From 21337afd777f807a4932c5b0a106798dcfd9d626 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Karl Berry Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 22:01:33 +0000 Subject: kantlipsum (20nov17) git-svn-id: svn://tug.org/texlive/trunk@45866 c570f23f-e606-0410-a88d-b1316a301751 --- .../texmf-dist/tex/latex/kantlipsum/kantlipsum.sty | 793 +++++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 398 insertions(+), 395 deletions(-) (limited to 'Master/texmf-dist/tex/latex/kantlipsum') diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/tex/latex/kantlipsum/kantlipsum.sty b/Master/texmf-dist/tex/latex/kantlipsum/kantlipsum.sty index 617739382a4..0cf8247ca35 100644 --- a/Master/texmf-dist/tex/latex/kantlipsum/kantlipsum.sty +++ b/Master/texmf-dist/tex/latex/kantlipsum/kantlipsum.sty @@ -5,64 +5,54 @@ %% The original source files were: %% %% kantlipsum.dtx (with options: `package') -%% -%% Do not distribute this file without also distributing the -%% source files specified above. -%% -%% File: kantlipsum.dtx (C) Copyright 2011-2012 Enrico Gregorio -%% -%% It may be distributed and/or modified under the conditions of the -%% LaTeX Project Public License (LPPL), either version 1.3c of this -%% license or (at your option) any later version. The latest version -%% of this license is in the file -%% -%% http://www.latex-project.org/lppl.txt -%% -%% This file is part of the "kantlipsum bundle" (The Work in LPPL) -%% and all files in that bundle must be distributed together. -%% -%% The released version of this bundle is available from CTAN. -%% -\RequirePackage{expl3} -\GetIdInfo$Id: kantlipsum.dtx 0.6 2012-10-14 12:00:00Z Enrico $ - {Dummy text in Kantian style} +%% --------------------------------------------------------------- +%% The kantlipsum package --- Generate text in Kant's style +%% Maintained by Enrico Gregorio +%% E-mail: enrico DOT gregorio AT univr DOT it +%% Released under the LaTeX Project Public License v1.3c or later +%% See http://www.latex-project.org/lppl.txt +%% --------------------------------------------------------------- +\RequirePackage{expl3}[2017/11/14] +\RequirePackage{xparse} \ProvidesExplPackage - {\ExplFileName}{\ExplFileDate}{\ExplFileVersion}{\ExplFileDescription} -\@ifpackagelater { expl3 } { 2012/07/15 } + {kantlipsum} + {2017/11/16} + {0.7} + {Generate text in Kantian style} +\@ifpackagelater { expl3 } { 2017/11/14 } { } { - \PackageError { kantlipsum } { Support~package~l3kernel~too~old. } + \PackageError { kantlipsum } { Support~package~expl3~too~old } { - Please~install~an~up~to~date~version~of~l3kernel~ - using~your~TeX~package~manager~or~from~CTAN.\\ \\ - Loading~xparse~will~abort! + You~need~to~update~your~installation~of~the~bundles~ + 'l3kernel'~and~'l3packages'.\MessageBreak + Loading~kantlipsum~will~abort! } \tex_endinput:D } \DeclareOption { par } { - \cs_set_protected:Nn \kgl_star: { \c_space_tl } - \cs_set_protected:Nn \kgl_nostar: { \par } + \cs_set_protected:Nn \__kgl_star: { \c_space_tl } + \cs_set_protected:Nn \__kgl_nostar: { \par } } \DeclareOption{ nopar } { - \cs_set_protected:Nn \kgl_star: { \par } - \cs_set_protected:Nn \kgl_nostar: { \c_space_tl } + \cs_set_protected:Nn \__kgl_star: { \par } + \cs_set_protected:Nn \__kgl_nostar: { \c_space_tl } } \DeclareOption{ numbers } - { \cs_set_protected:Nn \kgl_number:n { #1\nobreakspace\textbullet\nobreakspace } } + { \cs_set_protected:Nn \__kgl_number:n { #1\nobreak\enspace\textbullet\nobreak\enspace } } -\bool_new:N \g_kgl_makeindex_bool -\bool_gset_false:N \g_kgl_makeindex_bool +\bool_new:N \g__kgl_makeindex_bool +\bool_gset_false:N \g__kgl_makeindex_bool \DeclareOption{ index } - { \bool_gset_true:N \g_kgl_makeindex_bool } + { \bool_gset_true:N \g__kgl_makeindex_bool } -\cs_new_eq:NN \kgl_number:n \use_none:n +\cs_new_eq:NN \__kgl_number:n \use_none:n \ExecuteOptions{par} \ProcessOptions \scan_stop: -\RequirePackage{xparse} \msg_new:nnn {kantlipsum}{how-many} {The~package~provides~paragraphs~1~to~#1.~ Values~outside~this~range~will~be~ignored.} @@ -70,63 +60,64 @@ {Control~sequence~#1~already~defined.} {The~control~sequence~#1~is~already~defined,~ I'll~ignore~it} -\int_new:N \l_kgl_start_int -\int_new:N \l_kgl_end_int -\seq_new:N \g_kgl_pars_seq -\seq_new:N \g_kgl_words_seq +\int_new:N \l__kgl_start_int +\int_new:N \l__kgl_end_int +\seq_new:N \g__kgl_pars_seq +\seq_new:N \g__kgl_words_seq \NewDocumentCommand{\kant}{s>{\SplitArgument{1}{-}}O{1-7}} { \group_begin: \IfBooleanTF{#1} - { \cs_set_eq:NN \kgl_par: \kgl_star: } - { \cs_set_eq:NN \kgl_par: \kgl_nostar: } - \kgl_process:nn #2 - \kgl_print: + { \cs_set_eq:NN \__kgl_par: \__kgl_star: } + { \cs_set_eq:NN \__kgl_par: \__kgl_nostar: } + \__kgl_process:nn #2 + \__kgl_print: \group_end: } \NewDocumentCommand{\kantdef}{mm} { \group_begin: - \cs_set_eq:NN \kgl_number:n \use_none:n - \cs_set_eq:NN \kgl_par: \prg_do_nothing: + \cs_set_eq:NN \__kgl_number:n \use_none:n + \cs_set_eq:NN \__kgl_par: \prg_do_nothing: \cs_if_exist:NTF #1 { \msg_error:nnn {kantlipsum} {already-defined} {#1} } { - \tl_set:Nx \l_tmpa_tl { \seq_item:Nn \g_kgl_pars_seq {#2} } + \tl_set:Nx \l_tmpa_tl { \seq_item:Nn \g__kgl_pars_seq {#2} } \cs_new:Npx #1 { \l_tmpa_tl } } \group_end: } -\cs_new_protected:Nn \kgl_process:nn +\cs_new_protected:Nn \__kgl_process:nn { - \int_set:Nn \l_kgl_start_int {#1} - \IfNoValueTF{#2} - { \int_set:Nn \l_kgl_end_int {#1} } - { \int_set:Nn \l_kgl_end_int {#2} } + \int_set:Nn \l__kgl_start_int {#1} + \tl_if_novalue:nTF {#2} + { \int_set:Nn \l__kgl_end_int {#1} } + { \int_set:Nn \l__kgl_end_int {#2} } } -\cs_new_protected:Nn \kgl_print: +\cs_new_protected:Nn \__kgl_print: { \int_step_function:nnnN - {\l_kgl_start_int} {1} {\l_kgl_end_int} \kgl_use:n + {\l__kgl_start_int} {1} {\l__kgl_end_int} \__kgl_use:n } -\cs_new:Nn \kgl_use:n - { - \kgl_number:n {#1} - \bool_if:NT \g_kgl_makeindex_bool +\cs_new:Nn \__kgl_use:n + { + \int_compare:nNnF { #1 } > { \seq_count:N \g__kgl_pars_seq } + { \__kgl_number:n {#1} } + \bool_if:NT \g__kgl_makeindex_bool { - \use:x { \exp_not:N \index{ \seq_item:Nn \g_kgl_words_seq {#1} } } + \use:x { \exp_not:N \index{ \seq_item:Nn \g__kgl_words_seq {#1} } } } - \seq_item:Nn \g_kgl_pars_seq {#1} - } -\cs_new_protected:Nn \kgl_newpara:n - { \seq_gput_right:Nn \g_kgl_pars_seq {#1\kgl_par:} } -\cs_new_protected:Nn \kgl_newword:n - { \seq_gput_right:Nn \g_kgl_words_seq {#1} } + \seq_item:Nn \g__kgl_pars_seq {#1} + } +\cs_new_protected:Nn \__kgl_newpara:n + { \seq_gput_right:Nn \g__kgl_pars_seq {#1\__kgl_par:} } +\cs_new_protected:Nn \__kgl_newword:n + { \seq_gput_right:Nn \g__kgl_words_seq {#1} } \group_begin: \char_set_catcode_space:n {`\ } -\kgl_newpara:n {As any dedicated reader can clearly see, the Ideal of +\__kgl_newpara:n {As any dedicated reader can clearly see, the Ideal of practical reason is a representation of, as far as I know, the things in themselves; as I have shown elsewhere, the phenomena should only be used as a canon for our understanding. The paralogisms of practical @@ -140,7 +131,7 @@ Human reason depends on our sense perceptions, by means of analytic unity. There can be no doubt that the objects in space and time are what first give rise to human reason.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Let us suppose that the noumena have nothing to do +\__kgl_newpara:n {Let us suppose that the noumena have nothing to do with necessity, since knowledge of the Categories is a posteriori. Hume tells us that the transcendental unity of apperception can not take account of the discipline of natural reason, @@ -154,7 +145,7 @@ Ideal, the Antinomies; so, the transcendental aesthetic is just as necessary as our experience. By means of the Ideal, our sense perceptions are by their very nature contradictory.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Aristotle, the things +\__kgl_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Aristotle, the things in themselves (and it remains a mystery why this is the case) are a representation of time. Our concepts have lying before them the paralogisms of natural reason, but our a posteriori concepts have @@ -170,7 +161,7 @@ for our sense perceptions, and time occupies part of the sphere of the Ideal concerning the existence of the objects in space and time in general.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, what we have alone been able +\__kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, what we have alone been able to show is that the objects in space and time would be falsified; what we have alone been able to show is that, our judgements are what first give rise to metaphysics. As I have shown elsewhere, Aristotle tells @@ -188,7 +179,7 @@ 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.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Therefore, we can deduce that the objects in space and +\__kgl_newpara:n {Therefore, we can deduce that the objects in space and time (and I assert, however, that this is the case) have lying before them the objects in space and time. Because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions, it must not be supposed that, then, formal logic @@ -213,7 +204,7 @@ misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that our understanding rise to the architectonic of pure reason, as is evident upon close examination.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves are what first give rise to +\__kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves are what first give rise to reason, as is proven in the ontological manuals. By virtue of natural reason, let us suppose that the transcendental unity of apperception abstracts from all content of knowledge; in view of these @@ -229,7 +220,7 @@ treated like metaphysics. By means of the Ideal, it must not be supposed that the objects in space and time are what first give rise to the employment of pure reason.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, to avoid all +\__kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, to avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that, on the contrary, the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions is a representation of our inductive judgements, yet the things in @@ -252,7 +243,7 @@ suppose that this is the case) are the clue to the discovery of necessity. But the proof of this is a task from which we can here be absolved.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Thus, the Antinomies exclude the possibility of, on +\__kgl_newpara:n {Thus, the Antinomies exclude the possibility of, on the other hand, natural causes, as will easily be shown in the next section. Still, the reader should be careful to observe that the phenomena have lying before them the intelligible objects in space and @@ -272,7 +263,7 @@ but natural causes would thereby be made to contradict the Antinomies. The transcendental unity of apperception constitutes the whole content for the noumena, by means of analytic unity.} -\kgl_newpara:n {In all theoretical sciences, the paralogisms of human +\__kgl_newpara:n {In all theoretical sciences, the paralogisms of human reason would be falsified, as is proven in the ontological manuals. The architectonic of human reason is what first gives rise to the Categories. As any dedicated reader can clearly see, the paralogisms @@ -282,7 +273,7 @@ constitute a body of demonstrated doctrine, and some of this body must be known a posteriori. Human reason occupies part of the sphere of our experience concerning the existence of the phenomena in general.} -\kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, our ampliative judgements +\__kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, our ampliative judgements would thereby be made to contradict, in all theoretical sciences, the pure employment of the discipline of human reason. Because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions, Hume tells us that the @@ -296,7 +287,7 @@ knowledge of natural causes is a posteriori. Let us suppose that the Ideal occupies part of the sphere of our knowledge concerning the existence of the phenomena in general.} -\kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, what we have alone been +\__kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, what we have alone been able to show is that, in so far as this expounds the universal rules of our a posteriori concepts, the architectonic of natural reason can be treated like the architectonic of practical reason. Thus, our @@ -310,7 +301,7 @@ study of pure logic, our knowledge is just as necessary as, thus, space. By virtue of practical reason, the noumena, still, stand in need to the pure employment of the things in themselves.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that the +\__kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that the objects in space and time are the clue to the discovery of, certainly, our a priori knowledge, by means of analytic unity. Our faculties abstract from all content of knowledge; for these reasons, the @@ -334,7 +325,7 @@ reason, in other words, is what first gives rise to the transcendental aesthetic, yet our faculties have lying before them the architectonic of human reason.} -\kgl_newpara:n {However, we can deduce that our experience (and it +\__kgl_newpara:n {However, we can deduce that our experience (and it must not be supposed that this is true) stands in need of our experience, as we have already seen. On the other hand, it is not at all certain that necessity is a representation of, by means of the @@ -348,7 +339,7 @@ writings of Galileo. As I have elsewhere shown, natural causes, in respect of the intelligible character, exist in the objects in space and time.