LOFTER-网易轻博

如图可查看价格和质量，一般出单时间在一周到两周，多约工期多算。原神相关打折。不接民国/古风/赛博朋克。其余例图可以小窗找我询问。出单前退单退全款，出单后只接受退款50％，以及加急x2现出。

【核桃鉴定】

【品名】核桃

【种类】山核桃

【大小】直径32mm上下径30mm

左右径27mm

【手感】

轻轻搓捻湿黏木核​，指腹裹上层层土泥，指尖摩挲把黑细的泥肉，将腹部的感知落在每一寸凹凸有致的外壳。抚摸黑色的尖刺，这会刺开你的皮肉。

【外观】

如果它不慎滚落，你会听见一路属于核桃壳的乡音，咯咯落下笑。凑到鼻尖猛吸一口，是一味药，治愈每一位饥肠辘辘的苦主。

【气味】

如若掐开它的壳啊，汁水会剪下剩余的鼻息，直至扑满鼻腔，用肺贪婪吮吸之味。

【品味】

啃咬的津水会落满如罗曼蒂克般浪漫气息的果皮，丝丝涩口却放任甜蜜的馥郁。芬芳在果仁，大口嚼得稀碎，会有苦涩与清香交杂的肉。

有没有人看看这个多少钱啊，值不值的

4 导论 INTRODUCTION4.1    THE IDEA OF TRANSCENDENTAL PHILOSOPHY   超验哲学的 概念

 [Experience1 is no doubt the first product of our understanding, while employed in fashioning the raw material of our sensations. 

毫无疑问，当理解力被用来，对我们感性所感知到的原始材料，进行加工时，经验无疑是理解力的第一个产物。

It is therefore our first instruction, and in its progress so rich in new lessons that the chain of all future generations will never be in want of new information that may be gathered on that field. 

因此，经验就是我们最初的指示，而且在其发展进行中，新的传授是如此丰富，以至于所有后续产物的链条，都永远不缺少可以在经验区域所收集到的新信息。

Nevertheless, experience is by no means the only field to which our understanding can be confined. 

尽管如此，经验却绝不是我们的理解力可被局限于其中的唯一区域。

Experience tells us what is, but not that it must be necessarily as it is, and not otherwise. 

经验只告诉我们，我们所见所闻是什么，但并没有告诉我们，它们为什么必然如此，而不是其它样子。

It therefore never gives us any really general truths, and our reason, which is particularly anxious for that class of knowledge, is roused by it rather than satisfied. 

因此，经验永远不会给我们提供任何真正普遍的真相，而我们的理性，却总是在渴求这类知识，所以，理性与其说是被经验满足，不如说是被经验唤醒。

General truths, which at the same time Edition: Muller_1922; Page: [2] bear the character of an inward necessity, must be independent of experience, — clear and certain by themselves. 

由于一般的真相，同时具有内在必然性的特点，所以，一般真相，应该是独立于经验的，即仅通过其自身，就应是清晰的和确定的。

They are therefore called knowledge a priori, while what is simply taken from experience is said to be, in ordinary parlance, known a posteriori or empirically only. 

因此，它们被称为天生的知识，而那些从经验得到的知识，按通常的说法，则被认为只是后天的、或经验性的。

Now it appears, and this is extremely curious, that even with our experiences different kinds of knowledge are mixed up, which must have their origin a priori, and which perhaps serve only to produce a certain connection between our sensuous representations. 

现在，有一点，非常令人好奇，那就是，即使从我们的经验来看，不同种类的知识，也都已经混合了起来，这些知识，必然有其先天的起源，且此先天起源的用途，或许就是在我们感官的表示之间，产生某些联系。

For even if we remove from experience everything that belongs to the senses, there remain nevertheless certain original concepts, and certain judgments derived from them, which must have had their origin entirely a priori, and independent of all experience, because it is owing to them that we are able, or imagine we are able, to predicate more of the objects of our senses than can be learnt from mere experience, and that our propositions contain real generality and strict necessity, such as mere empirical knowledge can never supply.] 

因为，即使我们从经验中，把所有属于感官的东西都移去，那里还是会剩下一些起源性的概念，以及从它们导出的一些判断，它们应该是完全先天起源的，且独立于所有经验；因为，正是由于它们，我们才可以、或想象我们可以：对我们的感官对象，做出描述，这种描述，要比从单纯经验出发所能做的描述，更多；这样，我们的命题，就包含了真正的普遍性、和严格的必然性；而这些，则是单纯的经验性的知识，永远都不能提供的。

But1 what is still more extraordinary is this, that certain kinds of knowledge leave the field of all possible Edition: Muller_1922; Page: [3] experience, and seem to enlarge the sphere of our judgments beyond the limits of experience by means of concepts to which experience can never supply any corresponding objects. 

