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！
as to a beloved one who has been for a time estranged； because the
questions with which it is engaged relate to the highest aims of
humanity； and reason must always labour either to attain to settled
views in regard to these； or to destroy those which others have
already established。
Metaphysic； therefore… that of nature； as well as that of ethics；
but in an especial manner the criticism which forms the propaedeutic
to all the operations of reason… forms properly that department of
knowledge which may be termed； in the truest sense of the word；
philosophy。 The path which it pursues is that of science； which；
when it has once been discovered； is never lost； and never misleads。
Mathematics； natural science； the common experience of men； have a
high value as means； for the most part； to accidental ends… but at
last also； to those which are necessary and essential to the existence
of humanity。 But to guide them to this high goal； they require the aid
of rational cognition on the basis of pure conceptions； which； be it
termed as it may； is properly nothing but metaphysics。
For the same reason； metaphysics forms likewise the completion of
the culture of human reason。 In this respect； it is indispensable；
setting aside altogether the influence which it exerts as a science。
For its subject…matter is the elements and highest maxims of reason；
which form the basis of the possibility of some sciences and of the
use of all。 That； as a purely speculative science； it is more useful
in preventing error than in the extension of knowledge； does not
detract from its value； on the contrary； the supreme office of
censor which it occupies assures to it the highest authority and
importance。 This office it administers for the purpose of securing
order； harmony； and well…being to science； and of directing its
noble and fruitful labours to the highest possible aim… the
happiness of all mankind。
CHAPTER IV。 The History of Pure Reason。
This title is placed here merely for the purpose of designating a
division of the system of pure reason of which I do not intend to
treat at present。 I shall content myself with casting a cursory
glance； from a purely transcendental point of view… that of the nature
of pure reason… on the labours of philosophers up to the present time。
They have aimed at erecting an edifice of philosophy； but to my eye
this edifice appears to be in a very ruinous condition。
It is very remarkable； although naturally it could not have been
otherwise； that； in the infancy of philosophy； the study of the nature
of God and the constitution of a future world formed the commencement；
rather than the conclusion； as we should have it； of the speculative
efforts of the human mind。 However rude the religious conceptions
generated by the remains of the old manners and customs of a less
cultivated time； the intelligent classes were not thereby prevented
from devoting themselves to free inquiry into the existence and nature
of God； and they easily saw that there could be no surer way of
pleasing the invisible ruler of the world； and of attaining to
happiness in another world at least； than a good and honest course
of life in this。 Thus theology and morals formed the two chief
motives； or rather the points of attraction in all abstract inquiries。
But it was the former that especially occupied the attention of
speculative reason； and which afterwards became so celebrated under
the name of metaphysics。
I shall not at present indicate the periods of time at which the
greatest changes in metaphysics took place； but shall merely give a
hasty sketch of the different ideas which occasioned the most
important revolutions in this sphere of thought。 There are three
different ends in relation to which these revolutions have taken
place。
1。 In relation to the object of the cognition of reason；
philosophers may be divided into sensualists and intellectualists。
Epicurus may be regarded as the head of the former； Plato of the
latter。 The distinction here signalized； subtle as it is； dates from
the earliest times； and was long maintained。 The former asserted
that reality resides in sensuous objects alone； and that everything
else is merely imaginary； the latter； that the senses are the
parents of illusion and that truth is to be found in the understanding
alone。 The former did not deny to the conceptions of the understanding
a certain kind of reality； but with them it was merely logical； with
the others it was mystical。 The former admitted intellectual
conceptions； but declared that sensuous objects alone possessed real
existence。 The latter maintained that all real objects were
intelligible； and believed that the pure understanding possessed a
faculty of intuition apart from sense； which； in their opinion； served
only to confuse the ideas of the understanding。
2。 In relation to the origin of the pure cognitions of reason； we
find one school maintaining that they are derived entirely from
experience； and another that they have their origin in reason alone。
Aristotle may be regarded as the bead of the empiricists； and Plato of
the noologists。 Locke； the follower of Aristotle in modern times；
and Leibnitz of Plato （although he cannot be said to have imitated him
in his mysticism）； have not been able to bring this question to a
settled conclusion。 The procedure of Epicurus in his sensual system；
in which he always restricted his conclusions to the sphere of
experience； was much more consequent than that of Aristotle and Locke。
The latter especially； after having derived all the conceptions and
principles of the mind from experience； goes so far； in the employment
of these conceptions and principles； as to maintain that we can
prove the existence of God and the existence of God and the
immortality of them objects lying beyond the soul… both of them of
possible experience… with the same force of demonstration as any
mathematical proposition。
3。 In relation to method。 Method is procedure according to
principles。 We may divide the methods at present employed in the field
of inquiry into the naturalistic and the scientific。 The naturalist of
pure reason lays it down as his principle that common reason；
without the aid of science… which he calls sound reason； or common
sense… can give a more satisfactory answer to the most important
questions of metaphysics than speculation is able to do。 He must
maintain； therefore； that we can determine the content and
circumference of the moon more certainly by the naked eye； than by the
aid of mathematical reasoning。 But this system is mere misology
reduced to principles； and； what is the most absurd thing in this
doctrine； the neglect of all scientific means is paraded as a peculiar
method of extending our cognition。 As regards those who are
naturalists because they know no better； they are certainly not to
be blamed。 They follow common sense； without parading their
ignorance as a method whi