ntrocluc

:00

ocienee rext BOOKS

1C

AND

METAPHYSICS

OUTLINES
OF

LOGIC

AND METAPHYSICS

&amp.gt. o H O d L- VA O :: o u .

WITH PREFA TOR Y ESS A Y BY B.D. LIMITED & CO. BURT. C. . PH.OUTLINES OF LOGIC AND METAPHYSICS BY JOHANN EDUARD ERDMANN Late Professor of Philosophy in the University of Halle TRANSLATED FROM THE jlh {REVISED} EDITION. LONDON SWAN SONNENSCHEIN & NEW YORK: MACMILLAN 1896. r. CO.

Perth. Limited. ..Printed by Co-wan & Co.

in consciousness. but also as together constituting a world of realities of themselves. objects stand or by which they are determined that is to say. is practically evident from the fact that they are indispensable to thinking and discourse as such. if for no other. cause. That these notions have a necessary reality and meaning in experience. for the mind. IN discourse. predicates and relations under which. to objective or fixed coherence among ideas. since language is but the embodiment and instrument of thought in general. Such terms are. and so are a possible matter for a real science. being. actuality. with their primitives or derivatives. for example. among objects. general notions for which such terms stand are of very great significance and interest. terms all there which. the so-called categories of thought. and for this reason. besides terms representing mere objects or groups or classes of objects. to knowledge or science the very forms of language necessarily imply them. essence. . as the embodi ment of ideas of definite and necessary connections v : . regularly occur. truth. instead.PREFATORY ESSAY. The end. not only as form ing the ground of definite connection. quantity. stand for general notions. or verbal expression of thought. indispensable to thought itself and the sciences. originating within rather than from without. they are.

to criticise the categories the Still less is this study undertaken by as such. is. Let. and speaking roughly. namely. the . validity. to investigate &quot. The formal logic philology. complete as. relations.vi PREFA TOR Y ESSA Y. Logic. involve objects. then. so that _ it is may with entire truth be said that _any science a science in proportion to _the (in really and truly the categories receive in it. a understanding of the nature ot Now may necessary defined Logic be provisionally of course. the as such. immersed. rather than discourse or thought itself. organic and groupings in short. reality and the categories has to be given by great significance of a special science which takes precisely them for its The recognition which the sciences subject-matter. in particular. necessity. and. in general give to the categories. but must be gained by But a certain preliminary notion of it is entirety. the necessity of study bringing to clear consciousness in and for themselves. do not the of the though containing as some ing categories undertake so to their study them. Philosophy. (logical) origin. continually among them. not theoretical part. Even the sciences of discourse grammar. categories very distinct implications a given material in which. criticism. let it be repeated. par excellence. they are. direct) recognition which And for the matter of that it is worthy of being observed in passing the products of mere fancy could not exist without a certain basis in the cate gories. fundamental part of it. world sciences whose subject-matter is the external Such study. for the greater and indirect. the_task investigation. thing distinguishable from so to say. not possible at the threshold of the the study of it in its science. and Loo-ic is. the science. merely practical and direct. theoretical proof of the necessity. here be laid down. of science of a distinct science. is. &quot. rhetoric. in fact.

all possible or conceivable matter of the categories taken discovery of the limitations either individually or as groups must also be the them each discovery of what is complementary to_ instead of being assumed as given. . formal. and that the laws of thought are in relation to it merely But criticism. &quot.human&quot. Of this nature is. anything else of in organic relation to one another and to viewed ~as The of thought. It assumed the categories as logical facts. to cite an example. part prevent a beyond restricted thought within meaning reference to one another. negative. and in consequence reached the essentially negative result that human thought as regards ultimate is fatally self-contradictory there is or may be a realm beyond the reality. The categories must be its kind.&quot. be merely or mostly analytical. and instead of allowing its object to be determined for thought by its natural relations. . it according to a standard lying too to is apt judge much outside itself. Criticism may be of two criticism of the categories. and hence to be formal rather than real. scrutinize closely enough merely and directly limitations without always positively the complement for the overcoming : supplying proper of the limitations. Criticism of the firstreal.PREFA TOR Y ESSA Y. sort is content to assume its object as given. that &quot. in search for synthetic truth by which that spite of the That criticism was in great criticism was motived. developmental. reach of thought. to be adequate to its regulative. an unknowable thing-in-itself. must be &quot. the (mis)application of the to an effort sphere. to keep certain secure bounds. category. named to detect its isolate. treating as distinct and opposed and truth only in organic which had real categories &quot. restric sorts it may or it may be synthetical. positive. analysed certain of them them. in^a measure the Kantian criticism of the categories. tive. must be more than the Kantian criticism or object.

is itself a work of pure thought. most abstract form of thought. and transition into a logically succeeding one. naturally. their . indeed. Logic. criticism which occupies itself with the determination of the temporal order in which. It is thus the affirmation as well as the negation of the categories a criticism. This solution. and. is the solution of the problem of the criticism. it proceeds by a gradual develop ment to the highest. simplest. From this it is necessary to distin guish strictly the &quot. Such is the general nature of the logical criticism of the categories. and the circumstances under which. most complex.viii PREFA TOR Y ESSA Y.psychological&quot. thereby discovering or rather evolving the series or system of pure forms of thought or the categories. they make their entrance into the individual consciousness as such in its relations with environ ment. then. The meaning of a category in itself and in re lation to other categories as such is not identical with its meaning in and for the merely individual mind. which contains as a factor a certain measure of dogmatism. most concrete. very briefly. their evolution in a series or system. known its in its origin in a logically preceding one. evolution of the categories is itself this evolution. and the categories collectively must be seen as a system of predicates in organic relation to a subject to which they apply and give determination and meaning. Beginning with the lowest. 20. proceeds according to the method of that which is determined from within rather than from without. its relation . as having to do solely with activities or objects of pure thought.) (See below For the sake of as full as possible a preliminary notion of the nature and importance of the Science of Logic. or is self-determined. criticism of the The true categories is their self- spontaneous self-limitation and selfsublation into higher truth. we may here consider.

experiment. to be sound and truly successful. assume as a fact the general rationality of the world of existing things. _ can be. not unnaturally. It has sometimes been supposed. for should be in . and formal in ference must. But the knowledge of the rational as dispensable. must be coupled with that of Logic. really a new form of thought. become distinctly congruent with and expressive of The final the essence of pure. fact. by natural science possessing a rich and valuable viz. or in entire abstraction from that which it is supposed to There is more than one sort of have superseded. . that the and science of thought as such is empty and barren. perhaps. self-active thought.PREFA TOR Y ESSA Y. And science as thought. and. the term. and barrenness pure sense-knowledge. but must depend upon the No of thought as such. is in understanding of what the rational. has been superseded. to maintain its interest for. lifeless . the mind of man in its full integrity. commonly sothoroughly intelligent as empty and called. the work of observation. co-operation of the science devotee of science. thinks of the science of thought as his limited opporhe knows better. to say that to the complete realisation a mere truism of this assumption made by science the conscious as such is. too sanguine in belief as to the value of the content of the new form of thought taken merely by itself. such is precisely what Logic is therefore the cultiva tion of the sciences. ix of to the sciences in the more common acceptation whether consciously or not. or emptiness mere experience. These sciences. valuation of the results reached in interpretation and the sciences is not possible within the limits of the natural sciences as such. really active intelligence.. or mere speculation. and have a real claim upon. is quite as barren and empty _as pure . and their task is the working out Now it is almost or verification of this assumption. But the judicious will guard against being content.

it is. that it is true to its ideal. To illustrate the truth of the foregoing statements by means of a concrete case. or.. Now. speculative thought rather than anything that can actually be found (except as in the put there external world as such. i. Indeed. tries to reduce dynamical or chemical. to the student of the categories as such. The very clearest exhibition possible of the nature of evolution is. and to the ideal generally. not an empirical. at least as cultivated at the present day. evolving activity. he borrows and applies its ideal and idealising truths to give the results of his works depth and stability for inner consciousness. notion. the science of thought. or tends to assume.) .e. &quot. rather. in fact. must take into itself. not indeed the pure science of thought or logic. &quot. each of which preserves in itself the essential virtue of the one pre ceding. to complete its own work. to be found in the pro cess by which (as shown in the present work) thought by an inherent. assumes.&quot. natural tendency unfolds from a germ which is simplicity itself to the highest degree of complexity or concreteness. it would seem. but rather philosophy in a concreter form. Again to take another concrete case natural science. and thereby to mathematical truth. and even biological truth to mechanical. the result being. tunities permit. an object of pure. of science evolution. &quot.x PREFA TOR Y ESSA Y. let us take the most interesting and of the concepts advanced and applied by in the present age. the concept of an fruitful &quot. be sublated into. . in proportion as it is able to explain the world of external existences in mathematical terms it. that natural science. It would seem. an activity continually repeating in successively higher powers. certain that there is a kind of unitself &quot. therefore. to secure its own complete evolution. therefore. whatever the convenience there may be in being able to apply mathematical calculation to chemical and biological phenomena. is an ideal.

the recognised lower stages are in themselves self-contradictory and is too much a incomplete. if it be regarded as ultimate In pure thought. But there is one other consideration that may be here adduced to show the nature and necessity of the a subjective and formal. feels impelled by a necessity. such is Logic. sensuous imag ination and conception. as at bottom one and the same The systematic development of the considera fact. the earth because its absolute centre of gravity is in In short. falls to gories as their higher truth.PREFA TOR Y ESSA Y. and as certainly tainly are incomplete themselves into chemical and organic cate sublate as the stone. or Logic. that the real and the (so-called) ideal. depend upon the categories as such. nores the individual for the sake of a fancied uni and repulsive versal. it . the activities of sensible perception. : the mind. not yet understand. be seen. it does which. natural science the earth and not itself. in It is this psychological. as at home with its essen thought comfortably rests. mere otherness that ^of sphere of mere multiplicity. logical propaedeutic . consideration. because logical standpoint. What is demanded is that sense and to the abstract understanding be harmonised in a certain concrete unity. while in these stages of its working. The world of perception tial self. tion here briefly set forth forms the necessary psycho to the study of Logic (see below). to move onward to the stage of as such in which. truth in such application. In fact. as such lacks in comprehension of the relative merely value in themselves of the categories it finds it con the science of and must venient to use. object and subject. has a unity that is constrained mind. or at phenomena and law. or understanding which ig abstract understanding. the mechanical categories just as cer and relative. for explanation. say. or in pure science. for the remedy for its defect in this case. least distinctly felt.

whose division is a little peculiar. which from the beginning to the transition to essence. For comparison s sake we insert here a few notes of resemblances and differences between this version of the Hegelian Logic and others. of which the present is offered as an English transla is tion. From this it is not to be inferred that Logic not the ultimate form of thought as such. The work on Logic (in the sense above explained). In his division of the First Part of Logic Erdmann agrees with Hegel. The Michelet gives of general development. however. but for merely that a certain preparation is necessary minds inexperienced in logical reflection. peculiarly : well adapted for use as an introductory treatise on the subject which it undertakes to cover and for this reason has been translated. in the larger. while fall under being-for-self. and the propaedeutical treatises. that are different. and mode synthesis of the two). of psychological functions that would naturally exercise a perturbing influence upon the function of pure thinking. phical author and editor as well as university translation has been made from the The present fourth edition of the original work. is. a certain elimination. the lesser. and the systematic character of its form. (or. being.xii PREFA TOR Y ESSA Y. its relative simplicity of exposition. of the number of existing by its conciseness. 25). is substantially the same as that given by Erdmann it is merely the nodes or crises in the development . quality is a subordinate moment of there-being. The distinctions laid down by . Michelet divides as follows Being as such (or indeterminate being). himself in this respect. is : who uniform with and being-for-self there-being (or determinate being). together as its chief moments. but differs from Michelet. as he prefers. works of its class. For him quantity (the with ideality. Its author has for up wards of half a century been eminent as a philoso teacher. measure). as it were.

moment of plurality outweighs still that of unity in order to bring actuality to its true conclusion it seems . which returned into unity. and. is Erdmann s symmetrical division of judgment and of . as such (em actuality the following: (1) Actuality and necessity). 84. 85) gives as the division (Locjik. as from that given in given in the Lesser Logic. causality. contingency. The absolute is the reverse side of subjectivity. and others here use measure instead. had in philosophical discussion a significa generally tion which would make it denote a category of con denotes in it siderably higher order than that Erdmann s treatment. as necessary relation (embracing substanti actuality or interaction). a category of essence rather than of being. Michelet so uses it. by the very mode has powerful example and influence of Spinoza. In pursuance of this idea Michelet of 82. Erdmann s treatment a sub-category to the absolute. the reader observes. Erdmann s the use of mode as the third category of being. Erdmann xiii as regards quantitative relation. synthesis of quality For Michelet. (2) bracing possibility. namely. and at the same time becomes tangent to that of subjectivity.PREFA TOR Y ESSA Y. of actuality. (3) actu ality. while agree with those laid down in Hegel s Larger Logic. of mediation rounds itself completely out. mode. multiplicity necessary to posit it as totality. in In interaction as suck the fact. and quantity. diverges the Larger Logic and that given by Michelet. Hegel. This is done in the concept of the absolute. measure is a variety of Erdmann. relativity. seems unfinished. reciprocity. making it . 83. while essentially the same as Hegel s. absolute (embracing exposition of the ality as the In the absolute the sphere absolute. are ing more specific than those given in the Lesser Logic or in Attention may be directed to Michelet s work. Erdmann uses the term mode in the popular rather than the philosophical sense for. mode).

obs. [and of quantity. 2. judgment and syllogism. (See Rosenkranz s Logik.) 195. we find in Hegel and Michelet: mechanism. Michelet.).) 192. the doctrine of ideas. (Cf. Rosenkranz and others relegate the categories of objectivity to the philosophy of nature entirely. teleology. of essence. concept. obs. Instead of the grand divisions of Logic given in the present work. there seems no better reason for discarding concept and using notion in its stead. Hegel. regularly are First. we find in Rosenkranz the doctrine of being (including essence as well as being proper). kranz also gives a four-fold division of judgments. syllogism. con Since the three cept must be preferred to notion. or his Meine Reform der Hegelschen Philosophic. and in Hegel and Michelet.). dialectic : . one or both. which are as follows (1) Judgments of (2) quality. as denoting the three successive stages of (abstract) thought and its products. 4. (See below 191. and putting others in their places. chemism or dynamism. 124. of necessity syllogisms of there-being. obs. or essence (M. of reflection. Concept has been chosen for three reasons. . Michelet] Rosenof reflection (H. instead of the term notion so long same use. Secondly. the doctrine of the concept. Thirdly. diverges from these given by Hegel and Michelet. etc. its use is necessary to consistency in logical terminology if judgment and syllogism are neces sarily employed in the doctrine of subjectivity. is the etymological equivalent of Be-griff. obs. in an .xiv PREFA TOR Y ESSA Y. the use of concept. found together in psychological as well as logical dis cussion. Logik. Encyklopddie. of necessity.) An explanation seems called for as to the use throughout of the term concept as a translation of Bein vogue in the griff. than there would be for discarding judg ment and syllogism. Instead of the development of objectivity which Erdinann gives. 1. it . terms. in accordance with the three-foldness of the method. 197.

They occur in the Notes. they B. too much in clined to be merely subjective and one-sided. . Some additions have been made to the original of the present work.PREFA TORY ESSA V. and To helps to elevate it to the truly philosophic plane. gives a whole some shock and challenge to thought. or surmised. or in tended. in the form of references. it is hoped that contribute to the usefulness of the volume. B. included in [ ]. the foregoing considerations may be added this. that notion is in its ordinary sense rather too subjective more subjective than even concept. C. whether concrete or abstract. since it may signify what is merely arbitrarily fancied. instead of being definitely represented in any form of thought proper. xv objective as well as a subjective sense.

.

79 84 85 ( 88- 92 98 FIRST CHAPTER ESSENCE AS SUCH A. I. III. EXISTENCE (THINGS) B. - U9 122 ESSENTIAL RELATION ( II7-I23) - xvii . PAGE INTRODUCTION 1-27) FIRST PART CATEGORIES OF ( i IMMEDIACY 29-55) ( 28-87) - 22 24 I. MODE ( 77-87) ?8 QUANTITATIVE MODE (MEASURE) ( 78-82) B. ( 109-112)- ESSENCE AND PHENOMENON OF THE THING (H3-H6) C. FIRST CHAPTER B. SECOND CHAPTER QUANTITY MAGNITUDE ( 57-62) 54 - B.TABLE OF CONTENTS. ENDLESSNESS (iNDETERMINATENESS) ( 29-34) - 24 31 FINITUDE (DETERMINATENESS) INFINITUDE ( 47-55) ( ( 35-46) - 41 56-76) 53 II. QUANTITATIVE MODE (MANNER) ( 83) C. IDENTITY ( 93-94) B. C. C. MODE PROPER ( 84-87) SECOND PART CATEGORIES OF MEDIATION 139). C. GROUND AND CONSEQUENT ( IO2-IO7) SECOND CHAPTER PHENOMENON ( 108-123) - - IO7 112 113 A. QUALITY ( A. QUANTUM ( 63-70) 60 71 QUANTITATIVE RELATION (71-76) THIRD CHAPTER A. A. ( 92-107) - 98 IOI DIFFERENCE ( 95-IGl) - - II.

XVlii CONTENTS. THE CONCEPT ( B. THE IMMEDIACY OF THE IDEA ( 213-218) B. THIRD CHAPTER IDEA ( 211-233) A. ( 140- FIRST CHAPTER A. SUBSTANTIALITY B. ACTUALITY ( ( 124-139) 132-133) CAUSALITY ( 134-137) C. INTERACTION ( 138-139) THIRD PART CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM 233) I. C. THIRD CHAPTER A. FINALITY [OR PURPOSIVENESS] ( 207-210) Hi. SUBJECTIVITY 142-154) ( ( ( 140-189) II. SUBJECTIVITY AND OBJECTIVITY 2O2-2O6) C. III. THE IDEA AS ESSENTIAL RELATION THE IDEA AS ABSOLUTE ( 227-233) ( 219-226) - . THE SYLLOGISM SECOND CHAPTER 155-170) 171-189) OBJECTIVITY ( ( 190-210) A. RELATION OF OBJECTS 192-201) ( B. THE JUDGMENT C.

be called some thing new . accord have to examine not merely the objections that are usually made to each of these two disciplines. while recent works represent it as some thing antiquated. THE union of Logic and Metaphysics must. but also those 2. INTRODUCTION. when the discovery have been made that it was not only it . Our introductory remarks. which are brought against their union.OUTLINES OF LOGIC AND METAPHYSICS. lost the respect which for two thousand years was believed to had enjoyed. The old (or school) logic which was mostly t regarded as description^ of correct thinking or also as a guide* thereto. ingly. 1. if one consider the long period in which they were treated separately one from the other.

felt The universally satis 5) need of a reform of philosophy could not be fied by the employment of foreign elements/ but only by the presentation of logic as a science. to 6) consider also free or absolute thought/ W &quot. Trpomj &amp. knew without rules but even harmful^ because. such thought is expressed in propositions. in stead of by the earlier designation./ua or also of styled sometimes the theory of the being.2 INTRODUCTION. 2 &amp. ii. course. if its (which. the result must be an abstractly intel lectual treatment* 4 ) of philosophy.lt. of (3) are valid only for finite thought) were followed in the highest spheres of knowledge. was therefore 5) Such &amp. which has not so much to reject as to understand the rules of the old logic. This question also underlies the Kantian distinction between canon and organon. and. The father of of logic. &quot. while that took account only of finite thought.lt.lt. which the intellect was so depreciated inimieally disposed into logic foreign element is. introduced (6) This is the task its union with psychology. for example. describer Nature. and from the analysis of the proposition Aristotle deduced (4) The age in the primary logical distinctions. by set himsef in his reform of logic. useless.&quot. Method of Transcendentalism. ch.&quot.] ( 3) Finite thought is thought of a given objective.lt. &amp. Hegel 3.gt. Metaphysics merely per accidens so called. [See Kant s Critique of Pure Reason. Hence Ages the question whether logic is proceeded as a in the Middle an art or a science.iAoo-o&amp. . because teaching only what everyone already it. Aristotle. which also towards logic.

and. to the assertion that sible.) True. sometimes the science of that which transcends the sensible. by the fact that they have become universally prevalent opinions of the age. since. The Kantian reform of philosophy had therefore as a consequence the fact that the earlier metaphysics appeared as something im possible. could be accepted as the proper centre of philosophy indeed. but only the within logic in itself. is. logic ( has to investigate. in the first is metaphysics impos may by way is of neutralisation be opposed the assertion that it 4. treated as vb&tt prejudices of the age instance. 3 the essence. the combination of logic and meta physics. could in general exist only so long as the knowability of the essence of things or of the super sensible was admitted. the latter being. these objections have. of things (hence also ontology). 40. on account of the opposition of subjective and objective. possible. appears inadmissible. since the former has thougJit. as its object. itself Upon what is and what foundations the objections to it the strength of the objections. provisionally to be made harmless by showing how even this opinion does not . Finally. tion will indeed This opposi show It it itself to be false. acquired a great influ ence. all has taken possession of opinion of the educated. but before they are proved they are to be . rest. particularly modern times.INTRODUCTION. therefore.

i.obs. universalises ing consideration it. But. when essence in general is treated. one understands thereby the activity of the mind which has as its product the universal.INTRODUCTION. i. reflects upon what the thought 5. Nevertheless. we suppose that by we gain a knowledge of fact in our something objective it is contained fact in its that there are determinations ordinary consciousness same time pre of thought which are at one and the as also objective relations of cisely as well subjective actuality/ 1) These subjective and objective thoughts . is two-fold sense correct. the mind &quot. If. something subjective.. and. in thought is as universal. treat it as so uncontested itself supposes. now. 2. that is.e. ( 87. Contemplation. therefore. or the think of an object. but merely claims to neutralise one prejudice by another. become conscious such an alteration must be made in the object in order to perceive its essence. the expression in its Thought the activity of the universal.e. alters contemplation things we of the essence of gain a knowledge of fact itself.&quot. will become yet clearer Why later. i. acts Since. an axiom as is this opinion This showing obviously no proof for the contrary view.) 6.. one with which logic is supposed to be concerned is. since what we gain a knowledge thought. further. we believe that by it. of other than by thinking can be nothing also. thinking truth..e.

tion of the formally logical from the metaphysical is a pedagogical one for the subject.INTRODUCTION.) (2) designates only the system No name (3) is for this science more suitable than that of . tained consists.(3) but is not conditioned by the nature of the two disciplines. shows. shown that what ontology and metaphysics con If. &amp.gt. but likewise also root-relations. to distinguish them from merely subjective categories^ thoughts or notions. Their may be termed reason. separated into letters. it is now. then. it is thereby a separation of the two is a violent abstraction which may under certain circumstances be proper. W Mere reflection upon ideas common to us all. &amp. words are presented to the child. merely so-called root-con cepts. not. and understand thereby. relations of reason. totality The to science categories have. only in categories. 5 we call. that that opposition of subjective (2) Instead of and objective is not an absolute one. with Kant. In this manner.lt. (The word idea of rationality. approximating thus the Aristotelian concept of categories. Scientific method demands of the all completeness will of content. therefore. lay down the categories. accordingly.^ they themselves. Similarly. precisely as did the content of the old also shown that logic. ( is the difficulty above stated 4) removed. 7. one may also employ the word thought category 3 The propriety of a separa merely as singular. therefore. in order that the child may learn to read words as wholes.

an abstraction is necessary for making them themselves In the unwontedness of consideration. the that. coherence. in as one habitually does. not say that Hegel has employed the word contrarily to the ordinary usage of language. since it contains nothing whatever laws and forms by which thought is besides the and bound. logic. The lies in the fact peculiar difficulty of logic employed. (3) In the world there is reason. in the first instance merely a is. totelian and Stoic senses of the word are combined. and appears to one as the most themselves directing attention upon the categories instead of upon what. Aris suitable. what the idea is is shown in the entire logic. tive) The word idea means by means of the categories/ 2 ) as reason. the greater part of what is the unintelligibility logic has its ground. therefore. W of logic tempted. &quot. the and metaphysics which Schleiermacher at name dialectic was in every respect the most In Schleiermacher the Platonic. (5) One (4) may. using the categories one might. &quot. precisely name . .&quot.INTRO D UCTION. Aoyos similarly as ratio.&quot. (3) For the combination hence first at the end of it. since the categories are continually subject of making an object of consideration that which familiar of things. This unwontedness creates always the wish that. one of thinks by means called of the categories. 8. otherwise. signifies (objec We think by means of reason. since etymologically it has reference^ as much of its to the objective as to the subjective nature content.

1. 7 think something else (namely. apply to must be false. the object). logic properly first the fundamental philosophy. to think them only. WA regards and employs logic as mere gymnastic of thought. may. precisely. or the so-called advantage. and in the result of thought application of such a category the ( 2 &amp. obs.gt. 9. categories which are correct in the study (3) If one and thus the result is inept. as to discern in how certain categories what sphere of knowledge As have validity. . But precisely in what constitutes its difficulty lies also the importance. and view it only in so far as it is produced by the thinking of the sub Like all gymnastics. logical study is a discipline for consciousness. logic teaches how to distinguish well as W the true from the untrue categories. for the entering upon is In all these respects. to the dealing with As habituation categories.INTRODUCTION. (3) and serves as exercise subject and prop8edeutic philosophy. in what not/ 2 ) embracing all categories. whereas the problem is. it prevents the narrowness of findino in one or some relations of reason. reason O 1 itself as a whole. part category may in itself be untrue. disregard the objective (metaphysical) meaning of thought. the spiritual. As the scientific criticism of the categories employed in thought. With mere this material importance is also connected a formal importance.) (See ject. one must. of logical study. or forms the of the system of philosophy. logic as 7. of nature .0ne for example. of course.

that must be valid which of knowledge in general. Logic has to do not only with i\\Q forms of truth. If logic is the science ( 2) of the categories or it of thought.&quot.realm and logic leads. that. first instance. which is true of Since of the latter. not of scientific study. in the is only well it is known which what is is contained in cultivated opinion. there is that of taking logic in the merely formal sense and making it lifeless abstraction. therefore. that will be true of science in general. The last expression states. viz. The fact. therefore. souls of actuality.) as the &quot. 10. that logic contains in germ the entire truth. (Cf. that may not be . necessary to reflect upon is it. not the but only iis foundation.8 INTRODUCTION. Of science as a system of known ^ and it not true a mere aggregate. shadows. &quot. the relation of logic to the other philosophical disciplines . on the contrary.. Our exposition has two rocks to avoid. mere exercise belongs to the school. Here the case is that logic presents only the germ of truth. with the categories 233. is. so far as this may be done prior to the treatment of logic. 11. science. is the rock of making it so comfortable for the subject in this realm of shadows that he will no longer have a desire for the life-giving blood of the concreter parts of philosophy. First. But they are the mere a souls of actuality.&quot. Second. but also with truth itself. into of whole of Logic is. The school or gymnastical logic is a subject of learning and exercise.

therefore. Since in this analysis may be spoken of only appears that necessity where two things (i. understanding is it given as the character of dogmatism that. must. [See A. distinction between on and SIOTI correctly brings out the essential character of knowledge. and means.INTRODUCTION. Contemplation which emphasises this moment templation by the understanding. to make the 3) Cor out to be something bad.] wanting everything This is by those forgotten who try &amp. rectly in the interest of detiniteness it holds fast to aut aut. is it is con when it is carried results in the mode of view which ) termed dogmatism/ 3 W ness. ^ one.. Since it resolves [See Hegel s Encyklopadie. as (2) Aristotle s they do. terior Analytics. floats in nebulous indefiniteit is ness. not same of the understanding is an Where essential one in philosophical contemplation. to be analysed.&quot.] &quot. satisfied 9 with the perception that something is so or of this otherwise. &quot. but has to do with the necessity relation/2 ) Our idea of necessity it is. 13 1. etc. .&quot. and from conclusions drawn. s Pos ii.. it since the necessary nevertheless this its fixed determinateness first seize in and unity with (2) itself.lt. W The word Wissenchaft is formed analogously with Landschaft.e. 12. 119. in order to know a thing in its necessity.. a it united or ground and thing grounded) are inseparably 1 identical/ and that herein alone necessity consists. Ritterschaft. out one-sidedly. is. . i. a body closed within itself. Identity (2) is The element inseparable combination.

precisely as essential in the account as are the two others. gives the diametrical opposite of tism. distinct determinations duality. thirdly. and therefore cannot be. 13. everything into its fixed. But. self. is by 79. 81] designated as the Encyklopadie. But even which in practical matters gives to the healthy human understanding (i. the necessary contains in (that it secondly. therefore. this moment stands out in its extreme onesidedness. does not suffice . out one-sidedly. W The moment. The contemplation the understanding. it something concrete^ The combining moment this.e. the necessary is both at once Therein : and contains in itself contradiction.gt. likewise. . so scepticism maintains that the object contradicts itself. it is. is is. is To do carried this the problem of reflection^ 1 which.. simple determinations. Hegel (2 dialectical or negatively rational.i o INTROD UC TION. 12). 14. since only thereby does to it contain the motion which of belongs necessity. for regard must be had to contradiction in the object as well as to its resting determinateness.As does not contradict itself. But. dogmatism holds fast to the fact that the object is and therefore [&quot. scepticism^ dogma reflection emphasises.&quot. such superiority to all abstractions one-sidedness). In the so-called metaphysics of the understanding of the Wolfian school. therefore. dog matism has an abstract character. which &amp.

&quot. in combining. finally as it is the concrete identity of opposites. in analysing. only then occur when in the object to be . also upon that of intellectual intuition. ingenuity. therefore. both of which themselves to the thought of the under 2) standing as well as to reflection/ which contains in itself the concrete that which con 2 The age has scarcely passed in tains several.gt.e. the necessary all found only i. But if one takes the object it is so.Outlines in speculative thought my is of Psychology. to be its Comprehension will. even in Jacobi last oppose immediate knowledge. on nearer examina proper being. where these moments (cf. only one determination common term 15. receive their rights. it is afterwards or finally. which the philosophy of reflection was the most (!) The abstract is that . then all as pre penetration will have them speculative moments.INTRODUCTION.lt. understanding. supposed If 16. u may in science be one-sidedly emphasised at the ex . of reproach. afterwards proves. 122) or where there comprehension. it is at first something other than what but what tion. one term virtuosity in fixing. it is. &amp. This occurs then as it when the object is taken first as con tradicts itself. is Fully conceived.&quot. finally.. s and. and this happens not merely pense of the others but upon the standpoint of so-called common sense. acumen. &amp.

only when it is perceived in development. the proper necessity of an object is not with is its genesis perceived/ 3) That necessity perceived only when in the object itself apart from external circumstances there is. as necessary the converse is does not follow. only 17. at least. it since is an object becoming that which it properly development.W proceeds from a contradiction like that just but since the contradiction which mediates the temporal genesis of an object. contradiction resolved. as inseparable from the essence of the object. it indicated . which it it was must But in this it said that be afterwards other than was before. and hence ( ceived as necessary. This means that the perception of that contradiction will show that the object must so alter that it actually is. perceived. becomes the s that which it properly is When But is.12 IN TROD UC TION. Though a thing is perceived when seized in its development. may* be an accidental one. In this case it is perceived that the object is rightly taken only when it is conceived after in wards in a way different from that conceived before. ( follows from the reflections just is made 12-16) 15) per its that a thing comprehended. this occurs. comprehended a contradiction is discovered between what it was first taken to be and what is its proper signification. that . Even temporal genesis a develop ment.

. may produce a contradiction where it has in the object no ground (3) This is mis a living organism. demanded by its essence. follows. speaks of that which (not temporally understood) follows from what has preceded. since. The property dialectical of an object to enter into such eternal motion conditioned is upon inner contradiction eternal its nature.. in so &quot. the really independent.e. .gt.g. itself from the tree be ripe fruit separates there is contained a contradiction in the fact that cause the ripe. is &amp. nevertheless appears &amp.lt.. i. &amp. though it immanent only it. the development which the object. eternal sequence. the mathematician cor. 2 in the object itself.. and this motion. itself. e. doing. the eternal development.gt. [See Spinoza s Ethics. This the dialectic art ^ or method has to imitate and to produce. because Since the self-active dialectic thought reproduces all method produces that is contained in the fact . 18. because it is 13 inseparable. def. : &amp. is posited with the concept of 4 &amp.lt.e. to do with their notion. 44. rightly conceived has no relationship &amp. should be fruit. but means. This eternal development what comprehending per ception has to bring to light. i.lt. The concept of eternity which Spinoza already with time. i. wounding taken by those who would replace comprehension by The origin of States has nothing genetic thought.. is its dialectic.INTRODUCTION. W The 2) External circumstances selfless..e.&quot.] prop. part i. contradiction from which. Similarly 2. Even Aristotle distinguished the historic origin of the State from its true ground. viii.*) also part ii.lt.

for. Body and &amp. Soul. is superior to the geometrical. my &quot. &amp. rises object. obs. classed.) The more determinations which are contained in germ in that which is developing itself are posited. earlier. solved. it is. 14. it In this it it first appears in its truth. the more the object corresponds to its final nature. it contains more determinations than of As this unity more determinations.14 INTRODUCTION. in it from the more abstract to reaches its final the more concrete until it which all contradictions its are resolved.lt. pp.&quot. the nature of the dialectic extended discussions on method are to be found in work. with which rightly W Notwithstanding the different judgments which the dialectic method has experienced at the hands of Plato and of Kant.. 1. it stands related to the earlier stages as the richer or more concrete ( to the poorer all and more abstract. in preceding stage. each successive stage of development contains. or has to follow the object in development from its untruth to its truth. this development. as regards its evidence and it necessity. through the contradiction lying in nature. the two are agreed that it is the 2 More art of discovering contradictions in objects. 2nd ed. . itself.gt. that. Since. was as was in truth (really to 16) not. 18-33. in itself a contradiction ( 16) which did not exist in the 19. The dialectical method has therefore show how the itself.

through the dialectic method. and discovering the forward-impel ling contradiction in them. Each now. first in to it contemplation. 21. and so. also say. . must already be applied.) (Cf. ( In precisely this 9. But since. many things can receive their proper explanation only in the sequel. in methodical fashion. since. passing to the concreter. . beginning with the most abstract and the tical poorest of them. 15 later stage is the truth of the here finds its justification which. If. development of them.INTRODUCTION.) consists the criticism of them. The statement. shows what the object is in truth. earlier. for the reason named. science as system is made possible. the opposed error to that of immediately drawing consequences instead of abiding by the given fact. then will also logic as the science of the categories ( 6) have to follow the dialec 20. and to produce the system of them. The one employ thoroughness which (often only) appears to underlie such expectation is not to be approved. since what follows can be shown only in the consequence. that is to 220. nor be expected that each point when treated will be at once perfectly clear. the categories which have should be developed by logic. which will not That thoroughness forward until everything is com go is pletely understood. may neither be required that only such categories as are already deduced.

10. and objects of which logic as such knows nothing. asserts^ nothing. God are discussed. with an improved proposition. but only that by 1) nothing i. on the another. can it is the meaning that for it nothing is presupposed. which by such anticipa tions easily acquires the appearance of claiming to be the whole of philosophy. is fostered where relations of higher spheres are drawn into Nature. ( and hence also of logic as its first part the difficulty that 9). by the dilemma that the beginning of philosophy must either rest upon. ( It will therefore avoid that difficulty 22) by begin would be ning not with an assertion. of anticipating. Spirit. which was sought already by Plato. hence will philosophy starts contrary. a hypothesis.) 22. or must itself be. philosophical character is destroyed since it can be maintained only when no presuppositions are made. presupposed/ But it in fact. The assertion that philosophy must make no not have presupposition. Apart from the fact that thereby the pedagogical purpose ( 9) of logic is defeated. The latter mistake.e. logic. and since Descartes more or less by all philosophers. to be proved an impossibility. if it supposes. The beginning if of philosophy in general. appears. many misconceptions arise as to the significance of logic itself. also /^supposes nothing.. Aristotle. which of course . (Cf. this proposition must be deduced not be a beginning. if. encounters with & proved from proposition. 23. The presuppositionlessness of philosophy.16 INTRODUCTION.

i. the science of thought G. but puts Upon the confusion of these two relations it depends when one says. that since philo sophy comes into being only in the development of history. Spec. of a When . His error was in postulating several such W W^ere the beginning of philosophy. Knowledge 24.. &amp. it presupposes history. ( If. a theoretical proposition. therefore.] describes the beginning of philosophy as not a fact but a fact-act. he thereby. is to say. 2). there also can there be no question &amp. discovers the real philosophical method. since it is presupposed for the origination of philosophy. (3) [&quot. vol. Philos. fact-acts. for example. obs. Where philosophy avoids every tfeo-is.INTRODUCTION. 17 or would rest upon a mere assumption. while now it is a postulate or problem. Fichte Introduction to translated in Jour. Certainly history forms its presupposition. that dilemma 22. but it as little pre supposes history as in geometry the first axiom is 2 that there is a geometer. will. (1) does not derive elsewhere. obs. but with a demand tion or a postulate^ as regards which the ques of proof would be an absurdity. because the beginning ( must then be an axiom or theorem.gt. What that logic will is demand or wherein that its postulate will consist.^ it What it necessarily has forth. as Hegel always recognises. v7ro#eo-is. determined by it is entire pro blem. begin with the proposal to produce only this matter. therefore. Science of &quot. it requires it no other matter than merely naturally be compelled to this. This means that it proposes that there be merely .) would be valid.lt.

and begins with the postulate. The second difficulty may be could be expressed/ 3 ) met by a as practical illustration.lt.gt. another or many others (e. by the fact that this postulate appears as a purely it. its having begun with presupposed for logic without the definition of thought as 25. instead perhaps. it may be suggested against the first-mentioned claim how in our consciousness it is assumed that thought is Where such that function which makes man man. merely the resolve to is.1 8 INTRODUCTION. its first 0ris. to engage in the activity of W The accusation made against Hegel that . it were. because. and hence an entirely other the demand to think will have justification than any other demand which. makes possible for philosophical propaedeutic which the beginning of logic. that upon which the Science of Knowledge itself rests) might be laid down. &quot. The difficulty which arises on the one hand. is to be way by &amp. and on not the other hand by the removed fact that thereby it is known hoiv one has to act in order to realise that in a systematic postulate.&quot. therefore. at first present. of what that postulate requires. This resolve is engage in the activity of thinking. Think! There thought. perhaps.. &amp.g. of arbitrary act of will. By these two ways may the thought be his mere resolve produced. 2 the subject^ philosophising propaedeutic has not preceded.

the most untrue 19). but going forward.e. system has a double beginning viated. the category completely pure. and not abiding by negating the heuristic. beginning.gt. abandoning. and thinking would therefore itself . where there the activity of mere . the re thought as such. therefore. The Herein is contained the reason why it is merely a misconception on the part of Gassendi when he ob jected against Descartes that ambulo ergo sum pos sesses the same validity as cogito ergo sum. one at the same time abstracts from everything objective which makes thought applied thought and does not leave it pure. has Gabler treated the phenomenology of consciousness as propaedeutic.gt. (2 &amp. (3 &amp. in thinking. 27.. If it.INTRODUCTION. Thought was said ( 5) to be the activity of universalisation. unmixed. objective were thought. is mere All beginning anything definite. i. hence the most abstract is sult will be possible. But if one does this. Rightly. 26. One will therefore engage in the activity of mere or pure thought when. 19 is by this means ob best propsedeutic appears to be a dialectical development of consciousness which shows that thought is the real goal to which consciousness points. the its ginning the untrue. be differentiated is within but now. also that to which thought would be applied. and undetermined. besides mere thought. As ( this most abstract category beginning is as be untruth is corrected by. there would be in thinking.

gt. mediation in this thought is indicated is by this name.gt. i. apx^ is TO the individual. or as the sensible and precedes it as the lower. just as regards the super-sensible and spir natural does 2 Mere immediacy.lt. as If is contained in and conditions them. he quite correctly places immediacy. the simple and more abstract forms the foundation for the more concrete and composite. in the fact that a 7 for ^ ^ were a second ** would thing is & first (c?-pX Because of the double be mediated by the first. in speaking of derived nates as a/^eo-os that and original propositions.gt. This undifferentiatedness we call immediacy. but also the fact that this category not thought by means 1 be thought prior to it/ ) the prius of all other rather. is thinking. immediacy and &amp. as will be shown here itual. that it. irpS&amp. however. 2]. of any other to categories. is an abstraction. the But for this reason it is merely to rest. thinking in itself undifferentiated.&quot. and im to be treated in mediacy is the first of all things Not only the absence of combination and logic. uoiv again . For the rest. Ka96Xov). impossible mediathe beginning. hence also &amp.rov In fact. sensible.20 INTRODUCTION. desig vrpoTTjcrts ^s p? rriv ciXXr) Trporepa. untrue with which it is after. &amp. the category of immediacy : will be found if one answers the question What it ? is the least that is contained in is thought ? or what thought contained in every thought along with W When Aristotle Posterior [&quot. has with him. the difference of thought consists merely in the use of diverse categories. Analytics. nozu the most meaning which universal is termed immediate (for atrtov. /)&amp.gt.

