc$ to ! cognition ( a purely ideal ord]2 =1 by ! v fact t x is ?9k+1 x is consci\s ( itself1 & consci\sness is ess5tially a p>ticul> fact1 a cognition ( a det]m9ate be+1 s9ce )\t x !re c\ld be no consci\sness4 #id4 ,?is obs]vation ov]turns to its v f\ndation ! sy/em :i* pret5ds to b> all communication betwe5 ! real & ideal ord]s4 ,x %[s also t exp]i5ce is n only possible1 b absolutely necess>y to e ?9k+ be+1 s9ce consci\sness is by its v nature an exp]i5ce1 & ! cle>e/ & sure/ exp]i5ce4 ,! tru?s ( ! ideal ord] are !n necess>ily int]l9k$ ) ^? ( ! real ord]3 to suppose all int]communication betwe5 !m impossible1 is to dis[n a fundam5tal fact ( ideological & psy*ological sci5ce1 consci\sness4 #ie4 ,to r5d] ! tru? & exactness ( ! prec$+ doctr9e m evid5t1 let u suppose a man1 or r a human m9d1 absolutely ignorant ( ! exi/5ce ( an ext]nal _w1 ( e body1 & ev5 ( e _s2 "o t kn[s no?+ conc]n+ its own orig9 or de/9y1 b "o t w\ld nev]!less at ! same "t ex]cise its intellectual activity1 )\t :i* x w\ld be a lifeless ?+1 & c\ld (f] no field to obs]vation4 ,let u suppose him to h g5]al ideas1 su* z ( be+ & ( n-be+1 ( sub/ance & accid5ts1 ( ! absolute & ! condition$1 ( ! necess>y & cont+5t4 ,manife/ly he may comb9e !m 9 v>i\s ways1 & arrive at ! same purely ideal results to :i* we ourselves arrive4 ,!re is no supposition m favorable to a s]ies ( ab/ract cognitions indep5d5t ( exp]i5ce1 & yet n ev5 9 ?is case w\ld ! tru?s kn[n be limit$ to ! purely ideal ord]2 x w\ld ev5 "h be impossible = !m n to desc5d to ! real ord]1 if ! ?9k+ be+ 7 n dispossess$ ( all consci\sness ( itself4 ,inde$1 by ! v fact t a be+ is suppos$ capable ( ?9k+1 x is suppos$ able to say to itself1 ,i ?9k4 ,?is act is em95tly exp]im5tal1 & x ne$s only to be unit$ ) g5]al tru?s 9 a common consci\sness1 to enable ! isolat$ be+ to rise above itself1 & create = itself a positive sci5ce1 by :i* to pass f ! _w ( ideas to t ( facts4 ,! in/ability ( its ?\ghts1 & ! p]man5ce ( ! be+ t exp]i5ces !m1 (f] to x a practical case 9 :i* ! g5]al ideas ( sub/ance & accid5t are p>ticul>iz$4 ,! successive appe>ance & disappe>ance ( its own conceptions w %[ to x ! ideas ( be+ & ( n-be+ realiz$2 ! recollection ( ! "t :5 its own op]ations comm5c$1 beyond :i* ! memory ( its exi/5ce does n ext5d1 w enable x to "k ! cont+5cy ( 8 own be+2 & ?is fact1 comb9$ ) ! g5]al pr9ciples :i* express ! relations betwe5 cont+5t & necess>y be+s1 w sugge/ to ! ?\ght t !re mu/ be ano!r t communicat$ to x its exi/5ce4 ,,*apt] ,,xv4 ,,illu/rations ,,( ,,! ,,value ,,( ,,g5]al ,,conceptions4 #if4 ,h[ev] vague ! ideas an isolat$ be+ w\ld =m ( objects di/9ct f itself1 !y w nev] be s vague z n to ref] to a real ?+4 ,! m9d may n "k ! nature ( ?is reality1 b x kn[s = c]ta9 t x exi/s4 ,a man bl9d f 8 bir? c =m no cle> idea ( colors1 nor ( ! s5sation ( see+2 b is he !re=e ignorant t s5sation exi/s1 & t ! words1 color1 see+1 & o!rs :i* ref] to sight1 h a positive & det]m9ate object8 ,c]ta9ly n4 ,! bl9d man does n "k 9 :at ^! ?+s1 ( :i* he he>s1 consi/1 b he kn[s t !y are some?+2 ^? ( 8 conceptions t ref] to !m may be call$ imp]fect1 b !y are n va92 ! words by :i* he expresses !m1 h = him a positive1 al?\gh incomplete mean+4 #ig4 ,!re is a great diff]5ce betwe5 incomplete & indet]m9ate conceptions2 ! =m] may ref] to a positive ?+1 al?\gh imp]fectly kn[n2 ! latt] include no?+ b a relation ( ideas1 mean+ no?+ 9 ! ord] ( facts4 ,we w r5d] ?is diff]5ce m app>5t by expla9+ ! example ( ! prec$+ p>agraph4 ,a man bl9d f 8 bir? has no intuition ( colors1 nor ( any ?+ t ref]s to ! s5se ( sight2 b he is sure t !re exi/ ext]nal facts :i* correspond to an int]nal affection call$ see+4 ,?is idea is incomplete1 b x has a det]m9ate object4 ,! words ( ^? :o possess ! s5se ( sight reveal to him its exi/5ce2 he kn[s n1 :at x is1 b1 t x is2 9 o!r words1 he does n "k its ess5ce1 b its exi/5ce4 ,let u n[ suppose ! possibility ( an ord] ( s5sations diff]5t f ours1 & 9 n[ise resembl+ ^? :i* we exp]i5ce1 to be call$ 9 "q4 ,! conception ref]r$ to ! new s5sations w\ld n only be incomplete1 b w\ld h no relation to any real object4 ,! g5]al idea1 !n1 ( affection ( a s5sitive be+1 w be all t our m9d w h2 b x w "k no?+ ( its exi/5ce1 & c =m only m]e conjectures z to ! conditions ( its possibility4 ,?is example illu/rates our idea4 ,we f9d 9 ! man bl9d f 8 bir?1 :o he>s ( :at p]ta9s to ! s5se ( sight1 an incomplete conception1 b "o to :i* ! exi/5ce ( a s]ies ( facts1 kn[n to 8 m9d1 corresponds4 ,b 9 ourselves1 if we reflect ^u a k9d ( s5sations diff]5t f our own1 we f9d conceptions1 hav+1 inde$1 a g5]al object1 b ( ^: realization we "k no?+4 #ih4 ,?us is x expla9$ h[ our m9d1 )\t hav+ intuition ( a ?+1 c1 nev]!less1 "k x1 & be p]fectly c]ta9 ( its exi/5ce4 ,we h "h demon/rat$ t conceptions may1 al?\gh !y d n ref] to a s5sible intuition1 h a value1 n only 9 ! ord] ( ideas1 b also 9 t ( facts4 #ii4 ,9 ord] to prove ! /]ility ( all conception beyond s5sible intuition1 ,kant adduces "o reason1 :i* is1 t we _c def9e ! categories & ! pr9ciples :i* fl[ f !m )\t ref]r+ to ! objects ( s5sibility4 ,?is is no pro( at all2 =1 9 ! fir/ place1 ! impossibility ( a def9ition does n always arise f ! fact t ! conception to be def9$ is empty2 b x v frequ5tly results f ! conception be+ simple1 & consequ5tly n susceptible ( a division into p>ts t may be express$ by words4 ,h[ w he def9e ! idea ( be+8 ,no matt] h[ he attempts to def9e x1 ! ?+ to be def9$ w ent] into ! def9ition3 ! words1 ?+1 reality1 exi/5ce1 all signify be+4 ,x is v natural1 s9ce s5sible intuition is ! basis ( our relations ) ! ext]nal _w1 & consequ5tly ) our fell[-m51 t :5 we purpose to express any relation :atev]1 we %\ld call to our aid s5sible applications2 b we are n !nce to inf] t !re is n 9 our m9d1 indep5d5tly ( !m1 a real tru? conta9$ 9 ! conception :i* we wi% to expla94 #ajj4 ,?is capacity ( kn[+ objects "u g5]al ideas1 is a *>act]i/ic prop]ty ( our m9d1 & we _c1 9 our inability to p5etrate to ! ess5ce ( ?+s1 ?9k )\t ?is indisp5sable auxili>y4 ,9 ! ord9>y c\rse ( human affairs1 x (t5 happ5s t we ne$ to "k ! exi/5ce ( a ?+ & ( "s ( its attributes1 b d n require a p]fect k ( x4 ,9 su* cases1 g5]al ideas1 aid$ by "s data ( exp]i5ce1 put u 9 m$iate communication ) ! object n pres5t$ to our intuition4 ,b :y _c ! same ?+ be v]ifi$ ) respect to non-s5sible be+s1 :i* alone are ! object ( intellectual intuitions8 ,i "k n :at exception c be tak5 to ^! obs]vations1 f\nd$ z !y are ^u obs]vation ( int]nal ph5om5a1 & confirm$ by common s5se4 ,,*apt] ,,xvi4 ,,value ,,( ,,pr9ciples1 ,,indep5d5tly ,,( ,,s5sible ,,intuition4 #aja4 ,! pr9ciple ( contradiction1 indisp5sable condition ( all c]ta9ty1 ( all tru?1 & )\t :i* ! ext]nal _w1 & intellig5ce itself1 w\ld become a *aos1 (f]s u a good example ( ! intr9sic value ( purely intellectual conceptions indep5d5t ( s5sible intuition4 ,no det]m9ate idea is unit$ to ! conception ( be+ :5 we affirm ! impossibility ( a ?+ be+ & n-be+ at ! same "t1 or ! exclusion ( n-be+ by be+2 & s f> we absolutely ab/ract all s5sible intuition4 ,:atev] be its object1 :atev] its nature & ! relations ( its exi/5ce2 be x corporeal or incorporeal1 composite or simple1 accid5t or sub/ance1 cont+5t or necess>y1 f9ite or inf9ite1 always w x be f\nd true t be+ excludes n-be+2 ! absolute incompatibility ( ^! two extremes w always be v]ifi$1 s t ! affirmation ( ! "o is always1 9 all cases1 & "u all imag9able suppositions1 ! negation ( ! o!r4 ,?is be+ s1 to limit ! value ( ^! conceptions to s5sible intuition1 w\ld be to de/roy ! pr9ciple ( contradiction4 ,! limitation ( ! pr9ciple is equival5t to its nullification4 ,its absolute univ]sality is closely alli$ to its absolute necessity2 if x be curtail$1 x is made cont+5t2 =1 if ! pr9ciple ( contradiction may fail u 9 "o in/ance1 x fails u 9 all4 ,to admit ! possibility ( :at is absurd1 is to d5y its absurdity4 ,if ! contradiction ( be+ & n-be+ does n exi/ 9 e supposition1 x exi/s 9 no supposition4 #ajb4 ,! difficulty is to "k h[ ! transition f ! pr9ciple ( contradiction to real tru?s1 is made2 because n affirm+ any ?+ det]m9ate 9 x1 b solely ! repugnance ( yes to no1 & ( no to yes1 we ass]t t x w\ld be impossible to affirm ei!r "o ( ^! extremes )\t d5y+ ! o!r2 & z on ! o!r h&1 x is impossible1 if we conf9e ourselves to ! pr9ciple ( contradiction1 = x to include any ?+ m ?an ! mo/ g5]al relation betwe5 two g5]al ideas1 we conclude t x is ( itself alone1 p]fectly /]ile & unable to conduct u to any positive result4 ,?is is all true2 b x contradicts 9 no po9t :at we h said conc]n+ ! intr9sic value ( g5]al conceptions4 ,we h rem>k$ t tru?s ( ! purely ideal ord] h none b a hypo!tical value1 & t 9 ord] to produce a positive sci5ce1 !y require facts to :i* !y may apply4 ,we h also rem>k$1 t exp]i5ce furni%es ^! facts1 & t e ?9k+ be+ possesses "o at lea/1 consci\sness ( itself4 ,e ?9k+ be+ w !re=e1 provid$ x discov] 9 its own consci\sness facts to :i* x may apply x1 make a positive use ( ! pr9ciple ( contradiction4 #ajc4 ,ev5 7 we to admit ! supposition t !re is 9 our m9d no intuition b ! s5sible1 x c\ld n !re=e be conclud$ t g5]al pr9ciples1 & m p>ticul>ly t ( contradiction1 c h no positive value2 because1 if we suppose ^! pr9ciples comb9$ ) s5sible intuition to produce a cognition ( o!r be+s out ( ! ord] ( s5sibility1 x w\ld foll[ t we really "k !m1 al?\gh !y 7 n giv5 to u 9 imm$iate intuition4 ,& ?is is v]ifi$ 9 ! human m9d1 :5 x rises by discursion to ! cognition ( ! non-s5sible4 ,on ! "o h&1 ! data furni%$ by exp]i5ce1 & on ! o!r1 g5]al & necess>y tru?s1 =m a connection con/itut+ a positive sci5ce1 :i* guides u ) p]fect security to ! cognition ( objects n subject to imm$iate exp]i5ce4 ,?is !ory is s cle>1 s evid5t1 s root$ 9 ! consci\sness ( our own acts1 s p]fectly 9 accordance ) all t we obs]ve 9 ! proce$+s ( ! human m9d1 t x causes u a /range surprise to meet philosoph]s1 ^: errone\s doctr9es oblige u to expla9 & def5d x4 #ajd4 ,! transition f ! kn[n to ! unkn[n is a proce$+ *>act]i/ic ( our und]/&+2 & ?is transition is impossible if ! reality ( e cognition1 n ref]r$ to an intuition1 be d5i$4 ,:atev] is pres5t$ to u 9 ?is latt] way1 is giv5 to u1 is pres5t to our sight1 & we h no necessity ( seek+ x4 ,if1 !re=e1 no object be really kn[n1 unless (f]$ 9 intuition1 all intellectual progress becomes impossible3 all ! advances ( our m9d are r$uc$ to comb9ations ( ! =ms pres5t$ to ! s5sibility1 & ev5 ^! lead to no?+ :5ev] !y cease to be intuitive2 t is1 :5 !y no long] relate to det]m9ate objects imm$iately p]ceiv$4 ,! ,critic ( ,pure ,reason is ! de/ruction ( all reason3 = x exam9es itself ) suicidal int5t1 or 9 ord] to prove t x conta9s no?+ positive4 ,sci5ce _c survive ! r$uction ( g5]al pr9ciples to "o only value relative to s5sible intuitions4 ,:at we h demon/rat$ conc]n+ ! pr9ciple ( contradiction1 is a =tiori applicable to all o!r pr9ciples4 ,if ?is be n sav$1 all mu/ p]i% 9 ! wreck4 ,moreov]1 ! v basis ( ! necessity involv$ 9 ^! pr9ciples is ?reat5$4 ,we "k no?+1 save t !re is )9 u a s]ies ( ph5om5a :i* seem necess>y4 ,b :at use c we make ( !m beyond ! subjective ord]8 ,none at all4 ,behold u !n 9 ! mo/ p]fect skepticism1 condemn$ to simple appe>ances1 ) no means ( kn[+ any reality4 #aje4 ,no6 ! human m9d is n condemn$ to s despair+ a /]ility3 reason is n an empty ^w2 ratioc9ation is n a pu]ile play1 only fit to s]ve z an amusem5t4 ,9 ! mid/ ( ! prepossessions1 errors1 & extravagance ( human mis]y1 t[]s on high t =ce1 t admirable activity1 by :i* ! m9d spr+s beyond itself1 kn[s :at x does n see1 & =esees :at x w "o day feel4 ,nature is veil$ to our eyes2 imp5etrable secrets surr\nd u2 :i*ev] way we turn deep %ad[s hide ! reality ( objects3 b ?r\gh ?is d>kness we disc]n f af> "s sc9tillation ( light4 ,not)/&+ ! pr(\nd sil5ce :i* reigns ov] ! sea ( be+s1 ^: surges toss u ab\t l imp]ceptible atoms 9 ! imm5sity ( ! ocean1 we he> at times my/]i\s voices tell u ! c\rse we mu/ keep to rea* unkn[n %ores4 ,,*apt] ,,xvii4 ,,relations ,,( ,,intuition ,,) ,,! ,,rank ,,( ,,! ,,p]ceptive ,,be+4 #ajf4 ,! p]fection ( intellig5ce involves ext5sion & cle>ness ( its intuitions2 ! m p]fect x is1 ! m intuitive x w be4 ,! inf9ite intellig5ce does n "k by discursion1 b by intuition3 x does n ne$ to seek objects3 x sees !m all be=e itself4 ,x sees ) intuition ( id5tity :at belongs to its own ess5ce1 & ) intuition ( causality e ?+ t does or c exi/ outside ( itself4 ,o!r m9ds h an intuition s mu* ! m p]fect z !y are m elevat$ 9 ! ord] to :i* !y belong2 s t cognition by conceptions indicates an imp]fection ( intellig5ce4 #ajg4 ,! relations ( "o be+ ) o!r be+s w !re=e dep5d ^u ! rank x holds 9 ! scale ( ! univ]se4 ,god1 inf9ite be+1 & ! cause ( all t does or c exi/1 has intimate & imm$iate relations ) ! :ole univ]se1 consid]$ n only 9 its entir5ess b ev5 9 its smalle/ p>ticles4 ,!re is consequ5tly 9 ,god a mo/ p]fect repres5tation ( all be+s tak5 n only 9 _! g5]ality1 b also 9 _! m9ute/ diff]5ces4 ,! ,be+1 cause ( all1 does n "k objects by vague conceptions1 by means ( repres5tations :i* only %[ :at all be+s h 9 common1 b z he has made _! slighte/ diff]5ces1 !y mu/ be pres5t$ to him ) p]fect cle>ness4 ,8 cognition is f\nd$ ^u a reality :i* is himself2 8 und]/&+ does n fluctuate ?r\gh an ideal & hypo!tical _w2 b1 fix$ ) cle>e/ intuition ^u inf9ite reality1 he sees all t ! inf9ite be+ is1 & all t x c produce ) its inf9ite activity4 ,= ,god !re is no exp]i5ce proce$+ f )\t1 = no?+ c ex]t any influ5ce ^u him2 all 8 exp]i5ce consi/s 9 ! k & love ( himself4 #ajh4 ,creat$ be+s1 occupy+ a det]m9ate place 9 ! scale ( ! univ]se1 relate to x only "u c]ta9 aspects4 ,_! relations ) _! fell[ be+s are br\ght to a po9t ( view1 to :i* _! p]ceptive faculties are subord9at$4 ,! repres5tativ5ess1 :i* !y conta9 9 !mselves1 mu/ be proportionate to ! cognition t has to produce x4 ,h5ce x foll[s t e intellig5t be+ w h its repres5tativ5ess adapt$ to ! functions x has to ex]cise 9 ! univ]se4 ,if ! be+ d n p]ta9 to ! ord] ( intellig5ces1 its p]ceptive faculties w be limit$ to s5sible intuitions1 9 a measure correspond+ to ! place x is de/9$ to occupy4 #aji4 ,we h se5 t g5]al ideas & ! intuition ( det]m9ate objects fecundate ! intellectual faculties4 ,f ?is we inf] t e intellig5ce /&s 9 ne$ ( intuitions1 if its cognitions are n to be limit$ to a purely hypo!tical ord]4 ,! human m9d1 de/9$ to a union ) ! body1 & to a cont9ual communication ) ! corporeal univ]se1 has receiv$ ! gift ( s5sible intuition z ! basis ( its relations ) bodies4 ,! same is ! case ) brutes4 ,s5sible intuition has be5 giv5 to !m because !y mu/ h cont9ual relations ) ! ext]nal _w3 b1 be+ conf9$ to ! functions ( animal life1 !y h no intuitions sup]ior to ! sph]e ( s5sibility1 nor d !y possess ! =ce necess>y to conv]t s5sible repres5tations into objects ( intellectual comb9ations4 #aaj4 ,!re is an imm5se diff]5ce betwe5 brutes & man1 9 ! scale ( be+s4 ,s9ce e intellig5ce is consci\s ( itself1 & c fix its att5tion ^u its acts1 ! human m9d kn[s its own intuitively1 & !re=e discov]s 9 itself an intuition sup]ior to ! s5sible4 ,besides ^! intuitions1 we h ! p[] ( discursion by :i* we =m repres5tations1 & by !m atta9 to ! cognition ( objects n (f]$ imm$iately to our p]ception4 ,?us1 />t+ ) ! data furni%$ by ext]nal & int]nal exp]i5ce1 & aid$ by ^? g5]al pr9ciples :i* involve ! prim>y conditions ( e intellig5ce & ( e be+1 we are enabl$ to p5etrate to ! _w ( reality1 & to "k1 al?\gh imp]fectly1 ! assemblage ( be+s :i* con/itute ! univ]se1 & ! inf9ite cause :i* made !m all4 ,,*apt] ,,xviii4 ,,aspirations ,,( ,,! ,,human ,,s\l4 #aaa4 ,a close obs]vation ( int]nal ph5om5a %[s t ! human s\l aspires to some?+ f> beyond all t x actually possesses4 ,n satisfi$ ) ! objects giv5 to x 9 imm$iate intuition1 x d>ts =w>d 9 pursuit ( o!rs ( a sup]ior ord]2 & ev5 9 ^? t are (f]$ to x imm$iately1 x is n cont5t$ ) ! aspect "u :i* !y appe>1 b seeks to "k :at !y are4 ,! purely individual does n satisfy ! s\l4 ,nail$ to "o po9t 9 ! imm5se scale ( be+s1 x is unwill+ to limit itself to ! p]ception ( ^? t are 9 its environs1 & =m1 z x 71 ! atmosph]e :]e9 x mu/ live2 x aspires to ! cognition ( ^? t prec$e & foll[ x1 & seeks to "k ! connection1 to discov] ! law f :i* results ! ineffable h>mony t presides ov] ! creation4 ,x f9ds its pure/ pleasures 9 ris+ f ! sph]e :]e ! limitation ( its faculties holds x conf9$4 ,its activity is great] ?an its /r5g?2 its desires sup]ior to its be+4 #aab4 ,we discov] ! same ph5om5on 9 ! s5tim5t & ! w z 9 ! und]/&+4 ,man has1 to satisfy 8 necessities1 & provide = ! pres]vation ( ! individual & ( ! race1 s5sations & s5tim5ts :i* direct him to det]m9ate objects2 b at ! side ( ^! affections1 limit$ to ! sph]e 9 :i* he is circumscrib$1 he exp]i5ces s5tim5ts ( a m elevat$ "*1 :i* make him spr+ beyond 8 orbit1 & absorb1 s to speak1 8 individuality 9 ! ocean ( inf9ity4 ,:5 man comes 9 contact ) nature 9 h]self1 despoil$ ( all conditions relat+ to individuals1 he exp]i5ces an indef9able s5tim5t1 a k9d ( =eta/e ( ! inf9ite4 ,g into an un9habit$ region & sit d[n by ! sea side2 h>k to ! deaf5+ ro> ( ! waves break+ at y\r feet1 & ! :i/l+ ( ! w9ds :i* h rais$ !m2 ) eyes fix$ on ?is imm5sity1 see ! azure l9e :]e ! vault ( heav5 unites ) ! wat]s ( ! ocean3 /& on a va/ & des]t pla91 or 9 ! he>t ( anci5t =e/s2 contemplate 9 ! sil5ce ( night ! firmam5t /udd$ ) />s1 foll[+ _! c\rse 9 tranquillity1 z !y h foll[$ x = ages pa/1 & w foll[ x = ages to come3 )\t ef=t1 or labor ( any k9d1 ab&on y\rself to ! spontane\s movem5ts ( y\r s\l1 & y w see h[ s5tim5ts spr+ up 9 x & move x to its v c5tre2 h[ !y elevate x above itself1 & absorb x1 z x 71 9 imm5sity4 ,its individuality vani%es f its own eyes1 z x feels ! h>mony presid+ ov] t imm5se creation ( :i* x =ms b a mo/ insignificant "p4 ,9 su* solemn mom5ts is x t inspir$ g5ius *ants ! glories ( creation1 & lifts "o corn] ( ! veil t hides ! respl5d5t ?rone ( ! supreme ,creator f ! eye ( mortals4 #aac4 ,t calm1 grave1 & pr(\nd s5tim5t :i* ma/]s u on su* occasions1 has no relation to individual objects2 x is an expansion ( ! s\l at a t\* ( nature1 z ! fl[] exp&s to ! rays ( ! sun 9 ! morn+1 x is a div9e attraction by :i* ! au?or ( all creat$ ?+s raises u above ! du/ 9 :i* we drag out our brief days4 ,?us ! he>t & ! und]/&+ h>monize2 ?us ! "o =eta/es :at ! o!r kn[s2 ?us we are w>n$ 9 diff]5t ways1 t ! ex]cise ( our faculties is n limit$ to ! n>r[ orbit conc$$ to u ^u ?is e>?4 ,let u be on our gu>d1 le/ ! he>t be froz5 ) ! coldness ( ins5sibility1 & ! tor* ( ! und]/&+ qu5*$ by ! deva/at+ bla/s ( skepticism4 ,,*apt] ,,xix4 ,,elem5ts ,,& ,,v>iety ,,( ,,! ,,*>act]s ,,( ,,s5sible ,,repres5tation4 #aad4 ,i n[ come to exam9e ! primitive elem5ts ( our m5tal comb9ations4 ,i %all beg9 ) _! s5sible elem5ts4 ,ext5sion ent]s into e act ( repres5tative s5sibility2 )\t x no?+ is repres5t$ to u1 & s5sations are r$uc$ to m]e affections ( ! s\l1 hav+ no relation to any object4 #aae4 ,ext5sion1 ( itself1 ab/ract$ f its limitability1 is susceptible ( no comb9ation2 x only (f]s a vague1 indef9ite1 imm5se repres5tation1 f :i* no?+ di/9ct ( itself results4 ,b if limitability be jo9$ to ext5sion1 figurability1 t is1 ! inf9ite field ov] :i* geometrical sci5ce ext5ds1 w result4 #aaf4 ,ext5sion & limitability are !n ! two elem5ts ( s5sible intuition4 ,^! elem5ts may be (f]$ to u 9 two ways1 ei!r jo9$ to s5sations :i* pres5t to u det]m9ate objects1 or z productions ( our own int]nal activity4 ,if we see ! disc ( ! moon1 we h an intuition ( ! =m] class2 & if we /udy ! prop]ties ( a circle by produc+ )9 ourselves its repres5tation1 ?is w be an intuition ( ! latt] class4 #aag4 ,?is int]nal activity1 by :i*1 at our w or caprice1 we produce an indef9ite numb] ( repres5tations1 ) an indef9ite v>iety ( =ms1 is an important ph5om5on & "o wor?y ( att5tion4 ,x %[s u t ! productive activity is n limit$ to ! purely intellectual ord]1 s9ce we detect x 9 ! s5sible ord]1 n 9 any way :atev]1 b z unroll$ on an inf9ite scale4 ,suppose a "r l9e to be produc$ to inf9ity1 besides x & 9 ! same plane1 we may inf9ite o!r l9es2 ! v>iety ( angles 9 :i* we may consid] ! position ( ! diff]5t l9es w ext5d to ! inf9ite2 s t ) "r l9es alone1 ! productive activity 9 ! ord] ( s5sibility w "k no limit4 ,if we sub/itute curves = "r l9es1 _! comb9ations 9 =m1 9 nature1 9 _! respective positions & relations ) det]m9ate axes1 w likewise be inf9ite3 s t )\t quitt+ ! s5sible ord]1 we discov] )9 ourselves a =ce productive ( inf9ite repres5tations1 & "o ne$+ no elem5ts besides t]m9able or figurable ext5sion4 #aah4 ,! repres5tative s5sible faculty develops itself sometimes by ! pres5ce ( an object2 at o!r times1 spontane\sly1 )\t any dep5d5ce on ! w2 & f9ally1 at o!r times1 9 consequ5ce ( a free act4 ,?is is n ! place to exam9e 9 :at way ! ph5om5on ( repres5tation is connect$ ) ! affections ( ! corporeal organs2 at pres5t1 we propose only to designate & expla9 facts 9 ! ideological sph]e1 absolutely ab/ract+ _! physiological aspect4 ,among ! s5sible repres5tations j classifi$1 :i* we may call passive1 spontane\s1 & free1 !re are diff]5ces wor?y ( obs]vation4 #aai4 ,passive repres5tation is giv5 to ! s\l1 indep5d5tly ( its activity4 ,if we be plac$ 9 pres5ce ( an object1 ) our eyes op51 x w be impossible n to see x1 or ev5 n to see x 9 a c]ta9 mann]1 if we d n *ange ! direction ( our eyesight or o!r condition ( vision4 ,= ?is reason1 ! s\l seems1 9 ! ex]cise ( its s5ses1 to be purely passive1 s9ce its repres5tations necess>ily dep5d on ! conditions to :i* its corporeal organs 9 _! relation to objects1 are subject4 #abj4 ,spontane\s repres5tation1 or ! faculty productive ( s5sible repres5tations1 seems also1 s9ce x op]ates indep5d5tly ( ext]nal objects & ( ! w1 to be m or less passive1 & its ex]cise to dep5d ^u organic affections4 ,& ! fact t ^! s5sations are wont to exi/ )\t any ord]1 or at mo/1 if !y are recollections ( old s5sations1 ) t only :i* !y _h at ano!r "t1 appe>s to indicate x4 ,x is also wor?y ( note t ^! repres5tations are sometimes (f]$ to u1 9 spite ( all ! ef=ts ( ! w to dissipate & =get !m3 "s are s t5aci\s z = a long "t to triumph ov] all ! resi/ance ( freewill4 ,x is n easy to expla9 ?is ph5om5on )\t recurr+ to organic causes1 :i*1 on det]m9ate occasions1 produce ! same effect ^u ! s\l1 z ! impressions ( ! ext]nal s5ses4 ,x is c]ta9 t ! int]nal repres5tation rea*es1 9 c]ta9 cases1 s high a po9t ( vividness1 t ! subject conf\nds x ) ! impressions ( ! s5ses4 ,?is c only be expla9$ by say+ t ! int]ior organic affection has become s p[]ful1 z to be equival5t to t :i* ! impression ( an object op]at+ ^u ! ext]nal organ1 c\ld h caus$4 #aba4 ,9 ?is spontane\s production x is to be rem>k$ t pres5t repres5tations d n always correspond ) o!rs previ\sly receiv$2 b a p[] ( comb9ation is develop$ 9 !m f :i* result imag9>y objects entirely new4 ,?is comb9ation is sometimes ex]cis$ 9 a p]fectly bl9d mann]1 & !n foll[ extravagant results2 b1 at o!r times1 ?is activity subject$ to c]ta9 conditions produces1 indep5d5tly ( free w1 objects arti/ically beautiful & sublime4 ,g5ius is no?+ else ?an ! spontaneity ( ! imag9ation & s5tim5t1 develop$ 9 subord9ation to ! conditions ( ! beautiful4 ,arti/s1 n gift$ ) g5ius1 d n lack /r5g? ( w to produce works ( g5ius2 nor are !y want+ 9 imag9ation to reproduce a beautiful object if !y h once se5 x2 !y d n lack disc]nm5t & ta/e to di/+ui% & admire beautiful objects1 nor are !y ignorant ( ! rules ( art or ( all t c be said to expla9 ! "* ( beauty2 :at !y lack is t in/9ctively f9e spontaneity :i* develops itself 9 ! mo/ recondite s9uosities ( ! s\l1 & f> f be+ dep5d5t ^u ! free w ( its possessor1 directs & dom9e]s ov] him1 pursues him 9 sleep z 9 ! h\rs ( wak+1 9 ! "t ( recreation z 9 t ( bus9ess1 & (t5 consumes ! v exi/5ce ( ! privileg$ man1 z a furi\s fire bur/s ! sides ( ! frail cage t holds x4 #abb4 ,free production occurs :5 repres5tations are (f]$ to u by comm& ( our w1 & "u ! conditions x prescribes1 z 9 works ( art1 & 9 ! comb9ations ( ^? figures :i* con/itute ! object ( ! sci5ce ( geometry4 #abc4 ,?is a priori con/ruction _c be ref]r$ to a type exi/+ 9 our imag9ation2 s9ce1 z ?is type w\ld !n be ! s5sible repres5tation itself1 x w\ld n ne$ to be con/ruct$4 ,h[ !n is x possible to =m a repres5tation ( :i* we h n already ! image8 ,x is n en\gh to possess ! elem5ts1 t is1 figurable ext5sion1 s9ce ) !m inf9ite figures may be con/ruct$2 some?+ else !n is ne$$1 some?+ to s]ve z a rule1 9 ord] t ! desir$ repres5tation may result4 ,= ! bett] und]/&+ ( ?is1 ,i w\ld obs]ve t s5sible intuitions are alli$ to g5]al conceptions1 by ^: aid !y may be recon/ruct$4 ,al?\gh1 9 reality1 no s5sible repres5tation is (f]$ to u1 ( any figure :atsoev]1 = example1 a regul> hexagon2 ! conception =m$ ( ! ideas1 six1 l9e1 equality ( angles1 is all t we ne$ to produce 9 our int]ior ! s5sible repres5tation ( ! hexagon1 & to con/ruct x )9 u1 if we require x4 ,?is %[s u t ! free activity produc+ det]m9ate s5sible repres5tations is bas$ ^u g5]al conceptions1 :i*1 ?\gh indep5d5t ( s5sibility1 ref] to x 9 an indet]m9ate mann]4 ,h5ce1 also1 x foll[s1 t ! und]/&+ may1 if x obs]ve ! conditions to :i* ! elem5ts furni%$ by s5sibility 9 _! respective cases1 are subject1 conceive ! s5sible indet]m9ately1 )\t ! intellectual act be+ ref]r$ to any det]m9ate intuition4 #abd4 ,if we analyze ! object ( ^! g5]al conceptions1 ref]r$ to s5sible intuition1 also consid]$ 9 g5]al1 ! und]/&+1 :ile occupi$ 9 !m1 seems to be tak5 up ) ?+s n di/9ctly (f]$ to x1 b reta9$ only by c]ta9 signs2 confid5t1 h[ev]1 t x c develop :atev] !y involve1 & contemplate x ) p]fect cle>ness4 ,,*apt] ,,xx4 ,,int]m$iate ,,repres5tations ,,betwe5 ,,s5sible ,,intuition ,,& ,,! ,,intellectual ,,act4 #abe4 ,! "q n[ occurs1 :e!r ! und]/&+1 9 ord] to p]ceive ! geometrical relations (f]$ 9 s5sible intuition1 does or does n ne$ "s int]m$iate repres5tations :i* br+ x into contact ) ! s5sible ord]8#aj ,su* a necessity w\ld1 at fir/ sight1 seem to exi/1 s9ce1 z ! und]/&+ is a non-s5sible faculty1 s5sible elem5ts _c be its imm$iate object4 ,b on matur] exam9ation1 x seems m probable t !re is no necessity ( any ?+ int]m$iate1 except "s sign to connect ! s5sible elem5ts1 & to %[ ! po9t :]e !y mu/ unite1 & ! conditions to :i* !y are subject4 ,z ?is sign may1 h[ev]1 be a ^w1 or some?+ else1 susceptible ( a s5sible repres5tation1 its m$iation w n at all solve ! difficulty2 s9ce ! "q w always recur3 ,h[ is ! und]/&+ plac$ 9 communication ) ! s5sible sign8 #aj ,see ,*ap4 ,,vi4 ,?is difficulty arises f ! faculty ( ! s\l be+ consid]$1 n only z di/9ct1 b also1 z sep>ate1 & z ex]cis+ ea* "o ( its faculties 9 its own peculi> & exclusive sph]e1 entirely isolat$ f t ( all o!rs4 ,?is mode ( consid]+ ! faculties ( ! s\l1 ?\gh favorable to ! classification ( _! op]ations1 does n accord ) ! tea*+s ( exp]i5ce4 ,x _c be d5i$ t we obs]ve )9 ourselves1 affections & op]ations1 v unlike ea* o!r1 & aris+ f di/9ct objects1 & produc+ v diff]5t results4 ,?is has l$ to a di/9ction ( faculties1 & 9 "s degree1 to a sep>ation ( _! functions1 s z to prev5t !m f mix+ toge!r & be+ conf\nd$4 ,b !re c be no d\bt t all ! affections & op]ations ( ! s\l are1 z consci\sness reveals1 b\nd to a common c5tre4 ,:atev] becomes ( ! di/9ction ( ! faculties among !mselves1 x is v c]ta91 z consci\sness tells u1 t x is "o & ! same be+ t ?9ks1 feels1 desires1 acts1 or suff]s3 x is c]ta9 t ?is same consci\sness reveals to u ! intimate communication ( all ! op]ations ( ! s\l4 ,we in/antane\sly reflect ^u ! impression receiv$2 we in/antane\sly exp]i5ce an agreeable or disagreeable s5sation 9 consequ5ce ( a reflection :i* occurs to u3 we reflect ^u ! w2 we seek or repudiate ! object ( our ?\ght2 !re is1 s to speak1 )9 u a boil+ spr+ ( ph5om5a ( diff]5t k9ds1 all int]l9k$1 modifi$1 produc$1 reproduc$1 & mutually influ5c$ by ea* o!r 9 _! incessant communication4 ,we are consci\s ( all ^!2 we enc\nt] !m all 9 "o common field1 :i* is ! subject t exp]i5ces !m4 ,:at necessity1 !n1 is !re to imag9e int]m$iate be+s 9 ord] to br+ ! faculties ( ! s\l into communication ) ea* o!r8 ,:y may x n ) its activity1 call$ und]/&+1 occupy itself imm$iately ) s5sible repres5tations & affections & ) all t is 9 its consci\sness8 ,suppos+ ?is consci\sness 9 its indivisible unity to comprise all ! v>iety ( int]nal ph5om5a1 x does n !re=e foll[ t ! intellectual activity ( ! s\l _c be ref]r$ to :atev] x conta9s ( active or receptive1 )\t its be+ necess>y to imag9e species to s]ve z c\rti]s betwe5 ! faculties1 to ann\nce to "o :at has tak5 place 9 ! o!r4 #abf4 ,! act+ intellect ( ! ,ari/otelians1 admissible 9 s\nd philosophy s f> z x d5otes an activity ( ! m9d appli$ to s5sible repres5tations1 does n seem alike admissible1 if x be suppos$ to be ! produc] ( new repres5tations di/9ct f ! intellectual act itself4 ,! und]/&+ is all activity2 ! receptivity ( ! s\l has no?+ to d ) x1 b to proportion its mat]ials2 & ! conceptions elaborat$ 9 pres5ce ( ^! mat]ials1 seem to be no?+ else ?an ! ex]cise ( ?is same activity1 subject on ! "o h& to ! conditions requir$ by ! ?+ und]/ood1 & subord9at$ on ! o!r h& to ! g5]al conditions ( e intellig5ce4 #abg4 ,i d n mean to say t ! intellectual act does n ref] to any object4 ,i replace ! idea by o!r acts ( ! s\l1 or by affections or repres5tations ( "s k9d or o!r1 :e!r active or passive4 ,?is be+ s1 if ,i am ask$1 = example1 :at is ! imm$iate object ( ! intellectual act p]ceiv+ ( det]m9ate s5sible intuition1 ,i reply t x is ! intuition itself4 ,if ! difficulty ( expla9+ ! union ( su* diff]5t ?+s be urg$1 ,i answ]3 fir/1 t ?is union exi/s 9 ! unity ( consci\sness1 z ! int]nal s5se atte/s3 second1 t ! same difficulty militates aga9/ ^? :o pret5d t ! und]/&+ elaborates an intelligible species1 :i* x takes f ! s5sible intuition2 & h[1 ,i may ask1 does ! und]/&+ place itself 9 contact ) ?is intuition :5 x w\ld elaborate its intelligible species4 ,if ?is imm$iate contact be impossible 9 ! "o case1 x w be equally s 9 ! o!r2 & if !y conc$e x to be possible 9 _! own case1 !y _c d5y x to be possible 9 ours also4 ,:5 ! und]/&+ ref]s to no det]m9ate intuition1 b only to s5sible intuitions 9 g5]al1 its imm$iate object is _! possibility also 9 g5]al1 subject to ! conditions ( ! object consid]$ 9 g5]al1 & to ^? ( e intellig5ce2 among :i*1 ! pr9ciple ( contradiction holds a prim>y place4 ,,*apt] ,,xxi4 ,,det]m9ate ,,& ,,indet]m9ate ,,ideas4 #abh4 ,we mu/1 "u pa9 ( fall+ into s5sism1 by limit+ ! und]/&+ to ! p]ception & comb9ation ( objects pres5t$ by s5sibility1 admit o!r ?an intellectual acts ref]able to s5sible objects 9 g5]al4 ,& :at1 9 ?is case1 is ! object ( ! intellectual act1 is a "q z difficult z x is int]e/+4 #abi4 ,! pure und]/&+ c ex]cise its functions ei!r ^u det]m9ate or indet]m9ate ideas2 t is1 ^u ideas :i* conta9 some?+ det]m9ate1 some?+ realizable 9 a be+1 t is or may be (f]$ to our p]ception1 or ^u ideas :i* repres5t g5]al relations1 )\t application to any object4 ,c>e %\ld be tak5 n to conf\nd g5]al ) indet]m9ate1 or p>ticul> ) det]m9ate ideas4 ,e int]m$iate idea is a g5]al idea1 b n vice v]sa4 ,! idea ( be+ is g5]al & indet]m9ate2 t ( intellig5ce is g5]al b det]m9ate4 ,! p>ticul> idea ref]s to an individual2 ! det]m9ate to a prop]ty1 & x does n cease to be det]m9ate al?\gh we ab/ract all relation 9 x to an exi/+ individual4 ,?is di/9ction op5s ! way to consid]ations ( ! highe/ importance4 #acj4 ,:5 ! und]/&+ proce$s by indet]m9ate conceptions1 its pr9cipal object seems to be be+ 9 its greate/ univ]sality4 ,?is is ! radical & fundam5tal idea1 r\nd :i* all o!r ideas are gr\p$4 ,f ! idea ( be+ spr+s ! pr9ciple ( contradiction1 ) its inf9ite applications to e class ( objects2 f x also fl[ ! ideas ( sub/ance & accid5ts1 ( cause & effect1 ( ! necess>y & ! cont+5t1 & e ?+ conta9$ 9 ! sci5ce ( ontology1 call$ = ?is v reason ontology1 or ! sci5ce ( be+4 #aca4 ,!re is no?+ 9 ^? conceptions :i* express ! g5]al relations ( all be+s1 to *>act]ize !m until !y quit _! purely metaphysical sph]e & desc5d into ! field ( reality4 ,9 ord] to be able to conceive ( a real be+1 we require x to be pres5t$ to u ) "s prop]ty4 ,be+ & n-be+1 sub/ance & accid5ts1 cause & effect1 are1 :5 comb9$ ) some?+ positive1 highly fruitful ideas2 b tak5 9 g5]al1 ) no?+ det]m9ate assign$ to !m1 !y d n (f] u any exi/+1 or ev5 possible object4 #acb4 ,! idea ( be+ pres5ts u t ( a ?+ 9 ! ab/ract2 b if we w\ld conceive ( ?is z exi/+ or z possible1 we mu/ imag9e ?is ?+ to be some?+ ) *>act]i/ic prop]ties4 ,:5ev] we he> an exi/+ ?+ spok5 (1 we in/9ctively ask :at x is1 & :at is its nature4 ,god is ess5tially be+1 is inf9ite be+2 b no?+ w\ld be repres5t$ to our m9d 7 we to conceive ( him only z ( be+1 & n also z intellig5t1 active1 free be+ end[$ ) all ! o!r p]fections ( 8 inf9ite ess5ce4 #acc4 ,! idea ( sub/ance (f]s u t ( a p]man5t be+1 :i* does n1 l a modification1 inh]e 9 ano!r4 ,?is idea1 tak5 9 its g5]ality )\t o!r det]m9ation ?an t add$ to ! idea ( be+1 by t ( subsi/5ce1 (f]s u no?+ real or realizable4 ,p]man5ce 9 g5]al1 subsi/5ce by itself1 non-inh]5ce 9 a subject1 d n suffice to enable a sub/ance to exi/ or to be possible2 "s *>act]i/ic m>k1 "s attribute is also ne$$1 z corporeal1 intellig5t1 free1 or any o!r y please1 to det]m9e ! g5]al idea ( sub/ance4 #acd4 ,! same may be said ( ! idea ( cause1 or productive activity4 ,an active ?+1 9 g5]al1 (f]s u no?+ ei!r real or possible4 ,9 ord] to conceive an exi/+ activity1 we mu/ ref] to a det]m9ate activity2 ! idea ( act+1 or ( be+ able to act1 9 g5]al1 does n suffice2 we mu/ repres5t x to ourselves1 z ex]cis+ itself 9 "o way or ano!r1 ref]r+ to det]m9ate objects1 produc+1 n be+s 9 g5]al1 b be+s hav+ _! own *>act]i/ic attributes4 ,true1 we d n ne$ to "k :at ^! attributes are2 b we d ne$ to "k t !y exi/ ) _! det]m9at5ess4 ,! mo/ univ]sal cause conceivable is ,god1 ! fir/ & inf9ite cause2 & al?\gh we d n conceive ( him z ( cause 9 ! ab/ract1 reg>d+ ! simple idea ( productive activity1 b we atta* to ! g5]al idea ( cause ! ideas ( free w & intellig5ce4 ,:5 we say t ,god is omnipot5t1 we assign an inf9ite sph]e to 8 p[]2 we d n "k ! *>act]i/ic attributes ( all ! be+s :i* c be creat$ by ?is inf9ite activity2 b we are c]ta9 t e exi/+ or possible be+ mu/ h a det]m9ate nature2 & we d n conceive x to be possible = a be+ to be produc$1 :i*1 )\t any det]m9ation1 w\ld be no?+ b be+4 #ace4 ,we d n meet ?is det]m9ation1 indisp5sable z x is to u1 if we w\ld conceive ( ! exi/5ce or possibility ( a be+1 9 indet]m9ate ideas1 b mu/ take x f exp]i5ce2 :]e=e1 if our und]/&+ 7 limit$ to ! comb9ation ( ^? relations (f]$ 9 indet]m9ate conceptions1 x w\ld be condemn$ to a p]fectly /]ile sci5ce4 ,we h already se5 7,*ap4 ,,xiv47 t ! absolute non-communication ( ! real ) ! ideal ord] is impossible if ! intelligible ord] be n depriv$ ( all consci\sness ( itself4 ,x is n en\gh to "k1 t su* a communication exi/s1 b we mu/ asc]ta9 9 :at po9ts x is v]ifi$1 & h[ f> x ext5ds4 #acf4 ,be=e pass+ to ?is inve/igation1 we w\ld obs]ve1 t ! doctr9e expla9$ 9 ?is *apt] is n to be conf\nd$ ) t ( ! f\rte5? *apt]4 ,!re1 x 0 %[n t g5]al ideas ( !mselves alone1 h only a purely hypo!tical value1 & lead to no?+ because !y are n comb9$ ) any ?+ positive1 furni%$ by exp]i5ce2 "h1 we h prov$ t indet]m9ate ideas ( be+1 sub/ance1 & cause1 d n ( !mselves alone suffice to enable u to conceive ( any ?+ ei!r exi/+ or possible1 if !y be n accompani$ by "s det]m9ate idea1 :i* gives a "* to ! g5]al ideas4 ,!re1 a hypo!tical value1 ) respect to _! exi/5ce1 0 allott$ to g5]al ideas3 "h1 we affirm x to be necess>y = ^! ideas to be accompani$ by "s prop]ty t %all r5d] !m capable ( con/itut+ an ess5ce1 at lea/ 9 ! possible ord]4 ,^! are v diff]5t ?+s1 & mu/ n be conf\nd$2 h5ce ! importance ( n =gett+ ! di/9ction betwe5 g5]al & indet]m9ate1 & betwe5 p>ticul> & det]m9ate ideas4 ,,*apt] ,,xxii4 ,,limits ,,( ,,our ,,intuition4 #acg4 ,c\ld we assign limits to ! field ( exp]i5ce1 & det]m9e exactly h[ mu* !y inclose1 we c\ld also det]m9e ! *>act]i/ics by :i* a be+ may be pres5t$ to u z exi/+ or z possible4 #ach4 ,passive s5sibility1 active s5sibility1 und]/&+1 & w1 are1 if we be n mi/ak51 all t our und]/&+ conta9s2 & ?is is :y we _c conceive ( any attribute *>act]i/ic ( be+1 except ^! f\r4 ,let u exam9e ^!1 ea* 9 its turn1 & ) ! c>e requir$ by ! importance ( ! results :i* w foll[ ?is dem>cation4 #aci4 ,by passive s5sibility we und]/& ! =m "u :i* bodies are pres5t$4 ,z we h already expla9$ x 9 sev]al places1 ?is =m is r$ucible to figur$ or b\nd$ ext5sion4 ,x _c be d5i$ t ?is attribute conta9s a true det]m9ation1 z !re is no?+ m det]m9ate ?an objects pres5t$ to our s5ses1 ) ext5sion1 & figure1 & o!r prop]ties annex$ to ^! fundam5tal attributes4 ,motion & imp5etrability are det]m9ations :i* accompany ext5sion1 or r !y are relations ( ext5sion4 ,to u1 motion is ! *ange ( ! situations ( a body 9 space1 or ! alt]ation 9 ! positions ( ! ext5sion ( a body1 ) respect to ! ext5sion ( space4 ,imp5etrability is ! reciprocal exclusion ( two ext5sions4 ,! idea ( solid & liquid1 ( h>d & s(t1 & o!r simil> ideas1 express relations ( ! ext5sion ( a body to _! admission1 ) great] or less resi/ance1 ( ! ext5sion ( ano!r 9 "o & ! same place4 ,que/ions ^u ! nature ( ext5sion h no place "h4 ,ext5sion is1 s f> z we are conc]n$1 a det]m9ate object1 pres5t$ to u 9 ! cle>e/ intuition4 ,! attribute ( passive s5sibility has ev] be5 reg>d$ z "o ( ! mo/ *>act]i/ic det]m9ations2 & ?is is :y x has be5 made to ent] z a fundam5tal classification 9 ! scale ( be+s4 ,! di/9ctions ( corporeal & incorporeal1 ( mat]ial & immat]ial1 ( s5sible & ins5sible1 are ( z frequ5t use 9 ord9>y language z 9 t ( ! s*ools2 & x is obvi\s t ! words1 corporeal1 mat]ial1 & s5sible1 al?\gh n p]fectly synonym\s "u "s aspects1 are usually tak5 to be su*1 9 s f> z !y express a k9d ( be+s1 ^: *>act]i/ic prop]ties are ^? =ms "u :i* !y are (f]$ to our s5ses4 #adj4 ,active s5sibility is ! faculty ( feel+2 & is to u an object ( imm$iate exp]i5ce1 s9ce we h x )9 u4 ,f ! cle> pres5ce ( s5sitive acts1 we may easily conceive :at feel+ is 9 o!r subjects ?an ourselves4 ,we h no consci\sness ( :at passes 9 ano!r subject :5 x sees2 b we "k :at x is to see2 x is 9 o!rs ! same z 9 ourselves4 ,9 our own consci\sness t ( o!rs is portray$4 ,we well "k :at is spok5 (1 :5 we he> a s5sitive be+ m5tion$2 & ?is too by a p]fectly det]m9ate1 n by a vague idea4 ,if ! "q be rais$1 :e!r o!r s5ses are possible1 ! idea ( a be+ end[$ ) !m1 loses a c]ta9 am\nt ( its det]m9at5ess3 our und]/&+ has no intuition ( :at x w\ld be2 x disc\rses ^u ! reality or possibility by means ( g5]al conceptions4 #ada4 ,und]/&+1 or ! =ce ( conceiv+ & comb9+1 indep5d5tly ( ! s5sible ord]1 is ano!r ( ! data furni%$ by our own exp]i5ce4 ,z ?is is a fact ( consci\sness1 we "k x by intuition1 n by ab/ract ideas2 x is ! ex]cise ( an activity :i* we feel )9 ourselves2 x is ! me :i* we ourselves are4 ,?is activity1 by reason ( its v union1 its id5tity ) ! subject p]ceiv+ x1 is pres5t to u 9 s intimate a mann] t we f9d no difficulty 9 p]ceiv+ x4 ,! idea ( und]/&+ is intuitive to u1 n indet]m9ate1 s9ce x pres5ts an object :i* is imm$iately giv5 to our p]ception 9 our s\l itself4 ,:5 we speak ( und]/&+1 we fix our views ^u :at passes )9 ourselves1 & we see great] or less p]fection 9 ! scale ( intellig5t be+s portray$ 9 ! gradation ( ! cognitions :i* we exp]i5ce )9 ourselves2 & :5 we w\ld conceive ( a f> high] und]/&+1 we enl>ge & p]fect ! type we h discov]$ )9 ourselves2 j z we repres5t to ourselves great]1 m p]fect1 & m beautiful s5sible objects1 ?an ^? we see1 )\t quitt+ ! sph]e ( s5sibility1 b mak+ use ( ! elem5ts x furni%es to u1 & enl>g+ & embelli%+ !m s z to atta9 to t ideal type already conceiv$ ( 9 our imag9ation4 #adb4 ,! w1 al?\gh an insep>able companion ( ! und]/&+1 & ev5 necess>y to its exi/5ce1 is nev]!less a v diff]5t faculty f x2 = ! w (f]s to our intuition a s]ies ( ph5om5a v unlike ! ph5om5a ( ! und]/&+4 ,to und]/& is n to w2 a ?+ may be kn[n1 & yet n will$4 ,"o & ! same act ( ! und]/&+ may unite at v>i\s times1 or 9 div]se subjects1 v diff]5t if n contradictory acts ( ! w2 to w & to n w2 or incl9ation & av]sion4 ,! cognition ( t s]ies ( ph5om5a call$ acts ( ! w1 is n a g5]al b a p>ticul>1 n an ab/ract b an intuitive1 cognition4 ,:at necessity is !re ( ab/raction or discursion to asc]ta9 :at we w or d n w1 :at we love or :at we abhor8 ,?is cognition is intuitive1 s f> z ! acts ( our own w are conc]n$2 & al?\gh we h no imm$iate intuition ( :at ! w ( o!rs is1 we "k p]fectly well :at passes 9 !m1 f see+ x 9 "s degree manife/$ by :at we ourselves exp]i5ce4 ,:5 we he> ! acts ( ano!r's w spok5 (1 h we1 by *ance1 any difficulty 9 conceiv+ ! object 9 "q8 ,are we oblig$ to proce$ discursively by ab/ract ideas8 ,c]ta9ly n6 ,! same occurs 9 o!rs z 9 ourselves4 ,:5 !y w1 or d n w1 !y exp]i5ce j :at we ourselves exp]i5ce :5 we w or d n w4 ,! consci\sness ( our w is ! image ( all o!rs exi/+ or possible4 ,we conceive t w to be m or less p]fect1 :i* unites 9 a high] or l[] degree ! actual or possible p]fections ( our own3 & if we w\ld conceive a w ( inf9ite p]fection1 we mu/ elevate to an inf9ite degree ! actual or possible p]fection :i* we discov] 9 ! f9ite w4 #adc4 ,:5 ! ,sacr$ ,text tells u t man is creat$ to ! image & lik5ess ( ,god1 x tea*es u a tru? highly lum9\s1 :e!r consid]$ 9 a purely philosophical or 9 a sup]natural aspect4 ,we discov] 9 our s\l1 9 ?is image ( inf9ite intellig5ce1 n only a multitude ( g5]al ideas :i* c>ry u beyond ! limits ( s5sibility1 b also an admirable repres5tation :]e9 we contemplate1 z 9 a mirror1 e ?+ t passes 9 t inf9ite sea :i* _c be kn[n by imm$iate intuition s long z we rema9 9 ?is life4 ,?is repres5tation is imp]fect1 is enigmatical2 b x is a true repres5tation3 9 its m9ute/ p>ticles1 inf9itely increas$1 we may contemplate ! inf9ite2 its feeble/ brilliance reflects back to u ! spl5dor ( inf9ity4 ,! slight sp>k /ruck f ! fl9t may lead ! imag9ation to t ocean ( fire1 discov]$ by a/ronom]s 9 ! orb ( day4 ,,*apt] ,,xxiii4 ,,( ,,! ,,necessity ,,involv$ ,,9 ,,ideas4 #add4 ,9 all ideas1 ev5 9 ^? t relate to cont+5t facts1 !re is some?+ ( ! necess>y1 some?+ f :i* sci5ce may spr+1 b some?+ :i* _c emanate f exp]i5ce1 h[ev] multipli$ we suppose x4 ,e induction result+ f exp]i5ce is conf9$ to a limit$ numb] ( facts1--a numb]1 :i*1 ev5 if augm5t$ by all ! exp]i5ce ( all m5 ( all ages1 w\ld /ill rema9 inf9itely bel[ univ]sality1 :i* ext5ds to all t is possible4 ,moreov]1 h[ev] little we reflect ^u ! c]ta9ty ( ! tru?s intimately connect$ ) exp]i5ce1 su* z are ari?metical & geometrical tru?s1 we _c fail to p]ceive t ! confid5ce ) :i* we build ^u !m is n f\nd$ ^u induction1 b t we ass5t to !m indep5d5tly ( any p>ticul> fact1 & consid] _! tru? z absolutely necess>y1 al?\gh we _c v]ify x by ! t\*/one ( exp]i5ce4 #ade4 ,! v]ification ( ideas by facts is 9 _m cases impossible1 because ! weakness ( our p]ception & ( our s5ses1 & ! co>s5ess ( ! in/rum5ts we use1 fail to r5d] u c]ta9 t ! facts correspond exactly to ! ideas4 ,x is sometimes absolutely impossible to e/abli% ?is pro(1 s9ce geometrical tru? supposes conditions su* z _c be realiz$ 9 practice4 #adf4 ,let u apply ^! obs]vations to ! simple/ tru?s ( geometry4 ,c]ta9ly no "o w d\bt ! solidity ( ! pro( call$ sup]position3 t is to say1 if "o ( two l9es1 or surfaces1 be plac$ ^u ! o!r1 & !y exactly correspond1 !y w be equal4 ,?is tru? _c dep5d ^u exp]i5ce3 fir/1 because exp]i5ce is limit$ to a c]ta9 numb] ( cases1 :]eas ! proposition is g5]al4 ,to say t "o s]ves = all is to say t !re is a g5]al pr9cipal1 indep5d5t ( exp]i5ce1 s9ce1 )\t recogniz+ an intr9sic necessity 9 ?is tru?1 ! univ]sal c\ld 9 no o!r way be d$uc$ f ! p>ticul>4 ,secondly1 because ev5 :]e exp]i5ce avails1 x is impossible = u to make x exact1 s9ce sup]position made 9 ! mo/ delicate mann] imag9able1 c nev] atta9 to geometrical exactness1 :i* repudiates ! m9ute/ diff]5ce 9 any po9t4 ,x is an elem5t>y !orem1 t ! ?ree angles ( a triangle are equal to two "r angles4 ,?is tru? does n re/ ^u exp]i5ce3 fir/1 because ! univ]sal _c be d$uc$ f ! p>ticul>2 secondly1 because1 h[ev] delicate be ! in/rum5ts = measur+ angles1 !y _c measure !m ) geometrical exactness2 ?irdly1 because geometry supposes conditions :i* we _c realize 9 practice2 l9es h no ?ickness1 & ! v]tices ( angles are indivisible po9ts4 #adg4 ,if g5]al pr9ciples dep5d$ ^u exp]i5ce !y w\ld cease to be g5]al1 & w\ld be limit$ to a c]ta9 numb] ( cases4 ,nei!r w\ld _! enunciation be absolute1 ev5 = ! cases already obs]v$2 = x w\ld ( necessity be r$uc$ to :at _h be5 obs]v$1 t is to say1 to a little m or less1 b nev] be p]fect exactness4 ,consequ5tly we c\ld n ass]t t ! ?ree angles ( e triangle are equal to two "r angles2 all t we c\ld say w\ld be1 t s f> z our exp]i5ce goes1 we h obs]v$ t 9 all triangles ! ?ree angles are v ne>ly equal to two "r angles4 ,?is w\ld obvi\sly de/roy all necess>y tru?s2 & ev5 ma!matical tru?s w\ld be no m c]ta9 ?an ! reports ( adepts 9 any pr(ession :o rec\nt to u _! obs]vations conc]n+ _! respective objects4 #adh4 ,!re c be no sci5ce )\t necess>y tru?s2 & ev5 ! cognition ( cont+5t tru?s w\ld become exce$+ly difficult )\t !m4 ,h[ d we collect ! facts furni%$ by obs]vation1 & adju/ !m8 ,is x n by apply+ c]ta9 g5]al tru?s to !m1 z1 = example1 ^? ( num]ation8 ,o!rwise we c\ld h no p]fect confid5ce 9 !m1 nor 9 ! results ( obs]vation4 #adi4 ,human reason _c live1 if x ab&on ?is treasure ( necess>y tru?s :i* con/itute its common patrimony4 ,individual reason c\ld take no m ?an a few %ort /eps1 ov]:elm$ z x con/antly w\ld be ) ! mass ( obs]vations2 di/ract$ unceas+ly by ! v]ifications to :i* x w\ld always h to recur2 9 want ( "s light to s]ve = all objects2 & prohibit$ ev] f simplify+1 by unit+ ! rays ( sci5ce 9 a common c5tre4 ,g5]al reason w\ld also cease to be1 & m5 w\ld no long] und]/& ea* o!r3 e "o w\ld be conf9$ to 8 own exp]i5ce3 & s9ce !re w\ld be 9 ! exp]i5ces ( all m51 no?+ necess>y1 no?+ to connect !m1 !re w\ld be no unity 9 !m all toge!r3 all ! sci5ces w\ld be a field ( confusion1 to :i* all re/oration ( ord] w\ld be utt]ly impossible4 ,no language c\ld h be5 =m$2 or ev5 if =m$ c\ld be pres]v$4 ,we meet 9 ! simple/ enunciations ( language1 z well z 9 ! complication ( a long disc\rse1 an abundance ( g5]al & necess>y tru?s1 :i* s]ve z ! wo( = ! weav+-9 ( cont+5t tru?s4 #aej4 ,to inquire1 !re=e1 if !re are necess>y tru?s1 is to inquire1 if individual1 if g5]al reason exi/s2 if :at we call reason1 & discov] 9 all m51 really exi/s1 or is b a fanta/ical illusion4 ,?is reason does exi/3 to d5y x is to d5y ourselves3 n to wi% to admit x1 is to reject ! te/imony ( our consci\sness1 :i* assures u t x is 9 ! dep? ( our s\l2 x is to make impot5t ef=ts to de/roy a conviction irresi/ibly impos$ by nature4 #aea4 ,& "h ,i w\ld rem>k t ?is community ( reason among all m5 ( all ages & ( all climes2 ?is admirable unity1 discov]able 9 ! mid/ ( s mu* v>iety2 ?is fundam5tal accord :i* nei!r ! div]sity nor ! contradiction ( views c de/roy1 evid5tly proves t all human s\ls h "o common orig92 t ?\ght is n a "w ( *ance2 t1 besides human intellig5ces1 !re is ano!r :i* s]ves z _! support1 illum9ates !m1 & has1 f ! fir/ mom5t ( _! exi/5ce1 end[$ !m ) all ! faculties ne$$ to p]ceive1 & to "k :at !y p]ceiv$4 ,! admirable ord] :i* reigns ?r\gh\t ! mat]ial _w1 ! conc]t1 ! unity ( plan discov]able 9 x1 are n a m conclusive pro( ( ! exi/5ce ( ,god1 ?an are ! ord]1 ! conc]t1 ! unity1 (f]$ by reason 9 its ass5t to necess>y tru?s4 ,= our own "p1 we +5u\sly confess1 t we c discov] no m solid1 m conclusive1 or m cle> pro( ( ! exi/5ce ( ,god1 ?an t d$uc$ f ! _w ( intellig5ces4 ,beyond ?is x has ano!r advantage1 :i* is1 t x takes = its po9t ( dep>ture ! act mo/ imm$iate to u1 ! consci\sness ( our own acts4 ,x is true1 ! pro( be/ adapt$ to ! capacity ( ord9>y m51 is ! "o f\nd$ on ! admirable ord] reign+ ov] ! corporeal _w3 b ?is is because !y are unaccu/om$ to m$itate ^u ins5sible objects1 ^u :at passes )9 !mselves2 :]e=e x is t !y ab\nd m 9 direct cognitions ?an 9 p[] ( reflection4 ,! a!i/ asks h[ we c be c]ta9 ( ! exi/5ce ( ,god1 & dem&s an app>ition ( ! div9ity3 v well1 ?is app>ition exi/s1 n )\t1 b )9 u3 & al?\gh x may be p>donable = m5 ( little reflection n to p]ceive x1 mo/ c]ta9ly x is n p>donable = ^? :o pret5d to be adepts 9 metaphysical sci5ce1 n ev5 to endeavor to discov] x4 ,! sy/em ( ,malebran*e1 :i* makes m5 see e ?+ 9 ,god1 _c be su/a9$1 b x %[s a v pr(\nd ?9k]4 ,,*apt] ,,xxiv4 ,,exi/5ce ,,( ,,univ]sal ,,reason4 #aeb4 ,g5]al tru?s h "s relation to p>ticul> tru?s2 = s9ce !y are n a va9 illusion1 !y mu/ ( necessity be connect$ ) "s object ei!r exi/+ or possible4 ,:atev] exi/s is p>ticul>2 n ev5 possible be+ c be conceiv$ (1 if x be n1 s to speak1 p>ticul>iz$ 9 ! regions ( possibility4 ,god himself1 be+ by ess5ce1 is n a be+ 9 ab/ract1 b an inf9ite reality4 ,9 him1 ! g5]al idea ( ! pl5itude ( be+1 ( all p]fection1 ( inf9ity1 is1 s to speak1 p>ticul>iz$4 ,g5]al tru?s w\ld !n be va9 illusions did !y n ref] to some?+ p>ticul> ei!r exi/+ or possible4 ,)\t ?is relation1 cognition w\ld be a purely subjective ph5om5on2 sci5ce w\ld h no object2 k w\ld be _h1 b !re w\ld be no?+ kn[n4 ,! appe>ance ( kn[+ is nev] (f]$ to u z a purely subjective fact2 t is to say1 :5 we ?9k we "k1 we ?9k we "k some?+ ei!r )9 or )\t u1 accord+ to ! matt]s :i* occupy u4 ,suppos+1 !n1 ! ph5om5on ( cognition to be purely subjective1 & to become objective = itself1 we %\ld h :at w\ld con/antly lead u into error2 = ! human reason w\ld be infect$ ) a radical vice1 :i* w\ld oblige x to view ^! ph5om5a z means ( p]ceiv+ ! tru?1 :]eas !y are only et]nal s\rces ( deception4 #aec4 ,!re may arise a d\bt 9 ?is correspond5ce ( g5]al ) p>ticul> tru?1 z to :i* is ! pr9ciple2 t is1 :e!r g5]al tru? is tru? by means ( p>ticul> tru?s1 or ! contr>y4 ,all ! diamet]s ( a circle are equal2 ?is is a g5]al tru?4 ,if we suppose a circle to exi/1 all its diamet]s w be equal4 ,we h already se5 t ! c]ta9ty ( ! g5]al tru? nei!r does nor c rea* u ?r\gh ! p>ticul> tru?2 b nei!r1 on ! o!r h&1 does ! p>ticul> /& 9 ne$ ( ! g5]al2 s t x seems1 t ev5 :5 we ab/ract all intellig5ce1 capable ( p]ceiv+ ?is g5]al tru?1 ! exi/+ circle w n cease to h all its diamet]s equal4 #aed4 ,moreov]1 if ! tru? fail 9 "o s+le in/ance1 x _c be g5]al2 b ! p>ticul> may be true al?\gh x fail 9 g5]al4 ,! equality ( ! diamet]s ( an exi/+ circle is1 !n1 a condition necess>y to ! g5]al tru?2 b ! g5]al tru? is n necess>y to ! equality ( ! diamet]s4 ,x is true 9 g5]al t all diamet]s are equal1 s9ce ?is is v]ifi$ 9 all ei!r exi/+ or possible1 & ! g5]al tru? is only ! expression ( ?is v]ification2 b yet x does n appe> t ! diamet]s1 9 any "o p>ticul> case1 are equal by reason ( ! g5]al tru?4 ,x is true t "o p>ticul> :ole is great] ?an "o ( its p>ts1 al?\gh consid]$ 9 itself1 ab/ract$ f all g5]al tru?2 b x w\ld n be true t ! :ole is great] ?an "o ( its p>ts1 if 9 any "o p>ticul> :ole1 ! axiom %\ld fail4 #aee4 ,x w\ld seem t f ^! obs]vations we c\ld inf] t ! tru? ( pr9ciples dep5ds ^u ! tru? ( facts1 & n vice v]sa4 ,nev]!less1 if we reflect m ^u ?is matt]1 we %all discov] t tru? is n bas$ ^u p>ticul> facts1 b ^u some?+ sup]ior to !m4 ,i4 ,we _c f a p>ticul> fact inf] a univ]sal tru?2 b f univ]sal tru? we c inf] ! tru? ( all p>ticul> exi/+ or possible facts4 ,! reason :y ?is consequ5ce is legitimate is f\nd 9 ! necess>y connection ( ! pr$icate & subject2 & ?is necessity _c be discov]$ 9 p>ticul> facts ( _! own nature cont+5t4 ,,ii4 ,nei!r c ! reason ( ?is necessity be f\nd 9 ! simple proposition enunciat+ x1 s9ce ?is e/abli%es no?+1 b only expresses4 ,! enunciation is true1 because x expresses ! tru?2 b ! exi/5ce ( ! tru? does n dep5d ^u its enunciation4 ,,iii4 ,nor c x dep5d ^u our ideas2 = ^! are n productive ( ?+s2 all imag9able p]ceptions _c *ange "o iota ( reality4 ,! idea may express a ?+1 b does n make x4 ,! relation ( ideas ) ea* o!r1 9 s f> avails z x expresses ! relation ( objects2 if = "o mom5t we p]mit ourselves to d\bt ?is correspond5ce1 our reason becomes r$uc$ to utt] impot5ce1 to a va9 illusion ( t :i* ought to be ( no acc\nt4 ,! prop]ties ( ! triangle are conta9$ 9 ! idea we h ( x2 b if ?is idea 7 purely subjective1 if x _h no exact or approximate relation to any real or possible object1 x & all t is built ^u x1 w\ld be m]e ph5om5a ( our m9d1 w\ld signify absolutely no?+1 & w\ld h no m weight ?an ! rav+s ( a madman4 ,,iv4 ,! reason ( necess>y tru?s c 9 n[ise be discov]$ 9 our und]/&+2 e "o p]ceives !m1 )\t ?9k+ ( o!rs or ev5 ( himself4 ,tru? exi/$ be=e any individual2 & :5 we %all h disappe>$1 x w cont9ue ! same1 x w lose no?+4 ,v4 ,all m51 al?\gh !y nei!r d nor c agree1 p]ceive c]ta9 necess>y tru?s2 all individual intellig5ces1 !re=e1 h drunk at "s common f\nta92 !re=e univ]sal reason exi/s4 ,,*apt] ,,xxv4 ,,9 ,,:at ,,does ,,univ]sal ,,reason ,,consi/8 #aef4 ,:at is univ]sal reason8 ,if we consid] x z a simple idea1 z an ab/raction f individual reason1 z some?+ sep>ate f !m1 b n real1 we /rike ^u ! v rock we try to %un4 ,we endeavor to assign a cause ( ! unity ( human reason2 & appeal to univ]sal reason2 & !n to expla9 9 :at univ]sal reason consi/s1 we recur to an ab/raction f individual reason4 ,evid5tly1 ?is is a vici\s circle2 we place ! cause ( a fact s fruitful 9 an ab/raction1 9 a g5]alization ( ! v ?+ we h to expla92 we assign to a great effect a cause totally insuffici5t1 :i* has no exi/5ce out ( our und]/&+1 & :i* only gr[s out ( ! v effect ^: orig9 we are inve/igat+4 #aeg4 ,a real fact mu/ h a real pr9ciple2 a univ]sal ph5om5on mu/ h a univ]sal cause2 a ph5om5on indep5d5t ( all f9ite intellig5ce mu/ spr+ f "s cause indep5d5t ( all f9ite intellig5ce4 ,!re is1 !n1 a univ]sal reason1 ! orig9 ( all f9ite reason1 ! s\rce ( all tru?1 ! light ( all intellig5ces1 ! bond ( all be+s4 ,!re is1 !n1 above all ph5om5a1 above all f9ite individuals1 a be+1 9 :i* is f\nd ! reason ( all be+s1 a great unity1 9 :i* is f\nd ! bond ( all ord]1 & ( all ! community ( o!r be+s4 ,! unity1 !re=e1 ( all human reason af=ds a complete demon/ration ( ! exi/5ce ( ,god4 ,! univ]sal reason is2 b univ]sal reason is an unmean+ ^w1 unless x d5ote an intellig5t1 active be+1 a be+ by ess5ce1 ! produc] ( all be+s1 ( all intellig5ces1 ! cause ( all1 & ! light ( all4 #aeh4 ,imp]sonal reason1 ( :i* "s philosoph]s speak1 is an unmean+ ^w4 ,ei!r !re exi/s a reason di/9ct f ours1 or !re does n3 if x does exi/1 x is n imp]sonal2 if x does n exi/1 x is impossible to expla9 ! community ( human reason3 ?is community w\ld be to u a ph5om5on1 :i* we might call imp]sonal reason1 or any ?+ else we pleas$1 )\t x !re=e be+ possible = u to assign x any orig93 x w\ld be an effect )\t a cause2 a fact )\t a suffici5t reason4 #aei4 ,! und]/&+ ext5ds to a _w ( possibilities1 & !re discov]s a connection ( necess>y relations1 "s ( dep5d5ce1 o!rs ( contradiction3 b if !re 7 no reality :]eon to f\nd ! possibility1 ?is w\ld be an absurdity2 if no?+ exi/$1 no?+ w\ld be possible4 ,^u no?+1 no?+ c be f\nd$2 consequ5tly1 n ev5 possibility4 ,! connection ( necess>y relations :i* we discov] 9 possible be+s1 mu/ h a primitive type to :i* !y ref]3 b 9 no?+ !re are no types4 #afj4 ,! assemblage ( human und]/&+s _c e/abli% possibility4 ,no "o ( !m consid]$ isolately is necess>y to g5]al tru?2 & all toge!r _c h :at no "o ( !m has4 ,we conceive necess>y tru?1 absolutely ab/ract$ f ! human und]/&+3 individual und]/&+s appe> & disappe>1 b "w no *ange 9 ! relations ( possible be+s3 on ! contr>y1 ! und]/&+ ne$s1 9 ord] to ex]cise its functions1 a collection ( pre-exi/+ tru?s1 & )\t !m x _c "w4 ,:at any "o individual und]/&+ requires1 all require4 ,_! union does n increase ! /r5g? ( ea* "o3 s9ce ?is union is no?+ m ?an an assemblage =m$ 9 our m9d1 & may n correspond to any ?+ 9 reality except ! individual und]/&+s1 & _! respective /r5g?4 #afa4 ,necess>y tru?s1 !re=e1 exi/ be=e human reason2 b _! pre-exi/5ce is an unmean+ ^w1 if !y be n ref]r$ to a be+1 ! orig9 ( all reality1 & ! f\ndation ( all possibility4 ,!re is !n no imp]sonal reason prop]ly s call$2 !re is a community ( reason 9 s f> z "o & ! same light illum9es all f9ite intellig5ces2 ,god ! creator ( !m all4 ,,*apt] ,,xxvi4 ,,rem>ks ,,on ,,! ,,real ,,f\ndation ,,( ,,pure ,,possibility4 #afb4 ,s9ce ! argum5t prov+ ! necessity ( a be+ 9 :i* is laid ! f\ndation ( all ! relations 9 ! possible ord]1 is "o ( ! mo/ transc5d5tal 9 all metaphysics1 & at ! same "t "o ( ! mo/ difficult to be p]fectly und]/ood1 we judge x advisable to enl>ge some:at ^u ! consid]ations ?r[n out 9 ! prec$+ *apt]4 ,an example1 9 :i* we und]take to e/abli% ! possibility ( ?+s1 indep5d5tly ( a be+ 9 :i* is f\nd ! reason ( all1 w s]ve our purpose bett] ?an ab/ract reflections4 #afc4 ,two circles ( equal diamet]s are equal4 ,?is proposition is evid5tly true4 ,let u analyze its mean+4 ,! proposition ref]s to ! possible ord]1 & ab/racts absolutely ! exi/5ce ( ! circles & ( ! diamet]s4 ,no case is except$2 all are compris$ 9 ! proposition4 #afd4 ,nei!r does ! tru? ref] to our mode ( und]/&+2 b on ! contr>y1 we conceive x z indep5d5t ( our ?\ght4 ,7 we ask$1 :at w\ld become ( ?is tru? 7 we n to exi/1 we %\ld )\t hesitation reply t x w\ld be ! same1 t x acquir$ no?+ by our exi/5ce1 t x w\ld lose no?+ by our ext9ction4 ,if we believ$ ?is tru? to dep5d 9 any way ^u u1 x w\ld cease to be :at x is1 x w\ld no long] be a necess>y b a cont+5t tru?4 #afe4 ,nor is ! corporeal _w indisp5sable to ! tru? & necessity ( ! proposition3 on ! contr>y1 if we suppose no body to exi/1 ! proposition w\ld lose none ( its tru?1 necessity1 or univ]sality4 #aff4 ,:at w\ld happ51 if1 )draw+ all bodies1 all s5sible repres5tations1 & ev5 all intellig5ces1 we %\ld imag9e absolute & univ]sal no?+8 ,we see ! tru? ( ! proposition ev5 on ?is supposition2 = x is impossible = u to hold x to be false4 ,on e supposition1 our und]/&+ sees a connection :i* x _c de/roy3 ! condition once e/abli%$1 ! result w infallibly foll[4 #afg4 ,an absolutely necess>y connection1 f\nd$ nei!r on u1 nor on ! ext]nal _w1 :i* exi/s be=e any ?+ we c imag9e1 & subsi/s aft] we h annihilat$ all by an ef=t ( our und]/&+1 mu/ be bas$ ^u some?+1 x _c h no?+ = its orig93 to say ?is1 w\ld be to ass]t a necess>y fact )\t a suffici5t reason4 #afh4 ,x is true t 9 ! proposition n[ be=e u1 no?+ real is affirm$2 b if we reflect c>efully1 we f9d ev5 "h ! greate/ difficulty = ^? :o d5y a real f\ndation to pure possibility4 ,:at is rem>kable 9 ?is ph5om5on1 is precisely ?is1 t our und]/&+ feels itself =c$ to give its ass5t to a proposition :i* affirms an absolutely necess>y connection )\t any relation to an exi/+ object4 ,x is conceivable t an intellig5ce affect$ by o!r be+s may "k _! nature & relations2 b x is n s easy ( compreh5sion h[ x c discov] _! nature & relations 9 an absolutely necess>y mann]1 :5 x ab/racts all exi/5ce1 :5 ! gr\nd ^u :i* ! eyes ( ! und]/&+ are fix$1 is ! abyss ( no?+4 #afi4 ,we deceive ourselves :5 we imag9e x possible to ab/ract all exi/5ce4 ,ev5 :5 we suppose our m9d to h lo/ sight ( e ?+1 a v easy supposition1 grant+ t we f9d 9 our consci\sness ! cont+5cy ( our be+1 ! und]/&+ /ill p]ceives a possible ord]1 & imag9es x to be all occupi$ ) pure possibility1 indep5d5t ( a be+ on :i* x is bas$4 ,we repeat1 t ?is is an illusion1 :i* disappe>s s soon z we reflect ^u x4 ,9 pure no?+1 no?+ is possible2 !re are no relations1 no connections ( any k9d2 9 no?+ !re are no comb9ations1 x is a gr\nd ^u :i* no?+ c be pictur$4 #agj4 ,! objectivity ( our ideas & ! p]ception ( necess>y relations 9 a possible ord]1 reveal a communication ( our und]/&+ ) a be+ on :i* is f\nd$ all possibility4 ,?is possibility c be expla9$ on no supposition except t :i* makes ! communication consi/ 9 ! action ( ,god giv+ to our m9d faculties p]ceptive ( ! necess>y relation ( c]ta9 ideas1 bas$ ^u necess>y be+1 & repres5tative ( 8 inf9ite ess5ce4 #aga4 ,)\t ?is communication ! ord] ( pure possibility means no?+3 none ( ! comb9ations ref]able to x conta9 any tru?3 & ?is ru9s all sci5ce4 ,!re c be no necess>y relations if !re be no necessity ^u :i* !y are bas$1 & :]e !y are repres5t$2 if ?is condition be want+1 all cognitions mu/ ref] to some?+ actually exi/+2 !y are ev5 limit$ to :at appe>s1 to :at affects u1 & !y _c affirm any ?+ beyond ! actual ord]4 ,sci5ce1 9 ?is supposition1 is unwor?y ( ! "n2 x is no?+ b a collection ( facts1 ga!r$ toge!r 9 ! field ( exp]i5ce2 we _c say3 ,?is w be1 or w n be2 ?is may be1 or may n be2 we are necess>ily limit$ to :at is2 or1 r1 we ought to conf9e ourselves to t :i* affects u by simple appe>ances1 & nev] be able to rise above ! sph]e ( individual ph5om5a4 ,,*apt] ,,xxvii4 ,,individual ,,& ,,intellectual ,,ph5om5a ,,expla9$ ,,by ,,! ,,univ]sal ,,subsi/+ ,,reason4 #agb4 ,/>t+ f ! ph5om5a obs]vable 9 individual reason1 we h arriv$ at univ]sal reason4 ,let u1 s to speak1 make ! c\nt]pro(2 tak+ ?is univ]sal subsi/+ reason1 let u see if individual reason 9 itself & 9 its ph5om5a c be expla9$ by x4 ,i4 ,:at are necess>y tru?s8 ,!y are ! relations ( be+s1 su* z !y are repres5t$ 9 ! be+ :i* conta9s ! pl5itude ( be+4 ,^! necess>y tru?s1 !n1 /& 9 ne$ ( no individual f9ite reason2 _! reason is f\nd 9 an inf9ite be+4 ,,ii4 ,! ess5ce ( all be+s1 ab/ract$ f all p>ticul> be+s1 is some?+ real1 n 9 itself1 & sep>ately1 b 9 ! be+ :i* conta9s ! pl5itude ( e ?+4 ,,iii4 ,on ?is supposition sci5ce is n full ( empty words1 nor ( m]e creations ( our reason1 b ( necess>y relations repres5t$ 9 a necess>y be+1 & kn[n by x f all et]nity4 ,,iv4 ,sci5ce is possible2 !re is "s necessity 9 cont+5t objects2 _! de/ruction does n de/roy ! et]nal types ( all be+1 ! only object ( sci5ce4 ,v4 ,all individual reason1 sprung f ! same s\rce1 p>ticipates 9 "o same light1 lives "o same life1 has "o & ! same patrimony1 is indivisible 9 ! creative pr9ciple1 b divisible 9 creatures4 ,! unity1 !n1 or r ! uni=mity or community ( human reason is possible1 is necess>y4 ,,vi4 ,! reason1 !n1 ( all m5 is unit$ by ! inf9ite intellig5ce3 ,god !n is 9 u2 & ! mo/ pr(\nd philosophical tru? is conta9$ 9 ^! words ( ! ,apo/le3 ,9 ipso vivimus1 movemur1 et sumus4 ,,vii4 ,all philosophy1 !re=e1 :i* seeks to expla9 reason1 by isolat+ x1 consid]s only p>ticul> ph5om5a unconnect$ by a g5]al bond1 pret5ds to con/ruct ! magnific5t fabric ( our reason ^u p>ticul> facts alone1 b does n appeal to a common orig91 to "o s\rce ( light :5ce all lights h sprung1 is a false philosophy1 is sup]ficial1 at w> ) !ory1 & 9 contradiction ) facts4 ,:5 we reflect ^u ?is1 we c b pity ,locke1 & /ill m ,condillac1 & _! explanations ( human reason by s5sations alone4 ,,viii4 ,?us we und]/& :y we _c give ! reason ( _m ?+s2 we see !m2 !y are ?us3 !y are necess>y2 m we _c say4 ,a triangle is n a circle3 :at reason c we assign = ?is8 ,none6 ,x is s2 ?is is all4 ,b :y8 ,because !re does actually exi/ an imm$iate necessity 9 ! relation repres5t$ 9 ! inf9ite be+1 :i* is tru? by ess5ce4 ,! same inf9ite intellig5ce sees no great] reason ( itself1 ?an 9 itself4 ,x f9ds e ?+1 & ! relations ( all ?+s 9 ! pl5itude ( its be+2 b beyond !m is no?+4 ,he gave to individual reason1 :5 creat+ x1 an intuition ( ^! relations3 no discursion proves !m2 we see !m2 ?is is all4 ,,ix4 ,"s ev5 :o admit ! subjective value ( ideas1 ei!r d\bt+ or d5y+ _! objectivity1 lose sight ( ?is fact4 ,!y seek an argum5t1 :]e !re is ne$ only ( a vision2 !y dem& degrees :]e !re are none4 ,:5 human reason sees c]ta9 tru?s1 x _c g f>!r & d\bt ( !m4 ,x is subject to a primitive law ( its nature1 :i* x _c ab/ract )\t ceas+ to be :at x is4 ,by ! v act ( see+ ! object x is sure ( x2 ! diff]5ce betwe5 subjectivity & objectivity falls )9 ! space ( inf]5ces1 b n )9 t ( imm$iate reason1 or ! und]/&+ ( necess>y tru?s4 #agc4 ,we leave x to ! read]'s judgm5t :e!r ! prec$+ explanation is m satisfactory ?an t by imp]sonal reason2 ! !ory we h attempt$ to exp\nd has be5 held by all ! mo/ em95t metaphysicians4 ,) ,god1 all is cle>2 )\t ,god1 all is a *aos4 ,?is is true 9 ! ord] ( facts1 & n less s 9 ! ord] ( ideas4 ,our p]ception is also a fact2 our ideas likewise are facts2 ov] all presides an admirable ord]2 a *a9 :i* _c be de/roy$ unites all2 b nei!r ?is ord] nor ?is *a9 dep5ds ^u ?is4 ,! ^w reason has a pr(\nd mean+1 = x ref]s to ! inf9ite intellig5ce4 ,:at is true = ! reason ( "o man _c be false = ! reason ( ano!r2 !re are1 indep5d5tly ( all communication among human m9ds1 & ( all intuition1 tru?s necess>y = all4 ,we mu/1 if we w\ld expla9 ?is unity1 rise above ourselves1 mu/ elevate ourselves to t great unity 9 :i* e ?+ orig9ates1 & to :i* e ?+ t5ds4 #agd4 ,?is po9t ( view is high1 b x is ! only "o2 if we dep>t f x we c see no?+1 b are =c$ to use unmean+ words4 ,sublime & consol+ ?\ght6 ,al?\gh man disputes ^u ,god1 & p]haps d5ies him1 he has ,god 9 8 und]/&+1 9 8 ideas1 9 all t he is1 9 all t he ?9ks2 ! p[] ( p]ception communicates ,god to him2 objective tru? is f\nd$ on ,god2 he _c affirm a s+le tru? )\t affirm+ a ?+ repres5t$ 9 ,god4 ,?is intimate communication ( ! f9ite ) ! inf9ite1 is "o ( ! mo/ c]ta9 tru?s ( metaphysics4 ,al?\gh ideological inve/igations %\ld produce no o!r result ?an ! discov]y ( s important a tru?1 we ought to consid] ! "t sp5t 9 !m well improv$4 ,,*apt] ,,xxviii4 ,,obs]vations ,,on ,,! ,,relation ,,( ,,language ,,to ,,ideas4 #age4 ,! relation betwe5 ?\ght & language is "o ( ! mo/ important ideological ph5om5a4 ,:5 we speak we ?9k2 & :5 we ?9k we speak ) an int]nal language4 ,! und]/&+ ne$s spee* z a k9d ( guid+ ?read 9 ! labyr9? ( ideas4 #agf4 ,! connection ( ideas by a sign seems necess>y4 ,! mo/ univ]sal & mo/ conv5i5t ( ^! signs is language2 b we mu/ n =get t x is an arbitr>y sign1 z is prov$ by ! v>iety ( words us$ 9 diff]5t languages to express ! same idea4 #agg4 ,! ph5om5on ( ! relation ( ideas to language orig9ates 9 ! necessity ( p]petuat+ ideas by det]m9ate signs2 & ! importance ( spee* results f its be+ ! mo/ g5]al1 mo/ conv5i5t1 & mo/ flexible sign4 ,& h5ce x is t :5 ^! circum/ances c be unit$ 9 ano!r sign1 ! same object is atta9$4 ,physically speak+1 writt5 language is v diff]5t f language spok52 nev]!less1 9 v _m cases x answ]s equally well4 #agh4 ,! int]nal language is1 sometimes1 r a reflection 9 :i* ! idea is enl>g$ & develop$1 ?an an expression ( x4 ,true1 we d n ord9>ily ?9k )\t speak+ inw>dly2 b z we h already obs]v$1 spee* is an arbitr>y sign1 & consequ5tly we _c e/abli% a p]fectly exact p>allel betwe5 ideas & ! int]nal language4 #agi4 ,we ?9k ) in/antane\sness1 :i* defies ! succession ( words1 h[ev] rapid we may suppose !m to be4 ,x is true t ! int]nal language is f> m rapid ?an ! ext]nal2 b x always involves succession1 & requires a great] or less "t1 accord+ to ! words to be spok54 ,?is obs]vation is important1 le/ we too greatly exagg]ate ! relation ( ideas to spee*4 ,language is c]ta9ly a wond]ful *annel = ! communication ( ideas1 & a p[]ful auxili>y ( our und]/&+2 b we c1 )\t ignor+ ^! qualities1 take c>e to avoid t exagg]ation :i* seems to pron\nce all ?\ght impossible1 if "s ^w ?\ght does n correspond to x4 #ahj4 ,we exp]i5ce (t5 en\gh ! in/antane\s occurr5ce ( a multitude ( ideas1 :i* we aft]w>ds develop 9 our disc\rse4 ,we see ?is 9 ^? quick & lively replies excit$ by a ^w1 or a ge/ure1 :i* contradicts our op9ions or w\nds our feel+s4 ,9 reply+1 x is impossible = u to speak inw>dly1 s9ce ! in/antane\sness ) :i* we reply =bids x4 ,h[ (t51 9 li/5+ to an argum5t1 d we in/antly detect a fault1 :i* we c\ld n expla9 ) words )\t a long disc\rse8 ,h[ (t51 9 propos+ a difficulty to ourselves1 d we cat* its solution 9 an in/ant1 al?\gh we c\ld n possibly expla9 x )\t _m words8 ,h[ (t5 d we at ! v fir/ glance discov] ! flaw 9 a pro(1 ! =ce ( an argum5t1 or ! ease ) :i* x c be retort$ ^u ! propos] ( x1 & all ?is )\t occupy+ a moiety ( ! int]vals necess>y to ei!r ext]nal or int]nal locution8 ,?us x happ5s t ! sudd5 ?\ght is n unfrequ5tly express$ by a s+le ge/ure1 a glance ( ! eye1 a nod ( ! head1 a yes1 or a no1 an exclamation1 or any o!r simil> sign2 all f> m rapid ?an x is possible = ! words expressive ( our ?\ght to be4 #aha4 ,let u illu/rate ?is obs]vation by a few examples4 ,"s "o says3 ,all m5 are naturally equal4 ,! s5se ( ?is proposition _c be kn[n until ! ^w equal is pron\nc$4 ,h[1 !n1 is x t an enlight5$ & judici\s man1 w1 by an in/9ctive impulse1 answ] no1 w cat* ! ^w at ! mom5t1 & refute ! empty boa/ ( ! declaim] ) a fl[ ( reasons8 ,until aft] ! ^w1 naturally ! und]/&+ rema9$ 9 susp5se2 !re 0 no?+ to %[ ! mean+ ( ! proposition1 s9ce in/ead ( equal1 might h be5 said weak1 mortal1 incon/ant1 or any o!r su* ^w2 b s soon z ! ^w equal is pron\nc$1 ! und]/&+ says no1 )\t hav+ _h ! "t to use an int]nal or ext]nal locution4 ,! exact p>allel :i* "s suppose to exi/ betwe5 ideas & spee* is1 !re=e1 impossible2 & !y :o def5d x are guilty ( an exagg]ation incompatible ) exp]i5ce4 ,ano!r ass]ts1 ju/ice to h no b\nds b ! limit ( p[]4 ,all :o h any idea ( morality1 at once answ] no3 d !y1 =soo?1 ne$ an inw>d locution8 ,true1 9 ord] to expla9 :at is express$ by ?is no1 & ^u :at x is bas$1 _m words are requir$1 & t to reflect ^u ! proposition "o mu/ speak 9 inw>dly2 b ?is is all indep5d5t ( t intellectual act1 signifi$ by ! no1 & :i* w\ld h be5 /ill m briefly express$ _h x be5 possible4 ,ano!r yet may say3 ,if ?is fact be atte/$ by ! s5ses1 x w be true2 & if x be true1 x w be atte/$ by ! s5ses4 ,! he>] ass5ts to ! =m] "p1 b re/s 9 susp5se z to ! latt] "p until ! ^w atte/ is pron\nc$4 ,!n an in/antane\s no leaps f 8 lips1 or is express$ by a negative ge/ure4 ,does any int]ior locution prec$e8 ,none1 = none is possible4 ,! foll[+ w\ld be ! words expressive ( ?is act3 ,x is n true t e fact mu/ be atte/$ by ! s5ses2 s9ce _m facts are true1 :i* d n belong to ! sph]e ( s5sibility4 ,let u exam9e :e!r or n ^! words are compatible ) ! in/antane\sness ( ! no4 #ahb4 ,x w1 p]haps1 be object$1 t ! negation is "o ?+1 & ! reason ( ! negation ano!r3 t ! simple no suffices = ! =m]1 & t x is only = ! latt] t m words are ne$$4 ,b ?is is an equivocation4 ,:5 ! no 0 said1 x 0 said = a reason1 & ?is reason 0 ! sight ( ! inconsequ5ce !n express$ by ! words4 ,o!rwise x w\ld be necess>y to admit ! negative to be a bl9d judgm5t1 & giv5 )\t a reason4 ,?is be+ s1 ?is reason f\nd$ ^u ! judgm5t1 al?\gh express$ 9 ! mo/ laconical mode possible1 w\ld require "s words1 to =m :i*1 ei!r int]iorly or ext]iorly1 !re has be5 no "t4 ,!re is a "q ( calculation4 ,he :o he>s ! proposition _c "k ! mean+ ( x1 until ! ^w atte/ is pron\nc$1 & ! s5t5ce br\ght to a full /op4 ,be=e rea*+ ! ^w atte/1 ! s5se ( ! proposition 0 unkn[n2 x 0 n possible to =m any judgm5t1 s9ce in/ead ( say+1 ,if x be true ! s5ses w atte/ x1 he might h said1 ,if x be true ! s5ses w n belie x4 ,we h spok5 ( ! full /op1 9 ord] to %[ ! in/antane\sness ( ! p]ception & ( ! judgm5t1 :i* proves t ! und]/&+ does n det]m9e until ! la/ mom5t4 ,b let u suppose ! same ^w atte/ to h be5 us$ inde$1 b in/ead ( a full /op1 to h be5 foll[$ by ^! o!r words1 if ?is fact falls "u _! jurisdiction4 ,! words are ! same1 & yet !y d n provoke a negative judgm5t2 & :y8 ,simply because ! speak] cont9u$4 ,if he _h ceas$ speak+1 or _h us$ an inflection ( voice indicative ( a p]iod1 ! no w\ld h ris5 l a fla%4 ,a comma or a p]iod 9 writ+1 produce ! same effect z a pause or an inflection ( ! voice 9 speak+4 ,:5 we see ^! signs1 we judge in/antane\sly1 ) a velocity incomp>ably great] ?an any int]nal or ext]nal locution4 ,x w\ld be easy to multiply examples %[+ ! sup]iority ( ?\ght to spee*1 s f> z rapidity is conc]n$2 b ^? already adduc$ seem to u suffici5t to prove t !re is "s exagg]ation 9 say+ t man be=e speak+ 8 ?\ght1 ?9ks 8 words1 if x be und]/ood t all ?\ght is impossible )\t a ^w ?\ght4 ,,*apt] ,,xxix4 ,,orig9 ,,& ,,"* ,,( ,,! ,,relation ,,betwe5 ,,language ,,& ,,ideas4 #ahc4 ,_m ideas seem to be l s5sations & s5tim5ts2 simple facts1 incapable ( decomposition1 = :i* reason we _c expla9 !m ) words4 ,words illu/rate ideas2 b d !y n sometimes also confuse !m8 ,:5 we speak ( an idea1 we reflect ^u x1 & ,i h already rem>k$#aa t ! reflective =ce ( our p]ceptive ideas is mu* inf]ior to _! direct =ce4 #aa ,see ,book ,i41 ,*s4 ,,iii4 & ,,xxiii4 #ahd4 ,we h sometimes ?\ght t we d1 p]haps1 "k ?+s :i* we imag9e we d n "k1 & t we are ignorant ( ?+s we ?9k we "k4 ,x is c]ta9 t disputes h be5 _h 9 all s*ools ( philosophy ^u _m ideas1 )\t atta9+ any satisfactory result2 & yet ^! ideas ought to be suffici5tly cle> to our m9d1 s9ce we all use !m e day )\t any equivocation4 ,philosoph]s h n1 z yet1 be5 able to agree ^u ! ideas ( space & "t1 b ! mo/ ignorant m51 nev]!less1 make use ( ^! words1 & :5ev] ! necessity occurs1 apply !m ) exactness4 ,?is seems to prove t ! difficulty is n 9 ! idea b 9 its explanation4 #ahe4 ,x has be5 rem>k$ t !re is great tru? & exactness 9 ord9>y language1 s mu* s1 t ! c>eful obs]v] is a/oni%$ at ! recondite wisdom hidd5 9 a language2 to see h[ great1 h[ v>i\s1 & h[ delicate are ! gradations into :i* ! s5se ( words is di/ribut$4 ,?is is n ! fruit ( reflection2 x is ! "w ( reason op]at+ directly1 & consequ5tly mak+ use ( ideas )\t reflect+ ^u !m4 #ahf4 ,9 ideological inve/igations "s idea ( ! idea is s\ght1 & x is n not$ t if ?is be necess>y to sci5ce1 ano!r idea ( ! o!r idea may be exact$1 & t ?us an inf9ite process may be giv54 ,x ought to be borne 9 m9d t 9 treat+ ( simple facts1 z well ext]nal z int]nal1 no o!r explanation ( !m c be dem&$ ?an an exposition4 #ahg4 ,idea-images are a font ( error1 & probably all ideas explicable by words are n less s4 ,an idea-image induces ! belief t !re are 9 our m9d no ideas b s5sible repres5tations1 & ! supposition t e idea c be express$ by words1 makes u imag9e t to be composite :i* is simple1 & attribute to ! sub/ance :at belongs to ! =m4 #ahh4 ,a composite idea seems to be a union1 or r a connect$ s]ies ( ideas1 :i* are ei!r excit$ simultane\sly1 or foll[ ea* o!r ) great rapidity4 ,our und]/&+ requires words to b9d ?is collection1 to reta9 ! ?read :i* connects !m2 & h5ce x is1 t :5 ! idea is simple1 language is n indisp5sable4 ,x is said t spee* is necess>y 9 ord] to ?9k1 x might sometimes be said ) m propriety1 t x is necess>y 9 ord] to recollect4 #ahi4 ,:5 ! object occupy+ our att5tion is (f]$ to ! s5sible intuition1 we h no ne$ ( spee*4 ,we c1 :5 we reflect ^u a "r l9e1 an angle1 a triangle1 obs]ve t _! imag9>y repres5tation is all t we require1 & t we d n ne$ to b9d ^! objects toge!r by words4 ,! same ?+ happ5s 9 ?9k+ ( unity1 or on ! numb]s two1 ?ree1 & f\r1 :i* we easily repres5t to ourselves s5sibly4 ,! necessity = spee* beg9s :5 ! imag9ation loses ! di/9ct repres5tation ( objects1 & ne$s to comb9e v>i\s ideas4 ,did we n assign to a ^w ! idea ( a _m-sid$ polygon1 we %\ld be 9 ! greate/ confusion1 & x w\ld be impossible = u to reason ^u x4 #aij4 ,s9ce1 on ! "o h&1 our p]ceptive faculties d n create _! objects1 b are limit$ to ! comb9+ ( !m2 &1 on ! o!r h&1 our p]ception is n capable ( embrac+ _m at "o "t1 x results t ! ex]cise ( our faculties is necess>ily successive2 ! unity ( consci\sness s]v+ z ! bond ( union to our p]ceptions4 ,b consci\sness has no o!r means ( kn[+ :at passes )9 x1 ?an to fix its op]ations by det]m9ate signs1 :5ce fl[s ! necessity ( arbitr>y signs1 :i* mu/ be s5sible1 by reason ( ! relation unit+ our intellig5ce ) ! s5sitive faculties3 & x is to be obs]v$1 t = ?is reason1 e sign to :i* we assign an idea1 may be ! object ( "o ( ! s5ses4 ,! great numb] & v>iety ( ideas & _! comb9ations1 require an exce$+ly v>iable & flexible sign1 & ?is v>iety & flexibility require c]ta9 *>act]s to simplify x1 & ?us r5d] its ret5tion 9 ! memory m easy1 :5ce ! advantages ( language3 9 ! mid/ ( its a/oni%+ v>iety x lays ^! *>act]s 9 radical syllables4 ,! conjugation ( a s+le v]b alone (f]s u a consid]able numb] ( v diff]5t ideas1 ! ret5tion ( :i* w\ld be excessively difficult1 7 !y n jo9$ by "s tie su* z ! radical syllable3 z 9 ! v]b to speak1 ! syllable speak4 ,we see ?is by ! great] labor ! irregul> v]bs co/ u ?an d ! regul> v]bs :5 le>n+ a language3 & x may be rem>k$ 9 *ildr5 also1 :o blund] on ! irregul>ities4 ,we might comp>e language to ! catalogue ( a libr>y1 :i* is ! m p]fect1 ! m x unites simplicity ) v>iety1 s z to designate exactly ! classes ( ! books & ! %elves :]eon !y are to be f\nd4 #aia4 ,succession ( ideas & op]ations2 "h1 !n1 orig9ates ! necessity ( a sign by :i* to connect & recollect !m3 relation ( our und]/&+ ) ! s5sitive faculties1 is ! reason :y ! signs mu/ be s5sible2 v>iety & simplicity ( language con/itutes its m]it s f> z ! sign ( ideas4#ab #ab ,see ,bk4 ,i41 ,*4 ,,xxvi4 ,,*apt] ,,xxx4 ,,innate ,,ideas4 #aib4 ,among ! adv]s>ies ( innate ideas !re exi/ pr(\nd diff]5ces4 ,! mat]iali/s ma9ta9 t man has receiv$ e ?+ ?r\gh ! s5ses1 9 su* a way z to make our und]/&+ no?+ m ?an ! product ( an organism :i* has be5 advanc+ 9 p]fection1 j z a ma*9e acquires1 by use1 a great] facility & delicacy ( movem5t4 ,!y suppose no?+ b ! faculty ( s5sation to pre-exi/ 9 ! m9d2 or1 to speak m correctly1 !y admit no m9d1 b only a corporeal be+1 ^: functions naturally produce :at is call$ ! intellectual developm5t4 ,! s5si/s :o d n attribute to matt] ! faculty ( ?9k+1 d n admit innate ideas2 !y confess ! exi/5ce ( ! m9d1 b conc$e to x non-s5sitive faculties2 all t x owns mu/ h come to x ?r\gh ! s5ses1 & x c be no?+ else ?an a trans=m$ s5sation4 ,innate ideas c\nt$ o!r adv]s>ies :o 7 nei!r mat]iali/s nor s5si/s3 su* 7 ! s*ola/ics1 :o on ! "o h& def5d$ ! pr9ciple t !re is no?+ 9 ! und]/&+ :i* has n previ\sly be5 9 ! s5ses2 b1 on ! o!r h&1 combat$ bo? mat]ialism & s5sism4 ,! diff]5ce betwe5 ! s*ola/ics & ! fri5ds ( innate ideas w\ld n p]haps h be5 s great z x 0 suppos$ to be1 _h ! "q be5 propos$ 9 ano!r mann]4 #aic4 ,! s*ola/ics reg>d$ ideas z accid5tal =ms1 9 su* a way t an und]/&+ ) ideas may be comp>$ to a piece ( canvas cov]$ ) figures4 ,! def5d]s ( innate ideas said2 ,! figures already exi/ ^u ! canvas2 to see !m we h only to raise ! veil :i* cov]s !m4 ,?is explanation is some:at =c$1 s9ce x op5ly contradicts exp]i5ce1 :i* te/ifies3 fir/1 ! necessity ( ! und]/&+ be+ excit$ by s5sations2 secondly1 ! intellectual elaboration :i* we exp]i5ce 9 ?9k+1 & :i* tea*es u t !re is )9 u a k9d ( production ( ideas4 ,! canvas1 say ! adv]s>ies ( innate ideas1 is all :ite1 & 9 pro( witness ! unceas+ labor ( ! arti/ to cov] x ) figures4 ,b does _! doctr9e1 =soo?1 suppose t no?+ exi/s be=e exp]i5ce8 ,d !y admit man to be ! simple "w ( in/ruction1 ( education8 ,d !y ma9ta9 t our int]ior _w is no?+ m ?an a s]ies ( ph5om5a caus$ by impressions1 & t x w\ld h be5 o!r ?an :at x is1 _h x _h o!r impressions8 ,mo/ c]ta9ly n4 ,!y admit3 fir/1 an inw>d activity excit$ & improv$ by s5sible exp]i5ce3 secondly1 ! necessity ( fir/ pr9ciples z well intellectual z moral3 ?irdly1 an int]ior light1 to enable u to see !m :5 pres5t$1 & to ass5t to !m by an irresi/ible necessity4 ,we f9d ! words1 ,signatum e/ sup] nos lum5 vultus tui ,dom9e1 cit$ ^u e page ( ^? au?ors4 #aid4 ,sa9t ,?omas says t fir/ pr9ciples1 z well speculative z practical1 mu/ be naturally communicat$ to u3 ,oportet igitur naturalit] nobis esse indita1 sicut pr9cipia speculabilium1 ita et pr9cipia op]abilium4#ac ,9 ano!r place1 inquir+ :e!r ! s\l kn[s immat]ial ?+s 9 _! et]nal reasons1 79 rationibus t]nis17 he says t ! intellectual light :i* is )9 u1 is no?+ else ?an a c]ta9 p>ticipat$ lik5ess ( ! uncreat$ life1 9 :i* ! et]nal reasons are conta9$3 ,ipsum enim lum5 intellectuale1 quod e/ 9 nobis nihil e/ aliud1 quam qudam p>ticipata similitudo lum9is increati1 9 quo cont95tur rationes t]n4#ad #ac ,p4 ,i41 ,q4 ,l4 ,,xxix4 ,a4 #ab4 #ad ,ib41 ,q4 ,l4 ,,xxxiv4 ,a4 #e4 #aie4 ,we f9d x1 9 ^! passages1 expressly taught t !re is )9 u some?+ besides :at we h acquir$ by exp]i5ce1 9 :i* po9t ! s*ola/ics all agree ) ! def5d]s ( innate ideas4 ,! diff]5ce betwe5 !m is ?is3 ! =m] d n consid] ! intellectual light to suffice = k1 if ! =ms or species ^u :i* x may reflect are want+2 ! latt] di/+ui% ! light f ! colors1 & !m !y make orig9ate 9 ! light itself4 #aif4 ,! "q ( innate ideas1 s w>mly conte/$ 9 ! s*ools ( philosophy1 w\ld nev] h pres5t$ s great difficulties1 _h x be5 /at$ ) prop] cle>ness4 ,to d ?is x 0 necess>y to classify ! inw>d ph5om5a call$ ideas 9 a correspond+ mann]1 & to det]m9e ) accuracy ! s5se ( ! ^w innate4 #aig4 ,accord+ to :at we h already said1 we hold t !re are 9 our m9d s5sible repres5tations2 intellectual action ^u !m1 or geometrical ideas2 ideas purely intellectual1 ei!r intuitive or non-intuitive2 & g5]al det]m9ate & indet]m9ate ideas4 ,i w give examples ( ^! cases t !y may ! bett] be und]/ood4 ,a p>ticul> triangle is repres5t$ 9 our imag9ation2 "h1 !n1 is a s5sible repres5tation3 intellectual act p]ceiv+ ! nature ( ! triangle consid]$ 9 g5]al2 "h is a geometrical idea1 an idea relat+ to ! s5sible ord]3 cognition ( "o ( our acts ( und]/&+ or w2 "h is a pure & intuitive idea3 intellig5ce1 w1 conceiv$ 9 g5]al2 "h is a g5]al det]m9ate idea3 sub/ance2 "h f9ally is a g5]al indet]m9ate idea4#ae #ae ,see ,*s4 ,,xii4 & ,,xiii4 #aih4 ,:at is und]/ood by innate8 ,t :i* is n born1 :i* ! m9d possesses1 n acquir$ by its own labor1 nor by impressions com+ f ! ext]ior1 b by ! imm$iate gift ( ! au?or ( its nature2 ! innate is oppos$ to ! acquir$1 & to inquire if !re are innate ideas is to inquire if we h 9 our m9d ideas1 be=e receiv+ any impressions or do+ any act4 #aii4 ,x _c be ma9ta9$ t s5sible repres5tations are innate4 ,exp]i5ce te/ifies t )\t ! impressions ( ! organs we _c h repres5tations correspond+ to !m2 t once ^! are plac$ 9 action 9 a prop] mann]1 we _c help exp]i5c+ !m4 ,?is is applicable to all s5sations1 :e!r !y be actual1 exi/+1 or only recollect$4 ,!y :o und]take to ma9ta9 t s5sible repres5tations exi/ 9 our s\l previ\sly to all organic impressions1 also advance an op9ion unsu/a9able ei!r by facts ( exp]i5ce or by argum5ts a priori4 #bjj4 ,x is to be rem>k$1 t ! argum5t f\nd$ ^u ! impossibility ( ! body's transmitt+ impressions to ! m9d1 proves no?+ 9 favor ( ! op9ion we combat4 ,ev5 7 ! argum5t conclusive1 ! necessity ( innate ideas c\ld n !nce be inf]r$1 s9ce ! physical non-communication ( ! body & ! m9d w\ld be sav$ 9 ! sy/em ( occasional causes1 & x c\ld at ! same "t be argu$ t !re are no pre-exi/+ ideas1 b t !y h be5 caus$ 9 ! pres5ce1 & on occasion ( organic affections4 #bja4 ,ideas relative to s5sible repres5tations seem to consi/1 n 9 =ms ( ! und]/&+1 b 9 its acts ex]cis$ ^u ^! same repres5tations4#af #af ,see ,*4 ,,xx4 ,to call ^! ideas innate is to contradict exp]i5ce1 & ev5 to ignore _! nature4 ,^! acts _c be p]=m$ if ! object1 :i* is ! s5sible repres5tation be want+2 & ?is does n exi/ )\t an impression ( ! corporeal organs4 ,to call ^! ideas innate1 has !n1 ei!r no mean+ at all1 or c mean no?+ else ?an ! pre-exi/5ce ( ! intellectual activity1 subsequ5tly develop$ 9 ! pres5ce ( s5sible intuitions4 #bjb4 ,nei!r c ^? intuitive ideas1 n ref]able to s5sibility1 su* z are ^? we h :5 reflect+ ^u ! acts ( und]/&+ & w1 be innate4 ,:at 9 ?is case s]ves z ! idea1 is ! v same act ( ! und]/&+ or ( ! w :i* is pres5t$ to our p]ception 9 consci\sness3 to say1 !n1 t ^! ideas are innate is equival5t to say+ t ^! acts exi/ be=e !y exi/4 ,ev5 :5 ! p]ception does n ref] to pres5t acts1 b to pa/ acts n[ recollect$1 ! argum5t reta9s ! same =ce3 = x c h no recollection ( !m if !y h n previ\sly exi/$1 s9ce our acts _c exi/ be=e we h p]=m$ !m4 #bjc4 ,h5ce x may be inf]r$ t no intuitive idea is innate1 s9ce intuition supposes an object pres5t$ to ! faculty ( p]ception4 #bjd4 ,g5]al det]m9ate ideas are ^? :i* ref] to an intuition3 !y _c1 !re=e1 exi/ be=e x3 & s9ce1 on ! o!r h&1 intuition is impossible )\t an act1 x foll[s t ^! ideas _c be innate4 #bje4 ,la/ ( all rema9 g5]al indet]m9ate ideas1 t is to say1 ^? :i* ( !mselves alone (f] to ! m9d1 no?+ ei!r exi/+ or possible4#ag ,if we obs]ve c>efully ! nature ( ^! ideas1 we %all see t !y are no?+ else ?an p]ceptions ( "o aspect ( an object consid]$ "u a g5]al reason4 ,x _c be d\bt$1 t "o ( ! *>act]i/ics ( intellig5ce is ! p]ception ( ^! aspects2 & x is no less indubitable1 t x does n !nce foll[1 t we mu/ imag9e ^! ideas to a k9d ( =ms pre-exi/+ 9 our m9d1 & di/9ct f ! acts by :i* x ex]cises its p]ceptive faculty4 ,we d n see :at gr\nd !re c be = affirm+ ^! ideas to be innate1 & to h la9 hidd5 9 our m9d previ\sly to ! developm5t ( all activity1 j l ?+s /[$ away 9 ! corn]s ( a museum1 clos$ h[ev] to ! curiosity ( spectators4 #ag ,see ,*4 ,,xxi4 #bjf4 ,in/ead ( ab&on+ ourselves to simil> suppositions1 x w\ld seem t we ought to recognize 9 ! m9d an innate activity1 subject to ! laws impos$ ^u x by its ,creator1 ! inf9ite intellig5ce4 ,ev5 grant+ ideas to be di/9ct f p]ceptive acts1 x is n necess>y to admit !m z pre-exi/+4 ,true1 t 9 su* a case x w\ld be necess>y to recognize 9 ! m9d a faculty productive ( ! repres5tative species1 f :i*1 h[ev]1 we %\ld n escape by id5tify+ ideas ) p]ceptions4 ,^! la/ are acts spr++1 s to speak1 f ! v bottom ( our s\l1 & :i* appe> & disappe> l ! fl[]s ( a plant3 & ?us we mu/ 9 e way recognize 9 ourselves a p[] :i* 9 due circum/ances w n fail to produce :at be=e did n exi/4 ,)\t ?is x is impossible to =m any idea ( :at activity is4 #bjg4 ,resum+ ! doctr9e ?us f> deliv]$ ^u innate ideas1 we c r$uce x to a =mula 9 ! foll[+ mann]3 ,i4 ,!re are 9 u s5sitive faculties :i* are develop$ by organic impressions1 ei!r z cause or occasion4 ,,ii4 ,we p]ceive no?+ by ! s5ses n subject to ! laws ( organism4 ,,iii4 ,int]nal s5sible repres5tations _c be =m$ ( o!r elem5ts ?an ^? furni%$ by s5sations4 ,,iv4 ,:atev] is said conc]n+ ! pre-exi/5ce ( s5sible repres5tations to organic impressions1 besides be+ said )\t any reason1 is 9 contradiction ) exp]i5ce4 ,v4 ,geometrical ideas1 or ideas relat+ to s5sible intuitions1 are n innate2 s9ce !y are ! acts ( ! und]/&+ :i* op]ates ^u mat]ials provid$ by ! s5sibility4 ,,vi4 ,intuitive ideas ( ! intellectual ord] are n innate1 because !y are no?+ else ?an ! acts ( ! und]/&+ or w1 pres5t$ to our p]ception 9 reflex consci\sness4 ,,vii4 ,g5]al det]m9ate ideas are n innate1 s9ce !y are ! repres5tation ( intuitions1 ^u :i* "s act has ( necessity be5 p]=m$4 ,,viii4 ,!re is no gr\nd ( affirm+ t g5]al indet]m9ate ideas1 :i* seem to be acts ( ! faculty p]ceptive ( objects "u a g5]al reason1 are innate4 ,,ix4 ,all t !re is ( innate 9 our m9d is s5sitive & intellectual activity2 b bo? to be put into motion1 require objects to affect !m4 ,x4 ,! developm5t ( ?is activity beg9s ) organic affections2 & al?\gh x goes f> beyond ! sph]e ( s5sibility1 x always rema9s m or less subject to ! conditions impos$ by ! union ( ! s\l & body4 ,,xi4 ,! intellectual activity has a priori conditions totally indep5d5t ( s5sibility1 & applicable to all objects1 no matt] :at impressions may h be5 _! cause4 ,! pr9ciple ( contradiction figures z ! fir/ among ^! conditions4 ,,xii4 ,!re is !n 9 our m9d some?+ a priori & absolute1 :i* _c be alt]$1 ev5 al?\gh all ! impressions we receive f objects be totally v>i$1 nor if all ! relations we h ) !m 7 to und]go a radical *ange4 ,,book ,,fif?4 ,,idea ,,( ,,be+4 ,,*apt] ,i4 ,,idea ,,( ,,be+4 #a4 ,!re is 9 our und]/&+ ! idea ( be+4 ,indep5d5t ( s5sations1 & 9 an ord] f> sup]ior to !m1 !re exi/ ideas 9 our und]/&+1 :i* ext5d to1 & are a necess>y elem5t ( all ?\ght4 ,! idea ( be+1 or ( ens1 holds ! fir/ rank among ^!4 ,:5 ! s*ola/ics said t ! object ( ! und]/&+ 0 be+1 objectum intellectus e/ ens1 !y enunciat$ a pr(\nd tru?1 & po9t$ out "o ( ! mo/ c]ta9 & important ( all ideological facts4 #b4 ,be+1 or ens 9 se1 ab/ract$ f all modification & det]m9ation1 is1 consid]$ 9 its greate/ g5]ality1 conceiv$ by our und]/&+4 ,:atev] may be ! orig9 ( ?is idea1 or ! mode ( its =mation 9 our und]/&+1 c]ta9 x is t x exi/s4 ,x is ( cont9ual application1 & )\t x x is almo/ impossible = u to ?9k4 ,! v]b to be1 expressive ( ?is idea1 is f\nd 9 e language3 9 e disc\rse1 ev5 9 ! simple/1 we meet ?is expression3 ! le>n$ & ! ignorant1 alike1 cont9ually employ x 9 ! same s5se1 & ) equal facility4 ,! only diff]5ce1 z to ! use ( ?is idea1 betwe5 ! ru/ic & ! philosoph]1 is1 t ! "o does1 ! o!r does n1 reflect ^u x3 b ! direct p]ception is ! same 9 bo?1 equally cle> 9 all cases4 ,su* a ?