| Thus, and thus only, can the principle of final unity aid in the extension of the employment of reason in the sphere of experience, without being in any case detrimental to its interests. |
| [*Footnote; This was the term applied by the old dialecticians to a sophistical argument, which ran thus; If it is your fate to die of this disease, you will die, whether you employ a physician or not. |
| Cicero says that this mode of reasoning has received this appellation, because, if followed, it puts an end to the employment of reason in the affairs of life. |
| For a similar reason, I have applied this designation to the sophistical argument of pure reason.] |
| The second error which arises from the misconception of the principle of systematic unity is that of perverted reason (perversa ratio, usteron roteron rationis). |
| The idea of systematic unity is available as a regulative principle in the connection of phenomena according to general natural laws; and, how far soever we have to travel upon the path of experience to discover some fact or event, this idea requires us to believe that we have approached all the more nearly to the completion of its use in the sphere of nature, although that completion can never be attained. |
| But this error reverses the procedure of reason. |
| We begin by hypostatizing the principle of systematic unity, and by giving an anthropomorphic determination to the conception of a Supreme Intelligence, and then proceed forcibly to impose aims upon nature. |
| Thus not only does teleology, which ought to aid in the completion of unity in accordance with general laws, operate to the destruction of its influence, but it hinders reason from attaining its proper aim, that is, the proof, upon natural grounds, of the existence of a supreme intelligent cause. |
| For, if we cannot presuppose supreme finality in nature a priori, that is, as essentially belonging to nature, how can we be directed to endeavour to discover this unity and, rising gradually through its different degrees, to approach the supreme perfection of an author of all--a perfection which is absolutely necessary, and therefore cognizable a priori? |
| The regulative principle directs us to presuppose systematic unity absolutely and, consequently, as following from the essential nature of things--but only as a unity of nature, not merely cognized empirically, but presupposed a priori, although only in an indeterminate manner. |
| But if I insist on basing nature upon the foundation of a supreme ordaining Being, the unity of nature is in effect lost. |
| For, in this case, it is quite foreign and unessential to the nature of things, and cannot be cognized from the general laws of nature. |
| And thus arises a vicious circular argument, what ought to have been proved having been presupposed. |
| To take the regulative principle of systematic unity in nature for a constitutive principle, and to hypostatize and make a cause out of that which is properly the ideal ground of the consistent and harmonious exercise of reason, involves reason in inextricable embarrassments. |
| The investigation of nature pursues its own path under the guidance of the chain of natural causes, in accordance with the general laws of nature, and ever follows the light of the idea of an author of the universe--not for the purpose of deducing the finality, which it constantly pursues, from this Supreme Being, but to attain to the cognition of his existence from the finality which it seeks in the existence of the phenomena of nature, and, if possible, in that of all things to cognize this being, consequently, as absolutely necessary. |
| Whether this latter purpose succeed or not, the idea is and must always be a true one, and its employment, when merely regulative, must always be accompanied by truthful and beneficial results. |
| Complete unity, in conformity with aims, constitutes absolute perfection. |
| But if we do not find this unity in the nature of the things which go to constitute the world of experience, that is, of objective cognition, consequently in the universal and necessary laws of nature, how can we infer from this unity the idea of the supreme and absolutely necessary perfection of a primal being, which is the origin of all causality? |
| The greatest systematic unity, and consequently teleological unity, constitutes the very foundation of the possibility of the most extended employment of human reason. |
| The idea of unity is therefore essentially and indissolubly connected with the nature of our reason. |