Were Kant really arguing here and in the second argument on space solely from the _objective_ necessity of time and space, this criticism would be unanswerable. But even taking the argument in its first edition form, as an argument from the _psychological_ necessity of time, it lies open to the same objection as the argument on space. It rests upon a false statement of fact. We cannot retain time in the absence of all appearances of outer and inner sense. With the removal of the given manifold, time itself must vanish. =Fourth Argument.=[494]--This argument differs only slightly, and mainly through omissions,[495] from the fourth[496] of the arguments in regard to space; but a few minor points call for notice. (_a_) In the first sentence, instead of intuition, which alone is under consideration in its contrast to conception, Kant employs the phrase “pure form of intuition.” (_b_) In the third sentence Kant uses the quite untenable phrase “given through a single object (_Gegenstand_).” Time is not given from without, nor is it due to an object. (_c_) The concluding sentences properly belong to the transcendental exposition. They are here introduced, not in the ambiguous manner of the fourth[1] argument on space, but explicitly as a further argument in proof of the intuitive character of time. The synthetic proposition which Kant cites is taken neither from the science of motion nor from arithmetic. It expresses the nature of time itself, and for that reason is immediately contained in the intuition of time. =Fifth Argument.=--This argument differs fundamentally from the corresponding argument on space, whether of the first or of the second edition, and must therefore be independently analysed. The thesis is again that time is an intuition. Proof is derived from the fact that time is a representation in which the parts arise only through limitation, and in which, therefore, the whole must precede the parts. The original (_ursprüngliche_) time-representation, _i.e._ the fundamental representation through limitation of which the parts arise as secondary products, must be an intuition.