BACK

interconnected *random kant*

* random kant *


We can deduce that, so regarded, the Ideal of human reason stands in need of, for example, our sense perceptions. As we have already seen, the transcendental aesthetic exists in necessity. Since knowledge of the Antinomies is a priori, our a priori concepts exclude the possibility of, even as this relates to the Ideal of practical reason, time. As any dedicated reader can clearly see, the reader should be careful to observe that the Categories are a representation of the objects in space and time; in natural theology, metaphysics is a body of demonstrated doctrine, and some of it must be known a posteriori. In the case of our understanding, our experience depends on the Antinomies, since knowledge of the things in themselves is a posteriori.

By means of analytic unity, to avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that natural causes exclude the possibility of the manifold. Time (and it remains a mystery why this is true) may not contradict itself, but it is still possible that it may be in contradiction with the pure employment of our ideas. Because of the relation between the Ideal and our judgements, the transcendental unity of apperception teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of the discipline of practical reason; for these reasons, the phenomena are the mere results of the power of the architectonic of human reason, a blind but indispensable function of the soul. Reason, in accordance with the principles of our faculties, is by its very nature contradictory. By virtue of pure reason, it is not at all certain that our judgements (and Hume tells us that this is the case) can not take account of the Ideal of human reason; however, the Antinomies, consequently, prove the validity of the Ideal. Therefore, time teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of our sense perceptions.

In the study of the Transcendental Deduction, it is obvious that the phenomena should only be used as a canon for our synthetic judgements. In natural theology, the reader should be careful to observe that the architectonic of pure reason occupies part of the sphere of metaphysics concerning the existence of our sense perceptions in general, since knowledge of the noumena is a posteriori. Consequently, the pure employment of the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions, on the contrary, stands in need of our judgements, by virtue of practical reason. Because of the relation between reason and the phenomena, let us suppose that, when thus treated as natural causes, the objects in space and time constitute the whole content for the manifold. It must not be supposed that the things in themselves are a representation of the employment of necessity. Time, in reference to ends, excludes the possibility of our understanding; what we have alone been able to show is that, the pure employment of our ideas teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of, certainly, the paralogisms.

So, our ideas stand in need to our understanding, as will easily be shown in the next section. Because of the relation between the thing in itself and the Categories, the things in themselves, thus, are by their very nature contradictory; with the sole exception of the transcendental aesthetic, natural causes constitute the whole content for our knowledge. The paralogisms, for these reasons, are what first give rise to our experience; for these reasons, our experience can thereby determine in its totality, for example, the thing in itself. The Ideal of human reason teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of space. Because of the relation between metaphysics and the phenomena, the thing in itself can not take account of, in natural theology, the phenomena, but the transcendental unity of apperception is the clue to the discovery of the paralogisms of natural reason. Because of the relation between necessity and the paralogisms, the Antinomies have lying before them, thus, the things in themselves.

Philosophy, in so far as this expounds the practical rules of our concepts, can thereby determine in its totality our a posteriori concepts. By means of the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions, the reader should be careful to observe that natural reason is a representation of the intelligible objects in space and time, since knowledge of our sense perceptions is a posteriori. The noumena are what first give rise to the Ideal. By means of analysis, our experience, in respect of the intelligible character, is the key to understanding the objects in space and time, yet reason can be treated like the noumena. Has it ever been suggested that, since all of the objects in space and time are deductive, I assert that there is no relation between the transcendental aesthetic and the objects in space and time? The noumena, in reference to ends, exist in our a priori concepts, as any dedicated reader can clearly see. With the sole exception of the Ideal, the Categories, consequently, would be falsified, as is evident upon close examination.

It must not be supposed that the Ideal of human reason can be treated like the thing in itself. In the study of the architectonic of practical reason, Aristotle tells us that the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions (and it is not at all certain that this is true) stands in need of the Transcendental Deduction. By means of analytic unity, it is not at all certain that, in accordance with the principles of the things in themselves, the Categories have nothing to do with, in respect of the intelligible character, the paralogisms. For these reasons, Hume tells us that the objects in space and time are a representation of our faculties. The things in themselves are the mere results of the power of reason, a blind but indispensable function of the soul.

As any dedicated reader can clearly see, the paralogisms of pure reason are just as necessary as, in particular, the things in themselves, yet our faculties are a representation of our experience. The never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions can never furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like necessity, it constitutes the whole content for analytic principles, yet the employment of natural causes constitutes the whole content for reason. In view of these considerations, it remains a mystery why the architectonic of human reason, in the study of our experience, is a body of demonstrated doctrine, and none of it must be known a priori. By means of our experience, the reader should be careful to observe that our faculties are what first give rise to, insomuch as the transcendental aesthetic relies on natural causes, the Antinomies, as is proven in the ontological manuals. Let us suppose that, so regarded, the transcendental unity of apperception, when thus treated as our ideas, exists in time. Our judgements have lying before them natural causes.


...
original program by mark pilgrim and matt webb
BACK