. since same thing may appear in relation to one thing as the the more concrete. in relation to another Here is to be thought immediacy as the immediate.e. i. . tion are 21 one and only relative determinations.INTRODUCTION. the mediated. in its purest form. simple differencelessness.

and only in such development the articulation of what is developing itself originates. a preliminary statement of how the categories will group themselves would not only be unintelligible. If. which articulates itself. and not Instead with what of it organic. before section. is better to facilitate the survey of the ground passed over by a recapitulation at the end of each Even the general superscriptions are. always only when it is fully set forth and distinguished from others. further. such recapitulation. meaningless names. making such a preliminary statement. IN what the peculiarity of a group of categories 28. therefore. which is may be divided. but would even create the appearance of one s having to do with what is already formed. BEING. In oral discussion the designations of the individual 22 .first part CATEGORIES OF IMMEDIACY. the consists can be clear development of the categories ( 17) was to be set forth.

the younger). or. in most instances appears meaningless before the end of the group. principle. either one may designate each group according to the occurs in the group.BEING. finally^ one may ism. which we shall follow. and may in a printed outline they are not to at the close. &quot. 23 be expressed only chapters may be omitted. of course. but be dispensed with.&quot. In doing this. or tains in itself the when a development is set forth one may designate the individual groups as periods whose terminal points Transcendental Ideal are given (so Schelling in the Fichte. germ . reference is gener in which the selection of ally made to the section name is justified. and seek a name which points out that which is charac In the use of this teristic of the entire group. since it con first category which of all (so Hegel generally). the name. In the matter precisely this or that of nomenclature a threefold principle may be^observed.

the most abstract. since first what it is otherwise or besides (see 30) can appear hereafter. is produced as distinctionless reference to For this pure no distinction. unanswer able/ is 3) and only by reflection it upon higher categories Being is the interest underlying to be satisfied. Only 24 in the infancy of meta- . is.) QUALITY. Because of impossible this abstract character.gt. the first. IN the first instance. ENDLESSNESS (INDETERMINATENESS). say. (See 54. immediacy.) 29 (a). and hence with to be is it the beginning made. as pure immediacy. What being as a question con cerning the nearer determinations of being. (SEE 54. we may 32) . i.. being difficult.I FIRST CHAPTER. in the first instance to be exp]ained only by itself. Being is is. thought (the category) self. by the resolve to engage in the activity of pure thought.e. of conception or comprehension^ (see is. A. category. since being is the most indefinite of all things. which is affected by we have no more suitable expression than being P&amp. the question.

Since being distinction. which thought would not be posited (thought). there is is not at all affected with in it nothing whatever to be dis tinguished. because being category of dogmatism. above. even of the absolute. a category. and it is therefore complete contentlessis ness and emptiness. 25 physics (logic) can the mind abide by this category as the highest. More closely . that is.) the favourite It is the logic of dogmatism. &amp. therefore. (See 12. is infinitive of the copula is. (2) Conceived or comprehended can be only that in which what one must take together (con-cipere) is 3 contained. which does not exist. it whom treats it as the absolute With being.e. which. A definition of being would represent it as composite.QUALITY.lt. it expresses its sense of triumph in this new conquest by making it the predicate of every thing. the greatest of regarded not only 6V but precisely emu as this The Eleatic theory has. i.. in &amp. in feeling. is dogmatic character. which just as indefinite and as purely to be conceived as being. happened in the case of the Eleatics. so there is no expressed thought or pro position which does not contain the category being. Aristotle describes as thought in ^ When the consciousness of the meaning of a cate gory first dawns upon the mind. 30 (). therefore. to say nothing of its possessing a chimera. be employed through out to designate what is not further deduced hence x) : which what is to man is just so. To be is merely the actuality. 4) Being- is essentially chimera actuality.lt. made up of genus and differentia. etc. ) however. This word will. different it should not be. is merely the emu which from existence or even A As there is no o-i5yKeio-#cu. this category.

contains unwittingly the right relation. V&amp. therefore. is mere reference to self.lt. so is it.gt. more closely regarded. because here the reference to being is anticipated. call this nothing. regarded. from ni-wiht [no whit. we really think being. i. objective ( 2 this abstraction and emptiness or contentlessness. employed by the disciples of even more than by Heraclitus himself. being proves to be pure negation. hence complete distinctiorilessness which means that when we think nothing . which Heraclitus was not. Being is being and nothing more. the term not (ni) would seem to be the best for com .e. forms the real core of all views that are designated as Nihilism. wholly referenceless.26 CA TEGORIES OF IMMEDIA C F. (See as 32. As all thought is a positing.gt. and thus convert it into mere //0-being. and as this was really (or also) . They scepsis (see seize in the Heraclitic becoming only the side of not being..) 31. naturally. or perhaps better. a negation. The expression. The expression nothing (nichts naught]} carries with it the inconvenience that in the use of it a negative reference to something is thought of. like being. it therefore consists merely in 26). Nothing itself. which will. was. We not. the logicians of Thereby Heraclitus. &amp. an abstraction. an ^position or ^position. 13). in opposition to the affirmation of being by the Eleatics. W This also for transition may in expressed as follows : more suggestive form be Since being originated us by our having abstracted from everything &amp. they became. This category. just so the expression not-being. which pletely undetermined negation. not being. of course. immediately ( 31) appear so soon as one sees that not can not be thought without being at first.

nothing equals nothing. is its contrary. is thought. ( 21. when one proposition appears objectionable merely because one does not abide by it. being is pre participle of the copula is ( dicated of nothing. The distinction between being and not. If to distinguish nothing from being.). must is. as not (or not being). that to say. but draws consequences from it. therefore. nothing. which. while being was pure position. asserts that one feels a distinction between being and nothing. related that is 27 The two are so when one But this is thought. the other.. therefore. attributed to it mere unity with Finally. call not or nothing also not- . since being&quot. consists in the fact that thought. namely being. and say.e. nothing. for us. posited . and conversely. if one will avoid the word is. (Now may we. that when we think being.&quot.) 32 (c). one wishes to define it. become that whose not It is. order to be thought. this also merely means that the distinction when reflected upon vanishes. &quot. there is itself. and begin with the words. instead. the former first and the in latter after is also is a distinction not. and thus is completely expressed what the section declares. we came upon wards. in it them themselves. pure Hence. opposition. the converse also obtains. nothing is. Likewise. being.QUALITY. is not equal to existence but is merely 29. obs. that which is exactly our assertion. therefore. means that we merely denote a single idea by two words. rather. The result is. being is posited as Being (or being) but not. i. For the rest.

} Neither.^ compared with categories becoming. Antithesis. (In like manner it has until now been impossible to fix : . can the other.) because they are moments of a higher unity. like Fichte Thesis. with the exclusion of Our language permits this. obs. therefore. they are untrue/ 4) The three considered correspond essentially to the gories of quality. which are kept apart only by a violent abstraction. W Becoming the KiV^o-ts of Aristotle must here be taken as pure transition.28 GATE GORIES OF I MMEDIA C be Y.) of being and of not is the unity of call it (this ing^ interchange or this oscillation) becom This unity is so little incomprehensible that it rather in hended^ only are being and nothing compre Becoming is the real truth of the as categories hitherto considered. It thus neutralises the notion of time which creeps into this word. since it all idea of time. Really. being and nothing were not It is now apparent why to be conceived. Since alteration is equivalent to becoming other. are to be recognised. further. employs the word becoming to denote as well the future as the present (passive). being. their abstract character. (24. each can be truly thought unity with the other. Kantian cate In their consideration the three s moments ( 12-14) of scientific method. it is already something much more concrete than mere becoming. change of ^ Because of place and every other alteration. separably combined with the other We the two. which both underlies it. because really each is in . therefore. we must think the truth (19. only in its thought without Consequently. Synthesis. their unity. and is.

lt. being therein corrects 33.&quot. is.Ontol. far removed from dogmatism and scepticism. of course.e.That abstract. some have wished to begin logic with the unity of or even with being and not-being.e. (See 14. is implied in ordinary for example) becomes rather than Everything (a city. the In like manner. . 3 a becoming are inseparably joined/ ) W Sub late taken in the threefold sense of tollere.) Becoming &quot.. With it philo the first concept. as originating^ ceasing. . whose distinguishes itself from dogmatism. he was Heraclitus is in his speculative depth equally right. philosophy by the of the two. His prin (4) This is concrete.) Be concrete coming is precisely such a medium.) ciple of absolute flux untruth of being is the reason why thought cannot abide by that but must go further the untruth of &amp. unity itself from recognition of this concept distinguishes On account of this concreter character.e. But the beginning cannot be made with beginning: the most that. sophy Wolff enunciated when he said. hence with /aVqcris. all scepticism.. ( 19. precisely because the prius is always 3 is the real truth &amp. But.) becoming consciousness. Inter nihilprinciple by itself. as and likewise nothing as passing into The two as constituting being. no but as de longer as they were before their union. not being. made becoming the predicate of everything. i. itself. umet aliquidnon datur medium&quot.. i.QUALITY. i.. as the concrete unity of being and contains both in itself. fluor 29 as concreter category is. (&quot. of being. properly speaking. Becoming. Hence graded to mere moments.gt. in opposition to Xenophanes. When Heraclitus. as subletted^* in it being is contained as passing into nothing. 60.

conservare. because we have to do with some 3 That what originates thing other than a mixture. obs. 13. elevare: hence sublate and degrade at 2) one and the same time. as these distinct ten dencies. the unity of such self-sublating terms. origination. is cessation. but origination and cessation are one (one becoming).* W But This it is when is the claim of the sceptic. Origination and cessation are the same be coming. or that what has a beginning also comes to an end. and becoming.&quot. the become. &amp. : This origination the other tendency nothing passes over into being. Signi ficance of o-Tep^o-is for all origination.) ( just as false as it would be to claim that the process between acid and oxide is completed . in combina &amp. and is instead the transition into nothing. Similarly. iii. as itself. p.30 CATEGORIES OF IMMEDIACY. 34. tions of radical &amp. and every origination is in itself a cessation. Werke. but being just as much sublates itself. (Hegel. being passes over just as much the con : transition is into being. also ceases to be. reciprocally interpenetrate and are paralysed. with Aristotle.lt. is no merely empirical observation.lt. but the result of the self-sublating becom ing.) Each of these sublates itself and its other. and at the same time. The one tendency trary of is cessation is into nothing. as it were the precipitate of that process. and acid principles as such oxygen no longer exist. but nothing itself. &quot.gt.&quot. &quot. 109. sublates The result of such sublation cannot be equivalent to 1) nothing/ for this has itself been only a moment is in becoming..

24. therefore. therefore. however. &quot. but with a negation is (yonderInstead of it one might say ^-being or being). the result will be the radical or oxygen result of it is the neutral.gt. (Cf. also. There-being is being. the moment of being.. 44. is but this unity as having become fixed^ hence has a resting 33). If There is contained in it. (Cf. not being ( vipure being. . terite of : 31 rather the (2) The pre becoming which has become (geworden}. (2&amp. i. . 35. because he is (to express the thought quite as spacially) everywhere. There-being. there- being^ That until now fluid unity of being and notbeing here appears fixed like water in the crystal.QUALITY.) (a) Something. contains being hence one may speak of a in itself as its moment being in all there-being. being that coloured with not-being. &quot. no longer as a .e. FINITUDE (DETERMINATENESS). The become is becoming that has come to a rest (it is or has become}. W what-being. but being as identical with not30) this unity. the crystal. as that (werderi) language rightly denotes B. 42. moment come to of unresting becoming. but not conversely. but. Therebeing is limited being hence the there-being Dasein God is not here of God is an improper expression. ( which was likewise unresting cessation rest. or there.) one analyses the concept of the become one finds contained in it the fact that it is [has] become. .

prop. ( 31).lt. in so doing. these two moments con is stitutes fully the but this rather the con is crete unity of the two. says. calls one-sidely emphasised. but that determinateproperty ness with the change of which the quid itself ceases to be. pletely corresponds in there-being is of course negation.. God. etc.) actuality. another sense. also ( tion no longer this unity as unresting origina that has come to rest. But neither become of .&quot. i. but not as identical with being in not. as being. i. 37 (y).not&quot. the itself become contains as a moment but no longer the abstract referenceless not. omnimode determinatum. . or qualitative. the Reality in this sense is essenti reality 127. Omnis determinatio negatio.&quot. quiddity^ translation of the Aristotelian TO TL lori which com This as the not to this concept. in j0-being the so we call quality. Scholium]. but as being the same right negation to be called with reality. for example. 2 &amp. or per the haps better by the scholastic name.32 CA TEGORIES OF IMMEDIA C Y. Epistolae.. quidditative there*being. which will be taken in different from (See existence.. or 33).. which is almost as gets. viii. Spinoza entirely est right when he But he for the other side. 36. Later. [&quot.gt. &quot. which in there-being constitutes the there.&quot. there-being. 50. which a quale or quid. ^ is not meant a separable which one merely has. Ethics. when one. 41 is &quot. . (j8) Secondly. that determinateness which says what an object M By quality or quiddity is. &amp.e. have no plurals. because He is the sum ally of all realities. but as not This &quot.

to be fully con ceived.e. i. For of since the process from which it results was a unity being and nothing. But if something is what * is become. and the real result of becoming we get only by thinking along with something the nothing of something. That some ing thing is really the best designation for the concrete unity of those two moments is admitted by the fact that we habitually designate as well that in wJiich a quality appears. something has become. other. must be equally posited as not. and now for the first we solution fully perceive what really became in the re of becoming the become has now for the first . the result of o o tion is. this subla- properly speaking. it it is something.QUALITY. time won its true name. In our consciousness is 38.. is as having behind the contradiction of becoming. not fully conceived. Only so is something thought in its truth and what . in which the two appear as quite equally justified. i. In general something is a favourite cate gory of the ordinary consciousness. it is implied that when becom complete.. as also the quality itself by the word something.e. the result of the process cannot as here be posited merely as being. 33 Such a thing we time call something. because it is neither so abstract as the earlier categories. is becoming sublated into being. Something. nor so concrete as the succeeding. was said in the previous section must now be more c . but. complete and free from contradiction.

accordingly.) 40 (/3). this abstract expression Hegel admirably de notes the selflessness of something. something a expressed by the fact that by the word denoted. . By this. of becoming nearly defined to the effect that the result is something and other. its That (the thought of) something involves other as in complement is expressed in the Latin aliquid. They have. merely a part of a (U) Something and Other. so does it also that of being. who is more than a something. other. as. as were. i. Man. will.By we make what we &quot. its being open towards other. an adjectival being (Weisse). or also in or by other. things out of which therefore &quot. does not.e. it (a). . 39 other. (See 50. is for himself out of him not everything is to be made. for example. But as something contains the moment ( of not-being 36). subjects but in the very concept of something is in volved the being related to other and having towards it an open side. which coincided with the per aliud What is merely a something is thereby for concipi.34 CATEGORIES OF IMMEDIACY. it is for other. It is the in alio esse of Spinoza. &quot. fall only in us as the thinking and relating . as it is little is German totality. Something cannot be thought without This relativity of the two. therefore. To be for other is in something the side of its not-being..

) 41 (7). a tautology and no new discovery. for other. is identical with To this unity of being- . neither of the two may really be thought without the other. ( 35 35.. as opposed to its being being-in-self..e. the result of this category. ( 41. is only the negative of being-in- The Kantian philosophy in a great measure turns upon this distinction of what something is in itself and what it is for consciousness. made the possibility of itself. They rest upon the holding metaphysics fast of these two categories. It is the never-enough-to-be-esteemed merit of this philo sophy to have been in earnest with the application of If it is once applied. taken as inseparable from the it. rather each presupposes ^ the other. But if the being-in-self of something is merely the negation of its being-for-other and con versely. Hence each taken by itself is only a violent abstrac tion . not for other). The being of something. in its truth it is i. other.e. i. because it is (what it is) not for other.. is its Something is in itself its only.e. it has been shown ( doubtful. The Kantian objections to the knowability of the in3). will in this relation to other have also to be posited under the character of being. just as its being-for-other self. and receive their answer so soon as one perceives that we can not abide by these categories as ultimate categories. is not for us.QUALITY.) If it was for other because it it displayed its not-being towards other. for other. course is that things as they are in tkerns elves or the in-themselves of things is not known (i.

therefore. as when one says. &amp. In the clear. in itself is also for otJier. as real being and actual being. union of those two thoughts coincides what had been peculiar to each of the two. which something stands this opposition. being.gt. W ^ &amp. is &quot. and hence beyond it is Something. and point (2) Such refer to one another as their complements. means that a thing lacks the in itself. contains the confirmation. being posited.to something. but is expressly set (gesetzt posited) there. Since what something this is in it. only under other names. like wise the other expression.36 CA TEGORIES OF IMMEDIA C Y. There is something in him. signifies something in himself . (2) the expression. It is 42. its external relationship. in so far as something. or there is something only in it. is denoted by precisely the same word as its being-in-self . In posited being is contained the perfection and the goal (finis) of beingin-self. Universally where two tilings are so related that each is merely the not-being of the other. the fulfilment of the mere being-inself. or has being . appearance. are applied.. There is nothing in it. already in 16. or it is (4) posited as this. i.. the object has something in itself. means the man has an inner worth. At the same time the phrase. they are not to be thought without one another.for-other.e. i. The categories of being-in-self and posited being.e. taken from the circumstance that an object is not in a place accidentally merely.&quot.lt.. in the fact that the being-for-otlier of an ence consists object. is only an 4 The expression. that it is necessary to go beyond the two only opposed possible relations in to other. i. in-self and being-for other language points particularly in in many be at ways.e.

being. 37 of its own not something. being-in- independently of other). de by one and the same word not only that unity itself. tained in this concept. a fact that implies a defect.e. way in language. (c) Determined Being.e. according to Fichte.QUALITY. Determined being contains.) 43 (). which as the most important of the entire group (see p. was selected to designate them have to be developed. hence as restricted being. since just as in the case of the word something. comes a determined being only through the tendency which is called determination or ivhat is to be. is Some be thing in which restricted what it is in itself. W Something is determined which is in it as a thing yet to it \) (destinatnni) to that fulfilled or posited. only through the being of another. and its definite being. therefore requires to be accomplished outwardly. 33).. is definite i. things in themselves are . Determination is the In determination tendency to posit being-in-self. appears to us being-in-self. as it were in higher power hence. but as involved with its opposite. They are pre scribed in a very intelligible this. first. is to be more precisely The individual moments which are con considered.. but at the same time the moments contained in notes it of a further development. or that which makes it definite. . sclf (i. ( 44. but at the same time the tendency towards its removal.

something is adequate to its what-is-to-be hence the correctness of the expression that man can be (is) what he is to be. W Something tuni) is when it receives determined (coactum. i.^ (5) comes something. determinadeterminateness (to be its The distinguished from determination) from other.^ Through it the determined is a finite thing. barrier. an opposing tendency. the determining other becomes the limiting thing which experiences resistance or compelling limitation. since what-is-to-be is and hence is determination yet to be realised. what (through our doing) they should what-is-to-be is the proper . being..e. termination are here em&amp. or be ing that is in itself determined. presup must.lt. But since determined being contains likewise the moment of being-for-other.. but rather or as it has is its termination. limited. (2) Since be. i. 44 (/3). therefore. is (3) Only by its finitude. since that which compels poses is as such a foreign power. another (not one s own) (3) will. Of course. Limit. through the other. etc.e. same distinction underlies that between shall and 2) All compulsion. it itself is not. Determined being as being-in-self. duty. Hence is being determined depends upon But or must^ be determined by other. something is not determined with out other. as law.38 CATEGORIES OF IMMEDIACY.. other. something a determined some It be thing and precisely thereby something. also the restricted opposite is correct. inner determination of something. . is what-is-to-be. since where the limiting other begins. its since the opposite moment also is contained in it.

according to Aristotle) the liaecceitas This was above given as concept of determined being. the . makes something determined being (its in which barrier. (V of Duns Scotus. therefore.QUALITY. ( 42. and yet does But leads still further. is this determinate thing (roSe TI. is not?* and in which the other is riot it and self Definite something. The moment of tinitude (Trepas was by Pythagoras and Plato rightly emphasised as the higher compared with Limit is that mere indeterminateness (aireipov). that he (only then) is something. their use ployed as synonyms.) 45. (7) But since beginning and termination were according to that which limit. Its contradictory nature is. therefore. limited by another. the unity of being and not-being. we have in the concept of finitude the most important concept in this group and hence it was employed as superscription. Something is something through its limit the beginning But the limit of something is precisely of the other hence the being of something is of the other. It. ( owes its being to that. Something spatial finite in Since here the other beside something which appears to present and is so posited in something itself that this 38). the other begins. or within it. its termination) will be that and is both is. (See p. (2) coincides with this its limit. whereby something itself . 33.) W Hence the expression for one who has definite duties of calling. its it 33. displays in it the contradiction that not. and in all is 39 meaning that it is is abstracted from. be really the beginning it is only because in its being longs to its essence that ( 44).

aliud . 46.e. there it becomes. demand of 38.. and all deterrninateness was excluded from ^ Since something by its limit God. The Middle Ages alterum. But alterability. alterum . and is deter mined by other. Where it shall and must. W Hence something extends beyond its limit. At the same time.. could this quiddity of haecceitas. is not W This word is here (analogously one with it. a becoming it becoming should be something is really thought as identical with its not.} The being other has Jiere entered completely into something. .) excludes other from itself. (Cf. or where its own tendency unites with external Alteration is also compulsion. &quot. also. and higher power. becoming. i. as it is the real fulfilment of finitude. there is posited the necessity that met completely the which the result of also as not. alter. 36 2. but a determined becoming. by Spinoza. also forms the transition to a new group . (3) necessity of being other or alterability. as determined. (Aliud. it is one with its limit but since in the limit the other has its beginning. alterable/ 4^ and only as alter is it something. i. crepov eYepoi/. with mortality) not used for the mere possibility of alteration.e. and we have in alterability the fulfilment of finitude.&quot. Here thought here is other. be called the ultimate reality. something is alterable. . (4) As Where determined. alteritas. something is determined to something. predicated of the quid. as well as. Something is alterable because in its concept is involved the being other. according to now become that.40 CA TEGORIES OF IMMEDIA C Y. Wolff s ens realissimum also omnimode determination. the former wr as conceived as negation. Some thing able is.

it i. its 33. Therefore we have in this transition really a passage to other. infinitude. and not with any definite object. beginning as well itself termination.QUALITY. or (2 &amp. so also we cannot otherwise think it than that something when it alters (since alteration was equal to becoming something).) But since this other lias in the limit of something. absolute negativity..gt. is.. determination negative. comes into coincidence with itself. it in fact. the first negation has . Such transition what we call Infini therefore. negation identical is wherever. becomes or remains identical is with tude. As we cannot otherwise express it. that other. ( to become becomes other. something {something other or other something). i. its just as does something as its itself. by the negation of its the affirmative return to itself. . C. i. we think alteration completely. Infinitude or Absoluteness its is to be found wherever something becomes in with itself..e. INFINITUDE.W negation. we think in this section dis so soon as one reflects that we have here to appears The seeming sophism contained do with the thought-determination something. 47. in is which that which incidence with in transition comes into co itself. of categories. itself.e.e. In this. it 41 Something. because its is to say (because is must become other). becomes something. If.

The Ideality = sublatedness. is not vanished.lt. i. but again sublates this distinction (therefore restores its unity with self.e. that which does not exclude limit and finitude. in every enjoyment. The expression of The infinite is the unity of the infinite Schelling. . &amp. but as the not-real. there is contained also 2 infinitude.lt.. Negatio duplex affirmaf). The concept of infinitude arose when we thought alteration and observed what at the termina tion resulted therefrom.42 CATEGORIES OF IMMEDIACY. or ideally The infinite therefore. something becomes other. rather includes and contains them which is in itself as sublated moments. the opposietc.). &amp. As the Platonic cbretpov and ire pas correspond to indeterminateness and limit. limit. The circle is an infinite line because it returns to itself.gt. its own e J- e-w-i^-v}. 48. (3 &amp. namely. They are because the barrier in them is at the same infinite 3) time no barrier.. its own termination. Hence. this If now one does not allow thought to come to a termination.gt. be cause it distinguishes itself from itself (therefore negates its unity with itself). t*~ word infinite is. limits itself.. and the finite. other as itself some thing.lt. ( 33. subletted is. every satisfaction. as the ideality of these. but which. finds here its justification. be cause it is a return to self. if becomes again other. but posited. infinite.gt. one constantly repeats what has really vanished.^ tfVvU-. Just so God. (4) \ i.e.The &amp. 4 sublated is. &quot. &amp.&quot. not employed by us in the highest spheres only. therefore. but constantly repeats. Ego is absolute negativity. obs. so his /UKTOV corresponds to the &amp.

it excludes termination and finitude. truly this he says. eWeAes. at this therefore and conclusion. infinitude.&quot. in the constant alternation other.e. which is constantly lengthening. which forms its limit. prop. the Phys. What to him the perfect. Ethics. thing outside itself is leaves nothing outside infinite. cept of infinitude [Spinoza 44. The Grecian expression. 6). properly belongs to Endlessness is false infinitude. TO Se reAos Trepa?. because it does not correspond to the concept of infinitude.. one does not allow thought to arrive O &quot. 43 and other.. cor. Hence.] | 49. it has in that which is excluded another opposed to itself. there arises. points to an inclusion in itself by the infinite of the finite. in the case of the transition thought. a of the two determinations something and progression. to which is commonly the it. tion of something conclusion.QUALITY. Since. that of endlessness.determination into its opposite. indicated by the word therefore. Of i. drawn and &quot. 1. 2.. although only that of endlessness. and Spinoza s distinction between the infinitum (rationis) and the indefinitum or infinitum imaginations at least approximates the correct con itself. s &quot. As the circle is the image of infinitude. predicate infinite or false given.&quot.. its termination. But if the endless progression arises by the of one fact that one. 6.&quot. reAiov duSev p) xov reAos. part ii. the matter reaches ( no This conclusion we 46) have If &quot. Hi. like our perfect (vollendef). does not . that is to say. according to Aristotle infinite is that which forever leaves some (false) (&quot. so is the straight line.

since. Halle. nature does not rise above endless The scientific progression in the generic process. a concrete identity of opposite determinations must be thought. always begins anew and al two determinations. itself. as really identical. 2nd ed. which. However. may be called also superfinitude.. therefore. if i. think true one pleases. if. my work Body &quot. of extreme importance. but gression occurs. endless progression must result if one does not allow that In 31 and 32 this identity to be realised. while being . might it easily have been shown. 1849. there the demand stated in the section is to be seen therein. Wherever. for example. through whose alternating appearance the progression arises. there may be spheres in which. because such a con crete identity cannot be realised. p. wherever endless progression shows itself in our thought.e.&quot. be perceived in it the demand to posit the two deter minations. there must. he is in so far The correct as it is not possible to abide by that. 61. there is to be found in it the demand to get beyond and leave behind in thought this entire sphere. (Cf. infinitude. that is to say. superalterability. When Aristotle terms every thought which runs out into endless progression fallacious. but. wherever appears to be unavoidable. application of the above-given rule which follows from the very concept of endless progression is. Thus. allow the return into self to complete precluding this ternates the result. for methodical procedure. the endless pro But even then it is not ultimate. Something..44 CA TEGORIES OF IAfMEDIA C Y.) 50 (a). and Soul. Conversely. consideration of this process therefore impels thought beyond the sphere of nature.

obs..). contains the other in itself. negativity. self-dependent. became ( or absolute and thereby passed into infinitude. that is. Such a something. Being-for-self is here to be understood only as that reference to self which is mediated by negative relation to other. The substantive being (cf. but it will be a self-sufficient. We have not yet here true sub jectivity. even in the ex pression there is contained this polemic withdrawal of itself into itself.gt.QUALITY. or for. in se Spinozistically expressed (3 est per se concipitnr.e. is no longer a mere something. which required completion through other and by which ence to ( 35). a refer self. self or one. &quot. to say nothing of the idea of conscious personality. in call in a negative. for which and ( in which it was. now. obs. figurative expression may state the being-contained of the other in the one as no longer 2 real. obs. &amp. not for itself.). 39. In fact. ( 32. i. being-for-self is in finite being. (*) it. but the word is to be under: . although being-for-self forms the founda tion for those determinations. just as becoming does &amp. so that this merely appears of the other. other. it 45 became or remained identical with 46) restored unity with self itself. ideal way.gt. &amp. Something was only for other ( 39. it was limited 44).Here one is not to think of the numerical term one. which at the same time. a there-being something. of what is for itself is the foundation as well of substantivity as of subjectivity. Something as this ideality we being ^ in.* If there-being is limited being.lt. 1). and later for life. distinct thing. W This more for alteration &quot.

e. for itself is the ground-category of all atomistic The atomists of antiquity were entirely theories. 184). negative^ related. that it contains (true) infinitude. one can only be thought as negatively related to the 1) remaining ones/ Being-for-self is to be thought only as the juxtaposition of beings-for-self.&quot. and much more concrete cause it is incipient subjectivity}. But ? towards what but is Other does not stand opposed to it it. Leibnitz s monad theory agrees with them in that. It also emphasises the moment of ideality in the monads. 51 ($). as Leibnitz does of every monad. p. negative relation. Ed. This side of the ideal relation. as Leibnitz expresses himself Opp.gt. . in them all other monads appeared. They. they (&quot. These were therefore conceived as repre sentative. contained in it is as a sublated it moment.46 CA TEGORIES OF IMMED IA C Y. Thus it is passive. right in thinking of their atoms as above all change. Phil. are reflected in them as in Erdmann. therefore. And the fact that one and whole are often synonyms may justify this The category of the one which is linguistic usage. a person) (because it is merely incipient subjec than something (be tivity). Really.. is contained in the concept of the one which is for itself. fore. presupposes these and excludes them from itself. i. towards one or the entire totality of ones which it can be so only now stand opposed to as the rest. or. and the like. therefore. therefore. It. (=. If. If one has his It is more indefinite than one house. One is. therefore. for itself. stood as in such forms of expression as. there (2 &amp. cannot say of every atom. the atomists have entirely overlooked. as infinite return to self. which miroirs artifs.

We call it relation . their relation has. the monad is in a negative relation to the .Ency- 98 klopadie. &quot.gt. one in its use easily thinks of that which is The excluded one. Even the atomists others. how repelled as already existent.lt. &amp. one negates the oppos ing ones. just as. ever. p. are compelled to admit this dis tinction only they do not deduce it from the con cept of the atom. But since it negates the negative re is one. and through But each consists merely in this negative relation. showed itself raised to in finitude (1) it is the not (or un-) being of one. . One. and the previous exclusion be a coinciding. be come an affirmative proves to one. rather. Since. That one cannot be thought without this negative relation to all other ones will readily be admitted as a fact for us it is no longer an empirical observation. on the con trary. For Leibnitz. Iii 47 this exclusion not-being . the bellum contra omnes does. for the teachers of atom istic theories of the public law of the State. repulsion [see Hegel s &quot.&quot. but because the prin 2 ciple of distinction dwells in every monad. hence the one presupposes the remaining . to the opposing ones. not only because it has no windows through which they may act upon it. since each of them lation towards the ones. it really negates the negative relation to wards the ones. therefore. Hegel . now. employs the term &quot. vol. originates as an opposing term only through the exclusion. self- . but the separating void (the pores) exists along with it. 52 (f). because it denotes a definite manner (fas physical) of exclusion. iii. &amp. is too concrete.QUALITY. Larger Logic. ones..&quot. is only in negative relation this relation. &quot. 178] but apart from the fact that this term.

Since relation is contained in of the one. Hegel uses the term attraction. iii. taken by itself. against in 51.] . and in the sphere of infiri- tude the analogue of becoming lation is becoming-related. no one will dispute who thought the word merely reflects that almost involuntarily or negative relation gets the thought) excluding (i.^ therefore in fact its contrary. however. is exclusion lation. to discover the necessity of that fact. 202. which. where self- excluding things 51) form one ( 50). (&quot. therefore..lt. presented.e. . therefore. also. namely.48 CA TEGORIES OF IMMEDIA C Y. used. there the two determinations are united. . . a concreter conception of what Hegel The necessity of passing had called obs. Where ( relation is posited. re i.&quot. which. Re The three moments can : be designated thus United Being. Becoming of Unity. have. Dis united Being.. further.gt. that he deemed them entirely apposite. &amp.) [? See p. phasising this do the exclusive they as little deduce it as they but beside the atoms there is to be relation above p. 2 and. there obtains what was said fact that exclusion is not. it would perhaps have been more correct to see in the Kantian attraction. (!) The We being-for-self. Heo-el himself lays upon these terms no such stress as Werke.e. of course. The last of these may in also be designated as to becoming for one another one another are for them which beings opposed selves. without relation. and cannot be. is 2 &amp. the atomists cannot help em the concept determination also but. forward to the becoming of unity justifies blending attraction and repulsion into a single thought. would contract all things to a mathe matical point. 193..

) have process.. ( had not yet carried it was merely implicit therefore. 41. Also in this regard Leibnitz deserves 2) As preference before the atomists. relation of beings-for-self for what later will be recognised as realisation of subjectivity. wherever that is . not so much brought in from without as many suppose. since every monad is a mirror of the same universe. concept of of categories closed. found cJiance or necessity. absolute negativity. 53. the atomistic teachers of the public law of Similarly the State represent individuals as brought together by external need or force.). or exclusion shows itself as relation. i.e. be other. this. The pre-established harmony which. .e. the and thereby completed ( and the circle infinitude .. and being-for-other coincided in posited being ( 41). The concept of infinitude was absolute nega The one that was identical with itself was is true. it i. places the monad in relation is. so also. where the self-excluding ones return again into one (\ 52). as system. becoming. embraced under infinitude is fulfilled and Wherever a concept is posited. A system can be thought only where we ( 189. i. 49 which brings them together. there is posited in relation or in becoming-for-other.e. is and since there no longer any must be absolute negativity for the remaining ones But as being-in-self this it shows itself in exclusion.. or by an equally external contract. obs. so does the &amp. but because it itself into effect (against other).lt. tivity. being-for-self forms the basis for subjectivity (see 152). ac cording to Leibnitz. at least.QUALITY. 40. for other also it .) One must.

At the same of categories here concludes. the differences. obs. Within this group have arisen three divisions. when one enters more deeply into the articulation. time. which causes that which is in general of greatest concern. Fini- tude (Determinateness). hand. or there-being.) development concluded.50 realised. which. called such de- terminateness Quality the is superscription of quality. be designated as the period from being to becoming. from there-being to alterability. recapitulation of the also has to justify course passed over 28). the superscription chosen. ( and we have 36). an entire group 54. it actually has become what there is really was 16 and 41. on the other . which also its it is it in itself (or wherever (cf. CATEGORIES OF IMMEDIACY. lated together is How which these are articu shown by a (cf. viz. Infinitude (Self-determination). . then with merely those determinatenesses of being with whose alteration the first had to deal determined itself altered.. or also categories of quality. Since in this group we with being. the great pleasure which one has in this con stant repetition is often merely a pleasure in an entirely abstract schematism.) to the different principles of designation (see may either receive the superscription (Hegel s) being being-for-self. The parallelism which. appears between the sub divisions and the larger groups is a necessary con sequence of methodical progression but. according 28. from being-for-self to relation. however. or finally may be called Endlessness (Indeterminateness). given it.

to be overlooked. so here and not-being as origina united being. Since the two are opposed. qualitative categories. hence of all. O in infinitude. precisely as in become- ing. necessi tates a passage to those of quality/2 ) (1) When it it matter that said of the Kantian concept of implies only quantitative distinctions. into concrete unity. but neither is to be thought without the other. Since. disunion.QUALITY. or becoming-for-one-anotJier. As in becoming. because union (pro) supposes disunion and conversely. in which the peculiarity which above was vanished. The qualitative thought - determinations of * indeterminateness and determinateness came together. was the highest. ( 54) ascribed to qualitative being has This non-qualitative being we call quanti tative being/ 1 ) and the inner contradiction of the highest. cessation. being was contained as tion (see 33). itself 51 and with reason has drawn upon and reproach. But even in it. and dis united being for the same reason into united being as union. these two thoughts is sublate into the stable precipitate of a being-together- and-along-with-one-another which neither unitary nor the opposite. we have in this category the truth of all the preceding. there lies a contradiction. is . contempt 55. since it had as passed into disunited being. in this are contained all qualitative categories. but among them relation. therefore.

category. 1. the younger Fichte and Braniss. obs. determinations presuppose the qualitative quantitative hence can be treated only after them.) . is That the 52.52 CATEGORIES OF IMMEDIACY. clear enough. \ 58. being-ior-self (Cf. Of course contrary the application of the category many at the stage of of a quantitative is an anticipation this from . To the before one numerates like or similar whafs. 1. is easily shown One must have the concept of a what empirically.

number of atoms). be altered. 56. nature of that whose attribute which. specific gravity.II SECOND CHAPTER. This gives us the concept of magnitude.&quot.. mean as well quantity in general (in the sense of Troo-d-n/s. therefore. the being a magnitude) as also a quantity 53 . become no indifferent to being.having may &amp. had been. limit. IN what the peculiarity of quantity consists appears from reflection upon what qualitative determinateness.g. like the word fication. whose negation and truth 0) it proved to be. has the inconvenience that by it one may magnitude. which. QUANTITY. WThat quantity is the truth of (mere) quality gives to all attempts to reduce all qualitative attri butes (e. in such a As this was one with the deter its mined manner that with altered ( alteration the determined itself 36.. without prejudice to the will it is. 54). so the term W quantity be employed where something has a determinateness. fluidity) to merely quantitative (e.lt.g. an inner justi (2) The word quantity. is &quot. a limit that is just as well 3) Such an attribute alone have we first to think.

