the critique of pure reason- 第95部分

well…established　principle　of　transcendental　analytic　which　admits

of　no　exception。　The　question；　therefore；　is：　〃Whether　an　effect；

determined　according　to　the　laws　of　nature；　can　at　the　same　time　be

produced　by　a　free　agent；　or　whether　freedom　and　nature　mutually

exclude　each　other？〃　And　here；　the　common　but　fallacious　hypothesis　of

the　absolute　reality　of　phenomena　manifests　its　injurious　influence　in

embarrassing　the　procedure　of　reason。　For　if　phenomena　are　things　in

themselves；　freedom　is　impossible。　In　this　case；　nature　is　the

complete　and　all…sufficient　cause　of　every　event；　and　condition　and

conditioned；　cause　and　effect　are　contained　in　the　same　series；　and

necessitated　by　the　same　law。　If；　on　the　contrary；　phenomena　are

held　to　be；　as　they　are　in　fact；　nothing　more　than　mere

representations；　connected　with　each　other　in　accordance　with

empirical　laws；　they　must　have　a　ground　which　is　not　phenomenal。　But

the　causality　of　such　an　intelligible　cause　is　not　determined　or

determinable　by　phenomena；　although　its　effects；　as　phenomena；　must　be

determined　by　other　phenomenal　existences。　This　cause　and　its

causality　exist　therefore　out　of　and　apart　from　the　series　of

phenomena；　while　its　effects　do　exist　and　are　discoverable　in　the

series　of　empirical　conditions。　Such　an　effect　may　therefore　be

considered　to　be　free　in　relation　to　its　intelligible　cause；　and

necessary　in　relation　to　the　phenomena　from　which　it　is　a　necessary

consequence…　a　distinction　which；　stated　in　this　perfectly　general　and

abstract　manner；　must　appear　in　the　highest　degree　subtle　and　obscure。

The　sequel　will　explain。　It　is　sufficient；　at　present；　to　remark　that；

as　the　complete　and　unbroken　connection　of　phenomena　is　an　unalterable

law　of　nature；　freedom　is　impossible…　on　the　supposition　that

phenomena　are　absolutely　real。　Hence　those　philosophers　who　adhere

to　the　common　opinion　on　this　subject　can　never　succeed　in　reconciling

the　ideas　of　nature　and　freedom。



　　　　　Possibility　of　Freedom　in　Harmony　with　the　Universal　Law

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　of　Natural　Necessity。



　　That　element　in　a　sensuous　object　which　is　not　itself　sensuous；　I

may　be　allowed　to　term　intelligible。　If；　accordingly；　an　object

which　must　be　regarded　as　a　sensuous　phenomenon　possesses　a　faculty

which　is　not　an　object　of　sensuous　intuition；　but　by　means　of　which　it

is　capable　of　being　the　cause　of　phenomena；　the　causality　of　an　object

or　existence　of　this　kind　may　be　regarded　from　two　different　points　of

view。　It　may　be　considered　to　be　intelligible；　as　regards　its

action…　the　action　of　a　thing　which　is　a　thing　in　itself；　and

sensuous；　as　regards　its　effects…　the　effects　of　a　phenomenon

belonging　to　the　sensuous　world。　We　should　accordingly；　have　to　form

both　an　empirical　and　an　intellectual　conception　of　the　causality　of

such　a　faculty　or　power…　both；　however；　having　reference　to　the　same

effect。　This　twofold　manner　of　cogitating　a　power　residing　in　a

sensuous　object　does　not　run　counter　to　any　of　the　conceptions　which

we　ought　to　form　of　the　world　of　phenomena　or　of　a　possible

experience。　Phenomena…　not　being　things　in　themselves…　must　have　a

transcendental　object　as　a　foundation；　which　determines　them　as　mere

representations；　and　there　seems　to　be　no　reason　why　we　should　not

ascribe　to　this　transcendental　object；　in　addition　to　the　property

of　self…phenomenization；　a　causality　whose　effects　are　to　be　met

with　in　the　world　of　phenomena；　although　it　is　not　itself　a

phenomenon。　But　every　effective　cause　must　possess　a　character；　that

is　to　say；　a　law　of　its　causality；　without　which　it　would　cease　to

be　a　cause。　In　the　above　case；　then；　every　sensuous　object　would

possess　an　empirical　character；　which　guaranteed　that　its　actions；

as　phenomena；　stand　in　complete　and　harmonious　connection；　conformably

to　unvarying　natural　laws；　with　all　other　phenomena；　and　can　be

deduced　from　these；　as　conditions；　and　that　they　do　thus；　in

connection　with　these；　constitute　a　series　in　the　order　of　nature。

This　sensuous　object　must；　in　the　second　place；　possess　an

intelligible　character；　which　guarantees　it　to　be　the　cause　of　those

actions；　as　phenomena；　although　it　is　not　itself　a　phenomenon　nor

subordinate　to　the　conditions　of　the　world　of　sense。　The　former　may　be

termed　the　character　of　the　thing　as　a　phenomenon；　the　latter　the

character　of　the　thing　as　a　thing　in　itself。

　　Now　this　active　subject　would；　in　its　character　of　intelligible

