But as regards time future, which is not the condition of arriving at the present, in order to conceive it; it is quite indifferent whether we consider future time as ceasing at some point, or as prolonging itself to infinity.Take, for example, the series m, n, o, in which n is given as conditioned in relation to m, but at the same time as the condition of o, and let the series proceed upwards from the conditioned n to m (l, k, i, etc.), and also downwards from the condition n to the conditioned o (p, q, r, etc.)- I must presuppose the former series, to be able to consider n as given, and n is according to reason (the totality of conditions) possible only by means of that series.But its possibility does not rest on the following series o, p, q, r, which for this reason cannot be regarded as given, but only as capable of being given (dabilis).
I shall term the synthesis of the series on the side of the conditions- from that nearest to the given phenomenon up to the more remote- regressive; that which proceeds on the side of the conditioned, from the immediate consequence to the more remote, Ishall call the progressive synthesis.The former proceeds in antecedentia, the latter in consequentia.The cosmological ideas are therefore occupied with the totality of the regressive synthesis, and proceed in antecedentia, not in consequentia.When the latter takes place, it is an arbitrary and not a necessary problem of pure reason; for we require, for the complete understanding of what is given in a phenomenon, not the consequences which succeed, but the grounds or principles which precede.
In order to construct the table of ideas in correspondence with the table of categories, we take first the two primitive quanta of all our intuitions, time and space.Time is in itself a series (and the formal condition of all series), and hence, in relation to a given present, we must distinguish a priori in it the antecedentia as conditions (time past) from the consequentia (time future).
Consequently, the transcendental idea of the absolute totality of the series of the conditions of a given conditioned, relates merely to all past time.According to the idea of reason, the whole past time, as the condition of the given moment, is necessarily cogitated as given.But, as regards space, there exists in it no distinction between progressus and regressus; for it is an aggregate and not a series- its parts existing together at the same time.I can consider a given point of time in relation to past time only as conditioned, because this given moment comes into existence only through the past time rather through the passing of the preceding time.But as the parts of space are not subordinated, but co-ordinated to each other, one part cannot be the condition of the possibility of the other;and space is not in itself, like time, a series.But the synthesis of the manifold parts of space- (the syntheses whereby we apprehend space)- is nevertheless successive; it takes place, therefore, in time, and contains a series.And as in this series of aggregated spaces (for example, the feet in a rood), beginning with a given portion of space, those which continue to be annexed form the condition of the limits of the former- the measurement of a space must also be regarded as a synthesis of the series of the conditions of a given conditioned.It differs, however, in this respect from that of time, that the side of the conditioned is not in itself distinguishable from the side of the condition; and, consequently, regressus and progressus in space seem to be identical.But, inasmuch as one part of space is not given, but only limited, by and through another, we must also consider every limited space as conditioned, in so far as it presupposes some other space as the condition of its limitation, and so on.As regards limitation, therefore, our procedure in space is also a regressus, and the transcendental idea of the absolute totality of the synthesis in a series of conditions applies to space also; and I am entitled to demand the absolute totality of the phenomenal synthesis in space as well as in time.Whether my demand can be satisfied is a question to be answered in the sequel.
Secondly, the real in space- that is, matter- is conditioned.Its internal conditions are its parts, and the parts of parts its remote conditions; so that in this case we find a regressive synthesis, the absolute totality of which is a demand of reason.But this cannot be obtained otherwise than by a complete division of parts, whereby the real in matter becomes either nothing or that which is not matter, that is to say, the simple.Consequently we find here also a series of conditions and a progress to the unconditioned.
Thirdly, as regards the categories of a real relation between phenomena, the category of substance and its accidents is not suitable for the formation of a transcendental idea; that is to say, reason has no ground, in regard to it, to proceed regressively with conditions.
