The Critique of Pure Reason-第108章

The principles resulting from this highest principle of pure reason will, however, be transcendent in relation to phenomena, that is to say, it will be impossible to make any adequate empirical use of this principle.It is therefore completely different from all principles of the understanding, the use made of which is entirely immanent, their object and purpose being merely the possibility of experience.Now our duty in the transcendental dialectic is as follows.To discover whether the principle that the series of conditions (in the synthesis of phenomena, or of thought in general)extends to the unconditioned is objectively true, or not; what consequences result therefrom affecting the empirical use of the understanding, or rather whether there exists any such objectively valid proposition of reason, and whether it is not, on the contrary, a merely logical precept which directs us to ascend perpetually to still higher conditions, to approach completeness in the series of them, and thus to introduce into our cognition the highest possible unity of reason.We must ascertain, I say, whether this requirement of reason has not been regarded, by a misunderstanding, as a transcendental principle of pure reason, which postulates a thorough completeness in the series of conditions in objects themselves.We must show, moreover, the misconceptions and illusions that intrude into syllogisms, the major proposition of which pure reason has supplied- a proposition which has perhaps more of the character of a petitio than of a postulatum- and that proceed from experience upwards to its conditions.The solution of these problems is our task in transcendental dialectic, which we are about to expose even at its source, that lies deep in human reason.We shall divide it into two parts, the first of which will treat of the transcendent conceptions of pure reason, the second of transcendent and dialectical syllogisms.