subject；　be　subordinate　to　no　conditions　of　time；　for　time　is　only　a

condition　of　phenomena；　and　not　of　things　in　themselves。　No　action

would　begin　or　cease　to　be　in　this　subject；　it　would　consequently　be

free　from　the　law　of　all　determination　of　time…　the　law　of　change；

namely；　that　everything　which　happens　must　have　a　cause　in　the

phenomena　of　a　preceding　state。　In　one　word；　the　causality　of　the

subject；　in　so　far　as　it　is　intelligible；　would　not　form　part　of　the

series　of　empirical　conditions　which　determine　and　necessitate　an

event　in　the　world　of　sense。　Again；　this　intelligible　character　of　a

thing　cannot　be　immediately　cognized；　because　we　can　perceive

nothing　but　phenomena；　but　it　must　be　capable　of　being　cogitated　in

harmony　with　the　empirical　character；　for　we　always　find　ourselves

compelled　to　place；　in　thought；　a　transcendental　object　at　the　basis

of　phenomena　although　we　can　never　know　what　this　object　is　in　itself。

　　In　virtue　of　its　empirical　character；　this　subject　would　at　the　same

time　be　subordinate　to　all　the　empirical　laws　of　causality；　and；　as

a　phenomenon　and　member　of　the　sensuous　world；　its　effects　would

have　to　be　accounted　for　by　a　reference　to　preceding　phenomena。

Eternal　phenomena　must　be　capable　of　influencing　it；　and　its

actions；　in　accordance　with　natural　laws；　must　explain　to　us　how　its

empirical　character；　that　is；　the　law　of　its　causality；　is　to　be

cognized　in　and　by　means　of　experience。　In　a　word；　all　requisites

for　a　complete　and　necessary　determination　of　these　actions　must　be

presented　to　us　by　experience。

　　In　virtue　of　its　intelligible　character；　on　the　other　hand　（although

we　possess　only　a　general　conception　of　this　character）；　the　subject

must　be　regarded　as　free　from　all　sensuous　influences；　and　from　all

phenomenal　determination。　Moreover；　as　nothing　happens　in　this

subject…　for　it　is　a　noumenon；　and　there　does　not　consequently　exist

in　it　any　change；　demanding　the　dynamical　determination　of　time；　and

for　the　same　reason　no　connection　with　phenomena　as　causes…　this

active　existence　must　in　its　actions　be　free　from　and　independent　of

natural　necessity；　for　or　necessity　exists　only　in　the　world　of

phenomena。　It　would　be　quite　correct　to　say　that　it　originates　or

begins　its　effects　in　the　world　of　sense　from　itself；　although　the

action　productive　of　these　effects　does　not　begin　in　itself。　We　should

not　be　in　this　case　affirming　that　these　sensuous　effects　began　to

exist　of　themselves；　because　they　are　always　determined　by　prior

empirical　conditions…　by　virtue　of　the　empirical　character；　which　is

the　phenomenon　of　the　intelligible　character…　and　are　possible　only　as

constituting　a　continuation　of　the　series　of　natural　causes。　And

thus　nature　and　freedom；　each　in　the　complete　and　absolute

signification　of　these　terms；　can　exist；　without　contradiction　or

disagreement；　in　the　same　action　to



　　　　Exposition　of　the　Cosmological　Idea　of　Freedom　in　Harmony

　　　　　　　　with　the　Universal　Law　of　Natural　Necessity。



　　I　have　thought　it　advisable　to　lay　before　the　reader　at　first　merely

a　sketch　of　the　solution　of　this　transcendental　problem；　in　order　to

enable　him　to　form　with　greater　ease　a　clear　conception　of　the

course　which　reason　must　adopt　in　the　solution。　I　shall　now　proceed　to

exhibit　the　several　momenta　of　this　solution；　and　to　consider　them

in　their　order。

　　The　natural　law　that　everything　which　happens　must　have　a　cause；

that　the　causality　of　this　cause；　that　is；　the　action　of　the　cause

（which　cannot　always　have　existed；　but　must　be　itself　an　event；　for　it

precedes　in　time　some　effect　which　it　has　originated）；　must　have

itself　a　phenomenal　cause；　by　which　it　is　determined　and；　and；

consequently；　all　events　are　empirically　determined　in　an　order　of

nature…　this　law；　I　say；　which　lies　at　the　foundation　of　the

possibility　of　experience；　and　of　a　connected　system　of　phenomena　or

nature　is　a　law　of　the　understanding；　from　which　no　departure；　and

to　which　no　exception；　can　be　admitted。　For　to　except　even　a　single

phenomenon　from　its　operation　is　to　exclude　it　from　the　sphere　of

possible　experience　and　thus　to　admit　it　to　be　a　mere　fiction　of

thought　or　phantom　of　the　brain。

　　Thus　we　are　obliged　to　acknowledge　the　existence　of　a　chain　of

causes；　in　which；　however；　absolute　totality　cannot　be　found。　But　we

need　not　detain　ourselves　with　this　question；　for　it　has　already

been　sufficiently　answered　in　our　discussion　of　the　antinomies　into