但是，更令人惊奇的，则是这个，即有某类知识，离开了所有可能经验的领域，对于它们所使用的一些概念，经验永远也不能给其提供相应的对象，但它们似乎正是凭借这些概念，而把我们判断的领域，扩展到了经验的界限之外。

And it is in this very kind of knowledge which transcends the world of the senses, and where experience can neither guide nor correct us, that reason prosecutes its investigations, which by their importance we consider far more excellent and by their tendency far more elevated than anything the understanding can find in the sphere of phenomena. 

这种知识，超越了感官的世界，在这里，经验既不能引导我们，也不能纠正我们，而正是在这种知识中，理性却发起了其研究；相比于理解力在现象领域中所能发现的任何事物，我们认为，这种研究的重要性，要更加优越，且其目的趋势，也要崇高的多。

Nay, we risk rather anything, even at the peril of error, than that we should surrender Edition: current; Page: [3] such investigations, either on the ground of their uncertainty, or from any feeling of indifference or contempt.1

不仅如此，我们在这方面，就算有犯错的危险，也要冒险去做，绝不会因为研究基础的不确定性，或他人的漠不关心乃至冷嘲热讽，而放弃这种研究。（脚注1)Edition: current; Page: ））)

Now it might seem natural that, after we have left the solid ground of experience, we should not at once proceed to erect an edifice with knowledge which we possess without knowing whence it came, and trust to principles the origin of which is unknown, without having made sure of the safety of the foundations by means of careful examination. 

现在，看起来很自然的是，在我们离开了经验这一坚实的基础之后，我们不应该用我们所拥有的、但却不知道从哪里来的知识，立即去建立一座大厦；且对于有些原理，如果对其起源，我们一无所知，也没有凭借仔细的检查，来确认其基础的安全性，那么，我们就不应该相信它们。

It would seem natural, I say, that philosophers should first of all have asked the question how the mere understanding could arrive at all this knowledge a priori, and what extent, what truth, and what value it could possess. 

我要说，似乎看起来很自然的是，哲学家最先应该追问的问题是：单纯的理解力，如何能先天地达到所有这些知识？它将拥有什么样的范围、真实性和价值？

If we take natural Edition: Muller_1922; Page: [4] to mean what is just and reasonable, then indeed nothing could be more natural. 

如果我们把‘自然的’这个词，理解为‘公正的和合理的’，那么，的确没有什么，是可以更自然的了。

But if we understand by natural what takes place ordinarily, then, on the contrary, nothing is more natural and more intelligible than that this examination should have been neglected for so long a time. 

但是，如果我们把它理解为‘通常所发生的’，那么，正好相反，即没有什么，比‘这个检查应该已经被搁置很久了’这件事，更自然、和更可理解的了。

For one part of this knowledge, namely, the mathematical, has always been in possession of perfect trustworthiness; and thus produces a favourable presumption with regard to other parts also, although these may be of a totally different nature. 

因为，这种知识中的一个部分，即数学部分，一直拥有完全的可靠性；这样，也让人们对其它部分，产生了乐观的期待，虽然其它知识的本质，可能完全不同。

Besides, once beyond the precincts of experience, and we are certain that experience can never contradict us, while the charm of enlarging our knowledge is so great that nothing will stop our progress until we encounter a clear contradiction. 

另外，一旦超越了经验的辖区，且我们也确信经验永远也不会与我们作对，而扩展我们知识的诱惑，又是如此巨大，以至于在我们遇到一个清晰明确的矛盾之前，没有什么可以阻挡我们前进的步伐。

This can be Edition: current; Page: [4] avoided if only we are cautious in our imaginations, which nevertheless remain what they are, imaginations only. 

如果我们对于我们想象力，足够谨慎小心的话，那么，这种矛盾是可以避免的，因为想象力，无论如何，只是想象。

How far we can advance independent of all experience in a priori knowledge is shown by the brilliant example of mathematics. 

在独立于经验的先天知识中，我们究竟能走多远，数学给出了一个光辉的例子。

It is true they deal with objects and knowledge so far only as they can be represented in intuition. 

确实，数学所处理的，只是在观照中能被表现出来的对象和知识。

But this is easily overlooked, because that intuition itself may be given a priori, and be difficult to distinguish from a pure concept. 

但是，这点却很容易被忽视，因为，那个观照本身，可能是天生被给予的，从而，与一个纯粹的概念，很难区别开来。

Thus inspirited Edition: Muller_1922; Page: [5] by a splendid proof of the power of reason, the desire of enlarging our knowledge sees no limits. 

这样，被理性力量的这个壮丽的证明所激励，扩展我们知识的欲望，似乎就是无限的了。

The light dove, piercing in her easy flight the air and perceiving its resistance, imagines that flight would be easier still in empty space. 