MAGNITUDE.54 CATEGORIES OF IMMEDIACY. obs. the sense are. so that by it all determinations of magnitude shall be meant.gt. is opposed as relative being to absolute.. . 3) means to This is true only change it into something else. and hence this word has been chosen for the superscription of the entire the word magnitude will be used to chapter denote Troo-o-nys in the sense in which one speaks of the magnitude (size) of a house finally. quantity in the sense of a TTOO-OV. (Cf. the quantitative in general. the forest extend beyond to alter its qualita it.. and (2 &amp. or a magnitude. In order here to avoid misconception the foreign word quantity shall be used in the widest sense. will be denoted 8 by the word quantum.) One was determined that which possesses magnitude. (quantitative) limit of a forest may be widened.The .) A. 80. tive limit. the positive now are to be added. of TTOO-OV quantum. immaterial to it/ 1 Because of this difference from ) being-for- self. i. 44. viz. because it is only a limited sphere in which quantity is the supreme categorv. on the contrary. What is con- . A thing has magnitude. &amp. in itself. or the being a it magnitude is predicated of it.gt. 57 (a). a magnitude]. essentially distinct concepts. (See 47. its haecceitas (1. being a magnitude has the character of beino-& for-other. when there belongs to an attribute which is also external.e. however. and the forest remain a forest (in which . .lt. does so To these negative deductions only comparatively. within certain limits. &amp.

e. has shown itself to coincide with it. This means that in magnitude are to be distinguished what are not distinguished. whose truth it. and what.2) ( Hence distinctions of magni greatness of God. as. ( 52. 58 (b\ In magnitude we shall united ( 55) or self-excluding first ( have the dis . the self-excluding ones will have also the character of sameness . for example. Magnitude is taken as the supreme category when. will.g.lt. where the mind enters into external existence. Hence merely quantitative determinations have meaning chiefly where external existence is dealt with . magnitude appears . reflection ated. quantity proved to be as 55) must be found in but sublated moments. tude and relative distinctions are used as synonymous 3 As being and not were no longer as such con tained in becoming ( 33). therefore. but even in the mental sphere we speak of the greatness of a character or a deed. not be self-excluding. so in every later stage of development the earlier are contained in an essenti ally altered form. there fore. because they are one..QUANTITY. 55 tained in the concept of magnitude. is done by Islam. . and hence otherwise (3) than where they formed the unresolved (V contradiction. &amp. one really has in this category can be known by upon that from which this concept origin The two sides of the ( contradiction. 51) but the moment the since it moment is Jiere no longer opposed to union or the becoming one ( 50). W On account of this.) of self-exclusion of Therefore.gt. supreme stress is laid upon the &amp.

lt. therefore. and yet no one of them is what another is.gt.) Magnitude. a it was there designated term which then denotes something denoted transition. (3 &amp. the points are each what the others are. or explain the greater length of a line to ourselves by the addition of points.e.e. while here completed. i.. of a emphasise kingdom) as originating for us by leaps.g. obs. . W When to one says that two things are only quanti- tativel_y different.) Since this is an essential side of magni tude. just . when we think of magnitude (e. they are not really different. this refers merely to the fact that this difference is an immaterial one. as ^ or discrete. obs. ing together of something and something. many.) numerically one (see to know it. by the com &amp.. cannot avoid using it. ( 51. so in discretion not-being is repeated. therefore.) are opposed not many but the rest. where . and again something or rather one. without any numerical meaning (see 50. 35. contained in But that from which quantity originated itself. no difference.56 CATEGORIES OF IMMEDIACY. such a mode of viewing magnitude is not in In many mathematical demonstrations one correct.) 3) A sum. the moment which as Union. is equivalent &amp. tive determination the many stand opposed to the to one as we learned 55. homogeneity. or there belongs to magnitude the moment of discretion. secondly ( 55). is not formed of disparates but (4) This moment of discretion we of discretes. therefore. i. the ones. ( 2 Of Many one can speak only there is addibility.^ As in ex clusion.. 59 (c). a purely quantita tinguished.gt. (The somethings. (Cf. and again one . the things which are distinguished being also not dis Many is.

gt. as it 57 contained that character of moment. be considered as divided. by dividing the line may into lines. or also into points. one. will have the distinctionlessness. (3) magnitude as such belongs union.lt.As line. on a Magnitude continuum 4 to &amp.gt. (4) If one conceives of contains them negatively. 47) contain the many appear in itself. or forms a unity. &amp.gt.lt. will in This means that magnitude. for then it would contain them r^rists (tfw&teht. . which. which as such or as real that side will only is where this simplicity constant or ceases. or without leaps. but points. so points. an ideal manner 2 &amp. because they are sublated in the &amp. many are contained in magnitude in an ideal manner.gt. that the former has not several magnitudes. formed like entflieheri) from them. is ( as in itself homogeneous. as real. &amp. continuity. hence Therefore the length of a line as mere possibility. each of which has its length. the length of a line. one makes prominent the moment of continuity.The the latter not several lengths. but will be contained this as moment in homogeneity as moment. where it is The line does not twzsist (&?steht) of interrupted. &amp. hence as both being and not being. ( 2 &amp. 3 in the living organism simple chemical substances are contained as sublated (com bined).lt. and as such (free) first appear in decomposi tion. since it is a consciousness says that the magnitude of a kingdom. magnitude as growing gradually.QUANTITY. and be simple homo first first geneity/ 1) But that moment will not thereby be excluded. is a simple determina tion. appear only at its extremities.

Z 1) says. contains determinations. constant. &amp. But continuity and discretion are here taken only as determinations which belong to magnitude as such (in the sense of being a magnitude not of a magnitude). It is taken as the many and former when we attri It is both bute to an object the predicate much or little. That Leibnitz But what has thus far been developed com pels us to go further. ranges the lex continui with the When theory of increments is easily explicable. the plural alone shows that one takes magnitude in the sense of quantum. ki 8 rri .*&amp..lt. i.e. by conceiving their mere discretion as sublated. which is therefore. conceive a line (a continuum) arising out of points only by giving the points an extension. quite rightly perceived that we. Each limits the other. ^^ ^Sev f^ragy he has o-wexes. as the latter when the In both epithet great or small. for example. Discretion and continuity are determinations of magnitude. one speaks of discrete and continuous magnitudes as different.. Hence our division ..gt. 3). i. obs. and by the negation of and magnitude.Phys. . But those deter minations are such that each of them has in the other its limit. its termination and its negation . ( 2) When KVUV Aristotle (&quot.5S CA TEG DRIES OF IMMEDIA C Y.e. 7 X ara eV e s fr&v uOvvarov e aSicu/oerwv emu TL . 60. for as the moment of discretion appears only ( where con tinuity terminates 59. so can continuity appear only at the expense discretion. . cases magnitude is attributed to it.&quot. each of the negation of the other.

. only because the many Hence it /^supposes these were sublated in it. because no con is tinuity). But in like manner magnitude was continuous. problem of how entirely definite homogeneous quanta (e.g. but. The heap as a co-existence is a continuum as a co other. without the many. since discretion can not be completely conceived except when one thinks continuity. 61.) Hence.lt. when we 2) arrive at the aroa/A). ceases 59 indivisible (continua the logical puzzles of the ancients. at the same time.. existence of individual it contains The very remarkable tinuum. therefore continuity not to be thought . is distinctionless. their difference none. continuous.. treating of the growth of magnitude. The Kantian Second Antinomy of pure reason rests . some (e. . etc. now put forward the moment of dis cretion.. when the one is thought as discrete. the other must be taken only as a con kernels.e. Among and so on. there of continuity and discretion. acervns. discrete things are different. many. ( 59. fore. then an &amp.g. now pass suddenly from this determination to their co-existence. they are determined as the same.). without discretion it. by conceiving one grain brought. side and diagonal of a square) can be incommensurable. itself is unity i. would be solved if it were shown why. discretion is really the unity of discretion and continuity. many (one point has no magnitude. or their union. magnitude in being discrete i.QUANTITY.e. is really really Hence. calvus. But it is also evident that each of these two determinations is identical with the other .

does not which we show the necessity of it. 63. &amp.60 CA TEGORIES OF 1MMEDIA C Y. a magni The makes this although transition appear as ordinarily make. What we have at this point is this each is the concrete unity of both. &amp. without the and s is. is. each is. since itself. a quantity) or what. sans really simples. one B. which the section shows. the two limit one another. The empirical observation that in order to think magnitude. (Ibid. is was magnitude that the same with its limit KK&.) What But (a we really have then self -limiting is magnitude. as the second term we call quantum. effort to upon the tions hold fast one of these determina other. it transition from magnitude to a magnitude or quantum. the : whole of magnitude. one must think something having magnitude as the substrate of it. if definite magnitude magnitude.lt. to tude is thought. magnitude as limiting itself to magnitude. that is it or limited magnitude/ limited coincides 2 further. QUANTUM. quantum it. which indeed was both. has no other mean ing than that. il riy 62. ( 60. if magnitude is thought out. therefore. since magnitude was indifferent limit which the limited also transcended with .gt. ( As from the 1) transition it 62) results as the definite concept of quantum. finally. les already solved by Leibnitz aurait point de compose. therefore.) But now. This we must think we are to think magnitude completely.

or that it becomes quantity by quantity but that by which a thing becomes a thing ( 3) was its limit. i. bility Absolute varia therefore. 23. what constitutes the nature of indifferent to itself. the many . quantum.e. nature is . the deter (Cf. ( 61 56. would be justified. obs. 26. 25..U But sug quantum is a (i. or absolutely variable. then the choice of the term for that this category . as that which coincides with its will be indifferent to itself. Also here must be found. mination of being indifferent to itself is brought out by the mathematical explanation of magnitude. because is it that which is.. the many. tions in quantum from whose contradiction it re (a). quantum. any quantum may be transcended. limit.lt. (3) its own If in our idea of quantum all the developed deter minations should be contained. which says that a magnitude is that which may be increased or diminished.QUANTITY. there was discretion . 64 sulted. those determina moments. determined) magnitude gested even by language (2) that a quantum which coincides with its limit is is is that asserted continually when it is said that the nature of a magnitude con sists in magnitude. must be contained therein what that is.) Finally.e. degraded to hence essentially modified. &amp. and pass beyond Thereby it will be that which is indifferent to alteration. and elsewhere. quantum But since with will contain in itself the it moment of was shown that to ( this it moment was identical that opposed by which magnitude was a continuous unity 68).). altered without alteration of its . 45. itself.) First. (Cf.

since o or oo takes its place. there is discretion as sub must be contained in what previously constituted the quantum continuity of magnitude ( 59. now unity no longer stands opposed but has become identical with it many.^ Pro is perly. unity. ) mere number. therefore. but. whereas until now 3 unity was in its concept a mere singular.lt. becomes plural. YV henever one of these moments disappears. quantum will be letted. while the multiplier in the first case.. 2) Similarly. on this side. unity. there enters into its place something not merely quan titative. . it speaks of unities. negative.62 CA TEGORIES OF I MMEDIA C Y. l) quantum number.^ will be many as forming a This moment of quantum we it annumeration (anzahf)\ But. the multiplicand in the first case. an annumeration of unities.e. shows _as becoming plurality by uniting themselves. is quantum number. ^ When in the case of a con tinuously increasing magnitude we go beyond it. represents annumeration.e. number ceases. call plurality.gt. this. like that. That number has as its moments unities and annumeration may also be sensibly represented by uniting numbers as products or as fractions. but essentially other instead of a a limits of Scarcely in the case of any category has lan so aptly anticipated thought as in that of The many which are self-exclusive it quantity. the numerator in the second. They form the guage &amp. in this the justification of subjecting everything spiritual as well . i.. as moment of quantum i. secondly. unities! The as real identity of these two moments i. Number positive lies is a category. because to the 64). representing unity. &amp..e. (cf. the denominator in the second.

e. separate. numbers may be produced by composition or by being reckoned together. or numbering. tion that two moments (the aireipov and the Trepatvovra) constitute the essence of number. is not wanting it natural among them. on the contrary. which. If number had as its moments annumeration and i. or being taken separately. or by decom position. since operation upon them tlwught .^ Since. will be ( that system.e. there is and also their moments can in that an opposition in numbers. thought-determinations operation is externality ( external thought or reckoning.QUANTITY. as such. i. of spatial unities.. therefore. such Reckon ing the production of numbers. because of the externality of number. 27. the most im mediate. unity. will be where with unity (or annumeration).). The Pythogoreans re as the highest The correct percep garded category. one divides what is united/2) The is real foundation of the entire system of number formed by number first in in its immediacy.. as when. of they are 57). is immediately posited. numbers is are outside one another. obs. when separate numbers or their separate moments are united. . Spatial magnitudes form no exception a spatial quantum is : number 65. the Every quantum is number. one (1x1 = 1). Since numbers are is thought-determinations. as 63 to calculation. the first mode of its unity. also unity with an numeration (or unity). Num ber in its immediacy is.

) Hence comes that every number (a) as not posited (a) In their principle all numbers are the equals 1. which are more 3 than mere numbers. fundamental modes (species) of mode of reckoning consists in the operation in i. another as annumeration.64 CA TEGORIES OF JAfMEDIA C Y. Like variability. same.e. Aoyio-riK?/. It is number as not ( ) is posited. but yet i. taken separately. calculability. in so far it number in itself. namely. a process which has negative correlate diminishing or differencing. it is true. Only the Platonic numbers. immediate number. posited by the concept of number. One the real principle of numbers. (1) The act of numbering (2 ) is not Aoyi/o/. the latter process giving the correlate . which from number. Hence here even the impossible (imaginary) is per mitted.. are do-i /^Ar/Toi. concepts. The second mode of reckoning occurs where unity and annumeration. obs. the ability to be compounded and decompounded. one. the number being sought which was the unity therein or that which was annumera tion (quotient). are operated upon. numbers are as its compounded (summing). but are themselves. one into its is separated moments. does not find in the nature of number its limit.e. ( 41. the series of numbers origin (3) ates. The first again. By the position of one. Numbers are produced^ when one number is posited as unity. All the various upon certain forms of reckoning are based elementary operations which are the it. hence even by the Pythagoreans so taken.. 66.

summands. Looking 67 (ft). 2 The but not its components. one may.gt. the nature of the concept is con category. Herewith concluded the circle of the elementary operations. Quantum it. of production. since one produces numbers separation from one number by positing the same number as unity and annumeration potentiation (i. 2. and if arithmetical ex pressions may at all be employed to denote concrete unities. of power makes it clear why many philosophers are fond of using this In fact. (See obs. and.QUANTITY. with the of both.. &amp. see 64-) was mag nitude which was identical with its limit. concept. i. and therefore are mediated by their self -external being) together with is its correlate. if necessary. is which had to be discussed on account of what follow.lt. (1) to Hence a product is a more intimate and there fore higher unity than a sum. (or to the limit of is we shall thereby know how By quantum in the first instance to be conceded. 65 While.e. .. 141. the determination of roots. producing squares and higher powers (2) or such numbers as are posited as identical with one another. &amp. in the second. so-called division. tained in it only in an external manner.e. stated in this section. the third mode of reckoning combines the other two.) number. in the first mode. call that into which a chemical combination is decomposed its factors. one had to do with the immediate unity of unity and annumeration.

one hundred (for example). The question (&quot. make a hundred In one hundred. since all no one of the hundred complete. the limit of quantum or number is to be understood merely that by which this definite quantum is this one number. but. there fore. But number itself is not yet extensive quantum but in the latter. hence that which completes this number. 252 [242]. aims at know ing the extension of his possession. which extension really becomes different with every change..&quot. obs. a body or number of somethings. . so-called denominate number. But now the number. it . extension of quantitative limit./wzV^as anuumeration. With reason does Hegel condemn the confounding (which. of annumeration. is extensive quantum. quantum. whereas an extensive quantum requires number.) In the first we shall it aspect which have to take quantum in the has through annumeration. they may be large even when diminished the question how large they are.66 CA TEGORIES OF 1MMEDIA C Y. is not the hundredth.Works. is But now in a hundred (1100). hundred ( precisely the moment instance. 3. p. is explicable by the concept given of discretion and annumeration) of discrete and extensive magnitudes.) . forms the co-efficient (for example. since discretion is a determina tion of magnitude in itself. therefore. Magni tude in general is conceivable even without number. iii. twenty apples. Number. 64.) whether a person has mudi money has reference merely to the being large of his means. for the rest. is completed by no other number than the hundredth. is contained the limit of the hundred. how much he has.

e.) is. so is also extensive quantum something definite. 67. Even this quantum. i. it is related to that which gives the denomination precisely as the first of its moments to the second. rather. This determination of is the first . but which. 68 (c). (See itself. require it will as its co-efficient. number (Zahl) is here posited as annumeration.e. But.. it is extensive quantum is consistently thought a quantum which a simple determination.. although distinct from mere number. 67 twenty the annuraera- tion (Anzahl) of apples in fact. really. extensive ( 64. to the number the denomination number forfeits a Extensive part of its variability and calculability. quantum in it is increased or diminished of discretion . thing. As quantum in general. i. never contains as a sublated moment. distinct from all But ( 67) it is determined by annumeration.) Without plurality. there is when we think which.e. like the quantum whose co-efficient it number a here gives not so much an annumeration as. Of course in higher potency hence was fault found above when extensive quantum and discrete magni tude are interchanged. By what is joined unity. theless. others. hence in the common usage of quantum speech quantum is usually taken only so.QUANTITY. by leaps. however. it This being understood. there this definite quantum would not be presupposes plurality. it from which distinct. . the moment of plurality. obs. because the moment repeats itself.. i. Rightly does one here call . fore. Maiinon s definition is that extensive quantum is plurality as Kant defines similarly. presupposes plurality.

when posited as Neither. But plurality is taken as passed through. it is so conceived is intensive quantum. but in similar manner the back to the former. naj 7 . is although it is not not without the is it contains them all. an annumeration is as sublated moment i. . is Hence degree...e. If in extensive quantum. . i. sive as its That extensive quantum truth.. therefore. the latter unity. i. It the former when posited as annumeration.e. number which gives not the sum but the Quantum tion. is to be thought without refers to inten ( the other.e. The word degree we use wherever one determina tion (the twentieth degree of heat is only one heat. as sublated). or degree. unity thought as plurality. quantum was as annumera is here posited as unity. the analogy between degree and continuity is so apparent that one can not wonder if some entirely confound them. simple determination which.68 CA TEG DRIES OF IMMEDIA C Y. the twentieth degree of latitude is only one latitude) is different from all others (the twentieth degree is another heat than the nineteenth) without it (the twentieth degree nineteenth). To be extensive and its intensive belongs is to quantum by concept. so that in extensive and intensive quantum the concept of quantum completely posited. contains and hence presupposes . 69. For the rest. accord ing to Kant and Maimon. of course. the twentieth degree the nineteenth as sublated (in contained as having been. the co-efficient here an ordinal position. has been shown latter refers 68) . as sub lated.

when one speaks of twenty Only in higher analysis is the strength (i. though not to be thought without one another ( 61).gt. one simple deter mination.. and continuity. instead of saying (intensively) the twentieth degree we often say (extensively) twenty degrees of heat. Definite degree.. Q) Since the twentieth degree contains in itself the nineteenth. for pounds of force. one treats them as &amp. distinct from all others but since all it. is. etc. that is. as. i. idle. besides their inseparability just pointed out.QUANTITY. i. etc. extensive.. eighteenth.lt. so also the two higher negation as discretion But powers of them. in in these its annumeration.e. . other it (lower) degrees are contained. in the application of numbers. atomism and dynamism in the natural sciences which mostly. therefore. has its extension^ extensive vice quantum is. were the each of the other. also intensive. is . . of Every and the two diffi determinations culties/ to involve oneself in insoluble &amp. twenty degrees. the degree) of change taken into account ( 3) The dispute of without such transformation.e.. extensive and intensive quantum. sublated. turns upon the distinction between extensive and intensive magnitude O 70.e. . versa) To put forward only one is 3) therefore. Often in the ordinary reckonings having to do with intensive magnitudes. exhibit. example. . that is 69 to say. 2 The greater the mass (extensive) the greater the pressure (intensive) the greatness (intensive) of the character shows itself as a series (extensive) of deeds the higher degree of heat as also a greater quantum of heat (matter) the higher tone as a larger number of vibrations.

tical The prac (1) human understanding. is not entirely mistaken tensive extensive quantum and is in one another.gt. &amp. who has operated upon logician. Whoever operates upon that thinks in a manner which. 2) thought. W The distinction that is usually made between multum and multa contrasts strangely with the fact that are nevertheless (see 69. With this coheres the fact that already in extensive quan we making the &amp. though in the first instance only negatively. The calculability ( is in calculation neglected. Denominate numbers cannot denomination be multiplied. so the former yields place to the still higher category of quantum which is not quantum. . mere quanta. forever ceases to be is quantum/ and in the end the result that.70 CA TECOR1ES OF IMMEDIA C Y also a negative relation to one another. increasing extension is endangered. a reduction to the extensive. which supposes that with intensity . since it quantum it thought only as both. tum 65. can not seem strange to the The formula just used states. 2) begins to lose itself. as quantum has proved to be the truth of the category of magnitude.lt. and hence displace completely then. In intensive quantum there occurred when one would reckon with that. though doubtful to the elementary ( 66) reckoner. quantum But limit one another. the more contradicts Therefore. the concept of quantitative relation as also of the quantitative infinite. pletely it is it follows that the more com itself. 2) in the habit of 2 latter the measure of the former. has meaning only in the application.

. But both as a variable in the sides which compose it. i. which shows what the merely (2) relation is. its application in the exponent of the relation I shall mean the unalterable unit. (1) By + . and are therefore rightly joined by the sign =. ( = e). but according to 62.e. (1 At same time it appears. the concept given throws light upon the meaning of the quantitative infinite^ as upon reckoning. secondly. in every quantitative relation. . some thing definite. obs. there is. 3. both are the same. 70. 1 + x + x 2 and the series may be summed up x3 ). 3) such as are not quanta. Every quantitative .. according to the definition ( 63. By infinitely great (or small) magni tudes are meant such as cannot be transcended.gt. QUANTITATIVE RELATION. 71 C. Since thus the exponent (be cause not variable) no longer mere quantum. is.g. invariable as such it is represented by the exponent. first. contained the contradiction above developed. or of the elements Only where re(principles) of these magnitudes. while the sides are mere quanta. &amp. may be represented as an infinite series (e. ( 3) Every relation. is.QUANTITY. relation 71. are one quantum. that is to say. in the relation which they represent finally reckon ing may be made with relations of magnitudes in the moment of their vanishing.) But since every unity of opposed determinations ( can be represented as an endless progression ( 49).

whether o&summands or as factors. since there. 72 (a). and will therefore be also variable only with the the first other. as direct relation. The relation. and. they compose the But will if the exponent is a number.e. since it was made up of both sides the relation will only unity or annumeration. it shows precisely wherein the two sides do it is not coincide. 73 (//). two sides ing of being merely the mean a number. has completion in the other. relation.72 CA TEGORIES OF IMMEDIA C Y. Each side is moments of have its therefore an imperfect quantum. therefore. This was said to be the it is unity of both as its moments. is. mode of and in higher spheres gives way to higher modes. since a quotient was it is merely a moment of and therefore equal to only one side^ But number. is lations are concerned there necessarily reckoning with the infinite. and hence. appears in instance as the relation in which one side i. It is the first. hence the most superficial. for there a quotient. correspond to its concept only where the exponent contains both sides. as difference. but so neither in the direct arithmetical relation. since the exponent says what the relation it. changes just as the other does. The variable sides compose the relation. ..^ nor in the direct geometrical relation. But this relation contradicts itself if we pay regard to the exponent.

QUANTITY.
In both cases
arithmetical
<?>

73

we have
in

inverse relation, in the
4

first,

the

second,

<

>

not only here (when it is sum in direct relation does the exponent correspond to

geometrical QIC product}, rather than
its

But

the relation of the sides, concept, but so also does
since here
is

posited

what there merely was

to be.

In the alteration of one side the other should alter in
like

This does not really happen in direct as the relation, since the second side always appears 5 In inverse relation, dependent and non- variable.
manner.
<
>

on the contrary, the second side alters exactly as
does the
first,

since

it
6
<

makes

its

change in opposition

to that of the latter.
d) If in

>

= e, y and x are rect the relation of equal bases, which, for comparison s sake, angles are made to coincide, e is not that which is common 2) If x is reduced to the simplest to both. y

y-x

<

:

form by putting x = l, then e y, i.e., one side. 3 Two radii vectores from one point of an ellipse are = e. in inverse arithmetical relation, because here y + x 4 of the arm of the balance (y) and The
< >

<

length the weight (x) because yx = e.
>

are
(5)

In

in inverse geometrical relation, fact, if the rectangle x in

creases,
if

than it ; relation, as the truth of the direct, higher and in higher spheres, force, etc. (for example), increase by use (negation).
74
(c).

y remains that which exceeds it by e, or in y x = e, y was the double of x, and this a Hence is inverse its double. creases, y remains
in
:
<
>

If in the inverse arithmetical relation the
is,

exponent

as the

sum

of the sides, their unity,

74

CATEGORIES OF IMMEDIACY,
in

so

the geometrical

is

it,

as

their

product,

a

which their identity is posited as that of unity and annumeration. But at the same time the two sides whose unity forms the
definite

quantum

in

exponent

separate,

and indeed, forever,

for,

since

neither of the two

moments can
;

disappear, so neither

can become the exponent
other.

and, since this

was the
on

unity of both, neither can become unity with the

W

We

have,

therefore,

the

status

the

one hand, that the exponent is a definite complete quantum, i.e., is identical with itself; on the other
hand, that, since
its

moments
to

are forever separate,
be or is not.

the exponent does not come

Since,

now, the unity of being and not being is becoming, the exponent of the relation is really to be taken
as

becoming,

as

coming
is

to

be.

The
or

relation
2
<

with

such

exponents

variable

living

>

relation,

the truth and concrete unity of the direct and the
indirect relations.

The three together form a series which runs parallel to that of quantum/3 Accord
)

ing to the concept given

(

66) of power,

it

cannot

appear strange
contain powers.

if
<

the formulae for variable relations

4)

In the living relation the con
is

cept of relation

realised

because here both de

terminations of the relation, the being constant, the being variable, are posited in the ^-developing (5) exponent.

QUANTITY.
(1)
:

75

An endless approximation is posited (say the length of the arm of the balance) may increase, but since n (the weight) can never entirely disappear, it can never become the entirely static moment. 2) Hence expressions are here employed which are taken from life, as members (of a series), functions, ^Numbers may stand in direct re increments, etc. lation multitudes belong to inverse relation, while degrees, as intensities, are sides of the living relation which the continual change of an intensity (curva<

m

;

(4) Therefore, we meet example) displays. the relation of power in the so-called living forces. (5) In development that which changes yet remains If in the equations of the identical with itself. straight line and the parabola, we designate the 2 unchangeable by e, the formulse ex = y, and ex=y

tive, for

,

or

still

which

y y afford examples in e, and better, /x /x y the distinction of the direct relation is im

=

=

mediately evident, since it appears that in the ex ponent of the latter relation are contained deter minations which constitute the relation.
7o.

Viewing

relation in its entirety,

we

find in it

a determination which prepares the transition to a

new group
category
(
;

of categories.

Relation

is

a quantitative

but, at the

same time, was relation declared

70) to be no longer mere quantum, and

how

far it

is

not this has

now been shown
is

:

absolute variability
it is, this definite

has vanished, for relation
relation
alters.
;

only as

if

the attribute alters, the relation also
it

But

was the essence of

qualitative attri
is

butes that with them that which

them

also alters.

determined by Really, therefore, we have in rela-

?6

CA TEGOR1ES OF IMMEDIA C Y.

an attribute which, though of a quantitative Such an kind, has yet become qualitative also/ 1
tion
)

attribute

we

call

mode,*
of

and to the categories of
the
categories

quality and

those

quantity

of

modality
(1
>

<&>

or of

mode form the

third group.

This gives the positive determination to the 70. Relations are not merely merely negative in quantitative, but also at the same time qualitative
determinations.
states

Rightly

is it

what

sort of a relation

said that the exponent two numbers form. In

so far may the exponent be called the qualitative in the relation. Hence it was correctly said of infinite magnitudes, quantitatively taken, that they are = 0, but that they had a qualitative meaning. Since in the variable relation as the highest relation the qualitative chiefly is active, the calculation of the infinite occurs principally where such relations are concerned. Degree was the category in which above all mere quantums was sublated it has, therefore, more qualitative meaning than has extensive quan tum. Just on that account is every distinction of
:

degree, that it quality is not incorrect. Conversely, the category of degree is always applied where not so much things as rather their qualities are to be quantitatively determined. 2 Since the various meanings of this word will gradually appear as various determinations of one concept, the choice of the name will be justified. 3 The word modality is here not taken in the merely subjective sense in which Kant used it rather in the sense in which it is taken when one, say, terms
<

degree already qualitative. Hence, in quality exists in a definite degree, or finite intensity is the manner in which ties are quantitative. The definition of is the quantity (better quantum) of a

nature every have a de natural quali
to

>

<

>

;

QUANTITY.
the a7rocavo-as /wra
rpoirov of

77

the Aristotelians modal

judgments.
Also here a recapitulation of the completed 28 and 54) lets us see how under the course (cf.
76.

56, obs. 2), three general superscription Quantity ( distinct groups arose as sub-divisions, which, in

the qualitative categories, gave us parallelism with then definite magnitude, or first
indefinite magnitude,

quantum, and, finally, discovered quantitative relation, which last shows magnitude in its infinitude and also
in
its

transition

beyond

the

merely

quantitative

sphere.

there justifiable was characterised which sought to reduce that view which will 78. being it quantitative. the view justifiable butes to quantitative. which is proper for one kind 2 only of mode. is their truth. and ( determined as the unity of them. If. BY &quot. we mean is that attribute which its is both quantitative and qualitative. in it. as the superscription of the entire chapter. consists in the positing of the individual realisation all is moments contained pass.Ill THIRD CHAPTER. obs.lt. obs. (See fore. L) 41.gt. 5. by qualitative The development of this its important concept. in that by titative quan being is it qualitative. from which also mode of configuration of the number of them shall 78 . we take it. 77.) On account of the ambiguity and the great indefiniteness of this term. instead of the term measure used by Hegel. ( 56. whereby its comes to This is it accomplished when it determinations contained in are posited. there 1) as now appears qualitative attri as still more explain qualities by the physical different the atoms. MODE. &amp. similarly as in the preceding chapter we took the word Quantity. as the unity of quantity and quality.) &amp.Mode&quot. which.

the qualitative therefore. 79 Of course even this mode of view is not the (3) Also here shall we follow absolutely highest. The mode as the unity of quantitative first as the and qualitative attributes appears mediate im from in a unity of them ( 27 obs. therefore. Leibnitz. mode already lay dormant) came to light. there fore. follow. First. the quantita This gives us the notion of measure. Deum omnia measure is Vetus magnitude. relation. The various meanings of the word mode are really different determinations of thought. numero pondere. the qualitative appears as the accidental the former is the principale. forms here the real basis. The mining or modifying tive. we had It in the transition had been shown that quantitative attribute (viz. 78 (a). (1) . est. By to be understood that quanti tells tative attribute which what the quantita In all languages this tively determined object is. The than the admiration therefore. is here. of mere something far higher verbum fecisse. in which. what is itself often a merely quantitative determina In this case measure is either the tion. /xer/Dov apuj-Tov is. mode will be magnitude deter upon which quality (quiddity) depends. The quantitative.) This cannot be other than what quantity to mode. accessorium.. the latter the . therefore. 79. the usage of language in justifying it. mensura.MODE.

8o

CATEGORIES OF IMMEDIACY.
is,

whose annuraeration the measured

or

it

is

an-

numeralion^ which shows how many of a certain unity the measured contains; in short, we are here
the discovery of whose exponent

always concerned with only a quantitative relation, is termed measuring.

That for which such an exponent cannot be found is called the measureless or the unmeasured:^ it
coincides with
gree, this

undetermined magnitude. Like de form of measure is still quantitative re

lation.^

But

since

everything whatever
is

may
by

be

put into relation, measure itself
dental
;

indifferent, acci
it

it is,

accordingly as one understands

rather the unity whose

number

is

to be

found in the

measure, or the annumeration to which that which
is

to

be

measured

shall
7^

belong

a

standard of

in the concept of which, rule^ because of contingency, it is contained that the just exponent of that relation may be as well irrational

measure^ or a

as rational.

heap

So, for example, in an elenchus above-named, just as well a merely quantitative determina tion as are the distinctions quantitative which are
(1)

is

assumed between dwarf and giant. Hence in regard to that elenchus there is no question as to a change of quality. How with quantity quality really alters

we

shall
3

speak of immediately.
ell,

2

(

80.)

<

>

So, for

example, the
length.
< >

the measure for a So, six feet say, are the measure for the
etc., is

the foot,

height of a man.

W

Hence

"measureless, limitless,

MODE.
numberless,"

81

are employed as synonyms.
("

(5)

Hence

In a measure" etc.) measure, (6) A sodegree, relation are used as synonyms.
in

many

phrases

called natural, i.e., necessary, standard, i.e., a neces sary unity for comparison is therefore a contradictio in adjecto. External fitness may determine the

choice
is is

of

the

standard,

which

(choice)
(7)

otherwise

wholly a matter of indifference. merely the greater annumeration
its

The

of
it

rule cases ;

in

concept
It is

it

lies,

therefore,

that

has

ex

ceptions.

essentially distinct

from law.

That
rule,

the

appears to be suggested in the use of the word mode
in opposition to custom.
80.

mode may be mere

(contingent, external)

Because the what which the standard of
is

measure determines

not the real quiddity of the

object, the concept of

measure

is

in the standard of

measure not

yet, or

not fully, posited.

Measure was

to be immediate unity of quantitative

and qualitative

attribute
as
y

(

78)

;

it

is,

therefore, to

be taken rather

a quantitative attribute with which the being/7zz>,

so or being-

of the definite object is really

com

bined, so that in another

magnitude

it

would

really

be

In this case the magnitude will really different. make the quality measure will be quali-fying quan
;

tum.

This quantum has for this reason no longer the

character of indifference.
will,

The qualifying quantum

therefore,

no longer be a mere quantum, but
object this definite thing will be a
i.e.,

what makes the

quantum
thing.

of a qualitative being,
75, 1.)

a degree of some

(See

82

CA TEGORIES OF IMMEDIA C Y.

As an apposite example of a qualifying quantum that temperature is often cited at which alone water But it is, then, is still water (and not vapour or ice). not its amount (i.e., a definite quantum of water) which makes water water, but a quantum of the heat of the water i.e., a qualitative deterrninateness must exist in a certain degree or a certain quantity, in order that water may preserve the quiddity of water.
;

81. Qualifying quantum is more than external it is real measure, for it is standard of measure
:

already what measure was to be, unity of quantitative

and qualitative

attribute.

This unity

is

here

first

immediate^ 78), hence unity as being. (29.) But being was identical with not-being or passed into it
(

30); because of the

immediacy of that

coincidence

the quantitative and the qualitative attributes will
likewise separate, and since here the quantitative had

the meaning of the principale ( 78j, the qualitative, that of the accessorium, the quantitative attribute
will, in this separation,

show

itself as

preponderant in Quiddity
will,

the fact that
therefore,

it

has a greater breadth.

be completely joined to the qualifying but not the latter to the former. There quantum, fore will the quantum retain the nature of mere
in so far as it also

quantum

may

be altered without

the quiddity undergoing alteration.

rises

In the example cited water remains water when it from 40 to 50 of heat, though it has taken up a greater quantum of heat. On the contrary, the

MODE.

83

quiddity of the water can not change unless the quantum of heat were altered.

82
tribute

(a).

But

if

thus the unity of quantitative at

it is not,

and qualitative attribute just as much is as and being and not-being had their real truth

in cessation also here.

and origination

(

33), this will

appear

Now

will the qualifying

quantum be mere

indifferent

having ceased
tion of this

quantum, which may be altered, its unity with a definite quiddity, and now

again, this unity

come forth

so that with the altera

quantum

there immediately,

and therefore
There

suddenly, comes into being another quiddity.

fore the qualifying quantum, or the real measure, will
lie

between limits

;

and within these

limits or within

this

measure a certain quiddity will be found. If the measure be exceeded, another quiddity comes into
being.

The phenomena, that in the gradual heating of water there occurs a point where suddenly it is converted into vapour, or that gases under continued pressure suddenly become liquid, because the measure, of heat ing or pressure has been exceeded phenomena which have their analoga in the mental sphere, are examples of the passage of the merely quantitative into quali It is usual to call them incompre fying quantum. hensible. are comprehended when we have seen They that such a passage is necessary. Of course they are not thereby explained. Explanation has to do with the Trwsj comprehension only with the Stort. The greatest enemy of the concept/ says Hegel,
;
"

"is

84

CATEGORIES OF IMMEDIACY.

understood or explained genetically developed ( 17) comprehended through its dialectical deduction. So soon as some thing is seen to be necessary it is comprehended, even though unexplained, and indeed to remain inexplic able. If one cites the elenchi of the ancients as examples of this passage, one forgets that heaps and the like are merely quantitative determinations. (
How."

A

phenomenon

is

when

it

is

;

79, obs. 1.)

83

(#).

If one reflects

upon what

is

really con

tained in the concept stated, the

qualitative

came

forward where
reached.

the

termination

But

this obviously
is

of quantum was means nothing else than

that the quantitative
qualitative.

bounded, limited by the
is

Therefore, precisely,
(

the qualitative

the determining.

44.)

