{ 1 } - No a priori proof of either maxim of the antinomy of teleological judgment can be given.
{ 2 } - It is held that: "Some products of material Nature cannot be judged to be possible according to merely mechanical laws." because to judge them requires a quite different law of causality, namely that of final causes.
{ 3 } - The thesis of the antinomy of teleological judgment is: "The first maxim of judgment is the proposition: All production of material things and their forms can be judged to be possible only according to merely mechanical laws."
{ 4 } - Kant holds that the two maxims of the antinomy of teleological judgment contradict each other.
{ 5 } - Teleological judgment does not provide us with constitutive principles of the possibility of objects.
{ 6 } - The antithesis of the antinomy of teleological judgment is: "The second maxim of teleological judgment is the counter-proposition: Some products of material Nature cannot be judged to be possible according to merely mechanical laws."

He holds that they do not contradict each other because saying that I must judge the production of material things to be possible according to merely mechanical laws, is not saying that I ought to consider them as being possible only in this way. Not seeing how organic beings can be explained by mechanical causality, I find myself driven to consider such beings as ends, purposes of Nature.