轻盈的鸽子，展翅飞翔，会感觉到空气的阻力，或许它会想象，在没有空气的空间中，飞起来或许会更轻松些。

It was thus that Plato left the world of sense, as opposing so many hindrances to our understanding, and ventured beyond on the wings of his ideas into the empty space of pure understanding. 

同样，由于感官的世界，给理解力带来了诸多障碍，因此，柏拉图为了与之对抗，就离开了感官的世界，依靠他的想法的翅膀，冒险飞入了纯粹理解力的空间。

He did not perceive that he was making no progress by these endeavours, because he had no resistance as a fulcrum on which to rest or to apply his powers, in order to cause the understanding to advance. 

但他并没有发觉，通过这些努力，他却毫无进展，因为，没有阻力，就没有支点，用来支撑自己，并在其上应用他的力量，以让理解力得以前进。

It is indeed a very common fate of human reason first of all to finish its speculative edifice as soon as possible, and then only to enquire whether the foundation be sure. 

人类理性，确实有这么一个共同的命运，即首先，总是匆匆忙忙，过早地完成了思辨大厦的建设，然后，才去考察大厦的基础是否牢固。

Then all sorts of excuses are made in order to assure us as to its solidity, or to decline altogether such a late and dangerous enquiry.

然后，为了让我们相信其坚固性，各种各样的借口，就被编了出来，或者，干脆完全拒绝这样一个迟到的和危险的考察。

The reason why during the time of building we feel free from all anxiety and suspicion and believe in the apparent solidity of our foundation, is this: — A great, perhaps the greatest portion of what our reason finds to do consists in the analysis of our concepts of objects. 

为什么在建造的时候，我们一点都不担忧，并相信基础的这种表面上的坚固性呢？原因如下：我们理性发现它的工作中的一个伟大的、或许是最伟大的部分，就在于分析我们关于对象的概念。

This gives us a great deal of knowledge which, though it consists in no Edition: current; Page: [5] more man in simplifications and explanations of Edition: Muller_1922; Page: [6] what is comprehended in our concepts (though in a confused manner), is yet considered as equal, at least in form, to new knowledge. 

这给我们提供了大量的知识，虽然这些知识，无非是对在我们的概念中所理解的东西（尽管还是以模糊的方式），做出的简化和解释，但它们仍被认为，是等同于新知识的，或至少在形式上如此。{？}

It only separates and arranges our concepts, it does not enlarge them in matter or contents. 

它只是分类和整理了我们的概念，但并没有在材料或内容上,扩展它们。

As by this process we gain a kind of real knowledge a priori, which progresses safely and usefully, it happens that our reason, without being aware of it, appropriates under that pretence propositions of a totally different character, adding to given concepts new and strange ones a priori, without knowing whence they come, nay without even thinking of such a question. 

由于通过这一过程，我们获得了一种真正的先天知识，它们可靠并有用地发展着，于是，我们的理性，在完全没有意识到的情况下，会在那个{简化和解释的}借口之下，盗用一个具有完全不同特点的命题，来给那些被给予的概念，增加一些新的、和奇怪的先天概念，但这些新的概念，来源不明，不仅如此，理性甚至都不知道去思考一下这个问题。

I shall therefore at the very outset treat of the distinction between these two kinds of knowledge.

所以，一开始，我就将处理这两类知识之间的区别。

4.1.1 论分析判断与综合判断的区别  Of the Distinction between Analytical and Synthetical Judgments

In all judgments in which there is a relation between subject and predicate (I speak of affirmative judgments only, the application to negative ones being easy), that relation can be of two kinds. 

在所有判断中，主词与谓词之间，都有一个关系（我这里只考虑肯定判断，因为应用到否定判断上是很容易的），这个关系，可分为两类。{？}

Either the predicate B belongs to the subject A as something contained (though covertly) in the concept A; or B lies outside the sphere of the concept A, though somehow connected with it. 

要么，是谓词B属于主词A，作为包含于概念A中的某种东西（虽然是以隐蔽的方式）；要么，B虽然与A有某种联系，但却是处于概念A的领域之外。

In the former case I call the judgment analytical, in the latter synthetical. 

前一情况，我称判断为分析的；后一情况，我称判断为综合的。

Analytical judgments (affirmative) are therefore those in which the connection of the Edition: Muller_1922; Page: [7] predicate with the subject is conceived through identity, while others in which that connection is conceived without identity, may be called synthetical. 

因此，分析判断（肯定的），就是这样的判断，其中主词与谓词之间的联系，是通过身份{identity}来考虑的；在其他的一些判断中，并不借助身份，来考虑此联系，这种判断，被称为综合判断。

The former might be called illustrating, the latter expanding judgments, because in the former nothing is added by the predicate to the Edition: current; Page: [6] concept of the subject, but the concept is only divided into its constituent concepts which were always conceived as existing within it, though confusedly; while the latter add to the concept of the subject a predicate not conceived as existing within it, and not to be extracted from it by any process of mere analysis. 