+ is or is n2 0 or 0 n2 w be or w n be2 !re is some?+ or no?+2 we _h or did n h2 we %all h or %all n h1 are all applications ( ! idea ( be+1 applications made alike by all p]sons1 )\t ! lea/ %ad[ ( obscurity2 all compreh5d p]fectly well ! s5se ( ^! words1 & ! m9d consequ5tly has ! idea correspond+ to !m4 ,! difficulty1 if any !re be1 beg9s ) ! reflex act1 9 ! p]ception1 n ( be+1 b ( ! idea ( be+4 ,s f> z ! direct act is conc]n$1 ! conception is s p]fectly cle> z to leave no?+ to be desir$4 #c4 ,exp]i5ce tea*es ?is1 b x c also be prov$ by conclusive argum5ts4 ,all philosoph]s agree t ! pr9ciple ( contradiction is evid5t ( itself to all m51 t x ne$s no application1 to und]/& ! s5se ( ! words suffic+2 :i* c\ld n be true did n all m5 h ! idea ( be+4 ,! pr9ciple is1 t x is impossible = a ?+ to be1 & n to be at same "t4 ,"h1 !n1 is no "q ( any ?+ det]m9ate2 nei!r ( body nor ( m9d1 ( sub/ance nor ( accid5ts1 ( inf9ite nor ( f9ite1 b ( be+1 ( a ?+1 :atev] x may be1 9 its greate/ g5]ality2 ( :i* x is affirm$ t x _c bo? be & n be at ! same "t4 ,_h we no idea ( be+1 ! pr9ciple w\ld mean no?+3 contradiction is inconceivable :5 we h no idea ( ! contradict+ extremes1 & "h ! extremes are be+ & n-be+4 #d4 ,! same is se5 9 ano!r pr9ciple1 closely resembl+1 if n id5tical )1 t ( contradiction3 e ?+ ei!r is or is n4 ,"h1 also1 !re is "q ( be+ 9 its greate/ indet]m9at5ess1 consid]$ only z be+1 z no?+ m4 ,)\t ! idea ( be+1 ! axiom c\ld h no mean+4 #e4 ,! pr9ciple ( ,desc>tes1 ,i ?9k1 !re=e ,i am1 also includes ! idea ( be+3 ,i am4 ,:5 he und]takes to expla9 x1 ?is philosoph] relies ^u ! fact t :at is n1 _c act2 ?us ! idea ( be+ ent]s n only into ! pr9ciple ( ,desc>tes1 b is ev5 ! f\ndation ^u :i* he re/s x4 #f4 ,:e!r we make ! inw>d s5se ! basis ( our cognitions1 or pref] ! evid5ce by :i* "o idea is conta9$ 9 ano!r1 x is always necess>y to make ! idea ( be+ a prim>y elem5t2 we mu/ suppose ! und]/&+ to be be=e x c ?9k2 we mu/ suppose ?\ght to be be=e we c make use ( x2 we mu/ suppose our s5sations & s5tim5ts1 ! op]ations & affections ( our s\ls1 to be1 be=e we c inve/igate _! causes1 _! orig91 & inquire into _! nature2 we mu/ suppose ourselves to be1 t we are1 be=e we c advance "o /ep 9 any s5se4 ,! idea ( be+ does !n exi/ 9 our m9d1 & is an elem5t indisp5sable to all intellectual acts4 ,,*apt] ,,ii4 ,,simplicity ,,& ,,indet]m9at5ess ,,( ,,! ,,idea ,,( ,,be+4 #g4 ,no?+ c be conceiv$ m simple ?an ! idea ( be+4 ,x _c be compos$ ( elem5ts4 ,x all[s ( no?+ det]m9ate1 s9ce x is 9 itself absolutely indet]m9ate4 ,! in/ant t some?+ det]m9ate is made to ent] x1 x is 9 a mann] de/roy$2 x is no long] ! idea ( be+1 b ( su* a be+2 an idea appli$1 b n ! idea ( ! be+ 9 all its g5]ality4 #h4 ,h[ %all we make x und]/ood :at we w\ld express by ! ^w be+1 or ens8 ,if we say t x comprises all1 ev5 ! mo/ unlike & opposite ?+s1 !re is no reason :y x may n be und]/ood :at x is4 ,to jo9 to ! idea ( be+ any det]m9ation1 is to introduce into x a het]og5e\s elem5t1 :i* 9 no mann] belongs to x1 & c only accompany x z a pure aggregation1 b c nev] comb9e ) x1 )\t r5d]+ x :at x is n4 ,if ! idea ( subsi/5ce be comb9$ ) t ( be+1 we no long] h ! pure idea ( be+1 b t ( subsi/5ce4 #i4 ,! idea ( be+ is !n mo/ simple2 x _c be resolv$ into elem5ts1 & _c consequ5tly spr+ f spee*1 unless z f an excit+ cause4 ,if we be ask$1 = example1 :at we und]/& by sub/ance1 by modification1 cause or effect1 we expla9 x by unit+ to ! idea ( be+ t ( subsi/5ce or inh]5ce1 t ( productive =ce1 or ( a ?+ produc$2 b x is impossible = u to expla9 be+1 o!rwise ?an by itself4 ,we may make use ( ! words1 some?+1 :at is1 reality1 & ! l1 b all ^! are inadequate to expla9 ! ?+ itself2 !y are b ! ef=ts we make to excite 9 ! und]/&+ ( o!rs ! idea we contemplate 9 our own4 ,if we w\ld give fur!r explanations by %[+ h[ ! idea correspond+ to ! ^w be+1 is applicable to e ?+1 & 9 ord] to d ?is enum]ate ! diff]5t classes ( be+1 apply+ ! idea to !m all1 we only succe$ 9 %[+ ! use ( ! idea & ! applications ( :i* x is susceptible2 b we d n decompose x4 ,we say1 inde$1 t !re is 9 all some?+ correspond+ to x1 b we d n decompose ?is some?+2 we only po9t x out4 #aj4 ,f ?is we inf] t ! idea ( be+ is n intuitive to u1 & t by its v indet]m9at5ess x excludes all t a det]m9ate object c (f] to our p]ception4 ,,*apt] ,,iii4 ,,sub/antive ,,& ,,copulative ,,be+4 #aa4 ,= ! m ?or\gh und]/&+ ( ?is matt]1 x w be well to di/+ui% betwe5 ! absolute & relative ideas ( be+2 t is betwe5 :at is express$ by ! ^w be+1 :5 x designates reality1 simple exi/5ce1 & :5 x m>ks ! union ( a pr$icate & its subject4 ,9 ! two foll[+ propositions we see v closely ! diff]5t mean+ ( ! ^w is2 ,pet] is2 ,pet] is good4 ,9 ! =m] ! ^w is designates ! reality ( ,pet]1 or 8 exi/5ce2 9 ! latt]1 x expresses ! union ( ! pr$icate good ) ! subject ,pet]4 ,9 ! =m] ! v]b to be is sub/antive1 9 ! latt] x is copulative4 ,! sub/antive simply expresses ! exi/5ce2 ! copulative a det]m9ation1 a mode ( exi/+4 ,! desk is1 signifies ! simple exi/5ce ( ! desk2 ! desk is high1 expresses a mode ( be+1 height4 #ab4 ,purely sub/antive be+1 is n[h]e met )1 except 9 ! foll[+ proposition3 be+ is1 or :at is is2 9 all o!r propositions !re is involv$1 ev5 9 ! subject itself1 "s pr$icate :i* det]m9es ! mode4 ,:5 we say1 ! desk is1 not)/&+ t ! direct pr$icate ( ! proposition is ! ^w is1 !re yet ent]s into ! subject desk a det]m9ation ( ! be+ ( :i* we speak1 & t is ( a be+ :i* is a desk4 ,we 71 !n1 "r 9 say+ t ! v]b to be1 9 its purely sub/antive mean+1 is met ) 9 no o!r proposition ?an ?is3 be+ is4 ,?is is p]fectly id5tical1 absolutely necess>y & conv]tible1 t is1 ! pr$icate may be obs]v$ ( all subjects1 & ! subject ( all pr$icates4 ,suppose we give ! proposition a diff]5t =m2 be+ is exi/+2 we c /ill say all be+ is exi/+1 or ! exi/+ is be+2 t is1 all t exi/s is be+4 #ac4 ,if x be object$ t possible be+ does n exi/1 we answ] t purely possible be+ is n1 /rictly speak+1 be+2 b t x does exi/1 9 ! same mode 9 :i* x is1 t is1 9 ! possible ord]4 ,z we %all1 h[ev]1 treat ?is "q m fully h]eaft]1 we n[ turn to ! propositions 9 :i* be+ is copulative4 ,! desk is1 is equival5t to ?is1 ! desk is exi/+4 ,x is true t e real desk is exi/+1 b real is ! same z exi/+2 & ?us x might1 9 "o s5se1 be said t ! proposition resembles ?is o!r3 all be+ is4 ,b "h we detect a diff]5ce2 x consi/s 9 ?is1 t ! idea ( exi/5ce does n necess>ily ent] into t ( desk1 = we c conceive ( a desk :i* does n exi/1 b we _c conceive ( a be+ z su* )\t a be+1 t is1 ( a be+ :i* is n be+4 ,a v notable diff]5ce is e way p]ceptible betwe5 ! two propositions2 9 ! =m]1 ! subject may be affirm$ ( all pr$icates by say+1 all t is exi/+ is be+2 b x is evid5t t we _c say all t is exi/+ is desk4 #ad4 ,! reason ( ?is is t ! proposition1 be+ is1 is absolutely id5tical2 x is ! expression ( a pure conception r$uc$ to ! =m ( a proposition2 &1 consequ5tly1 ! t]ms :i* s]ve z extremes may be tak5 indiscrim9ately ! "o = ! o!r2 be+ is1 :atev] is1 is be+2 be+ is exi/+2 e ?+ exi/+ is be+4 ,b diff]5t ord]s ( ideas are comb9$ 9 all o!r propositions2 &1 al?\gh ! common idea ( be+ is applicable to all1 z ?is idea is ess5tially indet]m9ate1 x does n !nce foll[ t "o ( ! ?+s to :i* ! g5]al idea corresponds is id5tical ) ! o!r1 alike ent]+ into ! same g5]al idea4 ,be+ belongs to e exi/+ desk2 b n1 !re=e1 is e ?+ a desk4 #ae4 ,copulative be+ may be appli$ )\t ! sub/antive2 ?us :5 we say t ! ellipse is curvil9e>1 we ab/ract bo? ! exi/5ce & non-exi/5ce ( any "o ellipse2 & ! proposition w\ld be true al?\gh no ellipse at all 7 to exi/4 ,! reason is t ! v]b to be1 :5 copulative1 expresses ! relation ( two ideas4 #af4 ,?is relation is ( id5tity1 b 9 su* a way t m ?an ! union ( ! two is ne$$ be=e a pr$icate c be affirm$ ( a subject4 ,! head is unit$ to ! man1 b x _c1 !re=e1 be said1 man is 8 head2 ! s5sibility is unit$ to ! reason 9 ! same man1 b we _c say1 s5sibility is reason2 :it5ess is 9 union ) ! wall1 b we _c say ! wall is :it5ess4 ,! affirmation1 !n1 ( a pr$icate expresses ! relation ( id5tity1 & ?is is :y1 :5 ?is id5tity does n exi/ ) respect to ! pr$icate 9 ! ab/ract1 x is express$ 9 ! concrete1 9 ord] t some?+ involv+ id5tity may ent] into x4 ,! wall is :it5ess3 ?is proposition is false1 because x affirms an id5tity :i* does n exi/2 ! wall is :ite3 ?is proposition is true1 because :ite means some?+ :i* has :it5ess1 & ! wall is really some?+ :i* has :it5ess2 "h1 !n1 is ! id5tity :i* ! proposition affirms4#ah #ah ,see ,bk4 ,i41 ,*s4 ,,xxxvi41 ,,xxvii41 & ,,xviii4 #ag4 ,! pr$icate is1 !n1 9 e affirmative proposition1 id5tifi$ ) ! subject4 ,:5 we p]ceive1 !re=e1 we affirm ! id5tity4 ,judgm5t1 !n1 is ! p]ception ( ! id5tity4 ,we d n1 h[ev]1 d5y t 9 :at we call ass5t !re is (t5 some?+ m ?an ! simple p]ception ( id5tity2 b we d n und]/& h[ we ne$ any ?+ m ?an to see x evid5tly 9 ord] to ass5t to x4 ,:at we call ass5t1 adhesion ( ! und]/&+1 seems to be a k9d ( metaphor1 z if ! und]/&+ w\ld adh]e1 w\ld yield itself to ! tru?1 if x 7 pres5t$2 b 9 reality we v mu* d\bt if1 ) respect to :at is evid5t1 !re be any ?+ b p]ception ( ! id5tity4 #ah4 ,h5ce x foll[s1 t if ! same ideas 7 to correspond 9 ! v same mann] to ! same words1 ! opposition & div]sity ( judgm5ts 9 diff]5t und]/&+s w\ld be impossible4 ,:51 !n1 ?is div]sity or opposition does exi/1 !re is always a discrepancy 9 ! ideas4 #ai4 ,we conceive ( ?+s1 & reason ^u !m ab/ract$ f _! exi/5ce or non-exi/5ce2 or we ev5 suppose !m n to exi/1 t is1 conceive ( relations betwe5 pr$icates & subjects )\t ! exi/5ce ( ei!r pr$icates or subjects4 ,& z all cont+5t be+s may ei!r be or cease to be1 & ev5 ! fir/ mom5t ( _! be+ be designat$1 x foll[s t sci5ce1 or ! k ( ! nature & relations ( be+s1 f\nd$ ^u c]ta9 & evid5t pr9ciples1 has no?+ cont+5t = its object inasmu* z x exi/s4 ,!re is1 !n1 an inf9ite _w ( tru?s beyond cont+5t reality4 ,we conclude1 f our reflections ^u ?is1 t !re mu/ be beyond ! cont+5t _w a necess>y be+ 9 :i* may be f\nd$ t necess>y tru? :i* is ! object ( sci5ce4 ,sci5ce _c h no?+ = its object2 b cont+5t be+s1 if we ab/ract _! exi/5ce1 are pure no?+4 ,!re c be no ess5ce1 no prop]ties1 no relations 9 :at is pure no?+2 some?+ !re=e is necess>y :]eon to base ! necess>y tru? ( ^? natures1 prop]ties1 & relations :i* ! und]/&+ conceives ( 9 cont+5t be+s !mselves4 ,!re is1 !n1 a ,god2 & to d5y him1 is to make sci5ce a pure illusion4 ,! unity ( human reason furni%es u "o pro( ( ?is tru?2 ! necessity ( human sci5ce furni%es a second1 & confirms ! fir/4#ai #ai ,see ,bk4 ,,iv41 ,*4 ,,xxiii4 to ,*4 ,,xxvii4 #bj4 ,we f9d a conditional proposition involv$ 9 e necess>y proposition1 :]e9 sub/antive be+ is n affirm$ nor d5i$1 b ! relative1 z 9 ?is2 all ! diamet]s ( a circle are equal4 ,?us1 ! "o we h j cit$ is equival5t to ?is "o2 if !re exi/s a circle all its diamet]s are equal4 ,= 9 reality did no circle exi/1 !re w\ld be no diamet]s1 no equality1 or any ?+ else2 no?+ c h no prop]ties2 :]e=e 9 all t is ?us affirm$ we mu/ und]/& ! condition ( its exi/5ce4 #ba4 ,9 g5]al propositions ! union conceiv$ ( two objects is affirm$2 b we mu/ take good c>e to notice t al?\gh we are wont to say t :at is affirm$ is ! union ( two ideas2 ?is is n1 !re=e1 p]fectly exact4 ,:5 we ass]t t all ! diamet]s ( a circle are equal1 we d n mean t ?is is s only 9 ideas1 t we conceive x s to be1 b t x really is s1 beyond our own und]/&+ & 9 reality1 & ?is ab/ract+ our ideas & ev5 our own exi/5ce4 ,our und]/&+ sees !n a relation1 a union ( ! objects2 & x affirms t :5ev] ^! exi/1 !re w also really exi/ ! union1 provid$ ! conditions "u :i* ! object is conceiv$ be fulfill$4 ,,*apt] ,,iv4 ,,be+1 ,,! ,,object ,,( ,,! ,,und]/&+1 ,,is ,,n ,,! ,,possible1 ,,inasmu* ,,z ,,possible4 #bb4 ,"o v important po9t conc]n+ ! idea ( be+ rema9s to be illu/rat$1 & t is1 :e!r ?is idea has possible or real be+ = its object4 ,! s*ola/ics taught t ! object ( ! und]/&+ 0 be+2 nor 7 !y altoge!r )\t reason 9 s do+1 s9ce "o ( ! ?+s we conceive ( ) ! greate/ di/9ctness1 & :i* is f\nd to be ! mo/ fundam5tal 9 all our ideas1 is ! idea ( be+1 conta9+ z x does 9 a c]ta9 mann] all o!r ideas4 ,b z be+ is di/+ui%$ into actual & possible1 a difficulty occurs z to :i* ( ^! categories ! idea ( be+1 ! *ief object ( our und]/&+1 is applicable to4 #bc4 ,! ,abbate ,rosm9i1 9 8 ,nuovo ,saggio sull' orig9e delle idee1 pret5ds t ! =m & ! light ( our und]/&+1 & ! orig9 ( all our ideas1 consi/s 9 ! idea1 n ( real1 b ( possible be+4 ,! simple idea ( be+1 he says1 is n ! p]ception ( any exi/+ ?+1 b ! intuition ( "s possible ?+2 x is no m ?an ! idea ( ! possibility ( ! ?+4#bj #bj ,sec4 #e1 ,p4 #a1 ,c4 #c1 ,a4 #a1 #b4 ,i v mu* d\bt ! tru? ( ?is2 & !re seems also to be "s confusion ( ideas "h4 ,he ought to h def9$ possibility itself = u1 be=e mak+ ! idea ( x ent] into t ( be+4 ,i w myself give a def9ition ( x1 & ?is may s]ve greatly to facilitate ! und]/&+ ( ! :ole matt]4 #bd4 ,:at is possibility8 ,! idea ( possibility1 ab/ract$ f its classifications1 (f]s u a g5]al idea ( ! non-repugnance1 or non-exclusion1 ( two ?+s ) respect to ea* o!r2 j z ! idea ( impossibility pres5ts u su* a repugnance or exclusion4 ,a triangle _c be a circle4 ,a triangle may be equilat]al4 ,9 ! =m] case we affirm ! repugnance ( ! ideas ( ! triangle & ( ! circle3 9 ! latt]1 ! non-repugnance ( a triangle hav+ its ?ree sides equal4 ,x may be said t 9 ^! cases !re is no "q ( ! exi/5ce ( ! triangle or ( ! circle2 & t ! possibility or impossibility is ref]r$ to ! repugnance ( _! ess5ces1 ab/ract$ f _! exi/5ce or non-exi/5ce1 al?\gh ideal impossibility draws along ) x real impossibility4 #be4 ,s9ce1 :5ev] impossibility is ass]t$1 repugnance also1 is ass]t$1 & !re c be no repugnance ( a ?+ ) itself1 x foll[s t impossibility is only possible :5 two or m ideas are comp>$4 ,on ! o!r h&1 :5 !re is no repugnance !re is possibility2 !n1 no simple idea1 ( itself alone1 c (f] to u an impossible object4 ,! object1 !re=e1 ( e simple idea is always possible1 t is1 is n repugnant4 #bf4 ,^? ?+s only are intr9sically impossible :i* involve ! be+ & ! n-be+ ( ! same ?+2 :]e=e !y are /yl$ contradictory4 ,:5 an absurdity ( ?is nature is pres5t$ to u1 we at once recollect ! pr9ciple ( contradiction1 & say1 ?is _c be1 s9ce x w\ld be & w\ld n be at ! same "t4 ,:y is a circul> triangle impossible8 ,because x w\ld be & x w\ld n be a triangle at "o & ! same "t4 ,! idea ( n-be+ does !n ent] into t ( impossibility3 )\t x1 !re c be no exclusion ( be+1 & consequ5tly1 nei!r contradiction nor impossibility4 #bg4 ,possibility may be und]/ood 9 two ways3 ,i41 inasmu* z x expresses only simple non-repugnance2 & !n :at does n exi/1 is n only possible :5 x does n involve any contradiction1 b also1 ! exi/+1 ! actual2 ,,ii41 inasmu* z x expresses non-repugnance1 unit$ to ! idea ( n be+ realiz$2 & !n x is only applicable to non-exi/+ ?+s4 ,! possible tak5 9 ! =m] s5se1 is oppos$ to ! impossible2 9 ! latt]1 x is oppos$ to ! exi/+2 x involves1 h[ev]1 ! condition ( non-repugnance4 ,9 ! =m] case we h possibility simply s call$2 9 ! second1 pure possibility4 ,f ^! rem>ks we conclude t ! idea ( possibility adds some?+ to t ( be+1 t is1 non-repugnance1 non-exclusion2 & if !re be "q ( pure possibility1 ! non-exi/5ce ( ! possible be+ is likewise add$4 #bh4 ,:5 ! und]/&+ p]ceives be+ 9 itself1 x _c di/+ui% :e!r !re is or is n repugnance2 ?is is only discov]able by comp>ison2 = ! idea ( be+1 9 itself simple1 does n include comp>able t]ms4 ,! idea ( be+ c enc\nt] no repugnance if x be n appli$ to "s det]m9ate ?+1 to an ess5ce 9 :i* contradictory conditions are imag9$1 z may be v]ifi$ by seek+ to apply be+ to a circul> triangle4 #bi4 ,s f> is ! idea ( be+ 9 itself f be+ susceptible ( ab/raction f ! idea ( exi/5ce1 t x is r ! idea itself ( exi/5ce4 ,:5 we conceive ( be+1 9 all its ab/ractness1 we conceive ( no?+ else ?an ( exi/5ce2 ^! two words d5ote "o & ! same idea4 #cj4 ,we c1 9 det]m9ate ?+s1 conceive ( ! ess5ce )\t exi/5ce2 ?us also we c v easily consid] all imag9able geometrical figures & exam9e _! prop]ties & relations1 ab/ract$ f _! exi/5ce or non-exi/5ce2 b ! idea ( be+1 z some?+ absolutely indet]m9ate1 if x be ab/ract$ f exi/5ce1 is also ab/ract$ f itself1 is annihilat$4 ,i %\ld be mu* oblig$ to any "o :o w\ld tell me to :at ! idea ( be+ 9 g5]al corresponds1 ab/ract$ f exi/5ce4 ,if1 aft] ab/ract+ all det]m9ation1 we also ab/ract be+ itself1 :at rema9s8 ,"s "o may answ]1 !re rema9s a ?+ :i* may be4 ,:at does a ?+ mean8 ,9 case we ab/ract e ?+ det]m9ate1 ?+ c only signify a be+2 we %\ld h a ?+ :i* may be1 & ?is is equival5t to a be+ :i* may be4 ,?is is v well3 b :5 we speak ( a be+ :i* may be1 is !re only a "q ( an impure possibility8 !n we d n ab/ract exi/5ce1 & ! conditions ( ! supposition are n kept4 ,is !re "q ( pure possibility8 !n exi/5ce is d5i$1 & ! proposition is equival5t to ?is3 a be+ :i* is n1 b :i* involves no repugnance4 ,let u exam9e ! mean+ ( ?is expression3 a be+ :i* is n4 ,:at does ! subject1 a be+1 mean8 a ?+1 or r1 t :i* is4 ,:at does a ?+ mean8 a be+3 !n ab/raction is made f e ?+ det]m9ate4 ,!re=e1 ei!r ! subject ( ! proposition means no?+1 or ! proposition is absurd1 s9ce x is equival5t to ?is1 a ?+ :i* is1 :i* is n1 b :i* involves no repugnance4 #ca4 ,! orig9 ( ! equivocation we combat consi/s 9 apply+ to ! idea itself ( be+ t :i* belongs only to ?+s t are some?+ det]m9ate1 conceivable )\t exi/5ce4 ,pure be+1 9 all its ab/ractness1 is inconceivable )\t actual be+1 x is exi/5ce itself4 #cb4 ,nor does pure possibility mean any ?+ except 9 ord] to exi/5ce4 ,:at is possible be+ if x _c be realiz$1 _c exi/8 ,! idea ( be+ is !re=e indep5d5t ( ! idea ( possibility2 & ! latt] is only applicable 9 relation to ! =m]4 #cc4 ,! idea1 !n1 ( be+ is ! v idea ( exi/5ce1 ( realization4 ,if we conceive ( pure be+1 )\t mixture or modification1 & subsi/+ 9 itself1 we conceive ( ! inf9ite1 we conceive ( ,god3 b if we consid] ! idea ( be+ z p>ticipat$ 9 a cont+5t mann]1 by application to f9ite ?+s1 we !n conceive ( _! actuality or realization4 #cd4 ,:5 we apply ! idea ( be+ to ?+s1 we h no int5tion ( apply+ to !m t ( possibility1 b t ( reality4 ,if we say ! desk is1 we affirm ( ! subject desk ! pr$icate conta9$ 9 ! idea ( be+3 & /ill we d n mean to say t ! desk is possible1 b t x really exi/s4 #ce4 ,nev]!less1 ! idea ( be+ excludes t ( n-be+1 9 su* a way t if ! idea ( be+ 7 only ( ! possible1 x w\ld n exclude t ( n-be+1 s9ce ! purely possible ev5 includes n-be+2 possibility1 !re=e1 does n ent] into ! sole idea ( be+2 & ?is idea expresses simply exi/5ce1 reality4 ,,*apt] ,v4 ,a ,,difficulty ,,solv$4 #cf4 ,:at means ! idea ( purely possible be+8 ,if we ma9ta9 t ! object ( ! idea ( be+ is reality1 ^! two ideas1 be+1 & purely possible1 w\ld seem to be contradictory3 reality is n purely possible1 = 7 x purely possible1 x w\ld n exi/1 & 9 ! non-exi/+ !re is no reality4 ,let u exam9e ?is difficulty1 & inve/igate ! orig9 ( ! idea ( pure possibility4 #cg4 ,surr\nd$ z we are by cont+5t be+s1 cont+5t be+s ourselves1 we are incessantly aw>e ( ! de/ruction ( "s1 & ! production ( o!rs1 t is to say1 ( ! transition f be+ to n-be+1 & f n-be+ to be+4 ,our inw>d s5se atte/s to u ?is transition f n-be+ to be+2 we h ourselves exp]i5c$ x2 all our recollections are limit$ to a v brief t]m1 be=e :i* ! _w already exi/$4 ,?us1 !n1 reason1 exp]i5ce1 & inw>d s5se %[ u t !re are "s objects :i* are1 & !n disappe>1 & t o!rs1 :i* be=e 7 n1 n[ appe>4 ,9 ^? ?+s 9 :i* we witness ?is *ange1 we p]ceive prop]ties & relations :i* give occasion to a c]ta9 comb9ation ( our ideas1 & ?is comb9ation subsi/s :e!r ! objects to :i* !y ref] cont9ue or cease to exi/4 ,9 ?is way we =m a g5]al idea ( ?+s :i*1 al?\gh !y d n exi/1 may exi/2 b ?is subject ?+s1 does n express be+1 b 9 g5]al f9ite1 det]m9ate objects4 #ch4 ,"h1 !n1 is ! solution ( ! difficulty4 ,purely possible be+1 su* z we conceive x to be 9 ! mann] expla9$1 involves no contradiction2 x does n d5ote a reality :i* is n a reality1 b an object1 or a f9ite1 det]m9ate ?+1 ! idea ( :i* we h1 al?\gh x d n exi/1 & ^: exi/5ce involves no contradiction1 or repugnance ) any ( ! conditions conta9$ 9 its idea4 ,! expression1 !n1 purely possible be+1 if x be expla9$ 9 ?is mann]1 is no?+ m ?an ! g5]alization ( ^! & o!r simil> propositions4 ,a desk :i* is n is possible4 ,:at d we mean by ?is8 ,simply t 9 ! idea ( desk !re is no?+ repugnant to its exi/+2 & purely possible be+ signifies no?+ m ?an t we h _m ideas ( f9ite ?+s :i* may exi/ )\t repugnance4 ,! expression ref]s to det]m9ate ?+s conceiv$ ( by u1 b we ab/ract 9 ?is case :e!r ?is or t be ! ess5ce ( :i* we speak1 & comprise all ^? :i* (f] no repugnance4 #ci4 ,if x be object$ t an inf9ite1 non-exi/+ be+ w\ld !n be a contradictory ?+1 we admit x )\t hesitation4 ,if an inf9ite be+ d n exi/ x is an absurdity2 & if1 :5 we comp>e ^! two ideas1 inf9ity & non-exi/5ce1 we d n see ! repugnance betwe5 !m ) p]fect cle>ness1 x is because we d n compreh5d ! nature ( inf9ity4 ,?is is ! only reason :y ! demon/ration ( ! exi/5ce ( ,god f\nd$ simply on 8 idea1 has be5 & /ill is expos$ to difficulties4 ,b x is c]ta9 t if ! inf9ite be+ did n exi/1 x w\ld be impossible4 ,= t is impossible :i* _c exi/2 & did x n already exi/ x c\ld n exi/4 ,?is exi/5ce c\ld n come f ano!r1 s9ce ! inf9ite _c be a be+ produc$2 nor f itself1 s9ce x w\ld n exi/4 ,we d1 x is true1 imag9e ! inf9ite 9 its ess5ce1 ab/ract$ f its exi/5ce2 b ,i repeat t ?is ab/raction is only possible to u because we _c well compreh5d ! inf9ite2 c\ld we compreh5d x1 we %\ld see ! repugnance betwe5 ^! t]ms1 inf9ity & non-exi/5ce1 ) ! same cle>ness z we see t ( ! triangle & circle4 ,,*apt] ,,vi4 ,,9 ,,:at ,,s5se ,,! ,,idea ,,( ,,be+ ,,is ,,! ,,=m ,,( ,,! ,,und]/&+4 #dj4 ,:5 x is ass]t$ t ! object ( ! und]/&+ is be+1 !re is room to d\bt :e!r x is meant t ! idea ( be+ is ! g5]al =m ( all conceptions1 or only t all ! und]/&+ conceives is be+2 or1 9 o!r words1 :e!r ! quality ( object is attribut$ to be+1 z be+1 9 su* a way t "u ?is =m alone objects are conceivable1 or only t ! quality ( be+ belongs to all t ! und]/&+ conceives4 ,9 ! fir/ case ! proposition might be tak5 9 a r$uplicative s5se1 & w\ld !n be equival5t to ?is3 ,! und]/&+ conceives no?+ save inasmu* z x is be+2 9 ! second x might be tak5 =mally1 & be equival5t to ?is3 :atev] ! und]/&+ conceives is be+4 #da4 ,we are ( op9ion t x _c be said t ! object ( ! und]/&+ is be+ only inasmu* z be+2 9 su* a way z to make ! idea ( be+ ! only =m ( ! und]/&+'s conceiv+2 b t ?is =m is an ess5tial condition to all p]ception4 #db4 ,if we rem>k t ! idea ( be+1 9 itself consid]$1 nei!r includes any det]m9ation or v>iety1 nor expresses any ?+ m ?an be+1 9 its greate/ ab/ractness1 we %all n fail cle>ly to p]ceive t ?is idea ( be+ is n ! only =m conceiv$ by ! und]/&+2 if1 !re=e1 ! und]/&+ d n p]ceive any ?+ besides ?is idea 9 its objects1 x _c "k _! diff]5ces2 nor c its p]ception g beyond t :i* is common to all1 be+4 #dc4 ,if x be said t ! diff]5ces p]ceiv$ are modes ( be+1 modifications ( t :i* is repres5t$ 9 ! g5]al idea1 x is at once agre$ t be+ 9 itself is n ! only =m p]ceiv$2 s9ce bo? modification & mode ( be+ add some?+ to ! idea ( be+4 ,! rectangul> triangle is a k9d ( triangle3 its idea is a modification ( ! g5]al idea1 & no "o w pret5d t ! idea ( rectangul> adds no?+ to t ( triangle1 or t !y are bo? ! same ?+4 ,! same is v]ifi$ 9 ! idea ( be+ & its modifications4 #dd4 ,we h already se5#ba t indet]m9ate ideas by !mselves alone d n lead to positive cognitions2 & c]ta9ly no idea bett] m]its ! "n ( indet]m9ate ?an t ( be+4 ,7 our und]/&+ limit$ to x1 p]ception w\ld be no?+ b a vague conception1 incapable ( any comb9ation4 #ba ,see ,book ,,iv41 ,*4 ,,xxi4 #de4 ,negation itself1 z we %all h]eaft] see1 is kn[n to u1 b ?is x c\ld n be 7 we to admit t ! und]/&+ kn[s no?+ save inasmu* z x is be+2 9 :i* case ! indisp5sable condition ( all cognition1 ! pr9ciple ( contradiction1 w\ld deceive u4 #df4 ,^! reasons suffice to place beyond all d\bt :at we h propos$ to %[1 b z ?is po9t is intimately connect$ ) :at is mo/ transc5d5tal 9 logic & metaphysics1 we w endeavor to expla9 x m at l>ge 9 ! foll[+ *apt]4 ,,*apt] ,,vii4 ,,all ,,sci5ce ,,is ,,f\nd$ ,,9 ,,! ,,po/ulate ,,( ,,exi/5ce4 #dg4 ,we h said t ! idea ( be+ is n ! sole =m p]ceiv$1 b t x is a =m necess>y to all p]ception4 ,we d n mean by ?is to say t we _c p]ceive )\t ! actually exi/+2 b t exi/5ce ent]s 9 "s degree z a condition ( e ?+ p]ceiv$4 ,we w expla9 ourselves4 ,:5 we simply p]ceive an object1 & affirm no?+ ( x1 x is always (f]$ to u z a reality4 ,our idea c]ta9ly expresses some?+1 b x has no?+ except+ reality4 ,ev5 ! p]ception ( ! ess5tial relations ( ?+s involves ! condition t !y exi/4 ,?us1 :5 we say t 9 ! same circle or 9 equal circles equal arcs are subt5d$ by equal *ords1 we suppose impli$ly ?is condition1 if a circle exi/s4 #dh4 ,s9ce ?is mann] ( expla9+ ! cognition ( ! ess5tial relations ( ?+s may seem f>-fet*$1 we w endeavor to pres5t x "u ! cle>e/ possible po9t ( view4 ,:5 we affirm or d5y an ess5tial relation ( two ?+s1 d we affirm or d5y x ( our own ideas or ( ! ?+s8 ,cle>ly ( ! ?+s1 n ( our ideas4 ,if we say1 ! ellipse is a curve1 we d n say ?is ( our idea1 b ( ! object ( our idea4 ,we are well aw>e t our ideas are n ellipses1 t !re are none 9 our head1 & t :5 we reflect1 = example1 ^u ! orbit ( ! e>?1 t ?is orbit is n )9 u4 ,( :at1 !n1 d we speak8 ,n ( ! idea1 b ( its object2 n ( :at is 9 u1 b ( :at is )\t u4 #di4 ,nor d we mean t we see x ?us1 b t x is ?us2 :5 we say ! circumf]5ce is great] ?an ! diamet]1 we d n mean t we see x ?us1 b t x is ?us4 ,s f> are we f speak+ ( our idea1 t we %\ld ass]t x to be true al?\gh we did n see x1 & ev5 al?\gh x 7 n to exi/4 ,we speak ( our idea only :5 we d\bt ( its correspond5ce ) ! object2 !n we d n speak ( reality1 b ( appe>ance1 & 9 su* cases our language is admirably exact1 = we d n say1 x is1 b1 x seems to u4 #ej4 ,our affirmations & negations1 !re=e1 ref] to _! objects4 ,n[1 we argue ?us3 :at does n exi/ is pure no?+1 & no?+ c ei!r be affirm$ or d5i$ ( no?+1 s9ce x has no prop]ty or relation ( any k9d1 b is a pure negation ( e ?+2 !re=e1 no?+ c be affirm$ or d5i$2 !re c be no comb9ation1 no comp>ison1 no p]ception1 except on condition ( exi/5ce4 ,we say on condition1 because we "k ! prop]ties & relations ( _m ?+s :i* d n exi/2 b 9 all t we d "k ( !m1 ?is condition always ent]s3 if !y exi/4 #ea4 ,h5ce x foll[s t our sci5ce re/s always on a po/ulate2 & we purposely use ?is ma!matical expression 9 ord] to %[ t ^? sci5ces :i* are call$ exact by antonomasy d n disda9 ?is condition :i* we exact f all sci5ce4 ,! great] "p ( !m comm5ce ) ?is po/ulate3 ,let a l9e be drawn1 c41 ,suppose ,b to be a "r angle1 c41 ,take a quantity ,a great] ?an ,b1 c4 ,?is is ! way ! ma!matician1 ) all 8 rigor1 always supposes ! condition ( exi/5ce4 #eb4 ,x is necess>y to suppose ?is exi/5ce1 o!rwise no?+ c\ld be expla9$4 ,common s5se tea*es u :at has escap$ "s metaphysicians4 ,to prove x1 let u see h[ a ma!matician1 :o nev] dipp$ into metaphysics1 w\ld talk4 ,we w suppose ! int]locutor to set out to demon/rate to u t 9 a rectangul> triangle ! squ>e ( ! hypo!nuse is equal to ! sum ( ! squ>es ( ! base & p]p5dicul>2 & t we1 9 ord] to ex]cise 8 intellig5ce1 or r to make him %[ u1 )\t himself be+ aw>e ( x1 :at is pass+ 9 8 own m9d ) respect to ! p]ception ( its object1 put v>i\s que/ions to him1 9 reality se>*+1 al?\gh app>5tly ask$ out ( ignorance4 ,we w adopt ! =m ( a dialogue = ! sake ( great] cle>ness1 & w suppose ! demon/ration to be giv5 f memory1 )\t ! aid ( figures4 ,demon/ration4 ,drop a p]p5dicul> f ! "r angle to ! hypo!nuse4 ,:]e8 ,:y1 9 ! triangle ( :i* we speak1 ( c\rse4 ,b1 sir1 if !re be no su* triangle---- ,:y !n1 :at are we talk+ (8 ,we are talk+ ( a rectangul> triangle1 & ! case suppos$ is t !re is none4 ,is n1 b c be4 ,take pap]1 a p5cil1 & rul]1 & we w h "o "r away4 ,t is to say1 y speak ( ! triangle we may make8 ,yes1 sir4 ,ah1 ,i und]/&2 b !n we %\ld h x2 n[1 we h n got x4 ,all 9 good "t4 ,b if we _h drawn x1 c\ld we n drop ! p]p5dicul>8 ,c]ta9ly4 ,t is all ,i meant to say4 ,b y 7 say+ drop---- ,no d\bt we _c drop a p]p5dicul> 9 a triangle unless ! triangle exi/s1 s9ce !n !re is nei!r v]tex ( a "r angle1 hypo!nuse1 nor any ?+ else2 b :5 ,i say1 drop a p]p5dicul>1 ,i always suppose a triangle2 & z x is evid5t t ! triangle may exi/1 ,i d n express ! supposition1 b und]/& x4 ,i compreh5d ?is2 b !n we %\ld drop ! p]p5dicul> only 9 ?is triangle1 b y spoke z if we might drop x 9 all triangles4 ,i only took ?is triangle = an example2 we c cle>ly d ) all o!rs :at we c d ) ?is "o4 ,) all8 ,c]ta9ly4 ,c y n see h[1 9 e rectangul> triangle1 a p]p5dicul> may be drawn f ! "r angle to ! hypo!nuse8 ,yes1 9 y\r figure2 b s9ce :at is 9 my head is n a triangle1 = ,i imag9e "s ) sides a ?\s& miles long1 & !re is n 9 my head room en\gh-- ,!re is no "q ( :at is 9 y\r head1 b ( triangles !mselves-- ,b ^! triangles d n exi/2 !re=e1 we c say no?+ ( !m4 ,yes2 b may !y n exi/8 ,:o d\bts x8 ,well !n1 if !y d exi/1 be !y l>ge or small1 9 "o position or ano!r1 "h or !re1 is x n true t a p]p5dicul> may be drawn f ! v]tex ( ! "r angle to ! hypo!nuse8 ,evid5tly4 ,i h !n only to say t1 9 e rectangul> triangle1 ?is p]p5dicul> may be drawn4 ,!n y d n speak ( ^? :i* d n exi/8 ,is x n s8 ,i speak ( all1 :e!r !y d or d n exi/4 ,b a p]p5dicul> _c be drawn 9 a triangle :i* does n exi/4 ,:at does n exi/ is no?+4 ,b p]haps t :i* does n exi/ may exi/2 & ,i see ) p]fect cle>ness h[ e ?+ said w\ld be v]ifi$1 suppos+ x to exi/4 ,?us we c & d speak ( all exi/5ces & non-exi/5ces )\t any exception4 ,we leave x to ! read] to judge if we h n1 :ile ?us rudely tr\bl+ our good ma!matician ) our importunate que/ions1 made him reply z w\ld h repli$ e "o n at all acqua9t$ ) metaphysics4 ,x is evid5t t ^! replies ought to be accept$ z reasonable1 z satisfactory1 & z ! only ones 9 ?is case t all ! ma!maticians 9 ! _w c\ld give4 ,?is be+ s1 all t we h advanc$ is f\nd 9 ^! replies & explications4 ,all sci5ce is f\nd$ on ! po/ulate ( exi/5ce2 e argum5t1 to demon/rate ev5 ! mo/ ess5tial prop]ties & relations ( ?+s1 mu/ />t ) ! supposition ( _! exi/5ce4 ,,*apt] ,,viii4 ,,! ,,f\ndation ,,( ,,pure ,,possibility1 ,,& ,,! ,,condition ,,( ,,its ,,exi/5ce4 #ec4 ,we h said t ! f\ndation ( ! pure possibility ( ?+s1 & ( _! prop]ties & relations1 is f\nd$ 9 ! ess5ce ( ,god1 :]e9 is ! reason ( e ?+4#bb ,& x may at fir/ sight seem t sci5ce ne$s only ?is f\ndation1 & does n require to re/ ^u ! condition ( ! exi/5ce ( ?+s2 because1 if ess5ces are repres5t$ 9 ,god1 ! object ( sci5ce is f\nd 9 ! ,div9e ess5ce2 & consequ5tly1 ! argum5t f\nd$ ^u ! impossibility ( ass]t+ any ?+ ( no?+1 is n conclusive4 ,suppos+ !re to be su* a repres5tation1 sci5ce is n occupi$ ) a pure no?+1 b ) a real ?+2 & x has consequ5tly 9 view a positive object1 ev5 :5 x ab/racts ! reality ( ! ?+ consid]$4 #bb ,see ,l4 ,,iv41 ,c4 ,,xxiii4 to ,,xxvii4 ,let u see h[ we c solve ?is difficulty4 #ed4 ,! necess>y relations ( ?+s1 indep5d5tly ( _! exi/5ce1 mu/ h a suffici5t reason2 & ?is c only be 9 necess>y be+4 ,! condition1 !re=e1 ( exi/5ce1 presupposes ! repres5tation ( ! ess5ce ( ! cont+5t be+ 9 necess>y be+2 ! condition1 !re=e1 if x exi/1 _c be br\ght 9 unless x presupposes ! f\ndation ( possibility4 #ee4 ,?is rem>k %[s t !re are two que/ions3--#a/3 ,:at is ! f\ndation ( ! intr9sic possibility ( ?+s8 #b;d3 ,suppos+ possibility1 :at condition is involv$ 9 s mu* z x is affirm$ or d5i$ ( ! possible object8 ,! f\ndation ( ! possibility is ,god2 & ! condition is ! exi/5ce ( ! objects consid]$4 ,bo? are requisite to sci5ce2 if ! f\ndation ( intr9sic possibility be want+1 ! condition ( exi/5ce _c come 92 & if1 admitt+ ! possibility1 we omit ! condition1 sci5ce has no object4 #ef4 ,we w\ld rem>k1 = ! bett] und]/&+ ( ?is :ole subject1 t we d n1 9 affirm+ or d5y+ ! relations ( be+s repres5t$ 9 ,god1 treat ( :at ^! be+s are 9 ,god1 b ( :at !y w\ld be 9 !mselves 7 !y to exi/4 ,9 ,god1 all are ! same ,god2 = all t is 9 ,god1 is id5tical ) ,god4 ,if1 !n1 we consid] ?+s only z !y are 9 him1 we %all h ,god1 n ! ?+s1 = object4 ,c]ta9 x is1 t 9 ,god is ! f\ndation1 or ! suffici5t reason1 ( geometrical tru?s3 b geometry does n consid] !m su* z !y are 9 ,god1 b su* z !y are or may be realiz$4 ,9 ,god1 !re are nei!r l9es nor dim5sions ( any k9d2 he1 !re=e1 is n ! object ( geometry prop]ly s call$4 ,geometrical tru?s h 9 him an objective value or repres5tative value1 b n subjective2 we %\ld o!rwise be oblig$ to say t ,god is ext5sive4 #eg4 ,"h1 !n1 is se5 t :at we said above 9 ! place cit$1 does n conflict ) :at we h "h e/abli%$2 & t to make ,god ! f\ndation ( all possibility1 does n exclude ! sci5tific necessity ( ! condition ( exi/5ce4 #eh4 ,we w1 9 ord] to place ?is beyond all d\bt1 pres5t ! "q "u ano!r aspect1 by %[+ t :5 ,god kn[s f9ite tru?s1 he sees 9 !m ?is condition likewise3 ,if !y exi/4 ,god kn[s ! tru? ( ?is proposition3 ,triangles ( equal base & altitude are ( equal sup]fices3 ?is is true z well 9 ! eyes ( inf9ite intellig5ce1 z 9 ours2 7 x n ?us ! proposition w\ld n be true 9 itself1 & we %\ld be 9 error4 ,?is be+ s1 !re are 9 ,god1 :o is mo/ simple be+1 no true figures1 al?\gh he has ! intellectual p]ception ( !m4 ,! cognition1 !n1 ( ,god1 9 :at relates to f9ite ?+s1 ref]s to _! possible exi/5ce1 & consequ5tly involves ! condition t !y exi/4 ,! cognition ( ,god does n ref] to _! purely ideal repres5tation1 b to _! actual or possible reality2 :5 ,god kn[s a tru? ( f9ite be+s1 he does n "k x f ! sole repres5tation ( ^? tru?s :i* he has 9 himself1 b f t :i* !y w\ld be 7 !y to exi/4 #ei4 ,e object may be consid]$ ei!r 9 ! real or 9 ! ideal ord]4 ,! ideal is _! repres5tation 9 an und]/&+1 :i* has a value only inasmu* z x ref]s to possible or actual reality4 ,9 ?is mann] alone c ! idea h objectiv5ess1 s9ce o!rwise x c\ld only be a purely subjective fact1 ( :i*1 except+ ! purely subjective1 no?+ c\ld be ei!r affirm$ or d5i$4 ,! idea :i* we h ( ! triangle aids u1 9 s f> z x has a real or possible object1 to "k & comb9e3 we ref] :at we affirm or d5y ( x to its object3 if ?is disappe>1 ! idea is conv]t$ into a purely subjective fact1 to :i* we _c apply ! prop]ties ( a triangul> figure )\t an op5 contradiction4 ,,*apt] ,,ix4 ,,idea ,,( ,,negation4 #fj4 ,x is said t ! und]/&+ does n conceive no?+3 ?is is true 9 ! s5se t we d n conceive no?+ z some?+1 :i* w\ld be a contradiction2 b x does n !re=e foll[1 t we d n 9 any mode conceive no?+4 ,n-be+ is no?+1 & yet we conceive n-be+4 ,?is p]ception is necess>y to u2 )\t x we c\ld n p]ceive contradiction2 = :i* reason ! pr9ciple ( contradiction3 ,x is impossible = a ?+ to exi/ & n to exi/ at ! same "t3 fundam5tal z x is 9 our cognitions1 w\ld fail u4 #fa4 ,x may be said t to conceive no?+1 n-be+1 is n to conceive1 b to n-conceive3 ?is1 h[ev]1 is false1 = x is n ! same ?+ to conceive t a ?+ is n1 & n to conceive x4 ,! =m] involves a negative judgm5t1 & may be express$ by a negative proposition2 & ! latt] is ! simple abs5ce ( ! act ( p]ception2 ! =m] is objective1 ! latt] subjective4 ,we d n :5 asleep p]ceive ?+s2 b ?is non-p]ception is by no means equival5t to p]ceiv+ t !y are n4 ,x may be said ( a /one t x does n p]ceive ano!r /one2 b n t x p]ceives ! non-be+ ( ! o!r /one4 #fb4 ,! p]ception ( n-be+ is a positive act2 & x w\ld be a contradiction to say t x is ! v p]ception ( be+2 = x w\ld foll[1 t :5ev] we p]ceive be+1 we p]ceive its negation1 n-be+1 & vice v]sa1 :i* is an absurdity4 #fc4 ,:5 we p]ceive n-be+1 we d1 x is true1 p]ceive x 9 relation to be+2 & x is equally true1 an und]/&+ p]ceiv+ absolute n-be+1 )\t any idea ( be+1 is altoge!r inconceivable2 b ?is does n prove ! two ideas n to be di/9ct & contradictory4 #fd4 ,x is rem>kable t ! idea ( negation1 besides ent]+ into ! fundam5tal pr9ciples ( our und]/&+3 ,x is impossible = a ?+ to be & n to be at ! same "t3 ,e ?+ ei!r is or is n3 is also necess>y to almo/ all ( our p]ceptions4 ,we d n conceive di/9ct be+s )\t conceiv+ t "o is n ! o!r1 & we _c =m a negative judgm5t into :i* negation does n ent]4 ,h5ce x results t j z ! idea ( be+ is absolute & relative1 also is ! idea ( n-be+3 ?us1 we say1 ,! sun is2 ,all ! diamet]s ( a circle are equal2 & we also say1 ,! phnix is n3 ,! diamet]s ( an ellipse are n equal4 #fe4 ,we may ask ^? :o hold t e idea is ! image ( ! object1 :at sort ( an image ! idea ( n-be+ w\ld =m8 ,?is confirms :at we h already advanc$1 t x is a mi/ake to imag9e all ideas z a k9d ( types1 simil> to ?+s1 & t we _c (t5times expla9 any ( ^? inw>d ph5om5a1 call$ ideas1 not)/&+ we "k & expla9 _! objects by !m4 #ff4 ,x is also said t ! object ( ! und]/&+ is be+2 b ?is is inexplicable 9 ! s5se t ! und]/&+ does n p]ceive n-be+2 & c be und]/ood only 9 ! s5se t we p]ceive n-be+ z coord9at$ to be+1 & t n-be+ ( itself alone1 _c be ! orig9 ( any cognition4 ,rem>k "h an important diff]5ce4 ,by ! idea ( be+ e ?+ may be und]/ood2 & ! m ( be+ !re is 9 ! idea1 ! m d we und]/&2 & if an idea be suppos$ to repres5t a be+ )\t any limitation1 or1 :i* is ! same ?+1 )\t any negation1 we %\ld h a cognition ( an inf9ite be+4 ,on ! contr>y1 ! p]ception ( n-be+ tea*es u no?+1 save inasmu* z x %[s u ! limitation ( det]m9ate be+s & _! relations2 & if we suppose ! idea ( n-be+ to be gradually ext5d$1 we %all see t 9 proportion z x approa*es its limits1 t is1 pure n-be+1 absolute no?+1 ! und]/&+ loses its object2 ! po9ts ( comp>ison & ! elem5ts ( comb9ation fail2 all light goes out1 & intellig5ce dies4 #fg4 ,we "k univ]sal1 absolute no?+1 only z a mom5t>y condition :i* we imag9e1 b d n admit4 ,9 x we see t x is impossible t some?+ %\ld n exi/2 =1 c\ld any "o in/ant be designat$ 9 :i* no?+ exi/$1 no?+ c\ld n[ exi/4 ,9 ?is imag9>y no?+1 we discov] no po9t ( dep>ture = ! und]/&+2 all comb9ations become impossible & absurdities2 ! m9d sees itself p]i%+ 9 ! vacuum x has itself creat$4 #fh4 ,if ! idea ( negation be n comb9$ ) t ( be+1 x is p]fectly /]ile2 b ?us comb9$1 x has a k9d ( fecundity peculi> to itself4 ,! ideas ( di/9ction1 ( limitation1 & ( det]m9ation1 involve a relative negation1 = we d n conceive di/9ct be+s )\t conceiv+ t "o is n ano!r2 nor limit$ be+s1 )\t conceiv+ t !y are want+1 t is1 t 9 "s s5se !y are n2 nor det]m9ate be+s1 )\t conceiv+ some?+ :i* makes !m :at !y are & n o!rs4 ,,*apt] ,x4 ,,id5tity2 ,,di/9ction2 ,,unity2 ,,multiplicity4 #fi4 ,let u exam9e h[ we may draw f ! idea ( n-be+ ! explication ( ! ideas ( id5tity & di/9ction1 unity & multiplicity4 ,let u conceive a be+1 & fix our att5tion solely on x1 & comp>e x ) no?+ :i* is n x1 nor p]mit any idea ( n-be+ to come 92 we %all !n1 ) respect to x1 h ! ideas ( id5tity & unity2 or1 to speak m exactly1 ^! ideas ( id5tity & unity w be no?+ else ?an ideas ( ?is same be+4 ,ideas ( unity & id5tity are = ?is reason inexplicable by !mselves alone2 !y are simple1 or are conf\nd$ ) a simple idea 9 :i* c be no comp>ison1 & into :i* if negation ent]1 x is n not$1 nor c be made ! object ( reflection4 ,?us1 = in/ance1 ! idea ( n-be+ ent]s 9 "s mann] into ! p]ception ( e limit$ be+2 b we c ab/ract ?is negation1 & consid] :at ! object is1 n :at x is n4 #gj4 ,if we p]ceive a be+1 & aft]w>ds ano!r be+1 ! p]ception t "o is n ! o!r gives ! idea ( di/9ction1 & consequ5tly t also ( multiplicity4 ,!re is1 !n1 no di/9ction or numb] )\t p]ception ( relative n-be+ comb9$ ) be+2 b ?is p]ception is all t is requisite to di/9ction & numb]4 #ga4 ,! ideas ( id5tity & unity are simple1 ^? ( di/9ction & numb] composite2 ! =m] involve no negation1 ! latt] imply a negative judgm5t2 ?is is n t4 ,x is impossible = ,a to be pres5t$ to u z di/9ct f ,b1 if we d n p]ceive t ,b is n ,a2 & on ! o!r h&1 we ne$ only to "k t ,b is n ,a1 9 ord] to enable u to say !y are di/9ct4 ,^! expressions1 ,a is n ,b1 or1 ,a & ,b are di/9ct1 are p]fectly id5tical4 #gb4 ,f ?is we inf] t ! prim>y comb9ation ( our intellig5ce consi/s 9 ! p]ception ( be+ & n-be+4 ,by x we p]ceive id5tity & di/9ction1 unity & numb]2 by x we comp>e1 affirm1 or d5y2 )\t x we _c ev5 ?9k4 ,)\t ! p]ception ( negation1 we c h only ! p]ception ( be+1 t is1 an intuition fix$ ^u an id5tical object1 "o & immutable1 su* z we conceive ! ,div9e ,intellig5ce to be1 contemplat+ ! inf9ity ( be+ 9 ! inf9ite ess5ce4 #gc4 ,does ,god "k negations8 ,c]ta9ly2 = :5 a be+ ceases to exi/1 ,god kn[s ?is tru?1 9 :i* !re is a negation4 ,he kn[s ! tru? ( all negative propositions1 :e!r x expresses sub/antive or relative be+2 !re=e1 he kn[s negation4 ,b ?is is no imp]fection1 s9ce x _c be an imp]fection to "k tru?2 ! imp]fection is 9 ! objects1 :i*1 by ! v fact ( be+ f9ite1 include negation1 be+ comb9$ ) n-be+4 ,7 ,god n to "k negation1 x w\ld be because negation is 9 itself impossible2 :i* w\ld be equival5t to ! impossibility ( ! exi/5ce ( ! f9ite1 & w\ld lead to ! absolute & exclusive necessity ( "o sole inf9ite be+4 ,,*apt] ,,xi4 ,,orig9 ,,( ,,! ,,idea ,,( ,,be+4 #gd4 ,if x be impossible to ?9k )\t ! idea ( be+1 x exi/s prior to any reflex act1 & x _c h sprung f reflection4 ,! idea ( be+ mu/ !re=e be innate4 ,let u inve/igate ?is "q4 #ge4 ,we h %[n 9 ! prec$+ *apt] t we _c ?9k )\t ! idea ( be+2 let :oev] d\bts ?is consult 8 own exp]i5ce1 & make1 if he c1 a reflex act into :i* ! idea ( be+ w n ent]4 ,we h already se5 t we _c exclude x 9 ! conception ( fir/ pr9ciples1 & beyond ^! x is c]ta9 no "o w g4 #gf4 ,c ?is idea h come to u f s5sation8 ,s5sation 9 itself (f]s u only det]m9ate objects1 :]eas ! idea ( be+ is an indet]m9ate ?+3 s5sation (f]s u only p>ticul> ?+s1 :]eas ! idea ( be+ is ! mo/ g5]al x is possible to h3 s5sation tea*es u no?+1 tells u no?+1 except :at x is1 a simple affection ( our s\l1 :]eas ! idea ( be+ is a va/ idea1 ext5d+ to all1 &1 fecundat+ our m9d 9 an admirable mann]1 is ! elem5t ( all reflection & alone suffici5t to f\nd a sci5ce3 s5sation nev] leaves itself1 nor ext5ds to ano!r s5sation2 ! s5se ( t\* has no?+ to d ) t ( he>+2 all belong to an in/ant ( "t1 & only exi/ dur+ x1 :]eas ! idea ( be+ guides ! m9d ?r\gh e class ( be+s1 ! corporeal & ! incorporeal1 ! real & ! possible1 ! temporal & ! et]nal1 ! f9ite & ! inf9ite4 ,if we discov] any ?+ by s5sations1 if !y produce any intellectual fruit1 x is because we reflect ^u !m2 b reflection is impossible )\t ! idea ( be+4 #gg4 ,nei!r does x seem t ! idea ( be+ c be =m$ by ab/raction4 ,to ab/ract is ( necessity to reflect2 & reflection is impossible )\t ?is idea2 !re=e1 x is necess>y to ab/raction1 & consequ5tly _c h ab/raction = its cause4 #gh4 ,on ! o!r h&1 an exce$+ly simple explication ( ! me?od 9 :i* ab/raction is made1 may be oppos$ to ?is argum5t app>5tly s conclusive4 ,we see ! pap] ^u :i* we write2 ?is s5sation involves two ?+s1 :it5ess & ext5sion4 ,7 we limit$ to simple s5sation1 "h we %\ld /op1 & receive only ! impression1 ext5sion & :it5ess4 ,b hav+ )9 ourselves a faculty di/9ct f t ( feel+1 :i* makes u capable ( reflect+ ^u ! v s5sation we exp]i5ce1 we c consid] t ?is s5sation has "s simil>ity to o!rs :i* we recollect to h exp]i5c$4 ,we c !n consid] ext5sion & :it5ess 9 !mselves1 ab/ract+ ! actual affection :i* !y produce 9 u4 ,aft]w>ds we c reflect ^u ! fact t ^! s5sations h some?+ 9 common ) o!rs1 inasmu* z !y all affect u 9 a c]ta9 mann]1 & !n we h ! idea ( s5sation 9 g5]al4 ,if1 !n1 we consid] t ^! s5sations all h some?+ 9 common ) all t is 9 u1 9 s f> z !y modify u 9 a c]ta9 mann]1 we %all =m an idea ( a modification ( ! me1 mak+ ab/raction1 h[ev]1 ( its be+ a s5sation1 a ?\ght1 or an act ( ! w2 & if1 f9ally1 we ab/ract f ^! ?+s be+ 9 u1 _! be+ sub/ances or modifications1 & att5d only to ! fact t !y are some?+1 we %all h atta9$ ! idea ( be+4 ,?is idea may1 !re=e1 be =m$ by ab/raction4 ,?is explication1 s$uctive z x is by reason ( its simplicity1 is op5 to grave objections4 #gi4 ,f ! v beg9n+ ( ?is process we make use1 )\t adv]t+ to x1 ( ! idea ( be+2 we !re=e deceive ourselves :5 we imag9e t we =m x4 ,we _c reflect ^u ext5sion & :it5ess )\t rem>k+ t !y exi/1 t !y are some?+ simil> to o!r s5sations4 ,:5 we ?9k ^u :at affects u1 we "k t we are1 t t :i* affects u is1 & we speak ( its be+ or n be+1 ( its hav+ or n hav+ some?+ common2 & f9ally1 :5 we ab/ract ! modifications ( our m9d z be+ ?is or t1 & reg>d !m only z ?+1 z some?+1 z a be+1 we evid5tly _c s consid] !m if !re does n exi/ 9 u ! idea ( some?+ 9 g5]al1 t is1 ( be+4 ,?us be+ is a pr$icate :i* we apply to ?+s2 we d1 !re=e1 "k ?is pr$icate4 ,we only collect 9 "o g5]al & indet]m9ate idea1 p>ticul> & det]m9ate ?+s1 already exi/+ 9 our und]/&+4 ,! successive op]ations made by means ( ab/raction are only a decomposition ( ! object1 a classification ( x 9 v>i\s g5]al ideas s z to atta9 to ! sup]ior idea ( be+4 #hj4 ,x is difficult 9 view ( ^! reasons1 :i* are all /rong1 to decide )\t dang] ( err+ = ei!r ( ! op9ions advanc$4 ,nev]!less1 we %all give our own 9 accordance ) ! pr9ciples we h laid d[n 9 diff]5t p>ts ( ?is "w4 ,we hold t ! idea ( be+ is n innate1 9 ! s5se t x pre-exi/s 9 our und]/&+ z a type ant]ior to all s5sation & to all intellectual acts2#bc b we see no impropriety 9 call+ x innate1 if no?+ m be meant ?an ! innate faculty ( our und]/&+ to p]ceive objects "u ! g5]al reason ( be+ or exi/5ce1 s (t5 z x reflects ^u !m4 ,?us ! idea does n fl[ f s5sations2 x is recogniz$ z a prim>y elem5t ( pure und]/&+2 b x is n =m$ by ab/raction1 :i* sep>ates x f o!rs1 & purifies x1 s to speak1 itself contribut+ to ?is purification4 ,9 ?is s5se x may exi/ be=e reflection1 & yet be ! fruit ( reflection1 accord+ to ! v>i\s /ages 9 :i* we consid] x4 ,inasmu* z x is mix$ & confus$ ) o!r ideas1 x exi/s be=e reflection2 b inasmu* z x has be5 sep>at$ & purifi$1 x is ! fruit ( ! same reflection4 #bc ,see ,l4 ,,iv41 ,c4 ,,xxx4 #ha4 ,we mu/1 9 ord] to give a complete solution ( ! difficulties propos$1 give our ideas precision & exactness4 ,! idea ( be+ is n only g5]al b also indet]m9ate2 x (f]s to ! m9d no?+ real or ev5 possible1 s9ce we d n conceive t a be+1 :i* is only be+1 does or c exi/1 if no prop]ty besides t ( be+ c be affirm$ ( x4 ,9 ,god is ! pl5itude ( be+2 he is 8 own be+2 ) reason does he call himself1 ,i ,,am1 ,,:o ,,am2 b we also affirm ( him1 ) all tru?1 t he is intellig5t1 t he is free1 & t he possesses o!r p]fections n express$ 9 ! pure & g5]al idea ( be+4 ,f ?is we inf] t we ought n to reg>d ! idea ( be+ z a type repres5t+ to u some?+ det]m9ate1 ev5 some?+ 9 g5]al4 #hb4 ,! act by :i* we p]ceive be+1 exi/5ce1 reality1 is necess>y to our und]/&+1 b x is conf\nd$ ) all o!r intellectual acts1 z a condition s9e qua non ( !m all1 until reflection comes to sep>ate x f !m1 purify+ x1 & mak+ x ! object ( our p]ception4 ,s9ce1 :5 we p]ceive1 we p]ceive some?+1 x is evid5t t ! reason ( be+ is always involv$ 9 all our p]ceptions2 by ! simple fact ( kn[+ we "k be+1 t is1 we "k a ?+4 ,b z we d n always1 :5 we fix our p]ception ^u an object1 di/+ui% ! v>i\s reasons into :i* x may be decompos$1 al?\gh ! idea ( be+ is conta9$ 9 e object p]ceiv$1 x is n directly p]ceiv$ by our und]/&+ until reflection sep>ates x f all else4 #hc4 ,if we reflect ^u an azure object1 evid5tly ! idea ( color ent]s into t ( azure2 b )\t reflection we %all n di/+ui% ! g5us1 color1 & ! diff]5ce1 azure4 ,^! two ?+s are n really di/+ui%$ 9 ! object p]ceiv$2 = x w\ld be ridicul\s to pret5d t 9 a p>ticul> azure-color$ object1 color is "o ?+ & azure ano!r4 ,nev]!less we c1 :5 we reflect ^u ! object1 v easily di/+ui% betwe5 ! two ideas ( color & azure1 & we c discuss "o )\t pay+ att5tion to ! o!r4 ,mu/ we say we h ! idea ( color 9 g5]al1 prior to ! s5sible repres5tation8 ,mo/ c]ta9ly n3 x is only necess>y to recognize an innate =ce ( ! m9d to g5]alize :at is pres5t$ to x 9 p>ticul>1 & to decompose a simple object into v>i\s ideas or aspects4 #hd4 ,our und]/&+ is end[$ ) an intellectual =ce1 by virtue ( :i* x c conceive unity "u ! idea ( multiplicity1 & multiplicity "u ! idea ( unity4 ,we discov] an example ( ! latt] :5 we unite :at is really multiple 9 a s+le conception4 ,our und]/&+ may be comp>$ to a prism :i* decomposes a ray ( light into _m colors2 h5ce diff]5t conceptions relat+ to "o simple object4 ,:5 multiplicity is to be r$uc$ to unity1 ! intellectual =ce op]ates 9 an altoge!r contr>y mann]2 in/ead ( disp]s+1 x unites2 ! v>iety ( colors disappe>s1 & ! ray ( light is re/or$ 9 all its purity & simplicity4 #he4 ,our m9d1 f ! fact t x is limit$ to "k _m ?+s by conceptions only1 & n by intuitions1 requires ! faculty ( compos+ & decompos+1 ( see+ a simple ?+ "u di/9ct aspects1 & ( jo9+ diff]5t ?+s "u a common reason4 ,we mu/ n fail to obs]ve t ! p[] ( g5]aliz+ & ( divid+1 giv5 to our und]/&+1 is a great help to x1 indicat+1 h[ev]1 its weakness 9 ! intellectual ord]1 & cont9ually w>n+ x to proce$ ) due circumspection1 :5 x has to decide ^u ! intimate nature ( ?+s4 #hf4 ,accord+ to ?is doctr9e1 g5]al1 & m p>ticul>ly indet]m9ate ideas result f ! ex]cise ( reflection ^u our own p]ceptive acts2 & !re is 9 ! g5]al idea no?+ m ?an is se5 9 ! p>ticul> p]ception1 except+ its own g5]ality produc$ by ! elim9ation ( all individuat+ conditions4 ,?is is especially v]ifi$ 9 ! idea ( be+1 :i*1 z we h se51 ent]s z a necess>y condition into all our p]ceptions1 & is1 moreov]1 requisite to all op]ations z well ( composition z ( decomposition4 ,we _c conceive1 )\t conceiv+ "s ?+1 a be+2 & ?is is sub/antive be+4 ,we _c affirm or d5y )\t say+1 is1 or is n2 & ?is is copulative be+4 ,! idea ( be+ is1 !re=e1 less an idea ?an a condition necess>y to enable our und]/&+ to ex]cise its functions2 x is n a type repres5t+ no?+ det]m9ate2 x is r ! v condition ( its life1 )\t :i* x _c possibly ex]cise its activity4 #hg4 ,b we c1 by reflection1 p]ceive ?is condition ( all our ?\ghts2 ! idea ( be+1 /&+1 z x does1 involv$ ) ! o!rs1 is !n pres5t$ purifi$ to our eyes1 & we conceive t g5]al reason ( be+1 or ?+1 :i* ent]s into all our p]ceptions1 b :i* we _h n previ\sly di/+ui%$ ) suffici5t cle>ness4 ,,*apt] ,,xii4 ,,di/9ction ,,betwe5 ,,ess5ce ,,& ,,exi/5ce4 #hh4 ,x has be5 mu* disput$ 9 ! s*ools :e!r exi/5ce is di/9ct f ess5ce4 ,at fir/ sight1 ?is seems an indiff]5t "q2 b su* x is n1 if we att5d to ! consequ5ces :i*1 9 ! op9ion ( respectable au?ors1 fl[ f x2 = !y pret5d to no less ?an e/abli%+ ^u ! di/9ction betwe5 ess5ce & exi/5ce a *>act]i/ic note ( ! f9ite1 attribut+ to inf9ite be+ alone1 ! id5tity ( its ess5ce ) its exi/5ce4 #hi4 ,t we di/+ui% betwe5 ! ess5ce & ! exi/5ce ( ?+s is beyond all d\bt2 = inasmu* z we "k an object realiz$1 we conceive its exi/5ce2 & inasmu* z we "k t ?is object exi/s ) ?is or t det]m9ation1 con/itut+ x 9 su* or su* a species1 we conceive its ess5ce4 ,! idea ( exi/5ce repres5ts to u pure reality2 ! idea ( ess5ce (f]s u ! det]m9ation ( ?is reality4 ,! s*ools1 h[ev]1 n satisfi$ ) ?is1 h endeavor$ to transf] to ?+s t di/9ction :i* we discov] 9 our conceptions2 b _! op9ion seems to be subtle r ?an solid4 #ij4 ,! ess5ce ( a ?+ is t :i* makes x :at x is1 & di/+ui%es x f all else2 & exi/5ce is ! act :i* gives be+ to ess5ce1 or t by :i* ess5ce exi/s4 ,x w\ld appe>1 f ^! def9itions1 t !re really is no di/9ction betwe5 ess5ce & exi/5ce4 ,to r5d] two ?+s di/9ct1 x is requisite t "o be n ! o!r2 b s9ce ess5ce1 ab/ract$ f exi/5ce1 is no?+1 we _c say t !re is a real di/9ction betwe5 !m4 ,to :at is ! ess5ce ( a man1 if we ab/ract 8 exi/5ce1 r$uc$8 ,to no?+2 & !re=e1 no relation betwe5 !m is admissible4 ,we grant t :5 we ab/ract ! exi/5ce ( man1 we d yet conceive ! ess5ce ( man2 b ! "q is n :e!r we di/+ui% betwe5 ! idea ( man & 8 exi/5ce1 b :e!r !re is a real di/9ction betwe5 8 own ess5ce & exi/5ce4 #ia4 ,9 ,god are ! ess5ces ( all ?+s1 & 9 ?is s5se !y may be said to be di/+ui%$ f f9ite exi/5ce2 ?is does n1 h[ev]1 if we consid] x well1 at all affect ! pres5t "q4 ,:5 ?+s exi/ 9 ,god1 !y are n any ?+ di/9ct f him2 !y are repres5t$ 9 ! ,inf9ite ,intellig5ce1 :i* is1 ) all its repres5tations1 ! inf9ite ess5ce itself4 ,to comp>e1 !re=e1 ! f9ite exi/5ce ( ?+s ) _! ess5ce1 z ?is is 9 ,god1 is entirely to *ange ! /ate ( ! "q1 & to seek ! relation ( ?+s1 n ) _! p>ticul> ess5ces1 b ) ! repres5tations ( ! ,div9e und]/&+4 #ib4 ,x may be object$ t1 if ! exi/5ce ( f9ite be+s is ! same z _! ess5ce1 x w foll[ t exi/5ce w be ess5tial to ^! be+s2 =1 s9ce no?+ is m ess5tial ?an ess5ce itself1 f9ite be+s w\ld exi/ ( necessity1 z all t p]ta9s to ess5ce is necess>y4 ,! radii ( a circle are all equal1 = equality is conta9$ 9 ! ess5ce ( ! circle2 & 9 l mann]1 if exi/5ce belong to ! ess5ce ( ?+s1 !y mu/ exi/1 & non-exi/5ce w\ld be a v]itable contradiction4 ,?is difficulty re/s ^u ! ambigu\s mean+ ( ! ^w ess5ce1 & ! want ( exactness 9 jo9+ ! ideas ( ess5tial & necess>y4 ,! relation ( ess5tial prop]ties is necess>y1 = we _c de/roy x )\t fall+ into contradiction4 ,! radii ( a circle are equal1 because equality is involv$ 9 ! v idea ( ! circle2 consequ5tly1 if ?is be d5i$1 x w\ld be affirm$ & d5i$ at "o & ! same "t4 ,!re is1 h[ev]1 no contradiction :5 "s prop]ties are n comp>$ ) o!rs2 b ?is comp>ison is n made :5 !re is "q ( ess5ce & exi/5ce1 = 9 ?is case "o ?+ is n comp>$ ) ano!r1 b ) itself2 if ! di/9ction be introduc$1 x does n ref] to two ?+s1 b to "o & ! same ?+ consid]$ "u two aspects1 or 9 two diff]5t /ates1 9 ! ideal ord] & 9 ! real4 ,:5 we consid] ess5ce ab/ract$ f exi/5ce1 ! object is ! union ( ! prop]ties :i* give to be+s su* or su* a nature2 we ab/ract _! exi/5ce or non-exi/5ce1 & att5d only to :at !y w\ld be 7 !y to exi/4 ,! condition ( exi/5ce is ei!r expressly or impli$ly involv$ 9 all t we affirm or d5y ( prop]ties2 b :5 we consid] ess5ce realiz$ or exi/+1 we d n comp>e prop]ty ) prop]ty b ! ?+ ) itself4 ,9 ?is case1 non-exi/5ce does n imply contradiction2 = :5 exi/5ce disappe>s1 ! ess5ce also disappe>s1 ) all t x includ$4 ,!re w\ld be a contradiction 7 we to ass]t t ess5ce implies exi/5ce1 & to endeavor1 :ile ! =m] rema9s1 to make ! latt] disappe>1 :i* is n v]ifi$ 9 ?is supposition4 ,! equality ( ! radii ( a circle _c fail1 s long z ! circle does n fail2 & ! contradiction w\ld be to make ! radii unequal :ile ! circle cont9ues to be a circle2 b 7 ! circle to cease to be a circle1 !re w\ld be no reason :y ! radii %\ld n be unequal4 ,ess5ce is ! same z exi/5ce2 s long z !re is ess5ce1 s long w !re be exi/5ce2 if ! ess5ce fail ! exi/5ce w likewise fail2 :]e1 !n1 is ! contradiction8 ,life is ( ! ess5ce ( man1 & yet man dies2 we may !n say man is de/roy$1 & !re=e !re is 9 ?is no contradiction4 ,if ! ess5ce cease to exi/1 x also w be de/roy$1 & exi/5ce1 :i* is id5tifi$ ) x1 may fail )\t any contradiction4 #ic4 ,! s*ola/ics taught t ! be+ ^: ess5ce 0 ! same z its exi/5ce w\ld be inf9ite & absolutely immutable1 because1 s9ce exi/5ce is ! complem5t 9 ! l9e ( be+ or ( act1 x c\ld receive no?+ m4 ,?is difficulty also orig9ates 9 ! equivocal s5se ( words4 ,:at is meant by complem5t 9 ! l9e ( be+ or act8 ,if x mean t no?+ c sup]v5e to ess5ce id5tifi$ ) exi/5ce1 "h is a begg+ ( ! "q1 s9ce :at 0 to be prov$ is ass]t$4 ,if x mean t exi/5ce is ! complem5t 9 ! l9e ( be+ or act 9 ! s5se t1 giv5 x1 no?+ m is want$ to make ! ?+s1 ^: exi/5ce x is1 really exi/+1 an indubitable tru? is advanc$1 b n "o f :i* :at 0 to be demon/rat$ c be inf]r$4 #id4 ,x w\ld seem1 !re=e1 t !re is no real di/9ction 9 ?+s correspond+ to ! di/9ction betwe5 ess5ce & exi/5ce 9 our conceptions4 ,ess5ce is n di/+ui%$ f exi/5ce1 b x does n !re=e cease to be f9ite1 nor exi/5ce to be cont+5t4 ,9 ,god exi/5ce is id5tifi$ ) ess5ce2 b 9 su* a mann]1 t 8 non-exi/5ce implies contradiction1 & 8 ess5ce is inf9ite4 ,,*apt] ,,xiii4 ,,kant',s ,,op9ion ,,( ,,reality ,,& ,,negation4 #ie4 ,kant numb]s among 8 categories reality & negation1 or exi/5ce & non-exi/5ce1 &1 con=mably to 8 pr9ciples1 def9es !m ?us3 ,reality is a pure conception ( ! und]/&+2 x is :at corresponds1 9 g5]al1 to any s5sation :atev]1 consequ5tly t ^: conception d5otes a be+ 9 itself1 9 "t4 ,negation is t ^: conception repres5ts a n-be+ 9 "t4 ,! opposition ( ^! two ?+s consi/s 9 ! diff]5ce ( ! same "t1 z full or void4 ,s9ce !n1 "t consi/s solely 9 ! =m ( ! intuition1 & consequ5tly 9 ! =m ( ! objects z ph5om5a1 x foll[s t t :i* 9 !m corresponds to ! s5sation1 is ! transc5d5tal matt] ( all objects1 z ?+s 9 !mselves1 ess5tial reality4 ,e s5sation has a degree or int5sity1 by :i* x may fill m or less ! same "t1 t is1 ! inw>d s5se relatively to ! repres5tation ( an object1 until x be r$uc$ to no?+ #j negation4 ,!re is 9 ?is passage a fundam5tal error :i* ru9s ! :ole basis ( all intellig5ce3 !re is also mu* confusion 9 8 application ( ! idea ( "t4 #if4 ,accord+ to ,kant1 reality alone ref]s to s5sations2 !re=e ! idea ( be+ w be ! idea ( ! ph5om5a ( s5sibility 9 g5]al2 ?is idea w mean no?+1 if appli$ to ! non-s5sible2 ! v pr9ciple ( contradiction w necess>ily be limit$ to ! sph]e ( s5sibility2 & we nei!r %all "k1 or be able to "k any ?+ )\t ! s5sible ord]4 ,su* are ! consequ5ces ( ?is doctr9e2 let u n[ exam9e ! solidity ( ! pr9ciple f :i* !y fl[4 #ig4 ,7 ! idea ( reality only ! idea ( ! s5sible 9 g5]al1 we c\ld nev] apply x to non-s5sible ?+s1 :i*1 h[ev]1 exp]i5ce tea*es we c d4 ,we speak incessantly ( ! possibility & ev5 ( ! exi/5ce ( non-s5sible be+s1 & we ev5 di/+ui% ! ph5om5a ( our m9d into ^? belong+ to s5sibility1 & ^? :i* correspond to ! purely intellectual ord]4 ,! idea ( be+1 !re=e1 = u1 d5otes a g5]al conception non-circumscrib$ by ! s5sible ord]4 #ih4 ,kant w answ] t ! applications we make ( ?is idea1 ext5d+ x beyond ! sph]e ( s5sibility1 are va9 illusions express$ 9 unmean+ words4 ,to ?is we reply4 ,i4 ,!re is n[ no "q ( asc]ta9+ :e!r ! applications ( ! idea ( be+ or reality beyond ! s5sible ord] be f\nd$ or unf\nd$2 !re is "q only ( asc]ta9+ :at x is t ?is idea repres5ts to u1 :e!r ! object repres5t$ be illusory or n4 ,kant1 :5 def9+ reality1 reg>ds x z "o ( 8 categories1 & consequ5tly1 z "o ( ! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+4 ,to make 8 def9ition good1 he ought to employ ?is conception 9 its greate/ possible ext5t3 b z he has demon/rat$ t conception1 9 itself1 is n limit$ to ! sph]e ( s5sibility1 x mu/ foll[ t 8 def9ition is inadmissible4 ,_h he said t ! applications ( ! conception beyond ! s5sible ord] 7 unf\nd$1 he w\ld inde$ h err$1 b w\ld n h de/roy$ conception itself2 yet he equivocates n only 9 ! uses ( conception1 b also 9 its nature1 :i* he c only ru91 if he limit x to ! sph]e ( s5sibility4 ,,ii4 ,! pr9ciple ( contradiction is f\nd$ 9 ! idea ( be+1 & ext5ds z well to ! non-s5sible z to ! s5sible4 ,x w\ld foll[1 7 we to admit ,kant's doctr9e1 t ! pr9ciple ( contradiction1 ,x is impossible = a ?+ to be & n to be at ! same "t1 w\ld be equival5t to ?is proposition2 ,x is impossible = a ph5om5on ( s5sibility to appe> & n to appe> at ! same "t4 ,evid5tly nei!r philosophy nor common s5se ev] gave su* a mean+ to ! pr9ciple ( contradiction4 ,:5 ! impossibility ( a ?+'s be+ & n be+ at ! same "t is affirm$1 ?is is ass]t$ 9 g5]al1 & ab/raction is absolutely made ( ! ?+s p]ta9+ or n p]ta9+ to ! s5sible ord]4 ,7 x n ?us1 we %\ld be oblig$ to say t non-s5sible be+s are absolutely impossible1 :i* ev5 ,kant does n v5ture to ma9ta91 or1 suppos+ !m to exi/1 to d\bt :e!r ! pr9ciple ( contradiction is applicable to !m4 ,:o sees n ! absurdity ( su* a d\bt1 & t1 if x be admitt$ = a s+le in/ant1 all intellig5ce is de/roy$8 ,if we limit ! g5]ality ( ! pr9ciple ( contradiction1 ! impossibility is no long] absolute3 & suppos+ x to fail 9 c]ta9 cases1 :o %all assure u t x does n 9 all8 ,,iii4 ,kant himself admits ! di/9ction betwe5 ! ph5om5a ( s5sibility & purely intellectual conceptions3 ) him1 !re=e1 reality comprises some?+ m ?an ! s5sible4 ,purely intellectual conceptions are a reality1 are some?+ at lea/ z subjective ph5om5a ( our m9d1 & yet are n s5sible1 z ,kant himself confesses2 he !re=e falls into a contradiction1 :5 he limits ! idea ( reality to ! purely s5sible4 #ii4 ,kant conceives reality & negation only z fill+1 or leav+ void1 "t1 :i*1 9 8 op9ion1 is ! primitive =m ( our intuitions1 & a k9d ( back-gr\nd ^u :i* ! m9d sees all objects1 ev5 its own op]ations4 ,accord+ to ?is doctr9e1 ! ideas ( "t prec$e ^? ( reality & negation1 s9ce only 9 relation to x are ! two latt] conceivable4 ,& n[ we see ! s+ul>ity ( a =m1 or :atev] else x be call$1 to :i* ! ideas ( reality & negation are made to ref] :5 no?+ is conceivable )\t ! idea ( reality4 ,kant1 scrupul\s z he is 9 ! analysis ( ! elem5ts ( our m9d1 & contemptu\s z he is t[>ds all metaphysicians :o prec$$ him1 ought to h expla9$ to u ! nature ( ?is =m 9 :i* we see reality1 & :i*1 nev]!less1 is n conta9$ 9 ! idea ( reality4 ,if x is some?+1 x w be a reality2 & if x is n some?+1 x w be a pure no?+2 & consequ5tly1 x _c be a =m :i* c1 by fill+ & becom+ void1 pres5t to our m9d ! ideas ( reality or negation4 ,x w\ld be easy to %[1 by an abundance ( reason1 ! ,g]man philosoph]'s equivocation1 :5 he s inexactly det]m9es ! relations betwe5 "t & ! idea ( be+2 b z we propose to expla9 at l5g? ! idea ( "t1 we w pass ov] "h :at belongs to ano!r "p ( ?is "w4 ,,*apt] ,,xiv4 ,,recapitulation ,,& ,,consequ5ces ,,( ,,! ,,doctr9e ,,conc]n+ ,,! ,,idea ,,( ,,be+4 #ajj4 ,we wi% n[ to recapitulate ! doctr9e br\ght out 9 ! prec$+ *apt]s1 s t x may be se5 at a glance 9 all its be>+s & connections4 ,! idea ( be+ is s fruitful 9 results1 t we mu/ s\nd x "u all its aspects1 & nev] lose sight ( x 9 inve/igat+ transc5d5tal philosophy4 #aja4 ,we h ! idea ( ens1 or ( be+ 9 g5]al2 reason & our inw>d s5se bo? atte/ x4 #ajb4 ,?is idea is simple1 & _c be resolv$ into o!r elem5ts3 x expresses a g5]al reason ( ?+s1 & its nature is 9 a c]ta9 mann] de/roy$ if x be m+l$ ) p>ticul> ideas4 ,x is intuitive1 b indet]m9ate to su* a degree t1 by itself alone1 x af=ds u no idea ( a real or possible be+4 ,we n only "k t e be+ is1 b t x is "s ?+ :i* is its pr$icate3 ev5 ! ,inf9ite ,be+ is n only a be+1 b is an intellig5t & free be+1 & =mally possesses all p]fections :i* imply no imp]fection4 #ajc4 ,! idea ( be+ may express ei!r simple exi/5ce1 9 :i* case x is sub/antive1 or ! relation ( a pr$icate ) a subject1 & !n x is copulative4 ,9 ! proposition1 ! sun is1 be+ is sub/antive1 t is1 expresses exi/5ce2 9 ! proposition1 ! sun is lum9\s1 be+ is copulative1 t is1 x d5otes ! relation ( ! pr$icate ) a subject4 #ajd4 ,! ideas ( id5tity & di/9ction orig9ate 9 ! ideas ( be+ & ( n-be+2 & ?us ! idea ( copulative be+1 :i* affirms ! id5tity ( a pr$icate ) a subject1 fl[s also 9 a mann] f ! idea ( sub/antive be+4 #aje4 ,be+1 :i* is ! pr9cipal object ( ! und]/&+1 is n ! possible inasmu* z possible4 ,we conceive possibility only 9 ord] to actuality4 ,possibility fl[s f actuality1 n actuality f possibility4 ,we c\ld n conceive pure possibility1 t is1 possibility )\t exi/5ce1 did we n conceive f9ite be+s 9 ^: idea be+ is n ( necessity involv$1 & ( ^: appe>ance & disappe>ance we are incessantly rem9d$ by exp]i5ce4 #ajf4 ,! und]/&+ p]ceives be+1 & ?is is a condition indisp5sable to all its p]ceptions2 b ! idea ( be+ is n ! only "o (f]$ to x1 s9ce x kn[s diff]5t modes ( be+1 :i*1 by ! v fact t !y are modes1 add some?+ to ! g5]al & absolute idea ( exi/5ce4 #ajg4 ,:5 we consid] ! ess5ces ( ?+s1 & ab/ract _! reality1 our cognitions always involve ?is condition1--if !y exi/4 ,!re c be only a conditional sci5ce ( ! purely possible1 insomu* z x is n2 t is1 provid$ ! object pass f possibility to reality4 ,we mu/1 9 ord] to e/abli% pure possibility s t x may h necess>y relations1 subject to ! condition ( exi/5ce1 h rec\rse to a necess>y be+1 orig9 ( all tru?4 #ajh4 ,! ess5ces ( ?+s 9 ! ab/ract mean no?+1 nor c !y become ! object ( affirmation or negation1 unless we suppose a necess>y be+ 9 :i* is ! reason ( ! relations ( ?+s1 & ( ! possibility ( _! exi/5ce4 #aji4 ,pure tru?1 indep5d5t ( all und]/&+1 ( all be+ creat$ or uncreat$1 is an illusion1 or r an absurdity4 ,) pure no?+ !re is no tru?4 ,tru? _c be a!i/ic2 )\t ,god !re is no tru?4 #aaj4 ,we n only "k be+1 b also n-be+4 ,we h an idea ( negation1 & x always ref]s to "s be+4 ,absolute no?+ _c be ! object ( intellig5ce4 ,! idea ( n-be+ has its own peculi> fecundity2 comb9$ ) t ( be+1 x gives ! pr9ciple ( contradiction1 eng5d]s ! ideas ( di/9ction & multiplicity1 & makes negative judgm5ts possible4 #aaa4 ,! idea ( be+ does n fl[ f s5sations2 nei!r is x innate1 9 ! s5se t x pre-exi/s 9 our und]/&+ z a type prior to all p]ceptions4 ,!re is no reason :y x may n be call$ innate1 if ?is mean only a condition s9e qua non ( all our intellectual acts1 & consequ5tly ( ! ex]cise ( our innate faculties4 ,! idea ( be+ is m+l$ 9 e intellectual p]ception1 b x is n (f]$ to u ) p]fect cle>ness & di/9ctness until we sep>ate x by reflection f ! p>ticul> ideas :i* accompany x4 #aab4 ,ess5ce is n di/+ui%$ f exi/5ce ev5 9 f9ite be+s4 ,x is a di/9ction 9 conceptions1 to :i* !re is no real di/9ction correspond+4 #aac4 ,! id5tity ( ess5ce ) exi/5ce does n involve ! necessity ( f9ite ?+s4 ,! argum5ts by :i* "s pret5d to e/abli% ?is consequ5ce are f\nd$ ^u an ambigu\s mean+ ( words4 #aad4 ,kant's op9ion1 :i* limits ! idea ( reality1 & t also ( negation1 to ! purely s5sible ord]1 w\ld de/roy all intellig5ce1 s9ce x ov]?r[s ! v pr9ciple ( contradiction4 ,?is doctr9e ( ! ,g]man philosoph] is also 9 opposition ) :at he himself taught conc]n+ purely intellectual conceptions1 di/9ct f s5sible repres5tations4 ,:5 he ref]s ! ideas ( reality & negation to t ( "t1 z ! primitive =m ( ! inw>d s5se1 he leaves out ( ! idea ( reality :at no less p]ta9s to x1 & pres5ts ! idea ( "t "u a po9t ( view :olly equivocal4 #aae4 ,z s5sible repres5tation is bas$ ^u ! f9ite intuition ( ext5sion1 s ! p]ceptive faculties ( ! pure und]/&+ receive ! idea ( be+ z _! f\ndation4 ,9 ! same mann] t ext5sion is pres5t$ to s5sibility z limitable1 & f limitability results figurability1 & consequ5tly all ! objects ( geometrical sci5ce2 s also does ! idea ( n-be+1 comb9$ ) t ( be+1 fecundate 9 a mann] ! metaphysical sci5ces4 ,! p>allelism ( ! two ideas1 ext5sion & be+1 is n ( su* a nature z to r5d] ! =m] indep5d5t ( ! latt]4 ,s f> z sci5ce is conc]n$1 ! idea ( ext5sion is /]ile1 if x be n comb9$ ) ! g5]al idea ( be+ & n-be+4 ,?is may be %[n 9 _m ways2 b x w suffice to recollect t geometry _c take a s+le /ep )\t ! pr9ciple ( contradiction1 into :i* ! ideas ( be+ & ( n-be+ ent]4#bd #bd ,see ,l4 ,,iv41 ,c4 ,v4 #aaf4 ,all our cognitions fl[ f ! idea ( be+ & n-be+1 comb9$ ) intuitive ideas4 ,we %all h occasion 9 ! foll[+ books to rem>k ?is admirable fecundity ( an idea1 :i*1 al?\gh x _c ( itself tea* any ?+1 c yet1 :5 unit$ ) o!rs1 & modifi$ itself 9 v>i\s ways1 s illum9ate ! intellectual _w z to m]it to be call$ ! object ( und]/&+4 ,,book ,,six?4 ,,unity ,,& ,,numb]4 ,,*apt] ,i4 ,,prelim9>y ,,consid]ations ,,on ,,! ,,idea ,,( ,,unity4 #a4 ,be=e analyz+ ! idea ( numb]1 let u exam9e its simple/ elem5t1 unity4 ,numb] is a connection ( unities4 ,we _c "k :at numb] is1 if we d n "k :at unity is4#be #be ,see ,l4 ,v41 ,c4 ,x4 #b4 ,:at is unity8 ,:5 is a ?+ "o8 ,we all seem to "k :at unity is1 s9ce ^u x we f\nd ! fabric ( all our ari?metic cognitions4 ,we all "k :5 a ?+ is "o1 & we nev] equivocate on ! mean+ ( ! ^w4 ,9 ?is ! le>n$ & ! unle>n$ /& on ! same foot+4 ,! ^w "o1 9 our language1 has only "o mean+ = all :o und]/& x4 ,! same may be said ( ! ^w :i* 9 o!r languages expresses ! same idea4 ,:5 we meet ! figure #a1 :i* corresponds to ?is idea1 & expresses x 9 a g5]al mann]1 ab/ract+ ! diff]5ce ( idioms1 all m5 und]/& & apply x 9 ! same mann]4 #c4 ,! idea ( unity is ! same 9 all m52 x is a common patrimony ( ! human race4 ,x is n b\nd to ?is or t object1 nor to ?is or t act ( ! m9d2 x ext5ds to all 9 ! same mann]4 ,ev5 composite & multiple ?+s are call$ "o only1 inasmu* z !y p>ticipate 9 a g5]al idea4 ,! indivisible po9t is "o4 ,! l9e compos$ ( _m po9ts c\ld n be "o 7 !re n a contigu\s en*a9m5t ( ^! po9ts1 & did !y n all unite to =m "o object1 :i* gives u "o impression1 & is submitt$ to "o act ( our und]/&+4 #d4 ,! idea ( unity is n a p>ticul> s5sation1 s9ce x applies to all2 nei!r is x s5sation 9 g5]al1 s9ce x p]ta9s to :at is n s5sation4 ,! s5sation ( color is "o2 s1 also1 ! consci\sness ( ! me is "o1 al?\gh ?is is n a s5sation4 ,! size ( ! rectangle :i* ,i see is "o1 & ! relation ( ! equality ( its angles is also "o1 b is n a s5sation4 #e4 ,! idea ( unity is a simple idea1 & accompanies our m9d f its fir/ /eps2 we f9d x ev]y:]e1 & und]/& x well1 b _c expla9 x z we w\ld1 because x is simple1 & _c be decompos$ & express$ by v>i\s words4 ,we d n mean to say1 h[ev]1 t we mu/ abjure all explanation ( x2 we only propose to w>n ! read] ( ! k9d ( explanation he may expect1 :i* c be no o!r ?an ! analysis ( ! fact1 inasmu* z x is an object1 & ( ! ph5om5on z pres5t$ to our m9d4 ,,*apt] ,,ii4 ,,:at ,,is ,,unity4 #f4 ,! s*ola/ics 7 "r 9 tea*+ t e be+ is "o1 & t :atev] is "o is be+4 ,unity is a g5]al attribute ( e be+1 b is n di/9ct f x4 ,h[ev] little we reflect1 we _c fail to p]ceive t unity & be+ are n di/+ui%$3 ! unity ( unity1 by itself1 (f]s u no?+ real or ev5 possible4 ,:at !n w\ld become ( unity1 if no?+ b unity8 ,?is idea is involv$ 9 t ( be+2 x is an aspect ( x1 a reason "u :i* be+ is pres5t$ to ! und]/&+4 #g4 ,b :at is ! conception ( unity "u :i* be+s are pres5t$ to u8 ,!re is unity 9 ! object :5 !re is no di/9ction 9 ! conception pres5t+ x2 & !re is no di/9ction1 :5 ! p]ception ( relative n-be+ is n comb9$ 9 ! object ) t ( be+4 ,we h unity :5ev] we p]ceive an object simply4 ,suppose t we p]ceive ! object ,b4 ,no matt] :at ,b is1 x w to u be always "o1 unless we p]ceive x z compos$ ( ,c1 ,d1 "o ( :i* is n ! o!r4 ,if we p]ceive 9 ! object ,b1 a di/9ction betwe5 ,c & ,d1 unity disappe>s4 ,evid5tly :5 we are aw>e ( ?is composition we c ab/ract x & simply consid] ! result1 ! :ole1 ,b2 & !n unity appe>s anew4 #h4 ,we see by ?is t unity may be ei!r real or fictiti\s4 ,x is real & exi/+ :5 !re is no di/9ction 9 ! ?+ ei!r real or app>5t2 x is fictiti\s 9 ^? composites :i* ( !mselves include di/9ct ?+s t may be (f]$ to ! und]/&+1 inasmu* z !y are subord9at$ to "o unity ( ord]1 ab/raction made ( ! real di/9ction conta9$ 9 !m4 #i4 ,! s*oolm5 sometimes def9$ :at is "o to be1 ens indivisum 9 se1 et divisum ab aliis4 ,! =m] "p seems suffici5tly exact if by indivisum is meant non-di/9ctum & n non-sep>atum2 b ! second "p mu/ be reg>d$ at ! be/ z sup]flu\s4 ,if !re exi/$ only "o mo/ simple & sole be+1 x w\ld yet be "o1 al?\gh we c\ld n say t x 0 divid$ f o!rs1 divisum ab aliis2 = z !re w\ld be no o!rs x c\ld n be divid$ f !m4 ,?is "p ( ! def9ition is !re=e sup]flu\s4 #aj4 ,x is no solution ( ! difficulty to say t ?is "o be+ is divid$ f o!rs1 real or possible1 & t 9 ! supposition ( "o only be+1 o!rs are possible al?\gh n real4 ,! only be+ w\ld be really "o1 & ! division f o!rs w\ld be only possible2 s9ce !re c be no real di/9ction betwe5 two t]ms :5 "o ( !m is only possible4 ,! division f o!rs1 divisis ab aliis1 !re=e is n a necess>y elem5t ( unity1 because unity is real1 & ?is elem5t is only possible4 #aa4 ,h[ev]1 9 confirmation ( ?is doctr9e1 we may rem>k1 t 9 common p>lance1 unity is oppos$ to di/9ction1 & !re is no unity :]e !re is no di/9ction4 ,if ! only be+ be n conceiv$ z multiple !re c be no di/9ction2 & ?is is s indep5d5tly ( its be+ comp>$ ) ! re/4 ,! words1 o!rs1 & ! re/1 suppose s+le be+s2 ! idea ( unity prec$es t ( di/9ction2 be+s are n consid]$ z di/9ct betwe5 !mselves until aft] !y are conceiv$ z individually s+le4 #ab4 ,x seems1 !re=e1 t a s+le be+ ought to be def9$ z ens indivisum 9 se1 or a be+ :i* includes no division4 ,unity1 !n1 w dep5d ^u non-di/9ction4 ,if non-division d5ote non-di/9ction1 !re w be real unity2 b if x d5ote non-sep>ation or re-union1 we %all only h a fictiti\s unity4 ,! molecules )\t ext5sion1 ( :i* _m suppose matt] to be compos$1 w\ld be really "o1 because !re is no di/9ction 9 !m4 ,bodies are fictiti\sly "o because _! composite p>ts ?\gh unit$ are really di/9ct4 #ac4 ,a difficulty may be rais$ by ask+ :e!r a be+1 indivisible 9 itself1 b n divid$ f o!rs1 w\ld be really "o1 = 9 case x w\ld n be "o1 x might be inf]r$ t we _h unju/ly c5sur$ ! def9ition ( ! s*oolm51 s9ce :atev] wants ! second prop]ty requir$ by ! def9ition w\ld n be "o4 ,we reply1 !n1 a be+ t includes no di/9ction 9 itself1 & is n di/+ui%$ f o!rs1 w\ld inde$ be "o1 b 9 su* a case !re w\ld be no o!rs1 s9ce !y _c be :5 !re is no di/9ction4 ,9 su* an hypo!sis1 !re w\ld be only "o unity1 ! unity ( pan!ism1 ! great all1 ! absolute 9 :i* all ?+s w\ld be id5tifi$4 #ad4 ,we h already said t ! unity :i* is conf\nd$ ) be+1 is n ! unity :i* orig9ates numb]4 ,we "h 9 fact enc\nt] two diff]5t conceptions ( unity1 ! "o m>k+ only want ( di/9ction1 & ! o!r express+ ! prop]ty ( eng5d]+ numb]4 ,b we are n !nce to inf] t ! "o :i* is id5tifi$ ) be+ is di/9ct f t :i* eng5d]s numb]4 ,all be+s1 "o 9 !mselves1 b di/9ct f ea* o!r1 no matt] :at !y may be1 may be conceiv$ "u ! idea ( numb]4 ,! numb] ?ree ent]s into ! augu/ my/]y ( ! ,tr9ity1 & we say ) all tru? t 9 ,god !re are ?ree p]sons4 #ae4 ,x is n necess>y t ! unity :i* eng5d]s numb] %\ld be real2 x suffices if x be fictiti\s4 ,:5 we take a foot measure = unity1 we employ a fictiti\s unity1 s9ce ! foot is compos$ ( p>ts1 b ! numb] :i* results !refrom is1 nev]!less1 a true numb]4 ,,*apt] ,,iii4 ,,unity ,,& ,,simplicity4 #af4 ,real unity & simplicity are id5tical4 ,:at is really "o has no di/9ction 9 itself2 nor is x compos$ ( p>ts1 ( :i* x c be said1 ?is is n t4 ,evid5tly simplicity requires no?+ m2 ! simple is oppos$ to ! composite1 to :at is =m$ ( _m be+s :]e( "o is n ! o!r4 #ag4 ,we meet ?is simplicity 9 none ( ! objects ( our intuitions1 except+ ! acts ( our own m9d2 s t ev5 :5 we "k1 by discursion1 t !re are sub/ances really "o or simple1 we d n see !m 9 !mselves4 ,ext5sion consi/s ess5tially ( p>ts2 :5ce x happ5s t we nev] enc\nt] real unity or simplicity 9 ! corporeal _w z object ( our s5sibility4 ,b z ! composite mu/ be resolv$ into ! simple1 z x is h>d to proce$ ad inf9itum1 we inf] t ! corporeal univ]se itself is a union ( sub/ances :i*1 :e!r call$ po9ts )\t ext5sion1 or any ?+ else1 _c be decompos$ into o!rs2 = :i* reason !y are really "o1 or simple4 #ah4 ,h5ce we conclude t sub/ances may be said to be 9 a c]ta9 mann] simple2 & t ?+s call$ composite are unions ( sub/ances1 :i* 9 _! turn =m a ?ird sub/ance by virtue ( a law presid+ ov] !m & giv+ !m t unity :i* we call factiti\s4 #ai4 ,we _c1 !n1 d less ?an to rem>k t ! transc5d5tal analysis refutes ^? :o d5y simplicity to ?9k+ be+s1 s9ce we h se5 t simplicity is prior to composition1 :i* c nei!r be nor be conceiv$ if x be n presuppos$4 ,simplicity is a necess>y law ( e be+3 a composite be+ ought to be call$ a union ( be+s1 r ?an a be+4 #bj4 ,we h said t simple sub/ances are n objects ( our intuition1 :i* has none wor?y to be call$ simple except+ ! acts ( our m9d4 ,! reason ( ?is is1 t ! pr9cipal m$ium ( our intuition is s5sibility1 :i* is f\nd$ ^u repres5tations1 !mselves bas$ ^u ext5sion4 ,!re c be no d\bt t ! acts ( our m9d1 giv5 u by intuition1 9 ! inw>d s5se are p]fectly simple2 = :o c decompose a p]ception1 a judgm5t1 an act ( ! reason or ( ! w8 #ba4 ,! p]ception ( a c]ta9 object requires prep>atory acts2 & ! same may be said ( judgm5ts & ratioc9ations2 yet ^! op]ations are 9 !mselves exce$+ly simple1 & _c be divid$ into v>i\s p>ts4 ,simplicity is met ) alike 9 ! acts ( ! w1 :e!r ( ! pure1 intellectual1 or s5sible w4 ,h[ %all we divide su* acts z ^! into p>ts3 ,i desire1 ,i d n desire1 ,i love1 ,i abhor1 ,i suff]1 ,i rejoice8 #bb4 ,we mu/ take c>e n to conf\nd ! multiplicity ( ! acts ) ! acts !mselves2 !re may be _m acts1 b 9 !mselves !y are simple4 ,?\ghts1 impressions & affections cont9ually succe$ "o ano!r 9 our m9d2 ^! ph5om5a are all di/9ct f ea* o!r1 z is prov$ by _! exi/+ at diff]5t times1 "s at "o "t )\t ! o!rs1 & by "s be+ incompatible ) o!rs1 because contradictory2 b ea* individual ph5om5on is by itself incapable ( decomposition1 & admits 9 itself no di/9ction into v>i\s p>ts2 :]e=e1 x is simple4 #bc4 ,true unity1 !re=e1 is only f\nd 9 simplicity2 :]e !re is no true simplicity1 !re may be factiti\s1 b n real1 unity2 s9ce ev5 :5 !re is no sep>ation1 !re may be di/9ction betwe5 ! v>i\s p>ts ( :i* ! composite is =m$4 #bd4 ,x may be inf]r$ f ?is t indi/9ctum ought1 p]haps1 to take ! place ( indivisum 9 ! def9ition ( a "o be+2 because di/9ction is oppos$ to unity ( id5tity1 & division to union4 ,abs5ce ( division is all t factiti\s unity requires2 b real unity dem&s t !re be no di/9ction4 ,h[ev] closely unit$ two ?+s may be1 if "o is n ! o!r !y are di/9ct1 & _c1 9 /rict metaphysical language1 be call$ "o4 #be4 ,! object ( ^! obs]vations is only to fix our ideas1 n to modify our language4 ,9 common p>lance1 ! idea ( unity is us$ 9 a less rigor\s s5se1 &1 f> f oppos+ ?is use1 we readily accord x a reasonable f\ndation4 ,!re results f ! union ( two really di/9ct ?+s1 a conjunction1 rightly call$ "o s f> z x also is subject$ to a c]ta9 unity2 &1 7 x n p]mitt$ to use ?is ^w 9 a s5se less rigor\s ?an t exact$ by metaphysical analysis1 we %\ld be "u ! necessity ( exclud+ unity f ! great mass ( objects4 ,simple sub/ances1 we h said1 are n (f]$ to u 9 imm$iate intuition1 & we see compositions r ?an _! compon5t elem5ts4 ,c\ld we apply unity only to simple elem5ts1 sci5ce w\ld be greatly r$uc$1 language w\ld be impov]i%$1 & lit]ature & ! f9e arts w\ld be despoil$ ( unity1 "o ( _! *>act]i/ic p]fections4 ,,*apt] ,,iv4 ,,orig9 ,,( ,,! ,,t5d5cy ,,( ,,our ,,m9d ,,to ,,unity4 #bf4 ,s9ce we enc\nt] multiplicity 9 all s5sible objects1 :i* are ^? *iefly dem&+ our att5tion1 h[ does our m9d acquire ! idea ( unity8 ,9 sci5ce1 9 lit]ature1 9 ! arts1 & 9 e ?+1 we seek unity2 & :5ce ?is irresi/ible t5d5cy t[>ds unity1 :i* makes u seek a factiti\s :5 we _c f9d a real unity1 & ?is1 too1 not)/&+ ! multiplicity pres5t$ by all ! objects ( our p]ception8 #bg4 ,two orig9s1 if we mi/ake n1 may be assign$ to ?is t5d5cy t[>ds unity1 ! "o objective1 ! o!r subjective4 ,! =m] consi/s 9 ! v "* ( unity 9 :i* ! object ( ! und]/&+ is ma9ly compris$2 ! o!r is ! unity f\nd 9 ! intellig5t be+1 & :i* x exp]i5ces 9 itself4 ,we w expla9 ^! ideas m at l5g?4 #bh4 ,unity is be+2 e be+ is "o2 &1 prop]ly speak+1 be+ is n f\nd )\t unity4 ,let u take a composite object3 9 x we discov] two ?+s2 ! simple compon5t elem5ts ( x1 & ! union ( !m4 ,! be+1 prop]ly speak+1 does n consi/ 9 ! union1 b 9 ! unit$ elem5ts4 ,! union is a m]e relation1 n ev5 possible )\t ! elem5ts to be unit$4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ^! elem5ts 9 !mselves1 ab/ract$ f _! union1 are true be+s1 exi/$ be=e1 & w exi/ aft] _! union4 ,:at is an organiz$ body8 ,an aggregation ( molecules unit$ "u a c]ta9 law1 con=mably to a pr9ciple presid+ ov] _! organization4 ,! p>ts exi/$ be=e _! organization1 & w cont9ue to exi/ aft] its de/ruction4 ,! be+1 !re=e1 prop]ly consi/$ 9 ! elem5ts2 & ! organization 0 a relation ( !m among !mselves4 #bi4 ,organization requires a pr9ciple to rule x1 & subject its functions to det]m9ate laws4 ,?us we see t ev5 relation is subject to unity1 to ! unity ( end & to ! unity ( a rul+ & direct+ pr9ciple4 #cj4 ,x is inconceivable h[ ! union ( di/9ct ?+s c h any mean+1 or lead to any result1 if unity d n preside ov] x4 ,9 objects submitt$ to our exp]i5ce1 ?+s are unit$ 9 ?ree ways3 by juxtaposition 9 space2 by co-exi/5ce 9 "t2 & by association 9 ! ex]cise ( _! activity4 ,! elem5ts con/itutive ( ext5sion are unit$ 9 ! fir/ way2 all objects belong+ to ! same "t1 9 ! second2 & 9 ! ?ird all ^? :i* unite _! =ces & direct !m to "o & ! same end4 #ca4 ,! union consi/+ 9 ! cont9uity ( elem5ts 9 space1 has no value 9 ! eyes ( sci5ce1 save inasmu* z !re is an intellig5t be+ :o p]ceives ! =ms result+ f ?is cont9uity1 by r$uc+ !m to unity "u ideal types4 ,f\r l9es ( po9ts1 s dispos$ z to =m a quadrilat]al figure1 h no sci5tific mean+ until !re comes an intellig5ce & p]ceives ! =m ( a quadrilat]al figure "u ! aspect ( unity4 ,we d n d5y t ! quadrilat]al figure exi/s indep5d5tly ( intellectual p]ception3 ^! l9es w c]ta9ly exi/1 & be arrang$ 9 ! same mann]1 al?\gh we presc9d all intellig5ce2 b ?is disposition 9 ! quadrilat]al =m is a relation1 n a be+ di/9ct f ! aggregation ( ! elem5ts dispos$2 & ?is relation1 ( itself alone1 is no object ( intellig5ce except inasmu* z pres5t$ to x "u ! unity ( ! quadrilat]al =m4 ,! intellig5ce 9 se>* ( a true be+1 c f9d none1 save 9 elem5ts2 & if x wi%es to p]ceive _! relation1 x mu/ recur to ! unity ( =m4 #cb4 ,co-exi/5ce 9 "t1 is a relation1 :i*1 ( itself alone1 nei!r gives any ?+ to1 nor takes any ?+ f objects4 ,^! exi/ indep5d5tly ( ?is relation2 = !y mu/1 ( necessity1 exi/1 9 ord] to co-exi/4 ,?is relation d5otes some?+ p]ceptible to ! und]/&+1 only z x is pres5t$ to x "u unity1 :i*1 9 ?is case1 is unity ( "t1 z 9 ! =m] x 0 unity ( space4 #cc4 ,nei!r has ! association ( activities any mean+1 except :5 x expresses ! conv]g5ce ( =ces t[>ds "o & ! same object4 ,if unity be want+ to ! po9t ( _! direction1 _! union w express no?+1 & ! intellig5ce w h = its object only scatt]$ & unrelat$ activities4 #cd4 ,we h !n %[n t unity is a law ( our und]/&+1 f\nd$ ^u ! v nature ( ?+s4 ,absolute be+ is nev] f\nd 9 ! composite1 b only 9 ! simple1 & relative be+ is n ev5 conceivable1 if x be n submitt$ to unity4 #ce4 ,we discov] 9 ! v nature ( our m9d1 ! second orig9 ( its t5d5cy to unity4 ,x 9 itself is "o1 is simple1 & !re=e dispos$ to assimilate e ?+ to itself "u ?is same unity & simplicity4 ,x feels t x is "o 9 ! mid/ ( multiplicity1 p]man5t ev5 9 succession1 & "u all ! imm5se v>iety ( s5sible ph5om5a1 intellectual & moral1 :i* x unceas+ly exp]i5ces4 ,! inw>d s5se atte/s ) irresi/ible c]ta9ty ! id5tity ( ! me4 ,?is unity1 ?is id5tity1 is z c]ta91 z evid5t to ! *ild :o beg9s to feel pleasure or pa91 & is sure t he is "o & ! same t exp]i5ces bo? impressions1 z !y are to ! philosoph] :o has sp5t long ye>s 9 pr(\ndly inve/igat+ ! idea ( ! me & ! unity ( consci\sness4 ,! unity & simplicity :i* we exp]i5ce 9 ourselves =ce u to r$uce ! composite to ! simple1 ! multiple to ! "o4 ,! p]ception ( ?+s ! mo/ composite ref]s to a consci\sness ess5tially "o3 ev5 7 we to p]ceive ! :ole complicat$ univ]se by a s+le act1 ?is act w\ld be mo/ simple1 s9ce o!rwise ! me c\ld n say1 ,i p]ceive4 #cf4 ,two reasons1 !n1 exi/ :y our m9d 9 all ?+s seeks unity4 ,objects are un9telligible1 except s f> z subject$ to a c]ta9 p]ceptible unity1 to a =m1 "u :i* ! multiple is made "o1 & ! composite simple4 ,! object ( ! und]/&+ is be+1 & be+ consi/s 9 ! simple4 ,! composite involves an aggregation ( simple elem5ts ) ! relation call$ union2 b unless ?is be pres5t$ "u a c]ta9 unity1 x does n con/itute a p]ceptible object4 ,)\t ! indivisible unity ( consci\sness1 no intellig5t subject is conceivable4 ,e intellig5t be+ requires ?is l9k to unite ! v>iety ( ph5om5a ( :i* x is ! subject4 ,if ?is unity fail1 ! ph5om5a become an in=mal aggregation1 unrelat$ among !mselves3 intellectual acts )\t an intellig5t be+4 ,! t5d5cy to unity orig9ates 9 ! p]fection ( our m9d1 & is itself a p]fection2 b x ne$s to be c>efully wat*$1 le/ x g a/ray1 & seek real unity !re1 :]e only a factiti\s unity c be f\nd4 ,?is exagg]ation is ! cause ( pan!ism1 ! fatal error ( our day4 ,our m9d is "o1 s also is ! inf9ite ess5ce1 cause ( all f9ite be+s2 b ! aggregation ( ^! be+s is n "o1 = ev5 :5 unit$ by _m ties1 !y cease n to be di/9ct4 ,!re is 9 ! _w unity ( ord]1 ( h>mony1 ( orig91 & ( end2 b !re is no absolute unity4 ,numb] also ent]s into unity ( h>mony1 b x is incompatible ) absolute unity1 z reason & exp]i5ce bo? %[4 ,,*apt] ,v4 ,,g5]ation ,,( ,,! ,,idea ,,( ,,numb]4 #cg4 ,unity is ! fir/ elem5t ( numb]1 b does n ( itself alone con/itute numb]1 :i* is n unity1 b ! collection ( unities4 #ch4 ,two is a numb]4 ,:at is our idea ( ! numb] two8 ,evid5tly x is n conf\nd$ ) its sign1 = signs are _m & v diff]5t1 b x is "o & always ! same4 #ci4 ,x w\ld seem at fir/ sight t ! idea ( two is indep5d5t ( ! mode ( its g5]ation1 & t1 be+ "o1 x may be =m$ by addition or subtraction1 by add+ "o to "o1 or tak+ "o f ?ree3 #a #a #b2 #c-a #b4 ,b if we reflect ^u ^! two expressions1 we %all see t ! latt] is impossible )\t ! =m]4 ,we %\ld n "k t #c-a #b if we did n previ\sly "k t two ent]$ into ! composition ( ?ree1 & h[ x ent]$4 ,we c\ld "k no?+ ( ?is _h we n already ! idea ( two1 & ?is idea is no?+ else ?an ! p]ception ( ?is sum4 #dj4 ,! idea ( two is no s5sation1 = x ext5ds alike to ! s5sible & ! non-s5sible1 to ! simultane\s & ! successive4 ,9 itself x is simple1 its object is composite4 #da4 ,s9ce ! collection ( objects is small 9 two1 ! imag9ation c easily figure to itself :at ! und]/&+ p]ceives2 & ! idea seems cle>] to u because made s5sible by a repres5tation4 ,! idea ( addition made1 9 facto1 t is1 ! idea ( ! sum1 ent]s into t ( two1 b n ( addition 9 fi]i4 ,our idea ( ?is numb] is p]fectly cle>1 & yet we d n cont9ually ?9k ( "o plus "o4 #db4 ,! idea ( two ref]s to ! simultane\s z well z to ! successive2 b our m9d does n discov] x until aft] x has ! idea ( succession4 ,! object ( ?is p]ception is ! relation ( unit$ ?+s2 ! und]/&+ p]ceives !m z su*1 & !n only has x ! idea ( two4 #dc4 ,nei!r ! successive nor simultane\s p]ception ( two objects unaccompani$ by relation is ! idea ( two4 ,h5ce ! say+3 a man & a horse d n make two1 b only "o & "o2 & ! reason ( ?is is t ! man & ! horse are repres5t$ to ! und]/&+ by _! diff]5ce1 n by _! resemblance2 & ?+s mu/ be pres5t$ to ! m9d "u a common idea 9 ord] to give numb]4 ,?us1 if we ab/ract _! diff]5ce1 & consid] !m only z animals1 or corporeal be+s1 or be+s simply1 or ?+s1 !y w make two4 #dd4 ,9 objects1 !n1 totally unlike1 or n compreh5d$ "u "s common idea1 !re c be no numb]4 ,ab/ract numb] is numb] by excell5ce2 because x elim9ates all t di/+ui%es ! ?+s numb]$1 & consid]s !m only z be+s1 consequ5tly z simil>1 z conta9$ 9 ! g5]al idea ( be+4 ,concrete numb]s are only numb]s s f> z !y p>ticipate 9 ?is prop]ty4 ,two is applicable to "o horse & ano!r horse1 b n to a horse & a man1 unless we id5tify !m "u ! idea ( animal1 & ab/ract rationality & irrationality4 ,concrete numb] requires a common d5om9ation2 o!rwise x is n numb]4 #de4 ,! idea ( di/9ction1 t is1 t ! "o is n ! o!r1 ent]s into ! idea ( two1 s t ?is idea necess>ily involves an affirmation & a negation4 ,! affirmation is ( ! real1 possible1 or imag9>y exi/5ce ( ! ?+s c\nt$2 ! negation is ( ! "o ) respect to ! o!r4 ,affirmation )\t di/9ction or negation involves id5tity4 ,! idea ( two1 z well z t ( e o!r numb]1 includes ! ideas ( id5tity & di/9ction4 ,! id5tity is ( ea* extreme ) itself2 ! di/9ction is ( ! extremes among !mselves4 ,id5tity 9 ! ?+ is ! ?+ itself3 id5tity 9 ! idea is ! simple p]ception ( ! ?+4 ,di/9ction 9 ! ?+ is ! negation ( x ) respect to o!rs3 di/9ction 9 ! idea is ! p]ception ( negation4 ,we always p]ceive a ?+ z id5tical1 & consequ5tly e p]ception includes ! idea ( unity4 ,b we d n always1 :5 we p]ceive a ?+1 obs]ve its negation ) respect to o!rs1 & consequ5tly d n always p]ceive numb]4 ,! idea ( numb] orig9ates 9 comp>ison1 :5 we see an object :i* is n ano!r4 #df4 ,! ideas ( be+1 di/9ction1 & simil>ity ent] into t ( two4 ,! idea ( be+1 because no?+ _c be c\nt$3 t ( di/9ction1 or negation ( ! "o be+ ! o!r1 because ! id5tical does n con/itute numb]3 t ( simil>ity1 because ?+s are only numb]$ :5 ab/raction is made ( _! diff]5ce4 ,be+ is ! basis ( p]ception2 di/9ction1 ( comp>ison2 & simil>ity1 ( union4 ,p]ception beg9s ) unity1 proce$s ) di/9ction1 & ends ) simil>ity1 :i* is a k9d ( unity4 ,! p]ception ( ?is simil>ity unites :at is di/9ct2 b ! union ne$ n always be ( ! ?+s1 b may be 9 ! idea compris+ !m4 ,!re are two poles ( ! _w1 b !y are n unit$4 ,! p]ception ( ! numb] two requires some?