this procedure. The nearest example is afforded us at once by the pure
physiological table of the general principles of natural science. What in
all the world has the quantity of judgments to do with the fact that every
perception has an extensive magnitude? What has the quality of judgments
to do with the fact that every sensation has a degree? The former rests
rather on the fact that space is the form of our external perception, and
the latter is nothing more than an empirical, and, moreover, entirely
subjective feeling, drawn merely from the consideration of the nature of
our organs of sense. Further, in the table which gives the basis of
rational psychology (Critique of Pure Reason, p. 344; V. 402), the
_simplicity_ of the soul is cited under quality; but this is just a
quantitative property, and has absolutely no relation to the affirmation
or negation in the judgment. But quantity had to be completed by the
_unity_ of the soul, which is, however, already included in its
simplicity. Then modality is forced in in an absurd way; the soul stands
in connection with _possible_ objects; but connection belongs to relation,
only this is already taken possession of by substance. Then the four
cosmological Ideas, which are the material of the antinomies, are referred
to the titles of the categories; but of this we shall speak more fully
further on, when we come to the examination of these antinomies. Several,
if possible, still more glaring examples are to be found in the table of
the _Categories of Freedom!_ in the “Critique of Practical Reason;” also
in the first book of the “Critique of Judgment,” which goes through the
judgment of taste according to the four titles of the categories; and,
finally, in the “Metaphysical First Principles of Natural Science,” which
are entirely adapted to the table of the categories, whereby the false
that is mingled here and there with what is true and excellent in this
important work is for the most part introduced. See, for example, at the
end of the first chapter how the unity, the multiplicity, and the totality
of the directions of lines are supposed to correspond to the categories,
which are so named according to the quantity of judgments.
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