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Our ideas, in the case of the Ideal of pure reason, +\__kgl_newpara:n {Our ideas, in the case of the Ideal of pure reason, are by their very nature contradictory. The objects in space and time can not take account of our understanding, and philosophy excludes the possibility of, certainly, space. I assert that our ideas, by means @@ -363,7 +354,7 @@ has lying before it our experience. 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.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Since knowledge of our faculties is a posteriori, pure +\__kgl_newpara:n {Since knowledge of our faculties is a posteriori, pure logic teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of, indeed, the architectonic of human reason. As we have already seen, we can deduce that, irrespective of all empirical conditions, the Ideal of @@ -378,7 +369,7 @@ show is that the objects in space and time exclude the possibility of our judgements, as will easily be shown in the next section. This is what chiefly concerns us.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Time (and let us suppose that this is true) is the +\__kgl_newpara:n {Time (and let us suppose that this is true) is the clue to the discovery of the Categories, as we have already seen. Since knowledge of our faculties is a priori, to avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that the empirical objects @@ -392,7 +383,7 @@ however, formal logic; in the case of the manifold, the objects in space and time can be treated like the paralogisms of natural reason. This is what chiefly concerns us.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Because of the relation between pure logic and natural +\__kgl_newpara:n {Because of the relation between pure logic and natural causes, to avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that, even as this relates to the thing in itself, pure reason constitutes the whole content for our concepts, but the Ideal of practical reason @@ -410,7 +401,7 @@ to do with our judgements. In my present remarks I am referring to the transcendental aesthetic only in so far as it is founded on analytic principles.} -\kgl_newpara:n {With the sole exception of our a priori knowledge, our +\__kgl_newpara:n {With the sole exception of our a priori knowledge, our faculties have nothing to do with our faculties. Pure reason (and we can deduce that this is true) would thereby be made to contradict the phenomena. As we have already seen, let us suppose that the @@ -422,7 +413,7 @@ However, it is obvious that time can be treated like our a priori knowledge, by means of analytic unity. Philosophy has nothing to do with natural causes.} -\kgl_newpara:n {By means of analysis, our faculties stand in need to, +\__kgl_newpara:n {By means of analysis, our faculties stand in need to, indeed, the empirical objects in space and time. The objects in space and time, for these reasons, have nothing to do with our understanding. There can be no doubt that the noumena can not take @@ -432,7 +423,7 @@ the Ideal of human reason is what first gives rise to, therefore, space, yet our sense perceptions exist in the discipline of practical reason.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The Ideal can not take account of, so far as I know, +\__kgl_newpara:n {The Ideal can not take account of, so far as I know, our faculties. As we have already seen, the objects in space and time are what first give rise to the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions; for these reasons, our a posteriori concepts @@ -444,7 +435,7 @@ sense perceptions. I assert, thus, that our faculties would thereby be made to contradict, indeed, our knowledge. Natural causes, so regarded, exist in our judgements.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The never-ending regress in the series of empirical +\__kgl_newpara:n {The never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions may not contradict itself, but it is still possible that it may be in contradictions with, then, applied logic. The employment of the noumena stands in need of space; with the sole exception of our @@ -463,7 +454,7 @@ sphere of philosophy concerning the existence of the transcendental objects in space and time in general, as is proven in the ontological manuals.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The transcendental unity of apperception, in the case +\__kgl_newpara:n {The transcendental unity of apperception, in the case of philosophy, is a body of demonstrated science, and some of it must be known a posteriori. Thus, the objects in space and time, insomuch as the discipline of practical reason relies on the Antinomies, @@ -481,7 +472,7 @@ that our a priori knowledge is just as necessary as our ideas. In my present remarks I am referring to time only in so far as it is founded on disjunctive principles.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The discipline of pure reason is what first gives rise +\__kgl_newpara:n {The discipline of pure reason is what first gives rise to the Categories, but applied logic is the clue to the discovery of our sense perceptions. The never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the @@ -497,7 +488,7 @@ obvious that this is true) stands in need of the phenomena; for these reasons, our sense perceptions stand in need to the manifold. Our ideas are what first give rise to the paralogisms.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves have lying before them the +\__kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves have lying before them the Antinomies, by virtue of human reason. By means of the transcendental aesthetic, let us suppose that the discipline of natural reason depends on natural causes, because of the relation between the @@ -511,7 +502,7 @@ Transcendental Deduction in thought, or does it present itself to me? By means of analysis, the phenomena can not take account of natural causes. This is not something we are in a position to establish.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Since some of the things in themselves are a +\__kgl_newpara:n {Since some of the things in themselves are a posteriori, there can be no doubt that, when thus treated as our understanding, pure reason depends on, still, the Ideal of natural reason, and our speculative judgements constitute a body of @@ -533,7 +524,7 @@ paralogisms of natural reason, the paralogisms of human reason, in the study of the Transcendental Deduction, would be falsified, but metaphysics abstracts from all content of knowledge.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Since some of natural causes are disjunctive, the +\__kgl_newpara:n {Since some of natural causes are disjunctive, the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions is the key to understanding, in particular, the noumena. By means of analysis, the Categories (and it is not at all certain that this is the case) @@ -555,7 +546,7 @@ necessity, the things in themselves, because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions. But to this matter no answer is possible.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Since all of the objects in space and time are +\__kgl_newpara:n {Since all of the objects in space and time are synthetic, it remains a mystery why, even as this relates to our experience, our a priori concepts should only be used as a canon for our judgements, but the phenomena should only be used as a canon for @@ -571,7 +562,7 @@ take account of our faculties, as is proven in the ontological manuals. Certainly, it remains a mystery why the manifold is just as necessary as the manifold, as is evident upon close examination.} -\kgl_newpara:n {In natural theology, what we have alone been able to +\__kgl_newpara:n {In natural theology, what we have alone been able to show is that the architectonic of practical reason is the clue to the discovery of, still, the manifold, by means of analysis. Since knowledge of the objects in space and time is a priori, the things in @@ -590,7 +581,7 @@ character, teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of the thing in itself; however, the objects in space and time exist in natural causes.} -\kgl_newpara:n {I assert, however, that our a posteriori concepts (and +\__kgl_newpara:n {I assert, however, that our a posteriori concepts (and it is obvious that this is the case) would thereby be made to contradict the discipline of practical reason; however, the things in themselves, however, constitute the whole content of philosophy. As @@ -617,7 +608,7 @@ to the discovery of our understanding. Because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions, I assert that, indeed, the architectonic of natural reason, as I have elsewhere shown, would be falsified.} -\kgl_newpara:n {In natural theology, the transcendental unity of +\__kgl_newpara:n {In natural theology, the transcendental unity of apperception has nothing to do with the Antinomies. As will easily be shown in the next section, our sense perceptions are by their very nature contradictory, but our ideas, with the sole exception of human @@ -629,7 +620,7 @@ judgements are a priori. We can deduce that, indeed, the objects in space and time can not take account of the Transcendental Deduction, but our knowledge, on the other hand, would be falsified.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, our understanding is the clue +\__kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, our understanding is the clue to the discovery of necessity. On the other hand, the Ideal of pure reason is a body of demonstrated science, and all of it must be known a posteriori, as is evident upon close examination. It is obvious @@ -640,7 +631,7 @@ so far as I know, natural causes. In the case of space, our experience depends on the Ideal of natural reason, as we have already seen.} -\kgl_newpara:n {For these reasons, space is the key to understanding +\__kgl_newpara:n {For these reasons, space is the key to understanding the thing in itself. Our sense perceptions abstract from all content of a priori knowledge, but the phenomena can never, as a whole, furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like time, they are @@ -653,7 +644,7 @@ contradict, so far as regards the thing in itself, the Transcendental Deduction; in natural theology, the noumena are the clue to the discovery of, so far as I know, the Transcendental Deduction.} -\kgl_newpara:n {To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to +\__kgl_newpara:n {To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that, in respect of the intelligible character, the transcendental aesthetic depends on the objects in space and time, yet the manifold is the clue to the discovery of the Transcendental @@ -670,7 +661,7 @@ faculties can be treated like our concepts. As is shown in the writings of Galileo, the transcendental unity of apperception stands in need of, in the case of necessity, our speculative judgements.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The phenomena (and it is obvious that this is the +\__kgl_newpara:n {The phenomena (and it is obvious that this is the case) prove the validity of our sense perceptions; in natural theology, philosophy teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of the transcendental objects in space and time. In natural @@ -685,7 +676,7 @@ has lying before it the things in themselves. Aristotle tells us that, in accordance with the principles of the phenomena, the Antinomies are a representation of metaphysics.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves can not take account of the +\__kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves can not take account of the Transcendental Deduction. By means of analytic unity, it is obvious that, that is to say, our sense perceptions, in all theoretical sciences, can not take account of the thing in itself, yet the @@ -697,7 +688,7 @@ possibility of the Ideal. It must not be supposed that the things in themselves are a representation of, in accordance with the principles of philosophy, our sense perceptions.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, philosophy is +\__kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, philosophy is the mere result of the power of pure logic, a blind but indispensable function of the soul; however, the phenomena can never, as a whole, furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like general logic, @@ -716,7 +707,7 @@ section, the thing in itself, with the sole exception of the manifold, abstracts from all content of a posteriori knowledge. The question of this matter's relation to objects is not in any way under discussion.} -\kgl_newpara:n {By means of the transcendental aesthetic, it remains a +\__kgl_newpara:n {By means of the transcendental aesthetic, it remains a mystery why the phenomena (and it is not at all certain that this is the case) are the clue to the discovery of the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions. In all theoretical sciences, @@ -733,7 +724,7 @@ things in themselves, therefore, are by their very nature contradictory, by virtue of natural reason. This is the sense in which it is to be understood in this work.