+ m ?an ! simple p]ception ( objects2 !y mu/ be susceptible ( comp>ison1 & consequ5tly unit$ 9 a common idea4 ,?is p]ception1 !re=e1 dem&s comp>ison & ab/raction1 & ?is is :y animals _c num]ate2 !y c nei!r comp>e nor g5]alize4 #dg4 ,! analysis ( ! idea ( two is ! analysis ( all numb]s2 ! diff]5ce is n ( nature1 b ( m & less2 9 ! repetition ( ! same p]ception4 #dh4 ,if any "o n[ ask :e!r numb] be 9 ! ?+s1 or 9 ! m9d alone1 we reply t x is 9 ?+s z 9 its f\ndation1 because bo? di/9ction & simil>ity are 9 ! ?+s2 t is1 ! "o is n ! o!r1 & bo? h some?+ 9 common2 b x is ! m9d t sees all ?is4 #di4 ,aft] hav+ p]ceiv$ ! di/9ction & union ( two objects1 we c also p]ceive ano!r object1 :i* w be nei!r ! "o nor ! o!r ( !m1 & w yet be compreh5d$ 9 "o g5]al idea ) !m4 ,?is is ! p]ception or idea ( ! numb] ?ree4 ,no matt] h[ _m numb]s be imag9$1 no?+ w ev] be discov]$ 9 any ( !m except a simultane\s p]ception ( objects1 di/9ction ( objects1 & simil>ity ( objects4 ,if ^! be det]m9ate1 we %all h concrete numb]2 if !y be compris$ 9 ! g5]al idea ( be+1 ( ?+1 we %all h ab/ract numb]4 #ej4 ,! limits ( our m9d prev5t x f comp>+ _m objects at "o "t1 & f easily recollect+ ! comp>isons x has already made4 ,to assi/ ! memory1 & ! p]ception ( ^! relations1 we make use ( signs4 ,:5 we pass beyond ?ree or f\r1 our p[] ( simultane\s p]ception fails1 & we divide ! object into gr\ps :i* s]ve u z new units1 & are express$ by signs4 ,t5 is cle>ly ! g5]al gr\p 9 ! decimal sy/em2 b be=e we rea* ! numb] t5 we h already =m$ o!r subalt]nate gr\ps2 s9ce to c\nt t51 we d n say "o & "o & "o1 etc41 b "o & "o1 two2 two & "o1 ?ree2 ?ree & "o1 f\r1 etc4 ,ea* unit add$ =ms a new gr\p1 :i*1 9 its turn1 s]ves to =m ano!r4 ,) two1 we =m ?ree2 ) ?ree1 f\r1 & s on4 ,?is af=ds an idea ( ! relation ( numb]s ) _! signs2 b1 z ?is matt] is too important to be "h dismiss$1 we w fur!r develop x 9 ! foll[+ *apt]s4 ,,*apt] ,,vi4 ,,connection ,,( ,,! ,,ideas ,,( ,,numb] ,,) ,,_! ,,signs4 #ea4 ,! connection ( ideas & impressions1 9 a sign1 is a mo/ wond]ful intellectual ph5om5on1 & at ! same "t ( ! greate/ help to our m9d4 ,7 x n = ?is connection1 we c\ld sc>cely reflect at all ^u objects some:at complex1 & above all our memory w\ld be exce$+ly limit$4#bf #bf ,see ,l4 ,,iv41 ,c4 ,,xxviii4 & ,,xxix4 #eb4 ,condillac made "s excell5t rem>ks ^u ?is matt]3 9 8 op9ion1 we _c1 unaid$ by signs1 c\nt m ?an ?ree or f\r4 ,if1 inde$1 we _h no sign b t ( unity1 we c\ld readily c\nt two1 say+ "o & "o4 ,hav+ only two ideas1 we c\ld easily satisfy ourselves t we _h twice repeat$ "o4 ,b x is n s easy to be c]ta9 ( ! exactness ( our repetition :5 we h to c\nt ?ree1 by say+ "o & "o & "o2 /ill1 ?is is n difficult4 ,x is m s to c\nt f\r1 & next to impossible to g z f> z t54 ,if we und]take to ab/ract ! signs1 we %all f9d t x is impossible to =m an idea ( t5 by repeat+ "o2 & t x w be alike impossible1 if we employ no sign1 to make sure t we h repeat$ "o exactly t5 times4 #ec4 ,suppose ! sign two1 & "o half ( ! difficulty is obviat$2 ?us x w be mu* easi] to say two & "o1 ?an "o & "o & "o4 ,9 ?is supposition f\r w be no m difficult ?an 0 two1 s9ce1 j z we be=e said1 "o & "o1 two2 we n[ say1 two & two1 f\r4 ,! att5tion be=e divid$ f\r times by ! repetition ( "o1 is n[ only divid$ twice4 ,six 0 be=e a h>d numb] to c\nt1 b1 9 ! pres5t supposition1 x is z easy z ?ree 0 be=e2 =1 if we repeat two & two & two1 we %all h six4 ,! att5tion be=e di/ract$ by six signs1 is n[ di/ract$ only by ?ree4 ,evid5tly1 if we cont9ue to =m ! numb]s ?ree1 f\r1 & s on1 expressive ( di/9ct collections1 we %all gradually facilitate num]ation1 until we atta9 ! decimal simplicity n[ 9 use4 #ed4 ,x may "h be ask$ if ! actual sy/em be ! mo/ p]fect possible8 ,& if facility dep5d ^u ! di/ribution ( collections 9 signs1 c !re be any ?+ m p]fect ?an ?is di/ribution8 ,ei!r !re is "q ( new signs to d5ote new collections1 or ( ! comb9ation ( signs4 ,!re c be no numb] :i* we _c express ) our pres5t sy/em1 & consequ5tly !re is no ne$ ( inv5t+ any ?+ to d5ote new collections4 ,new signs might p]haps be inv5t$ = ^! collections1 & ^! collections might possibly be di/ribut$ 9 a simpl] & m conv5i5t mann]4 ,9 ?is case we admit an amelioration to be possible1 ?\gh v difficult2 b none 9 ! =m]4 ,9 a ^w1 ! only possible progress w\ld be 9 express+ bett]1 n 9 express+ m4 #ee4 ,! sign connects _m ideas :i*1 )\t x1 w\ld be isolat$2 h5ce its necessity 9 _m cases1 its utility 9 all cases4 ,) ! ^w hundr$1 or its num]ical repres5tative1 #ajj1 we "k t we h "o repeat$ a hundr$ times4 ,7 ?is help to fail1 we c\ld n speak ( a hundr$1 base calculations ^u x1 or ev5 =m x4 ,x is1 h[ev]1 well said t we d n succe$ 9 =m+ x except by t5s1 by repeat+ ! calculation t5 t5 times4 #ef4 ,let x n1 !re=e1 be ?\ght t ! idea ( ! numb] is ! idea ( ! sign2 = evid5tly ! same idea ( t5 corresponds to ! ^w t51 :e!r writt51 spok51 or num]ically repres5t$ by ! figures #aj1 al?\gh ^! ?ree signs are v diff]5t4 ,e language has a ^w ( its own to express t51 & all p h ! same idea ( x4 #eg4 ,?is la/ rem>k creates a difficulty z to :at ! idea ( t5 consi/s 94 ,we _c say t x is ! recollection ( ! repetition ( "o t5 times2 fir/1 because we d n ?9k ( ?is recollection :5 ?9k+ ( t52 & second1 because1 accord+ to :at has already be5 said1 a cle> recollection ( ?is repetition is impossible4 ,nei!r is x ! idea ( ! sign1 = ! idea signifi$ exi/$ be=e ! sign 0 inv5t$1 o!rwise ! inv5tion w\ld h _h no object1 & w\ld ev5 h be5 impossible4 ,!re c be no sign :]e !re is no?+ to signify4 ,! idea ( numb] includes m difficulties ?an ,condillac ev] imag9$2 :o1 if he _h1 aft] 8 close analysis ( :at facilitates num]ation1 pr(\ndly m$itat$ ^u ! idea itself1 w\ld n s readily h c5sur$ ,/4 ,augu/9e1 ,malebran*e1 & ! :ole ,platonic s*ool1 = hav+ said t numb]s p]ceiv$ by ! pure und]/&+ are some?+ sup]ior to ^? p]ceiv$ by ! s5ses4 ,,*apt] ,,vii4 ,,analysis ,,( ,,! ,,idea ,,( ,,numb] ,,9 ,,itself ,,& ,,9 ,,its ,,relations ,,) ,,signs4 #eh4 ,9 ord] cle>ly to conceive ! idea ( numb]1 & ! way x is eng5d]$ 9 our m9d1 let u /udy its =mation 9 a deaf & dumb p]son4 ,we h no bett] way ( giv+ su* a "o an idea ( unity ?an by pres5t+ an object to him4 ,n[1 if we w\ld convey to him ! idea ( two1 we %[ him two f+]s1 !n two oranges1 !n two books1 & 9 ea* ( ^! op]ations make a sign :i* mu/ be always ! same4 ,if we repeat ?is op]ation a numb] ( times1 ! deaf & dumb p]son w associate ! idea ( two ) t ( ! sign1 & "o w sugge/ ! o!rs2 & he w endeavor to %[ u t he has se5 two objects ( "s k9d1 by unit+ ! expression ( ! object ) ! sign ( two4 ,! same w take place ) ?ree1 or f\r4 ,:5 we rea* high] numb]s1 ! sign becomes m indisp5sable2 s9ce ! less easily ! idea ( numb] is repres5t$1 ! m necess>y is ! sign to secure x4 ,b :at we d to convey an idea ( numb] to ! deaf & dumb p]son1 :at he himself mu/ d to express ! numb] :i* he conceives1 we mu/ all d if we w\ld obta9 ! idea4 #ei4 ,num]ation is a repetition ( op]ations2 & ! art ( facilitat+ x consi/s 9 in/itut+ signs :i* recall to our memory :at we h done4 ,x is an exce$+ly complicat$ labyr9?1 & we _c tru/ ourselves to its w9d+s ) any expectation ( f9d+ our way out aga91 if we d n take c>e to m>k ! pa? we h foll[$4 ,x is to ! admirable simplicity ( ! decimal sy/em1 unit$ to its inexhau/ible v>iety1 t ! facility & fecundity ( our ari?metic are due4 ,algebra1 go+ a /ep beyond1 expresses )\t det]m9+ numb]s1 & pres5ts ! results ( its op]ations )\t effac+ its foot/eps on ! road travell$1 is f> sup]ior to ari?metic1 & has made ! human m9d take gigantic /rides4 ,b h[8 ,solely by aid+ ! memory4 ,?us1 ! v pr9ciple t enables ! *ild to say f\r & "o1 five1 in/ead ( add+ unity five times to unity1 ! dumb man to express five by a h&1 a hundr$ by a gra91 enables ! algebrai/ to express ! result ( 8 longe/ op]ations by a =mula easy ( ret5tion by ! memory4 ,bo? atta9 _! object simply by aid+ ! memory4 ,a gra9 ( :eat d5otes to ! dumb man ! idea ( hundr$1 & ?is he applies to all simil> collections2 a few lett]s comb9$ 9 a simple mann] designate to ! ma!matician a prop]ty ( c]ta9 quantities1 & ?is he applies to all :i* are f\nd 9 ! same case4 #fj4 ,num]ation is only an aggregation ( =mulas2 & ! m easy ^! are ( mutual trans=mation ) a slight modification1 ! m p]fect w be ! num]ation4 ,! bett] "o kn[s ! relations ( ^! =mulas & ! mann] ( trans=m+ !m1 ! bett] w he "k h[ to c\nt4 ,! great] a p]son's intellectual p[] ( fix+ simultane\sly ! att5tion ^u _m =mulas1 & ( compos+ !m1 ! m p]fect ari?metician w he be1 because ! simultane\s comp>ison ( _m1 leads to ! p]ception ( new relations4 #fa4 ,:at is our idea ( hundr$8 ,! union ( ! units compos+ x1 a union :i* we h made m or less frequ5tly :5 le>n+ to c\nt4 ,b h[ d we "k t x is ! same union8 ,because we h a =mula call$ a hundr$1 express$ by a sign #ajj4 ,?is =mula is s easily recollect$ t we h no difficulty 9 recollect+ ! idea ( hundr$ & all ! prop]ties connect$ ) x4 ,we may be ask$ if a hundr$ is m ?an n9ety4 ,7 we "u ! necessity c\nt+ "o & "o & "o1 we %\ld be bewild]$1 & nev] succe$ 9 di/+ui%+ ! great]2 b kn[+ z we d t to rea* ! =mula hundr$1 we mu/ pass by ano!r =mula n9ety1 & t ?is 0 9 asc5d+1 we "k1 once = all1 t hundr$ expresses n9ety & some?+ m1 t is1 a hundr$ is m ?an n9ety4 ,& if x be fur!r inquir$ :at is ! excess1 we %all n und]take to asc]ta9 ?is by add+ units1 b by ! two =mulas n9ety & t5 :i* compose ! =mula hundr$4 #fb4 ,by g5]alization we unite _m simil> ?+s 9 "o idea4 ,! g5]al idea is a k9d ( =mula4 ,num]ation unites 9 "o sign _m ?+s conta9$ 9 a g5]al idea1 b ?is sign has1 at ! same "t1 its own di/9ctive "*4 ,?us ! g5]al idea belongs z a pr$icate to ea* ( its p>ticul> objects2 numb] belongs to no "o 9 p>ticul>1 b to all jo9$4 ,we p]ceive 9 ab/raction a common prop]ty1 & lay aside all ! p>ticul> objects :i* x pres5ts2 9 num]ation1 we p]ceive simil>ity1 b always ) di/9ction4 ,ab/raction is ! result ( comp>ison1 b n comp>ison4 ,num]ation implies a p]man5t comp>ison1 or ! recollection ( x4 #fc4 ,! idea ( numb] is n conv5tional2 a hundr$ is always a hundr$ ) all its prop]ties & relations1 & ?is1 too1 prior to all conv5tion & ev5 to all human p]ception4 ,! sign1 & ! sign only1 is conv5tional4 ,7 !re no intellectual creature1 & a hundr$ be+s di/9ct among !mselves 7 to exi/1 !re w\ld really be ?is numb]4 ,! numb] ?ree exi/s 9 ! augu/ my/]y ( ! ,tr9ity1 f all et]nity1 & ( absolute necessity4 ,numb] requires only ! exi/5ce ( di/9ct ?+s2 s9ce1 h[ev] unlike !y may be1 !y always h some?+ 9 common be+1 :i* may be includ$ 9 a g5]al idea1 & consequ5tly !y fulfil ! two conditions necess>y to numb]4 #fd4 ,! p]ception ( be+ & ( di/9ction1 t is1 ( sub/antive be+ & ( relative n-be+1 is ! p]ception ( numb]4 ,! sci5ce ( ! relations ( e collection1 ) its measure1 :i* is unity1 is ! sci5ce ( numb]s4 ,,book ,,sev5?4 ,,on ,,"t4 ,,*apt] ,i4 ,,importance ,,& ,,difficulty ,,( ,,! ,,subject4 #a4 ,! explanation ( ! idea ( "t is n a matt] ( m]e curiosity1 b ( ! highe/ importance4 ,to conv9ce ourselves ( ?is we h only to consid] t ! explanation ( ! :ole edifice ( human cognitions is bas$ ^u x4 ,! mo/ fundam5tal & indisp5sable pr9ciple :i* supports all o!rs1 includes ! idea ( "t4 ,a ?+ _c be & n be at ! same "t3 impossibile e/ idem simul esse et non esse4 ,! impossibility ( be+ & ( n-be+ reg>ds only ! simul1 ! same "t4 ,!re=e1 ! idea ( "t necess>ily ent]s into ! v pr9ciple ( contradiction4 #b4 ,! idea ( "t is involv$ 9 all our p]ceptions2 x ext5ds to _m m objects ?an does ! idea ( space4 ,we e/imate n only ! movem5ts ( bodies by "t1 b also ! op]ations ( ! m9d4 ,we "k t a s]ies ( ?\ghts may be measur$ by "t ! same z a s]ies ( corporal movem5ts4 #c4 ,! idea ( succession necess>ily ent]s into t ( "t1 & vice v]sa1 ! idea ( "t into t ( succession4 ,we may conceive t "o ?+ succe$s ano!r2 b ?is w\ld be impossible )\t succession1 )\t a be=e & aft]1 t is1 )\t "t4 ,?is reason+1 app>5tly vici\s1 %[s1 p]haps1 t we mu/ n expla9 ! ideas ( "t & succession1 ! "o by ! o!r1 s9ce !y are id5tical4 #d4 ,"t does n seem to be di/9ct f ?+s2 = :o c imag9e duration )\t t :i* la/s1 or a succession )\t t :i* succe$s8 ,is x a sub/ance8 ,is x a modification inh]5t 9 ?+s1 or di/9ct f !m8 ,:atev] is some?+ exi/s2 & yet we n[h]e meet "t exi/+4 ,its nature is compos$ ( in/ants divisible to inf9ity1 ess5tially successive1 & consequ5tly incapable ( simultane\sness4 ,imag9e ! m9ute/ in/ant y c1 & x does n exi/1 = x is compos$ ( o!rs inf9itely m9ute1 :i* _c exi/ unit$4 ,to conceive an exi/+ "t1 we mu/ conceive x z actual1 & 9 ord] to d ?is1 we mu/ surprise x 9 an indivisible in/ant2 b ev5 ?is is n "t2 x involves no succession2 x is n duration1 conta9+ a be=e & an aft]4 #e4 ,no?+ is easi] ?an to calculate "t1 & no?+ m difficult ?an to conceive x 9 its ess5ce4 ,z to ! =m] ! le>n$ & ! ignorant are on ! same foot+2 bo? h equally cle> ideas2 ! latt] is excessively difficult ev5 to ! mo/ em95t m54 ,! passage 9 ! ,confessiones ( ,/4 ,augu/9e1 9 :i* ! ,holy ,doctor endeavors to p5etrate ?is my/]y is well kn[n4 ,,*apt] ,,ii4 ,,is ,,"t ,,! ,,measure ,,( ,,movem5t8 #f4 ,"t is said by _m philosoph]s to be ! measure ( movem5t4 ,?is idea is fruitful1 b x ne$s to be illu/rat$4 ,:5 we measure movem5t we ref] to some?+ fix$4 ,?us we measure ! rapidity ) :i* we h trav]s$ a c]ta9 space by notic+ ! "t d5ot$ by a wat*4 ,b h[ d we measure "t by a wat*8 ,by ! space pass$ ov] by ! h& on ! dial4 ,if we reflect c>efully1 we %all see t ?is is purely conv5tional1 or r1 t x dep5ds ^u an arbitr>y condition4 ,= if we suppose ! "t m>k$ to be an h\r1 ! space pass$ ov] by ! m9ute h&1 t is1 ! circumf]5ce ( ! dial1 has no relation ) ! h\r except :at ! artific] gave x by s con/ruct+ ! wat* t ! m9ute h& w\ld make "o revolution e h\r4 ,if ! wat*mak] _h con/ruct$ x diff]5tly1 z he did ! h\r h&1 ! "t w\ld be ! same1 b ! space pass$ ov] is v diff]5t4 #g4 ,! "t1 !re=e1 indicat$ by ! wat* is no measure1 save z itself is subject to ano!r measure2 consequ5tly x is n ! primitive measure4 ,! same c evid5tly be said ( all o!r wat*es :i* mu/ h be5 regulat$ "o aft] ano!r1 until we come to ! fir/ ( all wat*es4 ,!re 0 no o!r wat* to regulate ?is2 x foll[s1 !re=e1 t no "o ( ! measures furni%$ by art is ! primitive measure4 #h4 ,n f9d+ ?is measure 9 ! works ( man1 we mu/ seek x 9 nature2 & "h we discov] fix$ measures4 ,if we reg>d ! c\rse ( ! sun1 & take = unity ! "t x requires f ! "t x leaves ! m]idian until x returns1 we %all h ! day2 ?is divid$ into tw5ty-f\r p>ts gives u ! h\rs4 ,"h we h a great wat* :i* w s]ve to regulate all o!rs4 #i4 ,nev]!less1 h[ev] lightly we reflect ^u ?is1 we _c help see+ t ! solution is n s satisfactory z x seems at fir/ sight4 ,sol> "t & sid]eal "t d n agree4 ,?us1 if we note ! mom5t :5 a /> is 9 ! m]idian conjo9tly ) ! sun1 we %all ! next day see t ! /> rea*es ! m]idian a little be=e ! sun4 ,:i* is "r8 ,has ! /> tak5 j tw5ty-f\r h\rs1 or ! sun8 ,if "t be a fix$ ?+ indep5d5tly ( movem5t1 nei!r ( ^! measures corresponds exactly to "t4 #aj4 ,?is argum5t1 :i* may be call$ practical1 is corroborat$ by ano!r purely !oretical4 ,if we take cele/ial movem5t = ! measure ( "t1 w x be true t :5ev] ! movem5t1 :i* s]ves z ! rule1 %all be v]ifi$1 t !re has pass$ a fix$ & det]m9ate "t8 ,if we be answ]$ 9 ! affirmative1 we mu/ inf]1 t ev5 7 ?is movem5t to be accel]at$ or ret>d$1 z1 = in/ance1 if a sol> revolution 7 to be made ) a half1 or ) twice its ord9>y velocity1 x w\ld cont9ue to m>k ! same "t1 :i*1 h[ev]1 is absurd4 ,if x be said t ! movem5t is suppos$ to be uni=m1 we reply1 t ?is is a begg+ ( ! "q4 ,uni=mity ( movem5t consi/s 9 equal times recurr+ aft] equal int]vals4 ,did "t1 !n1 9 its nature dep5d ^u ! movem5t ( ! sun1 or ( any />1 z primitive measure1 nei!r uni=mity nor v>iety w\ld h any mean+4 ,if ! space ( tw5ty-f\r h\rs dep5d$ ^u a revolution's be+ made1 no matt] 9 :at mann] :e!r at a snail's pace1 or ) ! velocity ( light1 we %\ld nev] h m or less ?an tw5ty-f\r h\rs4 ,b if ^! dep5d ^u ano!r measure1 if prior to !m1 !re 0 a "t :i* measur$ ! velocity ( movem5t1 & det]m9$ :e!r x _h be5 accel]at$ or ret>d$1 !n ! movem5t ( ! />s is n ! primitive measure2 !y are 9 ! same category z our wat*es1 !y m>k$ ! "t pass$1 b "t has n pass$ because !y m>k x4 ,"t is ! measure ( _! movem5t1 n _! movem5t ! measure ( "t4 ,movem5t is 9 "t1 n "t 9 movem5t4 #aa4 ,to appeal to ! movem5t ( ! sup]ior heav5s1 is evid5tly no solution ( ?is difficulty1 = :at has be5 said ( ! sun1 may also be said ( ! remote/ /> 9 ! firmam5t4 ,:e!r we appeal to annual1 sol>1 or sid]eal movem5ts1 ! same difficulty rema9s4 ,w\ld sid]eal ye>s be ! same1 if ! movem5t be made ) great] or less velocity4 ,if !y w\ld1 an absurdity w\ld foll[2 if n1 ?is is n ! primitive measure4 #ab4 ,moreov]1 we p]ceive1 :5 consid]+ movem5t1 t we seem to conceive ( great] & less velocity2 & ?us ! idea ( "t1 ( necessity1 ent]s into t ( velocity1 s9ce velocity is ! relation ( space pass$ ov] 9 a giv5 "t4 ,! idea ( "t is !re=e prior to1 consequ5tly indep5d5t (1 e p>ticul> measure4 #ac4 ,we measure "t by movem5t1 & 9 ord] to measure ! velocity ( movem5t we ne$ t ( "t4 ,"h !n1 p]haps1 is a vici\s circle2 b possibly ?is only %[s t ^! are correlative ideas1 ! "o explanatory ( ! o!r2 or1 r1 !y are diff]5t aspects ( "o & ! same idea4 ,! difficulty ( sep>at+ !m1 & ! intimate union :i* unites !m on ! "o h& z mu* z x divides !m on ! o!r1 confirms ?is conjecture4 ,to %[ ?is1 we ask1 :at "t has pass$8 ,two h\rs4 ,h[ d we "k ?is8 ,by our "t-piece4 ,b :at if x be too fa/ or too sl[8 ,! measure fails4 ,?is "t is ?us to u z a fix$ measure1 prior to t ( ! wat* by :i* we und]take to measure x4 ,b :at are ^! two h\rs1 if we ab/ract ! measure ( ! wat*1 t also ( ! />s1 & e o!r measure8 ,two h\rs1 9 ! ab/ract1 c be f\nd 9 no category ( real or possible be+s2 & we _c1 )\t a measure1 give any idea ( !m1 nor =m "o = ourselves4 ,! idea ( h\r ref]s to a det]m9ate movem5t ( kn[n bodies2 & ?is 9 its turn ref]s to o!rs2 & f9ally1 we come to "o 9 :i* we c discov] no reason :y x %\ld be exempt$ f ! g5]al law to :i* ! o!rs are subject4 ,no f>!r ref]5ce be+ possible1 all measure fails2 & ?is fail+1 "t1 by ! =ce ( analysis1 vani%es4 #ad4 ,!re=e1 ! ref]r+ ( "t to movem5t1 expla9s no?+2 x only expresses a ?+ kn[n1 & t is1 ! mutual relation betwe5 "t & movem5t1 a relation kn[n to ! unle>n$1 & ( con/ant & common use2 b ! philosophic idea /&s intact2 ! same difficulty rema9s2 :at is "t8 ,,*apt] ,,iii4 ,,simil>ities ,,& ,,diff]5ces ,,betwe5 ,,"t ,,& ,,space4 #ae4 ,"t seems to u to be some?+ fix$4 ,an h\r is nei!r m nor less ?an an h\r1 no matt] h[ our "t-pieces g1 or ! _w itself2 j z a cubic foot ( space is always a cubic foot1 nei!r m nor less1 :e!r occupi$ or n occupi$ by bodies4 #af4 ,"t exi/s indep5d5t ( all movem5t1 ( all succession2 if x is some?+ absolute1 has a det]m9ate value ( its own1 is applicable to all t *anges )\t itself *ang+1 ! measure ( all succession )\t itself be+ measur$1 :at is x8 ,t x is some?+ accid5tal _c be reconcil$ ) its immutability & univ]sality4 ,e ?+ lives 9 x1 b x lives 9 no?+2 e ?+ dies 9 x1 b dea? has no p[] ov] x4 ,:5 ! sub/ance p]i%es1 ! accid5t p]i%es2 b "t cont9ues ! same al?\gh no sub/ance exi/4 ,be=e all creat$ be+s1 we conceive ages & ages1 t is1 "t2 & aft] ! de/ruction1 ! annihilation ( all be+s1 we /ill conceive a successive al?\gh un5d+ succession1 :i* is "t4 ,! idea1 !n1 ( "t1 does n dem& t ( ! univ]se2 x exi/$ be=e x1 & w survive x3 b )\t "t ! univ]se is inconceivable4 #ag4 ,! idea ( "t seems to be indep5d5t ( ! idea ( any be+2 ( all duration 9 x2 e ?+ may endure 9 x2 b x does n beg9 or end ) :at endures 9 itself2 x is applicable to all t endures1 b x is n itself an endurable ?+4 ,we imag9e x to be "o 9 ! multiple1 uni=m 9 ! v>i\s1 fix$ 9 ! movable1 et]nal 9 ! p]i%able2 & x ev5 seems to conta9 "s features ( ! attributes ( ,div9ity2 b x is1 on ! o!r h&1 ess5tially despoil$ ( e prop]ty except+ t ( succession 9 its ab/racte/ signification4 ,x is ess5tially /]ile1 has no p[] ( its own1 no condition ( be+ or action1 & consequ5tly leads to ! highe/ imag9ations ( :at a pure idea really is1 an ab/raction1 :i*1 l space1 we h imag9$ 9 ! pres5ce ( ?+s4 #ah4 ,! po9ts ( simil>ity betwe5 "t & space are wor?y ( our att5tion4 ,bo? are inf9ite1 immovable2 bo? are a g5]al measure2 bo? ess5tially compos$ ( cont9u\s & insep>able p>ts4 ,limit !m y _c1 det]m9e any limit y *ose1 & beyond x y w see an ocean ext5d$4 ,y\r p[]s are impot5t2 beyond ! highe/ heav5 are unb\nd$ abysses ( space2 be=e ! beg9n+ ( ?+s !re 0 a long *a9 ( int]m9able ages4 ,9 va9 w\ld y und]take to move space2 y c only move y\rself 9 x1 or survey its v>i\s po9ts4 ,its po9ts are all fix$2 y may m>k out di/ances & directions ) respect to !m1 b y _c *ange !m4 ,! result w be analog\s if y attempt to move "t4 ,! pres5t in/ant is n ! "o j pa/1 nor ! "o next to succe$2 !y are ( necessity di/9ct1 & ( necessity exclude ea* o!r4 ,_! v nature is to succe$ ea* o!r4 ,if _! place be *ang$ ) respect to "t1 x ceases to be ! same4 ,imag9e1 if y c1 t to-morr[ is to-day1 t to-day is ye/]day4 ,x is impossible = t :i* 0 at a c]ta9 "t n to h !n be52 b ?is w\ld n be impossible if "t c\ld be mov$2 = 9 ord] t :at 0 ye/]day may n be1 x is necess>y to conv]t ye/]day into to-morr[2 b ?is w\ld be an absurdity4 ,! pa/1 ! pres5t1 & ! future1 are ess5tially di/9ct ?+s4 ,a simple space1 a space )\t p>ts1 is no space at all1 x is a contradiction2 nei!r is a simple "t1 a "t )\t p>ts1 a "t1 b is a contradiction4 ,a space ^: p>ts are n cont9u\s1 is n a space2 nei!r is a "t ^: p>ts are n cont9u\s1 a "t4 ,! p>ts ( space are insep>able2 y may di/+ui% !m "o f ano!r1 c\nt !m "o aft] ! o!r1 comp>e !m "o ) ano!r1 & consid] !m "o aft] ano!r1 b y _c sep>ate !m4 ,all imag9able bodies may exi/ 9 ! ap>tm5t :]e we write1 "o or _m1 at re/ or 9 motion2 b ! space :i* we conceive is "o1 fix$1 & always ! same2 we c e/imate its ext5t 9 cubic feet1 if we *oose1 b ^! feet are fix$ & insep>able2 we _c sep>ate "o cubic foot f ano!r1 ev5 if we w\ld2 = ev5 :ile we annihilate x1 x is pres5t to u1 & 9 ! same di/ance t we ne$ 9 ord] to conceive sep>ation4 ,we _c conceive sep>ation1 if we d n conceive di/ance2 nor conceive di/ance1 if we d n conceive space4 ,we sep>ate bodies f ea* o!r1 b n "o space f ano!r4 ,space rema9s ) ! same cont9uity :5 bodies are sep>at$1 & x is by ?is cont9uity rema9+ unalt]able t we measure ! ext5t ( _! sep>ation4 ,! same happ5s ) "t2 x is a *a9 :i* _c be brok54 ,c we conceive ?ree successive1 imm$iate in/ants1 ,a1 ,b1 ,c1 & !n suppress ,b8 ,c]ta9ly n2 su* a suppression w\ld be impossible1 or x w\ld be a poor div]sion4 ,we de/roy ,b 9 our caprice1 & ,a & ,c are cont9u\s2 s9ce be+ only sep>at$ by ,b1 :5 x disappe>s ! extremes meet4 ,b 9 ?is case x is no long] ,a1 b ,b1 = ,b is ! in/ant :i* prec$es ,c4 ,we h no o!r di/9ction ?an t ( priority ) respect to ,c1 & cont9uity ) ,a4 ,:51 !n1 by ! imag9>y disappe>ance ( ,b1 ,a is br\ght into contact ) ,c1 x is conv]t$ into ,b4 ,moreov]1 ,a is n only connect$ ) ,c1 b is prec$$ by o!rs2 if1 !n1 by ! disappe>ance ( ,b1 x makes a /ep1 s also mu/ ! :ole inf9ite *a9 :i* prec$es x4 ,ea* "o is !n a soldi]1 or r no soldi]y is possible1 = we h tak5 an in/ant f ! inf9ite *a91 & s r5d]$ x f9ite4 ,or1 m di/9ctly2 c we conceive ye/]day or to-morr[ )\t to-day1 a future or a pa/ )\t ! pres5t8 ,evid5tly we _c4 ,"t1 !n1 is ess5tially compos$ ( insep>able p>ts4 #ai4 ,?is simil>ity betwe5 "t & space naturally leads u to believe t "t is an ab/ract idea j z space is4 ,:at we h said ( space is applicable to "t1 only ) a few modifications exact$ by ! v nature ( ! ?+4 ,x c 9 no case be )\t utility1 9 sci5tific inve/igations1 to approximate & comp>e ^! great ideas1 :i* are z imm5se receptacles :]e9 our m9d deposits its treasures4 ,! actual corporeal univ]se1 & all possible univ]ses1 are includ$ 9 ! idea ( space2 & all f9ite be+s1 corporeal or incorporeal1 are includ$ 9 t ( "t4 #bj4 ,we may well suspect t ^! ideas1 s intimately unit$ to our p]ceptions1 are =m$ 9 a simil> mann]2 = x is probable t !y belong to ! ord] ( ^? primitive laws :i* gov]n ! developm5t ( our intellect4 #ba4 ,! simil>ity betwe5 space & "t mu/ n make u ignore ! diff]5ces :i* di/+ui% !m4 ,i4 ,all ! p>ts ( space are co-exi/5t2 o!rwise1 t cont9uity :i* is ess5tial to !m1 w\ld be inconceivable4 ,"t is compos$ ( successive p>ts2 to imag9e !m co-exi/5t1 is to de/roy ! ess5ce ( "t4 ,,ii4 ,space ref]s solely to ! corporeal _w1 "u only "o aspect1 t ( cont9uity4 ,"t ext5ds to all t is successive1 corporeal or incorporeal4 ,,iii4 ,consequ5tly1 ! idea ( space exi/s only 9 ! geometrical ord]1 ( :i* x is ! basis4 ,! idea ( "t is m+l$ ) e ?+1 & m especially ) our own acts4 ,,iv4 ,our s\l1 :5 reflect+ ^u itself1 c totally presc9d space1 & =get all its relations ) ext5d$ objects2 b x _c presc9d "t1 :i* x f9ds necess>y ev5 to its own op]ations4 ,?is la/ diff]5ce is a great help to ! und]/&+ 9 :at ! idea ( "t consi/s2 & we v5ture to recomm5d x to ! att5tion & memory ( ! read]4 ,,*apt] ,,iv4 ,,def9ition ,,( ,,"t4 #bb4 ,"t is duration2 b duration )\t some?+ :i* endures1 is an absurdity4 ,!re c !n be no "t )\t some?+ exi/+4 ,! duration :i* we conceive1 aft] r$uc+ e ?+ to nihility1 is a va9 imag9ation2 x is n an idea1 b is r 9 contradiction ) ideas4 ,an important consequ5ce fl[s f ?is2 x is1 t "t 9 itself1 _c be def9$ ) absolute elim9ation ( e ?+ to :i* x ref]s4 ,"t1 !n1 has no prop] exi/5ce2 & sep>at$ f be+s is annihilat$4 #bc4 ,h5ce1 also1 x foll[s t t inf9ity :i* we attribute to "t1 has no rational f\ndation4 ,we h no o!r reason to affirm ?is inf9ity ?an a vague conception1 :i* pres5ts x z su*2 b we _c fail to p]ceive t ?is conception also exi/s1 ev5 if we suppose all to be r$uc$ to no?+4 ,if1 !n1 !re is 9 ?is supposition a va9 div]sion ( ! imag9ation1 x is n an idea1 b a contradiction ) ideas2 & :at has once deceiv$ u1 no long] des]ves any cr$it4 ,^? inf9ite ages ( "t :i* we conceive prior to ! creation1 are n no?+2 !y are an imag9>y "t1 simil> to an imag9>y space4 #bd4 ,"t has no necess>y relation ) movem5t1 s9ce if no?+ 7 to move1 or ev5 no bodies to exi/1 we %\ld nev]!less conceive "t 9 ! succession ( op]ations ( our s\l4 ,?is la/ is indisp5sable2 we mu/ h "s succession ( ?+s 9 ord] to conceive "t4 ,if we suppose no?+ to *ange or to be alt]$1 a be+ subject to no ext]nal or int]nal *ange1 hav+ "o s+le ?\ght always ! same1 "o s+le w always ! same1 hav+ no succession ( ideas or acts ( any k9d :atev]1 we conceive no?+ to :i* ! idea ( "t is applicable4 ,"t is a measure2 b :at is x to measure 9 a be+ ( ?is k9d8 ,succession8 ,b !re is no succession4 ,duration8 ,b :at is !re to measure 9 a duration always ! same1 :i* is only ! same be+8 ,duration mu/ h p>ts giv5 to x be=e x c be measur$2 b :at p>ts has x8 ,^? ( "t8 ,b ?is w\ld be a begg+ ( ! "q1 s9ce "t is appli$ to x :5 we are inquir+ :e!r "t is applicable to x4 ,:5 !ologians say t ! exi/5ce ( ,god _c be measur$ by "t1 t !re is no succession 9 et]nity1 b t all is unit$ 9 a s+le po9t1 !y utt] a pr(\nd tru?2 & ,cl>ke1 be=e ridicul+ x1 %\ld h /udi$ to und]/& x4 #be4 ,"t comm5ces ) mutable ?+s2 if !y p]i%1 x p]i%es ) !m4 ,!re is no succession )\t mutation2 & consequ5tly1 no "t4 #bf4 ,:at1 !n1 is "t8 ,! succession ( ?+s consid]$ 9 ! ab/ract4 ,:at is succession8 ,be+ & n-be+4 ,a ?+ exi/s2 x ceases to exi/2 "h we h succession4 ,:5ev] "t c be calculat$1 !re is succession2 & :5ev] succession c be calculat$ a be+ & a n-be+ are consid]$4 ,! p]ception ( ?is relation1 ( ?is be+ & n-be+1 is ! idea ( "t4 #bg4 ,"t _c exi/ )\t be+ & n-be+2 because 9 ?is1 succession consi/s2 :]ev] !re is succession1 !re is "s mutation2 & !re is no mutation )\t some?+ be+ 9 ano!r mann]1 & ?is o!r mann] is n possible unless ! prior mann] ceases to be4 ,sub/ances1 modifications1 & appe>ances h no succession )\t ?is be+ & n-be+4 ,:at is motion8 ,! succession ( ! positions ( a body ) respect to v>i\s po9ts2 & ?is succession is v]ifi$ by occupy+ "s ( ^! positions & de/roy+ o!rs4 ,:at is ! succession ( ?\ghts or affections ( our m9d8 ,! n-be+ ( "s :i* 71 & ! be+ ( o!rs :i* 7 n4 #bh4 ,"t1 !n1 9 ?+s1 is _! succession1 _! be+ & n-be+4 ,"t 9 ! und]/&+1 is ! p]ception ( ?is mutation1 ?is be+ & n-be+4 ,,*apt] ,v4 ,,"t ,,is ,,no?+ ,,absolute4 #bi4 ,is "t some?+ absolute8 ,! def9ition giv5 9 ! la/ *apt] %[s cle>ly en\gh t x is n4 ,"t 9 ?+s is n be+ only1 nor n-be+ only1 b ! relation ( be+ & n-be+4 ,"t 9 ! und]/&+1 is ! p]ception ( ?is relation4 ,! measure ( "t is no?+ else ?an ! comp>ison ( mutations among !mselves4 ,to u1 ^? mutations :i* seem to be unalt]ably uni=m s]ve z ! primitive measure4 ,= ?is we h tak5 ! movem5t ( ! sun4 ,?is movem5t v>ies :5 comp>$ ) t ( ! />s1 & ceases to be ! primitive measure :5 ref]r$ to ?is3 & x 0 ^u ?is ! s*ola/ics re/$ :5 !y taught t ! movem5t ( ! fir/ heav5s 0 ! primitive measure ( "t4 #cj4 ,b :at if ! velocity ( ! sun 7 augm5t$1 & x %\ld make its revolution 9 "o half ( its "t8 ,w\ld ! h\rs cont9ue ! same8 ,we di/+ui%4 ,if ?is alt]ation %\ld be v]ifi$ solely 9 ! sol> movem5t1 we %\ld p]ceive ! discordance betwe5 ?is & all o!r movem5ts2 & p]ceiv+ ?is alt]ation 9 ! sun1 we %\ld cont9ue to ref] our h\rs z ?+s fix$ to o!r measures1 to our own movem5ts1 to our "t-pieces1 or to o!r heav5ly bodies4 ,b if we suppose e ?+ to be *ang$ at "o & ! same "t1 & 9 ! same proportion2 ! movem5t ( all ! heav5s & ( e ?+ t]re/rial to be d\bly accel]at$1 b 9 su* a way z n to increase ! rapidity ( our ?\ghts2 we %\ld inde$ discov] an alt]ation1 b we %\ld n "k :e!r to attribute x to ! _w or to ourselves2 we %\ld p]ceive a discrepancy betwe5 our ?\ghts & ^! movem5ts1 b %\ld n "k :e!r ^! 7 accel]at$ or our ?\ghts ret>d$4 ,if ?is rapidity be also communicat$ to u1 s t su* or su* a s]ies ( ?\ghts =m]ly correspond+ to s _m m9utes is n[ made 9 "o half ! numb]1 we %\ld !n witness a p]fect correspond5ce 9 all ?+s2 we c\ld p]ceive no mutation4 ,an h\r1 = example1 is to u only ! p]ception ( ! relation ( c]ta9 mutations3 s long z ?is relation cont9ues ! same1 !re w be no alt]ation 9 ! h\r4 #ca4 ,to take away f "t e idea ( absolute1 seems an absurdity to ! imag9ation1 b n to reason4 ,?is case w make ?is evid5t4 ,n ! man1 ! be/ skill$ 9 p]ceiv+ ! succession ( "t1 c1 if he look at no "t-piece1 nor ref] to any measure = twelve h\rs1 say :e!r elev5 h\rs & a half or twelve h\rs h pass$4 ,if he live long 9 ?is way1 he w become totally incapable ( e/imat+ "t2 if lock$ up 9 a d>k dungeon = sev]al mon?s1 he w believe he has sp5t ye>s !re4 ,! idea1 !re=e1 ( ! measure ( "t1 is no?+ absolute2 x is ess5tially relative2 x is ! p]ception ( ! relations betwe5 v>i\s mutations4 ,s long z ^! relations rema9 :ole & intact1 "t w be to u ! same4 ,,*apt] ,,vi4 ,,difficulties ,,9 ,,! ,,explanation ,,( ,,velocity4 #cb4 ,"h arises a s]i\s difficulty3 if "t be no?+ absolute1 great] or less velocity is inexplicable4 ,?is seems to result ev5 f :at we h said1 t if ! relation ( movem5ts be n *ang$1 any augm5tation or dim9ution ( velocity is impossible2 because1 if velocity be 9 necess>y relation to "t1 & "t itself be no?+ b ! relation ( mutations1 x is inconceivable h[ "t1 & consequ5tly h[ velocity1 c be *ang$ )\t *ang+ ! relation ( mutations4 ,?us x w\ld be impossible = ! velocity ( ! :ole me*anism ( ! univ]se to be *ang$1 j z x w\ld be absurd to say t ! />s & e ?+ t exi/s may n[ exp]i5ce ! same *anges ( velocity4 ,?is w\ld de/roy ! v idea ( velocity2 at lea/ if tak5 z some?+ absolute1 :]e9 diff]5t grades may be consid]$4 #cc4 ,let u n[ exam9e ?is difficulty1 :i* inde$ des]ves to be exam9$1 = x seems to contradict our mo/ common ideas4 ,fir/ ( all1 we mu/ premise t velocity is n some?+ absolute1 b a relation4 ,physici/s & ma!maticians express x by a fraction ^: num]ator is ! space run ov] & ^: d5om9ator is ! "t consum$4 ,mak+ ,v ! velocity1 ,s ! space1 & ,t ! "t1 we %all h ,v ,s_/,t4 ,?is %[s ! velocity to be ess5tially a relation2 = x _c be o!rwise express$ ?an by ! ratio ( ! space to ! "t4 #cd4 ,?is ma!matic =mula expresses ! idea we all h ( velocity2 x expresses 9 ?ree lett]s :at ! unlett]$ man repeat$ly says to himself4 ,! velocity ( two horses is asc]ta9$ n solely by ! space !y h pass$ ov]1 nor solely by ! "t !y h consum$ 9 _! c>e]1 b by ! great] or less space pass$ ov] 9 a giv5 "t2 or by ! long] or %ort] "t requir$ to pass ov] a giv5 space4 ,to d5y1 !n1 to velocity an absolute nature1 is no?+ new2 = we all ( u make x ess5tially consi/ 9 a relation4 #ce4 ,9 ! expression ,v ,s_/,t two t]ms ent]1 space & "t4 ,view+ ! =m] 9 ! real ord]1 ab/raction made ( t ( ph5om5a1 we m easily come to reg>d x z some?+ fix$2 & we compreh5d x 9 a giv5 case )\t any relation4 ,a foot is at all times a foot2 & a y>d1 a y>d4 ,^! are quantities exi/+ 9 reality2 & if we ref] !m to o!r quantities1 x is only to make sure t !y are s2 n because _! reality dep5ds ^u ! relation4 ,a cubic foot ( wat] is n a cubic foot because ! measure s says1 b on ! contr>y1 ! measure s says because !re is a cubit foot4 ,! measure itself is also an absolute quantity2 & 9 g5]al1 all ext5sions are absolute1 = o!rwise1 we %\ld be oblig$ to seek measure ( measure1 & s on to inf9ity4 ,true1 to call ?+s l>ge or small dep5ds ^u comp>ison2 b ?is does n *ange _! own quantity4 ,! diamet] ( ! e>?1 comp>$ ) an in* measure1 is imm5se2 b x is an almo/ imp]ceptible po9t comp>$ ) ! di/ance ( ! fix$ />s2 yet ?is does n prev5t ! in* measure1 ! diamet] ( ! e>?1 & ! di/ance to ! fix$ />s1 f be+ values 9 !mselves det]m9ate1 & indep5d5t ( ea* o!r4#bg #bg ,see ,lib4 ,,iii41 ,*4 ,,xx4 ,if ! d5om9ator 9 ,s_/,t 7 a quantity ( ! same k9d z space1 t is1 hav+ det]m9ate values1 exi/+ & conceivable by !mselves alone1 ! velocity1 al?\gh /ill a relation1 might also h det]m9ate values1 n inde$1 :olly absolute1 b only 9 ! supposition t ! two t]ms1 ,s & ,t1 hav+ fix$ values1 are comp>$4 ,?us1 if we require a velocity ( #d1 we h only to take a fix$ quantity ( space1 & ano!r fix$ quantity ( "t1 hav+ ! relation to ea* o!r ( #d to #a2 & ?is is q easy1 :5 ,s & ,t are bo? absolute quantities4 ,if1 9 ?is supposition1 an accel]ation or delay be requir$ 9 ! :ole univ]se1 no?+ m w\ld be requir$ ?an to augm5t or dim9i% ! "t 9 :i* ea* "p w\ld h to trav]se its respective space4 ,b f ! difficulties :i* we h on ! "o h& se5 pres5t$ to ! consid]ation ( "t z an absolute ?+1 & f ! fact t1 on ! o!r h&1 no solid pro( c be adduc$ to %[ su* a prop]ty to h any f\ndation1 x foll[s t we "k n h[ to consid] velocity z absolute1 ev5 9 ! s5se above expla9$4 #cf4 ,h5ce a consequ5ce n less important ?an /rik+1 z to ! possibility ( a univ]sal accel]ation or ret>dation4 ,if we w\ld h an accel]ation or ret>dation ( ! :ole ma*9e ( ! univ]se1 & %\ld ab&on all motion to :i* we might ref] "t1 %\ld at once *ange all1 n exclud+ ! op]ations ( our own s\l1 we %\ld h a problem propos$ to u t appe>s insolvable1 no?+ less ?an ! realization ( an impossibility2 ! relation ( _m t]ms w\ld h to be *ang$ )\t und]go+ any *ange4 ,if velocity be only ! relation ( space & "t1 & "t only ! relation ( spaces trav]s$1 x is ! same ?+ to *ange !m all 9 ! same proportion1 & n to *ange !m at all2 x is to leave e ?+ z x is4 #cg4 ,! s+ul>ity ( su* consequ5ces ought n to be a suffici5t excuse = ab&on+ !m4 ,we mu/ n =get t we are exam9+ ! common ideas ( "t & velocity 9 _! mo/ transc5d5tal aspect1 & t x is by no means a/oni%+ t our m9d f9ds itself1 z x leaves its ord9>y walks1 9 an entirely new atmosph]e1 :]e9 x seems to discov] contradictions4 ,:5 we exam9e ! ideas ( "t & velocity1 we unwitt+ly fall into ! error ( unit+ !m 9 ! same explanation4 ,we w\ld presc9d !m2 b ?is we d only ) great difficulty1 & we (t5 fall into a vici\s circle4 ,h5ce x is t :51 by a great ef=t1 we succe$ 9 really presc9d+1 ! consequ5ces t foll[ seem contradictory2 b ?is app>5t contradiction arises solely f our n hav+ p]sev]$ ) due firmness 9 our prescision2 & z1 9 ?is case1 ! und]/&+ />ts f two diff]5t suppositions1 :]eas x believes t x />ts f "o alone1 ! results seem to x contradictory1 :i* 9 reality !y may n be4 ,! same ?+ occurs 9 ! exam9ation ( ! idea ( space4#bh #bh ,see ,lib4 ,,iii41 ,*s4 ,,xii41 ,,xiii41 & ,,xiv4 ,,*apt] ,,vii4 ,,fundam5tal ,,explanation ,,( ,,succession4 #ch4 ,! reasons t de/roy ! absolute nature ( "t1 inasmu* z x is subject to measure1 d n seem fully to obviate ano!r difficulty1 aris+ f ! consid]ation ( "t 9 itself4 ,if inde$ "t be succession1 :at is ?is succession8 ,x is evid5t t ?+s succe$ ea* o!r2 b if !re be no be=e or aft]1 t is1 "t exi/+ be=e succession1 s9ce succession consi/s 9 "s ?+s com+ aft] o!rs1 :at is ! mean+ ( succe$+ ea* o!r8 ,?us1 "t is expla9$ by succession1 & succession by "t4 ,:at is aft]w>ds b a "p ( "t t is 9 relation ) a h]et(ore8 #ci4 ,:at we said 9 ! f\r? *apt] does n seem completely to solve ! difficulty2 = be+ & n-be+ d n =m succession1 save only inasmu* z "o comes aft] ! o!r1 t is1 inasmu* z x presupposes ! "t to be expla9$ already to exi/4 ,!re may be a simultane\s be+ & n-be+ ( di/9ct ?+s2 & !re is 9 "o & ! same ?+ no repugnance betwe5 be+ & n-be+1 if n ref]r$ to ! same "t4 ,9 su* a case1 !re=e1 ?is is always presuppos$ s to be2 s9ce 9 "o & ! same ?+1 be+ & n-be+ are inconceivable unless at diff]5t in/ants ( "t4 ,h5ce x foll[s t be+ & n-be+ d n suffici5tly expla9 "t4 #dj4 ,?is difficulty is inde$ grave2 & we mu/1 9 ord] to solve x1 elaborate a fundam5tal explanation ( succession4 ,?is we %all endeavor to d1 & )\t 9 any s5se suppos+ ! idea ( "t4 #da4 ,!re are ?+s :i* exclude1 & ?+s :i* d n exclude ea* o!r4 ,:5 we h exi/5ce ( ?+s :i* exclude ea* o!r1 we h succession4 ,if 9 a l9e a--------b--------c1 a body be at a1 x _c pass to b1 )\t ceas+ to be at a4 ,! situation at b excludes t at a2 & s also t at c excludes t at b4 ,:5 we see ?+s exi/ not)/&+ ?is reciprocal exclusion1 we f9d succession4 #db4 ,succession is1 9 reality1 ! exi/5ce ( ?+s m5tally exclusive ( ea* o!r4 ,:at ea* involves is ! be+ ( t :i* excludes1 & ! n-be+ ( t :i* is exclud$4 #dc4 ,?is exclusion prevails 9 all v>iations2 & !re=e1 we f9d succession 9 e v>iation4 ,v>iation is ! mutation ( /ates2 ! loss ( "o1 & ! acquisition ( ano!r2 !re=e1 !re is exclusion1 = be+ excludes n-be+1 & n-be+1 be+4 #dd4 ,:5 we p]ceive ^! di/9ctions1 ^! exclusions realiz$1 we p]ceive succession1 "t4 ,:5 we compute ^! exclusions1 ^! di/9ctions 9 :i* di/9ct & exclusive ?+s are (f]$ to u1 su* z be+ & n-be+1 we compute "t4 #de4 ,"h arises a difficulty4 ,if succession involves exclusion1 & !re is no succession )\t exclusion1 x foll[s t ?+s :i* d n exclude ea* o!r are simultane\s2 & f ?is we inf] ! absurdity ( say+1 t ! ?+s happ5+ 9 ! "t ( ,adam1 :i* d n exclude ^? ( our own "t1 are simultane\s4 ,! motion ( ! plants ( ,p>adise excludes n t ( plants 9 g>d5s n[ exi/+2 ?is motion1 !n1 is simultane\s ) t2 ! motion t 0 !n is ! pres5t2 & ! pres5t motion 0 !n2 :i* is inconceivably absurd4 ,?is difficulty is s]i\s3 x seems to be bas$ ^u a reason f\nd$ 9 evid5t tru?s2 b x is n impossible to give a solution ( x4 #df4 ,7 !re to exi/ "o ?+ :i* exclud$ no?+1 & 0 exclud$ by no?+1 x w\ld be simultane\s ) e ?+4 ,"k y :at ?is ?+ is8 ,!re is b "o1 ,god4 ,x is !re=e t ! !ologians say1 ) great tru?1 & ) a pr(\ndness :i* has n1 p]haps1 be5 at all times und]/ood ev5 by ^? :o h made ! rem>k1 t ,god is pres5t to all times2 t to him !re is no succession1 no be=e or aft]2 t to him e ?+ is pres5t1 is n[4 #dg4 ,( ,god alone is ?is true2 9 all else !re is "s exclusion1 be+ & n-be+1 & !re=e succession4 ,let u n[1 = example1 exam9e h[ ! motion ( ! plants 9 our g>d5s is exclud$ by t ( ! g>d5 ( ,ed54 ,h[ are ^? ( our g>d5s mov$8 ,by exi/+1 & also by be+ subject to conditions necess>y to motion4 ,h[ d !y exi/8 ,by a developm5t ( ! g]ms !y !mselves conta94 ,:at is ?is developm5t8 ,a s]ies ( motions1 ( be+ & ( n-be+1 & consequ5tly ( ?+s t exclude ea* o!r4 ,!re is1 !n1 no simultane\sness betwe5 ^? ( ! g>d5 ( ,ed5 & ^? ( our own g>d5s2 = betwe5 ! =m] & ! fir/ g]m1 !re 0 no m$iation o!r ?an ! movem5t ( ! fir/ developm5t2 :]eas1 betwe5 ! movem5ts ( ^? ( our g>d5s & ! fir/ g]m1 _m o!rs h int]v5$4 ,"h we h exclusion1 be+ & n-be+4 ,! numb] ( exclusions necess>y to exi/5ce is v diff]5t 9 ! two cases2 !re=e1 !re is no simultane\sness4 ,consid]+ all ! developm5ts1 & all ! *anges ( ! orb1 z a dilat$ s]ies ( t]ms int]lac$ by a mutual dep5d5ce1 z 9 fact !y are by ! laws ( nature2 & call+ ^! t]ms ,a1 ,b1 ,c1 ,d1 ,e1--,n1 ! plants ( ! g>d5 ( ,ed5 belong to ! t]m ,a1 & ^? ( ours1 to ! t]m ,n4 #dh4 ,! non-simultane\sness ( motion is prov$ 9 ! same mann] z ! non-simultane\sness ( exi/5ce1 = motion is a mann] ( exi/+4 ,moreov]1 ! air :i* agitates ! plants ( our g>d5s has be5 mov$ by ano!r1 & ?is o!r by yet ano!r2 & ^! motions1 subject to all ! fix$ & con/ant laws ( nature1 are all int]l9k$ f ! v fir/ motion1 j z ! :eels are int]lock$ 9 a sy/em ( ma*9]y4 ,b z ! curvature ( "o :eel is n t ( ! o!r1 s ^! motions are diff]5t1 & exclude "o ano!r d[n to ! la/1 :i* is ! air :i* moves ! pres5t plants4 #di4 ,?is explanation ( succession & "t1 ?r[s mu* light on ! idea ( et]nity2 & %[s t et]nity1 or ! simultane\sness ( all exi/5ce1 belongs only to ! immutable be+4 ,all mutable be+s1 :i* necess>ily imply a transition f n-be+ to be+1 & f be+ to n-be+1 involve a succession1 if n 9 _! sub/ance1 at lea/ 9 _! modifications4 #ej4 ,?is expla9s h[ ! idea ( "t is f\nd 9 almo/ all our conceptions1 & is express$ 9 all languages4 ,man cont9ually p]ceives be+ & n-be+ 9 all ar\nd him4 ,he p]ceives x )9 him1 9 ! multitude ( 8 ?\ghts & affections2 at "o "t agree+1 at ano!r disagree+2 sometimes connect$1 & sometimes sep>at$2 b always di/+ui%$ f "o ano!r1 always produc+ diff]5t modifications 9 ! m9d3 !y !re=e exclude ea* o!r1 & _c co-exi/2 because ! exi/5ce ( "o excludes ! exi/5ce ( ! o!r4 ,,*apt] ,,viii4 ,,:at ,,is ,,co-,,exi/5ce8 #ea4 ,if ! succession ( "t involves exclusion1 !re mu/ be co-exi/5ce :]e !re is no exclusion3 !re=e1 suppos+ t ,god has creat$ o!r worlds1 !y mu/ necess>ily be contemporane\s ) ! pres5t2 = x is evid5t t !y w\ld n be exclud$2 & z !y h n ! mutual relation ( cause & effect l ! ph5om5a ( ! pres5t _w1 we _c apply to !m ! explanation :i* we gave to %[ t ! motion ( ! plants ( ,p>adise 0 n contemporane\s ) ! motion ( ! plants 9 our g>d5s4 ,we mu/1 !re=e1 hold t x w\ld h be5 impossible = ano!r _w to exi/ be=e ! pres5t _w2 & t ?\gh ,god might create z _m be+s z he pleas$1 yet1 s long z !y d n exclude ea* o!r1 !y mu/ be contemporane\s4 #eb4 ,?is difficulty is n easy to solve1 unless we h p]fectly und]/ood ! mean+ ( ! ^w exclusion4 ,by exclusion is meant1 n only ! intr9sical repugnance ( "o be+ to ano!r1 b t1 = "o reason or ano!r1 :e!r intr9sical or extr9sical1 ! exi/5ce ( "o implies ! negation ( ! exi/5ce ( ! o!r4 ,?is explanation solves ! difficulty4 #ec4 ,two worlds1 entirely indep5d5t ( "o ano!r1 c\ld h be5 subject$ to ?is exclusion by ! w ( ,god4 ,god c create "o )\t creat+ ! o!r2 9 ?is case1 we f9d ! exi/5ce ( ! fir/ & ! negation ( ! exi/5ce ( ! o!r4 ,god c cease to pres]ve ! fir/1 & create ! second2 we !n f9d ! exi/5ce ( ! second & ! negation ( ! fir/4 ,9 bo? ^! cases1 !re is be=e & aft]1 a succession 9 exi/5ce4 ,god c create bo?2 we c conceive ! exi/5ce ( bo? )\t ! negation ( ! exi/5ce ( ei!r2 ?is is co-exi/5ce4 #ed4 ,we %all und]/& ! :ole "q mu* bett]1 if we exam9e = a mom5t ! mean+ ( co-exi/5ce4 ,two be+s co-exi/1 or exi/ at ! same "t1 :5 !re is no succession ( "o to ! o!r1 :5 bo? exi/1 :5 !re is n ! exi/5ce ( "o & ! negation ( ! o!r4 ,9 ord] to conceive co-exi/5ce1 we ne$ only conceive ! exi/5ce ( two be+s3 we =m ! idea ( succession1 by comb9+ ) ! idea ( ! exi/5ce ( "o ! idea ( ! negation ( ! o!r4 ,! co-exi/5ce ( two be+s is _! exi/5ce2 _! succession is ! be+ ( "o1 & ! n-be+ ( ! o!r4 ,be+ ref]s only to ! pres5t2 ! pa/ & ! future are n be+4 ,t only is :i* is1 n t :i* 01 or :i* w be4 ,!re is a pr(\nd tru?1 a s\nd philosophy1 & an admirable ontology 9 ^? words ( ! sacr$ text3 ,i ,,am ,,:o ,,am4 ,he :o is1 ha? s5t me to y4 #ee4 ,)\t be+ & n-be+1 !re is no succession1 !re is no "t1 !re is only ! pres5t1 !re is et]nity4 ,to a be+ immutable 9 itself1 & 9 all its acts1 "o 9 its intellig5ce1 "o 9 its w1 always its own object1 un*angeable1 9 ! pl5itude ( its be+1 )\t any k9d ( negation1--to su* a be+ !re is nei!r be=e nor aft]2 !re is only n[4 ,if y give to x ! succession ( in/ants1 y apply to x1 )\t any gr\nd1 ! "w ( y\r imag9ation4 ,reflect well on ! mean+ ( be=e & aft]1 9 t :i* c *ange 9 no?+1 by no?+1 & = no?+1 & y w see t succession is 9 ?is case a ^w )\t any mean+4 ,we attribute to x succession because we judge ! object by our p]ceptions1 & our p]ceptions are successive2 !y h an alt]native ( be+ & n-be+1 ev5 :5 appli$ to an immutable object4 #ef4 ,e "o may exp]i5ce ?is 9 8 own m9d4 ,conceive two be+s to exi/2 add to ?is ?\ght no?+ accessory1 nei!r ! negation ( be+1 nor ( "t1 nor ( any ?+ else1--m]ely conceive ! exi/5ce ( two be+s1 & see if any ?+ is want+ to complete y\r idea ( _! co-exi/5ce4 ,if1 on ! contr>y1 y wi% to p]ceive succession1 or diff]5ce ( in/ants1 y mu/ p]ceive ! exi/5ce ( "o1 & ! negation ( ! exi/5ce ( ! o!r4 ,!re=e1 ! idea ( co-exi/5ce is simple1 & implies only ! exi/5ce ( ! be+s1 b ! idea ( succession is compos$ ( ! comb9ation ( be+ ) n-be+4 #eg4 ,i mu/ "h call att5tion to ! fruitfulness ( ! idea ( be+1 :i*1 comb9$ ) ! idea ( n-be+1 furni%es ! idea ( "t4 ,we h be=e se51 t ! ideas ( unity & numb] 7 favor$ 9 ! same mann]1 & we %all soon h occasion to obs]ve1 h[1 f ! ideas ( be+ & n-be+1 spr+ o!rs1 :i*1 al?\gh second>y 9 respect to ^!1 are ! mo/ important ( all ! ideas :i* ! human m9d possesses4 ,i call att5tion to ?is1 f a desire t ! read] may become accu/om$ to ref] all ideas to a few po9ts :]e !y are unit$1 n by a factiti\s *a9 impos$ by arbitr>y me?ods1 b by ! int]nal nature ( ?+s !mselves4 ,:at ext5sion is1 9 relation to s5sible intuitions1 ! idea ( be+ is1 9 relation to conceptions4 ,! intuition ( ext5sion1 & ! idea ( be+1 are ! two fundam5tal po9ts 9 all ideological & ontological sci5ce2 !y are two primitive data possess$ by ! m9d1 by means ( :i* x c solve all problems1 ei!r 9 ! s5sible ord]1 or 9 ! purely intellectual4 ,reg>d$ f ?is po9t ( view1 e ?+ becomes cle>1 & is arrang$ 9 ! mo/ logical ord]1 because x is ! ord] ( nature4 #eh4 ,i wi% to make "o obs]vation on ! me?od :i* ,i h foll[$ 9 ?is "w4 ,i did n ?9k x well to expla9 sep>ately my op9ion ( ^! g5]al connections ( all ideas2 = !n x w\ld h be5 necess>y to treat philosophy 9 a sy/ematic ord]1 plac+ at ! beg9n+ :at ought to be at ! end1 & try+ to e/abli% z a prelim9>y doctr9e1 :at ought only to be ! result ( a collection ( doctr9es4 ,to atta9 my object1 x 0 necess>y to g on analyz+ 9 succession facts & ideas1 )\t ref]5ce to sy/em1 )\t do+ viol5ce to !m1 9 ord] to make !m con=m to a sy/em1 b only exam9+ !m1 9 ord] to asc]ta9 _! result4 ,?is1 und\bt$ly1 is ! be/ me?od4 ,we ?us obta9 ! k ( tru? z a fruit ( our labors on facts1 & are n oblig$ to alt] objects = ! sake ( =c+ !m to b5d to ! au?or's op9ion4 ,aft] ! application :i* we h be5 mak+ ( ! ideas ( be+1 & n-be+1 to "o ( ! mo/ ab/ruse po9ts ( metaphysics1 x is n out ( place to call ! read]'s att5tion to ?is = a mom5t1 s t he may be able to see ! connection ( doctr9es4 ,,*apt] ,,ix4 ,,pres5t1 ,,pa/1 ,,& ,,future4 #ei4 ,aft] expla9+ ! idea ( co-exi/5ce1 we came to ! def9ition ( ! v>i\s relations :i* "t pres5ts4 ,!y are pr9cipally ?ree3 pres5t1 pa/1 & future4 ,all o!rs are comb9ations ( ^!4 #fj4 ,! pres5t is ! only absolute "t3 by ?is ,i mean1 t x ne$s no relation1 9 ord] to be conceiv$4 ,! pres5t is conceiv$ )\t relation to ! pa/ or to ! future4 ,nei!r ! pa/ nor ! future c be conceiv$ )\t relation to ! pres5t4 #fa4 ,! pa/ is an ess5tially relative idea4 ,:5 we speak ( ! pa/1 we h to take "s po9t to :i* x ref]s1 & 9 respect to :i* we say x is pa/4 ,?is po9t is ! pres5t1 ei!r 9 reality1 or 9 ! ideal ord]2 t is to say1 t by ! und]/&+1 we place ourselves 9 t po9t1 & make x pres5t to u1 & 9 ref]5ce to x1 we speak ( ! pa/4 ,to prove t ! idea ( pa/ is ess5tially relative1 we may obs]ve1 t by v>y+ ! po9ts ( ref]5ce1 ! pa/ may cease to be consid]$ z su*1 & may be pres5t$ z pres5t or future4 ,speak+ ( ! ev5ts ( ! "t ( ,alex&]1 !y are pres5t$ to u z pa/1 because we consid] !m 9 relation to ! pres5t mom5t2 b if we are speak+ ( ! empire ( ,seso/ris1 ! epo* ( ,alex&] ceases to be pa/1 & is conv]t$ into future4 ,if we 7 relat+ ev5ts contempor>y ) ! de$s ( ,alex&]1 ?is epo* w\ld cease to be pa/ or future1 & w\ld become pres5t4 ,! pa/1 !re=e1 is always 9 ref]5ce to a pres5t po9t1 tak5 9 ! c\rse ( "t1 & x is only 9 respect to ?is1 t any ?+ is said to h be51 to be pa/2 )\t ?is relation1 ! idea ( pa/ is absurd1 & x is impossible to conceive x4 #fb4 ,:at is ! relation ( pa/8 ,accord+ to ! def9ition :i* we h giv5 ( "t1 :5 we p]ceive ! be+ ( any ?+1 & !n its n-be+1 & ! be+ ( some?+ else1 we say ! fir/ is pa/ 9 relation to ! second4 #fc4 ,:at w\ld take place1 !n1 if we %\ld p]ceive ! be+ ( some?+1 & !n its n-be+1 )\t relation to any o!r be+8 ,?is hypo!sis is absurd2 = we mu/ always h ?is o!r be+1 if we p]ceive be+ & n-be+4 ,b x may be repli$ t we may suppose ! disappe>ance ( ourselves1 & !n ! objection w\ld be good4 ,ev5 ?\gh we %\ld disappe>1 !re w\ld /ill rema9 intellig5ces capable ( p]ceiv+ be+ & n-be+4 ,if !re 7 no f9ite intellig5ce1 !re w\ld /ill be ! inf9ite intellig5ce4 #fd4 ,"h arises a new difficulty2 = x may be ask$ :e!r ! ?+ w\ld be pass$ ) relation to ! inf9ite intellig5ce4 ,if we admit t x w\ld be1 we seem to introduce "t ) ! duration ( ,god1 by :i* we de/roy 8 et]nity1 :i* excludes all succession4 ,if we say t to ! eyes ( ! inf9ite intellig5ce ! ?+ w\ld n be pa/1 !n x w\ld n be pa/ 9 reality2 = ?+s are z ,god kn[s !m4 ,!n !re w\ld be ! idea ( be+ & ( n-be+1 & /ill !re w\ld n be ! idea ( pa/4 ,?is difficulty arises f a confusion ( t]ms4 ,let u suppose t ,god _h creat$ only "o be+1 & ?is be+ _h ceas$ to exi/2 & let u see :at w\ld be ! result ( ?is hypo!sis4 ,god kn[s ! exi/5ce & ! non-exi/5ce ( ! object4 ,?is intellectual act is mo/ simple2 !re c be no succession 9 x4 ,!re is prop]ly no pa/ ) respect to ,god1 & appli$ to ! object ?is idea c only mean its non-exi/5ce 9 relation to its exi/5ce :i* is de/roy$4 ,:5 ! ideas are pres5t$ 9 ?is light x is easy to und]/& t !re is no pa/ 9 ,god1 b t !re is ! k ( pa/ ?+s4 #fe4 ,on ?is hypo!sis1 h[ c ! "t ( only "o creature be measur$8 ,by its *anges4 ,b if x has none8 ,on ?is imag9>y supposition !re w\ld be no "t4 ,?is conclusion is absolutely necess>y1 al?\gh x may at fir/ sight seem /range4 ,we mu/ ei!r ab&on our def9ition ( "t1 or else admit t !re is no "t :]e !re is no *ange4 #ff4 ,:atev] conclusions we =m on que/ions f\nd$ on imag9>y suppositions1 ?is1 at lea/1 is c]ta9--t ! idea ( pa/ is ess5tially relative1 & t on no supposition c we conceive ! pa/1 if we take f x all relation4 ,! expression has be5 implies bo? be+ & n-be+1--! succession :i* con/itutes "t4 ,9 ?is relation ! ord] is su* t n-be+ is p]ceiv$ aft] be+1 & ?is is :y x is call$ pa/4 #fg4 ,! idea ( ! future is also relative to ! pres5t4 ,! future is inconceivable )\t ?is relation4 ,! future is t :i* is to come1--t :i* is to be ) respect to a real or hypo!tical n[2 = we may apply to ! future :at we said ( ! pa/1 t x is *ang$ by *ang+ ! po9t ( its ref]5ce4 ,! future = u w be pa/ to ^? :o come aft] u2 t :i* 0 future to ^? pa/1 is pres5t or pa/ to u4 ,! po9t ( ref]5ce ( ! future is always a pres5t mom5t2 x _c be ref]r$ to ! pa/ z its ultimate t]m2 = x is 9 itself ref]r$ equally to ! pres5t4 #fh4 ,!re=e all t we f9d 9 ! idea ( "t t is absolute is ! pres5t4 ,! pres5t ne$s no relation4 ,x n only ne$s none1 b x admits none4 ,we c nei!r ref] x to ! pa/ nor to ! future1 because ^! two times bo? presuppose ! idea ( ! pres5t1 )\t :i* !y _c ev5 be conceiv$4 #fi4 ,"t is a *a9 ^: l9ks are inf9itely divisible4 ,!re is no "t :i* we _c divide into o!r times4 ,! indivisible in/ant repres5ts some?+ analog\s to ! indivisible po9t2 a limit :i* we approa* )\t ev] rea*+1 an unext5d$ elem5t produc+ ext5sion4 ,a geometrical po9t mu/ be mov$ 9 ord] to g5]ate a l9e2 b no motion is conceiv$ z possible unless we presuppose space 9 :i* ! po9t moves2 or 9 o!r words1 :5 we treat ( ! g5]ation ( ext5sion1 we comm5ce by presuppos+ x4 ,a simil> ?+ happ5s 9 relation to "t4 ,we imag9e an indivisible in/ant1 f ! fluxion ( :i* results ! cont9uity ( duration :i* we call "t4 ,b ?is fluxion is impossible1 unless we suppose a "t 9 :i* x fl[s4 ,we wi% to exam9e ! g5]ation ( "t1 & we suppose x already exi/+1 prolong$ inf9itely1 z an imm5se l9e on :i* ! fluxion ( ! in/ant takes place4 ,:at are we to inf] f ^! app>5t contradictions8 ,no?+ b a /rong confirmation ( ! doctr9e :i* we h e/abli%$4 ,"t di/+ui%$ f ?+s is no?+4 ,duration 9 ! ab/ract1 di/+ui%$ f t :i* endures1 is a be+ ( reason1--a "w :i* our und]/&+ produces f ! mat]ials furni%$ by reality4 ,all be+ is pres5t4 ,t :i* is n pres5t is n-be+4 ,! pres5t in/ant1 ! n[1 is ! reality ( ! ?+2 x is n suffici5t to con/itute "t1 b x is necess>y to "t4 ,!re c be pres5t )\t ei!r pa/ or future2 b !re c be nei!r pa/ nor future )\t ! pres5t4 ,:5 besides be+ !re is n-be+1 & ?is relation is p]ceiv$1 "t beg9s4 ,to conceive pa/ & future )\t ! alt]nation ( be+ & n-be+1 z a sort ( l9e inf9itely produc$ 9 two opposite directions1 is to take an empty play ( ! phantasy = a philosophical idea1 & to apply to "t ! illusion ( imag9>y space4 #gj4 ,!re=e1 if !re is only be+1 !re is only absolute1 pres5t duration2 !re=e no pa/ nor future1 &1 consequ5tly1 no "t4 ,"t is 9 its ess5ce a successive1 fl[+ quantity2 x _c be seiz$ 9 its actuality2 = x is always divisible1 & e division 9 "t con/itutes pa/ & future4 ,?is is a demon/ration t "t is a m]e relation1 & 9 s f> z x is 9 ?+s1 x only expresses be+ & n-be+4 ,,*apt] ,x4 ,,application ,,( ,,! ,,prec$+ ,,doctr9e ,,to ,,sev]al ,,important ,,que/ions4 #ga4 ,?is !ory w be mu* bett] und]/ood by its application to ! solution ( sev]al que/ions4 ,i4 ,h[ long a "t _h pass$ be=e ! creation8 ,none4 ,z !re 0 no succession1 !re 0 only ! pres5t1 ! et]nity ( ,god4 ,all else t we imag9e is a m]e illusion1 contr>y to s\nd philosophy4 ,,ii4 ,0 x possible = ano!r _w to h exi/$ :5 ?is _w's exi/5ce began8 ,und\bt$ly x 02 ?is w\ld only require t ,god _h creat$ x1 )\t creat+ ?is _w2 x w\ld only require ! be+ ( ! "o & ! n-be+ ( ! o!r4 ,& z !re 0 n-be+ because !re 0 no creation1 x foll[s t if ,god _h creat$ ! "o )\t creat+ ! o!r1 & _h ceas$ to pres]ve ! fir/ :5 he creat$ ! second1 !re w\ld h be5 succession & priority ( "t4 ,,iii4 ,"h is ano!r "q :i* is some:at /range1 & at fir/ seems v difficult4 ,0 ! exi/5ce ( a _w prior to ?is possible 9 any "t8 or1 9 o!r words1 c\ld ano!r _w h ceas$ to exi/ "s "t be=e ! beg9n+ ( ! exi/5ce ( ?is _w8 ,?is "q implies a contradiction4 ,x supposes an int]val ( "t1 t is1 ( succession1 )\t any ?+ to succe$4 ,if a _w _h ceas$ to exi/1 & no new _w %\ld exi/1 !re w\ld be no?+ b ,god2 !re w\ld !n be no succession1 !re w\ld be only et]nity4 ,to ask1 !re=e1 h[ long a "t !y 7 ap>t1 is to suppose t !re is "t1 :]e !re is none4 ,! prop] answ] is1 t ! "q is absurd4 ,b we %all be ask$1 7 !y di/ant1 or 7 !y n8 ,!re is no di/ance ( "t :]e !re is no "t2 ?is di/ance is a m]e illusion1 by :i* we imag9e "t1 :ile1 by ! /ate ( ! "q1 we suppose t !re is no "t4 ,!n x may be object$1 t ! two successive worlds mu/ be necess>ily imm$iate1 t is to say1 t ! fir/ in/ant ( "o mu/ be imm$iately connect$ ) ! la/ in/ant ( ! o!r4 ,i d5y x4 ,= imm$iat5ess ( in/ants supposes ! succession ( be+s mutually connect$ 9 a c]ta9 ord]2 ! two worlds 9 "q w\ld h no mutual relation2 consequ5tly1 !re w\ld be nei!r di/ance nor imm$iat5ess betwe5 !m4 ,b1 x may be repli$1 !re is no m$ium betwe5 be+ & n-be+1 & di/ance be+ ! negation ( imm$iat5ess1 & imm$iat5ess ! negation ( di/ance1 by d5y+ "o1 we affirm ! o!r2 !y mu/1 !re=e1 ei!r be di/ant or imm$iate4 ,?is reply also supposes some?+ :i* we d5y4 ,x speaks ( di/ance & imm$iat5ess1 t is1 ( "t1 z ?\gh x 7 some?+ positive1 di/9ct f ! be+s !mselves4 ,! pr9ciple1 t e ?+ is1 or is n1 quodlibet e/ vel non e/1 is applicable only :5 !re is some?+2 b :5 !re is no?+1 !re is no disjunctive4 ,! "t ( ! two worlds is no?+1 z di/+ui%$ f !m2 x is ! succession ( _! respective ph5om5a2 ! succession ( ! two worlds1 ! "o to ! o!r1 is no?+ di/+ui%$ f !m2 x is ! be+ ( ! "o1 & ! negation ( ! o!r1 & ! be+ ( ! second & ! negation ( ! fir/4 ,god sees ?is2 an intellig5t creature w\ld also see x1 if he c\ld survive ! annihilation ( ! fir/ _w4 ,to ! eyes ( ,god1 :o sees ! reality1 succession w\ld be simply ! respective exi/5ce & non-exi/5ce ( ! two objects4 ,! intellig5t creature w\ld say1 t ! two worlds are imm$iate1 if to ! p]ception ( ! la/ in/ant ( ! annihilat$ _w1 ! p]ception ( a new exi/+ _w _h foll[$ )\t ano!r int]m$iate p]ception2 & he w\ld say1 t !re is di/ance1 if he _h exp]i5c$ v>i\s p]ceptions betwe5 ! annihilation ( ! old & ! p]ception ( ! new creation4 ,! measure ( ?is "t w\ld be tak5 f ! *anges ( p]ceptions ( ?is creature1 & w\ld be long] or %ort]1 accord+ to ! numb] ( ^! p]ceptions4 #gb4 ,! idea ( "t is ess5tially relative1 z x is ! ord]$ p]ception ( be+ & n-be+4 ,! m]e p]ception ( "o ( ! two extremes1 w\ld n be suffici5t to produce ! idea ( "t 9 our m9d2 = ?is idea necess>ily implies comp>ison4 ,! same is true ( ! idea ( space1 :i* has always a great resemblance to "t4 ,we _c conceive space1 or ext5sion ( any k9d1 )\t juxtaposition2 t is to say1 )\t relations ( v>i\s objects4 ,multiplicity necess>ily ent]s into ! ideas ( bo? space & "t4 ,h5ce1 we may say1 t if we conceive a be+1 absolutely simple1 ) no multiplicity1 ei!r 9 its ess5ce1 or 9 its acts1 b 9 :i* all is id5tifi$ ) its ess5ce1 !re is no room = ! ideas ( space & "t2 &1 consequ5tly1 !y are m]e fictions ( ! imag9ation1 :5 we attribute to !m any ?+ real1 beyond ! corporeal _w1 & be=e ! exi/5ce ( ! creat$4 ,,*apt] ,,xi4 ,,! ,,analysis ,,( ,,! ,,idea ,,( ,,"t ,,confirms ,,its ,,resemblance ,,to ,,! ,,idea ,,( ,,space4 #gc4 ,hav+ expla9$ ! idea ( "t1 & appli$ x to ! mo/ difficult que/ions1 we may expla9 ?is doctr9e /ill f>!r1 by exam9+ :at we h already intimat$ conc]n+ ! resemblance betwe5 "t & space4#bi ,!re is analogy 9 ! difficulties2 analogy 9 ! def9itions ( bo? ideas2 analogy 9 ! illusions :i* h9d] ! k ( ! tru?4 ,:at we ann\nc$ be=e ) respect to ^! two ideas1 consid]+ ! idea ( "t z only :at x appe>$ at fir/ sight1 we may n[ ass]t z ! secure result ( analytical inve/igations4 ,i call att5tion 9 p>ticul> to ! foll[+ p>allel1 because x greatly expla9s ! ideas ( bo?4 #bi ,see ,*4 ,,iii4 #gd4 ,space is no?+ 9 itself1 di/+ui%$ f bodies2 x is only ! ext5sion ( bodies3 "t is no?+ 9 itself1 di/+ui%$ f ?+s4 ,x is only ! succession ( ?+s4 #ge4 ,! idea ( space is ! idea ( ext5sion 9 g5]al2 ! idea ( "t is ! idea ( succession 9 g5]al4 #gf4 ,:]e !re are no bodies1 !re is no space3 :]e !re are no ?+s :i* succe$ ea* o!r1 !re is no "t4 #gg4 ,an inf9ite space1 be=e ! exi/5ce ( bodies1 or outside ( bodies1 is an illusion ( ! imag9ation3 an inf9ite "t be=e ! exi/5ce ( ?+s1 or outside ( !m1 is also an illusion4 #gh4 ,space is cont9u\s3 s is "t4 #gi4 ,"o "p ( space excludes all o!rs2 "o "p ( "t also excludes all o!rs4 #hj4 ,a pure space1 9 :i* bodies are situat$1 is imag9>y3 a succession1 a "t1 9 :i* ?+s succe$1 is also imag9>y4 #ha4 ,t :i* is entirely simple has no ne$ ( space1 & c exi/ )\t x3 t :i* is immutable has no ne$ ( "t1 & c exi/ )\t x4 #hb4 ,! simple & inf9ite is pres5t to all po9ts ( space1 )\t los+ its inf9ity3 ! immutable & inf9ite is pres5t to all in/ants ( "t1 )\t alt]+ its et]nity4 #hc4 ,two ?+s are di/ant 9 space1 because !re are bodies plac$ betwe5 !m2 ?is di/ance is only ! ext5sion ( ! bodies !mselves3 two be+s are di/ant 9 "t1 because !re are o!r be+s plac$ betwe5 !m2 ?is di/ance is ! exi/5ce ( ! be+s :i* are plac$ betwe54 #hd4 ,ext5sion ne$s no o!r ext5sion1 9 :i* to be plac$1 o!rwise we %\ld h a processus 9 inf9itum3 ! succession ( ?+s1 = ! same reason1 ne$s no o!r succession 9 :i* to succe$4 #he4 ,j z we =m ! idea ( cont9u$ succession 9 space by di/+ui%+ diff]5t p>ts ( ext5sion1 & p]ceiv+ t "o excludes ! o!rs1 s we also =m ! idea ( cont9u$ succession ( "t by di/+ui%+ diff]5t facts & p]ceiv+ t "o excludes ! o!rs4 #hf4 ,9 ord] to =m det]m9ate ideas ( ! p>ts ( space1 we mu/ take a measure & ref] to x3 to =m an idea ( ! p>ts ( "t we also ne$ a measure4 ,! measure ( space is ! ext5sion ( "s body :i* we "k3 ! measure ( "t is "s s]ies ( *anges :i* we "k4 ,to measure space we seek = fix$ ?+s1 z f> z possible2 = ! want ( some?+ bett]1 m5 h rec\rse to ! p>ts ( ! body1 ! h&1 ! foot1 ! y>d1 & ! pace1 :i* give an approximate1 if n an exact measure4 ,! exact sci5ces hav+ advanc$1 !y h tak5 = _! measure ! =ty-million? "p ( ! m]idian ( ! e>?3 "t is measur$ by ! motion ( ! cele/ial bodies1 by ! diurnal motion1 ! lun>1 sol>1 & sid]eal ye>4 #hg4 ,! idea ( numb] is necess>y 9 ord] to det]m9e space & comp>e its diff]5t p>ts3 ! same idea is necess>y 9 ! same mann] to "t4 ,! discrete quantity expla9s ! cont9u\s4 ,,*apt] ,,xii4 ,,relations ,,( ,,! ,,idea ,,( ,,"t ,,to ,,exp]i5ce4 #hh4 ,if "t is no?+ di/9ct f ?+s1 h[ does x happ5 t we conceive x 9 ! ab/ract1 indep5d5tly ( ?+s !mselves8 ,h[ does x happ5 t x pres5ts itself to u z an absolute be+1 subject to no trans=mation or motion1 :ile )9 x e ?+ is mov$ & trans=m$8 ,if x is a subjective fact1 :y d we apply x to ?+s8 ,if x is objective1 :y is x m+l$ ) all our p]ceptions8 ,because x conta9s a necessity suffici5t to be ! object ( sci5ce4 ,! idea ( "t1 :atev] x may be1 seems prior to all p]ception ( trans=mation1 ! consci\sness ( all int]nal acts includ$4 ,x is impossible = u to "k any ( ^! ?+s1 unless "t s]ves z a receptacle 9 :i* we may place our own *anges & ^? ( o!rs4 #hi4 ,! idea ( "t is n ! result ( obs]vation2 = 9 t case x w\ld be ! expression ( a cont+5t fact1 & c\ld n be ! pr9ciple ( sci5ce4 ,we measure "t ) ! same exactness z we d space1 & x is "o ( ! mo/ fundam5tal ideas ( ! exact sci5ces1 9 s f> z !y h any application to ! objects ( nature4 #ij4 ,x might seem to foll[ f ?is t ! idea ( "t is innate 9 our m9d2 & t x is prior to all ideas1 & ev5 s5sations2 = bo? are necess>ily involv$ 9 successive duration4 #ia4 ,! necessity ( ! idea ( "t seems to prove t "t is indep5d5t ( transitory ?+s2 9 ?is case we are oblig$ to conv]t x into a purely subjective fact1 or else to grant x an objective reality1 indep5d5t ( t :i* is *angeable4 ,by ! =m] we de/roy x2 by ! latt] we make x an attribute ( ! div9ity4 ,to d5y "t is to d5y ! light ( ! sun2 to raise x to ! rank ( an attribute ( div9ity is to admit *ange 9 an immutable be+4 ,if we make x purely subjective1 we d5y x2 if objective1 we make x div9e3 is !re no middle way8 #ib4 ,i agree t ! idea ( "t is n d]iv$ f m]e exp]i5ce2 = exp]i5ce c\ld n furni% an elem5t s solid & s fix$1 on :i* we may ) p]fect security re/ all ! obs]vations ( sci5ce4 ,/ill less c x be ma9ta9$1 t ! idea ( "t is d]iv$ f purely s5sible exp]i5ce1 or t x is 9 itself a s5sation4 #ic4 ,! idea ( "t is n a s5sation2 = x is relative1 & s5sation is an affection ( our be+1 )\t any ref]5ce to or comp>ison ) any ?+4 ,:5 we exp]i5ce s5sations1 if we _h only ! s5sitive faculty1 we %\ld be limit$ to pure s5sation1 )\t any consid]ation ( be=e or aft]1 or any relation ( any k9d4 ,s5sation1 be+ limit$ to c]ta9 objects1 _c1 l ! idea ( "t1 ext5d to all objects4 ,by "t1 we measure n only ! ext]nal _w1 b also ! int]nal2 n only ! affections ( ! body1 b also ! mo/ conceal$ & ab/ract actions ( our m9d4 ,"t is1 9 itself1 succession1 &1 9 our m9d1 x is ! p]ception ( ?is succession2 x _c1 !re=e1 pres5t any object to ! m9d2 ev5 :5 "t ref]s to objects1 & is1 z x 71 ! l9k betwe5 !m1 x is n itself ei!r ^! objects !mselves1 nor ! intuition ( !m4 ,! idea ( ! "t :i* measures ! succession ( a s\nd or ( a sight1 cle>ly is n ei!r ! s\nd or ! sight1 b ! p]ception ( _! succession1 ( _! connection4 ,if x 7 ! sight alone1 or ! s\nd alone1 ei!r ! sight or ! s\nd w\ld alone be suffici5t 9 ord] to p]ceive "t1 :i* is absurd2 = !re is no "t )\t succession1 & consequ5tly !re c be no "t :i* measures two s5sations )\t ^! s5sations4 ,! idea ( "t is indep5d5t ( ei!r ( ! two2 x is sup]ior to !m2 x is a sort ( univ]sal =m1 indep5d5t ( ?is or t matt]2 s t1 if aft] ! s\nd1 in/ead ( ! sight1 ano!r s\nd %\ld be p]ceiv$ by u1 ! measure ( ! succession w\ld be ! same1 & ?is measure is no?+ m ?an ! idea ( "t4 ,s5sations be+ m]e cont+5t facts1 _c be ! f\ndation ( necess>y & univ]sal tru?s1 !y _c s]ve z ! basis ( a sci5ce4 ,b ! idea ( "t is "o ( ! pr9cipal ideas 9 all ! physical sci5ces1 &1 l ext5sion1 is subject$ to a v rigor\s calculation2 !re=e1 x is n a s5sation1 & x is n d]iv$ f s5sation4 #id4 ,purely exp]im5tal cognitions are conf9$ to ! sph]e ( exp]i5ce2 ! idea ( "t ext5ds to ! :ole real & possible ord]1 x tea*es u n only :at is1 b :at may1 & :at mu/ be2 its relations are ( absolute necessity1 & may be subject$ to ! /ricte/ calculation2 !re=e x conta9s some?+ m ?an ! elem5ts furni%$ by s5sible or ins5sible exp]i5ce4 ,x is n o!rwise possible to expla9 ! necessity :i* x involves1 or to pass beyond a collection ( cont+5t facts to arrive at ! possession ( an elem5t ( sci5ce4 #ie4 ,let u obs]ve1 z we pass1 t "h is f\nd ano!r pro( t ! sy/em ( ,condillac is nei!r true nor subsi/5t4 ,8 sy/em has be5 f\nd insuffici5t to expla9 any fundam5tal idea1 & x does n expla9 ! idea ( "t1 any m ?an ! re/1 al?\gh x seems z ?\gh ?is idea mu/ h ! mo/ intimate relations to ! s5sible ord]4 #if4 ,if ! idea ( "t is n m]ely exp]im5tal1 h[ expla9 ! priority & necessity ( "t8 ,,*apt] ,,xiii4 ,,kant',s ,,op9ion4 #ig4 ,kant uses ! same !ory to expla9 "t t he us$ to expla9 space4 ,"t1 accord+ to him1 is no?+ 9 itself1 nei!r is x any ?+ 9 ?+s2 x is a subjective condition ( intuition1 a =m ( ! int]nal s5se1 by means ( :i* ph5om5a are pres5t$ to u z successive1 j z space 0 ! =m by :i* !y are pres5t$ z cont9u\s4 ,to speak frankly1 x seems to me t ?is is say+ no?+2 x affirms a well-kn[n fact1 b does n expla9 x4 ,:o does n "k t :at we p]ceive we p]ceive 9 succession--t we p]ceive ev5 our own p]ceptions 9 succession8 ,b :at is succession8 ,?is is :at he ought to h expla9$4 #ih4 ,kant says t "t is only 9 u2 b ,i %\ld l to ask him1 if succession is only 9 u4 ,he pret5ds t we "k no?+ ( ! ext]nal _w1 b t we p]ceive c]ta9 appe>ances1 or ph5om5a2 b he does n d5y t beyond ! appe>ance !re may be a reality4 ,if ?is reality is possible1 *anges are possible 9 x2 & *ange _c be conceiv$ )\t succession1 nor succession )\t "t4 #ii4 ,accord+ to ,kant1 ! ideas ( space & "t are priori1 !y _c be empirical1 or exp]im5tal2 = 9 t case !y c\ld n be ! basis ( sci5ce2 we c\ld only affirm :at we _h exp]i5c$1 & ?is only ) respect to ! cases 9 :i* we h exp]i5c$ x4 ,?is is true1 & ,i h demon/rat$ x 9 ! la/ *apt]2 b1 conc$+ ?is priority1 x proves no?+ 9 favor ( ,kant's sy/em4 ,! ideas ( space & "t1 al?\gh priori1 may nev]!less correspond to some?+ 9 reality1 z foll[s f ! !ory by :i* ,i h expla9$ !m4 #ajj4 ,"t is n any ?+ :i* subsi/s by itself1 b x is n equally c]ta9 t x does n belong1 z an objective det]m9ation1 to ?+s1 & t no?+ rema9s ( x1 if we ab/ract x f all ! subjective impressions ( intuition4 ,i h demon/rat$ t "t does n subsi/ by itself1 & t a duration )\t any ?+ :i* endures1 is an absurdity2 b x does n foll[ f ?is t ! ord] repres5t$ by ! idea ( "t is n some?+ real 9 ! objects4 ,ab/ract+ x f our intuition1 !re /ill rema9s some?+ :i* v]ifies ! propositions by :i* we express ! prop]ties ( "t4 #aja4 ,! ,g]man philosoph] makes "t purely subjective1 & relies on ! foll[+ argum5t3 ,if "t 7 a condition belong+ to ! ?+s !mselves1 or an ord]1 x c\ld n prec$e ! objects z a condition ( !m1 & be kn[n & p]ceiv$ priori by syn!tical judgm5ts4 ,?is la/ is easily expla9$ if "t is no?+ b ! subjective condition "u :i* all intuitions are possible 9 u4 ,= !n ?is =m ( ! int]nal intuition c be repres5t$ be=e ! objects1 & consequ5tly priori4444 ,if we ab/ract our mann] ( p]ceiv+ ourselves int]nally1 & ( embrac+1 by means ( ?is intuition1 all ext]nal intuitions 9 ! faculty ( repres5tation1 & consequ5tly take objects j z !y may be 9 !mselves1 "t is no?+4444 ,i c say t my repres5tations are successive1 b ?is only means t we are consci\s ( !m 9 a succession1--t is1 9 a =m ( ! int]nal s5se4 ,"t w\ld n !re=e be any ?+ 9 itself1 nor a det]m9ation inh]5t 9 ?+s4#cj #cj ,trans4 /h4 ,,ii41 ,a4 #f4 w4 f4 #ajb4 ,x is easy to see t ! philosoph] is /ruggl+ betwe5 two difficulties4 ,! fir/ is1 h[ to expla9 ! necessity involv$ 9 ! idea ( "t1 if he makes x proce$ f exp]i5ce4 ,! second is1 h[1 if x is n d]iv$ f exp]i5ce1 x c be f\nd really 9 ?+s1 or1 at lea/1 h[ we c "k t x is f\nd 9 !m4 ,h5ce1 he concludes1 t x is n possible to save ! necessity involv$ 9 ! idea ( "t1 unless by mak+ x a purely subjective fact1 a =m ( an intuition1 entirely indep5d5t ( ! reality ( ?+s4 ,x seems to me1 t by att5d+ to ! pr9ciples e/abli%$ above1 we c give an objective value to "t1 indep5d5tly ( our intuition1 & expla9 its relations to exp]i5ce1 )\t de/roy+ ! necessity conta9$ 9 its idea4 ,,*apt] ,,xiv4 ,,fundam5tal ,,explanation ,,( ,,! ,,objective ,,possibility ,,& ,,( ,,! ,,necessity ,,( ,,! ,,idea ,,( ,,"t4 #ajc4 ,?+s 9 !mselves1 ab/ract$ f our intuition1 are susceptible ( *ange4 ,:]e !re is *ange1 !re is succession1 & :]e !re is succession1 !re is a c]ta9 ord] 9 ! ?+s :i* succe$1--an ord] :i* is really 9 ! ?+s !mselves1 al?\gh x does n subsi/ by itself1 sep>at$ f !m4 ,kant might object to ?is1 t p]haps ! *anges are n 9 ?+s1 b 9 ! ph5om5a1 or ! mann] 9 :i* !y are pres5t$ to our intuition4 ,b he _c d5y1 t :e!r ^! *anges are 9 ! reality1 or n1 !y are1 at lea/1 possible1 indep5d5tly ( ! ph5om5a4 ,!re=e1 he ass]ts1 )\t reason1 t "t 9 ! ?+s is no?+1 & t x is only ! =m ( our int]nal s5se4 ,if he admits ! possibility ( real *anges1 he mu/ also admit ! possibility ( a real "t2 if he d5ies t x is possible = ! ?+s 9 !mselves to be really *ang$1 we w\ld ask him h[ he came to "k ?is impossibility1--he1 :o limits all our k to ! purely ph5om5al ord]4 ,we _c "k t a ?+ is impossible 9 an ord]1 if we "k no?+ ( ?is ord]2 if ,kant ma9ta9s t we "k no?+ ( ?+s 9 !mselves1 he _c prove t we "k ! impossibility ( _! really *ang+4 #ajd4 ,x is !n demon/rat$ t "t1 or a real ord] 9 ?+s1 is1 at lea/1 possible4 ,!re=e1 we _c say t "t is a purely subjective condition1 to :i* no?+ c correspond 9 ! reality4 #aje4 ,admitt+ ! possibility ( an objective value ( ! idea ( "t1 n only 9 ref]5ce to ! purely ph5om5al ord]1 b also to ! transc5d5tal1 or r to ?+s consid]$ 9 !mselves1 & ab/ract$ f our intuition2 we %all see h[ ! objectiv5ess ( ! idea ( "t & its relations to exp]i5ce c be %[n1 )\t de/roy+ ! intr9sic necessity :i* makes x "o ( ! pr9cipal elem5ts ( ! exact sci5ces4 #ajf4 ,"t1 consid]$ 9 ?+s1 is ! ord] ( _! be+1 & _! n-be+4 ,! idea ( "t is ! p]ception ( ?is ord] 9 its greate/ g5]ality & ab/ract$ f ! objects :i* are conta9$ 9 x4 ,z our und]/&+ evid5tly c consid] a purely possible ord] ( ?+s1 ! idea ( "t ext5ds to ! possibility z well z ! reality4 ,?is is :y we conceive "t be=e & aft] ! pres5t _w1 simil> to ! space :i* we imag9e beyond ! limits ( ! univ]se4 ,! idea ( be+1 elevat$ to a purely possible region1 9 :i* x is ab/ract$ f all individual ph5om5a1 is fre$ f ! in/ability to :i* ! objects ( our exp]i5ce are subject3 x c !n be an absolutely necess>y elem5t ( sci5ce2 = x expresses a relation :i* is n affect$ by any ?+ cont+5t4 ,^! obs]vations are a solution ( all difficulties4 ,,*apt] ,,xv4 ,,important ,,coroll>ies4 #ajg4 ,is ! idea ( "t d]iv$ f exp]i5ce8 ,?is "q is answ]$ by :at we said ( ! idea ( be+4 ,x is n a type exi/+ previ\s to all s5sation & to all intellectual act2 x is a p]ception ( be+ & n-be+ :i* accompanies all our acts1 b is n pres5t$ to u sep>ately until reflection elim9ates f x all t does n belong to x4 ,?is p]ception is ! ex]cise ( an innate activity1 :i* is subject$ to ! conditions ( exp]i5ce 9 all t conc]ns ! beg9n+ & ! cont9uation ( its acts1 b n ) respect to its laws :i* are *>act]i/ic ( x1 & correspond to ! pure intellectual ord]4 ,?is activity is unfold$ 9 ! pres5ce ( causes or occasions :i* excite x1 & its ex]cise ceases :5 ^! conditions are want+2 b :ile ! activity acts1 x ex]cises its functions 9 accordance ) fix$ laws :i* are indep5d5t ( ! objects excit+ x4 #ajh4 ,x is !re=e cle> t ! idea ( "t is n /rictly d]iv$ f exp]i5ce1 except inasmu* z ! m9d is excit$ to develop its activity by exp]i5ce4 ,nei!r is x entirely indep5d5t ( exp]i5ce2 = )\t exp]i5ce we %\ld h no k ( *ange1 & consequ5tly ! intellect w\ld n p]ceive ! ord] ( be+ & n-be+1 9 :i* ! ess5ce ( "t consi/s4 #aji4 ,h5ce ! idea ( "t is n a =m ( ! s5sibility1 b ( ! pure intellectual ord]2 & al?\gh x desc5ds to ! field ( s5sible exp]i5ce1 x does s aft] ! mann] ( o!r g5]al conceptions4 #aaj4 ,! idea ( "t is "o ( ! mo/ univ]sal & indet]m9ate ideas :i* our m9d possesses2 = x is ! comb9ation ( ! two mo/ g5]al & mo/ indet]m9ate ideas1 be+ & n-be+4 ,"h is ! reason :y ! idea ( "t is common to all m51 & is pres5t$ to u z a =m ( all our conceptions & ( all ! objects kn[n4 ,! ideas ( be+ & n-be+1 ent]+ z primitive elem5ts into all our p]ceptions1 g5]ate ! idea ( "t4 ,we !re=e f9d ?is idea 9 ! inmo/ recesses ( our s\l z a condition f :i* we _c )draw ourselves1 & f :i* we exempt ! ,inf9ite ,be+ himself only by an ef=t ( reflection4 #aaa4 ,! transition f ! purely intellectual ord] to ! field ( exp]i5ce takes place 9 ! idea ( "t1 9 ! same mann] z 9 ! o!r intellectual conceptions4 ,i h1 !re=e1 no?+ to add to :at ,i h already said on ?is po9t :5 expla9+ x else:]e4#ca #ca ,see ,bk4 ,,iv41 ,*apt]s ,,xiv4 & ,,xv4 ,,*apt] ,,xvi4 ,,pure ,,ideal ,,"t ,,& ,,empyrical ,,"t4 #aab4 ,"t is n only conceiv$ z a g5]al ord] ( *ange1 or z a relation ( be+ & n-be+2 b also z some?+ fix$1 :i* c be measur$ ) exactness4 ,?us1 be=e ! creation ( ! _w1 we conceive n only an ab/ract ord]1 or "t1 b a "t compos$ ( ye>s1 ( c5turies1 or "s o!r t]ms4 ,b ?is1 if we closely exam9e x1 is only an idea 9 :i* we conceive ! ph5om5a ( exp]i5ce "u a g5]al view1 tak+ !m out ( actuality & contemplat+ !m 9 ! sph]e ( possibility4 ,nei!r ! ye>s nor ! c5turies exi/$ :5 !re 0 no?+ by :i* !y c\ld be measur$4 ,if we imag9e a sort ( vague l9e ( duration prolong$ to inf9ity1 ab/ract+ x f ! measure & ! object measur$1 we become ! sport ( our imag9ation1 & are entangl$ 9 contradictions f :i* x is difficult to extricate ourselves4 #aac4 ,! pure & ab/ract idea ( "t admits no measure2 x is a m]e relation ( be+ & n-be+4 ,! measure is possible only :5 ! idea ( "t is comb9$ ) ! ph5om5a ( exp]i5ce4 ,subject z we are to *ange1 & situat$ amid be+s z *angeable z ourselves1 we %\ld c]ta9ly fall into ! greate/ confusion ( our ideas1 if 9 ?is ebb & fl[ ( ext]nal z well z int]nal exi/5ces :i* appe> to u1 we _h n ! greate/ facility 9 ref]r+ !m to fix$ measures1 :i* are ! ?read t guides u 9 ?is labyr9? ( cont9ual v>iations4 #aad4 ,two ?+s are requir$ = ?is measure3 fir/1 a suitable ph5om5on1 & secondly1 ! idea ( numb]4 ,! common idea ( "t :i* s]ves = ! ord9>y purposes ( life ( ^! ?ree elem5ts3 ! pure idea ( "t1 or ! relation ( be+ & n-be+2 secondly1 a suitable ph5om5on to :i* we apply ?is pure idea2 & ?irdly1 ! num]ation ( ! *anges ( ?is ph5om5on4 ,apply ?is obs]vation to all ! measures ( "t1 & y w f9d ^! ?ree elem5ts always suffici5t1 b always indisp5sable also4 #aae4 ,f ?is we d$uce ! necessity ( "t1 ev5 consid]$ empirically2 = x involves two ideas1 ! "o metaphysical1 & ! o!r ma!matical1 appli$ to a fact4 ,! metaphysical idea is ! relation ( be+ & n-be+2 ! ma!matical idea is numb]2 & ! fact is ! s5sible ph5om5on1 z1 = example1 ! sol>1 or human motion4 ,metaphysics & ari?metic take *>ge ( ! absolute c]ta9ty2 ! fact obs]v$ answ]s = ! exp]im5tal c]ta9ty2 & z1 on ! o!r h&1 ?is ph5om5on is suppos$ to be c]ta91 because1 9 case x 7 necess>y we c\ld ab/ract x f ! reality1 & att5d only to ! possibility2 x foll[s t "t1 ev5 consid]$ empirically1 may become ! object ( ! exact sci5ces4 #aaf4 ,?is !ory does n make "t a purely subjective condition1 nor grant x a nature indep5d5t ( ?+s2 x reconciles ! pure intellectual ord] ) ! ord] ( exp]i5ce2 & places man 9 communication ) ! real _w1 )\t creat+ a contradiction 9 8 ideas4 ,,*apt] ,,xvii4 ,,relations ,,( ,,! ,,idea ,,( ,,"t ,,& ,,! ,,pr9ciple ,,( ,,contradiction4 #aag4 ,let u expla9 ! true mean+ ( ! pr9ciple ( contradiction4 ,x is impossible = any ?+ to be & n be at ! same "t4 ,! connection ( ! ideas conta9$ 9 ?is pr9ciple seems at fir/ sight to be expla9$ )\t any difficulty2 s t1 to raise que/ions z to its true s5se is to place ourselves 9 contradiction ) "o ( ! fundam5tal tru?s on :i* re/s ! edifice ( our k4 ,=1 if !re be any d\bt z to ! true mean+ ( ! pr9ciple1 x may be und]/ood 9 sev]al ways1 & !n !re w be ano!r d\bt z to :e!r ! g5]ality ( m5 und]/& x z !y ought to1 & :e!r1 consequ5tly1 x is = !m a solid f\ndation ( k4 ,?is difficulty ceases to be "o :5 we reflect t ! mo/ evid5t axioms may be consid]$ 9 two mann]s3 empirically1 or sci5tifically2 or 9 o!r words1 inasmu* z !y are ! application1 or ! object ( analytical exam9ation4 ,9 ! fir/ mann]1 !y are equally c]ta9 & equally cle> to all m52 9 ! second1 !y are subject to difficulties4 ,! pr9ciple1--?+s equal to a ?ird are equal to ea* o!r1--consid]$ empirically1 is absolutely c]ta9 & evid5t to all m53 all m51 f ! wise/ to ! mo/ ignorant1 comp>e ?+s ) a ?ird1 :5 !y wi% to asc]ta9 _! equality or inequality2 ?is is only an application ( ! pr9ciple4 ,if y ask !m ! reason ( ?is proce$+1 al?\gh !y may n enunciate ! axiom 9 its precise t]ms1 !y ref] to x 9 diff]5t ways3 ,^! two tables are equal1 because ,i h measur$ !m1 & !y are ea* f\r feet squ>e4 ,probably ! g5]ality ( m51 n accu/om$ to reflect on _! k1 w\ld n express ! pr9ciple 9 univ]sal & precise t]ms2 z1 ,^! two tables are equal1 because !y h a common measure1 & ?+s equal to a ?ird are equal to ea* o!r4 ,yet !y are j z cle>ly c]ta9 ( ! pr9ciple1 & apply x1 )\t any dang] ( error1 9 all real & possible cases4 ,?is is :at ,i call ! empirical k ( pr9ciples1--a k :i* is p]fect 9 ! direct ord]1 & is defective only 9 ! reflex ord]4#cb #cb ,see ,bk4 ,i41 ,*4 ,,iii4 ,x is v easy to reconcile ! difficulty 9 ! analysis ( ! pr9ciple1 ) its cle>ness :5 appli$ to ord9>y purposes1 or to ^? ( sci5ce4 ,?us1 9 ! example giv51 ! analysis ( ! t]m equal leads to ! analysis ( ! t]m quantity3 reflection c discov] 9 ?is difficulties :i*1 al?\gh !y d n di/urb mank9d 9 ! possession ( tru?1 are difficulties not)/&+4 ,geometry is und\bt$ly a sci5ce p]fectly evid5t & c]ta92 b :o c d5y t ! idea ( ext5sion pres5ts s]i\s difficulties1 :5 exam9$ be=e ! tribunal ( metaphysics8 ,univ]sal ari?metic is1 beyond all d\bt1 a sci5ce2 yet ! ideas ( quantity & numb]1 :i* are indisp5sable to x1 give rise to ! mo/ ab/ruse que/ions ( metaphysics & ideology4 ,9 g5]al1 x may be said t !re is no bran* ( our k :i* is exempt f difficulties1 consid]$ 9 its root2 b ^! difficulties1 aris+ f reflection1 d n 9 any way less5 ! c]ta9ty ( direct k4 ,h5ce x is no objection t ! analysis ( ! pr9ciple ( contradiction pres5ts difficulties2 nor are we !re=e to fe> = ! firmness ( ! edifice ( our k4 ,x w\ld be ( no s]vice to u n to att5d to ^! difficulties1 if !y really exi/$2 a difficulty does n vani% because we %ut our eyes s z n to see x4 ,let u n1 !re=e1 va9ly fe> to exam9e ! true s5se ( ! pr9ciple ( contradiction4 #aah4 ,x seems t ?is pr9ciple ei!r does n exi/1 or has no mean+1 unless we presuppose ! idea ( "t2 &1 on ! o!r h&1 we _c conceive "t1 unless we presuppose ! pr9ciple ( contradiction4 ,d we ?us fall into a vici\s circle1 & ?is too 9 ! fundam5tal pr9ciple ( all our k8 ,?is is a difficulty :i* ,i %all fir/ develop & pres5t m cle>ly4 ,! pr9ciple ( contradiction presupposes ! idea ( "t1 because !re w\ld be no contradiction if be+ & n-be+ 7 n ref]r$ to ! same "t4 ,?is la/ condition is altoge!r indisp5sable2 =1 suppress+ ! simultane\sness1 !re is no contradiction 9 a ?+ bo? be+ & n-be+4 ,n only is !re no contradiction 9 ?is1 b x is a ?+ :i* we con/antly meet )1 9 e ?+ ar\nd u4 ,we see be+ & n-be+ 9 ?+s :i* pass f exi/5ce to non-exi/5ce1 or f non-exi/5ce to exi/5ce4 ,al?\gh ! simultane\sness may n be express$ 9 ! pr9ciple ( contradiction1 x is always und]/ood1 s t we %\ld ga9 no?+ by adopt+ ,kant's =mula4#cc ,9 :atev] t]ms ! pr9ciple may be enunciat$1 x is always true t ! same ?+ _c bo? be & n be at ! same "t1 b may v well be at "o "t & n be at ano!r "t4 #cc ,see ,bk4 ,i41 ,*4 ,,xx4 ,! idea ( "t is !re=e necess>y 9 ord] t ! contradiction may foll[ 9 "s cases1 & disappe> 9 o!rs4 ,if ! "t implies simultane\sness1 x g5]ates ! contradiction2 if x implies succession1 x de/roys ! contradiction2 because be+ & n-be+ are impossible1 unless we presuppose a successive duration1 among ! diff]5t p>ts ( :i*1 ?+s t w\ld o!rwise be contradictory are di/ribut$4 #aai4 ,! idea ( "t also presupposes ! pr9ciple ( contradiction2 =1 if "t1 9 ?+s1 is only be+ & n-be+1 & 9 ! intellect1 ! p]ception ( ?is be+ & n-be+2 we _c p]ceive "t )\t hav+ p]ceiv$ be+ & n-be+2 & z ^! ideas1 )\t succession1 involve a contradiction1 we mu/ p]ceive ! pr9ciple ( contradiction :5 we p]ceive "t4 ,i h said t succession implies ! mutual exclusion ( ! ?+s :i* succe$2 n[1 ! fir/ exclusion is ! pr9ciple ( contradiction3 9 p]ceiv+ "t1 we p]ceive succession2 !re=e we h already p]ceiv$ ! contradiction4 #abj4 ,^! rem>ks might incl9e u to believe x necess>y to *oose betwe5 a vici\s circle1 :i* is inadmissible 9 ! f\ndation ( all our k1 & an explanation ( "t1 indep5d5tly ( be+ & n-be+4 ,if we conceiv$ "t z exi/+ by itself1 z a sort ( l9e prolong$ to inf9ity2 z a =m ( ?+s1 b di/9ct f !m all2 z a vague capacity 9 :i* successive be+s might be plac$1 j z we situate co-exi/5ces 9 space1--!n ! idea ( "t w\ld n be expla9$ by ! pr9ciple ( contradiction1 & we c\ld only say t x 0 complet$ by x4 ,:5 we say t x is impossible = ! same ?+ to be & n be at ! same "t1 b t x is possible = ! same ?+ to be & n be at diff]5t times1 ! contradiction is affirm$ or tak5 away1 accord+ly z ! be+ & n-be+ are ref]r$ to ! same po9t or to diff]5t po9ts 9 ?is vague ext5sion1 ?is inf9ite l9e1 :i* we call successive duration1 & 9 :i* we conceive *angeable ?+s to be di/ribut$4 ,?is explanation is conv5i5t2 b x has a defect1 t x _c /& a philosophical exam9ation1 z we h se5 9 ! prec$+ *apt]s4 ,we mu/ !re=e h rec\rse to ano!r class ( consid]ations4 #aba4 ,to solve ?is difficulty1 x is necess>y to det]m9e precisely ! mean+ ( our ideas4 ,! expression ( vici\s circle is improp]ly appli$ to ?is case4 ,if we und]/& ?is1 ! :ole difficulty is solv$ at once4 ,9 expla9+ ?+s1 :i* are n id5tical1 a circle is a defect1 & is call$ vici\s2 b :5 two ?+s are id5tical at bottom1 al?\gh !y appe> di/9ct1 because pres5t$ "u v>i\s aspects1 x is impossible to expla9 "o )\t /umbl+1 s to speak1 on ! o!r1 or to approa* "o )\t meet+ ! o!r4 ,because !y are pres5t$ "u diff]5t aspects we are l$ to believe !m di/9ct2 b exam9+ !m analytically1 we ab/ract ! diff]5ce ( aspect1 & p5etrate to ! reality1 & discov] ! po9t :]e !y are unit$1 or1 r1 :]e !y are absolutely id5tifi$4 #abb4 ,we may draw f ^! obs]vations a crit]ion :i* we may use 9 a great _m cases4 ,:51 9 expla9+ two objects1 we f9d ourselves l$ alt]nately f ! "o to ! o!r1 )\t any possibility ( avoid+ a circle1 we may suspect t objects1 :i* appe> di/9ct1 are n s 9 reality1 & t ! objects pres5t$ to ! eyes ( our und]/&+ are n two objects1 b only "o object p]ceiv$ 9 diff]5t ways4 #abc4 ,?is is true 9 ! pres5t in/ance4 ,9 expla9+ ! pr9ciple ( contradiction we enc\nt] ! idea ( "t1 & 9 def9+ "t we enc\nt] ! pr9ciple ( contradiction1 or ! ideas ( be+ & n-be+4 ,?is is a circle1 b an inevitable "o2 & !re=e x ceases to be vici\s4 #abd4 ,:at is ! mean+ ( ! pr9ciple ( contradiction8 ,its true mean+ is1 t be+ excludes n-be+1 & n-be+ excludes be+2 t ! nature ( ^! conceptions is su* t ! affirmation ( "o implies ! negation ( ! o!r1 n only 9 ! ord] ( our ideas1 b 9 reality4 ,let u call ,a any be+ :atev]3 ! pr9ciple ( contradiction means t ,a excludes n-,a1 & n-,a excludes ,a4 ,if we ?9k ,a1 ! conception ( n-,a disappe>s2 & if we ?9k n-,a1 ! conception ( ,a disappe>s4 ,if we affirm ,a 9 reality1 we d5y n-,a1 & if we affirm n-,a 9 reality1 we d5y ,a4 ,?is is ! true mean+ ( ! pr9ciple ( contradiction4 ,if we reflect1 we %all f9d t1 z f> z possible1 we h ab/ract$ ! idea ( "t2 = we h only consid]$ ! mutual exclusion ( ,a & n-,a1 9 ref]5ce to a simul1 an indivisible po9t ( duration1 :i*1 involv+ no succession1 does n give u ! idea ( "t4 ,i said1 z f> z possible2 because z soon z we ?9k ,a & n-,a1 ! idea ( succession1 & consequ5tly ( "t1 arises 9 our m9d4 #abe4 ,a & n-,a imply contradiction2 b n s t !y absolutely _c be realiz$4 ,! exclusion is conditional2 t is1 x exi/s z long z ! contradictory extremes are simultane\s1 or ref]r$ to an indivisible n[2 b we discov] no intr9sic necessity ( exi/5ce 9 ! idea ( ,a3 consequ5tly1 al?\gh we "k t :ile ,a is1 n-,a _c be1 we c v well conceive t ,a may cease to be1 & n-,a may beg9 to be4 ,!re is1 91 t case1 no contradiction1 & we c easily reconcile 9 our m9d ! two ideas ( ,a & n-,a1 by ref]r+ !m to diff]5t in/ants4 #abf4 ,h5ce ! p]ception ( "t implies ! p]ception ( be+s t are n necess>y1--( be+s :i*1 :5 !y exi/1 may cease to exi/1 & :5 !y d n exi/1 may beg9 to exi/4 ,! diff]5ce betwe5 necess>y & cont+5t be+ is1 t ! exi/5ce ( ! =m] absolutely excludes its non-exi/5ce1 :ile ! exi/5ce ( ! latt] excludes its non-exi/5ce only conditionally1 or on ! supposition ( simultane\sness4 #abg4 ,?is is :y ! pr9ciple ( contradiction requires ! condition ( "t4 ,! objects :i* we p]ceive are *angeable2 !re is no?+ ei!r 9 _! nature or 9 _! modifications :i* involves exi/5ce4 ,if !y are1 !y may cease to be2 & if ?is *ange does n con/antly occur 9 _! sub/ance1 x does 9 _! accid5ts4 ,!re=e we _c affirm ! absolute1 b only ! conditional contradiction ( _! be+ & n-be+2 x exi/s only on ! supposition ( simultane\sness4 #abh4 ,if we conceiv$ only necess>y be+1 we c\ld h no idea ( "t3 its exi/5ce absolutely excludes its non-exi/5ce1 & !re=e ! contradiction w\ld be always absolute1 nev] conditional4 #abi4 ,a mo/ important consequ5ce results f ?is analysis4 ,! p]ception ( "t ) u implies ! p]ception ( ! non-necessity ( ?+s4 ,:5 we p]ceive a be+ :i* is n necess>y1 we p]ceive a be+ :i* may cease to be1 9 :i* case we h ! idea ( succession1 ( real or possible "t4 ,"h ano!r reflection arises :i* is also important3 ! idea ( "t is ! idea ( cont+5cy3 ! consci\sness ( "t is ! consci\sness ( our weakness4 #acj4 ,! idea ( "t is s deep 9 our m9d1 t )\t x we c\ld n =m ! idea ( ! me4 ,! consci\sness ( ! id5tity ( ! me supposes a l9k#cd :i* x is impossible to f9d )\t memory4 ,memory necess>ily involves ! relation ( pa/1 &1 consequ5tly1 ! idea ( "t4 #cd ,see ,bk4 ,i41 ,*4 ,,xxv4 ,,*apt] ,,xviii4 ,,summ+ ,,up4 ,let u collect toge!r ! doctr9es ( ! prec$+ *apt]s4 #aca4 ,"t is a "q difficult to expla94 ,:oev] d5ies ?is difficulty %[s t he has m$itat$ b sup]ficially on ! matt]4 #acb4 ,motion is measur$ by "t2 b x is n a suffici5t def9ition ( "t to call x ! measure ( motion4 #acc4 ,x is impossible to f9d a primitive measure ( motion2 we mu/1 at la/1 take "s measure or ano!r1 & al?\gh arbitr>ily *os51 we mu/ ref] motion to x4 ,x %\ld be ! mo/ uni=m measure possible4 #acd4 ,! resemblance betwe5 ! ideas ( "t & space creates a suspicion t !y ought to be expla9$ 9 a simil> mann]4 #ace4 ,!re is no duration )\t some?+ :i* endures2 !re=e !re is no duration sep>ate f ?+s4 ,if no?+ exi/$1 !re c\ld be no duration4 #acf4 ,!re is no succession )\t ?+s :i* succe$3 !re=e succession _c be realiz$ z a =m indep5d5t ( ?+s1 al?\gh x may be conceiv$ 9 ! ab/ract by itself4 #acg4 ,"t implies be=e & aft]1 &1 consequ5tly1 succession4 ,x is succession itself1 because 9 conceiv+ succession1 we conceive "t4 #ach4 ,succession involves ! exclusion ( "s ?+s by o!rs4 ,?is exclusion may ei!r be f\nd$ on ! ess5ce ( ?+s1 or be d]iv$ f an ext]nal cause4 #aci4 ,"t1 !re=e1 involves exclusion3 x is ! g5]al idea ( ! ord] ( *anges1 or ( ! mutual relation ( be+ & n-be+4 #adj4 ,if !re 7 no *ange !re w\ld be no "t4 #ada4 ,no "t _h pass$ be=e ! exi/5ce ( ! _w4 ,!re 0 no o!r duration ?an et]nity4 #adb4 ,et]nity is ! exi/5ce ( ! inf9ite be+1 )\t any alt]ation ei!r actual or possible4 #adc4 ,"t is n any ?+ absolute & indep5d5t ( ?