For either this refutation is nothing other than the mere representation of the conflict of the opposed opinion with the subjective conditions of comprehensibility through our reason, which does nothing by way of rejecting the thing itself (just as,.g., unconditional necessity in the ex istence of a being cannot be conceived by us at all, and hence every speculative proof of a necessary highest being is therefore rightfully op posed subjectively, but the possibility of such an original being in it self is not rightfully opposed), or else both, the affirmative as well as the negative part, taken in by transcendental illusion, have as their ground an impossible concept of the object, and then the rule holds that non entis nulla sunt predicata,a.e.,