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, let us suppose +\__kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, let us suppose that, in accordance with the principles of time, our a priori concepts are the clue to the discovery of philosophy. By means of analysis, to avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that, in @@ -752,7 +743,7 @@ Ideal of practical reason relies on the noumena, the Categories prove the validity of philosophy, yet pure reason is the key to understanding the Categories. This is what chiefly concerns us.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Natural causes, when thus treated as the things in +\__kgl_newpara:n {Natural causes, when thus treated as the things in themselves, abstract from all content of a posteriori knowledge, by means of analytic unity. Our a posteriori knowledge, in other words, is the key to understanding the Antinomies. As we have already seen, @@ -774,7 +765,7 @@ that natural reason is a representation of, insomuch as space relies on the paralogisms, the Transcendental Deduction, by means of analysis.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, the Ideal constitutes the +\__kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, the Ideal constitutes the whole content for the transcendental unity of apperception. By means of analytic unity, let us suppose that, when thus treated as space, our synthetic judgements, therefore, would be falsified, and the @@ -794,7 +785,7 @@ still, the Categories, when thus treated as the paralogisms, exist in the employment of the Antinomies. Let us apply this to our experience.} -\kgl_newpara:n {I assert, thus, that the discipline of natural reason +\__kgl_newpara:n {I assert, thus, that the discipline of natural reason can be treated like the transcendental aesthetic, since some of the Categories are speculative. In the case of transcendental logic, our ideas prove the validity of our understanding, as any dedicated reader @@ -810,7 +801,7 @@ are the mere results of the power of the Transcendental Deduction, a blind but indispensable function of the soul, as is proven in the ontological manuals.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The noumena have nothing to do with, thus, the +\__kgl_newpara:n {The noumena have nothing to do with, thus, the Antinomies. What we have alone been able to show is that the things in themselves constitute the whole content of human reason, as is proven in the ontological manuals. The noumena (and to avoid all @@ -826,7 +817,7 @@ its totality hypothetical principles, and the empirical objects in space and time are what first give rise to, in all theoretical sciences, our a posteriori concepts.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Our understanding excludes the possibility of +\__kgl_newpara:n {Our understanding excludes the possibility of practical reason. Our faculties stand in need to, consequently, the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions; still, the employment of necessity is what first gives rise to general logic. @@ -842,7 +833,7 @@ exclude the possibility of the discipline of pure reason, yet the empirical objects in space and time prove the validity of natural causes.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Because of the relation between space and the noumena, +\__kgl_newpara:n {Because of the relation between space and the noumena, our experience is by its very nature contradictory. It is obvious that natural causes constitute the whole content of the transcendental unity of apperception, as any dedicated reader can clearly see. By @@ -862,7 +853,7 @@ representation of the transcendental aesthetic. In my present remarks I am referring to the pure employment of our disjunctive judgements only in so far as it is founded on inductive principles.} -\kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that our sense +\__kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that our sense perceptions are the clue to the discovery of our understanding; in natural theology, necessity, in all theoretical sciences, occupies part of the sphere of the transcendental unity of apperception @@ -877,7 +868,7 @@ all content of a priori knowledge. The phenomena (and it remains a mystery why this is the case) are just as necessary as the Ideal of human reason.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As any dedicated reader can clearly see, our +\__kgl_newpara:n {As any dedicated reader can clearly see, our experience is the clue to the discovery of philosophy; in the study of space, the Categories are what first give rise to the transcendental aesthetic. As any dedicated reader can clearly see, the reader should @@ -894,7 +885,7 @@ that the phenomena (and it is not at all certain that this is the case) stand in need to the discipline of practical reason; thus, our knowledge, indeed, can not take account of our ideas.} -\kgl_newpara:n {In the study of time, our concepts prove the validity +\__kgl_newpara:n {In the study of time, our concepts prove the validity of, as I have elsewhere shown, our understanding, as any dedicated reader can clearly see. As will easily be shown in the next section, the reader should be careful to observe that, so far as regards our @@ -915,7 +906,7 @@ suppose that this is the case) are the clue to the discovery of our ideas. It remains a mystery why, then, the architectonic of practical reason proves the validity of, therefore, the noumena.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The paralogisms of practical reason can be treated +\__kgl_newpara:n {The paralogisms of practical reason can be treated like the paralogisms. The objects in space and time, therefore, are what first give rise to the discipline of human reason; in all theoretical sciences, the things in themselves (and we can deduce that @@ -933,7 +924,7 @@ contradict philosophy, yet our a posteriori concepts, insomuch as the Ideal of pure reason relies on the intelligible objects in space and time, are by their very nature contradictory.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Time, on the contrary, can never furnish a true and +\__kgl_newpara:n {Time, on the contrary, can never furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like the transcendental aesthetic, it constitutes the whole content for ampliative principles, yet natural reason, even as this relates to philosophy, proves the validity of the @@ -952,7 +943,7 @@ excludes the possibility of the manifold, as we have already seen. Consequently, the Ideal of pure reason can be treated like the phenomena. Let us apply this to the Transcendental Deduction.} -\kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that our a +\__kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that our a posteriori concepts (and it is obvious that this is the case) are what first give rise to the transcendental unity of apperception. In the case of necessity, the reader should be careful to observe that @@ -969,7 +960,7 @@ supposed that our ideas have lying before them metaphysics; consequently, the architectonic of pure reason, in all theoretical sciences, would be falsified.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The Transcendental Deduction stands in need of the +\__kgl_newpara:n {The Transcendental Deduction stands in need of the Ideal of pure reason, and the noumena, for these reasons, are by their very nature contradictory. The objects in space and time have lying before them our ideas. The transcendental unity of apperception, @@ -984,7 +975,7 @@ natural causes exclude the possibility of, consequently, metaphysics, and the discipline of pure reason abstracts from all content of a priori knowledge. We thus have a pure synthesis of apprehension.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions, +\__kgl_newpara:n {Because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions, what we have alone been able to show is that formal logic can not take account of the Categories; in the study of the transcendental aesthetic, philosophy can thereby determine in its totality the @@ -1002,7 +993,7 @@ so far as regards the thing in itself, the Ideal, as any dedicated reader can clearly see. This is the sense in which it is to be understood in this work.} -\kgl_newpara:n {It must not be supposed that, in respect of the +\__kgl_newpara:n {It must not be supposed that, in respect of the intelligible character, the Antinomies (and we can deduce that this is the case) constitute the whole content of the phenomena, yet the Categories exist in natural causes. The Ideal of natural reason, when @@ -1018,7 +1009,7 @@ can deduce that, when thus treated as the phenomena, our sense perceptions (and there can be no doubt that this is the case) are what first give rise to the discipline of practical reason.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Thus, the reader should be careful to observe that the +\__kgl_newpara:n {Thus, the reader should be careful to observe that the noumena would thereby be made to contradict necessity, because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions. Consequently, our sense perceptions are just as necessary as the architectonic of natural @@ -1036,7 +1027,7 @@ be known a priori; in view of these considerations, the phenomena can not take account of, for these reasons, the transcendental unity of apperception.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that, for +\__kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that, for example, pure logic depends on the transcendental unity of apperception. As any dedicated reader can clearly see, our a priori concepts are what first give rise to the Categories. Hume tells us @@ -1053,7 +1044,7 @@ content of, consequently, the transcendental unity of apperception, as will easily be shown in the next section. We thus have a pure synthesis of apprehension.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The Antinomies have nothing to do with our faculties. +\__kgl_newpara:n {The Antinomies have nothing to do with our faculties. As is shown in the writings of Hume, we can deduce that, on the contrary, the empirical objects in space and time prove the validity of our ideas. The manifold may not contradict itself, but it is still @@ -1072,7 +1063,7 @@ perceptions, a blind but indispensable function of the soul. As I have elsewhere shown, philosophy proves the validity of our sense perceptions.} -\kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that the +\__kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that the phenomena, so far as I know, exist in the noumena; however, our concepts, however, exclude the possibility of our judgements. Galileo tells us that our a posteriori knowledge would thereby be made to @@ -1094,7 +1085,7 @@ empirical conditions and the paralogisms. This distinction must have some ground in the nature of the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions.} -\kgl_newpara:n {To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to +\__kgl_newpara:n {To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that time excludes the possibility of the discipline of human reason; in the study of practical reason, the manifold has nothing to do with time. Because of the relation between our a priori knowledge @@ -1109,7 +1100,7 @@ of, thus, the manifold. I assert that space is what first gives rise to the paralogisms of pure reason. As is shown in the writings of Hume, space has nothing to do with, for example, necessity.} -\kgl_newpara:n {We can deduce that the Ideal of practical reason, even +\__kgl_newpara:n {We can deduce that the Ideal of practical reason, even as this relates to our knowledge, is a representation of the discipline of human reason. The things in themselves are just as necessary as our understanding. The noumena prove the validity of the @@ -1121,7 +1112,7 @@ ideas are the mere results of the power of the Ideal of pure reason, a blind but indispensable function of the soul. The divisions are thus provided; all that is required is to fill them.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The never-ending regress in the series of empirical +\__kgl_newpara:n {The never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions can be treated like the objects in space and time. What we have alone been able to show is that, then, the transcendental aesthetic, in reference to ends, would thereby be made to contradict @@ -1134,7 +1125,7 @@ theoretical sciences, to avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that the things in themselves are a representation of, in other words, necessity, as is evident upon close examination.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, it remains a +\__kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, it remains a mystery why our experience is the mere result of the power of the discipline of human reason, a blind but indispensable function of the soul. For these reasons, the employment of the thing in itself @@ -1155,7 +1146,7 @@ the transcendental unity of apperception can not take account of, however, our faculties. But at present we shall turn our attention to the thing in itself.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, we can deduce +\__kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, we can deduce that the transcendental unity of apperception depends on the Ideal of practical reason. Certainly, it is obvious that the Antinomies, in accordance with the principles of the objects in space and time, @@ -1181,7 +1172,7 @@ paralogisms of natural reason have nothing to do with the thing in itself, but the paralogisms prove the validity of transcendental logic.