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！
any concert with the speculative； assures reality to a supersensible
object of the category of causality； viz。； freedom； although （as
bees a practical concept） only for practical use； and this
establishes on the evidence of a fact that which in the former case
could only be conceived。 By this the strange but certain doctrine of
the speculative critical philosophy； that the thinking subject is to
itself in internal intuition only a phenomenon； obtains in the
critical examination of the practical reason its full confirmation；
and that so thoroughly that we should be pelled to adopt this
doctrine； even if the former had never proved it at all。*
*The union of causality as freedom with causality as rational
mechanism； the former established by the moral law； the latter by
the law of nature in the same subject； namely； man； is impossible；
unless we conceive him with reference to the former as a being in
himself； and with reference to the latter as a phenomenon… the
former in pure consciousness； the latter in empirical consciousness。
Otherwise reason inevitably contradicts itself。
By this also I can understand why the most considerable objections
which I have as yet met with against the Critique turn about these two
points； namely； on the one side； the objective reality of the
categories as applied to noumena； which is in the theoretical
department of knowledge denied； in the practical affirmed； and on
the other side； the paradoxical demand to regard oneself qua subject
of freedom as a noumenon； and at the same time from the point of
view of physical nature as a phenomenon in one's own empirical
consciousness； for as long as one has formed no definite notions of
morality and freedom； one could not conjecture on the one side what
was intended to be the noumenon； the basis of the alleged
phenomenon； and on the other side it seemed doubtful whether it was at
all possible to form any notion of it； seeing that we had previously
assigned all the notions of the pure understanding in its
theoretical use exclusively to phenomena。 Nothing but a detailed
criticism of the practical reason can remove all this
misapprehension and set in a clear light the consistency which
constitutes its greatest merit。
So much by way of justification of the proceeding by which； in
this work； the notions and principles of pure speculative reason which
have already undergone their special critical examination are； now and
then； again subjected to examination。 This would not in other cases be
in accordance with the systematic process by which a science is
established； since matters which have been decided ought only to be
cited and not again discussed。 In this case； however； it was not
only allowable but necessary； because reason is here considered in
transition to a different use of these concepts from what it had
made of them before。 Such a transition necessitates a parison of
the old and the new usage； in order to distinguish well the new path
from the old one and； at the same time； to allow their connection to
be observed。 Accordingly considerations of this kind； including
those which are once more directed to the concept of freedom in the
practical use of the pure reason； must not be regarded as an
interpolation serving only to fill up the gaps in the critical
system of speculative reason （for this is for its own purpose
plete）； or like the props and buttresses which in a hastily
constructed building are often added afterwards； but as true members
which make the connexion of the system plain； and show us concepts；
here presented as real； which there could only be presented
problematically。 This remark applies especially to the concept of
freedom； respecting which one cannot but observe with surprise that so
many boast of being able to understand it quite well and to explain
its possibility； while they regard it only psychologically； whereas if
they had studied it in a transcendental point of view； they must
have recognized that it is not only indispensable as a problematical
concept； in the plete use of speculative reason； but also quite
inprehensible； and if they afterwards came to consider its
practical use； they must needs have e to the very mode of
determining the principles of this； to which they are now so loth to
assent。 The concept of freedom is the stone of stumbling for all
empiricists； but at the same time the key to the loftiest practical
principles for critical moralists； who perceive by its means that they
must necessarily proceed by a rational method。 For this reason I beg
the reader not to pass lightly over what is said of this concept at
the end of the Analytic。
I must leave it to those who are acquainted with works of this
kind to judge whether such a system as that of the practical reason；
which is here developed from the critical examination of it； has
cost much or little trouble； especially in seeking not to miss the
true point of view from which the whole can be rightly sketched。 It
presupposes； indeed； the Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of
Morals； but only in so far as this gives a preliminary acquaintance
with the principle of duty； and assigns and justifies a definite
formula thereof； in other respects it is independent。* It results from
the nature of this practical faculty itself that the plete
classification of all practical sciences cannot be added； as in the
critique of the speculative reason。 For it is not possible to define
duties specially； as human duties； with a view to their
classification； until the subject of this definition （viz。； man） is
known according to his actual nature； at least so far as is
necessary with respect to duty； this； however； does not belong to a
critical examination of the practical reason； the business of which is
only to assign in a plete manner the principles of its possibility；
extent； and limits； without special reference to human nature。 The
classification then belongs to the system of science； not to the
system of criticism。
*A reviewer who wanted to find some fault with this work has hit the
truth better； perhaps； than he thought； when he says that no new
principle of morality is set forth in it； but only a new formula。
But who would think of introducing a new principle of all morality and
making himself as it were the first discoverer of it； just as if all
the world before him were ignorant what duty was or had been in
thorough…going error？ But whoever knows of what importance to a
mathematician a formula is； which defines accurately what is to be
done to work a problem； will not think that a formula is insignificant
and useless which does the same for all duty in general。
In the second part of the Analytic I have given； as I trust； a
sufficient answer to the objection of a truth…loving and acute critic*
of the Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals… a critic
always worthy of respect the objection； namely； that the notion of
good was not established before the moral principle； as be thinks it
ought to have been。*＇2＇ I have also had regard to many of the
objections which have reached me from men who show that they have at
heart the discovery of the tru