the+critique+of+practical+reason-第26部分

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！


condition　of　its　possibility　must　rest　solely　on　a　priori　principles
of　cognition。

　　　　　　　　　　I。　The　Antinomy　of　Practical　Reason。

　　In　the　summum　bonum　which　is　practical　for　us；　i。e。；　to　be
realized　by　our　will；　virtue　and　happiness　are　thought　as
necessarily　bined；　so　that　the　one　cannot　be　assumed　by　pure
practical　reason　without　the　other　also　being　attached　to　it。　Now　this
bination　（like　every　other）　is　either　analytical　or　synthetical。　It
bas　been　shown　that　it　cannot　be　analytical；　it　must　then　be
synthetical　and；　more　particularly；　must　be　conceived　as　the
connection　of　cause　and　effect；　since　it　concerns　a　practical　good；
i。e。；　one　that　is　possible　by　means　of　action；　consequently　either　the
desire　of　happiness　must　be　the　motive　to　maxims　of　virtue；　or　the
maxim　of　virtue　must　be　the　efficient　cause　of　happiness。　The　first　is
absolutely　impossible；　because　（as　was　proved　in　the　Analytic）
maxims　which　place　the　determining　principle　of　the　will　in　the　desire
of　personal　happiness　are　not　moral　at　all；　and　no　virtue　can　be
founded　on　them。　But　the　second　is　also　impossible；　because　the
practical　connection　of　causes　and　effects　in　the　world；　as　the　result
of　the　determination　of　the　will；　does　not　depend　upon　the　moral
dispositions　of　the　will；　but　on　the　knowledge　of　the　laws　of　nature
and　the　physical　power　to　use　them　for　one's　purposes；　consequently　we
cannot　expect　in　the　world　by　the　most　punctilious　observance　of　the
moral　laws　any　necessary　connection　of　happiness　with　virtue
adequate　to　the　summum　bonum。　Now；　as　the　promotion　of　this　summum
bonum；　the　conception　of　which　contains　this　connection；　is　a　priori　a
necessary　object　of　our　will　and　inseparably　attached　to　the　moral
law；　the　impossibility　of　the　former　must　prove　the　falsity　of　the
latter。　If　then　the　supreme　good　is　not　possible　by　practical　rules；
then　the　moral　law　also　which　mands　us　to　promote　it　is　directed　to
vain　imaginary　ends　and　must　consequently　be　false。

