194 
PHILO 
an infinite judgment is thereby placed in an infinite 
fphere. If I form the j udgment, “ the foul is not mortal,” 
I divide the fphere of all poffible things into that of 
mortal and not mortal, and place the foul in the fecond, 
without having determined what it properly is. The 
infinite judgment, therefore, though it refembles in form 
the affirmative, differs from it in this, that it contains no 
pofitive determination of the fubjeft; and it muff be 
diftinguiflied from it for our purpofe. 
Thirdly: All the relations of thinking in judgments 
are thofe of the predicate to the fubjeft, of the ground to 
• its confequence, and of all the members of divifion to the 
divided whole. In the hypothetical judgment, the re¬ 
lation is only of one kind. If the ground be admitted, 
the confequence is admitted alfo; but not converfely, 
that the confequence may determine the ground. This 
determination is reciprocal in the disjunctive judgment. 
For all the members excude one another ; fo that, if the 
one be admitted, all the others are excluded, and con¬ 
verfely. Every triangle is either rectangular or not. If 
we fay of a triangle, it is rectangular ; it follows that its 
angles are not all oblique, and converfely. The members 
therefore (land in a mutual relation, fo that, taken toge¬ 
ther, they conftitute a fphere of knowledge. 
Fourthly: Every judgment is completely determined 
as to its matter, when it is determined according to its 
Quantity,Quality,and Relation. With refpeft to Modality, 
that determines only its relation to the knowing faculty, 
whether it may be admitted (problematical), or is admit¬ 
ted (affertorical), or muff be admitted (apodiftical). In 
the problematical judgment, there is indeed a judging ; 
that is, the whole of a reprefentation is referred to an 
objeft; yet this is done with the confcioufnefs of an 
option. On the other hand, this objective reference 
aftually takes place in the affertorical judgment, and in 
the apodiftical it is accompanied even by the confcioufnefs 
of Neceffity. 
Of the pure Conceptions of Underftending; or, the Catego¬ 
ries. 
All knowledge begins with intuition, in which the va¬ 
riety of an objeft is given. But Time and Space are the 
conditions it priori upon which only it can be given. 
The next requifite to knowledge is fynthefis. It confifts 
in the aftion of adding different reprefentations to each 
other, whereby it is poffible to comprife them all into one 
confcioufnefs. This is already a property of Spontaneity, 
and confequently of the Underffanding; but does not 
yet complete our knowledge. The third requifite, which 
finally completes our knowledge, is the funftion of 
Judgment, whereby the reprefented whole of the variety 
given to fenfe is referred to an objeft, and an object is 
reprefented. 
There will be confequently juft as many conceptions as 
there are logical functions of judging, whofe effence will 
confift in this, that they will all exprefs the objective re¬ 
ference of reprefentations, or the aft of reprelenting an 
objeft. 
It is therefore not mere fynthefis, but a fynthefis ac¬ 
cording to conceptions by which knowledge is firft pro¬ 
duced. Thus for inltance, the aft of counting, which 
'confifts in adding one homogeneous thing to another, is a 
fynthefis. But this may alfo proceed according to a con¬ 
ception ; for inftance, that of decades, where the concep¬ 
tion of ten unities, conftituting a new unity, accompanies 
the fynthefis ad infinitum. The intuition of this example 
is merely to (how the poffibility of a (ynthefis according 
to conceptions. 
Thofe conceptions which mull accompany the fynthe¬ 
fis in order to produce an objeftive unity of a fenfible 
variety, that is, Knowledge, are called Categories, or 
Pure Conceptions of the Underffanding. Their Table 
muff be parallel to that of the Logical Fu nftions of Judg¬ 
ments. 
SOPHY. 
Table of the Categories. 
Quantity. Quality. Relation. Modality . 
Unity, Reality, Subftance and Accident, Poffibility, 
Multitude, Negation, Caufe and Effect, / Exiftence, 
Totality. Limitation. Aftion and Re-Aftion. Neceflity. 
This, then, is the catalogue of all the conceptions found 
upon a certain principle, which muff accompany all fyn¬ 
thefis, in order to conftitute knowledge. We have, with 
Ariftotle, called them Categories; he, however, neither 
knew their number nor their ufe. 
This Table is divided into two parts. The firft con¬ 
tains the Categories of Quantity and Quality, which refer 
merely to the intuition of the objeft, as well the pure 
intuitions, in Time and Space; as the empirical, or that 
in the reprefentation of the objeft which confifts of fenfa- 
tion. Thefe are called the Mathematical. The fecond 
part contains the Categories of Relation and Modality. 
Thefe refer to the exiftence of the objeft, either in relation 
to other objefts, or to the knowing faculty. Thefe are 
called Dynamical. 
Each clafs contains three Categories, whereas every di¬ 
vifion that refts upon a logical ground is a Dichotomy. 
The ground of our Trichotomy is this : When the divifion 
is analytical, it refts upon the pojition of contradiction. In 
that cafe we fay, “ Every thing is either A or not A ;” 
confequently the divifion is always dichotomic. But, if it 
is fynthetical, (though Hill a priori,) and according to 
conceptions, it muff neceflarily be a trichotomy, becaufe, 
by the fynthefis of two conceptions, a third, different from 
the two former, muft neceflarily arife. If the divifion is 
made by the conftruftion of conceptions, it is fynthetical 
and <1 priori; but it may be more than a trichotomy, as 
the divifion of the regular polyhedra into five kinds of 
bodies. But this divifion arifes by laying down the con¬ 
ception of a polyhedra in the intuition. From the there 
conception of it, not even the poffibility of fuch bodies, 
much lefs their poffible variety, would be conceivable. 
By uniting two Categories, the third of the fame clafs 
arifes. 
Multitude confidered as Unity, is Totality ; 
Reality connefted with Negation, is Limitation. 
If we think the relation of Substance to the Acci¬ 
dent, together with the relation of the Cause to the 
Effect, the conception of Action and Re-action 
arifes. Thus for inftance, if we take a body, the con¬ 
nexion of its parts cannot be otherwife thought than in 
contaft. It contains, of courfe, the relation ot Subftance 
and Accident; and, as it alfo contains the relation of 
Caufe and Ejfefl, the parts muft be thought in aftion and 
re-aft ion towards each other. The part A touches the 
part B, and produces in it an accident; but, for that very 
reafon, B alfo touches the part A, and produces likewife 
an accident in it. Laftly, the conception of Necessity 
arifes from the union ot Existence with Possibility. 
Notwithftanding this, each third Category is not a _con- 
ception derived from the two preceding, hut is in itfelf 
a particular conception of the underffanding, becaufe the 
aft df the underftanding, in.thinking an objeft by means 
of this conception, is different from that in the two pre¬ 
ceding Categories. 
Of the Deduction of the Categories of Underflanding. 
By the dedudlionoi a conception, is meant the deducing 
the right to apply it to objefts. If we examine the 
nature of our knowledge, we find in it a multitude ot 
empirical reprefentations. Of thefe no one would require 
a deduftion: for, as they are of empirical origin, it is only 
neceffary to (how, with refpeft to them, that the right to 
apply them to objefts of experience, lies in the faft, that 
they have arifen from experience. Thus for example, 
the fluidity of certain bodies is obtained from experience, * 
which experience is therefore identical with the applica¬ 
tion 