} -\kgl_newpara:n {We can deduce that, then, the noumena are just as +\__kgl_newpara:n {We can deduce that, then, the noumena are just as necessary as, so regarded, the practical employment of the objects in space and time. It is obvious that the manifold has nothing to do with our ideas; with the sole exception of the employment of the @@ -1202,7 +1193,7 @@ perceptions. To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that our ideas exclude the possibility of, irrespective of all empirical conditions, our ideas. Let us apply this to space.} -\kgl_newpara:n {It remains a mystery why our sense perceptions prove +\__kgl_newpara:n {It remains a mystery why our sense perceptions prove the validity of our a priori concepts. The objects in space and time, then, exist in metaphysics; therefore, the things in themselves can not take account of the transcendental aesthetic. The Ideal of pure @@ -1213,7 +1204,7 @@ as, in all theoretical sciences, our knowledge. The things in themselves constitute a body of demonstrated doctrine, and some of this body must be known a posteriori.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As will easily be shown in the next section, the +\__kgl_newpara:n {As will easily be shown in the next section, the Transcendental Deduction exists in the Ideal. To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that pure reason (and it is obvious that this is true) is the key to understanding the @@ -1234,7 +1225,7 @@ the transcendental aesthetic, thus, exists in our faculties. Our faculties are just as necessary as the Categories, yet the manifold has lying before it, certainly, our understanding.} -\kgl_newpara:n {It is obvious that the never-ending regress in the +\__kgl_newpara:n {It is obvious that the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions may not contradict itself, but it is still possible that it may be in contradictions with the architectonic of practical reason. The objects in space and time, so regarded, @@ -1248,7 +1239,7 @@ our inductive judgements. Still, the architectonic of pure reason is just as necessary as the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Thus, transcendental logic (and I assert, for these +\__kgl_newpara:n {Thus, transcendental logic (and I assert, for these reasons, that this is true) depends on the Antinomies. Still, general logic (and it remains a mystery why this is true) is what first gives rise to the objects in space and time, because of the relation between @@ -1267,7 +1258,7 @@ constitute the whole content of, for these reasons, the noumena. However, the objects in space and time are what first give rise to our understanding, because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions.} -\kgl_newpara:n {On the other hand, the Antinomies have nothing to do +\__kgl_newpara:n {On the other hand, the Antinomies have nothing to do with pure reason, because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions. Our speculative judgements are what first give rise to the Categories. Time is the key to understanding natural causes, as @@ -1280,7 +1271,7 @@ perceptions constitute the whole content of the manifold. In natural theology, the discipline of natural reason, on the other hand, would be falsified, as any dedicated reader can clearly see.} -\kgl_newpara:n {In the case of the discipline of human reason, it is +\__kgl_newpara:n {In the case of the discipline of human reason, it is obvious that the phenomena, still, are the mere results of the power of the practical employment of the Transcendental Deduction, a blind but indispensable function of the soul, by means of analysis. As any @@ -1304,7 +1295,7 @@ thereby be made to contradict, so regarded, the Ideal of natural reason. Hume tells us that our ideas abstract from all content of a posteriori knowledge, as is evident upon close examination.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The manifold is a representation of the phenomena. +\__kgl_newpara:n {The manifold is a representation of the phenomena. Our judgements constitute the whole content of, on the other hand, the things in themselves, as will easily be shown in the next section. By means of analytic unity, the phenomena, in the full sense of these @@ -1314,7 +1305,7 @@ pure reason (and there can be no doubt that this is true) is the key to understanding time. In the study of formal logic, the paralogisms of pure reason are the clue to the discovery of, thus, the manifold.} -\kgl_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that the never-ending regress in +\__kgl_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions may not contradict itself, but it is still possible that it may be in contradictions with, indeed, our sense perceptions. As is proven in the ontological manuals, the @@ -1335,7 +1326,7 @@ the mere results of the power of time, a blind but indispensable function of the soul. The divisions are thus provided; all that is required is to fill them.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, the Antinomies are a +\__kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, the Antinomies are a representation of the Categories. Necessity stands in need of the Antinomies. By virtue of natural reason, the Antinomies have lying before them the Ideal of pure reason; on the other hand, the @@ -1353,7 +1344,7 @@ nothing to do with disjunctive principles. But we have fallen short of the necessary interconnection that we have in mind when we speak of necessity.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, the paralogisms +\__kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, the paralogisms abstract from all content of a posteriori knowledge. Consequently, the transcendental aesthetic, in reference to ends, occupies part of the sphere of metaphysics concerning the existence of the Categories @@ -1372,7 +1363,7 @@ necessary ignorance of the conditions, Hume tells us that the manifold, irrespective of all empirical conditions, is what first gives rise to space.} -\kgl_newpara:n {In view of these considerations, our experience +\__kgl_newpara:n {In view of these considerations, our experience occupies part of the sphere of the Ideal concerning the existence of the objects in space and time in general, as will easily be shown in the next section. It must not be supposed that our ideas (and it @@ -1390,7 +1381,7 @@ far as I know, can never furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like the architectonic of pure reason, it is just as necessary as a priori principles.} -\kgl_newpara:n {To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to +\__kgl_newpara:n {To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that philosophy can not take account of our sense perceptions; in the study of the discipline of natural reason, our experience, in the study of the architectonic of practical reason, is the mere result @@ -1406,7 +1397,7 @@ of our necessary ignorance of the conditions. Human reason (and there can be no doubt that this is true) depends on our understanding, but the Ideal can thereby determine in its totality metaphysics.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Since knowledge of the objects in space and time is a +\__kgl_newpara:n {Since knowledge of the objects in space and time is a posteriori, general logic, in respect of the intelligible character, is by its very nature contradictory. By means of analytic unity, it is not at all certain that space, insomuch as our understanding relies @@ -1424,7 +1415,7 @@ the principles of the transcendental unity of apperception, occupies part of the sphere of our understanding concerning the existence of the phenomena in general.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Human reason (and we can deduce that this is true) +\__kgl_newpara:n {Human reason (and we can deduce that this is true) proves the validity of the architectonic of natural reason. To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that the employment of the things in themselves can not take account of the phenomena. The @@ -1439,7 +1430,7 @@ regress in the series of empirical conditions. Since knowledge of our ideas is a posteriori, the phenomena are a representation of the phenomena.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Necessity, as I have elsewhere shown, is the mere +\__kgl_newpara:n {Necessity, as I have elsewhere shown, is the mere result of the power of the architectonic of practical reason, a blind but indispensable function of the soul. The paralogisms of pure reason are the clue to the discovery of the practical employment of @@ -1454,7 +1445,7 @@ of natural reason, the transcendental aesthetic can be treated like general logic, yet the objects in space and time are just as necessary as the noumena. } -\kgl_newpara:n {In view of these considerations, let us suppose that +\__kgl_newpara:n {In view of these considerations, let us suppose that the Categories exclude the possibility of the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions. The manifold occupies part of the sphere of the thing in itself concerning the existence of the things @@ -1471,7 +1462,7 @@ certain that this is true) stands in need of the things in themselves. Philosophy is the key to understanding, thus, our sense perceptions. This is what chiefly concerns us.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Our understanding would thereby be made to contradict, +\__kgl_newpara:n {Our understanding would thereby be made to contradict, so far as regards the Ideal, necessity. Our faculties, as I have elsewhere shown, are the mere results of the power of time, a blind but indispensable function of the soul. Time, with the sole exception @@ -1488,7 +1479,7 @@ rise to the paralogisms, but our judgements are the clue to the discovery of, in the study of the thing in itself, the discipline of practical reason.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Our a priori concepts, with the sole exception of our +\__kgl_newpara:n {Our a priori concepts, with the sole exception of our experience, have lying before them our judgements. It must not be supposed that the Antinomies are a representation of the discipline of human reason, by means of analytic unity. In the study of the @@ -1515,7 +1506,7 @@ furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like the transcendental unity of apperception, they exclude the possibility of hypothetical principles.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Since none of our faculties are speculative, our ideas +\__kgl_newpara:n {Since none of our faculties are speculative, our ideas should only be used as a canon for time. With the sole exception of the manifold, our concepts exclude the possibility of the practical employment of metaphysics, by means of analysis. Aristotle tells us @@ -1534,7 +1525,7 @@ discovery of natural causes, by means of analysis. Let us suppose that, in other words, the manifold, that is to say, abstracts from all content of knowledge.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, Aristotle +\__kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, Aristotle tells us that the transcendental unity of apperception can be treated like the discipline of pure reason; in the case of our understanding, our sense perceptions are just as necessary as the noumena. The @@ -1550,7 +1541,7 @@ aesthetic can never furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like the transcendental aesthetic, it has nothing to do with ampliative principles. Transcendental logic exists in our faculties.} -\kgl_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that the objects in space and +\__kgl_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that the objects in space and time have nothing to do with our judgements. The architectonic of human reason has nothing to do with the noumena. What we have alone been able to show is that natural causes have nothing to do with, @@ -1568,7 +1559,7 @@ exception of the transcendental aesthetic, the thing in itself (and it remains a mystery why this is true) is the clue to the discovery of our speculative judgements.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As I have elsewhere shown, the Ideal is a body of +\__kgl_newpara:n {As I have elsewhere shown, the Ideal is a body of demonstrated science, and some of it must be known a priori, as is evident upon close examination. Our ideas abstract from all content of knowledge, and the phenomena have nothing to do with, then, @@ -1586,7 +1577,7 @@ analytic unity. It is not at all certain that the architectonic of practical reason, then, is what first gives rise to necessity; still, our concepts stand in need to the objects in space and time.} -\kgl_newpara:n {It must not be supposed that our sense perceptions are +\__kgl_newpara:n {It must not be supposed that our sense perceptions are the clue to the discovery of the Antinomies. As will easily be shown in the next section, our experience, in particular, excludes the possibility of natural causes, yet the architectonic of human reason @@ -1605,7 +1596,7 @@ content for practical reason. But we have fallen short of the necessary interconnection that we have in mind when we speak of the transcendental aesthetic. } -\kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, Aristotle tells us that, when +\__kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, Aristotle tells us that, when thus treated as the phenomena, the transcendental unity of apperception can thereby determine in its totality the Ideal of human reason. There can be no doubt that natural causes can not take @@ -1623,7 +1614,7 @@ consequently, the architectonic of natural reason (and what we have alone been able to show is that this is true) is the clue to the discovery of the objects in space and time.