前者也可被称为解释判断，后者则可被称为扩展判断，因为在前者中，谓词并没有给主词的概念，增加什么，主词的概念，只是被分解成了它的成分概念{构成它的}，这些成分概念，总是被认为，是已经存在于主词概念之中的，虽然其意义还有些模糊；而后者，则给主词的概念，增加了一个谓词，该谓词，不被认为是已经存在于主词概念中的，也不会通过单纯分析的手段，从主词的概念中，被提取出来。

If I say, for instance, All bodies are extended, this is an analytical judgment. 

例如，如果我说：“所有物体，都是有范围的”，则这是一个分析判断。

I need not go beyond the concept connected with the name of body, in order to find that extension is connected with it. 

我不需要越过‘与物体的名称相联系的概念’，去寻找与它相联的范围。

I have only to analyse that concept and become conscious of the manifold elements always contained in it, in order to find that predicate. 

为了找到那个谓词，我只要分析这个概念，就能够意识到：总是包含于其中的各种要素。

This is therefore an analytical judgment. 

因此，这是一个分析判断。

But if I say, All bodies are heavy, the predicate is something quite different from what I think as the mere concept of body. 

但是，如果我说：“所有物体，都是有重量的”，则其中的谓词，与我所认为的单纯物体的概念，是某种完全不同的东西。

The addition of such a predicate gives us a synthetical judgment.

这样一种谓词的增加，给我们提供了综合判断。

[It becomes clear from this,1

[1. That our knowledge is in no way extended by analytical judgments, but that all they effect is Edition: Muller_1922; Page: [8] to put the concepts which we possess into better order and render them more intelligible.

由此，可以清楚的得出以下几点：

我们的知识，通过分析判断，并没有得到扩展；分析所能产生的影响，只是把我们所拥有的概念，理顺了一些，并使它们更易理解罢了。

2. That in synthetical judgments I must have besides the concept of the subject something else (x) on which the understanding relies in order to know that a predicate, not contained in the concept, nevertheless belongs to it.

2、在综合判断中，我在主词概念之外，应该另有某物（X），理解力依赖于此物，目的是为了认识一个谓词，此谓词，虽然并不包含在此概念之中，但却仍属于它。

In empirical judgments this causes no difficulty, because this x is here simply the complete experience of an object which I conceive by the concept A, that concept forming one part only of my experience. 

在经验性的判断中，这并不会引起任何困难，因为，我通过概念A，构想了一个对象，而这个X，在这里，只是此对象的完整经验；这个概念，只是形成了我的经验的一部分。

For though I do not include the predicate of gravity in the general concept of Edition: current; Page: [7] body, that concept nevertheless indicates the complete experience through one of its parts, so that I may add other parts also of the same experience, all belonging to that concept. 

因为，虽然，我并不把重量这个谓词，包含在物体的一般概念之中，但尽管如此，这个概念，还是通过它的一部分，表达了那个完整的经验，于是，我同样可以给该经验增加其它部分；所有这些部分，都属于这个概念。

I may first, by an analytical process, realise the concept of body through the predicates of extension, impermeability, form, etc., all of which are contained in it. 

首先，我可以通过一个分析的过程，凭借扩展、不可渗透性、形状等谓词，来实现物体的概念；所有这些谓词，都包含在这个概念中。{？}

Afterwards I expand my knowledge, and looking back to the experience from which my concept of body was abstracted, I find gravity always connected with the before-mentioned predicates. 

然后，我扩展我的知识，因为我关于物体的概念，来自经验，所以，通过对这个经验的回顾，我发现，重量总是与前面提到的几个谓词相连的。

Experience therefore is the x which lies beyond the concept A, and on which rests the possibility of a synthesis of the predicate of gravity B with the concept A.]

因此，经验就是那个x，它处于概念A之外，‘重量的谓词B’与‘概念A’的综合的可能性，都依赖于它。

In synthetical judgments a priori, however, that Edition: Muller_1922; Page: [9] help is entirely wanting. 

然而，在先天的综合判断那里，这种辅助性的手段，却是完全缺乏的。

If I want to go beyond the concept A in order to find another concept B connected with it, where is there anything on which I may rest and through which a synthesis might become possible, considering that I cannot have the advantage of looking about in the field of experience? 

如果我打算超越到概念A之外，找到一个与它相连的概念B，那么，我就应该有某事物可依靠，且通过它，一个综合，才可以变的可能，但问题是，如果是在经验领域之内，则我是有寻找此类东西的有利条件的，但现在，并不在经验领域内，那么，它究竟在哪里呢？

Take the proposition that all which happens has its cause. 

