as means to purposes, and that their possibility is only completely intelligible through this kind of causality — for this we have absolutely no ground in the universal Idea of nature, as the complex of the objects of sense.

In the above-mentioned case, the representation of things, because it is something in ourselves, can be quite well thought a priori as suitable and useful for the internally purposive determination of our cognitive faculties; but that purposes, which neither are our own nor belong to nature (for we do not regard nature as an intelligent being), could or should constitute a particular kind of causality, at least a quite special conformity to law, — this we have absolutely no a priori reason for presuming. Yet more, experience itself cannot prove to us the actuality of