[1]
Nor is human reason to be blamed for this. It begins withprinciples which, in the course of experience, it must follow, and which are sufficiently confirmed byexperience. With these again, according to the necessities of its nature, itrises higher and higher to more remote conditions. But when it perceives thatin this way its work remains for ever incomplete, because the questions nevercease, it finds itself constrained to take refuge in principles which exceedevery possible experimental application, and nevertheless seem sounobjectionable that even ordinary common sense agrees with them. Thus,however, reason becomes involved in darkness and contradictions, from which, nodoubt, it may conclude that errors must be lurking somewhere, but without beingable to discover them, because the principles which it follows transcend allthe limits of experience and therefore withdraw themselves Edition: current; Page: [xviii] fromall experimental tests. It is the battle-field of these endless controversieswhich is called Metaphysic.
但是，人类理性并不因此，就应受到责备。因为理性是从一些道理开始的，这些道理，在经验的过程中，是理性应该遵循的，且是被经验充分证实了的。凭借这些道理，依据理性本性的必然性，理性越升越高，达到更远的条件。但是，当它感知到，由于新问题会不断涌现，而以这种方式，它的工作永远也不可能完成时，它就会发现，自己不得不求助于另外一些道理，这些道理，虽然超越了所有可能的经验性应用，但尽管如此，却仍显得无可置疑，甚至就连普遍的意识，也会表示赞同。但这样一来，理性就会陷入黑暗和矛盾之中，虽然，它可以毫无疑问地得出结论说，错误肯定潜藏于某处，但它却不能发现它们，因为，它所遵循的道理，超越了所有经验的限制，从而，常规经验的测试，在这里将不再适用。这个争论无休无止的战场，就叫做形而上学。
[2]
It falls into this difficulty without any fault of itsown. It begins with principles， whichcannot be dispensed with in the field of experience，and the truth and sufficiency of which are， at the sametime， insured by experience. With these principles itrises， in obedience to the laws of its own nature， to ever higher and more remote conditions. But it quickly discoversthat， in this way， its laboursmust remain ever incomplete， because new questionsnever cease to present themselves； and thus it finds itself compelledto have recourse to principles which transcend the region of experience， while they are regarded by common sense without distrust. It thusfalls into confusion and contradictions， from which itconjectures the presence of latent errors， which， however， it is unable to discover， because the principles it employs，transcending the limits of experience， cannot be testedby that criterion. The arena of these endless contests is called Metaphysic.
张本：
理性虽然陷入这种困境，但其自身，并无过错。理性是从一些道理开始的，这些道理，在经验领域，是理性应该遵循的，同时，这些道理的真理性和充分性，也通过经验，得以保证。借助这些道理，同时遵从理性自身本性的规律，理性达到了更高和更远的条件。但是理性很快就会发现，以这种方式，它的工作，永远也不是完整的，因为新的问题，不断涌现；于是，理性就会发现它自己，将被迫去寻找超越经验范围的道理，这些道理，从常识看来，也是可以接受的。这样，理性就陷入了混乱和矛盾之中，从此混乱出发，理性臆测着潜在的错误，然而，这些潜在的错误，不可能被发现，因为理性所使用的超验道理，超越了经验的限制，常规经验，在此无法测试验证。这些竞争，永无无止，它们所处的这个竞技场，就叫作形而上学。
邓本：
人类理性陷入这种困境并不是它的罪过。它是从在经验的进程中不可避免地要运用、同时又通过经验而充分验证了其运用的有效性的那些基本原理出发的。借助于这些原理，它（正如它的本性所将导致的那样）步步高升而达更遥远的条件。但由于它发现，以这种方式它的工作必将永远停留在未完成状态，因为这些问题永远无法解决，这样，它就看到自己不得不求助于一些原理，这些原理超越一切可能的经验运用，却仍然显得是那么不容怀疑，以至于就连普通的人类理性也对此表示同意。但这样一来，人类理性也就跌入到黑暗和矛盾冲突之中，它虽然由此可以得悉，必定在某个地方隐藏着某些根本性的错误，但他无法把它们揭示出来，因为它所使用的那些原理当超出了一切经验的界限时，就不再承认什么经验的试金石了。这些无休止的争吵的战场，就叫作形而上学。

[1]
At first the rule of Metaphysic, under the dominion of thedogmatists, was despotic. But as the laws still bore the traces of an oldbarbarism, intestine wars and complete anarchy broke out, and the sceptics, akind of nomads, despising all settled culture of the land, broke up from timeto time all civil society. Fortunately their number was small, and they couldnot prevent the old settlers from returning to cultivate the ground afresh,though without any fixed plan or agreement. Not long ago one might havethought, indeed, that all these quarrels were to have been settled and thelegitimacy of her claims decided once for all through a certain physiology ofthe human understanding, the work of the celebrated Locke. But, thoughthe descent of that royal pretender, traced back as it had been to the lowestmob of common experience, ought to have rendered her claims very suspicious,yet, as that genealogy turned out to be in reality a false invention, the oldqueen (Metaphysic) continued to maintain her claims, everything fell back intothe old rotten dogmatism, and the contempt from which metaphysical science wasto have been rescued, remained the same as ever. At present, after everythinghas been tried, so Edition: current;Page: [xix] they say, and tried in vain, there reign in philosophyweariness and complete indifferentism, the mother of chaos and night in allsciences but, at the same time, the spring or, at least, the prelude of theirnear reform and of a new light, after an ill-applied study has rendered themdark, confused, and useless.