　　　II。　Critical　Solution　of　the　Antinomy　of　Practical　Reason。

　　The　antinomy　of　pure　speculative　reason　exhibits　a　similar
conflict　between　freedom　and　physical　necessity　in　the　causality　of
events　in　the　world。　It　was　solved　by　showing　that　there　is　no　real
contradiction　when　the　events　and　even　the　world　in　which　they　occur
are　regarded　（as　they　ought　to　be）　merely　as　appearances；　since　one
and　the　same　acting　being；　as　an　appearance　（even　to　his　own　inner
sense）；　has　a　causality　in　the　world　of　sense　that　always　conforms
to　the　mechanism　of　nature；　but　with　respect　to　the　same　events；　so
far　as　the　acting　person　regards　himself　at　the　same　time　as　a
noumenon　（as　pure　intelligence　in　an　existence　not　dependent　on　the
condition　of　time）；　he　can　contain　a　principle　by　which　that　causality
acting　according　to　laws　of　nature　is　determined；　but　which　is
itself　free　from　all　laws　of　nature。
　　It　is　just　the　same　with　the　foregoing　antinomy　of　pure　practical
reason。　The　first　of　the　two　propositions；　〃That　the　endeavour　after
happiness　produces　a　virtuous　mind；〃　is　absolutely　false；　but　the
second；　〃That　a　virtuous　mind　necessarily　produces　happiness；〃　is
not　absolutely　false；　but　only　in　so　far　as　virtue　is　considered　as
a　form　of　causality　in　the　sensible　world；　and　consequently　only　if
I　suppose　existence　in　it　to　be　the　only　sort　of　existence　of　a
rational　being；　it　is　then　only　conditionally　false。　But　as　I　am　not
only　justified　in　thinking　that　I　exist　also　as　a　noumenon　in　a
world　of　the　understanding；　but　even　have　in　the　moral　law　a　purely
intellectual　determining　principle　of　my　causality　（in　the　sensible
world）；　it　is　not　impossible　that　morality　of　mind　should　have　a
connection　as　cause　with　happiness　（as　an　effect　in　the　sensible
world）　if　not　immediate　yet　mediate　（viz。；　through　an　intelligent
author　of　nature）；　and　moreover　necessary；　while　in　a　system　of　nature
which　is　merely　an　object　of　the　senses；　this　bination　could
never　occur　except　contingently　and；　therefore；　could　not　suffice
for　the　summum　bonum。
　　Thus；　notwithstanding　this　seeming　conflict　of　practical　reason　with
itself；　the　summum　bonum；　which　is　the　necessary　supreme　end　of　a　will
morally　determined；　is　a　true　object　thereof；　for　it　is　practically
possible；　and　the　maxims　of　the　will　which　as　regards　their　matter
refer　to　it　have　objective　reality；　which　at　first　was　threatened　by
the　antinomy　that　appeared　in　the　connection　of　morality　with
happiness　by　a　general　law；　but　this　was　merely　from　a
misconception；　because　the　relation　between　appearances　was　taken
for　a　relation　of　the　things　in　themselves　to　these　appearances。
　　When　we　find　ourselves　obliged　to　go　so　far；　namely；　to　the
connection　with　an　intelligible　world；　to　find　the　possibility　of
the　summum　bonum；　which　reason　points　out　to　all　rational　beings　as
the　goal　of　all　their　moral　wishes；　it　must　seem　strange　that；
nevertheless；　the　philosophers　both　of　ancient　and　modern　times　have
been　able　to　find　happiness　in　accurate　proportion　to　virtue　even　in
this　life　（in　the　sensible　world）；　or　have　persuaded　themselves　that
they　were　conscious　thereof。　For　Epicurus　as　well　as　the　Stoics
extolled　above　everything　the　happiness　that　springs　from　the
consciousness　of　living　virtuously；　and　the　former　was　not　so　base
in　his　practical　precepts　as　one　might　infer　from　the　principles　of
his　theory；　which　he　used　for　explanation　and　not　for　action；　or　as
they　were　interpreted　by　many　who　were　misled　by　his　using　the　term
pleasure　for　contentment；　on　the　contrary；　he　reckoned　the　most
disinterested　practice　of　good　amongst　the　ways　of　enjoying　the　most
intimate　delight；　and　his　scheme　of　pleasure　（by　which　he　meant
constant　cheerfulness　of　mind）　included　the　moderation　and　control
of　the　inclinations；　such　as　the　strictest　moral　philosopher　might
require。　He　differed　from　the　Stoics　chiefly　in　making　this　pleasure
the　motive；　which　they　very　rightly　refused　to　do。　For；　on　the　one
hand；　the　virtuous　Epicurus；　like　many　well…intentioned　men　of　this
day　who　do　not　reflect　deeply　enough　on　their　principles；　fell　into