If,

therefore,

we think
as ra

mode

as

measure

logically through,

we

are compelled

to think not so

much
is

a qualifying

quantum

ther quiddity

W

Since

it

as such

determining (quantifying) quantity. coloured by quantity, quantifying
the quantitative

quality will have already in itself

determination/ 2
is

)

Mode,

as precisely quality

which
is

modifying, as consisting in a quality which
but,

not

mere quality,
acts

even quantitatively determined, re the quantitative determinateness and against
it,

modifies

is

way

or
its

manner/ 3

)

If

in

measure

mode was
it is
(1)

posited in

quantitative moment, in

way

posited in its qualitative/*)

As an example

of this category

it

may

be cited

by the combination of what on the one side and what on . a definite quantum of heat. The of all things give way to his subjective condition. The different capacities for are in nature what in the spiritual sphere per haps so manifests itself that the same impression has a different effect according to the different condition of that which receives it. postulated by reason.e. and. it was chosen as the general superscription. show the great importance which (4) In this sense the is attributed to this category. i. 84 (c].. because definite it is 85 (by its quiddity) water. (2) In the example cited.e. and vice versa. takes of heat as different degree of quantum from that of ice. tative The quanti its limit. i. Everything depends upon manner value of a gift is increased by the how of the giving. Since mode means both way as well as measure. A further reflection upon the determina tions thus far considered leads further. Also here it must be observed that with the development of this category these phenomena are not explained. But if ( 45. that up a heat heat water. mode limits the qualitative. The individuality of man is then the modifying element. In the mental sphere the receptivity which strengthens the impression received has its more or less. the heat capacity of many substances is a definite one only in case of definite temperature.. Expres sions such as that. because it is its manner so to receive it. but shown to be necessary. etc. Herein lies a difference between quiddity ( 36) and way or between what and how. say. 2) the limited is one with those two determinations must be thought as one. take the term measure when in making man sophists the measure of things they make the objective value and way.MODE..

e. and vice versa. now. Inner Natiire. it when quantum must determine whether thing or to other. in measure the first qualitative leading category.). or it). magnitude. show itself as unity of that which quality and quantity had always shown in their third position. That which expresses this relation may. mode must. which is postulated by reason. be that which shows how one object is re (not to another. with 85. belong to some and the second quantitative leading category was conditioned by the second qualitative determinateness ( 35. but in quantity relation. absolute. first was joined with quantitative. unless one will perhaps say property. it lated to itself but in general. or. the other the mode had If. be called Inner Relation. which. been. i.e. therefore. fills the thinker definite (1) not with admiration but with joy. properly speaking. while in way. how is related. The complete or real mode will.. its concept realised or completely thought. wherever it is present.86 CA TEGOR1ES OF FMMEDIA C Y. When ways combine only in definite measures. By it is to be understood that de pendence of the determinations of measure upon way. i. Proper Being. therefore.. being. where it tran the scends the opposition of those two. certain relations of measure betray themselves . again. This had been in quality absoluteness. being-in-and-for-self. in default of a better term. ff.

A how recapitulation of the course passed over has here more than one purpose. respectively. spiritual world. and a point is reached which is related to the three chapters treated precisely as those (third) related to each categories had been. between Jews and Jesuits. it has to show in the chapter which 77-85) has the received the superscription realisation mode ( gradual of this concept has been accomplished. First. in certain 87 constantly appearing ways. which is precisely their mode. in which only definite measures of combinations may enter and be repre sented by equivalents. who does not perceive this to be a logical relation may lapse into astonishment or dream of borrowings when he hears of similarities in Buddhism and Like Papacy.MODE. this is with reason referred to the property and inner nature of such combinations. and thus mode. . | 80. Here a principal division of the logic is chapter. relations give like forms. is recognised that mode as here they have their own conceived combines the two other modal categories. concluded. the categories hitherto considered are in it con into all which all centrated. find their analogues in the (2) He Likewise isomorphism. W Chemical proportions. and likewise also the qualitative which contained Since all other qualitative categories with the quantitative quantitative categories had entered. etc.

then as qualitative or way 83). quality. the de velopment arrived at determinations in which the indifference is sublated. of course a wider meaning than that which . in and which. although distinct it from quality or the what. also in such a manner what. points or epicycles in the periphery of a greater circle. proper or second With to this second task is naturally combined a third belongs to fix the superscription which the finished part. : higher quality. The complex of inseparable or being attributes which the first chapter had treated. Jioiv. which again is suggested that mode that or the is. &quot.CATEGORIES OF IMMEDIACY. so return into self it here a relation of appears. in accordance with the prin 28. therefore. 84. neither could be thought without the other. in that the mode ( is conceived first as quantitative or as as measure ( 78-82). obs. ciple mentioned in in Hegel. had given place to the complex of the indifferent. as were. it fact that here a This is primary group of categories is concluded.. complete and real mode ( must bring to consciousness the Secondly. as unity of both. whereby those circles become. which Since (quantity) were treated in the second chapter. are again in being. and so as 85). it is nevertheless. &quot. evident from the fact that just as in the individual chapters also closed circles had shown themselves. uses the word being. finally.

MODE. hence is immediate.lt. are applied. &amp.lt. while the later categories.gt. whereas to study is difficult. as do those hereafter to be treated. a fact in which the peculiar of this difficulty precisely part is explained.gt. thought be characterised as the logic of natural or of life. &amp. it is no deviation from him when. for undeveloped and unreflected thought the same reason that the simplest occurrences in the later than are the more organism are investigated Because it is not so easy to study exactly complex. to disappear. where it denoted the first category. tive thought To reflect upon reflec thought applies. s &amp. in its im mediacy do not. they are employed which presupposes no preparation the first thought Hence this first part of for it. numbering. is easy for every one. the questions quid ? quantum 2 W hence entirely natural forms of thought. presupposing by others. no the logic (11 may 2 &amp. The later artistic and scholastic and categories are those which scientific &amp.lt. : those thus far considered first. instead of being. Categories of immediacy are. measuring as answers ? quomodo ? are the first. it 89 had there. because as the first. immediacy was placed.gt. &amp. take it as mediated in itself. however. Secondly. Since being had been equal to immediacy. so that with the aid of is the categories hitherto considered the object taken just as it is. they were so called because they leave the object to which they are applied. where they cause the being-just-so as well as being (4) to Naming. . .

. he must have it said of himself that he busies himself with what does not belong to logic or the theory of thought. : many 87. end. while here a relation of two is always stated. i. not is. etc. or how the object lation is is related to itself in itself. what is usually termed re flection. but has.) as the object. naming and counting as judging and concluding the former is more seldom done. The passage to a new group of categories is mediated by the perception that in those last con sidered there begins to disappear the character all which the categories of the First Part had had. but is a dualising thinking. to form the preterite of it. As if counting were not a kind of think 4 ing Compare the answers which are received to questions quid? and quantum? with those which n t qua de causa ? and cui bono ? and it will be found that there the answer states one thing which the object is. and it is no acci dent that for the designation of that category there offer themselves only terms which require a comple ment. the category which we apply when we observe how it stands with the object. But since a re conceivable only between two things. and when one does it. ( 13. To have is ! ( ) the negation of to be it therefore serves. and the concern is about such a thing (cause. we have in that question really no longer exercised a thought which is a taking of objects just as they are.) .e.) By this position of duplicity the hitherto simple being separates in two.. (Proper suggests an improper. in languages. That had been the real how. inner an outer.90 CA TEGORIES OF 1MMEDIA C Y.

which. we may . has ceased to be just because immediacy characterise as the categories of mediation.MODE. 91 is no For such duplication the name of immediacy and so the last modal category longer appropriate. formed the threshold to a group of categories.

Seconfc part CATEGORIES OF MEDIATION. 88. it. suffers diremption. improper. and appears in 4 &amp. instead of being which is in itself one and whole. thus negating at the point reached. to think. the latter as the essenceless. ( &amp. as a shadow. wherever a hitherto whole it. diametrically opposed to one another. as it were. for this do not both denote but as 3 they and being proper Essence and appearance are. As. kernel and both negate^ being. ESSENCE. instead of two things appear. two negations of it which are related to one another as we are compelled To these thoughts correspond the words essence and completely appearance. With is essence and appearance the circle of mediations entered upon/ 5) and if necessity proves to be the 92 .lt. therefore. so but in opposite ways. which shell.gt. but not as not-being.&amp. since the former is thought as that which cannot appear.gt. each as the whole one another. but so that the latter accompanies the former.

(3) Therefore essence pre is erat esse. Essence thought in opposition to appearance concept of the essential. it is here al ready clear why the position of duplicity was neces it.) (Cf. the latter . As upon .). rjv efvat (2) . there we here have to do with This sphere (4) pure determinations of reflection. or there exists between relation. others are a reciprocal union one with another. because deeper. appears in them a reciprocal reflection. had seen only one When our language designates (egg or nut). essential to it it as much it.^ also Like this mediation. subletted being as that which has been.^ is. ( sary to the perception of 12. etc. ferred ( 86) to being proper. this is a worthier. Each. and in the essence of a substance is sought the ground why it combines in (5) If (4) itself certain proportions. highest of all 93 mediations ( 130. 50. that of posited contradiction. 1. it takes an apt the Middle Aristotle calls essence TO turn.* all which we first call or relativity. therefore. requires the unessential as the unessential does the other. 89. God is conceived as essence over against the world as Age quod appearance. hitherto. The distinction be defined as follows : immediacy may. that which in it gives the only appears being the unessential. of this sphere against that of fore. essential is But since the is only as opposed to unessential. ff. category than when he is conceived only as great.ESSENCE. therefore.) one think of yolk or kernel and shell into which that which has split in two has transformed itself for the child who.

still. easier to discover than in the First Part. is not to be thought without negative. contradiction here is. and hence reciprocal reflection did not one category did not refer its appearance to another. (5) W This term. that comprehension has to take the object first as it is. so. then as it contradicts (5 itself. there will thereby be thrown a clearer light upon the assertion there discussed. categories of relation. 90. Here. obs. on the contrary. a reflection is posited. borrowed from Optics. contrary. and say nothing of their subjective modality meaning. the difficulty lies rather in abstracting from reflection upon other. Since scientific procedure has to do with necessity. but went over into it some immediately thing became other. . reference to self. which ) of quantity. taken objectively as reciprocal reference of things to (2 The one another. Here always two are posited at once relativity (4) In the Introduction and. that which is most difficult in the First Part here. flection. sphere of being everything was Kant treats beside to these are. cause not with effect. is usually taken only subjectively as denoting only our action 13 and 87). all the mediations here to be considered are . The transitions from one determination to another are. on the this fact rests the difficulty of this sphere. &amp. etc. If later it is shown that the concept. for example. only a part of the categories which are here (3) In the discussed. which discovers contradiction in the object. . the real object of comprehension. is the unity of being and essence. 1) it will appear (see It is here in how far one is justified in so taking it. therefore.94 CA TE GORIES F MEDIA T10N. later ( 95.gt. quality. as posited. on the contrary. etc. ( 13) it is said that to comprehension belongs re make . immediate. Positive. .

looks behind it. compares (cf. in that scholastic dogmatism regarded only scholastic scepticism only appearance. It does not stop at the immediate. criticises the categories natural the categories thought. essence.) Then it has to do with mediations. &amp. the sphere which separates both by the word school. 102) or will 95) or seeks grounds (cf. follows it. They appear. which alone interests scholastic gory.ESSENCE. yet unscientific. but. . as of of life. 95 hence also of artistic (by culture) mediated thought. and by 2 In this criticism they means of it finds another. it is intelligible why the school has elaborated pre cisely these categories into (exclusive) laws of thought.) As the First Part. however. those of mediation are so called double reason/ 1 ) logic (Cf. so the Second Part criticises of the sciences/ 2 ) The basis of them is constituted by the two just named. In this the institution which prepares for the scientific career. . which (institution) is also called school. they are &amp. with counting. forms of scientific. 86.lt. is by it limited to the applicability only of these two categories. breaking through this. and precisely as the categories of for a immediacy. (4) (!) The is satisfied first. therefore. with measur Quite otherwise does the mind function when it ing.gt. ( 119. as the makes the leading categories for the thought which If one denotes transition from life to the sciences. are shown to be untrue such. as a justified cate (3) Conceiv ability. thought. thinking with discovering quality. d^cover efficient forces.

lt. be it that mere essence itself an abstraction. for example. of inceptive thought Outlines of Psychology. it is to be conceived as such. any more than natural Hence thought can be satisfied with counting. The empiricist. shown forces although (since essence appearance) it is also reflected into must. Appearance is reflected not-being. since 106). dogmatism employ. yet. and . we have what to is the concept of essence as opposed to essenceless appearance. If scholastic scepticism had the victory over dogmatism. hence it is not proper to him to gain a judging knowledge of them. i. instead of the familiar three laws. not risen to this standpoint. regarded only from the (philosophical) absolute stand who as such has remain upon the standpoint of experience. but will &quot. in what is is follow. there would have been laid down in the gymnasial logic. It is. related to the undeveloped the categories which they true of the two forms of scepticism. as is The like &amp.e. etc. probability. is dogmatism life at most. won 91. therefore. cannot avoid using these categories. Now. three entirely opposite ones. opposed to appearance standing it has first so presented itself. with one that fear of all appearance which causes him to demonstrate even that which is most obvious.. entirely proper when in learned schools the pupils obtain conscious ness of the determinations of thought which form the foundation for those by the application of which one is This the pupil should not scientifically occupied.96 CATEGORIES OF MEDIATION. because into the it sphere of the (cf. (cf.*) yet be . In the first instance. point. and with the other the tendency to see in everything Scholastic only of appearance. my 112). essence is reflected being.&quot.

while their opposites may be assigned to appearance or be made predicates of appearance.ESSENCE. therefore. or essence in abstracto. mere essence. this All determinations which are present in will consideration be predicates of essence. is 97 first to be considered. only a more precise consideration of the one in order to true of the other. know (by inversion) what is . There is re quired.

when essence is sought i. it is being. reflected being.e. which appears in identity.. in trying to discover think of something entirely different/ ) but only Hence by essence is to be understood what itself. ESSENCE AS SUCH. reference which.. to self. latter. yet is. however. through. ESSENCE is not being (1) . On the other hand. one must the essence of a thing.I. it is but keep by the fact in hand. Identity contains in itself the two determina tions of being abstracts and being-returned-into-self. If one from the one has mere indifference. is it. its be broken true. ( 2) One must go forward. to discover it one must not stop at being. 98 . IDENTITY. FIRST CHAPTER. This reflected reference we call W Here is explained why. mediated by reference to other. 2 not. 92. the object is altered ( must being is treated as a shell that 5). i. A. not. 93.e. to be discovered.

merely the abstract form of identity. In every A= A judgment one really contravenes this law. in the law of identity or of contradiction.^ is W as Hence the word identity 2 &amp. mere being. this abstract identity is also called identity of the understanding. elsewhere) the category of identity was applied. non-identity similarity.. pure being. which as such has for its supposition exclusion ( 51. &amp. This abstract identity has been made the leading category in the so-called first law of thought. mere indiffer ence. thought of the it Because is The law of (contradiction) is mere appearance. and this is one of many examples of how one is &amp. . A.e. 52). This it is often denoted by the word identity. because one therein places the subject in relation to a pre dicate. however.lt. (3 So the proposition (Schelling and Hegel) that identity is unity of identity. 84. conceived only is completely when it is at the same time conceived pre as actual reference. and concept of identity.gt. only a moment in identity. thinks only it).e. although 2 &amp. so that the true or concrete identity is the unity of abstract identity its and opposite/ 3) i. inseparability. and non-identity is 4) This word comes nearest to the entirely correct. 12.g. because it pre dicates of empty identity.gt.. everything is identical.gt. he identity. This empty or abstract identity Identity is. &amp. (as rule: If one thinks a thing. &amp. It would there fore be stated. abstract is 99 distinctionlessness/ 1) i. says nothing. If hitherto (e. while this law allows A to be referred only to itself. commonly taken the essence of the understanding to isolate all deter minations.lt.lt.. this word is always used in the now developed sense.ESSENCE AS SUCH. is empty. and thereby to fix them.

Everything which. contradicts (See 93. the contrary.^ as what we have designated as othertherefore. we must think as unity or without sameness.. W that at the same time they both differ and are dis (2) In what has just been said the tinguished. the other is not in something but in general the absolutely other.) .e.) the proposition of identity. is difference different. U entirely clear. this question has no meaning when we have to do with something and other. before they have been compelled to apply categories How it is with the examined. If one says of two objects that they differ in or in that. When two things there may be assigned wherein they differ on Other) . (Or also thus. identical itself. entity vi being and not being. it we really think of what is called difference^ the reflected form If. obs. distinction is also given between being different and are different (or each is being other. of course. us proposition. it is. one says thereby that there is some this but thing in which they both coincide (are identical). quality will therefore properly be here for the first time etc. in difference the different (3) Since things are each related to its other. 21..) critically and quantity. being. remains un determined. unity of If we do this. i. the second form of of mediation/ 3) gives Applied as a the law thought. (Cf. essence was to be thought with . If identity is to be rightly thought. 94. whether it is on that account other. (abstract) identity and non-identity.TOO CATEGORIES OF MEDIATION. difference is likewise an essential category beside identity as the first. 2.

(completely) thought without that the accusation brought that it is a system of identity against philosophy is not so terrible as it at first appears. (1) This gives us immediate or external (2) difference. 95 (a).gt. is external to appears (3 them. 1. non-identity.B.This category is by Leibnitz converted into a law of thought. likeness . of difference : moments but identity as is. particularly determined. they appear immediately being. as ex ternal. cannot be one sees B. comparing. stated as a rule. obs. (Cf. 7 : . and their being reflected into one another then falls outside of them. or. This law of thought runs Ever} thing is diverse that the opposite is the case is merely an not . &amp. A= . Although we regard them as diverse. If you appearance. although. hence only the like and unlike may be described^ or be com unlikeness. equally external Both are therein contained. who then reflects Since reflection here falls within the one appears as the act of that one. identity difference. it not to touch things themselves. 89. first and at the same time If they are taken only in the as determination.ESSENCE AS SUCH. exclude B whereby not merely A is thought.^ Even the in this are to be found. Each of the different is related to itself. DIFFERENCE. reflected into its other. particularly in the grounding of it.) ( 2) subject comparing. diversity. think A. (6) (1) In the it upon them.^ pared as diverse. the far higher category of end plays a part.

(5) With play a very important part in comparison. (4) The categories of externality. our language denote the termination of a dispute by the word VergleicJi [= comparison taken in the sense of adjustment of a disagreement}. i. i.e..e. Opposition an essential category. since each side reflected into the difference. contains the indeed. The moments of diversity are like ness and unlikeness. and. As difference. each is them having in the other its other.e. the search for diver out a tertium comparationis ^ Not accidentally does sity is somewhat idle. reflected into itself.e. but the things distinguished of differ in themselves.).. while unlikeness the non-identity of things compared. when it was described which excludes as immediate difference relation) (i.. in which the reflection no longer falls in the comparing subject. i. the quantitative. each is difference.. higher than mere diversity.e. 97 (/.. is Essence opposition. essential Essential difference is opposition. of ones that have become: each moment other. But likeness is = identity of the non-identical.102 CATEGORIES OF MEDIATION. is therefore the other also is . relation a contradiction which compels us to conceive the merely external difference more inwardly. as the second is form of difference that difference. opposition . i. and. In the concept of diversity there is contained a contradiction which was indicated even in the name 96. we have. the immediate difference more essentially.

the all following posited as determinations difference. moments side i3 the one hand. but.. identity So like unity. the positive is the posited identical. the proposition 98. is : Since things are they are therein alike . posited identity.g. Everything is From the concept given of opposition result. since each of difference in itself. On .ESSENCE AS SUCH.* the negative has the posited non-identical. either ance).e. but. . an opposite. e. positive re Here abstraction is made from the fact that it (2) Because opposition is an has given content to a law of posited difference. so everything is inimical to every other. finally. to denote the being posited.^ W it is The word merely ligion. often used positive is. neither + nor ). therefore. since and they cancel one another. the positive appears as that which remains the same. or it must be non datur (or is mere appear tertium a proposition which completely contradicts that it is mere A (i. Hence opposition is formed .. different posited as identical the positive. own its everything which belongs not to any other. is + A or . will be is found here identity in spite of that unity with the other. essential category. first. therefore. W but since everything its reflected into the other as other. thought. as regards the relation of positive and negative. hence confirmed.A. wise non-identity. by the second. since specific nature. by the different posited as non-identical the negative.

the man the negative moment.1 04 is CA TE GOR1ES OF MEDIA TION.gt.\& far as is positive.A with itself. for example + ae and ae together make 2ae as the excentricity of the hyper 2 bola. the negative as the active. does not alter the quality of the multipli cand.^ and negative In reckoning with opposite magnitudes all these determinations receive their rights As alike they may be summed. when we think the opposite through. (Cf.) &amp. really .*&amp. the positive only by reflection into the is negative standing opposed to it. therefore determinate. 66. &amp. : &amp. therefore.)W its Each. and. while the negative determines it.e.) 99.lt. beyond itself. hence only because it is negative (the negative) tive is positive .gt.lt.*&amp. positive would be a contradictio in adjecto because in the second power a number is posited as identical &amp. But as diversity points If.&quot. my &quot. The positive multiplier. The positive appears as the weaker. in so \\. Psychology. is But if each is really also its contrary. we think. ( 97.As &amp.gt. 8 cancelling one another + 8 and 3 second power which were not together = 0. and since each directed towards the other. 26. therefore.. the nega as it opposed to it. &amp. also identical with contrary. we consider moments. Outlines of (Cf. obs. l. so also its does opposition.lt. while the appears as the changing and determining. The negative is only in so far is not mere absence but a thing posited.gt.lt. So in the difference of sex the woman is the positive. that is is to say. i. each is really the entire opposite.

is defec.. &amp. i5 contradiction (2) and highest form of difference. or explains it as appearance. 2 One needs only to consider the negation. 100 is (c).^ Nevertheless. . such examples.. These are not exactl} pheno observes mena of opposition. i. and must therefore be called the pnn(2) Motion and life are cipium non-contradictionis. belong here the various 7 phenomena of polarity.e. of opposition in the above formula. Contradiction occurs where something itself. A = A.lt. evil is not mere absence of the good position.e. W The commonly diction does not do this so-called proposition of contra as the negative form of the : contra proposition of identity it the rather makes diction the predicate of nothing. that it is the fear of contradiction is great characterised as the inconceivable. A= by A is to be understood is A predicate says that there taken absolute. i. since Mere privation does not amount to opposition. Before all. for more precisely to find contained in it W but its &amp. like them. whereas of a multitude phenomena are (2) real examples of existing contradiction without their being looked upon as impossibilities.gt. opposed to is As are diversity and opposition. to be predicated of everything. and the nothing of the kind. opposition has as its conditio sine qua non Thus. the opposite turned against as the third itself. so also contradiction an essential category and so deserves. as Schweigger rightly but in that the unlike are posited as identical.ESSENCE AS SUCH. proposition not A. that each of the polar opposites is in tension.

perfected. essence will be. ^ itself expression. in so far.. reflection into self. each side was the entire opposition and the opposition itself was essence ( 96). the above-mentioned fear well grounded. and hence. 101. secondly. posited. since we have the result that essence as contradiction repels itself from as Thereby essence is as and the duplicity which it was is itself. dependent. posits a consequent. ( But 99). Posited is that which has a mediated. contradiction sublates v&\& the relation of ground and consequent.io6 CATEGORIES OF MEDIATION. it. at another a thing may be described as merely posited. and. itself.^ When language makes the contradictory fall to the ground\ it displays a shrewd It has thus far been perception. contradiction appears to But of course we cannot is stop with con is tradiction. i. tion ? For what of contained in contradic Each side the opposition repels itself. position. may be presumed. itself and. The posited depends upon the positing. essence that itself. is identical with i. live without its opposite.e. there is aground for the object s being here. closer (1) The . In the example cited in 41. obs. posit ( 41). but which repels is ground. The former repulsion contradicts itself. therefore.e. obtains here a determination. at one time the being posited may be described as superior (to being-in-self). conditioned being. essence which self-repelled different from and is consequent. us as reality. In this repulsion. first... etc.^ since essence as ground.

&amp. that where presupposed (see Now that occurs something must follow therefrom. W . &amp. this relation also occurs. the unity of both. relation 102. which reflect 4) into one another and are inseparable/ so that will it is merely a violent abstraction.gt. C. obs. 107 16). forms. follows moves. 6) Empirical science uses these categories especially in fact. which separate them is or maintain only one as essential.) This relation. in different determinations. wherein what is identical with itself contradiction occurs. In it ground is the movement (1) of identity.lt. to seek the ground is more than merely to compare. is proved. 3 posited &amp. Thereby it is expressed that the two laws of thought thus far considered are inadequate.^ Essence therefore perceived wherever the relation of ground and consequent is perceived. and therefore yields the content (2) In it the same thing (essence) is twice thought. besides identity and differ since ence. the third form of mediation. They are treated as leading categories . GROUND AND CONSEQUENT. is an essential of a law of category. hence the fixed. 2. like those two. since it has been shown that presupposition contradiction has its truth in the relation of ground contradiction and consequent.lt. and hence contains contradiction. The of ground and consequent.ESSENCE AS SUCH. abstractly stated. while ( what 100.

so related the ground that the ground explicit^ or posited. Everything has a ground means.gt. If one considers this relation it more closely. 93. right in his polemic against the application of this 4 It category to the relation of God and the world. or (quite femininely) only by its conse () Hence the effort of Herbart. (5) Such abstraction is it. for example. (say in a definition of philosophy) knowledge and knowledge of grounds are used promis(2 ) cu6. is in itself. A time) other. difficult to define the ground otherwise than through the consequent.) 103. think (at the same &amp. when (3) Ground consequencelessness is mere appearance. in order to quences. implicite. the latter has as its scheme. that is. what The ground source from as in itself contained in the consequent. &amp. only that posited ( it in the way of being to 101) . Particularly in Leibnitz is the proposition of (sufficient) ground treated as such. if you think something. (Cf. the consequent is the germ or issues. rescue the proposition of identity. This proposition says that groundlessness or of essence .lt. therefore. everything is a ground. which the consequent is This determination pression : Omne (animal) correctly stated by the ex ex ovo.loS CATEGORIES OF MEDIATION. In fact. and consequent are the same essence hence Jacobi is . or vice versa. it is therefore is. . is. everything is a consequent everything has a consequent means. Baumgarten has rightly rounded out the Leibnitzian proposition into his prindpium rationis et ratiocinati. to eliminate that of = B. appears (a) that the consequent it is is the same with the ground. when one will justify an action (quite in the masculine manner) only by its grounds. ground. 2.

the consequent another than the ground. is foundation or presupposition. 104 (). distinct from it. will allow the consequent to occur The good reasons. as therefore an other than it. would therefore not be irrational. . in positing the consequent.). that is to say. as positing the consequent only by its self-sublation (or negation of self). 105 is is (c). because it is the }Kosupposing appears as the higher/ 2) The concept of ground as foundation. pelled it is 109 repels the conse the repelled and ex The ground.&quot. which. really posits itself ^&amp.e. compared with which the conse t quent.. even if it But even hereby the concept If. The ground. as referring itself to the consequent its other. its being is the not-being of the ground. Memorial to Jacobi Only as so understood is the concept of ground rightly (2) understood. which or through which the consequent were not confirmed in experience.gt. which a sophistical raisonnement has ready for every thing. is what is called condition or occasion under issues. stands opposed to it . are chiefly mere occasions. &quot.ESSENCE AS SUCH. sublates The ground.e. But since the ground quent. its therefore. of ground not exhausted. i. Treatise has been admirably discussed by Schelling on Freedom. (&quot. Hence. own not-being. W &quot. only under external conditions. The theory of generatio aequivoca. as that which grounds only as directed to the ground. i. when one seeks consequents. and particularly..

egg is 106. of essence had been degraded Since. as entering into its other (appearance) Filled with the essential. so essence itself its ^ posits itself as own negative. instead. and this we have. But now the negative to appearance. be cause they are the subservient moment of the conse For the rest. it has been shown that is not the same ( 104). we are compelled it by the inner contradiction of essence to think as its own other (as estranged from it itself). the ground had 102. of the ground coincide in living development the : equally germ.) As this complete contradiction. Finally. been the same with the consequent ( but. 1). therefore. and since this relation had been a determination of essence sublates itself itself. we are forced to filling is think it. In its completed development contradicts itself/ 1) it appears that ( this relation and hence 101) sublates itself to the end that something else follow from it the ground has been the positing : ( 101. Further. the relation of ground and consequent sublates itself. the ground had been that . all tlio various determinations quents. 103) it . it is but it has rather been shown ( 105) that the (pre) supposed. appearance it phenomenon.i io CATEGORIES OF MEDIATION* the grounds do not so readily offer themselves. since has been . and finally means of nourishment for the self-developing chick. which was identical it with itself but ( it has rather been shown that sublates itself. preserving condition. 105. however. obs.

&amp. may within easier reach of ordinary conception. and. must discover grounds and consequents. W 107. Difference has so the rather. secondly. identity peared. difference. and a mere abstraction (cf. hence the latter depends sequent. essential ap immediate . or tions. and upon it the ground is posited by 2 the consequent. 91) in the second place to consider. &amp. : etc. etc. of ground this we and saw mediation appear The parallelism consequent. namely. shown that mere essence points beyond hence is m itself. They would thus run In order to know essence one must distinguish.lt. A shows recapitulation of this first chapter originated that its articulation by the fact that essence. mediation. relation of articulation is chapter of the First Part but not difficult to discover much less important than to hold fast the discovered essential categories in their peculiarity.. Essence is be brought ideality. entered into essence that essence is opposed to itself. it and complete difference as .gt. The mediation was. as difference. with that of the first . depends upon it. so. thirdly. received various determina first. . . the propositions.ESSENCE AS SUCH. and. Subjectively expressed. ground. This contradiction occurs in the description of the ground as that which is presupposed by the con It is its prius.

in this sphere forms the analogue to quantity. we have.IT. because of the analogy. as multiplicity of essences.e.lt. Phenomenon. are thought. thought of passive negative relation of beingsSo is pheno ( 51. or as many phenomena. menon of essence to be thought only when a in the plurality of essences that are for themselves 3 &amp. quantitatively determined.lt.gt. PHENOMENON. appearance stands it as its other. SECOND CHAPTER. must enter phenomenon. 108. opposed to If. when we think phenomenon. which is. into 2) phenomenon therefore.) for-self towards one another. essence as being for itself. PHENOMENON is 1) appearance. ^ 112 . hence no longer mere essence/ Essence into springs forth &amp. appearance with essence (hence no longer mere (schein) and essence clothed with essenceless appearance) (erscheinung) filled . i. it is if . now this identical with itself in its other-being.. we have an But since being-for-self was thought only essence. But was the concept of being-for-self ( 50). &amp.

33. There is contained a deep meaning in the fact that in German the word the essence (essentia) and an essence (ens] are denoted by one word (wesen}. only that word has no plural. the same thing. like-being. (Gothe). therefore. &amp. must be contained the moments which were in that from which this concept resulted (cf. The empiricist.with.lt. A. was a singular. ality.) sidered. In the an essence. means to conceive more deeply than when one merely The former is done by predicates being of it. For this purpose he naturally applies the categories which offer them selves when one considers what the appearing essence is. etc.self in the phenomenal essence we call . looks down upon dogmatism and scepticism as mere school^ Essence. Hence occur here categories which the so soon as he will be empiricist. firstly. it essence is did not an essential phenomenon. his task is to necessity apply. a scientific standpoint. describe natural phenomena.PHENOMENON. physicist. &amp. (Cf. the latter by natural thought. hence. and else where). Phenomenon To conceive everything as empiricism. An essence and a phenomenon are. or in 109. there-being. according to ordinary usage of speech. phenomenal essence. the ground as having become the presupposed. 90. This moment of identity. now the concept of an essence is given. (i) 113 wanting appear ? What would appearance be where 2 ? Would essence be where &quot. &quot. is &quot. PHENOMENA OR EXISTENCE. must of In the first instance. ^ Since nature is phenomenon (of ration . category. 232) it appears as plurality of appearing essences. as hitherto con wisdom. the positive moment.gt.

and even Leibnitz still. The concept of logical matter coincides with that of That the content is the underlying. the detercontent. unities and annumeration. (5) is W The word matter here taken only as the Scholastics. in the sphere of quantity. as moment of difference. principle. and therefore i.. that which comes fortJi. The Aristotelian deter minations that vXr) is the e ov. i. be unity of con tent and form.^&amp.gt. stuff.e. The con cept materia secunda.e. 98). the form with the appear ance. determining. therefore. Aristotle teaches. multiplier. of its concept is i. or content..^ Secondly. will exist. content was the moment pect of limit.1 14 CA TEGOR1ES OF MEDIA TION. the ground whence the consequent issues or also that it is the vjrofleo-ts. therefore. the It is the executive and determining. By form is in general to be understood the principle of difference in an essence. Form is the concreter as If. form is. is implied mindble. matter. the negative moment which presupposed that first as its founda tion. .. Every essence will. in so far the positive (cf. and hence is the presupposing. takes materia prima.^ That things are phenomena therefore a tautology. are therefore absolutely (2) correct. matter as opposed to spirit.) is (The form rightly is the the content always ranged with the essence. and. the . does not to but to the philosophy of nature. by ordinary consciousness. belong logic. of ground.e. and from the analysis it is clear that the something existing or is phenomenal essence thing.wo&. hence negative. Hence form was by the Scholastics conceived as the mightier. presupposition.* The two are Here related as. determines it form. having in mind the v\t] of Aristotle.

PHENOMENON. though not indifferent to form in general. a hollow What is more form. This is true of the crystal. which is external to a definite content. when separated from the other. therefore. by existence which has will therefore be understood come forth from the ground follows that although (i. Hence much is characterised as something. 1 1 5 Hence it is wrong to use the rationally the earlier. and ISos ws a-wOtTtj. a non existent abstraction. &amp.e. does not exist. rather. still more of the living thing. is a finite content. only the 7 unit} of the two is to be conceived not so much as sum as.e. just as to give a content a form means at the same time to take its (other) con tent. actual existence only the formal 3) The contract. which. (See 215. represented) by itself. word formal in a contemptuous sense. or mere condition. An absolutely formless content. each can be thought A same similarity which appertains to there-being and existence)... i. . lias a certain similarity with that of something (the it being. or shape. is yet so towards a definite form. is a merely finite form. product. That which has form contract is.\ 29. content. has its form.) Since to existence unit}^ and form belong. a mere substrate. nevertheless. is a alone. than mere substrate forms itself. concept of existence . but. and to give form is always the same as to take form. of content properly se cxsistere or cxsisti) i.lt. which is to it no longer external. which could not be called a thing. is of {SA?. that is because the category of thing is not applicable (4) to God. each is. TJdng is a category which. of course. is limited to the world of phenomena. entirely correct.e. has sprung from the relation of ground and con sequent a being (existere .) The affirmation of Aristotle that every dwi o. as more definite. therefore. grounded (Cf.. and of the Scholastics that every ens consists of mater ia and forma (substantialis) is. If they excepted God. 4. obs.

. Here. &amp. be conceived as borne i.&quot. since they appear in it. which it /ias (z) as distinguished from They form its the side of appearance in the thing. formal while it is by its content thing. in that there it is shown how consciousness various upon various stages of development applies here how these form a series. 5) But how far one may later. only has no meaning. ino. are manifold determinations. 4) Compare upon &quot.gt. its relations. this and the following 74.1 16 CA TEGORIES OF MEDIA T10N. in &amp..e. on its Or. the rest of the essences ( 54). will where phenomenon is the appear highest concept. ff. side it is identical with itself. different my has to maintain here standpoints which the exposition and there. the properties show us the thing side. These. necessary that a symmetry should appear which. while being a thing constitutes the side of essence. related. otherwise. Outlines of Psychology. the reflection of the remain- siive itself effect in it.lt. in the first instance. not completely conceived. therefore. an essence is referred to hence the remaining things appear in the thing. which. &amp. by as having only in it their subsistence. stop. it. But with the concept of thing we cannot because here the essence which is for itself is As being-for-self. it.lt. must. 110. it Besides will have them in itself in an ideal manner. as its 2) properties. thing. {1 on this side is something distinguished.lt. that is.thinors will ^ o O While on that &amp. makes it categories. The totally sections. being for self. say only phenomena.

But the manifold attributes which constitute the side of phenomenon of the thing and exist in it only as its own. the mere describer of nature makes use of the cate is explicable. Proper ties belong to the thing. since to describe means to exhibit perceptions (/*&). Viewed from this side. therefore. cf. so that thing consists of these differences. hence also in relation to the thing ( 44. is so often characterised as substrate. on the other hand. themselves in turn manifold and determined. i. 108) single tiling would were not in general have no properties.. obs. in the case of thing. the pro thing perties as conditions. They must. are distinct from it. therefore. gories of the perceiving consciousness. 111. those manifold determinations rather the are not taken as properties. of having this word is. are yet. by the fact that they are limited in relation to everything else. quiddity. 2) Hence no thing can contradict itself. therefore. 3). think the side of difference as that which only occurs in it and has its subsistence in it. on the other side. so. be thought not merely as in other but as for themselves. not exist. on the one hand.e. may seem a repetition. only because as it stands W ( in relation with other things. but as self-excluding . If we must.) (Cf. are these differences to be thought as independent. used to denote the preterite occurs frequently where immediate oneness does. obs. H7 That superficially considered. only and alone (if such a thing A an (3 ) impossibility. 1.PHENOMENON. as in something and The relation its (1) Hence 36.

The phenomenal is . both bides are different. heat. both. 2). Not only will when he has taken electricity. 101.. side of its appearance. finally. as properties. is. independents. such will be a ground to a consequent obs.. as stuffs and matters. is this it reflected into and because it is essence itself. the description of the divine properties leads to the assumption of an exclusive relation of them. essence itself. thing. i. meet phenomena which compel him to stuffs. are related to one another.1 1 8 CA TE GOR1ES OF MEDIA 7 ION. the physicist. therefore. which make up the Each of the two sides has the thing ( proved to be essential in that ( 110) underlay the manifold (properties) while manifold (stuffs) 111) the make up the thing. as a comprehensive that the phenomenal again of essence really separates a relation non -appearing . a con flict of the properties. result. 112. on the other hand. Further.e. take them as but even in the highest sphere. since has issued from there appertains to it a manifoldness of relations. etc. will impel us foriuard. on the one hand. We not into have. But thereby has been shown in the concept of the phenomenal essence a contradiction which as (cf. to which is adjusted by fictions physicists similar those employed by the who attempt to solve these contradictions by the of fiction absolute impenetrability and contemporaneous porosity.

PHENOMENON.
essence and essenceless appearance, both
exist not, but, since the thought

119

of

which

of the existent, or

of thing, remains, and,

taken together with those,

becomes that juxtaposition of the two moments, the
essence of the

thing stands over against the thingi.e.,

like or

existing appearance,

the phenomenon

of

the thing.

To such a distinction of essence and phenomenon the physicist passes when he no longer merely pre sents or describes his percepts, but when reftectingly Outlines of Psychology," 79) he seeks something, behind what is perceived, i.e., from a dcscriber of nature becomes an investigator, a point to which he is brought even empirically only by the percep An tion of manifold determinations of the one thing. essence without any manifoldness whatever does not stimulate to the knowing of what is in or behind it. Here it has a meaning only when one speaks of mere
"

phenomenon
B.

as of something unessential.

ESSENCE AND PHENOMENON OF THE THING.
(a].

113

In the

first

instance this relation has

so presented itself to us that essence, not
this,

phenomenon,
the
first

not that,

is.