最初，在独断论者的管辖下，形而上学的统治，是专制的。但是，由于法律仍带有古代野蛮的痕迹，所以，就导致了内战和无政府的爆发；怀疑论者们，即一种游牧民族，蔑视大地上所有确定的文明，对所有的市民社会，进行一次又一次地破坏。幸运的是，他们的人数并不多，不能阻止老的定居者，返回家园，重新建设，虽然这种重建，没有任何确定的计划或协议。确实，不久以前，人们或许还会以为，通过人类理解力的某种自然学，即著名的洛克的工作，已经让所有这些争论，都得到了解决，且其要求的合法性，也一次性地得到永远确定。尽管老的女王（形而上学），号称是皇室后裔，但她的血统，追踪下去的话，却发现是来自普遍经验这一最低的贱民阶层，这样，就会使她的主张，备受怀疑，尽管她仍继续坚持着自己的主张，但是，由于她的族谱最终被证明是捏造的，所以，一切就又都跌回了陈旧的、腐朽的独断论，形而上学就又陷入了让人蔑视的地位，尽管我们一直是想把它从这种蔑视中拯救出来。当前，在所有办法都已经试过，且徒劳无功之后，他们说，在哲学中占统治地位的，是疲倦和完全的冷淡，它们是所有科学的混乱和黑暗之母；但同时，在科学，由于错误的研究方法的应用，而变得黑暗，混乱和无用后，毕竟，至少还是露出了一线变革的前奏和新的曙光。
[2]
At first， hergovernment， under the administration of the dogmatists， was an absolute despotism. But， as thelegislative continued to show traces of the ancient barbaric rule， her empire gradually broke up， and intestinewars introduced the reign of anarchy； while the sceptics， like nomadictribes， who hate a permanent habitation and settledmode of living， attacked from time to time those whohad organized themselves into civil communities. But their number was， very happily， small； and thus they could not entirely put a stop to the exertions ofthose who persisted in raising new edifices， althoughon no settled or uniform plan. In recent times the hope dawned upon us ofseeing those disputes settled， and the legitimacy ofher claims established by a kind of physiology of the humanunderstanding--that of the celebrated Locke. But it was found that--although itwas affirmed that this so-called queen could not refer her descent to anyhigher source than that of common experience，a circumstance which necessarily brought suspicion on her claims--as this genealogy was incorrect， she persistedin the advancement of her claims to sovereignty. Thus metaphysics necessarily fellback into the antiquated and rotten constitution of dogmatism，and again became obnoxious to the contempt from which efforts had been made tosave it. At present， as all methods， according to the general persuasion， havebeen tried in vain， there reigns nought but weariness andcomplete indifferentism--the mother of chaos and night in the scientific world， but at the same time the source of， or at least the prelude to， the re-creationand reinstallation of a science， when it has
fallen into confusion，obscurity， and disuse from ill directed effort.
最初，形而上学的统治，在独断论者的管辖下，是绝对的专制。但是，由于其立法总是显示出古代野蛮规则的轨迹，所以，她的帝国逐渐崩溃，不断的内战导致了无政府状态的出现；同时怀疑论者们，像那些憎恨永久定居生存模式的游牧民族一样，对组织起来的文明社会，不断地进行着攻击。值得欣慰得是，他们的数量很少，所以，他们没法阻止独断论者，坚持不懈地建设新的大厦，尽管这种建设，并不基于任何不变得和统一的计划。近代，这些争辩可以获得解决的希望，终于出现了，以及形而上学主张的合法性的建立，这是通过人类理解力的一种自然学而建立的，这一点，是由著名的洛克提出的。但是我们发现，虽然可以断定，那个所谓的女王的血统中，找不到比普通经验更高的来源，尽管周围环境一直对她的断言持怀疑态度，也就是说，她的家谱是错的，但她依旧坚持其对最高统治权的优先权。这样，形而上学就又必然地跌回陈旧的、腐烂的独断论的教条中，尽管人们曾经多次努力，试图将形而上学从被蔑视的讨厌境地中解救出来，但她还是又一次陷了回去。今天，当一切可能的方法都被试验过，并宣告无效后，社会信仰破产，对宗教是厌倦和冷淡的，从科学角度看，将导致思想处于混乱和黑暗中；但同时，也就是当形而上学由于错误的努力，跌入混乱、晦涩、和无用之地时，对于一门科学来讲，也酝酿着它的重生或重建的源头、或至少是序曲。
张本：
同[1]；
邓本：
最初，形而上学的统治在独断论者的管辖下是专制的。不过，由于这种立法还带有古代野蛮的痕迹，所以它就因为内战而一步步沦为了完全的无政府状态，而怀疑论者类似于游牧民族，他们憎恶一一切地面的牢固建筑，便时时来拆散市民的联盟。但幸好他们只是少数人，所以他们不能阻止独断论者一再地试图把这种联盟重新建立起来，哪怕并不根据任何在他们中一致同意的计划。在近代，虽然一度看来这一一切争论似乎应当通过（由著名的洛克所提出的）人类知性的某种自然之学（Physiologie）来作一个了结，并对那些要求的合法性进行完全的裁决；但结果却是，尽管那位所谓的女王的出身是来自普通经验的贱琵，因而她的非分要求本来是理应受到怀疑的，然而，由于这一世系事实上是虚假地为她捏造出来的，她就可以仍然坚持她的要求，这就使得一切又重新坠入那陈旧的、千疮百孔的独断论中去，并由此而陷入到人们想要使科学摆脱出来的那种被蔑视的境地。今天，当一切道路（正如人们所以为的）都白费力气地尝试过了之后，在科学中占统治的是厌倦和彻底的冷淡态度，是浑沌和黑夜之母，但毕竟也有这些科学临近改造和澄清的苗头，至少是其序幕，它们是由于用力用得完全不是地方而变得模糊、混乱和不适用的。

[1]
It is in vain to assume a kind of artificial indifferentism inrespect to enquiries the object of which cannot be indifferent to human nature.Nay, those pretended indifferentists (however they may try to disguise themselvesby changing scholastic terminology into popular language), if they think atall, fall back inevitably into those very metaphysical dogmas which theyprofess to despise. Nevertheless this indifferentism, showing itself in thevery midst of the most flourishing state of all sciences, and affecting thosevery sciences the teachings of which, if they could be had, would be the lastto be surrendered, is a phenomenon well worthy of our attention andconsideration. It is clearly the result, not of the carelessness, but of thematured judgment of our age, which will no longer rest satisfied with the mereappearance of knowledge. Edition:current; Page: It is, at the same time, a powerful appeal to reason toundertake anew the most difficult of its duties, namely, self-knowledge, and toinstitute a court of appeal which should protect the just rights of reason, butdismiss all groundless claims, and should do this not by means of irresponsibledecrees, but according to the eternal and unalterable laws of reason. Thiscourt of appeal is no other than the Critique of Pure Reason.