the　error　of　presupposing　the　virtuous　disposition　in　the　persons
for　whom　he　wished　to　provide　the　springs　to　virtue　（and　indeed　the
upright　man　cannot　be　happy　if　he　is　not　first　conscious　of　his
uprightness；　since　with　such　a　character　the　reproach　that　his　habit
of　thought　would　oblige　him　to　make　against　himself　in　case　of
transgression　and　his　moral　self…condemnation　would　rob　him　of　all
enjoyment　of　the　pleasantness　which　his　condition　might　otherwise
contain）。　But　the　question　is：　How　is　such　a　disposition　possible　in
the　first　instance；　and　such　a　habit　of　thought　in　estimating　the
worth　of　one's　existence；　since　prior　to　it　there　can　be　in　the
subject　no　feeling　at　all　for　moral　worth？　If　a　man　is　virtuous
without　being　conscious　of　his　integrity　in　every　action；　he　will
certainly　not　enjoy　life；　however　favourable　fortune　may　be　to　him
in　its　physical　circumstances；　but　can　we　make　him　virtuous　in　the
first　instance；　in　other　words；　before　he　esteems　the　moral　worth　of
his　existence　so　highly；　by　praising　to　him　the　peace　of　mind　that
would　result　from　the　consciousness　of　an　integrity　for　which　he　has
no　sense？
　　On　the　other　hand；　however；　there　is　here　an　occasion　of　a　vitium
subreptionis；　and　as　it　were　of　an　optical　illusion；　in　the
self…consciousness　of　what　one　does　as　distinguished　from　what　one
feels…　an　illusion　which　even　the　most　experienced　cannot　altogether
avoid。　The　moral　disposition　of　mind　is　necessarily　bined　with　a
consciousness　that　the　will　is　determined　directly　by　the　law。　Now　the
consciousness　of　a　determination　of　the　faculty　of　desire　is　always
the　source　of　a　satisfaction　in　the　resulting　action；　but　this
pleasure；　this　satisfaction　in　oneself；　is　not　the　determining
principle　of　the　action；　on　the　contrary；　the　determination　of　the
will　directly　by　reason　is　the　source　of　the　feeling　of　pleasure；
and　this　remains　a　pure　practical　not　sensible　determination　of　the
faculty　of　desire。　Now　as　this　determination　has　exactly　the　same
effect　within　in　impelling　to　activity；　that　a　feeling　of　the　pleasure
to　be　expected　from　the　desired　action　would　have　had；　we　easily
look　on　what　we　ourselves　do　as　something　which　we　merely　passively
feel；　and　take　the　moral　spring　for　a　sensible　impulse；　just　as　it
happens　in　the　so…called　illusion　of　the　senses　（in　this　case　the
inner　sense）。　It　is　a　sublime　thing　in　human　nature　to　be　determined
to　actions　immediately　by　a　purely　rational　law；　sublime　even　is　the
illusion　that　regards　the　subjective　side　of　this　capacity　of
intellectual　determination　as　something　sensible　and　the　effect　of　a
special　sensible　feeling　（for　an　intellectual　feeling　would　be　a
contradiction）。　It　is　also　of　great　importance　to　attend　to　this
property　of　our　personality　and　as　much　as　possible　to　cultivate　the
effect　of　reason　on　this　feeling。　But　we　must　beware　lest　by　falsely
extolling　this　moral　determining　principle　as　a　spring；　making　its
source　lie　in　particular　feelings　of　pleasure　（which　are　in　fact
only　results）；　we　degrade　and　disfigure　the　true　genuine　spring；　the
law　itself；　by　putting　as　it　were　a　false　foil　upon　it。　Respect；　not
pleasure　or　enjoyment　of　happiness；　is　something　for　which　it　is　not
possible　that　reason　should　have　any　antecedent　feeling　as　its
foundation　（for　this　would　always　be　sensible　and　pathological）；　and
consciousness　of　immediate　obligation　of　the　will　by　the　law　is　by
no　means　analogous　to　the　feeling　of　pleasure；　although　in　relation　to
the　faculty　of　desire　it　produces　the　same　effect；　but　from
different　sources：　it　is　only　by　this　mode　of　conception；　however；
that　we　can　attain　what　we　are　seeking；　namely；　that　actions　be　done
not　merely　in　accordance　with　duty　（as　a　result　of　pleasant　feelings）；
but　from　duty；　which　must　be　the　true　end　of　all　moral　cultivation。
　　Have　we　not；　however；　a　word　which　does　not　express　enjoyment；　as
happiness　does；　but　indicates　a　satisfaction　in　one's　existence；　an
analogue　of　the　happiness　which　must　necessarily　acpany　the
consciousness　of　virtue？　Yes　this　word　is　self…contentment　which　in