按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
contain nothing further than the assumption that we can do something
if it is required that we should do it； and these are the only
geometrical propositions that concern actual existence。 They are；
then； practical rules under a problematical condition of the will； but
here the rule says： We absolutely must proceed in a certain manner。
The practical rule is； therefore； unconditional； and hence it is
conceived a priori as a categorically practical proposition by which
the will is objectively determined absolutely and immediately （by
the practical rule itself； which thus is in this case a law）； for pure
reason practical of itself is here directly legislative。 The will is
thought as independent on empirical conditions； and； therefore； as
pure will determined by the mere form of the law； and this principle
of determination is regarded as the supreme condition of all maxims。
The thing is strange enough； and has no parallel in all the rest of
our practical knowledge。 For the a priori thought of a possible
universal legislation which is therefore merely problematical； is
unconditionally manded as a law without borrowing anything from
experience or from any external will。 This； however； is not a
precept to do something by which some desired effect can be attained
（for then the will would depend on physical conditions）； but a rule
that determines the will a priori only so far as regards the forms
of its maxims； and thus it is at least not impossible to conceive that
a law； which only applies to the subjective form of principles； yet
serves as a principle of determination by means of the objective
form of law in general。 We may call the consciousness of this
fundamental law a fact of reason； because we cannot reason it out from
antecedent data of reason； e。g。； the consciousness of freedom （for
this is not antecedently given）； but it forces itself on us as a
synthetic a priori proposition； which is not based on any intuition；
either pure or empirical。 It would； indeed； be analytical if the
freedom of the will were presupposed； but to presuppose freedom as a
positive concept would require an intellectual intuition； which cannot
here be assumed； however； when we regard this law as given； it must be
observed； in order not to fall into any misconception； that it is
not an empirical fact； but the sole fact of the pure reason； which
thereby announces itself as originally legislative （sic volo； sic
jubeo）。
COROLLARY。
Pure reason is practical of itself alone and gives （to man） a
universal law which we call the moral law。
REMARK。
The fact just mentioned is undeniable。 It is only necessary to
analyse the judgement that men pass on the lawfulness of their
actions； in order to find that； whatever inclination may say to the
contrary； reason； incorruptible and selfconstrained； always
confronts the maxim of the will in any action with the pure will； that
is； with itself； considering itself as a priori practical。 Now this
principle of morality； just on account of the universality of the
legislation which makes it the formal supreme determining principle of
the will； without regard to any subjective differentes； is declared by
the reason to be a law for all rational beings； in so far as they have
a will； that is； a power to determine their causality by the
conception of rules； and； therefore； so far as they are capable of
acting according to principles； and consequently also according to
practical a priori principles （for these alone have the necessity that
reason requires in a principle）。 It is； therefore； not limited to
men only； but applies to all finite beings that possess reason and
will； nay； it even includes the Infinite Being as the supreme
intelligence。 In the former case； however； the law has the form of
an imperative； because in them； as rational beings； we can suppose a
pure will； but being creatures affected with wants and physical
motives； not a holy will； that is； one which would be incapable of any
maxim conflicting with the moral law。 In their case； therefore； the
moral law is an imperative； which mands categorically； because
the law is unconditioned； the relation of such a will to this law is
dependence under the name of obligation； which implies a constraint to
an action； though only by reason and its objective law； and this
action is called duty； because an elective will； subject to
pathological affections （though not determined by them； and；
therefore； still free）； implies a wish that arises from subjective
causes and； therefore； may often be opposed to the pure objective
determining principle； whence it requires the moral constraint of a
resistance of the practical reason； which may be called an internal；
but intellectual； pulsion。 In the supreme intelligence the elective
will is rightly conceived as incapable of any maxim which could not at
the same time be objectively a law； and the notion of holiness；
which on that account belongs to it； places it； not indeed above all
practical laws； but above all practically restrictive laws； and
consequently above obligation and duty。 This holiness of will is；
however； a practical idea； which must necessarily serve as a type to
which finite rational beings can only approximate indefinitely； and
which the pure moral law； which is itself on this account called holy；
constantly and rightly holds before their eyes。 The utmost that finite
practical reason can effect is to be certain of this indefinite
progress of one's maxims and of their steady disposition to advance。
This is virtue； and virtue； at least as a naturally acquired
faculty； can never be perfect； because assurance in such a case
never bees apodeictic certainty and； when it only amounts to
persuasion； is very dangerous。
VIII。 THEOREM IV。
The autonomy of the will is the sole principle of all moral laws and
of all duties which conform to them； on the other hand； heteronomy
of the elective will not only cannot be the basis of any obligation；
but is； on the contrary； opposed to the principle thereof and to the
morality of the will。
In fact the sole principle