有些探究的对象，对于人类来说，不可能是无所谓的，所以，对于这种探究，假装漠不关心，是徒劳的。另外，那些假装的冷漠主义者们（无论他们如何把学术术语，换成大众流行语，借以伪装自己），如果他们思考的话，那么，他们终将不可避免地跌回到形而上学的教义中去，而这种教义，一直是他们宣称要鄙视的东西。同时，这种冷漠，是一种非常值得我们关注和思考的现象，因为，这种冷漠，产生于所有科学最昌盛的时期，另外，有些科学，一旦人们获得了关于它们的真正认识，那么，在所有的科学中，就最不会放弃它们，而此冷漠，则恰恰影响了这些科学。很显然，它不是粗枝大叶的结果，而是我们这个时代的成熟的判断力*的结果，因为我们的判断力，将不会仅满足于知识的表面现象。同时，它是一个对理性的强有力的恳求，要求它重新承担起‘其责任中最困难的那项任务’，即关于理性自我的知识，且要任命一个申诉法庭，该法庭不仅应保护理性的正当权利，而且应该驳回所有毫无根据的主张，理性做此事，不是通过不负责任的裁定，而是依据理性永恒的和无法改变的规律来进行的。这个上诉的法庭，不是别的，正是纯粹理性的鉴定。
[*footnote:We often hear complaints against the shallowness ofthought in our own time, and
the decay of sound knowledge. But I do not see that scienceswhich rest on a solid
foundation, such as mathematics, physics, etc., deserve thisreproach in the least. On
the contrary, they maintain their old reputation of solidity,and with regard to physics,
even surpass it. The same spirit would manifest itself in otherbranches of knowledge,
if only their principles had first been properly determined.Till that is done,
indifferentism and doubt, and ultimately severe criticism, arerather signs of honest
thought. Our age is, in every sense of the word, the age ofcriticism, and everything
must submit to it. Religion, on the strength of its sanctity,and law, on the strength of
its majesty, try to withdraw themselves from it; but by sodoing they arouse just
suspicions, and cannot claim that sincere respect which reasonpays to those only who
have been able to stand its free and open examination.]
[*脚注：我们总是听到，关于我们这个时代，思想肤浅、及可靠的认识缺乏的的抱怨。但是，我不认为，一些基于坚实基础的科学，如数学、物理学等，应受这种责备。相反，它们保持着其所固有的坚实声誉，且物理学在这方面，甚至做的更好。在其它的认识分支中，也表现出同样的精神，只要它们的道理，在开始的时候，真正地规定好了。在这点保证没有做到之前，冷漠、怀疑以及及最终的严格鉴定，毋宁说是思维具有诚实性的标志。就每个词的字面意义而言，我们的时代，是鉴定的时代，每件事情都需要提交给它。宗教，基于其神圣性的力量，法律，基于其权威的力量，都试图免于鉴定；但是，这样做，只能让它们引起怀疑，不能得到真诚的尊敬，理性只把这种尊敬，给予那些可以面对理性的自由和公开检查的认识。]
[2]
For it is in reality vain to profess indifference in regard to such inquiries，the object of which cannot be indifferent to humanity. Besides， these pretended indifferentists， however much they may try to disguise themselves by theassumption of a popular style and by changes on the language of the schools， unavoidably fall into metaphysical declarations and propositions， which they profess to regard with so much contempt. At the sametime， this indifference， whichhas arisen in the world of science， and which relatesto that kind of knowledge which we should wish to see destroyed the last， is a phenomenon that well deserves our attention and reflection. Itis plainly not the effect of the levity， but of thematured judgement* of the age，which refuses to be any longer entertained with illusory knowledge， It is， in fact， a callto reason， again to undertake the most laborious of alltasks—that of self-examination， and to establish atribunal， which may secure it in its well-groundedclaims， while it pronounces against all baseless assumptionsand pretensions， not in an arbitrary manner， but according to its own eternal and unchangeable laws. Thistribunal is nothing less than the Critical Investigation of Pure Reason.
所以，对这样的一些探究，要想装出无所谓的态度，是徒劳的，因为这种探究的对象，对人类并不是无所谓的。另外，对于那些假装的冷漠主义者们，不论他们如何通过改换学院语言，而以流行的方式来伪装自己，最终，都不可避免地跌回到形而上学的主张上去，而此主张，正是他们一致宣称是极为鄙视的。同时，这种冷漠，是一种值得我们关注和反省的现象，因为，它产生于科学世界；另外，有些知识，是我们最不愿意放弃的，而此冷漠，恰与这些知识有关。这种态度，显然不是思想轻浮的结果，而是这个时代的成熟的判断力*的结果，这个时代，拒绝虚幻的知识。实际上，它是对理性的一个恳求，要求理性，重新接过它的一切任务中最困难的那个，即关于自我认识的任务，并建立一个法庭，该法庭可以保证理性的正当权利，同时，可以反对一切毫无根据的假设和自负，这种反对，不是以强制的方式，而是依据理性自己的永恒不变的规律来处理的。这个法庭不是别的，正是纯粹理性的鉴定性研究。
{
这一段广告做得，气势磅礴.译到这里，想起《宗镜录》里，永明延寿禅师的一段话：
“可谓。香中爇其牛头。宝中探其骊颔。华中采其灵瑞。照中耀其神光。食中啜其乳糜。水中饮其甘露。药中服其九转。主中遇其圣王。故得法性山高。顿落群峰之峻。醍醐海阔。横吞众派之波。似夕魄之腾辉。夺小乘之星宿。如朝阳之孕彩。破外道之昏蒙。犹贫法财之人。值大宝聚。若渴甘露之者。遇清凉池。为众生所敬之天。作菩萨真慈之父。抱膏肓之疾。逢善见之药王。迷险难之途。偶明达之良导。久居闇室。忽临宝炬之光明。常处裸形。顿受天衣之妙服。”；
这才是大禅师的手笔.你不上当都不行。
}
[*Footnote: We very often hear complaints of theshallowness of the present age， and of thedecay of profound science. But I do not think that those which rest upon asecure foundation， such as mathematics， physical science， etc.， in the least deserve this reproach， butthat they rather maintain their ancient fame， and inthe latter case， indeed， farsurpass it. The same would be the case with the other kinds of cognition， if their principles were but firmly established. In the absence ofthis security， indifference，doubt， and finally， severe
criticism are rather signs of a profound habit ofthought. Our age is the age of criticism，to which everything must be subjected. The sacredness of religion， and the authority of legislation， are bymany regarded as grounds of exemption from the examination of this tribunal. But， if they on they are exempted， they becomethe subjects of just suspicion， and cannot lay claim tosincere respect， which reason accords only to thatwhich has stood the test of a free and public examination.]