Each

is,

therefore, in

instance, to

be taken as identical with
is

itself,

and

their

first
is

relation

that of indifferent diversity.

Essence

other than phenomenon.

This category

is

a justifiable one.

Therein

lies

the justification of the
It

Kantian

view of the world.

can here cause no

1

20

CA TEGORIES OF MEDIA TION.
is

surprise that essence

described as being-in-self.

ISIot

between essence and pheno menon is analogous to that between being-in-self and being-for-other, but phenomenon is actually beingonly that the relation
for-other, only in higher potency.
114.

But

as

diversity in general

was impelled
:

forward to opposition ( 96), so also here pheno menon is other than essence or distinguished from it but
yet

:

phenomenon
is

is

its

phenomenon, just as
its

phenomenon has
essence

in essence
to

essence

;

therefore,
logically

related
is

phenomenon,
conceived as
other, that

and

phenomenon
Each
is

to

be

not only other
is,

than essence but as
to

its

its

different.

be conceived as the

negative

of

the

other, essence as the contrary

of phenomenon.

Even the
this-side

and yon-side, which of course gory,

opposition of essence and phenomenon, rests upon a justifiable cate

is not the highest. In the Schellingian school this opposition often occurs, and by Klein and others is made a principle. Things appear as the contrary of that which they are in This view, moreover, underlies the fact themselves. that Fichte calls the world of phenomena the worst In the aesthetic sphere romanticism occu possible. inverted world (Hegel, pies the standpoint of the des Geistes," pp. 118 and fol.). Phanomenologie
" "

"

115

(I)}.

But

if

essence

is

the opposite of pheno

menon, and
the other in

this the contrary of that, each contains
itself,

and

is

not to be thought without

PHENOMENON.
it.

121

Each contains the other
is

in itself,

and therefore
This
is

the relation here really
tent
is

that one and the same con

taken as essence, and as phenomenon.
it

means that

will

now appear
1)

as

that which

identical with itself, hence singular,

and again as the

manifold forming a plurality/

This relation

we

of which the designate as that of law and phenomena, former is represented as the unchanging prototype of

manifold phenomena, reflection into
as the manifold, reflection into other.

self,

(2)

the latter

W
(2
>

Since

it is

one content, the law
latter

from the phenomena, the
If

is apprehended from the former.

In the law, therefore, we have the true essence. one inquire still further after the essence of law, one falls back, to an already out-grown lower The law as tJie ( 113.) thought-determination. same content with the phenomena is more than mere rule; with its concept, the exception, which was involved in that of the rule (79, obs. 6), is in con
flict.

116.
tion,

But
find,

if

we

look more closely into this rela

on the one hand, essence, but in its phenomenon, for it is more than mere rule on the other hand, phenomena, but as governed by law, i.e.,
;

we

the phenomenon of essence, therefore ingly the unity of
both,
i.e.,

;

each

is

accord
essence.

phenomenal

Therefore, that relation brings us necessarily to
relation in

a

which each of the two

sides is the

same

122

CATEGORIES OF MEDIATION.

With the phenomenon of phenomenal essence. essence and the coming into mutual opposition of essence and phenomenon is to be joined essential
relation as the third

member

of the triad.

If the empiricist, hence, for example, the empirical physicist, must be content to describe and investigate Nature, he must in the first case abide by things, in

by the law, as the ultimate. His vocation, however, is to explain Nature. This he will do when he applies still higher categories, and indeed those now to be developed. One first passes to explanation when one has already discovered laws, and, on the other hand, the knowledge of laws stimulates to
the latter explanation, precisely as the perception of has stimulated to investigation.
all

marks

C.

ESSENTIAL RELATION.
understand a relation in

117.
>y

essential relation we

which, exactly as in the quantitative, two sides con
stitute the relation, only

with the nearer determina
the other to which
1)

tion

that with each side
is

it

is

related
is

necessarily posited/

and that each side

at the

same time the
<

entire essence
of

which forms
this relation

the relation.

2)

The various forms
which the lowest
its
is

form a

series in

that which least

corresponds to

concept, the highest that

which

corresponds most.
(1)

In the quantitative relation I

may

at pleasure

PHENOMENON,
;

123

the whole, on the place a in relation with b, c, etc. to the parts, the is related necessarily contrary, (2) This inner to the outer. appears to be an absurd But it has been shown in the pre determination. in the ceding section, and receives its verification
following.

118

(a).

Naturally there are again here to be
last section,

found the moments which occurred in the

only modified. Upon thing with the character which the law had,
singular ; upon the other, the same
character which these

the one side will stand

the
as

i.e.,

W thing

with the

phenomena had

as multifold.

In this form
whole and
parts
its

the relation meets us as that of the

parish

Both are the same
and

;

for the
it
;

make up

the whole, and are equal to
is

the

whole contains the parts,

equal to

them/ 3

This relation is applicable only to phenomenal If one takes God as a whole, essence, i.e., to things. as all, for example, and creatures as his parts, this is a crude mechanical pantheism, which makes of God
a thing.
parts, since

W

it (e.g., to it into such,

(2) When the kill it. i.e., physicist, in order to explain the law (of chemical affinity), de mands (atomistically) that we think the smallest

living product of Nature has no no mere thing in order to divide anatomise, to analyse it), one must convert

Even the
it is

;

parts
(3
>

of masses, he passes, just as we do, from law and phenomena to the whole and the parts.

Here,

it

is

evident, that in this relation there

is

a

real correspondence to the postulate 117, obs. 2.) (

above expressed.

construes (geometrically) the totality of the path. not to the whole but to the parts. But it is equal to the sum or collective unity of the parts.. or of infinitely many members. rather parts equal the parts. is But this is not equal to the parts. 119. the parts. When the which. like every such progression. etc. the contradiction whole equals rather the negation of the whole. or (arithmetically) bids to sum the series 1 + + totality. like every other 49). therefore. so parts equal the whole. We have. equal to Just so are the parts only equal to the divided whole. finite i. It said that the whole is equal to the parts. the contrary ob tains. this divided thing. W or. more correctly. This ( endless progression means. say a line B. At the same was time.1 24 CA TEGORIES OF MEDIA TION.e. then C as whole. which is a whole. in order to solve the difficulties which W A A A AD W are brought about by the endless division of the path to be traversed in the familiar sophism (Achilles). that we should hold fast both .e. but them as parts. sum To think this . as a whole. i. endless progres sion of division. This progression comes to an end only when I regard. i. as part. If one alter nates these two determinations. contains a problem W to be solved. is indeed a problem.e. rather whole equals whole . is taken as whole... which. again. hence take its half C as part. one has the division ad infinitum.. he recognises this. 120 (b}. also... mathematician.

of the whole. 1). since I can divide at pleasure. determinations identical I2 5 at the same time is : the whole is with the parts. On^the 2) Since contrary.gt. and that which had the character of plurality as the consequent of the other. it akin to it. like contradiction. is true. it moves This dynamic mode of explanation in tautologies. like all explanation. of force is really a higher category the category than that of law. and itself. as is shown by the experience of the with their faculties of the soul. If we do this. not be forgotten that. namely. (3 Hence come very &amp. are not. psychologists who. as should have exactly these particular parts obs. different from them. but is closely is. in the present twice manner described.) By that endless progression we are therefore compelled which to conceive essential relation so that the side had the character of singularity will be thought as the ground of the other side. force has its definite expressions. in is which one and the same content (3 &amp. gave as the relation of ground and consequent. the physicist is justified when he does not stop at law.lt.PHENOMENON. posited with the concept been the case ( 117. V&amp.gt. hence contradicts Now the unity of those two their truth determinations. Of course it must speaks of the underlying forces. ( 102. In the relation of whole and parts. we think an essential relation which of it corresponds more to the concept ^ (1) it is the relation of force hitherto considered . in order to explain it. than does that to its expressions. . near to a soul that is divided. higher than the atomic. but.

identical the with the manifold opposed to different and yet at therefore be same time from it. fully But the conclusion is not above ( 120) drawn that every singular was it. and it appears to follow that. since here the difference between ground and consequent might such a view be characterised comes forward. instead of the relation con thought in which also the plural the the has the meaning of ground. the singular that of con sequent. also as a contrast to the previously-mentioned crude pantheism. . is pantheism. For. it and it is contained in the concept presupposes it . the world as expression. to identical with the singu different which plurality appertains. i.126 CA TEGORIES OF MEDIA TION. If we take God as force. usually explained only from its expression. it is contained in the concept of expression to be forced (:) One says this when one says that force must .e. one is to be from it . and must is. is force and vice versa. on the other hand. demand which force by contains its already satisfied in relation of force is and expression. taken as the ground of Likewise however. it. 121. according to Schleiermacher. to be expression^ as.. in fact. The conclusion it is is correct . One may maintain this in so far as force and expression are one nature on the other side. this. lar. and at the same time sidered. of force to have itself a presupposition. the other side. since force means of the expression and in it.

&amp.lt. then as expression. and is what we the inner ^ on the other side its the expression which. more intimately joined with essence than is expres the former is the constant. essence . for example. there as it is what was called force. an expression of a psychical event. is transient. (3) The outer is fests itself of itself. the one side. but 120 That relation ( and 121) refers us to a higher. so long needed a to its solicitation. the two coincide. and we are therefore on compelled so to conceive essential relation that. them. in the outer. but each time abstraction is made from the other 2) The inner is essence as it mani determination. the latter the sion look. &amp. etc. no longer has is this itself the outer. ^ ground in the inner. but which is now solicits call itself expression. this again of B is first taken as force. A . in be solicited (set loose). W . which one has designated as expression. therefore. the relation of inner and outer^ In the endless progression which appears in the fact that A is the expression of B. and. Also here one may continually keep apart the two determinations. and the latter is the former. 127 2 This one says when. by alternating The 1) that if force is expression. C. &amp. cause to occur an endless progression/ truth is. however. something one recognises again the solicitation to something.PHENOMENON. while the physiog nomy is the expression of a constant psychical condi (1) was known where tion.gt. If. 122 (V). manifestation of it.lt.

of course correct to say that it is unknow This assertion is a pure tautology. it appeared that both must be thought as becoming distinguished. potentiated. (Cf. higher existence. we had. still thing more is it true that it is known where the inner is neither known. hence as. 40. properties of the it was known where the were known ( 110). because it is what exists also. immediately one with it. now. More. more in realising itself. the former was the ex istent as essence. Recapitulating the course traversed by this chapter. and become pheno menal essence secondly. : abstraction it . But if. in was shown concrete identity ever . as it were. . until at last appeared a relation itself. which the inner had this determination in to be outer. and as op . if grounds were known. posed to one another. the man who is merely inwardly good passes only for such. first. though in a restored. essence as appearing in pheno menon. is Of the abstract inner able.) 123.128 CATEGORIES OF MEDIATION. and therefore under stand by the actual more than the existent. a fact which gave the various relations of essence essential relation to phenomenon finally. cbs. We call it actuality. while the latter was the existent pass on to as phenomenon. Inner and outer are identical hence a mere inner is an is without the other . it follows that we must the thought of an existence which is thought as existence.

into Actuality as essence that has entirely entered phenomenon forms to essence menon the third member of the as such triad. hence 129 more lasting way. and pheno .PHENOMENON. therefore with a plus.

e. so here there appears a similar realisa tion. in order to express of a man that he is true-hearted only in an 130 . though they had been in the foregoing. and pared with actuality. so realised itself that it was posited. THIRD CHAPTER. (2) Here is explained how that usage of speech could originate. which. must here occur again in an essentially altered meaning. the active its being Com exceeds mere existence/ 1 ) is essential. it has a greater intensity of being than something or thing . ACTUALITY. . W Even the impossible may be called something. equal as mere moments. tive. essence and phenomenon are 2 equal one to the other/ i. if we reflect upon the moments. then in its qualita moment. which. first in its quantitative. even disorder may exist . more full of content than the latter.III. but the energy of actuality does not appertain to it. it is. 124 THE actual : is the concrete unity of essence and phenomenon more full of form than the first. ) As the concept of mode. as language beautifully suggests. because it was real unity of quantity and quality..

contain the moment was which. now. i. from the in the concept of possibility fact that it we .lt. is pressing towards expression. moment W The actual will. uttering there originates thereby the thought of abstract. Even we say that in a person there is stuff for a poet or painter. however. With Aristotle Suva/its = vXtj with the Scholastics potentia = materia. means both. Aristotle also i5A?/ and VTTOK^^VOV as equal to one another.gt. is in the actual the side of identity with self. is tree as 3 inner. 131 is not of such a nature (&quot. 125 (a). &amp. the inner. but which here. Hence with Aris totle Suva/us. striving towards consequent. force &amp. called it excluded phenomenon. external manner. The seed is the real possibility of the tree. &amp. says that he essence but only has it. W The connection of this concept with that of essence is brought out by Spinoza and Leibnitz in 2 the use of the word essentia. or capacity. abstract itself.lt.gt. .).e. What has in the foregoing shown itself to be the highest.. &amp.gt. which. 126. with the Scholastics /0fe#tf.gt. ground etc. therefore.lt. &amp. puts &amp. so long as essence.gt. will necessarily be found as in the actual. as that which &amp. is If.lt. &amp. is matter refer 4 &amp. &amp. 2 tends to become phenomenon. capa 4 city for being either of these.lt. &amp.lt. gives (real) possibility. Possibility. 3) self-expressing inner. &quot.ACTUALITY. has the tendency it is to enter into difference. Finally. ring to form.

as possibility is ab stractly or concretely conceived. mere relation to bs predicated of everything so soon as one thinks it only out of all relation to other/ 2 ) while may only to that which realises Accordingly. it is an entirely 4 empty or a very important category/ ) true (real) possibility belongs itself. or existence. and left behind. therefore. it is possible that a leaden bird might fly. his highest task germ. defined like them/ This possibility. Possibility is merely a is moment. being. when. dispute Leibnitzians is. ) and is. possibility. not distinct from those earlier considered etc. the 127 (b}.^ It belongs to being-actual and becoming- . since self. quod W As self possible est ^ If one ab stracts from the fact that the air is specifically lighter. This category is so-called logical. (3) The between the Spinozists and etc. absurd when the historian asks what conceivably would have been possible.^ it is with the other moment. may be called (essential) reality. 1 therefore.. to be settled by Leibnitz s it is (4) Thus distinction of possibility and compossibilite. then.132 CATEGORIES OF MEDIATION. real possibility. at the same time.^ It of force. actuality or energy. (3) distinctionless unity with non implicat contradictionem. Its com pletion to full reality called formed by what was hitherto In concrete unity expression phenomenon. abstract identity. of course. or it is so-called conceivability. of is to comprehend what happens.

a proposition which is absolutely correct only (2) Aristotle s as regards pure being. but manifestation of an inner existence grounded in itself. possibility was. 2) this would be dis reality ( as singulare tantum. (3) From etc. is precisely as illogical as the philosophy of sloth and mediocrity.lt. actual with the possibility/ 4^ 133 same as does real logical necessity W later Existentia. opposed to essentia. Leibnitz and Wolff designated as complementum by Since essentia was the moment of con possibilitatis. which supposes that what is in time will execute and of great indivi itself. may yet be executed. $?&amp.. able intentions.e. 36. eVepyeta. or as the common tinguished of speech distinguishes the solid (Reelle) from &amp. Kant may rightly say that by existence there is added to a concept no new determination of content. 128.. its from mere existence in disappears. i. which Descartes and Spinoza. by other/ It does 1) This gives the category of is not exclude necessity. and we have mere positedness the being posited contingency. usage 4) The view that admir the merely real ( Realeri). rather the same with external necessity tingent is in that the con is mined/ 3) merely deter This concept of contingency answers the what merely follows or . in the absence of energy are filled with an essential (solid) duals. even when they are not timely (i. obs. If reality is conceived just difference as. like is therefore philosophers.ACTUALITY. above ( 126). the actus of the Scholastics.gt.e. is not mere existence. tent ( 125). those who content. not really possible).

Leibnitz So rightly calls contingentia arbitrii a necessity brute. and then again contingens and accident). &amp. positing. there underlies the identification the same perception which causes him to identify what is So wr e also call the shape /3ip. question posited itself would not be merely posited. at the hypothetica. One is . and hence the external violent encroach ment upon foreign spheres is here the order of the To deny the contingent. always justified in calling contingent what is posited In a larger by external force. If w7 ith Aristotle a-v^aiv^iv signifies necessary con sequence. o-vpftepi-jKos the contingent (so in the Middle Age contingit and acddit. an d what o-u/z/3e/3?7Ko s. tion cujus essentia non involvit existentiam. 4) anything contingent/ whether and where this category may be applied. &&amp. with right to what he designates as contingent. have philosophy comprehend everything. of the tree.gt. for example) nothing contingent. as if there . &amp. much that at first appeared contingent will appear otherwise. as Wolff did necessitas (1) What but. circumstances.lt. The merely existing is precisely 5 the contingent.gt. as do those who will day. into which it was forced.1 34 CA TEG OKIES OF whether there is ME DIA T10N. and hence perishable. and says of it that it nunquain existere Hence also the determina potest necessitate essentiae. To assert that there is (in Nature. can the atomists identify necessity and contingency. &amp. etc. (4) The question whether the contingent is some thing actual must be answered in the negative that whether anything contingent exists must be answered in the affirmative. same time.gt. survey of the total connection and inner determina tions. Spinoza attri butes necessitous respectu causae. contingent. etc. means to mistake the fact that Nature shows us just such external there-being.

lt. as to their truth. &amp. since it something it posited only by other. W Hence it is &amp. the two contain the same contradiction. the ground opposed to or is has it is outside itself. therefore. it. but these results positively the two as one. ground/^j. not yet posited .e.ACTUALITY. this. said that the actual must above is all be possible. closer abstractions shown is consideration each self- hence Possibility was merely ground. possibility and contingency are sublated. as not posited. is precisely to posit it everywhere. i. and their 4 But if we think of what difference disappears/ ) those contradictions point to. therefore.^ shown has as regards contingency. and 2) And . then. but the ground has shown itself In the to be foundation i. complete actuality or necessity^ To c &amp. But that both that on logical possibility and con is tingency are untrue.gt. something one regards the possible as so indifferent possible. not only negatively- vanished difference. something presupposed. only yet it is said. to merely grounded. Thereby.e. (3) What... therefore. is The same has been This occurs where But.lt. possibility is the essential/1 ) in the latter the unessential. is be thought as entirely ungrounded. as do those who see in lawlessness freedom. 129. contradictory. or posited. were nothing as it is 135 as erroneous unintelligible. first respect. violent therein.

the latter ent. fore. namely. W The The word fact fact is is here taken as when one says. ordinary opinion defines the contingent precisely as the possible is above defined. called contingent. (-2) which presupposes them. like earlier logicians. ^ mentnm a 130 contingentia mundi. Hence the old de termination as regards the necessary cujus essentia involvit existentian or the Leibnitzian what by its The necessary transition possibility has reality.1 36 CA TEGORIES OF MEDIA TION. as that From them both which we call fact. or of rationalism. takes possible and contingens as interconvertible concepts. hence them but rather accomplishes Its is itself forthcoming the truly is actual occurrence^ or becoming of actual.&quot. issues the necessary. the powerless and subservi The same is true of possibility. . its true nature perceived.gt. Since the necessary is is the truth of the contingent. Even Spinoza. (c). which yields to the actuality of the necessary. so that the word denotes the (4 There contingens as well as the casus fortuitus. the necessary^ : Necessity is the highest essential category of something is where the necessity is perceived. as that which may equally well be or not be. pheno menon that of empiricism.^ not dependent upon at their cost. from contingency to necessity underlies the argu- ^ &quot. true but does not concern the person. so necessity is that of rational thought. As essence was the category of dogmatism. as that which may equally well What happens without ground is &amp. it ( 3) be that one defines and not be.

&quot. contains the That is to it say.ACTUALITY.^ both is : it is.gt.gt. ^ &amp. ceivable nor is what merely exists. is just as one-sided as everything to circumstances In the to lay everything to the whim of the actors. indeed made &quot. but what must exist. i. or pure non-actual. of the fact is contained the pre-established necessity 3 This difference between mere harmony of both.lt. is since moment 12). ence of a material to be used. to be formulated in that. So wrong. natural science.e. As this immediacy (3) which posited by the sublation of mediation. when they distinguish (4) the merely factual and the historical.^ . by punishment. to be 5 Kant s Physica rationalis. realises itself. 12) as contained in our think namely. From this is evident ( what was presupposed in itself it in the Introduction ing. Only the hence only the rational is is truly actual necessary The irrational has only the passing exist actual.. 137 2 The fact. will lay down propositions which have as compelling evidence as the laws of thought of the school. since in itself mediation. . &amp. &amp. the (main) fact. relation. simple im lies mediacy It is ( but likewise it is there in it contradiction 13). ( (1) of identity. because it is. and are as full of content as the pro Not what is only con positions of the empiricists. fore makes for itself circumstances just as do con To attribute tingently (arbitrarily) acting persons.lt. which What must happen is &amp. and actual occurrence lies (unconsciously) becoming with many in the background. &amp.gt. that the necessary contains opposed determinations. 131. and there say a historical occurrence. but only. &amp. exists. it is itself. and indeed relation in absolute relation.lt.

These as mode was the highest form of being. first. in the absolute relation.^ with itself and excludes from itself every determina tion. 2. There is.138 CATEGORIES OF MEDIATION. 132. of all others. absolute form of mediation (cf. instead been by Kant treated as categories of relation. 3) Purposely is an expression chosen (4 As relation has which involves a contradiction. JN ecessary &amp. already in other groups proved to be the highest be given. relation. is the highest 89. 90). which do not affec subsist for themselves. category. SUBSTANTIALITY. not so as rather going to the ground is in it. (Cf.gt. obs. as expression of unalterable necesis that for which a because can &amp. If this is the moment of possibility in the necessary. The necessary contained (1) is because it is. It sity. (2) is so. this side of essentiality gives us the con cept of substance^ Secondly. therefore. This moment gives of unessentially in the absolute relation us the concept of accidents.) A. JiigJiest forms of mediation have.lt. so is it here also. but as transient tions inhere it (8 ^ mere in substance. this is related to the differ moment ence/ 6) mere consequent (5) in which falls mere positedness and contingency / of 7 &amp.gt. much produced by The first form of the absolute relation the relation of substantial- . Necessity. O Hence. the fact as its own ground negating all mere This it is as that which is identical groundedness.

lt. 1) and substantia. since they identify the concepts of the con tingent and the befalling (accidit. because of their kinship. (8 With Spinoza the accident (mode) is quod in alio est. (3) Substance be taken only in the negative sense. he could appeal to the fact that Spinoza frequently comes near cidents. no occurrence without substance. plurality presented.) Holding fast to the developed concept of occurrence. and (say) God as substance and the world as ac &amp. W ^ &amp. is that which alone is because not related to other. highest. (io) When Jacobi makes pantheism rest upon the proposition of the ground which itself merely con tains an inference from whole to parts.ACTUALITY. fact. In the double coincide in the Greek word dvo-io. (The relation of whole and parts appears here in a higher potency. different. (11) (10) In Spinoza. which is to involvit existentiam. according to Spinoza. result is a pantheism which has been denominated acosmism.). ity (9) 139 or relation of subsistence and inherence (Kant). The concepts essentia (see 125. The essential in such a view is the mere immanence of God in things. and he says by way of pointing out its essencelcss nature. (7) Also here the languages are re falls.gt. as absoluta affirmatio existentiae excludes every deter mination.lt. lation of who in his system has taken the : re substantiality as the highest. accidens etc. sense which o-v/z/Scu vetv has with Aristotle is to be recognised the kinship of concepts otherwise so In the accidents. obs. &amp. all essential (1) substance is determinations receive their dues to him something necessary. one may say. quamvis existant eos ut non existentes concipere (9) If we take this relation as the possumus. the correctly . cujus essentia 2) It is causa sui.

substance. because not all the determinations of are posited. at the same time. B. is actually related logically think only itself. its first form. however. but. in this. posited by it.) In it. however. 133. (11) This thinking of modes as parts of substance. accidents. shapes. When. occurs in Kant s rational physics as the proposition First Analogy of Experience. therefore. 134. CAUSALITY. they are nothing actual. because of this defect the relation of substantiality points beyond itself in that in it there is latent already a higher form of the absolute relation. In fact. viz.. static. and what to. the necessary (the fact) was said to be related to itself. like the sea. neces sary. stand opposed at the same time. waves of the merely changing. but have their actuality only in substance (in actuality the waves are merely in the actiially is water of the sea) : what therefore it stands op posed to substance. the absolute relation does not correspond to the concept stated in it 131. (See 19. accidents. hence are that cujus essentia non iiivolvit The existentian . In the relation is of substance only one side. are merely posited. they are nothing actual. To substance the . we out the relation of substantiality we are compelled to . But. on the contrary.140 CA TEGORIES OF MEDIA TION.

(2) Hence of motion.ACTUALITY. no occurrence/ 3) obs. speaks against the causa transiens. which. W . Without causality there is 2) Even Causa.) The truth (19. W &quot. of moisture. as something actual. Spinoza in maintaining the relation of substantiality. hence original (primary fact. ^ it. English) cause . once as the positing. just because here in place of the accidents be. moisture. motion.lt. Kant s tive). which the cause is here an essential into effect passes . &amp. while Jacobi. the relation of force to expression). demands that God be conceived as cause of the world. which in substance ceased to stands the effect.W on the other hand. German ur-sache. which is posited from it (effected) the effect.&quot. cosa in both meanings. Experience. issues from the cause (there appears in it. 1) of the relation of substance is the relation of causality. Second Analogy of 135. in higher The potency. speech that the effect is something actual (effec suggests (3) (Cf.) The causal relation in which the same fact (1) is a appears once as cause and again as effect higher form of the absolute relation. the act ual. This gives what is termed transcendence. 141 think a relation in which the fact occurs twice. in order to establish an extra (praeter) mundane God. which mere accident was not. as into something actually standing over against The cause of heat is heat.

136. &amp.e. consistently carried out. A 137. but the cause disappears in its passage into the effect. the relation of substantiality did correspond to the concept of absolute relation. posited .lt. namely. the relation of God and the world only as causalitj^. merely not the character of contingency.lt.gt.142 CATEGORIES OF MEDIATION. is counterbalances. therefore. If. The cause therefore only it has. returns to the cause. one knows ( &amp. compared with the relation of other. Heat produces heat by becoming 2 &amp.. But at the same time in this relation is to it. the negation of all immanence. i. more closely considered. No one has taken the transcendence of the divine. so does the causal relation just as little correspond. Where : &amp. the effect follows whether it 4) remains doubtful. atheism. so seriously as the Epicureans. the side of effect here necessary/ 2 ) for and is at the same is time. by the cause. therefore. would. become the opposite of acosmism. be perceived the necessity of going beyond The .gt. ^ of mere existence. view which conceives is. only for the opposite reason/ 4 ) lost from the a thing is known its necessity that it must be 3 so. . W In fact the relation of causality displays pre cisely the opposite defect from that of the relation of is substantiality it is. But the superiority which one side in the the It causal relation has as substantiality. as there. as effect. W communicating body. true that the effect in the relation to the cause no longer. If the cause is.

) C. 11. etc. as effect. then indeed. and. to the two other forms of essential relation. the cause is properly (as cause) effect of the effect. we think (if we will less progression) really is through abstraction. But just so the effect therefore. and vice versa. where it has as The we apply A effect B. and the not. which then again is taken as cause. But since the cause is not cause without effect. presupposes the cause. it can of course not terrify. and pre supposes the effect as its own. be led astray into the end a relation in which each side related as cause i.. cause of the cause. in fact. latter again the former. INTERACTION. 2) . cause is 143 the positing. the effect the posited. (De Gen. related to the relation of substantiality and that of causality as the relation of inner is and outer ( 722) &amp. But if the cause presupposes the effect..e. 138.ACTUALITY. and effect to the other as effect and cause. when we have first taken abstracting therefrom take it as cause. endless progression arises immediately so soon to a definite thing the perceived truth that the cause is in itself effect.^) It In is it the absolute relation is actually realised. et Corr an IT.lt.. is. interaction. Interaction is the truth of mere causality. Since the nature of the endless progression is known Even Aristotle ( 49). is by the progression of causes and effects impelled to the thought of interaction.

. the must In completed (&quot. was given as the concept of the posited which ( 131) with absolute relation.re therefore. which. identical with being. because here is completely posited There But. we have the must be vealed&quot. we freedom/ 3) It is the subject of the Third Part of the logic. results. Just for that reason it also the last. Only in duplicity there a must which of course involves a contradiction. CA TEGOR1ES OF MEDIA TION. just as above. the proposition. have in fact that as actually again. therefore. obs. unity with self We.1 44 . a being which coincides mediated being. (See 44. Every same time. at the ( 89) was stated as its essence reciprocal union is with one another. given what above tion. 2. instead of duplicity. We stand here at the limit of the sphere of media tions. in this category. another. W Empirically this is : _ Action is fully . the highest mode of media is. This inner necessity.) necessity. since the determined call and the determining coincide. there had appeared. cause and and they therefore coincide. expressed as follows a proposition which and reaction are equal. As one to every mediation ( 89). therefore.) But since in interaction each side is determined as effect. so also is to necessity there belongs a duplicity experiences is need only where thing compulsion through be. consists in that compulsion has disappeared be. there happening is interaction.

lt. Because. ff).gt. 102. then. was think distinctionless thought 27). &amp. and interaction exhibits in higher potency negative grounding. in causality is and in interaction. Also here First. 86) recapitulation has a double task. as if here one would For this mystic. (cf. possibility and actuality or energy have be been shown to be its moments. in which.e. at the beginning of present to ( the logic.ACTUALITY. then the last-named has proved to be absolute relation. only the resolve ptire^ i. in the analysis of the actual.. which realised itself in subsistence and inherence. the course of the discussion. by a retrospect of the entire to path traversed. its articulation fixed. the now treated main division of logic is limited towards the others. &amp.) view which causes the mystic to say. substance is related to cause as categories ( source to condition. &quot. its peculiar character given. W 139. the First Part had to do only with determina- . it has to fix the articulation of the chapter here concluded. God is in me so much as is laid to me in Him. or the being presup The justification of this name appears in posed.&quot. mere causality. the actual itself to the necessary. (Kant s Third Analogy oi Experi Even in the highest sphere it is a deeper ence. assume a one-sided causality. The second object which recapitulation is be accomplished by the that. correct only 145 where we have to do with mechanical which is better expressed thus: There is no motion. this opposition of immanence and transcend 2 If one returns to earlier ence no longer exists.

. having become identical with actuality. how. that immediacy was sublated to relativity. we had first (first chapter) considered essence in general. with which we entered upon the logic. after the common character of all. itself.146 CA TEGORIES OF MEDIA TION. 86. see itself In this Part. the first of the categories if it be designated after appearing in it. it gave with the chapters of the (The parallelism First Part is easy to be shown. and with this concept of inner necessity mediated in itself we enter another sphere. . over against it. the caption Mediation. and which was ruptured within.ascending series we arrived finally at a point where the mediation returned again to being. nearly coincide. the two determinations. however. necessarily be given the superscription Essence (Hegel) if.) In ever. then seen (in the second chapter) how it lost itself in phenomenon. finally (in the third chapter). that of freedom. 90). The result was. tions of distinctionlessness or immediacy. Second Part of the To this (from essence as such to absolute relation} will. gave the concept of essence and of the appearance standing this being. (Also here as above.

not by means of another. 140. where one thing is. FREEDOM being-through one another exists.irb part CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM.) S UBJECTI VIT Y. CONCEPT. I. FIRST CHAPTER.^ or from . but b}^ means of itself where. W Freedom as a logical category of spiritual is not to be restricted to the sphere pheno mena/ 2) therefore does not coincide with personality. being through self or of self. to which the other conducts as to its necessary consequence. subjectivity. (Cf. instead of the highest form of necessity. therefore. of exists . since it consists but with only in the carry The transition ing out of a subject or a principled from the Second Part of the logic to the Third may therefore tiality be termed the transition also from substan causality to to subjectivity.% 152.

the need of exact denotation causes synony mies to disappear. and mediated thought took its objects as mediate.e. but yet so high that to happening-of-itself. therefore. It is. With the logic of it it. 2. the highest category. A is through B. 2) for dead matter subject to changes. free growth are spoken of. therefore. subject not at all distinct. As immediate thought thought ever} thing as immediate. it ) &amp. i. it is what is termed evolution... r creatorship. and only form the foundation/ not subjectivity but exerted and completed subjec tivity is the highest of things. 109. 132) (1 ) From through A. the premises. not a figurative 132. therefore is causa sui in the positive sense of this term. deriv ing. the first categories of freedom are inade ) 5 in that to it quate. while substance was so only in the negative (2 sense. has our chapter to do. for which.148 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. Originally were the three translations.lt. etc. substance.) As everywhere so here. not predicative. and B is necessarily follows that A is through A. may be called deductive. We use substrate (cf. Thought which has not yet risen thus high. of the Grecian wro/cet/ievov and iwo crTao-is. developing. so to bring under the categories of freedom means to consider freely. because there is an inner tendency in consequence of which the stone of itself.) ( but an entirely exact expression when free falling. For the most part this occurs in philosophical thinking. . i. or even genetic. with a criticism of the categories which first applies. (In the Middle Ages subjective only. 3) falls.e. substrate. substance (cf.

we designate.) (See What as the possibility of absolute beginning. also those of of the Third into its province. besides the categories first the chapter of the Second Part. since in German there only a single word which signifies . rightly prided himself upon his school saw therein a proof for the personality of God. Strauss.) (A How it could come that the word which here denotes only also creatorship in distinction from causality could the entirely opposite meaning of opposition acquire to subjectivity can likewise become clear only later Therefore. (4) has initiative power is subject. Hegel When this transition.e. when he denied the dom by God vrml^-subject personality of God.SUBJECTIVITY. prepare not . see 153. and whoever will conceive God as personality must conceive Him also as subject but the converse does (V That the school has to not follow. i. ject of his actions. this was one of the mistakings of the meaning of logic. for that in 149 which raanifoldness goes to the ground which puts suffers them not. opening chapter 141. of the reasons why the logic to be treated in the of the gymnasia has taken. because it also the plant of its changes. but also for philosophy. first.. as trees do because blossoms. Kant could characterise free 202. therefore is related to them Man is the sub at once. hence free. is one only for the sciences. subject for that forth changes from itself. and was therefore within the school punished the fact that D. Certainly this view is higher than that which sees in God merely the cause of the world. This mere to all is principle of development pre conceived realisation. hence as is at the mere beginning. but limitation will be discussed later. yet called his He put forth things from Himself. First. positively and negatively. we have to conceive subjectivity in its it lowest form.

The second meaning which occurs especially in the phrase to be in the notion (Jm Begriffe stehen\ may.lt. since in it.1 50 CA TEGORIES OF FREEDOM. . is. be shown in the Greek. nature. &quot. therefore. the psychological reflex of this inner necessity and accordingly conception and formation of concepts can be spoken of only where inner neces sity is known. astonishment. &amp. . concept (Begriff)^ By this word next. stand opposed to actuality is it rather the true actuality. Adyos is the (2 Hence a universal idea is far px 7 f growing. knows its etc. &amp. its type. W ) / . . ^ The concept it as inner necessity (3) . It follows from the concept of triangle that. to that which is Hence philosophy dispels comprehensible unfree. as the true causa sui. this meaning the Greek word Adyos also has. at once inner necessity calling it and beginning^ by this word. hended (begriffenen) one stands free. so that Aristotle can say that a plant s Adyos impels it to grow. does not. Hence the concept may serve as critical standard of 5) In relation to that which is compre measure. He who knows the concept of the plant. in an indirect fashion.gt. being and must-be ^ have become united and interlocked into freedom. at least. is none parabola 4 we have alone a true and actual one. since in the example cited. and comprehends what nature intended by it.^) In the first meaning the word is taken when one says. as is the true essence and being. from being a concept to the latter belongs inner ^ A so-called actual ground and inner necessity. while in the formula of the same.lt. &quot. also denoted . &amp.

though it is customary just there to speak of incom 3) prehensibility/ Conversely. a freeing. Where. or the self-development of the self-contained and self-satisfied concept/ 5) Compared. contradiction. Therefore. contains in opposite determinations/ 1 ) Therefore could those thoughts in which opposites were combined be called concepts. 142. 1 51 THE CONCEPT. there the concept. i. the question. nor of posited contradiction or appearance of things in one another but is the de &amp. which had amounted to the opposition of being and must-be. where the concept it is is. resolution al of a contradiction.e.gt. is i. a it. therefore. occurs. therefore.. tion. therefore. hence also where in us..S UBJE C 77 VITY. . itself What is the concept ? with which the ques How do we comprehend ? coincides. and by the concept we shall As the concept its henceforth understand as itself thought-counterpart as well contains the unity of being and must-be. indeed. with the other 6) again. velopment into in-itself self. of all the contradictions hitherto considered. has its peculiar difficulties/ Parts. the exposition of the categories of this Part of the logic. the Third. A. is not so much an exposition of emerging contradiction or of the transition from one thing to another as in being. (2) The concept is not. but rather the resolution of and.e. there must be present resolved contradiction/ 4 ) of the concept.

&quot. which prove to is be none because every moment of the concept also the others.&quot. this. and all succeeding cate and not-being. Thereby also will what outside of being has been essence now acquire another name. therefore. &amp. whose opposition when they no naturally. (5) Hegel calls it clearness and transparency of the concept the fact that its development does not alter it. be fixed.152 (J ) CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM.] [Hegel. phenomena of the concept. they will now. but becoming In all these concepts was already the con gories. 212). p. be an enigma to the under 4 Hence the one has comprehended some &amp. which separates everything. although they may standing. 12. and are. Since the sists development of the concept con it in its becoming what reflect really is (see it 16). can (2) Hence not being be an object of the concept. and distinction- . and the love towards what is comprehended. vol. but have become moments of the concept. hence resolved contradiction. indifference.lt. enjoyment considering it. as liberation.. itself we have out to be. as such. another. The word concept (from concipere} suggests Those who assume that there is no contradic tion in God deny that He can be comprehended. of rationality (see later. it is to Since now upon what it was resolved contradiction has given must contain resolved in those determinations it. have acquired another meaning. contain in themselves sublated defect. so that really we have been continually cept (3) Love as free relation. 143. v. The plant is Werke. (c) Differences must developed in becoming a plant. stand in opposition to one longer But. joy and enjoyment when thing. Being.gt.

and empty/ ) The universal. which excludes every difference and every distinction. the universal has extension. just thereby 3 without content. and the concept concept. Likewise why the various determinations which explicable the universal will receive (see following sections) must correspond to the three modes of being which were treated in the three chapters of the First Part. as a 153 moment is. on the other hand. it as distinguished Aristotle could intelligible why is being the immediate. or whose be so analysis of the concept may also that the becoming of the concept in us. 27. obs. If the fixed it appears.SUBJECTIVITY. universal it is Since the from call is it essence. of the concept. The concept 2 &amp. it is merely abstract^ is 5) something fancied/ falls all from which quality it gives. _ (a) The Universal Concept. is the universal (1) since refer mere reference to itself. as it is when is abstraction moment. on the one hand. 144 it is (1). the made from every other As this.gt. conceived W The . in this is universality. lessness.) (Cf. In the extension of the concept it can be abstracted. as and imperishable. or moment. and excludes all ence to other/ In this absolute is distinctionless- ness the universal the absolutely simple. therefore. it is.