+s1 b is really 9 !m4 ,x is ! ord] betwe5 be+ & n-be+4 #add4 ,co-exi/5ce is m]ely ! exi/5ce ( v>i\s be+s4 ,to conceive _m be+s )\t ! idea ( ! negation ( be+1 is to h ! p]ception ( co-exi/5ce4 #ade4 ,"t may be consid]$ "u ?ree aspects2 ! pres5t1 ! pa/1 & ! future4 ,all o!r relations ( "t1 diff]5tly express$ 9 diff]5t idioms1 are only comb9ations ( ^!4 #adf4 ,! pres5t is ! only absolute "t3 x is conceiv$ )\t relation to ! pa/ or ! future2 b ! pa/ & ! future are n conceiv$ )\t relation to ! pres5t4 #adg4 ,! idea ( pres5t accompanies ! v idea ( be+2 or r1 x is conf\nd$ ) ! idea ( exi/5ce2 t :i* has no pres5t exi/5ce is n be+4 #adh4 ,! idea ( pa/ "t is ! p]ception ( n-be+1 or ( a be+ t has be5 de/roy$1 9 relation to a pres5t be+3 ! idea ( future "t is ! p]ception ( a possible be+ proce$+ f a cause already det]m9$1 & 9 relation to a pres5t be+4 #adi4 ,! idea ( "t is excit$ by exp]i5ce2 b x _c be call$ a fact ( m]e obs]vation2 = ?is w\ld be oppos$ to its intr9sic necessity1 by virtue ( :i* x is ! object ( ! exact sci5ces4 #aej4 ,/ill less c we say1 t ?is idea is conf9$ to ! s5sible ord]1 s9ce x includes e mann] ( *ange 9 g5]al1 :e!r s5sible or sup]s5sible4 #aea4 ,! idea ( "t be+ ! p]ception ( ! ord] betwe5 be+ & n-be+1 ?is relation1 consid]$ 9 g5]al1 belongs to ! pure intellectual ord]4 ,! transition to exp]i5ce is realiz$ 9 ! same mann] z 9 o!r g5]al & indet]m9ate conceptions4 #aeb4 ,x is necess>y to make a di/9ction betwe5 pure ideal "t & empirical "t3 pure ideal "t is ! relation betwe5 be+ & n-be+1 consid]$ 9 ! greate/ g5]ality & ! mo/ complete indet]m9at5ess2 empirical "t is ! same relation subject$ to a s5sible measure4 #aec4 ,to measure ?is succession1 ?ree ?+s are necess>y1 & _! union =ms ! idea ( empirical "t4 ,!y are1 fir/1 ! pure idea ( be+ & n-be+1 or ( *ange2 secondly1 ! application ( ?is idea to a s5sible ph5om5on1 z1 = example1 ! sol> motion2 & ?irdly1 ! idea ( numb] appli$ to ! det]m9+ ( ! *anges ( ?is ph5om5on4 #aed4 ,we ?us conceive :y empirical "t implies a true necessity1 & is ! object ( sci5ce4 ,( ! ?ree elem5ts :i* compose x1 ! fir/ is a metaphysical idea1 ! second1 a ma!matical idea1 & ! ?ird1 a fact ( obs]vation1 to :i* ^! ideas are appli$4 ,if ?is fact be n real1 x mu/1 at lea/1 be possible1 9 ord] to save ! necessity ( ! calculation :i* is bas$ ^u x4 #aee4 ,!re is a close relation betwe5 ! idea ( "t & ! pr9ciple ( contradiction4 ,ea* is expla9$ by ! o!r1 yet ?is is n a vici\s circle4 ,! pr9ciple ( contradiction consi/s 9 ! mutual exclusion ( be+ & n-be+1 & ! idea ( "t is ! p]ception ( ! ord] betwe5 be+ & n-be+4 ,analysis mu/ !re=e lead to a "p :i* is id5tical 9 bo?1 to ! comp>ison ( ! ideas ( be+ & n-be+4 #aef4 ,)\t ! idea ( "t1 memory w\ld be impossible2 consequ5tly also1 ! unity ( consci\sness4 ,,*apt] ,,xix4 ,a ,,glance ,,at ,,! ,,ideas ,,( ,,space1 ,,numb]1 ,,& ,,"t4 #aeg4 ,we may n[ m>k out & det]m9e ) p]fect exactness ! necess>y elem5ts :i* =m ! object ( ! natural & exact sci5ces4 ,?is is n only curi\s1 b highly important2 = x pres5ts "u ! simple/ aspect1 an imm5se field ( k1 ! limits ( :i* exp&1 z we advance2 s t1 x is impossible to assign a limit to progress4 #aeh4 ,space1 numb]1 & "t1 are ! ?ree elem5ts ( all ! natural & exact sci5ces4 ,all else conta9$ 9 !m p]ta9s to m]e exp]i5ce1 to ! ord] ( cont+5t facts1 :i* involve no necessity1 & _c /rictly be ! objects ( sci5ce4 #aei4 ,univ]sal ari?metic is f\nd$ on ! idea ( numb]s1 geometry on t ( space1 & ! idea ( "t places u 9 communication ) ! s5sible _w1 s z to det]m9e ! relations ( its ph5om5a4 ,^! ph5om5a are isolat$ cont+5t facts1 & _c become ! object ( sci5ce1 until subject$ to ! g5]al ideas ( space1 numb]1 & "t4 #afj4 ,h5ce1 !re are two p>ts 9 e natural sci5ce2 ! !oretic1 & ! exp]im5tal4 ,! =m] is f\nd$ on necess>y ideas1 ! latt] on cont+5t facts2 ! fir/ )\t ! second1 w\ld n come d[n to ! real _w2 ! second )\t ! fir/1 w\ld n rise to ! regions ( sci5ce4 #afa4 ,! natural sci5ces m]it ! "n ( sci5ce1 9 proportion to ! quantity ( necess>y elem5ts :i* !y conta91 & ! clos5ess ( ! connection by :i* !y unite ) !m cont+5t facts4 ,b z no natural sci5ce c be conceiv$1 )\t cont+5t facts1 s !re is none entirely free f ! cont+5cy :i* !y communicate4 #afb4 ,^! obs]vations reveal a great simplicity 9 ! elem5ts ( sci5ce1 & we may pu% ?is simplicity mu* f>!r1 if we recollect :at has be5 said :5 analyz+ ! ideas ( numb] & "t4 #afc4 ,! idea ( numb] arises f ! idea ( be+ & n-be+3 ! same is also true ( ! idea ( "t2 !re=e1 at bottom1 ^! ideas are b "o1 ?\gh pres5t$ "u diff]5t aspects4 #afd4 ,h5ce1 all ! natural & exact sci5ces may be r$uc$ to two elem5ts3 ! intuition ( ext5sion1 & ! g5]al conception ( be+4 ,ext5sion is ! basis ( all s5sible intuitions3 ext]nally1 x is a necess>y condition ( ! relations :i* we conceive 9 ! corporeal _w2 int]nally1 x is a p]ception1 )\t :i* ! s5sibility c\ld n repres5t ext]nal objects4 ,! conception ( be+1 is ! basis ( all conceptions2 develop$ 9 diff]5t ways1 x g5]ates ! ideas ( numb] & "t2 & ^!1 comb9$ ) ext5sion1 con/itute ! necess>y "p ( all ! natural & exact sci5ces4 #afe4 ,! ideas ( space1 numb]1 & "t are common to all m52 ! pro( t !y are id5tical to all is1 t1 9 _! application1 all are l$ to ! same results1 & 9 speak+ ( !m !y all use ! same expressions4 ,all m5 measure space1 & its v>i\s dim5sions2 !y all c\nt1 !y all conceive "t3 :y1 !n1 is !re s great difficulty 9 expla9+ ^! ideas8 :y su* diff]5ce ( op9ion among philosoph]s8 ,"h we h a confirmation ( :at we h said#ce ( ! /r5g? ( direct p]ception1 & ! weakness ( reflex4 ,:5 we cont5t ourselves ) ! direct p]ception ( space1 ( numb]1 & ( "t1 our ideas are cle>1 & ! und]/&+ feels its /r5g? & en]gy1 x ext5ds ! sph]e ( its k beyond all limits1 & raises ! edifice ( ! ma!matical & exact sci5ces4 ,b z soon z x turns ^u itself1 &1 leav+ ! direct p]ception1 passes to ! reflex1 endeavor+ to p]ceive its p]ception1 its /r5g? fails1 & x falls into a confusion :i* gives rise to int]m9able disputes4 ,we sc>ce p]ceive t idea1 :i*1 a mom5t ago1 we appli$ to e ?+1 :i* p5etrat$ all our cognitions1 & circulat$1 l our life1 ?r\gh all our p]ceptions2 b 9 its isolation1 & its purity1 x cont9ually escapes f u2 m+l$ ) all ?+s1 we see t x is some?+ di/9ct f !m2 we sep>ate x f "o1 & x unites ) ano!r2 we make an ef=t to cut x (f f all t is n itself1 & ! m9d feels a k9d ( dizz9ess come ov] x1 e ?+ vani%es f be=e x1 &1 unable to rea* ! reality1 x is =c$ to be cont5t$ ) names1 :i* x pron\nces & repeats a ?\s& times1 turn+ ov] 9 !m ! little reality :i* !y conta94 #ce ,see ,bk4 ,i41 ,*ap4 ,,iii4 #afg4 ,"o ( ! causes ( ?is weakness & ( ! errors :i* are its ord9>y consequ5ce1 is1 z ,i h be=e said1 our mad desire ( repres5t+ e idea z an int]nal =m1 or image1 :]eas we ought to consid] t 9 _m cases !re is only a p]ception1 a simple act 9 ! l[e/ dep? ( our m9d1--an act1 :i* c be repres5t$ by no?+1 :i* resembles no?+1 & :i* _c be expla9$ 9 words1 because x _c be decompos$1 & x is only pres5t z a simple fact ( consci\sness4 ,b ?is fact ( consci\sness is an active fact2 by x we p5etrate into ?+s1 & see :at !y h 9 common1 & sep>ate x f :at is p>ticul>1 e/abli%+ 9 our m9d1 z x 71 a c5tral1 culm9at+ po9t1 f :i* we contemplate ! int]nal & ! ext]nal _w1 & roam ?r\gh ! b\ndless regions ( possibility4 ,,book ,,eigh?4 ,,! ,,inf9ite4 ,,*apt] ,i4 ,,transitory ,,view ,,( ,,! ,,actual ,,/ate ,,( ,,philosophy4 #a4 ,9 ! works on transc5d5tal philosophy :i* h be5 publi%$ ( late ye>s1 we f9d ! words inf9ite1 absolute1 indet]m9ate1 uncondition$1 frequ5tly repeat$1 & made to play a v prom95t "p 9 ! explanation ( ! mo/ recondite secrets :i* c be pres5t$ to ! consid]ation ( man4 ,! words f9ite1 relative1 det]m9ate1 conditional1 are easily comb9$ ) ^!2 & f ?is comb9ation !y pret5d t a ray ( light w arise to dissipate ! d>kness ( philosophical que/ions4 #b4 ,9 spite ( ! bad use _m make ( su* words1 we mu/ confess t ! fact indicat$ is consol+ by reason ( ! great desire !re is to use !m4 ,?is desire m>ks an ef=t 9 ! human m9d to raise itself f ! mire 9 :i* ! impi\s s*ool ( ! la/ c5tury has sunk x4 #c4 ,:at 0 ! _w 9 ! eyes ( ! false philosoph]s :o prec$$ ! ,fr5* revolution8 ,a mass ( matt]1 subject to simple me*anical laws ( motion1 ! :ole explanation ( :i* 0 giv5 9 two words1 bl9d necessity4 ,:at 0 ! human m9d8 ,no?+ b matt]4 ,:at 0 ?\ght8 ,a modification ( matt]4 ,9 :at did ! diff]5ce betwe5 ?9k+ & non-?9k+ matt] consi/8 ,9 a little great] or less subtilty1 9 a m or less happy disposition ( atoms4 ,:at 0 morality8 ,an illusion4 ,:at 7 s5tim5ts8 ,a mat]ial ph5om5on4 ,:at 0 ! orig9 ( man8 ,t ( matt]1--a ph5om5on (f]$ by a quantity ( molecules1 :i* at "o mom5t happ5 to be dispos$ "o way1 & a mom5t aft] 9 a v diff]5t way4 ,if y inquir$ if !re 7 a de/9y beyond ! grave1 ,we argue t "q6 !y w\ld answ] ) a scornful smile4 ,h y su* a ^w z religion8 ,! scorn increas$ & *ang$ into contempt4 ,d y recognize ! dignity ( ! human race8 ,o1 yes6 we admit ?is dignity1 & we are ( op9ion t x is ( ! same nature z t ( ! brutes1 only x has rea*$ a high] degree ( p]fection4 ,we d n d5y t y\r =m may be m noble & elegant ?an t ( ! monkey1 nor d we dispute ! sup]iority ( y\r intellig5ce2 b we w\ld h y take good c>e n to make pret5sions to a nobl] orig9 or a l(ti] de/9y4 ,! c\rse ( ages may develop & p]fect ! monkey =m1 & r5d] x equal ) y\rs2 x may develop & p]fect 8 c]ebral organs1 s t f ?is v monkey1 ^: extravagant motions & ridicul\s attitudes n[ amuse1 m5 w be born su* z 7 ,plato1 ,sa9t ,augu/9e1 ,leibnitz1 or ,bossuet4 #d4 ,) su* a sy/em1 x 0 useless to deal 9 ideas3 !y reta9$ only s5sations4 ,:atev] c\ld occupy ! m9d ( man1 :e!r ! mo/ imbecile or end[$ ) ! l(tie/ g5ius1 0 no?+ m ?an a s5sation trans=m$4 ,! v brutes possess$ all ! elem5ts ( human intellig5ce2 to ?9k 0 only to feel m p]fectly4 ,su* 0 ! la/ t]m ( _! analysis2 su* ! result ( _! mo/ accurate obs]vation2 su* ! solution _! pr(\nde/ philosophy gave to ! problems ( man's und]/&+4 ,plato1 ,ari/otle1 ,sa9t ,augu/9e1 ,sa9t ,?omas1 ,desc>tes1 ,malebran*e & ,leibnitz 7 no?+ b sublime dream]s1 ^: g5ius /rongly contra/$ ) _! ignorance ( ! true nature ( ?+s4 ,none ( !m knew any ?+ ab\t ideology or metaphysics2 ^! sci5ces 7 an unkn[n _w until ,locke & ,condillac came & discov]$ !m4 #e4 ,?is s*ool1 z fatal z frivol\s1 has involv$ & /ifl$ m9d 9 matt]4 ,! butt]fly c\ld n unfold 8 w+s ( fair & v>i\s colors2 he 0 =c$ to lay !m (f & to *ange into a /upid & fil?y worm1 entangl$ 9 a cov]+ z loa?some & unclean z itself4 ,9 ?is consi/$ progress4 ,! limit ( ideological p]fection 0 to d5y ideas2 t ( metaphysical /udies1 to d5y spirits2 t ( morals1 to d5y morality2 t ( society1 to d5y au?ority2 t ( politics1 to e/abli% lic5se2 t ( religion1 to d5y ,god4 ,?us1 human reason1 ?9k+ to advance1 m>*$ 9 a retrograde direction2 & propos$ to raise ! edifice ( its k1 :5 !re 0 no?+ left to demoli%3 ?us !y imag9$ to atta9 a sci5tific result by d5y+ e ?+1 & by f9ally d5y+ !mselves4 #f4 ,at pres5t1 !re is a reaction aga9/ s degrad+ a philosophy4 ,we h only to op5 ! writ+s ( ! philosoph]s ( ?is age to conv9ce ourselves ( ?is consol+ tru?4 ,we ev]y:]e meet ! ^w idea 9 contraposition to t ( s5sation2 t ( m9d to t ( matt]2 t ( activity ( ?\ght to t ( bodily motion2 ^? ( cause1 ord]1 lib]ty1 ( free w1 morality1 inf9ity4 ,! ideas :i* accompany !m are sometimes inexact1 sometimes extravagant2 b at ! bottom ( all ?is we di/+ui% an anxi\s desire to rise f ! abyss d[n to :i* an a!i/ical & mat]ial philosophy _h dragg$ ! human m9d4 ,"s :o h contribut$ to ! reaction d n admit a free & intellig5t ,god1 di/9ct f ! univ]se4 ,:at we h said above is !re=e true1 t pan!ism is a!ism 9 disguise2 nev]!less1 ! a!ism ( ! pan!i/ n[-a-days is an a!ism :i* is a%am$ to confess itself su*1 & :i* sometimes1 p]haps1 deceives itself1 be+ p]suad$ t x is n4 #g4 ,! a!ism ( mod]n philosoph]s unites itself ) ! inf9ite3 x does n reject ^? great ideas :i* z relics ( a primitive tradition 7 common 9 ! old _w1 & 7 aft]w>ds fix$1 cle>$ up & elevat$ by ! sup]ior tea*+ ( ,*ri/ianity4 ,! philosophy ( ! la/ c5tury sat d[n 9 ! d>kness & %ad[ ( dea? & decl>$ itself alone 9 possession ( light & life4 ,philosophy n[ /ill rema9s 9 obscurity1 b x is n satisfi$ ) x1 & gropes ab\t 9 ! d>k1 seek+ "s outlet to ! regions ( light4 ,h5ce ^? desp]ate ef=ts to resolve itself1 n into matt]1 b into ! focus ( intellig5ce1 into ! me1 t is1 ! m9d3 h5ce ! cont9ual use ( ! words absolute1 unconditional1 inf9ite1 words :i*1 not)/&+ !y ord9>ily lead to absurdities1 d yet indicate a sublime aspiration4 #h4 ,^! obs]vations %[ t we d n conf\nd ! philosophy ( to-day ) t ( ! pa/ c5tury2 t we d n reg>d ! pan!ism ( to-day z a pure mat]ialism1 & t1 not)/&+ ! a!ism ( :i* we accuse ! doctr9e ( c]ta9 philosoph]s1 we d n d5y t !y h1 ev5 9 ! mid/ ( _! extravagance1 pres]v$ a k9d ( horror ( x1 & t1 lo/ z !y are 9 ! labyr9? ( _! speculations1 !y seek ! ?read :i* %all conduct !m to ! gates ( tru?4 #i4 ,?is act ( ju/ice we will+ly r5d] to mod]n philosoph]s1 b x w n prev5t u f combat+ _! pret5sion to a m]it !y d n possess4 ,!y /yle !mselves re/or]s ( ! spirituality ( ! s\l1 & ( human lib]ty2 & :5 !y speak ( ,god !y almo/ exact a tribute ( gratitude f him = hav+ replac$ him ^u 8 ?rone4 ,be=e mak+ su* pr\d pret5sions !y ought to h consid]$ t !y are ev5 yet f> f ! tru? ) respect bo? to ,god & to man1 n only z ,*ri/ianity has at all times taught x1 b also z ! mo/ illu/ri\s mod]n philosoph]s h pr(ess$ x4 ,!y are ambiti\s to be call$ re/or]s1 b _! re/oration ) its lic5ti\s frequ5cy is a new revolution1 at times z t]rible z ! evil x attempts to combat4 #aj4 ,ano!r consid]ation ought to h mod]at$ _! zeal to be ?\ght inv5tors1 :i* is t !y h said no?+ conc]n+ ,god1 ! human m9d1 ?\ght1 ideas1 ! lib]ty ( freewill1 :i* may n be read 9 all ! works ( ! philosoph]s :o fl\ri%$ be=e1 or ev5 9 ! beg9n+ (1 ! eighte5? c5tury4 ,op5 ! text-books ( ! s*ools1 & y w f9d _m ?+s :i* !y w\ld h u believe to be important discov]ies4 ,! great philosoph]s glori$ 9 kn[+ :at !y _h be=e le>n$ :5 *ildr54 ,! philosophical tradition ( s\nd ideas 0 n int]rupt$ dur+ ! pa/ c5tury4 ,9 _m p>ts ( ,europe s*ools exi/$ :i* taught !m ) scrupul\s fidelity4 ,& besides human s*ools1 !re 0 t ( ! ,god-,man1 ! ,*ur* ( ,jesus ,*ri/1 :i*1 among its sup]natural dogmas1 pres]v$ ev5 natural tru?s1 not)/&+ ! s5seless ef=ts :i* h be5 made to oblit]ate !m4 #aa4 ,to :at1 !n1 are ! inv5tion & re/oration r$uc$8 ,inv5tion !re is n1 ei!r ) respect to ,god1 to ! human m9d1 or to morality1 = no?+ true has be5 said ( !m :i* _h n already be5 said4 ,re/oration1 prop]ly s call$1 !re is n2 = :at does n p]i% _c be re/or$4 ,! tru? exi/s2 & has be5 kn[n & rev]$ dur+ ! :ole six ?\s& ye>s x has refus$ to b[ ! knee to ,baal4 ,let n des]t]s say1 :5 !y turn & come back to ! tru? t !y h re/or$ x1 b t !y h recov]$ x2 n t !y give1 b t !y receive x2 n t !y enlight5 ! _w1 b t !y are bl9d1 & t x is ! goodness ( ,provid5ce :i* op5s _! eyes to ! light4 ,,*apt] ,,ii4 ,,importance ,,& ,,anomaly ,,( ,,! ,,que/ions ,,on ,,! ,,idea ,,( ,,! ,,inf9ite4 #ab4 ,! exam9ation ( ! idea ( ! inf9ite is ( ! highe/ importance1 n only because we meet x 9 v>i\s sci5ces1 ! exact sci5ces among o!rs1 b because x is "o ( ! pr9cipal *>act]i/ics by :i* we di/+ui% ,god f creatures4 ,a f9ite ,god w\ld be no ,god2 an inf9ite creature w\ld n be a creature4 ,9 ! scale ( f9ite be+s we discov] a gradation1 by :i* !y are int]l9k$2 ! less p]fect1 z !y are p]fect$1 g on approa*+ ! p]fect2 & !re are1 pres]v+ ! limits ( ea* "o's nature1 po9ts ( comp>ison by :i* we may measure _! respective di/ances4 ,betwe5 ! f9ite & ! inf9ite !re is no comp>ison2 all measures are inadequate & z no?+4 ,we pass f an imp]ceptible drop to an imm5se ocean2 f ! atom :i* escapes obs]vation to ! abundance ( matt] diffus$ ?r\gh all space2 & mu* z ^! transitions express1 !y are z no?+ to ! transition f ! f9ite to ! inf9ite2 ^! oceans1 comp>$ ) ! inf9ite tru?1 become 9 _! turn imp]ceptible drops1 & ?us an int]m9able scale baffles ! ef=ts ( ! m9d 9 se>* ( some?+ to correspond to its idea4 ,! exam9ation ( ! idea ( ! inf9ite ought to occupy an important place 9 ! /udy ( philosophy1 al?\gh x s]v$ = no o!r purpose ?an ! contemplation ( inf9ite greatness4 #ac4 ,! disputes on ! idea ( ! inf9ite1 n only 9 relation to its nature1 b also to its exi/5ce1 pres5t a /range anomaly4 ,if x exi/s 9 our m9d x ought to fill x entirely1 s t x mu/ be impossible to cease to p]ceive x4 ,yet x is well kn[n t philosoph]s dispute ev5 on ! exi/5ce ( ?is idea2 al?\gh x is an inf9ite treasure1 ^? :o possess x d\bt its reality--j z ! h]oes 9 romance1 :5 !y f9d !mselves 9 a ca/le ri*ly & spl5didly adorn$1 imag9e x ! effect ( en*antm5t4 #ad4 ,! m]e dispute z to :e!r ! idea ( ! inf9ite be positive or negative1 is equival5t to ! "q ( its exi/5ce4 ,if x is negative1 x expresses an abs5ce ( be+2 if positive1 ! pl5itude ( be+4 ,:at "q c be m vital to an idea ?an ! dispute :e!r x repres5ts ! abs5ce or ! pl5itude ( be+8 #ae4 ,"h aga9 we meet ! fact :i* we h obs]v$ 9 ! prec$+ discussions4 ,reason1 aft] digg+ at its own f\ndations1 is ?reat5$ ) dea? "u ! ru9s ( its l(tie/ edifices4 ,,*apt] ,,iii4 ,,h ,,we ,,! ,,idea ,,( ,,! ,,inf9ite8 #af4 ,if we _h no idea ( ! inf9ite1 ! ^w w\ld h no mean+ to u1 & :5 us$ x w\ld n be und]/ood4 #ag4 ,:atev] may be ! nature & p]fection ( our idea ( ! inf9ite1 x is c]ta9 t x involves some?+ fix$1 & common to all intellig5ces4 ,we apply ! idea to ?+s ( v diff]5t ord]s1 & x is always und]/ood 9 ! same s5se by all m54 ,ev5 ! difficulty we f9d 9 attempt+ to expla9 x1 9 itself or 9 its applications1 proce$s f ! idea itself2 x is a difficulty :i* we all meet )1 because we all conceive 9 ! same mann] :at is und]/ood by ! inf9ite1 tak5 9 g5]al4 #ah4 ,inf9ite & indef9ite express v diff]5t mean+s4 ,! inf9ite implies ! abs5ce ( limits2 ! indef9ite implies t ^! limits retire cont9ually f u2 x ab/racts _! exi/5ce1 & only says t !y _c be assign$4 #ai4 ,:atev] exi/s is f9ite or inf9ite2 = x ei!r has limits or x has n3 9 ! fir/ case1 x is f9ite2 9 ! second1 inf9ite3 !re is no m$ium betwe5 yes & no4 #bj4 ,h5ce1 prop]ly speak+1 !re is 9 reality no?+ indef9ite2 ?is ^w only expresses a mode ( conceiv+ ?+s1 or r a vagu5ess 9 ! conception1 or indecision 9 ! judgm5t4 ,:5 we d n "k ! limits ( any ?+1 &1 on ! o!r h&1 d n d>e to affirm its inf9ity1 we call x indef9ite4 ,?us1 space is call$ indef9ite by ^? :o see no way ( assign+ a limit to x1 & yet are unwill+ to say t x is inf9ite4 ,ev5 9 ord9>y language we call a ?+ indef9ite :i* has no limits assign$ to x2 ?us1 we say a concession has be5 made = an indef9ite "t1 al?\gh x is limit$ to "s "t :i* has n be5 det]m9$4 #ba4 ,! idea ( ! inf9ite does n consi/ 9 conceiv+ t ano!r quantity may always be add$ to a giv5 quantity1 or t a p]fection may be made m int5se2 ?is expresses only ! possibility ( a s]ies ( conceptions by :i* we endeavor to approa* ! absolute idea ( ! inf9ite4 ,x is easy to see t ! absolute idea is some?+ di/9ct f ^? conceptions1 because we reg>d x z a type to :i* ! s]ies ( connections is ref]r$1 b :i* x c nev] equal1 no matt] h[ greatly prolong$4 #bb4 ,let u consid] ! words 9 :i* we naturally express :at passes )9 u :5 we ?9k ( ! inf9ite4 ,:at is an inf9ite l9e8 ,a l9e :i* has no limits4 ,is x a million1 or a billion miles 9 l5g?8 ,!re is no numb] to express its l5g?2 x w always be great] ?an ! numb]4 ,b d we n approa* ! inf9ite 9 proportion z we prolong a f9ite l9e8 ,c]ta9ly1 9 s f> z approa*+ means only plac+ quantities :i* are f\nd 9 :at we approa*2 b n 9 s f> z x means t ?is diff]5ce c be assign$4 ,!re is no comp>ison betwe5 ! f9ite & ! inf9ite2 & !re=e x is n possible to assign ! diff]5ce betwe5 !m4 ,w\ld an inf9ite l9e be =m$ by ! addition ( all f9ite l9es8 ,no2 = we c conceive ! multiplication ( ea* ( ! t]ms ( ! addition1 & !re=e an increase 9 ! inf9ite1 :i* w\ld be absurd4 ,w\ld ! inf9ity ( ! l9e consi/ 9 our n kn[+ its limits1 or n ?9k+ ( !m8 ,no2 b 9 its n hav+ !m4 #bc4 ,?us1 we see1 t ! idea ( ! inf9ite1 is 9 ! rea* ( ! mo/ common intellects1 & expresses only :at any p]son ( ord9>y und]/&+ w\ld say1 ev5 ?\gh he _h nev] occupi$ himself ) philosophical /udies2 t ! idea ( ! inf9ite is 9 our und]/&+1 z a con/ant type1 to :i* all f9ite repres5tations are unable to arrive4 ,we "k ! conditions :i* mu/ be fulfill$1 b at ! same "t1 we see ! impossibility ( fulfill+ !m4 ,:5 any "o tries to p]suade u ( ! contr>y1 we reflect on ! idea ( ! inf9ite1 & say3 ,no2 x is a contradiction ( inf9ity2 x is n inf9ite1 b f9ite4 ,we di/+ui% p]fectly well betwe5 ! abs5ce ( ! p]ception ( ! limit & its non-exi/5ce4 ,if any "o tries to make u conf\nd ^! two ideas1 we answ]1 ,no2 !y mu/ n be conf\nd$2 !re is a great diff]5ce betwe5 our n p]ceiv+ an object & ! non-exi/5ce ( t object1 & we are n n[ exam9+ :e!r we conceive ! limit1 b :e!r x exi/s4 ,?\gh ! limit retire & hide itself1 s to speak1 f our eyes1 we are n deceiv$3 x exi/s1 or does n exi/4 ,if x exi/s1 ! condition involv$ 9 ! conception ( inf9ity is n fulfill$1 & ! object is n inf9ite1 b f9ite2 if x does n exi/1 !re is true inf9ity1--! condition is compli$ )4 #bd4 ,:5 ! idea ( ! inf9ite is consid]$ 9 g5]al1 x c nev] be conf\nd$ ) ! idea ( ! f9ite4 ,!re is a l9e :i* divides !m1 & :i* prev5ts all error2 = x is ! pr9ciple ( contradiction itself2 x is ! di/9ction betwe5 yes & no4 ,:5 we say f9ite1 we affirm ! limit2 :5 we say inf9ite1 we d5y x4 ,no ideas c be cle>] or m exact4 ,,*apt] ,,iv4 ,,! ,,limit4 #be4 ,! ^w inf9ite is equival5t to n f9ite1 & seems to express a negation4 ,b negations are n always truly su*1 al?\gh ! t]ms imply x2 = if t :i* is d5i$1 be a negation1 ! d5ial ( x is an affirmation4 ,?is is ! reason :y two negatives are said to be equival5t to an affirmative4 ,if ,i say1 x has n v>i$1 & y d5y x1 y d5y my negation2 = x is ! same ?+ to d5y t x has n v>i$1 z to affirm t x has v>i$4 ,9 ord]1 !re=e1 to det]m9e :e!r ! ^w inf9ite expresses a true negative1 we mu/ "k :at is meant by ! ^w f9ite4 #bf4 ,! f9ite is t :i* has a limit4 ,a limit is ! t]m beyond :i* !re is no?+ ( ! object limit$4 ,! limits ( a l9e1 are ! po9ts beyond :i* ! l9e does n ext5d2 ! limit ( a numb]1 is ! extreme :]e ! numb] /ops2 ! limit ( human k1 is ! po9t to :i* we may arrive1 b :i* we _c g beyond4 ,a limit be+ a negation1 to d5y a limit1 is to d5y a negation1 & is consequ5tly an affirmation4 #bg4 ,x is easy to see f ^! examples1 t a limit 9 ! ord9>y s5se1 expresses an idea di/9ct f :at ma!maticians def9e x4 ,!y call a limit e expression1 :e!r f9ite1 inf9ite1 or a nullity1 :i* a quantity may cont9ually approa* )\t ev] rea*+4 ,?us1 ! value #j_/;a is ! limit ( ! decrem5t ( a fraction1 ! num]ator ( :i* is v>iable x_/a2 because1 if we suppose ,x to be con/antly dim9i%+1 ! fraction w approa* ! expression #j_/;a1 )\t ev] be+ conf\nd$ ) x1 s long z ,x does n entirely disappe>4 ,if we suppose 7b x7_/a an expression 9 :i* ,x is decreas+1 ! expression w cont9ually approa* 7b #j7_/;a b_/a1 :i* w be ! limit ( ! fraction4 ,if we suppose ! expression a_/x1 9 :i* ,x is decreas+1 we %all cont9ually approa* ! expression a_/#j 1 an inf9ite value :i* ! fraction c nev] atta91 until ,x becomes #j1 :i* _c happ51 because ,x is a true quantity4 ,^! examples %[ t ma!maticians admit limits :i* are f9ite1 inf9ite1 or a nullity1 & prove t ma!maticians employ ! ^w limit 9 a diff]5t s5se f its ord9>y z well z philosophical mean+4 #bh4 ,a limit1 !re=e1 expresses a true negation1 & ! ^w f9ite1 or limit$1 necess>ily involves a negative idea4 ,t :i* is n1 is n limit$2 !re=e ! f9ite is n an absolute negation4 ,an absolute negation is no?+1 & we d n call ! f9ite no?+4 ,!re=e1 9 ! idea ( f9ite are conta9$ be+1 & a negation ( ano!r be+4 ,a l9e "o foot 9 l5g?1 involves ! positive value ( "o foot1 & ! negation ( all value ( m ?an a foot4 ,!re=e1 ! f9ite1 9 s f> z f9ite1 involves a negation relatively to a be+4 ,if we c\ld express ?is idea 9 ! ab/ract1 us+ ! ^w f9ity1 z we h ! ^w inf9ity1 we %\ld say t f9ity 9 itself expresses only ! negation ( be+ relatively to a be+4 #bi4 ,h5ce1 ! ^w inf9ite is n negative2 = x is ! negation ( a negation4 ,! inf9ite is ! n-f9ite2 x is t :i* has no negation ( be+1 consequ5tly t :i* possesses all be+4 #cj4 ,we h1 !re=e1 an idea ( ! inf9ite1 & ?is idea is n a pure negation4 ,b x mu/ n be suppos$ t we h arriv$ at ! la/ t]m ( ! analysis ( ! inf9ite4 ,we are /ill f> f x1 & x is ev5 d\btful :e!r we %all obta9 any satisfactory result aft] long inve/igations4 ,,*apt] ,v4 ,,consid]ations ,,on ,,! ,,application ,,( ,,! ,,idea ,,( ,,! ,,inf9ite ,,to ,,cont9u\s ,,quantities1 ,,& ,,to ,,discrete ,,quantities1 ,,9 ,,s ,,f> ,,z ,,^! ,,la/ ,,are ,,express$ ,,9 ,,s]ies4 #ca4 ,"o ( ! *>act]i/ic prop]ties ( ! idea ( ! inf9ite is application to diff]5t ord]s4 ,?is gives occasion to "s important consid]ations :i* greatly assi/ to make ?is idea cle> 9 our m9d4 #cb4 ,f ! po9t :]e ,i am situat$ ,i draw a l9e 9 ! direction ( ! nor?2 x is evid5t t ,i may prolong ?is l9e inf9itely4 ,?is l9e is great] ?an any f9ite l9e c be2 = ! f9ite l9e mu/ h a det]m9ate value1 & !re=e1 if plac$ on ! inf9ite l9e1 w rea* only to a c]ta9 po9t4 ,?is l9e1 !re=e1 seems to be /rictly inf9ite 9 all ! =ce ( ! ^w1 because !re is no m$ium betwe5 ! f9ite & ! inf9ite1 & we h %[n t x is n f9ite1 s9ce x is great] ?an any f9ite l9e2 !re=e x mu/ be inf9ite4 ,?is demon/ration seems to leave no?+ to be desir$2 yet !re is a conclusive argum5t aga9/ ! inf9ity ( ?is l9e4 ,! inf9ite has no limits1 & ?is l9e has a limit1 because1 />t+ f ! po9t f :i* x is drawn 9 ! direction ( ! nor?1 x does n ext5d 9 ! direction ( ! s\?4 #cc4 ,?is l9e is great] ?an any f9ite l9e2 b we may f9d ano!r l9e great] /ill4 ,if we suppose x produc$ 9 ! direction ( ! s\?1 x w be great] by h[ mu* x is produc$ t[>ds ! s\?2 & if x be inf9itely produc$ 9 ?is direction1 its l5g? w be twice t ( ! fir/ l9e4 #cd4 ,by ! inf9ite prolongation ( a l9e 9 two opposite directions we seem to obta9 an absolutely inf9ite l9e2 = we _c conceive a l9eal value great] ?an t ( a "r l9e inf9itely prolong$ 9 opposite directions4 ,b x is n s3 by ! side ( ?is "r l9e ano!r may be drawn1 ei!r f9ite or inf9ite1 & ! sum ( ! two w =m a l9eal value great] ?an t ( ! fir/ l9e2 !re=e t l9e is n inf9ite1 because x is possible to f9d ano!r /ill great]4 ,& z1 on ! o!r h&1 we may draw inf9ite l9es & prolong !m inf9itely1 x foll[s t none ( !m c =m an inf9ite l9eal value1 because x is only a "p ( ! l9eal sum result+ f ! addition ( all ! l9es4 #ce4 ,reflect+ on ?is app>5t contradiction 9 our ideas1 we discov] t ! idea ( ! inf9ite is indet]m9ate1 & consequ5tly susceptible ( diff]5t applications4 ,?us1 9 ! pres5t in/ance1 x _c be d\bt$ t ! "r l9e1 prolong$ to inf9ity1 has "s inf9ity1 s9ce x is c]ta9 t x has no limit 9 its respective directions4 #cf4 ,?is example w\ld lead u to believe t ! idea ( ! inf9ite repres5ts no?+ absolute to u2 because ev5 among ^? objects :i* are pres5t$ ! mo/ cle>ly to our m9d1 su* z ! objects ( s5sible intuition1 we f9d inf9ity "u "o aspect :i* is contradict$ "o by ano!r4 #cg4 ,:at we h obs]v$ ( l9eal values is also true ( num]ical values express$ 9 s]ies4 ,ma!matics speak ( inf9ite s]ies1 b !re c be no su* s]ies4 ,let ! s]ies be a1 b1 c1 d1 e1 44443 x is call$ inf9ite if its t]ms cont9ue ad inf9itum4 ,x _c be d5i$ t ! s]ies is inf9ite "u "o aspect2 = !re is no limit :i* puts an end to x 9 "o s5se2 b x is evid5t t ! numb] ( its t]ms w nev] be inf9ite1 because !re are o!rs great]2 su*1 = in/ance1 is ! s]ies cont9u$ f left to "r1 if cont9u$ f "r to left at ! same "t1 9 ?is mann]3 4444444444 e1 d1 c1 b1 a1 b1 c1 d1 e1 4444444444 ,9 ?is case ! numb] ( t]ms is evid5tly twice z great z 9 ! fir/ s]ies4 ,!re=e ! s]ies :i* are call$ inf9ite are n inf9ite1 & _c be s1 9 ! /rict s5se ( ! t]m4 #ch4 ,b :at is /ill m /range is1 t ! s]ies is n inf9ite1 ev5 ?\gh we suppose x cont9u$ 9 opposite directions2 = by its side we may imag9e ano!r1 & ! sum ( ! t]ms ( bo? w be great] ?an ! t]ms ( ei!r2 !re=e nei!r w be inf9ite4 ,z x is evid5t t :atev] be ! s]ies1 we c always imag9e o!rs1 x foll[s t !re c be no inf9ite s]ies 9 ! s5se 9 :i* ma!maticians use ! ^w s]ies to express a cont9uation ( t]ms1 n exclud+ ! possibility ( o!r cont9uations besides ! suppos$ inf9ite cont9uation4 #ci4 ,! objections aga9/ l9eal inf9ity apply equally to surfaces4 ,if we suppose an inf9ite plane1 x is evid5t t we c describe an inf9ity ( planes di/9ct f ! fir/ pla9 & int]sect+ x 9 a v>iety ( angles2 ! sum ( all ^! surfaces w be great] ?an any "o ( !m4 ,!re=e ! inf9ite ext5sion ( a pla9 9 all directions does n con/itute a truly inf9ite surface4 #dj4 ,a solid exp&+ 9 all directions seems to be inf9ite2 b if we consid] t ! ma!matical idea ( a solid does n involve imp5etrability1 we %all see t inside ( ! fir/ solid a second may be plac$1 :i*1 add$ to ! fir/1 w give a value d\ble t ( ! fir/ alone4 ,let ,s be ! empty space :i* we imag9e to be inf9ite2 & let ,w be a _w ( equal ext5sion plac$ 9 x & fill+ x2 x is evid5t t ,s ,w are great] ?an ,s alone4 ,!re=e1 al?\gh we suppose ,s to be inf9ite1 1 ,w also 2 !re=e ,s ,w #b 4 ,& z ?is value expresses ! size1 ! fir/ is n inf9ite because x c be d\bl$4 ,if we take ! imp5etrability1 ! op]ation may proce$ ad inf9itum4 ,!re=e ! fir/ inf9ite1 f> f be+ inf9ite1 seems to be a quantity susceptible ( inf9ite increase4 ,,*apt] ,,vi4 ,,orig9 ,,( ,,! ,,vagu5ess ,,& ,,app>5t ,,contradictions ,,9 ,,! ,,application ,,( ,,! ,,idea ,,( ,,! ,,inf9ite4 #da4 ,! difficulties 9 ! application ( ! idea ( inf9ity1 seem on ! "o h&1 to prove t ei!r ?is idea does n exi/ 9 u1 or is v confus$2 & on ! o!r h&1 t we possess x1 & 9 a v p]fect degree4 ,:y d we discov] t numb]s are n inf9ite1 al?\gh at fir/ !y seem to be8 ,:y d we d5y ! inf9ity ( c]ta9 dim5sions1 not)/&+ _! inf9ite prolongation 9 "o s5se8 ,because1 on exam9+ ^! objects1 we f9d t !y d n correspond to ! type ( inf9ity4 ,if ?is type did n exi/ 9 our m9d1 h[ c\ld x be possible = u to make use ( x8 ,h[ c\ld we comp>e be+s ) x1 if we did n "k x8 ,is x possible to "k :5 any ?+ arrives at a turn1 if we h no idea ( t turn8 ,x is comp>+ )\t a po9t ( comp>ison2 t is1 x is ex]cis+ a contradictory act4 #db4 ,al?\gh ^! argum5ts 9 favor ( ! exi/5ce ( ! idea ( ! inf9ite1 if we exam9e our own m9d1 we _c d5y t we f9d !re a c]ta9 vagu5ess & confusion :i* inspire /rong d\bts z to ! reality ( ?is idea4 ,:at is pres5t$ to our m9d1 :5 we ?9k ( ! inf9ite8 ,! imag9ation ab&on$ to itself1 ext5ds space1 exp&s dim5sions1 multiplies numb]s indef9itely1 b x (f]s no?+ to ! intellect :i* has ! m>ks ( inf9ity4 ,if we leave ! imag9ation1 & reg>d ! und]/&+ only1 x gives a type by :i* to judge ( ! inf9ity or n-inf9ity ( ! objects pres5t$ to x1 b if we reflect on ! type itself1 x loses ! cle>ness x possess$ be=e1 & we ev5 ask if ! type really exi/s4 #dc4 ,d we1 !re=e1 d5y ! exi/5ce ( ?is idea8 are we go+ to r5\nce our int5tion ( expla9+ x8 ,we d nei!r4 ,i believe t x is necess>y to admit ! idea1 t x is n impossible to expla9 x1 & t we may ev5 po9t out ! reason ( its obscurity4 #dd4 ,be=e pass+ fur!r1 ,i wi% to obs]ve1 t "o ( ! causes ( ! difficulties 9 ! explanation ( ! idea ( ! inf9ite1 arises f our n di/+ui%+ ! intuitive f ! ab/ract cognition4#cf ,_m difficulties w\ld be avoid$ by att5d+ to ?is di/9ction4 ,:5 we say t ! idea ( ! inf9ite is n intuitive1 b ab/ract1 we give ! key to ! solution ( ! pr9cipal objections br\ght aga9/ x4 #cf ,see ,book ,v41 ,*4 ,,xi4 #de4 ,we h no intuitive idea ( inf9ity2 t is to say1 ?is idea does n pres5t to our m9d an inf9ite object2 we c h ?is intuition only :5 we see ! ess5ce ( ,god1 :i* w happ5 9 a future life4 #df4 ,if we _h n[ ! intuition ( an inf9ite object1 we %\ld see its p]fections z !y are1 ) _! true m>ks2 or r1 we %\ld see h[ all ! p]fections disp]s$ among limit$ be+s1 are unit$ 9 "o inf9ite p]fection4 ,we c\ld n ref] ! idea ( ! inf9ite to det]m9ate objects1 z1 = example1 to ext5sion1 because ^! objects contradict ! idea4 ,x w\ld be impossible = u to modify ! idea 9 diff]5t ways1 & apply x fir/ 9 "o s5se1 & !n 9 ano!r v diff]5t s5se4 ,! idea is "o1 & simple2 x w\ld1 !re=e1 always relate to an object :i* is also "o & simple1 n vague & indet]m9ate1 z n[1 b ) ! det]m9ation ( a necess>y exi/5ce & an inf9ite p]fection4 ,we %\ld h intuition ( inf9ite be+1 z we h intuition ( ! facts ( our consci\sness3 our cognition ( x w\ld be t ( an object em95tly incommunicable1 z pr$icate to any ord] ( f9ite be+s2 & x w\ld be z manife/ a contradiction1 to apply ! idea ( ?is inf9ity to any numb] or ext5sion1 z x w\ld be to id5tify an act ( our consci\sness ) ext]nal objects4 #dg4 ,! indet]m9ate "* 9 :i* ! idea ( ! inf9ite is pres5t$ u1 & ! ease ) :i* we modify x 9 v>i\s ways1 & apply x to diff]5t objects1 9 diff]5t s5ses1 proves t ?is idea is n intuitive1 b ab/ract & indet]m9ate1 t x is "o ( ^? g5]al conceptions1 by ! aid ( :i* ! m9d obta9s a c]ta9 k n af=d$ by intuition4 ,?is w expla9 ! orig9 ( ! vagu5ess ( our idea ( inf9ity4 ,indet]m9ate conceptions1 & because !y are indet]m9ate1 relate to no p>ticul> object1 or quality1 :i* may be conceiv$ by itself alone1 z some?+ :i* may be realiz$2 !y d n conta9 ^? det]m9ations :i* fix our cognition 9 an absolute mann]4 ,! indet]m9ate mann] 9 :i* !y pres5t any prop]ty ( be+s1 causes a diff]5ce 9 ! application1 accord+ly z ! p>ticul> prop]ties1 :i* are comb9$ ) ! g5]al1 are diff]5t4 ,if we take a "r-angle triangle1 9 :i* we "k ! measure ( all ! sides & angles1 ! det]m9at5ess ( ! idea avoids ! vagu5ess ( ! intellect1 & prev5ts ! application ( ?is idea to cases diff]5t f t :i* is det]m9ate & fix$4 ,b if we take a "r-angle1 9 g5]al1 )\t det]m9+ ! value ( its sides & angles1 its applications may be inf9ite4 ,! m g5]al & indet]m9ate ! idea ( a triangle becomes1 ! great] is ! v>iety ( its applications4 #dh4 ,indet]m9ate ideas1 9 ord] to repres5t any ?+1 mu/ be appli$ to "s prop]ty :i* is ! condition ( _! actual or possible realization4 ,until ?is application is made1 !y are pure intellectual =ms1 :i* repres5t no?+ det]m9ate4 ,i d n mean by ?is1 t ^! ideas are empty conceptions1 :i* _c be appli$ outside ( ! s5sible ord]1 z 0 ma9ta9$ by ,kant2#cg b only t grant+ !m an univ]sal value1 ,i d5y t !y h by !mselves alone a value repres5tative ( any ?+ t c be realiz$1 beyond ! prop]ty :i* !y express4 ,! idea ( a pure triangle c n be realiz$1 = e real triangle w\ld conta9 some?+ m ?an is 9 ! idea3 x w\ld be a "r-angl$ or oblique-angl$1 etc41 all :i*1 ! pure idea ab/racts4 ,! object w be indet]m9ate1 9 proportion to ! indet]m9at5ess ( ! prop]ties conta9$ 9 ! conception2 consequ5tly1 t :i* is pres5t$ to ! und]/&+ w also be m vague1 & ! applications :i* may be made ( ! idea1 w be m v>i$ & num]\s1 z is ! case 9 ! ideas ( be+1 n-be+1 limit1 & ! l4 #cg ,see ,book ,v41 ,*apt]s ,,xiv41 ,,xv41 & ,,xvi4 ,,*apt] ,,vii4 ,,fundam5tal ,,explanation ,,( ,,! ,,ab/ract ,,idea ,,( ,,! ,,inf9ite4 #di4 ,suppos+ t our idea ( ! inf9ite is n intuitive b ab/ract1 let u see h[ its true nature may be expla9$4 ,we h ! ideas ( be+ & ( its opposite1 n-be+2 ^! ideas consid]$ 9 !mselves are g5]al1 indet]m9ate1 & may be appli$ to e ?+ :i* is subject$ to our exp]i5ce4 ,we may affirm & d5y some?+ ( e limit$ be+3 we may affirm :at x is3 we may d5y :at x is n3 ! limit is only conceiv$ z su* :5 some?+ is d5i$ ( x4 #ej4 ,! activity ( our be+ is unceas+1 b x is limit$ by ! abs5ce or ! resi/ance ( objects2 ! ext]nal _w is an assemblage ( be+s pres5t+ a great v>iety ( limitations4 ,!re=e bo? int]nal & ext]nal exp]i5ce give u ! idea ( ! f9ite1 t is1 ( a be+ :i* involves "s n-be+4 ,! brute has s5sible p]ception1 b no und]/&+3 x is s5sitive1 & h]e9 x has be+2 x is n intellig5t1 & h]e9 x is limit$4 ,man is s5sitive & intellig5t2 ! limit ( ! brute is n ! limit ( man4 ,among intellig5t be+s "s und]/& m ?an o!rs2 !re=e ! limit ( all is n ! same4 #ea4 ,s9ce we f9d a limit 9 bo? int]nal & ext]nal exp]i5ce1 x is evid5t t we c =m ! g5]al idea ( limit1 t is1 ( a negation appli$ to an object4 #eb4 ,! same exp]i5ce tea*es t :at is ! limit ( "s ?+s is n ! limit ( o!rs1 & t ! limit appli$ to "o object mu/ be d5i$ ( ano!r4 ,:5 we comp>e diff]5t be+s toge!r1 we frequ5tly f9d ourselves d5y+ c]ta9 limits4 ,z our und]/&+ has ! faculty ( g5]aliz+1 x is evid5t t we may conceive 9 g5]al ! negation ( c]ta9 limits1 & =m an indet]m9ate conception1 includ+ ! two ideas ( negation & limit4 #ec4 ,i d n see :at objection c be made ei!r to ! possibility or to ! exi/5ce ( ?is conception2 b z ?is fact is necess>y = ! explanation ( ! idea ( inf9ity1 ,i %all make "s fur!r obs]vations = ! purpose ( confirm+ x4 ,we h an idea ( negation 9 g5]al2 ?is is a primitive fact ( our m9d3 )\t x no negative judgm5ts w\ld be possible1 nor c\ld we ev5 "k ! pr9ciple ( contradiction4 ,x is impossible = any ?+ to be & n be at ! same "t2 :5 we say n be we express a negation1 we !re=e h ! conception ( negation4 ,?is conception is g5]al1 because x involves no det]m9ation2 we speak ( n-be+ )\t apply+ x to any p>ticul> object1 nor ev5 to any det]m9ate species or g5us4 ,!re=e ! conception ( negation is g5]al & absolutely undet]m9$4 #ed4 ,we h ! idea ( limit2 =1 z we h se51 x is a negation appli$ to a be+4 ,we h also ! idea ( ! negation ( limit2 = j z we conceive ! limit z appli$ or applicable1 we may & d conceive x z n appli$ or n applicable4 ,at e mom5t we d5y c]ta9 limits2 ?is idea g5]aliz$ becomes ! negation 9 g5]al ( limit 9 g5]al4 #ee4 ,aft] ^! rem>ks we may e/abli% :at is conta9$ 9 ! idea ( ! inf9ite4 ,?is idea is a g5]al conception involv+ ! conception ( be+ 9 g5]al1 & ! negation ( limit 9 g5]al4 ,! union ( ^! two conceptions con/itutes ! ab/ract idea ( ! inf9ite4 #ef4 ,! g5]al conception ( ! negation ( limit gives u an idea ( inf9ity 9 ! ab/ract1 b n any inf9ite ?+4 ,)\t ! intuitive cognition ( an inf9ite object1 & ) only a v imp]fect idea ( x1 we may speak ( inf9ity )\t fall+ into contradiction1 & det]m9e ! cases 9 :i* x may be appli$ to a be+ or to an ord] ( be+s1 :e!r real or possible4 ,man has _m ideas ( ?is vague k9d1 :i* nev]!less answ] 8 necessities4 ,we %all make ?is palpable by examples4 #eg4 ,suppose we take an un$ucat$ p]son & po9t out to him a numb] ( le>n$ m51 tell+ him t "o ( !m kn[s m ?an all ! re/4 ,! un$ucat$ p]son has no idea ( :at ! man kn[s :o kn[s ! mo/1 nor ! man :o kn[s ! lea/2 he has no idea ( ! degrees ( sci5ce1 nor ( :at sci5ce itself is2 b he possesses ! g5]al ideas ( degree1 ( m & less1 & also ( k1 & ?is enables him to speak1 )\t contradiction or confusion1 ( ! great] sci5ce ( ! "o & ! less sci5ce ( ! o!rs1 & ev5 to solve ) c]ta9ty ! que/ions conc]n+ ! sci5ce ( ^? individuals1 9 s f> z ^! que/ions are conta9$ 9 ! g5]al idea t ! sci5ce ( "o is great] ?an t ( all ! o!rs4 ,a s]vant 9 an e/abli%m5t :]e ! mo/ beautiful products ( art are collect$1 may speak ( !m all )\t contradiction or confusion1 al?\gh he may be incapable ( kn[+ _! m]it1 & entirely ignorant ( ! circum/ances :i* con/itute ! beauty ( ! objects4 ,x is suffici5t = him to h ! idea ( p]fection or beauty 9 g5]al1 & to arrange by c]ta9 arbitr>y signs ! degrees ( p]fection or beauty ( ! objects1 9 ord] to be able to po9t !m out to visitors1 & talk ( ! great] skill ( "o arti/1 ! poor] success ( ano!r2 ! great] effect & value ( ! works ( ! =m]1 & ! inf]iority ( ^? ( ! second1 & to make o!r rem>ks ( a simil> nature1 :i* at fir/ might make u suppose him a consummate arti/1 or1 at ! lea/1 an amateur ( a great intellect & exquisite ta/e4 #eh4 ,x w\ld be easy to %[ by o!r examples1 h[ fruitful "s g5]al ideas are1 & h[ !y may und]go innum]able comb9ations1 )\t pres5t+ any ?+ det]m9ate to ! intellect4 ,?is is precisely :at happ5s ) ! idea ( ! inf9ite3 9 va9 we ask :at !re is )9 u :i* corresponds to x3 ! conception ( be+ 9 g5]al & ( ! negation ( limit pres5t no?+ fix$1 except c]ta9 ab/ract conditions to :i* we cont9ually r$uce ! objects :i* come "u our intuition1 or are pres5t$ to u ) c]ta9 *>act]i/ic prop]ties :i* p]mit u to =m a less vague idea ( ! negation ( limit4 ,,*apt] ,,viii4 ,,! ,,def9ition ,,( ,,inf9ity ,,confirm$ ,,by ,,application ,,to ,,ext5sion4 #ei4 ,we h expla9$ ! idea ( inf9ity 9 g5]al1 by ! indet]m9ate conceptions ( be+ & ! negation ( limit4 ,9 ord] to assure ourselves t ! explanation is well gr\nd$1 & t we h po9t$ out ! ess5tial m>ks ( ! conception1 let u exam9e :e!r _! application to det]m9ate objects corresponds to :at we h e/abli%$ 9 g5]al4 ,if ! idea ( inf9ity is :at we h def9$ x to be1 we may apply x to all objects ( s5sible intuition or ( ! pure und]/&+1 & we %all obta9 ! results :i* we ought to obta91 includ+ ! anomalies already ref]r$ to4#ch #ch ,see ,*ap4 ,v4 #fj4 ,! anomalies1 or1 r1 ! contradictions :i* we seem to f9d 9 ! applications ( ! idea ( ! inf9ite1 :5 any ?+ is pres5t$ to u z inf9ite :i* we aft]w>ds discov] n to be s1 orig9ate 9 ! application ( ?is idea "u diff]5t conditions4 ,?is v>iety w\ld n be possible if ! idea repres5t$ any ?+ det]m9ate2 b z x only conta9s ! negation ( limit 9 g5]al jo9$ to be+ 9 g5]al1 x foll[s t we subject ?is negation to p>ticul> conditions 9 ea* case1 & !re=e :5 we pass to o!r conditions1 ! g5]al idea _c give u ! same result4 #fa4 ,a l9e drawn f ! po9t :]e we are situat$ 9 ! direction ( ! nor?1 & produc$ inf9itely1 gives u an inf9ite & a n-inf9ite4 ,?is contradiction is only app>5t2 !re is really only ! diff]5ce ( result caus$ by ! condition "u :i* ! g5]al idea is appli$4 ,:5 we consid] a l9e inf9itely produc$ t[>ds ! nor?1 we d n apply ! idea ( ! inf9ite to a l9eal value 9 ! ab/ract1 b to a "r l9e />t+ f a po9t & produc$ only 9 "o direction4 ,! result is :at x %\ld be4 ,! negation ( limit is affirm$ "u a condition2 ! inf9ite :i* results is subject to t condition4 ,x may be said t !re is no m$ium betwe5 ! inf9ite & ! n-inf9ite2 b x is easy to solve ?is difficulty1 if we obs]ve t yes & no1 to be contradictory1 mu/ be ref]r$ to ! same ?+1 :i* is n ! case :5 ! conditions ( ! object are *ang$4 #fb4 ,if in/ead ( a l9e produc$ 9 "o direction only1 we _h wi%$ to apply ! negation ( limit to a "r l9e 9 g5]al1 x is evid5t t we %\ld h be5 oblig$ to produce ! l9e 9 ! two opposite directions3 :i* w\ld h giv5 u ano!r inf9ite "u a new condition4 ,we h be=e se5 t n ev5 9 ?is case c we h a l9eal value /rictly inf9ite2 because ?is "r l9e only =ms a "p ( ! sum ( l9es :i* we c imag9e4 ,is x !n inf9ite1 or is x n8 ,x is bo?1 if we make ! prop] di/9ction4 ,x w be inf9ite1 or we %all h ! idea ( inf9ity or negation ( limit1 appli$ to a "r l9e alone2 b if in/ead ( "o "r l9e alone1 we take a l9eal value1 )\t any condition1 ! suppos$ l9e w n be inf9ite2 ! negation ( ! limit is n appli$ "u t condition2 ! result mu/ !re=e be diff]5t4 #fc4 ,we f9d ! same anomaly1 if we take two l9es alone4 ,let u suppose a "r l9e inf9itely produc$ 9 bo? directions1 & by its side let u describe a curve ) cont9ual undulations ext5d+ inf9itely 9 a direction p>allel to ! "r l9e4 ,bo? l9es w be inf9ite if we consid] only _! direction1 ab/ract+ _! l9eal value2 b if we reg>d ?is value ! curve is great] ?an ! /raight l9e2 = x is evid5t if we take a "p ( ! curve correspond+ to a "p ( ! /raight l9e1 & ext5d or /raight5 ?is "p ( ! curve1 x w be great] ?an ! correspond+ "p ( ! /raight l9e2 z ?is may be done ?r\gh\t ! :ole l5g? ( ! l9es1 ! l9eal value ( ! curve mu/ be great] ?an t ( ! /raight l9e 9 proportion to ! law ( its undulations4 #fd4 ,?is may suffice to %[ h[ ! idea ( inf9ity may be appli$ "u diff]5t conditions & produce diff]5t results1 )\t any contradiction4 ,:at is inf9ite "u "o aspect is n s "u ano!r aspect2 h5ce we h ! ord]s ( inf9ities :i* figure s l>gely 9 ma!matics2 b ,i say aga9 t ^! contradictions are n susceptible ( any explanation if we attribute an absolute value to ! idea ( ! inf9ite1 in/ead ( consid]+ x z ! ab/ract repres5tation ( ! negation ( limit4 #fe4 ,is x possible to conceive 9 a "r l9e or curve an absolutely inf9ite l5g? or l9eal value1 to :i* we may apply ! negation ( limit absolutely8 ,i ?9k n3 = :atev] be ! l9e "u consid]ation we c always draw o!rs1 :i*1 add$ to ! fir/1 w give a value great] ?an t ( ! fir/ above4 ,?is is a case 9 :i* !re is a contradiction betwe5 ! negation ( limit & ! condition to :i* x is subject$4 ,y dem& a l9eal value to :i* ! negation ( limit may be appli$ absolutely2 & on ! o!r h& y require t ?is l9eal value %\ld be f\nd 9 a det]m9ate l9e1 :i* by ! fact ( its be+ det]m9ate1 excludes ! absolute negation ( limit4 ,! problem supposes contradictory data2 !re=e ! result mu/ be a contradiction4 #ff4 ,:at mu/ we suppose 9 ord] to conceive an absolutely inf9ite l9eal value8 ,we ne$ only suppose no condition :i* excludes ! absolute negation ( limit4 ,we mu/ "h di/+ui% betwe5 ! pure conception & ! s5sible intuition 9 :i* x is express$4 ,! conception ( inf9ite l9eal value exi/s f ! mom5t t we unite ! two g5]al conceptions ( l9eal value & negation ( limit4 ,b ! s5sible intuition1 :i* may repres5t ?is conception1 is n s easy to imag9e1 ev5 9 g5]al4 ,to arrive at x we mu/ imag9e a space )\t any limit2 & !n consid]+ 9 g5]al all ! l9es :e!r "r l9es or curves1 :i* may be drawn 9 x1 9 all directions1 & "u all possible conditions1 we mu/ take ! sum ( all ^! l9eal values2 & ! result w be an absolutely inf9ite l9eal value2 = we %all h appli$ ! negation ( limit )\t any re/riction4 #fg4 ,we may obta9 9 ! same way an inf9ite sup]ficial value2 = x is evid5t t we may apply to x all t we h said ( l9eal values4 #fh4 ,9 all ^! cases we apply ! negation ( limit to ext5sion consid]$ only 9 "s ( its dim5sions4 ,if we wi% to obta9 an absolutely inf9ite ext5sion1 we mu/ ab/ract no dim5sion2 consequ5tly ! absolutely inf9ite ( ?is ord]1 is ext5sion 9 all its dim5sions ) ! absolute negation ( limit4 ,b x is also to be obs]v$ t we mu/ presuppose an absolutely inf9ite value ( ext5sion 9 ord] to obta9 an absolutely inf9ite value ( l9es or surfaces2 because x is equival5t to presuppos+ an inf9ite space 9 :i* ! l9es & surfaces may be drawn 9 all directions & "u all possible conditions4 ,,*apt] ,,ix4 ,,conception ,,( ,,an ,,inf9ite ,,numb]4 #fi4 ,c we conceive an inf9ite numb]8 ,on "o side1 x seems n2 because we d\bt its possibility1 & if we possess$ ?is idea we %\ld h no d\bt ( its exi/5ce4 ,on ! o!r side1 x seems t we c conceive an inf9ite numb]2 = we "k imm$iately :5 a numb] is n inf9ite1 & we c\ld n "k ?is if we _h n ! idea ( inf9ite numb]4 ,our obs]vations on inf9ite s]ies w\ld seem to prove t ! idea ( inf9ite numb] is an illusion2 = we f9d ^? numb]s :i* we believ$ inf9ite1 n to be s4 ,i ?9k ?is "q may be solv$ on ! same pr9ciples z ^? ( ! la/ *apt]4 ,i see no difficulty 9 admitt+ ! idea ( an inf9ite numb]1 nor h[ any contradiction c proce$ f x4 #gj4 ,numb] is a collection ( units2 x is a g5]al idea1 because to conceive ! numb]1 we d n ne$ to "k ( :at class1 or h[ _m ! units may be4 ,! idea ( numb] 9 g5]al ab/racts absolutely all su* det]m9ations4 ,x is evid5t t1 :atev] numb] we imag9e1 we c always conceive ano!r /ill great]1 & if we assign a limit to a numb]1 we c always remove x indef9itely1 s t ! limit ( "o is n ! limit ( ! o!r4 ,to ! idea ( numb]1 we unite ! idea ( a limit & ( ! negation ( ano!r limit4 ,!re=e1 if we unite to ! idea ( numb] 9 g5]al1 ! idea ( ! negation ( limit 9 g5]al1 we %all obta9 ! idea ( an inf9ite numb]4 #ga4 ,:at does ?is idea repres5t8 ,x repres5ts no?+ det]m9ate3 x is an entirely ab/ract conception1 =m$ ( two o!r ab/ract conceptions1 ^? ( numb] & ! negation ( limit4 ,no det]m9ate object corresponds to x2 x is a "w ( our und]/&+ ref]r$ to objects 9 g5]al1 )\t a det]m9ation ( any sort4 ,we may n[ solve ! difficulties previ\sly intimat$4 #gb4 ,:y is a s]ies ( t]ms pres5t$ to u z inf9ite1 :i*1 :5 we exam9e x closely1 we f9d wants "s ( ! m>ks ( inf9ity8 ,because1 9 ! fir/ in/ance1 we apply ! negation ( limit "u a condition :i* we take no notice ( 9 ! second in/ance4 ,set u ! s]ies a1 b1 c1 d1 e1 4444444444 ,x is evid5t t we may cont9ue x inf9itely1 & conceive ! negation ( all limit ( ?is cont9uation3 9 ?is s5se1 ! numb] ( t]ms is inf9ite2 = ! idea ( ! negation ( limit is really appli$ to ! s]ies4 ,:5 we ask if ! numb] ( t]ms is absolutely inf9ite1 we ab/ract ! condition "u :i* we _h unit$ ! negation ( limit4 ,t1 !re=e1 :i* is inf9ite 9 "o in/ance is n s 9 ano!r4 ,/ill !re is n any contradiction because ! yes & ! no ref] to diff]5t suppositions4 #gc4 ,let u take a l9e & measure x by feet4 ,produc+ ?is l9e we multiply ! numb] ( feet2 & we may conceive ! negation ( all limit ( ?is multiplication4 ,! numb] ( feet w !n be inf9ite4 ,if in/ead ( a foot we take an in* z ! unit ( measure1 we %all h a numb] twelve times z great4 ,?is numb] w\ld also be inf9ite1 & ?us we %\ld h two inf9ite numb]s1 "o ( !m great] ?an ! o!r4 ,is !re any contradiction 9 ?is8 ,c]ta9ly n3 !re is only a diff]5t comb9ation ( ideas4 ,9 ! fir/ case1 ! idea ( ! negation ( limit 0 subord9at$ to ! condition ( ! division ( ! l9e into feet3 :]eas1 9 ! second case1 we introduce a diff]5t condition2 ! division ( ! l9e into in*es4 #gd4 ,b1 x may be said1 ^! numb]s1 consid]$ 9 !mselves1 ab/ract$ f _! relation to feet or in*es1 are equal or !y are n equal2 consequ5tly !y are inf9ite or n inf9ite4 ,! objection vani%es z soon z we correct ! error :i* supports x4 ,:5 we ab/ract all relation to det]m9ate divisions1 we consid] numb] 9 g5]al2 on ?is supposition !re are n two cases1 b only "o2 !re _c !n be a relation ( great] or less4 ,we h only ! conception ( numb] 9 g5]al comb9$ ) ! idea ( ! negation ( limit 9 g5]al2 !re=e ! result mu/ be an inf9ite numb] 9 ! ab/ract4 ,! difficulty consi/s 9 a contradiction :i* escapes our sight at fir/4 ,we ab/ract p>ticul> conditions 9 ord] to "k if ! numb]s are 9 !mselves inf9ite or n2 & at ! same "t we d n ab/ract !m1 because x is only 9 ref]5ce to !m t ! objection has any mean+1 s9ce x supposes ! division into v>i\s k9ds ( units4 ,:51 !re=e1 we speak ( p>ticul> numb]s1 & at ! same "t pret5d to consid] !m 9 !mselves1 we fall into a contradiction1 because we take ! numb]s bo? ) & )\t p>ticul> conditions at ! same "t4 #ge4 ,f all t has be5 said1 we may conclude t ! conception ( inf9ite numb]1 ab/ract$ f ! nature & relations ( ! ?+s numb]$1 involves no contradiction1 s9ce x conta9s only ! two ideas ( numb]1 z a collection ( be+s1 & ( ! absolute negation ( limit2 b we _c affirm f ?is alone1 t an inf9ite numb] c be realiz$4 ,inf9ite numb] _c become actual )\t an inf9ite collection ( be+s2 & ^! be+s1 :5 realiz$1 _c be ab/ract be+s1 :i* conta9 no?+ else b be+2 !y mu/ h *>act]i/ic qualities1 & mu/ be subject to ! conditions impos$ by ^! qualities4 ,z we absolutely ab/ract ^! conditions 9 ! g5]al conception1 x is n possible to discov]1 f ! conception alone1 ! contradiction :i* !y may imply4 ,h5ce1 al?\gh !re is no contradiction conta9$ 9 ! conception1 !re may /ill be 9 ! reality4 ,9 ! same mann]1 c]ta9 me*anical !ories are p]fectly conceivable1 b !y _c be r$uc$ to practice on acc\nt ( ! opposition ( ! matt] to :i* !y %\ld be appli$4 ,f9ite be+s are ! matt] on :i* indet]m9ate & metaphysical conceptions are to be realiz$2 ! possibility ( ! conceptions does n absolutely prove ! possibility ( ! be+s4 ,! reality may draw ) x c]ta9 det]m9ations involv+ a contradiction :i* 0 lat5t 9 ! g5]al conception1 & is made manife/ by ! reality4 ,,*apt] ,x4 ,,conception ,,( ,,inf9ite ,,ext5sion4 #gf4 ,is inf9ite ext5sion conceivable8 ,?is conception includes two ideas3 ! idea ( ext5sion1 & ! idea ( ! negation ( limit4 ,! idea ( ext5sion is a g5]al conception1 ref]r+ to ! intuition :i*1 :atev] may be 9 itself & 9 its object1 repres5ts ext5sion & ! union ( ! ?ree dim5sions1 ! pure =m ( :i* is space4 ,x is evid5t t we c unite1 9 "o conception1 ! two ideas ( ext5sion 9 g5]al & ! negation ( limit2 & if ?is is :at is call$ ! idea ( inf9ite ext5sion1 x is cle> t we h ?is idea4 ,?is conception ( inf9ite ext5sion1 ab/racts all conditions ( ! reality2 we d n "k :e!r !re be1 9 ! nature ( ext5d$ ?+s1 any ?+ :i* prev5ts ! absolute inf9ity ( _! ext5sion2 consequ5tly1 we are ignorant :e!r !re is or is n any lat5t contradiction1 :i* ! g5]al conception does n reveal to u4 #gg4 ,x mu/ be rememb]$ t ,i am speak+ ( ! idea & n ( ! s5sible repres5tation ( ext5sion2 = al?\gh ,i hold t x is possible = u to h ! conception ( an inf9ite ext5sion1 ,i d n ?9k ! same ) respect to its s5sible repres5tation4 ,! latt] may be indef9itely exp&$1 b x _c become inf9ite4 ,reason demon/rates ?is impossibility :i* consci\sness makes kn[n to u4 ,int]nal s5sible repres5tations are only ! repetition ( ! ext]nal1 or at lea/ are =m$ f ! elem5ts :i* ^! latt] furni%4 ,sight & t\* are ! two s5ses :i* produc$ ! repres5tation ( ext5sion1 & !y bo? imply a limit4 ,t\* only rea*es t :i* is imm$iate to x1 & sight _c see ) a limit :i* s5ds ! rays ( light to x4 ,int]nal s5sible repres5tations mu/ always reta9 ?is limitation2 _! object may be exp&$1 or ! limit remov$ to a great] di/ance1 b to de/roy ?is limit w\ld be to de/roy !mselves4 ,!re=e1 ! imag9ation ( an inf9ite ext5sion is impossible to e s5sitive be+4 #gh4 ,i h propos$ above 7 #dj7 an objection aga9/ ! inf9ity ( ext5sion1 9 s f> z we may repres5t x z a size )\t limits4 ,! objection 01 t z ! idea ( imp5etrability is n conta9$ 9 ! conception ( a solid1 we may imag9e an inf9ite s]ies ( inf9ites plac$ "o inside ( ano!r4 ,?is difficulty is only conclusive :5 speak+ ( ! conception ( a solid :i* conta9s some?+ m ?an ! pure idea ( ext5sion4 ,! idea ( ext5sion necess>ily implies t "s p>ts are outside ( o!rs1 & x is n possible to conceive ext5sion o!rwise4 ,x is c]ta9 t a body may be situat$ 9 a "p ( space2 tak+ f ?is body its imp5etrability1 we may put ano!r body 9 ! same place1 & s on to inf9ity2 b 9 t case we conceive some?+ besides pure ext5sion1 we unite some?+1 al?\gh 9 a g5]al & indet]m9ate mann]1 to ! idea ( ?+s situat$ 9 space2 o!rwise we %\ld n di/+ui% ! space1 repres5t+ pure ext5sion1 f ! solids plac$ 9 x1 nor %\ld we di/+ui% ^! solids f "o ano!r1 if we did n recognize 9 !m "s diff]5ce1 al?\gh g5]al & undet]m9$4 #gi4 ,x seems mo/ probable t ! pure idea ( an inf9ite ext5sion is conta9$ 9 ! idea ( an inf9ite size1 :i* is no?+ m ?an ! idea ( space4 ,:atev] else is introduc$ into ! idea is a =eign elem5t1 add+ to pure ext5sion some?+ :i* does n belong to x1 su* is ! diff]5ce betwe5 ext5d$ be+s1 al?\gh conceiv$ 9 an indet]m9ate mann]4 ,,*apt] ,,xi4 ,,possibility ,,( ,,inf9ite ,,ext5sion4 #hj4 ,:at are we to ?9k z to ! possibility ( ! inf9ities :i* we conceive8 ,let u exam9e ! "q4 ,is an inf9ite ext5sion possible8 ,!re is no incompatibility betwe5 ! idea ( ext5sion & ! negation ( limit1 at lea/1 accord+ to our way ( conceiv+ !m4 ,x is m difficult = u to conceive ext5sion absolutely limit$1 ?an to conceive x unlimit$3 beyond all limit1 we imag9e space )\t end4 #ha4 ,nei!r d we discov] any impossibility 9 ! exi/5ce ( an unlimit$ ext5sion1 if we consid] ! "q 9 relation to ! div9e omnipot5ce4 ,beyond all ext5sion ,god c create ano!r ext5sion2 if we suppose t he has appli$ 8 creative p[] to all ! ext5sion possible1 he mu/ h creat$ an inf9ite ext5sion4 #hb4 ,"h a difficulty arises4 ,if ,god _h creat$ an inf9ite ext5sion he c\ld n create ano!r ext5sion2 8 p[] w\ld be exhau/$1 & consequ5tly x w\ld n be inf9ite4 ,?is difficulty proce$s f und]/&+ inf9ite p[] 9 a false s5se4 ,:5 we say t ,god c d all ?+s1 we d n mean t he c d ?+s t are contradictory3 omnipot5ce is n an absurd attribute1 z x w\ld be if appli$ to ?+s t are absurd4 ,an absolutely inf9ite ext5sion is contradictory 9 relation to ano!r di/9ct ext5sion2 =1 be+ absolutely inf9ite1 x conta9s all possible ext5sions4 ,if we suppose x to exi/1 no o!r is possible3 to affirm t ,god c\ld n produce ano!r1 is n to limit 8 omnipot5ce1 b only to say t he _c d a ?+ :i* is absurd4 #hc4 ,we w make ?is solution cle>]4 ,! intellig5ce ( ,god is inf9ite2 & he _c und]/& m ?an he n[ und]/&s2 all progress w\ld suppose imp]fection1 because x w\ld involve a *ange f a less to a great] intellig5ce4 ,if1 !n1 we say t ,god w nev] und]/& m ?an he does n[1 d we limit 8 intellig5ce8 ,c]ta9ly n4 ,he _c und]/& m1 because he und]/&s all t is real & all t is possible1 & we _c1 )\t contradiction1 conceive t he c und]/& m ?an he n[ does3 ?is is n to limit 8 intellig5ce1 b to affirm its inf9ity3 x is n susceptible ( p]fection1 because x is inf9ite4 ,?is w enable u to und]/& ! expression _c1 z appli$ to ,god4 ,:at is d5i$ is n a p]fection1 b an absurdity3 :]e=e ,/4 ,?omas v opportunely obs]ves1 t we %\ld mu* bett] say t ! ?+ _c be done1 ?an t ,god _c d x4 ,,*apt] ,,xii4 ,,solution ,,( ,,v>i\s ,,objections ,,aga9/ ,,! ,,possibility ,,( ,,an ,,inf9ite ,,ext5sion4 #hd4 ,! discussions on ! possibility ( an inf9ite ext5sion are ( a v anci5t date4 ,h[ c\ld x be o!rwise8 ,mu/ n ! glori\s spectacle ( ! univ]se1 & ! space :i* we imag9e beyond ! b\nd>ies ( all worlds1 naturally h giv5 rise to que/ions z to ! exi/5ce or possibility ( a limit to ?is imm5sity8 ,"s philosoph]s ?9k an inf9ite ext5sion impossible4 ,let u see on :at !y f\nd _! op9ion4 #he4 ,ext5sion is a prop]ty ( a f9ite sub/ance1 & t :i* belongs to a f9ite ?+ _c be inf9ite2 !re=e x is impossible to conceive inf9ity ( any k9d 9 a f9ite be+4 ,?is argum5t is n conclusive4 ,x is true t an ext5d$ sub/ance is f9ite1 9 ! s5se t x does n possess absolute inf9ity su* z is conceiv$ 9 ! ,supreme ,be+2 b x does n foll[ f ?is t x _c be inf9ite "u c]ta9 aspects4 ,nei!r is x correct to say t no f9ite sub/ance c h an inf9ite prop]ty1 because ! prop]ties fl[ f ! sub/ance1 & ! inf9ite _c proce$ f ! f9ite4 ,9 ord] t ?is argum5t may be valid1 x is necess>y to prove t all ! prop]ties ( a be+ emanate f its sub/ance3 figures are accid5tal prop]ties ( bodies1 & yet _m ( !m h no relation to ! sub/ance1 & are m]e accid5ts :i* appe> or disappe>1 n by ! int]nal =ce ( ! sub/ance1 b by ! action ( an ext]nal cause4 ,we see ext5sion 9 bodies2 b z we "k n ! ess5ce ( corporeal sub/ance1 we _c say h[ f> ?is prop]ty is connect$ ) ! sub/ance1 :e!r x is an emanation f x1 or only some?+ :i* has be5 giv5 to x & may be tak5 f x )\t any ess5tial alt]ation4#ci #ci ,see ,bk4 ,,iii41 ,*aps4 ,,xix41 ,,xxi41 ,,xxiv41 ,,xxv41 ,,xxvi41 ,,xxvii4 & ,,xxviii4 ,moreov]1 :5 we say t ! inf9ite _c proce$ f ! f9ite1 we d n d5y t an inf9ite prop]ty may proce$ f a sub/ance f9ite 9 its ess5ce4 ,:5 we admit ! inf9ite prop]ty1 we admit at ! same "t all t is necess>y 9 ! sub/ance 9 ord] t ?is prop]ty may h its root 9 x1 s long z we d n d5y ! "* ( f9ite :i* ess5tially belongs to e creature4 ,:5 we d5y t creatures are or c be inf9ite1 we speak ( ess5tial inf9ity1 ( t inf9ity :i* implies necessity ( be+ & absolute indep5d5ce "u e aspect2 b we d n d5y !m a relative inf9ity1 su* z t ( ext5sion4 ,to und]take to prove t inf9ite ext5sion is impossible1 because e prop]ty ( a f9ite sub/ance mu/ be f9ite1 is equival5t to suppos+ ! v ?+ 9 dispute2 = ! precise "q is1 :e!r "o ( ^! prop]ties1 namely1 ext5sion1 c be inf9ite4 ,9 ord] to e/abli% ! negative proposition1 ,no prop]ty ( a f9ite sub/ance c be inf9ite1 x is necess>y to prove ?is ( ext5sion4 ,h5ce ! argum5t :i* we are impos+ implies1 9 "s mann]1 a begg+ ( ! "q1 :5 !y f\nd x on a g5]al proposition :i* c only be c]ta9 :5 ! pres5t "q is solv$4 #hf4 ,inf9ite ext5sion ought to be ! greate/ ( all ext5sions1 b !re is no su* ext5sion4 ,f any giv5 ext5sion ,god c take away a c]ta9 quantity2 = example1 a y>d3 9 t case ! inf9ite ext5sion w\ld become f9ite1 = x w\ld be less ?an ! fir/2 & z ! diff]5ce betwe5 ! two ext5sions is only a y>d1 x is cle> t n ev5 ! fir/ c\ld be inf9ite2 = x is impossible t !re %\ld be only ! diff]5ce ( "o y>d betwe5 ! f9ite & ! inf9ite4 ,?is difficulty m]its a s]i\s consid]ation3 at fir/ sight x seems s conclusive t no possibility ( a satisfactory solution is conceivable4 ,! proposition t ! diff]5ce betwe5 ! f9ite & ! inf9ite _c be f9ite1 is n :olly correct4 ,we mu/ fir/ ( all take notice t ! diff]5ce betwe5 two quantities1 :e!r f9ite or inf9ite1 _c be absolutely inf9ite1 9 ! s5se ( dim9ution4 ,diff]5ce is ! excess ( "o quantity ov] ano!r1 & necessity implies a limit2 = z ! excess only is consid]$1 ! quantity exce$$ is n conta9$ 9 ! diff]5ce4 ,call+ ! diff]5ce ,d1 ! great] quantity ,a1 & ! small] a1 ,i say t ,d c 9 no hypo!sis be inf9ite4 ,by ! supposition ,d ,a - a2 !re=e ,d a ,a2 9 ord] t ,d may equal ,a x is necess>y to add to x a2 !re=e ,d _c be inf9ite4 ,if we suppose ,a 1 we %all h ,d ,a - a - a1 or ,d a 4 ,!re=e to make ,d inf9ite we mu/ add to x a1 & we c nev] h ,d unless a #j2 b 9 t case !re w\ld be no true diff]5ce1 s9ce ! equation1 ,d ,a - a1 w\ld be conv]t$ into ,d ,a - #j ,a1 & ! diff]5ce w\ld n be real b imag9>y4 ,x foll[s f ?is t no diff]5ce betwe5 two positive quantities c be absolutely inf9ite2 if x is s 9 "s s5se1 x is n s 9 ! s5se ( dim9ution2 & ! union ( ^! two ideas ( diff]5ce & inf9ity results 9 a contradiction4#dj #dj ,i am speak+ ( ! diff]5ce betwe5 positive quantities2 = ) reg>d to o!r quantities we may express an inf9ite diff]5ce algebraically4 ,let ! two quantities be 7 - a7 & 7-a74 ,! diff]5ce betwe5 !m w be express$ 9 ?is equation1 ,d7 - a7 - 7-a7 - a a 4 ,! diff]5ce betwe5 an inf9ite quantity & a giv5 f9ite quantity _c be ano!r giv5 f9ite quantity1 b x mu/ be inf9ite 9 "s s5se4 ,let u suppose an inf9ite l9e & a giv5 f9ite l9e1 ! diff]5ce betwe5 !m _c be express$ by a giv5 f9ite l9eal value4 ,= suppos+ ! second l9e to be a f9ite & a giv5 l9e1 we may place x ^u ! inf9ite l9e 9 any ( its directions1 & f any po9t 9 x x w rea* a c]ta9 po9t ( ! inf9ite l9e4 ,if we suppose a second giv5 f9ite l9e1 repres5t+ ! diff]5ce betwe5 ! o!r two l9es1 we ought to place x ^u ! inf9ite l9e at ! po9t :]e ! o!r t]m9ates2 & x is evid5t t x w t]m9ate at ano!r po9t det]m9$ by its l5g?2 !re=e x w n measure ! :ole ( ! diff]5ce betwe5 ! inf9ite & ! f9ite l9es4 ,we obta9 ! same result 9 algebraic expressions4 ,if ,a be a giv5 f9ite value1 ! diff]5ce betwe5 ,a & _c be ano!r giv5 f9ite value4 ,=1 express+ ! diff]5ce by ,d1 we %all h - ,d ,a ,d4 ,!re=e1 ,d ,a 2 consequ5tly1 if bo? 7 giv5 f9ite values1 an inf9ite w\ld result f two giv5 f9ite values1 :i* is absurd4 ,h5ce1 a diff]5ce may be 9 "s s5se inf9ite1 accord+ to ! mean+ we atta* to ! t]m inf9ity4 ,if f ! po9t :]e we are situat$1 we draw a l9e t[>ds ! nor? & produce x inf9itely1 & !n produce x1 also1 inf9itely t[>ds ! s\?1 ! diff]5ce betwe5 ei!r ( ^! l9es & ! sum ( !m bo?1 w be inf9ite only 9 a c]ta9 s5se4 ,?is is also v]ifi$ by algebraic expressions4 ,if we h ! inf9ite value equal #b1 & comp>e x ) 1 ! result is #b - 4 ,9 g5]al1 f any inf9ite value we may subtract any f9ite diff]5ce 9 relation to x1 s long z ! subtrah5d is n a giv5 f9ite value4 ,let be ! inf9ite value1--,i say t we c f9d 9 x any f9ite value2 =1 be+ an inf9ite value1 ,a conta9s all f9ite values ( ! same ord]2 !re=e x conta9s ! f9ite value1 ,a2 consequ5tly we may =m ! equation1 - ,a ,b4 ,:atev] be ! value ( ,b1 ! relation ( ,b to is ,a2 = by only add+ ,a to ,b we obta9 4 ,! equation1 - ,a ,b1 gives ,b ,a 1 & also - ,b ,a2 & z ,a is a giv5 value accord+ to ! supposition1 & ,a is ! giv5 f9ite diff]5ce betwe5 & ,b1 x foll[s t we may f9d a f9ite diff]5ce to e inf9ite value4 ,we may inf] f ?is t ! possibility ( assign+ a f9ite diff]5ce to an inf9ite ext5sion1 does n prove any ?+ aga9/ its true inf9ity4 ,! inf9ite1 & because x is inf9ite1 conta9s all t belongs to ! ord] 9 :i* x is inf9ite4 ,we may take any sure value1 & consid]+ x z a diff]5ce1 & we %all obta9 a f9ite diff]5ce4 ,b f> f prov+ ! abs5ce ( inf9ity1 ?is confirms its exi/5ce2 = x %[s t all ! f9ite is conta9$ 9 ! inf9ite4 ,9 ?is case1 ! subtrah5d w\ld be inf9ite "u a c]ta9 aspect2 b n 9 ! ord] ( dim9ution1 because x wants ! quantity :i* is tak5 f x4 #hg4 ,!re is ano!r argum5t aga9/ ! absolute inf9ity ( ext5sion1 :i* seems to h m weight ?an any ( ^? :i* prec$e1 & ,i _c see :y x has nev] occurr$ to ^? :o argue aga9/ ?is possibility4 ,x is ?is1--we suppose an inf9ite ext5sion to exi/4 ,god c annihilate x1 & !n create ano!r equally inf9ite4 ,! sum ( bo? is great] ?an ei!r alone2 !re=e nei!r ( !m alone is inf9ite4 ,?is annihilation we may suppose z (t5 z we wi%2 h5ce we may h a s]ies ( inf9ite ext5sions4 ,! t]ms ( ?is s]ies _c exi/ at ! same "t1 s9ce "o actual inf9ite ext5sion excludes all o!rs4 ,!re=e1 z ! sum ( ! ext5sions is great] ?an any numb] ( p>ticul> ext5sions1 ! absolute inf9ite ext5sion mu/ be f\nd1 n 9 ! p>ticul> ext5sions1 b 9 ! sum1 & h5ce an actual inf9ite ext5sion is intr9sically impossible4 ,to solve ?is difficulty we mu/ di/+ui% betwe5 ext5sion & ! ?+ ext5d$3 ! :ole "q turns on ! intr9sic possibility ( ! inf9ity ( ext5sion1 consid]$ 9 itself1 ab/ract+ absolutely ! subject 9 :i* x is f\nd4 ,! difficulty places be=e our sight a s]ies ( successive inf9ite ext5sions2 b 9 reality ?is succession is 9 ! be+s :i* are ext5d$1 & ! numb] ( :i* goes on increas+2 b n 9 ! ext5sion itself4 ,! pure idea ( inf9ite ext5sion 9 ! "o case1 is n increas$ by ! new ext5sions :i* are produc$2 ! ext5sion appe>s1 disappe>s1 reappe>s1 & aga9 disappe>s1 b is n increas$4 ,! succession %[s ! intr9sic possibility ( its appe>ance & its disappe>ance1 its ess5tial cont+5cy1 because x is n repugnant = x to cease to exi/ :5 x exi/s1 or to pass aga9 f non-exi/5ce to exi/5ce4 ,if we exam9e our ideas1 we %all f9d t we _c increase ! inf9ite ext5sion :i* we conceive1 by any imag9able supposition2 & t :atev] we may d1 is r$uc$ to a succession ( productions & annihilations4 ,! idea ( inf9ite ext5sion seems to be a primitive "p ( our m9d2 ! inf9ity :i* we imag9e 9 space1 is only ! attempt :i* our m9d makes to express its idea 9 reality4 ,creat$ ) s5sible intuition1 we h receiv$ ! p[] ( exp&+ ?is intuition on an inf9ite scale1--to d ?is we require ! idea ( an inf9ite ext5sion4 ,,*apt] ,,xiii4 ,,exi/5ce ,,( ,,inf9ite ,,ext5sion4 #hh4 ,! "q ( ! possibility ( an inf9ite ext5sion is v diff]5t f t ( its exi/5ce4 ,! fir/ we answ] 9 ! affirmative1 ! second 9 ! negative4 ,desc>tes ma9ta9$ t ! ext5sion ( ! _w is indef9ite2 b ?is is a t]m :i*1 al?\gh x has a v rational mean+ :5 x ref]s to ! compass ( our und]/&+1 has no mean+ :5 appli$ to ?+s4 ,!re is no objection to say+ t ! ext5sion ( ! _w is indef9ite1 if x only means t we _c assign its limits2 b 9 ! reality1 ! limits exi/ or d n exi/1 indiff]5tly ( our p[] ( assign+ !m2 !re is no m$ium betwe5 yes & no2 !re=e !re is no m$ium betwe5 ! exi/5ce & ! non-exi/5ce ( ^! limits4 ,if !y exi/1 ! ext5sion ( ! _w is f9ite2 if !y d n exi/1 x is inf9ite2--9 ei!r case1 ! ^w indef9ite expresses no?+4 ,! argum5t ( ,desc>tes proves no?+1 or x proves ! true inf9ity ( ! _w4 ,=1 if we mu/ remove its limits indef9itely because we always conceive indef9itely an ext5sion beyond e o!r ext5sion1 z1 on ! o!r h&1 we "k t ?is s]ies ( conceptions has no limit1 we may at once transf] ! unlimit$ness to ! object :i* corresponds to ^? conceptions1 & affirm t ! ext5sion ( ! _w is absolutely inf9ite4 ,un=tunately1 ! argum5t ( ,desc>tes is )\t any basis2 = x consi/s 9 a transition f ! ideal1 or1 r1 imag9>y ord]1 to ! real ord]1 :i* is contr>y to good logic4#da #da ,see ,book ,,iii41 ,*apt] ,,viii4 #hi4 ,leibnitz ma9ta9$1 t al?\gh ,god c\ld h made ! mat]ial univ]se f9ite 9 its ext5sion1 x is m 9 con=mity ) 8 wisdom n to h done s4 ,?us ,i d n say1 he writes1#db z is "h imput$ to me1 t ,god _c give limits to ! ext5sion ( matt]2 b ! appe>ance is t he does n wi% x1 b pref]r$ to give x m4 ,! op9ion ( ,leibnitz is f\nd$ on 8 sy/em ( optimism1 :i* is op5 to a multitude ( objections1 b x is n ! place "h to exam9e !m4 #db ,lettres entre ,leibnitz et ,cl>ke1 ,vime crit4 de ,leibnitz1 #gc4 #ij4 ,to speak frankly my own op9ion1 ,i say t ?is is a "q :i* _c be solv$ on purely philosophic pr9ciples2 =1 z ! ideas conta9 no intr9sic necessity1 ei!r = or aga9/ ! exi/5ce ( an inf9ite ext5sion1 we mu/ look = its solution to :at exp]i5ce tea*es u4 ,all ! "t occupi$ 9 attempt+ to solve ?is "q is lo/4 ,:at we c ass]t is1 t ! ext5sion ( ! _w exce$s all appreciation2 & z ! sci5ce ( a/ronomy advances1 great] dep?s are discov]$ 9 ! ocean ( space4 ,:]e is ! %ore8 or is !re any8 ,reason _c answ] su* que/ions4 ,:at d we1 poor insects1 "k1 ^: life is b a mom5t>y dwell+ on ?is little ball ( du/1 :i* we call ! globe ( ! e>?8 ,,*apt] ,,xiv4 ,,possibility ,,( ,,an ,,actual ,,inf9ite ,,numb]4 #ia4 ,is an inf9ite numb] possible8 ,does ! union ( ! idea ( numb] ) ! idea ( ! absolute negation ( limit1 involve any contradiction :i* prev5ts ! realization ( ! conception8 ,:atev] numb] we may conceive1 we c always conceive "o /ill great]3 ?is seems to %[ t no exi/+ numb] c be absolutely inf9ite4 ,if we suppose ?is numb] to be realiz$1 an intellig5ce may "k x1 & may multiply x by two1 ?ree1 or any o!r numb]2 !re=e ! numb] may be increas$1 & consequ5tly x is n inf9ite4 ,?is difficulty is f> f be+ conclusive1 if we exam9e x c>efully4 ,! intellectual act ( :i* x speaks1 w\ld be impossible on ! supposition ( ! exi/5ce ( an inf9ite numb]4 ,if ! intellig5ce %\ld n "k ! inf9ity ( ! numb]1 x might make ! multiplication1 b x w\ld fall into a contradiction ?r\gh its ignorance2 = ! numb] be+ absolutely inf9ite1 c\ld n be increas$2 its multiplication w\ld be an absurdity1 & ! intellig5ce mak+ x1 w\ld comb9e two ideas :i* w\ld /ill be repugnant1 al?\gh n kn[n to be s by ! intellig5ce4 ,if ! absolute inf9ity ( ! exi/+ numb] 7 kn[n to ! intellig5ce1 ! idea ( multiplication c\ld nev] be associat$ ) x2 = ! intellig5ce w\ld "k t all possible products already exi/4 #ib4 ,an absolutely inf9ite numb] _c be express$ 9 ! algebraic or geometrical values2 ! attempt s to express x limits x 9 a c]ta9 s5se1 & !re=e de/roys its absolute inf9ity4 ,if ! expression 1 repres5t$ an absolutely inf9ite numb]1 x w\ld n be susceptible ( any comb9ation :i* w\ld increase x3 to suppose t x may be multipli$ by o!r numb]s1 f9ite or inf9ite1 is to take its inf9ity 9 ano!r ?an an absolute s5se4 ,! fraction a_/#j does n express an inf9ite value 9 all ! /rictness ( ! ^w2 = x is evid5t t :atev] be ! value ( a_/#j x w always be less ?an #b;a_/#j or1 9 g5]al1 less ?an na_/#j n repres5t+ a value great] ?an unity4 #ic4 ,nei!r c an inf9ite numb] be repres5t$ 9 geometrical values4 ,let u take a l9e "o foot long4 ,x is evid5t t if we produce ?is l9e inf9itely 9 opposite directions1 ! numb] ( feet w be 9 "s s5se inf9ite1 s9ce ! foot is suppos$ to be repeat$ inf9ite times3 ! expression ( ! numb] ( ! feet w be ! expression ( an inf9ite value4 ,n[1 ,i say t ?is numb] is n inf9ite1 because !re are o!r numb]s /ill great]4 ,9 ea* foot !re are twelve in*es2 !re=e1 ! numb] ( in*es conta9$ 9 ! l9e w be twelve times z great z ! numb] ( feet2 consequ5tly ! numb] ( feet is n inf9ite4 ,nei!r is ! numb] ( in*es inf9ite2 = !y 9 _! turn may be divid$ into l9es1 ! l9es into po9ts2 & x is evid5t t ! numb] ( ! small] quantities w be proportionally great] ?an ! numb] ( ! great] quantities4 ,!re w be twelve times z _m in*es z feet1 twelve times z _m l9es z in*es1 & twelve times z _m po9ts z l9es2 & ?is progression c nev] end1 because ! value ( a l9e is inf9itely divisible4 #id4 ,pu%+ to inf9ity ! divisibility ( an inf9ite l9e1 we seem to h an inf9ite numb] 9 ! elem5ts :i* con/itute x2 b a slight reflection w dissipate ?is illusion4 ,= x is evid5t t we c draw o!r inf9ite l9es by ! side ( ! suppos$ inf9ite l9e2 & s9ce accord+ to ! supposition1 ea* ( !m may be inf9itely divid$1 x foll[s t ! sum ( ! elem5ts ( all ! l9es w give a great] numb] ?an ! sum ( ! elem5ts ( any "o ( !m4 #ie4 ,if we wi% to f9d an inf9ite numb] ( p>ts 9 values ( ext5sion1 we mu/ suppose a solid inf9ite 9 all its dim5sions1 ) all its p>ts inf9itely divid$4 ,b n ev5 !n %\ld we h an absolutely inf9ite numb]1 al?\gh we %\ld h ! greate/ :i* c be repres5t$ 9 values ( ext5sion4 ,conc$+ t an inf9ite ext5sion exi/$ :i* is inf9itely divisible1 ! numb] ( its p>ts w\ld n be absolutely inf9ite2 = we c conceive o!r be+s besides ext5d$ be+s1 & consid]+ bo? "u ! g5]al idea ( be+1 we might unite !m 9 a numb] :i* w\ld be great] ?an t ( ext5d$ be+s alone4 #if4 ,no imag9able species ( be+s inf9itely multipli$1 c give an absolutely inf9ite numb]4 ,! reason is ! same z t giv5 9 ! la/ p>agraph3 ! exi/5ce ( be+s ( "o species does n r5d] ! exi/5ce ( be+s ( ano!r species impossible4 ,!re=e1 besides ! suppos$ inf9ity ( ! numb] ( be+s ( a det]m9ate species1 !re are o!r numb]s :i*1 unit$ ) ?is1 produce a numb] great] ?an ! pret5d$ inf9ity4 #ig4 ,! exi/5ce ( an absolutely inf9ite numb] requires3 fir/1 ! exi/5ce ( inf9ite species ( be+s2 & secondly1 ! exi/5ce ( inf9ite individuals ( ea* species4 ,let u see if ^! conditions c be realiz$4 #ih4 ,!re seems to be no d\bt ( ! intr9sic possibility ( inf9ite species4 ,! scale ( be+s is betwe5 two extremes1 no?+ & inf9ite p]fection3 ! space betwe5 ^! extremes is inf9ite2 & be+s may be di/ribut$ on x 9 an inf9ite gradation4 #ii4 ,admitt+ ! intr9sic possibility ( an inf9ite gradation 9 ! scale ( be+s1 ! "q occurs1 :e!r _! possibility is only ideal1 or also real1 t is1 may be realiz$4 ,god is inf9itely p[]ful2 if ! inf9ite gradation is intr9sically possible1 ,god c produce x2 = :atev] is intr9sically possible falls )9 ! rea* ( div9e omnipot5ce4 ,on ! o!r h&1 suppos+1 z we mu/1 ! lib]ty ( ,god1 !re is no d\bt b ,god is free to create all t he c create4 ,if !n !re is no?+ repugnant 9 an inf9ity ( ! species ( be+s di/ribut$ 9 an inf9ite gradation1 ^! be+s may exi/ if ,god w x4 ,!re=e d5y+ all limit to ! numb] ( species & ( individuals ( ea* species1 x seems t ! inf9ite numb] w\ld exi/1 s9ce x is impossible to imag9e any increase or limitation 9 ! collection ( all be+s4 ,on ?is supposition ! mo/ p]fect creat$ be+s possible w\ld exi/1 & no m p]fect be+ 9 ! sph]e ( creatures c\ld be conceiv$4 ,all t c be imag9$ w\ld already exi/1 f no?+ to inf9ite p]fection4 #ajj4 ,/ill x mu/ be obs]v$ t ! collection ( creat$ be+s1 :atev] be _! p]fection1 are necess>ily subject to ! condition ( dep5d5ce on ano!r be+2 a condition f :i* ! inf9ite be+ above is ess5tially exempt4 ,?is condition involves limitation2 !re=e1 all creat$ be+s mu/ be f9ite4 #aja4 ,does ! "* ( f9ite1 :i* is met ) 9 all creat$ be+s1 involve a det]m9ate limit beyond :i* !y _c pass8 ,if ?is limit exi/s1 is n ! numb] ( possible species also limit$8 ,& if ^! species are n inf9ite1 is n an inf9ite numb] an illusion8 ,al?\gh ! intr9sic possibility ( ! inf9ite scale ( be+s seems beyond a d\bt1 we mu/ bew>e ( solv+ too quickly ! pres5t "q4 ,) respect to indet]m9ate conceptions1 we see no possible limit2 b w\ld ?is /ill be s1 if we _h an intuitive k ( ! species8 ,are we sure t 9 ! p>ticul> qualities ( be+s1 comb9$ ) limitation & dep5d5ce1 :i* are ess5tial to !m1 we %\ld n discov] a t]m beyond :i* !y _c g1 by reason ( ! con/itution ( _! nature8 ,h[ impot5t philosophy is to solve su* que/ions6 #ajb4 ,:atev] may be conclud$ z to ?is inf9ity ( species & _! respective p]fection1 ,i d n believe t an actually inf9ite numb] c exi/4 ,among ^! species mu/ be c\nt$ intellig5ces :i* ex]cise _! acts 9 succession4 ,?is is evid5tly s2 = 9 ?is numb] are includ$ human m9ds :i* ?9k & wi% 9 a successive mann]4 ,! acts ( ^! intellig5ces may be numb]$3 ?is we "k f consci\sness4 ,!re=e !re w\ld nev] be an inf9ite numb]1 because ^! acts1 be+ successive1 c nev] be all at ! same "t4 #ajc4 ,x may be answ]$ t 9 ?is case we might suppose t spirits1 includ+ our own1 h only "o act ( intellig5ce & w4 ,to ?is ,i reply1 t besides contradict+ ! nature ( creat$ be+s1 :i*1 because !y are f9ite1 mu/ be subject to *ange1 x is also op5 to ano!r objection1 inasmu* z x elim9ates at once _m species ( be+s1 & ?us1 in/ead ( pres]v+ ! inf9ity1 r5d]s x impossible4 ,:o c d5y ! possibility ( t :i* exi/s8 ,if1 z our exp]i5ce in=ms u1 !re n[ exi/ be+s ( successive activity1 :y w\ld n ^! be+s be possible on ! supposition t ! div9e omnipot5ce _h ex]t$ all its inf9ite creative p[]8 #ajd4 ,?is difficulty1 :i* is f\nd$ on ! nature ( f9ite intellig5ces1 seems to r5d] ! exi/5ce ( an inf9ite numb] impossible1 & x becomes /ill /rong] if we exam9e ! "q "u a m g5]al aspect4 ,! exi/5ce ( an absolutely inf9ite numb] excludes ! exi/5ce ( any o!r numb]4 ,t :i* is numb]$ is n sub/ance alone1 b its modifications also4 ,?is has already be5 demon/rat$ ) reg>d to intellig5ces1 & is true 9 g5]al ( all f9ite be+s4 ,e f9ite be+ is *angeable1 & its *anges may be c\nt$4 ,! modifications produc$ by ! *anges _c all exi/ at once1 = "s ( !m exclude o!rs4 ,!re=e1 an actual inf9ite numb] is nev] possible4 #aje4 ,let u apply ^! consid]ations to ! s5sible _w4 ,motion is a modification to :i* bodies are subject4 ,?is modification is ess5tially successive4 ,a motion1 ! p>ts ( :i* co-exi/1 is absurd4 ,! co-exi/5ce ( diff]5t /ates1 :i* result f diff]5t motions1 is also absurd3 ?+s t are contradictory _c exi/ at ! same "t1 & _m ( ^! situations are contradictory1 because "o ( !m necess>ily involves ! negation ( o!rs4 ,if a l9e fall+ on ano!r l9e revolve ar\nd a po9t1 x w successively describe diff]5t angles4 ,:5 x =ms an angle ( #de degrees1 x w n =m an angle ( #cj degrees1 nor ( #dj1 nor #gj1 nor #hj2 ^! angles mutually exclude "o ano!r4 ,a portion ( matt] w =m diff]5t figures1 accord+ to ! arrangem5t :i* is giv5 to ! p>ts ( :i* x is compos$4 ,:5 ^! p>ts =m a globe1 !y w n =m a cube2 ^! two solids _c exi/ at ! same "t1 =m$ ( ! same portion ( matt]4 #ajf4 ,?is v>iety ( motion & =m c be numb]$4 ,at e /ep we measure motion1 apply+ to x ! idea ( numb]2 at e in/ant we c\nt ! =ms ( a portion ( matt]1 z = example1 a piece ( wax1 to :i* diff]5t =ms h be5 giv5 successively3 :atev] be ! numb] ( ! be+s :i* we suppose to exi/1 e "o ( !m w be susceptible ( trans=mations :i* may be c\nt$4 ,!re=e1 9 ! v nature ( ?+s1 !re is an intr9sic impossibility ( ! exi/5ce ( an actual inf9ite numb]4 #ajg4 ,i believe t ^! argum5ts fully demon/rate ! impossibility ( an actual inf9ite numb]2 & if ,i d n d>e to say t ,i am sure ( hav+ giv5 a complete demon/ration1 x is because ! nature ( ! "q pres5ts s _m & s great difficulties1 x s bewild]s & conf\nds ! weak und]/&+ ( man1 t !re is always reason to fe> t ev5 ^? argum5ts1 :i* seem ! cle>e/ & mo/ conclusive1 may conceal "s fault :i* vitiates _! =ce1 & makes an illusion appe> an inconte/ible tru?4 ,/ill ,i _c b obs]ve t to combat ?is demon/ration1 x seems1 to me t x w\ld be necess>y to d5y our prim>y ideas1 ! exclusion ( be+ & n-be+1 & ! necessity ( succession1 ( "t1 to ! realization ( contradictory ?+s4 #ajh4 ,p]haps x may be object$ to me t contradictory modifications are n a "p ( ! inf9ite numb]1 :i* only relates to ! possible3 b ?is does n de/roy my demon/ration2 x r confirms x4 ,= z ! absolute inf9ite numb] implies ! absolute negation ( all limit1 :51 9 treat+ ( ! realization ( ?is conception1 ,i meet ) ?+s t are contradictory1 ,i say t ! realization ( ! conception is contradictory1 because ! g5]al & indet]m9ate conception is m ext5d$ ?an all possible numb]4 #aji4 ,! orig9 ( _! great] conception is1 t ! indet]m9ate conception ab/racts all conditions1 t ( "t includ$2 b ! reality does n & _c ab/ract ^! conditions4 ,h5ce arises ! conflict betwe5 ! conception & its realization1 & ?is expla9s :y ! conception is n contradictory1 al?\gh its realization is impossible4 ,let u suppose a numb] realiz$ conta9+ all ! species & individuals possible1 we may reflect on ! conception ( ! inf9ite numb]1 & say t ! true inf9ity ( ! numb] requires ! absolute negation ( all limit2 b ?9k+ ( ! collection ( ?+s :i* exi/s1 we c f9d x a limit1 = conc]n+ ?is collection ( units 9 g5]al1 we may add to x ano!r numb] express+ ! new modifications :i* may be produc$4 ,at ! in/ant ,a1 ! numb] ( units may be express$ by ,m4 ,at ! in/ant ,b1 !re w be a new collection ( units :i* may be express$ by ,n4 ,! sum ( ,m ,n w be great] ?an ei!r ,m or ,n alone4 ,!re=e1 nei!r ,m nor ,n w be absolutely inf9ite4 ,! indet]m9ate conception ab/racts in/ants & relates to ! sum above2 h5ce x includes ?+s :i* _c co-exi/4 ,,*apt] ,,xv4 ,,idea ,,( ,,absolutely ,,inf9ite ,,be+4 #aaj4 ,we are ent]+ on a difficult "q4 ,s]i\s difficulties are f\nd 9 ! idea ( ! inf9ite 9 g5]al2 ! idea ( absolutely inf9ite be+ is n less difficult4 ,we h se5 t !re are diff]5t ord]s ( inf9ities1 ea* "o ( :i* is a conception =m$ by ! association ( ! two ideas ( a p>ticul> be+ & ! negation ( limit4 ,b x is easy to see t none ( ! inf9ities hi!rto exam9$ c be call$ inf9ite 9 ! /rict s5se ( ! t]m3 !y are all limit$ "u _m aspects1--none ( !m is an inf9itely p]fect be+4 ,! idea ( ?is be+ is n fully possess$ by u :ile 9 ?is life2 /ill x may be analyz$ & expla9$ ) m cle>ness ?an x is by mo/ au?ors4 ,! great difficulties1 :i* we meet ) 9 ?is attempt1 %[ ! necessity ( deep m$itation1 & ! transc5d5cy ( ! errors :i* orig9ate 9 a wrong und]/&+ ( ! ^w inf9ite :5 appli$ to ,god4 #aaa4 ,:at is an absolutely inf9ite be+8 ,x might seem t we _h said all t is necess>y 9 def9+ ! absolutely inf9ite be+ to be t :i* has no negation ( be+3 b ?is is a common notion :i* leaves mu* to be desir$4 ,x is an indisputable tru? t ! inf9ite be+ has no negation ( be+2 b x is a tru? s f> beyond our rea* t x pres5ts to our weak und]/&+ only a gloomy confusion1 z soon z we attempt to det]m9e exactly its true s5se4 #aab4 ,if ! absolutely inf9ite be+ has no negation ( be+1 x seems t no?+ c be d5i$1 b t ev]y?+ may be affirm$ ( x1 = x mu/ be all2 9 ?is case pan!ism results f ! idea ( inf9ity4 ,if a true negative proposition c be e/abli%$ 9 relation to ! inf9ite be+1 !re is 9 x a negation ( be+1 or ( ! pr$icate :i* is d5i$ 9 ! proposition4 ,x _c be said t :5 negative propositions are appli$ to ,god1 only a negation is d5i$1 = 9 reality positive ?+s are d5i$ ( ,god4 ,:5 ,i say t ,god is n ext5d$1 ,i d5y ( him a reality :i* is ext5sion4 ,:5 ,i say ,god is n ! univ]se1 ,i d5y ( him ! reality ( ! univ]se4 ,!re=e negative propositions1 z appli$ to ,god1 d5y n only negations1 b also realities4 ,x does n seem to solve ! difficulty to say t ! realities d5i$ involve imp]fection1 & are1 consequ5tly1 repugnant to ,god4 ,?is is v true1 b we are treat+ at pres5t ( ! explanation ( ! idea ( ! absolutely inf9ite1 & ! difficulty militates aga9/ ! supposition t ! idea ( ! absolutely inf9ite is to be expla9$ by ! absolute abs5ce ( negation ( be+4 ,if ^! realities are any ?+1 :5 d5i$ ( ,god "s be+ is d5i$2 & s9ce ! proposition _c be true if !re is n 9 ,god ! negation ( ! be+ d5i$1 x foll[s t x is incorrect to say t ! absolutely inf9ite be+ is t :i* has no negation ( be+4 #aac4 ,x also seems t a be+ ( ?is nature c\ld h no prop]ties2 = "s positive prop]ties exclude o!rs3 ?us1 intellig5ce & ext5sion1 fre$om ( w & necessity ) respect to ! same ?+ are positive prop]ties :i* mutually exclude "o ano!r4 ,!re=e ! inf9ite be+ _c h all prop]ties1 unless we make x a collection ( absurdities1 aft] ! fa%ion ( pan!i/s4 #aad4 ,! inf9ite be+ mu/ h all be+ :i* involves no imp]fection4 ,?is is v true1 b !re /ill rema9 s]i\s difficulties to be solv$4 ,:at is p]fection8 ,:at is imp]fection8 ,^! are que/ions :i* x is n easy to answ]1 & yet we _c advance a /ep until we h det]m9$ _! mean+4 #aae4 ,! idea ( p]fection implies be+3 no?+ _c be p]fect1 a p]fect n-be+ is a manife/ contradiction4 #aaf4 ,n all be+ is absolute p]fection2 = !re are modes ( be+ :i* involve imp]fection3 :at is p]fection = "o be+ is imp]fection = ano!r4 #aag4 ,9 f9ite be+s p]fection is relative2 a v p]fect b>n w\ld be a v imp]fect *ur*2 a pa9t+ may be an ornam5t 9 a gall]y :i* w\ld be a pr(anation if plac$ 9 ! sanctu>y4 ,p]fection seems to consi/ 9 a prop]ty be+ conducive to its end4 ,?is idea is n applicable to ! inf9ite be+ :i* c h no o!r end ?an itself4 ,!re=e1 p]fection 9 ! absolutely inf9ite be+ _c be relative1 b mu/ be absolute4 #aah4 ,if p]fection is be+1 x seems t ! p]fection ( ! inf9ite be+ mu/ consi/ 9 c]ta9 prop]ties :i* are f\nd =mally 9 x1 & !re=e exclude all imp]fection4 ,an absolutely indet]m9ate be+1 t is1 a be+ )\t any prop]ty1 is impossible4 ,:at conception c we =m ( a ?+ )\t intellig5ce1 )\t w1 & )\t lib]ty8 ,! propositions 9 :i* ^! prop]ties are affirm$ ( ,god1 are true2 !re=e ^! prop]ties really exi/ 9 ! subject ( :i* !y are affirm$4 #aai4 ,an inf9itely p]fect be+ mu/ h all p]fection2 b 9 :at s5se are we to und]/& all8 ,does x mean all possible p]fections8 ,b :at p]fections are possible8 ,^? :i* are n repugnant4 ,to :at is ! repugnance to be ref]r$8 ,x mu/ be ei!r a mutual repugnance1 or a repugnance to a ?ird3 if ! fir/1 x is necess>y to presuppose "o ( ! two extremes1 9 ord] t ! o!r may be repugnant to x2 9 t case1 :i* is to be pref]r$8 ,if ! second1 :at is ! ?ird to :i* !y are repugnant8 ,on :at is x f\nd$8 ,if by all p]fection is meant all t we c conceive1 ! same difficulty rema9s4 ,= if we speak ( ! conception ( a f9ite be+1 ! conception is n inf9ite2 if ( ! conception ( an inf9ite be+1 x is a begg+ ( ! "q1 because 9 expla9+ ! p]fections ( ! inf9ite be+ we appeal to its conception4 ,^! difficulties c only be solv$ by det]m9+ m precisely ! mean+ ( ^! ideas4 #abj4 ,a ?+ may be d5i$ ( ano!r 9 two mann]s3 by ref]r+ ! negation to a prop]ty1 or to an individual4 ,:5 ,i say a surface is n a triangle1 ,i may ref] ! pr$icate ei!r to ! species ( triangle 9 g5]al1 or to an individual triangle4 ,9 ! fir/ in/ance1 ,i d5y t ! figure is triangul>2 9 ! second1 ,i d5y t ! figure is ano!r giv5 triangle4 ,:5 ,i say ,god is n ext5d$1 ,i d5y a prop]ty2 :5 ,i say ,god is n ! _w1 ,i d5y an individual4 ,x is evid5t t 9 ord] to attribute absolute inf9ity to any be+1 x is necess>y t no be+ %\ld be d5i$ ( x1 ei!r ) respect to prop]ties or to individuals1 & t ! pr$icate %\ld be affirm$ )\t de/roy+ ! pr9ciple ( contradiction4 ,?is exception is absolutely indisp5sable1 unless we wi% to make ! inf9ite be+ ! greate/ ( all absurdities1 a jumble ( contradictions4 ,i believe t ?is w expla9 to a great ext5t ! idea ( absolute inf9ity1 n consid]$ 9 ! ab/ract1 b appli$ to a really exi/5t be+4 ,,*apt] ,,xvi4 ,,all ,,! ,,reality ,,conta9$ ,,9 ,,indet]m9ate ,,conceptions ,,is ,,affirm$ ,,( ,,god4 #aba4 ,we h se5 t our cognitions are ( two classes3 "s are g5]al & indet]m9ate1 o!rs intuitive4 ,all ! objects :i* we "k1 :e!r indet]m9ately or intuitively1 may be affirm$ ( ,god1 provid$ !y involve no contradiction4 #abb4 ,g5]al & indet]m9ate conceptions are ! ideas ( be+ & n-be+1 sub/ance & accid5ts1 simple & composite1 cause & effect4 ,all t is real 9 ^! conceptions is affirm$ ( ,god4 #abc4 ,be+ or t :i* really exi/s1 is affirm$ ( ,god4 ,t :i* is n has no prop]ty4 #abd4 ,sub/ance1 or be+ subsi/5t 9 itself1 is also affirm$ ( ,god4 ,i d n ent] into ! discussion ( ! "q greatly disput$ 9 ! s*ools1 :e!r ! ideas ( be+ & sub/ance are appli$ 9 ! same s5se1 or1 z logicians say1 univoce1 to ,god & creatures4 ,x is suffici5t = my purpose t ! idea ( be+ is appli$ to ! inf9ite be+1 z oppos$ to ! idea ( n-be+1 & ! idea ( sub/ance z oppos$ to accid5ts1 or r1 z imply+ a ?+ :i* conta9s all t is necess>y 9 ord] to subsi/ by itself )\t inh]+ 9 any o!r4 #abe4 ,! idea ( accid5t _c be appli$ to ! inf9ite be+2 b ?is is n to d5y x any ?+ positive1 b r to affirm a p]fection2 = we say t x has no ne$ ( be+ inh]5t 9 ano!r4 ,?is is a p]fection2 x is be+3 to d5y ! quality ( accid5t is to remove a negation4 ,to say t a be+ is a sub/ance is to d5y t x is an accid5t3 ^! two ideas are contradictory & _c be attribut$ to ! same subject at ! same "t4 #abf4 ,simplicity is affirm$ ( ,god4 ,?is attribute d5ies no?+2 to be conv9c$ ( ?is we ne$ only recollect :at simplicity is4 ,! simple is "o2 ! composite is a union ( be+s4 ,if ! p>ts are real1 z !y mu/ be if !re is a true composition1 ! resultant is a collection ( be+s subord9at$ to a c]ta9 law ( unity4 ,:51 !re=e1 we say t ,god is simple1 we say t ,god is n a collection ( be+s1 b "o be+4 ,?is involves no negation3 b on ! contr>y x is ! affirmation ( an exi/5ce n divid$ into v>i\s be+s4 #abg4 ,! idea ( cause1 t is1 ( activity :i* produces 9 ano!r ! transition f n-be+ to be+1 or f "o mode ( be+ to ano!r1 is also affirm$ ( ,god4 ,?is involves no negation1 b is an affirmation ( be+2 = a cause is n only be+1 b a be+ :i* s ab\nds 9 p]fection z to communicate x to o!rs4 #abh4 ,! idea ( effect _c be appli$ to ,god2 b ?is is an affirmation1 n a negation4 ,e effect is a ?