靠谱电子书 > 经管其他电子书 > the+critique+of+pure+reason_纯粹理性批判 >

第101部分

the+critique+of+pure+reason_纯粹理性批判-第101部分

小说: the+critique+of+pure+reason_纯粹理性批判 字数: 每页4000字

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页,按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页,按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部!
————未阅读完?加入书签已便下次继续阅读!



from its internal possibility… which is but a miserable tautology。 The
word reality in the conception of the thing; and the word existence in
the conception of the predicate; will not help you out of the
difficulty。 For; supposing you were to term all positing of a thing
reality; you have thereby posited the thing with all its predicates in
the conception of the subject and assumed its actual existence; and
this you merely repeat in the predicate。 But if you confess; as
every reasonable person must; that every existential proposition is
synthetical; how can it be maintained that the predicate of
existence cannot be denied without contradiction?… a property which is
the characteristic of analytical propositions; alone。
  I should have a reasonable hope of putting an end for ever to this
sophistical mode of argumentation; by a strict definition of the
conception of existence; did not my own experience teach me that the
illusion arising from our confounding a logical with a real
predicate (a predicate which aids in the determination of a thing)
resists almost all the endeavours of explanation and illustration。 A
logical predicate may be what you please; even the subject may be
predicated of itself; for logic pays no regard to the content of a
judgement。 But the determination of a conception is a predicate; which
adds to and enlarges the conception。 It must not; therefore; be
contained in the conception。
  Being is evidently not a real predicate; that is; a conception of
something which is added to the conception of some other thing。 It
is merely the positing of a thing; or of certain determinations in it。
Logically; it is merely the copula of a judgement。 The proposition;
God is omnipotent; contains two conceptions; which have a certain
object or content; the word is; is no additional predicate… it
merely indicates the relation of the predicate to the subject。 Now; if
I take the subject (God) with all its predicates (omnipotence being
one); and say: God is; or; There is a God; I add no new predicate to
the conception of God; I merely posit or affirm the existence of the
subject with all its predicates… I posit the object in relation to
my conception。 The content of both is the same; and there is no
addition made to the conception; which expresses merely the
possibility of the object; by my cogitating the object… in the
expression; it is… as absolutely given or existing。 Thus the real
contains no more than the possible。 A hundred real dollars contain
no more than a hundred possible dollars。 For; as the latter indicate
the conception; and the former the object; on the supposition that the
content of the former was greater than that of the latter; my
conception would not be an expression of the whole object; and would
consequently be an inadequate conception of it。 But in reckoning my
wealth there may be said to be more in a hundred real dollars than
in a hundred possible dollars… that is; in the mere conception of
them。 For the real object… the dollars… is not analytically
contained in my conception; but forms a synthetical addition to my
conception (which is merely a determination of my mental state);
although this objective reality… this existence… apart from my
conceptions; does not in the least degree increase the aforesaid
hundred dollars。
  By whatever and by whatever number of predicates… even to the
plete determination of it… I may cogitate a thing; I do not in
the least augment the object of my conception by the addition of the
statement: This thing exists。 Otherwise; not exactly the same; but
something more than what was cogitated in my conception; would
exist; and I could not affirm that the exact object of my conception
had real existence。 If I cogitate a thing as containing all modes of
reality except one; the mode of reality which is absent is not added
to the conception of the thing by the affirmation that the thing
exists; on the contrary; the thing exists… if it exist at all… with
the same defect as that cogitated in its conception; otherwise not
that which was cogitated; but something different; exists。 Now; if I
cogitate a being as the highest reality; without defect or
imperfection; the question still remains… whether this being exists or
not? For; although no element is wanting in the possible real
content of my conception; there is a defect in its relation to my
mental state; that is; I am ignorant whether the cognition of the
object indicated by the conception is possible a posteriori。 And
here the cause of the present difficulty bees apparent。 If the
question regarded an object of sense merely; it would be impossible
for me to confound the conception with the existence of a thing。 For
the conception merely enables me to cogitate an object as according
with the general conditions of experience; while the existence of
the object permits me to cogitate it as contained in the sphere of
actual experience。 At the same time; this connection with the world of
experience does not in the least augment the conception; although a
possible perception has been added to the experience of the mind。
But if we cogitate existence by the pure category alone; it is not
to be wondered at; that we should find ourselves unable to present any
criterion sufficient to distinguish it from mere possibility。
  Whatever be the content of our conception of an object; it is
necessary to go beyond it; if we wish to predicate existence of the
object。 In the case of sensuous objects; this is attained by their
connection according to empirical laws with some one of my
perceptions; but there is no means of cognizing the existence of
objects of pure thought; because it must be cognized pletely a
priori。 But all our knowledge of existence (be it immediately by
perception; or by inferences connecting some object with a perception)
belongs entirely to the sphere of experience… which is in perfect
unity with itself; and although an existence out of this sphere cannot
be absolutely declared to be impossible; it is a hypothesis the
truth of which we have no means of ascertaining。
  The notion of a Supreme Being is in many respects a highly useful
idea; but for the very reason that it is an idea; it is incapable of
enlarging our cognition with regard to the existence of things。 It
is not even sufficient to instruct us as to the possibility of a being
which we do not know to exist。 The analytical criterion of
possibility; which consists in the absence of contradiction in
propositions; cannot be denied it。 But the connection of real
properties in a thing is a synthesis of the possibility of which an
a priori judgement cannot be formed; because these realities are not
presented to us specifically; and even if this were to happen; a
judgement would still be impossible; because the criterion of the
possibility of synthetical cognitions must be sought for in the
world of experience; to which the object of an idea cannot belong。 And
thus the celebrated Leibnitz has utterly failed in his attempt to
establish upon a priori grounds the possibility of this sublime
ideal being。
  The celebrated ontological or Cartesian argument for the existence
of a Supreme Being is therefore insufficient; and we may as well
hope to increase our stock of knowledge by the aid of mere ideas; as
the merchant to augment his wealth by the addition of noughts to his
cash account。

     SECTION V。 Of the Impossibility of a Cosmological Proof
                  of the Existence of God。

  It was by no means a natural course of proceeding; but; on the
contrary; an invention entirely due to the subtlety of the schools; to
attempt to draw from a mere idea a proof of the existence of an object
corresponding to it。 Such a course would never have been pursued; were
it not for that need of reason which requires it to suppose the
existence of a necessary being as a basis for the empirical regress;
and that; as this necessity must be unconditioned and a priori; reason
is bound to discover a conception which shall satisfy; if possible;
this requirement; and enable us to attain to the a priori cognition of
such a being。 This conception was thought to be found in the idea of
an ens realissimum; and thus this idea was employed for the attainment
of a better defined knowledge of a necessary being; of the existence
of which we were convinced; or persuaded; on other grounds。 Thus
reason was seduced from her natural courage; and; instead of
concluding with the conception of an ens realissimum; an attempt was
made to begin with it; for the purpose of inferring from it that
idea of a necessary existence which it was in fact called in to
plete。 Thus arose that unfortunate ontological argument; which
neither satisfies the healthy mon sense of humanity; nor sustains
the scientific examination of the philosopher。
  The cosmological proof; which we are about to examine; retains the
connection between absolute necessity and the highest reality; but;
instead of reasoning from this highest reality to a necessary
existence; like the preceding argument; it concludes from the given。
unconditioned necessity of some being its unlimited reality。 The track
it pursues; whether rational or sophis

返回目录 上一页 下一页 回到顶部 0 0

你可能喜欢的