This univer therefore. for example. that abstract universality must be conceived otherwise when it supplies the defect of being merely imagined. the Nominalists claimed. there is comprehension where the universal is apprehended. and in the Middle Ages. In this sense one takes the word concept when one takes it as equivalent to universal idea (see my Outlines of Psychology. Totality quantitative . If it exists only so long as abstraction i. Epicurus. everything in particular. formed by the sum is the things embraced in universality. which are empty. &amp. Of this universal is therefore true what in antiquity.lt. It. &quot. (2) In this sense the word universal is taken when.&quot. 145 (2). &amp. all difference. really related to the different. and presupposes sality is. the formation of the concept consists in abstracting . But it appears here. speaks of concepts 4 without perception. or the ^ &quot. 5 from specific differences. it is one which rests upon all i. with Kant. totality. is explicable.gt. is made from it is. more these/ closely 1) considered. everything in particular. &quot. &amp. or when one.e. upon closer in spection. universal or the concept is viewed from this side. ^ it. &amp. nevertheless.154 GATE GORIES OF FREED OM.e. Hence When the universally and in abstracto as synonyms. 100). is re psychological reflex of the concept flected upon then would first this appear. universality of reflection. one says that one asserts this or that only universally without reference to the individuals.lt..^ The extension of all of the concept therefore.. That the universal concept is by Aristotle identified with V\TI. displays the moment of identity.gt. like that. community is.

the Conceptualists. and which alone was allowed and what is &amp. might generate stantial them will express itself in them. posited by Therefore. 5).) (Cf. is them/ (cf. is valid as against the differ and rules them. totality. !) determination by obs. 146 (3). true totality. The concept 1) of totality really contains a contradiction/ problem. It will not have the different in opposition to itself. no longer com sub over pulsory. It is and has become the entire concept/ 5) not some- . the universal is to be it. that is to say. Middle Ages who conceived validity by those in the universals as collections. is the common found. this place may be expressed thus: Comprehension takes Since where the common is brought to light. identical 142. i. 2) The universal so taken or conceptive 140. nevertheless. obs. hence complete totality is always a This contradiction compels us to go beyond If. because which is reflected into it. true of no one in particular (see on that account rightly refers to 3 himself in particular.SUBJECTIVITY. conceived as that which ent. it is universality^ (genus). the latter are. 2) everyone just 144.e. 106.. closer ISS Similarly as above.^ is There with the of universality by the moment other moments of the concept (cf. It is the universality which chiefly hovers before the imagination when the word universal is used.lt. as the free. Totality is a universality it is related to the particular of reflection. &amp. but. this is the real truth of abstract universality. precisely.gt. 2) universality. obs. the universal presupposes the different. there fore abstraction.

e. Herein is the justification of the Realists of the Middle Ages. 147. 2). the impelling power/ (1) namely. In the sphere of the mind the category of genus ^ In this sense is law custom. unseparated). Sia&amp. and. the examples have their proper actuality (immortality see 153.gt. and not volonte de tous. (7) So the Platonic ideas 8) in this and only in this.gt. when he took it as vXrj (see 144. an (2) endless series. but a really completed thing. that the former kv /carr/yo/otiTai. obs. that the individuals or par separate individuals) are taken together (i. ticulars the - (5) thing corresponds to its concept substantial universality has acquired reality in it. which is may not mere sum or unity. which. has no application. represent the real essence of things..a TU&amp.lt. therefore. &m Hence Schleiermacher universality (the genus}. of whom the most significant were those who conceded to the Nominalists and Conceptualists (relative) justification.lt.e. taken for itself. .1 56 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. Analogously as above. (4) The genus is not merely a sum to be approxi mately discovered. 5). s) is . the difference between yei/o? and rl (see 148) is this.gt. 153. was compelled to identify it with &amp.lt. mode ( thing merely fancied.o/&amp. &amp. it must be said that one comprehends when one apprehends substantial completeness./&amp. when he identifies the universal with force right and Aristotle. It says. as VA 2 I Q nature this universality occur only as genus (cf. universal will volonte generate. A when its (^ . Totality is.5iW/xis.. but real power. (i. Where the universality of the concept appears as genus. according to Porphyry. not only em bracing but producing the different examples under it. but rather real true actuality sion of the its (6) 84) and and essentiality/ is. 8) 7) The true exten extension of concept therefore. Besides the moment. obs.

particularity. it related to this it is as determining form to content. 58.lt. Particu but. as 1) moment of the concept. in the embraces or comprehends concept (Aoya). is moment larity is of the concept as universality. it became the discrete) disjunction. not relation of two entirely diverse things. uni itself. W As not known. is magnitude. opposed to the universal. the sion and the content of the concept stand in inverse . 2) W Particularity is not separation the latter is hindered by the fact that the particulars are. secondly. &amp. in obs. except as posited by the . here has become The concept &amp. disjunction.SUBJECTIVITY.e. one. but. The expression called division. of that which separates the extension of the concept into particularity is commonly (V) The Particular Particularity Concept. i. iS7 had been versality/ being. appears. cept. 148 (1). that which.) essence. first.gt. 3). or has content. the concept contains in for itself. which 2 since the particular is the itself thein under rule that the exten negation of the universal. as the It moment is of difference. taken difference had been (See 89. because the difference falls within the one con the disparate (see (as. ratio has a justification.lt. and contradiction. &amp.. Difference as held apart from itself (or as universal) the concept as identical with as essential a is particularity.

/&amp. already by Aristotle and Porpyhry very correctly dis tinguished.lt.J&amp. or rather as put into Particularity has.gt. it. 149 (2). therefore. other. external reflection substance.^ mere mark.o/3a and the ev o-vyu.^ The sum of marks forms the content 2). When we In fact. Logical determination is opposed speak of a division of a universal sphere. therefore. It tells what the first chapter of the Second Part. or of grounds of division. By this term expositions of formal logic. KaT^yopeirai many ri eo-n it OVK kv ecmv. (2) universal. 2) of the concept. (1) 144. T&amp. (Cfto abstraction. (See 95.) Such division is called artificial. has in this restriction and its But thereby as well the universal also is The par limited and restricted by the particular.158 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM.gt. (3) Porphyry not incorrectly parts are conceivable. it. this particularisation belongs to scholastic./?e/5^/co s pass into each other. ticular has thereby raised itself to equality with the to universal.x&amp.lt. in a very superficial of former that oirolov ri dAA T&amp. ^ manner. Analogously with what was said above. But it since particularity its is opposed to universality. similarly as diversity is brought to light by the comparison of a third. these fall into a reflection external to the one dividing.lt. makes and says S/. does not constitute but forms only the accidental in Particularity as brought into the universal concept is from without logical difference.J. &amp.lt. it must be here said that one comprehends only as one perceives differences and marks.lt. denote the most various determinations.&amp. the character of something posited by it. or the universal has become degraded .

Porphyry. In this particularisation. how univer ever. equality with the particular. : . Disjunction. the of the Empiricists. tion. species. and that thereby the former is itself de W was graded a particular. the nature the universal as . and has. also kind (external mode).) them disjunc Such are species. 1.^ cept form its The species which contain the con true content. phenomenon.^ The species but yet it is expresses not. phenomenal. and. which. at the same time have the character of sality. as the concept was the universal. always signifies something external. the positing. when it said that the particular opposes itself to the universal. 147. etSos. opposed to therefore. is this mode of specification Rightly.) species is a difficult determination. therefore.) (Cf. repeats itself. as it was here explained. like mere difference. so the species. 159 Thereby we get the rela tion of two things which as particular are disjoined^ and hence stand under one universality. therefore. 3) Hence the name have well referred. 148. is the most immediate. since here opposite moments must be held fast at the same time. and.SUBJECTIVITY. in pointed out in some so-called natural systems to nature. of an essential moment the con it is cept (3) . in his category investigations upon the yevt/ccorarov and etSiKwrarov. but the essence. (See (2) The 108. Hence the uncertainty in this concept to which the Stoics. the character Specification is of the merely existing. Analogously with the above Comprehended is only that whose species are &amp. after them. only the condition.lt. 1. embrace under (Cf.

and Rightly. But if particularity is the other of uni versality. but in the fact that the universal puts forth of from it itself specific differences^ (3) by means which separates into the species constituting the uni versal. since it contains the (1) In the of division. or has this as its content. therefore. not not a particular but is particularity 150 (3). do not. which kv TO) rrys OVOrias Aoycf Kara (TU//3e/fyxos. dx^pwrrat distinguished. the particu is actually realised. which the concept was seen to be. known. The species. is The concept completion of the species the moment of particularity In truth. such. completion of the species.6 KaO avro Trpoa-ova-ai. which TTOiovaiv Sia^opais ciSoTrotois it is therefore said that the ye^os Swcx/^ei //. 0. it is in fact not to be hence is identical with it. larity of brought the concept consists not in a difference in from without. come forth from the universal. since it a concept is the species [plural]. If universality was totality ( 146).ev TroVas ex 66 ( l) - . W The is species. but is ground not merely the species. are the Sia^opai xupunai and among the latter again. therefore. thought without it. nor even in that in univer or that there are sality the species are to be found.160 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. therefore. Xa^avovrat KOL Trotoucrtv aAAo and the (2) Of the dAAotov. but rather are to be thought as filling it. the species are rightly thought only when they make up a totality. itself.

not without advan W tage. and hence not correspond to the science. however. ch. an analysis of the concept will necessarily be able to reconvert its moments into those determinations {i. 278. to go through the course for is. The real result. one s self for one who will orientate himself as to the point where he stands. p = o. * the three possible cases. would presup \&amp. &quot. . however. one thinking universal sections (y 2 = it itself. iii. or + or give the It is contained in the concept of three species of it. (similarly destruction] of water. &amp. /cat TTTT^I/CO KCU erz Spa). 161 The real specific . 3 &amp.. Aristotle saw tliat the true Sicu peo-ts occurred by the fact that TO yevos rat? avTtSi?7/3?7yU. but only the actual and self-realising particularisation. demand which must be made of the Nevertheless.) gives true disjunction.gt. is not posited by the contained in the concept of the The universal formula for all conic difference is px + p *~) is its 2 complete content because . Dialectic.) merely conceivable essential nor the phenomenal.e. Such a course.lt. (CfNeither the Schleiermacher. which has issued.&quot. Then it would possible to begin the logic with the theory of the concept. the animal that it separates into certain disjunct species. the as by the analysis moments sublated in it can be shown as independent substances).gt. part ii. (Cf.z pose the concept as ready at hand.SUBJECTIVITY.. 151.ei/cus Siac^opous Sicupei rat KaOd-Trep TO wov TW TTC^OJ. If the hitherto considered moments of the concept are merely being and essence sublated and de graded to moments.

Only is it as this absolute negativity and return-into-self the actual concept. as The determined or concrete (complete) con is the universality which is in particularity identical with itself. gives the definition. one of them out of view.e. the unity of genus and specific difference. was accordingly in the habit of recommending for selfstudy this course besides the systematic.) &&amp. versal was first only the one.i6z CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. concept displaying (1) activity. who once so presented the logic.^ the Aristotelian If one leaves statements upon this are intelligible. without becoming lost therein. Since the becoming of the concept in us. is that the universal does not exclude the particular. 5. It would The uni be what the proof is in calculation. Then it is determined or has determined itself as concept. the particular the other moment of the concept complete and realised the concept appears only where it appears as the unity of its moments.gt.. but posits it particularity does not exclude univer only as this actual unity is sality but constitutes it . or the becoming conscious of it.^ the other shrinks into a wholly external formula/ 4 ^ . 5. obs. .) Hegel. obs. the actual subject. cept. 152. (See 41. (c) The Determined Concept. W . determined concept. i. true principle. the concept actual.^ ( 41. is inner essence as it specificates itself in external phenomenon.

163 W Not the concept of man. what we therefore. it appears as a third beside call gives is. abstraction made from the other them/1 and ) two. from which everything else follows. For if the individual is opposed to the particular. That it contains the ground of existence. that the formula of the ellipse helps us to discover an apparatus for constructing it.e.. tion of the. thought . indifferent. more closely considered.* i. As there can be only one concept. that. concrete is That the individual an abstraction it shown therein. and. so that it shall be the immediate. &amp. s development. so there can be only one definition of an object. then it occurred to set up definitions (of course. Individualisation an abstract. that Spinoza lays down this principle the correct definition of the right-angled triangle gives us the (two) principal propositions regarding it. in the doing so. shows how a definition ^ Genus was taken as can be a creator (subject). in untrue mode of manifesta concept. &amp. If this moment of the concept is is fixed. the word definition is used precisely as we use the word concept..e. is ^ Hence in the the principle of S. is itself. arbitrary and numerous) by combining the two. abstract universality. i. Middle Ages. precisely coincides with the two others which were to be distinguished from it. differentia specifica as a mere mark. i. : 153.SUBJECTIVITY. unmediate^d and self. ( as that which excludes the uniindividual. from which everything else is deduced.lt.gt. and even later. but that of Socrates. the individual. one thinks mere relation to what But the 144) had been the abstract universal. to denote 3 the inner nature.e..

therefore. just as gave only the accidental. characterises as 3 Hence. proof that we (2) would perhaps be what Hegel. has no true substantial existence and an abstract universal (red. in not come forth as actual any sphere the concept could have in this sphere merely indivi subject. one would dual beings. ject.lt. while true subjectivity is is singularity. accordingly as one will count differently. which are repeatable. whose aim . quadrupKcity. a species. espece. merely a subThus.gt. is. was a merely imagined universal. category one may find triplicity. is the same with the particular/ If.r)Toi. in for example) is merely an individual determination So it comes that Aristotle characterises now a thing. (4) ^A mere individual. & mere particularity is Nature.) universal determination. as them. the slave. therefore. stripped of its 144.f3\. who uses the This C1 ) If applies to . one them an external. fivefoldness. as the abstract immediate individual. is called homo or puer he is no sub but only a thing. &amp. the universal. various senses. which would have their substance. and again the individual as immediate. word individual in &amp. . as mere species. a mere predicate (singular). 2. a mere universal individual is only something supposed. and their species producing have only the meaning of examples. stanceless fragment.!6 4 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. Hence is the individual as such absolutely contingent.( one counts the moments of the concept. from itself versal and so stands over against 4) it. (Cf. and hence improper. . outside themselves.^ The true relation that each moment of the concept is 6) the unity of the other two. It is accident in the genus. a have here to do with aptdpot da-vp.

genus and species have their existence. and to fill himself with a universal con tent.. 165 to produce a true subject existing for itself. . existence as subject is existence of the concept as such. which is not solely and completely author of that which it does. it is only as In this the examples as mere accidents go to genus. The genus embraces the species and examples. where the universal by its particularisation closes with itself. but of one type. is a definite concrete character. man. is not subject to it. Every true subject has its own defini tion. Therefore is he with that which generates him.. has led . able genus.e. nor replaceable. co-efficient of that whose example it is. examples. hence to them as substanceless stands opposed substantial universality as the subjectless. i. finally. In the sphere of spirit. his substance. the ground. example. i. the more he exists as individual. can not do this. according to Plato and Aristotle).e. amples are mere individtials . since his universal nature (reason) acts in him by means of his particular species (nature). the species make up the genus and con tain the examples in the examples. this as what the concept to the fore- has proved to be 143). non-self-developing. only an exemplar. Therefore. As self-generating. it is his destiny to sublate his mere individuality. valent). It is otherwise in the Here there is neither an unalter sphere of spirit.lt. 154. Its productions are therefore repetitions Ex helper. G &amp. Reflection upon (cf. and only in this has the example its true and unchangeable actuality (immortality. The more he does this. and therein precisely by himself. lie is his own His genus. while it itself is the substanceless and perishable. because indifferent (equi This is the highest which it produces. man.SUBJECTIVITY. identical. as he specificates (distinguishes) himself.

e. shown what that But if is in itself which has yet is to develop itself. therefore. and a thing is known in truth only when it is known it in its development. there lies concealed in the determinate concept a relation in which the concept appears as dirempt. and the position of difference. which shows what the concept judgment.1 66 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. for if its makes its itself development consists in that it that which it is. for example. is different from that of the parabola. tion is This diremp- therefore the further development. this consideration can concern only the nature of the But hereby is said that this concept in general. is really contained already in the result arrived subject. since no other being stands opposed to the concept. as The determined concept . (2) it is the Hence the (determined) concept of the ellipse.) (1) But. 143-152). the concept considered only as it is in itself (i. 51. But that is posits itself in mo is ment of particularity at. In fact. develops itself as. the ex clusion. consideration of the concept has not yet been ex haustive .. as related to itself). the concept must be posited also in the other moments the contained in it. such it for itself but as being for itself ( it is exclusive. a fulfilment really is . which it going analysis of the concept ( has not so much considered how rather. W . can fall only in the concept itself. posits difference.

moments and True. it is here clear how we can speak of mere concept as distinguished from the judgment. one has at once subject and active. judgment. is to be thought only as it posited as subjectivity If one does this. their unity has not disappeared. since they are its moments in it identical. it is but because the it realisation of not yet posited (as that to which the judgment has to conduct) copula has the character of immediacy. The determinate judgment met us in the definition just as in the formula of the curve the fomer is. distinctionless. B. and appears as (2) This is the introduced from without. ^ 167 while there are no different necessities of both. the case is regarded type. In general. where there are no tiated substantiality.e. the transition from substantiality here it may be mentioned (see 140).cept. . subject. i. different things posited as one likewise. tivity was remarked that while substance is by its concept sole. . real subjects. separate. which. to subjec above.. the latter an equation. therefore. on the contrary. 155. reason why the judgment. predicate. examples are merely repetitions of one Where they are not this. as an irrationality. JUDGMENT. If. regarded is a higher form of the cor..e. while in the sphere of spirit originality & In so far as judgment as a mishap. substantive and verb. self - In the judgment the concept appears as (1) In this diremption its excluding duality.SUBJECTIVITY. always called a judgment. is differen In nature. like the concept. as later from the syllogism. i. and we say the example is abor is not tive.

the copula. that to It has. speak of several 155. .168 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. likewise an objective and our judging. here. which was until now not possible any more than there are two or more actualities or necessities. of their external relation to one another. it in which realisation it fulfills its destiny as subject. (2) 156. it has ac it quired the meaning of the individual: as subject. there- which it is. and of a combination of two. in either case that which comprehends Because. must subsume by rather. By copula we mean (subjectively and objectively) the bond by which the terms related in the judgment are joined to one another. subsumed. Until then has only the position of subject. first to was show itself in the realisation of the judgment. that to which the as. the latter appears not so individual much itself. and appears posed to as the merely it grammatical subject. consists merely in our following the self-diremption of the 3 concept as objective/ ) (1) Hence we may obs. or also the particular. But since the other moments it the concept stand over against as exclusive.^ it. 1). relation. is is a category. In the subject ( 153) diremption made of its appearance. is a true one. Hence we say of a man who judges incorrectly that he has no judgment. (2) Op stands the universal. however. as already above ( concepts. commonly regarded Judgment if it is as a product only of our reflection.

this predication ap the work of the one judging. product since it is subject to its universal standing over against &amp. (6) Therein consists its judgment and doom (Gericht). i. it. concept. an in dividual tion.e. matical) subject. way -judgment Also the so-called logical subject. abstract logic.. there not accidental that Aristotle uses the same words and subject. and of the judgment.gt.*&amp.SUBJECTIVITY. according to Aristotle.lt. passes for that.gt. and predicate to that (gram therefore. It is. fore.Q vTroKfi^evov. as the value of the universal. is Wherever.lt. the copula is shows that the predicate is no longer Every attributed to the subject by us but is its. 3 TO wov KanyyopetTot Kara If. by which he denotes tho real substrate in order to denote the grammatical subject: tVo/cet/xevov (2) The universal formula for the is to him both. of nature expresses or exhibits a judgment. judgment W Since each moment is is really the entire hence unity of the two others. the individual is (or is not) is therefore judgment universal (I-U) since even the particular has. but pears to bo merely &amp. Most expositions of the old. : &amp. the realisation different forms of the which gives the consists in this unity the judgment/ itself 5) that every i. rov dvOpuirov (is K. In the instance the relation exists that a mere individual subsumed under an abstract universal in an immediate of immediacy. moment shows first is to be that every concept of the judgment becomes the concept. a subsumed under a universal determina occurs.O. (D fore. . 169 even yet only the determination of is its universal nature. opposed to the universal.e..

The rose is red. start : (a) The Judgment of Immediacy. In the case of indefinite. every other form there must. posited by the nature of the subject or the predicate. Upon the nomencla ture a remark If. and to show (say) how the judgment. Since we have seen that a mere form does not exist. In Aristotle such empty distinctions do not occur. no difference whatever is to be made between the positive and the assertoric judgment. and therefore place the difference of the various judgments in the mere form. &quot. the same names should be employed that are employed by formal logic. Since here form and content are not considered apart. According to the old way.&quot. if the example shall be fit. to designate the various forms of judgment. singular judgments.170 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. passes through the forms of the positive. This judgment has as contingent no truth. this will occur only because that name appears as the most suitable. etc. without there being a necessity for the subsumption. 157 (1). since the individual as subject is subsumed/ or subsumes itself. it is an inadmissible demand if it be required to show the passage of one form of judgment into the others in one and the same content. The immediate judgment is positive ) 1 judgment. The main thing is not the name but what is perceived as the peculiarity of each form of judgment. from the unreal abstraction of a contentless form. negative.) although it . the various forms of the judgment will be to us also in content different judgments. (2) under a predicate. and the categorical judg ment is different from them only when one has regard to the content. be chosen another example.

positive acquires hence the usage of speech opposes it to the rational The sky may also acquire another and necessary. ( is Only. obs. contingent. 3). &quot. with predicate universal. U- : predicated is mere thinghood (cf. and the predicate expresses which the mark obs. here the meaning of the accidental. WEven have its correctness Mk&k I have by occupa tion become the possessor.. which inheres in the subject along marks. I may be unaccommodating to others. ^ the subsumption is merely positive. ( z) If I a thing. &amp. i. yield to everyone without being obliged by my duty.SUBJECTIVITY. &quot. . 158 (2). ..The sky is blue. 4).lt. are positive judgments. just as well be expressed by the in this case the subjectivity of that of I formula &amp. But it appears in the case of the contin itself well as in contingency gent judgment as (129. and the abstract is merely an individual determination 153. predicate.U) is also its. since the union of subject here an external one. W The propositions: etc.gt.gt. the predicate can receive the mean mere mark ing of a merely external attribute or with other ( 148).e.&quot. 171 may (I be correct where a contingent content is con The universal formula of the judgment cerned. a certain condi substrate. give my self up to a determination. is i.e. &amp. the grammatical subject is the 110.&quot.. &amp. let it pass for right. ence may. 5 &amp. tion of it. therefore. there is yet no (eternal) if it 5 The relation of inher truth (of reason) therein.lt.lt.gt. (3) The my pleasure is the copula in this judgment.This aud the act whereby I occupy house is yellow. 4 &amp.

it is judgment when I renounce a right. it or the (entire) universal can not be predicated of The truth judgment (I of the positive in judgment individual is. individual. be predicated of the indi vidual . Cajus is not learned. Both expres sions mean the same hence the formula for the I -P. I predicate the universal of the individual. the which an is withdrawn not U). determination (I P). this again contains more than merely . 1). This is an negative judgment. that in it it lies its opposite.e. W (1) Of the sky only sky-blue. the negative judgment. i. 159 a nega (3).. : W In civil wrong I negate merely the subsumption of my affair under a universal rule. Just so. obs. therefore. It is therefore a negative judgment.172 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. of this house not all yellow but only a particular yellow.e. Such a judgment would the proposition. tive be. therefore. which expresses may just as well not occur. there nevertheless belongs to the individual only a part of the sphere which the universal includes there can. the embraces more than the predicate (the particular) the same relation repeated. exception.. And in the negative is judgment precisely Since. since the subsump- tion If. and will represent my conduct as an exception (as a particular). W only a particular species of the universal. namely. namely. or withdraws itself from subsumption it is under a universal in that particular subsumed under a i.

negative and the so-called infinite ^ : the mind. say. In spite have (un absurdity these judgments !) fortunately reality.lt.. is &amp. therefore. i. a will which wills nothing. absurd is. the obstinacy which says that my is the mind mind (3) In general the real difference will is my will. 4) it a judgment which is no longer contradicts itself and is in so far a meaningless &amp. sense than is and particular. in universal which the pre of dicate. 5 Just as is entirely empty. 173 that particular determination. judgment.SUBJECTIVITY. That is to say.e. but the The proposition : W (2) The proposition: The right itself by my will. The result is. or. crime. a judgment. is Hence it in the negative judgment/ and usually said. . a deed which is no deed. the indefinite (infinite) or identical judgment. which in the two other forms of judgment a higher had had the meaning appears as their unity.non U). their of i. (1) or the individual is related only to itself (I ( 2) (I I). says (judges) nothing.e. between the Maimon has directed judgment. This crime in which I do not negate line is not-sweet. The mind _ obstinacy. (5) The mind is not-square. .gt. to which Salomon The proposition attention. unity of the positive 3) In this judgment the since it is judgment sublates itself. is too much neglected. the subsumption of my act under the right. the relation between be conceived that every subject and predicate is so to reference of the individual to the universal becomes by the complete negation of the latter impossible .. The mind is not square.

itself. essential judgment occurs where an individual subsumes itself or is subsumed under an 161. even though opposed to the mere of the genus. higher than that.) meaning only this 153. The essential (substantial) universal determination. this. But what is contained in the fact that the highest form of the immediate judgment contradicts In fact. it has thereby become true universality of the concept. and the truth of the immediate judgment will be a judgment which the subject is subsumed (or subsumes itself) to a predicate which constitutes the true substance in and ( real essence of the subject. ($) The Essential Judgment. 5.174 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. as i. get the obs.e. We call judgment the essential judgment. while the subject is merely an indi- . it is As the truth of the immediate judgment.. its true concept. (1) series of its If in the immediate judgment the is forms was produced by the alteration of the it predicate^ here is otherwise : the predicate the totality of the concept. for when the predicate in the various forms of this judgment has passed through the different moments of the concept. needs therefore no further development. this really occurs. 160. 152). is that we have to go beyond it. ( individual.

gt. the positive. The the character of in judgment has itself still immediacy where a mere individual essential an immediate way is subsumed. (2) which this judgment has to realise itself give the various forms of the the foundation is judgment.gt. appears an essential relation as a mere individual case! We call this is relation singular (essential) as judgment. one (Cf. M who Hence more judgment is attributed to the man says. Tin is white. The man (2) That itself out to the is blonde. but immediately by natural character (2) It is a contradiction that what is in itself alone. 162 (1). than to one who says. in which an individual \sfree.) complete concept. true should have merely the meaning of something Acwhereby it accidentally has its correctness. : . . will designate the various forms by the earlier analogous formulae. therefore. vidual. Tin is a conductor of electricity. (1 &amp. There then under an essential determination. formula would be (V These This (tin) is an electrical propositions conductor. is. or. the predicate will have to be designated as unalterable (p).^ Its It as I contingent p. not because of his merit. in which formed by the fact that the subject essential its has an essential universality as predicate. 175 and has consequently to develop itself and The various stages by become equal to that. to fill If. is mortal despotism in the Orient.SUBJECTIVITY. Cajus acts justly. or subsumes itself. Man is free. 156. @&amp.

) . the individual shall be a universal. a judgment be a singular judgment. 162. Because of the other may meaning here. to it is at the say. of immediacy cording to the formal logic. The propositions Some metals show capacity to conduct electricity 1 : . ancient freedom. of a particular essential nature. the word essentials added. 2). the truth of the singular essen will be a judgment is judgment in which the sub ject a particular species of a genus. this particular (essential) judgment (or the judgment of plurality) 2) is equally affirmative and negative/ Its formula would be P-p. which consisted in the fact that some (the Greeks) were free. But the contradiction which carries us is contained that is judgment beyond it. species (see tial the concept of the 149. (2) The freedom of the Greeks only.. the (subjected) individual and (predicated of it). as unity of the essential universal If such a unity gives the concept i. i.e.176 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. of which the 1 Since rational nature of the latter is predicated/ contained that other species are therein is implicit^ excluded by this subsumption.freedom of the Bar The negative judgment and the particular barians. Some men are rational. If.. etc. of judgments show relationship with the category possibility. 1. 163 in this (2). same time determined as both. (Cf.e. involved the non. The death of an animal shows it to be subject to its genus.

gt. to say. the individuals and particulars. found where the the totality of all individuals and particulars are subsumed to an essential universality. and has the value merely of i. 165. upon the two that is foregoing. involves a contradiction. in the singular judgment the subject was conceived the particular. be. therefore. as the individual. is true only for the nonce. the concept of totality. or the judgment of totality.SUBJECTIVITY. Its schema would be U p. since both judgments should be equally true. 177 This defect is : remedied in a higher form this form. duals and particulars ticulars. A universal judgment. z&amp. in the particular as it will.. is. hence. The proposition All wolves are vertebrates the complete equality of all classes of men before the : : law. number. have to be taken as the unity of the as the universal embracing two determinations. they exclude togetherness therefore.. 164 (3). of the essential judgment when we reflect If.. totality. and totality still since it can never completely an end to be realised.e. judgment which obtains of the greatest (1) . But we cannot stop even with judgment of Totality comprehends together the indivi . emerges as their unity. but as individuals and par . the value of a particular judgment M . The universal is (essential) judgment.

The judgment of the concept occurs where the subject has a determination that con stitutes its innermost essence. points so that we can as little rest it with it as with the indefinite corresponds. To what we have judgment to which to pass from it. Sub- sumption under this predicate appears first as a mere . This successive develop ment of the judgment into the syllogism ( 170) . ) Both subject and predicate. &amp. therefore. namely.) further but it is merely required that the copula also be fulfilled to the concept.lt. like that. beyond itself. have not to alter 165.I7 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. of man ^ to be respected by the law. the subject has passed through the various moments of the concept. and 2 thereby has become the entire concept/ (Cf. In this. Tacitly there is assumed as the basis of those universal judgments the judgment that it is involved in the concept of the wolf to be a vertebrate. (c) The Conceptual Judgment. as did the predicate in the immediate judgment. since their determination is accomplished.gt. has been shown in the various forms of the essential judgment. gives the various forms of the conceptual judgment. wolves are vertebrates is true in the only of all those which are known. 166 (1). (1) That all first instance 2 &amp. by which is determined its relation to the predicate attributed to it.

subsumption under the predicate ditioned posited and con by the essence of it. once more the earlier analogous formula?. judgment and assertorical judgments. it has here only the character of being and immediacy. i. of the concept corresponds to what mediate W Only of the work : . Hegel calls the categorical If we employ 167 (2). resolved.. In the immediate judgment of the con cept there is contained a contradiction. destination. it (1) It corresponds to the judgment of the concept. or must This gives the immediate be subsumed under it. or faithfulness to duty as that of (2) Such a man. is it said that he has real judgment.. which even It consists in that.^ It we have the essential judgment of occurs where the subsumption of . is The contradiction a relation. (2) of one who names beauty as the purpose of art. i.) If in place of mere is an essential relatedness enters. immediacy and becomes true (See 131. an unalterable letter will here have to be taken for the subject also. although the is the name suggests. since the copula loses the character of necessity. immediate copula: predicate belongs to it 179 is not yet shown that this from inner necessity.SUBJECTIVITY. in which in an immediate way man The im corresponds to custom. the concept.e.e. because the sumption is only a fact. subpositive and the singular judgment. and we should have s p. man (no is expressed in the proposition judgment a man) is a rational essence it is contained longer in innocence.

l8o

CA TEGORIES OF FREEDOM.
predicate

the subject under the

has acquired the

character of necessity, and

may

be called the judg

ment

of necessity or compulsion^

(1) With Hegel, the hypothetical judgment. (2) In the proposition, the criminal must be punished (or, if a man is a criminal he is further, in punished) the external legality of man we meet this judgment
;

in its subjective
168.

and objective meaning.
subsumption has
lost
is

Since, however, the

the character of immediacy, the opposite defect
present.

That

is

to say, being

is

wanting to
i.e.,

it, it

has

got the meaning of a mere must be,
(TrpoflXfjfj.a),

of a

problem

and

this

judgment istherefore/r^/wztf/zV.^
there
is

Just

on

that

account

repeated here, in

higher potency, the negative judgment as well as the
particular.

What

is

problematic obtains always only
is

of some.

Since the subsumption
it
is

compulsion,
(

i.e.,

external necessity,

mere contingency
This, however,
is

126).

As mere problem
the copula
s

this
2)

judgment contains an

un

resolved contradiction/

resolved

by

being posited again as immediacy, i.e., as immediacy produced by the sublation of mere
mediation.
(Cf.

131.)

This gives us the grounded or

completed judgment of the concept.
Rightly, therefore, did Hegel, earlier, identify hypothetical judgment with the problematic. Although it is necessary that the criminal be pun(1)

the

SUBJECTIVITY.
ished,
it

181

is yet problematical whether it always and when it happens, it remains, since that (2) This necessity is an external one, an accident.

happens

;

contradiction

is contained in the concept of every be problem, every should-be, which as such cannot The law, therefore, can only realised. 44, 2.) (Cf.

condemn,
169
or

its

judgment compels and punishes.

(3).

The complete judgment

of the concept,

judgment of freedom, is to be found where the is by subject, by means of its possible independence, subsumed essential (1) its predicate nevertheless
under
it.

(

166.)

It contains,

therefore, the
2
< >

two

forms of the conceptional judgment hitherto, been considered, and is their truth.

which have,

The sub-

a new being, sumption, that, is to say, is neither but is both, hence free and, nor even a mere must-be,
3

therefore, conceptual

>

subsumption.<

of freedom has a universal character,

The judgment for what should

be forms no exception. In so far as in such a judgment as The wolf is either a mollusc, or articulate, or vertebrate, it is at least is subsumed represented as possible that the subject under another as its appropriate predicate, we may the disjunctive. (2) It call this with
:

W

and has, therefore, the character of inner necessity, 3 As an example of this therefore, apodictic. is, be judgment in so far as it has real meaning, may even willed rationality, in which man, though cited he can be irrational, is rational. This relation may
<
>

Hegel

judgment

easily

be reduced to a disjunctive judgment.

1

82

CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM.
170.

The various forms

of the conceptual judg
realises

ment have shown how the copula
had exhibited
this

freedom,

i.e.,

the concept, just as the series of immediate judgments
realisation of the predicate, the

essential judgment that of the subject.
ever, i\iQ

Thereby,
(

how
For

goal of the

judgment

is

reached

157) and

hence also the termination of
since,

its

development.

as

was

postulated, the concepts have

become

concept,

we

are compelled to think the concept which,
is

through the concept,
syllogism.^
ising concept

identical with itself,

i.e.,

the

This, as the return of the self-particular
(

154)

is

the truth of the judgment,
therefore,
41,
obs.

whose highest form
gism/
2)

is,

really
4.)

the syllo
this, self-

(Cf.

16,

In

exclusion yields to self-inclusion.

In the example last cited the subsumption of rationality is itself rationality, i.e., con (2) The difficulty of distinguishing the highest cept. form of the judgment from the syllogism has in this The student involuntarily passes relation its ground. from one to the other because what is thought of is itself this passage. Only in a higher sense must it be

W

man under

said of the

judgment

of freedom, as of identical
it is

universal judgment, that

and no (longer) judgment.

C.

THE SYLLOGISM.
is

171. Also the syllogism

generally regarded as
;

merely a product of our thought

but as category

it is

SUBJECTIVITY.

183

and the syllogism which just as well a real relation, we make is merely a psychological reflex, or an inner
repetition, of the syllogism
fact itself.

which

is

contained in the

^

As the return

of the concept from the
is

judgment to itself, the syllogism concept and the judgment (hence its judgment of the concept), and
syllogism
its
is

the unity of the
is

latent in the
2
< >

truth.

The
;

the concept which

is

mediated with itself

in that development can, therefore, consist only
itself

it

posits

as

this

self -mediation.

The various

of it are shown, each again, by stages of realisation these various forms, the figures of the syllogism

^

;

form a

series

of stages

in

that they successively

final determination of the approach more nearly the Since the syllogism has shown itself to be

syllogism.

the truth and foundation of the judgment, a paral
lelism

between the various syllogisms and judgments

cannot cause surprise.
not the case, one says rightly 2) Such propositions as no syllogism. is a syllogism, have therefore a everything God, etc., ^ Pre in these. 29, obs. 5.) (Of.

Where

this is

that there

is

(

justification

_

156, is true here as what was said ( cisely the same obs. 5) regarding the various forms of the judgment. But the more the theory of syllogisms has kept, in the form which the most careful formal

the logic, observer of the reflex of the syllogism in us, Aristotle, has given it, the more we shall know ourselves in with it, the more its terms may also be

agreement

1

84

CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM,

Since the abstract logic abstracts employed here. from the content, so it ignores the difference between the stages, and rests in the most abstract. Hence in
the ordinary usage of speech the figures of the syllogism denote only the forms of the immediate syllogism, arid the syllogism of analogy, for example, is not commonly called a particular figure.

172. The syllogism will therefore appear first as not yet realised. The concept has, therefore, not yet

become

identical with itself

;

therefore, the syllogism

appears as a plurality of concepts, like the judgment (Cf. 155.)^) But mere judgment it can not be, for the

mere copula has become mediating concept.
Therefore, the syllogism will
tion of
first

(

170.)

appear as a

media

two concepts by means of a concept, in which mediation the two extremes as much as the terminus
medius have the meaning of mere moments of the 1) concept/ each of which is by itself taken as concept.

As

this not yet

mediated syllogism the syllogism

is

immediate syllogism. W
(1) As in the quantitative relation, because one quantum was made of two, these had the meaning only of moments of the quantum ( 72), so here the concepts which make up the syllogism, which is, how

This ex self-mediating concept. pression contains the contradiction which lies in the fact itself; the syllogism is not yet (completed)
<->

ever, only the

Otherwise ex syllogism, but only begins to be it. The first pressed syllogism is conceptual mediation.
:

the fulfilment of the immediate judgment. (a) The Immediate Syllogism. not conceptual mediations.. the universal. were taken by themselves. in the figure the as its particular will be combined with the individual as predicate and with the universal its subject. itself. ^ is by a particular subsumed under a This first foundation of figure of the immediate syllogism (the the positive judgment) may therefore be denoted by the formula I valid P . i. the dividual. appear as an immediate and external subsumption. If these. 173 concepts so (1).SUBJECTIVITY.e.lt. &amp. 185 syllogisms to be considered exhibit only superficial^ forced. and that of the individual under the particular. Since the three concepts are the each by mediation will have the Therefore both the sub- character of externality.U. now. and in immediate syllogism. and hence. are. it) 2 The premisses of the syllogism (the immediate in as) are therefore (or may be represented first judgments/ In this case. by a concept mediated that each gets the meaning of a mere moment of the concept. 3) . will have in the first place to be so conceived that in it an individual universal. sumption of the particular under the universal. the particular. as judgment. In the immediate syllogism the various distinct from them.