[*脚注:对于这个时代思维方式的肤浅和彻底科学研究的沦落，我们经常听到相关的抱怨。但是，有些科学，根基牢固，如数学和物理学等，我看不出，这些科学，有丝毫值得如此责备之处，相反，它们维护了其古老的荣誉，在物理学中，甚至超过以往。对于其它种类的认识学科，也是一样，只要它们的道理，坚不可摧。在这个安全没有做到之前，冷漠、怀疑、以及最后的严格的鉴定，反倒是思维具有深刻广大习惯的标志。我们的时代，是真正鉴定的时代，一切都必须接受鉴定。宗教想要凭借其神圣性，立法想要凭借其权威性，以逃脱这个法庭的检查。但是，如果它们被豁免的话，那么，它们就会变成怀疑的对象，无法要求别人真正的尊重；只有那些经受得住理性的自由地和公开地检查的事物，才能得到理性的尊重。]
邓本：
因此，想要对这样一些研究故意装作无所谓的态度是徒劳的，这种研究的对象对于人类的本性来说不可能是无所谓的。上述那些伪称的冷淡主义者也是这样，不论他们如何想通过改换学院语言而以大众化的口吻来伪装自己，只要他们在任何地方想到某物，他们就不可避免地退回到他们曾装作极为鄙视的那些形而上学主张上去。然而，这种在一切科学繁盛的中心发生并恰好针对着这些科学的无所谓态度——这些科学的知识一当它们能够被拥有，人们就无论如何也不会对之有丝毫的放弃——毕竟是一种值得注意和深思的现象。这种态度显然不是思想轻浮的产物，而是这个时代的成熟的判断力①的结果，这个时代不能够再被虚假的知识拖后腿了，它是对理性的吁求，要求它重新接过它的一切任务中最困难的那件任务，即自我认识的任务，并委任一个法庭，这个法庭能够受理理性的合法性保障的请求，相反，对于一切无根据的非分要求，不是通过强制命令，而是能按照理性的永恒不变的法则来处理，而这个法庭不是别的，正是纯粹理性的批判。
① 人们时常听到抱怨当代思维方式的肤浅和彻底科学研究的沦落。但我看不出那些根基牢固的科学如数学和物理学等等有丝毫值得如此责备的地方，相反，它们维护了彻底性的这种古老的荣誉，而在物理学中甚至超过以往。而现在，正是同一个彻底精神也将在另一些知识类型中表明其作用，只要我们首先留意对它们的原则加以校正。在缺乏这种校正的情况下，冷淡、怀疑，最后是严格的批判，反倒是彻底的思维方式的证据。我们的时代是真正的批判时代，一切都必须经受批判。通常．宗教凭借其神圣性，而立法凭借其权成，想要逃脱批判。但这样一来，它们就激起了对自身的正当的怀疑，并无法要求别人不加伪饰的敬重，理性只会把这种敬重给予那经受得住它的自由公开的检验的事物。——康德
评：
邓本太硬。

[1]
I do not mean by this a criticism of books and systems, but ofthe faculty of reason in general, touching that whole class of knowledge whichit may strive after, unassisted by experience. This must decide the question ofthe possibility or impossibility of metaphysic in general, and thedetermination of its sources, its extent, and its limits — and all thisaccording to fixed principles.
我所说的这个鉴定，并不是指对某些书或系统的鉴定，而是对一般理性能力的鉴定，这是就某些认识而言的，对于所有这种认识，理性努力在没有经验的帮助下，达到对它们的认识。这个鉴定，将规定一般形而上学的可能性或不可能性的问题，及这门科学的源泉、扩展和界限等；所有这一切，都依据的是确定的道理。
[2]
I do not mean by this a criticism of books and systems， but a critical inquiry into the faculty of reason， with reference to the cognitions to which it strives to attain without the aid of experience； in other words， the solution ofthe question regarding the possibility or impossibility of metaphysics， and the determination of the origin， as wellas of the extent and limits of this science. All this must be done on the basisof principles.
我这里所说的，不是对某些书或系统的鉴定，而是对理性能力的鉴定性的探寻，这是就某些认识而言的，对于所有这种认识，理性努力在无需经验的帮助的前提下，达到对它们的认识；换句话说，它将解决，形而上学的可能性和不可能性的问题，以及这门科学的起源、范围和界限等的规定。所有这些，都应该是在某些道理的基础上进行的。
邓本：
但我所理解的纯粹理性批判，不是对某些书或体系的批判，而是对一般理性能力的批判，是就一切可以独立于任何经验而追求的知识来说的，因而是对一般形而上学的可能性和不可能性进行裁决，对它的根源、范围和界限加以规定，但这一切都是出自原则。
评：
从这段话看，翻成鉴定，比批判好。

[1]
This, the only way that was left, I have followed, and Iflatter myself that I have thus removed all those errors which have hithertobrought reason, whenever it was unassisted by experience, into conflict withitself. I have not evaded its questions by pleading the insufficiency of humanreason, but I have classified them according to principles, and, after showingthe point where reason begins to misunderstand itself, solved themsatisfactorily. It is true that the answer of those questions is not such as adogma-enamoured curiosity might wish for, for such curiosity could not havebeen satisfied except by juggling tricks in which I am no adept. But this wasnot the intention of the natural destiny of our reason, and it became the dutyof philosophy to remove the deception which arose from a false interpretation,even though many a vaunted and cherished dream should vanish at the same time. Inthis work I have chiefly aimed at Edition:current; Page: [xxi] completeness, and I venture to maintain that thereought not to be one single metaphysical problem that has not been solved here,or to the solution of which the key at least has not been supplied. In factPure Reason is so perfect a unity that, if its principle should proveinsufficient to answer any one of the many questions started by its verynature, one might throw it away altogether, as insufficient to answer the otherquestions with perfect certainty.
我现在踏上的这条到路，是唯一留下的路；迄今为止，有些错误，在理性没有经验支持的地方，可以让理性，陷入自相矛盾；我敢自诩，通过这种方式，我已经消除了所有这些错误。对于理性的这些问题，我并没有借口人类理性的无能，而回避它们，相反，我是依据道理，把它们分类，指出理性在何处开始误解自己，然后，把它们满意地解决了。确实，对这些问题的回答，不像一个教条迷恋型的好奇者所希望的那样，因为，对于这种好奇者，只有通过变戏法的方式，才能使其满足，但对此，我并不在行。但是，我们理性的自然命运，并不打算做此事，于是，哲学的责任，就是移除由错误的解读所引起的欺骗，尽管很多正在被吹嘘的、和被憧憬的黄粱美梦，同时也会烟消云散。在这项工作中，我主要瞄准的是完整性，我敢说，没有任何一个形而上学的问题，在这里没有得到解决，或者至少，其解决方案的钥匙，没有被提供。事实上，纯粹理性，是一个如此完美的同一体，以至于对于任何一个起始于其本性中的问题，如果它的道理，被证明不足以回答的话，那么，人们就可以彻底抛弃它，因为，十分确定地回答其它问题，它已经做不到了。
[2]
This path--the only one now remaining--has been enteredupon by me； and I flatter myself that I have， in this way， discovered the cause of—and consequentlythe mode of removing--all the errors which have hitherto set reason at variancewith itself， in the sphere of non-empirical thought. Ihave not returned an evasive answer to the questions of reason， by alleging the inability and limitation of the faculties of the mind； I have， on the contrary， examined them completely in the light of principles， and， after having discovered the cause ofthe doubts and contradictions into which reason fell，have solved them to its perfect satisfaction. It is true， these questions have not been solved as dogmatism， in its vain fancies and desires， hadexpected； for it can only be satisfied by the exerciseof magical arts， and of these I have no knowledge. Butneither do these come within the compass of our mental powers； and it was the duty of philosophy to destroy the illusions which hadtheir origin in misconceptions， whatever darling hopesand valued expectations may be ruined by its explanations. My chief aim in thiswork has been thoroughness； and I make bold to say thatthere is not a single metaphysical problem that does not find its solution， or at least the key to its solution， here.Pure reason is a perfect unity； and therefore， if the principle presented by it prove to be insufficient for thesolution of even a single one of those questions to which the very nature ofreason gives birth， we must reject it， as we could not be perfectly certain of its sufficiency in the caseof the others.
