The distinction between the transcendental and the transcendent may be illustrated by reference to the Ideas of reason. Regarded as regulative only, _i.e._ merely as ideals which inspire the understanding in the pursuit of knowledge, they are transcendental. Interpreted as constitutive, _i.e._ as representing absolute realities, they are transcendent. Yet, despite the fundamental character of this distinction, so careless is Kant in the use of his technical terms that he also employs transcendental as exactly equivalent in meaning to transcendent. This is of constant occurrence, but only two instances need here be cited. In the important phrase “transcendental ideality of space and time” the term transcendental is used in place of the term transcendent. For what Kant is asserting is that judged from a _transcendent_ point of view, _i.e._ from the point of view of the thing in itself, space is only subjectively real.[331] The phrase is indeed easily capable of the orthodox interpretation, but, as the context clearly shows, that is not the way in which it is actually being used by Kant. Another equally surprising example is to be found in the title “transcendental dialectic.” Though it is defined in A 63-4 = B 88 in correct fashion, in A 297 = B 354 and A 308-9 = B 365-6 it is interpreted as treating of the illusion involved in transcendent judgments, and so virtually as meaning _transcendent_ dialectic.[332] =Not a Critique of books and systems.=[333]--Kant here inserts a statement from the omitted _Preface_ to the first edition.[334] He now adds that the _Critique_ will supply a criterion for the valuation of all other systems. =A 13 = B 27.=--Kant’s reason for omitting the title of Section II in the second edition was no doubt its inconsistency with the assertion of its opening sentence, viz. that the _Critique_ is _not_ transcendental philosophy, but only a preparation for it. Instead of it, Kant has introduced the more appropriate heading placed over the preceding paragraph. =The highest principles of morals do not belong to transcendental philosophy.=[335]--Cf. A 801 = B 829. The alteration made in this passage in the second edition[336] indicates a transition towards the opposite view which Kant developed in the _Critique of Practical Reason_.[337] =The division of this science.=[338]--Kant in this paragraph alternates in the most bewildering fashion between the _Critique_ and _Transcendental Philosophy_. In this first sentence the _Critique_ seems to be referred to. Later it is _Transcendental Philosophy_ that is spoken of. =Doctrine of Elements and Doctrine of Methods.=[339]--Cf. A 707 ff. = B 735 ff., and below, pp. 438, 563.