THE PROBLEM OF SENSIBLE EXPERIENCE.
124. The great problem of philosophy does not consist in the explanation of the possibility of experience; but in establishing the reason of the consciousness of experience, as experience. Experience in itself is a fact of our soul attested by consciousness, butto knowthat this fact is a fact of experience, is something very different from mere experience; for, by knowing this, we pass from the subjective to the objective, referring to the external world what we experience within us.
We refer objects to different points of space, and regard them as outside of, and distinct from, each other: to say that the instinct by which we so regard them is a condition of the subject and of sensible experience is to establish a sterile fact. The difficulty is in knowing why we have this instinct; why the representation of an extension is in our soul; and why this subjective extension in a simple being should be presented to our perception as the image of something external and really extended.
125. Transcendental esthetics may determine the following problems:
I. To explain what is the subjective representation of extension, abstracted from all that is objective.
II. Why this representation is found in our soul.
III. Why a simple being contains in itself the representation of multiplicity, and an unextended being the representation of extension.
IV. Why and how we pass from ideal to real extension.
V. To determine how far we may apply to extension what is true of the other sensations, which are consideredas phenomena of our soul, having no external object like them, and no other correspondence with the external world than the relation of effects to their cause.
126. What is the subjective representation of extension, abstracted from all that is objective? It is a fact of our soul; no further explanation is possible; he that has it, knows what it is; he that has it not, does not, except intelligences of a higher order, which know what this representation is, without experiencing it as we do.
127. I do not pretend that it is possible to explain why the representation of extension is found in our soul; we might as well ask why we are intelligent and sensible beings. The only reasona prioriwhich we can give, is that God has so created us. This representation may be found in us, and it is so found, for we experience it; but this internal experience is the limit of philosophy; immediate observation can go no farther back. Reason raises us to the knowledge of a cause which created us, but not to a phenomenon which is the source of the phenomena of experience.
128. Why a simple being contains in itself the representation of multiplicity, and an unextended being the representation of extension, is the problem of intelligence, which, because it is intelligence, is one and simple, and capable of perceiving multiplicity and composition.
129. We pass from ideal to real extension by a natural and irresistible impulse, which is confirmed by the assent of reason. This has been demonstrated in the first book, and also in the second when treating of the objectiveness of sensations.
130. Of the five problems the last remains. We must determine how far we may apply to extension what is true of the other sensations, which are considered as phenomena of our soul, having no external object like them, and noother correspondence with the external world than the relation of effects to their cause.
131. The solution of this problem settles the question for or against the idealists. If we may apply to extension what is true of the other sensations, idealism triumphs, and the real world, if it exists, is a being which has no resemblance to the world which we think.
I have proved in treating of sensations[49]that extension is something real, and independent of our sensations, and I have shown[50]that it represents multiplicity and continuity. This is sufficient to overthrow idealism, and also to explain, to a certain extent, what extension consists in; but as the idea of space, which is closely connected with extension, had not then been examined, it was not possible for us to rise above the order of phenomena and regard extension under a transcendental aspect, examining it in itself, abstracted from all its relations with the world of appearances. This is what I propose to do in the following chapters.
132. We come now to a more cragged path; we have to distinguish the reality from appearance; our understanding, which is always accompanied by sensible representations, must now depart from them, and place itself in opposition to a condition to which it is naturally subjected in the exercise of its functions.