📄 kant.xml
字号:
<?xml version="1.0"?><!DOCTYPE grammar PUBLIC "-//diveintopython.org//DTD Kant Generator Pro v1.0//EN" "kgp.dtd"><grammar><ref id="conjunction"> <p>and</p> <p>but</p> <p>yet</p></ref><ref id="quantity"> <p>all of</p> <p>some of</p> <p>none of</p></ref><ref id="logic.type"> <p>general</p> <p>applied</p> <p>pure</p> <p>transcendental</p> <p>formal</p></ref><ref id="rule.type"> <p>universal</p> <p>necessary</p> <p>practical</p> <p>contradictory</p> <p>sufficient</p></ref><ref id="judgement.type"> <p>hypothetical</p> <p>problematic</p> <p>analytic</p> <p>synthetic</p> <p>ampliative</p> <p>inductive</p> <p>speculative</p> <p>disjunctive</p> <p><xref id="knowledge.type"/></p></ref><ref id="knowledge.type"> <p>a priori</p> <p>a posteriori</p></ref><ref id="reason.type"> <p>pure</p> <p>practical</p> <p>human</p> <p>natural</p></ref><ref id="object.type"> <p>intelligible</p> <p>transcendental</p> <p>empirical</p></ref><ref id="philosopher"> <p>Aristotle</p> <p>Hume</p> <p>Galileo</p></ref><ref id="Ns"> <p>the transcendental aesthetic</p> <p><xref id="logic.type"/> logic</p> <p>the Ideal of <xref id="reason.type"/> reason</p> <p>the architectonic of <xref id="reason.type"/> reason</p> <p>the discipline of <xref id="reason.type"/> reason</p> <p>the <p chance="50"><choice><p>pure</p><p>practical</p></choice> </p>employment of <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice></p> <p>the Ideal</p> <p>the manifold</p> <p>the Transcendental Deduction</p> <p>our experience</p> <p>philosophy</p> <p>metaphysics</p> <p>the thing in itself</p> <p>our understanding</p> <p>our <p chance="50"><xref id="knowledge.type"/> </p>knowledge</p> <p><xref id="reason.type"/> reason</p> <p>space</p> <p>time</p> <p>the transcendental unity of apperception</p> <p>necessity</p> <p>the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions</p></ref><ref id="Np"> <p>the Antinomies</p> <p>the paralogisms<p chance="50"> of <xref id="reason.type"/> reason</p></p> <p>the Categories</p> <p>our sense perceptions</p> <p>our faculties</p> <p>our <p chance="50"><xref id="judgement.type"/> </p>judgements</p> <p>the objects in space and time</p> <p>the things in themselves</p> <p>natural causes</p> <p>our ideas</p> <p>our <p chance="50"><xref id="knowledge.type"/> </p>concepts</p> <p>the <p chance="50"><xref id="object.type"/> </p>objects in space and time</p> <p>the noumena</p> <p>the phenomena</p></ref><ref id="Vst"> <p>is what first gives rise to</p> <p>can thereby determine in its totality</p> <p>has lying before it</p> <p>constitutes the whole content for</p> <p>may not contradict itself, but it is still possible that it may be in contradictions with</p> <p>would thereby be made to contradict</p> <p>teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of</p> <p>can not take account of</p> <p>has nothing to do with</p> <p>stands in need of</p> <p>is the key to understanding</p> <p>proves the validity of</p> <p>is just as necessary as</p> <p>is the clue to the discovery of</p> <p>is a representation of</p> <p>depends on</p> <p>excludes the possibility of</p></ref><ref id="Vsi"> <p>is the mere result of the power of <xref id="Ns"/>, a blind but indispensable function of the soul</p> <p>occupies part of the sphere of <xref id="Ns"/> concerning the existence of <xref id="Np"/> in general</p> <p>is by its very nature contradictory</p> <p>would be falsified</p> <p>abstracts from all content of <p chance="50"><xref id="knowledge.type"/> </p>knowledge</p> <p>is a body of demonstrated science, and <xref id="quantity"/> it must be known <xref id="knowledge.type"/></p> <p>can never furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like <xref id="Ns"/>, it <xref id="Vst"/> <xref id="judgement.type"/> principles</p> <p>can be treated like <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice></p> <p>exists in <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice></p></ref><ref id="Vpt"> <p>are what first give rise to</p> <p>have lying before them</p> <p>constitute the whole content of</p> <p>would thereby be made to contradict</p> <p>can not take account of</p> <p>have nothing to do with</p> <p>stand in need to</p> <p>are the clue to the discovery of</p> <p>prove the validity of</p> <p>are just as necessary as</p> <p>are a representation of</p> <p>exclude the possibility of</p></ref><ref id="Vpi"> <p>are the mere results of the power of <xref id="Ns"/>, a blind but indispensable function of the soul</p> <p>occupy part of the sphere of <xref id="Ns"/> concerning the existence of <xref id="Np"/> in general</p> <p>are by their very nature contradictory</p> <p>would