Oyonale - 3D art and graphic experiments

ThinkSpam

Consequently phenomena in the world are conditionally limited, but the world itself is not limited, either conditionally or unconditionally. | |

For this reason, and because neither the world nor the cosmical series of conditions to a given conditioned can be completely given, our conception of the cosmical quantity is given only in and through the regress and not prior to it--in a collective intuition. | |

But the regress itself is really nothing more than the determining of the cosmical quantity, and cannot therefore give us any determined conception of it--still less a conception of a quantity which is, in relation to a certain standard, infinite. | |

The regress does not, therefore, proceed to infinity (an infinity given), but only to an indefinite extent, for or the of presenting to us a quantity--realized only in and through the regress itself. | |

II. Solution of the Cosmological Idea of the Totality of the Division of a Whole given in Intuition. | |

When I divide a whole which is given in intuition, I proceed from a conditioned to its conditions. | |

The division of the parts of the whole (subdivisio or decompositio) is a regress in the series of these conditions. | |

The absolute totality of this series would be actually attained and given to the mind, if the regress could arrive at simple parts. | |

But if all the parts in a continuous decomposition are themselves divisible, the division, that is to say, the regress, proceeds from the conditioned to its conditions in infinitum; because the conditions (the parts) are themselves contained in the conditioned, and, as the latter is given in a limited intuition, the former are all given along with it. | |

This regress cannot, therefore, be called a regressus in indefinitum, as happened in the case of the preceding cosmological idea, the regress in which proceeded from the conditioned to the conditions not given contemporaneously and along with it, but discoverable only through the empirical regress. | |

We are not, however, entitled to affirm of a whole of this kind, which is divisible in infinitum, that it consists of an infinite number of parts. | |

For, although all the parts are contained in the intuition of the whole, the whole division is not contained therein. | |

The division is contained only in the progressing decomposition--in the regress itself, which is the condition of the possibility and actuality of the series. | |

Now, as this regress is infinite, all the members (parts) to which it attains must be contained in the given whole as an aggregate. | |

But the complete series of division is not contained therein. | |

For this series, being infinite in succession and always incomplete, cannot represent an infinite number of members, and still less a composition of these members into a whole. | |

To apply this remark to space. | |

Every limited part of space presented to intuition is a whole, the parts of which are always spaces--to whatever extent subdivided. | |

Every limited space is hence divisible to infinity. | |

Let us again apply the remark to an external phenomenon enclosed in limits, that is, a body. | |

The divisibility of a body rests upon the divisibility of space, which is the condition of the possibility of the body as an extended whole. |

Gilles Tran © 1993-2009 www.oyonale.com