} -\kgl_newpara:n {In the case of the Transcendental Deduction, our ideas +\__kgl_newpara:n {In the case of the Transcendental Deduction, our ideas would thereby be made to contradict, in natural theology, the objects in space and time. In all theoretical sciences, it remains a mystery why the employment of our understanding has nothing to do with the @@ -1641,7 +1632,7 @@ necessity; on the other hand, philosophy occupies part of the sphere of the Transcendental Deduction concerning the existence of the intelligible objects in space and time in general.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Still, time is by its very nature contradictory. The +\__kgl_newpara:n {Still, time is by its very nature contradictory. The paralogisms of practical reason constitute a body of demonstrated doctrine, and none of this body must be known a priori; for these reasons, the noumena are the mere results of the power of the @@ -1656,7 +1647,7 @@ the discovery of problematic principles, since knowledge of the objects in space and time is a priori. The Categories are what first give rise to the Transcendental Deduction.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Our faculties, in the full sense of these terms, exist +\__kgl_newpara:n {Our faculties, in the full sense of these terms, exist in the noumena, because of the relation between space and the phenomena. Because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions, the paralogisms of practical reason are a representation of, indeed, our @@ -1676,7 +1667,7 @@ in contradictions with disjunctive principles; by means of our knowledge, formal logic would thereby be made to contradict the noumena.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Since all of our a posteriori concepts are synthetic, +\__kgl_newpara:n {Since all of our a posteriori concepts are synthetic, applied logic has nothing to do with, for example, the noumena. With the sole exception of philosophy, the Ideal of practical reason is what first gives rise to our ideas, as is evident upon close @@ -1698,7 +1689,7 @@ objects in space and time can not take account of the noumena, but the empirical objects in space and time, with the sole exception of metaphysics, exist in the empirical objects in space and time. } -\kgl_newpara:n {On the other hand, the reader should be careful to +\__kgl_newpara:n {On the other hand, the reader should be careful to observe that the Transcendental Deduction can never furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like our experience, it would thereby be made to contradict synthetic principles. The pure employment of @@ -1718,7 +1709,7 @@ perceptions is a priori. 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.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Our sense perceptions are just as necessary as the +\__kgl_newpara:n {Our sense perceptions are just as necessary as the employment of the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions, but our a priori concepts can never, as a whole, furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like necessity, they would @@ -1736,7 +1727,7 @@ Antinomies; certainly, the employment of our sense perceptions abstracts from all content of a priori knowledge. The paralogisms of pure reason should only be used as a canon for time.} -\kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, I assert that the +\__kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, I assert that the paralogisms, for example, would be falsified; however, our inductive judgements constitute the whole content of the discipline of natural reason. The noumena constitute the whole content of the noumena. The @@ -1757,7 +1748,7 @@ perceptions are inductive, we can deduce that the manifold abstracts from all content of knowledge; on the other hand, our faculties should only be used as a canon for the pure employment of the Categories.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Aristotle tells us that our ideas have lying before +\__kgl_newpara:n {Aristotle tells us that our ideas have lying before them the phenomena. In the study of the employment of the objects in space and time, it is not at all certain that the transcendental aesthetic teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of, so @@ -1776,7 +1767,7 @@ of our necessary ignorance of the conditions, the reader should be careful to observe that, indeed, the transcendental aesthetic, still, exists in natural causes.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Since none of the objects in space and time are +\__kgl_newpara:n {Since none of the objects in space and time are analytic, it remains a mystery why, in the full sense of these terms, the objects in space and time have lying before them the Categories, and our ideas (and let us suppose that this is the case) have lying @@ -1795,7 +1786,7 @@ Transcendental Deduction stands in need of natural reason. There can be no doubt that the manifold, when thus treated as the things in themselves, is by its very nature contradictory.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As I have elsewhere shown, the never-ending regress in +\__kgl_newpara:n {As I have elsewhere shown, the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions, in the study of the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions, occupies part of the sphere of the Transcendental Deduction concerning the existence of the @@ -1812,7 +1803,7 @@ never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions, when thus treated as the objects in space and time, constitutes the whole content for the Ideal.} -\kgl_newpara:n {It is not at all certain that, so far as regards the +\__kgl_newpara:n {It is not at all certain that, so far as regards the manifold and our ideas, the Categories are just as necessary as, in the study of the architectonic of pure reason, the discipline of human reason. It must not be supposed that metaphysics is the mere result @@ -1825,7 +1816,7 @@ the architectonic of natural reason, what we have alone been able to show is that our judgements constitute the whole content of, on the other hand, our inductive judgements, as we have already seen. } -\kgl_newpara:n {The objects in space and time should only be used as a +\__kgl_newpara:n {The objects in space and time should only be used as a canon for the phenomena. By means of analysis, to avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that the noumena are just as necessary as pure logic; however, natural causes exist in the Ideal @@ -1844,7 +1835,7 @@ never furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like philosophy, it has lying before it speculative principles. This is the sense in which it is to be understood in this work.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Still, the Ideal is what first gives rise to, when +\__kgl_newpara:n {Still, the Ideal is what first gives rise to, when thus treated as our ideas, the transcendental aesthetic. As any dedicated reader can clearly see, it is obvious that natural causes exclude the possibility of natural causes; therefore, metaphysics is a @@ -1868,7 +1859,7 @@ a blind but indispensable function of the soul; by means of the manifold, time is the key to understanding space. By virtue of human reason, our speculative judgements have nothing to do with the Ideal.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Transcendental logic constitutes the whole content +\__kgl_newpara:n {Transcendental logic constitutes the whole content for, for example, the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions. It remains a mystery why, even as this relates to time, the Ideal excludes the possibility of the Categories, but natural @@ -1887,7 +1878,7 @@ transcendental aesthetic, in the case of metaphysics, can be treated like necessity; for these reasons, the noumena exclude the possibility of the Ideal.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that our a +\__kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that our a posteriori knowledge has lying before it the Categories, as is shown in the writings of Galileo. Thus, the Categories are the mere results of the power of space, a blind but indispensable function of the soul. @@ -1906,7 +1897,7 @@ stand in need to our judgements. The Transcendental Deduction proves the validity of the things in themselves, and our sense perceptions would thereby be made to contradict our understanding.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, Galileo tells +\__kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, Galileo tells us that natural causes, so far as regards necessity, can never, as a whole, furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like the manifold, they prove the validity of ampliative principles. Let us @@ -1925,7 +1916,7 @@ contradictory. With the sole exception of the architectonic of natural reason, there can be no doubt that our understanding would be falsified. This is what chiefly concerns us.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Because of the relation between philosophy and the +\__kgl_newpara:n {Because of the relation between philosophy and the objects in space and time, the Categories, in all theoretical sciences, are by their very nature contradictory. What we have alone been able to show is that our knowledge is a representation of the @@ -1944,7 +1935,7 @@ possibility of the paralogisms. The thing in itself, in view of these considerations, is by its very nature contradictory. Let us apply this to necessity.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, our sense +\__kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, our sense perceptions, as I have elsewhere shown, should only be used as a canon for our ideas; in natural theology, the paralogisms, indeed, are by their very nature contradictory. By virtue of practical reason, the @@ -1962,7 +1953,7 @@ all certain that this is the case) are a representation of our ideas; still, time, with the sole exception of our experience, can be treated like our sense perceptions. This is what chiefly concerns us. } -\kgl_newpara:n {The Categories, as I have elsewhere shown, constitute +\__kgl_newpara:n {The Categories, as I have elsewhere shown, constitute the whole content of necessity. The transcendental unity of apperception is just as necessary as the transcendental objects in space and time. Consequently, I assert that the thing in itself is a @@ -1977,7 +1968,7 @@ relates to necessity, may not contradict itself, but it is still possible that it may be in contradictions with the architectonic of human reason.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Since knowledge of the objects in space and time is a +\__kgl_newpara:n {Since knowledge of the objects in space and time is a priori, it remains a mystery why, in reference to ends, the phenomena prove the validity of the paralogisms. As is proven in the ontological manuals, the empirical objects in space and time would @@ -2003,7 +1994,7 @@ writings of Galileo, the objects in space and time exclude the possibility of our ideas; thus, the objects in space and time, for these reasons, are the clue to the discovery of the Antinomies.} -\kgl_newpara:n {With the sole exception of the never-ending regress in +\__kgl_newpara:n {With the sole exception of the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions, it is not at all certain that the noumena, in so far as this expounds the practical rules of the paralogisms of pure reason, can never, as a whole, furnish a true and @@ -2022,7 +2013,7 @@ supposed that the manifold, as I have elsewhere shown, abstracts from all content of knowledge; in the study of the Ideal of practical reason, our concepts are the clue to the discovery of our experience.} -\kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that the +\__kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that the Categories would be falsified. Consequently, there can be no doubt that the noumena can not take account of, even as this relates to philosophy, the Antinomies, as any dedicated reader can clearly see. @@ -2041,7 +2032,7 @@ manifold, that, indeed, the objects in space and time have lying before them our faculties, and the architectonic of natural reason stands in need of the things in themselves.} -\kgl_newpara:n {By means of analytic unity, the objects in space and +\__kgl_newpara:n {By means of analytic unity, the objects in space and time (and there can be no doubt that this is the case) constitute the whole content of the Antinomies, but our ideas have lying before them the noumena. The Ideal is the key to understanding, that is to say, @@ -2058,7 +2049,7 @@ natural causes is a posteriori, the empirical objects in space and time have nothing to do with philosophy. The divisions are thus provided; all that is required is to fill them.} -\kgl_newpara:n {In view of these considerations, the noumena would +\__kgl_newpara:n {In view of these considerations, the noumena would thereby be made to contradict, in view of these considerations, the paralogisms of natural reason. Because of the relation between the discipline of pure reason and our sense perceptions, we can deduce @@ -2075,7 +2066,7 @@ reason. The reader should be careful to observe that the manifold, irrespective of all empirical conditions, is by its very nature contradictory. } -\kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that natural +\__kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that natural causes (and to avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that this is the case) have lying before them necessity. We can deduce that our a priori knowledge (and Galileo tells us that this is @@ -2095,7 +2086,7 @@ objects in space and time, but the objects in space and time (and it is obvious that this is the case) are the clue to the discovery of the paralogisms.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As any dedicated reader can clearly see, it is not at +\__kgl_newpara:n {As any dedicated reader can clearly see, it is not at all certain that, on the contrary, the objects in space and time, in the case of space, stand in need to the objects in space and time, but the phenomena have lying before them the discipline of human reason. @@ -2119,7 +2110,7 @@ posteriori; thus, time is the mere result of the power of the Transcendental Deduction, a blind but indispensable function of the soul. But this need not worry us.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Aristotle tells us that, insomuch as the pure +\__kgl_newpara:n {Aristotle tells us that, insomuch as the pure employment of the Categories relies on our ideas, the things in themselves are just as necessary as, in all theoretical sciences, the noumena. Therefore, let us suppose that the phenomena occupy part of @@ -2144,7 +2135,7 @@ other words, would thereby be made to contradict our understanding; still, the employment of the noumena is a representation of the Ideal.} -\kgl_newpara:n {We can deduce that the paralogisms of human reason are +\__kgl_newpara:n {We can deduce that the paralogisms of human reason are a representation of, in the full sense of these terms, our experience. The thing in itself, in reference to ends, exists in our judgements. As is shown in the writings of Aristotle, let us suppose that, in @@ -2161,7 +2152,7 @@ Consequently, it remains a mystery why our concepts abstract from all content of knowledge, since knowledge of the objects in space and time is a posteriori.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Because of the relation between practical reason and +\__kgl_newpara:n {Because of the relation between practical reason and our problematic judgements, what we have alone been able to show is that, in respect of the intelligible character, our faculties, insomuch as our knowledge relies on the Categories, can be treated @@ -2181,7 +2172,7 @@ not take account of, by means of space, our knowledge. But we have fallen short of the necessary interconnection that we have in mind when we speak of necessity.} -\kgl_newpara:n {It is not at all certain that space can not take +\__kgl_newpara:n {It is not at all certain that space can not take account of natural causes. The Transcendental Deduction can not take account of our a priori knowledge; as I have elsewhere shown, the objects in space and time (and let us suppose that this is the case) @@ -2196,7 +2187,7 @@ can not take account of the noumena, but the paralogisms of natural reason, thus, abstract from all content of knowledge. This is not something we are in a position to establish.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Since none of our ideas are inductive, our ideas +\__kgl_newpara:n {Since none of our ideas are inductive, our ideas constitute the whole content of the paralogisms; consequently, our faculties can not take account of metaphysics. As will easily be shown in the next section, the Ideal, in reference to ends, may not @@ -2220,7 +2211,7 @@ the power of pure reason, a blind but indispensable function of the soul, yet the objects in space and time, with the sole exception of the manifold, exist in our ideas.} -\kgl_newpara:n {In natural theology, it must not be supposed that the +\__kgl_newpara:n {In natural theology, it must not be supposed that the objects in space and time, so far as regards the manifold, should only be used as a canon for natural reason. The manifold, so far as regards our a priori knowledge, teaches us nothing whatsoever @@ -2239,7 +2230,7 @@ the Categories, but the things in themselves, however, constitute a body of demonstrated doctrine, and some of this body must be known a posteriori. And similarly with all the others.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Our speculative judgements, therefore, prove the +\__kgl_newpara:n {Our speculative judgements, therefore, prove the validity of the transcendental unity of apperception. Necessity is just as necessary as, that is to say, transcendental logic. The reader should be careful to observe that the noumena (and it must not @@ -2253,7 +2244,7 @@ discipline of human reason. As any dedicated reader can clearly see, the paralogisms prove the validity of, as I have elsewhere shown, the architectonic of pure reason.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Space may not contradict itself, but it is still +\__kgl_newpara:n {Space may not contradict itself, but it is still possible that it may be in contradictions with, for these reasons, the phenomena; with the sole exception of metaphysics, our ideas exclude the possibility of, in natural theology, the thing in itself. What we @@ -2278,7 +2269,7 @@ should only be used as a canon for our knowledge. But we have fallen short of the necessary interconnection that we have in mind when we speak of necessity.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The objects in space and time are the mere results of +\__kgl_newpara:n {The objects in space and time are the mere results of the power of metaphysics, a blind but indispensable function of the soul; in the study of our a posteriori knowledge, the manifold, so far as I know, proves the validity of the Ideal. Hume tells us that, so @@ -2298,7 +2289,7 @@ of the Categories, because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions. But we have fallen short of the necessary interconnection that we have in mind when we speak of the Categories.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions, +\__kgl_newpara:n {Because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions, it is not at all certain that, for example, the thing in itself (and the reader should be careful to observe that this is true) can not take account of our experience, and our concepts, in all theoretical @@ -2310,7 +2301,7 @@ only be used as a canon for our a posteriori judgements. Our understanding can be treated like the transcendental unity of apperception. The Categories can be treated like space.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Since some of our sense perceptions are hypothetical, +\__kgl_newpara:n {Since some of our sense perceptions are hypothetical, philosophy proves the validity of natural causes; on the other hand, our experience, in other words, can never furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like our experience, it depends on @@ -2328,7 +2319,7 @@ experience, by virtue of natural reason. Therefore, the noumena, in view of these considerations, are by their very nature contradictory, as will easily be shown in the next section.} -\kgl_newpara:n {On the other hand, the never-ending regress in the +\__kgl_newpara:n {On the other hand, the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions stands in need of practical reason. As will easily be shown in the next section, there can be no doubt that, in so far as this expounds the contradictory rules of the discipline @@ -2342,7 +2333,7 @@ in the writings of Hume. Certainly, what we have alone been able to show is that natural causes, in reference to ends, would be falsified. But this need not worry us.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Since some of the objects in space and time are +\__kgl_newpara:n {Since some of the objects in space and time are speculative, let us suppose that our sense perceptions are the clue to the discovery of, in particular, our a posteriori knowledge. Since knowledge of the transcendental objects in space and time is a @@ -2364,7 +2355,7 @@ constitutes the whole content for, still, the intelligible objects in space and time, and space is the clue to the discovery of, in particular, our a posteriori concepts. } -\kgl_newpara:n {The Ideal of human reason has nothing to do with time. +\__kgl_newpara:n {The Ideal of human reason has nothing to do with time. As we have already seen, Aristotle tells us that, so far as regards the Transcendental Deduction, the transcendental aesthetic, insomuch as the practical employment of the never-ending regress in the series @@ -2383,7 +2374,7 @@ means of general logic, that the transcendental unity of apperception teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of, consequently, the Antinomies, because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Since all of our concepts are inductive, there can be +\__kgl_newpara:n {Since all of our concepts are inductive, there can be no doubt that, in respect of the intelligible character, our ideas are the clue to the discovery of the transcendental unity of apperception, and the paralogisms of natural reason should only be used as a canon @@ -2402,7 +2393,7 @@ Antinomies, yet the employment of the pure employment of our a posteriori concepts is what first gives rise to, in all theoretical sciences, the noumena.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Since knowledge of natural causes is a posteriori, it +\__kgl_newpara:n {Since knowledge of natural causes is a posteriori, it is obvious that the transcendental unity of apperception is the mere result of the power of the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions, a blind but indispensable function of the soul; @@ -2419,7 +2410,7 @@ considerations, that our faculties, even as this relates to the thing in itself, occupy part of the sphere of the Transcendental Deduction concerning the existence of the Categories in general.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, it is not at all certain +\__kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, it is not at all certain that, that is to say, the Transcendental Deduction is the clue to the discovery of, in particular, our knowledge, yet the thing in itself would thereby be made to contradict our faculties. As is proven in @@ -2438,7 +2429,7 @@ as this relates to the transcendental unity of apperception, the Categories, certainly, should only be used as a canon for the thing in itself. This is not something we are in a position to establish.} -\kgl_newpara:n {It is obvious that space depends on the things in +\__kgl_newpara:n {It is obvious that space depends on the things in themselves. There can be no doubt that, in particular, the Ideal, in so far as this expounds the practical rules of the phenomena, is just as necessary as the transcendental unity of apperception. There can @@ -2449,7 +2440,7 @@ avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that our understanding (and to avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that this is true) is a representation of the Antinomies.} -\kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, the Antinomies are a +\__kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, the Antinomies are a representation of metaphysics; in the case of the practical employment of the transcendental aesthetic, the Categories are by their very nature contradictory. It is not at all certain that the phenomena @@ -2467,7 +2458,7 @@ nothing to do with our a posteriori knowledge. There can be no doubt that metaphysics is a representation of the transcendental unity of apperception, as any dedicated reader can clearly see.} -\kgl_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that our concepts, in accordance +\__kgl_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that our concepts, in accordance with the principles of the noumena, are by their very nature contradictory, as is shown in the writings of Galileo. Space is what first gives rise to, in other words, the Antinomies, and space depends @@ -2482,7 +2473,7 @@ metaphysics, on the contrary, occupies part of the sphere of the thing in itself concerning the existence of our synthetic judgements in general.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, I assert that, +\__kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, I assert that, so far as regards metaphysics, our knowledge proves the validity of, on the contrary, the manifold, yet the objects in space and time are what first give rise to, in the study of formal logic, the paralogisms @@ -2499,7 +2490,7 @@ for these reasons, that our knowledge stands in need of the things in themselves, since knowledge of our faculties is a priori. But this is to be dismissed as random groping.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Our understanding can not take account of our +\__kgl_newpara:n {Our understanding can not take account of our faculties; certainly, the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions is what first gives rise to, therefore, the things in themselves. It is not at all certain that, then, time @@ -2516,7 +2507,7 @@ means of analysis. Thus, the Categories would thereby be made to contradict the things in themselves, as any dedicated reader can clearly see.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves are just as necessary as the +\__kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves are just as necessary as the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions. As any dedicated reader can clearly see, the architectonic of natural reason (and it remains a mystery why this is true) can thereby determine in @@ -2534,7 +2525,7 @@ ignorance of the conditions. It is not at all certain that the manifold stands in need of, for these reasons, the Antinomies, by virtue of human reason.} -\kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of practical reason, there can be no doubt +\__kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of practical reason, there can be no doubt that our experience, still, occupies part of the sphere of the manifold concerning the existence of our analytic judgements in general; as I have elsewhere shown, the Categories can never, as a @@ -2559,7 +2550,7 @@ ontological manuals, the Ideal is a body of demonstrated science, and some of it must be known a priori. This may be clear with an example.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The transcendental unity of apperception, so far as +\__kgl_newpara:n {The transcendental unity of apperception, so far as regards the Ideal of practical reason and the noumena, abstracts from all content of a posteriori knowledge, by virtue of human reason. To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that, that is to @@ -2580,7 +2571,7 @@ science, because, like the employment of philosophy, they have nothing to do with hypothetical principles. Our ideas have nothing to do with the transcendental aesthetic.} -\kgl_newpara:n {In the case of philosophy, the Transcendental +\__kgl_newpara:n {In the case of philosophy, the Transcendental Deduction proves the validity of necessity, by means of analysis. Our sense perceptions have lying before them, certainly, our experience. There can be no doubt that space (and it remains a mystery why this is @@ -2594,7 +2585,7 @@ in the ontological manuals, space has nothing to do with, thus, our ideas, yet the things in themselves, in natural theology, can be treated like the transcendental aesthetic.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Galileo, it remains a +\__kgl_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Galileo, it remains a mystery why, so far as I know, the phenomena are the mere results of the power of the Ideal of pure reason, a blind but indispensable function of the soul, but the paralogisms (and there can be no doubt @@ -2619,7 +2610,7 @@ assert, for these reasons, that this is the case) would thereby be made to contradict the transcendental unity of apperception. But the proof of this is a task from which we can here be absolved. } -\kgl_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Hume, the noumena +\__kgl_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Hume, the noumena should only be used as a canon for the Categories. As is proven in the ontological manuals, our sense perceptions, consequently, are by their very nature contradictory; therefore, our experience (and it @@ -2634,7 +2625,7 @@ Antinomies constitute the whole content of our a priori concepts; on the other hand, the Ideal of natural reason (and there can be no doubt that this is true) is a representation of the manifold.} -\kgl_newpara:n {I assert, certainly, that, irrespective of all +\__kgl_newpara:n {I assert, certainly, that, irrespective of all empirical conditions, the Categories are just as necessary as, on the other hand, the thing in itself, yet the manifold proves the validity of, on the other hand, the employment of the transcendental unity of @@ -2649,7 +2640,7 @@ exclude the possibility of, however, general logic; consequently, the paralogisms of natural reason, when thus treated as our ideas, can be treated like philosophy.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, our faculties +\__kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, our faculties stand in need to the transcendental objects in space and time; certainly, our ideas are a representation of the objects in space and time. The reader should be careful to observe that the Categories @@ -2664,7 +2655,7 @@ Aristotle tells us that there is a causal connection bewteen the noumena and the things in themselves? The employment of the Antinomies is the key to understanding our ideas.} -\kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that the +\__kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that the employment of the transcendental aesthetic, still, exists in our sense perceptions; as I have elsewhere shown, the phenomena exist in the discipline of practical reason. Necessity (and Aristotle tells us @@ -2686,7 +2677,7 @@ account of our sense perceptions, but the thing in itself, so far as I know, can not take account of our sense perceptions. Let us suppose that our ideas are a representation of metaphysics.} -\kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of human reason, the Ideal of pure reason, +\__kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of human reason, the Ideal of pure reason, in the full sense of these terms, is by its very nature contradictory, yet necessity is the key to understanding metaphysics. The Categories have nothing to do with, therefore, the phenomena. We can deduce that @@ -2699,7 +2690,7 @@ concerning the existence of the phenomena in general. The paralogisms of human reason are the clue to the discovery of, on the contrary, our understanding.} -\kgl_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that, in reference to ends, the +\__kgl_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that, in reference to ends, the thing in itself excludes the possibility of the objects in space and time, but the discipline of human reason is by its very nature contradictory. It is obvious that, in other words, the manifold, in @@ -2710,7 +2701,7 @@ yet the thing in itself is just as necessary as the Antinomies. Metaphysics exists in our speculative judgements. By means of analysis, the phenomena are a representation of our faculties.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The phenomena stand in need to our sense perceptions, +\__kgl_newpara:n {The phenomena stand in need to our sense perceptions, but our concepts are the clue to the discovery of formal logic. The objects in space and time have nothing to do with the things in themselves, as is evident upon close examination. Time teaches us @@ -2726,7 +2717,7 @@ have already seen. Consequently, it remains a mystery why our a priori concepts, on the other hand, are what first give rise to the Ideal of human reason, as any dedicated reader can clearly see.} -\kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that, then, +\__kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that, then, the Ideal of human reason, in reference to ends, is the mere result of the power of practical reason, a blind but indispensable function of the soul, but the Ideal (and the reader should be careful to observe @@ -2750,7 +2741,7 @@ reason depends on time. However, our a priori judgements have lying before them the employment of necessity, by means of analytic unity. } -\kgl_newpara:n {As will easily be shown in the next section, it is not +\__kgl_newpara:n {As will easily be shown in the next section, it is not at all certain that the transcendental unity of apperception is the key to understanding the things in themselves; certainly, the Categories prove the validity of our faculties. Let us suppose that @@ -2766,7 +2757,7 @@ posteriori concepts, yet the thing in itself can not take account of, as I have elsewhere shown, the Categories. The question of this matter's relation to objects is not in any way under discussion.} -\kgl_newpara:n {It must not be supposed that, so regarded, our +\__kgl_newpara:n {It must not be supposed that, so regarded, our experience, in particular, can thereby determine in its totality our analytic judgements, yet necessity has nothing to do with, in reference to ends, the discipline of human reason. It is not at all @@ -2790,7 +2781,7 @@ In my present remarks I am referring to the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions only in so far as it is founded on hypothetical principles.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves prove the validity of, on the +\__kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves prove the validity of, on the other hand, transcendental logic; therefore, necessity has lying before it, indeed, the paralogisms. What we have alone been able to show is that our ideas constitute a body of demonstrated doctrine, and @@ -2803,7 +2794,7 @@ still, the practical employment of the transcendental objects in space and time, that is to say, has lying before it the things in themselves. Natural causes prove the validity of necessity.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that our a +\__kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that our a priori concepts, in other words, can never, as a whole, furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like general logic, they prove the validity of hypothetical principles, by virtue of human reason. There @@ -2818,7 +2809,7 @@ of pure reason. Our ideas constitute the whole content of the objects in space and time, but the Ideal, indeed, is the key to understanding our understanding.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, it is not at all certain that +\__kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, it is not at all certain that the Ideal of pure reason is just as necessary as natural causes; in the case of the Transcendental Deduction, our faculties, in natural theology, abstract from all content of knowledge. The Categories can @@ -2833,7 +2824,7 @@ whether the paralogisms exist in our experience? Still, natural reason, so far as I know, would be falsified, because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions. Our faculties would be falsified.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The Ideal proves the validity of the objects in space +\__kgl_newpara:n {The Ideal proves the validity of the objects in space and time. To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that our judgements are a representation of, however, the manifold. The objects in space and time exclude the possibility of necessity. @@ -2842,7 +2833,7 @@ abstracts from all content of knowledge. There can be no doubt that, indeed, the objects in space and time would thereby be made to contradict human reason.} -\kgl_newpara:n {It is obvious that the transcendental unity of +\__kgl_newpara:n {It is obvious that the transcendental unity of apperception can be treated like the Ideal. I assert that applied logic (and it is not at all certain that this is true) stands in need of the objects in space and time; certainly, the Ideal of practical @@ -2862,7 +2853,7 @@ knowledge of our sense perceptions is a priori, we can deduce that our experience is what first gives rise to the architectonic of practical reason. This may be clear with an example. } -\kgl_newpara:n {I assert, consequently, that the Transcendental +\__kgl_newpara:n {I assert, consequently, that the Transcendental Deduction would thereby be made to contradict our faculties, as will easily be shown in the next section. Let us suppose that our ideas, in the full sense of these terms, occupy part of the sphere of formal @@ -2885,7 +2876,7 @@ noumena; on the other hand, the transcendental unity of apperception teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of, then, the Ideal of pure reason.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, the things in +\__kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, the things in themselves are the clue to the discovery of the phenomena, and philosophy (and what we have alone been able to show is that this is true) teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of the @@ -2901,7 +2892,7 @@ pure reason, let us suppose that general logic stands in need of the Ideal of human reason, as we have already seen. The noumena prove the validity of, in the study of transcendental logic, our understanding.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Space (and what we have alone been able to show is +\__kgl_newpara:n {Space (and what we have alone been able to show is that this is true) stands in need of necessity, yet our understanding, so far as regards the Ideal of practical reason, can never furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like the transcendental unity @@ -2925,7 +2916,7 @@ representation of, in respect of the intelligible character, time, and the pure employment of the discipline of natural reason has lying before it our experience.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Still, it must not be supposed that our faculties are +\__kgl_newpara:n {Still, it must not be supposed that our faculties are a representation of the Ideal of practical reason, as is evident upon close examination. As is proven in the ontological manuals, the reader should be careful to observe that the objects in space and time @@ -2946,7 +2937,7 @@ be careful to observe that, for example, the things in themselves (and it is not at all certain that this is the case) are the clue to the discovery of our concepts. But this need not worry us.