+ produc$1 :i* has1 consequ5tly1 pass$ f n-be+ to be+3 to d5y ! quality ( effect is to remove ! negation ( be+1 & affirm ! fulness ( be+4 #abi4 ,:at has be5 said ( ! ideas ( cause & effect1 may be ext5d$ to ! ideas ( necess>y & cont+5t4 ,! negative proposition1 ,god is n cont+5t1 is an affirmation2 = cont+5cy is ! possibility ( n-be+4 ,to d5y ?is possibility is to affirm ! necessity ( be+1 :i* is ! fulness ( p]fection4 ,,*apt] ,,xvii4 ,,all ,,t ,,is ,,n ,,contradictory ,,9 ,,intuitive ,,ideas ,,is ,,affirm$ ,,( ,,god4 #acj4 ,we h se5 t all t is positive 9 g5]al & indet]m9ate conceptions is affirm$ ( ,god4 ,let u see if ! same is true ( intuitive ideas4 ,^! ideas1 9 all t t\*es our und]/&+1 may be r$uc$ to ^! f\r2 passive s5sibility1 active s5sibility1 intellig5ce1 & w4 #aca4 ,passive s5sibility1 or ! =m "u :i* ! objects ( ! ext]nal _w are pres5t$ to our s5ses1 _c be attribut$ to ! inf9ite be+4 ,?is negative proposition1 ! inf9ite be+ is n passively s5sible1 is /rictly true4 ,does ?is proposition d5y any ?+ positive ( ,god8 ,let u exam9e x4 ,! =m ( passive s5sibility is ext5sion1 :i* necess>ily implies multiplicity4 ,! ext5d$ is necess>ily a collection ( p>ts3 to d5y ext5sion ( ,god is to affirm 8 simplicity2 to d5y t he is a collection ( be+s1 & to affirm ! indivisible unity ( 8 nature4 #acb4 ,besides ext5sion1 !re is 9 ! passive s5sibility ( objects only ! relation ( causes :i* produce 9 u ! effects call$ s5sations4 ,?is causality c & mu/ be affirm$ ( ,god3 = x is c]ta9 t ! inf9ite cause is capable ( produc+ 9 u all s5sations )\t ! int]v5tion ( any m$ium4 #acc4 ,! negative proposition3 ! inf9ite be+ is n mat]ial1 means no?+ m ?an ! o!r2 ! inf9ite be+ is n passively s5sible4 ,we d n "k ! intr9sic nature ( matt]3 all we "k is1 t x is pres5t$ 9 intuition to our s5sibility "u ! =m ( ext5sion1 z an ess5tially multiplex object4 ,:5 we d5y t ,god is mat]ial or corporeal1 we d5y t he is passively s5sible1 or t he is multiple "u ! =m ( ext5sion4 #acd4 ,! o!r prop]ties ( matt]1 su* z mobility1 imp5etrability1 & divisibility1 relate to ext5sion1 or to a p>ticul> impression caus$ on our s5ses4 ,! difficulties t may be rais$ on ^! po9ts are solv$ by ! prec$+ p>agraphs4 ,in]tness1 or indiff]5ce to re/ or motion1 is a purely negative prop]ty4 ,x is ! incapacity ( all action1 ! abs5ce ( an int]nal pr9ciple productive ( *ange1 ! purely passive disposition to receive all t is communicat$ to x4 #ace4 ,x !re=e rema9s demon/rat$ t to d5y to ,god passive s5sibility1 or corporeal nature1 is to affirm 8 undivid$ nature1 8 productive activity1 & ! impossibility ( 8 suff]+ any k9d ( *ange4 #acf4 ,active s5sibility1 or ! faculty ( p]ceiv+1 pres5ts two *>act]i/ics :i* mu/ be def9$4 ,!re are 9 s5sation two ?+s3 ! affection caus$ 9 ! s5sitive be+ by ! s5sible object1 & ! int]nal repres5tation ( ! s5sible be+4 ,! fir/ is purely passive1 & supposes ! possibility ( be+ affect$ by an object1 &1 consequ5tly1 ( be+ subject to *ange4 ,?is _c be attribut$ to ! inf9ite be+3 to d5y x is to affirm immutability1 or ! necessity ( rema9+ always 9 ! same /ate4 ,! second is a sort ( inf]ior ord] ( cognition1 by :i* ! s5sitive be+ p]ceives ! s5sible object4 ,! repres5tation ( all objects mu/ necess>ily be f\nd 9 ! inf9ite be+1 consequ5tly all t is intuitively p]ceptive 9 ! s5sitive faculty mu/ be conta9$ 9 ! p]ception ( ! inf9ite be+2 t is to say1 all t s5sibility pres5ts to u ( ext]nal objects1 all t x transf]s to our intuition ( ext]nal exi/5ce1 mu/ be conta9$ 9 ! repres5tation :i* ! inf9ite intellig5ce has )9 itself4 ,man _c "k "u :at =m objects are pres5t$ to ! intuition ( ! inf9ite be+2 b x is c]ta9 t all ! tru? conta9$ 9 s5sitive repres5tation is pres5t$ to ?is intuition4 #acg4 ,intellig5ce1 or ! p]ception ( objects )\t ! =ms ( s5sibility1 implies ! p]ception ( be+s & ( _! relations1 :i* is some?+ positive4 ,9 u x is (t5 accompani$ by ! negative circum/ance1 ( ! abs5ce ( det]m9ate objects to :i* ! g5]al conception may be ref]r$4 ,! inf9ite be+ sees 9 a s+le intuition all t exi/s & all t c exi/1 & conta9s all t is positive 9 intellig5ce1 )\t :at is negative1 :i* is an imp]fection4 #ach4 ,x is evid5t t w mu/ be affirm$ ( ,god2 = we _c d5y ! inf9ite be+ t int]nal1 spontane\s activity :i* is call$ to w1 & ! nature ( :i* involves no imp]fection4 #aci4 ,! w ( ,god1 al?\gh "o & mo/ simple1 is di/+ui%$ into free & necess>y1 accord+ to ! objects to :i* x is ref]r$4 ,?is gives rise to v>i\s negative propositions1 :i* x is well to exam9e4 ,we say3 ,god _c w moral evil2 ?is proposition1 app>5tly negative1 is1 logically consid]$1 affirmative4 ,god _c w moral evil1 because 8 w is inv>iably fix$ on good1 on t sublime type ( all hol9ess :i* he contemplates 9 8 inf9ite ess5ce4 ,! impot5ce ( moral evil is 9 ,god an inf9ite p]fection ( 8 inf9ite hol9ess4 #adj4 ,! div9e w may be ref]r$ to ext]nal objects1 :i*1 be+ f9ite1 c be comb9$ 9 diff]5t mann]s1 & ! exi/5ce or non-exi/5ce ( ^! comb9ations dep5ds on ! end propos$ by ! ag5t :i* produces or modifies !m4 ,! w ( ,god ex]t$ on ^! objects is free2 & to say t he has no necessity ( do+ ?is or t is to d5y no?+1 b to affirm a p]fection1 namely1 ! faculty ( will+ or n will+1 or will+ 9 diff]5t mann]s1 objects :i*1 on acc\nt ( _! f9ite nature1 _c b9d ! inf9ite w4 #ada4 ,h5ce all ! reality conta9$ 9 g5]al ideas1 :e!r indet]m9ate or intuitive1 t is n contradictory1 is affirm$ ( ! absolutely inf9ite be+4 ,z to individual realities1 x is evid5t t ^? :i* are f9ite _c be affirm$ ( ! inf9ite be+ )\t contradiction4 ,! proposition3 ! inf9ite be+ is ! corporeal univ]se1 is equival5t to ?is3 ! inf9ite be+ is an ess5tially f9ite be+4 ,! same contradiction w be met ) 9 e proposition :]e ! subject is ! inf9ite be+1 & ! pr$icate an individual reality di/9ct f ! inf9ite be+4 ,?is rem>k w suffice = ! pres5t3 !y w be m cle>ly und]/ood :5 we come to treat ( ! multitude ( sub/ances1 9 refut+ ! error ( pan!i/s4 ,,*apt] ,,xviii4 ,,intellig5ce ,,& ,,! ,,absolutely ,,inf9ite ,,be+4 #adb4 ,! inf9ite be+ is n a vague object pres5t$ 9 ! g5]al idea ( be+1 b is possess$ ( true prop]ties :i*1 )\t ceas+ to be real1 are id5tifi$ ) its inf9ite ess5ce4 ,a be+ :i* is n some?+1 ( :i* "s prop]ty _c be affirm$1 is a dead be+1 :i* we conceive only "u ! g5]al idea ( ?+1 & is pres5t$ to u z some?+ :i* _c be realiz$4 ,su* is n ! conception :i* mank9d =m ( ! inf9ite be+2 ! idea ( activity has always be5 associat$ ) ! idea ( ,god3 ?is is n a g5]al1 b a fix$ & det]m9ate activity2 int]nally1 x is ! activity ( intellig5ce2 ext]nally1 ! activity :i* produces be+s4 #adc4 ,! idea ( activity 9 g5]al does n exclude all imp]fection3 activity to d evil is an imp]fect activity3 ! activity by :i* "s s5sible be+s act on o!rs1 is subject to ! conditions ( motion & ext5sion1 & is1 consequ5tly1 n exempt f imp]fection4 ,pure1 int]nal activity1 consid]$ 9 itself1 involves no imp]fection2 ?is is intellectual activity4 ,x is an in(f5sive activity1 & ( itself does no h>m2 x is an immaculate faculty1 & ( itself is nev] /a9$4 #add4 ,to "k good1 is good2 to "k evil1 is also good2 to wi% good is good2 to wi% evil is evil2 "h is a diff]5ce betwe5 ! und]/&+ & ! w2 ! w may be defil$ by its object1 ! und]/&+ nev]4 ,! morali/ consid]s1 exam9es1 & analyzes ! greate/ iniquities1 & /udies ! details ( ! mo/ degrad+ corruption2 ! politician kn[s ! passions1 ! mis]ies1 & ! crimes ( society2 ! lawy] witnesses inju/ice "u all its aspects2 ! naturali/ & ! physician contemplate ! mo/ fil?y & loa?some objects2 & 9 all ?is no /a9 atta*es to ! intellig5ce4 ,god himself kn[s all ! evil !re is or c be 9 ! physical or 9 ! moral ord]1 & yet 8 intellig5ce rema9s immaculate4 #ade4 ,creat$ be+s abuse lib]ty z su*2 = x is ess5tially a pr9ciple ( action1 & may be direct$ to evil2 b ! intellig5ce1 z reg>ds itself alone1 _c be abus$4 ,x is ess5tially an imman5t or intransitive act 9 :i* are repres5t$ real or possible objects2 ! abuse does n comm5ce until ! free w comb9es ! acts ( ! intellig5ce & directs !m to a bad action2 !re is no evil k until ! act ( ! w is introduc$ into ! comb9ations ( ! und]/&+4 ,a collection ( /ratagems to commit ! mo/ horrible crimes1 may be ! innoc5t object ( intellectual contemplation4 #adf4 ,a wond]ful ?+ is intellig5ce4 ,) x !re is relation1 ord]1 rule1 sci5ce1 art2 )\t intellig5ce !re is no?+4 ,conceive1 if y c1 ! _w )\t ! pre-exi/5ce ( intellig5ce2 all is *aos2 imag9e ! ord] :i* n[ exi/s1 de/roy intellig5ce1 & ! univ]se is a beautiful picture plac$ be=e ! ext+ui%$ sight ( a corpse4 #adg4 ,we conceive be+s z m p]fect accord+ly z !y are high] 9 ! ord] ( intellig5ce4 ,leav+ ! sph]e ( ! ins5sible & ent]+ ! ord] ( s5sitive repres5tation1 a new _w comm5ces4 ,! fir/ degree is ! animal 9 :i* s5sations are limit$ to a small numb] ( objects1 & ! summit is intellig5ce4 ,morality fl[s f intellig5ce1 or1 r1 is "o ( its laws1 x is ! prescription ( con=mity to an inf9itely p]fect type4 ,morality is expla9$ ) intellig5ce2 )\t intellig5ce x is an absurdity4 ,! intellig5ce has its laws1 its duties1 b !y proce$ f itself1 z ! sun enlight5s itself by its own light4 ,lib]ty is expla9$ ) intellig5ce2 )\t x1 lib]ty is an absurdity4 ,)\t intellig5ce causality is pres5t$ to u z a f>ce op]at+ )\t an object or a direction1 )\t a suffici5t reason1 & is consequ5tly ! greate/ ( absurdities4 ,:5 "s !ologians said t ! con/itutive attribute ( ! ess5ce ( ,god is intellig5ce1 !y express$ an idea :i* conta9s a wond]fully pr(\nd philosophical mean+4 #adh4 ,by ! intellectual act be+ does n g out ( itself3 intellig5ce is an imman5t act :i* may be ext5d$ to inf9ity1 & ex]cis$ ) inf9ite int5sity )\t ! intellig5t leav+ itself4 ,! m pr(\nd its und]/&+ is1 ! m pr(\nd is its conc5tration on ! abyss ( its consci\sness4 ,intellig5ce is ess5tially active3 x is activity4 ,see :at happ5s 9 man3 he ?9ks1 & 8 w awakes & acts3 he ?9ks1 & 8 body moves3 he ?9ks1 & 8 /r5g? is multipli$1 all 8 faculties are subject to 8 ?\ght4 ,let u imag9e an intellig5ce inf9ite 9 ext5sion & 9 int5sity1 an intellig5ce 9 :i* !re is no alt]nation ( action & re/1 ( en]gy & abatem5t1 an inf9ite intellig5ce :i* kn[s itself inf9itely1 & kn[s inf9ite1 real1 or possible objects ) an inf9itely p]fect k2 an intellig5ce1 ! s\rce ( all light )\t any d>kness1 ! orig9 ( all tru? )\t any mixture ( error2 we may !n =m "s idea ( ! absolutely inf9ite be+4 ,by ?is inf9ite intellig5ce ,i conceive an inf9itely p]fect w2 ,i conceive creation1 a pure act ( w call+ into exi/5ce1 f no?+1 ! types :i* pre-exi/$ 9 ! inf9ite intellig5ce2 ,i conceive inf9ite hol9ess1 & all ! p]fections id5tifi$ 9 t ocean ( light4 ,)\t intellig5ce ,i conceive no?+3 ! absolute be+1 :i* is 9 ! orig9 ( all ?+s1 seems ! old *aos1 & ,i try 9 va9 to induce "s ord] into x4 ,! ideas ( be+1 ( sub/ance1 & ( necessity are knock$ ab\t 9 ! greate/ confusion 9 my und]/&+2 ! inf9ite is n a focus ( light = me1 b an abyss ( d>kness3 ,i "k n :e!r ,i am imm]g$ 9 an inf9ite reality1 or lo/ 9 ! imag9>y space ( a vague & empty conception4 ,,*apt] ,,xix4 ,,summ+ ,,up4 #adi4 ,! exam9ation ( ! idea ( ! inf9ite is ( ! greate/ importance1 because x is insep>ably unit$ ) ! idea ( ,god4 #aej4 ,we h ! idea ( ! inf9ite2 b ! disputes conc]n+ its nature1 & ev5 its exi/5ce1 d5ote its obscurity4 #aea4 ,! f9ite is t :i* has limits4 #aeb4 ,! inf9ite is n ! same z ! indef9ite4 ,! inf9ite is t :i* has no limits--! n-f9ite2 ! indef9ite is t to :i* no limits are assign$--! n-def9$4 #aec4 ,! diff]5ce betwe5 ! inf9ite & ! f9ite is f\nd$ on ! pr9ciple ( contradiction3 ! f9ite affirms limits2 ! inf9ite d5ies !m3 !re is no m$ium betwe5 yes & no4 #aed4 ,limit is ! negation ( a be+1 or ( some?+ real1 appli$ to a be+3 ! limit ( a l9e is ! po9t :i* t]m9ates x2 ! limit ( a =ce is ! po9t beyond :i* x does n ext5d4 #aee4 ,! idea ( ! inf9ite1 d5y+ limit1 d5ies a negation2 !re=e x is an affirmative idea3 ! idea ( ! f9ite is negative1 because x affirms a negation4 #aef4 ,! idea ( ! inf9ite is appli$ to _m ord]s ( be+s1 & pres5ts /range anomalies1 :i* seem contradictions4 ,a l9e produc$ to inf9ity 9 only "o direction appe>s inf9ite1 s9ce x is great] ?an all f9ite l9es2 & x is n inf9ite1 because x has a limit 9 ! po9t :]e x />ts4 ,! same ?+ is v]ifi$ 9 surfaces & solids4 ,to expla9 ^! anomalies we mu/ att5d to ! foll[+ obs]vations4 #aeg4 ,! idea ( ! inf9ite is n intuitive4 ,we h no intuition ( an object ei!r absolutely or relatively inf9ite4 #aeh4 ,! idea ( ! inf9ite is an indet]m9ate conception =m$ by ! union ( ! two indet]m9ate ideas ( be+ 9 g5]al1 & ! negation ( limit 9 g5]al4 #aei4 ,! indet]m9ate conception ( ! inf9ite gives u no k ( any ?+ inf9ite4 #afj4 ,! anomalies & app>5t contradictions1 :i* we f9d 9 ! application ( ! idea ( ! inf9ite1 vani% :5 we reflect t ! diff]5ce ( ! results dep5ds on ! diff]5t conditions "u :i* we apply ! idea ( ! inf9ite4 ,?+s :i* w\ld be inf9ite "u "o condition cease to be s :5 consid]$ "u o!r conditions3 ! app>5t contradiction is caus$ by "o n rem>k+ ! *ange ( conditions4 #afa4 ,we h ! conception ( inf9ite numb]1 = we c unite 9 our m9d ! two indet]m9ate conceptions ( numb] & ! negation ( limit4 #afb4 ,we h ! conception ( inf9ite ext5sion1 = we c unite ! two indet]m9ate ideas ( ext5sion & ! negation ( limit4 #afc4 ,! possibility or non-contradiction ( conceptions 9 ! purely ideal ord] does n prove _! possibility 9 ! real ord]4 ,:5 ! conceptions are realiz$1 _! reality is n 9 an ab/ract ext5sion or an ab/ract numb]1 b 9 individual ext5d$ be+s1 or individual numb]s3 ! det]m9at5ess impli$ by ! reality may involve contradiction to ! true inf9ity1 al?\gh x be impossible = u to discov] any contradiction 9 ! indet]m9ate conception1 :i* ab/racts ! conditions ( _! realization4 #afd4 ,al?\gh we h ! conception ( inf9ite ext5sion1 x is impossible = u to imag9e x4 #afe4 ,no extr9sic or intr9sic repugnance c be discov]$ 9 ! exi/5ce ( inf9ite ext5sion4 #aff4 ,we _c "k by purely philosophical means :e!r ! ext5sion ( ! univ]se is inf9ite or f9ite4 #afg4 ,al?\gh an absolutely inf9ite numb] may be indet]m9ately conceiv$1 x is n susceptible ( any ari?metical or geometrical expression3 no s]ies ( :at ma!maticians call inf9ite expresses an absolutely inf9ite numb]4 #afh4 ,! intr9sic impossibility ( an actual inf9ite numb] may be demon/rat$ f ! intr9sic repugnance ( ! co-exi/5ce ( c]ta9 ?+s :i* may be numb]$4 #afi4 ,! idea ( ! absolutely inf9ite real be+ _c be indet]m9ate3 x necess>ily involves positive & =mal p]fections4 #agj4 ,all t does n imply a contradiction mu/ be affirm$ ( ! inf9ite be+4 ,t :i* is absurd is n a p]fection4 #aga4 ,analyz+ indet]m9ate & intuitive ideas1 we f9d t all ! reality conta9$ 9 !m is affirm$ ( ,god4 #agb4 ,! absolutely inf9ite be+ mu/ be intellig5t4 #agc4 ,intellig5ce is a p]fection :i* does n imply contradiction4 #agd4 ,w & lib]ty mu/ also be f\nd 9 ! absolutely inf9ite be+4 #age4 ,! indet]m9ate idea ( ! inf9ite is favor$ by ! comb9ation ( ! ideas ( be+ & n-be+4 #agf4 ,! idea ( an absolutely inf9ite be+ consi/s 9 ! idea ( a union ( all be+ t involves no contradiction4 #agg4 ,! indet]m9ate idea ( a real inf9ite be+1 or ( ,god1 is =m$ f ! idea ( an absolutely inf9ite be+1 comb9$ ) ! intuitive ideas ( intellig5ce1 w1 lib]ty1 causality1 & all o!rs t c be conceiv$ )\t imp]fection1 9 any inf9ite degree4 ,,book ,,n9?4 ,,on ,,sub/ance4 ,,*apt] ,i4 ,,"n ,,& ,,g5]al ,,idea ,,( ,,sub/ance4 #a4 ,:at is sub/ance8 ,h we a cle> & di/9ct idea ( x8 ,! disputes ( philosoph]s conc]n+ ! idea ( sub/ance & ! cont9ual applications :i* we make ( x1 prove two ?+s3 fir/1 t ! idea ( sub/ance exi/s2 & secondly1 t its cle>ness & di/9ctness are n all t c\ld be desir$4 ,a m]e "n1 conta9+ no idea1 c\ld n s /rongly draw ! att5tion ( all philosoph]s1 nor be us$ s g5]ally1 ev5 9 ord9>y language2 a cle> & di/9ct idea c\ld n give occasion to s mu* dispute4 #b4 ,! importance ( ?is idea may be se5 9 ! results to :i* philosoph]s are l$1 accord+ to ! way 9 :i* !y expla9 x4 ,! entire sy/em ( ,sp9osa is f\nd$ on wrong def9ition ( sub/ance4 #c4 ,9 ! pres5t "q z 9 _m o!rs1 x does n seem to be ! %orte/ way to beg9 ) a def9ition1 unless ! ?+ def9$ is only a "n3 to def9e a ?+ is to expla9 x1 & we _c expla9 x if we are ignorant ( :at x is1 & we are ignorant1 or are suppos$ to be ignorant ( ?is1 :5 we ent] on inve/igations 9 ord] to asc]ta9 :at x is4 ,if philosoph]s1 at ! beg9n+ ( _! treatises1 w\ld n say1 sub/ance is ?is1 b only1 ?is is :at ,i und]/& by sub/ance1 !y w\ld escape a numb] ( difficulties4 #d4 ,aft] def9+ ! "n ( sub/ance1 & mak+ a cle> & di/9ct idea correspond to x1 x is /ill necess>y to %[ h[ f> ! idea repres5ts objects really exi/+1 or1 :e!r x belongs to ! class ( ideas express+ only ! relation ( diff]5t ideas1 )\t our hav+ any means ( asc]ta9+ :e!r ?is relation is f\nd 9 ! positive _w or n2 t is to say1 :e!r ! idea ( sub/ance is only ! "w ( our und]/&+1 a m]e result ( ! comb9ation ( c]ta9 ideas1 or is furni%$ u by exp]i5ce itself4 ,i %all try n to fall into any ( ^! faults2 ,i "k n1 h[ev]1 :e!r ,i c escape !m4 ,= ?is purpose1 ,i %all fir/ analyze ! ^w1 ) respect to its etymological s5se1 & !n exam9e ! v>i\s mean+s :i* h be5 giv5 to x4 ,! analysis ( words is v useful = ! analysis ( ideas3 words (t5 conta9 a great deal ( tru?1 :i* we lose by n att5d+ to _! common mean+4 #e4 ,! ^w sub/ance1 sub/antia1 implies some?+ :i* is "u1 sub/at1 :i* is ! subject on :i* o!r ?+s are plac$2 j z its correlative1 accid5t or modification1 expresses some?+ :i* happ5s to ! subject1 accidit2 some?+ :i* modifies x1 :i* is 9 x1 z a mode ( be+1 modus4 #f4 ,by sub/ance we seem to und]/& some?+ con/ant 9 ! mid/ ( v>iation1 some?+ :i*1 al?\gh x is 9 v>i\s ways successively1 accord+ to ! v>iety ( modifications :i* affect x1 rema9s con/ant & id5tical "u diff]5t trans=mations4 ,:5 we say t ! sub/ance has receiv$ any new modification1 al?\gh we und]/& by ?is t ! sub/ance is1 9 a new mode1 we d n mean t x is diff]5t 9 itself1 t x has lo/ its int]nal primitive be+1 & tak5 a new be+2 b we only consid] ?is *ange z ext]nal1 & z leav+ unt\*$ a c]ta9 base1 :i* is :at we call sub/ance4 ,if x 7 n s1 if we did n conceive some?+ con/ant & id5tical "u modifications1 we c\ld n di/+ui% sub/ance f its modifications4 ,! modification passes f n-be+ to be+1 & f be+ to n-be+2 n[ x is1 & n[ x resigns its po/ to ano!r & v diff]5t modification4 ,b ! sub/ance is ! same "u diff]5t modifications2 x does n pass f n-be+ to be+ ) ! succession ( its modifications4 ,f ! mom5t t we attribute to sub/ance ! in/ability :i* belongs to its modifications1 x ceases to be di/+ui%able f !m4 ,ord9>y language confirms ?is tru?4 ,:5 !re is a v>iation ( modifications we say t ! sub/ance *anges1 t is1 we conceive some?+ :i* exi/$ be=e ! *ange1 & exi/s aft] x4 ,we say t a modification has entirely disappe>$2 we d n say ?is ( ! sub/ance1 b only t x is1 or is pres5t$ to u1 9 a diff]5t mann]4 ,we !re=e conceive some?+ :i* rema9s con/ant & id5tical "u diff]5t modifications3 ! subject 9 :i* ^! *anges occur1 ?is some?+ :i* does n disappe> ) ! disappe>ance ( ! modifications1 :i* is n *ang$ int]nally ) ^! *anges1 we call sub/ance1 sub/antia1 sub/ratum4 ,,*apt] ,,ii4 ,,application ,,( ,,! ,,idea ,,( ,,sub/ance ,,to ,,corporeal ,,objects4 #g4 ,let u apply ! ideas conta9$ 9 t ( sub/ance to a corporeal object3 ?is w help expla9 ^! ideas1 & p]haps sugge/ o!rs4 ,! pap] on :i* ,i am writ+ is susceptible ( v>i\s modifications3 ,i may write on x a ?\s& diff]5t ?+s1 9 v>i\s *>act]s1 & 9 diff]5t colors2 ,i may fold x 9 v>i\s ways1 & give x an inf9ite v>iety ( positions 9 relation to ! objects ar\nd x1 & ,i may move x 9 all imag9able directions4 ,"u ?is inf9ity ( *anges !re is some?+ con/ant1 some?+ :i* does n *ange4 ,!re are _m new ?+s1 b !re is "o :i* is n new1 :i* is always ! same4 ,!re is "o :i* suff]s ^! *anges1 b reta9s some?+ :i* does n *ange4 ,if ,i make ! pap] blue & !n r$1 t :i* is n[ r$ is ! same t 0 blue1 & be=e t :ite1 & to ?is :i* is con/ant all ^? *anges are ref]r$4 ,if a :ite pap] is %[n me1 & !n ano!r pap] t is blue1 & !n "o t is r$1 x is cle> t x is n ! same z ?\gh ,i gave all ^! trans=mations to ! same pap]4 ,! impression :i* ! color produces 9 me rema9s ! same2 9 :at1 !n1 does ! diff]5ce consi/8 ,! diff]5ce is1 t 9 ! "o case !re is some?+ p]man5t1 :i* has pass$ ?r\gh successive *anges2 9 ! o!r case ?is some?+ is n ! same1 b is ano!r & diff]5t ?+4 ,9 ! "o case !re are diff]5t modifications2 9 ! o!r !re are diff]5t sub/ances4 #h4 ,let u g deep] into ! matt]4 ,if we only receiv$ ! successive impressions )\t any means ( ref]r+ !m to ! same object1 to connect !m 9 a common po9t1 we %\ld f9d no diff]5ce betwe5 ! two cases ( :i* we h be5 speak+4 ,if a piece ( :ite pap] be plac$ be=e u1 &1 aft] turn+ our eyes aside = a mom5t1 we f9d a blue pap] 9 ! same place1 ) ! same dim5sions1 & aft] aga9 turn+ our eyes aside we f9d a r$ pap]3 x is cle> t x w\ld be impossible = u to di/+ui%1 by ! m]e succession ( ! visual impressions1 :e!r ! same pap] has be5 diff]5tly color$ 9 succession1 or diff]5t pap]s h be5 sub/itut$ = ! fir/4 ,b if we keep our eyes on ! place :]e ! pap] is1 we see :e!r ! pap] is color$ or *ang$4 ,9 ! fir/ case1 ! appe>ance ( ! new color w cont9ue ) ! same s5sation ( ! pap]1 unmov$1 ! trans=mation is made )\t our los+ sight ( x1 & ! pap] receives ! cont9u$ succession ( its motions & positions "u ! h& ( ! "o :o colors x4 ,we are !n sure t ! pap] is ! same1 because !re has be5 a cont9uity ( s5sation1 or r a connection ( ! diff]5t colors ) a ?ird1 result+ f ! situation ( ! pap] & its motions1 & f all t by :i* we "k :at is common to ! fir/ & ! second4 ,b if !re is no new color+ ( ! pap]1 b a sub/itution ( a diff]5tly color$ pap]1 we see t ! fir/ pap] is tak5 away2 ! :ole ord] ( ! s5sation is int]rupt$1 & new s5sations are pres5t$4 ,^! la/ h no connection ) ! fir/2 !re is1 consequ5tly1 = u a diff]5t ?+4 #i4 ,?is %[s h[ ! idea ( sub/ance ) respect to bodies is g5]at$ 9 u1 or1 to speak m prop]ly1 h[ we apply ! idea ( sub/ance to bodies4 ,:5 we discov] a l9k :i* unites ! diff]5t s5sations 9 "o po9t1 we call t 9 :i* !y are unit$1 sub/ance4 ,& z we meet 9 nature ) _m ( ^! po9ts :i* are indep5d5t ( "o ano!r1 we naturally say !re are _m corporeal sub/ances4 #aj4 ,:5 we p]ceive an impression we nev] call x a sub/ance1 if we ref] x to an object1 or consid] x z objective3 = ! object is n1 ( itself alone1 capable ( connect+ v>i\s s5sations4 ,we receive ! s5sations ( r$1 & n only ord9>y p1 b ev5 philosoph]s1 :5 n philosophiz+1 make ! color objective1 & consid] ! r$1 n z a simple s5sation1 b z an ext]nal quality4 ,no "o w\ld call ?is quality by itself a sub/ance2 = x is n capable1 ( itself alone1 ( connect+ o!r impressions or qualities4 ,if !re is a *ange ( color ! r$ disappe>s1 & ! new impression is connect$ 9 ! ord] ( "t ) ! s5sation ( ! r$1 b does n reside 9 x4 ,if !re is a *ange ( =m1 al?\gh ! r$ cont9ues1 we d n conceive ?is color z ! necess>y l9k betwe5 ! two =ms1 because we "k t ! cont9uance ( ! r$ is indiff]5t to ! v>iety ( =m1 :i* may be *ang$ ) or )\t ! cont9uance ( ?is color4 ,z 9 g5]al we h exp]i5c$ t no s5sation is necess>ily connect$ ) ano!r1 & t among s5sations connect$ at a common po9t1 "s disappe> )\t ! re/ disappe>+1 we inf] t none ( !m is a necess>y l9k2 & !re=e1 al?\gh we make !m objective1 we d n give !m ! "* ( a sub/ance1 ( any ?+ rema9+ id5tical ?r\gh *anges1 ( :i* x is1 z x 71 ! recipi5t4 #aa4 ,!re is a prop]ty 9 bodies :i* is necess>y to all s5sations1 or at lea/1 to ! two pr9cipal s5sations ( sight & t\*4 ,?is prop]ty is ext5sion1 :i*1 :e!r consid]$ subjectively or objectively1 we reg>d z a recipi5t ( all s5sations4 ,we nei!r see nor imag9e ! :ite or black2 we nei!r t\* nor imag9e ! h>d or ! s(t1 ! w>m or ! cold1 )\t ! ext5sion 9 :i* ! :it5ess or blackness1 ! h>dness or s(tness1 ! w>m? or ! cold reside4 ,?us ext5sion might p]haps m]it ! honor ( sub/ance1 if x 7 n subject to ano!r condition1 :i* deprives x ( ?is title4 ,al?\gh :5 we conceive ext5sion 9 g5]al1 9 ! ab/ract1 consid]+ x z a m]e cont9uity1 we absolutely ab/ract x f all =m2 :5 we h ne$ ( an appli$ ext5sion z ! recipi5t ( s5sations1 x is impossible to f9d x )\t a det]m9ate =m & figure4 ,we d n see a color simply1 b we see x 9 a circul>1 triangul>1 or o!r ext5sion4 ,^! =ms are conf\nd$ ) ext5sion itself z its applications2 & d n s]ve z a l9k = o!r s5sations4 ,sometimes1 x is true1 ! same figure receives diff]5t colors1 diff]5t positions1 diff]5t degrees ( heat or cold1 etc41 b ! contr>y also sometimes occurs1 & ) ! same color1 & ! same degree ( heat or cold1 ) ! same cont9uance ( ! o!r s5sations1 ! object *anges its =m2 j z a r$ circle may become a gre5 circle1 a r$ object may become circul>1 & aft]w>ds triangul>4 ,9 ! fir/ case1 ! circul> figure is ! l9k connect+ ! s5sations ( ! colors2 9 ! second1 ! color is ! l9k connect+ ! figures4 #ab4 ,hav+ depriv$ ext5sion ( ! honor ( sub/ance1 z well z all o!r s5sations1 9 s f> z objective2 we may obs]ve t all ^! v>iations 9 ! objects are successive1 & ! s5sations are connect$ ) ea* o!r4 ,?us ! same circle may take diff]5t colors2 & ! same color diff]5t figures2 ! colors may be aga9 *ang$1 & ! fir/ reproduc$1 ! figure rema9+ ! same2 or ! fir/ figure may be reproduc$1 ! colors rema9+ ! same4 ,we conclude t "u ?is v>iety !re is some?+ con/ant1 t "u ?is multiplicity !re is some?+ :i* is "o2 t "u ?is succession ( be+ & n-be+ !re is some?+ p]man5t2 & ?is :i* is con/ant1 "o1 & p]man5t1 ! recipi5t ( ^! *anges1 ! po9t outside ( u :i* connects !m1 & enables u to conceive !m connect$1--?is is :at we call sub/ance4 ,,*apt] ,,iii4 ,,def9ition ,,( ,,corporeal ,,sub/ance4 #ac4 ,:at is ! p]man5t subject ( trans=mations 9 ! s5sible ord]8 ,is x a pure illusion8 ,is x a reality8 ,:at reality c x be8 ,does x n seem r an ab/raction8 ,a ?+ :i* is no color1 b l5ds itself all colors2 :i* is none ( ! qualities :i* we exp]i5ce1 b ! subject & cause ( !m all2 :i* is no =m1 b accommodates itself to all =ms2 :i* is n pure ext5sion1 because ?is is an ab/raction1 & x is some?+ :i* s]ves z ! gr\nd ( o!r ?+s2 a corporeal object :i*1 9 itself1 c affect none ( ! s5ses2 :at is x8 ,is x :at ! ,ari/otelians call an occult quality1 a my/]i\s1 & fanta/ic be+1 a m]e illusion8 ,let u exam9e x by ! light ( exp]i5ce4 #ad4 ,let u take a piece ( wax & )\t lett+ x g out ( our h&s pa9t x diff]5t colors successively1 subject x to diff]5t degrees ( temp]ature1 s(t5+ x by w>m+1 & !n cool+ x2 let u give x diff]5t =ms1 ( a globe1 a cyl9d]1 a p>allelopip$on1 a table1 a vase1 or a /atue2 d all ^! *anges take place 9 ! same ?+8 ,yes4 ,is ?is ?+ n a color1 or a figure1 or a degree ( temp]ature8 ,no2 because all ^! qualities 7 & ceas$ to be :il/ ! ?+ rema9$ ! same4 ,h[ d ,i "k t ! ?+ rema9$ ! same8 ,because !re 0 a cont9uity ( s5sation 9 ! eye fix$ ^u ! object2 9 ! t\* :i*1 al?\gh x felt ! modifications ( w>m & cold1 h>d & s(t1 exp]i5c$ also an un9t]rupt$ s5sation ( an object1 :i* rema9$ con/antly 9 ! h&1 & ! weight ( :i* 0 cont9u\sly felt4 ,!re=e !re is some?+ !re :i* is n ! modifications1 b is t :i* is modifi$1 some?+ common to !m all1 :i* receives & connects !m1 outside ( me & )9 me4 #ae4 ,exam9+ "o conception ( ?is p]man5t some?+1 we f9d t1 aft] ab/ract+ its qualities1 we h3 ,i4 ,! idea ( be+4 ,we say ! ?+1 ! some?+1 ! subject1 etc41 we !re=e speak ( a be+1 ( a quality4 ,)\t ! reality !re is no?+2 & no?+ _c be ! subject ( modifications1 or ! l9k connect+ impressions4 ,,ii4 ,! idea ( be+1 :i* we "h f9d1 is n pure1 x is n be+ alone4 ,! qualities exi/1 are be+s1 & /ill we d n conf\nd !m ) ! subject4 ,,iii4 ,t :i* accompanies ! idea ( be+ is ! idea ( p]man5ce amid/ succession1 & ! relation ( ?is p]man5ce z ! po9t ( connection1 ! immovable c5tre 9 ! mid/ ( succession4 #af4 ,if1 !re=e1 we wi%$ to def9e sub/ance1 we c\ld only say t x is a p]man5t be+ 9 :i* occur ! *anges :i* are pres5t$ to u 9 ! s5sible ph5om5a4 ,our k is all r$uc$ to ?is2 all t we c add beside1 is only hypo!sis or conjecture4 ,9 va9 y ask me1 :at is ?is be+8 ,give me ! intuition ( ! ess5ce ( corporeal ?+s1 & ,i w tell y2 b :ile ,i "k !m only by _! effects1 t is1 ! impressions :i* !y produce 9 me1 ,i _c answ] y4 ,i "k t x is some?+2 ,i "k its relation to its =ms2 ,i "k t ! =ms are 9 ! subject1 & are n ! subject2 b "h is ! limit ( my k4 ,! object correspond+ to ! idea compos$ ( a p]man5t be+ & its relation to v>i\s =ms is :at ,i call corporeal sub/ance4 #ag4 ,s9ce ! sub/ance *anges its accid5ts1 rema9+ ! same itself1 x foll[s t its exi/5ce is indep5d5t ( ! accid5ts4 ,ab/ract+1 = ! pres5t1 :e!r x c or _c exi/ )\t any1 ,i only affirm t none 9 p>ticul> is necess>y to x4 ,"h we mu/ take note ( ! diff]5ce betwe5 sub/ance 9 itself1 & 9 ! m$ium by :i* x is manife/$ to u1 & plac$ 9 active or passive communication ) u4 ,! accid5ts are ?is m$ium2 !y are ! transitory =ms x puts on4 ,h[ c we "k ! exi/5ce ( bodies1 except by s5sations8 ,! object ( s5sation is n sub/ance 9 its inn] nature1 b only its qualities z affect+ u4 ,,*apt] ,,iv4 ,,relation ,,( ,,corporeal ,,sub/ance ,,to ,,its ,,accid5ts4 #ah4 ,9 ! idea ( corporeal sub/ance ! idea ( p]man5ce is p]fectly includ$1 ! idea ( unity only imp]fectly4 ,! unity :i* we conceive 9 e corporeal sub/ance is a factiti\s unity2 s9ce t :i* is con/ant is n "o b an aggregate ( _m1 z is prov$ by ! divisibility ( matt]2 out ( e corporeal sub/ance we may make _m :i* w h ! same "r z ! fir/ to be call$ sub/ances4 ,a piece ( wood is a sub/ance2 b we may slit x into sev]al pieces :i* w be equally sub/ances4 ,^! pieces1 jo9$ toge!r1 =m$ :at are call$ "o sub/ance2 b x is cle> t ?is unity 0 v imp]fect1 & 0 r a union ?an a unity1 & t if we consid] x z "o1 x 0 9 relation to ! unity ( effect :i* x produc$ 9 u1 by ! connection :i* x gave to our s5sations & to ! ph5om5a :i* result$ f x4 #ai4 ,h5ce1 e corporeal sub/ance involves multiplicity1 or comb9ation ( ! elem5ts :i* compose x4 ,exp]i5ce in=ms u t ?is comb9ation is n p]man5t2 !re is1 consequ5tly1 no corporeal sub/ance :i* does n imply at lea/ "o modification1 namely1 ! arrangem5t ( its p>ts4 ,ab/ract+ ! *anges :i* ?is modification may und]go1 x c nev] be conf\nd$ ) ! sub/ance3 al?\gh ! bodies might be pres5t$ con/antly to our s5ses ) ! same arrangem5t ( ! p>ts1 ! p]man5t be+ w\ld be 9 ! p>ts1 n 9 _! arrangem5t4 ,! latt] is some?+ ext]nal :i* is add$ to ! ?+ exi/+2 !re c be no union & comb9ation )\t p>ts :i* are unit$ & comb9$4 #bj4 ,a diff]5ce :i* we obs]ve betwe5 ! sub/ance & its modifications is1 t ! sub/ance is indep5d5t ( ! modifications1 b ! modifications are n indep5d5t ( ! sub/ance4 ,! sub/ance1 :ile rema9+ ! same1 *anges its accid5ts1 b an accid5t _c *ange its sub/ance & rema9 ! same4 ,! same block may receive diff]5t figures successively2 b a figure1 num]ically ! same1 _c pass f "o block to ano!r4 ,two blocks may h a simil> or a diff]5t figure1 :e!r cubic1 sph]ical1 or pyramidal1 & "o may take ! figure ( ! o!r2 b 9 t case1 ! figures are n id5tical1 b simil>1 !y are specifically b n num]ically ! same4 #ba4 ,if ,i am ask$ h[ ,i "k t !re is only simil>ity & n num]ical id5tity 9 ! figures :i* bodies take successively1 t !re is no p]man5ce 9 ! figures :i* *ange _! subject1 & consequ5tly t ! same figure _c pass f "o sub/ance to ano!r1 9 ! same mann] t ! same sub/ance passes f "o figure to ano!r2 ,i %all n f9d x difficult to prove :at ,i ass]t4 ,!re is no "o :o does n see :at an extravagant ?+ x w\ld be = a cubic figure to leave a body & pass to ano!r4 ,:at is ?is figure sep>at$ f ! body8 ,h[ is x pres]v$ dur+ ! transition8 ,:y is x n exactly ! same 9 bo?1 b pres5t$ ) slight modifications8 ,has x und]gone a modification 9 its passage f "o body to ano!r8 ,!n !re w\ld be a modification ( a modification1 & ! figure 9 itself ab/ract$ f all body1 w\ld be a k9d ( sub/ance ( a second>y ord]1 p]man5t "u modifications4 ,^! are b absurd dreams 9 :i* t is appli$ to ! concrete :i* belongs to ! idea only 9 ! ab/ract4 ,?is transition ( ! =ms w\ld suppose _! sep>ate exi/5ce1 & ?us we might h all k9ds ( ab/ract figures1 cubes1 sph]es1 circles1 triangles1 etc41 subsi/+ 9 !mselves )\t application to any ?+ figur$4 #bb4 ,a /ill /rict] demon/ration ( ?is tru? is possible4 ,if we suppose a figure1 num]ically ! same1 to pass f "o body to ano!r2 ! block ,a1 :i* loses ! cubic =m1 transmits x to ! body ,b4 ,n[1 ?is individual =m _c be 9 bo? at ! same "t4 ,suppose t aft] ! cubic =m has left ! block ,a1 we turn x back be=e x has t\*$ ! body ,b1 evid5tly x w n be ! same 9 bo?3 !re=e ! body ,b has n acquir$ ! same1 b only a simil> =m4 ,x is also evid5t t 9 ord] to give ! cubic =m1 we ne$ n take x f ano!r2 !re=e1 ! =m ( "o is n individually t ( ! o!r2 o!rwise we %\ld h to say t x is & is n1 t x is pres]v$ & ceases to exi/ at ! same "t4 #bc4 ,! t]m transmission or communication ( motion1 :i* is s mu* us$ 9 physical sci5ce1 expresses some?+ real s long z limit$ to ! ph5om5on :i* is "u calculation2 b x w\ld be an absurdity1 if x meant t ! same motion :i* 0 9 "o body has pass$ to ano!r4 ,! sum ( ! quantities ( motion is ! same 9 ela/ic bodies aft] impact z be=e x2 ! velocity be+ divid$ betwe5 !m1 & ! "o ga9+ :at ! o!r loses4 ,?is is prov$ by calculation1 & confirm$ by exp]i5ce4 ,b x is evid5t t "o body does n imp>t ! same individual velocity :i* x conta9$ to ! o!r body2 = n only c ! velocity n be sep>at$ f ! body & pass f "o subject to ano!r2 b x _c ev5 be conceiv$ except z a relation1 ! idea ( :i* includes ! ideas ( a body mov$1 ( space1 & ( "t4 ,x is true t ,q repres5t+ ! quantity ( ! motion be=e impact1 ! value ( ,q rema9s ! same aft] impact2 b ?is only expresses ! ph5om5on 9 relation to its effects1 z subject to calculation2 n t ! velocity 9 ! second memb] ( ! equation is compos$ ( ! p>ts ( ! fir/4 ,let ,a & ,b repres5t two bodies1 ! individual masses ( :i* are express$ by ^! two lett]s2 & ,v1 v _! respective velocities be=e impact4 ,! quantity ( motion w be ,q ,a ,v ,b v4 ,aft] impact !re w be a new velocity :i* we may call w1 & ! quantity ( motion w be ,q ,a w ,b u4 ,ma!matically speak+1 ! value ( ,q w be ! same2 b ?is only means t if ! results ( ! motion be express$ 9 l9es or numb]s1 we %all h ! same aft] impact z be=e x2 x does n & _c mean t 9 ! velocity u1 consid]$ z unit$ to ! subject1 !re is a portion ( velocity :i* has be5 deta*$ f ,v to be jo9$ to v4 #bd4 ,h5ce1 we d n conceive ! accid5ts ( bodies z possible )\t a subject 9 :i* !y are inh]5t2 & t sub/ances are n inh]5t 9 ano!r be+1 b are conceiv$ & really exi/ )\t ?is inh]5ce4 ,a figure _c exi/ )\t a ?+ figur$1 b ! ?+ figur$ may /ill exi/1 ?r\gh all o!r ?+s are de/roy$4 ,! analysis ( ! nature ( sub/ance %[s t its exi/5ce supposes ! exi/5ce ( ano!r be+ :i* produc$ x2 b relation betwe5 !m is t ( cause & effect1 n ( inh]5ce1 or t ( ! subject & its modification4 #be4 ,^! la/ obs]vations expla9 ano!r m>k ( corporeal sub/ances4 ,9 ! ?ird *apt] ( ?is book we f\nd ! ?ree *>act]i/ics ( be+1 ! relation ( ! p]man5t to ! v>iable1 & ! subject ( ! v>iations2 we n[ f9d a f\r?1 :i* is a negation1 non-inh]5ce 9 ano!r4 ,?is negative *>act]i/ic is includ$ 9 ! positive "o1 p]man5t subject ( v>iations2 = x is cle> t 9 conceiv+ a subject p]man5t amid v>iations we d n include inh]5ce1 b r d5y x1 at lea/ implicitly4 ,non-inh]5ce supposes some?+ positive1 some?+ on :i* is f\nd$ ! d5ial ( ! necessity ( be+ inh]5t4 ,:at is ?is some?+8 ,we "k n4 ,we "k t x exi/s1 b its explanation is beyond our rea*4 ,x is probably inexplicable )\t ! intuition ( ! ess5ce ( ?+s2--an intuition :i* we h n4 ,,*apt] ,v4 ,,consid]ations ,,on ,,corporeal ,,sub/ance ,,9 ,,itself4 #bf4 ,! idea ( sub/ance1 su* z we h ?us f> expla9$ x1 implies a relation to accid5ts 9 g5]al4 ,! idea we are n[ exam9+ is n t ( an indet]m9ate sub/ance1 b ( corporeal sub/ance2 & x mu/ be confess$ t x is difficult to conceive a p>ticul> corporeal sub/ance )\t any accid5t4 ,if ,i take f ! pap]1 on :i* ,i am writ+1 its figure1 ext5sion1 & all t relates to my s5ses1 :at is !re left = me to conceive some?+ p>ticul> & det]m9ate1 some?+ :i* is n ! idea ( be+ 9 g5]al1 b ( ?is be+ 9 p>ticul>8 ,x is cle> t1 9 ord] t ! object may n disappe> altoge!r1 & los+ its individuality be conf\nd$ 9 ! univ]sal idea1 ,i mu/ res]ve some?+ by :i* ,i c say ?is3 t is to say1 t :i* is "h1 or :i* has affect$ me 9 ?is or t mann]1 or has be5 ! subject ( su* or su* modifications4 ,i consid] at lea/ its position ) respect to o!r bodies1 or its causality 9 relation to ! effects :i* x has produc$ 9 me1 or its nature z ! subject ( det]m9ate accid5ts4 ,j z ! idea ( f9ite sub/ance 9 g5]al involves relation to c]ta9 accid5ts 9 g5]al1 ! idea ( a p>ticul> sub/ance involves relation to p>ticul> accid5ts4 #bg4 ,we f9d ?is relation 9 our mode ( conceiv+ corporeal sub/ance2 we _c ass]t t x is involv$ 9 ! nature ( ! sub/ance4 ,?is nature is unkn[n to u1 & :5 we attempt to exam9e x1 we pass to ano!r "q1 t ( ! ess5ce ( bodies4 #bh4 ,nei!r c we say h[ f> ! id5tity ( ! corporeal sub/ance cont9ues "u its diff]5t trans=mations4 ,! p>tisans ( corpuscul> philosophy consid] all trans=mations z m]e local motions1 & all ! v>iations :i* we see 9 bodies z m]e results ( ! diff]5t position ( ! corpuscles among !mselves4 ,leibnitz resolv$ matt] into an inf9ity ( monads1 diff]+ f ! atoms ( ,epicurus1 b conduc+ to ! sub/antial inv>iability ( bodies1 :i* are only a collection ( indivisible sub/ances1 :i* he calls monads4 ,! ,ari/otelians believ$ t1 ( ! *anges ( bodies1 "s 7 accid5tal1 z figure1 motion1 d5sity1 w>m?1 cold1 etc42 o!rs sub/antial1 z ! *ange ( wood to a%es4 ,b 9 all ! v>iety ( sy/ems1 all admit some?+ p]man5t1 ! subject ( ! *anges4 ,! ,atomi/s & ,leibnitz evid5tly admitt$ ! id5tity ( ! subject4 ,z to ! ,ari/otelians1 al?\gh ! *ange :i* introduc$ a sub/antial =m diff]5t f ! fir/ sub/antially trans=m$ ! be+1 s t aft] ! *ange ( ! sub/antial =m x c\ld n be said t "o 0 sub/antially ! o!r1 !y /ill ?\ght !re 0 a common subject 9 ^! sub/antial trans=mations1 & ?is 0 :at !y call$ ! fir/ matt]1 mat]ia prima4 ,all sy/ems ( philosophy admit ?is cle> & evid5t tru?1 t 9 ! mid/ ( ! trans=mations ( ! corporeal _w1 !re is some?+ p]man5t4 #bi4 ,?is corporeal sub/ance be+ a reality1 mu/ n only exi/1 b x mu/ be some?+ det]m9ate4 ,?is sub/antial det]m9ation ( ! body1 :i* makes x ?is p>ticul> ?+1 & di/+ui%es x 9 its int]nal nature1 9 its ess5ce1 f all o!r bodies ( o!r species1 ! ,ari/otelians call$ ! sub/antial =m4 ,! subject ( ?is =m1 or actuality1 :i* 0 common to all bodies1 !y call$ ! mat]ia prima1 :i* 0 a pure pot5tiality1 a sort ( m$ium betwe5 pure no?+ & actual be+4 #cj4 ,ev] s9ce !re h be5 s*ools ( philosophy1 ^! po9ts h be5 disput$2 & x is probable !y always w be2 b x is to v little purpose4 ,we "k ! exi/5ce ( ! corporeal _w1 we "k its relations to ourselves1 we "k its prop]ties & its laws1 s f> z !y are subject to our obs]vation2 b its intr9sic nature is beyond ! rea* ( our s5ses1 or our in/rum5ts4 ,increas$ acut5ess ( obs]vation & improvem5t 9 ! p[] & delicacy ( in/rum5ts1 discov]s new my/]ies1 & man f9ds ! b>ri]s :i* he believ$ ! ne plus ultra1 remov$ f him z he advances4 ,w he ev] be able to pass !m8 ,w he ev] make ! entire circuit ( ?is sci5tific _w8 ,is ! k ( ! intr9sic nature ( ! subject ( ?is inf9ity ( ph5om5a :i* a/oni% u1 res]v$ to ! future8 ,x is h>d to believe x4 ,! telescope1 becom+ m p]fect1 ext5ds ! limits ( ! univ]se1 & seems to behold ! inf9itely great2 ! p]fection ( ! microscope1 advanc+ 9 ! opposite direction1 reg>ds ! inf9itely little4 ,:]e are ! limits8 ,x is probable t man is n p]mitt$ to rea* !m :ile 9 ?is _w4 ,! m9d ( man 9 its fruitful activity1 /ruggles alt]nately aft] ! two extremes1 b j z he flatt]s himself he is rea*+ ! la/ limit1 he feels t some?+ /rong] ?an himself )holds him f atta9+ ! object ( 8 noble desires2 x is ! *a9 t b9ds him to ! mortal body1 & ob/ructs ! flight ( 8 pure _s4 ,,*apt] ,,vi4 ,,sub/antiality ,,( ,,! ,,human ,,me4 #ca4 ,we h n f\nd p]fect unity 9 corporeal sub/ances3 all t are subject to our s5ses may be resolv$ into a numb] ( o!rs equally sub/ances 9 _! turn2 a body is r an aggregate ( sub/ances1 ?an "o sub/ance4 ,we d n f9d ! unity 9 ! bodies2 we attribute x to !m ei!r inasmu* z !y =m a common l9k ( our s5sations1 or inasmu* z we consid] ! diff]5t sub/ances subord9at$ to "o be+ & gov]n+ sub/ance4 ,?us ! p>ts ( an animat$ body con/itute a sort ( unity1 inasmu* z !y are subord9ate to ! pr9ciple :i* animates !m4 #cb4 ,we d n conclude f ?is t true unity does n exi/ 9 bodies2 if we c\ld "k _! ess5ce1 we %\ld d\btless discov] x1 :e!r 9 ! monads1 z ma9ta9$ by ,leibnitz1 or 9 some?+ else m or less resembl+ !m4 ,al?\gh ?is k ( _! ess5ce is d5i$ u1 reason leads u to ?is unity4 ,! composite is =m$ ( p>ts2 if ^! p>ts are 9 turn =m$ ( o!rs1 we mu/ at la/ come to some?+ :i* has no p>ts2 "h we f9d ! indivisible1 or r1 ! true unity4 ,?is reason+ is equally valid1 ev5 ?\gh we suppose matt] to be inf9itely divisible4 ,inf9ite divisibility w\ld suppose an inf9ity ( p>ts into :i* any body may be divid$3 ^! p>ts w\ld !re=e exi/2 ^! inf9itesimal elem5ts w\ld be real3 ! unity w\ld be 9 !m4 #cc4 ,indep5d5tly ( ! ext]nal _w1 we f9d ! idea ( sub/ance 9 ourselves2 consci\sness reveals its real application & p]fect unity4 ,consci\sness makes kn[n to u t we ?9k1 desire1 feel1 & exp]i5ce an inf9ity ( affections1 "s ( :i* are subject to our w & are ! product ( ! int]nal activity ( our s\l2 o!rs are indep5d5t ( u1 !y come )\t our w1 & (t5 aga9/ x1 & x is n always 9 our p[] to reproduce !m ev5 if we wi% x4 ,?is ebb & fl[ ( ideas1 volitions1 & s5tim5ts1 h a po9t 9 :i* !y are connect$1 a subject :i* receives !m1 rememb]s !m1 comb9es !m1 & seeks or avoids !m2 ?is be+1 ( :i* we are int]nally consci\s1 philosoph]s h call$ ! me4 ,x is "o & id5tical "u all trans=mations2 ?is unity1 ?is id5tity1 is an indisputable fact :i* consci\sness reveals to u4 ,:o c\ld make u d\bt t ! me :i* ?9ks at ! pres5t mom5t is n ! same :i* ?\ght ye/]day1 :i* ?\ght ye>s ago8 ,not)/&+ ! v>iety ( ?\ghts & desires1 ! *anges ( op9ion & w1 :o c\ld deprive u ( ! firm & deep conviction :i* we h t we are ! same :o exp]i5ce !m all1 t !re is some?+ "h )9 u :i* is ! subject ( !m all8 #cd4 ,if !re 7 n some?+ 9 u p]man5t 9 ! mid/ ( ?is v>iety1 ! consci\sness ( ! me w\ld be impossible4 ,memory & comb9ation w\ld also be impossible2 = !re w\ld be )9 u only a succession ( unconnect$ ph5om5a4 ,?9k+ is impossible )\t some?+ :i* ?9ks & rema9s id5tical "u ! v>iety ( ! =ms ( ?\ght4 ,!re is1 !re=e1 )9 u a simple subject :i* connects all ! *anges :i* occur 9 x3 !re is a sub/ance4 ,9 x !re is unity3 ! unity :i* we only f9d 9 corporeal sub/ances aft] an inf9ite s]ies ( decompositions1 is pres5t$ to u 9 ! spiritual sub/ance1 at ! fir/ in/ant1 z a simple int]nal fact1 )\t :i*1 all ! ph5om5a :i* we p]ceive )9 u are absurd1 & all exp]i5ce ( ! ext]nal _w impossible4 ,)\t ! unity ( ! me !re c be no s5sation1 & )\t s5sation no exp]i5ce ( ! be+s ar\nd u4 ,,*apt] ,,vii4 ,,relation ,,( ,,! ,,proposition1 ,i ,,?9k1 ,,to ,,! ,,sub/antiality ,,( ,,! ,,me4 #ce4 ,! proposition1 ,i ?9k1 c h no s5se unless we admit t ! s\l is a sub/ance4 ,philosophy loses its re/+-po9t1 & all t exp]i5ce )9 u is a s]ies ( unconnect$ ph5om5a1 incapable ( be+ obs]v$1 or subject$ to any rule4 #cf4 ,my pres5t ?\ght is n individually my ?\ght ( ye/]day1 z my ?\ght ( to-morr[ w n be my ?\ght ( to-day4 ,^! ?\ghts1 consid]$ 9 !mselves & ab/ract$ f a subject 9 :i* !y are f\nd1 h no connection ) "o ano!r3 p]haps _! objects are )\t any relation to ea* o!r1 or ev5 contradictory2 p]haps ! ?\ght ( to-day is ! d5ial ( ! ?\ght ( ye/]day4 #cg4 ,! same is true ( all ?\ghts1 all acts ( ! w1 ( all s5tim5ts1 imag9>y repres5tations1 & s5sations1 &1 9 g5]al1 ( all t ,i exp]i5ce )9 myself4 ,turn+ my att5tion to all int]nal affections1 :atev] !y may be1 ,i see 9 !m only a s]ies ( ph5om5a1 a sort ( curr5t ( exi/5ces pass+ away & disappe>+1 "s nev] to return1 o!rs to reappe> at a diff]5t "t1 expressly pres5t+ ?is diff]5ce4 ,! reappe>ance is n individual1 b simil>3 ! affection :i* is repeat$ is n ! same1 b ano!r resembl+ x4 ,:5 ! affection returns1 ,i am consci\s ( its pres5ce at ! "t1 & consci\s ( its pres5ce at a previ\s "t2 ?is d\ble consci\sness con/itutes recollection1 makes me di/+ui% betwe5 ! two affections1 & necess>ily implies ! judgm5t t "o is n ! o!r4 ,!re w\ld be no recollection1 if ! affection recall+ 7 id5tifi$ ) ! affection recall$4 ,a ?+ pres5ts itself1 b does n recall itself4 #ch4 ,!re=e e ?+ passes away )9 u nev] to return1 ! disappe>ance is real1 ! reappe>ance b app>5t2 t :i* ceases to be c nev] return to be aga92 !re may be a simil> ?+1 b n ! same2 t :i* 01 is pass$1 & "t does n retrace its /eps4 #ci4 ,!re=e1 ! s]ies ( int]nal ph5om5a1 consid]$ 9 !mselves & ab/ract$ f ! subject 9 :i* !y reside1 are necess>ily unconnect$1 & !re is no way ( subord9at+ ! t]ms ( ! s]ies to any law1 or connect+ l9k4 #dj4 ,/ill ?is law exi/s 9 all our intellectual acts2 reason1 )\t laws :i* gov]n x1 w\ld be ! greate/ ( absurdities2 ?is l9k is f\nd 9 all our affections4 ,t !y pass f u ) _! di/9ction & diff]5ce & resemblance is a fact ( our m9d1 to :i* we are subject$1 z to a primitive & inevitable condition ( our exi/5ce4 #da4 ,! proposition1 ,i ?9k1 9 ! s5se 9 :i* ! ^w ?9k includes all int]nal affections1 does n relate to isolat$ ph5om5a alone1 b x necess>ily implies a po9t1 :i* we call ! me1 9 :i* ^! ph5om5a are connect$4 ,if ?is po9t does n exi/1 if x is n "o & id5tical1 ! ?\ght ( to-day c h no connection ) ! ?\ght ( ye/]day3 !y are two di/9ct ?+s1 at diff]5t times1 & p]haps contradictory3 :5 ,i say to-day1 ,i ?9k1 & mean t ! ,i is ! same z 9 ! proposition1 ,i ?\ght ye/]day1 my language w\ld be absurd2 if !y are m]e ph5om5a1 two ?\ghts )\t any connect+ l9k1 ! me is no?+1 ,i _c say1 ,i ?\ght1 ,i ?9k2 b ,i mu/ say !re 0 ?\ght1 !re is ?\ght4 ,if1 !n1 y ask me1 :]e8 9 :om8 ,i mu/ reply1 t !re is no :]e1 no :o2 ,i mu/ d5y ! supposition1 & conf9e myself to repeat+1 !re 0 ?\ght1 !re is ?\ght4 #db4 ,to say me1 x is necess>y to suppose a p]man5t reality2 a reality1 because t :i* is n real is no?+2 p]man5t1 because t :i* passes away disappe>s1 ceases to be1 & _c s]ve z ! po9t to unite o!r ?+s4 ,,*apt] ,,viii4 ,,rem>ks ,,on ,,! ,,s\l',s ,,intuition ,,( ,,itself4 #dc4 ,! p]man5t reality ( ! me1 consid]$ 9 itself & ab/ract$ f ! ?+s :i* pass )9 x1 is a fact :i* we p]ceive 9 our intuition1 & :i* we express 9 all our words4 ,if ?is pres5ce1 ?is int]nal exp]i5ce1 be :at is call$ ! intuition ( ! s\l1 !n we h intuition ( our s\l4 ,?is intuition is reproduc$ 9 e p>ticul> intuition1 & 9 all int]nal affections 9 g5]al2 =1 al?\gh !y are isolat$ ph5om5a1 !y imply ! intuition ( ! me1 because !y imply ! consci\sness ( !mselves4 #dd4 ,! v>iety ( isolat$ ph5om5a in/ead ( prov+ any ?+ aga9/ ! unity ( ! intuition ( ! me1 on ! contr>y1 evid5tly confirms x4 ,if we conceiv$ only "o fix$ & id5tical ?\ght1 !re w\ld be less necessity ( unit+ ) x ! idea ( a subject 9 :i* x resides2 b :5 !re is a multitude ( diff]5t ph5om5a1 :i* _c co-exi/ )\t contradiction1 we mu/ ref] !m to some?+ con/ant1 or else ! int]nal _w is conv]t$ into an absolute *aos4 #de4 ,! s\l has1 !re=e1 an intuition ( itself2 t is to say1 x is consci\s ( its unity 9 multiplicity1 ( its id5tity 9 div]sity1 ( its p]man5ce 9 succession1 ( its con/ant duration 9 ! appe>ance & disappe>ance ( ph5om5a4 ,ei!r we mu/ admit ?is1 or we mu/ r5\nce ! legitimacy ( all te/imony ( consci\sness1 & embrace ! mo/ complete skepticism t ev] exi/$1 ext5d+ x bo? to ! int]nal & to ! ext]nal _w4 #df4 ,we f9d )9 u ! realization ( ! indet]m9ate conceptions ( be+1 unity1 p]man5ce1 & subject ( modifications2 ?is realization is reveal$ by consci\sness1 & is confirm$ by ! logical analysis ( ! s]ies ( ph5om5a 9 _! relation to a po9t ( connection4 #dg4 ,all t is includ$ 9 ! idea ( f9ite sub/ance is conta9$ 9 ^! f\r t]ms3 be+1 "o1 p]man5t1 & ! subject ( modifications4 ,all ?is is 9 our s\l1 & we p]ceive by exp]i5ce t we are int]nally affect$ by x4 ,if ?is p]ception is call$ intuition1 we h intuition ( ! sub/antiality ( our s\l4 #dh4 ,! ?9k+ be+ n only p]ceives itself b x kn[s itself z a real object1 to :i*1 by means ( reflection1 x applies ! ideas ( be+1 unity1 p]man5ce1 & ! subject ( modifications4 ,!re=e ! s\l may be ! true pr$icate ( propositions re/+ on logic & consci\sness4 #di4 ,h we any o!r intuition ( ! s\l1 besides t :i* has j be5 expla9$8 ,to ?is ,i answ]1 t we h n :ile 9 ?is life1 & at ! same "t ,i ask :e!r any o!r ?an t ( consci\sness is possible4 ,accu/om$ z we are to s5sible intuitions :i* imply ext5sion 9 space1 we ask :at ! s\l is 9 itself1 & we d n seem to be satisfi$ )\t see+ its image4 ,leav+ ! ord] ( s5sibility & ris+ to ! purely intellectual sph]e1 :o kn[s :e!r we c say t !re is no o!r intuition ( ! s\l ?an t :i* we n[ h2 :e!r ! s\l 9 itself1 9 ! unity & simplicity ( its entity1 is ! =ce :i* we p]ceive2 :e!r ?is =ce is ! subject ( ! modifications1 ! sub/ance1 )\t its be+ necess>y to imag9e ano!r support 9 :i* ?is =ce might reside8 ,:y may n ?is =ce be subsi/5t8 ,:y mu/ we imag9e ano!r sub/ratum to support x8 ,if x 7 s1 if we mu/ apply to ! sub/ance ( ! s\l :at ! great ,leibnitz ?\ght applicable to all sub/ances1 mak+ ! idea ( sub/ance to consi/ 9 ! idea ( =ce2 :y may we n say t ! pressure ( ! int]nal s5se1 ! consci\sness ( itself1 is all ! intuition ( itself :i* ! s\l c h8 #ej4 ,y may ask me1 :at is ! s\l sep>at$ f ! body8 ,:at w x p]ceive & "k ( itself1 :5 x exi/s alone8 ,z ?\gh x did n n[ p]ceive & "k alone1 or z ?\gh ! organs1 :i* x uses1 c\ld p]ceive or ?9k4 ,does x1 p]*ance1 "k h[ x uses !m1 or ev5 "k o!rwise ?an by exp]i5ce t x uses !m at all8 ,is x n alone 9 ! dep?s ( its activity ) its ?\ghts & ! acts ( its w1 its s5tim5ts1 its joy & its sadness1 its pleasures & its pa9s8 ,say1 !n1 t p]haps we d n =m suffici5tly cle> ideas ( ! mode ( consci\sness :i* we %all h ( ourselves aft] ?is life2 say t p]haps o!r intuitions ( our self are possible2 b d n imag9e ! s\l z inconceivable alone4 ,leave me ?\ght1 w1 s5tim5t1 all t is int]nally pres5t to my consci\sness1 to f9d myself2 ,i ask no m4 ,give me communication ) o!r be+s1 :i* affect me or are affect$ by me1 :i* transmit to me ?\ghts & wills1 :i* cause me pleasure or pa92 ,i ne$ no?+ m 9 ord] to h a _w :i* ,i c v well conceive4 ,i am ignorant ( ! quality ( ! ?+s1 n ( _! possibility3 ! s\l *anges its /ate1 n its nature4 ,,*apt] ,,ix4 ,,kant',s ,,op9ion ,,( ,,! ,,argum5ts ,,prov+ ,,! ,,sub/antiality ,,( ,,! ,,s\l4 #ea4 ,! psy*ological argum5ts 9 favor ( ! sub/antiality ( ! s\l are m]e p>alogisms1 9 ,kant's op9ion2 al?\gh !y prove an ideal sub/ance1 !y c nev] lead to a real sub/ance4 ,besides ! argum5ts ) :i* ?is philosoph] attacks ! psy*ological pro( ( ! sub/antiality ( ! s\l1 he _h also a p]sonal argum5t1 :i*1 consid]+ ! weakness ( ! human he>t1 0 v p[]ful4 ,he _h ei!r to place ! sub/antiality ( ! s\l 9 d\bt1 or else cons5t to ! ru9 ( 8 :ole sy/em4 ,x w\ld be1 he says1 a great & ev5 ! only /umbl+-block 9 our :ole critique1 if !re 7 a possibility ( demon/rat+ a priori t all ?9k+ be+s are 9 !mselves simple sub/ances1 & 7:i* is a consequ5ce ( ! pr9ciple ( ?is demon/ration7 are insep>ably accompani$ by p]sonality & ! consci\sness ( _! exi/5ce di/9ct f all matt]4 ,=1 9 ?is case1 if we _h tak5 a s+le /ep out ( ! _w ( ! s5ses1 we %\ld h ent]$ into ! field ( ! n\m5a1 & no "o w\ld dispute our "r to ext5d f>!r into x1 to build 9 x1 &1 accord+ to ea* "o's good luck1 to take possession ( x4#dc #dc ,von d5 ,p>alogism5 d] re95 ,v]nunft1 p4 #big4 #eb4 ,9 ,kant's conception1 ! fir/ p>alogism ( pure psy*ology 9 favor ( ! sub/antiality ( ! s\l is ! foll[+3--,e ?+1 ! repres5tation ( :i* is ! absolute sub/ance ( our judgm5ts1 & :i* _c s]ve z a det]m9ation ( any ?+ else1 is a sub/ance4 ,! me1 z ?9k+ be+1 is ! absolute sub/ance ( all possible judgm5ts1 & ?is repres5tation ( itself _c be ! pr$icate ( any ?+ else2 !re=e ! me1 z ?9k+ be+1 is a sub/ance4 ,^! are ! t]ms 9 :i* he pres5ts ! psy*ological reason+ :i* he proposes to attack1 9 ! fir/ edition ( 8 ,critic ( ,pure ,reason2 9 ! second edition1 wi%+ to be m cle>1 or1 p]haps1 m obscure1 he expresses ! same argum5t 9 ^! words3--,t :i* _c be ?\ght o!rwise ?an z subject1 does n exi/ o!rwise ?an z subject1 & is !re=e sub/ance4 ,n[ a ?9k+ be+1 reg>d$ m]ely z su*1 _c be ?\ght o!rwise ?an z subject4 ,!re=e x exi/s only z su*1 t is1 z sub/ance4 ,we mu/ confess t if psy*ology c\ld f9d no cle>] exp\nd]s ?an ,kant1 & %\ld h to use 9 its demon/rations ! =ms :i* ?is philosoph] employs 9 ^! passages1 x w\ld h b a small numb] ( proselytes1 = ! simple reason t v few c\ld und]/& its language4 ,i am sure t b few read]s w\ld be conv9c$ by ! syllogisms prov+ ! sub/antiality ( ! s\l1 su* z ,kant pres5ts !m2 9 ?is way !re is a great advantage 9 ! position ( ! philosoph]2 = he has to prove t an argum5t1 ! =ce ( :i* has n be5 felt1 has no =ce4 ,b let u suppose ! philosoph] to desc5d f ! ,olympus ( incompreh5sible ab/ractions1 & deign to use ! humble language ( mortals1 pres5t+ ! psy*ological argum5t "u a m simple =m1 :o kn[s b :at ! conviction :i* x w\ld produce w\ld be some:at m difficult to de/roy8 ,let u see4 #ec4 ,a sub/ance is a be+ rema9+ id5tical ) itself1 a p]man5t reality 9 :i* diff]5t modifications occur4 ,b !re is )9 me ?is reality :i*1 rema9+ id5tical1 has a v>iety ( ?\ghts1 acts ( ! w1 s5tim5ts1 & s5sations1 z is reveal$ by consci\sness4 ,!re=e t :i* is )9 me is a sub/ance4 ,i defy all ! philosoph]s 9 ! _w to po9t out a false1 or ev5 a d\btful proposition 9 ?is syllogism1 or to %[ a fault 9 ! consequ5ce1 )\t plac+ !mselves 9 op5 contradiction ) ! te/imony ( consci\sness on ! "o h&1 & ) all ! laws ( human reason on ! o!r4 #ed4 ,kant pret5ds t ! argum5t 9 favor ( ! sub/antiality ( ! s\l is n conclusive1 because ! pure categories1 & consequ5tly t ( sub/ance also1 h absolutely no objective value1 except 9 s f> z appli$ to ! div]sity ( an intuition subject to !m3 t is to say1 ! conception ( sub/ance is a purely logical function1 )\t any objective value or mean+ except z ref]r$ to s5sible ?+s1 & z soon z we leave ! sph]e ( s5sibility1 x c lead to no result4 ,x is evid5t t ! sub/antiality ( ! s\l _c be ! object ( s5sible intuition2 consequ5tly1 to apply to ! s\l ! idea ( sub/ance is to ext5d ! conception beyond :at its nature all[s4 ,x mu/ be confess$ t ,kant's reason+ is conclusive1 if we admit 8 pr9ciples2 & "h we h a pro( ( ! necessity ( combat+ c]ta9 !ories1 :i*1 because !y are 9 ! realm ( ab/ractions1 seem innoc5t1 b 9 reality are mo/ dang]\s1 on acc\nt ( ! results to :i* !y lead4 ,su* is ! sy/em ( ,kant z d5y+ ! objective value ( ! pure categories1 & ?is is :y ,i h combat$ x1#dd demon/rat+3 ,i4 ,t indet]m9ate conceptions1 & ! g5]al pr9ciples f\nd$ on !m1 h an objective value beyond ! field ( s5sible exp]i5ce1 9 respect to be+s :i* are 9 n[ise subject to our intuition2 ,,ii4 ,t x is n true t we h only s5sible intuition1 = we h intuitive k ( a pure intellectual ord]1 above ! sph]e ( s5sibility4 ,?is doctr9e ov]?r[s ! :ole ( ,kant's argum5t1 = x de/roys its f\ndation4 #dd ,see ,bk4 ,,iv41 ,*s4 ,,xiii41 ,,xiv41 ,,xv41 ,,xvi41 ,,xxi41 ,,xxii4 #ee4 ,! ,g]man philosoph] seems to h p]ceiv$ ! weak po9t 9 8 reason+1 & !re=e he tries to give ! psy*ological argum5t 9 su* t]ms z to %[ a transition f ! ideal ord] to ! real1 keep+ out ( sight ! po9t :i* unites ?+s s di/ant4 ,8 language is purely ideological3 ,e ?+1 ! repres5tation ( :i* is ! absolute sub/ance ( our judgm5ts1 & :i* _c s]ve z a det]m9ation ( any ?+ else1 is a sub/ance4 ,obs]ve t he def9es sub/ance by ! repres5tation & ! incapacity ( s]v+ z a det]m9ation ( any ?+ else2 t is1 by purely ideological or dialectic attributes4 ,! =m :i* he employs 9 ! second edition suff]s f ! same defect4 ,t :i* _c be ?\ght o!rwise ?an z subject1 does n exi/ o!rwise ?an z subject1 & is1 !re=e1 sub/ance4 ,:y does he n tell u t ! sub/ance "h spok5 ( is a p]man5t be+1 9 :i* ! modifications are realiz$1 b :i* rema9s id5tical ) itself8 ,:y does he speak only ( repres5tation1 ( ?\ght1 ( ! det]m9ation or pr$icate8 ,because x help$ 8 purpose to pres5t ! argum5t z a sophism 9 :i* !re is a transition f "o ord] to ano!r entirely diff]5t ord]2 because x 0 = 8 int]e/ to give an obscure =m1 s t he c\ld make ! foll[+ obs]vations3--,9 ! major1 a be+ is spok5 ( :i* c be ?\ght "u any view 9 g5]al1 & consequ5tly1 also1 z x is giv5 9 ! intuition4 ,b1 9 ! m9or1 ! same be+ is spok5 ( 9 s f> z x is reg>d$ z subject1 9 relation only to ?\ght & ! unity ( consci\sness1 b n at ! same "t 9 relation to ! intuition by :i* ! unity is giv5 to ! ?\ght z its object4 ,consequ5tly ! conclusion foll[s only by a fallacy1 p] sophisma figur dictionis4 ,& 9 a note he says3 ,?\ght is tak5 9 ! two premises 9 an entirely diff]5t s5se2 9 ! major1 z belong+ to an object 9 g5]al1 & su*1 consequ5tly1 z x may be giv5 9 ! intuition2 b 9 ! m9or only z x is 9 relation to ! consci\sness ( self1 :]e x is n ?\ght 9 any object1 b is m]ely repres5t$ 9 relation to itself1 z subject1 z ! =m ( ! ?\ght4 ,9 ! fir/ case1 a ?+ is spok5 ( :i* c only be ?\ght z subject2 b1 9 ! second1 ?\ght is spok5 (1 n ?+s1 s9ce ab/raction is made ( all objects2 & 9 ! ?\ght ! me always s]ves z subject ( ! consci\sness2 h5ce ! conclusion :i* foll[s is n1 t ,i _c exi/ o!rwise ?an z subject1 b only1 t ,i _c make use ( myself 9 ! ?\ght ( my exi/5ce1 o!rwise ?an z subject ( ! judgm5t1 :i* is an id5tical proposition1 reveal+ absolutely no?+ conc]n+ ! mann] ( my exi/5ce4#de ,x makes "o indignant to see a man attempt1 by su* a confusion ( ideas & ( words1 to rob ! human m9d ( its exi/5ce2 = x am\nts to ! same ?+1 to d5y t x is a sub/ance4 ,x makes "o indignant to see a philosoph] pret5d1 by su* an absurd confusion1 to attack "o ( ! cle>e/1 mo/ evid5t1 & mo/ irresi/ible argum5ts :i* c be pres5t$ to human reason4 ,i ?\ght ye/]day1 ,i ?9k to-day3 9 all ! v>iety ( my situations1 ,i f9d myself ! same & n ano!r2 ?is reality1 :i* rema9s id5tical 9 ! mid/ ( div]sity1 ,i call my s\l2 !re=e my s\l is a p]man5t reality1 ! subject ( modifications2 !re=e x is a sub/ance4 ,c any ?+ be cle>]8 #de ,critik d] re95 ,v]nunft1 p4 #bih4 #ef4 ,psy*ology does1 x is true1 make use ( ! g5]al idea ( sub/ance 9 prov+ ! sub/antiality ( ! s\l3 b x appeals to a fact ( exp]i5ce1 to ! te/imony ( consci\sness1 9 ord] to apply ?is idea to ! pres5t case4 ,:at does ,kant mean :5 he pret5ds to h demon/rat$ t ! conception ( a ?+ :i* c exi/ ( itself z subject1 b n z m]e attribute1 does n involve any objective reality8 ,:5 he speaks ( subject1 does he mean a real subject1 ! subject ( modifications8 ,!n ! s\l is a subject2 b we d n say t x is a subject only2 we conceive its reality "u ?is aspect )\t1 !re=e1 d5y+ t x has o!r *>act]s3 on ! contr>y1 we expressly ackn[l$ge t x is an active pr9ciple1 :i* implies some?+ m t ! m]e subject ( modifications1 = ?is la/ is a passive1 r ?an an active1 quality4 ,if by subject ,kant und]/&s ! logical subject1 we d5y t ?is is exclusively ! "* ( ! s\l 9 su* a way t x _c logically be ! attribute or pr$icate ( a proposition4 #eg4 ,! conception ( a ?+1 says ,kant1 :i* c exi/ z its own subject1 b n z a m]e pr$icate1 draws ) x no objective reality2 t is1 "o _c "k :e!r any object corresponds to x1 s9ce "o _c conceive ! possibility ( su* a mann] ( exi/+1 consequ5tly !re is absolutely no cognition4 ,9 ord] t x may indicate "u ! d5om9ation ( sub/ance1 an object :i* may be giv51 9 ord] t x may be a cognition1 a con/ant intuition mu/ be plac$ at ! f\ndation1 z ! indisp5sable condition ( ! objective reality ( a conception1 namely1 t by :i* alone ! object is giv54 ,b we h no?+ con/ant 9 ! int]nal intuition1 = ! me is only ! consci\sness ( my ?\ght2 if1 !re=e1 we conf9e ourselves to ! ?\ght alone1 ! necess>y condition ( ! application ( ! conception ( sub/ance1 t is1 ( a subject subsi/+ 9 itself z ?9k+ be+4#df #df ,critik d] re95 ,v]nunft1 p4 #bii4 ,no argum5t c\ld be m common-place & sophi/ical4 ,kant does n admit ! sub/antiality ( ! s\l1 because we _c take ! sub/ance itself & pres5t x 9 s5sible intuition2 b !n he ought n to speak ( pure intellectual conceptions ( logical functions1 or ( ideas2 = all ^! are ?+s :i* are out ( ! ord] ( s5sibility1 & !re=e _c be giv5 u 9 ! s5sible intuition4 ,yet !y really exi/ z int]nal ph5om5a1 z subjective facts1 ( :i* ,kant is cont9ually talk+1 & to :i* he devotes ! great] "p ( 8 ,critic ( ,pure ,reason4 ,w x1 p]*ance1 be said t ! pure idea ( relation means no?+1 because we _c pres5t an ab/ract relation 9 s5sible intuition8 ,w x be said t ! pr9ciples f :i* proce$ ! ph5om5a ( attraction1 aff9ity1 electricity1 magnetism1 galvanism1 light1 & all t *>ms or a/oni%es u 9 nature1--w x be said t !y d n exi/1 t !y are n p]man5t ?+s1 b empty words1 because we _c repres5t !m 9 s5sible intuition8 ,su* a mann] ( argu+ is unwor?y ( a philosoph]4 ,x might be excusable 9 an un$ucat$ p]son1 accu/om$ only to ! ph5om5a ( s5sibility1 :o _h nev] desc5d$ to ! dep?s ( ! s\l 9 ! sph]e ( pure intellig5ce1--su* a p]son might be p>don$ if1 :5 we speak ( a _s1 a cause1 or a sub/ance1 he %\ld ask1 :at is x8 & require u to %[ ! ins5sible "u a s5sible =m3 b "o :o pret5ds to excel all philosoph]s1 anci5t or mod]n1 "o :o f ! inaccessible height ( 8 wisdom looks d[n ) su* sov]eign contempt on all ! argum5ts :i* 7 be=e reg>d$ z conclusive1 ought to produce "s o!r title ( 8 sup]iority ?an m]ely say+3 "o _c conceive ! possibility ( su* a mann] ( exi/+3 we h no int]nal intuition ( ?is p]man5t ?+ :i* y speak (2 ! me is only ! consci\sness ( my ?\ght4 ,:at !n6 is any ?+ m necess>y 9 ord] to prove :at we propose1 ?an ?is consci\sness4 ,is n ?is consci\sness "o amid ! v>iety ( our ?\ghts8 ,is !re n a po9t connect+ ye/]day's1 to-day's1 & to-morr['s ?\ght8 ,diff]5t & contradictory z !y are1 d !y n all belong to ! same ?+1 to ?is ?+ :i* we call ! me1 & :i* au?orizes u to say3 ,i :o ?9k to-day1 am ! same :o ?\ght ye/]day1 & :o w ?9k to-morr[8 ,c any reason+ be cle>] or m conv9c+ ?an affirm+ ! real p]man5ce :i* we p]ceive 9 ! int]nal te/imony ( our consci\sness8 ,i d n see my sub/ance1 y may say1 ,i h no intuition ( x2 ,i only p]ceive my consci\sness4 ,:at m d y want8 ,?is consci\sness :i* y exp]i5ce1 :i* is "o amid multiplicity1 id5tical amid di/9ction1 con/ant amid v>iety1 & p]man5t 9 ! mid/ ( ! succession ( ! ph5om5a :i* appe> & disappe>2 ?is consci\sness1 :i* is no "o ( y\r individual ?\ghts1 :i* endures :ile !y pass away1 n to return2 ?is consci\sness pres5ts to y ! sub/antiality ( y\r s\l1 x pres5ts x 9 a c]ta9 mann] 9 intuition1 n 9 ! intuition ( s5sations1 b 9 ! intuition ( ! int]nal s5se1 z a ?+ affect+ y deeply1 & ! pres5ce ( :i* y _c d\bt1 z y d n d\bt ! pleasure or pa9 9 ! act by :i* y exp]i5ce x4 #eh4 ,9 attack+ ! psy*ological = ! sub/antiality ( ! s\l1 ,kant supposes t ^? :o make use ( x1 attempt to prove ! sub/antiality ( ! s\l by />t+ f ! pure & simple category ( sub/ance4 ,?is mi/ake might h occasion$ ! =m 9 :i* ,kant pres5ts ?is argum5t2 b we h se5 t1 :e!r int5tionally or n1 ?is =m is arrang$ 9 ! be/ mann] = af=d+ weak po9ts = ! attacks ( ! philosoph]4 ,op5 any treatise on psy*ology & y w f9d t al?\gh ! g5]al idea ( sub/ance is employ$1 x is only made use ( aft] x has be5 legitimat$ by a fact ( exp]i5ce2 x is n inf]r$ f ! pure category ( sub/ance t ! s\l is a sub/ance2 b only aft] we h e/abli%$ ! idea ( sub/ance z a g5]al type1 we scrut9ize ! dep? ( consci\sness to see if !re is any ?+ !re to :i* ?is type may apply4 ,?is is :at has be5 done 9 ! prec$+ p>agraphs1 & if ,kant _h wi%$ to be m exact 9 8 acc\nt ( ! op9ions ( 8 adv]s>ies1 he w\ld n h said t ! fir/ argum5t ( rational psy*ology only gives a light1 :i* is pret5d$ to be true1 :5 x pres5ts ! con/ant logical subject ( ! ?\ght1 z ! cognition ( ! real subject ( ! inh]5ce4 ,f> f its be+ possible1 he says1 to inf] ^! prop]ties f ! pure & simple category ( a sub/ance1 on ! contr>y1 ! p]man5ce ( a giv5 object _c be tak5 z a pr9ciple1 except by />t+ f exp]i5ce1 :5 we wi% to apply to x ! empirically g5]al conception ( a sub/ance4 ,! philosoph] is "r3 ! prop]ties ( ! pure & simple category ( a sub/ance _c take u out ( ! ideal ord]1 unless we re/ on a fact ( exp]i5ce2 b he =gets a "p ( ! psy*ological argum5t :5 he adds t 9 ! pres5t case we h n plac$ at ! f\ndation any exp]i5ce1 & t we h only drawn our conclusions f ! conception ( ! relation ( e ?\ght to ! me z ! common subject ) :i* ?is ?\ght is connect$4 ,! exp]i5ce exi/s 9 ?is v consci\sness ( ! relation ( all ?\ghts to ! me2 9 ?is po9t ) :i* !y are all connect$2 ! relation to ! me is n possible if ! me is n some?+2 ?\ghts _c be connect$ 9 ! me if ! me is a pure no?+4 ,ref]r+ ! ?\ght to ! me1 ,kant goes on to say1 we _c e/abli% ?is p]man5ce by a c]ta9 obs]vation2 because1 al?\gh ! me is f\nd at ! bottom ( e ?\ght1 besides t !re is no intuition to di/+ui% x f e o!r p]ceptible object1 x is connect$ ) ?is repres5tation4 ,x is true t we d n p]ceive ! p]man5t me 9 ! same mann] t we d ! objects ( ! o!r intuitions2 b we p]ceive x by ! int]nal s5se1 by t pres5ce1 ( :i* we _c d\bt1 & :i*1 z ,kant himself confesses1 makes u ref] all ?\ghts to ! me z to a common subject :i* connects !m4 #ei4 ,x may be obs]v$1 he says1 t ?is repres5tation 7t ( ! me7 is con/antly reproduc$ 9 e ?\ght2 b n t x is a fix$ & p]man5t intuition 9 :i* v>iable ?\ghts succe$ ea* o!r4 ,!re is an evid5t contradiction 9 ?is passage4 ,! repres5tation ( ! me is con/antly reproduc$ 9 e ?\ght3 b ! me ei!r means no?+1 or x means some?+ id5tical ) itself2 = if ! me :i* ?9ks to-day is n ! me :i* ?\ght ye/]day1 ! ^w me means some?+ v diff]5t f :at all ! _w und]/&s by x2 !re=e1 if ! repres5tation ( ! me returns 9 e ?\ght1 ! me is ! same 9 e ?\ght2 !re=e ! me is fix$ & p]man5t1 & consequ5tly ! me is a sub/ance 9 :i* all v>iable ?\ghts succe$4 #fj4 ,i _c see any answ] to ?is argum5t1 f\nd$ on ,kant's own words :5 e/abli%+ a ph5om5on1 ! exi/5ce ( :i* he 0 unable to place 9 d\bt1 namely1 ! pres5ce ( ! me 9 e ?\ght4 ,?is is n ! place to exam9e ! philosophical que/ions on ! un9t]rupt$ness ( consci\sness1 or :e!r !re is any "t 9 :i* ! s\l does n ?9k1 & is n consci\s ( itself4 ,_m philosoph]s believe !re is su* an int]ruption2 & !y re/ _! op9ion on our exp]i5ce :5 asleep1 & our n recollect+ :at happ5s to u 9 t /ate2 b ,leibnitz ?9ks t ?\ght is nev] entirely ext+ui%$1 t !re is nev] an absolute pause ( consci\sness1 t our ?\ght is a light :i* %$s b little lu/re at times1 b :i* nev] goes entirely out4 ,:i*ev] ( ^! op9ions be ! true "o1 ! p]man5ce ( ! sub/ance ( ! s\l is beyond a d\bt2 & x is wor?y ( rem>k t ! int]ruption ( ?\ght & ( consci\sness1 f> f favor+ ^? :o oppose ! p]man5ce ( ! s\l1 conf\nds !m 9 a mo/ conclusive mann]4 ,= if x is impossible to conceive1 )\t suppos+ some?+ p]man5t1 h[ diff]5t ph5om5a1 cont9u$ 9 an un9t]rupt$ s]ies1 are connect$ 9 consci\sness2 x is /ill m inconceivable h[ !y c be connect$1 if we suppose ?is s]ies to be int]rupt$1 & a c]ta9 space ( "t to int]v5e betwe5 ! exi/5ce ( ! connect$ ph5om5a4 #fa4 ,let ,a1 ,b1 ,c1 ,d be ?\ghts :i* are cont9u$ )\t any int]val ( "t betwe5 !m1 & ,q ! consci\sness ?r\gh :i* !y pass2 if ?is ,q is n some?+1 x is impossible to conceive h[ ! t]ms ( ! s]ies c be connect$1 &1 h[1 not)/&+ _! diff]5ce & div]sity1 !re is f\nd at ! bottom ( !m all some?+ con/ant & id5tical1 :i* we call ! me1 & by virtue ( :i* we c say3 ,i1 :o ?9k ,d1 am ! same :o ?\ght ,c1 & ,b1 & ,a4 ,b if ! consci\sness is int]rupt$1 if "s h\rs h pass$ betwe5 ,c & ,d1 dur+ :i* !re 0 no ?\ght1 no consci\sness1 x is /ill m inconceivable h[ at ! bottom ( ! ?\ght me !re is f\nd ! same me :i* 0 9 ! ?\ght ,c2 x is /ill m inconceivable1 because 9 ?9k+ ,d we may say3 ,i1 :o ?9k ,d1 am ! same :o ?\ght ,c1 & :o h be5 = a c]ta9 "t depriv$ ( ?\ght4 ,)\t some?+ p]man5t1 some?+ :i* la/s dur+ ! succession1 h[ expla9 ?is connection8 ,are we1 p]*ance1 speak+ ( unkn[n facts8 ,is n ?is our daily exp]i5ce on awak+8 ,if ?is is n conclusive1 let u d5y consci\sness1 let u d5y reason2 b let u n wa/e "t 9 talk+ philosophy4 ,,*apt] ,x4 ,,kant',s ,,op9ion ,,( ,,! ,,argum5t ,,:i* ,,he ,,calls ,,p>alogism ,,( ,,p]sonality4 #fb4 ,kant attacks ! argum5t f\nd$ on ! te/imony ( consci\sness 9 a p>ticul> mann] 9 ! exam9ation ( :at he calls ! ,p>alogism ( ,p]sonality4 ,he gives ! argum5t 9 ?is =m2 ,:atev] has ! consci\sness ( its num]ical id5tity at diff]5t times is1 by ?is fact alone1 a p]son2 ?is is v]ifi$ ( ! s\l2 !re=e s\l is a p]son4 ,kant uses ! ^w p]son 9 a v incorrect s5se3 x n only means an intellig5t sub/ance1 b "o t is ! complete pr9ciple ( its actions1 indep5d5tly ( all connection ) any o!r sub/ance1 or a union ) a supposition4 ,at any rate1 ! ,g]man philosoph] und]/&s "h by p]son an intellig5t sub/ance2 & 9 ?is s5se he proposes to combat ! argum5t prov+ ! p]sonality ( ! s\l4 #fc4 ,if ,i wi%1 he says1 to "k by exp]i5ce ! num]ical id5tity ( any ext]nal object1 ,i apply my att5tion to t :i* is con/ant 9 ! ph5om5on1 to :i* all ! re/ is ref]r$1 z a det]m9ation to its subject2 & ,i obs]ve ! id5tity ( ! subject at ! "t 9 :i* ! det]m9ation *anges4 ,i am an object ( ! int]nal s5se1 & "t is only ! =m ( ?is s5se2 ,i !re=e ref] all my successive det]m9ations1 & ea* "o ( !m 9 p>ticul>1 to t :i* is num]ically id5tical1 9 all "t1 t is1 9 ! =m ( ! int]nal intuition ( myself4 ,h5ce ! p]sonality ( ! s\l ought only to be d$uc$ or conclud$ z a proposition p]fectly id5tical ) consci\sness 9 "t2 consequ5tly1 ?is proposition is valid a priori1 because x does n really ann\nce any ?+ else ?an t 9 all ! "t 9 :i* ,i am consci\s ( myself1 ,i am consci\s ( ?is "t z a ?+1 :i* is a "p ( my unity4 ,?is is ! same z to say3 ,all ?is "t is 9 me z individual unity1 or r1 ,i am 9 all ?is "t ) num]ical id5tity4 ,x w\ld h be5 desirable if ,kant _h %[n :y ! int]nal s5se ( ! num]ical id5tity may be express$ by ! proposition2 all ?is "t is 9 me z an individual unity1 or 9 ?is o!r2 9 all ! "t 9 :i* ,i am consci\s ( myself1 ,i am consci\s ( ?is "t z a ?+1 :i* is a "p ( my unity4 ,x is true t ! num]ical unity is p]ceiv$ 9 ! div]sity ( "t2 b x is n true t we are consci\s ( "t z a ?+ :i* is a "p ( u4 ,he is treat+ ( ! consci\sness ( self1 z x is f\nd 9 ! greate/ "p ( mank9d1 :o1 f> f consid]+ "t z a ?+ :i* is a "p ( !mselves1 reg>d x z a sort ( vague ext5sion or succession 9 :i* !y & all t is v>iable exi/4 ,x is well kn[n t philosoph]s !mselves dispute on ! true nature ( "t2 & t x is ! =m ( ! int]nal s5se is an op9ion ( ,kant's1 :i* is n accept$ by _m o!rs1 & :i*1 z ,i h %[n1#dg he expla9s badly & proves /ill worse1 al?\gh he pret5ds to h rais$ 8 !ory to ! height ( an inconte/ible doctr9e4 ,:e!r "t is an int]nal or an ext]nal =m1 :e!r1 ev51 x is an illusion or a reality1 we p]ceive our num]ical id5tity 9 its succession2 !re=e :5 ! ,g]man philosoph] bases himself on 8 !ory ( "t1 9 ord] to attack ! solidity ( ! argum5t ( consci\sness1 he re/s on a supposition :i* we are n requir$ to admit1 & :at is m1 he expla9s ?is s5tim5t ( id5tity 9 t]ms :i* no "o ev] us$ be=e him4 ,if he wi%es to make "t ent] into ! s5tim5t ( num]ical id5tity1 he might say3 ,i f9d myself 9 all ?is "t 9 a num]ical id5tity1 or3 all ?is "t has pass$ ov] me z ov] an individual unit2 b n t we are consci\s ( "t z a ?+ :i* is a "p ( ourselves4 ,if we look to consci\sness1 we %\ld r be incl9$ to believe t "t is a sort ( successive ext5sion1 9 :i* we live1 & by :i* our exi/5ce is measur$4 #dg ,see ,book ,,viii41 ,*apt]s ,,xii4 & ,,xiv4 #fd4 ,! id5tity ( ! p]son1 cont9ues ,kant1 mu/ inevitably be f\nd 9 my consci\sness2 b if ,i reg>d myself f ! po9t ( view ( ano!r 7z ! object ( 8 ext]nal intuition7 ?is o!r obs]v] conceives me only 9 "t2 =1 9 ! app]ception1 "t is n /rictly repres5t$ except )9 me2 !re=e he w n conclude my objective p]man5ce f ! me1 :i* he admits1 & :i* accompanies all repres5tations 9 all "t 9 my consci\sness1 & 9 a p]fect id5tity4 ,! "t 9 :i* ! obs]v] places me n be+ ! same :i* is f\nd 9 my own s5sibility1 b t :i* accompanies 8 intuition1 x foll[s t ! id5tity :i* is necess>ily jo9$ to my consci\sness1 is n jo9$ to 81 t is1 to ! ext]nal intuition ( my subject4 ,x is difficult to und]/& precisely :at ,kant means 9 ?is passage1 & x seems v d\btful :e!r he und]/ood x himself2 h[ev]1 let u see :at c be d$uc$ f x aga9/ ! p]man5ce ( ! s\l4 ,! ,g]man philosoph] admits t ! id5tity ( ! p]son is inevitably f\nd 9 our consci\sness2 t is1 ! me f9ds itself num]ically id5tical 9 ! div]sity ( "t4 ,x is also true t a /range obs]v] conceives ! me only 9 "t1 t is1 if "o man reflects on ! s\l ( ano!r man1 he conceives x only 9 "t4 ,b ?is does n %[ :y ,kant says t ! obs]v] w\ld n inf] f ?is ! objective p]man5ce ( ! s\l obs]v$4 ,:at w\ld happ5 w\ld be ?is4 ,if ! man :o reflects on ! s\l ( ano!r man believes t same passes 9 ! s\l ( ?is man :i* he p]ceives )9 himself1 he w inf] t ! o!r s\l is p]man5t1 = ! same reason t he affirms ! p]man5ce ( 8 own s\l4 ,x is true t z he _c ent] into ! consci\sness ( ! o!r1 he c only "k x by ext]nal m>ks2 b if he is conv9c$ t ^! m>ks are suffici5t to d5ote a s]ies ( ph5om5a ( consci\sness simil> to ^? :i* he exp]i5ces 9 himself1 he w inf] t ! s\l :i* he obs]ves is z p]man5t z 8 own4 ,:at does ,kant mean !n1 :5 he says t ! id5tity :i* is necess>ily connect$ ) my consci\sness1 is n connect$ ) t ( ! obs]v]8 ,:o ev] d\bt$ ?is tru?8 ,:o ev] suppos$ t ! p]ception ( ! id5tity 9 relation to "o's own consci\sness is n v diff]5t f t :i* relates to ano!r's8 ,our own id5tity is reveal$ to u by imm$iate consci\sness2 ! id5tity ( ano!r is %[n to u by a s]ies ( ext]nal ph5om5a :i* lead u by reason+ & analogy to ! conviction t outside ( u !re are be+s simil> to ourselves4 #fe4 ,! id5tity ( ! consci\sness ( myself at diff]5t times1 ,kant goes on to say1 is only a =mal condition ( my ?\ghts & _! connection2 b x does n prove ! num]ical id5tity ( my subject1 9 :i*1 not)/&+ ! logical id5tity ( ! me1 su* a *ange may take place1 z to r5d] x impossible to pres]ve ! id5tity ( ?is me1 :i* does n prev5t our always attribut+ to x ! id5tical me1 :i* me may /ill pres]ve 9 ano!r /ate1 & ev5 9 ! metamorphosis ( ! subject1 ! ?\ght ( ! previ\s subject1 & transmit to x all t comes aft]w>ds4 ,?is is precisely :at ,kant ought to h expla9$2 because ! ph5om5on ( ! s5tim5t ( id5tity 9 ! mid/ ( cont9ual v>iety1 is :at irresi/ibly incl9es u to believe t ! me is some?+ p]man5t4 ,x is n true t we h only ! topical id5tity ( ! me1 = we are n speak+ ( ! subject ( a proposition1 b ( a real subject1 exp]i5c$1 p]ceiv$ 9 ! dep? ( our consci\sness4 ,kant imag9es t he c expla9 ?is s5tim5t ( id5tity ) great simplicity4 ,i w try to express 8 /range op9ion 9 an intelligible mann]4 ,let ,a1 ,b1 ,c1 ,d1 ,e1 444 be in/ants ( "t1 & let a1 b1 c1 d1 e1 444 be ?\ghts or any o!r int]nal ph5om5a1 correspond+ to !m4 ,at ! in/ant ,a1 ! ?\ght a exi/s4 ,at ! in/ant ,b1 ! ?\ght b succe$s4 ,at ! in/ant ,b1 ! s\l :i* exi/$ at ! in/ant ,a1 no long] exi/s4 ,! s\l at ! in/ant ,b1 is some?+ entirely new2 x is n a b b4 ,! same is true ( all ! re/4 ,b h[1 y w say1 is x possible = ! s\l at all ^! in/ants to believe itself ! same8 ,x is v simple3 ! subject a transmits ! ?\ght to ! subject b2 b transmits its own & a's to c4 ,no?+ rema9s id5tical2 b ! consci\sness ( ! id5tity always la/s4 ,does n su* an hypo!sis seem truly wond]ful & philosophical8 ,:at c\ld be imag9$ cle>] & m satisfactory8 ,! read] may p]haps ?9k t ,i am je/+1 & t ,i pres5t ,kant's op9ion "u a ridicul\s aspect = ! sake ( combat+ x m easily2 b x is j ! rev]se2 ! exposition :i* ,i h j made ( ,kant's philosophy is m s]i\s ?an 8 own4 ,^! are 8 words3 ,"o ela/ic ball /rik+ ano!r 9 a "r l9e1 communicates to ! latt] its :ole motion1 & consequ5tly its :ole /ate 7consid]+ only _! positions 9 space74 ,admit n[1 by analogy ) ^! bodies1 c]ta9 sub/ances1 ( :i* "o transmits repres5tations to ano!r1 ) ! consci\sness :i* accompanies !m2 we may !n conceive a :ole s]ies ( su* repres5tations1 9 :i* ! fir/ communicates its /ate1 & ! consci\sness ( its /ate to ! second2 ! second communicates its /ate1 toge!r ) t ( ! prec$+ sub/ance1 to ! ?ird2 ! ?ird1 9 l mann]1 communicates ! /ates ( bo? ( ! prec$+ sub/ances toge!r ) its own1 & ! consci\sness :i* accompanies !m to ! f\r?4 ,! la/ ( ! s]ies w !n h ! consci\sness ( all ! /ates ( ! sub/ances :i* prec$$ x1 z ( its own2 because ^! /ates1 & ! consci\sness ( ^! /ates h be5 transmitt$ to x4 ,/ill x w n h be5 ! same p]son 9 all ^! /ates4 ,kant1 9 try+ to refute ! psy*ological argum5t f\nd$ on consci\sness1 ov]?r[s & de/roys ! "* ( consci\sness3 a transmitt$ consci\sness is n a true consci\sness2 x is only ! cognition ( a previ\s ?\ght4 ,^! sub/ances1 exi/+ successively & transmitt+ _! consci\sness f "o to ano!r1 w\ld be some?+ di/9ct f ! act ( consci\sness1 or !y w\ld n4 ,if di/9ct1 we mu/ admit a subject ( ! consci\sness1 :i* 9 itself1 & z subject1 does n come "u ! s5sible intuition2 & consequ5tly we may argue ad hom9em1 & retort ,kant's objection aga9/ himself4 ,if ^! transitory sub/ances are only ! act ( ! consci\sness1 :5 ! act ceases1 no?+ rema9s ( ! sub/ances1 & !re=e1 !re is no?+ transmissible4 ,transmission supposes some?+ :i* may be transmitt$2 if1 !n1 ! act ( consci\sness is transmitt$1 x mu/ be some?+ p]man5t 9 itself1 9 ! mid/ ( ! succession ( ! sub/ances2 & ?is is a v /range conclusion to :i* ! ,g]man philosoph] is br\ght by 8 !ory ( transmission4 ,all psy*ologi/s _h said t ! sub/ance ( ! s\l is p]man5t1 & its ph5om5a transitory2 n[1 on ! contr>y1 we f9d t ! transitory is ! sub/ance1 & t :i* is p]man5t is ! ph5om5on1 or ! act ( consci\sness :i* is transmitt$4 #ff4 ,p]haps x may be answ]$ t by transmission is n meant ! communication ( any ?+ con/ant1 b m]ely ! succession ( ph5om5a unit$ by any tie among !mselves4 ,?us1 suppos+ ! in/ants ,a1 ,b1 ,c1 ,d1 ! acts ( consci\sness1 a1 b1 c1 d1 correspond+ to !m1 w n be /rictly id5tical 9 numb]1 b successive1 & connect$4 ,b ?is reply1 :i* avoids ! necessity ( admitt+ ! p]man5ce ( ! act ( consci\sness1 expla9s no?+1 & makes x incompreh5sible1 h[1 at ! in/ant ,d1 = example1 !re c be consci\sness ( ! acts c1 b1 a1 :i* !re is an irresi/ible incl9ation to believe h at bottom some?+ num]ically id5tical4 ,:5 d exi/s !re is no long] any ?+ ( c left2 !re is no sub/ance rema9+1 because1 by ! supposition !re ei!r is no su* sub/ance1 or x is some?+ transitory2 !re is no act ( consci\sness rema9+1 because a is num]ically di/9ct f c1 & besides1 we h se5 t ! p]man5ce ( ! ph5om5a _c be admitt$4 ,!re=e x is absolutely impossible to expla9 or to compreh5d h[ !re c be 9 ! act a ! repres5tation ( c4 #fg4 ,to say t ! ph5om5a are unit$ by any tie :atev] is to elude ! difficulty by a fooli% play ^u words4 ,:at is ! mean+1 9 ?is case1 ( unit+1 ( a tie8 ,!y are metaphors :i* if !y mean any ?+ mu/ express ! p]man5ce ( "s ?+ amid ! v>iety ( ! ph5om5a2 ! tie1 ! bond1 mu/ ext5d to ! v>i\s ?+s :i* x connects & unites3 !re=e x mu/ be common to !m all2 & ?is some?+1 :atev] x be1 :i* rema9s con/ant 9 v>iety1 we call sub/ance4 #fh4 ,! m]e succession ( ! ph5om5a or acts ( consci\sness is n suffici5t to transmit ! belief ( ! num]ical id5tity2 if x 71 all m5 w\ld be consci\s ( ! previ\s acts ( o!rs4 ,let a1 b1 be two successive acts ( consci\sness3 if1 9 ord] t ! act b1 :i* is num]ically di/9ct f a1 may repres5t ! num]ical id5tity ( consci\sness1 x is suffici5t t b %\ld succe$ a2 s9ce ?is succession is met ) 9 ! acts ( consci\sness ( diff]5t m51 x mu/ foll[ t all m5 h consci\sness ( all ! acts ( ! o!rs4 ,risum tematis8 ,& yet ?is conclusion is absolutely necess>y3 x _c be avoid$ by say+ t !re is a =m ( ! int]nal s5se1 & t ! succession takes place 9 ea* man 9 8 respective int]nal s5se1 & t !re=e ! succession ( ! int]nal ph5om5a ( "o is 9 a diff]5t "t1 9 a diff]5t =m f :at x is 9 ano!r4 ,! words1 respective int]nal s5se1 int]nal =m ( ea* man1 h a mean+1 if we admit some?+ p]man5t 9 our int]ior2 b if !re is no?+ b successive ph5om5a1 ! ^w respective is absurd1 because !re c be no respective int]nal s5se if !re is no?+ to :i* x c ref]4 ,suppose ! man ,m1 & ! man ,n be m]ely a succession ( ph5om5a1 & 9 ea* "o !re is only a m]e succession3 !re is ! same reason :y ! ph5om5a ( ,n %\ld be connect$ ) ea* o!r z ) ^? ( ,m4 ,!re=e1 if !re is a community ( consci\sness 9 ! ph5om5a ( ,m1 )\t any o!r suffici5t reason ?an ! m]e succession1 ?is community %\ld be f\nd 9 all ! ph5om5a1 because !y all h ! same suffici5t reason4 #fi4 ,x mu/ be obs]v$ t 9 all ?is argum5t1 ,i ab/ract ! nature ( ! sub/ance ( ! s\l1 & only purpose to demon/rate t we mu/ admit some?+ con/ant 9 ! mid/ ( ! v>iety ( ! ph5om5a1 & common to !m all4 ,call x a tie1 a =m1 an act ( consci\sness1 or :at y w1 x is ei!r some?+ real or x is n4 ,if x is n some?+ real1 :oev] expresses x1 employs a ^w )\t any mean+3 if x is some?+ real1 ! sub/antiality ( ! s\l is ackn[l$g$1 because a p]man5t reality is admitt$ 9 ! mid/ ( ! v>iety ( ! ph5om5a4 ,we1 :o admit ?is sub/antiality1 d n pret5d t ! s\l c be giv5 9 s5sible intuition1 nor t we c express 9 an exact def9ition its int]nal prop]ties ab/ract$ f ! ph5om5a :i* we exp]i5ce 9 x4 ,:at we say is1 t we "k its real exi/5ce1 its p]man5ce1 & its num]ical id5tity 9 ! mid/ ( ! succession & div]sity ( ! ph5om5a4 ,!re=e f ! mom5t t x is admitt$ t !re is )9 u some?+ real1 p]man5t1 & num]ically id5tical 9 ! mid/ ( div]sity1 ! sub/antiality ( ! s\l1 :i* we def5d1 is admitt$4 ,disputes may arise on ! di/9ctive "* ( its nature2 :e!r x is or is n a =ce1 z ,leibnitz ma9ta9$1 :e!r its ess5ce consi/s 9 ?\ght1 z 0 ! op9ion ( ,desc>tes3 b ^! que/ions are =eign to ! matt] n[ 9 h&4 ,is !re some?+ real & p]man5t amid ! v>iety ( int]nal ph5om5a8 ,if !re is n1 ! consci\sness ( num]ical id5tity is absurd2 if !re is1 !n ! sub/antiality ( ! s\l is demon/rat$4 #gj4 ,! op9ion ( "s anci5t philosoph]s1 says ,kant1 t all is transitory & no?+ con/ant 9 ! _w1 al?\gh x _c be ma9ta9$ if we admit sub/ances1 /ill x _c be refut$ by ! unity ( consci\sness2 because we _c ev5 judge by consci\sness1 :e!r1 z some?+1 we are or are n p]man5t2 = we attribute to our id5tical me only t ( :i* we h consci\sness1 & ?us we mu/ necess>ily judge t we are precisely ! same 9 all ! durations ( :i* we are consci\s4 ,kant expressly ackn[l$ges t ! judgm5t t we are ! same is necess>y1 t is1 t ! id5tity ( ! me is = u a necess>y fact ( consci\sness4 ,x w\ld be difficult to imag9e a confession m injuri\s & m conclusive aga9/ ! argum5ts ( ! ,g]man philosoph]4 ,if we are =c$ to judge ourselves id5tical1 if consci\sness tell u s1 c we d5y or d\bt ?is id5tity )\t de/roy+ ! fundam5tal fact ( all psy*ological inve/igations1 & consequ5tly fall+ into ! mo/ complete skepticism8 ,if ! te/imony ( consci\sness is n valid1 if ! judgm5t to :i* x necess>ily =ces u is n c]ta91 :at %all we cat* hold ( 9 ord] t we may n be precipitat$ into ! mo/ absolute skepticism8 :]e %all we look = a solid f\ndation = ! edifice ( our k8 #ga4 ,b1 ,kant cont9ues1 f ! po9t ( view ( ano!r1 we _c hold ?is judgm5t valid1 because1 f9d+ 9 ! s\l no o!r con/ant ph5om5on ?an ! repres5tation ( ! me :i* accompanies & unites all ! o!r ph5om5a1 we c nev] decide t ?is me 7a simple ?\ght7 is n z fleet+ z ! o!r ?\ghts1 :i* are respectively connect$ by x4 ,d n1 !n1 admit t ! repres5tation ( ! me1 al?\gh ess5tially repres5t+ an id5tity1 is valid2 say t1 al?\gh transitory x necess>ily br+s u to ! illusion ( p]man5ce2 b draw also all ! consequ5ces ( ?is doctr9e1 & ma9ta9 t human reason avails no?+1 absolutely no?+2 say t recollection is a pure illusion1 t al?\gh we are necess>ily induc$ to believe t ! ?\ght :i* we n[ h is ! recollection ( ano!r previ\s ?\ght1 t all ?is is pure illusion2 t we are n sure t !re is ! relation ( recollection1 & t we only "k t at pres5t we h ! consci\sness ( a ?\ght :i* seems to u connect$ ) ano!r previ\s ?\ght2 say too t reason+ has no validity1 = all conviction ( ideas is impossible )\t memory2 & t1 al?\gh an int]nal repres5tation necess>ily produces an ass5t1 we mu/ di/ru/ ! judgm5t :i* necessity dem&s3 say too t all t we ?9k1 all t we p]ceive1 all t we w1 all t we exp]i5ce )9 u1 _c enable u to "k any ?+1 t we are condemn$ to a complete impot5ce ( acquir+ any c]ta9ty ( any ?+2 & t ! language ( e philosoph] %\ld be ! foll[+3 ,?is n[ seems s2 ,i am consci\s ( x2 ,i "k no?+ fur!r2 ,i exp]i5ce a necessity ( believ+ x1 b p]haps ?is belief is a pure illusion2 ,i "k no?+ ( ! ext]nal _w2 ,i "k no?+ ei!r ( ! int]nal _w2 all k is d5i$ me2 ,i myself am only a succession ( ph5om5a :i* pass away & disappe>2 an irresi/ible necessity impels me to believe t ^! ph5om5a h a common tie1 b ?is tie is no?+2 because :5 a ph5om5on disappe>s no?+ is be=e x2 if ,i ackn[l$ge any reality1 no matt] :at1 ,i fall into ! sub/antiality ( ! s\l1 :i* ,i h resolv$ n to admit2 all is illusion1 all is no?+1 because1 z ,i am n ev5 c]ta9 ( ! facts ( consci\sness1 ,i am n c]ta9 ev5 ( ! illusion4 ,:o c enc\nt] su* consequ5ces8 ,,*apt] ,,xi4 ,,simplicity ,,( ,,! ,,s\l4 #gb4 ,i h conf9$ myself 9 ! prec$+ *apt]s to prov+ ! sub/antiality ( ! s\l2 to d :i* x 0 only necess>y to demon/rate by ! te/imony ( consci\sness t !re is )9 u a p]man5t reality1 ! subject ( ! modifications :i* we exp]i5ce4 ,i %all n[ demon/rate t ?is sub/ance is simple4 ,to proce$ me?odically1 let u fix ! mean+ ( ! ^w simple4 ,:5 _m be+s are unit$ & =m a collection1 ! result is call$ a composite be+2 s t !re is a true composition :]ev] be+s sub/antially di/9ct are unit$2 ! b& :i* unites !m may be ( diff]5t species1 :i* produces ! div]sity ( compositions4 ,simplicity is oppos$ to composition2 ! idea ( simplicity ess5tially excludes ! idea ( composition2 z ?is la/ includes a numb] ( di/9ct ?+s :i* are unit$ to =m a :ole1 ! idea ( simplicity ess5tially excludes ! idea ( numb] ( ?+s unit$ to =m a :ole4 ,!re=e ! simple is /rictly "o1 & !re is simplicity 9 a sub/ance :5 x is n a collection ( sub/ances4 ,:51 !re=e1 we say ! sub/ance ( ! s\l is simple1 we mean t x is n a collection ( sub/ances1 b "o sub/ance4 #gc4 ,! idea ( simplicity ?us det]m9$ ) exactness1 let u see if x belongs to our s\l4 ,z ! s\l is n giv5 u 9 intuition aft] ! mann] ( s5sible ?+s1 & we only "k x by ! pres5ce ( ! int]nal s5se1 & by ! ph5om5a :i* we exp]i5ce 9 ! dep?s ( our consci\sness1 we mu/ exam9e ^! two s\rces to see if we c f9d simplicity 9 !m4 ,x is an indisputable fact t 9 all our acts1 9 all our int]nal affections1 we p]ceive ! id5tity ( ! me4#dh ,!re is no id5tity betwe5 ?+s t are di/9ct3 consequ5tly ! int]nal s5se at once rejects ! multiplicity ( ! s\l4 ,x may be said t ?is id5tity does n exi/ betwe5 di/9ct sub/ances1 b t a composite sub/ance is id5tical ) itself1 & p]haps ! id5tity reveal$ by consci\sness is only ! id5tity ( a composite ) itself3 b ?is reply is de/roy$ by m]ely exam9+ ! te/imony ( consci\sness4 ,t :i* we p]ceive z v>i\s & multiple is n ! me1 b t :i* takes place 9 ! me3 we ?9k1 we w1 we p]ceive diff]5t ?+s2 b consci\sness atte/s t :at ?9ks !m1 wills !m1 & p]ceives !m1 is "o & ! same1 ! me4 ,!re=e1 ! te/imony ( consci\sness alone proves ! simplicity ( ! s\l2 = x is impossible to expla9 o!rwise h[ we p]ceive )9 u ! p]man5t unity amid ! multitude ( int]nal ph5om5a4 #dh ,see ,*aps4 ,,vi41 ,,vii41 ,,viii41 ,,ix41 & ,x4 #gd4 ,ab/ract+ ! te/imony ( ! int]nal s5se1 & look+ only at ! nature ( ! int]nal ph5om5a1 x may be demon/rat$ t ! subject ( !m is a simple sub/ance4 ,if x 7 n s1 ! ?9k+ sub/ance w\ld be compos$ ( v>i\s sub/ances2 let u see :at w\ld foll[ f ?is supposition4 ,let ! compon5t sub/ances be ?ree1 = example1 ,a1 ,b1 ,c2 ,i say t ?is collection _c ?9k4 ,to demon/rate x ) ! mo/ complete evid5ce1 let u take ?is judgm5t3 metal is a body1 & let u see if x is possible = ! collection ( ,a1 ,b1 ,c1 to =m ?is judgm5t4 ,let u suppose ! repres5tation ( ! subject1 metal1 to be 9 ! sub/ance ,a2 ! idea ( ! pr$icate1 body1 to be 9 ,b2 & ! g5]al idea ( ! relation ( ! pr$icate to ! subject1 or ! copula1 is1 to be 9 ,c2 c a judgm5t be ! result8 ,by no means4 ,a w p]ceive ! metal1 ,b ! body1 & ,c ! g5]al idea ( ! copula1 is4 ,ea* ( ^! sub/ances w h consci\sness ( its own2 b z x is n consci\s ( :at is 9 ! o!r two1 x c =m no judgm5t1 = ?is ess5tially consi/s 9 ! relation ( ! pr$icate to ! subject4 #ge4 ,if y say t ea* ( ! sub/ances conta9s ! repres5tations ( ! ?ree ?