IDEALITY AND REALITY. 347 increases, while in itself it is and remains of some fixed " size. And this use of words is perfectly correct, in the' physical or empirical sense of " in itself "; but in the tran- scendental sense the raindrops, also, together with their form and size, are themselves mere phenomena, the " in itself" of which remains entirely unknown to us. Kant, moreover, does not wish to see the subjectivity of the forms of intuition placed on a level with the subjec- tivity of sensations or explained by this, though he accepts it as a fact long established. The sensations of color, of tone, of temperature are, no doubt, like the representation of space in that they belong only to the subjective consti- tution of the sensibility, and can be attributed to objects only in relation to our senses. But the great difference between the two is that these sense qualities may be different in different persons (the color of the rose may seem different to each eye), or may fail to harmonize with any human sense ; that they are not a priori in the same strict sense as space and time, and consequently afford no knowledge of the objects of possible experience independ- ently of perception ; and that they are connected with the phenomenon only as the contingently added effects of a particular organization, while space, as the condition of external objects, necessarily belongs to the phenomenon or intuition of them. // is through space alone that it is possible for things to be external objects for us. The subjec- tivity of sensation is individual, while that of space and time is general or universal to mankind ; the former is empirical, individually different, and contingent, the latter a priori and necessary. Space alone, not sensation, is a conditio sine qua non of external perception. Space and time are the sole a priori elements of the sensibility ; all other sensuous concepts, even motion and change, presup- pose perception ; the movable in space and the successiorv,' of properties in an existing thing are empirical data. In confirmation of the theory that all objects of the senses are mere phenomena, the fact is adduced that (with the exception of the will and the feelings, which are not cognitions) nothing is giv en us through the sense s but re- presentations of relations, while a thing in itself cannot be
