| |
| | A. FIRST ANALOGY. |
 | | By it alone we could, therefore, never determine whether this manifold, as an object of experience, is coexistent or successive, unless it had for a foundation something fixed and permanent, of the existence of which all succession and coexistence are nothing but so many modes (modi of time). |
 | | Only in the permanent, then, are relations of time possible (for simultaneity and succession are the only relations in time); that is to say, the permanent is the substratum of our empirical representation of time itself, in which alone all determination of time is possible. |
 | | If we were to attribute succession to time itself, we should be obliged to cogitate another time, in which this succession would be possible. |
| www.rbjones.com /rbjpub/philos/classics/kant/kant058.htm (1377 words) |
|