How did Kant wish the term transcendental to be understood. First with Kant it is something of a neologism and he’s using it quite deliberately to distinguish what he has in mind from the transcendent. The transcendent refers to that which transcends experience. It is beyond the ambit of our perceptual resources. It’s what traditional rationalism says that it is available to us as non sensory mode of knowing. Kant says that’s off limits. We don’t do that because we can’t do that. Forget looking for the transcendent as an element of knowledge. The transcendent can be reached by faith, by believe, by imagination, by hope, by coin flipping; need I go on? But not as an element of knowledge because for there to be knowledgeable it must be a sensory basis that must be an experiential basis on which any knowledge claim is based. So establish something as transcending the realm of experience and you have established that whatever it is you achieve, it is not knowledge. So he wants to make a distinction now the distinction between the realm of the transcendent which is off limits epistemologically and what he refers to as transcendental conditions. It is at A708 b736 where he tells us what he has in mind with the doctrine of methods which we will get to when he says it’s the determination of all the formal conditions of the complete system of pure reason so it’s going to develop a methodology. He is going to develop a mode of the argument and analysis that establishes when reason goes beyond its legitimate grounds, it’s legitimate terrain. With respect to the transcendental he is helpful again in giving us the definition. I entitle transcendental this is at A11 B 25. I entitle transcendental all knowledge which is occupied not so much with objects as with the mode of our knowledge of objects in so far as this mode of knowledge is to be possible A-priori. transcendental refers to the enabling conditions. The conditions that render something possible. So the transcendental analysis is an analysis of some Achievement of Ours and Achievement Is Established. We See Trees and Then the Question Is What Must Be in Place A-priori and Necessarily for Us to Have the Concept of a Tree for Us to Be Able to Subsume a Particular Tree under that General Concept. Now That Would Be a Transcendental Analysis and the Conditions Necessary for That Would Be Transcendental Conditions. So the Term Refers to the Conditions or Powers That Render Something Possible the A-priori Conditions that Are Enabling. They Don’t Come about As a Result of Experience but Are Understood to be necessary for there to be experience.