Kant's Critique of Pure Reason
TRANSCENDENTAL LOGIC, SECOND DIVISION: TRANSCENDENTAL
I. Transcendental Illusion (p. 297)
II. Pure reason as the Seat of Transcendental Illusion (p. 300)
- Dialectic in general is a logic of illusion.
- Not the same as probability which is part of the analytic logic.
- Not the same as appearance, illusion is not in the object but in the
- Transcendental illusion exerts its influence on principles that are not intended for use in experience.
- Not optical illusion.
- Not logical illusion, i.e. misusing a logical rule.
- Transcendental dialectic
carries us beyond the empirical use of the categories.
- Immanent Principles: application is confined within the limits of possible experience.
- Transcendent Principles: those whose application carries us beyond those limits.
- Transcendental illusion is mistaking the subjective necessity of a connection of our concepts for an objective necessity in the determination of things in themselves.
- We cannot prevent the illusions.
- They will not disappear after we identify them.
A) Reason in General
Back to Appendix: The Amphiboly Of Concepts Of Reflection:
Arising From The Confusion Of The Empirical With The Transcendental Employment Of
B) The Logical Employment of Reason (p. 303)
- Reason is the faculty of principles, it secures the unity of the rules of understanding under principles.
- Understanding is the faculty of rules.
- Knowledge from principles is that in which I apprehend the particular in the universal through concepts.
- Principles are synthetic modes of knowledge derived from concepts, understanding can never supply them.
- Reason applies itself to understanding, never to experience or objects.
C) The Pure Employment of Reason (p. 305)
- Immediate Inference: (inference of the understanding) when the judgment is already contained in the earlier judgment so that it may be obtained without the mediation of a third representation.
- Inference of the Reason: When another judgment is required, in addition to the primary proposition, to reach the conclusion.
- In every syllogism, I:
- First, think a rule through the understanding (major premiss).
- Second, subsume something known under the condition of the rule by means of judgment (minor premiss).
- Finally, I determine through the predicate of the rule, and so a priori, through reason
- The three types of syllogism are Categorical, Hypothetical and Disjunctive.
- The question is: Does pure reason contain a priori synthetic principles and rules?
- Reason in the syllogism does not concern itself with intuitions but with concepts and judgments.
- Even if pure reason does concern itself with objects, it has no immediate relation to them, but only to the understanding.
- Therefore, the unity of reason is not the unity of
- Reason, in its logical employment, seeks to discover the universal condition of its judgment.
- The principle peculiar to reason in general is: To find, for the conditioned knowledge, the unconditioned whereby its unity is brought to completion.
- Meaning: each major premiss, although a universal rule, should be subjected to the same requirement of reason, namely to find the universal condition of it.
- This principle can become a principle of pure reason when we assume that the series of conditioned knowledge can be traced back to an unconditioned.
- Such a principle of pure reason is synthetic.
- The principles arising from this principle of pure reason will be transcendent in relation to appearances.
- Whether this principle has any objective validity will be the subject of the Transcendental Dialectic.
Forward to BOOK I: The Concepts Of Pure Reason
Table of Contents