K A 
fentation of an object with the obje6t itfelf. The Sceptic 
however is in danger of becoming a Dogmatift fo long as 
he is not a Tranfcendental PhiJofopher, and does not torn 
his attention to the original ufe of the underfanding in the 
Categories. 
The refult of Tranfcendental Philofophy is the por¬ 
tion, We do not know the things as they are in the??fives, but only 
as they appear to us. This pofition expreffes nothing more 
than that the underftanding fyrithefiz'es and fchematizes 
originally in the Categories which conftitute the original 
life of underftanding; and that the conjunction we af- 
cribe to the things entirely refts upon that which the un¬ 
derftanding exercifes in its original ufe. 
The objeSiive validity of a conception is its intelligibility. 
When a conception can be carried back to the original 
ufe of underftanding in the Categories, (the Analytical 
unity of the conception to the original fynthtetical objec¬ 
tive unity of the original ufe of underftanding,) it is ob¬ 
jectively valid. The conception, by this tranfcendental 
reflection, is elevated to a difcurftve Knowledge, which is 
identical with the real pojfwility of a Conception. All hu¬ 
man knowledge is a compound of Conceptions and Intui¬ 
tions. Conceptions without bituitiotis are empty, and Intuitions 
without Conceptions are blind'-, therefore, every Conception 
muft have arifen from an Intuition, or it is no conception 
at all, but a mere creature of the imagination, and with¬ 
out any meaning. But Conceptions once for?ned by any 
human mind with clear confcioufnefs become an nbfolute 
property, and conftitute the real medium of communica¬ 
tion from Mind to Mind; as, for example, the conception 
of a Triangle, having obfdive validity, is transferable to 
any human mind by its marks, which are again concep¬ 
tions. This joining conceptions together is Thinking. 
Knowledge confifts of an Intuition joined to a Conception 
■which conftitutes a Phenomenon. But the caufe of a 
Phenomenon is a Noumenon. The conception of a Nou- 
menon is the conception of an objedt that has no original 
ufe of underftanding for its bails. It is out of Time and 
Space, confequently out of the fphere of the Intelligible, and 
belongs to the territory of the unintelligible, or the Intel- 
legibilis Region. 
We may now reprefent the conception of a nonetitity, 
i. e. of Nothing, according to the Table of the Categories. 
Nothing is, firf, that which is neither one, many, nor all; 
i.e. to which no original ufe of underftanding in the Ca¬ 
tegories of Quantity can be applied, (an ens rationis.) Such 
is the conception of a noumenon, which is out of time and 
fpace, and to which however exiftence muft belong. 
Nothing is, fecondly, that which has no original ufe of 
underftanding in the Categories of Quality for a foundation ; 
(a nihilprivativum.) Such is the conception of empty Space. 
Nothing is, thirdly, that which contains no original ufe 
of the Categories of Relation, which poftte a permanent in 
fpace; (an ens imaginarium.) Such is the conception of 
a mathematical figure. 
Thefe three conceptions do not run counter to the ori¬ 
ginal ufe of underftanding; they are therefore not coun¬ 
ter-intelligible. But they are unintelligible, as the 
analytical unity which is thought in them cannot be car¬ 
ried back to any original fynthetic obje&ive unity. 
Nothing is, fourthly, that which contains no original ufe 
of the Categories of Modality, (a nihil negativum ;) for exam¬ 
ple, the conception of a right-lined figure of two fides ; 
tiie conception of a fubftance which is prefent in fpace, 
yet without filling it; the conception of a creation of 
matter. The above conceptions run counter to the ori¬ 
ginal ufe of underftanding. 
Tranfcendental Philofophy therefore confifts in this, 
that all fignification and intelligibility of our conceptions 
lie in the original ufe of underftanding; thatitcan be faid 
of a conception, that it has an objed, that it refers to an ob- 
je£l, and that it has objective validity, only when its ana¬ 
lytical unity can be carried back to the original fynthetic objechve 
unity of confcioufnefs. 
The queftion is now ealiiy anfwered, how we come by 
Vol. XI. No. 780. 
N T. 6J 3 
the pure conceptions of underftanding, that is, the Cate¬ 
gories, and apply them to experience, though they are not 
derived from experience. The faft is they are the very 
underftanding itfelf, and are that alone which renders all 
experience pofiible. This is termed, in the Critic of Pure 
Reafon, the Deduction of the Categories of Nature, and 
is proved with apodiflical certainty. This explanation of 
Understanding, or the fecond degree of mental fpon- 
taneity, completely limits and determines the power of 
this facility. Underfanding is accordingly that faculty of the 
mind which raifes conceptions from Intuitions, and is completely 
limited to Time and Space. It differs from Senfe in polfefi- 
ing a freedom’ of aition, though this freedom is Itill con¬ 
fined within the boundary of Time and Space. Confe¬ 
quently, whenever it is occupied with fpeculations that 
tranfeend this limit, the refult of thefe fpeculations will 
be a mere play of thoughts, and contain nothing intelligible. 
Such are its attempts to inveiiigate the Human Soul, the 
Deity, and Immortality; which, being Ideas of Reason, 
can only be inveftigated by that Faculty, and can never 
become intelligible objects for the underftanding ; that is 
to fay, objects in Time and Space, or in Experience. Thus 
it is evident that Underfanding has no other flare in the pro- 
dudion of Knowledge than that of giving form or U Nity to the 
matter or variety which is received by Sense. But to give 
form to the matter is to conftitute the objeft. As an ar¬ 
chitect conftruCts a lioufe by giving a certain form to the 
materials, the Intellect conftitutes the objects of experi¬ 
ence by giving to the received matter, which it could 
not create, a certain form, according to the nature and 
powers of its conftitution, namely, according to the Ca- 
tegories. Underftanding therefore can only form Con¬ 
ceptions. 
Having thus explained what is to be underftood by Know¬ 
ledge; namely, that it is the joint effect or produce of the 
faculties of Underfanding and Senfe ; or, in other words, 
that Knowledge is the comprehending an Intuition under a Con¬ 
ception, and is produced by the judging ail of the Unuer- 
ftandirig; it wiil be proper to enquire into the nature of 
Judgment before we proceed to examine what Reafon has 
to do with Knowledge, what influence it has upon our 
actions, and in what manner it fecures to us Morality, which 
includes the Idea of the Deity, of the Immortality of the 
Soul, and of a future ftate. 
JUDGMENT 
is the logical Ufe of Understanding and of Reason. 
To comprehend an intuition under a conception is t® 
judge. The Underftanding judges immediately, that is, 
applies a predicate to a fubject immediately. “The 
grafs is green.” Reafon judges alfo, but mediately. It 
alfo applies a predicate to a 1'ubjeCt; but it does this by 
means of another conception, or middle term ; and this 
procefs is named Conclulion. The general nature of Con- 
clufion is, that it confifts of three Judgments; but, as 
every judgment comprehends a reprefented variety in a 
conception, a Conclufion will confilt of three conceptions. 
Thus it comprehends an Intuition under a Conception, 
and a Conception under a higher conception, arranging 
what is particular under what is general. For inftance. 
All Men are Mortal; Locke is a Man ; therefore Locke 
is mortal. The fphere of the conception Mortal is the 
largeft; Man is the next, which is comprehended in the 
former; and the intuition Locke is contained in the con¬ 
ception Man. This may be illuftrated by the following 
figures. 
Predicate. Middle Term. Subject. 
The 
7 R 