+s1 we %all h ?ree judgm5ts1 & !re w n be "o ?9k+ be+1 b ?ree4 ,besides1 ei!r ( ! ?ree sub/ances ,a1 ,b1 ,c1 is compos$ ( o!rs1 or x is n4 ,if x is n1 is simple1 & we h a simple & p]ceptive sub/ance1 :y !n suppose ?ree :5 "o is en\gh8 ,if x is compos$ ( o!rs1 ! difficulty is increas$2 = suppos+ ,a to be =m$ ( two sub/ances1 :i* we may call m1 n2 ! repres5tation ( metal :i* 0 9 ,a w be di/ribut$ betwe5 m & n1 9 :i* case1 f> f obta9+ a judgm5t1 we %\ld n ev5 h a subject2 = x w\ld n be possible to =m ! repres5tation ( metal1 suppos+ x to be divid$ betwe5 m & n4 ,if x is n possible to =m a judgm5t1 or ev5 ! idea ( "o t]m1 x is evid5t t all reason+ & ?\ght w\ld be impossible2 = reason+ implies a connection ( judgm5ts f :i* x d$uces ! conclusion conta9$ 9 ! premises4 #gf4 ,acts ( ! w are also impossible 9 a composite sub/ance2 !re is no w :]e !re is no cognition1 & ?is latt] is1 z we h j se51 insep>able f simplicity4 ,b we may ext5d ! demon/ration /ill fur!r4 ,an act ( ! w implies an incl9ation1 t5d5cy1 or :atev] x may be call$1 t[>ds an object kn[n4 ,let u suppose ! two sub/ances ,a & ,b to compose a sub/ance :i* has a w2 & let u suppose all t is necess>y = ! act ( will+ to be divid$ betwe5 !m 9 su* mann] t ! k ( ! object will$ is 9 x1 & ! incl9ation or t5d5cy 9 ,b2 ,i say su* an act or w is absurd4 ,to feel ! =ce ( ?is tru? let u suppose t ! act ( ! w is to be =m$ ( ! cognition ( "o man1 & ! incl9ation ( ano!r t[>ds ! object kn[n by ! fir/2 ! pure cognition ( "o is n ! act ( ! w1 & ! incl9ation ( ! o!r t[>ds an object is impossible unless he has ! cognition ( ! object t[>ds :i* he is incl9$1 because ?is is equival5t to suppos+ a relation )\t any t]m to :i* x relates4 ,^! contradictions mu/ be admitt$ by e "o :o d5ies ! simplicity ( ! sub/ances :i* w2 = ei!r ! incl9ation & ! cognition mu/ be divid$ betwe5 ! p>ts ( ! sub/ances1 or all conc5trat$ 9 "o "p1 & !n ! o!rs are unnecess>y4 ,moreov]1 ! sub/ances compos+ ! sub/ance :i* w are ei!r simple or composite2 if simple1 !n !re are simple sub/ances :i* "k & w2 if composite1 ea* act ( ! w w\ld be an aggregate ( ! action ( ! p>ts1 & :at w\ld an act ( ! w be :i* %\ld consi/ 9 an aggregate8 #gg4 ,! union :i* we conceive 9 di/9ct sub/ances is ei!r juxtaposition 9 space1 simultane\sness 9 "t1 or ! conc\rse ( =ces produc+ a common effect3 juxtaposition 9 space or simultane\sness ( "t does n help u to expla9 ?\ght1 ! act ( ! w1 nor any int]nal ph5om5a2 & nei!r does ! conc\rse ( =ces produc+ a common effect solve ! problem4 ,on ?is supposition we %\ld h to conceive int]nal ph5om5a z ! products ( an elaboration to :i* v>i\s sub/ances h occurr$4 ,let u = a mom5t admit ?is absurdity2 we advance no?+ by x1 = we !n ask1 :]e does ! ph5om5on reside8 ,if 9 all ! sub/ances jo9tly x mu/ be 9 itself composite1 & its consci\sness w\ld also be composite2 none ( ! compon5t sub/ances c\ld say ,i ) respect to ?is ph5om5on2 !re w\ld1 !re=e1 be a multiplicity ( consci\snesses4 ,ei!r ^! consci\snesses w\ld be unit$ 9 a po9t 9 ord] to =m a common consci\sness1 or !y w\ld n4 ,if !y are unit$1 _! po9t ( union mu/ be a simple sub/ance1 or we relapse into ! multiplicity ( consci\snesses3 if !y are n unit$1 ! diff]5t int]nal consci\snesses ( ea* man w be l ! consci\snesses ( diff]5t m52 ea* sub/ance w ?9k its own1 )\t kn[+ :at ! o!r ?9ks4 #gh4 ,f9ally1 ?is divisibility ( sub/ance & ( consci\sness w ext5d to inf9ity1 or x w n2 if ! =m]1 in/ead ( "o ?9k+ be+1 !re w be an inf9ite numb] ( ?9k+ be+s )9 ea* "o ( u2 if ! latt]1 we mu/ come to simple sub/ances ) ?\ght & consci\sness1 :i* is precisely :at our adv]s>ies are oppos$ to4 ,inf9ite divisibility does n save !m f simplicity2 ! division sep>ates ! p>ts1 b x supposes !m di/9ct2 !re=e1 inf9ite division mu/ suppose an inf9ite numb] ( simple be+s :i* make ! division possible4 ,,*apt] ,,xii4 ,,kant',s ,,op9ion ,,( ,,! ,,argum5t ,,prov+ ,,! ,,simplicity ,,( ,,! ,,s\l4 #gi4 ,kant calls ! argum5t1 by :i* we h j prov$ ! simplicity ( ! s\l1 ! second p>alogism ( psy*ology4 ,he gives x 9 ^! t]ms3 ,e ?+1 ! action ( :i* c nev] be conceiv$ z ! concurr5ce ( _m ag5ts1 is simple3 ! s\l or ?9k+ sub/ance is ( ?is nature2 !re=e ! s\l is simple4 ,! ,g]man philosoph] admits t ?is argum5t is n a m]e sophism1 inv5t$ by "s dogmati/ = ! purpose ( giv+ 8 ass]tions a slight appe>ance ( tru?2 & he confesses t x seems to defy ! mo/ att5tive exam9ation & ! mo/ pr(\nd reflection4 ,/ill he flatt]s himself t he c expose its fallacy1 %[+ t ?is pr9cipal support ( rational psy*ology is a false f\ndation1 & t1 consequ5tly1 ! :ole edifice ( ?is sci5ce is built 9 ! air4 #hj4 ,kant obs]ves t ! n]vus prob&i ( ! argum5t is 9 ! fact t _m repres5tations _c =m a ?\ght1 except inasmu* z !y are conta9$ 9 ! absolute unity ( ! ?9k+ subject2 b no "o1 he says1 c prove ?is proposition by conceptions4 ,:]e c\ld he beg98 ,! proposition3 ',a ?\ght c only be ! effect ( ! absolute unity ( ! ?9k+ subject1' _c be analyz$2 ! unity ( ?\ght 7& ev5 ?\ght results f _m repres5tations7 is collective2 & z to simple conceptions1 _! unity may j z well be ref]r$ to ! collective unity ( sub/ances :i* contribute to produce ! ?\ght 7j z ! motion ( a body is ! motion ( all its p>ts7 z to ! absolute unity ( ! subject4 ,! necessity ( ! supposition ( a simple sub/ance _c consequ5tly be kn[n by ! rule ( id5tity 9 a composite ?\ght4 ,no "o :o und]/&s ! reason ( ! possibility ( syn!tic judgm5ts a priori1 z we h expla9$ !m above1 w d>e to affirm t ?is proposition c be kn[n syn!tically1 & p]fectly a priori1 or by pure conceptions4 ,?is reason+ is pure sophi/ry1 & w vani% 9 ! light ( evid5ce4 #ha4 ,9 ! fir/ place1 x is n correct to say t all ?\ghts result f _m repres5tations2 9 ! p]ception ( a simple idea1 z ( be+1 = example1 !re are n _m repres5tations2 !re=e ,kant's argum5t fails at ! fir/ /ep2 = if !re be ev5 "o ?\ght :i* requires simplicity1 x has already be5 demon/rat$ t1 if ! s\l is simple 9 "o in/ance x _c cease to be s 9 ano!r4 #hb4 ,let u n[ exam9e h[ ! div]sity ( repres5tations ent] into ^? ?\ghts :i* admit ( ?is div]sity4 ,:5 ^! repres5tations =m :at is call$ a ?\ght1 !y are unit$1 z x 71 9 a po9t :i* requires ! unity ( ! p]ception & ( ! subject p]ceiv+4 ,9 ! ?\ght call$ judgm5t v>i\s repres5tations are comb9$1 t ( ! subject & t ( ! object2 b ^! diff]5t repres5tations d n con/itute ! ?\ght call$ judgm5t1 except inasmu* z !y are pres5t$ z connect$ ) ! relation :i* au?orizes u to affirm or d5y ! pr$icate ( ! subject2 !re=e at ! bottom ( ! div]sity !re is unity1 t is to say1 ! relation2 !re=e ! ?\ght by :i* ?is relation is p]ceiv$ is "o1 & ! action ( p]ceiv+ is ess5tially "o1 not)/&+ ! v>iety ( ! repres5tations4 #hc4 ,!re is no ord] 9 our ?\ghts except z we comp>e !m ) ea* o!r3 all our intellectual acts are r$uc$ to ! p]ception & comp>ison ( ideas2 9 p]ception !re is simplicity1 z !re mu/ also be 9 comp>isons1 s9ce !re c be no comp>ison ( t :i* is v>i$1 except by r$uc+ ! v>i$ to t :i* is "o1 t is1 to ! relation :i* is p]ceiv$ 9 ! comp>ison4 ,!re=e 9 e ?\ght !re is unity2 ?\ght c nev] be conceiv$ z ! concurr5ce ( _m ag5ts2 !re=e ! proposition1 :i* ,kant consid]$ indemon/rable1 is demon/rat$1--t _m repres5tations _c =m a ?\ght except 9 s f> z !y are conta9$ 9 ! absolute unity ( a ?9k+ subject4 #hd4 ,let u pres5t ! same demon/ration "u a /rict] =m4 ,suppose ,a1 ,b1 ,c1 to be ! ?ree ag5ts concurr+ 9 ! =mation ( ! ?\ght2 ea* "p w yield its cont+5t2 let u suppose a to correspond to ! fir/1 b to ! second1 & c to ! ?ird1 ! result w be ! union compos$ ( a1 b1 & c2 ?is w be ! ?\ght2 x w !re=e be triple & c nev] con/itute a po9t ( comp>ison2 !re=e1 we mu/ ei!r reject ?is hypo!sis1 or d5y ?\ght4 ,kant's sophism proce$s f 8 att5d+ solely to ! div]sity ( ! repres5tations1 & ab/ract+ ! unity :i* is always met ) 9 ! p]ception ( ?is div]sity2 h5ce x is no?+ /range t he does n f9d unity 9 ! conception ( ?\ght4 ,he pres5ts ?is conception incompletely1 or r1 falsely2 he pres5ts ?\ght z a collection ( repres5tations1 & n z a mo/ simple po9t 9 :i* repres5tations unite1 9 ord] to be p]ceiv$ 9 ! relation :i* !y h among !mselves4 ,! div]sity ( ! repres5tations does n =m a collection aft] ! mann] ( s5sible objects2 ! ?\ght1 9 :i* ! relation ( two diff]5t triangles is kn[n1 _c be express$ by ! sum ( ! figures ( ! two triangles2 x is some?+ diff]5t f !m2 some?+ :i* is 9 ! mid/ ( !m2 :i* unites !m by comp>+ !m1 & :i* jo9s _! div]sity 9 ! unity ( _! relation4 #he4 ,! example br\ght by ,kant manife/s ! rud5ess ( 8 idea ( ! "* ( ! union ( ! repres5tations 9 ! =mation ( a :ole ?\ght4 ,! unity ( ! ?\ght is1 he says1 collective1 & may be ref]r$ to ! collective unity ( _m sub/ances1 j z ! motion ( a body is ! motion compos$ ( all ! p>ts ( ! body4 ,"h we see cle>ly :]e9 ,kant's equivocation consi/s2 he takes ! collection ( ! repres5tations = ! ?\ght :i* relates to !m1 & !re=e x is no wond] t he _c see ! unity impli$ 9 ! div]sity1 on ! supposition t ?is div]sity has to be ?\ght4 ,to c>ry conviction to ! f>!/ po9t1 let u take ?is example ( motion1 & suppose a cube to be mov$4 ,let u call its eight v]ticles ,a1 ,b1 ,c1 ,d1 ,e1 ,f1 ,g1 ,h2 !y all move1 & ! collection ( _! motions1 ) ^? ( ! po9ts :i* are betwe5 !m1 =ms ! :ole motion4 ,:at is !re common 9 ! result ( ?is concurr5ce ( ag5ts8 ,no?+1 except juxtaposition 9 space1 & ! relation :i* !y pres]ve by ! equal velocity ( ! motion4 ,b ! motion ( ! v]tex ,h is n ! motion ( ! v]tex ,a1 z is evid5t if we consid] t ! v]tex ,a may be cut (f f ! cube1 & rema9 at re/ )\t discont9u+ or alt]+ ! motion ( ! v]tex ,h2 !re=e1 ! two motions are ?+s absolutely di/9ct4 ,x is evid5t t ! same holds true ) respect to ! o!r po9ts2 !re=e ! unity ( ! composite motion is purely factiti\s2 :at !re is1 9 reality1 is a multiplicity ( sub/ances1 & ( motions1 )\t any o!r ?an a purely extr9sical connection1 ! relation ( positions 9 space4 ,let u *ange ! v]tices into repres5tations1 & see :at w be ! result4 ,d !y exi/ )\t any o!r connection ?an _! co-exi/5ce8 ,!n !y d n =m a ?\ght1 b only a collection ( ph5om5a :i* may be consid]$ z a union ( ?+s1 b n a ?\ght2 9 t case ! sum ( all ! repres5tations w be simil> to ! sum ( ! motions2 b x w produce no result 9 relation to ! object :i* we are n[ exam9+4 ,if we give ^! repres5tations a po9t ( union1 t is1 ! relation "u :i* !y are p]ceiv$1 we %all h a ?\ght2 b :at has ?is act1 :i* is "o & mo/ simple1 9 common )1 ! totality ( a numb] ( po9ts 9 motion8 #hf4 ,if ,kant _h wi%$ to pres5t a m s$uctive example1 he ought to h made use ( a !ory 9 me*anics1 ! application ( :i* to ! pres5t case pres5ts1 if n m difficulty1 at lea/ a m deceitful appe>ance2 ,i mean ! resultant ( a sy/em ( =ces & _! po9t ( application4 ,:5 sev]al =ces act ^u a l9e1 a plane1 or a solid1 !y produce an effect equal to t "o =ce alone1 :i* is call$ ! resultant3 ?is =ce has a det]m9ate direction & a po9t ( application1 z ?\gh x 7 simple or _h n emanat$ f o!rs2 :y _c ?is be appli$ to ?\ght8 ,:y may n a ?+1 al?\gh x is simple1 be ! product ( ! concurr5ce ( v>i\s ag5ts8 ,?is example is m speci\s1 because x pres5ts ! result ( ! composition conc5trat$ 9 a po9t1 b if we exam9e x well1 we %all f9d t x proves no?+ aga9/ u4 ,! disp>ity is ?is3 ?\ght is a simple act 9 itself1 :il/ ! resultant ( ! =ces is s only 9 its relation to ! effect exp]i5c$1 :i* is all t comes "u our calculation4 ,if two =ces are appli$ at ! two extremities ( an inflexible "r l9e ! effect w be ! same z ?\gh we appli$ "o =ce equal to ! sum ( !m bo? at "o po9t ( ! l9e1 at a di/ance f ei!r extremity inv]sely proportion$ to ! value ( ! fir/ =ces4 ,b ! unity ( ?is effect dep5ds on ! cohesion ( ! p>ts1 :i*1 n p]mitt+ isolat$ motions1 mu/ make ! =ce act on a s+le po9t2 b ! compon5t =ces d n cease to be di/9ct & sep>ate1 s t at ! mom5t ! cohesion %\ld cease1 ! respective p>ts w\ld ea* feel ! action ( ! =ce correspond+ to x1 & move 9 ! direction & ) ! velocity :i* ! =ce impresses on !m4 ,if1 :ile ! cohesion la/s1 x 7 possible to give ea* ( ! compon5t =ces ! consci\sness ( its action1 !re w\ld be two consci\snesses really di/9ct1 :i* c\ld nev] =m "o common consci\sness1 & c\ld only be unit$ 9 ! production ( an effect4 ,if ! po9t ( _! application %\ld h ! consci\sness ( ! action :i* x exp]i5ces1 x might h a consci\sness simil> to t ( ! action ( "o =ce1 equal to ! sum ( ! compon5ts1 if x did n "k ! mann] 9 :i* _! action is transmitt$ to x2 b f ! mom5t t x becomes consci\s ( _! respective action1 x w\ld "k t ! result is ow+ to ! impossibility ( ea* ( !m produc+ its effect 9 an isolat$ mann]4 ,if1 !re=e1 we comp>e ! ?9k+ subject to ?is po9t ( application ( ! =ces1 we mu/ attribute to ?is subject ! consci\sness ( ! orig9 ( ! repres5tations :i* concur 9 ! production ( ! :ole effect4 ,p]haps x may be said t by ! v analysis ( ! example1 we h prep>$ ! way = ! triumph ( ! adv]s>ies ( ! simplicity ( ! s\l2 because aft] arbitr>y suppositions we h at la/ come to a simple effect inh]5t 9 a simple ?+1 & produc$ by ! concurr5ce ( v>i\s ag5ts2 b if we look clos] to x1 we %all f9d t ?is pret5d$ triumph 0 nev] f>!r f be+ realiz$ ?an x is 9 ! la/ result to :i* we are l$ by ! analysis ( ! =ces4 ,=1 9 ord] to arrive at a simple result produc$ by ! concurr5ce ( v>i\s =ces1 we also require a simple po9t 9 :i* ?is result is conc5trat$4 ,!n1 & precisely because we h arriv$ at ?is simplicity1 we c ab/ract ! compon5t =ces1 & consid] ! result z a simple effect1 produc$ by a simple =ce1 & inh]5t 9 a simple subject1 :i* is ! indivisible po9t1 to :i* we consid] ! =ce z appli$4 ,!re=e1 cont9u+ ! comp>ison1 we ought to say t1 :atev] may be ! numb] ( ! ag5ts concurr+ 9 ! production ( ! ?\ght1 ?is ?\ght mu/ reside 9 a simple subject1 & 9 t case ! simplicity ( ! s\l is admitt$4 ,x is true t we %\ld !n suppose a c]ta9 numb] ( ag5ts act+ on ! s\l 9 ord] to produce ! ?\ght2 b ! ?\ght once produc$1 ! s\l alone w\ld be ! ?9k+ subject1 j z ! indivisible po9t is ! only "o :i* unites ! action ( ! compon5t =ces4 ,?us all t our adv]s>ies w\ld h ga9$ w\ld be ! burd5 ( ! ridicul\s inv5tion ( ! concurr5ce ( ag5ts1 & be =c$ not)/&+1 to admit a simple ?9k+ sub/ance1 :i* is all t we propos$ to demon/rate4 #hg4 ,kant pret5ds t x is impossible to d$uce f exp]i5ce ! necess>y unity ( ! ?9k+ subject1 z ! condition ( ! possibility ( all ?\ght1 because exp]i5ce reveals no necessity1 & ! conception ( absolute unity belongs to an ord] diff]5t f t :i* we are "h consid]+4 ,x is c]ta9 t exp]i5ce alone does n reveal any necessity2 = x is limit$ to p>ticul>1 cont+5t facts1 & does n rea* ! univ]sal reason ( objects2 b ?is is n true ( exp]i5ce reg>d$ objectively1 or 9 relation to ! cognition ( ! g5]al reasons ( ?+s2 = al?\gh ?is cognition1 consid]$ subjectively z an individual act1 is a cont+5t fact1 /ill inasmu* z x exi/s x repres5ts a true necessity 9 c]ta9 objects2 unless we wi% to r5\nce ! c]ta9ty ( all ! sci5ces1 ma!matics includ$4 ,x is cle> t 9 speak+ ( ?\ght & ! ?9k+ subject1 we _c =get exp]i5ce1 s9ce x is impossible to ab/ract ! basis ( all psy*ological inve/igations1--,i ?9k1--a proposition :i* expresses a fact ( consci\sness1 an act ( int]nal exp]i5ce2 b ) ?is exp]i5ce is comb9$ ! idea ( unity 9 g5]al1 or ! exclusion ( di/9ction & multiplicity f ! act ( ?\ght & f ! ?9k+ subject4 ,?us ! demon/ration ( ! simplicity ( ! s\l foll[s 9 ! same pa? z all demon/rations :i* are conf9$ to ! purely ideal ord]1 & :i* consequ5tly are =m$ ( "o premise :i* conta9s a necess>y tru?1 & ano!r :i* e/abli%es a fact ( exp]i5ce4 ,9 ! pres5t in/ance1 ! necess>y premise is ! v def9ition ( unity & simplicity2 ! o!r expresses ! fact exp]i5c$1 t is1 ! nature ( ! ?\ght1 z x is reveal$ 9 consci\sness4 #hh4 ,h5ce ! demon/ration ( ! simplicity ( ?9k+ be+s is n limit$ to ! human m9d1 b ext5ds to all ! subjects 9 :i* ! fact ( consci\sness exi/s4 ,:5 ,kant says we _c ext5d ?is demon/ration1 because we !n g out ( ! field ( exp]i5ce1 we reply ) ?is argum5t3 our demon/ration is f\nd$ on ! idea ( unity & ! fact ( consci\sness2 ! idea ( unity is g5]al1 & consequ5tly is valid 9 all cases2 ! fact ( consci\sness is a ?+ :i* is f\nd 9 e ?9k+ be+1 s9ce ?\ght is inconceivable )\t a subject1 :i* may say1 ,i ?9k2 !re=e1 we proce$ legitimately 9 ext5d+ ! demon/ration ( simplicity1 unless y mean to give to ! ^w ?9k a v diff]5t mean+ f t :i* we all give to x1 9 :i* case we g out ( ! ar5a ( philosophy & ent] on a discussion ( words4 #hi4 ,we mu/ h receiv$ ! idea ( a ?9k+ be+ f int]nal exp]i5ce3 we may exp& or re/rict ?is idea1 increas+ or decreas+ its p]fection2 b at bottom x rema9s always ! same1 & we _c conceive ?\ght 9 ano!r be+ )\t attribut+ to x some?+ simil> to :at we exp]i5ce 9 ourselves4 ,9 ?is respect ,kant is !re=e "r :5 he says t if we wi% to repres5t to ourselves a ?9k+ be+ we mu/ put ourselves 9 ! place ( ! object4 ,accord+ to him1 we require = ?\ght ! absolute unity ( ! subject1 only because )\t ?is unity x w\ld be impossible to say1 ,i ?9k2 s9ce1 al?\gh ! totality ( ! ?\ght may be di/ribut$ among ! v>i\s subjects1 ! subjective me _c be divid$ or sep>at$1 & e ?\ght supposes ?is me4 ,! proposition1 ,i ?9k1 is ! f\ndation on :i* psy*ology raises ! edifice ( its k3 ,kant admits ?is1 b ,i _c und]/& :y1 admitt+ t ?is proposition is ! =m ( ! app]ception :i* is jo9$ ) & prec$es all exp]i5ce1 he /ill says t x is n exp]im5tal2 z ?\gh ! ?\ght 7 n j z subject to a real exp]i5ce z its =m2 :]eas if we closely exam9e x1 we %\ld r say t ! =m is exp]i5c$ ?an ! ?\ght itself1 on ! supposition t ! latt] is di/9ct :il/ ! =m is id5tical 9 e in/ance2 = ! =m 9 itself is only ! consci\sness ( ! unity id5tical 9 ! mid/ ( div]sity4 #ij4 ,9 conceiv+ ?is absolute unity 9 ! me1 we d n1 z ,kant pret5ds1 conceive a topical unity1 b a real unity1 if we suppose x to rema9 really ! same ?r\gh ! v>iety ( ?\ght4 ,:5 we enunciate ?is unity 9 ! proposition1 ,i ?9k1 we d n speak ( a =m 9 ! ab/ract1 common to all p]ceptions1 b ( some?+ positive :i* is )9 u1 & ! reality ( :i* is indisp5sable to ! possibility ( ?\ght4 #ia4 ,! ,g]man philosoph] fur!r says3 ,?is subjective condition ( all k _c ) propriety be conv]t$ into a condition ( ! possibility ( a k ( ! objects2 t is1 into a conception ( ?9k+ be+ 9 g5]al1 s9ce we _c repres5t ?is be+ to ourselves )\t putt+ ourselves 9 its place by ! =mula ( our consci\sness4 ,i d n believe t ! psy*ologi/s :o h pret5d$ t !y c\ld demon/rate ! simplicity ( ! s\l1 ev] flatt]$ !mselves ) arriv+ at a p]fect idea ( ?9k+ be+s1 or d5i$ t we obta9 ! type ( ?is idea f our own exp]i5ce2 :at !y h pret5d$ is1 t reason leads !m to inf] t !re is absolute unity ( ! subject :]ev] !re is a ?9k+ be+2 :e!r its ?\ght may belong to a high] or l[] ord] ?an our own4 #ib4 ,:5 ,kant obs]ves t ! subject 9 :i* ! ?\ght inh]es is only indicat$ 9 a transc5d5tal way1 )\t its prop]ties be+ discov]$1 & t1 !re=e1 we d n "k ! simplicity ( ! subject itself1 he decl>es a fact :i* is 9 "s s5se admissible1 b he d$uces f x a false consequ5ce4 ,x is true t we only "k ! sub/ance ( ! s\l by ! pres5ce ( ! int]nal s5se1 & by its relation to its acts2 & consequ5tly t ! s\l 9 itself ab/ract$ f all ! ph5om5a :i* we exp]i5ce1 is n giv5 9 imm$iate intuitions1 & t :5 we arrive at ?is po9t we are r$uc$ to ! idea ( a simple be+1 b ?is indet]m9at5ess1 & vagu5ess1 9 ! k ( ! sub/ance ( ! s\l1 does n prev5t our kn[+ its simplicity1 if ?is simplicity is reveal$ by ! int]nal s5se1 & also by ! nature ( ! ph5om5a by :i* we "k ! ?9k+ subject4 #ic4 ,"s p]sons may believe t ! indet]m9at5ess ( ! k ( ! sub/ance ( ! s\l is a fact rec5tly discov]$ by ! ,g]man philosoph]2 b x is easy to %[ t x _h be5 obs]v$ long be=e1 & is laid d[n 9 a v special & int]e/+ mann] 9 ! writ+s ( ,/4 ,?omas4 ,?is em95t metaphysician proposes ! "q :e!r ! intellectual s\l kn[s itself by its ess5ce1 utrum anima intellectiva seipsam cognoscat p] suam ess5tiam1 & aft] ! v>i\s rem>ks on intellig5ce1 & ! intelligibility ( objects1 he solves x 9 ^! rem>kable words3 ,our und]/&+ does n "k itself by its ess5ce1 b by its act2 & ?is 9 two ways3 9 "o way1 9 p>ticul>2 inasmu* z ,sortes or ,plato p]ceives t he has an intellectual s\l1 because he p]ceives t he und]/&s3 9 ! second way1 9 g5]al2 inasmu* z we consid] ! nature ( ! human m9d 9 ! act ( ! und]/&+4 ,b x is true t we d]ive ! judgm5t & efficacy ( ! k by :i* we "k ! nature ( ! s\l1 by ! light ( ! div9e tru? ( :i* our intellect p>ticipates1 & 9 :i* are conta9$ ! reasons ( all ?+s1 z 0 said above4 ,h5ce1 ,augu/9e says1 9 ! n9? book on ! ,tr9ity3 ,we h intuition ( ! inviolable tru? by :i* we p]fectly det]m9e1 z f> z possible1 n :at ! m9d ( ea* man is1 b :at x %\ld be accord+ to ! et]nal reasons4 ,b !re is a diff]5ce betwe5 ^! two cognitions1 =1 to h ! fir/1 we only ne$ ! pres5ce ( ! m9d1 :i* is ! pr9ciple ( ! act by :i* ! m9d p]ceives itself1 &1 !re=e1 we say t x kn[s itself by its pres5ce2 b = ! second1 ! pres5ce ( ! m9d is n suffici5t1 b a c>eful & subtile inve/igation is necess>y4 ,h5ce _m are ignorant ( ! nature ( ! s\l1 & _m also h err$ on ! nature ( ! s\l2 :]e=e 9 ! t5? book on ! ,tr9ity1 ,augu/9e1 speak+ ( ?is inve/igation1 says3 ,! s\l %\ld n try to see itself z some?+ abs5t1 b endeavor to di/+ui% itself z some?+ pres5t2 t is1 to "k its diff]5ce f o!r ?+s1 :i* is to "k its quiddity & nature4#di #di ,non ergo p] ess5tiam suam1 s$ p] actum suum se cognoscit intellectus no/]1 et hoc duplicit]4 ,uno quidem modo p>ticul>it]1 secundum quod ,sortes1 vel ,plato p]cipit se hab]e animam intellectivam ex hoc1 quod p]cipit se intellig]e4 ,alio modo 9 univ]sali1 secundum quod naturam m5tis human ex actu intellectus consid]amus4 ,s$ v]um e/ quod judicium1 et efficacia hujus cognitionis p] quam naturam anim cognoscimus1 competit nobis secundum d]ivationem lum9is intellectus no/ri a v]itate div9a1 9 qua rationes omnium r]um cont95tur1 sicut supra dictum e/4 ,unde ,augu/4 dicit 9 #i de ,tr94 ,intuemur inviolabilem v]itatem1 ex qua p]fecte quantum possumus1 deff9imus1 non qualis sit uniuscujusque hom9is m5s1 s$ qualis esse sempit]nis rationibus debeat4 ,e/ autem diff]5tia int] has duas cognitiones2 nam ad primam cognitionem de m5te hab5dam sufficit ipsa m5tis prs5tia1 qu e/ pr9cipium actus1 ex quo meus p]cipit seipsam3 et ideo dicitur se cognosc]e p] suam prs5tiam4 ,s$ ad secundam cognitionem de m5te hab5dam1 non sufficit ejus prs5tia3 s$ requiritur dilig5s1 et subtilis inquisitio4 ,unde et multi naturam anim ignorant1 et multi etiam circa naturam anim errav]unt4 ,propt] quod ,augu/4 dicit #aj de ,tr94 de tali inquisitione m5tis1 ,non velut abs5tem se qurat m5s c]n]e2 s$ prs5tem qurat disc]n]e2 id e/ cognosc]e diff]5tiam suam ab aliis rebus1 quod e/ cognosc]e quidditatem1 et naturam suam4 ,s4 ,?om4 ,sum4 ,!ol4 ,p4 ,i4 ,q41 ,,lxxxvii41 ,a4 #a4 #id4 ,x is to be obs]v$ t ,/4 ,?omas admits two cognitions ( ! s\l by itself2--t ( its pres5ce1 z we p]ceive x 9 p]ceiv+ our ?\ght1 p]cipit se hab]e animam intellectivam ex hoc quod p]cipit se intellig]e2 & ano!r :i* we d$uce f ! analysis ( ! intellectual act reason+ f g5]al consid]ations1 & reflect+ on ! light :i* ! et]nal reasons %$ ^u ?is fact ( exp]i5ce4 ,?is is h[ ,/4 ,?omas expla9s ! k ( pres5ce or consci\sness conta9$ 9 ! proposition1 ,i ?9k2 & ! g5]al k :i* we d$uce f ! same intellectual act 9 its relations to ! unity ( ! subject ex]cis+ x4 ,t ?is la/ conta9s some?+ ab/ract & indet]m9ate no "o d5ies2 & :5 ,kant calls att5tion to x1 he tells u no?+ :i* ! holy ,doctor _h n already told u :5 he expressly affirm$ t ! s\l kn[s itself n 9 its ess5ce1 b 9 its acts4 ,^! few laconic words express all ! tru? :i* is conta9$ 9 ,kant's diffuse explanation ( ! limitation ( our cognition to ! acts ( consci\sness1 & ! abs5ce ( ! intuitive k ( ! sub/ance ( ! s\l1 ! transc5d5tal subject ( ! ?\ght4 ,,*apt] ,,xiii4 ,,9 ,,:at ,,mann] ,,! ,,idea ,,( ,,sub/ance ,,may ,,be ,,appli$ ,,to ,,god4 #ie4 ,9 ! idea ( sub/ance z =m$ f ! be+s ar\nd u & f ! te/imony ( our consci\sness we f9d ! relation to *anges :i* occur 9 x z _! subject or recipi5t4 ,b we h be=e rem>k$ t besides ?is relation !re is a negation ( inh]5ce 9 ano!r z ! modifications are inh]5t 9 ! sub/ance2 ?is negation implies a p]fection :i* exempts x f ! necessity ( inh]5ce to :i* ! *angeable & transitory be+s :i* we call accid5ts or modifications are subject4 ,z we are ignorant ( ! intr9sic ess5ce ( sub/ances1 we d n "k :at ?is p]fection is2 yet we _c d\bt t x exi/s 9 ! v nature ( ! subject1 & is indep5d5t ( ! modifications :i* trans=m x4 ,if !n ! ess5ce ( ! sub/ance mu/ consi/ 9 any ?+1 x mu/ be 9 ?is p]fection ( :i* we h a k1 b n an intuitive cognition4 ,:5 !re=e sub/ance is def9$ 9 relation to accid5ts1 quod sub/at accid5tibus1 x is r def9$ by ! mann] 9 :i* x is pres5t$ to u ?an by :at x is 9 itself4 #if4 ,h5ce1 ( ! two def9itions usually receiv$ 9 ! s*ools3 ,ens p] se subsi/5s1 a be+ subsi/+ by itself1 &1 id quod sub/at accid5tibus1 ! subject ( accid5ts2 ! fir/ is ! m correct1 because x comes ne>] ! expression ( :at x is 9 itself4 ,al?\gh we "k f9ite sub/ances only inasmu* z reveal$ by accid5ts1 & ev5 our own m9d kn[s itself only 9 its acts1 reason tells u t 9 ord] to be kn[n ?+s mu/ exi/1 & 9 ord] t our m9d may f9d 9 !m some?+ p]man5t1 x is necess>y t ?is some?+ %\ld be 9 !m4 ,our k does n produce its objects2 9 ord] to be kn[n !y mu/ exi/4 #ig4 ,^! reflections manife/ ! possibility ( ! exi/5ce ( a sub/ance n subject to accid5ts or *ange ( any k9d2 & t ?is sub/ance n only does n lose ! "* ( sub/ance by be+ immutable1 b possesses x 9 a mu* m p]fect degree4 ,! p]fection ( sub/ance is n 9 its *anges b 9 :at is p]man5t 9 x1 n 9 hav+ a succession ( modifications inh]5t 9 x1 b 9 exi/+ 9 su* a mann] z n to ne$ to inh]e 9 ano!r4 ,! sub/ance :i* %\ld possess ?is p]man5ce1 ?is p]fection enabl+ x to exi/ by itself1 & at ! same "t %\ld h no modification1 %\ld exp]i5ce no *ange1 w\ld be inf9itely sup]ior to all o!r sub/ances4 ,?is sub/ance is ,god4 #ih4 ,n[ x is easy to answ] ! "q :e!r :5 appli$ to ,god ! idea ( sub/ance is und]/ood 9 ! same s5se z :5 appli$ to creatures2 or1 to speak 9 ! t]ms ( ! s*ools1 :e!r x is tak5 univocally or analog\sly4 #ii4 ,9 ! idea ( e sub/ance is conta9$ ! idea ( be+2 :at does n exi/ _c be a sub/ance4 ,inasmu* z we conceive be+ z a reality1 z oppos$ to no?+ness1 ! idea ( be+ belongs bo? to ,god & to creatures3 ,god is1 t is to say1 ,god is a real ?+1 n no?+4 ,b if f ?is g5]al idea1 su* z we conceive x 9 opposition to no?+ness1 we pass to its realization 9 objects1 to ! mann] ( its application1 s to speak1 we f9d all ! diff]5ce t !re is betwe5 ! cont+5t & ! necess>y1 ! f9ite & ! inf9ite4 ,al?\gh we d n intuitively see ! inf9ite be+1 nor ! ess5ce ( f9ite be+s1 /ill we h evid5t k t ! ^w be+ appli$ to ! inf9ite means some?+ v diff]5t f :at x does :5 appli$ to ! f9ite4 #ajj4 ,9 ! idea ( sub/ance is also conta9$ ! idea ( some?+ p]man5t2 ?is p]man5ce belongs also to ,god3 ! inf9ite be+ is ess5tially p]man5t4 #aja4 ,9 ! sub/ances ar\nd u we f9d ?is p]man5ce comb9$ ) ! succession ( ! modifications :i* affect !m2 ^! *anges are impossible 9 ,god4 ,! relation to modifications is a *>act]i/ic quality ( f9ite sub/ances4 #ajb4 ,sub/ances are n inh]5t 9 o!rs z modifications are inh]5t 9 !m2 ?is non-inh]5ce also belongs to ! div9e sub/ance4 #ajc4 ,sub/ances mu/ conta9 some?+ :i* exempts !m f ! necessity ( inh]5ce & raises !m above ! ?+s :i* s rapidly succe$ ea* o!r1 & 9 _! exi/5ce always ne$ ano!r to su/a9 !m2 ?is p]fection is f\nd 9 ! div9e sub/ance :i* is be+ ess5tially1 ! f\nta9 ( p]fection4 #ajd4 ,x foll[s f ?is analysis t all ! p]fection conta9$ 9 ! idea ( sub/ance may be appli$ to ! inf9ite be+2 & t all t is conta9$ 9 ?is idea :i* _c be appli$ to ?is be+ is :at implies negation or imp]fection4 ,,*apt] ,,xiv4 ,,an ,,important ,,rem>k1 ,,& ,,summ>y4 #aje4 ,:5 we say1 t a sub/ance is a be+ subsi/+ by itself1 we d n mean t x is a be+ :i* has absolutely no ne$ ( ano!r = its exi/5ce4 ,to conf\nd ^! two ?+s w\ld produce a frightful confusion ( ideas1 & is itself produc$ by a n less frightful confusion ( ! relation ( cause & effect ) ! relation ( sub/ance & accid5ts4 #ajf4 ,! relation ( cause & effect consi/s 9 ! cause giv+ ! effect its be+2 ! relation ( sub/ance & accid5t consi/s 9 ! sub/ance s]v+ z subject to ! accid5t4 ,s great is ! diff]5ce betwe5 ^! two relations t n only does reason %[ !m to be di/9ct1 b at e mom5t exp]i5ce pres5ts !m z sep>ate4 ,our s\l is ! subject ( _m accid5ts 9 ! production ( :i* x has no "p1 b on ! contr>y oppos$ to _! production z f> z x is able4 ,su* are all pa9ful s5sations1 all disagreeable impressions1 all tr\blesome ?\ghts :i* pres5t !mselves 9 spite ( u1 & :5 we wi% to ?9k ( some?+ else4 ,9 ^! cases ! s\l is ! subject1 & n ! cause3 x has ! relation ( sub/ance to ?+s ( :i* x is n ! cause1 & ) respect to :i* x is entirely passive4 ,if ,i am n greatly mi/ak51 ?is example is conclusive1 & m>ks ! l9e :i* divides causality f sub/ance1 effect f accid5t4 #ajg4 ,to be subsi/5t by itself expresses an exclusion2 if ?is exclusion is ref]r$ to causality1 to be subsi/5t by itself is to be n caus$2 if ref]r$ to inh]5ce1 x means to be n inh]5t 9 ano!r z accid5ts are 9 _! sub/ance4 ,:5 sub/ance is def9$ a be+ subsi/5t 9 itself1 x is und]/ood 9 ! second s5se1 n 9 ! fir/1 & ?is di/9ction is suffici5t to ov]?r[ ! :ole sy/em ( ,sp9oza1 & all ! pan!i/s1 :atev] be ! aspect "u :i* !y pres5t _! error4 #ajh4 ,9 ord] to ent] on ! "q ( pan!ism free f all confusion1 let u sum up 9 a few words all t reason & exp]i5ce tea* conc]n+ sub/ance4 ,i4 ,)9 u !re is a be+1 "o1 simple1 id5tical1 p]man5t1 ! subject ( ! ph5om5a :i* we exp]i5ce4 ,,ii4 ,outside ( u !re are objects :i* pres]ve some?+ con/ant ?r\gh ! v>iety ( ?is ph5om5a4 ,,iii4 ,9 ! idea ( sub/ance are conta9$ ! ideas ( p]man5ce & non-inh]5ce 9 ano!r z a modification4 ,,iv4 ,! relation ( a subject to its modifications1 is f\nd 9 all f9ite sub/ances4 ,v4 ,relation to modifications is n insep>able f ! ideas ( be+1 p]man5ce1 & non-inh]5ce 9 ano!r4 ,,vi4 ,an immutable sub/ance implies no contradiction4 ,,vii4 ,to subsi/ by itself is n ! same z to be indep5d5t ( all o!r be+s4 ,! relation ( cause & effect ought n to be conf\nd$ ) ! relation ( sub/ance & accid5t4 ,,viii4 ,non-inh]5ce 9 ano!r is *>act]i/ic ( sub/ance2 b ?is negative idea mu/ be f\nd$ on some?+ positive2 on ! =ce to subsi/ by itself )\t ! necessity ( adh]+ to ano!r4 ,,*apt] ,,xv4 ,,pan!ism ,,exam9$ ,,9 ,,! ,,ord] ,,( ,,ideas4 #aji4 ,! idea ( sub/ance & all its applications1 z well to ! ext]nal z to ! int]nal _w1 are f> f lead+ u to inf] ! exi/5ce ( a s+le sub/ance2 on ! contr>y1 reason accord+ ) exp]i5ce =ces u to ackn[l$ge a multitude ( sub/ances4 ,:y %\ld we admit only "o sub/ance8 ,?is is "o ( ! mo/ important que/ions ( philosophy1 & f ! mo/ anci5t times has giv5 occasion to ! mo/ s]i\s errors2 x consequ5tly des]ves a c>eful inve/igation4 #aaj4 ,^? :o admit only "o sub/ance mu/ f\nd _! op9ion ei!r on ! idea ( sub/ance or on exp]i5ce2 our m9d c h no o!r rec\rse ?an to its primitive ideas1 or ! tea*+s ( exp]i5ce4 ,let u beg9 ) ! a priori me?od or t :i* is f\nd$ on ! idea4 #aaa4 ,:at d y und]/& by sub/ance8 we ask4 ,if by sub/ance y und]/& a be+ subsi/+ by itself1 & by ?is subsi/5ce y mean t x has no ne$ ( ano!r1 & nev] _h any ne$ ( ano!r 9 ord] to exi/1 !n y are speak+ ( a be+ t is n caus$1 ( a necess>y be+ :i* has 9 itself ! suffici5t & necess>y reason ( its exi/5ce4 ,if y say ?is be+ is only "o1 or t !re is no o!r ( its k9d1 we agree ) y1 only we tell y t y take ! "n ( sub/ance 9 an improp] s5se4 ,b at bottom ! diff]5ce w\ld be only 9 ! "n2 & 9 ord] to come to a mutual und]/&+ x is only necess>y = u to "k t by sub/ance y und]/& an absolutely necess>y1 & consequ5tly absolutely indep5d5t be+4 ,b if y ass]t t ?is be+ is ! only "o 9 ! s5se t !re is no?+1 & c be no?+ beside x1 !n y\r ass]tion is gratuit\s & we ask = jo9t pro(4 ,:y %\ld ! necess>y be+ exclude ! possibility ( o!r be+s8 ,is x n m reasonable to conclude t x conta9s ! reason ( _! possibility & exi/5ce8 ,! be+ :i* has 9 itself ! necessity ( exi/+1 mu/ possess activity1 & ! ext]nal t]m ( ?is activity is production4 ,:y may n o!r be+s be ! result ( ?is production8 ,inasmu* z produc$ !y w\ld be di/9ct f ! be+ produc+ !m4 #aab4 ,)\t go+ beyond our ideas we f9d cont+5cy & multiplicity4 ,exp]i5ce reveals a cont9ual succession ( =ms )9 u2 ^! appe>ances are some?+2 !y _c be a pure no?+1 = !y mu/ be some?+1 ?\gh only appe>ances4 ,9 !m we behold a cont9ual transition f n-be+ to be+1 & f be+ to n-be+2 !re=e !re is a production ( some?+ :i* is n necess>y1 s9ce x is1 & ceases to be2 !re=e !re is some?+ besides ! be+ :i* is suppos$ ! only "o4 ,?is argum5t is f\nd$ on ! purely int]nal ph5om5a1 &1 !re=e1 is valid ev5 aga9/ ! ideali/s1 aga9/ ^? :o take f ! ext]nal _w all reality1 & r$uce x to m]e appe>ances1 to simple ph5om5a ( our m9d4 ,^! appe>ances exi/ at lea/ z appe>ances2 !y are !n some?+1 !y are cont+5t1 !y are n !re=e necess>y be+4 ,!re=e besides ?is be+ !re is some?+ :i* is n x2 !re=e ! sy/em :i* ass]ts ! exi/5ce ( only "o be+ is n su/a9able4 ,! idea ( a be+ absolutely indep5d5t by reason ( its absolute necessity does n exclude ! exi/5ce ( cont+5t be+s2 x only %[s t ! necess>y be+ is ! only necess>y be+1 n t x is ! only be+4 #aac4 ,nei!r does x foll[ f ! idea ( necess>y be+ t !re _c be cont+5t be+s1 caus$1 & yet subsi/+ by !mselves 9 ! s5se t !y are n inh]5t z modifications 9 o!rs4 ,n to be caus$ & n to be inh]5t are two v di/9ct ?+s2 ! fir/ implies ! second1 b ! second does n imply ! fir/4 ,e be+ n caus$ mu/ be free f inh]5ce1 because if x is n caus$ x is necess>y1 & conta9s 9 itself all t is necess>y 9 ord] n to inh]e 9 ano!r4 ,if necess>y1 x mu/ be absolutely indep5d5t ( all o!rs1 :i* x w\ld n be if x ne$$ !m z a modification ne$s a sub/ance4 ,b n e ?+ :i* is n inh]5t is necess>ily n caus$1 = its cause may h made x su* t x does n ne$ to be inh]5t z a modification 9 ano!r4 ,x w\ld !n dep5d on ano!r z an effect on its cause1 b n z an accid5t on its sub/ance2 !re w\ld be betwe5 !m ! relation ( causality1 b n t ( sub/ance2 ?+s :i* we h %[n 9 ! la/ *apt] to be v di/9ct4 #aad4 ,nev] w ! pan!i/s be able to prove t because a ?+ is n a modification x mu/ be n caus$2 & ?is is precisely :at !y mu/ prove 9 ord] to c>ry _! sy/em ?r\gh 9 triumph4 ,once prove t :atev] subsi/s 9 itself is n caus$1 & y w h prov$ :atev] subsi/s 9 itself to be necess>y4 ,& z ! necess>y be+ mu/ be only "o1 y w h prov$ t !re is only "o sub/ance4 #aae4 ,! secret ( pan!ism is ! conf\nd+ ( non-inh]5ce ) absolute indep5d5ce2 & ! means ( ov]?r[+ its argum5ts is always to di/+ui% ^! two ?+s4 ,all t is n caus$ is sub/ance1 b n all t is sub/ance is uncaus$4 ,all t is n caus$ is necess>y & !re=e n inh]5t1 b n e sub/ance is necess>y4 ,f9ite sub/ance is n inh]5t 9 ano!r be+1 b x is caus$ by ano!r be+4 ,x _c exi/ )\t ?is o!r be+1 x is true2 b ?is dep5d5ce is n ! dep5d5ce ( a modification on its sub/ance1 b t ( an effect on its cause4 ,! cause gives be+ to ! effect2 ! sub/ance su/a9s ! accid5t3 ! cause is n modifi$ by ! effect2 ! sub/ance is modifi$ by ! accid5t4 ,^! ideas are cle> & di/9ct2 by !m pan!ism is de/roy$ 9 all its trans=mations1 & =c$1 z old ,proteus 0 by ,m5elaus1 to resume its primitive =m4 ,a!ism is its nature1 & %\ld be its "n4 ,_m ( ! errone\s sy/ems :i* di/urb ! ideal _w are f\nd$ on an equivocation2 to oppose !m ) success1 we mu/ fix ourselves on ! po9t :i* cle>s up _! equivocation1 & n g out ( x4 ,! equivocation w assume diff]5t =ms1 b we mu/ n suff] ourselves to be deceiv$ or conf\nd$ by x2 we mu/ always return to ! same di/9ction & make t ! battle-gr\nd4 ,! passage ( ! immortal poet 9 ! place j allud$ to1 might be tak5 z a fable giv+ an excell5t me?od ( defeat+ sophisms3 ,collect all y\r /r5g? & c\rage1 says ! goddess ,ido!a to ,m5elaus1 &1 ?r[+ y\rself ^u him1 hold him tightly despite all 8 ef=ts2 = he w metamorphose himself 9 a ?\s& ways 9 ord] to escape f y3 he w take ! semblance ( all ! mo/ savage animals4 ,he w also *ange himself into wat]2 he w become fire3 b let none ( ^! frightful =ms t]rify y1 or =ce y to let him g2 on ! contr>y1 hold him & /ra9 him ! m tightly4 ,b z soon z he returns to ! fir/ =m 9 :i*1 he 01 444 !n use no m viol5ce1 b let him g4#ej ,s x is ) pan!ism1 x w speak ( matt]1 ( m9d1 ( ! reality ( ph5om5al1 ( ! me1 ( ! n-me1 ( subsi/5ce & non-subsi/5ce1 ( ! necess>y & ! cont+5t2 b d n all[ x to g beyond ! fundam5tal ideas1 lead x to !m2 x w at la/ return to its fir/ =m1 & :5 x has return$ to ?is1 !n let x g1 %[+ x to ! _w z x is1 say+3 ,see x 9 its horrible de=mity2 x has always be5 :at x is n[2 not)/&+ all its trans=mations1 x is no?+ b a!ism4 #ej ,odyss41 ,bk4 ,,iv4 ,,*apt] ,,xvi4 ,,pan!ism ,,exam9$ ,,9 ,,! ,,ord] ,,( ,,ext]nal ,,facts4 #aaf4 ,if pan!ism is unsu/a9able 9 ! region ( ideas1 x is n less s 9 ! field ( exp]i5ce4 ,! latt]1 f> f lead+ u to ! exclusive unity ( sub/ance1 %[s u on all sides multiplicity4 #aag4 ,!re is unity :]e !re is no division1 :5 9 ! ?+ t is "o no o!rs c be di/+ui%$1 :5 x admits no negative judgm5t4 ,no?+ ( all ?is is obs]v$ 9 ! ext]nal _w2 b a con/ant exp]i5ce pres5ts directly ! contr>y4 #aah4 ,9 ! ext]nal _w division is visible1 palpable2 !re is no o!r unity ?an t ( ord]1 ( direction to an end2 besides ?is1 all is multiplicity4 ,! only m$ium by :i* we are plac$ 9 communication ) ! ext]nal _w are ! s5ses1 & !y enc\nt] multiplicity on e side--s5sations di/9ct 9 numb]1 div]se 9 species1 graduat$ 9 a ?\s& diff]5t ways1 di/ribut$ into inf9ite gr\ps1 :i*1 al?\gh !y are connect$ 9 ?is or t po9t1 may be divid$ & are divid$ 9 a ?\s& o!rs4 #aai4 ,multiplicity is z truly reveal$ by ! te/imony ( ! s5ses z ! v exi/5ce ( objects4 ,if we d5y ! compet5cy ( _! te/imony 9 ! fir/1 we mu/ d5y x also 9 ! second4 ,!y n only tell u t su* a body exi/s1 b t x is n ano!r body4 ,we "k no?+ ) m c]ta9ty ?an t an ext]nal object corresponds to a s5sation1 t ! objects ( two di/9ct s5sations are di/9ct4 ,to say t ! s5ses are n good judges 9 ?is matt]1 because !y are limit$ to m]e s5sation1 & consequ5tly _c judge ( ! objects ( ! s5sation1 is to appeal to idealism1 = by ! same reason we may ass]t t ! s5ses1 limit$ to m]e s5sation1 _c give u c]ta9ty ( ! exi/5ce ( _! respective objects4 #abj4 ,to e/abli% unity outside ( ourselves is to annihilate ! corporeal _w4 ,! idea ( ext5sion contradicts unity4 ,9 t :i* is ext5d$ "s p>ts are n ! o!rs4 ,?is is evid5t1 & :oev] attempts to d\bt x attacks ! basis ( ! c]ta9ty ( geometry4 ,if ! _w is some?+ real1 x is ext5d$2 if x is n ext5d$1 we _c be c]ta9 t x is any ?+ real4 ,we h ! same c]ta9ty ( its ext5sion z ( its exi/5ce4 ,its v exi/5ce is manife/$ by ! ext5sion pres5t$ to our s5ses4 ,if1 !n1 ?is ext5sion does n exi/1 s5sations are a m]e int]nal ph5om5on1 a pure illusion1 9 s f> z we attribute to !m a correspond5ce to ! ext]ior4 #aba4 ,?is argum5t seems to me "o ( ! mo/ conclusive ?an c be br\ght aga9/ ,sp9osa1 :o1 toge!r ) ! on5ess ( ! sub/ance admits ext5sion1 z "o ( its attributes4 ,! ext5d$ is ess5tially multiplex2 x always involves ! di/9ction betwe5 its p>ts2 we c always say ( x3 ,! "p ,a is n ! "p ,b4 ,pan!ism _c escape ?is argum5t except by tak+ refuge 9 pure idealism2 & 9 ?is respect ,fi*te & ,hegel are m logical ?an mo/ p]sons give !m cr$it = be+4 ,9 ord] to ma9ta9 ! exclusive on5ess ( sub/ance1 x is necess>y to conv]t ! ext]nal _w into m]e ph5om5a1 ^: only reality consi/s 9 _! be+ ?us pres5t$ to u4 ,?is is to absorb ! _w 9 ! me1 & conc5trate ! reality 9 ! idea2 b ?is absorption1 ?is conc5tration1 not)/&+ its obscurity1 is a necess>y & logical consequ5ce ( ! pr9ciple e/abli%$4 ,!re is absurdity1 b !re is at lea/ ! consequ5ce ( ! absurdity4 #abb4 ,^? :o call ,sp9osa ! disciple ( ,desc>tes1 h n obs]v$ t !re is a necess>y contradiction betwe5 ! two sy/ems4 ,! argum5t f\nd$ on ext5sion1 :i* ,i h j pres5t$1 al?\gh conclusive "u e hypo!sis1 is /ill m s aga9/ ^? :o admit ) ,desc>tes1 t ! ess5ce ( bodies consi/s 9 ext5sion4 ,9 t case1 ! v>i\s p>ts ( ext5sion are ess5tially di/9ct1 s9ce ea* "p con/itutes an ess5ce4 ,! ess5tial & sub/antial multiplicity ( bodies w\ld be 9 proportion to ! multiplicity ( ext5sion4 #abc4 ,if y ma9ta9 t ext5sion is n ! ess5ce ( bodies1 b an attribute or modification ( bodies1 :e!r a det]m9ation f\nd$ on _! ess5ce or an accid5tal det]m9ation1 & pret5d t ?is modification or attribute may belong to ! only sub/ance1 we ask y :e!r ?is sub/ance 9 itself ab/ract$ f ext5sion is simple or composite4 ,if composite1 x implies multiplicity1 & ,sp9osa co9cides ) ! common op9ion ( a corporeal _w1 compos$ ( _m p>ts1 "o ( :i* w h no m "r ?an ano!r to be ! true sub/ance4 ,= !n !re w\ld n be a s+le sub/ance1 b "o compos$ ( _m2 & ! corporeal univ]se _c be call$ a sub/ance except 9 ! s5se 9 :i* x is commonly call$ "o1 t is1 n tak+ ! on5ess 9 a /rict s5se1 b inasmu* z all its p>ts are connect$ toge!r1 & dispos$ 9 a c]ta9 ord] to conspire to ! same end4 ,if ! sub/ance1 ! subject ( ext5sion is simple1 ! result w be a simple sub/ance det]m9$ or modifi$ by ext5sion1 a simple ext5d$ sub/ance1 :i* is a contradiction4 ,a ?+ _c be conceiv$ z a modification ( ano!r unless x is modifi$ by x2 ?is is :at ! words express4 ,a modification modifies1 giv+ to ! ?+ modifi$ ! =m ( ! modification1 apply+ itself to ! ?+ modifi$4 ,ext5sion _c modify except by mak+ ! ?+ modifi$ ext5d$2 & to be ext5d$1 & to h ext5sion1 are absolutely id5tical expressions4 ,!re=e x is repugnant = a simple sub/ance to h ext5sion = "o ( its modifications2 !re=e ,sp9osa's sy/em is absurd4 ,,*apt] ,,xvii4 ,,pan!ism ,,exam9$ ,,9 ,,! ,,ord] ,,( ,,int]nal ,,facts4 #abd4 ,! multiplicity ( sub/ances is no less atte/$ by ! consci\sness ( ourselves1 or ( ! int]nal _w4 ,our fir/ reflex act reveals )9 u some?+ :i* is "o1 indivisible1 & rema9+ always ! same ?r\gh all ! trans=mations ( our be+4 ,?is unity ( ! me is indisp5sable to ! connection ( all ! ph5om5a 9 a po9t2 )\t x all memory1 all comb9ation1 & all consci\sness are impossible2 our own be+ disappe>s1 & !re rema9s only a s]ies ( unconnect$ ph5om5a4 ,b ?is unity1 :i* we mu/ take z an int]nal fact :i* consci\sness places beyond all d\bt1 & ! conviction ( :i* x is impossible = u to )/&1--?is unity produces ! k ( multiplicity4 ,!re is some?+ :i* affects u & :i* is n ourselves4 ,our w1 our activity1 is impot5t to resi/ o!r activities :i* act ^u u2 !re is1 !n1 some?+ :i* is n ourselves1 :i* is indep5d5t ( u4 ,!re is some?+ :i* is n a modification ( ourselves1 because v (t5 x does n affect u1 does n modify u4 ,?is some?+ is a reality1 = no?+ _c affect any ?+4 ,x is n inh]5t 9 u2 x is1 !n1 9 itself1 or 9 some?+ :i* is n ourselves4 ,!re is1 !re=e1 a sub/ance :i* is n our sub/ance2 & ! me & ! n-me :i* h made s mu* noise 9 ,g]man philosophy1 f> f lead+ to ! unity ( ! sub/ance1 lead to multiplicity2 & de/roy pan!ism entr5*$ beh9d idealism4 #abe4 ,at ! v fir/ we meet at lea/ ) duality1 ! me & ! n-me2 b c>ry+ our obs]vations a little f>!r1 we f9d a /rik+ multiplicity4 ,our m9d is n alone3 ! consci\sness ( :at we daily exp]i5ce proves our communication ) o!r m9ds1 :i*1 l our own1 h ! consci\sness ( !mselves--a sph]e ( activity ( _! own1 &1 l our own m9d1 are subject$ to o!r activities )\t _! w1 & sometimes ev5 aga9/ x4 ,! me & ! n-me exi/+ = our consci\sness1 exi/s also = !irs2 :at 9 u alone 0 duality becomes a wond]ful multiplicity by means ( ! repetition ( ! same fact :i* we h exp]i5c$ 9 ourselves4 #abf4 ,to attribute ?is v>iety ( consci\snesses to ! same be+1 to take !m z modifications ( ! same sub/ance1 z revelations ( itself to its own eyes1 is a gratuit\s ass]tion2 & n only gratuit\s b absurd4 ,) full confid5ce ,i c defy ! greate/ philosoph] ( ! _w to assign any reason1 ,i d n say satisfactory1 b ev5 a speci\s reason1 prov+ t two individual consci\snesses belong to a common consci\sness1 or are consci\snesses ( ! same be+4 #abg4 ,9 ! fir/ place1 ?is doctr9e is 9 contradiction to common s5se1 & is reject$ ) irresi/ible =ce by ! int]nal s5se ( e man4 ,! s5tim5t ( our exi/5ce is always accompani$ by ! s5tim5t ( our di/9ction f o!r be+s l u4 ,we are n only c]ta9 t we exi/1 b t we are di/9ct f o!rs2 & if 9 any ?+ ! s5tim5t ( ?is di/9ction is pr(\ndly m>k$1 x is 9 :at reg>ds ! ph5om5a ( our consci\sness4 ,nev] at any "t1 9 any c\ntry or phase ( society1 c\ld m5 be p]suad$ t ! consci\sness ( all _! acts & impressions belong$ to "o & ! same be+ 9 :i* individual consci\snesses 7 unit$4 ,x is a bad philosophy :i* beg9s by /ruggl+ aga9/ humanity1 & plac+ itself 9 op5 contradiction to an irresi/ible s5tim5t ( nature4 #abh4 ,! v idea ( consci\sness excludes ?is mon/r\s absurdity1 :i* attempts to trans=m individual consci\snesses into modifications ( "o univ]sal consci\sness4 ,consci\sness1 t is1 ! int]nal s5tim5t ( :at a be+ exp]i5ces1 is ess5tially individual1 x is1 s to speak1 incommunicable to e o!r4 ,to o!rs we communicate ! k ( our consci\sness1 b n our consci\sness itself4 ,x is an intuition or a s5tim5t :i* is complet$ 9 ! inn]mo/ recesses ( our be+1 9 t :i* is mo/ our own4 ,:at1 !n1 w\ld t consci\sness be :i* does n belong to u z individuals1 :i* is n our own :i* is no?+ ( :at we believe x to be1 b only a prop]ty ( an unkn[n be+1--a be+ ( :i* we h no k1 & ( :i* we are only a ph5om5on1 a pass+ modification8 ,:]e w\ld be ! unity ( consci\sness 9 ! mid/ ( su* div]sity1 opposition1 & mutual exclusion8 ,?is be+1 modifi$ by s _m consci\snesses1 w\ld h no consci\sness ( its own1 = x c\ld give itself no acc\nt ( :at x exp]i5ces4 ,,*apt] ,,xviii4 ,,fi*te',s ,,pan!i/ic ,,sy/em4 #abi4 ,i am go+ to fulfil a promise made 9 ! beg9n+ ( ?is "w1#ea to expla9 & refute ! sy/em ( ,fi*te4 ,we h se5 ! cabali/ic =ms employ$ by ! ,g]man philosoph] to obta9 a simple result1 :i* am\nt$ to nei!r m nor less ?an ,desc>tes' pr9ciple1 ,i ?9k1 !re=e1 ,i am4 ,! read] c\ld nev] imag9e t any "o %\ld attempt to f\nd pan!ism on ?is fact ( consci\sness1 & t ! human m9d1 because x f9ds itself1 %\ld h ! arrogance to ma9ta9 t no?+ exi/s beside itself1 t :atev] !re is1 proce$s f itself1 & :at is /ill m extraord9>y1 t x is itself produc$ by itself4 ,9 ord] to believe t su* ?+s h be5 writt5 we h to see !m1 & !re=e 9 expla9+ ,fi*te's sy/em1 ,i %all copy 8 own words4 #ea ,see ,bk4 ,i41 ,*ap4 ,,vii4 ,?us1 al?\gh he may suff] a little f ! =eign g>b1 & ! read] may be fatigu$ ) deciph]+ enigmas1 he w h an idea ( ! matt] & ( ! =m ( ! sy/em1 :i* he c\ld n h1 if we %\ld take f ! philosoph] 8 extravagant orig9ality1 :i*1 h[ev]1 relates to ! =m1 r ?an to ! sub/ance4 #acj4 ,?is act1 namely ,x ,i am1 is f\nd$ on no high] pr9ciple4#eb #eb ,grundlage d] gesammt5 ,wiss5sehaftslehre4 ,er/4 ,?4 #a4 #f4 b4 ,?is is true to a c]ta9 ext5t1 inasmu* z x affirms t 9 ! s]ies ( ! facts ( consci\sness1 we come to our own exi/5ce z ! la/ limit1 & c g no f>!r4 ,! reflex act1 by :i* we p]ceive our exi/5ce1 is express$ by ! proposition1 ,i am1 or1 ,i exi/2 b ?is proposition by itself alone1 tells u no?+ z to ! nature ( ! me1 & is v f> f prov+ our absolute indep5d5ce4 ,on ! contr>y1 f ! mom5t t we beg9 to reflect1 int]nal facts are pres5t$ to u :i* incl9e u to believe t our be+ is dep5d5t on ano!r2 & 9 proportion z we cont9ue to reflect1 we acquire a deep conviction ( ?is tru?1 aris+ f a rigor\s demon/ration4 ,9 no way c we affirm t ! act1 ,i am1 does n dep5d on any high] pr9ciple1 if we mean by t1 t ! act does n spr+ f any pr9ciple ( action1 & t by itself alone1 x produces exi/5ce4 ,besides pla9ly contradict+ common s5se1 ?is ass]tion is )\t any pro(1 & is also oppos$ to ! mo/ fundam5tal notions ( s\nd philosophy4 #aca4 ,fi*te ?9ks diff]5tly1 & )\t kn[+ :y1 he d$uces f ! above propositions ^! consequ5ces3 ,!re=e x 7! act1 ,x ,i am7 is suppos$ absolutely1 & f\nd$ on itself1 z ! pr9ciple ( a c]ta9 7&1 z w be se5 by ! :ole ,doctr9e ( ,sci5ce1 ( e7 act ( ! human m9d1 consequ5tly1 also ( its pure "*1--! pure "* ( activity 9 itself1 ab/ract$ f its p>ticul> empirical conditions4 ,x is no great discov]y t ! "* ( act is activity2 b ?is "* is n pure1 s9ce 9 u no act is pure activity1 b x is always a p>ticul> ex]cise ( activity4 ,consequ5tly1 he cont9ues1 ! supposition ( ! me by itself is its pure activity4 ,! me supposes itself1 & x is1 9 virtue ( ?is m]e supposition by itself2 & on ! o!r h&1 ! me is & x supposes its be+1 by virtue ( its m]e be+4 ,x is at ! same "t ! act+1 & ! product ( ! act2 ! active1 & t :i* is br\ght ab\t by ! activity2 act & fact are "o & precisely ! same ?+2 &1 !re=e1 ,i am is ! expression ( an act1 & also ( ! only "o possible1 z mu/ be se5 f ! :ole ,doctr9e ( ,sci5ce4 ,he t c1 may und]/& :at is ! mean+ ( a be+ :i* is at ! same "t produc+ & produc$1 pr9ciple & t]m ( ! same action1 cause & effect ( ! same ?+4 ,he t c1 may und]/& ! mean+ ( exi/+ 9 virtue ( a m]e action1 & ex]cis+ ?is action 9 virtue ( exi/5ce4 ,if ^! be n contradictions1 ,i "k n :at is4 ,9 ,god1 :o is inf9ite be+1 ess5ce1 exi/5ce1 & action are id5tical2 b we _c say t ! action produces 8 be+1 t he supposes himself by 8 action2 we say t he exi/s necess>ily1 & t x is !re=e impossible t he %\ld h be5 produc$1 t he %\ld h pass$ f n-be+ to be+4 #acb4 ,!re occurs to me "h a rational explanation ( ,fi*te's language1 an explanation :i* ev5 if admissible w\ld n excuse ! philosoph] = express+ v simple ?+s 9 contradictory t]ms4 ,h[ev]1 x is ?is4 ,! s\l is an activity2 its ess5ce consi/s 9 ?\ght1 by :i* x is manife/$ to its own eyes1 & f9ds itself 9 ! act ( consci\sness4 ,9 ?is s5se we may say t ! s\l supposes itself1 t is1 kn[s itself1 takes itself z subject ( a proposition to :i* x applies ! pr$icate ( exi/5ce4 ,! s\l is ! pr9ciple ( its act ( consci\sness2 & ?us x is productive2 x is also pres5t$ 9 ! act ( consci\sness z object1 h5ce x may also be said1 ?\gh inexactly1 t 9 ! ideal ord] x is produc$2 9 ?is way x is ! pr9ciple & ! t]m ( ! action1 b "u diff]5t respects4 ,?is explanation1 :e!r m or less f\nd$1 is at lea/ reasonable & ev5 intelligible1 & ! basis on :i* x re/s1 t ! ess5ce ( ! s\l consi/s 9 ?\ght1 has ! "n ( ,desc>tes 9 its favor4 ,?us al?\gh we d n def5d ! words ( ,fi*te1 we might at lea/ def5d 8 ideas4 ,b un=tunately1 ! philosoph] has tak5 good c>e to prev5t ev5 ?is2 8 words c\ld n h be5 m oppos$ to x4 ,we n[ consid] once m1 he says1 ! proposition3 me is me4 ,! me is suppos$ absolutely4 ,if x is admitt$ t ! me :i* 9 ! above proposition /&s 9 ! place ( ! =mal subject is ! me suppos$ absolutely2 & t 9 ! place ( ! pr$icate means ! exi/+ me2 x is express$ 9 ! judgm5t :i* is absolutely valid1 t bo? are completely "o1 or suppos$ absolutely2 t ! me is1 because x has suppos$ itself4 ,e judgm5t implies id5tity ( ! pr$icate & ! subject2 b 9 ! proposition3 me is me1 ! id5tity is n only impli$ b explicitly ass]t$2 = :i* reason1 ! proposition belongs to ! class ( :at are t]m$ id5tical propositions1 because its pr$icate expla9s no?+ conc]n+ ! idea ( ! subject1 b only repeats x4 ,:5ce !n does ,fi*te d$uce t ! me exi/s because x has suppos$ itself8 ,s f> we h only ! me say+3 me is me2 x affirms itself & ?us supposes itself z subject & pr$icate ( a proposition3 b x is cle>] ?an day-light t to suppose by affirm+ is altoge!r diff]5t f suppos+ by produc+3 on ! contr>y1 common s5se & reason alike tea* t ! exi/5ce ( ! ?+ affirm$ is necess>y to ! legitimacy ( ! affirmation4 ,to conf\nd ^! two ideas1 to consid] x ! same ?+ to affirm z to suppose by produc+1 is an inconceivable absurdity4#ec #ec ,"h1 z else:]e1 9 ! exam9ation ( ,fi*te's sy/em1 ,i h translat$ ! ,g]man ^w setz5 & ! ,spani% pon] by ! v]b to suppose4 ,_h ,i kn[n any bett] ^w ,i %\ld h us$ x1 b ,i ?9k ?is suffici5tly expla9s ! philosoph]'s mean+4 ,i h also f\nd ! ,fr5* ^w pos] :i* exactly corresponds to x1 & :i* ,m4 ,c\s9 uses 9 8 sket* ( ,fi*te's sy/em1 translat$ suppose by ,mr4 ,ripley1 9 ! ,specim5s ( ,=eign ,lit]ature4--,,translator4 #acc4 ,expla9+ ?is 9 a note1 ,fi*te adds :at foll[s3 ,x is also c]ta9ly s accord+ to ! logical =m ( e proposition4 ,9 ! proposition ,a ,a1 ! fir/ ,a is t :i* is suppos$ 9 ! me ei!r absolutely z ! me itself1 or on any o!r gr\nd z e det]m9$ n-me4 ,9 ?is case ! me repres5ts ! absolute subject1 & h5ce ! fir/ ,a is call$ ! subject4 ,! second ,a d5otes :at ! me1 :i* takes itself z ! object ( reflection1 f9ds z suppos$ 9 itself because x has fir/ suppos$ x 9 itself4 ,! judg+ me pr$icates some?+1 n prop]ly ( ,a1 b ( itself1 namely1 t x f9ds an ,a 9 itself2 & h5ce ! second ,a is call$ ! pr$icate4 ,s 9 ! proposition3 ,a ,b1 ,a d5otes t :i* is suppos$ n[2 ,b t :i* is f\nd already suppos$4 ,x repres5ts ! transition ( ! me f ! act ( suppos+ to ! reflection on t :i* is suppos$4 ,:at does ,fi*te mean by ?is comp>ison ( ideas & ( language8 ,does he mean t 9 ?is proposition ! me is subject & pr$icate accord+ to ! diff]5t aspects "u :i* x is consid]$8 ,does he mean t ! me1 9 s f> z x occupies ! place ( subject1 expresses simply exi/5ce1 & t z pr$icate x is pres5t$ z an object ( reflection8 ,:at does he mean by ! ^w suppose8 ,if he means by x to produce1 h[ is x possible = a ?+ :i* is n to produce itself8 ,if he means by x ! manife/ation ( itself1 s t ! object manife/$ may s]ve z ! logical t]m ( a proposition1 :y does he tell u t ! me exi/s because x supposes itself8 ,b let u foll[ ! ,g]man philosoph] 9 8 w&]+ d$uctions4 #acd4 ,! me 9 ! fir/ acceptation & t 9 ! second mu/ be absolutely ! same4 ,we c !re=e inv]t ! above proposition & say3 ! me supposes itself1 absolutely because x is4 ,x supposes itself by its m]e be+1 & is by its m]e supposition4 ,)\t def9+ ! s5se ( ! ^w suppose1 )\t say+ any ?+ m ?an :at all ! _w kn[s2 t ! me is ! me2 he inf]s t ! me exi/s because x supposes itself1 & supposes itself because x exi/s3 he id5tifies exi/5ce ) supposition )\t ev5 notic+ t at lea/ "s prelim9>y rem>ks 7 necess>y be=e plac+ himself 9 direct opposition ) common s5se & ! doctr9es ( all philosoph]s1 includ+ ,desc>tes1 :o make exi/5ce necess>y = action1 & reg>d x z a contradiction = a ?+ to be active )\t exi/+4 ,leibnitz ?\ght t !re 0 no?+ & c\ld be no?+ )\t a suffici5t reason2 b ?anks to ! au?or ( ! ,doctr9e ( ,sci5ce1 we may h5ce=? p ! _w at pleasure ) f9ite or inf9ite be+s1 & if ask$ :5ce !y came1 we may answ] t !y h be5 suppos$2 if we are fur!r ask$ :y !y h be5 suppos$1 we may answ]2 because !y exi/2 & if /ill aga9 ask$ :y !y exi/1 we may say1 because !y h be5 suppos$2 ?us we may pass f supposition to exi/5ce1 & f exi/5ce to supposition1 )\t any dang] ( refutation4 #ace4 ,al?\gh ?is philosophy is any ?+ b cle>1 x seems to h satisfi$ its au?or1 :o goes on ) admirable gravity to say3 ,?us1 !n1 x is p]fectly cle> 9 :at s5se we "h use ! ^w me1 & we are l$ to a det]m9ate explanation ( ! me z absolute subject4 ,e ?+ ^: be+ 7exi/5ce7 consi/s solely 9 its suppos+ itself z be+1 is ! me1 z absolute subject4 ,s f> z x supposes itself1 x is2 & s f> z x is1 x supposes itself2 & ! me is !re=e absolute & necess>y = ! me4 ,t :i* is n = itself is no me4 ,ideal pan!ism c\ld n be e/abli%$ m explicitly1 & at ! same "t m gratuit\sly2 "o is a/oni%$ to f9d "o's self s]i\sly occupi$ ) su* extravagances4 ,!y h made a noise1 because !y h n be5 kn[n2 !y ought !re=e to be pres5t$ to ! read] z !y are1 ev5 at ! risk ( fatigu+ him4 #acf4 ,fi*te tries to make 8 ideas cle>]1 b we may be always sure t ea* explanation w add to _! obscurity4 ,let u p]mit him to cont9ue3 ,explanation6 ,"o (t5 he>s ! "q ask$1 :at 0 ,i be=e ,i came to ! consci\sness ( myself8 ,! natural answ] to ?is is3 ,i 0 no?+ at all2 = ,i 0 n ! me4 ,! me is only 9 s f> z x is consci\s ( itself4 ,! possibility ( ?is "q is f\nd$ on a confusion ( ! me z subject1 & ! me z object ( ! reflection ( ! absolute subject1 & is entirely inadmissible4 ,! me repres5ts itself1 takes itself s f> "u ! =m ( ! repres5tation1 & is n[ = ! fir/ "t some?+1 an object2 consci\sness receives "u ?is =m a sub/ratum :i* is1 & al?\gh )\t actual consci\sness1 is "h ?\ght corporeally4 ,su* a case is consid]$1 & x is ask$3 :at 0 !n ! me2 t is1 :at is ! sub/ratum ( consci\sness8 ,b ev5 !n we ?9k ! absolute subject z t :i* has intuition ( ?is sub/ratum1 toge!r ) x1 al?\gh we d n take note ( x2 we also1 )\t tak+ note ( x1 at ! same "t ?9k t :i* we pret5d$ to ab/ract1 & ?us fall into a contradiction4 ,we c ?9k absolutely no?+ )\t at ! same "t ?9k+ ! me z consci\s ( ( itself2 we c nev] ab/ract our own consci\sness3 h5ce all que/ions ( ?is k9d are unansw]able2 = !y w\ld be1 if well und]/ood1 unaskable4 ,t ! me did n exi/ z ! object ( its reflection be=e x _h consci\sness ( itself1 is an evid5t tru?2 be=e ?9k+ itself1 x does n ?9k itself2 :o ev] d\bt$ x8 ,b ! difficulty is1 :e!r ! me is any ?+1 indep5d5tly ( its own reflections or its objectiv5ess 9 relation to itself2 t is1 :e!r !re is 9 ! me any ?+ m ?an ! be+ ?\ght by itself4 ,! "q is n contradictory1 b x is "o :i* naturally pres5ts itself to reason & to common s5se2 = reason z well z common s5se resi/ ! tak+ z id5tical1 t :i* exi/s1 & t :i* is kn[n2 t :i* kn[s itself1 & t :i* produces itself4 ,we are n n[ exam9+ :e!r we h or h n a cle> idea ( ! sub/ratum ( consci\sness2 b x is curi\s to he> ! ,g]man philosoph] rem>k t :5 we d n conceive ! me z ! object ( reflection1 we conceive x "u a bodily =m4 ,?is is to conf\nd imag9ation ) ideas1 ?+s1 z ,i h else:]e#ed %[n1 :i* are v diff]5t4 #ed ,see ,bk4 ,,iv41 f ,*4 ,i4 to ,x4 #acg4 ,x foll[s f ,fi*te's doctr9e t ! exi/5ce ( ! me consi/s 9 its suppos+ itself by means ( consci\sness2 & t if consci\sness %\ld n exi/1 ! me w\ld n exi/4 ,9 ?is case to be & to be kn[n are ! same ?+4 ,al?\gh ,i might ask ,fi*te = 8 pro(s ( s extravagant an ass]tion1 ,i %all conf9e myself to insi/+ on ! difficulty :i* he proposes1 & :i* he only eludes by a confusion ( ideas4 ,:at w\ld ! me be1 if x 7 n consci\s ( itself8 ,if to exi/ is to h consci\sness1 :5 !re is no consci\sness !re is no exi/5ce4 ,fi*te answ]s t ! me )\t consci\sness is n ! me1 9 :i* case1 x does n exi/2 b t ! "q re/s on an impossible supposition1 ! ab/raction ( consci\sness4 ,we c ?9k absolutely no?+1 he says1 )\t at ! same "t ?9k+ ! me z consci\s ( itself2 we c nev] ab/ract our own consci\sness4 ,i say aga92 ^! words d n solve ! difficulty2 !y only elude x4 ,i pass ov] 8 ass]tion t consci\sness is ! same z exi/5ce3 b x is c]ta9 t we conceive an in/ant 9 :i* ! me is n consci\s ( itself4 ,has ?is conception nev] be5 realiz$8 ,has !re1 or has !re n1 be5 an in/ant 9 :i* ! me 0 n consci\s ( itself8 ,if we admit ?is in/ant1 we mu/ admit t at ?is in/ant ! me did n exi/2 !re=e x nev] c\ld h exi/$1 unless ,fi*te w conc$e t ! me dep5ds on a sup]ior be+1 & ?us admit ! doctr9e ( creation4 ,if we d n admit ?is in/ant1 ! me has always exi/$1 & ) ! consci\sness ( itself2 !re=e ! me is an et]nal & immutable intellig5ce2 x is ,god4 ,!re is no way = ,fi*te to escape ?is dilemma4 ,!re is no room "h = ! di/9ction betwe5 ! me z subject & ! me z object3 we are speak+ ( ! me z hav+ consci\sness ( itself1--t consci\sness 9 :i* ,fi*te makes its exi/5ce consi/1--& we ask :e!r ?is me has always exi/$ or n2 if ! fir/1 ! me is ,god2 if ! second1 y mu/ ei!r ackn[l$ge creation1 or hold t a be+ :i* does n exi/ c give itself exi/5ce4 #ach4 ,fi*te does n retreat f ! fir/ consequ5ce1 & al?\gh he does n call me ,god1 he gives x all ! attributes ( div9ity4 ,if ! me1 he says1 is only 9 s f> z x supposes itself1 x is only = ! suppos+1 & supposes only = be+4 ,! me is = ! me1--b if x supposes itself absolutely z x is1 x supposes itself necess>y1 & is necess>y1 = ! me4 ,i am only = myself2 b ,i am necess>y = myself--79 say+ = myself ,i always suppose my be+47 ,to suppose itself1 & to be1 are1 speak+ ( ! me1 entirely ! same4 ,! proposition3 ,i am1 because ,i h suppos$ myself1 c1 !re=e1 be also express$ 9 ?is mann]3 ,i am absolutely1 because ,i am4 ,moreov]1 ! me :i* supposes itself1 & ! me :i* is1 are entirely id5tical2 !y are "o & ! same ?+4 ,! me is = t :i* x supposes itself2 & x supposes itself z t :i* x is4 ,!re=e1 ,i am absolutely1 :at ,i am4 ,! imm$iate expression ( ! act :i* we h n[ develop$ w\ld be ! foll[+ =mula3 ,i am absolutely1 t is1 ,i am absolutely1 because ,i am2 & am absolutely1 :at ,i am2 bo? = ! me4 ,b if ! enunciation ( ?is act is int5d$ to be plac$ at ! head ( a doctr9e ( sci5ce1 x %\ld be express$ some:at 9 ! foll[+ mann]3 ,! me orig9ally supposes its own be+ absolutely4#ee #ee ,grundlage d] gesammt5 ,wiss5s*aftslehre1 ,i4 ,!il1 ,i41 pp4 #ig-ih4 ,!re is only "o fact :i* is cle> 9 all ?is extravagance ( expression2 & t is1 ! pan!ism op5ly pr(ess$ by ,fi*te2 ! deification ( ! me1 &1 consequ5tly1 ! absorption ( all reality 9 ! me4 ,! me ceases to be a limit$ _s2 x is an inf9ite reality4 ,fi*te does n d5y x3 ,! me det]m9es itself1 ! absolute totality ( reality is ascrib$ to ! me4 ,! me c det]m9e itself only z reality1 = x is suppos$ absolutely z reality1 & no negation :atev] is suppos$ 9 x4#ef #ef ,ib41 ,,ii41 ,?4 #d4 ,b41 p4 #abi4 ,b reality is suppos$ 9 ! me4 ,!re=e ! me mu/ be suppos$ z ! absolute totality ( reality1 7!re=e z a quantity1 :i* conta9s all quantities1 & :i* may be a measure = !m all27 & ?is1 too1 orig9ally & absolutely1 if ! syn!sis1 :i* we h j expla9$ problematically1 be possible1 & ! contradiction is to be solv$ 9 a satisfactory mann]4 ,!re=e3 ,! me supposes absolutely1 )\t any f\ndation1 & "u no possible condition1 ! absolute totality ( reality1 z a quantity1 ?an :i*1 by virtue ( ?is supposition1 none great] is possible2 & ?is absolute maximum ( reality x supposes 9 itself4 ,all t is suppos$ 9 ! me is reality3 & all reality t is1 is suppos$ 9 ! me4444 99 99 99 99 99 444 ,! conception ( reality is simil> to ! conception ( activity4 ,all reality is suppos$ 9 ! me1 is ! same z3 ,all activity is suppos$ 9 ! me1 & rev]sely2 all 9 ! me is reality1 is ! same z3 ,! me is only active2 x is ! me only 9 s f> z x is active2 & 9 s f> z x is n active1 x is ! n-me4#eg #eg ,ib41 ,d41 pp4 #acg-h4 ,only 9 ! und]/&+ is !re reality2 x is ! faculty ( ! actual2 9 x ! ideal fir/ becomes real4#eh #eh ,ib41 ,d$uction d] ,vor/ellung1 ,,iii41 pp4 #bcc-d4 ,! me is only t :i* x supposes itself2 x is inf9ite2 t is1 x supposes itself inf9ite4444 ,)\t ! inf9ity ( ! me1--)\t a productive faculty ^: t5d5cy is unlimit$ & illimitable1--x is impossible to expla9 ! possibility ( repres5tation4 #aci4 ,let u give a glance at ^! rav+s4 ,psy*ology />ts f a fundam5tal fact--! te/imony ( consci\sness4 ,! human m9d _c ?9k )\t f9d+ itself2 ! />t+-po9t ( its psy*ological inve/igations is ! proposition1 ,i ?9k2 9 ?is is f\nd ! id5tity ( :i* ,fi*te speaks--! me is ! me4 ,all ?\ght1 f ! fir/ mom5t t x exi/s1 p]ceives itself subject to a law2 ! p]ception ( e ?+ involves ! p]ception1 ei!r explicit or implicit1 ( ! id5tity ( ! ?+ p]ceiv$4 ,9 ?is s5se1 ! mo/ simple =mula 9 :i* we c express ! fir/ law ( our p]ception is3 ,a is ,a2 b ?is =mula is z /]ile z x is simple2 & x is impossible to conceive h[ any "o c\ld pret5d to raise ^u x a sy/em ( philosophy4 ,?is =mula1 suppos+ x to be enunciat$1 involves ! exi/5ce ( ! me :i* enunciates x4 ,x _c be said t ,a is ,a1 if !re is n a be+ 9 :i* ! relation ( id5tity is suppos$4 ,if ! proposition ,a ,a is true1 x is necess>y to suppose an ,a1 or a be+ 9 :i* x exi/s4 ,a purely ideal tru?1 )\t any f\ndation 9 a real tru?1 is an absurdity1 z we h else:]e prov$ & expla9$ at great l5g?4#ei #ei ,see ,bk4 ,,iv41 ,*s4 ,,xxiii41 ,,xxiv41 ,,xxv41 ,,xxvi41 & ,,xxvii42 & ,bk4 ,v41 ,*s4 ,,vii4 & ,,viii4 #adj4 ,b ! exi/5ce ( an ideal tru?1 9 s f> z x is repres5t$ 9 u1 t is to say1 9 s f> z x is a fact ( our consci\sness1 is n necess>y1 b hypo!tical1 x exi/s :5 x exi/s2 b :5 x exi/s x may n exi/1 or :5 x does n exi/ x may exi/4 ,necessity _c be inf]r$ f exi/5ce3 ! te/imony ( consci\sness assures u ( ! fact2 b 9 ?is consci\sness we f9d no pro( t ! fact is necess>y1 t x has n dep5d$ on a high] ag5t2 q ! contr>y1 ! s5tim5t ( our weakness1 ! %ortness ( ! "t to :i* ! recollections ( our consci\sness ext5d1 ! natural & p]iodical int]ruptions ( !m :i* we exp]i5ce dur+ sleep1 e ?+ %[s t ! fact ( consci\sness is n necess>y1 & t ! be+ :i* exp]i5ces x has b a little :ile ago comm5c$ its exi/5ce1 & might lose x aga9 z soon z ! inf9ite be+ %\ld cease to pres]ve x4 ,! me :i* we p]ceive )9 u kn[s itself1 affirms itself2 ! ^w supposes itself has no reasonable mean+1 unless x mean t ! me affirms its exi/5ce2 b ?is kn[+ itself is n produc+ itself2 :oev] ass]ts su* an absurdity is "u obligation to prove x4 #ada4 ,9 tru? x requires all ! gravity ( ,fi*te to pret5d to connect su* a collection ( extravagant absurdities into sci5ce4 ,x 0 res]v$ = mod]n times to see a man s]i\sly occupi$ ) a sy/em ^: exi/5ce w1 ) difficulty1 be believ$ by ^? :o read ! hi/ory ( ! ab]rations ( ! human m9d4 ,! sy/em ( ,fi*te is already judg$ by all ?9k+ m51 & !re is no sur] means to make x =gott5 ?an to expose x to ! eyes ( ! judici\s read]4 #adb4 ,hav+ e/abli%$ ! necess>y & absolute exi/5ce ( ! me1 ,fi*te proposes to demon/rate t f ! me proce$s ! n-me1 t is to say2 all t is n ! me4 ,b ! n-me c only be suppos$ 9 s f> z a me1 to :i* x is oppos$1 is suppos$ 9 ! me 79 ! id5tical consci\sness74 ,b ! n-me mu/ be suppos$ 9 ! id5tical consci\sness4 ,!re=e ! me mu/ also be suppos$ 9 x 9 s f> z ! n-me is suppos$ 9 x4 444 ,if me me1 all is suppos$ :i* is suppos$ 9 ! me4444 ,! me & ! n-me are bo? products ( orig9al acts ( ! me1 & ! consci\sness itself is a product ( ! fir/ orig9al act ( ! me1 ( ! supposition ( ! me by itself4#fj #fj ,ib41 #c41 pp4 #ajf-g4 ,?is1 !n1 is h[ accord+ to ,fi*te1 ! n-me1 t is to say2 ?is :i* we call ! ext]nal _w1 & all t is n ! me1 is born ( ! me2 ! di/9ction ( "o ?+ f ano!r is a pure illusion1 a play ( relations by :i* ! me conceives itself z n-me 9 s f> z x limits itself2 b ! me & ! n-me are absolutely id5tical4 ,! me & ! n-me inasmu* z !y are suppos$ id5tical & oppos$ by ! conception ( mutual limitation1 are some?+ 9 ! me 7accid5ts7 z divisible sub/ances1 suppos$ by ! me1 ! absolute & illimitable subject1 to :i* no?+ is id5tical & no?+ oppos$4 ,!re all judgm5ts1 ! logical subject ( :i* is ! limitable or det]m9able me1 or some?+ :i* def9es ! me1 mu/ be limit$ or def9$ by some?+ high]2 b all judgm5ts1 ! logical subject ( :i* is ! absolutely illimitable me1 _c be det]m9$ by any ?+ high]1 because ! absolute me is n det]m9$ by any ?+ !y are f\nd$ on1 & def9$ absolutely by !mselves4 ,?is is ! la/ result ( ,fi*te's sy/em1 ! me conv]t$ into an absolute be+1 :i* is det]m9$ by no?+ above itself1 into an unlimit$ & illimitable subject1 an inf9ite be+1 into ,god4 ,e ?+ emanates f ?is absolute subject4 ,9 s f> z ! me supposes itself z inf9ite1 its activity 7t ( suppos+ itself7 is sp5t on ! me itself1 & on no?+ else ?an ! me4 ,its :ole activity is sp5t on ! me1 & ?is activity is ! gr\nd & ! compass ( all be+4 ,! me is !re=e inf9ite 9 s f> z its activity returns to itself1 & consequ5tly s f> also is its activity inf9ite z its product1 ! me1 is inf9ite4 7,inf9ite product1 inf9ite activity2 inf9ite activity1 inf9ite product2 ?is is a circle1 b n a vici\s "o1 = x is "o f :i* reason escapes1 = x expresses t :i* is absolutely c]ta9 by itself1 & = its own sake4 ,product1 activity1 & active are "h "o & ! same ?+1 & we sep>ate !m only 9 ord] to express ourselves47 ,! pure activity ( ! me alone1 & ! pure me alone are inf9ite4 ,b pure activity is t :i* has no object1 b returns to itself4 ,9 s f> z ! me supposes limits1 &1 accord+ to :at we h said1 supposes itself 9 ^! limits1 its activity is n sp5t imm$iately on itself1 b on a n-me :i* is to be oppos$ to x4#fa #fa ,ib41 ,,iii41 ,?4 #e1 ,,ii41 p4 #bef4 ,h[ %all we sum up ?is doctr9e8 ,9 ! words ( ,fi*te3 ,9 s f> z ! me is absolute1 x is inf9ite & unlimit$4 ,x supposes all t is2 & t :i* is n suppos$1 is n 7= x2 & out ( x !re is no?+74 ,b all t x supposes1 x supposes z me2 & x supposes ! me z all t x supposes4 ,h5ce 9 ?is respect ! me conta9s 9 itself all1 t is1 an inf9ite1 unlimit$ reality4 ,9 s f> z ! me opposes to itself a n-me1 x necess>ily supposes limits1 & supposes itself 9 ^! limits4 ,x divides ! totality ( ! be+ suppos$ 9 g5]al betwe5 ! me & ! n-me2 s f> supposes itself necess>ily z f9ite4#fb #fb ,ib41 p4 #bee4 #adc4 ,?us ,fi*te 9 a few words de/roys ! reality ( ! ext]nal _w1 conv]t+ x into a modification or developm5t ( ! activity ( ! me4 ,is x necess>y to /op any long] to refute su* an absurd doctr9e1 "o1 too1 f\nd$ on no pro(8 ,i believe n3 especially s9ce ,i h e/abli%$ on solid pr9ciples ! demon/ration ( ! exi/5ce ( an ext]nal _w1 & h expla9$ ! orig9 & "* ( ! facts ( consci\sness1 )\t hav+ rec\rse to su* extravagant absurdities4#fc #fc ,see ,bks4 ,,ii41 ,,iii41 & ,,iv4 ,,*apt] ,,xix4 ,,relations ,,( ,,fi*te',s ,,sy/em ,,to ,,! ,,doctr9es ,,( ,,kant4 #add4 ,i h already %[n#fd h[ ,kant's sy/em leads to ,fi*te's4 ,:5 a dang]\s pr9ciple is e/abli%$1 !re is nev] want+ an au?or bold en\gh to d$uce its consequ5ces1 :atev] !y may be4 ,! au?or ( ! ,doctr9e ( ,sci5ce1 l$ a/ray by ! doctr9es ( ,kant1 e/abli%es ! mo/ extravagant pan!ism t 0 ev] inv5t$4 ,9 conclud+ 8 "w1 he says t he leaves ! read] at ! po9t :]e ,kant takes him2 he ought r to h said t he takes ! read] at ! po9t :]e ,kant leaves him4 ,! au?or ( ! ,critic ( ,pure ,reason1 by conv]t+ space into a purely subjective fact1 de/roys ! reality ( ext5sion1 & op5s ! door to ^? :o wi% to d$uce all nature f ! me2 & by mak+ "t a simple =m ( ! int]nal s5se1 he causes ! succession ( ph5om5a 9 "t to be consid]$ z m]e modifications ( ! me to ! =m ( :i* !y relate4 #fd ,see ,bk4 ,,iii41 ,*4 ,,xvii4 #ade4 ,b x is f> f be+ necess>y = u to hunt aft] d$uctions2 ! philosoph] himself1 9 ! mid/ ( 8 obscurity & enigmatical language1 does n cease to lay d[n 9 ! mo/ precise mann] ?is mon/r\s doctr9e4 ,let u he> h[ he speaks 9 8 transc5d5tal ,logic1 :]e he proposes to expla9 ! relation ( ! und]/&+ to objects 9 g5]al1 & ! possibility ( kn[+ !m a priori4 ,! ord] & regul>ity 9 ph5om5a1 t :i* we call nature1 is consequ5tly our own "w2 we %\ld n f9d x !re if we _h n plac$ x !re by ! nature ( our m9d2 = ?is natural unity mu/ be a necess>y unity1 t is to say1 a c]ta9 unity a priori ( ! connection ( ! ph5om5a4 ,b h[ c\ld we produce a syn!tic unity a priori1 if !re 7 n 9 ! primitive s\rces ( our m9d subjective reasons ( ?is unity a priori1 & if ^! subjective conditions 7 n at ! same "t objectively valid1 s9ce !y are ! gr\nds ( ! possibility ( kn[+ 9 g5]al an object 9 exp]i5ce8#fe ,:o does n see 9 ^! words ! g]m ( ,fi*te's sy/em1 :i* d$uces f ! me ! n-me1 t is to say1 ! _w1 & gives to nature no o!r validity ?an t :i* x has receiv$ f ! me8 #fe ,kant1 ,critik d] re95 ,v]nunft1 ,trause4 ,log4 #adf4 ,b ,kant is /ill m explicit1 :]e he is expla9+ ! nature & attributes ( ! und]/&+4 ,he says3 ,we h be=e def9$ ! und]/&+ 9 diff]5t ways2 we h call$ x a spontaneity ( k1 79 opposition to ! receptivity ( s5sibility17 a faculty ( ?\ght1 or r1 a faculty ( conceptions or judgm5ts2 ^! def9itions1 rightly expla9$1 are b "o4 ,we may n[ *>act]ize x z a faculty ( rules4 ,?is "* is m fruitful1 & comes ne>] to ! ess5ce ( ! ?+3 s5sibility gives u =ms 7( intuition7 & ! und]/&+ rules4 ,! latt] is always appli$ to ! obs]vation ( ph5om5a 9 ord] to f9d 9 !m "s rule4 ,! rules1 if objective1 7if1 consequ5tly1 necess>ily unit$ to ! k ( ! object17 are call$ laws4 ,al?\gh we "k _m laws by exp]i5ce1 /ill ^! laws are only p>ticul> det]m9ations ( o!r high] laws1 ! highe/ ( :i* 7to :i* all ! o!rs are subject$7 proce$ a priori f ! und]/&+ itself1 & are n tak5 f exp]i5ce1 b1 on ! contr>y1 !y give to ! ph5om5a _! validity1 & !re=e make exp]i5ce possible4 ,! und]/&+1 !n1 is n simply a faculty ( mak+ rules = itself1 & comp>+ ph5om5a2 x is also ! legislation = nature2 t is to say1 t )\t ! und]/&+ !re w\ld be no nature1 or syn!tic unity ( ! multiplicity ( ph5om5a accord+ to c]ta9 rules4 ,= ! ph5om5a1 z su*1 _c exi/ out ( u2 on ! contr>y1 !y only exi/ 9 our s5sibility2 b ?is1 z ! object ( ! k 9 an exp]i5ce1 ) all t x c conta91 is only possible 9 ! unity ( ! app]ception4 ,! unity ( ! app]ception is ! transc5d5tal f\ndation ( ! necess>y legitimacy ( all ! ph5om5a 9 an exp]i5ce2 ?is unity ( ! app]ception 9 relation to ! multiplicity ( ! repres5tations 79 ord] to det]m9e ! multiplicity by />t+ f only "o7 is ! rule1 & ! faculty ( ^! rules is ! und]/&+4 ,all ph5om5a1 !n1 z possible exp]i5ces1 are a priori 9 ! und]/&+1 & f x !y d]ive _! =mal possibility1 9 ! same mann] t !y are pure intuitions 9 ! s5sibility1 & are only possible by x 9 relation to ! =m4 ,9 ! d$uction ( ! pure conceptions ( ! und]/&+1 ,kant n only pret5ds t ! objects ( our k are n ?+s 9 !mselves1 b t x is impossible t !y %\ld be1 because we c\ld n !n h conceptions a priori4 ,he adds1 t ! repres5tation ( all ^! ph5om5a1 consequ5tly all objects :i* we "k1 are all 9 ! me1 & are det]m9ations ( my id5tical me1 :i* expresses ! necessity ( a univ]sal unity ( ^! det]m9ations 9 only "o & ! same app]ception4 #adg4 ,f ^! passages x cle>ly foll[s t ,fi*te's sy/em1 or ! ideal pan!ism :i* r$uces e ?+ to modifications ( ! me1 accords ) ! pr9ciples e/abli%$ 9 ! ,critic ( ,pure ,reason1 & is ev5 expressly laid d[n1 al?\gh x does n =m its pr9cipal object 9 t "w4 ,= ! sake ( imp>tiality ,i _c d less ?an ref] ! read] to ! sev5te5? *apt] ( ! ?ird book1 :]e ,i h intimat$ t ! ,g]man philosoph] attempts to expla9 8 expressions s z to escape idealism1 :i* he pr(esses to refute4 ,b ?is he seems to me to d only by an inconsequ5ce4 #adh4 ,h[ev]1 my op9ion ( ! connection ( mod]n pan!ism ) ! ,critik d] re95 ,v]nunft is confirm$ ev5 by ! ,g]mans4 ,f ^! dep?s1 says ,ros5kranz1 speak+ ( ?is "w1 ! results ( ! transc5d5tal /hetics & logic receive a new importance 9 ! great problems ( !ology1 cosmology1 morals1 & psy*ology1 :i* 0 n ev5 suspect$ by ! dull s5se ( ! great] "p ( its admir]s4 ,!y "k no?+ ( ! *a9 :i* unites ,fi*te's ,doctr9e ( ,sci5ce1 ,s*ell+'s ,sy/em ( ,transc5d5tal ,idealism1 ,hegel's ,ph5om5ology & ,logic1 & ,h]b>t's ,metaphysics1 ) ,kant's ,critic4444 ,i may say t ! ,engli% & ,fr5* 9 p>ticul> w und]/& no?+ ( ! developm5t ( ,g]man philosophy s9ce ,kant1 until !y h p5etrat$ ! ,critic ( ,pure ,reason1 = we ,g]mans always look to t4444 ,j z we use ! h\ses1 ! palaces1 ! *ur*es1 b mo/ ( all ! t[]s :i* rise ov] e ?+ to guide u 9 a l>ge city2 s also 9 contempor>y philosophy1 amid ! labyr9? ( its qu>rels x is impossible to take a s+le /ep ) security unless we keep our sight fix$ on ,kant's ,critic4 ,fi*te1 ,s*ell+1 ,hegel1 & ,h]b>t made ?is "w ! great c5tre ( _! op]ations = attack or def5ce4#ff #ff ,preface ( ! edition ( ,leipsic1 #ahch4 #adi4 ,i d n mean by ?is t ! ,g]man philosoph]s s9ce ,kant h add$ no?+ to ! ,critic ( ,pure ,reason3 ,i h already obs]v$ 79 ! sev5? *apt] ( ! fir/ book7 t ! cause ( ! great] obscurity :i* is f\nd 9 ,fi*te's words1 proce$s f 8 hav+ gone f>!r ?an ,kant 9 8 ab/raction ( all objectiv5ess bo? ext]nal & int]nal1 plac+ himself 9 ,i "k n :at pure primitive act1 f :i* he pret5ds to d$uce e ?+2 9 :i* he diff]s f ! au?or ( ! ,critic ( ,pure ,reason1 ^: labors did n s absolutely annihilate ! objectiv5ess ( ! int]nal _w1 & !re=e 8 obs]vations are less incompreh5sible1 & ev5 pres5t "h & !re "s few lum9\s po9ts3 ,i only wi%$ to %[ ! baneful importance ( ,kant's works1 to place ^? incauti\s p]sons on _! gu>d1 :o1 judg+ f :at !y h he>d1 are incl9$ to reg>d him z ! great re/or] ( spiritualism & s\nd philosophy1 :51 9 reality1 he is ! f\nd] ( ! mo/ p]nici\s s*ools :i* ! hi/ory ( ! human m9d has kn[n1 & w\ld be "o ( ! mo/ dang]\s writ]s t ev] exi/$1 7 x n t ! obscurity ( 8 ideas1 increas$ by ! obscurity ( _! expression1 r5d]s him intol]able to ! imm5se majority ( read]s1 ev5 ( ^? v]s$ 9 philosophical /udies4 ,,*apt] ,,xx4 ,,contradiction ,,( ,,pan!ism ,,to ,,! ,,prim>y ,,facts ,,( ,,! ,,human ,,m9d4 #aej4 ,i d n "k h[ any philosoph] :o has m$itat$ on ! human m9d c incl9e to pan!ism4 ,! deep] we g into ! me f :i* x is pret5d$ to d$uce su* an absurd sy/em1 ! m we discov] ! contradiction 9 :i* pan!ism appe>s 9 respect to ! prim>y ideas & facts ( our m9d4 ,my developm5t ( ?is obs]vation w be brief1 = x turns on que/ions l>gely exam9$ 9 _! respective places4 #aea4 ,we h se5 7,bk4 ,,vi41 ,*4 ,v47 t ! idea ( numb] is f\nd 9 e und]/&+1 & exp]i5ce tea*es t we employ x explicitly or implicitly 9 almo/ all our words4 ,we sc>cely speak )\t us+ ! plural1 & ?is c h no mean+ )\t ! supposition ( ! idea ( numb]4 ,pan!ism r$uces all exi/5ce to an absolute unity2 multiplicity ei!r has no real exi/5ce1 or is limit$ to ph5om5a1 :i*1 9 ! judgm5t ( "s foll[]s ( ?is sy/em1 conta9 no reality ( any sort1 &1 9 ! op9ion ( all pan!i/s1 c conta9 no sub/antial reality4 ,accord+ to !m1 !re=e1 ! idea ( numb] ei!r has no correspond5ce 9 ! reality1 or x relates only to modes ( be+1 to ! v>i\s modifications ( ! same be+1 & !re=e does n ext5d to ! be+s !mselves1 = 9 ?is sy/em !re is only "o be+4 ,if ?is be s1 h[ is x t ! idea ( numb] exi/s 9 our und]/&+8 h[ is x t we conceive n only _m modes ( be+1 b _m be+s8 ,9 ! sy/em ( ! pan!i/s n only is !re no multiplicity ( be+s1 b x is impossible t !re %\ld be2 :y1 !n1 has our und]/&+ ?is radical vice :i* necess>ily leads x to conceive ! multiplicity ( ?+s1 if ?is multiplicity is absurd8 :y is ?is ideal defect confirm$ by exp]i5ce :i* also necess>ily leads u to believe t !re are _m di/9ct ?+s8 #aeb4 ,9 ! sy/em ( ! pan!i/s our und]/&+ is only a modification1 a manife/ation ( ! only sub/ance2 b x is impossible to expla9 ?is disagreem5t betwe5 ! ph5om5on & ! reality1 ?is necess>y error into :i* ! ph5om5on ( ! sub/ance leads u 9 respect to ! sub/ance itself4 ,if we are a m]e manife/ation ( ! unity1 :y d we f9d ! idea ( multiplicity z a primitive fact )9 u8 ,:y ?is cont9ual contradiction betwe5 ! be+ & its appe>ances8 ,if we are all "o same unit1 :5ce d we obta9 ! idea ( numb]8 ,if ! ph5om5a ( exp]i5ce are only evolutions1 s to speak1 ( ?is "o unit1 :y d we feel ourselves irresi/ibly incl9$ to suppose multiplicity 9 ! ph5om5a1 & to multiply ! ?+s 9 :i* !y succe$8 #aec4 ,! idea ( di/9ction oppos$ to t ( unity is also fundam5tal 9 our m9d2#fg yet pan!ism gives x no correspond5ce 9 ! reality4 ,if !re is only be+1 if all is id5tical1 !re is no?+ di/9ct1 & ! idea ( di/9ction is a pure *im]a4 ,9 ?is sy/em di/9ction n only does n exi/1 b x is impossible2 consequ5tly ! idea ( di/9ction is absurd2 !re=e "o ( ! prim>y facts ( our m9d is a contradiction4 #fg ,see ,bk4 ,v41 ,*s4 ,,ix4 & ,x4 #aed4 ,negative judgm5ts =m a consid]able "p ( ! weal? ( our und]/&+2#fh pan!ism de/roys !m4 ,9 ?is sy/em ! proposition3 ,a is n ,b1 c nev] be true2 =1 if all is id5tical1 "o ?+ _c be d5i$ ( ano!r1 !re w\ld be no di/9ct ?+s1 !re w\ld be no "o or ano!r2 all w\ld be "o2 ! negative judgm5t mu/ be limit$ to ! foll[+3 9 reality ,a is ! same z ,b1 !re is only ! appe>ance ( di/9ction2 ,b is ,a exi/+ or pres5t$ diff]5tly4 #fh ,see ,bk4 ,v41 ,*4 ,,ix4 #aee4 ,! idea ( relation is also absurd 9 ! pan!i/ic sy/em2 !re is no relation )\t a t]m ( ref]5ce1 & !re is no ref]5ce )\t di/9ction4 ,accord+ to ! pan!i/s ! subject ref]r$ & ! t]m ( ! ref]5ce are absolutely id5tical2 !re are1 consequ5tly1 no true1 b only app>5t1 relations2 ?us we f9d ano!r ( ! prim>y facts ( our und]/&+ radically absurd1 because x is 9 contradiction ) ! reality1 & ev5 ) ! possibility4 #aef4 ,! support ( all our k1 ! pr9ciple ( contradiction1 x is impossible = ! same ?+ to be & n to be at ! same "t1 is )\t mean+1 & c h no real or possible application1 if ! doctr9e ( pan!ism be admitt$4 ,:5 we say t x is impossible = ! same ?+ to be & n be at ! same "t1 we und]/& t !re is ! possibility ( n-be+2 9 our m9d ! idea ( be+ excludes t ( n-be+ only ) respect to ! same ?+ & at ! same "t4 ,if !re is only "o be+1 & all o!r be+ is impossible1 x foll[s t ! idea ( n-be+ is absolutely contradictory1 & all ! propositions 9 :i* x is express$ are absurd4 ,!re is 9 ?is case only "o be+ :i* is e ?+1 to ?is be+ negation ( be+ c nev] be appli$2 ?is negation1 !n1 is absolutely absurd1 & ano!r idea ( our m9d is absolutely contradictory4 #aeg4 ,! idea ( cont+5cy is also contradictory if pan!ism be admitt$2 all t c be is1 & all t does n exi/ is impossible2 !re=e :5 we di/+ui% cont+5cy f necessity we contradict bo? ! reality & ! possibility4 ,h5ce !re is ano!r prim>y illusion ( our m9d :i* pres5ts to u z possible1 & ev5 exi/5t1 t :i* 9 itself is absurd4 #aeh4 ,nei!r c ! ideas ( f9ite & inf9ite co-exi/ 9 ! sy/em4 ,"o ( !m mu/ be contradictory2 if ! only be+ is inf9ite1 !re is & c be no?+ f9ite2 !re=e ! opposition betwe5 ! f9ite & ! inf9ite is a *im]a ( our m9d1 to :i* !re is no?+ 9 reality correspond+4 ,!re is only "o ?+2 x mu/ be f9ite or inf9ite2 9 ei!r case1 "o ( ^! t]ms mu/ disappe>1 "o ( ^! ideas is contradictory1 s9ce x is 9 opposition to an absolute necessity4 #aei4 ,! sy/em ( absolute unity de/roys ! idea ( ord]4 ,9 ?is idea is conta9$ ! arrangem5t ( di/9ct ?+s1 di/ribut$ 9 a conv5i5t mann] to conspire to an end4 ,if !re is no di/9ction !re is no ord]1 & ! di/9ction is impossible if !re is absolute unity4 ,! idea ( ord] is /ill "o ( ! fundam5tal ideas ( our m9d2 lit]>y & arti/ic unity1 & 9 g5]al t ( all s5sible beauty1 is ! unity ( ord]3 sub/itute = ?is absolute unity1 & y de/roy all beauty ( ! imag9ation2 art becomes absorb$ by *aos4 #afj4 ,x is useless to add t pan!ism de/roys lib]ty ( w2 ?is lib]ty ( :i* we are s cle>ly & vividly consci\s1 & :i* accompanies u ?r\gh e mom5t ( our exi/5ce4 ,9 ?is mon/r\s sy/em absolute unity is insep>able f absolute necessity2 ! exi/5t & ! possible are conf\nd$2 no?+ :i* is c cease to be2 no?+ :i* is n c be4 ,! action mu/ spr+ f ! only sub/ance by a spontane\s developm5t2 und]/&+ by spontaneity ! abs5ce ( an ext]nal cause2 b ?is action _c b exi/1 x w be an irradiation1 z x 71 ( ! only sub/ance1 j z light radiates f lum9\s bodies4 ,)\t lib]ty ( w m]it is absurd2 a be+ t acts by absolute necessity c h no m]it or dem]it4 ,!n laws are to no purpose1 rew>ds & puni%m5ts useless2 ! hi/ory ( individuals z ( all mank9d is only a hi/ory ( ! phases ( ! only sub/ance1 :i* goes on et]nally develop+ itself 9 subjection to absolutely necess>y conditions :i* h no o!r f\ndation ?an ! sub/ance itself4 #afa4 ,pan!ism n only de/roys fre$om ( w1 b x r5d]s un9telligible all affections :i* relate to ano!r4 ,if !re is only "o be+1 :at mean ! s5tim5ts ( love1 respect1 gratitude1 & 9 g5]al1 all ^? :i* suppose a p]son di/9ct f ! me :i* exp]i5ces !m8 ,no matt] h[ di/9ct we suppose ! t]m ( ^! affections1 !y c nev] h any2 & al?\gh !y seem to proce$ f diff]5t pr9ciples1 !y spr+ f only "o4 ,! man :o loves "o man & hates ano!r is ! me lov+ & hat+ itself2 appe>ances d5ote div]sity & opposition1 b at bottom !re is unity1 id5tity4 ,:o c accept su* absurdities8 #afb4 ,?us pan!ism1 aft] de/roy+ ! intellectual man1 annihilates ! moral man2 aft] decl>+ ! fundam5tal ideas ( our m9d contradictory1 x attacks ! mo/ preci\s fact ( our consci\sness1--! fre$om ( w2 x de/roys ! s5tim5ts ( ! he>t1 d5y+ our individuality1 x precipitates u all into ! deep abyss ( ! only sub/ance1 ! absolute be+1 conf\nd+ & id5tify+ u ) x1 till we lose )9 x our own exi/5ce1 z ! molecules ( a gra9 ( du/ are lo/ 9 ! imm5sity ( space4 ,,*apt] ,,xxi4 ,,rapid ,,glances ,,at ,,! ,,pr9cipal ,,argum5ts ,,( ,,pan!i/s4 #afc4 ,! pr9cipal argum5ts on :i* pan!ism re/s are f\nd$ on ! unity ( sci5ce1 ! univ]sality ( ! idea ( be+1 ! absolut5ess & exclusiv5ess ( ! idea ( sub/ance1 & ! absolut5ess & exclusiv5ess ( ! conception ( ! inf9ite4 #afd4 ,sci5ce mu/ be "o1 say ! pan!i/s1 & x _c be completely s1 unless !re is unity ( be+4 ,sci5ce mu/ be c]ta91 & !re _c be absolute c]ta9ty1 unless !re is id5tity ( ! be+ :i* kn[s ) ! ?+ kn[n4 ,! solution ( ^! difficulties consi/s 9 d5y+ ! gratuit\s propositions on :i* !y are f\nd$4 ,x is n true t human sci5ce mu/ be "o1 nor t unity ( be+ is necess>y = ! unity ( sci5ce4 ,!y mu/ prove bo? ^! ass]tions2 to triumph 9 a discussion x is n en\gh to ass]t4 ,f> f ei!r ( !m be+ suffici5tly prov$1 !y are bo? contradict$ by reason & by exp]i5ce4 ,x is unnecess>y to repeat "h1 :at ,i h expla9$ at full l5g? :5 treat+ ( ! possibility & exi/5ce ( transc5d5tal sci5ce z well 9 ! absolute intellectual ord] z 9 ! human4 ,= ?is ,i ref] ! read] to ! f\r?1 fif?1 six?1 & sev5? *apt]s ( ! fir/ book4 ,! second proposition :i* exacts ! id5tity ( ! subject kn[+ ) ! object kn[n1 has also be5 suffici5tly refut$4 ,i h else:]e %[n t ! sy/em ( univ]sal id5tity does n help to expla9 ! problem ( repres5tation1 & ,i h prov$ by inconte/ible argum5ts1 t besides ! repres5tation ( id5tity1 !re are ! repres5tations ( causality & ideality4#fi ,i h also demon/rat$ ! objective value ( ideas1 9 s f> z di/+ui%$ f objects1 f\nd+ my pro( on ! unity ( consci\sness4#gj #fi ,see ,bk4 ,i41 ,*4 ,,viii4 to ,,xiv4 #gj ,see ,bk4 ,i41 ,*4 ,,xxv4 ,! doctr9es ( ,kant :i* conv]t ! ext]nal _w into a purely subjective fact1 & ?us give rise to ,fi*te's transc5d5tal idealism1 are refut$ 9 ! second book1 :]e ,i h demon/rat$ ! objectiv5ess ( s5sations1--9 ! ?ird book1 :]e ,i h prov$ ! reality ( ext5sion1 & 9 ! sev5? book1 :]e ,i h prov$ t "t is n a pure =m ( ! int]nal s5se4 #afe4 ,! argum5t f\nd$ on ! idea ( ! univ]sality ( be+1 t is1 ! impossibility ( m ?an "o be+1 because ! idea ( be+ is absolute & embraces e ?+1 is a sophism 9 :i* !re is a transition f ! ideal ord] to ! real1 by :i* an indet]m9ate & ab/ract idea is conv]t$ into an absolute be+4 ,to =m a p]fect conception ( ?is idea & its relations to ! reality1 see :at has be5 said 9 ! fif? book1 :5 treat+ ( ! idea ( be+4 #aff4 ,sp9osa1 ,fi*te1 ,c\s91 ,krause1 & all :o h taught pan!ism "u "o =m or ano!r1 />t ) a wrong def9ition ( sub/ance4 ,x is impossible to ov]rate ! necessity ( acquir+ cle> & di/9ct ideas ( ?is def9ition1 = !re is no d\bt b t "h is ! orig9 ( ! error ( ! pan!i/s1 & ! secret to put a /op to _! progress4 ,:5 "o exam9es pr(\ndly ! pr9ciples ( sy/ems :i* h made s mu* noise 9 ! philosophical _w1 "o is surpris$ at contemplat+ _! insubsi/5cy 9 its nak$ness4 ,! doctr9es summ$ up 9 ,*apt] ,,xiv4 %\ld be kept always 9 sight4 #afg4 ,9 ! importance & transc5d5cy ( ! def9ition1 ! notion ( ! inf9ite may compete ) t ( sub/ance4 ,x is incr$ible to :at ext5t ?is ^w has be5 abus$ )\t any c>e to expla9 its diff]5t s5ses1 or its orig91 or ! legitimacy ( its applications4 ,all ! argum5ts :i* ! pan!i/s pret5d to f\nd on ! idea ( ! inf9ite vani% l smoke :5 we cle>ly und]/& ! "*1 ! orig91 & ! application ( ?is idea4#ga #ga ,see ! :ole ( ,book ,,viii4 #afh4 ,i w conclude ) "o rem>k4 ,i am pr(\ndly conv9c$ t ! mo/ baneful sy/ems 9 philosophy arise 9 great "p f confusion ( ideas1 & ! sup]ficiality ) :i* ! mo/ fundam5tal po9ts ( ontology1 ideology1 & psy*ology are exam9$4 ,my rul+ idea 9 ! pres5t "w is to prev5t ?is evil2 ?is is :y ,i h s greatly ext5d$ ! "p ( fundam5tal philosophy1 ab/ract+1 z f> z possible1 all second>y que/ions4 ,^! la/ are easily answ]$1 aft] we h once acquir$ a cle> & exact k ( ! fundam5tal ideas ( human sci5ce4 7#d7 ,,book ,,t5?4 ,,necessity ,,& ,,causality4 ,,*apt] ,i4 ,,necessity4 #a4 ,be+s are divid$ into two classes3 necess>y & cont+5t2 necess>y be+ is t :i* _c b be2 cont+5t is t :i* may be & cease to be4 ,9 ^! def9itions e ?+ is said2 b _! laconism does n p]mit all t is express$ 9 !m to be easily und]/ood4 ,necessity & cont+5cy may ref] to diff]5t aspects & give rise to v div]se consid]ations4 ,?is makes a c>eful analysis ( ! ideas express$ by !m necess>y4 #b4 ,:at is meant by necessity8 ,9 g5]al t is call$ necess>y :i* _c b be2 b ! expression _c1 may be tak5 9 diff]5t s5ses3 9 a moral s5se1 z :5 we say3 ,i _c b fulfil ?is duty2 9 a physical1 z 9 ?is proposition2 a p>alytic _c move himself2 & 9 a metaphysical s5se1 z3 ,a triangle _c be a quadrilat]al4 ,9 ! fir/ example1 ! ob/acle is f\nd$ on a law2 9 ! second1 x arises f nature2 9 ! ?ird1 x foll[s f ! ess5ce ( ! ?+s4 ,9 all ^! suppositions1 necessity implies ! impossibility ( ! contr>y1 & ?is impossibility results f ! necessity4 #c4 ,h5ce x foll[s t ! ideas necessity & impossibility are correlative1 & t is metaphysically necess>y ^: opposite is metaphysically impossible4 ,impossibility consi/s 9 ! exclusion ( "o ?