PHILOSOPHY, 
The refult of all this is, that the Categories are fen- 
fualized by jneans of the Schemata, but at the fame time 
reftridled to the conditions of fenfe. Therefult of Tranf- 
cendental Efthetics, which we have given in its proper 
place, will here be ftill more illuftrated ; namely, that ue 
do not know the things as they are in themfelves, but only as 
they appear to us. For the unity of intuition can only be 
represented as necefiary in reference to the form of Internal 
Senfe; and consequently only in this reference can it be 
coniidered as an objedl; but in itfelf, without this fenfible 
condition, this connexion cannot at all be reprefented. 
This however would be required for the knowledge of 
things as they are in themfelves, in which cafe the repre¬ 
sented objedl (phenomenon) would be exadlly the fame, 
or identical with the thing in itfelf; a kind of knowledge 
of which we have merely an idea. 
Chap. II. System of all the Principles of pure Un¬ 
derstanding. 
The preceding chapter has furnilhed us with the con¬ 
ditions under which the application of the Categories to 
intuition is poflible. According to thefe conditions we 
fliall now be able to determine <1 priori the cafes of their 
application ; that is to fay, to lay down rules under 
which the objedls of experience mull Stand, and which 
will be laws to them h priori. For, though we fliall now 
perceive that, by means of the condition of Time, the Ca¬ 
tegory, for example that of Caufe, acquires reality, that 
is, application to intuition, and thereby produces know¬ 
ledge, fince in this manner a necefiary connexion of the 
intuition takes place, (as the one that precedes necefl'arily 
determines the other’s place in time,) ftill, however poflible 
this application might be, it would not take place unlefs 
there were determined rules indicating the cafe of this ap¬ 
plication. Thefe will be principles, becaufe they confti- 
tute the foundation of all experience. Nevertheless they 
will require a proof, which can be deduced only from the 
fame principle, namely, that they render experience pof¬ 
lible. On account of their property of determining the 
cafes of the application of the Categories, they will natu¬ 
rally follow the order of the Categories. The principles 
of.the Mathematics, whofe truth and certainty are felf- 
evident, form no part of the prefent inveftigation ; on the 
contrary, they pre-fuppofe a principle of the application 
of the Category of Quantity which does not belong to it, 
and which enables us to comprehend the imnlediate and 
apodidlical certainty of the Synthetic propofitions of the 
mathematics, and particularly in relation to objects of 
experience. 
The principles of which we here treat cannot be ana¬ 
lytical judgments, as may eafily’be forefeen, rind conse¬ 
quently they do not reft on the principle of contradidlion. 
This pofition, as it exprefi'es the fundlion of thought itfelf, 
is certainly the chief principle of thinking ; but it is far 
from being the chief principle of knowledge. All know¬ 
ledge muft indeed accord with it, for in no other way can 
any thing be thought. But, as to know means to unite 
representations into a unity of confcioufnefs; whencearifes 
the representation of an objedl, (the aggregate of a necef- 
farily-combined variety ;) the queftion ftill remains, even 
though the representations might be united agreeably to 
the principle of contradidlion, whether their connexion is 
necefiary. A very different principle is required to de- 
m on ft rate the poffibility of Synthetical judgments it priori. 
It is evident that the principles of which we are treating 
will b efynthetical, fince the rule muft furnifh the cafe of the 
application of the Category ; it will therefore contain the 
combination of a given fenlible objedl with the Category, 
which does not take place in mere thought. What then 
is this principle ? 
When the variety of the empirical intuition is thought 
in connexion with the necefiary unity of confcioufnefs, 
experience arifes, and that by means of the Schema of the 
Categories. When therefore experimental knowledge oc¬ 
199 
curs, the application of the Schema to the empirical intu¬ 
ition takes place at the fame time. Consequently the 
principle of the pofiibility of this application muft refer <1 
priori to experience. The principle of all Synthetical 
Jaws ii priori, or that pofition upon which the certainty A 
priori of thefe laws with refpedt to all poflible objedls of 
experience refts, is the following: Every objedl muft ac¬ 
cord with the neccJJ'ary conditions under which the Jynthe- 
tical unity of the variety of an Intuition is poflible. 
Hence follows the pofiibility of Jynthetical principles <5 
priori, but only in regard to a merely-poffible experience. 
Beyond this they have no meaning, fince they only deter¬ 
mine the application of the Schemata of the Categories to 
empirical intuition, but give no rules for representing 
objedls absolutely, without reference to given Intuition, 
and to the form of internal Senfe, as the condition of its 
Synthetical unity. 
With refpedl even to the truths of Geometry, they are 
certain it priori, yet this certainty by no means grounds 
itfelf upon the principle of the pofiibility of experience ; 
they pofiefs objedlive validity, however, only fo far as they 
refer to objedls of poflible experience ; and, without this 
reference, would produce nothing but mere phantoms of 
the brain. 
Syflemalical Reprefehtation of all the Synthetical Prin¬ 
ciples of pure Underfunding. 
It is evident, even before the reprefentation of thefe 
principles, that there muft necefl'arily be Such. For, if 
experience is to take place, and this confifts in the repre¬ 
fentation of a necefiary connexion of the variety of em¬ 
pirical intuition, valid for every body, but which is pof- 
fible only by the application of the Categories to intu¬ 
ition, the underftanding muft contain necefiary rules that 
determine the cafes of this application. 
The connexion of the variety of empirical intuition, 
according to the Categories, is of two kinds ; for it is 
either a connexion of the homogeneous (compojitio), and 
this again a connexion of the homogeneous of the form 
of intuition (aggregatio), or of the homogeneous of the 
matter of intuition ( coalitio)-, or it is a connexion of the 
heterogeneous ( [noxus). Compofition is the connexion 
according to the Categories of Quantity and Quality ; 
Jundlion (nexus) is that according to the Categories of 
Relation and Modality. 
Belides this, a ftill farther difference reveals itfelf with 
refpedt to thefe modes of connexion. For, though the 
connexion reprefented by the Categories of Quantity and 
Quality is thought as necefiary, yet the reprefentation of 
this neceffity follows from thefirft perception ; for inftance, 
when I perceive an animal, its form is at once determined, 
and every one muft find it the fame as I do ; but the parts 
of it do not necefl'arily belong to each other prior to the 
perception; for the animal may be thought under any 
other form. On the other hand, its parts, fo far as their 
connexion is thought by the Category of Relation, be¬ 
long necefl'arily to each other, even before the perception; 
for inftance, the Accidents to a Subftance, the RffeSl to a 
Caufe. And here we may perceive an important differ¬ 
ence among the fynthetical principles of pure underftand¬ 
ing. Thole which determine the application of the Ma¬ 
thematical Categories are called Mathematical Principles ; 
and, fince they involve the intuition of the objedl, (as well 
formal as material,) they thereby become evident. The 
principles, however, that determine the application of the 
Categories of Relation and Modality to the intuition, 
will, like thefe Categories, be termed dynamical. They 
proceed to the exiftence of the objedls, whofe intuition 
is given ; confequently are deprived of their evidence, 
but their apodidtical certainty will not be lefs than the 
mathematical. All the principles of pure underftanding 
will therefore be, according to the Table of the Categories, 
as follows; 
•Axioms 
