(_Vorgestellt-werden_), if we annul it in its quality as an Object, yet still wish to retain something, we can meet with nothing but _the Subject_. Conversely, if we desire to abstract from the subjectivity of the Subject, yet to have something over, the contrary takes place, and this leads to Materialism. [56] Compare Kant, "Krit. d. r. Vern." Elementarlehre. Abschnitt ii. Schlüsse a. d. Begr. _b_ and _c_. 1st edition, pp. 33 and 34; 5th edition, p. 49. (Transl. M. Müller, p. 29, _b_ and _c_.) [57] Kant, "Krit. d. r. V." Kritik des Vierten Paralogismus der transcendentalen Psychologie, p. 369, 1st edition. (Engl. Transl. by M. Müller, p. 320.) [58] _Ibid._ 1st edition, pp. 374-375. Note. (Engl. Transl. p. 325. Note.) [59] Kant, "Krit. d. r. V." "Betrachtung über die Summe," &c., p. 383 of 1st edition. (Engl. Transl. p. 331.) Spinoza, who never thoroughly sifted the matter, and never therefore acquired a clear notion of it, nevertheless quite understood the necessary correlation between Subject and Object as so essential, that they are inconceivable without it; consequently he defined it as an identity in the Substance (which alone exists) of that which knows, with that which has extension. OBSERVATION.--With reference to the chief argument of this paragraph, I take the opportunity to remark that if, in the course of this treatise, for the sake of brevity and in order to be more easily understood, I at any time use the term _real objects_, I mean by it nothing but the intuitive representations that are united to form the complex of empirical reality, which reality in itself always remains ideal. § 20. _Principle of Sufficient Reason of Becoming._