+ by ano!r2 ?us1 a circul> triangle is impossible1 means ! same z ! nature ( a triangle excludes ! nature ( a circle4 ,9 all impossibility1 !re=e1 !re is a t]m d5i$2 z 9 all necessity !re is a t]m affirm$2 ! metaphysically necess>y is t ^: opposite is contradictory2 ! exi/5ce ( ! absurd is impossible1 ! non-exi/5ce ( ! necess>y is absurd4 ,x is contradictory = a triangle to h f\r sides2 & x is absurd = a triangle n to h ?ree angles4 #d4 ,9 ! purely ideal ord] we see _m necessities )\t any relation to exi/5ce2 su* are all geometrical tru?s4 ,ev5 9 ! real ord] we conceive _m hypo!tical necessities 9 cont+5t be+s3 su* are ^? :i* are obta9$ by apply+ absolute pr9ciples to any hypo!sis furni%$ by exp]i5ce4 ,! pr9ciple ( contradiction s]ves 9 an inf9ity ( cases to f\nd a c]ta9 necessity ev5 9 cont+5t be+s4 ,!re is no absolute necessity ( ! exi/5ce ( ext5d$ be+s2 b on ! supposition t !y exi/1 x is necess>y = !m to h ! prop]ties proce$+ f ext5sion4 #e4 ,9 no f9ite be+ c !re be an absolute necessity2 ! only necessity :i* x c h is hypo!tical4 ,! relation ( its ess5tial attributes is necess>y2 b1 z its ess5ce does n exi/ necess>ily1 :atev] is necess>y 9 x is s only hypo!tically1 t is1 on ! supposition t x exi/s4 #f4 ,we mu/ !n di/+ui% two necessities3 "o absolute1 ! o!r hypo!tical4 ,! latt] relates to ! ess5ces ( ?+s1 ab/ract+ _! exi/5ce1 al?\gh imply+ x z a condition1 & suppos+ ano!r necess>y z ! gr\nd ( its possibility2#gb ! =m] relates to ! exi/5ce ( ! ?+4 ,! absolutely necess>y is t ^: exi/5ce is absolutely necess>y4 #gb ,see ,bk4 ,,iv41 ,*s4 ,,xxiii41 ,,xxiv41 ,,xxv41 ,,xxvi41 & ,,xxvii4 #g4 ,! ess5ce ( ! necess>y be+ mu/ conta9 exi/5ce2 its idea mu/ involve ! idea ( exi/5ce1 n only logical & conceptual1 b also realiz$4 #h4 ,we c conceive ! exi/5ce ( ! necess>y be+ di/9ct f its ess5ce1 b ! reason ( ?is is 9 ! imp]fection ( ! idea1 :i* ) u is n intuitive1 b discursive2 & consequ5tly1 we c di/+ui% betwe5 ! logical ord] & ! real ord]4 ,"h we f9d ! defect ( ,desc>tes' argum5t by :i* he pret5ds to demon/rate ! exi/5ce ( ,god f ! fact t ! pr$icate1 exi/5ce1 is includ$ 9 ! idea ( a necess>y & inf9ite be+4 ,! idea ( necess>y be+ involves exi/5ce1 b n real exi/5ce1 only logical & conceptual2 s9ce aft] we h ! idea ( ! necess>y be+1 x /ill rema9s to be prov$ t !re is an object :i* corresponds to ?is idea2 ! pr$icate belongs to ! subject accord+ to ! mann] 9 :i* ! subject is tak51 & z ?is is only 9 ! purely ideal ord]1 ! pr$icate is also purely ideal4 #i4 ,! reality ( ! necess>y idea _c be demon/rat$ f its idea alone2 b x may be demon/rat$ ) complete evid5ce by introduc+ into ! argum5t o!r elem5ts :i* exp]i5ce furni%es u4 ,some?+ exi/s2 at lea/ ourselves2 at lea/ ?is p]ception :i* we h 9 ?is act2 at lea/ ! appe>ance ( ?is act4 ,i leave aside = ! pres5t all ! que/ions disput$ betwe5 ! dogmati/s & ! skeptics2 ,i only suppose a datum :i* no "o c d5y me1 ?\gh he c>ry skepticism to ! utmo/ exagg]ation4 ,:5 ,i say t some?+ exi/s1 ,i only mean to affirm t n e ?+ is a pure no?+4 ,if some?+ exi/s1 some?+ has always exi/$1 or !re is no mom5t 9 :i* x c\ld be said ) tru?3 !re is no?+4 ,if su* a mom5t ( univ]sal no?+ness _h ev] be51 no?+ w\ld n[ exi/1 !re nev] c\ld h be5 any ?+4 ,let u imag9e a univ]sal & absolute no?+ness2 ,i !n ask3 ,is x possible t any ?+ %\ld come f no?+8 ,evid5tly n2 !re=e on ! supposition ( univ]sal no?+ness reality is absurd4 #aj4 ,!re=e some?+ has always exi/$1 ) a cause1 )\t a condition on :i* x dep5ds2 !re=e !re is a necess>y be+4 ,its exi/5ce is suppos$ always1 )\t relation to any hypo!sis2 !re=e its n-be+ is always exclud$ "u all conditions2 !re=e !re exi/s an absolutely necess>y be+1 t is1 a be+ ^: n-be+ implies a contradiction4 #aa4 ,summ+ up ! doctr9e :i* prec$es1 we may say3 ,i4 ,t we h ! idea ( a necess>y be+4 ,,ii4 ,t we d$uce its exi/5ce f its idea alone4 ,,iii4 ,t 9 ord] to demon/rate ! exi/5ce ( a necess>y be+1 x is suffici5t to "k t some?+ exi/s4 ,,iv4 ,we "k by exp]i5ce t some?+ exi/s2 = exp]i5ce pres5ts to u1 if no?+ else1 ! exi/5ce ( our own ?\ght4 ,,*apt] ,,ii4 ,,! ,,uncondition$4 #ab4 ,! words1 condition$ & uncondition$1 are greatly us$ 9 mod]n philosophy2 z ! ideas :i* ^! t]ms express h a great analogy to ^? expla9$ 9 ! la/ *apt]1 ,i w briefly consid] !m "h4 #ac4 ,! condition$ is t :i* dep5ds on a condition2 t is to say1 t :i* is suppos$ if ano!r ?+1 :i* is call$ ! condition1 is suppos$4 ,if ! sun is above ! horizon1 !re is light2 "h ! light is ! condition$1 ! sun ! condition4 ,! uncondition$ is t :i* supposes no condition1 z its "n expresses4 #ad4 ,! univ]se is an assemblage ( condition$ be+s2 ?is is manife/$ by bo? int]nal & ext]nal exp]i5ce3 does any ?+ uncondition$ exi/8 ,yes4 #ae4 ,repres5t+ ! univ]se by a s]ies ,a1 ,b1 ,c1 ,d1 ,e1 ,f1 444 etc41 ! condition ( ,f is 9 ,e2 ! condition ( ,e 9 ,d2 t ( ,d 9 ,c2 t ( ,c 9 ,b1 & s on successively4 ,if !re is no?+ uncondition$ ?is retrogression w ext5d to inf9ity1 & we %all h an inf9ite s]ies ( condition$ t]ms4 ,to arrive at any t]m1 = example1 ,b1 x w h be5 necess>y to pass ?r\gh ! inf9ite conditions :i* prec$e x3 ! inf9ite s]ies w h be5 exhau/$3 ?is is contradictory4 ,& z :at is said ( ,b may be said ( ,a1 or ( any o!r ( ! prec$+ or succe$+ t]ms1 x foll[s t !y are all impossible3 !re=e ! s]ies is absurd4 #af4 ,9 ! suppos$ s]ies all is condition$1 !re is no?+ uncondition$2 & /ill ! exi/5ce ( its successive totality is necess>y4 ,!re=e ! s]ies 9 itself is uncondition$2 !re=e a collection ( condition$ t]ms is uncondition$1 al?\gh x is suppos$ impossible to assign any ?+1 out ( ! s]ies1 :i* is uncondition$4 ,:o w\ld admit su* an absurdity8 #ag4 ,let u give a m precise =mula to ! argum5t4 ,tak+ any ?ree t]ms 9 ! s]ies2 ,a 444 ,f 444 ,n1 we may =m ! foll[+ propositions4 ,if ,a exi/s1 ,f & ,n w exi/4 ,if ,n exi/s1 ,f & ,a h exi/$4 ,if ,f exi/s1 ,a has exi/$ & ,n w exi/4 ,objections4--,i4 ,:5ce arises ! connection ( ! conditions ) "o ano!r8 ,,ii4 ,:y %\ld any "o ( !m be suppos$8 #ah4 ,by admitt+ a necess>y1 uncondition$ be+ :i* conta9s ! condition ( :atev] exi/s1 e ?+ is expla9$4 ,to ! fir/ objection x may be answ]$1 t ! connection ( ! condition$ conditions dep5ds on ! uncondition$ condition4 ,to ! second1 x may be said t ! primitive condition has no ne$ ( any o!r condition1 suppos+ x to be a necess>y be+4 ,to ask :y x %\ld be suppos$1 is to fall into a contradiction2 s9ce x is uncondition$ x has no :y1 ! reason ( its exi/5ce is 9 itself4 #ai4 ,b if we admit no?+ necess>y1 no?+ uncondition$1 nei!r ! t]ms nor _! connection c be expla9$4 ,inf9ite t]ms w\ld exi/1 necess>ily connect$1 ) any int]nal or ext]nal suffici5t reason4 ,!re w\ld be no m reason = ! exi/5ce ( ! univ]se ?an = its non-exi/5ce2 be+ & non5tity w\ld be indiff]5t to x2 & x _c be conceiv$ :y exi/5ce %\ld h prevail$4 ,= no?+ x is evid5t t no?+ is requir$2 :y !n is !re n an absolute & et]nal no?+8 #bj4 ,! m we exam9e ! necessity ( ! connection ( ! conditions1 "o ) ano!r1 ! /rong] ?is difficulty becomes2 = if x be said t "o condition _c exi/ )\t ano!r2 ) /ill m reason we ask :y a fir/ condition is n necess>y = ! collection ( ! conditions1 or ! entire s]ies4 #ba4 ,!re=e ! condition$ supposes ! uncondition$2 ! fir/ giv51 we c conclude ! second4 ,! condition$ is giv5 u 9 ! ext]nal & 9 ! int]nal _w4 ,!re=e !re exi/s an uncondition$ be+1 ^: exi/5ce has no reason 9 any ?+ outside ( itself4 ,,*apt] ,,iii4 ,,immutability ,,( ,,necess>y ,,& ,,uncondition$ ,,be+4 #bb4 ,! absolutely necess>y & uncondition$ is immutable4 ,= its exi/5ce is1 or1 to speak 9 mod]n language1 is suppos$ absolutely1 by intr9sic necessity1 )\t any condition2 & ) ?is exi/5ce its /ate is also suppos$4 ,we ab/ract = ! pres5t ! nature ( ?is /ate1 :e!r x be ( ?is or t p]fection1 ?is or t degree1 or ev5 f9ite or inf9ite4 ,its exi/5ce be+ suppos$ unconditionally1 its /ate is suppos$ unconditionally also2 !re=e z its non-exi/5ce is contradictory1 7,*4 ,i47 its no-/ate is also contradictory4 ,*ange is only a transition f "o /ate to ano!r /ate :i* implies ! no-/ate ( ! fir/2 !re=e *ange 9 ! necess>y is contradictory4 #bc4 ,9 ord] to pres5t ?is 9 a cle>] & m precise mann]1 we w call ,e ! necess>y & uncondition$ be+4 ,z ,e is suppos$ absolutely by intr9sic necessity1 )\t any condition1 ! n-,e mu/ be contradictory4 ,e is n ab/ract b real be+1 consequ5tly x mu/ h c]ta9 p]fections1 z intellig5ce1 w1 activity1 or any o!r :atev]2 & x mu/ h ^! p]fections 9 a c]ta9 degree1 ab/ract+ = ! pres5t1 :e!r x be great] or less1 f9ite or inf9ite4 ,) ! absolute exi/5ce ( ,e a /ate ( p]fection1 :i* we %all call ,n1 is also suppos$4 ,:at has det]m9$ ! /ate ,n8 ,by ! supposition1 x c h be5 det]m9$ by no?+2 s9ce ! /ate is uncondition$4 ,!re=e1 if ! /ate ,n is absolutely & necess>ily1 ! n-,n is contradictory4 ,!re=e ! *ange by :i* ,e w\ld pass f ,n to n-,n is contradictory4 #bd4 ,b let u = a mom5t suppose a *ange 9 ! necess>y be+1 & suppose x to h proce$$ f ?is be+ itself4 ,z ! reason ( ! *ange mu/ be necess>y & et]nal1 we %\ld h to admit an inf9ite s]ies ( evolutions1 & %\ld aga9 fall into ! impossibility ( reconcil+ ! inf9ity ( ! s]ies ) ! exi/5ce ( any "o ( its t]ms4#gc #gc ,see ,*4 ,,ii4 #be4 ,?us x is demon/rat$ t ! necess>y & uncondition$ be+ c suff] no *ange :i* w\ld cause x to lose its primitive /ate4 ,! necess>y be+ c lose no?+2 x _c pass f ,n to n-,n2 b :o kn[s b :at x is possible t )\t los+ ,n1 or pass+ to n-,n1 x might acquire some?+ :i* c\ld be unit$ to ,n 9 "o way or ano!r4 ,9 o!r words2 ,n be+ giv51 n-,n is contradictory1 b w\ld ,n ,p be contradictory1 ,p express+ a p]fection1 or degree ( p]fection8 ,?is w\ld be impossible2 because ,p :i* is add$ mu/ emanate f ,n2 !re=e all t is 9 ,p 0 already 9 ,n2 !re=e !re has be5 no *ange1 & to suppose x is contradictory4 #bf4 ,x may be repli$ t ,p 0 9 ,n virtually1 & t ! new /ate only adds a new =m4 ,b does ?is =m1 z su*1 involve some?+ new 9 reality8 ,ei!r x does or x does n3 if x does n1 !re is no *ange2 if x does1 x 0 ei!r conta9$ 9 ,n or n conta9$ 9 x2 if conta9$ 9 x1 !re is no *ange2 if n conta9$ 9 x1 :5ce does x come8 #bg4 ,to elude ?is demon/ration1 "s h imag9$ v>i\s necess>y be+s act+ on ea* o!r1 & mutually produc+ *anges 9 ea* o!r1--by ?is means !y attempt to expla9 :5ce ! new /ates come4 ,b ^! are n only fictions1 & evid5tly gr\ndless cavils 9 contradiction ) ! pr9ciples ( ontology1 b !y may be de/roy$ by "o conclusive argum5t4 ,let ,a1 ,b1 ,c1 ,d1 be ! necess>y & uncondition$ be+s2 ea* is suppos$ absolutely1 & ) primitive /ates1 :i* we %all respectively call a1 b1 c1 d4 ,!n1 tak+ !m 9 _! primitive /ate1 ! collection ( ! exi/5ces w be unit$ ) a collection ( necess>y & uncondition$ /ates1 :i* we may repres5t 9 ?is =mula3 ,aa1 ,bb1 ,cc1 ,dd1 7#a47 ,?is expression repres5ts a primitive1 necess>y1 & uncondition$ /ate3 n[ ,i ask3 :5ce come ! *anges8 ,all is uncondition$2 h[ !n is ! condition$1 ! mutable introduc$8 #bh4 ,! =ce ( ! argum5t is n weak5$ by suppos+ ! primitive & mutual action ( ,a1 ,b1 ,c1 ,d1 to be impli$ 9 ! primitive /ates a1 b1 c1 d4 ,= ! mutual actions1 be+ primitive & absolute1 w\ld produce primitively & absolutely a result 9 _! respective t]ms4 ,?is result w\ld be primitively necess>y1 & w\ld be conta9$ 9 ! =mula4 7#a47 ,!re=e ! =mula w\ld suff] no v>iation by ! new supposition2 & consequ5tly !re w\ld h be5 no *ange ( any k9d4 #bi4 ,by imag9+ t ! mutual action does n suppose a primitive /ate1 b a successive s]ies ( /ates1 we fall into ! inf9ite s]ies1 & consequ5tly into ! impossibility ( arriv+ at any t]m ( x1 )\t suppos+ ! inf9ity to be exhau/$1 7,*4 ,,ii474 #cj4 ,aga91 ! ess5ces ( ! necess>y & uncondition$ be+s ,a1 ,b1 ,c1 ,d1 be+ di/9ct1 :at reason is !re = suppos+ !m to be 9 relations ( activity8 ,:at is ! gr\nd ( ?is relation if !y are all f\r necess>y1 uncondition$1 & !re=e indep5d5t ( ea* o!r8 #ca4 ,b let u leave su* absurdities1 & g on ) our analysis ( ! idea ( a necess>y & uncondition$ be+4 ,immutability excludes p]fectibility1 s t x is necess>y ei!r to suppose ! summit ( p]fection primitively 9 ! necess>y be+1 or to admit t x c nev] atta9 ?is p]fection4 ,p]fectibility is "o ( ! *>act]i/ics ( ! cont+5t1 :i* improves its mode ( be+ by a s]ies ( trans=mations2 ! absolutely necess>y is :at x is1 & c be no?+ else4 #cb4 ,! cont+5t mu/ emanate f ! necess>y1 ! condition$ f ! uncondition$2 !re=e all p]fections1 ( :atev] ord]1 mu/ be f\nd 9 ! necess>y & uncondition$ be+2 !re=e all ! p]fections ( exi/+ reality mu/ be 9 x1 at lea/1 virtually1 & ^? :i* imply no imp]fection mu/ be conta9$ 9 x =mally4#gd #gd ,see ,bk4 ,,viii41 ,*4 ,,xx4 to ! end4 #cc4 ,! possibility ( ! non-exi/5t mu/ h a f\ndation2#ge possible p]fections mu/ exi/ 9 a real be+1 if _! idea is possible2 !re=e ! inf9ite scale ( p]fections1 :i* we conceive 9 ! ord] ( pure possibility1 besides ^? :i* exi/1 mu/ be realiz$ 9 ! necess>y & uncondition$ be+4 #ge ,see ,bk4 ,,iv41 ,*s4 ,,xxii4 to ,,xxviii41 & ,bk4 ,v41 ,*s4 ,,vii4 & ,,viii4 ,,*apt] ,,iv4 ,,ideas ,,( ,,cause ,,& ,,effect4 #cd4 ,we h ! idea ( cause2 ! cont9ual use :i* we are always mak+ ( x %[s ?is4 ,philosoph]s d n alone possess x2 x is ! inh]itance ( mank9d4 ,b :at d we und]/& by cause8 ,all t makes any ?+ pass f n-be+ to be+1 z ! effect is all t :i* passes f n-be+ to be+4 ,i am n n[ consid]+ :e!r t :i* passes f n-be+ to be+ is sub/ance or accid5t1 nor ! mann] 9 :i* ! cause influ5ces ?is transition4 ,h5ce ! def9ition includes e class ( cause1 & e species ( causality4 #ce4 ,! idea ( cause conta9s3 ,i4 ,! idea ( be+4 ,,ii4 ,! relation to t :i* passes f n-be+ to be+1 z ( a condition to ! condition$4 ,! idea ( effect conta9s3 ,i4 ,! idea ( be+4 ,,ii4 ,! idea ( ! transition f n-be+ to be+4 ,,iii4 ,! relation to ! cause1 z ( ! condition$ to ! condition4 #cf4 ,axiom ,i4--,no?+ _c be a cause2 or 9 o!r t]ms3 e cause is a be+1 or exi/s4 #cg4 ,i say t ?is is an axiom1 because x _c be demon/rat$1 s9ce ! pr$icate exi/5ce1 is evid5tly conta9$ 9 ! idea ( cause4 ,t :i* is a cause1 is2 if x is n1 x is n a cause4 ,to affirm ! cause & d5y t x is1 is to affirm & d5y at ! same "t4 ,!re=e ?is proposition is an axiom4 ,to be conv9c$ ( its tru?1 we ne$ only to att5d to ! ideas ( cause & effect1 & we see ! idea ( be+ evid5tly conta9$ 9 ! idea ( cause4 ,! explanation :i* ,i give mu/ n be reg>d$ z a demon/ration1 b z an illu/ration1 = ! purpose ( bett] comp>+ ! two ideas4 ,:oev] comp>es !m z he ought w want no demon/ration1 he w see x intuitively1 & ?is is :at con/itutes ! "* ( an axiom4 #ch4 ,axiom ,,ii4--,!re is no effect )\t a cause4 #ci4 ,to und]/& ! s5se ( ?is axiom x mu/ be obs]v$1 t "h ! ^w effect only means t :i* passes f n-be+ to be+1 :e!r x be caus$ or n2 =1 if by effect 0 meant a ?+ caus$1 ! axiom w\ld be an id5tical & useless proposition4 ,sub/itut+ = effect its mean+1 x w\ld be1 ,!re is no?+ caus$ )\t be+ caus$1--:i* is v true1 b ( no use4 ,! s5se !n is ?is3 :atev] passes f n-be+ to be+1 requires some?+ di/9ct f itself1 :i* produces ?is transition4 #dj4 ,i say t ?is proposition is an axiom1 & to be conv9c$ ( x1 we ne$ only fix our att5tion ^u ! ideas conta9$ 9 x4 ,let u consid] a ?+ t is1 & transf] x to ! "t :5 x 0 n4 ,let u ab/ract all t :i* is n x1 let u suppose no o!r be+ :i* may h produc$ x or tak5 "p 9 its production2 ,i ass]t t we see evid5tly t ! transition to be+1 w nev] be made4 ,n only is x impossible = u to make ! object emanate f ! pure idea ( its n-be+1 b we also see t x c nev] emanate f x4 ,!re is no be+1 no action1 no production ( any k9d2 !re is pure no?+2 :5ce w ! be+ emanate8 ,! tru?1 ( ! proposition is !n intuitively pres5t$ to u3 we n only d n see ! possibility ( ! app>ition ( be+ 9 ! pure idea ( n-be+ by itself1 b we see 9 ?is idea ! impossibility ( ?is app>ition4 ,!y are ideas :i* exclude ea* o!r2 n-be+ is possible only by ! exclusion ( be+1 & vice v]sa4 #da4 ,:5 we conceive a productive action1 we ei!r ref] x to ! ?+ :i* f n-be+ mu/ pass to be+1 or to some?+ di/9ct f ?is4 ,9 ! fir/ case1 we fall into contradiction2 because we suppose an action & d n suppose x1 s9ce !re is no action 9 pure no?+4 ,let u suppose t ! ?+ is cause be=e be+2 we !n f9d ourselves 9 contradiction ) ,axiom ,i1 7 #cf74 ,9 ! second case1 we already conceive ! cause1 s9ce cause is only t :i* produces ! transition f n-be+ to be+4 #db4 ,! common expression1 ex nihilo nihil fit1 is a tru?1 if und]/ood 9 ! s5se ( ,axiom ,,ii4 ,,*apt] ,v4 ,,orig9 ,,( ,,! ,,notion ,,( ,,causality4 #dc4 ,are !re 9 ! _w any cause & effect8 ,?is is equival5t to ask+ :e!r !re is any *ange 9 ! _w4 ,all *ange involves a transition f n-be+ to be+4 ,! lea/ *ange is inconceivable )\t ?is transition4 ,:atev] is *ang$ is1 aft] *ang+1 9 ano!r way ?an x 0 be=e ! *ange2 !re=e x has ?is mode ( be+ :i* x _h n be=e4 ,?is mode did n exi/ be=e1 x exi/s n[2 x has pass$1 !re=e1 f n-be+ to be+4 #dd4 ,ev5 if we 7 n 9 relation ) ! ext]nal _w1 & our m9d 0 conf9$ to int]nal facts alone1 to ! consci\sness ( ! me & its modifications1 we %\ld "k t !re is transition f n-be+ to be+1 by ! te/imony ( ! successive appe>ance ( new p]ceptions & affections4 ,)9 ourselves we exp]i5ce ! ebb & fl[ ( modifications :i* pass f n-be+ to be+1 & f be+ to n-be+4 #de4 ,x is cle>1 f :at has be5 said1 t ! ideas ( cause & effect suppose a real or possible ord] ( cont+5t be+s4 ,if !re 7 only necess>y & immutable be+s1 !re c\ld be no causes & effects4 #df4 ,i said 7,*ap4 ,,iv47 t ! idea ( cause conta9s ! idea ( be+ & ! idea ( relation to ! n-be+ :i* has pass$ or passes to be+4 ,! idea ( cause is n a simple idea2 x is compos$ ( ^! two4 ,! idea ( be+ alone is n suffici5t to con/itute x2 = we may conceive be+ )\t conceiv+ cause4 ,:at ! idea ( cause adds to ! idea ( be+ is some?+ di/9ct f ! idea ( be+1 & n conta9$ 9 x2 x may be call$ causality1 p[]1 productive =ce1 activity1 or any su* t]m2 !y all express ! relation ( "o be+ to realize 9 ano!r ! transition f n-be+ to be+4 #dg4 ,9 ! idea ( causality is likewise includ$ ano!r simple idea1 :i*1 ?\gh accompany+ ! idea ( be+1 mu/ n be conf\nd$ ) x4 ,if any "o %\ld call x a modification ( ! idea ( be+1 ,i %\ld h no objection4 #dh4 ,:5ce does ! idea ( causality arise8 ,! m]e intuition ( ! idea ( be+ does n seem suffici5t to produce x4 ,! idea ( be+ is simple1 x expresses no?+ b be+2 we c1 !re=e1 f9d 9 x no relation to ! transition f n-be+ to be+4 #di4 ,does x1 p]*ance1 spr+ f exp]i5ce8 ,"h we mu/ di/+ui% betwe5 ! idea ( causality1 & ! k ( ! exi/5ce ( ! cause4 ,exp]i5ce reveals ! succession ( be+s1 t is1 _! transition f n-be+ to be+1 & vice v]sa4 ,we h already rem>k$ t 9 ! intuition ( n-be+ ) relation to be+ we see ! impossibility ( a transition1 )\t ! m$iation ( "s be+ :i* executes x2 !re=e ! c]ta9ty ( ! exi/5ce ( ! cause arises f exp]i5ce1 comb9$ ) ! intuition ( ! ideas ( be+ & n-be+4 #ej4 ,if ?is exp]i5ce did n exi/1 we %\ld n "k t causality is possible2 because 9 ! idea ( be+1 z we possess x1 we d n see ! idea ( =ce3 we might p]haps conceive ! =ce1 b we c\ld n "k :e!r any ?+ 9 reality corresponds to x4 ,we %\ld ?us h ! notion ( ! =ce1 b n ! notice ( its exi/5ce1 nor ev5 ! c]ta9ty ( its possibility4 #ea4 ,b if we exam9e x well1 ?is want ( exp]i5ce is an impossible supposition2 because a limit$ intellig5t be+1 z unit+ intellig5ce ) limitation1 feels ! succession ( its p]ceptions1 &1 consequ5tly1 exp]i5ces )9 itself ! transition f a n-be+ to be+4 ,& z1 on ! o!r h&1 x p]ceives its p[] ( comb9+ ideas1 x p]ceives )9 itself ! exi/5ce ( causality1 ( a p[] :i* produces its reflections4 #eb4 ,! ex]cise ( our w1 :e!r ) respect to int]nal or ext]nal acts1 likewise gives u ! k ( ! dep5d5ce ( "s ?+s ^u o!rs2 & ! impressions :i* we receive )\t our w1 or aga9/ x1 confirm u 9 ?is conviction4 ,)\t ?is exp]i5ce we %\ld see ! succession ( ! ph5om5a1 b %\ld n "k _! relations ( causality2 = x is cle> t ! incl9ation to assign z ! cause ( a ph5om5on t :i* prec$$ x1 supposes ! idea ( cause & ! k ( ! dep5d5ce ( ! ph5om5a 9 ! relation ( causes & effects4 #ec4 ,"s philosoph]s say t man has no idea ( ! creation1 f :i*1 )\t int5d+ x1 !y come to ! conclusion t we h n ! idea ( any cause4 ,by creation is meant ! transition ( a sub/ance f n-be+ to be+1 by virtue ( ! productive action ( ano!r sub/ance4 ,i hold t ?is is only ! idea ( causality 9 its highe/ degree1 t is1 z appli$ to ! production ( a sub/ance2 b s9ce !re=e we h ! idea ( cause1 ! idea ( creation is n a new & inconceivable idea1 b a p]fection ( an idea :i* is common to all mank9d4 ,we h se5 t ! idea ( cause conta9s ! idea ( produc+ a transition f n-be+ to be+2 ?is p[] is an attribute ( e active be+1 b ) ?is diff]5ce1 t f9ite causes h only ! p[] to produce modifications1 :il/ ! inf9ite cause has also ! p[] to produce sub/ances4 #ed4 ,"h we f9d ! same ?+ z 9 o!r bran*es ( our philosophical cognitions3 ! idea ( ! ess5ce p]ta9s to reason1 ! k ( its exi/5ce dep5ds on exp]i5ce4 ,! fir/ is indep5d5t ( ! second1 & we may reason on ! ess5ce by means ( ! condition ( exi/5ce1 t is1 by means ( a po/ulate4#gf ,we always h ?is po/ulate1 if 9 no?+ else1 at lea/ 9 ! ph5om5a ( our consci\sness4 #gf ,see ,bk4 ,v41 ,*s4 ,,vii4 & ,,viii4 ,,*apt] ,,vi4 ,,=mula ,,& ,,demon/ration ,,( ,,! ,,pr9ciple ,,( ,,causality4 #ee4 ,! pr9ciple ( causality1 or ! proposition3 all t comm5ces mu/ h a cause2 has be5 some:at disput$ latt]ly2 h5ce x is necess>y = u to place x beyond ! rea* ( attack4 ,i believe x possible to d ?is1 by pres5t+ ! doctr9e ( ! prec$+ *apt]s "u a cle> po9t ( view1 :i* %all drive away all d\bt & cle> up all difficulty4 ,i beg ! read]'s att5tion = a few mom5ts to ! argum5t :i* ,i am go+ to propose4 #ef4 ,let u take any be+1 ,a4 ,9 ord] t ! pr9ciple ( causality may be appli$ to x x is necess>y t x %\ld h begun to be1 & t x %\ld n h exi/$ be=e2 =1 if we d n suppose ?is beg9n+1 ,a mu/ h exi/$ always4 ,we c !n assign a duration 9 :i* ,a 0 n1 & 9 :i* !re 0 n-,a4 ,!re=e 9 ! ord] ( duration !re has be5 a little s]ies ( two t]ms3 n-,a 444 ,a4 ,to beg9 is to pass f ! fir/ t]m1 n-,a to ,a4 ,! pr9ciple ( causality says3 ! transition f ! fir/ t]m to ! second is n possible )\t ! int]v5tion ( a ?ird t]m1 ,b1 :i* mu/ be some?+ real4 #eg4 ,:at does ! t]m n-,a repres5t by itself alone8 ! pure negation ( ,a1 ! m]e non5tity ( ,a4 ,9 ! conception ( n-,a1 in/ead ( ,a1 we f9d its contradictory t]m2 s t1 in/ead ( ! second be+ conta9$ 9 ! =m]1 !y mutually exclude ea* o!r1 & make ! proposition3 x is impossible = n-,a & ,a to exi/ at ! same "t1 absolutely true4 ,?us x is impossible = ,a ev] to emanate f ! conception n-,a1 & consequ5tly )\t a real t]m to produce ! transition x is impossible to pass f n-,a to ,a1 ev5 9 ! purely ideal ord]4 #eh4 ,obs]ve1 h[ev]1 t ,i d n pret5d to say t1 conceiv+ n-,a s z to d5y ,a z kn[n1 x w\ld be impossible to conceive ,a2 = x is evid5t t :oev] conceives n-,a1 mu/ h j conceiv$ ,a1 & he might conceive x entirely alone1 by simply de/roy+ ! negation2 b ,i say t on ! supposition t !re is an absolute conception ( n-,a1 con=m$ to ! absolute objective n-,a1 ,a c\ld nev] emanate f ?is conception2 & if we reflect on x we %all see t !re c\ld n ev5 be ?is conception1 s9ce ! ?\ght ( pure negation is no ?\ght1 no conception4 ,!re w\ld !n be an absolute abs5ce ( conception2 & 9 ! purely ideal ord]1 we %\ld f9d ourselves 9 ! fir/ t]m ( ! s]ies1 9 a pure negation1 9 n-,a1 )\t any means ( pass+ to ! second t]m1 ,a4 #ei4 ,^?1 !n1 :o d5y ! pr9ciple ( causality1 conceive ! transition f n-,a to ,a )\t any reason1 or any int]m$i>y3 ^? :o d5y creation1 admit :at is a ?\s& times m incompreh5sible ?an creation4 ,:5ce d !y inf] ! possibility ( ?is transition8 ,n f exp]i5ce2 because exp]i5ce pres5ts only succession1 & !re=e n absolute appe>ance 9 ! mann] :i* !y suppose3 n f reason2 because reason _c make a positive conception emanate f a pure negation4 #fj4 ,h[ is ! transition f n-,a to ,a effect$8 ,^? :o admit ! pr9ciple ( causality1 say x is effect$ by ! action ( ,b1 :i* !y call ! cause4 ,if x is a sub/ance :i* is produc$1 !y suppose ! int]v5tion ( an inf9ite p[]4 ,b ^? :o d5y ! pr9ciple ( causality c only answ] t ! transition f n-,a to ,a is made absolutely4 ,!y imag9e ! in/ant ,m1 9 :i* ,a did n exi/2 & !n ! in/ant ,n1 9 :i* ,a exi/s4 ,b :y8 ,!y allege no reason3 )\t _! kn[+ h[1 ,a has aris5 f no?+1 )\t ! action ( any ?+4 ,?is is a manife/ contradiction4 #fa4 ,! pr9ciple ( causality is f\nd$ on ! pure ideas ( be+ & n-be+4 ,suppose only n-be+1 & we see evid5tly t be+ _c beg94 ,! pr9ciple !n is purely ontological3 ^? :o1 9 ord] to e/abli%1 or oppose x1 appeal only to reasons ( exp]i5ce1 put ! "q badly2 !y take x f its true field2 !y conf\nd ! notice ( causality ) ! notion or idea ( causality4 ,^? philosoph]s :o keep )9 ! s5sible ord]1 _c give a solid f\ndation to ?is pr9ciple2 = ?is reason1 !y :o admit no o!r ideas ?an s5sations1 h all fall5 into errors or d\bts on ?is po9t2 & all s5si/s w\ld h fall5 into ! same d\bt if !y _h only be5 logical en\gh to draw ! la/ consequ5ces ( _! doctr9e4 ,,*apt] ,,vii4 ,,! ,,pr9ciple ,,( ,,prec$5cy4 #fb4 ,! transition f n-be+ to be+ implies succession3 to conceive t some?+ beg9s1 we mu/ conceive t some?+ did n exi/4 ,! s]ies n-,a1 ,a1 has no s5se if ei!r t]m is want+2 & ^! t]ms1 inasmu* z !y are contradictory1 _c exi/ at ! same "t4 #fc4 ,let u imag9e absolute no?+ness4 ,! fir/ t]m1 n-,a1 /&s alone4 ,all exi/5ce is d5i$3 no?+ c be affirm$ )\t contradict+ ! supposition4 ,!n !re is no "t2 = "t be+ only ! succession ( ?+s1 or ( be+ & n-be+1#gg _c exi/ :5 !re is no?+ :i* c succe$4 ,if we suppose any ?+ to beg91 we e/abli% ! s]ies n-,a1 ,a2 9 :i* case we imag9e two diff]5t in/ants ,m & ,n1 to :i* ! t]ms ( ! s]ies respectively correspond 9 ?is mann]3 #gg ,see ,bk4 ,,vii4 n-,a 44 ,a4 ,m 4444 ,n4 ,x may be said ) tru?3 ,m is n ,n4 ,:at is ! mean+ ( ?is proposition8 ,s9ce "t & duration 9 g5]al is n di/9ct f ! ?+s t endure#gh1 ,n c only repres5t ! exi/5ce ( ,a1 9 relation to n-,a2 ,m 9 ! same mann] c repres5t only n-,a1 9 relation to ,a4 ,h5ce ! conception ( ,a1 9 s f> z x beg9s1 conta9s ! relation to n-,a1 )\t :i* x c\ld n be conceiv$ z begun4 #gh ,see ,bk4 ,,vii41 ,*s4 ,,iv4 & ,v4 #fd4 ,:at we h expla9$ is conceivable on ! supposition at lea/ ( "o intellig5ce2 because ?is intellig5ce w\ld ref] n-,a & ,a to _! prop] duration1 successively1 if ?is duration 7 successive l ours2 9 "s o!r way1 if ?is duration 7 n successive4 ,b if !re is absolutely no?+1 ! s]ies1 n-,a 444 ,a1 is inconceivable1 s9ce ! relation ( ,a1 9 s f> z x beg9s1 has no real or conceiv$ t]m ( comp>ison1 unless we imag9e a pure "t1 entirely empty1 9 :i* we suppose ! t]ms ( ! s]ies to be plac$4 #fe4 ,?us x seems t by ! m]e fact ( ?9k+ ,a1 9 s f> z begun1 we ?9k also a prec$+ exi/5ce1 because !re is no beg9n+ unless n-,a prec$$ ,a2 & ?is prec$5ce means no?+ unless !re is an exi/5ce to :i* x relates1 ei!r z to a successive s]ies1 or z to an immutable duration4 #ff4 ,if ,a mu/ be prec$$ by an exi/5ce ,b1 !n no?+ c beg9 indep5d5tly ( a prec$+ exi/5ce1 or unless some?+ already exi/s2 or ! simple conception ( succession implies ! necessity ( some?+ always exi/+1 9 ord] t some?+ may beg94 #fg4 ,z duration is no?+ di/9ct f ?+s1 ! two t]ms ( ! s]ies1 ,b1 ,a1 ( :i* "o prec$es ! o!r1 _c be plac$ 9 an absolute duration di/9ct f ! ?+s !mselves1 z 9 two di/9ct in/ants1 indep5d5tly ( ! ?+s4 ,! relation1 !n1 :i* exi/s betwe5 ,b & ,a is n a relation ( "o in/ant to ano!r1 s9ce ! in/ants 9 !mselves are no?+1 b ( "o ?+ to ano!r4 ,!re=e ,a1 inasmu* z x beg9s1 has a necess>y relation to ,b4 ,!re=e ,b is ! necess>y condition ( ! exi/5ce ( ,a4 ,!re=e x is demon/rat$ t e be+ :i* beg9s1 dep5ds on an exi/5t be+4 #fh4 ,?is demon/ration1 ?\gh diff]5tly develop$1 is f\nd 9 ! works ( ,b>on ,pascual ,galuppi1 ,pr(essor ( ,philosophy 9 ! ,univ]sity ( ,naples2#gi & al?\gh x is impossible to d5y t x is v pr(\nd1 /ill x does n leave ! und]/&+ :olly satisfi$4 ,^! are ! words ( ! ,italian philosoph]3 #gi ,lett4 filos4 sulle vicissit4 della filos(ia1 ,lett]a ,,xiv4 ,is ! proposition3 !re is no effect )\t a cause1 an id5tical proposition8 ,i h demon/rat$ its id5tity 9 ?is mann]3 :atev] has a beg9n+ ( exi/5ce mu/ h be5 prec$$ ei!r by an empty "t or by a be+2 because o!rwise ! ?+ ( :i* we are speak+ w\ld be ! fir/ exi/5ce1 & ! fir/ lett] ( ! alphabet ( be+s1 & x c\ld n be said t x beg9s to be1 = ! notion ( beg9n+ ( exi/5ce implies a priority 9 relation to ! be+ :i* beg9s4 ,^! two notions1 exi/5ce begun1 & exi/5ce prec$$ by ano!r1 are !n id5tical2 b is x possible = an exi/5ce to be prec$$ by an empty "t8 ,i h prov$ t an empty duration is a *im]a1 a product ( ! imag9ation1 )\t any reality4 ,! developm5t ( ?is pro(1 :i* ,i %all n give 9 ?is place1 may be f\nd 9 my ,essays on ! ,critique ( ,k4 ,i h !re e/abli%$ t "t is no?+ else ?an ! numb] ( productions4 ,ari/otle said t "t 0 ! numb] ( motion4 ,!re=e an exi/5ce begun is an exi/5ce prec$$ by ano!r exi/5ce4 ,?is proposition is id5tical2 b h[ c an exi/5ce be prec$$ by ano!r8 ,is t :i* prec$es1 p]*ance1 f\nd 9 an in/ant ( "t prior to t 9 :i* t :i* is prec$$ is f\nd8 ,!n we fall aga9 into ! doctr9e ( a "t di/9ct f exi/5t ?+s4 ,?us we mu/ admit t ! exi/5ce :i* prec$es is su* z to make ! exi/5ce prec$$ exi/5ce begun4 ,x is n begun because x is prec$$2 ! priority ( ! exi/5ce :i* prec$es1 is a priority ( nature1 an objective priority1 :i* makes ! beg9n+ ( ! exi/5ce :i* is prec$$2 x is !re=e ! effici5t cause ( ?is exi/5ce4 ,?us ! great pr9ciple ( causality /&s inv9cibly demon/rat$1--x is an id5tical proposition4 #fi4 ,i say aga9 t ?is demon/ration does n leave "o :olly satisfi$2 n because x is n conclusive 9 itself1 b because x ne$s great] developm5t4 ,! n]ve ( ! pro( is 9 ! impossibility ( conceiv+ a beg9n+1 )\t conceiv+ some?+ pre-exi/5t2 or to conceive prec$5cy1 )\t ! relation ( t :i* beg9s to t :i* pre-exi/s4 ,x is n easy to conceive h[ f ?is may be inf]r$ ! intr9sic dep5d5ce ( ! ?+s2 & f\nd+ ! argum5t ^u s difficult an idea z t ( "t1 greatly increases ! d\bt4 #gj4 ,let u suppose ! _w to exi/1 & some?+ to beg9 n[4 ,prec$5ce is !n conceiv$ )\t dep5d5ce4 ,?is1 9 fact1 happ5s cont9ually2 s9ce be+s are cont9ually beg9n+ :i* are prec$$ by o!rs on :i* !y d n dep5d4 ,x may be said t !y d n dep5d on all ^? :i* prec$e !m1 b /ill !y dep5d on "o ( !m4 ,?is is precisely :at is to be prov$4 ,9 ord] to prove t ! pr9ciple ( causality is demon/rat$ by ! m]e idea ( ! ord] ( duration1 x is necess>y to prove t ! relation ( prec$5ce is a relation ( dep5d5ce4 ,t :i* beg9s supposes some?+3 c]ta9ly2 b x rema9s to be prov$ t x dep5ds on ?is ?+ z on some?+ produc+ x1 & n only z on a condition :i* makes ! conception ( beg9n+ possible = u4 ,until x is prov$ t ! action ( a be+ is indisp5sable = ! transition f n-be+ to be+1 ! pr9ciple ( causality does n seem to be prov$1 b only t ( prec$5cy2 & z ! ord] ( ?+s 9 duration1 z priority & po/]iority1 c repres5t no o!r dep5d5ce ?an t ( pure succession1 x w\ld foll[ t if we %\ld conf9e ourselves to prec$5cy1 we %\ld n prove t e ?+ t beg9s mu/ dep5d on ano!r1 b t e ?+ t beg9s mu/ succe$ ano!r2 ?is la/ is n ! pr9ciple ( causality1 b ( succession4 #ga4 ,we w make ^! ideas cle>]4 ,! difficulty rais$ aga9/ ! =m] demon/ration w be bett] und]/ood1 if we obs]ve t ^? :o reject ! pr9ciple ( causality1 d n conceive x impossible = any ?+ to beg9 at any mom5t )\t any cause4 ,let u repres5t ! successive be+s ( ! univ]se by ! s]ies 444 ,a1 ,b1 ,c1 ,d1 ,e1 444 & ! times 9 :i* !y exi/1 by ! s]ies 444 a1 b1 c1 d1 e4444 ,accord+ to ! demon/ration :i* we are exam9+1 no t]m c\ld h begun1 unless ano!r _h prec$$ x2 :]e=e1 ,d begun means ! same z ,d prec$$4 ,!re=e ,d has a necess>y relation to ,c1 because ! in/ants d & c are no?+ 9 !mselves1 z di/+ui%$ f ,d & ,c4 ,any "o :o does n admit ! pr9ciple ( causality w say t ,d may beg9 )\t any dep5d5ce on ,c2 & t 9 ord] t ! conception ( beg9n+ may be possible1 x is only necess>y t !re %\ld always h be5 some?+ exi/+1 al?\gh ! t]ms prec$+ & ^? prec$$ h no relation to ea* o!r4 ,?us z ! ord] ( be+s is repres5t$ by ! s]ies 444 ,a1 ,b1 ,c1 ,d1 ,e1 444 ano!r s]ies 444 ,m1 ,n1 ,p1 ,q1 ,r1 444 may be imag9$1 to bo? ( :i* ! s]ies 444 a1 b1 c1 d1 e1 444 corresponds4 ,!n ,d may beg9 )\t any necess>y dep5d5ce on ,c1 = x is suffici5t t ,p pre-exi/s at ! in/ant c1 9 ord] to make ! conception ( beg9n+ possible = u2 9 :i* case1 ,d w h no necess>y relation1 ei!r to ,c or to ,p2 s9ce ! prec$5ce ( ei!r is suffici5t4 ,& z x is evid5t t :at we h said ( ,c & ,p may be said ( any o!r t]ms ( ^! or o!r s]ies1 x foll[s t ! demon/ration only leads u to ! necessity ( conceiv+ some?+ pre-exi/5t2 & ?is only 9 ord] to make ! conception ( a beg9n+ possible4 ,if to ?is we add ! peculi> difficulty proce$+ f ! nature ( ! ideas ( "t & ( all duration1 ,i ?9k we mu/ conclude t ! demon/ration is n s satisfactory z might be desir$4 ,^? :o h n exam9$ ! idea ( "t v pr(\ndly w sc>cely und]/& ! mean+ ( ! pro(2 ! o!rs w see ! contradiction involv$ 9 an absolute beg9n+ demon/rat$1 & !re=e ! necessity ( some?+ hav+ be5 always exi/+2 b n ! intr9sic dep5d5ce impli$ 9 ! relation ( an effect to a cause4 ,^! difficulties r5d] a m rigor\s & pr(\nd exam9ation necess>y4 #gb4 ,! pr9ciple ( prec$5cy leads u to an important result4 ,our und]/&+ conceives absolutely an ext]nal exi/5ce2 s9ce x is impossible = x to conceive an absolute beg9n+ )\t a prec$+ be+4 #gc4 ,! conception ( absolute no?+ is impossible4 ,i4 ,because ?is conception w\ld be entirely void1 or r1 ! abs5ce ( all conception4 ,we conceive negation relatively to an exi/5ce1#hj b n absolutely4 ,,ii4 ,because a conception is n possible )\t consci\sness1 & consci\sness implies ! idea ( a be+1 ( some?+1 & ?is is contradictory ( absolute no?+4 #hj ,see ,book ,v41 ,*ap4 ,,ix4 #gd4 ,unable to conceive absolute no?+1 we always conceive some?+ exi/+2 & s9ce1 z we h demon/rat$1 we _c conceive an absolute beg9n+1 x foll[s t we _c ?9k )\t our ?\ght imply+ an et]nal exi/5ce4 ,h[ lum9\s a tru?6 ,:at reflections x inspires6 ,let u cont9ue to m$itate on x4 #ge4 ,h5ce ! necessity ( ?9k+ ! necess>y & et]nal is a primitive fact ( our m9d1 & ! confusion :i* we feel 9 ?9k+ on duration 9 ! ab/ract1 & ! incl9ation to imag9e "t be=e ! _w exi/$1 arise f ! necessity ( conceiv+ ! et]nal1--a necessity1 f :i* our m9d _c emancipate itself s long z x ?9ks4 #gf4 ,! basis ( ! pr9ciple ( contradiction1 ! idea ( be+1 is f\nd 9 our conceptions 9 an absolute mann]2 its opposite1 ! conception ( n-be+ is f\nd only 9 relation to ! cont+5t1 & is a sort ( condition impli$ by cont+5cy4 #gg4 ,e ?+ cont+5t includes "s n-be+1 s f> z cont+5t x c n be1 & !re=e its n-be+ is at lea/ 9 ! ord] ( possibility4 ,b ^! transitions f n-be+ to be+ are n ev5 conceivable )\t presuppos+ some?+ exi/+1 necess>y1 & et]nal4 #gh4 ,?us 9 our ideas we f9d be+ z absolute1 & n-be+ only z relative2 & we c conceive be+ :i* has proce$$ f n-be+1 or has begun1 only 9 relation to an absolute be+4 #gi4 ,?is relation consid]$ objectively does n seem at fir/ sight to be ! relation ( causality1 b only ( succession2 b x pres5ts a subjective fact :i* br+s u to ! k ( ! objective tru?4 ,our conceptions ( n-be+ & be+ are connect$ 9 su* sort t we _c conceive ! transition f n-be+ to be+ )\t conceiv+ a pre-exi/5t be+3 "h we f9d a reflex ( objective causality :i* is reveal$ to u 9 subjective facts4 ,duration1 z di/9ct f ?+s1 is a pure imag9ation2 ! relation ( durations is !re=e a relation ( be+s4 ,true1 9 ?is relation ( durations we discov] only succession1 & n intr9sic dep5d5ce2 b ?is dep5d5ce1 ?\gh n kn[n intuitively1 is repres5t$ 9 ! v connection 9 :i* we conceive be+s 9 duration4 ,x is c]ta9 t we c imag9e diff]5t s]ies2 b t ( "t is a pure imag9ation 9 s f> z we conceive x di/9ct f o!rs4 ,if ! s]ies ( times disappe>s1 !re rema9s only ! s]ies ( ?+s3 ! relation betwe5 ! t]ms w be ! relation betwe5 ! ?+s2 & :at is call$ ! dep5d5ce ( succession w be ! dep5d5ce ( reality4 ,! real relation ( t :i* passes f n-be+ to be+1 ) t :i* is absolutely1 is a dep5d5ce ( causality4 #hj4 ,let u imag9e any s]ies ( realities4 ,a1 ,b1 ,c1 ,d1 ,e1 444 ,m1 ,n1 ,p1 ,q1 ,r4444 ,! s]ies ( times a1 b1 c1 d1 e1 9 s f> z di/9ct f ! o!rs1 means no?+4 ,9 ?is case x may be elim9at$1 & all ! relations ( "s ( ! t]ms on o!rs w be relations ( ?+s1 n ( "t4 ,n[1 x has be5 demon/rat$ t a t]m1 ,d1 = example1 _c be conceiv$ z pass+ f n-be+ to be+1 or z beg9n+1 )\t a relation1 & x has be5 %[n t ?is relation is a real relation ( ,d to any ( ! t]ms4 ,x has be5 object$ t ,d1 9 ord] to beg91 requires only a t]m :i* w\ld make ! conception ( priority1 & consequ5tly1 ( beg9n+1 possible1 :i* t]m might be s\ght 9 ano!r di/9ct s]ies2 b ?is is really only to *ange a "n2 =1 if ! t]m :i* is necess>y = ! beg9n+ is f\nd 9 ano!r s]ies1 ! cause is f\nd 9 x also1 = 9 x is f\nd t :i* is necess>y = ! effect4 #ha4 ,all ! t]ms begun presuppose ano!r1 ei!r "o or m1 = we "h ab/ract _! unity2 !re=e we mu/ come at la/ to "o or m t]ms n begun4 ,^? :i* h begun c\ld n h begun )\t ! exi/5ce ( ^? :i* h n begun2 !re=e ! exi/5ce ( ^! is necess>y = ! exi/5ce ( ^?4 ,!re=e ! exi/5ce ( ^! la/ conta9s ! reasons ( ! beg9n+ ( ! exi/5ce ( ! o!rs2 !re=e !y conta9 true causality4 #hb4 ,! difficulties oppos$ to ?is demon/ration arise f inadv]t5tly violat+ ! supposition by attribut+ to duration an exi/5ce di/9ct f ! be+s4 ,9 ord] to p]ceive ! :ole =ce ( ! pro(1 x is necess>y to elim9ate entirely ! imag9>y conception ( pure duration3 & !n x w be se5 t ! dep5d5ce repres5t$ z ! relation ( duration is ! dep5d5ce ( ! be+s !mselves1--a dep5d5ce :i* repres5ts no?+ else ?an ! relation express$ by ! pr9ciple ( causality4 #hc4 ,aft] completely elim9at+ ! conception ( pure duration z a ?+ di/9ct f ! be+s1 !re rema9s only ! transition f n-be+ to be+ z all t is express$ by ! ^w1 beg9n+4 ,9 ?is case we f9d t ! pr9ciple ( prec$5cy is ! same z ! pr9ciple ( causality2 & z we h _h to ab/ract entirely duration 9 itself 9 ord] to solve ! difficulties1 we f9d t if ! pr9ciple ( causality is to be plac$ beyond all d\bt1 & to be reg>d$ z an axiom1 x c only re/ on ! contradiction betwe5 n-be+ & be+1 or ! impossibility ( conceiv+ a be+ :i* sudd5ly makes its appe>ance1 )\t any ?+ m ?an a pure n-be+ prec$+ x4 #hd4 ,?us1 aft] exam9+ ! "q on e side1 we come to :at we e/abli%$ 9 ! prec$+ *apt]s3 a n-be+ _c arrive at be+ )\t ! int]v5tion ( a be+3 ! s]ies n-,a1 ,a1 is impossible )\t ! int]v5tion ( a be+1 ,b4 ,we f9d x s ev5 9 our ideas1 & to contradict ?is tru? is to d5y our reason4 ,i believe1 !n1 t ! pr9ciple ( causality is completely expla9$ only 9 ! mann] 9 :i* we h treat$ x 9 ! prec$+ *apt]s4 ,to beg9 supposes a n-be+ ( t :i* beg9s2 & x is impossible & contradictory to d$uce be+ f ! conception ( n-be+4 ,! pr9ciple is true subjectively1 because x is f\nd$ on our ideas2 b x is also true objectively1 because 9 ^! cases objectiv5ess is necess>ily jo9$ ) subjectiv5ess4#ha ,! be+ :i* sudd5ly appe>s1 )\t a cause1 )\t a reason1 )\t any ?+1 is an absurd repres5tation :i* our intellect rejects z in/antly & z /rongly z x accepts ! pr9ciple ( contradiction4 #ha ,see ,bk4 ,i41 ,*ap4 ,,xxv4 ,z "t is ! relation ( n-be+ to be+--! ord] ( ! v>iable--x is a contradiction to conceive succession )\t any ?+ :i* pre-exi/s2 & ?us ! pr9ciple ( prec$5cy confirms ! pr9ciple ( causality2 or r1 x %[s t ! two are "o1 ?\gh pres5t$ "u diff]5t aspects3 ! pr9ciple ( prec$5cy relates to duration1 t ( causality to be+2 b bo? ( !m express an application ( ! fundam5tal pr9ciple3 x is impossible = ! same ?+ to be & n be at ! same "t4 ,,*apt] ,,viii4 ,,causality ,,9 ,,itself4--,,insuffici5cy ,,& ,,error ,,( ,,"s ,,explanations4 #he4 ,causality implies relation3 if 9 ex]cise1 x implies actual relation2 consid]$ n 9 ex]cise1 b 9 pot5tia1 x implies a possible relation4 ,no?+ causes itself2 causality always relates to ano!r4 ,!re is no cause :]e !re is no effect2 & !re is no effect :]e !re is no transition f n-be+ to be+4 ,if ?is transition takes place 9 a sub/ance :i* 0 n1 b beg9s to be1 x is call$ creation2 & is said to be passive1 relatively to ! effect1 & active1 9 relation to ! cause4 ,if ! transition is ( accid5ts only1 ! effect is a new modification2 we d n !n say t !re is a new be+1 b t ! be+ is 9 ano!r mann]4 #hf4 ,f ?is x may be inf]r$ t causality is n ! same z activity3 all causality is activity1 b n all activity is causality4 ,god is active 9 himself2 b he is cause only 9 relation to ! ext]nal4 ,8 intellig5ce & 8 w are c]ta9ly inf9ite activity1 consid]$ 9 !mselves1 & ab/ract$ f creation1 z we conceive ,god f all et]nity be=e ! beg9n+ ( ! _w2 yet1 inasmu* z !y are purely imman5t1 !y are causality1 = !y produce no?+ new 9 ,god4 ,8 intellig5ce is a pure act1 inf9itely p]fect1 & c nev] suff] any *ange2 ! same mu/ be said ( 8 w3 !re=e ! div9e intellig5ce & w ) respect to ,god himself are n acts ( causality4 ,ev5 z ref]r$ to ext]nal objects1 !y are a produc+ cause 9 reality1 only by subjection to ! free w ( ! ,creator2 = o!rwise we %\ld h to admit t ,god creat$ ! _w necess>ily4 ,activity 9 creatures1 ev5 9 imman5t op]ations1 is always causality2 = !y _c ex]cise _! activity )\t produc+ new modifications4 ,acts ( und]/&+ & w are ! ex]cise ( an imman5t activity1 & yet !y modify u 9 diff]5t ways4 ,:5 we ?9k or w we are 9 a diff]5t mann] f t 9 :i* we are :5 we d n ?9k or w2 & :5 we pass f ?9k+ or will+ "o ?+ to ?9k or w ano!r1 ?is transition _c take place )\t our exp]i5c+ new modes ( be+4 #hg4 ,9 :at does ! relation ( effici5t causality consi/8 ,:at is ! mean+ ( ! dep5d5ce ( ! effect 9 relation to ! cause8 ,?is is a difficult & a pr(\nd "q2 "o ( ! mo/ difficult & mo/ pr(\nd :i* c be pres5t$ to sci5ce4 ,! majority ( m5 & ev5 ( philosoph]s imag9e t !y c solve x1 by us+ words :i*1 rightly analyz$1 expla9 no?+4 #hh4 ,to cause1 x is said1 is to give be+4 ,:at means to give8 ,to give is "h synonym\s ) to produce4 ,:at means to produce8 ,) ?is ! explanations are at an end1 unless "o %\ld wi% to fall into a vici\s circle1 say+ t to produce is to cause or give be+4 ,a cause1 x is also said1 is t f :i* a ?+ results4 ,:at is und]/ood by result+8 ,to emanate4 ,:at is to emanate8 ,to emanate is to proce$1 to fl[ f ano!r4 ,always ! same ?+3 metaphorical expressions :i* at bottom h all ! same mean+4 ,x is said t a cause is t :i* gives1 produces1 makes1 communicates1 g5]ates1 etc41 & t an effect is t :i* receives1 proce$s1 emanates1 results1 fl[s1 comes1 spr+s1 etc4 #hi4 ,causality implies succession1 b is n id5tifi$ ) x4 ,we c cle>ly conceive t ,b is aft] ,a1 )\t ,a be+ ! cause ( ,b4 ,int]nal & ext]nal exp]i5ce pres5t cont9ual examples ( succession di/9ct f causality4 ,a man goes out into ! field1 ano!r foll[s him3 betwe5 ! go+ out ( bo? !re is succession1 b !re may be no causality4 ,! two ph5om5a1 :e!r consid]$ objectively 9 !mselves1 or subjectively1 z kn[n by u1 are connect$ by ! relation ( succession1 b n by t ( causality4 ,!re is z great a diff]5ce 9 philosophy z 9 ord9>y language betwe5 po/ & propt]1 aft] & because (4 ,! same is true 9 purely int]nal ph5om5a4 ,i ?9k ( a "q ( philosophy1 & !n pass to a lit]>y "q3 ! two ?\ghts are successive1 b "o is n ! cause ( ! o!r4 #ij4 ,! relation ( causality is n ! connection ( ! ideas ( ?+s4 ,! repres5tations ( ,a & ,b may be /rongly connect$ 9 our m9d )\t our ev5 ?9k+ ( ! relation ( causality4 ,we h se5 9 a place a sc5e :i* made a pr(\nd impression on u2 ev] aft]w>ds ! remembrance ( ! place recalls ! sc5e1 & ! recollection ( ! sc5e rem9ds u ( ! place2 "h we f9d two int]nal repres5tations /rongly connect$1 )\t our !re=e attribut+ to ! objects ! relation ( causality4 ,we "k t two p]sons arrive at ! same place & )\t ! com+ ( ! "o influ5c+ ! com+ ( ! o!r4 ,! idea ( ! com+ ( ! "o w be associat$ 9 ! m9d ) ! idea ( ! com+ ( ! o!r4 ,!re w !n be a connection ( repres5tations1 al?\gh we d5y to ! objects ! relation ( causality4 #ia4 ,al?\gh ! connection ( ! ideas 9 our und]/&+ may1 9 consequ5ce ( a con/ant exp]i5ce1 be su* t "o is always prec$$ by ! o!r1 z ! condition$ is by ! condition1 ?is is n en\gh = true causality4 ,an obs]v] may h rem>k$ ! correspond5ce ( ! ebb & fl[ ( ! tide ) ! motion ( ! moon2 b :e!r = reasons ( philosophy1 or because x has nev] occurr$ to him t ! motion ( ! moon c\ld influ5ce ! motion ( ! sea1 he consid]s ^! ph5om5a entirely indep5d5t ( "o ano!r1 al?\gh he may try h>d to expla9 s /range a co9cid5ce4 ,9 ! m9d ( ?is obs]v] ! two ph5om5a w be always jo9$1 9 su* a way t ! ph5om5on ( ! moon w always be t ( ! ebb & fl[1 )\t its be+ possible to inv]t ! ord] & make ! ebb & fl[ prec$e ! motion ( ! moon4 ,"h !n is a necess>y priority 9 an idea1 & yet true causality is n attribut$ to ! object4 #ib4 ,!re is a fact 9 ! hi/ory ( philosophy :i* proves ) ! greate/ evid5ce ! tru? ( :at ,i h j said4 ,?is fact is ! sy/em ( occasional causes ma9ta9$ by em95t philosoph]s4 ,if a body1 !y say1 /rike ano!r body at re/1 x w communicate to x its motion2 b ?is communication does n imply a true causality1 b t ! motion ( ! imp++ body is a m]e occasion ( ! motion ( ! body imp+$4 ,"h !n a ?+ is conceiv$ z a necess>y condition ( ! exi/5ce ( ano!r1 & yet x is d5i$ t !re is betwe5 !m ! relation ( causality4 ,9 ?9k+ ( ! two ph5om5a we _c inv]t ! ord]1 & conceive ! motion ( ! body imp+$ z ! condition ( ! motion ( ! imp++ body1 yet we c d5y ! relation ( causality betwe5 ! condition & ! condition$4 ,!re=e ! idea ( causality repres5ts some?+ besides ! necess>y ord] ( ?+s among !mselves4 #ic4 ,?is br+s u to a new phasis ( ! "q4 ,is ! relation ( causality fai?fully repres5t$ 9 ! conditional proposition3 if ,a exi/s1 ,b w exi/8 ,! connection express$ by ?is proposition is n ! relation ( causality4 ,if ! fruit-tree ,n fl\ri%es 9 a c]ta9 c\ntry1 ,m w fl\ri%4 ,a con/ant exp]i5ce proves x4 ,! conditional proposition 9 ?is case does n express ! relation ( causality ( ! fl\ri%+ ( ,n ) respect to ! fl\ri%+ ( ,m2 yet ! proposition is true4 ,"o ph5om5on may be ! sign ( ! imm$iate approa* ( ano!r1 )\t be+ its cause4 #id4 ,conditional propositions1 9 :i* ! exi/5ce ( "o object is affirm$ z ! condition ( ! exi/5ce ( ano!r1 express a connection2 b ?is may n be a connection ( ! objects ) ea* o!r1 b ) a ?ird4 ,if a g5tleman's s]vant goes to a place1 & !n ano!r s]vant ( ! same g5tleman goes to ! same place1 ! cause ( ! go+ ( ! second may n be ! go+ ( ! fir/1 b simply t _! ma/] wi%$ !m to g "o aft] ! o!r4 ,! crops 9 "o field indicate ! /ate ( ! crops ( ano!r field1 & ?is indication may be express$ by a conditional proposition4 ,:y s8 ,is x on acc\nt ( ! causality ( ! crops 9 "o field 9 relation to ^? 9 ano!r8 ,c]ta9ly n2 b because ! circum/ances ( ! climate & ! soil produce a suffici5tly fix$ ord] betwe5 !m to v]ify ! conditional proposition1 )\t ! int]v5tion ( ! idea ( ! causality ( "o 9 relation to ! o!r4 #ie4 ,!re are _m cases 9 :i* ! relation betwe5 ! condition is necess>y1 & yet ! condition nei!r is1 nor c be1 ! cause ( ! condition$4 ,we are "h treat+ ( effici5t cause1 ( t :i* gives be+ to ! ?+1 & x w\ld (t5 be absurd to attribute ?is k9d ( causality to conditions :i* on ! o!r side are necess>ily connect$ ) ! condition$4 ,take away ! pill> on :i* a body re/s1 & ! body w fall2 ! connection ( ! condition ) ! condition$1 or ( ! tak+ away ! pill> ) ! fall ( ! body is necess>y2 ! proposition 9 :i* ?is connection is express$ is true & necess>y 9 ! natural ord]2 & /ill x _c be said t ! removal ( ! pill> is ! effici5t cause ( ! fall ( ! body4 #if4 ,ev5 a purely occasional connection is all t is necess>y = ! tru? ( ! conditional proposition2 & no "o ev] conf\nds ! occasion ) ! cause4 ,9 ! pres5t example1 ! body _c fall unless ! pill> is remov$2 & x mu/ necess>ily fall if x is remov$2 b ! cause ( ! fall is n 9 ! removal ( ! pill>1 b 9 ! weight ( ! body1 z is evid5t if we suppose ! specific gravity ( ! body to be equal to t ( ! fluid 9 :i* x is subm]g$1 s9ce 9 t case1 ! removal ( ! pill> is n foll[$ by ! fall ( ! body4 #ig4 ,causality _c express a necess>y relation ( ! condition to ! condition$1 unless we d5y all free causes4 ,suppos+ ! idea ( causality to be correctly express$ 9 ?is proposition3 if ,a exi/s1 ,b w exi/2 by sub/itut+ ,god & ! _w = ,a & ,b1 x w become3 if ,god exi/s ! _w w exi/2 :i* w\ld lead u into ! error ( ! necessity ( ! creation4 ,by sub/itut+ man & det]m9ate actions = ,a & ,b1 we %all h ! proposition3 if man exi/s1 8 det]m9ate actions w exi/1 :i* implies necessity1 & de/roys free w4 #ih4 ,"h arises ! "q3 w\ld ! relation ( causality be correctly express$ by a conditional proposition1 tak5 9 an inv]se s5se1 or ) ! effect1 z ! condition & ! cause z ! condition$1 7n condition$ 9 ! ord] ( exi/5ce1 b only z a ?+ necess>ily suppos$17 t is1 if1 in/ead ( say+3 if ,a exi/s1 ,b w exi/1 we say3 if ,b exi/s1 ,a exi/s8 ,9 ?is case1 ! proposition may be appli$ ev5 to ! dep5d5ce ( creatures on ,god1 & 9 g5]al ( all free actions on _! causes2 = we c say ) tru?3 if ! _w exi/s1 ,god exi/s2 if !re is a free action1 !re is a free ag5t4 #ii4 ,al?\gh at fir/ sight ?is seems to expla9 ! relation ( causality1 ?is new =mula _c be reg>d$ z correct4 ,=1 ?\gh x is true 9 g5]al1 t if !re is an effect !re is a cause1 x is also c]ta9 t (t5times "o ?+ supposes ano!r1 n z its cause1 b z a m]e occasion1 z a condition s9e qua non2 :i* is f> f be+ true causality4 ,suppos+ ! body support$ by ! pill> to be s plac$ t x _c fall unless ! pill> is remov$1 we might =m ! conditional proposition3 if ! body has fall51 ! pill> has be5 tak5 away2 ! proposition is true1 al?\gh ! removal ( ! pill> is n ! effici5t cause ( ! fall ( ! body4 #ajj4 ,god c\ld h s creat$ ! _w t creatures w\ld h no true action ( causality ^u "o ano!r1 & yet h s arrang$ !m t ! ph5om5a w\ld correspond ) ea* o!r 9 ! same mann] z !y n[ d4 ,?is is ! op9ion ( def5d]s ( ! doctr9e ( occasional causes1 & to ?is is r$uc$ ! pre-e/abli%$ h>mony ( ,leibnitz1 accord+ to :i* all ! monads con/itut+ ! univ]se are l s _m clocks1 :i*1 ?\gh indep5d5t ( "o ano!r1 agree ) admirable exactness4 ,on ?is hypo!sis we might =m inf9ite conditional propositions express+ ! correspond5ce ( ! ph5om5a )\t ! idea ( causality ent]+ into any ( !m4 #aja4 ,f :at has be5 said we mu/ inf] t ?is idea is some?+ di/9ct f ! necess>y connection1 & t x is n correctly express$ 9 all its purity by ! relation conta9$ 9 ! conditional propositions1 :e!r ! cause be tak5 z ! condition or z ! condition$4 ,! dep5d5ce ( ! effect on its cause is some?+ m ?an ! simple connection4 ,to say t :atev] is necess>ily connect$1 ev5 successively & 9 a fix$ ord]1 is connect$ by ! relation ( causality1 is to conf\nd ! ideas ( common language z well z ^? ( philosophy4 ,,*apt] ,,ix4 ,,necess>y ,,& ,,suffici5t ,,conditions ,,( ,,true ,,absolute ,,causality4 #ajb4 ,we h j se5 t ! necess>y connection ( two objects is n en\gh to e/abli% ! "* ( causality2 :at circum/ances are !n necess>y8 #ajc4 ,if we conceive an object1 ,b1 :i* beg9s1 & suppose t ! object ,a 0 necess>y to its exi/5ce1 & t ( itself alone x 0 suffici5t = ! exi/5ce ( ,b1 we f9d 9 ! relation ( ,a to ,b ! true "* ( ! relation ( a cause to its effect4 ,= ! complete "* ( absolute cause1 two conditions are indisp5sable3 ,i4 ,! necessity ( ! exi/5ce ( ,a = ! exi/5ce ( ,b4 ,,ii4 ,t ! exi/5ce ( ,a be suffici5t = ! exi/5ce ( ,b1 )\t any ?+ m be+ requisite4 ,^! conditions may be express$ 9 ! foll[+ propositions or =mulas3 ,if ,b exi/s1 ,a exi/s4 ,! exi/5ce ( ,a alone is suffici5t = ! exi/5ce ( ,b4 ,:5 ! relation betwe5 two objects is su* t bo? ^! propositions are true at ! same "t1 !re is a relation ( absolute causality4 #ajd4 ,f ?is explanation x is evid5t t ! "* ( cause mu/ be d5i$ to all m]e occasions1 s9ce ! second proposition _c be appli$ to !m4 ,:5 two facts are occasionally connect$1 x may be said t if ! "o exi/s ! o!r mu/ exi/1 & ! fir/ proposition is v]ifi$ 9 ?is case2 b x _c be said t ! exi/5ce ( ! "o is suffici5t = ! exi/5ce ( ! o!r2 & !re=e ! second proposition fails ( its application4 ,if two m5 h agre$ t ! "o %all fire a pi/ol :5 ! o!r gives a signal ) 8 h&1 x may be said t if ! signal is giv5 ! pi/ol w be fir$1 b n t ! signal alone conta9s :at is suffici5t = ! fir+ ( ! pi/ol4 ,=1 suppos+ ! man ) ! pi/ol to be asleep1 ! signal may be repeat$ a numb] ( times )\t ! fir+ ( ! pi/ol4 #aje4 ,! "* ( cause mu/ also be d5i$ to e condition :i* is only ! removal ( an ob/acle 7remov5s prohib5s74 ,to su* ! fir/ proposition is applicable1 b n ! second4 ,9 ! case ( a body re/+ on a pill> s t x _c fall unless ! pill> be remov$1 we may say3 if ! body has fall51 ! pill> has be5 tak5 away2 b n t ! removal ( ! pill> is suffici5t = ! fall ( ! body2 because if ! body 7 ( a less specific gravity ?an ! fluid 9 :i* x is subm]g$1 or unit$ to ano!r body :i* w\ld prev5t its fall+1 x w\ld n fall4 ,x is evid5t t ! removal ( ! ob/acle is n suffici5t = ! fall1 b t some?+ m is requir$1 z ! =ce ( gravity1 or an impulse4 #ajf4 ,all ph5om5a connect$ 9 succession ( "t necess>ily & 9 a fix$ ord]1 mu/ be d5i$ ! relation ( cause & effect1 unless ! application ( ^! ideas is made legitimate by some?+ else2 because1 al?\gh ! con/ant ord] au?orizes u to say t if ,a happ5s1 ,b w happ51 & !n ,c1 & !n ,d1 & s on successively1 x _c be said t 9 ! exi/5ce ( ,a is conta9$ t :i* is suffici5t = ! exi/5ce ( ,b1 nor 9 ! exi/5ce ( ,b :at is suffici5t = ! exi/5ce ( ,c1 s9ce we suppose an indisp5sable condition outside ( ! s]ies4 #ajg4 ,! fir/ proposition3 if ,b exi/s1 ,a exi/s2 is true ( e cause :e!r necess>y or free4 ,! second proposition is likewise applicable to bo? ^! classes ( causes4 ,x is necess>y to obs]ve ) c>e t ! proposition does n say t if ,a exi/s1 ,b w exi/2 b t ! exi/5ce ( ,a is all t is requisite 9 ord] t ,b may exi/4 ,if1 suppos+ ,a1 ,b is necess>ily suppos$ also1 ! cause is necess>y2 b if1 suppos+ ,a1 only t :i* is suffici5t = ! exi/5ce ( ,b is suppos$1 ! cause rema9s free2 because ! exi/5ce ( ,b is n affirm$1 b only ! possibility ( its exi/5ce4 #ajh4 ,let u apply ?is doctr9e to ! fir/ cause4 ,if ! _w exi/s1 ,god exi/s3 ?is proposition is absolutely true4 ,if ,god exi/s1 ! _w exi/s2 ?is proposition is false1 because1 ,god exi/+1 ! _w might n h exi/$4 ,if ,god exi/s1 ! _w may exi/2 t is1 9 ! exi/5ce ( ,god is conta9$ t :i* is suffici5t = ! possibility ( ! exi/5ce ( ! _w3 ?is proposition is true2 because 9 ! inf9ite be+ is conta9$ ! possibility ( f9ite be+s1 & 9 him is f\nd suffici5t p[] to give !m exi/5ce1 if he ?us freely wills x4 ,,*apt] ,x4 ,,second>y ,,causality4 #aji4 ,9 det]m9+ 9 ! la/ *apt] ! conditions ( true causality1 ,i spoke only ( absolute causality2 ! reason ( ?is1 :i* ,i %all n[ expla91 turns on ! diff]5ce betwe5 ! fir/ cause & second causes4 #aaj4 ,we h se5 t ! pure idea ( absolute causality is ! p]ception ( ?ree conditions3 ! necessity ( "o ?+ = ! exi/5ce ( ano!r2 ! suffici5cy ( ! fir/ alone = ! exi/5ce ( ! second2 & la/ly 7:5 ! cause is free7 ! act ( ! w necess>y = ! production ( ! effect4 ,^! ?ree conditions are fulfill$ absolutely 9 ! fir/ cause1 s9ce no?+ c exi/ unless ,god exi/s2 & = ! exi/5ce ( any object ! exi/5ce ( ,god1 ) ! free w ( creat+ ! object1 is suffici5t4 ,x is evid5t t causality _c be appli$ 9 ! same s5se to second causes2 ( none ( !m c x be said t its exi/5ce is absolutely necess>y = ! exi/5ce ( ! effect1 s9ce ,god c\ld h produc$ x ei!r by means ( ano!r second>y ag5t1 or imm$iately by himself2 nei!r is its exi/5ce alone suffici5t = ! exi/5ce ( ! effect1 s9ce :atev] exi/s presupposes & requires ! exi/5ce ( ! fir/ cause4 #aaa4 ,?us1 !n1 ! idea ( causality appli$ to ,god has a v diff]5t mean+ f t :i* x has :5 appli$ to second causes3 x is necess>y to be> ?is 9 m9d1 & n to raise que/ions conc]n+ second causes be=e ! mean+ ( ! ^w cause is /rictly def9$4 ,x is c]ta9 t ! relation ( an effect to its cause is a relation ( dep5d5ce2 b we h se5 t ! words dep5d5ce1 connection1 condition1 etc41 are susceptible ( diff]5t mean+s2 if !y are n cle>ly & /rictly det]m9$ x is impossible to give any solution to ^! que/ions4 #aab4 ,:at !n is meant by second>y causality8 ,aft] ! obs]vations :i* we h made1 x is n difficult to say4 ,9 ! ord] ( creat$ be+s ,a w be ! cause ( ,b :5 ! foll[+ conditions are fulfill$4 ,i4 ,t ! exi/5ce ( ,a is necess>y 7accord+ to ! ord] e/abli%$7 = ! exi/5ce ( ,b2 :i* may be express$ by ?is =mula3 if ,b exi/s1 ,a exi/s or has exi/$4 ,,ii4 ,t 9 ! ord] e/abli%$ ,b & ,a =m a s]ies :i* goes back to ! fir/ cause1 )\t ! concurr5ce ( ! t]ms ( any o!r s]ies be+ requisite4 ,?is la/ condition w n1 p]haps1 be und]/ood1 unless expla9$ by "s examples4 #aac4 ,! motion ( my p5 is ! effect ( ! motion ( my h&2 "h ,i h ! true relation ( second>y causality1 = ,i pass ?r\gh a s]ies ( conditions1 :i* d n require ! conditions ( any o!r s]ies3 ! motion ( ! p5 dep5ds on ! motion ( my h&2 t ( my h& dep5ds on ! animal spirits 7or :atev] cause physiologi/s may please to assign72 t ( ! animal spirits dep5ds on ! comm& ( my w2 & my w dep5ds on ,god1 :o creat$ x1 & pres]ves x4 ,i "h f9d a s]ies ( second causes to :i* ,i give ! true "* ( causality1 9 s f> z x c exi/ 9 a second>y ord]2 & ! effici5t cause1 ! pr9cipal among second>y causes is my w2 because 9 ! second>y ord] ( x is ! fir/ t]m ( ! s]ies4 ,! motion ( ! p5 ( my secret>y dep5ds on my w1 n h[ev] z its true effici5t cause1 b z its occasion2 because 9 ! secret>y is f\nd ! same s]ies z 9 ! =m] example3 ! fir/ t]m ( ?is s]ies is 8 w1 :i* ,i _c absolutely det]m9e1 s9ce be+ free1 x det]m9es itself4 ,!re is true effici5t causality 9 ! w ( ! secret>y2 because !re ends ! s]ies ^: fir/ t]m is at my disposal only 9 an improp] s5se1 t is to say1 s long z ! secret>y pleases4 #aad4 ,! body1 ,a1 9 motion /rikes ^u ! body1 ,b at re/3 ! motion ( ! body ,a is ! cause ( ! motion ( ! body ,b1 & ! causality w be f\nd 9 all ! t]ms ( ! s]ies1 t is1 9 all ! motions ^: successive communication has be5 necess>y 9 ord] t ! motion might rea* ! body ,b4 ,let u suppose t 9 ! s]ies ( ^! communications ob/acles h be5 remov$ :i* imp$$ ! communication ( ! motion2 ! removal ( ! ob/acles is an indisp5sable condition on ! supposition t !y exi/$1 b x is n a true cause1 s9ce x is a t]m =eign to ! s]ies ( ! communications1 & might n h exi/$1 )\t ! motion !re=e ceas+ to exi/4 ,=1 suppos+ !re _h be5 no ob/acles1 !y w\ld n h be5 remov$1 & yet ! motion w\ld h be5 communicat$4 ,b x is n ! same ) respect to ! t]ms :i* =m ! s]ies ( ! communications2 = if we repres5t !m by ,a4 ,b4 ,c4 ,d4 ,e4 ,f4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 ! motion ( ,a _c rea* ,f if "o ( ! int]m$iate bodies s]v+ z ! vehicle ( ! communication be tak5 away4 #aae4 ,f ?is !ory x foll[s t ! idea ( second>y causality repres5ts a concat5ation ( v>i\s objects =m+ a s]ies1 :i* t]m9ates 9 ! fir/ cause1 :e!r by a necess>y ord]1 z 9 ! ph5om5a ( corporeal nature1 or by ! m$ium ( a fir/ t]m 9 ! second>y ord] ) a det]m9ation ( its own1 z is ! case 9 ?+s :i* dep5d on free w4 ,,*apt] ,,xi4 ,,fundam5tal ,,explanation ,,( ,,! ,,orig9 ,,( ,,! ,,obscurity ,,( ,,ideas ,,9 ,,:at ,,relates ,,to ,,causality4 #aaf4 ,x may be ask$1 ( :at nature is ?is connection ( ! t]ms ( ! s]ies2 h[ "o communicates ) ano!r2 :at x is :i* is communicat$2 by virtue ( :at quality !y are plac$ 9 relation4 ,all ^! que/ions arise f a confusion ( ideas :i* has be5 ! occasion ( int]m9able disputes4 ,9 ord] to avoid !m we mu/ rememb] ! diff]5ce betwe5 intuitive & discursive k1 & betwe5 det]m9ate & indet]m9ate1 intuitive & n-intuitive ideas1 z expla9$ 9 its prop] place4#hb #hb ,see ,bk4 ,,iv41 ,*aps4 ,,xi41 ,,xiii41 ,,xiv41 ,,xv41 ,,xvi41 ,,xix41 ,,xx41 ,,xxi41 & ,,xxii4 #aag4 ,i !re said#hc t ! pure intellect may ex]cise its functions by indet]m9ate ideas1 or ^? repres5t+ g5]al relations :i* are n appli$ to any real or possible object1 until a det]m9ation furni%$ by exp]i5ce is add$ to !m4#hd ,! idea ( cause is indet]m9ate2#he &1 consequ5tly1 tak5 9 g5]al1 x _c be pres5t$ to u )\t ! relation ( be+ & n-be+1 or ( be+s unit$ among !mselves by a c]ta9 necessity1 b 9 an absolute indet]m9ate mann]4#hf ,!re=e ! idea ( cause is n en\gh to det]m9e ! "* ( ?is activity & its means ( communication2 ?is idea by itself c tell u no?+ ( ! p>ticul>2 x c only tea* u c]ta9 tru?s a priori2 ! application ( ^! tru?s to be+s re/s on exp]i5ce4 #hc ,see ,bk4 ,,iv41 ,*ap4 ,,xxi4 #hd ,ib41 #ace4 #he ,ib41 #acd4 #hf ,ib41 #acj4 #aah4 ,i said#hg t our intuition is conf9$ to passive s5sibility1 active s5sibility1 intellig5ce1 & w2 :atev] lies outside ( ?is sph]e we c "k only by indet]m9ate conceptions1 &1 consequ5tly1 x is impossible = u to expose to ! intuition ( ano!r t :i* we feel to be want+ to our own4 ,we may develop ?is doctr9e f>!r by apply+ x to ! philosophical que/ions on causality4 #hg ,ib41 ,*ap4 ,,xxii4 #aai4 ,!re h be5 great disputes z to :e!r bodies ex]cise a true action on ea* o!r2 & ^? :o hold ! negative are always ask+1 h[ "o body c cause any ?+ 9 ano!r8 :at t is :i* is transmitt$1 & :at is ! "* ( its active quality8 ,v>i\s replies h be5 made2 b ,i greatly d\bt if x is possible to make any :i* is satisfactory1 )\t consid]+ ! doctr9e :i* ,i h j expla9$1--:at answ]1 !n1 c be made8 ,x is ?is3 we "k no?+ intuitively ( bodies except passive s5sibility1 :i*1 9 ! la/ result1 is only ext5sion ) its v>i\s modifications4#hh ,n[ ^! modifications are r$uc$ to figure & motion2 :atev] w\ld make u dep>t f ^! two intuitions1 requir+ an explanation ) *>act]i/ic det]m9ations1 w\ld ask = t :i* is beyond ! p[] ( man4 ,! limits ( our intuition on ?is po9t are conf9$ to ext5sion & motion1 & _! relations to our s5sibility2 we mu/1 !re=e1 be cont5t$ ) obs]v+ ! ph5om5a ( bodies1 & subject+ !m to calculation )9 ! circle ( ?is intuition3 all beyond ?is is impossible4 ,we "k t ! body ,a moves ) a c]ta9 velocity1 :i* we measure by ! relation ( space to "t2 :5 x arrives at ! place :]e x meets ,b1 ,b moves 9 a correspond+ direction & ) a correspond+ velocity4 ,"h !re is a succession ( ph5om5a 9 "t & space2 ! ph5om5a are subject to con/ant laws1 :i* are kn[n by exp]i5ce4 ,our intuitive cognitions g no f>!r2 :5 we attempt to g beyond ?is we f9d ! g5]al relations ( be+ & n-be+1 ( be+ be=e & be+ aft]1 ( condition & condition$1 :i* pres5t no?+ det]m9ate by :i* we c expla9 ! true "* ( second>y causality4 #hh ,ib41 #aci4 #abj4 ,philosophy1 :5 treat+ ( bodies1 is limit$ to :at is /rictly call$ physics2 :5 x attempts to rise to ! region ( metaphysics bodies disappe>1 9 s f> z !y are ph5om5a subject to s5sible obs]vation1 & !re rema9s only ! g5]al & indet]m9ate ideas ( !m4 #aba4 ,z reg>ds ! s5sitive faculty1 we are 9 "s sort passive1 inasmu* z we receive ! impressions :i* we call s5sations4 ,:atev] activity we possess 9 s5sation does n dep5d on our free w1 suppos+ t we are subject to ! conditions ( s5sibility4 ,if y put y\r h& 9 ! fire x is impossible = y n to exp]i5ce ! s5sation ( heat4 ,9 :at reg>ds ! causality :i* we h z to ! reproduction ( pa/ s5sations or ! production ( new s5sible s5sations1 x is va9 to ask u ! mann] 9 :i* we ex]cise ?is activity3 its ex]cise is a "p ( consci\sness2 all we "k ab\t x is t x exi/s 9 su* or su* a mann] 9 our consci\sness4 #abb4 ,! same may be said ( ! elaboration ( ideas4 ,none ( ! philosoph]s c expla9 ! mann] ( ?is imman5t production2 ideological inve/igations g no f>!r ?an ! *>act]iz+ & classify+ ^! ph5om5a & %[+ ! ord] ( _! succession2 !y c tell u no?+ conc]n+ ! mann] 9 :i* !y are produc$4 #abc4 ,! ex]cise ( ! w pres5ts to our intuition1 or if y please1 to our consci\sness1 ano!r s]ies ( ph5om5a1 ( ! mann] ( ! production ( :i* we "k no?+4 ,consci\sness te/ifies t ! free pr9ciple :i* ex]cises ?is activity is )9 u3 ?is is all t we "k ab\t x4 ,^! ph5om5a are f\nd at times connect$ ) motions ( our bodies1 :i* a con/ant exp]i5ce pres5ts z dep5d+ on our w1 b h[ ?+s s diff]5t are connect$1 we "k n3 philosophy w nev] "k4 ,,*apt] ,,xii4 ,,causality ,,( ,,pure ,,=ce ,,( ,,! ,,w4 #abd4 ,9 :at does creation consi/8 ,h[ c ,god produce ?+s f no?+8 ,su* a ?+ is incompreh5sible4 ,?is is ! language ( _m :o d n reflect t ! same incompreh5sibility is f\nd 9 ! ex]cise ( second>y causality1 bo? 9 ! corporeal & 9 ! incorporeal _w4 ,if we knew ,god 9 ! intuitive mann] 9 :i*1 accord+ to ! ,ca?olic dogma1 ! bless$ see him 9 ! mansion ( glory1 we might "k intuitively ! mann] ( ! creation4 ,z x is1 we say t 9 s f> z we c =m any idea ( ! action ( ! ,creator1 he produces all ?+s f no?+ by ! =ce ( 8 w2 :i* besides accord+ ) ! tea*+s ( religion1 is 9 h>mony ) :at we exp]i5ce 9 ourselves4 ,god wills1 & ! univ]se spr+s up out ( no?+3 h[ c ?is be und]/ood8 ,to him :o asks ?is1 ,i say3 man wills1 & 8 arm rises2 he wills1 & 8 :ole body is 9 motion4 ,h[ c ?is be und]/ood8 ,"h is a small1 weak1 & incomplete1 b true image ( ! ,creator3 an intellig5t be+ :i* wills1 & a fact :i* appe>s4 ,:]e is ! connection8 ,if y _c expla9 x to u 9 s f> z conc]ns f9ite be+s1 h[ c y ask u to expla9 x ) respect to ! inf9ite be+8 ,! incompreh5sibility ( ! conception ( ! motion ( ! body ) ! =ce ( ! w does n au?orize u to d5y ! connection2 !re=e ! incompreh5sibility ( ! connection ( a be+ :i* appe>s = ! fir/ "t ) ! =ce ( ! inf9ite w _c au?orize u to d5y ! tru? ( ! creation3 on ! contr>y1 ! f9d+ a simil> ?+ 9 ourselves greatly /r5g!ns ! ontological argum5ts :i* demon/rate its necessity4 ,9 ! dogmas ( ! ,*ri/ian religion1 besides :at !y reveal t is sup]natural1 we f9d at e /ep philosophical tru?s z pr(\nd z !y are important4 #abe4 ,! causality :i* relates to purely possible effects c only be und]/ood by plac+ x 9 an intellig5ce4 ,! cause :i* does n produce an effect1 b :i* may produce x1 involves a relation ( ! exi/5t to ! non-exi/5t2 ! cause exi/s1 ! effect does n exi/2 ! cause does n produce x1 b may produce x2 :at is ! relation ( t :i* exi/s to t :i* does n exi/8 is n a relation )\t a t]m to :i* x relates1 a contradiction8 ,x is c]ta9ly1 if ab/ract$ f ! intellig5ce3 ! intellig5ce alone c relate to t :i* does n exi/2 = x c ?9k ! non-exi/5t4 ,a body c h no relation to a body :i* does n exi/2 b an intellig5ce may h a relation to t :i* does n exi/1 ev5 kn[+ t x does n exi/2 we may ourselves w&] at pleasure ?r\gh ! regions ( pure possibility4 #abf4 ,! w also p>ticipates ( ?is "* ( ! intellect4 ,desire relates to an enjoym5t :i* is n1 b :i* may be2 we w & w n1 we love & hate ?+s t are (t5 purely ideal1 & ^: id5tity we "k p]fectly well1 /ill ?is does n prev5t our will+ !m4 ,?us we desire ?+s to happ5 :i* are n1 & we may ev5 desire ?+s :i* we "k to be impossible4 ,we may wi% to recov] t :i* we "k is lo/ =ev]2 we may wi% = ! pres5ce ( a fri5d :om we "k to be at s great a di/ance z to r5d] 8 com+ impossible2 we may wi% t "t w\ld /op or hurry on 9 con=mity to our wants or our caprices4 #abg4 ,?us we f9d bo? ! intellect & ! w 9 relation to t :i* does n exi/2--a relation :i* is n ev5 conceivable 9 a be+ de/itute ( intellect4 ,?is leads to an important result4 ,! absolute beg9n+ ( any ?+ is n possible unless we conceive causality z hav+ its root 9 ! intellect4 ,t :i* beg9s passes f n-be+ to be+1 & h[ is x possible t a be+ has produc$ 9 ano!r a transition f n-be+ to be+1 if ! relation to ! o!r be=e x exi/$ 0 intr9sically impossible8 ,an intellig5t be+ may ?9k ano!r al?\gh ! o!r does n exi/2 b = an un9tellig5t be+ if ! o!r does n exi/ 9 reality x does n exi/ at all2 consequ5tly no relation to x is possible1 any su* relation t may be imag9$ is contradictory1 & !re=e x is absurd to suppose t :i* is n to beg9 to be4 #abh4 ,?is reason+ proves t 9 ! orig9 ( ?+s !re is an intellig5t be+1 ! cause ( e ?+1 & t )\t ?is intellig5ce no?+ c\ld h begun4 ,if some?+ has begun1 some?+ mu/ h exi/$ f all et]nity2 & t :i* began 0 kn[n by t :i* exi/$4 ,n admitt+ intellig5ce1 beg9n+ is absurd4 ,imag9e 9 ! orig9 ( ?+s a be+ )\t intellig5ce1 its relations c only be to t :i* exi/s2 x c h no relation to ! non-exi/5t2 h[ !n is x possible = ! non-exi/5t to beg9 to exi/1 ?r\gh ! action ( ! exi/5t8 ,9 ord] t ! non-exi/5t may beg9 to be1 "s reason is necess>y2 = o!rwise ! beg9n+ ( "o ?+ or ( ano!r1 & ev5 its beg9n+ or n-beg9n+ w\ld be indiff]5t4 ,unless we suppose a be+ :i* kn[s t :i* does n exi/1 & may e/abli%1 s to speak1 a communication ) no?+1 ! be+ :i* does n exi/ c nev] exi/4 ,,*apt] ,,xiii4 ,,activity4 #abi4 ,to und]/& m cle>ly ! idea ( causality1 x w be useful to reflect on ! ideas ( activity & action1 z also on ^? ( in]tness1 or inactivity1 & inaction4 #acj4 ,an absolutely inactive be+ is a be+ )\t intellig5ce1 )\t w1 )\t s5sibility1 )\t any k9d ( consci\sness1 conta9+ 9 itself no?+ :i* c *ange its own /ate or t ( any ?+ else4 ,?us absolute inactivity or in]tness requires ! foll[+ conditions3 ,i4 ,! absolute d5ial ( all pr9ciple1 ( intellig5ce1 ( w1 ( s5sibility1 & 9 g5]al ( e ?+ :i* is accompani$ by consci\sness4 ,,ii4 ,! absolute d5ial ( all pr9ciple ( *ange 9 itself4 ,,iii4 ,! absolute d5ial ( all pr9ciple ( *ange 9 o!rs4 ,! union ( ^! ?ree conditions =ms ! idea ( absolute inactivity or in]tness3 ! /ate ( su* a be+ is t ( absolute inaction4 #aca4 ,a be+ ( ?is nature1 reg>d$ 9 g5]al1 pres5ts only ! idea ( an exi/+ ?+3 we may also consid] x z a sub/ance1 suppos+ x n to inh]e z a modification 9 ano!r1 or r1 suppos+ x z a sub/ratum capable ( receiv+ modifications by ! action ( o!r be+s ^u x4 ,! only means by :i* we c *>act]ize to a c]ta9 ext5t ?is g5]al idea1 s t x may be pres5t$ to our intuition1 is to add to x ! idea ( ext5sion1 by :i* we make 9 "s mann] ! idea ( in]t matt]4 #acb4 ,aft] ! ideas ( in]tness & inaction are expla9$1 _! opposites1 ! ideas ( activity & action1 are cle>ly und]/ood4 ,:5 we conceive a be+ :i* has ! reason ( its *anges )9 itself1 we conceive an active be+4 ,:5 we conceive a be+ :i* has )9 itself ! reason ( ! *anges ( o!r be+s1 we conceive an active be+4 ,:5 we conceive a be+ :i* kn[s1 wills1 p]ceives1 or has consci\sness 9 any way1 we conceive an active be+4 ,h5ce activity may repres5t ?ree ?+s to u3 ! orig9 ( its own *anges2 ! orig9 ( ! *anges ( o!rs2 & consci\sness4 #acc4 ,! fir/ k9d ( activity c belong only to *angeable be+s2 ! second also to immutable be+s1 :i* are causes2 ! ?ird is an activity :i* belongs to mutable or immutable be+s1 ab/ract+ absolutely ! idea ( causality4 #acd4 ,! g5]al relation ( pr9ciple ( its own or ano!r's *anges1 is an indet]m9ate idea2 consequ5tly ! only activity ( :i* we c h an intuitive idea is t ( intellig5ce1 ( w1 & 9 g5]al ( :atev] relates to ! ph5om5a :i* require ! p]ception call$ consci\sness4 #ace4 ,we mu/ consid] consci\sness z an activity1 & include 9 ?is ord] ! idea ( intellig5ce & w ab/ract$ f all relation to _! own or ano!r's *anges1 unless we mean to say t ,god 0 f all et]nity an inactive be+1 because he _h no o!r action ?an ! imman5t acts ( kn[+ & will+4 #acf4 ,!re=e n all activity is transi5t1 b !re is a true imman5t activity1 ( :i* we h an intuitive k 9 ! ph5om5a ( our consci\sness4 #acg4 ,! activity :i* we c conceive 9 bodies is r$uc$ to a pr9ciple ( _! own *anges or ^? ( "s o!r be+2 x is !re=e some?+ ( :i* we c h no intuitive k4 ,9 fact1 we are 9 relation ) bodies only by means ( ! s5ses1 :i* pres5t b two ord]s ( facts ) respect to corporeal nature2 subjective facts1 or ! impressions :i* we exp]i5ce & call s5sations1 & :i* we believe to emanate f ! action ( bodies ^u our organs2 & objective facts1 t is1 ext5sion motion1 & ! diff]5t modifications :i* ! s5ses discov] 9 ext5d$ ?+s :i* move4 ,nei!r ! fir/ class ( facts nor ! second give u an intuitive idea ( ! activity ( corporeal be+s4 ,subjective facts or s5sations are imman5t1 t is1 are 9 u1 n 9 ! ?+s2 & inasmu* z subjective tell u no?+ ( :at is outside ( u1 b only :at is )9 u4 ,ev5 suppos+ s5sations to be a true effect ( ! activity ( bodies1 ?is activity is n pres5t$ 9 ! effect4 ,:5 our h& is w>m$ by ! fire we h ! intuitive p]ception ( ! s5sation ( heat1 inasmu* z x is 9 u2 if we suppose t ?is s5sation is really an effect ( ! activity ( ! fire1 we "k ! relation ( our s5sation to ?is activity consid]$ 9 g5]al1 & indet]m9ately z ! orig9 ( our s5sation2 b we d n "k ! activity intuitively 9 itself1 because z su* x is n repres5t$ 9 our s5sation4 ,nei!r d objective facts1 t is1 ext5sion1 motion1 & :atev] we conceive :i* is n 9 our s5sation1 b 9 ! object itself1 give u any intuitive idea ( ! activity ( corporeal ?+s4 ,! modifications ( ext5sion1 or figures1 motion ) all its accid5ts1 & 9 g5]al all t pres5ts ! corporeal _w to our s5ses1 are ! *anges !mselves & _! relations1 b n ! pr9ciple ( ^! relations or ( ^! *anges4 ,! body ,a1 :i* is 9 motion1 /rikes ^u ! body ,b at re/2 ,b aft] ! impact beg9s to move3 )\t consid]+ :e!r ! impact ( ,a is ! cause ( ! motion ( ,b1 t :i* we are c]ta9 ( is1 t we h no intuition ( ! activity produc+ ! motion4 ,:at d ! s5ses tell u ( ! body ,a8 ,!y only tell u t x has mov$ ) a c]ta9 velocity t[>ds ! po9t ,m :]e ! body ,b 0 situat$4 ,:at d !y tell u ( ! body ,b8 ,only t x began to move ! in/ant ! body ,a rea*$ ! po9t ,m3 s f> we h only ! relations ( space & "t betwe5 ! two ext5d$ objects ,a & ,b4 ,:]e is ! intuition ( ! activity ( ,a1 & ( its action on ,b8 ,we see absolutely no?+ ( x4 ,by reason+1 by analogy1 by consid]ations ( ord]1 ( agreem5t1 & su* l1 we may prove ) m or less evid5ce t 9 ! body ,a !re is an activity :i* causes ! motion ( ! body ,b2 b ?is gives u only an indet]m9ate idea1 n an intuition ( activity4 #ach4 ,^! consid]ations are conclusive z appli$ to all ! ph5om5a ( corporeal nature4 ,take any "o y please1 select t "o :i* leads u mo/ /rongly to imag9e a true activity2 analyze x well1 & y w f9d our intuition limit$ to relations ( ext5sion 9 space & 9 "t4 ,t all bodies are heavy is a fact ( exp]i5ce2 d we "k intuitively ! pr9ciple f :i* ! ph5om5a ( weight proce$8 ,by no means4 ,let u exam9e x 9 ! subjective ord] & 9 ! objective4 ,:at does weight z p]ceiv$ by u pres5t to u8 ,only t affection :i* we call heav9ess1 t is1 ! pressure on ! memb]s ( ! body4 ,:at does x pres5t objectively8 ,only ! direction ( bodies t[>ds a c5tre ) a c]ta9 velocity dep5d+ on circum/ances4 ,we f9d 9 all ?is only a purely int]nal fact1 :i* is ! unpleasant s5sation ( weight or heav9ess1 or ! pure relations ( ext5d$ objects 9 space & "t4 #aci4 ,! fire burns objects & r$uces !m to a%es2 no?+ c\ld be bett] suit$ to give u ! idea ( activity4 ,/ill we _c say t we "k x intuitively4 ,9 ! subjective ord] we h ! pa9ful s5sation ( burn+1 :i* ?us f> is a purely int]nal fact2 9 ! objective ord] we h ! disorganization ( ! bodies burnt1 :i* pres5ts to ! s5ses only a *ange 9 ! size1 figure1 color1 & o!r qualities relative to our s5ses--all ?is may be ! effect ( ! activity1 b x is n ! activity itself4 #adj4 ,! light reflect$ f an object /rikes our eyes1 pa9t+ on ! ret9a ! object :i* reflects x4 ,h we 9 ?is case an intuition ( ! activity ( light4 ,n at all4 ,9 ! subjective ord] we f9d ! s5sation call$ see+2 9 ! objective ord]1 we f9d ! size1 figure1 & o!r qualities ( ! object 9 space4 ,if we consid] ! light itself1 we f9d a fluid ^: rays h ?is or t direction 9 subjection to det]m9ate laws1 b we h no intuitive k ( its activity2 & 9 ord] to p]suade ourselves t ! activity exi/s1 we reason f pr9ciples :i* are n )9 ! sph]e ( our intuition4 #ada4 ,! f\r intuitions ( passive s5sibility1 active s5sibility1 intellig5ce1 & w1 may be r$uc$ to two3#hi ext5sion & consci\sness2 includ+ 9 ext5sion all its modifications1 & 9 consci\sness all ! int]nal ph5om5a ( a s5sitive or intellectual be+2 9 s f> z !y h ! common gr\nd ( consci\sness4 ,we !re=e "k intuitively two modes ( be+3 consci\sness & ext5sion2 consci\sness is )9 u1 x is a subjective fact2 ext5sion is ext]nal1 its exi/5ce is reveal$ by s5sations1 p>ticul>ly ^? ( sight & t\*4 #hi ,see ,book ,,iv41 ,*4 ,,xxii4 #adb4 ,! classification ( ^! two intuitions is important beyond measure = ! di/9ction ( ! active f ! in]t4 ,9 consci\sness we f9d a type ( true activity2 9 ext5sion1 z su*1 we h a type ( true in]tness4 ,9 ?9k+ ( consci\sness1 we ?9k ( some?+ active )\t add+ any o!r idea2 :5 we ?9k ( ext5sion1 x pres5ts to u ! image ( a ?+ susceptible ( v>i\s modifications1 ! pr9ciple ( none ( :i* is conta9$ 9 ext5sion2 9 ord] to ?9k ( a corporeal activity we h to g out ( ! pure idea ( ext5sion1 & consid] a pr9ciple ( *ange 9 g5]al1 :i* is n ! object ( ! intuition ( ! ext5d$4 #adc4 ,?us ! only activity :i* we "k intuitively is t ( consci\sness2 = we h only indet]m9ate ideas ( corporeal activity4 ,! words action1 reaction1 =ce1 resi/ance1 impulse1 express only indet]m9ate relations1 & repres5t some?+ fix$ & det]m9ate1 only 9 _! effects4 ,me*ani/s express =ces by l9es or numb]s1 t is1 by results subject to calculation4 ,ev5 ,newton1 9 e/abli%+ 8 sy/em ( univ]sal attraction1 decl>es 8 ignorance ( ! imm$iate cause ( ! ph5om5on1 & conf9es himself to assign+ ! laws to :i* ! motions ( bodies are subject$4 #add4 ,activity 9 *angeable be+s repres5ts a pr9ciple ( _! own & o!rs' *anges1 a sort ( sup]abundance ( be+ :i* con/antly develops itself1 &1 9 proportion z x is develop$1 p]fects itself4 ,we f9d an example ( ?is developm5t 9 our own m9d4 ,! *ild at its bir? receives 9 a confus$ mann] ! impressions ( all t surr\nds x4 ,by ! repetition ( ^! impressions its activity is develop$2 t :i* 0 obscure becomes cle>1 ! confusion is put into ord]1 t :i* 0 feeble becomes /rong1 ?\ght arises1 comp>ison beg9s1 reflection is unfold$1 & ! be+ :i* 0 torpid & almo/ in]t becomes p]haps a g5ius :i* a/oni%es ! _w4 ,mat]ials h come to x f )\t1 b ( :at use w\ld !y h be5 )\t t liv+ fire ( activity :i* trans=m$ !m & d$uc$ f !m new & valuable products8 ,! same ph5om5a ( nature are pres5t$ to ! eyes ( brute animals z to ,kepl] or ,newton2 b :at = ! fir/ is only a s5sible impression is = ! latt] a />t+-po9t ( sublime & wond]ful !ories4 #ade4 ,! active be+ possesses virtually ! p]fections :i* x is to acquire2 x may be comp>$ to ! acorn :i* conta9s ! mighty oak1 ^: developm5t dep5ds on circum/ances ( soil & climate4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ! inactive be+ c give itself no?+2 x has a /ate1 & x pres]ves x till "s o!r *anges x2 & x rema9s 9 ?is new /ate until ano!r action f )\t takes x away & communicates ano!r4 #adf4 ,activity is a pr9ciple ( its own or ano!r's *anges2 ?is activity may op]ate 9 two ways3 ) intellig5ce & )\t x4 ,:5 ! be+ is intellig5t its incl9ation to t :i* is kn[n is call$ w4 ,! w is incl9$ to ! object necess>ily or n necess>ily3 9 ! fir/ case1 x is a necess>y spontaneity2 9 ! second1 x is a free spontaneity4 ,lib]ty1 !n1 does n consi/ solely 9 ! abs5ce ( coaction2 x requires ! abs5ce ( all1 ev5 spontane\s1 necessity2 ! w mu/ be able to w or n w ! object2 if ?is condition is want+ !re is no freewill4 #adg4 ,x is wor?y ( rem>k t our intuition ( ! ext]nal relates only to ! inactive1 to ext5sion2 & t int]nal intuition relates pr9cipally to activity1 to consci\sness4 ,by ! fir/ we "k a sub/ratum ( *anges1 s9ce all *ange seems to take place 9 ext5sion2 by ! second we "k no subject intuitively1 b only ! *anges !mselves4 ,we prove ! unity ( _! subject by reason+1 b we d n see x intuitively4#ij ,ext5sion1 z su*1 is pres5t$ to u z simply passive3 consci\sness1 z su*1 is always active2 =1 ev5 9 ^? cases 9 :i* x is mo/ passive1 z 9 s5sations1 9 s f> z !re is consci\sness1 x implies activity2 = by x ! subject gives itself an acc\nt1 explicitly or implicitly1 ( ! affection exp]i5c$4 #ij ,see ,bk4 ,,ix41 ,*s4 ,,vi41 ,,vii41 ,,ix41 & ,,xi4 ,,*apt] ,,xiv4 ,,possibility ,,( ,,! ,,activity ,,( ,,bodies4 #adh4 ,hav+ m>k$ ! limits ( our intuitive k ) respect to causality & activity1 x is easy to answ] ! objections aga9/ second>y causality1 :i* arise f conf\nd+ intuitive & indet]m9ate ideas2 b we h /ill to exam9e :e!r !re are true second causes1 t is1 :e!r !re really is 9 f9ite be+s a pr9ciple ( _! own & o!rs' *anges4 ,"s philosoph]s1 among o!rs ! illu/ri\s ,malebran*e1 h d5i$ ! efficacy ( second causes1 ?us r$uc+ !m to m]e occasions4 ,! au?or ( ! ,inve/igation de la ,vrit goes s f> z to ma9ta9 t second>y causality n only does n exi/1 b is impossible4 #adi4 ,! univ]se conta9s two classes ( be+s1--immat]ial be+s1 & corporeal be+s3 ea* pres5ts difficulties :i* x w be well to exam9e sep>ately4 ,let u beg9 ) matt]4 ,x is said t matt] is incapable ( all activity1 t its ess5ce is indiff]5t to e ?+1 susceptible ( any sort ( modification4 ,i _c discov] on :at ?is g5]al proposition is f\nd$1 nor d ,i see h[ x is possible to prove x ei!r by reason or by exp]i5ce4 #aej4 ,9 ord] to ma9ta9 t matt] is completely inactive1 or incapable ( any activity1 x w\ld be necess>y to "k its ess5ce2 b ?is we d n "k4 ,by :at "r d we d5y ! possibility ( an attribute :5 we are ignorant ( ! nature ( ! object to :i* x %\ld belong1 :5 we d n "k ev5 "o ( its prop]ties to :i* ?is attribute is repugnant8 ,x is true t we d5y to matt] ! possibility ( ?\ght1 & ev5 ( s5sation2 b we c d s only because we "k en\gh ( matt]1 to e/abli% ?is impossibility4 ,9 matt]1 :atev] may be its intr9sic ess5ce1 !re are p>ts1 consequ5tly !re is multiplicity2 & ! facts ( consci\sness necess>ily require a be+ :i* is "o & simple4#ia #ia ,see ,bk4 ,,ix4 ,x is n ! same ) respect to activity2 = activity1 :5 x does n pres5t ! intuitive idea ( consci\sness1 gives u only ! indet]m9ate conception ( a pr9ciple ( *anges 9 itself or 9 o!r be+s4 ,?is does n contradict ! idea ( multiplicity4 ,suppose bodies 9 motion to h a true activity :i* really produces motion 9 o!rs1 !re is no contradiction 9 ?is activity be+ di/ribut$ among ! diff]5t p>ts ( ! o!r body1 :i* at ! mom5t ( impact produce _! respective effects1 caus+ motion 9 ! p>ts ( ! o!r body ) :i* !y come 9 contact4 #aea4 ,consequ5tly1 exam9+ ! "q a priori1 or consid]+ ! idea ( body1 we c f9d no reason = d5y+ ! possibility ( its be+ active4 ,x is true t ! ext5sion ( bodies1 inasmu* z ext5sion1 is pres5t$ to u z some?+ )\t life1 indiff]5t to all figures & to all motions1 & t we d n discov] 9 x any pr9ciple ( activity2#ib b ?is c prove no?+1 unless we suppose t ! ess5ce ( bodies consi/s 9 ext5sion1 & t ext5sion conta9s no?+ m ?an is pres5t$ to our s5ses1 t x includes no?+ on :i* its activity c be f\nd$4 ,! fir/ is an op9ion1 b "o )\t any f\ndation2 ! second c nev] be demon/rat$1 because x escapes all obs]vation1 & _c be ! object ( inve/igations a priori4 #ib ,see ,*4 ,,xiii4 #aeb4 ,h[ c x be prov$ t ! ess5ce ( bodies consi/s 9 ext5sion8#ic ,:at we may say is1 t we exp]i5ce x1 & t all corporeal nature is pres5t$ to u "u ! =m ( ext5d$4 ,if we ass]t any ?+ m ?an ?is we d s )\t any f\ndation1 we sub/itute = ! reality a play ( our fancy4 ,! ess5ce ( any ?+ is t :i* con/itutes x :at x is1 t :i* s]ves z ! int]nal gr\nd or root ( ! prop]ties3 :o c say t we "k ?is gr\nd1 ?is root1 9 corporeal objects8 ,our s5ses1 x is true1 p]ceive no?+ n ext5d$3 we _c conceive to :at bodies w\ld be r$uc$ if depriv$ ( ext5sion2 b f ?is we c only inf] t ext5sion is a =m "u :i* bodies are pres5t$ to our s5ses2 t ?is =m is a necess>y condition ( ! affection ( our s5sibility2 b n t ! =m is ! ess5ce ( ! ?+1 n t !re is 9 ! object no?+ m intimate 9 :i* ! =m itself has its root4 #ic ,see ,bk4 ,,iii4 #aec4 ,if ! ess5ce ( bodies consi/$ 9 ext5sion1 su* z x appe>s to our s5ses1 ext5sion be+ equal !re w\ld be equality ( ess5ce2 ! ess5ces ( bodies might be measur$ l _! dim5sions2 two globes ( equal diamet]s1 w\ld be two ess5tially equal bodies4 ,exp]i5ce1 & ev5 common s5se are oppos$ to ?is4 ,x may be said1 t pure dim5sion1 9 s f> z subject to measure1 is n en\gh to =m equality ( ess5ce2 b t ! equality ( nature ( ! ext5sion ( bo? bodies is also requisite2 b :at1 ,i ask1 is ! mean+ ( ! nature ( ext5sion8 ,if ! ^w nature "h means any ?+1 x mu/ mean some?+ di/9ct f ext5sion1 9 s f> z subject to our s5sibility2 9 :i* case ,i inf] t j z 9 ord] to div]sify ! ess5ces ( bodies some?+ is imag9$ :i* is n conta9$ 9 ext5sion 9 s f> z subject to s5sible intuition1 some?+ may 9 ! same mann] be suppos$ :i* is capable ( activity1 & :i* (f]s to our und]/&+ an accessory idea giv+ life1 s to speak1 to ! dead matt] :i* we f9d 9 ext5sion1 consid]$ z ! simple object ( purely geometrical ideas4 #aed4 ,exp]i5ce _c demon/rate ! impossibility ( ! activity ( bodies4 ,absolute inactivity _c affect u1 & !re=e _c be kn[n by exp]i5ce4 ,we c only exp]i5ce action1 or ! ex]cise ( activity2 inaction1 or ! /ate ( an absolutely inactive ?+1 _c be ! object ( exp]i5ce )\t a contradiction4 ,,*apt] ,,xv4 ,,conjectures ,,z ,,to ,,! ,,exi/5ce ,,( ,,corporeal ,,activity4 #aee4 ,exp]i5ce1 f> f au?oriz+ u to inf] ! absolute in]tness ( bodies1 on ! contr>y incl9es u to believe t !y are end[$ ) activity4 ,al?\gh ! s5ses d n give u intuition ( any corporeal activity1 !y pres5t a cont9u\s s]ies ( *anges 9 a fix$ ord] 9 ! ph5om5a ( ! corporeal _w2 & if ! true activity ( "s on o!rs c be inf]r$ f ! co9cid5ce ( _! relations 9 space & "t1 f ! con/ant succession 9 :i* we see "s foll[ o!rs1 & ! inv>iable exp]i5ce t ! exi/5ce ( "s suffices = ! exi/5ce ( o!rs2 !n we mu/ admit true activity 9 bodies4 ,:atev] ?is argum5t may be wor? at ! tribunal ( metaphysics1 x has always be5 suffici5tly p[]ful to conv9ce ! majority ( mank9d1 & h5ce x is t ! d5ial ( ! activity ( bodies is contr>y to common s5se4 #aef4 ,if we consid] our relations to ! corporeal _w1 we are equally l$ to believe t !re is true activity 9 bodies4 ,:atev] may be our ignorance ( ! mann] 9 :i* s5sations are produc$ )9 u1 x is c]ta9 t we exp]i5ce !m 9 ! pres5ce ( bodies :i* are connect$ ) u 9 space & "t1 & 9 a fix$ & con/ant ord]1 :i* au?orizes u to progno/icate ) safety :at w foll[ 9 our s5ses if su* or su* bodies are plac$ 9 relation ) our organs4 ,! idea ( activity pres5ts to u ! idea ( a pr9ciple ( *anges 9 o!r be+s2 bodies are cont9ually produc+ real or app>5t *anges 9 u4 ,! ex]cise ( ! s5sitive faculties implies a communication ) corporeal be+s2 9 ?is communication ! s5sitive be+ receives f bodies a multitude ( impressions caus+ cont9ual *anges4 #aeg4 ,x is said t exp]i5ce %[s bodies to be indiff]5t to re/ or motion1 & "s works on physics at ! v beg9n+ lay x d[n z a ?+ beyond all d\bt1 t a body plac$ at re/ w\ld rema9 9 ! same /ate = all et]nity1 & if put 9 motion x w\ld move = all et]nity 9 a "r l9e1 & always ) ! same velocity :i* x at fir/ receiv$4 ,i d n "k h[ !y c\ld h le>n$ ?is f exp]i5ce2 & ,i ma9ta9 t n only !y c\ld n "k x1 b exp]i5ce seems to prove directly ! contr>y4 #aeh4 ,:]e 0 !re ev] a body t 0 indiff]5t to re/ or motion8 ,9 all t]re/rial bodies we f9d a t5d5cy to motion1 if no o!r1 at lea/ t ( gravitation t[>ds ! c5tre ( ! e>?4 ,cele/ial bodies1 s f> z our obs]vation ext5ds1 are all 9 motion2 calculation agrees ) exp]i5ce 9 %[+ !m to be subject to univ]sal attraction3 :]e1 !n1 is ! indiff]5ce to re/ or motion1 reveal$ by exp]i5ce8 ,we %\ld r say t exp]i5ce reveals a g5]al incl9ation ( bodies to be 9 motion4 #aei4 ,x w\ld be object$ t ?is incl9ation does n fl[ f any activity 9 ! bodies1 b t x is a simple effect ( a law impos$ by ! ,creator4 ,let x be s3 b at lea/ d n tell u t exp]i5ce pres5ts bodies z indiff]5t to motion or re/2 expla9 motion1 if y w1 )\t activity1 ma9ta9 t !re is no activity1 despite ! appe>ances ( exp]i5ce2 b d n tell u t ^! appe>ances %[ ! abs5ce ( activity4 #afj4 ,if ,i place a body on my table1 x rema9s at re/1 ,i f9d x !re ! next day1 & if ,i return aft] _m ye>s ,i /ill f9d x !re4 ,b ?is body is n indiff]5t to motion or re/2 "h x is at re/1 b x is cont9ually ex]cis+ its activity1 z is evid5t f its pressure on ! table :i* supports x4 ,?is ex]cise is incessant1 x is exp]i5c$ at e mom5t2 try to raise x & x (f]s resi/ance1 take away ! table & x falls1 place y\r h& "u x & x w press ^u y\r h&1 & x *anges ! =m ( s(t bodies on :i* x re/s4 #afa4 ,to say t ! attraction ( ! c5tre ( ! e>? acts ^u ! body1 proves no?+ aga9/ corporeal activity b r confirms x2 = ?is c5tre is ano!r body1 & ?us y take activity f "o body to give x to ano!r4 ,moreov]1 all obs]vations %[ t attraction is mutual1 & !re=e attractive activity is a prop]ty ( all bodies4 #afb4 ,! corporeal _w1 f> f appe>+ to u z an in]t mass1 pres5ts ! appe>ance ( an activity develop+ its colossal =ces4 ,! mass ( bodies :i* move 9 space is colossal2 ! orbit :i* !y describe is colossal2 _! velocity is colossal2 ! influ5ce1 at lea/ app>5t1 :i* !y ex]cise ^u ea* o!r1 is colossal2 ! di/ance at :i* !y communicate is colossal4 ,:]e is ! want ( activity reveal$ by exp]i5ce8 ,rays ( light inundate space1 produc+ 9 s5sitive be+s ! wond]ful ph5om5a ( sight3 rays ( heat ext5d 9 all directions1 & motion & life spr+ up on all sides2 :]e is ! want ( activity reveal$ by exp]i5ce8 ,d n ! vegetation :i* cov]s our globe1 ! ph5om5a ( life :i* we exp]i5ce )9 u1 & 9 ! animals ar\nd u1 require a cont9ual motion ( matt]1 an ebb & fl[1 s to speak1 ( action & reaction ( bodies on ea* o!r1 9 reality or 9 appe>ance8 ,d n ! ph5om5a ( electricity1 ( magnetism1 ( galvanism1 appe> to be pr9ciples ( great activity1 ! orig9 ( motion :]ev] !y exi/1 r ?an objects indiff]5t to motion or re/8 ,! ideas ( activity1 ( =ce1 ( impulse1 are n alone sugge/$ to u by our int]nal activity1 b also by ! exp]i5ce ( ! corporeal _w1 :i* displays be=e our eyes1 & 9 ob$i5ce to con/ant laws1 a cont9ual v>iety ( magnific5t sc5es1 ^: orig9 seems to indicate a fund ( activity surpass+ all calculations4 #afc4 ,) h[ little reason !n d y appeal to exp]i5ce to combat ! exi/5ce ( causality 9 bodies1 & h[ mu* m 9 accordance ) exp]i5ce are ^? philosoph]s :o give a true activity to bodies1 is app>5t f :at ,i h said4 ,9 assign+ ! limits ( our intuition 9 relation to causality & activity 9 !mselves1#id ,i said en\gh to %[ t ,i d n judge x possible to demon/rate metaphysically ! exi/5ce ( activity 9 ! corporeal _w2 yet ,i _c b insi/ t if ! con/ant relation ( ph5om5a 9 space & "t1 & ! inv>iable succession ( "s ?