[17] For a fuller discussion of the subject see Chh. IV and VI.
[18] i. e. as not having a place in the reality which, as we think, exists independently of the mind.
[19] Cf. Ch. IV. This distinction should of course have been examined by one whose aim it was to determine how far our knowledge can reach.
[20] For the self-evidence of mathematics to Kant compare B. 120, M. 73 and B. 200, M. 121.
[21] This is stated B. 200, M. 121. It is also implied B. 122, M. 75, B. 263-4, M. 160, and by the argument of the Analytic generally.
[22] This appears to be the real cause of the difference of treatment, though it is not the reason assigned by Kant himself, cf. B. 120, M. 73-4.
[23] His remarks about pure natural science in B. 20, M. 13 and Prol. § 4 sub fin., do not represent the normal attitude of the Critique.