逻辑学与科学理论（二） (5-3)

3. I. Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, tr. P. Guyer and A. Wood (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 205 [A68/B93]. [Ibid., 408. In fact, the definitions cited by Cavaillès are not found in this exact form in the Logic, but rather in the Critique of Pure Reason: Transcendental Analytic, Book 1, Chapter 1, First Section—GC/CE.]

4. Kant, ‘The Jäsche Logic’, 529 [Ibid., 333–GC/CE.]

5. G.W.F. Hegel, The Science of Logic, tr., ed. G. Di Giovanni (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 524, Di Giovanni’s translation of this passage reads: ‘Such a content as is here spoken of [in Kant’s philosophy], one without the concept, is something void of concept and therefore void of essence.’ [Greater Logic: Introduction to the third book, ‘On the Concept in General’, ed. Lasson, vol. II (IV of the Oeuvres complètes), 232. We owe the communication of this reference to the kindness of André Kaan—GC/CE.]

6. Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, 195. [Transcendental Logic, Introduction II, Kants Werke, ed. Cassirer, vol. III, 82—GC/CE.]

7. Kant, ‘The Jäsche Logic’, 528. [Logik, Cassirer, vol. VIII, 332—GC/CE.]

8. Ibid., 534. [Ibid., 339—GC/CE.]

9. Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, 210. [Transcendental Analytic, bk. I, chap. I. sec. 3, § 10 (2d. ed., 1787). (Cassirer, vol. III, 96)—GC/CE.]

10. Ibid., 211. [Ibid., 97—GC/CE.]

11. Ibid., 250. [bk. I., chap. 2, sec. 2, § 17 (in fine). (Kants Werke, ed. Cassirer, vol. III, 119)—GC/CE.]

数学联邦政治世界观提示您：看后求收藏（同人小说网http://tongren.me），接着再看更方便。