+s aft] o!rs1 prove any ?+ 9 favor ( causality1 we mu/ admit ! op9ion :i* holds t !re is true activity 9 bodies2 t 9 a second>y ord] ! reason ( ! *anges ( "s is conta9$ 9 o!rs2 & t consequ5tly !re is 9 ! corporeal _w a *a9 ( second causes :i* rea*es back to ! fir/ cause1 ! orig9 & ! reason ( all t is4 #id ,see ,*s4 ,,xi4 & ,,xiii4 ,,*apt] ,,xvi4 ,,int]nal ,,causality4 #afd4 ,consci\sness reveals ! exi/5ce ( a faculty )9 u :i* produces c]ta9 int]nal ph5om5a4 ,if we conc5trate our att5tion by means ( a free act ( our w1 we exp]i5ce ! production ( images & ideas4 ,! works ( ! imag9ation are an irrefutable pro( ( our int]nal activity4 ,s5sations furni% ! mat]ials2 b ! fancy builds edifices ) !m4 ,:o1 if n ourselves1 gave !m _! new =m8 ,we mu/ confess t if we are absolutely )\t activity1 nature completely deludes u1 mak+ u believe t we are active4 ,our recollections (f] ano!r pro( ( true activity4 ,we propose to ?9k ( a c\ntry :i* we h visit$1 & wi% to recollect its details2 at ! comm& ( ! w ! imag9ation is ar\s$ & displays to our intuition ! sc5es :i* we once saw4 ,b ^! images already exi/$1 x w be said1 & x 0 only necess>y to awak5 !m2 b x _c be said t !y exi/$ 9 act1 = we _h no actual consci\sness ( !m2 & ! comm& ( our w 0 necess>y & suffici5t 9 ord] to =ce !m to reappe>4 ,?is new pres5ce adds some?+ to our habitual /ate1 & is produc$ )9 u by ! m]e act ( ! w4 ,x is true t we d n "k ! mann] ( ?is production2 b x is c]ta9 t consci\sness assures u t x imm$iately foll[s an act ( our w2 & we h1 to say ! lea/1 a /rong pro( t !re is 9 u a =ce :i* produces ! transition ( ^! images f _! habitual to an actual /ate4 ,! same may be said ( all recollections2 & if we (t5 f9d t we _c recollect all t we wi% to1 ?is only proves t our active faculties are limit$ by c]ta9 conditions f :i* !y _c free !mselves4 #afe4 ,)\t consid]+ recollections1 e "o kn[s h[ ideas are elaborat$ 9 m$itation4 ,our ideas are n ! same :5 we beg9 to reflect on any subject1 z aft] we h m$itat$ = a long "t on x4 ,sometimes )\t ! assi/ance obta9$ by read+ any new "w or he>+ any new obs]vation1 by ! m]e =ce ( our own reflection we h made cle> & di/9ct :at 0 be=e only a confus$ idea4 ,to say t ! new ideas are ! result ( o!rs :i* already exi/$ 9 our m9d only proves t our und]/&+ has a true activity2 = ?is result1 :atev] its orig91 is some?+ new1 x produces a new /ate 9 ! s\l1 s9ce x n[ kn[s p]fectly :at be=e x ei!r knew n at all1 or only 9 a confus$ mann]4 ,! relations ( ! sub-secant to ! secant1 & ( ! sub-tang5t to ! tang5t1 are geometrical ideas )9 ! rea* ( ! mo/ ord9>y intellects3 s also are ! simil>ity ( ! triangles :i* are imag9$ = ! purpose ( comp>+ l9es ) ea* o!r1 & ! successive approximation ( ! sub-secant to ! sub-tang5t1 & ( ! secant to ! tang5t2 b to r$uce ^? elem5ts to ! po9t :]e ! wond]ful !ory ( inf9itesimal calculus %9es =? ) ! /ronge/ light1 an imm5se di/ance has to be pass$ ov]4 ,%all we say t ^? g5iuses :o fir/ cross$ ov] ?is di/ance ?\ght no?+ new1 because !y already _h ! elem5ts f ! comb9ation ( :i* ?is !ory results8 #aff4 ,if ?is productive activity is cle>ly se5 9 any ph5om5a1 x is c]ta9ly 9 ! acts ( freewill4 ,:at becomes ( fre$om1 if ! s\l does n produce its volitions8 ,fre$om means no?+1 if !y are only ph5om5a produc$ by ano!r be+1 9 :i* ! s\l has no o!r "p ?an t x is ! subject 9 :i* !y are produc$4 ,x is a contradiction to say t ! s\l is free1 & at ! same "t d5y t x is ! pr9ciple ( its det]m9ations4 #afg4 ,m]e intellig5ce1 ev5 m]e s5sibility1 & 9 g5]al1 e ph5om5on imply+ consci\sness1 seems to be ! ex]cise ( an activity2 & 9 ?is s5se ,i h %[n#ie t we h intuition ( an int]nal activity4 ,if to "k1 to w1 to h consci\sness ( a s5sation1 are n actions1 ,i "k n :]e ! type ( a true action c be f\nd4 ,to p]ceive a ?+1 to w x1 ! imp]ative act ( ! w :i* makes me seek ! means ( obta9+ x1 are und\bt$ly actions2 & action is ! ex]cise ( activity4 ,! idea ( life repres5ts activity 9 its mo/ p]fect degree2 & among ! ph5om5a ( life1 ! mo/ p]fect are ^? :i* imply consci\sness2 if we d n call ^! actions1 we mu/ say t we h no idea ( action or ( activity4 #ie ,see,ch4 ,,xii4 ,al?\gh we d n "k ! mann] ( ! production1 we are consci\s ( x1 we h intuition ( ! action 9 itself4 ,:5 we see a bodily motion we behold a passive modification2 b :5 we exp]i5ce )9 ourselves ! ph5om5a ( consci\sness1 we behold an action1 & consequ5tly h an intuition ( our activity4 #afh4 ,"h an objection arises4 ,if int]nal ph5om5a are truly actions1 :y are !y s (t5 indep5d5t ( our w8 ,we suff] despite ourselves2 ideas come ^u u :i* we w\ld fa9 ca/ (f2 ?\ghts arise s quickly & spontane\sly z to seem r inspirations ?an ! fruit ( labor4 ,:]e 9 su* cases is ! activity8 ,are we n =c$ to say t ^! ph5om5a are :olly passive8 #afi4 ,?is objection1 app>5tly s conclusive1 proves no?+ aga9/ int]nal activity4 ,9 ! fir/ place1 we might answ] t ! s\l be+ passive 9 "s cases1 does n prove t x is s 9 all2 & t 9 ord] to affirm ! exi/5ce ( int]nal activity1 we require only c]ta9 ph5om5a to be produc$ by x4 ,b x is n ev5 necess>y to admit t activity is n f\nd 9 ! cases propos$ by ! objection2 =1 if we c>efully exam9e !m1 we %all f9d t ev5 !re ! s\l ex]cises a true activity4 ,! =ce ( ! objection re/s on ! appe>ance )9 u ( c]ta9 ph5om5a )\t ! concurr5ce ( our w1 & at times 9 spite ( x2 b ?is only leads u to inf] t !re are o!r functions 9 ! s\l indep5d5t ( freewill )\t oblig+ u to believe t ^! functions are n active4 ,) ?is obs]vation ! difficulty at once disappe>s4 ,!re are )9 u c]ta9 ph5om5a :i* we nei!r will$ be=e nor aft] !y appe>$2 s f> ,i conc$e4 ,!re=e !re are )9 u ph5om5a 9 :i* ! s\l is purely passive2 ?is ,i d5y4 ,! consequ5ce is illegitimate2 all t c\ld logically be d$uc$ is1 t c]ta9 ph5om5a appe> & are cont9u$ 9 ! s\l )\t ! concurr5ce ( our w4 ,! same ?+ happ5s ) ! body3 !re are functions :i* x ex]cises indep5d5tly ( our freewill1 su* z ! circulation ( ! blood1 respiration1 dige/ion1 assimilation ( food1 transpiration1 & o!rs2 b !re are o!rs :i* are only p]=m$ at ! comm& ( ! w1 z eat+1 walk+1 & 9 g5]al :atev] relates to ! motion & position ( ! memb]s4 ,:y may n a simil> ?+ happ5 9 ! s\l8 ,:y may n ! s\l h active faculties :i* are develop$1 & produce v>i\s ph5om5a1 )\t ! concurr5ce ( ! w8 ,i d n believe any reply to ?is solution possible4 ,/ill ,i propose to /r5g!n x by "s rem>ks on ! "* ( ! ph5om5a 9 :i* x is pret5d$ t ! s\l is purely passive4 #agj4 ,! objection speaks ( pa9ful s5sations1 9 :i* app>5tly ! s\l has no activity4 ,:o w say t a man to :om ,i apply a burn+ iron1 & :o suff]s horrid pa91 ex]cises 9 ?is ! activity ( 8 s\l8 ,is x n m reasonable to say t ! s\l is "h purely passive1 & 9 a /ate v l t ( ! body :5 press$ d[n by ! weight ( ano!r body8 ,if any activity is ex]cis$ 9 su* a case x is r t ( reaction aga9/ a pa9ful s5sation4 ,reflect well ^u ^! obs]vations1 & y w f9d t !y conta9 no difficulty ^: solution _c be f\nd 9 ! prec$+ p>agraph4 ,i admit t ! pa9ful s5sation does n dep5d on ! freewill ( ! suff]]1 & t 8 free action is oppos$ to ?is s5sation2 b despite all ?is1 ! s\l may h a true activity 9 ! m]e fact ( p]ceiv+3 x only %[s t ! ex]cise ( ?is activity is subject to necess>y conditions :i* :5 !y exi/ are m p[]ful = its developm5t ?an is our w to prev5t x4 ,no?+ is m c]ta9 ?an ! developm5t ( c]ta9 active faculties indep5d5tly ( our freewill4 ,:at m active ?an viol5t passions8 ,& yet x is (t5 impossible = u n to feel !m2 & x requires all ! comm& ( our freewill to re/ra9 !m )9 ! b\nds ( reason4 #aga4 ,s5sation 9 itself _c be all passive2 & ^? :o ma9ta9 t x is1 %[ t !y h m$itat$ b little on ! facts ( consci\sness4 ,^! facts are ess5tially individual1 & inasmu* z !y are facts ( consci\sness1 absolutely incommunicable4 ,ano!r may feel a pa9 v l1 & ev5 equal to1 t :i* ,i suff]2 b he _c exp]i5ce ! same num]ically consid]$2 = my pa9 is s ess5tially m9e1 t if x is n m9e x does n exi/4 ,!re=e pa9 _c be communicat$ z an individual entity to me1 & all t c be done to produce x 9 me1 is to excite my s5sitive p[] s z to exp]i5ce x4 ,?is obs]vation %[s t s5sations _c be m]ely passive facts4 ,a passive modification is all receiv$2 ! subject suff]+ does no?+4 ,f ! mom5t t ! subject has 9 itself "s pr9ciple ( its modification1 x is n purely passive4 ,s5sation _c be all receiv$2 x mu/ be born 9 ! subject "u "s influ5ce or o!r1 on ?is or t occasion2 b ! be+ :i* exp]i5ces x mu/ conta9 a pr9ciple ( its own exp]i5ce2 o!rwise x w\ld be a lifeless be+1 & c\ld n p]ceive4 #agb4 ,! objection speaks ( pa9ful s5sations z ?\gh _! necessity 7 an exception f ! g5]al rule2 :]eas all s5sations1 pleasant or unpleasant1 are equally necess>y1 provid$ ! s5sitive faculties are plac$ 9 ! conditions necess>y = _! ex]cise4 ,!re is ! same necessity 9 ! pa9 :i* ,i feel if a burn+ coal is plac$ 9 my h&1 z 9 ! sight ( a beautiful pa9t+ plac$ be=e my eyes4 #agc4 ,! spontane\sness ( int]nal ph5om5a1 9 ! pure intellectual ord]1 or 9 t ( imag9ation or s5tim5t1 confirms ! exi/5ce ( an activity indep5d5t ( our freewill1 & by no means indicates t ^! ph5om5a are purely passive4 ,!re is an important circum/ance to be obs]v$ "h4 ,! ex]cise ( ! functions ( ! s\l is connect$ ) ! ph5om5a ( ! organization4 ,exp]i5ce tea*es t ! s\l p]ceives ) m or less activity1 accord+ to ! disposition ( ! body2 & x is a fact kn[n f all antiquity t c]ta9 liquors h an inspir+ p[]4 ,! /ate ( ! dige/ion causes heavy dreams & torm5ts ! fancy ) horrible =ms2 fev] raises or depresses ! imag9ation2 sometimes x increases ! /r5g? ( ! und]/&+1 & sometimes x produces a /upor 9 :i* intellig5ce is ext+ui%$4 ,^! ph5om5a (f] a great] field to obs]vation :5 !y rea* a v high degree1 z happ5s :5 ! organic functions are greatly di/urb$2 b ?is %[s t !re is an imm5se scale pass$ ov] be=e arriv+ at ! extremity2 s t "s ph5om5a1 ^: spontane\s appe>ance seems inexplicable1 p]haps dep5d on c]ta9 unkn[n conditions to :i* our organization is subject4 ,:atev] op9ion be adopt$ z to ! equality or inequality ( human s\ls1 no "o has any d\bt b t ! diff]5ces ( organization may h an influ5ce on ! tal5t or "*1 & t c]ta9 m9ds ( extraord9>y faculties owe a "p ( _! end[m5ts to a privileg$ organization4 ,h5ce x may be inf]r$ t :at is call$ ! spontaneity ( ! s\l1 & :i* has attract$ s mu* att5tion f "s mod]n philosoph]s1 is a ph5om5on v g5]ally kn[n1 & "o :i* nei!r de/roys int]nal activity nor tells u any ?+ new z to its "*4 ,x is c]ta9 t !re are c]ta9 ph5om5a 9 our s\l :i* are indep5d5t ( our freewill2 b !re is no d\bt t _! pres5ce is sometimes sudd5 & unexpect$1 because ! conditions ( our organization ) :i* !y are connect$ are unkn[n4 ,b ?is is only ext5d+ to a great] numb] ( cases :at we h frequ5tly rem>k$ 9 psy*ological facts1 ! effects ( disease1 & :at we con/antly exp]i5ce 9 s5sations4 ,:at is a s5sation b a sudd5 appe>ance ( a ph5om5on 9 our s\l1 produc$ by a *ange 9 ! /ate ( ! organs8 #agd4 ,i d n mean by ?is to say t all spontane\s ?\ghts1 & 9 g5]al all ph5om5a :i* sudd5ly appe> )9 u )\t any kn[n prep>ation1 arise f affections ( ! organization2 ,i only wi%$ to recall a physiological & psy*ological fact1 ! neglect ( :i* might produce useless & ev5 dang]\s speculations4 ,9 read+ ! works ( "s mod]n philosoph]s :o treat ?is po9t1 x seems z ?\gh _! object 7 to prep>e ! way = ma9ta9+ t ! individual reason is only a ph5om5on ( ! univ]sal & absolute reason2 & t inspirations1 & 9 g5]al all spontane\s ph5om5a indep5d5t ( freewill1 are only indications ( ! absolute reason appe>+ to itself 9 ! human reason2 t :at we call our me is a modification ( ! absolute be+2 & ! p]sonality ( our be+ is only a phasis ( ! absolute & imp]sonal reason4 #age4 ,:at is call$ spontaneity1 ! intuition ( =m] times1 to ! eyes ( reason & ( criticism c only be ! primitive tea*+ :i* ! human race receiv$ f ,god3 :atev] "s mod]n philosoph]s say to ! contr>y is only a p>tly disguis$ repetition ( ! sophisms ( ! incr$ul\s ( e epo*1 pres5t$ 9 a deceitful dress by m5 :o abuse ! tal5ts :i* !y possess4 ,read ) reflection ! writ+s to :i* we allude1 /rip !m ( "s high-s\nd+ & enigmatical t]ms1 & y w f9d 9 !m no?+ m ?an :at ,lucretius & ,voltaire _h already said aft] _! own fa%ion4 ,,*apt] ,,xvii4 ,,rem>ks ,,on ,,spontaneity4 #agf4 ,!re is no?+ easi] ?an to write a few brilliant pages on ! ph5om5on ( spontaneity2 "s philosoph]s ( our day disc\rse ( ! g5ius ( ! poets1 ( ! arti/s1 & ( ! capta9s ( all ages1 ! fabul\s & ! h]oic times1 my/icism & religion1 9 books :i* are nei!r philosophy1 nor hi/ory1 nor poetry1 b :i* c only be reg>d$ z a flood ( agreeable & h>moni\s words ) :i* writ]s ( sp>kl+ fancy & inexhau/ible eloqu5ce deluge ! ov]p[]$ intellect ( ! +5u\s read]4 ,& aft] all1 :at is ?is spontaneity1 ?is inspiration ( :i* !y tell u s mu*8 ,let u fix our ideas by e/abli%+ & classify+ facts4 #agg4 ,reason prop]ly s call$ is n develop$ 9 ! human m9d :5 completely isolat$ f o!r m9ds2 ! sight ( nature is n suffici5t to ar\se x4 ,! /upidness ( *ildr5 f\nd 9 ! woods & ! scanty intellig5ce ( deaf-mutes are und5iable evid5ce ( ?is tru?4 #agh4 ,! human m9d1 :5 plac$ 9 communication ) o!r m9ds1 exp]i5ces a developm5t 9 "p direct & spontane\s1 9 "p reflex & elaborate4 ,?is is ano!r fact :i* we all p]ceive )9 ourselves4 ,m9ds are develop$ ) great] spontane\sness 9 proportion z _! qualities are m advanc$4 #agi4 ,( ! ?\ghts :i* occur to u sudd5ly & :i* seem to u purely spontane\s1 n a few are rem9isc5ces1 m or less fai?ful1 ( :at we h be=e read1 he>d1 or ?\ght2 & consequ5tly !y proce$ f a prep>atory fact1 :i* we d n rememb]4 ,?is expla9s h[ labor p]fects ! inv5tive faculty4 #ahj4 ,z ! organization ( our body ex]cises a p[]ful influ5ce 9 ! developm5t ( ! s\l's faculties1 we may say t ! spontaneity ( "s int]nal ph5om5a is connect$ ) c]ta9 *anges ( our organization4 #aha4 ,!re is no philosophical difficulty 9 admitt+ an imm$iate communication ( our m9d ) ano!r m9d ( a high] ord]2 & consequ5tly !re is none 9 admitt+ t "s int]nal spontane\s ph5om5a arise f ! direct influ5ce ( ?is high] m9d ^u ours4 #ahb4 ,! human race did n orig9ally h a spontane\s developm5t indep5d5t ( ! action ( ! ,creator2 philosophy %[s u ! necessity ( a primitive tea*+1 )\t :i* ! human race w\ld h rema9$ 9 a /ate ( brute-l /upidity4 ,?is la/ rem>k requires a fur!r explanation4 #ahc4 ,religion reveals a primitive in/ruction & education ( ! human race giv5 by ,god himself to ! p]son ( ! fir/ man2 ?is is 9 p]fect con=mity ) :at bo? reason & exp]i5ce ass]t4 ,our m9d possesses innum]able g]ms1 b _! gr[? requires an ext]nal cause4 ,:at w\ld a man be :o _h be5 alone f 8 infancy8 ,little m ?an a brute3 ! preci\s /one w\ld be cov]$ ) co>se e>? :i* w\ld prev5t its gli/5+4 ,language does n & _c produce ideas2 ?is is c]ta93 ! reason ( ideas is n 9 language1 b ! reason ( language is 9 ideas4 ,words are signs2 & t :i* is n conceiv$ c h no sign4 ,b ?is sign1 ?is in/rum5t is ( a wond]ful use2 words are to ! und]/&+ :at :eels are to ! p[] ( a ma*9e2 ! p[] imp>ts motion1 b ! ma*9e w\ld n g )\t :eels4 ,! und]/&+ might h "s motion )\t language1 b v sl[1 v imp]fect1 v heavy4 #ahd4 ,! ,bible repres5ts man z speak+ z soon z creat$2 language 0 !re=e taught him by ,god4 ,?is is ano!r wond]ful fact :i* reason fully confirms4 ,man c\ld n inv5t language4 ,?is inv5tion surpasses all t c be imag9$1 & w\ld y attribute x to be+s s /upid z m5 )\t language8 ,bett] to say t a ,hott5tot c\ld sudd5ly inv5t inf9itesimal calculus4 #ahe4 ,! mo/ ignorant man :o kn[s a language possesses an incr$ible treasure ( ideas4 ,9 ! simple/ conv]sation we may f9d _m physical1 metaphysical1 & moral ideas4 ,take ! foll[+ s5t5ce1 :i* is )9 ! compreh5sion ( ! l[e/ m9d3 ,i did n wi% to pursue ! bea/ f>!r = fe> t1 becom+ irritat$1 he might d h>m4 ,"h are ! ideas ( "t1 act ( ! w1 action1 cont9uity1 space1 causality1 analogy1 end1 & morality4 ,"t pa/3--,i did n2 ,act ( ! w3--wi%2 ,action3--to pursue2 ,cont9uity & space3--f>!r2 ,analogy3--becom+ irritat$2 s9ce f irritation 9 o!r in/ances1 x is inf]r$ 9 ! pres5t2 & x is also kn[n f :at happ5s to ourselves if mole/$4 ,motive & end3--= fe>1 t irritat$1 etc42 ,causality3--he might d h>m2 ,morality3--n to h>m o!rs4 #ahf4 ,sci5ce is discov]+ ! aff9ity ( languages1 f9d+ !m unit$ 9 great c5tres4 ,! dialects ( savages are n elem5ts1 b fragm5ts2 !y are n ! lisp+ spee* ( infancy1 b ! torpid & extravagant j>gon ( degradation & ebriety4 #ahg4 ,language _c produce 9 ! m9d ! idea ( a s5sation :i* x has n3 all ! words 9 ! _w c\ld n give "o born bl9d ! idea ( color4 ,/ill less c\ld pure ideas1 di/9ct f all s5sation1 result f language2 & ?is is a /rong argum5t 9 favor ( innate ideas4 #ahh4 ,! ideas ( unity1 numb]1 "t1 & causality express ?+s :i* are n s5sible2 !re=e !y _c be produc$ 9 u by any s5sible repres5tation express$ 9 language4 ,yet ^! ideas exi/ 9 u z g]ms susceptible ( a great developm5t1 fir/ by s5sible exp]i5ce1 & !n by reflection4 ,! *ild :o burns 8 h& 9 ! fire beg9s to p]ceive ! relation ( causality1 :i* he aft]w>ds g5]alizes & purifies4 ,! great ideas ( ,leibnitz on causality 7 ! ideas ( ,leibnitz ! *ild4 ,! diff]5ce 0 9 ! developm5t4 ,?us ! organization ( ! giant oak is conta9$ )9 ! %ell ( ! acorn4 ,"s h said t man's und]/&+ is l a blank tablet on :i* no?+ is yet writt52 o!rs t x 0 a book :i* he _h only to op5 9 ord] to read2 ,i believe x may be comp>$ to a lett] writt5 9 invisible ink1 :i* looks :ite until rubb$ ) a my/]i\s liquid :i* br+s out ! black *>act]s4 ,! magic liquid is in/ruction & education4 #ahi4 ,%[ me a s+le nation :i* ( itself has em]g$ f a savage or a b>b>\s /ate4 ,all kn[n civilizations are subord9at$ "o to ano!r 9 an un9t]rupt$ *a94 ,european civilization owes mu* to ,*ri/ianity1 & some?+ to ! ,roman2 ! ,roman to ! ,greek2 ! ,greek to ! ,egyptian2 ! ,egyptian to ! ,ori5tal2 & ov] ! ,ori5tal civilization hangs a veil :i* c be lift$ only by ! fir/ *apt]s ( ,g5esis4 #aij4 ,9 ord] to "k ! human m9d x is necess>y to /udy ! hi/ory ( humanity2 :oev] isolates objects too mu* runs 9 dang] ( mutilat+ !m2 h5ce s _m ideological frivolities :i* h pass$ = pr(\nd inve/igations1 al?\gh !y 7 z f> f true metaphysics z ! art ( arrang+ a museum symmetrically is f ! sci5ce ( ! naturali/4 #aia4 ,if innate ideas be def5d$1 x is impossible to d5y to our und]/&+ a p[] to =m new ideas accord+ly z objects1 especially language1 excite x2 o!rwise x w\ld be necess>y to say t we d n le>n any ?+1 & _c le>n any ?+2 t we h e ?+ be=eh& 9 our m9d1 z if writt5 9 a book4 ,our und]/&+ seems to resemble a case conta9+ all k9ds ( types2 b1 9 ord] t !y may mean any ?+1 ! h& ( ! compositor is necess>y4 ,?is image ( pr9t]'s types rem9ds me ( an important ideological fact3 ,i mean ! scanty numb] ( ideas :i* are 9 our m9d1 & ! great v>iety ( comb9ations ( :i* !y are susceptible4 ,all t is 9 ! intellectual ord]1 or is conta9$ 9 ! categories1 :e!r we adopt ^? ( ,kant or ^? ( ,ari/otle1 or any o!rs1 may be r$uc$ to a v few4 ,ea* ( ^? ideas :i* we call g5]ative is l a ray ( light :i*1 pass+ successively ?r\gh innum]able prisms & refract$ on a numb] ( spectra1 pres5ts an inf9ite v>iety ( colors1 %ades1 & figures4 ,z our ?\ght is almo/ entirely r$uc$ to comb9ation1 & z ?is comb9ation may be made 9 v>i\s ways1 !re is a wond]ful agreem5t 9 ! fundam5tal comb9ations :i* all m9ds h4 ,9 ! second>y po9ts !re is div]g5ce1 b n 9 ! pr9cipal4 ,?is proves t ! human m9d1 9 its exi/5ce & 9 its developm5t1 dep5ds on an inf9ite intellig5ce1 :i* is ! cause & ma/] ( all m9ds4 #aib4 ,reject ^! doctr9es s accordant ) philosophy & ) hi/ory1 & spontaneity1 :e!r ( ! individual or ! race1 ei!r means no?+1 or x expresses ! vague & absurd !ories ( ideal pan!ism4 ,,*apt] ,,xviii4 ,,f9al ,,causality2--,,morality4 #aic4 ,^? be+s :i* act by intellig5ce mu/ h1 besides _! effici5t activity1 a moral pr9ciple ( _! det]m9ations4 ,9 ord] to w1 ! faculty ( will+ is n alone suffici5t2 x is necess>y to "k t :i* is will$1 = no?+ is will$ )\t be+ kn[n4 ,h5ce arises f9al causality1 :i* is ess5tially di/9ct f effici5t causality1 & c exi/ only 9 be+s end[$ ) intellig5ce4 #aid4 ,recall+ :at 0 said 9 ! t5? *apt] ( ?is book1 we may obs]ve t f9al causes =m a s]ies di/9ct f t ( effici5t causes2 :at 9 ! latt] is physical action1 is 9 ! =m]1 moral influ5ce4 ,9 a pa9t+1 ! s]ies ( effici5t causes is ! p5cil1 ! h&1 ! muscles1 ! animal spirits1 & ! comm& ( ! w4 ,?is s]ies1 :i* is necess>y = ! execution ( ! pa9t+1 may be comb9$ ) diff]5t s]ies ( f9al causes4 ,! arti/ may purpose by ! brilliancy ( 8 g5ius to acquire r5[n1 & by r5[n to enjoy ! happ9ess ( a great "n4 ,ano!r s]ies may be1 to please a p]son = :om he is work+2 & ?is 9 ord] t ! p]son may pay him a sum ( money2 & ! money 9 ord] to gratify ! arti/'s wants or pleasures4 ,a ?ird s]ies may be1 9 ord] to seek 9 pa9t+ a di/raction f a grief2 & ?is 9 ord] to pres]ve 8 heal?4 ,x is evid5t t _m s]ies ( a purely moral or intellectual influ5ce may be imag9$1 & :i* concur 9 ! production ( ! effect only1 9 s f> z comb9$ ) ! s]ies ( effici5t causes1 !y influ5ce ! arti/'s det]m9ation4 #aie4 ,?is moral influ5ce may be ex]t$ 9 two ways3 ei!r necess>ily b5d+ ! w1 or leav+ x free to w or n w2 9 ! fir/ case1 !re is a volunt>y1 b necess>y spontane\sness2 9 ! second1 !re is a free spontane\sness4 ,e free act is volunt>y1 b n e volunt>y act is free4 ,god freely wills ! cons]vation ( creatures2 b he necess>ily wills virtue1 & _c w iniquity4 #aif4 ,reg>d+ only effici5t causality1 we h only ! relations ( cause & effect2 b consid]+ f9al causality1 a new ord] ( ideas & facts is pres5t$1 :i* is morality4 ,let u fir/ ( all e/abli% ! exi/5ce ( ! fact4 #aig4 ,good & evil1 moral1 immoral1 j1 unju/1 "r1 duty1 obligation1 comm&1 prohibition1 lawful1 unlawful1 virtue1 & vice1 are words :i* we all use cont9ually1 & apply to ! :ole c\rse ( life1 to all ! relations ( man ) ,god1 ) himself1 & ) 8 fell[-m51 )\t any d\bt z to _! true mean+1 & p]fectly und]/&+ ea* o!r1 j z :5 we speak ( color1 light1 or o!r s5sible objects4 ,:5 ! t]m lawful or unlawful is appli$ to an act1 :o ev] asks :at x means8 ,:5 ?is man is call$ virtu\s1 t vici\s1 :o does n "k ! mean+ ( ^! expressions8 ,is !re any "o :o f9ds a difficulty 9 und]/&+ ! expressions :i* foll[3 he has a "r to p]=m ?is act2 he is oblig$ to comply ) t circum/ance2 ?is is 8 duty2 he has neglect$ 8 duty2 ?is is comm&$2 t is prohibit$2 ?is is "r2 t is wrong3 ?is is a h]oic virtue2 t is a crime8 ,no ideas are m common1 m ord9>ily us$1 by ! ignorant z by ! le>n$2 by b>b>\s z by civiliz$ nations2 9 ! y\? ( societies z 9 _! infancy1 & 9 _! old age2 9 ! mid/ ( pure cu/oms1 z ( ! mo/ revolt+ corruption2 !y express some?+ primitive1 innate 9 ! human m9d & indisp5sable to its exi/5ce1 some?+ :i* x _c ?r[ (f :ile x reta9s ! ex]cise ( its faculties4 ,!re may be m or less error & extravagance 9 ! application ( ^! ideas to c]ta9 p>ticul> cases3 b ! g5]ative ideas ( good & evil1 j & unju/1 lawful & unlawful1 are ! same at all times1 & 9 all c\ntries2 !y =m1 z x 71 an atmosph]e 9 :i* ! human m9d lives & brea!s4 #aih4 ,x is rem>kable t ev5 ^? :o d5y ! di/9ction betwe5 good & evil1 are =c$ to admit x 9 practice4 ,a philosoph]1 ) 8 p5 9 8 h&1 laughs at :at he calls ! prejudices ( ! human race conc]n+ ! diff]5ce betwe5 good & evil2 b say to him3 ,x seems to me1 ,sir ,philosoph]1 t y are a dete/able wret*1 to sp5d y\r "t 9 de/roy+ t :i* is mo/ holy on e>?2 & y w see h[ soon he w =get 8 philosophy & all t he has said ( ! empty mean+ ( ! words virtue & vice1 become indignant at be+ ?us address$1 w>mly def5d himself1 & attempt to prove to y t he is ! mo/ virtu\s man 9 ! _w1 giv+ repeat$ argum5ts ( hone/y1 s9c]ity1 & honor4 ,x matt]s little t 9 8 l(ty !ories1 honor1 s9c]ity1 & hone/y1 are unmean+ words1 s9ce !y c h no s5se unless ! ^w ord] is admitt$2 ! philosoph] is n /agg]$ by an inconsequ5ce1 or r1 he takes no notice ( x2 moral ideas & s5tim5ts are awak5$ 9 8 m9d z soon z he he>s himself call$ immoral1 he ceases to be a sophi/1 & becomes a man aga94 #aii4 ,c ! idea ( ?is moral ord] be a prejudice1 :i*1 )\t any ?+ 9 reality correspond+ to x1 or any f\ndation 9 human nature1 owes its orig9 to education1 s t x w\ld h be5 possible = m5 to h liv$ )\t moral ideas1 or ) o!rs directly contr>y to ^? :i* we n[ h8 ,if x is a prejudice1 h[ comes x t x is g5]al to all times & c\ntries8 ,:o communicat$ x to ! human race8 :o 0 /rong & p[]ful en\gh to make all m5 adopt x8 ,h[ did x happ5 t ! passions1 :5 9 possession ( _! lib]ty1 r5\nc$ x1 & suff]$ a bridle to be put on !m8 ,:o 0 t extraord9>y man :o subdu$ all times & all c\ntries1 ! mo/ brutal cu/oms1 ! mo/ viol5t passions1 ! mo/ obtuse und]/&+s1 & diffus$ ! idea ( a moral ord] ov] ! :ole face ( ! e>?1 not)/&+ ! div]sity ( climates1 languages1 cu/oms1 & necessities1 & ! diff]5ces 9 ! social condition ( nations1 & gave to ?is idea ( ! moral ord] su* =ce & consi/5cy t x has be5 pres]v$ ?r\gh ! mo/ complete revolutions1 amid ! ru9s ( empires1 & ! fluctuations & transmigrations ( civilization1 rema9+ firm z a rock1 unmov$ by ! furi\s waves ( ! riv] ( ages8 ,"h is n ! h& ( man2 a ph5om5on ( ?is sort does n spr+ f human comb9ations2 x is f\nd$ on nature1 & x is inde/ructible because x is natural2 ?us1 & ?us only1 is x possible to expla9 its univ]sality & p]man5ce4 #bjj4 ,to d5y all diff]5ce betwe5 good & evil is to place "o's self 9 op5 contradiction ) ! ideas ! mo/ deeply root$ 9 ! human m9d1 ) all its mo/ pr(\nd & mo/ p[]ful s5tim5ts2 all ! sophisms ( ! _w c\ld n p]suade any "o1 n ev5 ! sophi/ himself1 t !re is no diff]5ce betwe5 consol+ "o :o is afflict$1 & add+ to 8 afflictions2 betwe5 assi/+ ! un=tunate1 & increas+ _! mis=tunes2 betwe5 be+ grateful = a favor1 & do+ evil to ! b5efactor2 betwe5 fulfill+ a promise1 & break+ x2 betwe5 giv+ alms1 & tak+ :at belongs to ano!r2 betwe5 be+ fai?ful to a fri5d1 & betray+ him2 betwe5 dy+ = "o's c\ntry1 & sell+ x to ! enemy2 betwe5 respect+ ! laws ( mode/y1 & violat+ !m )\t %ame2 betwe5 sobriety & drunk5ness2 betwe5 temp]ance & mod]ation 9 all ! acts ( life1 & ! disord] ( unbridl$ passions4 ,no argum5t1 nor g5ius1 nor cavil c de/roy ! divid+ l9e4 ,! sophi/ discusses1 imag9es1 feigns1 subtilizes1 b 9 va92 nature is !re2 %e says to s5seless man3 ,s f> may/ ?\ g1 b "h %all ?y pride be brok54 #bja4 ,if !re is no intr9sic diff]5ce betwe5 good & evil1 & all t is said ( ! morality & immorality ( actions is a collection ( words :i* h no mean+1 or only su* z !y h receiv$ f human conv5tion2 h[ is x t :il/ ! j man sleeps securely 9 8 b$1 ! evil-do] is toss$ ab\t ) a he>t /ruggl+ ) remorse8 ,:5ce come ^? s5tim5ts ( love & respect inspir$ by :at we call virtue1 & ! av]sion creat$ by :at is call$ vice8 ,d n ! love ( *ildr51 ! v5]ation ( p>5ts1 fidelity to fri5ds1 compassion = suff]+1 gratitude t[>ds b5efactors1 ! horror :i* all m5 h = a cruel fa!r1 a p>ricide son1 an unfai?ful wife1 a di%one/ fri5d1 a traitor to 8 c\ntry1 a h& r$ ) ! blood ( its victim1 oppression ( ! weak1 des]tion ( ! orphan1 d n all ^! s5tim5ts %[ cle>] ?an ! light ( day ! h& ( ! ,almighty engrav+ 9 our s\ls ! ideas ( ! moral ord]1 & /r5g!n+ u ) s5tim5ts :i* in/9ctively %[ u1 ev5 :5 we h n "t to reflect1 ! pa? :i* we %\ld foll[8 #bjb4 ,i d n d5y t s]i\s difficulties are enc\nt]$ 9 exam9+ ! gr\nds ( morality2 ,i admit t ! analysis ( ! k ( good & evil is "o ( ! mo/ hidd5 po9ts ( philosophy2 b ^! difficulties prove no?+ aga9/ ! diff]5ce we h e/abli%$4 ,no "o d5ies ! exi/5ce ( a build+ because he _c see h[ deep its f\ndations g3 its dep? is a pro( ( its solidity1 a gu>anty ( its duration4 ,! diff]5ce betwe5 good & evil demon/rat$ a priori by ! int]ior s5tim5ts ( ! he>t1 is /r5g!n$ ) fur!r evid5ce if we reg>d ! consequ5ces ( its exi/5ce or non-exi/5ce4 ,let u admit ! moral ord]1 & suppose all m5 to regulate _! conduct con=mably to ?is prejudice4 ,:at w be ! result8 ,! _w becomes a p>adise2 m5 live l bro!rs1 us+ ) mod]ation ! gifts ( nature1 divid+ ) ea* o!r _! happ9ess1 & aid+ "o ano!r to be> mis=tune2 ! mo/ lovely h>mony reigns 9 ! individual1 ! family1 & society2 if ! moral ord] is a prejudice1 let u confess t nev] did prejudice h m gr&1 b5eficial1 & delightful consequ5ces2 if virtue is a lie1 nev] 0 !re "o m useful1 fair]1 or m sublime4 #bjc4 ,b let u make ! c\nt]pro(4 ,let u suppose ?is prejudice to disappe>1 & all m5 to be conv9c$ t ! moral ord] is a va9 illusion :i* !y mu/ bani% f _! und]/&+1 _! w1 & _! acts2 :at w be ! result ?is "t8 ,! moral ord] de/roy$1 ! physical alone rema9s2 e "o ?9ks & acts accord+ to 8 views1 passions1 or caprices2 man has no o!r guide ?an ! bl9d in/9ct ( nature or ! cold speculations ( egotism2 ! individual becomes a mon/]1 all ! ties ( family are brok5 asund]2 & society1 sunk 9 a frightful *aos1 rapidly advances to complete de/ruction4 ,^! are ! necess>y consequ5ces ( ! rejection ( ! prejudice4 ,language w\ld be horridly mutilat$ if ! ideas ( ! moral ord] %\ld disappe>2 good & bad conduct w\ld be words )\t mean+2 praise & blame w\ld h no object2 ev5 vanity w\ld lose a great "p ( its food2 flatt]y w\ld be =c$ to conf9e itself to natural qualities1 consid]$ 9 ! purely physical ord]2 to pron\nce ! ^w m]it1 w\ld be =bidd5 "u pa9 ( fall+ into absurdity4 #bjd4 ,see1 !n1 if any objection c\ld be suffici5t to make su* consequ5ces admissible4 ,:oev]1 fright5$ at ! difficulties accompany+ ! exam9ation ( ! fir/ pr9ciples ( morality1 %\ld und]take to d5y morality1 w\ld be z fooli% z ! husb&man :o1 see+ ! /ream :i* wat]s 8 fields1 %\ld insi/ on d5y+ ! exi/5ce ( its wat]s because inaccessible crags prev5t 8 approa* to _! s\rce4 ,,*apt] ,,xix4 ,,v>i\s ,,explanations ,,( ,,morality4 #bje4 ,!re h be5 _m disputes conc]n+ ! orig9 & "* ( ! morality ( actions2 ! same happ5+ "h z else:]e1 t ! und]/&+ becomes p]plex$ & confus$ :5ev] x attempts to p5etrate into ! fir/ pr9ciples ( ?+s4 ,z ,i am n go+ to write a treatise on morals1 b only to analyze ! f\ndations ( ?is sci5ce1 ,i %all conf9e myself to giv+ ! "*1 z f> z possible1 ( ! primitive ideas & s5tim5ts ( ! moral ord]1 )\t desc5d+ to _! application4 ,9 ?is ,i %all proce$1 z usual1 on ! analytic me?od1 decompos+ ! fact e/abli%$ 9 ! prec$+ *apt]1 glanc+ at ! v>i\s explanations :i* h be5 giv5 ( x1 %[+ ! insuffici5cy & inexactness ( "s ( !m1 be=e com+ to ! only "o :i* appe>s to me true & complete4 #bjf4 ,:at is good8 :at is evil8 :y are ?+s good or evil8 9 :at does goodness or evil consi/8 :at is _! orig98 ,we are told t good is t :i* is con=m$ to reason1 t :i* is 9 h>mony ) ! et]nal laws1 t :i* is pleas+ to ,god1 & t evil is t :i* is oppos$ to reason1 t :i* contradicts ! et]nal law1 t :i* displeases ,god4 ,?is is true1 b does x completely solve ! "q on a sci5tific gr\nd8 ,! moral wor? ( ! dictate ( reason dep5ds on its con=mity to ! et]nal law2 :51 !re=e1 to f\nd ! moral ord]1 y call 9 ! =m]1 y also appeal to ! latt]2 !y are n !re=e two solutions ( ! "q1 b only "o4 ,acts _c please or displease ,god1 except z con=m$ to ! et]nal law2 !re=e1 to judge ( ! goodness or evil ( acts by _! relation to ! pleasure or displeasure ( ,god1 is to judge ( !m by _! con=mity to ! et]nal law4 ,f ?is x may be inf]r$ t1 al?\gh an act con=m$ to reason1 "o agree+ ) ! et]nal law1 & "o displeas+ to ,god1 express diff]5t aspects ( an idea1 !y all mean ! same :5 us$ 9 expla9+ ! f\ndations ( ! moral ord]4 #bjg4 ,! rules ( ! et]nal law d n dep5d on ! free w ( ,god1 s9ce1 9 t case1 ,god c\ld make good evil1 & evil good4 ,! et]nal law _c be any ?+ else ?an ! et]nal reason1 or ! repres5tation ( ! moral ord] 9 ! div9e intellect4 ,morality ?us seems1 accord+ to our mode ( conception1 to prec$e its repres5tation2 t is to say1 morality seems to be repres5t$ 9 ! div9e intellect because x is2 b n t x is because x is repres5t$4 ,9 ! moral ord] we come to some?+ resembl+ metaphysical & geometrical sci5ce4 ,geometrical tru?s are et]nal1 inasmu* z !y are repres5t$ 9 ! et]nal reason2 & ?is repres5tation supposes an intr9sic & necess>y tru? 9 !m1 s9ce ! repres5tation w\ld o!rwise be false4 ,z ?is tru? mu/ h "s et]nal f\ndation1#if & ?is f\ndation _c be 9 any f9ite be+1 x mu/ be s\ght = 9 ! ess5tially inf9ite be+1 :i* conta9s ! reason ( all ?+s4 ,! inf9ite intellect repres5ts ! tru?1 & is1 !re=e1 true2 b ?is tru? is itself f\nd$ on ! ess5ce ( ! inf9ite be+ :i* kn[s x4 #if ,see ,bk4 ,,iv41 ,*s4 ,,xxiv41 ,,xxv41 ,,xxvi41 & ,,xxvii4 #bjh4 ,moral tru?s are n di/+ui%$ 9 ?is respect f metaphysical2 _! orig9 is 9 ,god1 moral sci5ce _c be a!i/ic4 ,:y are "s ?+s repres5t$ 9 ,god z good & o!rs z evil8 ,to ask ! reason ( ?is is l ask+ :y triangles are n repres5t$ z circles1 & circles z triangles4 ,if !re is an intr9sic necessity1 ei!r we c assign no reason = x or we mu/ at any rate come to a reason :i* c be expla9$ by no o!r reason4 ,x w 9 any case1 be necess>y = u to come to a po9t :]e we c only say3 ,x is s4 ,any fur!r satisfaction1 :i* we might desire1 is beyond our rea*1 z we d n intuitively see ! inf9ite ess5ce :i* conta9s ! fir/ & ultimate reason ( all ?+s4 #bji4 ,x is necess>y fir/ to suppose good & evil be=e ?+s c be repres5t$ z su*1 or ev5 conceiv$ z s repres5t$4 ,:at is a good ?+8 ,if we say x is be+ repres5t$ z good 9 ! div9e m9d1 ! ?+ def9$ is conta9$ 9 ! def9ition2 ! difficulty /ill rema9s3 :at is x to be repres5t$ z good8 ,goodness _c consi/ 9 ! simple repres5tation1 s t :atev] is repres5t$ 9 ,god is good2 = !n e ?+ w\ld be good1 z e ?+ is repres5t$ 9 ,god4 ,!re=e1 9 ord] t a ?+ may be good1 x mu/ n only be repres5t$1 b repres5t$ "u su* or su* a "* :i* makes x good2 b /ill ! difficulty rema9s3 :at is ?is "*8 #baj4 ,let u make ^! ideas cle>] by comp>+ a metaphysical ) a moral tru?4 ,all ! diamet]s ( ! same circle are equal2 ?is tru? does n dep5d on any p>ticul> circle1 x is f\nd$ on ! ess5ce ( all circles2 ?is ess5ce is 9 turn repres5t$ et]nally 9 ! inf9ite ess5ce1 :]e ) ! pl5itude ( be+1 is conta9$ ! repres5tation & k ( all ! f9ite p>ticipations 9 :i* ! wisdom & p[] ( ,god may be ex]cis$4 ,all ! p>ticipations are subject to ! pr9ciple ( contradiction1 9 none ( !m c be+ cease to exclude n-be+1 or n-be+ to exclude be+2 h5ce proce$s ! necessity ( all ! prop]ties & relations1 )\t :i* ! pr9ciple ( contradiction _c subsi/2 among ^! is ! equality ( all ! diamet]s ( ! same circle4 #baa4 ,^! consid]ations sugge/ ! "q3 is x possible to expla9 ! moral ord] l ! metaphysical & ma!matical1 by %[+ x conta9$ 9 ! pr9ciple ( contradiction8 #bab4 ,x is easy to see t 9 all metaphysical & ma!matical tru?s1 id5tity is express$ or d5i$4 ,all =mulas are r$uc$ to ,a is ,b1 or ,a is n ,b2 ?is is ! g5]al =mula ( all tru?s ( an absolute ord]4 ,b x is o!rwise 9 ! moral ord]1 :]e no?+ is ev] express$ absolutely1 z is %[n by ! v =m ( ! propositions4 ,god is good1 expresses a metaphysical tru?1 ,god mu/ be lov$1 or 9 o!r words1 we ought to love ,god1 expresses a moral tru?4 ,note ! diff]5ce3 9 "o case we say is absolutely2 9 ! o!r1 mu/ be1 ought to be1 !re is obligation1 etc41 us+ diff]5t expressions :i* all mean ! same ?+2 b 9 all1 ! v]b to be1 z an absolute affirmation1 disappe>s4 ,x seems t no moral proposition c\ld be ?us express$1 if we reg>d ! primitive elem5ts ( our moral ideas2 = all ^! propositions express ! idea ( duty1 :i* is ess5tially a relative idea4 #bac4 ,to love ,god is good4 ,?is is a moral proposition ^: /ructure seems to contradict :at ,i h j e/abli%$4 ,"h an absolute affirmation is f\nd express$ simply by is1 z 9 metaphysical or ma!matical propositions4 ,/ill1 ! lea/ reflection w suffice to %[ t ?is absolute "* is de/roy$ by ! nature ( ! pr$icate4 ,:at is ! mean+ ( good8 ,"h we h an ess5tially relative idea :i* communicates ?is "* to ! proposition4 ,to love ,god is good1 is ! same z3 to love ,god is a ?+ con=m$ to reason1 or to ! et]nal law1 or pleas+ to ,god1 or a ?+ :i* we are "u obligation to d2 x is always a relative idea1 & nev] absolute1 l be+1 n-be+1 a triangle1 a circle1 etc4 #bad4 ,good1 say "s1 is t :i* leads to ! end :i* corresponds to intellig5t be+s4 ,?is explanation mu/ n be conf\nd$ ) ! !ory ( private int]e/2--a !ory alike reject$ by religion & by ! s5tim5ts ( ! he>t1 & combat$ by ! mo/ pr(\nd ?9k]s2--"h1 9 speak+ ( end1 ! la/ end is meant1 :i* is some?+ sup]ior to :at is und]/ood by ! expression1 private int]e/4 ,)\t d\bt1 to arrive at ! la/ end1 is a great int]e/ ( e intellig5t be+2 b at lea/ ?is int]e/ is tak5 9 an elevat$ s5se1 & does n promote ! developm5t ( a paltry egotism4 ,hav+ ?us designat$ ! diff]5ce betwe5 ^! doctr9es1 ,i say t n ev5 ! latt] seems to me admissible4 ,moral good mu/ lead to ! end2 b ?is does n con/itute ! "* ( morality4 ,=1 :at is meant by end8 ,if ,god himself is meant1 a moral act is t :i* leads to ,god2 9 :i* case ! difficulty /ill rema9s1 = we aga9 ask1 :at is meant by lead+8 ,if x means to conduce to ! happ9ess :i* consi/s 9 a union ) ,god1 h[ does x conduce to ?is happ9ess8 ,by ! p]=mance ( :at ,god has comm&$2--c]ta9ly2 b !n we ask3 ,i4 ,:y does do+ :at ,god has comm&$ conduce to happ9ess8 ,,ii4 ,:y has ,god comm&$ "s ?+s & prohibit$ o!rs8--:i* is equival5t to putt+ anew ! "q ( intr9sic morality4 #bae4 ,besides1 ! idea ( happ9ess repres5ts some?+ v diff]5t f ! idea ( morality4 ,imag9+ a be+ :i* sacrifices all t x possess$ = ! sake ( o!r be+s1 we h ! idea ( a highly moral be+1 b n a happy be+4 ,if morality consi/$ 9 happ9ess1 ! p>ticipation ( happ9ess w\ld be ! p>ticipation ( morality2 e enjoym5t w\ld be a moral act2 & c\ld only be immoral because too %ort or feeble4 ,9 proportion z we rose to ! idea ( a /rong] & m la/+ enjoym5t1 we %\ld =m ! idea ( a m elevat$ morality2 ! enjoym5t ! mo/ free f tr\ble w\ld be ! pure/ act ( morality2 :o does n see t ?is ov]?r[s all our moral ideas1 & is repugnant to e s5tim5t ( ! he>t8 #baf4 ,x is n en\gh to say t a moral be+ w obta9 happ9ess1 & t its happ9ess w be great 9 proportion to its morality2 ?is only proves t happ9ess is ! rew>d ( morality2 x does n au?orize u to conf\nd ! two1 ! gu]don ) ! m]it4 #bag4 ,to conf\nd morality ) happ9ess is to r$uce morality to a calculation1 to /rip virtue ( ! pure lu/re :i* *>ms & attracts u1 & makes x appe> m beautiful accord+ly z x is jo9$ ) great] suff]+4 ,if we id5tify happ9ess ) morality1 dis9t]e/$ness becomes a calculation ( int]e/1 a sacrifice ( a small] to a great] int]e/1 a loss = ! pres5t to ga9 9 ! future4 ,no6 ! morality ( actions is n an affair ( calculation3 ! virtu\s man obta9s a rew>d2 b1 9 ord] t ! act may be virtu\s1 some?+ m is necess>y ?an a comb9ation = ! purpose ( obta9+ x2 !re mu/ be some?+ :i* makes ! act m]it ! rew>d2 & we _c ev5 conceive t a rew>d c be res]v$ = any act1 unless ! act is 9 itself m]itori\s4 ,:5 ,god prep>$ puni%m5t = "s acts & rew>ds = o!rs1 he mu/ h f\nd an intr9sic diff]5ce 9 !m2 & !re=e he gave !m diff]5t de/9ies2 b1 accord+ to ! sy/ems :i* we are oppos+1 acts c\ld be good only inasmu* z !y lead to a rew>d1 & !re w\ld be no reason :y "s %\ld lead to x r ?an o!rs4 ,?is reason mu/ be f\nd 9 an intr9sic diff]5ce 9 ! acts !mselves2 or we fall into ! absurdity ( say+ t all actions are 9 !mselves indiff]5t1 & ! good may be evil1 & ! evil good4 #bah4 ,to lead to ! good ( mank9d is ano!r incomplete "* ( ! morality ( actions4 ,x is cle> t ?is morality w\ld be only human1 & w\ld n include ! intr9sic morality :i* we consid] common to all intellig5t be+s4 #bai4 ,:at1 too1 is ! good :i* is spok5 (8 ,9 :at /ate are mank9d consid]$8 ,d y mean a society con/itut$ z a nation1 or mank9d1 prop]ly s call$2 "o g5]ation or _m2 _! de/9y on e>? or h]eaft] 9 ano!r life8 ,are y speak+ ( _! well-be+1 or ( _! developm5t & p]fection ab/ract$ f _! great] or less well-be+8 ,if ! morality ( actions is to be plac$ 9 _! conduciv5ess1 s to speak1 to ! g5]al good ( mank9d1 9 :at does ?is supreme good consi/8 ,is x ! developm5t ( ! und]/&+1 ( ! imag9ation1 or ( ! he>t2 or 9 ! p]fection ( ! arts1 :i* secure mat]ial enjoym5ts8 ,y mu/ n1 !n1 place moral p]fection z ! end2 = by ! supposition x is only ! means2 & ! actions w be m moral accord+ly z !y are m useful means ( obta9+ ! g5]al good4 #bbj4 ,to say t morality is only ! object ( s5tim5t1 & t no o!r m>k ( :at is good c be giv5 ?an ! my/]i\s p]fection :i* we f9d 9 virtue1 is to bani% morality z a sci5ce1 & to %ut ! door aga9/ all inve/igation4 ,i d n d5y t !re is 9 u a moral s5tim5t1 or t our he>t feels my/]i\s sympa?y = virtue2 b ,i believe ! sci5tific /udy ( ! f\ndations ( ! moral ord] to be compatible ) ?is fact4 ,x is necess>y to ackn[l$ge ! primitive "* ( "s facts ( our m9d1 & n attempt to expla9 e ?+2 b we mu/ gu>d aga9/ exagg]ation 9 ?is respect1 :i* is only ! m dang]\s :5 cov]$ ) ! cloak ( mode/y4 ,,*apt] ,,xx4 ,,fundam5tal ,,explanation ,,( ,,! ,,moral ,,ord]4 #bba4 ,!re mu/ be some?+ absolute 9 morality4 ,x is n possible to conceive any ?+ all relative1 )\t some?+ absolute on :i* x is f\nd$4 ,moreov]1 e relation implies a t]m to :i* x relates1 &1 consequ5tly1 ?\gh we suppose a s]ies ( relations1 we mu/ come to a la/ t]m4 ,?is %[s :y purely relative explanations ( morality d n satisfy ! und]/&+2 reason1 & ev5 s5tim5t seek an absolute basis4 ,besides1 ?is purely ontological argum5t 9 favor ( ! absolute 9 morality1 !re are o!rs n less conclusive1 & :i* are )9 ! rea* ( ord9>y m54 #bbb4 ,9 ! inf9itely p]fect be+ we conceive inf9ite hol9ess1 indep5d5tly ( ! exi/5ce ( creatures2 & :at is inf9ite hol9ess b moral p]fection 9 an inf9ite degree8 ,?is argum5t is decisive = all ! _w1 except+ a!i/s3 :oso admits ! exi/5ce ( ,god mu/ admit 8 hol9ess2 ! contr>y is repugnant to reason1 to ! he>t1 to common s5se4 ,!re=e some?+ absolutely moral exi/s2 !re=e morality 9 itself _c be expla9$ by any relation ( creatures to end1 s9ce morality 9 an inf9ite degree w\ld exi/ ?\gh !re _h nev] be5 any creature4 #bbc4 ,9 conceiv+ a creat$ intellig5t be+1 we also conceive morality z an inflexible law to :i* ! actions ( ?is be+ mu/ be subject$4 ,x is to be obs]v$ t we conceive ?is morality1 ev5 suppos+ only "o intellig5t be+2 !re=e morality _c be expla9$ by ! relations ( creatures to ea* o!r4 ,imag9e "o man all alone on ! e>?1 c y conceive him exempt f all morality8 ,w\ld he be equally beautiful 9 ! moral ord]1 :e!r he labor$ to p]fect 8 intellect & develop 8 faculties h>moni\sly1 or ab&on$ himself to 8 co>se in/9cts1 l[]+ himself to ! level ( ! bea/s by 8 /upidity & debasem5t8 ,imag9e ! e>?1 ! :ole corporeal univ]se1 & all creat$ be+s1 except "o intellig5ce1 to disappe>2 c y conceive ?is creature :olly exempt f all moral law8 ,c y suppose all 8 ?\ghts & acts ( ! w to be indiff]5t1 & t morality is = him an unmean+ ^w8 ,impossible1 unless y place y\rself 9 op5 /ruggle ) our prim>y ideas1 ) our pr(\nde/ s5tim5ts1 ) ! common s5se ( mank9d4 ,?is1 !n1 is ano!r pro( t 9 ! moral ord] !re is some?+ absolute1 an intr9sic p]fection1 indep5d5t ( ! mutual relations ( creatures2 t c]ta9 acts ( an intellig5t & free creature h a beauty ( _! own4 #bbd4 ,! imputability ( actions (f]s ano!r argum5t 9 confirmation ( ?is tru?4 ,morality is nev] measur$ by ! result2 its p]fection is appreciat$ by :at is imman5t1 t is1 by ! motives :i* h impell$ ! w1 by ! great] or less delib]ation :i* prec$$ ! act ( ! w1 by ! great] or less int5sity ( ! act4 ,if ! result is sometimes consid]$1 all its moral wor? arises f ! int]ior ( ! s\l4 ,:e!r ! result 0 =ese5 or un=ese52 :e!r x 0 possible or n to =esee x2 :e!r x 0 will$ or n2 :e!r x 0 propos$ z ! pr9cipal or second>y object2 :e!r x 0 desir$ or accept$ ) sorr[2 ^! & o!r su* consid]ations are pres5t :5 ! m]it or dem]it ( an action :i* has _h su* or su* result1 is weigh$ & appreciat$4 ,h5ce ?is result has no weight 9 ! moral ord] except 9 s f> z x is ! expression ( ! act ( ! w4 #bbe4 ,?is "* ( imman5ce1 :i* is ess5tial to all moral acts1 ov]?r[s all ! !ories :i* f\nd morality on ext]nal comb9ations2 & %[s t ! act ( a free & intellig5t be+ is good or bad 9 itself1 absolutely ab/ract$ f its good or bad consequ5ces1 :i* 7 n conta9$ 9 ! int]nal act 9 "o way or ano!r4 ,a man1 :o1 by an act :i* he did n & c\ld n =esee1 %\ld s]i\sly injure ! :ole human race1 w\ld be innoc5t2 & ano!r :o ) an evil int5tion %\ld b5efit mank9d1 w\ld be guilty4 ,x is n a virtu\s act to save "o's c\ntry ?r\gh a motive ( vanity or ambition2 & ! un=tunate man1 :o ) a pure & dis9t]e/$ int5tion & ) an ard5t desire to save 8 c\ntry1 %\ld by an error produce its d[nfall1 w\ld n cease to be virtu\s2 ! v act ^: result is s sad1 is consid]$ an act ( virtue4 #bbf4 ,9 :at1 !n1 does absolute morality consi/8 ,:]e is ! hidd5 s\rce ( ?is ray ( beauty :i* we all p]ceive1 :i* p5etrates e ?+1 mak+ all ?+s beautiful1 & )\t :i* ! _w ( intellig5ces w\ld )] & fade away8 ,x seems to me t on ?is po9t1 z on _m o!rs1 sci5ce has n paid suffici5t reg>d to ! admirable pr(\ndness ( ! ,*ri/ian religion1 :i* answ]s ) "o ^w1 z full ( t5d]ness z ( mean+3 ,love4 ,i p>ticul>ly call ! att5tion ( my read]s to ! !ory :i* ,i am go+ to unfold4 ,aft] s _m difficulties z we h hi!rto enc\nt]$ conc]n+ ! moral ord]1 we mu/ try to ga9 "s light on s important a subject4 ,?is light w m & m confirm a tru? :i* sci5ce reveals4 ,:5 we come to ! pr9ciples or ! la/ results ( sci5ce1 ! ideas ( ,*ri/ianity are n useless2 !y ?r[ light on ! f\ndation & on ! summit ( ! edifice ( human k4 ,let n ! read] imag9e t in/ead ( a sci5tific !ory1 ,i am go+ to (f] him a *apt] ( my/icism4 ,i am sure t 9 ! end ! read] w be conv9c$ t1 ev5 "u a purely sci5tific aspect1 ?is doctr9e is mu* m exact & pr(\nd ?an t ( ^? au?ors :o c>efully avoid us+ ! ^w ,god1 z ?\gh ?is augu/ "n w\ld be a blot on ! pages ( sci5ce4 #bbg4 ,absolute morality is ! love ( ,god2 all moral ideas & s5tim5ts are applications & p>ticipations ( ?is love4 ,let u give a pro( ( ?is by c>ry+ ?is pr9ciple to all ! p>ts ( ! moral _w4 ,:at is absolute morality 9 ,god8 ,:at is ! attribute ( ! inf9ite be+1 :i* we call hol9ess8 ,! love ( himself1 ( 8 inf9ite p]fection4 ,9 ,god !re is no duty1 prop]ly s call$1 !re is an absolute necessity ( be+ holy2 = he is "u ! absolute necessity ( lov+ 8 inf9ite p]fection4 ,?us morality 9 its mo/ absolute s5se1 9 its highe/ degree1 is inf9ite hol9ess2 x is indep5d5t ( all freewill4 ,god _c cease to be holy4 #bbh4 ,b x may be ask$1 :y mu/ ,god love himself8 ,?is "q has no mean+ if ! matt] is rightly und]/ood2 = x supposes t :at is entirely absolute c be exactly express$ 9 relative t]ms4 ,! proposition3 ,god mu/ love himself is n exact2 /rict exactness is express$ only 9 ?is3 ,god loves himself2 = x expresses an absolute fact 9 an absolute mann]4 ,if x is n[ ask$1 :y ,god loves himself2 ,i answ] t x might z well be ask$1 :y ,god kn[s himself1 :y he kn[s ! tru?1 or :y he exi/s2 :5 we come to ^! que/ions1 we h arriv$ at ! primitive orig91 at absolute1 uncondition$ ?+s2 !re=e e :y is absurd4 #bbi4 ,morality c1 !re=e1 be express$ 9 an absolute proposition4 ,x is 9 itself1 9 an inf9ite degree1 an absolute tru?2 x implies an id5tity ^: opposite is contradictory3 x is n less connect$ ) ! pr9ciple ( contradiction ?an all metaphysical & geometrical tru?s4 ,its simple/ =mula is3 ! inf9ite loves itself4 #bcj4 ,god 9 8 intellig5ce sees f all et]nity an inf9ity ( possible creatures4 ,conta9+ 9 himself ! gr\nd ( _! possibility & ( all _! relations among !mselves or to _! ,creator1 no?+ c exi/ indep5d5t ( him2 h5ce x is n possible = any be+ to cease to be direct$ to ,god4 ,! end :i* ,god propos$ 9 ! creation c be no o!r ?an himself2 s9ce be=e ! creation only ,god exi/$1 & aft] ! creation !re 7 no p]fections 9 creatures :i* 7 n conta9$ 9 ,god 9 an inf9ite degree1 ei!r =mally or virtually4 ,!re=e ?is direction ( all creatures to ,god z _! la/ end1 is a condition insep>able f !m1 & se5 by ,god f et]nity 9 all possible worlds4 ,:atev] is creat$ or may be creat$ is a realization ( a div9e idea1 ( t :i* 0 repres5t$ 9 ! inf9ite m9d1 ) ! absolute or relative prop]ties :i* pre-exi/$ 9 t repres5tation4 ,!re=e :atev] exi/s or may exi/ mu/ be subject to ?is condition1 x mu/ be direct$ to ,god1 )\t :om its exi/5ce w\ld be impossible4 #bca4 ,among ! creatures1 9 :i* is realiz$ ! repres5tation pre-exi/+ 9 ! div9e m9d1 !re are "s end[$ ) w1 :i* is an incl9ation to :at is kn[n1 &1 by means ( an act ( ! und]/&+1 becomes a pr9ciple ( its own det]m9ations4 ,if ! creature knew ,god intuitively1 ! acts ( its w w\ld be necess>ily moral2 = x w\ld necess>ily be an act ( ! love ( ,god4 ,! rectitude ( ! creat$ w w\ld !n be a con/ant reflection ( ! inf9ite hol9ess1 or ( ! love :i* ,god be>s himself4 ,! moral p]fection ( ! creature w\ld n 9 t case be free1 ?\gh x w\ld /ill be an em95t degree ( moral p]fection4 ,!re w\ld be a p]petual con=mity ( ! creat$ w to ! w ( ,god1 = ! creature lov+ ,god by a happy necessity1 c\ld w no?+ b :at ,god wills4 ,! morality ( ! creat$ w w\ld be ?is con/ant con=mity to ! div9e w1 :i* con=mity w\ld n be di/+ui%$ f ! ess5tially moral & holy act1 by :i* ! creature w\ld love ! inf9ite be+4 ,b s9ce ! k ( ,god is n intuitive1 s9ce ! idea :i* ! creature has ( ,god is an incomplete conception involv+ _m indet]m9ate notions1 ! inf9ite good is n lov$ by necessity1 because x is n kn[n 9 its ess5ce4 ,! w has an incl9ation to good1 b to good indet]m9ately2 & !re=e x does n feel a necess>y incl9ation to any real object4 ,! good is pres5t$ "u a g5]al & indet]m9ate idea1 ) v>i\s applications1 & to none ( !m is ! w incl9$ necess>ily2 h5ce proce$s its fre$om to dep>t f ! ord] se5 by ,god z con=m$ to 8 sov]eign designs2 :5 fre$om1 f> f be+ a p]fection1 is a defect aris+ f ! weakness ( ! k ( ! be+ :i* possesses x4 #bcb4 ,! rational creature con=m+ 9 its acts to ! w ( ,god1 realizes ! ord] :i* ,god wills2 lov+ ?is ord]1 x loves :at ,god loves4 ,if1 al?\gh realiz+ ?is ord]1 ! creature 9 its fre$om does n love ! ord]1 b acts f motives indep5d5t ( x1 its w1 p]=m+ ! act mat]ially1 does n love :at ,god loves2 & "h is ! l9e :i* divides morality f immorality4 ,! prop] morality ( an act consi/s 9 explicit or implicit con=mity ( ! creat$ w to ! div9e w2 ! my/]i\s p]fections ( moral acts1 t lovel9ess 9 !m :i* *>ms & attracts u1 is no?+ else ?an con=mity to ! w ( ,god2 ! absolute "* :i* we f9d 9 morality is ! explicit or implicit love ( ,god1 &1 consequ5tly1 a reflection ( ! inf9ite hol9ess1 or ( ! love by :i* ,god loves himself4 ,by apply+ ?is doctr9e to facts1 we %all see m cle>ly /ill its p]fect exactness4 #bcc4 ,to love ,god is a morally good act2 to hate ,god is a morally evil act1 & ( ! mo/ dete/able "*4 ,:]e is ! morality ( ! act ( lov+ ,god8 ,9 ! act itself1 ! reflection ( ! inf9ite hol9ess1 :i* consi/s 9 ! love :i* ,god has = 8 inf9ite p]fection2 "h is a palpable pro( ( ! tru? ( our !ory4 ,! love ( ! creature = ! ,creator has always be5 reg>d$ z an ess5tially moral act1 z ! pure/ morality2 :i* %[s t 9 ! second>y & f9ite ord]1 ?is act is ! pure/ & mo/ fai?ful expression ( absolute morality4 #bcd4 ,if we ask :y we mu/ love ,god1 we are ord9>ily rem9d$ ( ! b5efits :i* he has conf]r$ ^u u1 ( ! love :i* he be>s u1 & ev5 ( ! example ( ! love :i* we owe to our fri5ds & b5efactors1 & especially our p>5ts2 ^! reasons are c]ta9ly v useful 9 ord] to make ! morality ( ! act 9 "s s5se palpable1 & to move our he>t2 b !y are n completely satisfactory 9 ! field ( sci5ce4 ,=1 if we c\ld d\bt t we ought to love ! inf9ite ,be+1 ! au?or ( all be+s1 x is cle> t we %\ld also d\bt t we ought to love our p>5ts1 our fri5ds1 or our b5efactors4 ,!re=e our love = !m mu/ be f\nd$ on some?+ high]1 or else1 :5 ask$ :y we love !m1 we mu/ rema9 )\t an answ]4 #bce4 ,to wi% to p]fect ! und]/&+ is a moral act 9 itself4 ,:5ce proce$s ! morality ( ?is act8 ,god1 9 giv+ u intellig5ce1 evid5tly wi%$ u to use x4 ,its use1 !re=e1 ent]s into ! ord] kn[n & will$ by ,god2 9 will+ ?is ord]1 we w :at ,god wills2 we love ?is ord] :i* ,god lov$ f all et]nity1 z a realization ( 8 supreme designs2 if1 on ! contr>y1 ! creature does n p]fect 8 intellectual faculties1 & mak+ use ( 8 fre$om leaves ^! faculties unex]cis$1 he dep>ts f ! ord] e/abli%$ by ,god1 he does n w :at ,god wills1 he does n love :at ,god loves4 #bcf4 ,a man may p]fect ^! faculties m]ely = ! sake ( obta9+ ! pleasure ( be+ prais$ by o!rs2 9 ?is case he realizes ! ord] 9 ! p]fection ( 8 und]/&+1 b he does n d s f love ( ! ord] 9 itself1 b f love ( some?+ di/9ct :i* does n ent] into ! ord] will$ by ,god2 = x is evid5t t ,god did n end[ u ) intellectual faculties = ! fruitless object ( obta9+ ea* o!r's praise4 ,"h1 !n1 is ! diff]5ce :i* we "k1 :i* we p]ceive betwe5 two equal actions done ) diff]5t ends3 ! w 9 "o p]fects ! und]/&+ z a simple realization ( ! div9e ord]2 p]haps we may n be able to expla9 :at !re is !re1 b we "k = c]ta9 t ?is w is "r2 9 ! o!r ! w is ! same1 x wills ! same ?+1 b x suff]s some?+ =eign to ?is ord] to m+le ) x2 & ! und]/&+ & ! he>t bo? tell u ?is act :i* does some?+ good1 is n good1 x is n virtue1--x is meanness4 #bcg4 ,!re is a p]son 9 great want1 b :o1 nev]!less1 has e probability ( soon improv+ 8 =tunes1 ,l5tulus & ,julius ea* give him an alms4 ,l5tulus gives 81 because he hopes t :5 ! poor man is bett] (f he w rememb] 8 b5efactor1 & assi/ him if necess>y4 ,! action ( ,l5tulus c h no moral value2 9 judg+ ( x we see a calculation1 n a virtu\s act4 ,julius gives ! alms solely 9 ord] to succor ! un=tunate man1 :o excites 8 pity1 )\t ?9k+ ( ! return :i* may be made2 ! action ( ,julius is morally beautiful1 x is virtu\s4 ,:5ce ?is diff]5ce8 ,l5tulus does good1 assi/+ ! ne$y2 b n f love ( ! int]nal ord] ( ! act2 he b5ds ?is ord] t[>ds himself4 ,god1 will+ t m5 %\ld /& 9 ne$ ( ea* o!r1 also will$ t !y %\ld mutually help "o ano!r2 to help "o1 !re=e1 simply 9 ord] to alleviate 8 wants is to realize simply ! ord] will$ by ,god2 to help "o = a p>ticul> end1 is to realize ?is ord] n z x is e/abli%$ by ,god1 b z comb9$ by man4 ,!re is a complication ( view1 ! simplicity ( int5tion is want+1--?is simplicity s recomm5d$ by ,*ri/ianity1 & ev5 9 philosophy conta9+ a pr(\nd mean+4 #bch4 ,reg>d+ ! purely natural ord]1 we f9d t all moral obligations h 9 ! la/ result a useful object2 z all prohibitions are direct$ to prev5t an injury2 b x does n suffice = morality1 t we w its utility1 we mu/ w ! ord] itself f :i* ! utility results2 = ! great] ! reflection1 & ! love ) :i* ?is ord] is will$1 )\t any mixture ( het]og5e\s views1 ! m moral is ! act4 ,to help ! poor ) ! simple view ( assi/+ !m1 out ( love = !m1 is a virtu\s act2 to help !m1 out ( ?is love1 & ) ! explicit reflection t x is comply+ ) a duty ( humanity1 is /ill m virtu\s2 to help !m1 = ! ?\ght ( ,god1 because y see 9 ! poor man ! image ( ,god1 :o comm&s y to love him1 is a /ill m virtu\s act ?an ei!r ( ! o!r two2 to help !m1 ev5 aga9/ ! incl9ation ( y\r own he>t1 excit$ by res5tm5t aga9/ !m1 or mov$ by o!r passions1 to subdue y\rself ) a firm w = ! love ( ,god1 is an act ( h]oic virtue4 ,obs]ve t ! moral p]fection ( ! act increases 9 proportion z ! ?+ 9 itself is will$ ) great] reflection & love2 & arrives at ! highe/ po9t :51 9 ! ?+ lov$1 x is ,god himself t is lov$4 ,if ! views are selfi% ! ord] is p]v]t$1 & morality is bani%$2 :5 !re are no selfi% views1 b ! act is prompt$ pr9cipally by s5tim5t1 ! action is beautiful1 b belongs r to s5sibility ?an to morality2 :5 ! sacrifice te>s ! he>t1 b ! w prec$$ by reflection comm&s ! sacrifice1 & ! duty is p]=m$ because x is a duty2 or p]haps an act n obligatory is done = ! love ( its moral goodness1 & because x is agreeable to ,god1 we see 9 ! action some?+ s fair1 s lovely1 s des]v+ ( praise1 t we %\ld be conf\nd$ if ask$ ! reason ( ! s5tim5t ( respect :i* we feel = ! p]son :o = su* noble motives sacrifices himself = 8 fell[-m54 ,con=mably to ^! pr9ciples we may cle>ly & exactly det]m9e ! ideas ( morality4 #bci4 ,absolute morality1 & consequ5tly ! orig9 & type ( ! moral ord]1 is ! act by :i* ! inf9ite ,be+ loves 8 inf9ite p]fection4 ,?is is an absolute fact ( :i* we c give no reason a priori4 ,9 ,god !re is1 /rictly speak+1 no duty2 !re is ! absolute necessity ( be+ holy4 #bdj4 ,! act ess5tially moral 9 creatures is ! love ( ,god4 ,x is impossible to f\nd ! morality ( ?is act on ! morality ( any o!r act4 #bda4 ,! acts ( creatures are moral 9 s f> z !y p>ticipate ( ?is love1 explicitly or implicitly4 #bdb4 ,creatures :i* see ,god intuitively1 love him necess>ily2 & ?us all _! acts1 /amp$ ) ?is augu/ m>k1 are necess>ily moral4 #bdc4 ,creatures :i* d n see ,god intuitively necess>ily love good 9 g5]al1 or "u an indet]m9ate idea2 b !y d n love necess>ily any object 9 p>ticul>4 #bdd4 ,9 ?is love ( good 9 g5]al1 ^! free acts are moral1 :5 _! w wills ! ord] :i* ,god has will$1 )\t m+l+ ) ?is ord] =eign or contr>y comb9ations4 #bde4 ,9 ord] t an act may be moral1 x is n necess>y t ! "o :o p]=ms x %\ld ?9k explicitly ( ,god1 nor t 8 w %\ld love him explicitly4 #bdf4 ,! act is m moral1 9 proportion z x is accompani$ ) great] reflection on its morality & its con=mity to ! w ( ,god4 #bdg4 ,moral s5tim5t 0 giv5 u 9 ord] t we might p]ceive ! beauty ( ! ord] will$ by ,god2 x is1 s to speak1 an in/9ct ( love ( ,god4 #bdh4 ,z ?is s5tim5t is innate1 indelible1 & indep5d5t ( reflection1 ev5 a!i/s exp]i5ce x4 #bdi4 ,! idea ( moral obligation or duty results f two ideas3 ! ord] will$ by ,god1 & ! physical fre$om to dep>t f ?is ord]4 ,god grant+ u life1 wills u to try to pres]ve x2 b man is free1 & sometimes kills himself4 ,he t pres]ves 8 life fulfils a duty2 he t de/roys himself1 infr+es x4 ,?us ! idea ( duty conta9s ! idea ( physical fre$om1 :i* _c be ex]cis$1 9 a c]ta9 s5se1 )\t dep>t+ f ! ord] :i* ,god has e/abli%$4 #bej4 ,puni%m5t is a sanction ( ! moral ord]2 x s]ves to supply ! necessity :i* is impossible 9 free be+s4 ,creatures t act )\t k1 fulfil _! de/9y by an absolute necessity2 free be+s d n fulfil _! de/9y by an absolute necessity1 b by t k9d ( necessity produc$ by ! sight ( a pa9ful result4 #bea4 ,"h may be se5 ! diff]5ce betwe5 physical evil & moral evil ev5 9 ! same free be+2 physical evil is pa92 moral evil is ! dep>ture f ! ord] will$ by ,god4 #beb4 ,unlawful is :at is contr>y to a duty4 #bec4 ,lawful is :at is n oppos$ to any duty4 #bed4 ,! et]nal law is ! ord] ( intellig5t be+s1 will$ by ,god con=mably to 8 inf9ite hol9ess4 #bee4 ,intr9sically moral acts are ^? :i* =m a "p ( ! ord] :i* ,god 7suppos+ ! w to create su* or su* be+s7 has will$ necess>ily1 by =ce ( ! love ( 8 inf9ite p]fection4 ,su* actions are comm&$ because !y are good4 #bef4 ,! actions :i* are good because !y are comm&$ are ^? :i* =m a "p ( ! ord] :i* ,god has will$ freely1 & ( :i* he has giv5 creatures k4 #beg4 ,! comm& ( ,god is 8 w communicat$ to creatures4 ,if ?is w is necess>y1 ! precept is natural1 if free1 ! precept is positive4 #beh4 ,reg>d+ ! natural only1 ! ord] will$ by ,god is t :i* leads to ! pres]vation & p]fection ( creat$ be+s4 ,actions are moral :5 con=m$ to ?is ord]4 #bei4 ,! natural p]fection ( be+s consi/s 9 us+ _! faculties = ! end = :i* _! nature %[s !m to be de/9$4 #bfj4 ,nature has *>g$ ea* individual to take c>e ( 8 own pres]vation & p]fection4 #bfa4 ,! natural impossibility ( man's liv+ alone1 %[s t ! pres]vation & p]fection ( individuals mu/ be obta9$ 9 society4 #bfb4 ,! fir/ society is ! family4 #bfc4 ,p>5ts mu/ support & educate _! *ildr52 = )\t ?is ! human race c\ld n be pres]v$4 #bfd4 ,conjugal duties arise f ! ord] necess>y = ! pres]vation & p]fection ( ! society ( ! family1 :i* is indisp5sable = ! pres]vation ( ! human race4 #bfe4 ,! m necess>y ! connection ( an act ) ! pres]vation & p]fection ( ! family1 ! m necess>y is its morality1 & consequ5tly ! less subject to modifications4 #bff4 ,! immorality ( acts contr>y to *a/ity1 & especially ( ^? aga9/ nature1 is f\nd$ on great reasons ( an ord] indisp5sable = ! pres]vation ( ! individual & ! species4 #bfg4 ,passions1 because !y are bl9d1 are evid5tly giv5 u z means1 n z ends4 #bfh4 ,!re=e1 :5 ! gratification ( ! passions is tak51 n z a means1 b z ! end1 ! act is immoral4 ,a simple example w expla9 ?is idea4 ,! pleasure ( eat+ has a v useful object 9 ! pres]vation ( ! individual2 ?us to eat ) pleasure is n evil1 b good2 to eat = ! pleasure ( eat+ is to inv]t ! ord]3 ! act is n good4 ,! same action :i* 9 ! fir/ case is v reasonable1 9 ! second1 is an act ( gluttony4 ,common s5se r5d]s any pro( ( ?is sup]flu\s4 #bfi4 ,if a man liv$ all alone1 ! use ( 8 physical fre$om c\ld nev] injure any "o b himself2 ! moral limit ( 8 fre$om w\ld be to satisfy 8 wants & desires 9 con=mity to ! dictates ( reason4 ,b z m5 live 9 society1 ! ex]cise ( ! physical fre$om ( "o necess>ily int]f]es ) ! fre$om ( o!rs2 to prev5t disord] x is necess>y t ! physical fre$om ( ea* "o %\ld be re/rict$ a little1 & t all %\ld be subject$ to an ord] con=m$ to reason & conducive to ! g5]al good2 h5ce ! necessity ( civil legislation4 ,b z ! legislation _c be e/abli%$ or pres]v$ by itself alone1 a public p[] becomes necess>y4 ,! object ( society is ! g5]al good1 9 subjection to ! pr9ciples ( et]nal morality2 ! same is ! object ( ! public p[]4 #bgj4 ,?is !ory expla9s satisfactorily ! d\ble "* pres5t$ by ! moral ord]3 ! absolute1 & ! relative4 ,! he>t1 reason1 & common s5se =ce u to ackn[l$ge 9 ! moral ord] some?+ absolute & indep5d5t ( ! consid]ation ( utility2 ?is is expla9$ by ris+ to an absolute act ( absolute p]fection1 & reg>d+ ! morality ( creatures z a p>ticipation ( t act4 ,reason & exp]i5ce tea* t ! morality ( actions has useful results2 ?is is expla9$ by obs]v+ t ! absolute act includes ! love ( ! ord] :i* mu/ rule among creat$ be+s 9 ord] t !y may fulfil _! de/9ies4 ,?is ord]1 !n1 is at ! same "t will$ by ,god1 & conducive to ! special end ( ea* creature2 !re=e x is at ! same "t bo? moral & useful4 #bga4 ,b ^! two *>act]s are always kept ess5tially di/9ct2 ! fir/ we p]ceive2 ! second we calculate4 ,:5 ! fir/ is want+1 we are evil2 :5 ! second fails1 we are un=tunate4 ,! pa9ful result is puni%m5t :5 our w has kn[+ly violat$ ! ord]2 o!rwise1 x is simply mis=tune4 #bgb4 ,i hope ,i may flatt] myself t ?is !ory is some:at m satisfactory ?an ^? inv5t$ by "s mod]n philosoph]s = ! purpose ( expla9+ ! absolute nature ( morality4 ,i _h ne$ ( ! idea ( ,god1 x is true2 b ,i conceive no moral ord]1 if ,god be tak5 f ! _w4 ,)\t ,god morality is no?+ b a bl9d s5tim5t1 z absurd 9 its object z 9 itself2 ! philosophy :i* does n f\nd x on ,god1 c nev] expla9 x sci5tifically2 x mu/ conf9e itself to e/abli%+ ! fact z a necessity ^: "* & orig9 !y "k no?+ (4 #bgc4 ,i %all add "o obs]vation :i* is an epitome ( my :ole !ory1 & w %[ :]e9 x diff]s f o!rs :i* likewise ackn[l$ge t ! f\ndation ( ! moral ord] is 9 ,god1 & t ! love ( ,god is ! fir/ ( all duties4 ,! sy/ems to :i* ,i ref]1 suppose ! idea ( morality to be di/9ct f ! idea ( ! love ( ,god2 b ,i say t ! love ( ,god is ! ess5ce ( morality4 ,?us ,i ass]t t ! inf9ite hol9ess is ess5tially ! love ) :i* ,god loves himself2 t ! fir/ & ess5tially moral act ( creatures is ! love ( ,god2 t ! morality ( all _! actions consi/s 9 explicit or implicit con=mity to ! w ( ,god1 :i* is ! same z ! explicit or implicit love ( ,god4 ,"o ( ! mo/ rem>kable results ( ?is !ory :i* places ! ess5ce ( morality 9 ! love ( ,god1 or ( ! inf9ite good1 is t x de/roys ! diff]5ce ( =m ( moral & metaphysical propositions1 %[+ t ! mu/ & ought ( ! =m] is r$uc$ to ! absolute is ( ! latt]4#ig ,! explanation ( ?is important result is ! foll[+4 ,! proposition3 to love ,god is good morally1 is an absolute & id5tical proposition2 = moral goodness is ! same ?+ z ! love ( ,god4 #ig ,see #baj1 #baa1 #bab1 & #bac4 ,! proposition3 to love our neighbor is good1 is r$uc$ to ! =m]1 s9ce to love our neighbor is1 9 a c]ta9 s5se1 to love ,god4 ,! proposition3 to help our neighbor is good1 is r$uc$ to ! la/1 = to help is to love4 ,! proposition3 man ought to pres]ve 8 life1 is expla9$ by ?is absolute proposition3 ! pres]vation ( man's life is will$ by ,god4 ,?us ! ^w ought expresses ! necessity t man %\ld pres]ve 8 life1 if he does n mean to oppose ! ord] will$ by ,god4 ,^! examples are en\gh to %[ h[ easily moral propositions may be r$uc$ to an absolute =m4 ,i _c see h[ ?is is possible1 if in/ead ( say+ t ! love ( ,god is morality1 we di/+ui% betwe5 morality & love1 say+ t ! love ( ,god is a moral act4 #bgd4 ,:atev] judgm5t may be =m$ ( ?is explanation1 x _c be d5i$ t by x1 a pr(\nd wisdom1 ev5 9 ! natural & philosophical ord]1 is recogniz$ 9 t admirable doctr9e ( our div9e ,ma/]1 9 :i* he calls ! love ( ,god ! fir/ & greate/ ( ! comm&m5ts2 & 9 :i*1 :5 he wi%es to po9t out ! "* ( ! moral good1 he especially designates ! fulfilm5t ( ! div9e w4 #bge4 ,if we place ! ess5ce ( morality 9 love1 t :i* is moral mu/ appe> beautiful1 s9ce no?+ is m beautiful ?an love2 x mu/ be agreeable to ! s\l1 s9ce no?+ is m pleas+ ?an love4 ,we see also :y ! ideas ( dis9t]e/$nessss & sacrifice seem s beautiful 9 ! moral ord]1 & make u in/9ctively reject ! !ory ( self-int]e/2 no?+ m dis9t]e/$ ?an love1 no?+ m capable ( great sacrifices4 #bgf4 ,?us egotism is bani%$ f ! moral ord]3 ,god loves himself1 because he is inf9itely p]fect2 outside ( him !re is no?+ to love :i* he has n creat$4 ,! love :i* he has = creatures is completely dis9t]e/$1 s9ce he c receive no?+ f !m4 ,! creature loves itself & also o!rs2 b :at x loves 9 itself & 9 o!r creatures1 is ! reflection ( ! inf9ite good4 ,x desires to be unit$ to ! supreme good1 & 9 ?is x places its la/ happ9ess2 b ?is desire is unit$ ) ! love ( ! supreme good 9 itself1 :i* ! creature does n love precisely = ! reason t !nce results its own happ9ess4 ,,*apt] ,,xxi4 ,a ,,glance ,,at ,,! ,,"w4 #bgg4 ,i h approa*$ ! t]m ( my labor2 & x is well to ca/ a glance ov] ! long pa? :i* ,i h travell$4 ,i propos$ to exam9e ! fundam5tal ideas ( our m9d1 :e!r consid]$ 9 !mselves1 or 9 _! relations to ! _w4 #bgh4 ,) reg>d to objects1 we h f\nd 9 our m9d two primitive facts2 ! intuition ( ext5sion1 & ! idea ( be+4 ,all objective s5sibility is f\nd$ on ! intuition ( ext5sion2 all ! pure intellectual ord] 9 :at relates to indet]m9ate ideas1 is f\nd$ on ! idea ( be+4 ,we h se5 t f ! idea ( be+ proce$ ! ideas ( id5tity1 di/9ction1 unity1 numb]1 duration1 "t1 simplicity1 composition1 ! f9ite1 ! inf9ite1 ! necess>y1 ! cont+5t1 ! mutable1 ! immutable1 sub/ance1 accid5t1 cause1 & effect4 #bgi4 ,we f9d 9 ! subjective ord]1 z facts ( consci\sness1 s5sibility1 or s5sitive be+1 7includ+1 9 ?is1 s5tim5t z well z s5sation17 intellig5ce1 & w2 :5ce we h intuitive ideas ( det]m9ate modes ( be+1 di/9ct f ext5d$ be+s4 #bhj4 ,?us all ! elem5ts ( our m9d are r$uc$ to ! intuitive ideas ( ext5sion1 s5sibility1 intellig5ce1 & w1 & ! indet]m9ate ideas :i* are all f\nd$ on ! idea ( be+4 #bha4 ,f ! idea ( be+1 comb9$ ) n-be+1 spr+s ! pr9ciple ( contradiction1 :i* ( itself produces only indet]m9ate cognitions4 ,9 ord] t sci5ce %\ld h an object t c\ld be realiz$1 ! idea ( be+ mu/ be pres5t$ "u "s =m4 ,our intuition gives two3 ext5sion1 & consci\sness4 #bhb4 ,consci\sness pres5ts ?ree modes ( be+3 s5sibility1 or s5sitive be+2 intellig5ce1 & w4 #bhc4 ,ext5sion1 consid]$ 9 all its purity1 z we imag9e x 9 space1 is ! basis ( geometry4 #bhd4 ,! same ext5sion modifi$ 9 v>i\s ways1 & plac$ 9 relation ) our s5sibility1 is ! basis ( all ! natural sci5ces1 ( all ^? :i* h = _! object1 ! corporeal univ]se4 #bhe4 ,intellig5ce gives rise to ideology & psy*ology4 #bhf4 ,! w1 9 s f> z mov$ by ends1 gives rise to ! moral sci5ces4 #bhg4 ,! idea ( be+ begets ! pr9ciple ( contradiction2 &1 by ?is pr9ciple1 ! g5]al & indet]m9ate ideas1 ^: comb9ation produces ontology1 :i* circulates1 l a life-giv+ fluid1 ?r\gh all ! o!r sci5ces4 #bhh4 ,su* ,i conceive ! tree ( human sci5ce3 to exam9e its roots 0 ! object ( ! ,fundam5tal ,philosophy4 ,,notes ,,to ,,book ,,sev5?4 ,,on ,,*apt] ,i4 ,!re are n want+ ^? :o h believ$ t "t is a ?+ v easily expla9$4 ,su* is ! op9ion ( ,buffi] 9 8 celebrat$ ,trait des premires v]its4#ih ,aft] expla9+ 9 8 own way 9 :at duration & "t consi/1 he adds3 #ih ,"p ,,ii41 *4 xxiii4 ,de la dure et du temps4 ,j'admire donc que tant de philosophes ai5t p>l du temps et de la dure comme de *oses inexplicables ou incomprh5sibles3 si non rogas1 intelligo1 leur fait-on dire1 et selon la p>aphrase de ,locke1 plus je m'applique dc\vrir la nature du temps1 mo9s je la conois4 ,le temps qui dc\vre t\tes les *oses ne saurait tre compris lui-mme4 ,cep5dant1 quoi se rduis5t t\s ces my/res8 ,a deux mots que n\s v5ons d'expos]4 ,x is /range t s di/+ui%$ a writ] %\ld n h kn[n1 or %\ld n h rememb]$1 t ! difficulty ( expla9+ "t 0 ackn[l$g$ n only by ! philosoph]s ( :om he speaks1 b ev5 by s em95t a man z ,/4 ,augu/9e4 ,! words to :i* he alludes are f ,/4 ,augu/9e1 & are f\nd 9 ! f\rte5? *apt] ( ! second book ( 8 confessions3 ,quid enim e/ tempus1 quis hoc facile1 brevit]que explicav]it8 ,quis hoc ad v]bum de illo pr(]5dum vel cognatione compreh5d]it 444 quid ergo e/ tempus8 ,si nemo ex me qurat scio1 si qur5ti explic>e velim nescio4 ,:at is "t8 ,if no "o ask me1 ,i "k1 b if ,i wi% to expla9 x1 ,i "k x n4 ,! great doctor discov]$ "h a pr(\nd "q1 & l all great g5iuses :5 !y f9d !mselves 9 sight ( a deep abyss1 he felt a /rong desire to "k :at 0 hidd5 9 its bottom4 ,full ( a holy en?usiasm1 he turns to ,god1 & begs him to expla9 ?is my/]y3 ,ex>sit animus meus nosse i/ud implicatissimum enigma4 ,noli claud]e1 ,dom9e ,deus1 bone pat]2 p] ,*ri/um obsecro1 noli claud]e desid]io meo i/a et usitata1 et abdita1 quom9us 9 ea p5etret1 et dilucescant alluc5te mis]icordia tua1 ,dom9e6 ,quem p]cunctabor de 88 et cui fructuosius confitebor imp]itiam meam nisi tibi1 cui non sunt mole/a /udia mea flammantia vehem5t] 9 scripturas tuas8 ,da quod amo2 amo enim1 et hoc tu d$i/i4 ,da1 pat]1 qui v]e no/i data bona d>e filiis tuis4 ,da1 quoniam suscepi cognosc]e te2 et labor e/ ante me donec ap]ias4 ,p] ,*ri/um obsecro1 9 nom9e ejus sancti sanctorum nemo mihi ob/repat4 ,et ego cr$idi propt] quod et loquor4 ,hc e/ spes mea1 ad hanc vivo1 ut contempl] delectationes ,dom9i4 ,ecce vet]es posui/i dies meos1 et transeunt2 et quomodo1 nescio4 ,et dicimus1 ,tempus et tempus1 tempora et tempora4 ,quamdiu dixit hoc ille2 quamdiu fecit hoc ille2 et quam longo tempore illud non vidi2 et duplum temporis habet hc syllaba2 ad illam simplam brevem4 ,dicimus hc1 et audimus hc3 et intelligimur1 et intelligimus4 ,manife/issima et usitatissima sunt1 et eadem rursus nimis lat5t1 et nova e/ inv5tio eorum4 7,lib4 ,,xi41 cap4 xxii47 ,video igitur tempus quamdam esse di/5sionem1 s$ video an vid]e mihi videor8 ,tu demon/rabis lux1 v]itas4 7,cap4 xxiii47 ,et confiteor tibi 7,dom9e7 ignor>e me adhuc quid sit tempus2 et rursus confiteor tibi 7,dom9e7 scire me 9 tempore i/a dic]e1 et diu me jam loqui de tempore1 atque idipsum diu1 non esse nisi moram temporis4 ,quomodo igitur hoc sciam1 qu&o quid sit tempus nescio8 an =te nescio quemadmodum dicam quod scio8 ,hei mihi qui nescio saltem quid nesciam6 ,ecce ,deus meus coram te1 quia non m5tior2 sicut loquor ita e/ cor meum4 ,tu illum9abis luc]nam meam1 ,dom9e ,deus meus2 illum9abis t5ebras meas4 7,cap4 xxv47 ,to pres5t z easy ?+s :i* seem$ difficult to ! greate/ m51 is1 to say ! lea/ ( x1 r bold4 ,! au?or flatt]s himself1 9 su* in/ances t he has settl$ ! "q :5 he has n p5etrat$ beyond its surface4 ,x (t5 happ5s t objects seem v cle> at fir/1 & we only discov] ! difficulty :i* !y pres5t1 :5 we exam9e !m m closely4 ,ask a man unskill$ 9 que/ions ( philosophy1 :at ext5sion is1 or space1 or "t1 & he w wond] t y f9d any difficulty 9 ?+s s cle>4 ,& :y8 ,because 8 fir/ reflex act does n g beyond ! ord9>y idea ( ^! objects1 or r1 ! use ( ?is idea4 ,fa!r ,buffi] says1 9 ! *apt] f :i* we quot$ be=e3 ,dans t\tes ces re*]*es de mtaphysique1 si emb>asses en app>5ce1 il ne faut1 comme je l'ai dit d'abord1 que di/+u] les ides les plus simples que n\s avons dans l'esprit d'avec les noms qui y sont atta*s p> l'usage1 p\r y dc\vrir ce qui n\s doit t5ir lieu de premire vrit leur sujet4 ,i d n d5y t ?is obs]vation pres5ts a useful crit]ion2 b ,i _c see 9 x s simple a means ( solv+ ! mo/ difficult que/ions ( philosophy4 ,= ! difficulty is 9 di/+ui%+ ) exactness ^! simple ideas1 :i*1 because !y con/itute ! f\ndation ( our k1 are1 = ?is v reason1 g5]ally plac$ at a great] dep?1 & cov]$ ov] ) a ?\s& diff]5t objects1 :i* h9d] u f p]ceiv+ !m cle>ly & di/9ctly1 ,fa!r ,buffi] 0 l$ a/ray by ! v cle>ness ( 8 explanation ( "t1 & believ$ he saw ! bottom ( ! abyss1 :5 he only saw ! reflection on its surface3 ,qu'e/-ce que dur]8 ,c'e/ exi/] sans tre dtruit3 voil l'explication la plus nette qu'on puisse donn] de la dure2 mais le simple mot de dure fait compr5dre la *ose aussi clairem5t que cette explication4 ,outre l'ide de la dure1 n\s avons l'ide de la mesure de la dure1 qui n'e/ pas la dure elle-mme1 bi5 que n\s confondions s\v5t l'une avec l'autre2 comme il arrive d'ord9aire de confondre nos s5tim5ts ou avec leurs effets1 ou avec leurs causes1 ou avec leurs autres circon/ances4 ,or1 cette mesure de la dure n'e/ autre *ose que ce que n\s appelons le temps2 et le temps n'e/ que la rvolution rgulire de quelque *ose de s5sible1 comme du c\rs annuel du soleil1 ou du c\rs m5suel de la lune1 ou diurnal d'une aiguille sur le cadran d'une horloge4 ,l'att5tion que n\s avons cette rvolution rgulire fait prcism5t en n\s l'ide du temps4 ,l'int]valle de cette rvolution se divisant en de mo9dres int]valles =me l'ide des p>ties du temps1 auxquelles n\s donnons aussi le nom de temps plus long ou plus c\rt1 selon les div]s int]valles de la rvolution4 ,qu& n\s avons une fois acquis cette ide du temps1 n\s l'appliquons t\te la dure que n\s concevons ou que n\s supposons rpondre tel int]valle de la rvolution rgulire1 et p> l n\s donnons la dure mme le nom de temps1 appliquant le nom de de la mesure la *ose mesure2 mais sans que la dure qu'on mesure soit au fond le temps auquel on la mesure1 et qui e/ une rvolution4 ,a9si1 ,dieu a dur avant le temps1 c'e/--dire a t sans cess] d'tre avant la cration du monde1 et avant la rvolution rgulire d'aucun corps4 ,"h foll[s ! passage already quot$1 :]e ! au?or %[s 8 surprise t ! explanation ( "t has be5 f\nd s difficult4 ,aft] giv+ 8 rule t ! simple/ ideas mu/ be sep>at$ f ! t]ms :i* cu/om has jo9$ to !m1 he concludes ) ^! words3 ,p> ces deux moy5s n\s tr\vons t\t d'un c\p l'ide ou la notion de dure et de temps3 j'ai l'ide d'un tre en tant qu'il ne cesse pas d'tre1 c'e/ ce qui s'appelle dure2 j'ai l'ide de cette dure en tant qu'elle e/ mesure p> la rvolution rgulire d'un corps ou p> les int]valles de cette rvolution1 c'e/ ce que j'appelle temps4 ,il me semble que ces notions sont aussi claires qu'elles peuv5t l'tre1 et celui qui *]*e les claircir davantage e/ peu prs aussi peu s5s que celui qui v\drait claircir comm5t deux fois deux font quatre et ne font pas c9q4 ,:at explanation is conta9$ 9 ^! passages8 ,i c see none4 ,duration1 says ,buffi]1 is un9t]rupt$ succession1 & "t is ! measure ( ?is duration4 ,b he ought to h reflect$ t only :at has quantity c be measur$2 & consequ5tly duration _c he measur$1 unless he supposes a l5g? be=e ! measure4 ,?is is precisely :at ! difficulty consi/s 94 ,x is well kn[n t "t is measur$ by ref]5ce to ! revolution ( "s quantity4 ,b :at he ought to h expla9$ 01 ! nature ( t :i* is measur$1 ( ?is quantity1 or l5g?1 indep5d5tly ( ! measure4 ,measure requires a great] & a less1 & ?is great] & less exi/s indep5d5tly ( all measure4 ,:at1 !n1 is ! nature ( ?is quantity1 ( ?is great] & less8 ,fa!r ,buffi] obs]ves1 t al?\gh !re 7 no succession ( ?\ght 9 u1 & we %\ld h only "o ?\ght1 we %\ld /ill h ! idea ( duration z mu* z ev]4 ,?is is true1 if we make ! idea ( duration ! same z ! idea ( un9t]rupt$ exi/5ce4 ,b on ?is hypo!sis we c\ld n measure ?is duration1 & consequ5tly c\ld n h ! idea ( "t4 ,9 ,god1 says ,buffi]1 !re is no succession1 =1 does n 8 be+ endure always8 ,no d\bt ( x2 b ?is argum5t in/ead ( confirm+ 8 doctr9e1 only %[s its weakness4 ,! duration ( ,god _c be measur$ unless we suppose a great] & less 9 ! duration ( necess>y & inf9ite be+4 ,!re=e1 ! idea ( duration1 or un9t]rupt$ exi/5ce1 does n give u ! idea ( "t1 or ( a duration t c be measur$4 ,,on ,,*apt] ,,iv4 ,! d5ial ( all succession 9 et]nity1 & mak+ x all pres5t1 )\t any pa/ or future1 mu/ n be reg>d$ z a va9 subtlety ( ! s*ools4 ,long be=e ! s*ola/ics ?is _h be5 taught by ! mo/ em95t au?ors4 ,/4 ,augu/9e says3 ,idipsum enim tempus tu fec]as3 nec prt]ire potu]unt tempora antequam fac]es tempora4 ,si autem ante clum et t]ram nullum erat tempus1 cur quritur quid tunc faciebas8 ,non enim erat tunc1 ubi non erat tempus2 nec 9 tempore tempora prc$is2 alioqu9 non omnia tempora prc$]es4 ,s$ prc$is omnia tempora prt]ita1 celsitud9e semp] prs5tis t]nitatis3 et sup]as omnia futura2 quia et illa futura sunt2 et cum v5]9t prt]ita erunt2 tu autem idem ipse es1 et anni tui non defici5t4 ,anni tui nec eunt1 nec v5iunt3 i/i autem no/ri1 et eunt1 et v5iunt1 ut omnes v5iant4 ,anni tui omnes simul /ant1 quoniam /ant2 nec euntes v5i5tibus excluduntur1 quia non transeunt3 i/i autem no/ri omnes erunt cum omnes non erunt4 ,anni tui dies unus3 et dies tuus non quotidie1 s$ hodie3 quia hodi]nus tuus non c$it cra/9o neque succ$it he/]no4 ,hodi]nus tuus t]nitas2 ideo cot]num g5ui/i1 cui dixi/i3 ,ego hodie g5ui te4 ,omnia tempora tu feci/i1 et ante omnia tempora tu es1 nec aliquo tempore non erat tempus4 7,conf4 ,lib4 ,,xi41 cap4 xiii47 ,9 ano!r place we f9d ! same doctr9e 9 ^! t]ms3 ,anni ,dei t]nitas ,dei e/4 t]nitas ipsa ,dei sub/antia e/1 qu nihil habet mutabile4 ,ibi nihil e/ prt]itum1 quasi jam non sit2 nihil e/ futurum1 quasi nondum sit4 ,non e/ ibi1 nisi e/4 ,non e/ ibi1 fuit et erit1 quia et quod fuit jam non e/2 et quod erit nondum e/2 s$ quidquid ibi e/1 non nisi e/4 7,9 ,psal4 #aja2 ,s]m4 #b1 num4 #aj47 ,plato 0 n ignorant ( ?is tru?1 & ! holy fa!rs h con/antly taught x4 ,:5 ! s*ola/ics adopt$ ! def9ition ( ,bo?ius1 t et]nity is int]m9abilis vit tota simul et p]fecta possessio1 !y only embrac$ a doctr9e z solid z x 0 univ]sal4 ,x is difficult to expla9 ^! sublime ideas 9 a m l(ty or a m pr(\nd mann] ?an ,f5elon does 9 8 ,treatise on ! ,exi/5ce ( ,god4#ii #ii ,,ii4 "p1 *4 ii41 #i4 ,c'e/ retomb] dans l'ide du temps1 et confondre t\t1 que de v\loir imag9] en ,dieu ri5 qui ait rapport aucune succession4 ,en lui ri5 ne dure1 p>ce que ri5 ne passe3 t\t e/ fixe2 t\t e/ la fois2 t\t e/ immobile4 ,en ,dieu ri5 n'a t1 ri5 ne s]a2 mais t\t e/4 ,supprimons donc p\r lui t\tes les que/ions que l'habitude et la faiblesse de l'esprit f9i1 qui veut embrass] l'inf9i sa mode troite et racc\rcie1 me t5t]ait de faire4 ,dirai-je1 mon ,dieu1 que v\s aviez dj une t]nit d'exi/5ce en v\s-mme avant que v\s m'eussiez cr1 et qu'il v\s re/e encore une autre t]nit1 aprs ma cration1 o v\s exi/ez t\j\rs8 ,ces mots de dj et d'aprs sont indignes de celui qui e/4 ,v\s ne p\vez s\ffrir aucun pass et aucun av5ir en v\s4 ,c'e/ une folie que de v\loir divis] votre t]nit1 qui e/ une p]man5ce indivisible3 c'e/ v\loir que le rivage s'enfuie1 p>ce qu'en desc5dant le long d'un fleuve1 je m'loigne t\j\rs de ce rivage qui e/ immobile4 ,ins5s que je suis6 ,je veux1 immobile vrit1 v\s attribu] l'tre born1 *angeant et successif de votre crature6 ,v\s n'avez en v\s aucune mesure dont on puisse mesur] votre exi/5ce2 c> elle n'a ni bornes ni p>ties2 v\s n'avez ri5 de mesurable3 les mesures mme qu'on peut tir] des tres borns1 *angeants1 divisibles et successifs1 ne peuv5t s]vir v\s mesur]1 v\s qui tes inf9i1 indivisible1 immuable et p]man5t4 ,comm5t dirai-je donc que la c\rte dure de la crature e/ p> rapport votre t]nit8 ,n'tiez-v\s pas avant moi8 ,ne s]ez-v\s pas aprs moi8 ,ces p>oles t5d5t signifi] quelque vrit2 mais elles sont la rigueur indignes et impropres4 ,ce qu'elles ont de vrai1 c'e/ que l'inf9i surpasse inf9im5t le f9i2 qu'a9si votre exi/5ce inf9ie surpasse inf9im5t en t\t s5s mon exi/5ce1 qui1 tant borne1 a un comm5cem5t1 un prs5t et un futur4 ,mais il e/ faux que la cration de votre ouvrage p>tage votre t]nit en deux t]nits4 ,deux t]nits ne f]ai5t pas plus qu'une seule3 une t]nit p>tage1 qui aurait une p>tie antrieure et une p>tie po/rieure1 ne s]ait plus une vritable t]nit3 en v\lant la multipli]1 on la dtruirait1 p>ce qu'une p>tie s]ait ncessairem5t la borne de l'autre p> le b\t o elles se t\*]ai5t4 ,qui dit t]nit1 s'il ent5d ce qu'il dit1 ne dit que ce qui e/1 et ri5 au del2 c> t\t ce qu'on aj\te cette inf9ie simplicit l'anantit4 ,qui dit t]nit ne s\ffre plus le langage du temps4 ,le temps et l't]nit sont incomm5surables1 ils ne peuv5t tre comp>s2 et on e/ sduit p> sa propre faiblesse t\tes les fois qu'on imag9e quelque rapport entre des *oses si disproportionnes4 ,v\s avez nanmo9s1 mon ,dieu1 fait quelque *ose hors de v\s2 c> je ne suis pas v\s1 et il s'en faut inf9im5t4 ,qu& e/-ce donc que v\s m'avez fait8 ,e/-ce que v\s n'tiez pas avant que de me faire8 ,mais que dis-je8 ,me voil dj retomb dans mon illusion et dans les que/ions du temps4 ,je p>le de v\s comme de moi1 ou comme de quelque autre tre passag] que je p\rrais mesur] avec moi4 ,ce qui passe peut tre mesur avec ce qui passe2 mais ce qui ne passe po9t e/ hors de t\te mesure et de t\te comp>aison avec ce qui passe3 il n'e/ p]mis de dem&] ni qu& il a t1 ni s'il tait avant ce qui n'e/ pas1 ou qui n'e/ qu'en passant4 ,v\s tes1 et c'e/ t\t4 ,o que j'aime cette p>ole1 et qu'elle me remplit p\r t\t ce que j'ai connatre de v\s6 ,v\s tes celui qui e/4 ,t\t ce qui n'e/ po9t cette p>ole v\s dgrade4 ,il n'y a qu'elle qui v\s ressemble4 ,eu n'aj\tant ri5 au mot d'tre1 elle ne dim9ue ri5 de votre gr&eur4 ,elle e/1 je l'ose dire1 cette p>ole1 inf9im5t p>faite comme v\s4 ,il n'y a que v\s qui puissiez p>l] a9si1 et r5f]m] votre inf9i dans trois mots si simples4 ,je ne suis pas1 mon ,dieu1 ce qui e/4 ,hlas6 je suis presque ce qui n'e/ pas4 ,je me vois comme un milieu incomprh5sible entre le nant et l'tre4 ,je suis celui qui a t2 je suis celui qui s]a2 je suis celui qui n'e/ plus ce qu'il a t2 je suis celui qui n'e/ pas encore ce qu'il s]a2 et dans cet entre-deux que je suis1 un je ne sais quoi qui ne peut s'arrt] en soi1 qui n'a aucune consi/ance1 qui s'c\le rapidem5t comme l'eau2 un je ne sais quoi que je ne puis saisir1 qui s'enfuit de mes propres ma9s1 qui n'e/ plus ds que je le veux saisir ou l'ap]cevoir2 un je ne sais quoi qui f9it dans l'in/ant mme o il comm5ce2 en sorte que je ne puis jamais un seul mom5t me tr\v] moi-mme1 fixe et prs5t moi-mme1 p\r dire simplem5t3 ,je suis4 ,a9si1 ma dure n'e/ qu'une dfaillance p]ptuelle4 ,o que je suis lo9 de votre t]nit qui e/ indivisible1 inf9ie1 et t\j\rs prs5te t\t entire6 ,que je suis mme bi5 loign de la compr5dre6 ,elle m'*appe =ce d'tre vraie1 simple et imm5se2 comme mon tre m'*appe =ce d'tre compos de p>ties1 ml de vrit et de m5songe1 d'tre et de nant4 ,c'e/ trop peu que de dire de v\s que v\s tiez des sicles inf9is avant que je fusse4 ,j'aurais honte de p>l] a9si2 c> c'e/ mesur] l'inf9i avec le f9i qui e/ un demi-nant4 ,qu& je cra9s de dire que v\s tiez avant que je fusse1 ce n'e/ pas p\r d\t] que v\s exi/ant1 v\s ne m'ayez cr1 moi qui n'exi/ais pas3 mais c'e/ p\r loign] de moi t\tes les ides imp>faites qui sont au-dessus de v\s4 ,dirai-je que v\s tiez avant moi8 ,non2 c> voil deux t]mes que je ne puis s\ffrir4 ,il ne faut pas dire1 v\s tiez2 c> v\s tiez m>que un temps pass et une succession4 ,v\s tes3 et il n'y a qu'un prs5t1 immobile1 indivisible et inf9i que l'on puisse v\s attribu]1 p\r p>l] dans la rigueur des t]mes4 ,il ne faut po9t dire que v\s avez t\j\rs t1 il faut dire que v\s tes2 et ce t]me de t\j\rs1 qui e/ si =t p\r la crature1 e/ trop faible p\r v\s2 c> il m>que une cont9uit et non une p]man5ce4 ,il vaut mieux dire simplem5t et sans re/riction1 que v\s tes4 ,o ,etre6 ,etre6 votre t]nit1 qui n'e/ que votre tre mme1 m'tonne2 mais elle me console4 ,je me tr\ve devant v\s comme si je n'tais pas2 je m'abme dans votre inf9i2 et lo9 de mesur] votre p]man5ce1 p> rapport ma fluidit cont9uelle1 je comm5ce me p]dre de vue1 ne me tr\v] plus1 et ne voir en t\t que ce qui e/2 je veux dire v\s-mme4 ,ce que j'ai dit du pass1 je le dis de mme de l'av5ir4 ,on ne peut po9t dire que v\s s]ez aprs ce qui passe2 c> v\s ne passez po9t4 ,a9si1 v\s ne s]ez prs5t en p>lant de v\s4 ,on ne dit po9t d'un rivage immobile1 qu'il devance ou qu'il suit les flots d'une rivire3 il ne devance ni ne suit2 c> il ne m>*e po9t4 ,ce que je rem>que de ce rivage p> rapport l'immobilit locale1 je le dois dire de l'tre inf9i p> rapport l'immobilit d'exi/5ce4 ,ce qui passe a t et s]a1 et passe du prtrit au futur p> un prs5t imp]ceptible1 qu'on ne peut jamais assign]4 ,mais ce qui ne passe po9t exi/e absolum5t1 et n'a qu'un prs5t inf9i3 il e/1 et c'e/ t\t ce qu'il e/ p]mis d'en dire3 il e/ sans temps dans t\s les temps de la cration4 ,quiconque sort de cette simplicit1 tombe de l't]nit dans le temps4 ,,note ,,to ,,book ,,eigh?4 7#c7 ,p]haps "s ( my read]s1 :o are n well acqua9t$ ) ! hi/ory ( philosophy1 may ?9k t ,i h ext5d$ ! explanation ( ! idea ( ! inf9ite to too great l5g?1 & consid] ^! que/ions z s]v+ r to subtilize1 ?an to acquire solid k4 ,?is is a great mi/ake4 ,at all times ! philosophical que/ions ( ! idea ( ! inf9ite h held a prom95t position1 & at ! pres5t "t !re is sc>cely any :i* require to be m c>efully exam9$1 if we wi% to /ay ! progress ( pan!ism4 ,i %all n cease to repeat t a great _m ( ! mo/ s]i\s errors h _! bir? 9 a confusion 9 _! fundam5tal ideas2 if "o is well gr\nd$ 9 ^! ideas1 he has no?+ to fe> f c]ta9 works ^: secret 9 lead+ "o a/ray1 consi/s 9 us+ incompreh5sible words1 or 9 giv+ a false s5se to ^? :i* c be und]/ood4 ,h[ev] ?is may be1 ,i w\ld rem9d ^? :o believe ^! que/ions m]e s*ola/ic cavils1 t !y mu/ reg>d z cavill]s ! mo/ em95t philosoph]s ( anci5t & mod]n times4 ,,note ,,to ,,book ,,n9?4 7#d7 ,i "k t "s mod]n philosoph]s1 & m especially ,m4 ,c\s91 reject ! accusation ( pan!ism1 & expla9 9 _! own way ^? passages ( _! works 9 :i* ?is error is pr(ess$4 ,z x is n possible = me to exam9e at any l5g?1 a "q :i* w\ld require ! ins]tion ( long extracts1 ,i m]ely ref] ! read] to :at ,i h said 9 ! body ( ! "w1 & ) respect to ,m4 ,c\s91 to ! extracts :i* ,i h made 9 my ,lett]s to a ,skeptic 9 ,matt]s ( ,religion1 ,lett] ,i4 ,x is n ! fault ( ,m4 ,c\s9's adv]s>ies t he has us$ su* cle> expressions t no man ( s\nd judgm5t c d\bt t !y conta9 a full pr(ession ( pan!ism4 ,leav+ to ! philosoph] ! responsibility ( 8 int5tions1 ,i %all only beg our "y m5 n to judge lightly ( ! disputes ( ! neighbor+ k+dom1 :i* are n always receiv$ "h ?r\gh fai?ful organs2 & to )hold _! fai? f ^? :o w\ld attempt to p]suade !m t !re is no gr\nd = ! al>ms ( m5 ( s\nd philosophical doctr9e4 ,,! ,,end4 99 99 99 99 99 ,transcrib]'s ,notes ,obvi\s typographical errors h be5 sil5tly correct$4 ,v>iations 9 hyph5ation h be5 /&>dis$1 b o!r v>iations 9 spell+1 acc5ts & punctuation are z 9 ! orig9al4 ,italics are repres5t$ ?us italic4 #ah1 ,book ,,vii1 f\r? p>agraph ,a space ^: p>ts are n cont9u\s1 is n a space2 nei!r is a "t ^: p>ts are n cont9u\s1 a space4 ,! f9al space has be5 *ang$ to "t4 ,footnote #fa read ,,iii4 ,?4 #e1 ,,ii41 p4 #bef44 ,f ! context x appe>s t ,ib41 0 omitt$4 ,book ,x ,*apt] #a4 ,! fir/ s5t5ce read #a4 ,be+s are divid$ into two classes3 necess>y & cont+5t2 necess>y be+ is t :i* _c be2 ,?is has be5 *ang$ to _c b be2 ,! repetition ( ! title ( ea* book on consecutive pages at ! beg9n+ has be5 remov$4