4. here. the conclusion.gt. the purchase in which I get possession by means of a &quot. (3) The regular form of this syllogism is then P U. (1) From this defect of content there fol lows also its defective form. I subject myself to a particular determination as to a rule. (2) On the contrary. for the sake of a particular interest. mediated. (See There could equally well\&amp. in which.) judgment which it proves. (Cf. therefore defines the first figure as that in which the terminus minor is contained in the medius^ and this in the W [See Prior. or every contract. in short a contingent judg ment.Q subsumed under the universal another particular. who in his exposition always seizes the real relation of the concepts combined.] The proposi This house is yellow because painted with ochre tion. or the reference of the two extremes. This syllogism is as regards its content just as contingent as the 157. I-P. Analytics. may serve as 157. I-U. particular stipulation.) ( 2) The modern expositions of formal logic always put forward this form as the assented form. and the individual combined by the same particularity with another universal. . the reference of is each extreme to the tion or mean an immediate presupposi an assumption. Aristotle. i. /. major. examples of this syllogistic figure.. obs. or the same interest to another . namely. 2. is syllogism.&quot. 174. 1.^) ^ to this In that example another interest might lead me same contract.1 86 CA TE GO R IES OF FREED OM. Only one part of the which the syllogism should be.

gt. accidental that I have this particular interest. or in which the two coincide. This defect demands a remedy. 175 (2). This figure points to its own sublation.lt. . that from the syllogism everything shall be removed which contradicts its nature.SUBJECTIVITY. . But if this be posited as that which figure it really is. &amp. in both (as already done in the first) assign to the universal the place of predicate. if whose formula will be I- U-P. judgment. one takes the premisses as judgments. &amp. This now would not occur if its premisses were by this same figure . must. made conclusions thereby form.lt. my obliga contract tion compulsory or in every syllogism the conclusion (3) It is is by its ergo no longer a mere judgment.gt. in the conclusion with the individual. demonstration the negative 2 &amp. That is to say. i87 2 The contract is concluded. is the universal. there results a syllogistic in which precisely the universal forms the This second figure of the syllogism^ of mean the concept. namely. and to another figure of the syllogism. if in the first premiss the universal is identical with the particular. etc.&amp. It occurs when any individual what ever obtains through the universal a particular pre dicate. then really that which joins the par ticular with the individual. but rather repeat the regressus in infinitum which would arise would not take away this defective it.

there results a is figure which a particular placed 2 &amp. but.gt.&quot. &amp. premiss. (P_I_U). points to another as contained in it as it is in the one which is Since. 2 &amp. 176 (3). I represent etc.gt.Prior this figure of the syllogism in which the concept of greatest comprehension forms the terminus medius.lt. The is not learned because he was not industrious relation in which from universal respects I renounce a particular right. my affair as an exception. but without giving a reason why it is so This reason lies in the fact that it has the declared. since contains an immediated its truth.:88 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. and both. Cajus apparent. The regular form Examples of this is then: P U. the second. that to of the uni say. the individual medi an ates them in This being posited. it of the it syllogism stands it. [&quot. 158) the proposition.( This third figure of the syllogism in . This figure first. in the second premiss. therefore. supported upon . that. universal use. Therefore (cf. that of the individual with the particular. it is really involved and the particular coincide in the that the universal individual. by means with of individual in relation universality. in the con clusion. second form of the judgment for its conclusion.. I -P. higher than the because still presupposes ^ is But even it. (D Also Aristotle 5] calls Analytics. (3 that figure are so to be chosen the connection with the judgment is always clearly &amp.gt. the identity versal with the individual. . first. I-U . is in this second figure expressed. i. or in which. likewise.

Not only. which it presupposes. the indefinite judgment. W . empty (see so this is above-mentioned superiority. (See 105. (i. was.) ^ : 177. (3) has no unmediated premiss. does the syllogism of itself defective in immediacy show the fact that its . As.lt.SUBJECTIVITY. because it is my pleasure. because Cajus is both.. &amp. and that he is a finite being. one repeats. infers itself. and rightfully one from the major premiss only the major premiss nothing. entirely nugatory.gt. . is made law. It is. 3 The regular form here would be I U.) i\\Q proposition. exactly taken. in spite of the the truth of the 159. allows validity to this further step. nevertheless. . therefore. (5) and can gain a content only by a subreption.e.. although figure. finite being i. however. which really con tains the anticipation of a higher syllogism.e. we have an example of this syllogism also where (in transgression) a particular interest. but one concludes or infers This subreption makes us say Some It is a gratuity when one finite being is learned. follows. forms. &amp. (6) Precisely this is the reason why formal logic but the gives the preference to the first figure foundation or presupposition occupies a lower posi (2) In tion than the presupposition. (5) From the fact that Cajus is learned. (4) The first forms the presupposition of its major premiss. Cajus) is learned. I P P U. the second of its minor premiss. two other 3). however. 189 which the terminus medius appears as joined with both extremes as its subject. There are finite beings who are learned. only that a . ( 182. the truth of the (4) two former.

But is The positive merely the that what they each this is that. syllogism has become (b) The Essential Syllogism. therefore. which (moment) joins in an external and accidental way the two extremes. negative result. but a repetition identical (a bis idem. as is the judgment) figures . Since the terminus syllogism is a determination which essential to the of terminus minor. .190 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. mediated (as con appears in the others as something and all three They. of true inference. and the syllogism in whose various figures each moment has taken the position of the mean will now have for its terminus medius a determination which is not a mere moment of the concept. cannot. and not a mere accidental predicate be the terminus major also. form is highest really no syllogism. form a circle. medius in the essential is 178. essential syllogism. clusion). The but forms an essential mediation of them. to which the same is to it. have shown must be combined. a like result emerges when the three all are more exactly considered. to figures conduct to the negation the circulus in ratiocinando. as in the immediate syllogism. therefore. subordinated. Between the three figures of the syllogism there exists the relation that what in one has (in the premisses) the character of immediacy.

we have this figure as In the first example proposition or as real relation. The essential syllogism. is the individual. it stands over against the universal. but will likewise be an essential universality. the species is all metals in the second.^ (2) among the immediate syllogisms and figure proves the singular essential judgment. there results a syllogism in which the mean embracing is formed by the species ( 149. obs. 179 The mean.SUBJECTIVITY. whose mean formed by particularity widened into that universality. the fulfilment of the essential judgment occurs tion 173). the syllogism first It corresponds to the of totality. or subsumes under universal nature. (cf. (3) W If one calls this (tin) an electrical conductor because all metals are so. where something to it is by means of a determina itself. (1). stand to it 191 in an external relation. as being its subsumed under the universal. since it stands over against the individual. by which (the its species) the individual is subsumed under this essential universality. or if Cajus acts rightly because it is universal custom. 2). 5). so species. obs. all individuals. will have the significance of the uni versal ( 153. . essential its subsumed. is We call syllogism. but since the individual can be subject to the universal only by being subsumed under and has the it. value of a particular. . Both facts taken together. all who act (2) Here the species is the form the middle term.

are the mean. the middle term can not be a mere individual.. since a thing can be predicated of For all individuals only when it is true of this individual also. and the circle which the three figures its of the immediate syllogism present has this syllogism. are. In the syllogism of totality a universal it predicated of the individual because pertains to all individuals of this species. ( follows the schema of the third But by the concept of the essential syllogism 178).gt. examples : of this would be 180 is I . which. In spite of the superiority which this syllogism has in comparison with the immediate syllogism of the first figure. which means that the terminus medius the particular. to be a delusion. all individuals as individuals. z&amp.gt.. it at last proves. figure.192 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. the major premiss really /^supposes the conclusion. made appearance also in this syl But if the conclusion of logism really forms the premisses. Its schema (2). the major premiss really the conclusion.P . (In so far. there lies concealed in the syllogism of totality a syllogism in which precisely the individual forms the middle term. as a rule. posited again.p. which are com monly cited as examples of the first figure. there fore. nevertheless. therefore only individuals as forming a totality. it follows the .) (3 &amp. (See syllogism. The syllogisms. if one compares it with the immediate syllogism. may one say of this syllogism. is mediating. 162.

realises the universal end of the : State. This syllogism has a double defect. in which.) whereby this itself (metal) is joined to a determina tion essential to it (capacity of conduction. the species tial universality. etc. therefore. ness. the terminus medius.) Hegel. The validity of this syllogism is therefore problematic (cf. First.SUBJECTIVITY. because the totality of the is individuals never realised. through the condition of right and activity of all its members. is a never-concluded series. uses for this syllogism the name Syllogism As of Induction it is the syllogism of experience. by means of all the individuals is subsumed under an essen i. 168). That a mode of action is the custom of all. syllogism is what is familiarly known by the name Syllogism of Induction : in this the mean is formed by all individuals of a species (gold. presupposes that The psychological reflex of this it is of Cajus also. iron. this syllogism occurs when a corpora tion. formed by universality individualised may be termed the syllogism of complete is It occurs where. the middle term in a series. Its formula will be P i. an endless progression which merely says that the individuals should form a totality. . real relation. of a species. i. i ---- That all metals are electrical conductors is true only on the presupposition that tin also is. 181 (3). therefore. silver.) This syllogism of posited totality which the one above con sidered really presupposes. second figure of 193 the immediate syllogism.

which i. this name is really proper only for the psychological reflex of this syllogism.e. forms for that the presupposition. i. this syllogism essential judgment really proves only the particular minor Secondly.^ middle term is formed by an individual which.194 CA TEGORIES OF FREEDOM. (3) which just as well appears as real relation. since totality merely says that for the nonce the and series is to be regarded as complete. this syllogism (cf.. what there was immediated assumption. Because the middle term 180) has this concrete character. points beyond itself. i. it occurs wherever the bination. (i.) but universality. be referred to the second as well as the third may figure. which is contains. here becomes conclusion. and when. x &amp. . ( is per premiss under the major (the assumption) missible only under the presupposition of the correct ness of the conclusion which. so also this. &amp. therefore. in which the individual as universal forms the middle term. when as middle term is taken in a uni dividuality versality ality. the Syllogism of Analogy (2) . considered. As the syllogism by the circle just it con sidered. and hence may be better called the Syllogism of Com That is to say. individu which at the same time is universality. not only is should form i. This reference carried out when the problem contained in the syllogism last i. Though Hegel calls this syllogism. the subsumption of the 133).. further.lt.gt.e.

Since here there belong to the middle term two determinations. in the other. but only as it immediately exists an individual. gives here the privilege be more than individual ego. instead of 3 like gold. i.. and not in so far (say) as they are coloured. if one said. one subsumes the moon under the concept earth. Likewise would it be a quaternio terminorum if. they are nine teen times as heavy as water. Analogy would be superficial and invalid if one said that. in so far as they are metals.&quot.e. &quot. etc. Then would occur a quaternio terminorum. Here gold is zinc. in the example cited. With reason are we in the habit of calling inference by analogy a combining. lead. because he is (4 a universal. since metals are like gold. is 195 valued according to its universal nature.lt. an in dividual claim becomes legal through the will of the We meet monarch. in the other determination. tel est notre plaisir and tel est mon plaisir were confounded. etc. that to the metal 2) A this predicate is essential. are (like) gold. this syllogism where. for example. saying .SUBJECTIVITY. &amp. one says a species of gold. cause he The monarch is &amp. since the earth is not inhabited as a mere independent heavenly body but merely in this latter respect is it taken when . or by a universal. Gold combines metalleity and capacity for electrical conduction now tin.. logy would be.&quot. .lt. therefore. however. &amp. or that the moon is inhabited. &quot. as is the earth. etc. taken only in its universal nature hence.gt. this syllogism is invalid when the middle term in the one premiss is as taken only in one determination.. silver. syllogism of ana &amp.^ (1) In that example there is the tacit presupposition that to be electrical conductors is essential to gold. . a we.gt.

even in the highest form of this the two determinations which were joined only by also or at the same time. .e. Unmediated syllogism. i.I 96 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. If. by the The result is that the versality of the concept. pre syllogism. 182. which gives the syllogisms considered the char acter of contingency. did the others.. (4) the middle term is formed true uni by the self-producing genus. instead of should consideration of these forms shows sult. instead of such mere combina tion. precisely as supposes its conclusion. But even in this syllogism there has not other forms disappeared the circle by which the two (1) This of the essential syllogism were fatally vitiated. under the defect which. (2) the former on the contrary labour petitio principii. ( the assumption 181). position the minor premiss would be are therefore. were. since they move in a constant circle. all forms of the essential syllogism in that superior to those of the immediate syllogism the former admit of an advance. The true mediation will consist in that. however. since without this presup incorrect. rather be called petitio condusi^ still But the another re ( Since successively the major premiss ( 180). that is. and the minor premiss 182) have been shown to be mediated (by the conclusion). while in the case of the latter nothing results. it is involved therein that everything unmediated must be removed from the syllogism.

SUBJECTIVITY.gt. and has passed into The metals are like gold.lt. can I say only on the &quot. (c) The Conceptual Syllogism. the will of the monarch. 183. 4) in that the individual (see ground the contingent. in which the terminus medius. the genius of the investigator.. ie. whether his upon inductions and analogies bring him to what ^is (4) This contingency has its chief correct or not. It is a matter of good as such was fortune when the individual will of this monarch coincides with the will of the monarch (who does The quaternio terminorum is possible. &amp. itself. In as well as the subsumption of one extreme under . (3) The correctness of induction and whether the presaging of the &amp. not with 2 Hence Bacon of Verulam (say) a matter of taste. W have to do with something presupposition that we which he can justify. finds fault Instauratio Magna to (Introduction on the ground that it gives _no with the syllogism new knowledge. essential syllogism realises its concept (see 197 178). what is lawful. not in so far as they they This is are nineteen times as heavy as water. &quot. obs. the conceptual syllogism the defect of the immediate syllogism. instead of it. because here two things are combined . and thereby has completed the conceptual syllogism. one is not mediated through the other. only in so far as are electrical conductors.) ^ analogy depend upon Hence it is contingent. 153. &quot. depends conclusion is correct.&quot. induction and analogy. not die). and praises.

since now its own 146).) ceptual judgment/ (1) 2) that postulate demanded is not therefore those syllogisms are not (Cf.. syllogism will not have.e. never-realised postulate. Since what (efficere). Its formula will be s p. hence not the absolutely contingent one of an in- . forms the middle term. is. The subsumption will therefore be conceptual (rational). or the circle in the syllogism ( 180 and 182). has nature. the concept which syn thetically combines in itself being and must be into inner necessity. i. therefore. since in it true universality forms the middle term. There it was shown that the subject by itself to nature subsumed an essential determination. namely. the syllogism has Just so was acquired the character of necessity. in which what could not be arrived This defect the conceptual at^ was presupposed. How the conceptual syllogism is in the first its instance to be conceived appears from the foregoing. of the other. which had as consequence either the endless pro gression ( 181). had the character contingency.198 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. 178. The conceptual syllogism the explication and proof of the con ( 138. the genus disappeared ( . realised ^ m 184 (1).) completely demonstrative (efficere}.iddle it term was to develop displayed a vers lity. in that itself to true uni- . the essential syllogism defective the r .

theless the subsumption conceivable or possible. contained that the contrary. W he follows his nature but it is equally possible that he should not do so. Such a syllogism is expressed in the proposi tion The (not a) wolf is. never is.) * \ O The same the true of the relation of the medius to major ^ therefore. 4. (3) impulse 191. is mediated (2) It that man may lend ear is possible custom. and therefore has this for its premisses.* is only is. called the the fulfilment of the immediate conceptual judg ( ment 160). It occurs as real relation in marriage. by The immediate conceptual syllogism Hegel. is is. the character of and both premisses have. a vertebrate. mere possibility. only a conditioned. in which man. 1) It is just as possible that the sexual conduct to ethicality. subjective (see necessity. only it (See But therein well. Although the terminus because 126. .) it in the medius its essential predicate. That terminus medius is not the only one by which a man subsumes himself under ethicality in another this terminus medius is but something else. so. where he does to the voice of the sexual impulse : . will immediacy. (S 129. .SUBJECTIVITY. But herein minor has consists its defect. is as may be. with by means of the sexual relation. in the beginning the character of This im mediate conceptual syllogism W categorical. as mammal. Marriage has not an absolute. dividual. . itself. but the contrary is just as conceivable. like 199 But here the conceptual syllogism have everything in its beginning. obs.

and the latter to the major. But.. it also will have the may therefore be called the Syllogism of Necessity or of Compulsion.200 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. result. If the criminal confesses. combination with the where the minor must be subsumed under There will.e. and must as such be resolved. The defect in the syllogism just char acterised like every defect. but an subject. It is easy proposition analogous to the above. character of necessity. he must be punished now. since he must belong to a caste. more exactly considered. as diametrical opposite of the immediate conceptual (categorical) syllogism. not a merely being. i. it is justifiable when Hegel. relation we meet it where the Hindu. be expressed. is compelled to carry out the end of to express this relation in a the State. etc. who called the preceding syllogism the categorical syllo As real gism. is. displays . the syllo gism of compulsion. a contradiction. but the one confessing must be Since this proposition may equally well punished. designates this as the hypothetical. therefore. the medius. and Like has judgments of compulsion for that. This takes place precisely as in the case of the judgment. as the truth of the syllogism just considered. 185 (2). An example of this syllogism would be. in that its it premisses.. essential. What it is essential predicate is posited as such when enters into. The crimi nal must confess. 186 (3). one which demonstrates the judgment of compulsion.

i. as is and it is the judgment founded upon it. (analogously as above terminus minor subsumes itself disappear. an opposite be. which postulated their unity ( If it lay in the concept an thing occurs. that ( truth to be conceived as a syllogism in which sub- sumption has the character of freedom. and the major by means of its in will dependence of them. therefore.SUBJECTIVITY. so here tions. in this immediacy and contingency 169) will in the judgment. the judgment of the criminal must confess (the de of torture urge). likewise. and the necessity of this syllogism is sity. 201 defect.e. and will be unconditioned and absolute! As its premisses it is. This occurs in a higher form of the syllogism the last remnant of 142. (Cf. it will have the judgment whose fulfilment freedom. and.. therefore his confession is fenders adherents of the English jury contingent (as the W Because . since the under the medius. which yet clings to the syllogism of necessity. The subsumption here is is a must- But to the must-be wanting being. problematical. As possibility and contingency were only abstrac 129). always a problem.^ merely external neces What the syllogism con tains remains. contingency.) . analogous of the conceptual syllogism that the subsumption be it must be ( 183). it is in 184). This syllogism offreedom have removed the conditionedness.

the conclusion is already It is thereby the concept which had ( dirempted in the judgment the 154). what mediation is conceptual and what development is. hence mediated so. or the absolute syllogism. he does neither of those three. deny. The criminal will con : and be punished.. calls this Hegel syllogism the disjunctive.202 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. or the military profession. 169). The seat of immediacy was always the premisses. has now. fess. ( 152). and was posited in moment . What is mediation of the concept ? i. class in his calling. excluded from the labouring class. The entire investigation into the various syllogisms has merely the meaning of answering the question.) when a man. since the concept is posited all its moments. which was continually The development of the concept which had begun in by its the diremption into the judgment.). therefore. cept 108. according to . 187. reached conclusion. He may therefore may also be expressed thus exculpate himself or confess. (Cf. so is now the subjectivity of the con realising itself. completed. connects himself with the State through the learned (cf. In this syllogism of freedom. but these are now grounded ( (completed) judgments of the con . (3) Freedom 142) is absoluteness. actually returned if to itself and the concept was as return into self subject cept. obs. W The proposition. of particularity (ibid. all immediacy has disappeared. but etc. assert).e. lie. As real relation we meet this syllogism 185. unconditionedness.

shows that the concept was as abstract. 203 Since.^ sub proper destination. but only that which occurs in the syllogism of freedom. in which the individual moments of the concept fell asunder and their unity only should be posited. just as.. 140) . concept again 188. and self-determina tion. A recapitulation of this chapter. and syllogism correspond to indeterminateness. they run parallel difference. was shown how the concept issued from the sphere of contradiction and in the syllogism or mediation of the concept ( 171-187) has rounded its itself out to that which was jectivity. and finally. etc. it appears that that not yet so in which there occurs a development relation such as that in the immediate syllogism. i. or relation of concept ( 157-170). and then cept ( ment. which really is what the syllogism should be. now. determinateness. with identity. (3) Deductive thought which ground. to concrete in the Since the subjectivity of quality First Part corresponded to essence in the Second. so concept. as dirempted in \X\z judg 142-154).SUBJECTIVITY. that.. on the other hand. judgment.e. restored. complete? is unity of concept and judgment. to (see which the superscription Subjectivity^ 99) was has realised its given because therein the concept nature to be subjective. and the issuing from a consisted in the application of these categories (see above. mere con first considered only in itself.

of subjectivity is. From it But even where subjectivity appears only confusedly. But the attained completion to say. totle [&quot. obs. as cannot be otherwise. hence various species the the mediating.gt.. shows figures of \\\v& first (in the the immediate syllogism) every moment the the of the concept gets the is meaning of the terminus immediate medius. that is Reflec upon what has come to light in the theory of the syllogism. &amp. since immediacy always disappeared. here the seed from which and that to which the development proceeds (3 Herein lies the reason why Aris are distinct. there is on that account syllogism. in defining. ii. 189. in the third place (as . this chapter may be also headed or also. i. &amp. & (1) tion (see According to the various principles of designa 28. and why with us concluding and inferring consequences are synonyms. The plant shows itself displays the same thing. : the Concept to the Where really concrete subjectivity is.lt. since the ego closes with itself. Syllogism. subsuming. only.204 CATEGORIES OP FREEDOM. The Concept. subject only in that it develops itself. the conceptual syllogism). and combining. likewise God. the seed . has made itself subject only where its development has reached a conclusion. itself. everything has now the character of the . secondly (in syllogism). of terminus medius has developed into complete uni versality of the concept finally. occupies therefore. also its termination.&quot. tion. 2] identities the terminus medius with the ground.Posterior Analytics. Ego is a syllo gism.).e.

The concept it has realised itself. and such a syllogism of a process. System and synthesis are kindred con The question as to the possibility of syntheses cepts. forms the synthesis. syllogisms necessarily i. are each the terminus medius. therefore.. and hence as containing this moment The concept in this its medi ated reality true fact. at the same time.e.^ concept or content. unity with itself. returning into itself.^ is but. System is realised if it we is. Fichte) is the cardinal question of logic. In the family.. (Kant. Objectivity. in relation to the concept and the judgment regarded as the thesis and the antithesis. ^ A . for example. But consider this attained reality of the concept. i.SUBJECTIVITY.e. the mediation im manent in them is is constant. mother. of mediations or a syllogism of syllogisms/ 1 ) Since here it has ceased to be the case that mediation is external to the things mediated. . mediated. (5) W Such a syllogism of syllogisms is everything in which concrete subjectivity displays itself. 205 The result is. is the truth of the merely subjective con cept^) and its fulfilment. able. the determinations lying in have unfolded themselves into a system which. or has objectivity. true system which were not a process is not conceiv In it there occurs a mediation with self. hence immediacy in itself. since father. itself. there is a trinity of syllogisms. because returned to being. as having issued from mediation. that the syllo gism has proved to be a circle. child. therefore.

or again acquired im mediacy. the real value of which. will experience that God is active in him. that the development became objective also. . objectivity.lt. (*) We called the inner nature of the 131. however. and will hereafter be still clearer ( 207). since until now subjec As opposed to objectivity. lower. and fulfilment of the mere concept forms the logical basis for the ontological proof for the being of God. (Cf. But. Hence we have here true necessity. Similarly had relation shaped itself in the treatment of quality and of quantity and elsewhere. : Hence the expression of Hegel immediacy through the sublation of mediation. it is still in its untruth. 4) is not insur mountable and absolute. be pointed out in how far one may speak of mere subjectivity. The true is. i.) this subject it exists already in the seed. the subject appears as the immediate.. Later it will appear how in a certain way the contrary is just as correct. It may even here.) plant the subject of its development. depends upon still another. (3) &amp.e. it is rather to be remarked that only that is a sub jective (and not mere substrate) which shows itself to be such a passage. still more later. obs. so. 5) The knowledge that objectivity forms the neces sary completion. subjectively^ i.e. It is clear even here. and there fore has actuality.. He in whom the idea of God is and not as a dead possession. ( As 152. 5. Against the claim that there is no passage from the subjective to the objective. that the distinc tion of subjective and objective (cf. vitally. tivity was the highest.206 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM.

uneducated thought these words are gener used as synonyms being was entirely unde terally : W By 207 . nor. tivity as (4) the explication and realisation of sub- jectivity. finally. show itself likewise to be In the first instance^ we have nothing to do with the opposition to the subjective upon which the but only to take objec latter usage of speech rests. therefore. The question.II. (3) Another sense in which will later it is usual to take this word justified. mere actuality all these determinations are poorer : than it. whether to the con cept objectivity appertains. is 2) peculiar. OBJECTIVITY. SECOND CHAPTER. BY objectivity is to be understood neither mere being nor there-being. or reality only of the concept. since only the Philosophical linguistic concept can have objectivity/ since Kant justifies the taking of this word in usage this sense. (1) Objectivity is conceptual reality. Objectivity exhibits in higher potency the nature of quantity and of pheno menon. 190. nor existence.

and then afterwards up to Kant. be without thought). although In the entire 191.gt. . because it is to does not keep to this existence.lt.e. tivity Now. should have objective reality. does not appertain to the grasped with the hands Even the it too unworthy.* a world of objects. 3 Kant opposes to one another maxims and laws: the latter are (according to him) objective^ principles. and the objectivity therefore . objective. proof (of God s existence) are not even to any rich man an object. as system. &amp. They are so because in them reason is Laws are they exist only in the &amp. will of subjects. &amp. demands eleva It was therefore barbarous tion beyond the sensible. much which Just as barbarous was it to less to philosophy. in his polemic against the ontological cited the hundred dollars. of course. it tion of the concept system. therefore. is. truth.gt. 189.208 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. 29). &amp. mined unity with self ( modified by not-being ( there-being was being a grounded 35). only as totality. right. should exist outside thought (i. is. . existence that may be itself rational. Middle Ages. realised. reality ( 2 Of course. in the realisa has been shown that it is ( syllogism of syllogisms. demand that the true content. the word object was so little opposed to being in thought that rather only that which is thought. etc.lt. but seeks empiricist the supersensible law as the really true philosophy does this still more it.) Objec therefore. taken..lt.gt. existence of the essential ( 109). merely the concept as again immediate.*&amp. concept. But a totality with the character of immediacy is a world. Objectivity itself. objectivity. actuality phenomenon being of the in-and-for124). &amp. finally. when Kant. like religion.. as the merely conceived.

subject. 109). is. but is.gt. lies in the nature of the case. or in a (3) totality (Inbegriff) of them. Kant often employs the expression realm realm. obs. the objective categories have to do it categories we show in so far as it is a totality. That they find their application alone or even only especially in the sphere of nature is an illusion tion with phenomenon (or existence) are especially applied where one will describe or explain nature (cf. 108. an illusion. obs. true.2&amp. explicable by the nevertheless. concept of . That these relations can objects display only processes. and 115. .) gate. etc. The of W Before was &amp. 209 nearer determinations of objectivity which will come to light. give various relations to We have. which By their anplicathe systematic connection of them for whether a phenomenon is to be explained mechanically or chemically concerns the systematic* of science.lt. hence even the highest syllogisms had a merely subjective necessity (Cf. consider the relations in which things stand as of a world.gt.g of ends. &quot.). The manifestation of essence appeared in a plurality of things ( 108. one speaks of a world of thought. etc.*&amp. therefore. it is nature.) inactive world were no world. 8 A world is more than a mere aggre 184. hence Koo-yuos world is a category which can as well be applied to the spiritual as tothe natural. the objectivity ot the concept (Begriff) in a world of objects. e. which that world first to An 189.lt. or the objective categories. ( is &amp.&quot. 2. to be will the & which are now developed. it had returned to this immediacy it merely subjective.OBJECTIVITY. it is a system.

They only because they nevertheless a relation where. Since mechanism obiect in the sphere of the one correctly speaks of it even there are There is a mechanical memory. are indepen Since the related objects to them and external dent. mechanical arrangements in iorman aggregate. so. \ then independent ( 101. is a logical category. hence not (cf. form a totality. Herein lies the reason why the a disparaging. they 41). or is in so word object has. where various sensible objects mechanical combinations ot there are (i) &amp.210 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. is ruled by it. A. is an objective Mechanism relation. Since objectivity has the im mediacy. tradictory determinations give interconnection or hence lowest. 1.) all its moments but if are immediate. RELATION or OBJECTS. now come together into a become objects only when they no That on which nothing depends totality. though independent. now a respectful meaning. as the first. the State. posited obs. their relation appears \ 193 (1). they will therefore form are precisely therein not are related to one another. and every far a machine. character of 192. mechanical world category.lt. or and us. relation of objectivity. But. on the contrary. are one. . just as much as. and 1) These con are objects to one another/ independent.) mnd (a) Mechanism.

and the two If one assume that.) That and. leads to endless M That the two deter mmations are inseparable. their unity can con sist only that an external force (God s will or a pre-established harmony) has brought them together Combination is a favourite category of the under standing. 211 spite of their relation.e. the spiritual. compulsion is here posited.^ possible. nevertheless. to be re lated. is therein not free but This in determination of is concept although independent. lies because it lies the the so in the concept of the object to determine and view determined/*) which allows validity to be determinism. merely a superficial operation or so-called impression. which has not risen to higher categories & combination or composition arises by mere addi tion In the sensible world this is^ssure lm. i. that which is done pact. W m m W . from threats or fear is mechanically done. they are externally conditioned towards one another.OBJECTIVITY. forced. body and soul are related to one another as objects. to Since it suffer.e. relation. in which receives the operation mechanically determined.. both to operate forcevvise and to be susceptible of such operation. Because here the object is determined by another. but only as composite. therefore.^ Their relation to one another is.. and the determinist denies freedom ie self determination. object. and can not be thought as one. and hence. for example. i. the an objective only to mechanical operation as progression. This would give what is not riven here a perpetuum mobile. Every action calls forth a reaction. is expressed by the proposi tion.

lt. the object of his desire. If the two determinations ( are. only fixed.. which is dependent.e. are exactly 11)4 (2).212 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. and will there fall fore outside it itself. postulates it something in relation will. but thiit. &amp. The to object. it. therefore every external to it. and resistance. of the object to be outside itself. like quantitatively and qualitatively) equal. (5) The mechanical de impact terminism of Descartes seeks to avoid this endless in a circle and progression by supposing motion to act to remain constantly the same. : be over against itself. as is postulated by that progression is 49). outside ad it will posit on the contrary. wherein he has (2) Since it lies in the concept his centre of gravity. therefore. 2) This eccentricity of the to object makes subject a relation which we describe as mechanical tendency^ W In Nature the object in relation to which another posits itself as dependent is called its centre in the spiritual sphere of gravity.gt. actu this gives as the truth of it ally posited as identical. or its centre . It consists in that the object at one shall both be for itself. that the being of the object to be dependent. as dependent. in the spiritual the conditions &amp.e. i. . (i.lt. and be be for other. is and the same time passive. even one having a desire appears dependent as regards another thing.e.. In endless progression the contradiction contained in mechanical determination not overcome.. i. therefore. object gravitates toward every thing 8 A sensible manifestation of this tendency is of passion falling . &amp.

are is actually centre as it united. to become de (centre) is ( separation from its object the rather brought about only contingently. to say. tendency the strictly taken. the one opposed to that which had shown That is itself in mechanical determinedness. not both. what means the same. corresponds more to the concept of objectivity (cf. since it repre sents actually a system and not a mere series. of the mechanical process or of mechanism will be given in a relation in which the two. the 191) than do the mechanical determination and mechanical combines. hence 126) But in this separation consists the independence. where it itself tends pendent. like are rightly described as a being-besidea losing of one s self. which two it synthetically . contradiction not resolved. (4) tendency. its force. and was therefore contingent. there where to or. but rather only one of the two determinations comes to its rights. centrality and eccentricity. and hence the per fection. The true union. dent. it posited itself it its suffering came from without. and the like.OBJECTIVITY.^ by force. at the Where solute the object just as much same time seeks a centre. the object it was essentially indepen . 213 and the one s-self. it exerted on the contrary.^ a relation which. (3). 195 But even is in mechanical for. namely. (1) Here. then we have free or ab mechanism.

196. that the its independence towards other. obs. It. and on the con trary. the earth. that other is itself object. But now.. however. itself. mechanism in the solar system. maintains fore. since it were con two another. the same will. 2. i. of self That positing appears in Nature as W only as independent inertia. the State has a side by virtue of which it has rightly been characterised as a machine in the management of taxation where the individuals. not to remain a body but to become a mathematical point. . two determinations. be true of it. . in the circulation of the blood. posits itself as dependent.e.) . and the government form a system each of these moments both is itself a centre. and there results as the truth of free mechanism (hence also of mechanism in in free mechanism all other forms of tained) a relation of general. their needs. In the free mechanism are contained the object both maintains also. each of which towards one objects directed other first as de posits the pendent^ or will be posited by it as dependent. there This being will posit the other as dependent. however. as independent. therefore. in the spiritual world as The stone tends towards the centre of indolence. it there are other bodies in the way would be a W point . therefore. which prevent its doing so. and. which will explain why the absolute mechanism from the concurrence of fall and ( 194) impact. suffers (3) In nature we find such a violence from them. etc. If it went to the centre. and has its (4) Herein is contained a reason centre in the other. ( 193. the view recommends itself.214 GATE G OKIES OF FREEDOM. secondly.

as light. mechanical. The chemical of makes its when each sides the mutually related objects is appearance is the contradiction. (every) but dynamic or chemical relation. is and also elective affinity in so far as this tension an inner nisus. directed towards one 215 another. called affinity. mechanical relation of the central body to the planets manifests itself also dynamically. are brought about. which described as the tension of the towards one another/ 1 it is tradicts itself because itself it is Each by itself con incomplete. Because here . : but towards objects antagonistically in tension relation is. there is a confusion of temporal becoming with con For that matter. therefore. and in so far similar to arbitrary choice. relation 197.OBJECTIVITY. (2) them while in a violent abstraction to isolate precisely is mechanism force brought them together. The tension not a tension towards object in general. The world is. to that demand. it ceptual succession of stages. chemical processes When how (b) Chemism (Dynamism). that even might here be answered empirically it appears that the. their therefore. a system of chemical relations. in the first instance. and integrates ) Therefore only by the absorption of the other. by which. it is demanded that it be empirically shown out of a mechanical relation a dynamical arises. is no longer external. finally.

in which they equilibrate them Since the selves.2i6 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. in which each of the two is degraded to a moment.) (Cf.gt. however. the more are artificial means necessary to W keep them asunder. but exist tion. here taken in a wider sense than usual. in the relation of the sexes. 200. The more objects are in chemi cal tension. and their difference tension cease. instead of chemical interpenetra mechanical juxtaposition. 3 &amp. The product of it is in tension. no longer an object which no longer independently for must itself/ be 2) integrated. etc.lt. chemism is negation of mechanism. one will fix the differ ence precisely in the extinction of which the chemical W .. But since the chemical relation exists only so long as that onesidedness. 198. is The postulated concurrence and as of two objects therefore a process. in the relation of The nations in tension towards one another. The attempt to reduce all chemical phenomena to mechanical relations mistakes this. therefore. it is lost in the result of the chemical process. word chemical is. is the reciprocal tendency an inclination. &amp. (1) therein each of them it. W relation This relation appears both in Nature (in the of acids and bases) and in the spiritual sphere. is much absorbed by is other as it absorbs the product by actual interpenetration one produced a neutral. but one at rest in itself. If one puts.

as in mechanical operation. and there issues as the third relation reciprocal ism. mechanism appears. with the same necessity with If. it is cess is related to to other. so that it no more requires another for its completion. chemically one-sided things are neutralised in that they enter into one another. Concordia res parvce crescunt. Action and re action are here no more. the child is the neutral. chemism appears. hydrogen. increase.. indifferently as i. sexual relation be taken only on its chemical side. although proportional to one another. not by addition. however. but is rather to be described as a union of factors. just as. (192. etc. mechanical. things indifferent. the same. In conversation. at the end of chemism. Oxygen is hydrogenised. oxygenised. all other objects. If.) latter In the end. In nature the crystal is the caput mortuum of the chemical process. 217 Chemical combination is actual process consists.. which the led to it. 199. in war. but has the character of independence. therefore. chemism leads to mechanism. however. is ^ If the effected. at the end of mechanism. its relation is external. the result of the chemical pro an object which is not chemically conditioned.OBJECTIVITY. this merely means that they mutually limit one the other. and originates. intussusception. among objects the determination of mechanism and chem . therefore.e. in which an actual multiplication.

lt. attraction stands as correlate affinity to mechanical the attempt to explain the phenomena of gravitation between solar by the assumption of chemical affinity In the spiritual sphere some and terrestrial bodies. Mechanism and (c) Reciprocal Determination of Chemism.lt. Neither more inexplicable.gt.gt. . is more natural. reference this reciprocal really contained in relations refers to that each of those is the other as to its truth . &amp. &amp. to a relation as their truth in which they are both sublated and . inner inclinations.218 GATE GORIES OF FREED OM. others everything from expect everything of force.gt. But what is this. In this reciprocal determination the the me the chanical will as show itself in so far more powerful vice the dynamical and chemical are properties of object modified thereby/ 1) and versA the modification in a chemical regard has as consequence a modification in a mechanical regard. neither termed. 200. than the other.lt. &amp. &amp. attempts to reduce each of them to 3 &amp. therefore. as it is This reciprocal de termination of two relations makes intelligible the the other. impelling 201. both. (D In the natural sphere the chemical property divided con changes with the (mechanically) finely dition in the spiritual. etc. inclination or disinclination of circumstances or of changes with the pressure 2 Thus the metal becomes friable by oxydaforce (3) To the attempts to reduce chemical tion. is 2 &amp.

in sides 197) each of the related was a contradiction. therefore. ..e. Objectivity with itself that will. contradicts itself. B. From this how far one the following section) in in opposing subjectivity to is justified Of course it will hereafter appear how objectivity.OBJECTIVITY. so enter into difference at the same time each of the sides appearing in this differentiation is reflected in the other. as will. i. ( what had shown itself. 202. All the developed determinations receive . and the only there into difference are the concept and its reality. unity with the other 189. In both rela 211. in connection with essence clear phenomenon. allowing itself to since its being consisted in its objectivity be absorbed. since objectivity is only the realised concept ( it which can enter moments in 190). hence not to be. its and outside But if. in tions there is here repeated and a lower potency. How is this relation to be Mechanism was chemism ( posited contradiction 192) . degraded o conceived ( 2ig to ? moments. THE SUBJECTIVE AS OPPOSED TO THE 8 OBJECTIVE. be tween subjectivity it is and objectivity (cf. hitherto considered between relation a between the concept and its reality. result the truth of the relations subject and object. Now should be a relation in which both these conditions are fulfilled at the same time.) this opposition is overcome. therefore.

lt. Before him there is only a mechanical or chemical view of the world the former among the Atomists. powerless against it 5 &amp. The relation of end is.lt. Secondly. the ideological stands above that. (1) Anaxagoras. but shows 4 matter to be determined by &amp. 3 &amp.lt. not withstand the end entering into it. Objectivity can. the end is not a concept which or could remain in objectivity as its its mere subjectivity. must serve relation is and they. is therefore necessarily a dualist. for this in that it is the truth of those hitherto considered only at the same time their negation.&amp.gt. because it it is properly 190)/ must receive into itself as its necessary fulfilment. necessary compliment.220 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. against the end.gt. in this there their dues in the relation of end. itself to be the it. . reality ( objectivity. finally.gt.sm. First. &amp. . lies a dualism/ 1 ) since what is merely subjective/ 2) mere concept. &amp. the truth of and shows itself as this in that mechanism and chemi. stands opposed to a mere objective. the end. &amp.gt. and operates (in so far mechanically) upon it as upon its other. it degrades them to subservient moments. on account of this (as it were chemical) relation. whose chief merit is rightly said to be that he introduced into philosophy the concept of end. . the latter in 2 The end is subject of the change Empedocles. but refers to as.^ If one combines the mechanical and the chemical mode of view under the term physical. on the its other hand.

and does not regard that a par with the causa efficiens. i. As this merely subjective. has caused many a divine assistance or a prede assumption of termined harmony. It is to be obviated that objectivity is the sub only by the perception of the concept..OBJECTIVITY. or the concept.. as the truth of this. as a miracle. subjective. i.e. identification of end and contingency emphasises as that both are non comparationis the fact not yet necessity. . instinct of a plant or of an animal) an end existing in an even a merely willed end.. 189. how the words understanding. &amp.. it is a concept than that of ground God as end of the world higher view which regards which merely conceives him as cause of the than that 6 In those two the determining lies before.lt. in world. the quality of stand meaning to be realised. &amp. objectivity of mere objectivity. that which is (pre) servient moment on (5) If one places the causa finalis supposed by it.gt. tertium necessity &amp. obs. or it is a lack (e. Here is explained could have the sense which subjectivity. or of cause. and. obs. This subjectivity of it of being mere subjectivity. (Cf. etc. the end is found where 3).) (See how a subjective end can make its way into question to take refuge in the objectivity. and the like. 152. the laws of mere mechanism. every 3 Just for this with them.. 221 which occurs in its realisation. or there the ground is the determining.e.e. this it lies behind. and chemically) working travenes the (mechanically The end realises itself in that it over-rides causes. (Cf.lt. joined here gets the reason. it must of course appear as some that the end con thing conceptless. on the other hand.. (the one of course Since the end is a higher the other no longer so). here on the contrary the consequent. the determined. Kant s &amp. one has Baumgarten first. 5). ing over against the end (4) The difficulty contained in _the 190. i. i.e. since Kant.g.gt. acquires here the character because objectivity is still wanting to it. uses them.

