I think it will be understood that I here do not mean the rules of the observation of a nature that is already given, for these already presuppose experience. I do not mean how (through experience) we can study the laws of nature; for these would not then be laws a priori, and would yield us no pure science of nature; but [I mean to ask] how the conditions a priori of the possibility of experience are at the same time the sources from which all the universal laws of nature must be derived.
Uste dut ulertuko dela, ni ez naizela hemen ari, jadanik emanda dagoen natura hautemateko erregelez hitz egiten, hauek esperientzia suposatzen baitute aurretiaz; beraz, ni ez naiz ari esaten, nola ikas genitzakeen guk legeak naturarengandik (esperientziaren bidez), ba orduan horiek ez lirateke apriorizko lege izango eta ez lukete inolako natur zientzia hutsik emango; baizik eta ni esaten ari naizena da, esperientzi posibilitatearen apriorizko baldintzak iturri batzuk direla, eta horietatik atera behar direla natur lege unibertsal guztiak.