我现在踏上的这条道路，是惟一留下的路；在非经验性思维的领域，迄今为止，有些错误，会使理性陷入自相矛盾，我敢自诩，以这种方式，我找到了错误的原因，同时也找到了消除错误的模式。对于理性的这些问题，我不是借口人类心灵能力的无能和限制，而加以回避，从而给出一个含含糊糊的答案；相反，我是在道理的指导下，对它们进行彻底的检查，发现使理性陷入怀疑和矛盾的原因，然后完美地解决了它们，从而使理性得到完全满意。那些独断论者们，总是处于徒然的假想和期望中，而这些问题的解决，确实与他们的期望，并不一样；他们的那种期望，只能通过变戏法的练习，才能得到满足，对此我并不在行。但这两者，都非我们精神力量的本意；哲学的任务，一直就是清除由误解所产生的幻相，不论多少热切的期望和高度的期待，同时也会被摧毁。我在这项工作中的主要目标，是完整性；我敢说，形而上学的所有问题，都得到了解决方案，或者说至少都得到了解决方案的钥匙。纯粹理性是一个完美的同一体。所以，对于理性的本性所提出的所有问题，其中哪怕有一个，是纯粹理性所提供的道理不足以充分回答的，那么，我们就必须抛弃它，因为我们不知道对于其它问题，是否也会如此。
邓本：
现在我走上了这条惟一留下尚未勘查的道路，我自认为在这条道路上，我找到了迄今使理性在摆脱经验的运用中与自身相分裂的一一切谬误得以消除的办法：对于理性的这些问题，我不是例如通过借口人类理性的无能而加以回避，而是根据原则将它们完备地详细开列出来，并在把理性对它自己的误解之点揭示出来之后，对这些问题进行使理性完全满意的解决。虽然对那些问题得出的回答根本不是像独断论的狂热的追求者们所可能期望的那样；因为这些人除了我所不在行的魔法的力量之外，没有什么能够，使他们满足。然而，这倒也并非我们理性的自然使命原来的意图；哲学的职责曾经是：消除由误解而产生的幻觉，哪怕与此同时还要去掉很多被高度评价和热爱的妄想。在这件工作中我把很大的关注放在了详尽性方面，我敢说，没有一个形而上学的问题在这里没有得到解决，或至少为其解决提供了钥匙。事实上，就连纯粹理性也是一个如此完善的统一体：只要它的原则哪怕在它凭自己的本性所提出的一切问题中的一个问题上是不充分的，人们就只好将这个原则抛弃，因为这样一来它也就无法胜任以完美的可靠性来处理任何其他问题了。

[1]
While I am saying this I fancy I observe in the face of myreaders an expression of indignation, mixed with contempt, at pretensionsapparently so self-glorious and extravagant; and yet they are in reality farmore moderate than those made by the writer of the commonest essay professingto prove the simple nature of the soul or the necessity of a first beginning ofthe world. For, while he pretends to extend human knowledge beyond the limitsof all possible experience, I confess most humbly that this is entirely beyondmy power. I mean only to treat of reason and its pure thinking, a knowledge ofwhich is not very far to seek, considering that it is to be found withinmyself. Common logic gives an instance how all the simple acts of reason can beenumerated completely and systematically. Only between the common logic and mywork there is this difference, that my question is, — what can we hope toachieve with reason, when all the material and assistance of experience istaken away?
当我这样说的时候，完全可以想象，面对这种如此明显过分的大言不惭，读者肯定是一脸的不以为然；要知道，有些最普遍的论文的作者，也宣称证明了灵魂的简单本性、或世界的最初开始的必然性，而事实上，我所讲的，与这些人的相比，要温和的多。因为，这些作者，自称把人类的认识，扩展到了所有可能经验的界限之外，对此，我只能极为谦卑地承认，这完全超过了我的能力。我的意思，是只处理理性和它的纯粹思维，这种认识，并不需要去远处寻找，在我自己这里，就可以找到。普遍的逻辑，提供了这样一个实例：即所有理性的简单活动，如何才能完全地、和系统性地被列举出来。只有在普遍逻辑和我的工作之间，才有这个区别，我的问题是：当所有经验的材料、和经验的支持都被去掉后，仅凭理性，我们究竟能有什么样的成就？
[2]
While I say this，I think I see upon the countenance of the reader signs of dissatisfactionmingled with contempt， when he hears declarations whichsound so boastful and extravagant； and yet they arebeyond comparison more moderate than those advanced by the commonest author of thecommonest philosophical programme， in which thedogmatist professes to demonstrate the simple nature of the soul， or the necessity of a primal being. Such a dogmatist promises toextend human knowledge beyond the limits of possible experience； while I humbly confess that this is completely beyond my power.Instead of any such attempt， I confine myself to theexamination of reason alone and its pure thought； and Ido not need to seek far for the sum-total of its cognition， because it has its seat in my own mind. Besides， common logic presents me with a complete and systematic catalogueof all the simple operations of reason； and it is mytask to answer the question how far reason can go， withoutthe material presented and the aid furnished by experience.
当我说这些的时候，可以猜想，读者脸上充满了轻蔑的不满神态，因为他听到了如此大言不惭和不谦虚的话语。然而，有些最普通的这些论文的作者，在其文章中，独断地妄称，可以演证诸如灵魂的单纯本性或世界的最初开端的必然性等问题；而我所说的，比起他们中任何一个来说，都要谦虚的多。一个这种独断论者，信誓旦旦地说，要把人类的知识，扩展到可能经验的范围之外，对此，我要谦卑地承认：这完全超出了我的能力。相反，我不做任何这种尝试，而是把自己限制在理性的检查及其纯粹思维的范围之内；我无需到远处，去寻找理性认识的总和，因为，在我的心灵中，就有它们的位置。另外，对于理性的所有简单的活动来说，普通逻辑，已经为我提供了它的完整和系统的目录；我的任务，则是回答，没有经验所提供的材料、及没有经验的帮助，理性能走多远。
{
希迁大师约公元700年，诞生于广东高要陈姓家之子。少时即聪明异常，后出家。一日因读东晋著名僧人僧肇所著《肇论》中的《涅槃无名论》:“夫至人空洞无象，而万物无非我造。会万物以成己者，其唯圣人乎!”而感叹曰：“圣人无己，靡所不己。法身无相，谁云自他?圆镜虚鉴于其间，万象体玄而自现。境智真一，孰为去来?”
}
邓本：
说到这里，我相信可以在读者脸上看出对于表面上似乎如此大言不惭和不谦虚的要求报以含有轻蔑的不满神态，然而，这些要求比起那些伪称要在其最普通的纲领中，证明例如灵魂的单纯本质或最初的世界开端的必然性的任何一个作者的要求来，还算是温和无比的。因为这种作者自告奋勇地想要把人类知识扩展到可能经验的一切范围之外，对此我谦卑地承认：这种事完全超出了我的能力，相反，我只想和理性本身及其纯粹思维打交道，对它的详尽的知识我不可以远离我自己去寻找，因为我在我自身中发现了它们，在这方面我甚至已经有普通逻辑作为例子，即逻辑的一切简单活动都可以完备而系统地列举出来；只是这里有一个问题，即如果我抽掉经验的一切素材和成分，我凭惜逻辑可以大致希望有多大的收获。
评：邓本最后一句“我抽掉经验的一切素材和成分”，费解。

[1]
So much with regard to the completeness in our laying hold ofevery single object, and the thoroughness in our laying hold of all objects, asthe material of our critical enquiries — a completeness and thoroughnessdetermined, not by a casual idea, but by the nature of our knowledge itself.
Besides this, certainty and clearness with regard to form aretwo essential demands that may very properly be addressed to an author whoventures on so slippery an undertaking.
对单个对象，要完整地掌握，对全体对象，要彻底地掌握，以作为我们鉴定所需的材料，这种完整性和彻底性，不是凭任意的想法而规定的，而是由我们认识本身的本性所规定的。
另外，就形式而言的确定性和清晰性，是两个最内在本质的要求，这个事业，非常困难，任何一人，如果敢于从事它的话，那么，向他提出这两个要求，都非常正当。
[2]
So much for the completeness and thoroughness necessary inthe execution of the present task. The aims set before us are not arbitrarilyproposed, but are imposed upon us by the nature of cognition itself.
The above remarks relate to the matter of ourcritical inquiry. As regards the form, there are two indispensable conditions ,which any onewho undertakes so difficult a task as that of a critique of pure reason, isbound to fulfil. These conditions are certitude and clearness.
要完成这个任务，对完整性和必要的详尽性的要求，非常巨大。我们面前的目标，并非任意设定的，而是由认识自身的本性，给我们规定的。
上面的说明，与我们的鉴定性探寻的质蕴有关。至于形式，有两个不可或缺的条件，任何想要做纯粹理性鉴定的人，都必须完全完成它们。这两个条件，就是确定性和清晰性。
邓本：
在达到每个目标方面注重完备性的同时，也注重在达到一切目标方面的详尽性，这些并非任意采取的决心，而是知识本身作为我们批判研究的题材的本性向我们提出的任务。
再就是确定性和明晰性这两项，这涉及到这门研究的形式，它们必须被看作人们对一个敢于做这样一种难以把握的工作的作者可以正当提出的基本要求。
评：

[1]
Secondly, as to clearness, the reader has a right to demand notonly what may be called logical or discursive clearness, which is based onconcepts, but also what may be called æsthetic or intuitive clearness producedby intuitions, i.e. by examples and concrete illustrations. With regard to theformer I have made ample provision. That Edition: current; Page: [xxiv] arose from the very nature of mypurpose, but it became at the same time the reason why I could not fullysatisfy the latter, if not absolute, yet very just claim. Nearly through thewhole of my work I have felt doubtful what to do. Examples and illustrationsseemed always to be necessary, and therefore found their way into the firstsketch of my work. But I soon perceived the magnitude of my task and the numberof objects I should have to treat; and, when I saw that even in their driestscholastic form they would considerably swell my book, I did not consider itexpedient to extend it still further through examples and illustrationsrequired for popular purposes only. This work can never satisfy the populartaste, and the few who know, do not require that help which, though it isalways welcome, yet might here have defeated its very purpose. The AbbéTerrasson1writes indeed that, if we measured the greatness of a book, not by the numberof its pages, but by the time we require for mastering it, many a book might besaid to be much shorter, if it were not so short. But, on the other hand, if weask how a complicated, yet in principle coherent whole of speculative thoughtcan best be rendered intelligible, we might be equally justified in saying thatmany a book would have been more intelligible, if it had not tried to be sovery intelligible. For the helps to clearness, though they may be missed2with regard to details, often distract with regard to the whole. The readerdoes not arrive quickly enough at a survey of the whole, because the bright coloursEdition: current; Page: [xxv] ofillustrations hide and distort the articulation and concatenation of the wholesystem, which, after all, if we want to judge of its unity and sufficiency, aremore important than anything else.