As relation logical. according as one places himself upon the side of the end or upon (2) In the dualism that of equally correct. These various designations are.. it is since it has not yet realised it itself in objectivity only inner . In the first instance. all impulse is ^ occurs everywhere. the end merely subjective stands opposed to objectivity. tor mindless. gets the meaning end is merely subjec complement to the fact that the is formed by the fact that to mass mere tive.W than objectivity. subjectivity wanting. In this dualism each moment has in the other its limit. this W objectivity. a mass which has not in itself this example. massy finely-divided condition. that what only follows can determine. hence even in Nature.e. limit. since it is is something entirely other external end. phenomena. since it exchides from itself or has over against itself the con The of conceptless mass. to of Anaxagoras. 203 as (a). there stands opposed as the possessor of all ends.222 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. therefore. from a nest is built. then the impossibility proving (i. be If the tacit presupposition is made that there can is that of easily only those two. for this only Over against it stands objectivity. cept. has in objectivity its Since the end finite it is . 204 (b\ The contradiction (1) which is contained . or also in all parasitic &amp. instinct. which. claiming).gt. therefore. things in their the vos If.

it appears at hand by it. to although objectivity pertains tivity. 205 no difficulty where Ine seeks.. i. and just on something found. and that objec excludes it from it This occurs quite immediately because itself to more competent than the mass. where there yields is found over against material which at once the end an unresisting (soft) but not so to it. it carries (4 of end In this form. it relates it as mere (crude) realised/ force. it. (2) Such immediate realisation of the end meets There is etc us in phenomena.e. end. the relation to this does not correspond to its concept. however. itself. marble vovs of its : the animal tinds at hand what find it Anaxagoras end into the mass. however. of the inactive active. that which actually be its its objectivity. Clay yields to the artist. itself. According stands over against the end should latter. already which is limited by that that account can the end .OBJECTIVITY. as here. 2) This realisation of itself in the end is stuff is a ridding itself of itself as its finitude and the accom plishment of (D mass. in 22 3 the fact that the concept is not yet objectivity. and mass is related to it as in or by which the unresisting stuff or as material. s although the concept reality the end realises is resolved by the fact that is . and have the meaning of basis (see 202) . against the in which it would scarcely a concept as in the concept ol be so easy to show contradictions of the following ground.

e.&amp. is reduced to a just . rightly insists upon) brought the vovs of Anaxagoras brings its ends to the mass. W The end. which displays itself no longer 204) but as cunning. shaping end.224 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. it is merely forming. presupposes the immediate. the relationship of which with the end Aristotle Since to the substrate. realisation of the end. never loses is & If the relation of end to corre spond to its concept. but through them.lt.gt. end. therefore.&amp. as in the animal the mediated. them. it but in order really to be pene must actually be negatively basis. They are finite ends which are thus (3) The more the mass realised in the mass. The end therefore remains ex ternal to it. the means. and therefore stands higher than as crude force (see 5 &amp. degraded to mere the ( 105. of an object determined by operating (mechanically. since it permeates (5) In man the immediate realisation of ends. (i.gt.. it.) i. and thereby necessarily . as the mass to its finitude. the object will no longer merely yield to the end. chemically) upon other objects. and. and in this operation (4) This mediated being negatively posited (used up). and the less the end presses into it. that. yields the more it gives way to the end. it.. and is only an external form (a concept. offer first a (passive) resistance trated posited by the end. external never be master of It remains external to the mass. not animating nor (4) The end realised itself not merely in creative. therefore.) This gives us the concept of means.e. does not force its way into the material but merely produces changes in it from (2) without.

the end. The means. Where something it made according to is an no ) end. by therefore. The finitude. of subjectivity and objectivity has here been removed. rather. This gives purposiveuess or realised The plow is something higher and more honour it able than the desire of enjoyment which causes plough. ( 123. determined. however. lies But if in the concept of means. objectivity has come into accord with the end. is 207. he must learn that which the animal can and by making tools always acts with In this cunning he gets rid of his barbar- 206. 225 minimum do of cunning. itself. since that which is an object is at the same time subjective also. one finds in is one considers more precisely what it an object. perhaps willed.) In this . which. and hence realised. which. but. stand higher than the mass and higher than mere finite end.OBJECTIVITY. . therefore. compel us to conceive a relation. there is practically denied that there transition from the subjective to the objective/ 1 The hitherto merely inward end is here present in externality. ousness. Just so also is it more than the land. FlXALITY (OK PURPOSIVENESS). to C. in which no longer does the subjective end stand over against objectivity. finite end.

so also the union of the . or what it is good &amp. the i. therefore. wills the end wills the means also. But just therefore .. something purposively formed 5 The former This asked ctti bono ? is posited. the end the principale.&quot.226 CA TEGORIES OF FREEDOM. means. that is end according to which the material was formed was one external to it. two can be only a it is mechanical and forced one tingent one ( but then a con 128). : The transition &quot. to be understood only advantage.e. for is. is Therefore enlightened^ thought teleological contemplation/ 5) an advance upon itself. Whoever maxims. an end. 208. If it is not used. and. its realism. from Anaxagoras to the Sophists an advance. &amp. of in the place enlightenment (industry) consists in that. (3) there fore it stands higher than the fore. (6) By real interests is.lt. shows what one gets by a thing. This may be shown even as to Kant (2) s celebrated So long as it serves. The end sanctifies the means.lt. hundred dollars. finite. mere (raw) material. upon J &amp. &quot. as that is given in the means had been.gt. and may pride (6) as opposed to that. and as such transitory. &amp.gt. as a rule. it is a mere object. there also than the merely wished or sought end. realised end is. They make (4) Even in the practical. therefore. to say. etc. posive or But not accidentally does the word pur serves useful signify that which (as means) Since. permanently combined what transiently (2) in the means was only united. and sees in a tool which (3) This is the truth in the it cannot use mere iron. &quot.

a means was necessary. (1) For if. and the enlightened. same therefore. of course produced a pro- gressus and a regressus. is 209. according to which things have value only as transformed (the cork-tree only as stoppers). but also the (and hence every) means end. alternating application of them to one and the object. (1) And if finitude is not really removed from the end. the end brought to the material from without and combined o with it by a sort of juxtaposition. But not only is the (and hence every) attained finite end really means. there fore. not distinct from the attained and therefore itself an end. one must not wonder if. By not to be separated. as it were and . a means is to a new end to be attained.OBJECTIVITY. etc. 227 upon nearer consideration. ends of that sort are called merely subjective or even finite. is. also every realised end. so also for the transient union was a means necessary.) the teleological higher standpoint (see below mode of view which places the end outside the real (1) The realised this to and beyond it. in order to bring the subjective end into objectivity and to combine the two. house is means to comfortable (2) On undisturbed labour. appears immature and childish.) . in infinitumf (See 48. narrow and | silly. in spite of their realisation. 211 ff. a living. must be thought as unity. The concepts of the means and the realised end are.

228 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. in place of the useful. so Socrates goes beyond of the finite end.gt. we think end is which cause means and is not wanting in reality. A retrospect of the chapter closed ( 190. The means be procured by all to the building of the house must kinds of means. logical &amp. 1. appears in its immediacy objects objectivity the various forms which the relation of objects could assume were mechanism. 1. and chemism. in that. menon.lt. To it as to actual unity subjectivity and objectivity (4) finite purposiveness refer as to its tvuth. just be it is sdl-realising end. the categories of objec 209). ence of God. 3 &amp. &amp. plex of things had Then. he puts Sophists. 210. truth in this transition.lt. sub.) (3 As the Sophists point the beyond Anaxagoras. reciprocal They correspond to what in the Second Part the com exhibited. determination of the two. ( (2) again means must be employed. If we sum up what has been shown.gt. secondly. among objects comes to be as objective In this relation among . in the place 4) The teleological argument for the exist good. which in this sphere corresponds to pheno to essence. which passes from the existence of the has its merely purposive to the concept of a self-end. Such a and in what is remarked sub. series is given in the preceding. This gives that which we of call self-end or ideal. and therefore. which has considered tivity. for which still etc. objec- . just as concept does the relation relation. &amp. first. shows how. the self-end.

in the realised end repeated. to be emphasised need how this exactly the transition from chapter corresponds to that from the Second Chapter in the Second Part of the lode to the Third. or to It does not the idea as the final true relation. gave us the relation of the subjective in which the relation of essence and phenomenon is we saw sub Finally.OBJECTIVITY. . the objective (as there inner ex pressed which referred as to the self-end. tivity entered into difference 229 and mediation. and the jective end become itself). which objective.

As such. that it the idea in itself is exalted above all objects. 211. and. philosophy places is upon the standpoint of the idea. IDEA. to point out cpntradictions in on the one hand. sub Where. the idea is at once accomplished being and end to be realised/ 1 ) and must be thought as immanent process of selfmediation/ 2 While in the realisation of the end ) the subjective and the objective is. The various determinations which . or idealism. still stand over against one another. easy (7) it. the idea ject-object. as their unity. it is. so that to self-conscious reason there is here no reference. etc. cause and 230 effect. BY idea we mean self-end. so contains ground and consequent. THIRD CHAPTER.. (6) Since the idea contains in itself the highest opposition^ resolved. it the opposition of subject and object does not for exist/4 ) The idea as this unity is reason^ in the sense of rationality.III. on the other. therefore.^ itself as their unity. To the idea as this unity the concept appears opposed as a subordinate moment.

the idea in the Kantian sense the second. (6) as one &amp. Philosophy as idealism &amp. &amp.gt. being.. that is to say. Hence one may speak of mere concept in so far means thereby the concept as not yet by itself As distin posited as identical with objectivity. have theirs principally in the sphere of spirit.gt. The idea is neither.lt. &amp. under actuality. &amp. ^ furnishes the proof for the possibility of the union 5 of Logic and Metaphysics (see 4). 231 the consideration of self-end brings to light may be called ideal categories. as it were. lifeless. beginning. i. 8 They correspond to what &amp. abstractly considered. the concept which had got lost in objec 4 tivity returns to itself. therefore. and then proceeds.. (1) Of these two determinations. The idea unity of concept and objectivity. the idea in Plato s sense emphasises the first. in the First Part mode . particularly the higher. reason as self-conscious (cf. in was treated under the superscription the Second. is not completed.lt. 92). the ideal categories. there applies to his procedure what was said in 151. Outlines of Psychology. the idea is analysed^ i.e. (2) The idea realises itself.lt. dead Therefore it is system. &amp. &amp. the latter merely regulative. 212. This it must be even as it must .lt. although logical categories.gt. in the beginning. analytically. the idea is the truly actual. 7 In guished from it. For the same reason for which the categories of objectivity. Schelling therefore defines reason (what he calls reason means here idea) as the unity of the subjective and the When he places this definition at the objective. nevertheless appear to find their application chiefly in the natural sphere. that. The former is. In the idea. my is &quot.IDEA. Spirit is the idea as knowing itself.e. therefore.gt.

be conceived. the idea is of immediacy. &quot.e. self-end/3) This word is here taken as logical category.gt. i. W In each of these is the idea. . therefore. and. ( 50).232 CA TEGORIES OF FREEDOM. Hence. etc. therefore. and since immediacy was being. in popular usage life often denotes a complex of living beings. forms the abstract basis both of vitality in nature and of other spiritual relations. in a totality of living things. infinite returning to self its being will.for-self shows itself life only in beings-for-self. THE IMMEDIACY OF THE IDEA. His Critique of Judgment contains more (true) idealism than all the rest of his &amp.lt. since this is appear in a a conceptual plurality. so also will plurality. the idea is first to be considered as being or as immediate. i. in as wide a sense as it is taken in when one speaks of living community.. A. being-for-sclf.e. be an infinite being. 213. the idea cannot contradict its destiny of being self-mediation. and. In the highest sphere beauty is the immediate existence (life) of the (2) absolute spiritual content. is first If now way that which is at the first to beginning be taken in the in general the immediate. Self-end idea has been rightly recognised by Kant as the real nature of life. This W 3 Only what is manifestation of self-end has life. To apply it means to consider everything organically. But if being. &amp. category &quot. . KfeW The immediacy or being of the idea we call Even as being.

. and their totality body) and the living will life be a unity of body and soul. are taken as the highest. or at the . organs or members. but the end as the 4 of the many posits them as unity/ 5 all ideality (the members] are not &amp. The organ ism is more than a mere machine. 233 It is particularly the immediate idea with which he therein occupies himself. means to be used will realise itself in up ( 205) but this end such means as have value in the If realisation of that itself as end. we call that end the vital principle. which does not realise material to which cost of a it 203). than a mechan If these ism. Since the manifold an aggregate which is held to gether by an external force. there will be a no longer external end ( end. works. ) ) mechanical and chemical action are degraded to a moment/6 and appear ) as such only where life is 7) imperilled or extinct/ W i. hence the reflec tions upon life and upon beauty. This word is as immanent end.e. here taken as Aristotle takes it. 2) Even in the spiritual and &amp. the highest spheres this category finds its application.e.. or soul^ the means. i.lt. itself but an immanent against a foreign ( does violence 204).. The Church is the body of the Lord.IDEA. 214. therefore. therefore a system in the highest sense. Organs are not parts. (3) be merely where there exists such a unity. God would be conconcepts . In every living thing.lt. not even mere means an organic view of the State does not regard it as an aggregate.

) 3 Since life equals idea. 5. disease. 243. ^ According to the con cept laid down. in the instance..lt. [&quot. and leads one into the other the more the stronger it is. in decomposition. these are merely chemical processes digestion is not. so that the : living produces itself as the productive product it shows itself in that it realises itself (as end) in itself (as material).. because it is something still more than that. &amp. again.gt. which. is taken as the In formative. is more than to conceive Him as its end. 216] may with right describe the idea 4 as unity of body and soul.234 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. p. lies in the nature of this relation. &amp. Hegel Werke v.e. this process of organisation precisely the the principle or subject of life. but its nature is. &amp.gt.^ and ^ the positing of this soul. To it belongs both activity as a manifold activity by itself.lt. Without its organisation there is no life. &quot. &amp.&quot. first activity as process appears. as directed towards itself. it (a). is not applicable to living being appears in an em pirical way in the fact that organic matter. Animals live their lives more quickly than trees. &quot. even chemically regarded. The soul continually in the of material the manifoldnegates interchange ness of the organs. the separation of body and soul is a ^ How the merely chemical mode of view non-sens. to remit. is a composition different from (7) In the inorganic. obs. W That in . i. (See 202.Encyklopadie. Since the living is manifestation of the cannot be processless This its rest. : 215 idea. This self-production and self-forma tion gives us the process of organisation. ceived as the soul of the world.

not living. be subject to all the relations in which objects stand to one another ( 192). upon one another. because there is in them no manifoldness crystals are because there is no manifoldness coming from not. 3. obs. stands in objec it will. the But if since its is being objective (objectivity) moment. 3. and therefore has no justification against it. apart from the example of Aristotle. infect the merely objective (3) The process of assimilation is it.. assimilating neutralneither mechanical composition nor chemical . the 23] always affirmed in his polemic against of souls. operation of objects upon the living as suchW will be for this only the occasion of degrad own ing it to a moment : the object can only stimulate & it the living: the living.) however. but immanent. (Cf. transmigration 2 The elements are. and the body as its matter. finite. therefore. therefore. 109.IDEA. a world ( 191) tivity as a part of . since the so it concept as having objectivity. but the only possible mode of De Anima.. on the contrary. i. as with vitality. this is not possible here. hence absolute form. 235 general it is a likeness of the relation which. by were. Therefore. ( ) . [&quot. in the Middle Ages caused the soul to be conceived as the form of the The soul is not body. 216 (). within. will. to say. This relation Aristotle actuality. The body is not mere substrate. to all the ways in which they act every mere object could be determined by the other.&quot. But herewith That is is the activity it of the is living not closed.

and every living thing must. its self-feeling. i. Assimilation is.e.gt.lt. namely. object stimulating by assimilating an which represents to it only its therefore. the neutral.236 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. : 217 (c). On the other is in of satisfaction the object infected by and becomes of its essence. (4 presuppositions &amp. by which. it 2 does not enter into the account as living. &amp. is assimila Learning tion without it the mind ossifies and dies. etc. but is specifically different there 3 from. has enhanced the process it. . Only the living can. on the contrary...lt. &amp.^ This process which both of the . equally assimilated. &amp. in it reaction is not equal to the (stimulating) action. This infectional process (Oken. in such process the living satisfies lies This satisfaction merely in the fact that 1) has produced itself anew/ hand. the product is only one of the two. &amp. on the itself. the as 4 Not similating a difference that is absolute.gt. be stimulated. The namely. lifted. Hegel) of the assimilating object Aristotle has in mind when he shows that everything nourishes itself by what is and is not like itself. in it is own essence. therefore. no mere chemical process. without assimilation there no W When a living thing is pushed. In this a third thing is pro In the former. it one hand.lt.gt. though it isation. But the closer consideration of the pro : cess just explained compels us to think another result.gt. is that. &amp. duced. Both sides taken together give us the concept of a process in which the living produces itself it. has both as is its life. &amp. even in the spiritual sphere.

perservation.the merely ence.IDEA. the identical essence. is generated. of nourish ment for example. this is not . at the cost. sphere in the spiritual. the latter becomes a representative all hitherto have had who have identi of the species fied the nutritive and the reproductive function. But the is result of this process is. sacrifice. by chemical intussuscep juxtaposition tion a product. &amp.lt. only that remains wardly directed. feeling of the necessity of which transition cannot. since assimilation of the also a becoming assimilated. therefore. &quot. (3) The living thing re-creates itself in the process (2) The of assimilation. 237 forms hitherto considered of the life-process are synthetically combined. Without it there is no life. of course. and with the if of its individu ality/^ But now the idea was the immediate in . &amp. but enhancement of exist 218. may be described as process of re-creation or reproduction.lt. by mechanical an aggregate. without Language is then mental life dies.gt. The living. this transition have the meaning that by assimilation. the mind reproduces the genus fellows. 3 it occurs as process of In the natural &amp. its with in itself community only the fructifying germ. assimilation and repro duction are equivalent to potentiating . that each two things undergoing a process have as such which was not out disappeared. which If. does not in this process so itself much produce and that & rather only its (universal) essence.

that individuals as such must cease to be.e. 219. where it relates itself to itself. in the highest form of the life-process. well says Johannes Erigena of dialogue.e. its substance. therefore 117). 2. (2) Also here obs. is essential relation (cf. his individuality. as reference and as essential relation! In the generic process the individual does not its blood. where. De duobus intellectibus fit uuus.e. i. W y B.. THE IDEA The idea AS ESSENTIAL RELATION. and it here appears.) (Cf. the different moments which contained in Hence the will stand over against the objective. 2. which was distinctionlessness. produce itself as individual. fest that the idea as it is mani immediate has disappeared. of course. man in society gives up i. i. the idea which at first was to be conceived in immediacy will now have to be thought rather as having entered into difference. the idea side forms both shines ( sides. But if immediacy. but produces Just so. posited in the always are according to it. has ceased to be. though in each the other 89) as its necessary complement. what in the preceding elsewhere.. and obtains. . however.238 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. 221. has often been recalled as regards transi tion. has/tfr us ceased to be. subjective idea . obs. it that existed in these (living) individuals. it is In this relation the idea can enter only as different sides.

the one or the other side point. is the truth. objectivity have become adequate one to the ideal objectivity. Tn the first instance it is is clear from the above development how truth distinguished from that mere objectivity. as (a) The True. therefore. like every other. in the entire investigation of the categories each has been described as untrue which has not been adequate to its concept. (Cf. conceived the idea as theoretical and practical.IDEA.) Therefore the truth does not appertain to the idea. i. be two-fold. and is. concept and other. 239 aud each will necessarily be referred to the other. 1) in that he gave the idea validity. A man exists . is accordingly as regarded as the starting- Objective rationality (idea) posited as subjective gives us the concept of truth. but those in which it was adequate to its concept as its truth. Plato made the advance that he praises.e. and only the idea. This relation. 19.. hence in his ideal living : where he brings it to his consciousness it is always beauty which he relation. but the idea. man. Socrates got beyond the Sophists (see 209. i. A thing contains truth only in so far as it contains idea. Therefore. will.. but only in the form of immediacy. 220. It consists in. or the world . humanity.e.

and subjective objectivity. and has won ideal existence. if its object is for the idea as subject. therefore. true man and good man. it to the effect that in the objectivity of the idea was the starting-point. likewise. .2 40 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM.gt. or will be truth. the idea as subjective subjects. The idea have this theoretical character. Objective rationality of itself tends to be as subjective. manifested in rational is which as such are conscious. now. rationality.) More closely. . to take into itself And to the subject s impulse to know. that true which is known as it is. whom hence 221. are used as synonyms. is Since. and what here was given as the concept of the likewise of the good/ 1 ( true obtains 224. will. of men. what belongs it to the ideal relation gener whether be regarded from the one or the other side. But in what has hitherto been said is con tained only ally. its goal. The usual explanation of @&amp. and only by this correspondence does the truth come to be. his destiny in the subject identifies itself with humanity. (4) W Hence the expressions. who has become adequate to his concept. and truth is self -manifesting or conscious rationality. however. this relation was determined. corresponds the impulse of revelation in objective rationality.* for A truth which were not knowledge would be a contradictio in adjecto. its subjectivity. has objectivity a true man is he . ff.

The thought of some mystics that because there are eternal truths there must be an eternal understanding. this correspondence. in the place of objective rationality.gt. for and problems and synthetic method. If here the transition is made from the process of reproduction ( 218) to truth and conscious rationality. not of (rational) truth. method. also in the fact that in German the word manifest (offenbar) frequently stands in the place of true (wahr). of truth and In the former aspect the truth in the latter. fast. moments are one-sidedly held there results the opposite views of dogmatical empiricism. the act of knowing. which knows only anxioms and theorems. it is also empirically shown as In the first of the above-cited examples 217. therefore. (4 It is usual to call accident that which is merely &amp. &amp.gt. 3) there is produced in the generic process that in which the single exemplar has its truth in the second the giving-up of individuality leads to knowledge of the truth. obs. .IDEA.lt. dA^fleia. Whoever seeks vtillfind. knowing must be both the perceiving the producing of is it. the truth. gives a definition at most of correctness. Hence the dialectic of So 3 This crates and Plato consists only in conversation. comes to be only in the act in which objective rationality becomes sub 222. reference to knowledge is suggested in the word follows ( : : &amp. truth. jective. But if this is so. mere existence.. it is assumed or received . therefore. contains. and of which there are only postu and recognises lates only an analytic constructive idealism. 241 which in the place of knowledge puts repre sentation. If these put forth (outward). The truth. i.e.

fest that unity of the subjective mani idea is and the objective the product of an activity which has its Therefore the relation which proper ground in the idea as subjective. and my &quot. (Cf. precisely as the true.&quot.) 223. obs. that . and has being only where its the subjectivity of the idea and objectivity are . If we consider what lay in the fact that it is the truth comes to be by being produced. hence pro ceeds from it. The good is. was described as truth points to another (or another form of the ideal relation). 111. must. ideal relation. as rationality which to be carried into objectivity. and ff. Psychology. be as objective. Since the good has emerged as the neces it is sary consequence of the true. in the first instance.Outlines of pears here.. is rationality as end. primacy in relation to the (b) The Good. in the idea it is is which the subjectivity of the starting-point and the goal. the good. much The psychology which considers knowing not so to show how truth comes to be as how the subject comes into possession of it.242 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. 224. Rationality. to be seen in how far Kant can grant to the practical reason the theoretical. treat of much that ap 110. only with a changed point of view.

gt. adequate to one another. Fichte s. ideal. of is objectivity. and objective. therefore (or really). i. the finite end merely subjective. 2 43 221. as. moral world-order. So little as mere objectivity is truth. to the objective idea. Thus there that results as a determination corresponding to discovered in The good is is rationality that is to be realised.) But the idea as it appears as realised.lt. so that it now is as was thought 221. if it (1) have not the determination it. A 225.. the so-called 2 Kant does not of itself make man good. entirely right when he opposes to one is. on the contrary. !&amp. (willed).e. and hence the good occurs where subjective is carried over into objectivity. The good is the idea as end. knows no higher category than the good. conceives God only as the world s final purpose that is to be. its But the end its had as its truth and termination realisation. is for knowledge. (Cf. as a world-plan to be realised. the good as being. objective^ of duty. therefore. Compared with it. or rationality as end. is realised or has objectivity. The mere conception &amp. In the termination.gt. 1. say.) But if this relation gave the true in that the subjective idea was made adequate thought as rationality it it is. another maxims and laws of reason as subjective view which. the concept of the R . is no longer a problem for the will .IDEA. &amp. so little mere subjectivity the also good.

and and. the primacy. If we bring the endless progression to a conclusion by fulfilling what it is demands already is ( 49). must be conceived as neither the one nor the other. therefore. it. &amp. because it is both the one and the . on the one hand. idea points with necessity to the as truth. in the consideration of the good. driven to the idea of a perfect essence. which is the (theoretical) of the spirit. willing as a continual problem. and. as incomplete. and is forever again brought back to the non-deducible conditio sine qua appulsion. as much for its limit as for its presupposi tion. takes the good as endless problem. Fichte. Kant.^ possible If one will avoid this consequence.gt.lt. also. ( conclusion. the theo 2 Hence. Kant is compellc 1 to concede to on the the practical reason. behind as a forever unknown residuum. with same necessity as that with which good. since it as should be carried out. takes knowing. because it limits (3) Therefore. other hand. retical assumption of the reality of the good. i. transition must be made from the truth in to the good. W Therefore. non for the practical being is &amp.244 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. the thing-in-itself remains knowledge. and has therefore.e. Each is the termination the other. and thereby 222) the true. as its cor relate it has the never realised ideal of the good. there it results that the idea. so brings them into the endless progression.. 226. this is matter to a only if one never brings the therefore. on the other.

and The idea so taken is living. THE IDEA AS ABSOLUTE. C.) has been styled Christianas (2) This means here the idea taken ante CJiristum. which finitude/ 1) and is absolute idea^ absolute rationality. Since the idea has got rid of into itself the limitation which it had when the good . in short. Therefore. end in the other. and taken up 227. since it realises its determinations. it appeared still as a plurality (these _two) Each of them still displays in itself of ideas. All categories may. because each had it. the absolute. and so has absolved its development. obs. self-realising truth. Historically.IDEA. were still finite modes of the idea. the absolute. actual return-into-itself has as such got rid of all taken absolutely.^ The true and the good. religion occurs as finitude.! absolute. be called definitions (of course defec that tive) of the absolute. is This neither theoretical nor practical idea (3) The idea has also been called speculative idea. 245 Thus it is the idea in general. &amp. rationality is both realised good. In the absolute sphere. other. reality (law and gospels.lt. the transition from the theoretical and practical to the absolute idea was made by Aristotle. Hence Plato ( 219. by which is asserted merely the (logical) absolute is not to be confounded with the The absolute is far (theological) concept of divinity. from being the absolute spirit. morals and dogmatics). therefore.

absolute idea. p. 82. objectively taken. To follow in this is the task of the science of logic. the idea has returned to immediacy. As is the difference of the good and the true. (1) life of the idea process of constant mediation with is The self-mediation logic... whose manifestation actuality is. (Cf. 228. in that it is not resting being but it is process. which knows nothing of God. Its procedure consists in metiiod. logic. but absolute The word reason is here taken as it is idealism. hence not destroyed. destroyed in the idea categories ( the idea is the totality of the 6). it is. the absolute final end. How reason. is related to God. and life. the category taken absolutely.. . the difference in sublated. all be realised like the good. tively taken. therefore. actuality the The problem my &quot. but the self-realising final it is absolute reason. or logic subjec i.) however. which had in a succession ascended to this difference .&quot. neither empirical nor practical. of philosophy is to apprehend in absolute. say.246 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. when one says. is and the self. Logos. cannot. of course.e. reason absolutely. and the true were opposed to each other. On the other hand. or the Logos. Logos. Nature or Creation. i. therefore. There is reason in the world. it is the It is no longer a rational end to truly infinite ( 47). Since difference is destroyed in the idea. end . the It is.e. so is also the difference of all categories. This it is. ff.

has for its subject the idea. must. made clear in how far in the Introduction the pre supposition could be made.IDEA. its 247 accompanying the movement of the idea through the various categories onward. therefore. development. the one hand. ap peared as a mere act of arbitrary will. of the subject of logic. because. what has been done in the exposition of In the beginning of the exposition. since it This it is in a double sense. namely. ft . tical. and if in the Introduction its it was called the science of (3) the categories. ject^ 152.) At most it could only be pointed out that it was not . the self-movement of the idea. that it could have in itself the necessity of self(3) This can be intel 18. first be given (4) Here the at the end. be said As only here what logic is. genitivus objecti and subjecti coincide. having originated through it has this as its sub (Cf. ( 25. 5. therefore. on has the idea as and.) In this respect one may (figuratively) speak of (2) Here is the blessed. on the other hand. The method is dialec since that movement itself is dialectic! The science of logic. obs. reconciled life of the idea.) (Cf. here true definition is that it is the science of the idea. as in W amor dei. ligible only at the end. 229. the resolve to engage in the activity of pure thought. at the close of the logic can so only here can one become conscious of it. its object.

it had to be followed itself up to the point where has completed as process. this resolve has been nothing other than the impulse ( of reason. This unity met us first there as phenomenon of life . we have itself . in the essential rela presented to us the ideas of the true and the . which. The recapitulation secondly. of the idea to be thought. that thought has to be con we have merely followed What sidered as something living. In this chapter we have had itself to to do with the unity of idea. completed itself. when all moments had attained as it to their rights. therefore. good finally. then have to show what the peculiarity of the . 221. not generated the but has generated there might appear strange. namely. as immediate in the tion. 230. was shown that the idea opposed itself to itself subjective and objective. recapitulation must first recall the course of the chapter concluded.) What as that we might regard of the idea as our doing appears us.248 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. As at the conclusion of each main part. now which impelled logic. Therefore. it it. so here. which had shown be the subjectivity and objectivity. But now we know that inconsistent with reason. appears here as necessary. the idea was considered had absolved and will. and. since nothing else has been thought than the idea which has shown mediation ( itself to be the process of self- 226).

IDEA. and. First has been shown the . it has completed its course. when . But it when two things are done first. The goal of logic has been to follow the . only at the close of its every science can be said what ficance is. categories is 249 which were treated of in the Third Part of the Logic. finally. the to third task which the recapitulation had. or Categories of Freedom. finally. so that the idea categories of which contains the earlier in itself all ones. They receive according to the different principles of nomenclature the superscription. forms a closed totality second. truth. compare with the re capitulations already given. concept further. realises it as subject of (every) free development it has been shown how this development and explicates itself in objectivity . peculiar signi so only here also may be brought to con be. thus becomes full. sciousness this occurs what logic really is and should . freedom (all which entered into these). as sublated moments. when logic has been defined in relation to the discipline contiguous to it. first To accomplish it the of the two It is is. If. in the entire system of science. \ 231. when has been shown how logic. has come to light that the real truth is there arrived at where both sides are adequate to one another. Concept* or From the Abstract Concept to the Absolute Idea. or all. placed only at the close of the whole.

immediacy appeared to be the untrue . so that the entire . self -correction of idea. as mediation the idea was called Since the idea appeared here. impelled us onward As against the idea as mediation. it was immediacy.250 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. we had constantly to do with relations the more . the idea was however. mediation of the idea. it. the more we approached that itself. namely. In the sphere of freedom it we have observed the idea as self-mediation. the the abandoned sphere. ruptured within essence. which yearned after a fulfil ment. only as it is most remote from the goal of self and mediation. poverty itself. beginning the subject know itself. The most remote possible from being the totality of all categories. idea as mediation It appeared. It strove to rid itself of the contradiction that the totality. was as emptiness. to the categories of mediation. concrete these became. Even though already at the was only the idea striving to so. and passing on its to those categories which nearer to The the contradiction which dis categories of played itself in all immediacy. and was by us termed being. This contradiction the lie we corrected by executing the truth. it was the poorest of all the categories indeed. likewise contradicted and that the highest form of mediation as unresolved contradiction pointed to the sphere where all con tradictions were solved. where as completed is satisfied in itself.

) if 232.. whether we had to regard this becoming as becoming in us or as becoming in itself. we call Nature. to complete no longer becomes other. for the idea. Nature.IDEA. it in has not. . This transition to Nature not a transition of the idea. completed. because there is in it no lack. as in itself itself. of therebeing it was the product itself. as hitherto. one is compelled i.e. since the idea in to its if one has thought becoming become. and transition must be made from logic to the philosophy of Nature as the second main part of the system of philosophy. But the logic has considered this gradual self-realisation of the idea. 228. (cf. This transition . is satisfied itself. is to the end. logic has 251 do with the gradual self-realisation of the idea as such. think it as as there-being. its becoming. hence with its becoming. as complete and perfected. complete since has realised becoming as But the idea or reason as therebeing. is still less a speculative either demonstration of creation here is no question of a creator or of a forth-putting of creative activity. the idea as there-being. what then is the real result of that process for ? Manifestly the settled precipitate 34). i. (Cf. Nature as it has here presented itself is only there- being rationality. or we from the idea to . O no limitation but the science of logic passes over into the science of Nature.e..

for the first time be intelligible. as completed. which are valid alike in all spheres . the latter with idea in its objectivity. shows how far it could be said with right that logic is fundamental philosophy^ but also mere fundamental philosophy. us be life). processless) drives It is the task of the pJiilosophy of religion to investigate whether what we call Nature may have also still another meaning (of creation). and yet therebeing (i. the yond Nature. its continual completion of itself. only therebeing rationality just as much is its task to show that the contradic tion which lies in that Nature is idea (hence process. It is calling of Nature. logic may be defined as science of the idea in the abstract This definition. This had to do with the inner movement of the idea. With this we pass out of the sphere of logic.252 CATEGORIES OF FREEDOM. the distinction between the subject of Logic is and that of the philosophy of Nature so fixed that the former has to do with the idea in its subjectivity. a task of the philosophy of Nature to justify . It forms the presupposition and basis of the concreter parts of philosophy.e. reason is to be conceived as external therebeing. In distinction from the philosophy of Nature. The logical categories are the universal relations of reason. now.. Both lie outside logical investigation. which can here element of thought. 233. one must know these before one can . on the con trary. externally existing. Hence. which will explain reason as therebeing.

to be satisfied with the fact that it was a manifestation of causality. who saw in a straw-halm (his) God. one must know logic shows. and its study is for that of the latter indispensable. heat. there fore. is something far better than such a The application of the cate repetition of the logic. etc. not false. With logical knowledge. not-being. i. time. (which alone phy siology. manifests itself in space. W It forms only the foundation. when one says that they are being. 253 show how in each sphere reason displays itself in a particular manner. &amp. etc. 3 &amp. becoming. and with which they begin. aim which precisely at). if one should demand of him. The philosophy of nature of Vanini. believes that he has conceived the essence of space. since.IDEA. for example. one stands as yet only in their fore-court. .lt. in the case of any phenomenon. the life of the mind. but how the totality of the categories. when it keeps to the the universal.) is here to be applied. the (entire) absolute or (entire) reason. therefore. Not these categories. Logic forms the foundation for the other parts of philosophy. is. W pneumatology. is what the philosophy of nature should explain.e.e.. what reason etc. just because it makes known only at the end that which they presuppose. THE END. i. . but this logical category does not suffice.. It is therefore a logical categories when mistaking of the nature of the one. That is.gt. gories in the concreter parts of philosophy is. motion. reason. but it gives. in order to apprehend reason in Nature. correct he wishes to know what physical category (electricity. not that which one really wishes Rightly would the physicist be dissatisfied specific.. of course.

. Limited Perth.. .Printed &y Cowan & Co.

.

.

Ref.University of Toronto Library DO NOT REMOVE THE CARD FROM THIS POCKET Acme Library Card Pocket Under Pat. Made by LIBRARY BUREAU . Index FU&quot. &quot.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful