在康德《纯粹理性批判》一书中,“先验对象”无疑是一个十分复杂的概念,甚至康德本人在运用它时也出现不少含混之处。“先验对象”在第一版“先验演绎”中被明确地提出来,但是在第二版中又奇怪地消失了。对此,很多研究者都给出了自己的解释。同时,“先验对象”与“本体”“物自身”等概念经常被康德放在一起讨论,三者之间究竟是怎样的关系?这又激发起研究者们的各种意见。笔者认为,我们可以从“双重意义”的视角分析“先验对象”:一种是在消极意义上,将“先验对象”理解为脱离感性直观而形成的纯粹知性对象,它只是可思维的;另一种是在积极意义上,“先验对象”是能够产生经验知识的先天的根据,它既是可思维的,也是可认识的。换句话说,在消极意义上,它和“本体”与“物自身”一样,发挥着限制知性逾越经验界限的作用;而在积极意义上,它是形成经验性知识的必要条件,是范畴具有客观有效性的依据。因此,就内容而言,它包含着后两个概念。与此同时,通过对这一概念的分析表明,两版演绎的区别其实并没有那么明显。 In Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, “transcendental object ” is undoubtedly a very complicated concept, and even Kant himself used a lot of ambiguities in it. “A priori object ” was explicitly stated in the first version of “a priori deduction ”, but weirdly disappeared in the second edition. In response, many researchers have given their own explanation. At the same time, such concepts as “a priori object ” and “ontology ” “object itself ” are often discussed together by Kant, what is the relationship between the three? This in turn stimulates the researchers Kind of opinion In the author’s opinion, we can analyze “transcendental object ” from the perspective of “double meaning ”: one is that in the negative sense, “transcendental object ” is understood as a purely intellectual object formed from sensual intuition , It is only thinkable; the other is that in the positive sense, “a priori object ” is a natural basis for the production of empirical knowledge, which is both knowable and recognizable. In other words, in the negative sense, it plays the role of limiting the bound of the experience of transgressorism, just as the “prophecy” and “the thing itself”; in the positive sense, it is a necessary condition for the formation of empirical knowledge , Is the basis for the category has the objective and effective. So, in terms of content, it contains the latter two concepts. At the same time, through the analysis of this concept shows that the difference between the two versions of interpretation is actually not so obvious.