第二，至于清晰性，读者不仅有权要求，逻辑上或推论上的清晰性，这是基于概念的，而且，有权要求美学的或观照的清晰性，这是由观照产生的，也就是说，是由例子和具体说明产生的。对于前者，我已经做了充分的准备。这正是产生于我的意图的本性之中，但同时，也变成了：为什么我不能满足后者的原因；后者的要求，即便不是绝对的，但毕竟也是公正的。几乎在我工作的整个过程中，对于究竟该怎么做，我都一直犹豫不决。例子和说明，似乎总是必要的，所以在最初的草稿中，也有其位置。但是，很快我就发现，我将要处理的任务，数量庞大，对象繁杂；当我看到，这些东西，即使用最枯燥的经院哲学的形式来表示，也足以使本书，无比膨胀；有些例子和说明，是为了满足大众化方面的要求，它们只会使本书更加臃肿，故不可取。本书这种工作，永远不可能满足大众的口味，而对于少数行家来说，虽然帮助总是受欢迎的，但如果主旨受到干扰的话，没有也罢。修道院长特拉松说过：“如果我们不是按照页数，而是按照掌握其内容所需要的时间，来判断一本书伟大与否的话，那么，关于很多书就可以这样说：如果它们以前不是这么短的话，那么现在，它们简直就是短的吓人了”。但是，另一方面，对于一个思辨思想的整体，它虽然很复杂，但尽管如此，却是依据道理而相互连贯的，如果我们要问，如何才能使它变的更易理解呢？那么，我们可以同样有权说：“很多书，如果不是因为打算变得很清晰而过于努力的话，则实际可能会更清晰些”。因为，清晰性的帮助，虽然在细节方面，可能会让人留恋，但从整体的角度来说，却可能会偏离主旨。通常，读者不可能很快地对全部内容有一个纵览，因为全部系统的关节和骨架，可能会被五颜六色的说明，遮住并扭曲了，而如果我们想判断它的同一体性和充分性的话，那么，这些关节和骨架，将比任何东西都重要。
[2]
As regards clearness， the reader has a right to demand， in the first place， discursive or logicalclearness， that is， on thebasis of conceptions， and，secondly， intuitive or aesthetic clearness， by means of intuitions， that is， by examples or other modes of illustration in concreto. I have donewhat I could for the first kind of intelligibility. This was essential to mypurpose； and it thus became the accidental cause of myinability to do complete justice to the second requirement. I have been almostalways at a loss， during the progress of this work， how to settle this question. Examples and illustrations alwaysappeared to me necessary， and，in the first sketch of the Critique， naturally fellinto their proper places. But I very soon became aware of the magnitude of mytask， and the numerous problems with which I should beengaged； and， as I perceivedthat this critical investigation would， even ifdelivered in the driest scholastic manner， be far frombeing brief， I found it unadvisable to enlarge it stillmore with examples and explanations， which arenecessary only from a popular point of view. I was induced to take this course fromthe consideration also that the present work is not intended for popular use， that those devoted to science do not require such helps， although they are always acceptable， andthat they would have materially interfered with my present purpose. AbbeTerrasson remarks with great justice that， if we estimatethe size of a work， not from the number of its pages， but from the time which we require to make ourselves master of it， it may be said of many a book --that it would be much shorter，if it were not so short. On theother hand， as regards the comprehensibility ofa system of speculative cognition， connected under asingle principle， we may say with equal justice: many abook would have been much clearer， if it had not beenintended to be so very clear. For explanations and examples， and other helps to intelligibility， aid usin the comprehension of parts， but they distract the attention， dissipate the mental power of the reader，and stand in the way of his forming a clear conception of the whole；as he cannot attain soon enough to a survey of the system， and the colouring and embellishments bestowed upon it prevent his observingits articulation or organization--which is the most important considerationwith him， when he comes to judge of its unity and stability.
至于清晰性，读者有权要求，首先，有凭惜概念的那种推理的或逻辑上的清晰性，其次，也可以要求有观照的或美学的（感性的）清晰性，这是凭借观照而形成的，亦即，凭借实例或其它具体的说明方式形成的。把第一种做到清晰易懂，我已尽力而为了。对于我的目的来说，这也是本质上很重要的；但正因为此，让我对于第二种要求，无法做到公正的满足。在本工作的进行中，如何解决这个问题，一直都让我很困惑。实例和说明，对我来说，似乎总是必要的，因此，在本鉴定最初的草稿中，也有其位置。但是，很快我就发现，我将要处理的那些课题，数量巨大，对象繁多，并觉得，这一切，就算是以最枯燥的经院的方式来陈述，就已经会使这本书无比庞大了，所以，我发现，尽管从大众的观点看，实例等是必要的，但是，如果这样做，会使本书变得更加膨胀的话，则不可取。尤其是，我倾向于认为，这本书决不会适合于大众的使用，而对于那些致力于科学的人来说，这种帮助，虽然总是可以接受，但却并非必需，并且，它们在这里，可能会影响当前的目标。修道院院长特拉松的评论很公道①：如果对一本书的篇幅，不是按页数、而是按人们理解它所需要的时间来衡量的话，那么，对有些书我们就可以说，如果它们以前不是这么短的话，那么现在，它们简直就是短的吓人了。另外，这个思辨认识的系统，是在一个单一的道理下连接起来的，就它的易懂性而言，我们可以同样公正地说：很多书，如果不是过于追求清晰的话，那么，它们可能会更清晰些。至于说明和例子，及其它有助于易懂性的手段，确实能够帮助我们理解局部，但往往会分散读者的精力，对于整体概念的形成，会构成障碍；当读者要了解一个系统的同一性和稳定性时，观察系统的组织结构，就是最重要的，太多的装饰，反倒会带来干扰，让他不能快速地纵览全局。
邓本：
最后，谈到清晰性，那么读者有权首先要求有凭惜概念的那种 推理的（逻辑的）清晰性，但然后也可以要求有凭借观照的直觉的感性的）清晰性．即凭借实例或其他具体说明的清晰性。对于前者我己给予了充分的注意。这涉及到我的意图的本质，但它也是种偶然的原因，使得我未能考虑这第二个虽然不是那么严格但毕竟是合理的要求。我在自己的工作进程中对于应如何处理这个问题几乎一直都是犹豫不决的。实例和说明在我看来总是必要的，因而实际上在最初构思时也附带给予了它们以适当的地位。但我马上看出我将要处理的那些课题之巨大和对象之繁多，并觉得这一切单是以枯燥的、纯粹经院的方式来陈述就已经会使这本书够庞大的了，所以我感到用那些仅仅是为了通俗化的目的而必要的实例和说明来使这本书变得更加膨胀是不可取的，尤其是，这本书决不会适合于大众的使用，而真正的科学内行又并不那么迫切需要这样一种方便，尽管这种方便总是令人舒服的，但在这里甚至可能引出某种与目的相连背的结果来。虽然修道院院长特拉松尝云①：如果对一本书的篇幅不是按页数、而是按人们理解它所需要的时间来衡量的话，那么对有些书我们就可以说，如果它不是这么短的话，它将会更加短得多。②但另一方面，如果我们把目的放在对宽泛但却结合于一条原则中的那个思辨知识总体的可理解性之上，那么我们就会有同样的正当理由说：有些书，如果它并不想说得如此明晰的话，它就会更加明晰得多。这是因为清晰性的辅助手段虽然在部分中有效③，但在整体中往往分散了，这样它们就不能足够快地让读者达到对整体的综观，倒是用它们所有那些明亮的色彩贴在体系的结合部或骨架上，使它们面目垒非了，而为了能对这个体系的统一性和杰出之处下判断，最关键的却是这种骨架。
① 康德引证的是特拉松院长的《哲学，按其对精神与道德的一切对象的一般影响来看》一书（1 754年），1762年德文版第117而。——据英译本
② 意为：如果篇幅长一点，就更容易理解一些。——译者
③ “有效( helfer)”原文为“缺乏(fehlen)”，含义不明，茁据罗森克朗茨（Rosenkranz）校改。——据德文编者
评：

[1]
Such a system of pure (speculative) reason I hope myself toproduce under the title of ‘Metaphysic of Nature.’ It will not be half solarge, yet infinitely richer than this Critique of Pure Reason, which has,first of all, to discover its source, nay, the conditions of its possibility, Edition: current; Page: [xxvi] infact, to clear and level a soil quite overgrown with weeds. Here I expect frommy readers the patience and impartiality of a judge, there the goodwill and aidof a fellow-worker. For however completely all the principles of the systemhave been propounded in my Critique, the completeness of the whole systemrequires also that no derivative concepts should be omitted, such as cannot befound out by an estimate a priori, but have to be discovered step bystep. There the synthesis of concepts has been exhausted, here it will berequisite to do the same for their analysis, a task which is easy and anamusement rather than a labour.