下面，以命题：“所有发生之事，皆有其原因”为例。

In the concept of something that happens I no doubt conceive of something existing preceded by time, and from this certain analytical judgments may be deduced. 

在“某事发生了”这一概念中，毫无疑问，我构想了另一事，它在某事之前的时间中存在，通过它，某些分析判断，可被导出。

But the concept of cause is entirely outside that concept, and indicates something different from that which happens, and is by no means contained in that representation. 

但是，原因的概念，则完全处于那个概念之外，并不是指向所发生之事，而是指向他处，无论如何，它不会包含在所发生之事的表示中。

How can I venture then to predicate of that which happens something totally different from it, and to represent the concept of cause, though not contained in it, as belonging to it, and belonging to it by necessity? 

因此，对于那个已发生的事情，我怎么敢冒险用另一个完全不同的事，来谓词描述它呢？并把原因的概念（虽然不包含于其中），表现为属于它，而且是必然地属于它呢？

What is here the unknown x, on which the understanding may rest in order to find beyond Edition: current; Page: [8] the concept A a foreign predicate B, which nevertheless is believed to be connected with it? 

这里，就要有一个未知的x，理解力依赖于它，就可以在概念A之外，找到一个外部的谓词B，尽管是在外的，但 B却被认为是与A相连的，那么，这个未知的X，究竟是什么呢？

It cannot be experience, because the proposition that all which happens has its cause represents this second predicate as added to the subject not only with greater generality than experience can ever supply, but also with a character of necessity, and therefore purely a priori, and based on concepts. 

它不可能是经验，因为，“所有发生之事，皆有其原因”这一命题，把这里的第二个谓词，表现为增加给主词的东西，并认为它，不仅比经验能够提供的普遍性更大，而且，有着必然性的特点，从而，它是纯粹先天的，且是基于概念的。

All our speculative knowledge a priori aims at and rests on such synthetical, i.e. expanding propositions, for Edition: Muller_1922; Page: [10] the analytical are no doubt very important and necessary, yet only in order to arrive at that clearness of concepts which is requisite for a safe and wide synthesis, serving as a really new addition to what we possess already.

我们所有的先天的思辨知识，都是以这种综合的、亦即可扩展的命题为目的，且是依赖于它们的；因为，分析的命题，虽然毫无疑问，是非常重要的、和必然的，但也只是为了达到一个概念的清晰性，这种清晰性，对于一个可靠的、和广泛的综合来说，是必要的，其作用，就是对于我们已经拥有的东西，能够带来真正的、新的增加。

[We1 have here a certain mystery2 before us, which must be cleared up before any advance into the unlimited field of a pure knowledge of the understanding can become safe and trustworthy. 

这里，在我们面前，隐藏着某个神秘*；理解力的纯粹知识的区域，广阔无限，要想在其中前进，只有揭开此神秘，才能变得安全和可靠。

We must discover on the largest scale the ground of the possibility of synthetical judgments a priori; we must understand the conditions which render every class of them possible, and endeavour not only to indicate in a sketchy outline, but to define in its fulness and practical completeness, the whole of that knowledge, which forms a class by itself, systematically arranged according to its original sources, its divisions, its extent and its limits. 

我们应该在最大范围内，去发现‘先天综合判断的可能性’的根据；有些条件，使得每一类这种判断，变得可能，对于这些条件，我们都应该去理解；并且，因为这个知识的全部，依据它的原始源泉、划分、范围和界限，自成一类，且被系统性地安排好了；所以，对此全部，我们不仅要用一个粗略的概述去表示它，而且要按照其充分性、和实践的完整性，去定义它。

So much for the present with regard to the peculiar character of synthetical judgments.]

关于综合判断的特殊性质，暂时就说这么多。

[*Footnote: If any of the ancients had ever thought of asking this question, this alone would have formed a powerful barrier against all systems of pure reason to the present day,and would have saved many vain attempts undertaken blindly and without a true knowledge of the subject in hand.]

[*脚注：如果有任何古人，曾经想到过提出这个问题的话，那么，仅此问题，就足以对当今的的所有纯粹理性的系统，构成一个强有力的关卡，很多徒劳的尝试，都可无须再做了，因为它们对这个主题，缺乏真正的知识。]

It will now be seen how there can be a special Edition: Muller_1922; Page: [11] Edition: current; Page: [9] science serving as a critique of pure reason. 

现在，可以看出，为什么会有这样一门‘其作用为纯粹理性的鉴定’的科学了。

[Every kind of knowledge is called pure, if not mixed with anything heterogeneous. 

任何一种知识，如果没有与任何异类的知识相混杂的话，就都可被称为纯粹的。

But more particularly is that knowledge called absolutely pure, which is not mixed up with any experience or sensation, and is therefore possible entirely a priori.] 

