As will easily be shown in the next section, the Antinomies would thereby be made to contradict, therefore, our disjunctive judgements. The never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions may not contradict itself, but it is still possible that it may be in contradictions with, in natural theology, the transcendental objects in space and time; for these reasons, the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions would be falsified. As is evident upon close examination, metaphysics is just as necessary as the transcendental aesthetic, and the objects in space and time have nothing to do with our ideas. Galileo tells us that, irrespective of all empirical conditions, the discipline of human reason can not take account of the transcendental aesthetic. Because of the relation between the transcendental unity of apperception and the things in themselves, it must not be supposed that, in accordance with the principles of our ideas, the pure employment of our judgements (and to avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that this is true) stands in need of our ideas. The Ideal is a body of demonstrated science, and all of it must be known a posteriori.
Consequently, necessity is the clue to the discovery of our hypothetical judgements. To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that the Antinomies are the clue to the discovery of the noumena. In the study of the manifold, the transcendental aesthetic is a representation of the things in themselves. (However, the transcendental aesthetic can not take account of the objects in space and time.) Our ideas are what first give rise to human reason, because of the relation between our understanding and our judgements. With the sole exception of transcendental logic, the Ideal of natural reason would be falsified, as any dedicated reader can clearly see. But this need not worry us.
As we have already seen, it remains a mystery why, insomuch as time relies on our disjunctive judgements, the transcendental unity of apperception may not contradict itself, but it is still possible that it may be in contradictions with our faculties. As will easily be shown in the next section, to avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that, indeed, transcendental logic is just as necessary as the manifold. As is evident upon close examination, I assert, still, that our understanding can thereby determine in its totality our faculties. By virtue of natural reason, it is obvious that, in respect of the intelligible character, the thing in itself can be treated like the objects in space and time. Certainly, what we have alone been able to show is that the architectonic of natural reason has nothing to do with, consequently, our ideas, as is shown in the writings of Hume. The transcendental unity of apperception may not contradict itself, but it is still possible that it may be in contradictions with, for example, our judgements, and the Antinomies exclude the possibility of, still, the Ideal of human reason. But at present we shall turn our attention to the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions.
As any dedicated reader can clearly see, the things in themselves (and Aristotle tells us that this is the case) exclude the possibility of metaphysics, and space (and let us suppose that this is true) is the clue to the discovery of the paralogisms. It remains a mystery why, even as this relates to our understanding, natural causes can never, as a whole, furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like metaphysics, they have nothing to do with ampliative principles, but the Ideal of practical reason, so far as regards our a priori knowledge and the Categories, abstracts from all content of knowledge. However, the practical employment of the Antinomies, for these reasons, can never furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions, it is just as necessary as a priori principles, as we have already seen. It must not be supposed that, so far as I know, the paralogisms would be falsified, but philosophy, even as this relates to the transcendental aesthetic, would thereby be made to contradict our faculties. Since knowledge of our ideas is a priori, metaphysics teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of the things in themselves. The Ideal may not contradict itself, but it is still possible that it may be in contradictions with the objects in space and time, because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions. Philosophy, in particular, proves the validity of the Ideal.
Natural causes constitute a body of demonstrated doctrine, and some of this body must be known a priori; in all theoretical sciences, the Categories abstract from all content of knowledge. However, the paralogisms of natural reason have lying before them metaphysics, since knowledge of our concepts is a posteriori. By virtue of practical reason, space excludes the possibility of the thing in itself; thus, philosophy would be falsified. Because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions, I assert, in natural theology, that, in reference to ends, the things in themselves have nothing to do with, in view of these considerations, the Ideal. Our a posteriori judgements are a representation of the Categories; in the case of the manifold, the transcendental unity of apperception has lying before it the Ideal of natural reason. This is what chiefly concerns us.
To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that the things in themselves are what first give rise to our understanding. However, it is obvious that the noumena are a representation of, for example, our experience, since all of the objects in space and time are speculative. We can deduce that, on the contrary, the things in themselves exist in our sense perceptions, and time may not contradict itself, but it is still possible that it may be in contradictions with, in all theoretical sciences, the things in themselves. The never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions (and there can be no doubt that this is true) is just as necessary as the objects in space and time; therefore, our faculties constitute the whole content of our understanding. It is obvious that the objects in space and time are just as necessary as natural causes. Our knowledge (and it remains a mystery why this is true) is the key to understanding the Categories; thus, the transcendental unity of apperception proves the validity of, in view of these considerations, necessity.
This is a randomly generated philosophy just for you! No one else will get this wisdom! Try to make sense of it after few drinks! No our bot was not under GUI(Generating Under Influence)! If you kant understand it, don't say it is all kant(rubbish)!