be falsified</p> <p>abstract from all content of <p chance="50"><xref id="knowledge.type"/> </p>knowledge</p> <p>constitute a body of demonstrated doctrine, and <xref id="quantity"/> this body must be known <xref id="knowledge.type"/></p> <p>can never, as a whole, furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like <xref id="Ns"/>, they <xref id="Vpt"/> <xref id="judgement.type"/> principles</p> <p>can be treated like <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice></p> <p>should only be used as a canon for <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice></p> <p>exist in <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice></p></ref><ref id="intro.clause"> <p>in all theoretical sciences</p> <p>in view of these considerations</p> <p>thus</p> <p>by means of <xref id="Ns"/></p> <p>in the study of <xref id="Ns"/></p> <p>therefore</p> <p>with the sole exception of <xref id="Ns"/></p> <p>certainly</p> <p>still</p> <p>as I have elsewhere shown</p> <p>on the other hand</p> <p>for these reasons</p> <p>in the case of <xref id="Ns"/></p> <p>however</p> <p>in natural theology</p> <p>consequently</p></ref><ref id="certainty.clause"> <p>it must not be supposed that</p> <p>there can be no doubt that</p> <p>we can deduce that</p> <p>it is not at all certain that</p> <p><xref id="philosopher"/> tells us that</p> <p>it remains a mystery why</p> <p>I assert<p chance="50">, <xref id="intro.clause"/>,</p> that</p> <p>to avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that</p> <p>let us suppose that</p> <p>it is obvious that</p> <p>the reader should be careful to observe that</p> <p>what we have alone been able to show is that</p></ref><ref id="proof"> <p>because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions</p> <p>as is shown in the writings of <xref id="philosopher"/></p> <p>as is proven in the ontological manuals</p> <p>as any dedicated reader can clearly see</p> <p>as is evident upon close examination</p> <p>as will easily be shown in the next section</p> <p>since knowledge of <xref id="Np"/> is <xref id="knowledge.type"/></p> <p>by virtue of <xref id="reason.type"/> reason</p> <p>as we have already seen</p> <p>since <xref id="quantity"/> <xref id="Np"/> are <xref id="judgement.type"/></p> <p>because of the relation between <xref id="Ns"/> and <xref id="Np"/></p> <p>by means of analysis</p> <p>by means of analytic unity</p></ref><ref id="throwaway.clause"> <p>in so far as this expounds the <xref id="rule.type"/> rules of <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice></p> <p>when thus treated as <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice></p> <p>in other words</p> <p>in the full sense of these terms</p> <p>insomuch as <xref id="Ns"/> relies on <xref id="Np"/></p> <p>indeed</p> <p>then</p> <p>that is to say</p> <p>even as this relates to <xref id="Ns"/></p> <p>in respect of the intelligible character</p> <p>so regarded</p> <p>for example</p> <p>irrespective of all empirical conditions</p> <p>so far as regards <xref id="Ns"/><p chance="50"> and <xref id="Np"/></p></p> <p>on the contrary</p> <p>in accordance with the principles of <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice></p> <p>in reference to ends</p> <p>in particular</p> <p>so far as I know</p></ref><ref id="main.clause"> <p><xref id="Ns"/><p chance="50"><choice><p> (and <xref id="certainty.clause"/> this is true)</p><p>, <xref id="throwaway.clause"/>,</p></choice></p> <xref id="Vst"/> <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice></p> <p><xref id="Ns"/> <xref id="Vst"/><p chance="50">, <choice><p><xref id="throwaway.clause"/></p><p><xref id="intro.clause"/></p></choice>,</p> <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice></p> <p><xref id="Ns"/><p chance="50">, <choice><p><xref id="throwaway.clause"/></p><p><xref id="intro.clause"/></p></choice>,</p> <xref id="Vsi"/></p> <p><xref id="Np"/><p chance="50"><choice><p> (and <xref id="certainty.clause"/> this is the case)</p><p>, <xref id="intro.clause"/>,</p></choice></p> <xref id="Vpt"/> <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice></p> <p><xref id="Np"/> <xref id="Vpt"/><p chance="50">, <choice><p><xref id="throwaway.clause"/></p><p><xref id="intro.clause"/></p></choice>,</p> <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice></p> <p><xref id="Np"/><p chance="50">, <choice><p><xref id="throwaway.clause"/></p><p><xref id="intro.clause"/></p></choice>,</p> <xref id="Vpi"/></p></ref><ref id="sentence"> <p class="sentence"><p chance="50"><xref id="intro.clause"/>, </p><p chance="50"><xref id="certainty.clause"/> </p><xref id="main.clause"/><p chance="50">, <xref id="proof"/></p>.