但是，还有一种更特殊的知识，它没有与任何经验或感觉相混杂，所以被称为绝对纯粹的，从而，就是完全先天可能的。

Reason is the faculty which supplies the principles of knowledge a priori. 

理性，就是那种给先天知识提供原理的能力。Pure reason therefore is that faculty which supplies the principles of knowing anything entirely a priori. 

从而，纯粹理性，就是给任何完全先天的事物，提供认识其原理的能力。

An Organum of pure reason ought to comprehend all the principles by which pure knowledge a priori can be acquired and fully established. 

一个纯粹理性的工具论，应该包含：获得和完全建立纯粹先天知识所需要的所有原理。A complete application of such an Organum would give us a System of Pure Reason. 

这样一种工具论的完整应用，将给我们提供一个纯粹理性的系统。

But as that would be a difficult task, and as at present it is still doubtful whether and when such an expansion of our knowledge is here possible, we may look on a mere criticism of pure reason, its sources and limits, as a kind of preparation for a complete system of pure reason. 

但是，由于那将是一个困难的任务，且由于现在，我们知识的这样一种扩展，是否可能，及何时才可能，仍有疑问，所以，我们可以把纯粹理性鉴定、其来源、及界限，只看作是对‘一个完整的纯粹理性系统’的准备工作。

It should be called a critique, not a doctrine, of pure reason. 

所以，它应该被称为纯粹理性的鉴定，而不是一门纯粹理性的学说。

Its usefulness would be negative only, serving for a purging rather than for an expansion of our reason, and, what after all is a considerable gain, guarding reason against errors.

它的作用，只是否定性的，所以，与其说是对我们理性的扩展，不如说是对我们理性的净化；归根结底，能防止理性犯错，就已经是收获颇丰了。

I call all knowledge transcendental which is occupied not so much with objects, as with our a priori concepts of objects.1

任何知识，如果它所研究的，主要不是对象，而是我们关于对象的先天概念，那么，我就称其为超验的。

A system of such concepts might be Edition: Muller_1922; Page: [12] called Transcendental Philosophy. 

一个这种概念的系统，就称为超验哲学。

But for the present this is again too great an undertaking. 

但对目前来说，这个事业，又有点太大。

We should have to treat therein completely both of analytical knowledge, and of synthetical knowledge a priori, which is more than we intend to do, being satisfied to carry on the analysis so Edition: current; Page: [10] far only as is indispensably necessary in order to recognise in their whole extent the principles of synthesis a priori which alone concern us. 

对于其中先天的分析知识、和先天的综合知识，我们都要完整地处理，这比我们打算做的要多，因为我们所关心的，只是那些先天的综合原理，把此分析，推进到能够满足‘可以在其全部范围内认识它们’，对我们来说，就已经很满意了。

This investigation which should be called a transcendental critique, but not a systematic doctrine, is all we are occupied with at present. 

这个研究，应被称为超验的鉴定，而不是一个系统性的学说，这是我们当前的主要任务。It is not meant to extend our knowledge, but only to rectify it, and to become the test of the value of all a priori knowledge. 

因为，它不是打算要扩展我们的知识，而只是要纠正知识，所有先天知识，是否有价值，将由它来检验。

Such a critique therefore is a preparation for a New Organum, or, if that should not be possible, for a Canon at least, according to which hereafter a complete system of a philosophy of pure reason, whether it serve for an expansion or merely for a limitation of it, may be carried out, both analytically and synthetically. 

因此，这样的一个鉴定，是在为一个新的工具论做准备，或者，如果这一点不可能的话，至少也是为一部法典做准备；据此法典，从此以后，一个关于纯粹理性的、完整的哲学系统，无论是为了扩展纯粹理性，还是仅仅为了限制纯粹理性，就都可以既分析地、又综合地推出了。

That such a system is possible, nay that it need not be so comprehensive as to prevent the hope of its completion, may be gathered from the fact that it would have to deal, not with the nature of things, which is endless, but with the understanding which judges of the nature of Edition: Muller_1922; Page: [13] things, and this again so far only as its knowledge a priori is concerned. 

这样的一个系统，应该是可能的，不仅如此，它应该也不是那种无所不包的系统，以至于人们对于完成它，不抱希望；这一点，从以下事实，就可以事先得到证明，即它所要处理的，不是无休止的‘事物的本性’，而是判断‘事物的本性’的理解力，而对于理解力，我们所关心的，又只是它的先天知识那部分。

Whatever the understanding possesses a priori, as it has not to be looked for without, can hardly escape our notice, nor is there any reason to suppose that it will prove too extensive for a complete inventory, and for such a valuation as shall assign to it its true merits or demerits.1

不管理解力先天所拥有的是什么，由于我们不可能在理解力之外去寻找它们，所以，它们就不可能躲过我们的注意；同时，也没有任何理由可以假定，对于一个完整的清单、及对于一个依据其真正优缺点所做的评价来说，它可能会太广泛了。{以至于我们无法完成这个工作}