} -\kgl_newpara:n {The architectonic of natural reason is the key to +\__kgl_newpara:n {The architectonic of natural reason is the key to understanding, so far as regards our a posteriori knowledge and the paralogisms, time; still, the Categories, with the sole exception of the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions, should @@ -2964,7 +2955,7 @@ transcendental aesthetic. Aristotle tells us that our faculties have nothing to do with the objects in space and time. We thus have a pure synthesis of apprehension.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Since none of the noumena are hypothetical, there can +\__kgl_newpara:n {Since none of the noumena are hypothetical, there can be no doubt that, in particular, our knowledge, in other words, is the clue to the discovery of the things in themselves. Therefore, the Ideal is just as necessary as, then, the Ideal, as will easily be @@ -2978,7 +2969,7 @@ in the manifold. In the case of time, the Categories, by means of transcendental logic, constitute the whole content of the things in themselves, as any dedicated reader can clearly see.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Transcendental logic can thereby determine in its +\__kgl_newpara:n {Transcendental logic can thereby determine in its totality, consequently, our faculties, because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions. Since some of the paralogisms are analytic, there can be no doubt that, in reference to ends, the @@ -2997,7 +2988,7 @@ like time, but our judgements are just as necessary as the Categories. Our understanding is a representation of the objects in space and time, and the paralogisms are just as necessary as our experience.} -\kgl_newpara:n {Philosophy (and it must not be supposed that this is +\__kgl_newpara:n {Philosophy (and it must not be supposed that this is true) is a representation of the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions; however, the Antinomies have nothing to do with, in the study of philosophy, the discipline of practical reason. @@ -3018,7 +3009,7 @@ transcendental unity of apperception, insomuch as the architectonic of human reason relies on the Antinomies, can thereby determine in its totality natural causes.} -\kgl_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Hume, it remains a +\__kgl_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Hume, it remains a mystery why our judgements exclude the possibility of the transcendental aesthetic; therefore, the transcendental aesthetic can not take account of the thing in itself. Our knowledge depends on, @@ -3033,173 +3024,185 @@ manuals, it remains a mystery why space exists in the objects in space and time; still, the noumena, in the case of necessity, constitute the whole content of philosophy.} -\kgl_newword:n {Ideal} -\kgl_newword:n {noumena} -\kgl_newword:n {Aristotle} -\kgl_newword:n {transcendental} -\kgl_newword:n {metaphysics} -\kgl_newword:n {reason} -\kgl_newword:n {science} -\kgl_newword:n {necessity} -\kgl_newword:n {Categories} -\kgl_newword:n {philosophy} -\kgl_newword:n {knowledge} -\kgl_newword:n {regress} -\kgl_newword:n {paralogism} -\kgl_newword:n {empirical} -\kgl_newword:n {space} -\kgl_newword:n {manifold} -\kgl_newword:n {understanding} -\kgl_newword:n {aesthetic} -\kgl_newword:n {noumena} -\kgl_newword:n {sphere} -\kgl_newword:n {time} -\kgl_newword:n {practical reason} -\kgl_newword:n {perception} -\kgl_newword:n {things in themselves} -\kgl_newword:n {doctrine} -\kgl_newword:n {regress} -\kgl_newword:n {mystery} -\kgl_newword:n {existence} -\kgl_newword:n {contradiction} -\kgl_newword:n {a priori} -\kgl_newword:n {natural causes} -\kgl_newword:n {analysis} -\kgl_newword:n {apperception} -\kgl_newword:n {Antinomies} -\kgl_newword:n {Transcendental Deduction} -\kgl_newword:n {phenomena} -\kgl_newword:n {formal logic} -\kgl_newword:n {soul} -\kgl_newword:n {misapprehension} -\kgl_newword:n {elsewhere} -\kgl_newword:n {theology} -\kgl_newword:n {employment} -\kgl_newword:n {logic} -\kgl_newword:n {practical reason} -\kgl_newword:n {theoretical sciences} -\kgl_newword:n {a posteriori} -\kgl_newword:n {mystery} -\kgl_newword:n {philosophy} -\kgl_newword:n {things in themselves} -\kgl_newword:n {experience} -\kgl_newword:n {contradictory} -\kgl_newword:n {Categories} -\kgl_newword:n {perceptions} -\kgl_newword:n {Galileo} -\kgl_newword:n {apperception} -\kgl_newword:n {empirical objects} -\kgl_newword:n {judgements} -\kgl_newword:n {phenomena} -\kgl_newword:n {power} -\kgl_newword:n {hypothetical principles} -\kgl_newword:n {transcendental logic} -\kgl_newword:n {doctrine} -\kgl_newword:n {understanding} -\kgl_newword:n {totality} -\kgl_newword:n {manifold} -\kgl_newword:n {inductive judgements} -\kgl_newword:n {Transcendental Deduction} -\kgl_newword:n {analytic unity} -\kgl_newword:n {Hume} -\kgl_newword:n {canon} -\kgl_newword:n {knowledge} -\kgl_newword:n {universal} -\kgl_newword:n {section} -\kgl_newword:n {body} -\kgl_newword:n {ignorance} -\kgl_newword:n {sense perceptions} -\kgl_newword:n {natural reason} -\kgl_newword:n {exception} -\kgl_newword:n {ampliative judgements} -\kgl_newword:n {experience} -\kgl_newword:n {Categories} -\kgl_newword:n {analysis} -\kgl_newword:n {philosophy} -\kgl_newword:n {apperception} -\kgl_newword:n {paralogism} -\kgl_newword:n {ignorance} -\kgl_newword:n {true} -\kgl_newword:n {space} -\kgl_newword:n {Ideal} -\kgl_newword:n {accordance} -\kgl_newword:n {regress} -\kgl_newword:n {experience} -\kgl_newword:n {a priori} -\kgl_newword:n {disjunctive} -\kgl_newword:n {soul} -\kgl_newword:n {understanding} -\kgl_newword:n {analytic unity} -\kgl_newword:n {phenomena} -\kgl_newword:n {practical reason} -\kgl_newword:n {cause} -\kgl_newword:n {manuals} -\kgl_newword:n {dedicated reader} -\kgl_newword:n {a posteriori} -\kgl_newword:n {employment} -\kgl_newword:n {natural theology} -\kgl_newword:n {manifold} -\kgl_newword:n {transcendental aesthetic} -\kgl_newword:n {close} -\kgl_newword:n {full} -\kgl_newword:n {Aristotle} -\kgl_newword:n {clue} -\kgl_newword:n {me} -\kgl_newword:n {account} -\kgl_newword:n {things} -\kgl_newword:n {sense} -\kgl_newword:n {intelligible} -\kgl_newword:n {understanding} -\kgl_newword:n {Categories} -\kgl_newword:n {never} -\kgl_newword:n {apperception} -\kgl_newword:n {Ideal} -\kgl_newword:n {need} -\kgl_newword:n {space} -\kgl_newword:n {virtue} -\kgl_newword:n {Hume} -\kgl_newword:n {still} -\kgl_newword:n {whatsoever} -\kgl_newword:n {even} -\kgl_newword:n {sphere} -\kgl_newword:n {position} -\kgl_newword:n {ignorance} -\kgl_newword:n {word} -\kgl_newword:n {phenomena} -\kgl_newword:n {theology} -\kgl_newword:n {mystery} -\kgl_newword:n {Categories} -\kgl_newword:n {perception} -\kgl_newword:n {power} -\kgl_newword:n {experience} -\kgl_newword:n {never-ending} -\kgl_newword:n {analytic} -\kgl_newword:n {itself} -\kgl_newword:n {a priori} -\kgl_newword:n {rule} -\kgl_newword:n {Transcendental Deduction} -\kgl_newword:n {empirical conditions} -\kgl_newword:n {knowledge} -\kgl_newword:n {disjunctive} -\kgl_newword:n {transcendental} -\kgl_newword:n {science} -\kgl_newword:n {falsified} -\kgl_newword:n {reader} -\kgl_newword:n {blind} -\kgl_newword:n {employment} -\kgl_newword:n {discipline} -\kgl_newword:n {function} -\kgl_newword:n {careful} -\kgl_newword:n {Aristotle} -\kgl_newword:n {Categories} -\kgl_newword:n {part} -\kgl_newword:n {noumena} -\kgl_newword:n {doubt} -\kgl_newword:n {duck} -\kgl_newword:n {Kant} +\__kgl_newword:n {Ideal} +\__kgl_newword:n {noumena} +\__kgl_newword:n {Aristotle} +\__kgl_newword:n {transcendental} +\__kgl_newword:n {metaphysics} +\__kgl_newword:n {reason} +\__kgl_newword:n {science} +\__kgl_newword:n {necessity} +\__kgl_newword:n {Categories} +\__kgl_newword:n {philosophy} +\__kgl_newword:n {knowledge} +\__kgl_newword:n {regress} +\__kgl_newword:n {paralogism} +\__kgl_newword:n {empirical} +\__kgl_newword:n {space} +\__kgl_newword:n {manifold} +\__kgl_newword:n {understanding} +\__kgl_newword:n {aesthetic} +\__kgl_newword:n {noumena} +\__kgl_newword:n {sphere} +\__kgl_newword:n {time} +\__kgl_newword:n {practical reason} +\__kgl_newword:n {perception} +\__kgl_newword:n {things in themselves} +\__kgl_newword:n {doctrine} +\__kgl_newword:n {regress} +\__kgl_newword:n {mystery} +\__kgl_newword:n {existence} +\__kgl_newword:n {contradiction} +\__kgl_newword:n {a priori} +\__kgl_newword:n {natural causes} +\__kgl_newword:n {analysis} +\__kgl_newword:n {apperception} +\__kgl_newword:n {Antinomies} +\__kgl_newword:n {Transcendental Deduction} +\__kgl_newword:n {phenomena} +\__kgl_newword:n {formal logic} +\__kgl_newword:n {soul} +\__kgl_newword:n {misapprehension} +\__kgl_newword:n {elsewhere} +\__kgl_newword:n {theology} +\__kgl_newword:n {employment} +\__kgl_newword:n {logic} +\__kgl_newword:n {practical reason} +\__kgl_newword:n {theoretical sciences} +\__kgl_newword:n {a posteriori} +\__kgl_newword:n {mystery} +\__kgl_newword:n {philosophy} +\__kgl_newword:n {things in themselves} +\__kgl_newword:n {experience} +\__kgl_newword:n {contradictory} +\__kgl_newword:n {Categories} +\__kgl_newword:n {perceptions} +\__kgl_newword:n {Galileo} +\__kgl_newword:n {apperception} +\__kgl_newword:n {empirical objects} +\__kgl_newword:n {judgements} +\__kgl_newword:n {phenomena} +\__kgl_newword:n {power} +\__kgl_newword:n {hypothetical principles} +\__kgl_newword:n {transcendental logic} +\__kgl_newword:n {doctrine} +\__kgl_newword:n {understanding} +\__kgl_newword:n {totality} +\__kgl_newword:n {manifold} +\__kgl_newword:n {inductive judgements} +\__kgl_newword:n {Transcendental Deduction} +\__kgl_newword:n {analytic unity} +\__kgl_newword:n {Hume} +\__kgl_newword:n {canon} +\__kgl_newword:n {knowledge} +\__kgl_newword:n {universal} +\__kgl_newword:n {section} +\__kgl_newword:n {body} +\__kgl_newword:n {ignorance} +\__kgl_newword:n {sense perceptions} +\__kgl_newword:n {natural reason} +\__kgl_newword:n {exception} +\__kgl_newword:n {ampliative judgements} +\__kgl_newword:n {experience} +\__kgl_newword:n {Categories} +\__kgl_newword:n {analysis} +\__kgl_newword:n {philosophy} +\__kgl_newword:n {apperception} +\__kgl_newword:n {paralogism} +\__kgl_newword:n {ignorance} +\__kgl_newword:n {true} +\__kgl_newword:n {space} +\__kgl_newword:n {Ideal} +\__kgl_newword:n {accordance} +\__kgl_newword:n {regress} +\__kgl_newword:n {experience} +\__kgl_newword:n {a priori} +\__kgl_newword:n {disjunctive} +\__kgl_newword:n {soul} +\__kgl_newword:n {understanding} +\__kgl_newword:n {analytic unity} +\__kgl_newword:n {phenomena} +\__kgl_newword:n {practical reason} +\__kgl_newword:n {cause} +\__kgl_newword:n {manuals} +\__kgl_newword:n {dedicated reader} +\__kgl_newword:n {a posteriori} +\__kgl_newword:n {employment} +\__kgl_newword:n {natural theology} +\__kgl_newword:n {manifold} +\__kgl_newword:n {transcendental aesthetic} +\__kgl_newword:n {close} +\__kgl_newword:n {full} +\__kgl_newword:n {Aristotle} +\__kgl_newword:n {clue} +\__kgl_newword:n {me} +\__kgl_newword:n {account} +\__kgl_newword:n {things} +\__kgl_newword:n {sense} +\__kgl_newword:n {intelligible} +\__kgl_newword:n {understanding} +\__kgl_newword:n {Categories} +\__kgl_newword:n {never} +\__kgl_newword:n {apperception} +\__kgl_newword:n {Ideal} +\__kgl_newword:n {need} +\__kgl_newword:n {space} +\__kgl_newword:n {virtue} +\__kgl_newword:n {Hume} +\__kgl_newword:n {still} +\__kgl_newword:n {whatsoever} +\__kgl_newword:n {even} +\__kgl_newword:n {sphere} +\__kgl_newword:n {position} +\__kgl_newword:n {ignorance} +\__kgl_newword:n {word} +\__kgl_newword:n {phenomena} +\__kgl_newword:n {theology} +\__kgl_newword:n {mystery} +\__kgl_newword:n {Categories} +\__kgl_newword:n {perception} +\__kgl_newword:n {power} +\__kgl_newword:n {experience} +\__kgl_newword:n {never-ending} +\__kgl_newword:n {analytic} +\__kgl_newword:n {itself} +\__kgl_newword:n {a priori} +\__kgl_newword:n {rule} +\__kgl_newword:n {Transcendental Deduction} +\__kgl_newword:n {empirical conditions} +\__kgl_newword:n {knowledge} +\__kgl_newword:n {disjunctive} +\__kgl_newword:n {transcendental} +\__kgl_newword:n {science} +\__kgl_newword:n {falsified} +\__kgl_newword:n {reader} +\__kgl_newword:n {blind} +\__kgl_newword:n {employment} +\__kgl_newword:n {discipline} +\__kgl_newword:n {function} +\__kgl_newword:n {careful} +\__kgl_newword:n {Aristotle} +\__kgl_newword:n {Categories} +\__kgl_newword:n {part} +\__kgl_newword:n {noumena} +\__kgl_newword:n {doubt} +\__kgl_newword:n {duck} +\__kgl_newword:n {Kant} \group_end: \msg_info:nnx {kantlipsum} {how-many} - { \int_eval:n {\seq_count:N \g_kgl_pars_seq} } + { \int_eval:n {\seq_count:N \g__kgl_pars_seq} } +%% Copyright (C) 2011-2017 by +%% Enrico Gregorio +%% enrico DOT gregorio AT univr DOT it %% +%% It may be distributed and/or modified under the conditions of the +%% LaTeX Project Public License (LPPL), either version 1.3c of this +%% license or (at your option) any later version. The latest version +%% of this license is in the file +%% http://www.latex-project.org/lppl.txt +%% This work consists of the file kantlipsum.dtx +%% and the derived files kantlipsum.pdf, +%% kantlipsum.sty and +%% kantlipsum.ins. %% %% End of file `kantlipsum.sty'. -- cgit v1.2.3