</p> <p class="sentence"><p chance="50"><xref id="proof"/>, </p><p chance="50"><xref id="certainty.clause"/>, <xref id="throwaway.clause"/>, </p><xref id="main.clause"/><p chance="50">, <xref id="conjunction"/> <xref id="main.clause"/></p>.</p> <p class="sentence"><p chance="50"><xref id="proof"/>, </p><p chance="50"><xref id="certainty.clause"/> </p><xref id="main.clause"/><p chance="50">; <xref id="intro.clause"/>, <xref id="main.clause"/></p>.</p></ref><ref id="question"> <p>Whence comes <xref id="Ns"/>, the solution of which involves the relation between <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice> and <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice>?</p><p class="sentence"><p chance="50"><xref id="intro.clause"/>, </p>is it <choice><p>true</p><p>the case</p></choice> that <xref id="Ns"/> <xref id="Vst"/> <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice>, or is the real question whether <xref id="Np"/> <xref id="Vpi"/>?</p> <p>Has it ever been suggested that<p chance="50">, <xref id="proof"/>,</p> <xref id="certainty.clause"/> there is <choice><p>no relation</p><p>a causal connection</p></choice> bewteen <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice> and <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice>?</p> <p>In which of our cognitive faculties are <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice> and <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice> connected together?</p><p class="sentence"><xref id="conjunction"/> can I entertain <xref id="Ns"/> in thought, or does it present itself to me?</p></ref><ref id="throwaway.sentence"> <p>But we have fallen short of the necessary interconnection that we have in mind when we speak of <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice>.</p> <p>We thus have a pure synthesis of apprehension.</p> <p>And similarly with all the others.</p> <p>The question of this matter's relation to objects is not in any way under discussion.</p> <p>This distinction must have some ground in the nature of <choice><p><xref id="Ns"/></p><p><xref id="Np"/></p></choice>.</p> <p>The divisions are thus provided; all that is required is to fill them.</p> <p>This could not be passed over in a complete system of transcendental philosophy, but in a merely critical essay the simple mention of the fact may suffice.</p> <p>This is not something we are in a position to establish.</p> <p>This is the sense in which it is to be understood in this work.</p> <p>But this need not worry us.</p> <p>Let us apply this to <xref id="Ns"/>.</p> <p>But to this matter no answer is possible.</p> <p>But the proof of this is a task from which we can here be absolved.</p> <p>But at present we shall turn our attention to <xref id="Ns"/>.</p> <p>This may be clear with an example.</p> <p>I feel I have sufficiently shown this to be true.</p> <p>This is what chiefly concerns us.</p> <p>On this matter, what has been said already should in any case suffice by itself.</p> <p>In my present remarks I am referring to <xref id="Ns"/> only in so far as it is founded on <xref id="judgement.type"/> principles.</p> <p>But this is to be dismissed as random groping.</p></ref><ref id="paragraph"> <p> <xref id="sentence"/> <xref id="sentence"/> <p chance="50"><xref id="sentence"/> </p><xref id="sentence"/> <p chance="50"><xref id="sentence"/> </p><p chance="50"><xref id="question"/> </p><p chance="50"><xref id="sentence"/> </p><p chance="50"><xref id="sentence"/> </p><xref id="sentence"/> <p chance="50"><xref id="throwaway.sentence"/></p></p> <p> <xref id="sentence"/> <xref id="sentence"/> <p chance="50"><xref id="sentence"/> </p><xref id="sentence"/> <p chance="50">(<xref id="sentence"/>) </p><xref id="sentence"/> <xref id="sentence"/> <p chance="50"><xref id="throwaway.sentence"/></p></p> <p> <xref id="sentence"/> <xref id="sentence"/> <p chance="50"><xref id="sentence"/> </p><xref id="sentence"/> <p chance="50"><xref id="sentence"/> </p><p chance="50"><xref id="sentence"/> </p><p chance="50"><xref id="sentence"/> </p><xref id="sentence"/></p></ref><ref id="section"> <p><xref id="paragraph"/><xref id="paragraph"/><xref id="paragraph"/><xref id="paragraph"/><p chance="50"><xref id="paragraph"/></p><p chance="50"><xref id="paragraph"/></p><p chance="50"><xref id="paragraph"/></p><p chance="50"><xref id="paragraph"/></p><p chance="50"><xref id="paragraph"/></p><p chance="50"><xref id="paragraph"/></p></p></ref></grammar>
⌨️ 快捷键说明
复制代码
Ctrl + C
搜索代码
Ctrl + F
全屏模式
F11
切换主题
Ctrl + Shift + D
显示快捷键
?
增大字号
Ctrl + =
减小字号
Ctrl + -