4.2 超验哲学的划分   DIVISION OF TRANSCENDENTAL PHILOSOPHY

Transcendental Philosophy is with us an idea (of a science) only, for which the critique of pure reason should Edition: current; Page: [11] trace, according to fixed principles, an architectonic plan, guaranteeing the completeness and certainty of all parts of which the building consists. (It is a system of all principles of pure reason.)1

超验哲学，对我们来说，只是一个（科学的）想法，纯粹理性鉴定，应该依据确定的原理，去追踪它的架构的蓝图，从而，保证构成该建筑的各部分的完整性和确定性。（它是一个由纯粹理性的所有原理，所构成的系统）。

The reason why we do not call such a critique a transcendental philosophy in itself is simply this, that in order to be a complete system, it ought to contain likewise a complete analysis of the whole of human knowledge a priori. 

我们为什么不把这样一个鉴定本身，称为超验哲学，原因如下：要成为一个完整的系统，它就应该同样地包含着对‘全部人类先天知识’的一个完整的分析。

It is true that our critique must produce a complete list of all the fundamental concepts which constitute pure knowledge. 

确实，我们的鉴定，对于组成纯粹知识的所有基础概念，应该列出一个完整的列表。

But it need not give a detailed analysis of these concepts, nor a complete list of all derivative concepts. 

但是，它却不需要对这些概念，做一个详细的分析，也不需对所有的派生概念，提供一个完整的列表。

Such an analysis would be out of place, because it is not beset with the Edition: Muller_1922; Page: [14] doubts and difficulties which are inherent in synthesis, and which alone necessitate a critique of pure reason. 

这种分析，将是不合适的，因为，它并没有被‘综合中内在固有的怀疑和困难’所困扰，而唯有此综合，才能使一个纯粹理性的鉴定，成为必要。

Nor would it answer our purpose to take the responsibility of the completeness of such an analysis and derivation. 

我们的目的，是要承担起‘一个这种分析及派生的完整性’的责任，而对此责任，它也不会回答。

This completeness of analysis, however, and of derivation from such a priori concepts as we shall have to deal with presently, may easily be supplied, if only they have first been laid down as perfect principles of synthesis, and nothing is wanting to them in that respect.

然而，这一分析、及从这些先天概念所导出的概念，是我们现在要处理的事务，只要它们首先可以被当作完美的综合原理，--（并且从这一角度看，它们也不缺少什么了），那么，它们的完整性，就都很容易被提供。

All that constitutes transcendental philosophy belongs to the critique of pure reason, nay it is the complete idea of transcendental philosophy, but not yet the whole of that philosophy itself, because it carries the analysis so far only as is requisite for a complete examination of synthetical knowledge a priori.

所有组成超验哲学的东西，都属于纯粹理性鉴定，不仅如此，它还是超验哲学的完整概念，但尽管如此，仍不是那个完整的哲学本身，因为它目前所承担的分析，只对一个先天综合知识的完整检验来说，是必要的。

The most important consideration in the arrangement of such a science is that no concepts should be admitted Edition: current; Page: [12] which contain anything empirical, and that the a priori knowledge shall be perfectly pure. 

在这样一门科学的安排中，最重要的考虑就是：任何概念，如果包含着经验性东西，那么，它就不应该被接受，并且，这种先天知识，将是完全纯粹的。

Therefore, although the highest principles of morality and their fundamental concepts are a priori knowledge, they do not Edition: Muller_1922; Page: [15] belong to transcendental philosophy, because the concepts of pleasure and pain, desire, inclination, free-will, etc., which are all of empirical origin, must here be presupposed. 

因此，虽然最高的道德原理，和它们的基础概念，都是先天的知识，但它们并不属于超验哲学，因为在这里，应该预设了快乐和痛苦、欲望、自由意志的倾向等，而这些概念，都起源于经验。

Transcendental philosophy is the wisdom of pure speculative reason. 

超验哲学，是纯粹思辨理性的智慧。Everything practical, so far as it contains motives, has reference to sentiments, and these belong to empirical sources of knowledge.

每个实践的事情，只要它包含着动机，就都与情感相关，而情感，则属于知识的经验性源泉。

If we wish to carry out a proper division of our science systematically, it must contain first a doctrine of the elements, secondly, a doctrine of the method of pure reason. 

如果我们希望，系统性地建立这门科学的一个真正分支，则它应该首先包含：纯粹理性的要素论；其次，纯粹理性的方法论。

Each of these principal divisions will have its subdivisions, the grounds of which cannot however be explained here.

这两个主要的分支，又都可包含子分支，其根据，这里还无法解释。

So much only seems necessary for previous information, that there are two stems of human knowledge, which perhaps may spring from a common root, unknown to us, viz. sensibility and the understanding, objects being given by the former and thought by the latter. 

