the critique of pure reason- 第32部分

the　latter　possible。　This　mediating　representation　must　be　pure

（without　any　empirical　content）；　and　yet　must　on　the　one　side　be

intellectual；　on　the　other　sensuous。　Such　a　representation　is　the

transcendental　schema。

　　The　conception　of　the　understanding　contains　pure　synthetical

unity　of　the　manifold　in　general。　Time；　as　the　formal　condition　of　the

manifold　of　the　internal　sense；　consequently　of　the　conjunction　of　all

representations；　contains　a　priori　a　manifold　in　the　pure　intuition。

Now　a　transcendental　determination　of　time　is　so　far　homogeneous

with　the　category；　which　constitutes　the　unity　thereof；　that　it　is

universal　and　rests　upon　a　rule　a　priori。　On　the　other　hand；　it　is

so　far　homogeneous　with　the　phenomenon；　inasmuch　as　time　is

contained　in　every　empirical　representation　of　the　manifold。　Thus　an

application　of　the　category　to　phenomena　becomes　possible；　by　means　of

the　transcendental　determination　of　time；　which；　as　the　schema　of

the　conceptions　of　the　understanding；　mediates　the　subsumption　of

the　latter　under　the　former。

　　After　what　has　been　proved　in　our　deduction　of　the　categories；　no

one；　it　is　to　be　hoped；　can　hesitate　as　to　the　proper　decision　of

the　question；　whether　the　employment　of　these　pure　conceptions　of

the　understanding　ought　to　be　merely　empirical　or　also　transcendental；

in　other　words；　whether　the　categories；　as　conditions　of　a　possible

experience；　relate　a　priori　solely　to　phenomena；　or　whether；　as

conditions　of　the　possibility　of　things　in　general；　their

application　can　be　extended　to　objects　as　things　in　themselves。　For　we

have　there　seen　that　conceptions　are　quite　impossible；　and　utterly

without　signification；　unless　either　to　them；　or　at　least　to　the

elements　of　which　they　consist；　an　object　be　given；　and　that；

consequently；　they　cannot　possibly　apply　to　objects　as　things　in

themselves　without　regard　to　the　question　whether　and　how　these　may　be

given　to　us；　and；　further；　that　the　only　manner　in　which　objects　can

be　given　to　us　is　by　means　of　the　modification　of　our　sensibility；

and；　finally；　that　pure　a　priori　conceptions；　in　addition　to　the

function　of　the　understanding　in　the　category；　must　contain　a　priori

formal　conditions　of　sensibility　（of　the　internal　sense；　namely）；

which　again　contain　the　general　condition　under　which　alone　the

category　can　be　applied　to　any　object。　This　formal　and　pure

condition　of　sensibility；　to　which　the　conception　of　the　understanding

is　restricted　in　its　employment；　we　shall　name　the　schema　of　the

conception　of　the　understanding；　and　the　procedure　of　the

understanding　with　these　schemata　we　shall　call　the　schematism　of

the　pure　understanding。

　　The　schema　is；　in　itself；　always　a　mere　product　of　the

imagination。　But；　as　the　synthesis　of　imagination　has　for　its　aim　no

single　intuition；　but　merely　unity　in　the　determination　of

sensibility；　the　schema　is　clearly　distinguishable　from　the　image。

Thus；　if　I　place　five　points　one　after　another。。。。　this　is　an　image　of

the　number　five。　On　the　other　hand；　if　I　only　think　a　number　in

general；　which　may　be　either　five　or　a　hundred；　this　thought　is　rather

the　representation　of　a　method　of　representing　in　an　image　a　sum

（e。g。；　a　thousand）　in　conformity　with　a　conception；　than　the　image

itself；　an　image　which　I　should　find　some　little　difficulty　in

reviewing；　and　comparing　with　the　conception。　Now　this

representation　of　a　general　procedure　of　the　imagination　to　present

its　image　to　a　conception；　I　call　the　schema　of　this　conception。

　　In　truth；　it　is　not　images　of　objects；　but　schemata；　which　lie　at

the　foundation　of　our　pure　sensuous　conceptions。　No　image　could　ever

be　adequate　to　our　conception　of　a　triangle　in　general。　For　the

generalness　of　the　conception　it　never　could　attain　to；　as　this

includes　under　itself　all　triangles；　whether　right…angled；

acute…angled；　etc。；　whilst　the　image　would　always　be　limited　to　a

single　part　of　this　sphere。　The　schema　of　the　triangle　can　exist

nowhere　else　than　in　thought；　and　it　indicates　a　rule　of　the　synthesis

of　the　imagination　in　regard　to　pure　figures　in　space。　Still　less　is

an　object　of　experience；　or　an　image　of　the　object；　ever　to　the

empirical　conception。　On　the　contrary；　the　conception　always　relates

immediately　to　the　schema　of　the　imagination；　as　a　rule　for　the

determination　of　our　intuition；　in　conformity　with　a　certain　general

conception。　The　conception　of　a　dog　indicates　a　rule；　according　to

which　my　imagination　can　delineate　the　figure　of　a　four…footed

animal　in　general；　without　being　limited　to　any　particular

individual　form　which　experience　presents　to　me；　or　indeed　to　any

possible　image　that　I　can　represent　to　myself　in　concreto。　This

schematism　of　our　understanding　in　regard　to　phenomena　and　their

mere　form；　is　an　art；　hidden　in　the　depths　of　the　human　soul；　whose

true　modes　of　action　we　shall　only　with　difficulty　discover　and

unveil。　Thus　much　only　can　we　say：　〃The　image　is　a　product　of　the