这样一个纯粹（思辨）理性的系统，我希望，是在“自然的形而上学”这个标题下产生。它与这个纯粹理性鉴定相比，篇幅尚不及一半，但内容却要丰富的多；因为此鉴定，首先，应该发现它的源泉，甚至他的可能性的条件，事实上，对于一个荒草丛生的地方，首先要除草和平整土地。在这里，我希望读者们，有着法官般的耐心和公正；而在那里，所期待的，则是助手般的善意和支持。因为，我在鉴定中，已经提出了系统的所有道理，但是，不论这种提出是多么地完整，全部系统的完整性，还是会要求，任何导出的概念，都没被忽略，例如那些不能天生地估计出来、而只能是逐步地去发现的概念。在那里，概念的综合，已被穷尽了；那么，在这里，对概念的分析也要穷尽，就是必须的了，好在这是一个容易的任务，与其说是劳作，不如说是娱乐。
I have only a few words to add with respect to the printing ofmy book. As the beginning had been delayed, I was not able to see the cleansheets of more than about half of it. I now find some misprints, though they donot spoil the sense, except on p. 379, line 4 from below, where specificshould be used instead of sceptic. The antinomy of pure reason from p.425 to p. 461 has been arranged in a tabular form, so that all that belongs tothe thesis stands on the left, what belongs to the antithesis on the rightside. I did this in order that thesis and antithesis might be more easilycompared.
关于书的印刷，还有几句说明。由于开始已经延迟了，所以大约连校样的一半，我都看不到。现在，我找到一些印刷错误，虽然它们并没有把原意搞混，除了在379页，从下数第4行，那里应该用“特殊”而不是“怀疑”。从425页到461页，纯粹理性的二律背反，已经按列表的形式排列了。属于正论的在左，属于反论的在右，我之所以这样做，是为了让正论和反论，更容易地比较。
[2]
Such a system of pure speculative reason I hope to beable to publish under the title of Metaphysic ofNature*. The content of this work (whichwill not be half so long) will be very much richer than that of the presentCritique， which has to discover the sourcesof this cognition and expose the conditions of its possibility， and at the same time to clear and level a fit foundation for thescientific edifice. In the present work， I look for thepatient hearing and the impartiality of a judge； in the other， for the good-will and assistance of a co-labourer. For， however complete the list ofprinciples for this system may be in the Critique， thecorrectness of the system requires that no deduced conceptions should be absent.These cannot be presented a priori，but must be gradually discovered； and， while the synthesis of conceptions has been fully exhausted in the Critique， it is necessary that， in theproposed work， the same should be the case with their analysis. But thiswill be rather an amusement than a labour.
这样一种纯粹思辨理性的系统，我希望，能够按照自然的形而上学这个名称发布。这项工作的内容（目前尚未完成一半），将比现在鉴定的内容，要丰富的多，这个鉴定，将发现认识能力之源，并揭示其可能（发生）的条件，同时，为这门科学大厦的建立，清理并打下一个合理的基础。在当前的工作中，我希望读者们，拥有足够的耐心来阅读，同时，也具有一个法官的公正；而在那里的工作中，则期待的是同事般的善意和协助。因为，这个系统的道理，在本鉴定中被列出，无论此道理的列表是多么的完整，系统的正确性都要求：没有任何推出的概念可以缺席。这些概念，不可能天生地被提供，而只能逐步地被发现；当在本鉴定中，概念的综合已经被完全穷尽后，那么，在未来的工作中，对它们的分析，就是同样必要的。这一切将是轻松的，与其说是工作，不如说是消遣。
[*Footnote: In contradistinction to the Metaphysic of Ethics. This work was never published.]
[*脚注：与伦理的形而上学相对。这个工作从来没有发布过。]
邓本：
我希望这样一种纯粹的（思辨的）理性的体系在自然的形而上学这个标题下被提供出来，这个体系比起这里的批判来虽然篇幅还不及一半，但却具有无可比拟地更为丰富的内容。这个批判必须首先摆明形而上学之可能性的源泉和条件，并清理和平整全 部杂草丛生的地基。在这里我期待读者的是一位法官的耐心和不偏不倚，但在那里则是一位帮手的襄助②和支持；因为，若是把该体系的所有原则也都完全在批判中陈述出来，属于该体系本身的详尽性的毕竟还有：不要缺乏任何派生出来的概念，这些概念不能先天地凭跳跃产生出来，而必须逐步逐步地去探寻，同样，由于在那里概念的垒部综台已被穷尽了，所以在这里就额外要求在分析方面也做到这样，这一切将是轻松的，与其说是工作，还不如说是消遣。
我只是对印刷方面还有一些要说明的。由于开印受到一些延迟，我只能看到大约一半的校样，在其中我虽然发现了一些印刷错误，但还不至于搞混意思，只除了一个地方，即第379页倒数第4行上，①怀疑的应改为特殊的。纯粹理性的二律背反，从第425-461页，都是用这样的版武编排的，即凡是属于正题的都排在左边，凡是属于反题的别排在右边。我之所以要这样安排，是便于更容易将命题和对立命题相互加以比较。
① 指第一版页码。——德文编者
②原文为Willhigkeit，德文无该词，应为Willfahrigl：eit（襄助）之误，兹据费利克斯-迈纳出版社1919年版改正。——译者
评：