对于以前的信息来说，看来有必要指出的无非是，人类的知识，有两个主干，即感性和理解力，它们也可能是从同一个根上发出的，不过这个根，我们现在还不知道；对象通过感性被给予，通过理解力被思考。

If our sensibility should contain a priori representations, constituting conditions under which alone objects can be given, it would belong to transcendental philosophy, and the doctrine of this transcendental sense-perception would necessarily Edition: Muller_1922; Page: [16] form the first part of the doctrine of elements, because the conditions under which alone objects of human knowledge can be given must precede those under which they are thought.

如果我们的感性，要包含先天的表示，这些表示构成了这样的条件，只有在其下，对象才能被给予，那么，该表示将属于超验哲学，且这种超验的‘感官-感知’的学说，必然会形成要素论的第一部分，因为，人类知识的对象，要被给予，需要一些条件，而思考这些对象，又需要一些条件，前一组条件，应该先行于后一组条件。

 ·MBTI紫人NT组群像创作·

 ·无性别及相关设定，可自行代入·

  ₪

锐星众舰集合体，银剑高科技术协会，会议室。

“抱歉，我的时间很紧。怎么处置？”

长桌右侧，【指挥官】金边三角名牌。丝绒西装前襟，有黑线穿就的刺绣郁金香。

“按照目前的审讯结果：非法占用集合体资源以及盗用关键技术和领导人个人信息，进行非法的高能实验，按联邦【法律】足以判处死刑。”

长桌左侧，【执政官】银边三角名牌。浑黑丝绸衬衫，桌上烫了半杯现磨特浓黑咖啡。

“我插一句啊，确实该死，按执政官说的来就可以。但实验日志很有意思——请允许我问问他，问完再杀。”

长桌左侧尽头，【参谋长】的银边三角名牌在指尖下飞转成了指尖陀螺。羊毛手勾的新式上衣，桌角一瓶底沿滴冷的柠檬气泡水。

“请便。”

长桌右侧尽头，【会长】银边三角名牌。一年四季的白大褂里竖着深灰的纯棉立领长袖上衣，银白的细小尾戒环扣着小指，眼镜片晃着白光。

₪₪

锐星众舰集合体，世界联邦太空监狱，A级刑讯室。

“我衷心希望你对我不要敌意这么大。这是唯一能把自己的实验结果留存于世的机会，”纯能玻璃后的参谋长在笑，“虽然我的转化体在实验里死了，但表现还挺出色——不得不说你很会模拟，虽然严格意义上，这应该归功于你盗取的人员资料和ATmosphere。”

Hymerous干裂的嘴张了张：“参谋长，我不是有意怠慢。请您给我一杯水。”

₪₪₪

“具体情况就是这样，”Hymerous匀了口气，“您四位的转化体们几乎每次都能完美解构ATmosphere，也正因如此，我利用实验数据引导ATmosphere迭代了三十万次，现在这一代的ATmosphere-Ⅸ……

“终于有了【雏形规则】，可以毁灭其中一个转化体了。”

“你的场景模拟得很有意思，「无知山谷」，如果是我本人在场……”翻阅实验日志的参谋长看起来很是愉悦，“确实是我之前会干出来的事呢？不过很显然，你盗取的人物资料有点儿早。”

“是，这是我的疏忽。”Hymerous显然遗憾至极，“转化体没有跟着ATmosphere迭代，并不能完全模拟现在的您四位……毕竟，我抽象结构的原型可是现在的【法律】呢……”

“看得出来，亲爱的，”参谋长“哈”地一声笑，“你对集合体的批判性思想多棒？博士，你本可以采取更好的方式达成你的目的。”

“我不后悔，”Hymerous说，一双眼在玻璃后微微地闪着，犹如一双泛着微光的深海乌贼，“过程和手段的选择也很重要，亲爱的参谋长。”

参谋长听懂了，点了点头：“走好。”

说罢起身，拿了实验日志准备走。

“对了，”参谋长的语气很轻松，“我的转化体的眼睛不错。”

最后的回眸，Hymerous看清了，那是一双青彩流波的眼，清利地闪着白幽的星光。

确实应该迭代。

博士喝了口水，莫名其妙地笑了。

₪₪₪₪

“他显然没有理解【法律】，”指挥官很烦躁，又一次拿这事烦他的参谋长被他掐着脖子摔在了墙上，“我的时间很紧。”

“也是提供了另一种思路嘛老大。”参谋长摔得有点儿疼，腾出手揉了揉肩膀。

“你出得去吗？”一直缄默伏案的执政官搁下量子处理器，调整了一下VR悬浮视窗的位置，正好看得清参谋长的眼睛。

“谁知道？”参谋长龇牙咧嘴，又是疼的又是笑，“我又不是先驱者。”