empirical　faculty　of　the　productive　imagination…　the　schema　of

sensuous　conceptions　（of　figures　in　space；　for　example）　is　a

product；　and；　as　it　were；　a　monogram　of　the　pure　imagination　a　priori；

whereby　and　according　to　which　images　first　become　possible；　which；

however；　can　be　connected　with　the　conception　only　mediately　by

means　of　the　schema　which　they　indicate；　and　are　in　themselves　never

fully　adequate　to　it。〃　On　the　other　hand；　the　schema　of　a　pure

conception　of　the　understanding　is　something　that　cannot　be　reduced

into　any　image…　it　is　nothing　else　than　the　pure　synthesis　expressed

by　the　category；　conformably；　to　a　rule　of　unity　according　to

conceptions。　It　is　a　transcendental　product　of　the　imagination；　a

product　which　concerns　the　determination　of　the　internal　sense；

according　to　conditions　of　its　form　（time）　in　respect　to　all

representations；　in　so　far　as　these　representations　must　be

conjoined　a　priori　in　one　conception；　conformably　to　the　unity　of

apperception。

　　Without　entering　upon　a　dry　and　tedious　analysis　of　the　essential

requisites　of　transcendental　schemata　of　the　pure　conceptions　of　the

understanding；　we　shall　rather　proceed　at　once　to　give　an

explanation　of　them　according　to　the　order　of　the　categories；　and　in

connection　therewith。

　　For　the　external　sense　the　pure　image　of　all　quantities

（quantorum）　is　space；　the　pure　image　of　all　objects　of　sense　in

general；　is　time。　But　the　pure　schema　of　quantity　（quantitatis）　as　a

conception　of　the　understanding；　is　number；　a　representation　which

comprehends　the　successive　addition　of　one　to　one　（homogeneous

quantities）。　Thus；　number　is　nothing　else　than　the　unity　of　the

synthesis　of　the　manifold　in　a　homogeneous　intuition；　by　means　of　my

generating　time　itself　in　my　apprehension　of　the　intuition。

　　Reality；　in　the　pure　conception　of　the　understanding；　is　that

which　corresponds　to　a　sensation　in　general；　that；　consequently；　the

conception　of　which　indicates　a　being　（in　time）。　Negation　is　that

the　conception　of　which　represents　a　not…being　（in　time）。　The

opposition　of　these　two　consists　therefore　in　the　difference　of　one

and　the　same　time；　as　a　time　filled　or　a　time　empty。　Now　as　time　is

only　the　form　of　intuition；　consequently　of　objects　as　phenomena；　that

which　in　objects　corresponds　to　sensation　is　the　transcendental　matter

of　all　objects　as　things　in　themselves　（Sachheit；　reality）。　Now

every　sensation　has　a　degree　or　quantity　by　which　it　can　fill　time；

that　is　to　say；　the　internal　sense　in　respect　of　the　representation　of

an　object；　more　or　less；　until　it　vanishes　into　nothing　（=　0　=

negatio）。　Thus　there　is　a　relation　and　connection　between　reality

and　negation；　or　rather　a　transition　from　the　former　to　the　latter；

which　makes　every　reality　representable　to　us　as　a　quantum；　and　the

schema　of　a　reality　as　the　quantity　of　something　in　so　far　as　it　fills

time；　is　exactly　this　continuous　and　uniform　generation　of　the　reality

in　time；　as　we　descend　in　time　from　the　sensation　which　has　a

certain　degree；　down　to　the　vanishing　thereof；　or　gradually　ascend

from　negation　to　the　quantity　thereof。

　　The　schema　of　substance　is　the　permanence　of　the　real　in　time；

that　is；　the　representation　of　it　as　a　substratum　of　the　empirical

determination　of　time；　a　substratum　which　therefore　remains；　whilst

all　else　changes。　（Time　passes　not；　but　in　it　passes　the　existence

of　the　changeable。　To　time；　therefore；　which　is　itself　unchangeable

and　permanent；　corresponds　that　which　in　the　phenomenon　is

unchangeable　in　existence；　that　is；　substance；　and　it　is　only　by　it

that　the　succession　and　coexistence　of　phenomena　can　be　determined

in　regard　to　time。）

　　The　schema　of　cause　and　of　the　causality　of　a　thing　is　the　real

which；　when　posited；　is　always　followed　by　something　else。　It

consists；　therefore；　in　the　succession　of　the　manifold；　in　so　far　as

that　succession　is　subjected　to　a　rule。

　　The　schema　of　community　（reciprocity　of　action　and　reaction）；　or　the

reciprocal　causality　of　substances　in　respect　of　their　accidents；　is

the　coexistence　of　the　determinations　of　the　one　with　those　of　the

other；　according　to　a　general　rule。

　　The　schema　of　possibility　is　the　accordance　of　the　synthesis　of

different　representations　with　the　conditions　of　time　in　general

（as；　for　example；　opposites　cannot　exist　together　at　the　same　time

in　the　same　thing；　but　only　after　each　other）；　and　is　therefore　the

determination　of　the　representation　of　a　thing　at　any　time。

　　The　schema　of　reality　is　existence　in　a　determined　time。

　　The　schema　of　necessity　is　the　existence　of　an　object　in　all　time。

　　It　is　clear；　from　all　this；　that　the　schema　of　the　category　of

quantity　contains　and　represents　the　generation　（synthesis）　of　time

itself；　in　the　successive　apprehension　of　an　object；　the　schema　of

quality　the　synthesis　of　sensation　with　the　representation　of　time；　or

the　filling　up　of　time；　the　schema　of　relation　the　relation　of

percept