element which is manifestly existent in the sum…total of all
conditions… I am not entitled to conclude that its existence is
therefore conditioned； just as I am not entitled to affirm； in a
hypothetical syllogism； that where a certain condition does not
exist （in the present； pleteness； as far as pure conceptions are
concerned）； the conditioned does not exist either。 On the contrary； we
are free to consider all limited beings as likewise unconditionally
necessary； although we are unable to infer this from the general
conception which we have of them。 Thus conducted； this argument is
incapable of giving us the least notion of the properties of a
necessary being； and must be in every respect without result。
This argument continues； however； to possess a weight and an
authority； which； in spite of its objective insufficiency； it has
never been divested of。 For； granting that certain responsibilities
lie upon us； which； as based on the ideas of reason； deserve to be
respected and submitted to； although they are incapable of a real or
practical application to our nature； or； in other words； would be
responsibilities without motives； except upon the supposition of a
Supreme Being to give effect and influence to the practical laws： in
such a case we should be bound to obey our conceptions； which；
although objectively insufficient； do； according to the standard of
reason； preponderate over and are superior to any claims that may be
advanced from any other quarter。 The equilibrium of doubt would in
this case be destroyed by a practical addition； indeed； Reason would
be pelled to condemn herself； if she refused to ply with the
demands of the judgement； no superior to which we know… however
defective her understanding of the grounds of these demands might be。
This argument； although in fact transcendental； inasmuch as it rests
upon the intrinsic insufficiency of the contingent； is so simple and
natural； that the monest understanding can appreciate its value。 We
see things around us change； arise； and pass away； they； or their
condition； must therefore have a cause。 The same demand must again
be made of the cause itself… as a datum of experience。 Now it is
natural that we should place the highest causality just where we place
supreme causality； in that being； which contains the conditions of all
possible effects； and the conception of which is so simple as that
of an all…embracing reality。 This highest cause； then； we regard as
absolutely necessary； because we find it absolutely necessary to
rise to it； and do not discover any reason for proceeding beyond it。
Thus； among all nations； through the darkest polytheism glimmer some
faint sparks of monotheism； to which these idolaters have been led；
not from reflection and profound thought； but by the study and natural
progress of the mon understanding。
There are only three modes of proving the existence of a Deity； on
the grounds of speculative reason。
All the paths conducting to this end begin either from determinate
experience and the peculiar constitution of the world of sense； and
rise； according to the laws of causality； from it to the highest cause
existing apart from the world… or from a purely indeterminate
experience； that is； some empirical existence… or abstraction is
made of all experience； and the existence of a supreme cause is
concluded from a priori conceptions alone。 The first is the
physicotheological argument； the second the cosmological； the third
the ontological。 More there are not； and more there cannot be。
I shall show it is as unsuccessful on the one path… the empirical…
as on the other… the transcendental… and that it stretches its wings
in vain； to soar beyond the world of sense by the mere might of
speculative thought。 As regards the order in which we must discuss
those arguments； it will be exactly the reverse of that in which
reason； in the progress of its development； attains to them… the order
in which they are placed above。 For it will be made manifest to the
reader that； although experience presents the occasion and the
starting…point； it is the transcendental idea of reason which guides
it in its pilgrimage and is the goal of all its struggles。 I shall
therefore begin with an examination of the transcendental argument；
and afterwards inquire what additional strength has accrued to this
mode of proof from the addition of the empirical element。
SECTION IV。 Of the Impossibility of an Ontological Proof of
the Existence of God。
It is evident from what has been said that the conception of an
absolutely necessary being is a mere idea； the objective reality of
which is far from being established by the mere fact that it is a need
of reason。 On the contrary； this idea serves merely to indicate a
certain unattainable perfection； and rather limits the operations
than； by the presentation of new objects； extends the sphere of the
understanding。 But a strange anomaly meets us at the very threshold；
for the inference from a given existence in general to an absolutely
necessary existence seems to be correct and unavoidable； while the
conditions of the understanding refuse to aid us in forming any
conception of such a being。
Philosophers have always talked of an absolutely necessary being；
and have nevertheless declined to take the trouble of conceiving
whether… and how… a being of this nature is even cogitable； not to
mention that its existence is actually demonstrable。 A verbal
definition of the conception is certainly easy enough： it is something
the non…existence of which is impossible。 But does this definition
throw any light upon the conditions which render it impossible to
cogitate the non…existence of a thing… conditions which we wish to
ascertain； that we may discover whether we think anything in the
conception of such a being or not？ For the mere fact that I throw
away； by means of the word unconditioned； all the conditions which the
understanding habitually requires in order to regard anything as
necessary； is very far from making clear whether by means of the
conception of the unconditionally necessary I think of something； or
really of nothing at all。
Nay； more； this chance…conception； now bee so current； many
have endeavoured to explain by examples which seemed to render any
inquiries regarding its intelligibility quite needless。 Every
geometrical proposition… a triangle has three angles… it was said；
is absolutely necessary； and thus people talked of an object which lay
out of the sphere of our understanding as if it were perfectly plain
what the conception of such a being meant。
All the examples adduced have been drawn； without exception； from
judgements； and not from things。 But the unconditioned necessity of
a judgement does not form the absolute necessity of a thing。 On the
contrary； the absolute necessity of a judgement is only a
conditioned necessity of a thing； or of the predicate in a
judgement。 The proposition above…mentioned does not enounce that three
angles necessarily exist； but； upon condition that a triangle
exists； three angles must necessarily exist… in it。 And thus this
logical necessity has been the source of the greatest delusions。
Having formed an a priori conception of a thing； the content of
which was made to embrace existence； we believed ourselves safe in
concluding that； because existence belongs necessarily to the object
of the conception （that is； under the condition of my positing this
thing as given）； the existence of the thing is also posited
necessarily； and that it is therefore absolutely necessary… merely
because its existence has been cogitated in the conception。
If； in an identical judgement； I annihilate the predicate in
thought； and retain the subject； a contradiction is the result； and
hence I say； the former belongs necessarily to the latter。 But if I
suppress both subject and predicate in thought； no contradiction
arises； for there is nothing at all； and therefore no means of forming
a contradiction。 To suppose the existence of a triangle and not that
of its three angles； is self…contradictory； but to suppose the
non…existence of both triangle and angles is per