康德"超絕演繹"的主旨直接關涉到可能經驗的構成。而對于并非經驗性的幾何學知識,康德卻欲言又止,定位不清,這就給詮釋者們帶來了極大的困難。其第二版B161上的注釋便是極端的一例。為此我們須先跳出相關爭論,從整體視野上探明康德心目中幾何學的意指與其對象之所是,并在明確知性的綜合與綜合統一運作的結構之前提下澄清幾何學概念構造的機理,特別是揭示空間直觀形式的連續性本質。在完成這一主要的、可說是"正本清源的"工作之后,前述注釋之謎也就迎刃而解了。

Kant’s "transcendental deduction"directly relates to the constitution of possible experience,but as for the knowledge of geometry—which is not empirical—Kant seems to be somehow equivocal,causing great difficulty for his commentators. The note on page B161 is an extreme example of this. For this reason,it is necessary,beyond the relevant debates,to try to comprehensively explore the meaning of geometry and its object in Kant’s mind,and to clarify the mechanism of the construction of geometric concepts after clarifying the structure of actions of understanding,i. e.,synthesis and synthetic unity,and especially to reveal the continuity of space( as a form of intuition). When this paper has completed this major,in other words,"radical"task,the riddle of the note mentioned above is naturally solved.