IN the case of a philosophical work it seems not only superfluous but in view of the nature of the subject
even inappropriate and inexpedient to begin as writers
usually do with a preface explaining the end the
author had in mind the circumstances which gave rise
to the work and the relation in which the writer takes
it to stand to other treatises on the same subject written
by his predecessors or his contemporaries For whatever it might be suitable to state about philosophy in a
preface say an historical sketch of the main drift
and point of view the general content and results a
string of desultory assertions and assurances about
truth this cannot be accepted as the form and manner
in which to expound philosophical truth
Moreover because philosophy has its being essentially
in the element of universality which encloses the particular within it the end or final result seems in the
case of philosophy more than in that of other sciences
to have absolutely expressed the complete fact itself
in its very nature for which the mere process of bringing it to light would seem properly speaking to have
no essential significance On the other hand in the
general idea of eg anatomy the knowledge of the parts of the body regarded as lifeless we are quite
sure we do not possess the objective concrete fact
the actual content of the science, but must over and
above be concerned with particulars Further in the
case of such a collection of items of knowledge which
has no real right to the name of science any talk
about purpose and suchlike generalities is not commonly very different in manner from the descriptive
and superficial way in which the contents of the science
these nerves and muscles etc are themselves spoken
of In philosophy on the other hand it would at once
be felt incongruous were such a method made use of
and yet shown by philosophy itself to be incapable of
grasping the truth
In the same way too by determining the relation
which a philosophical work professes to have to other
treatises on the same subject an extraneous interest is
introduced and obscurity is thrown over the point at
issue in the knowledge of the truth The more the
ordinary mind takes the opposition between true and
false to be fixed the more is it accustomed to expect
either agreement or contradiction with a given philosophical system and only to see the one or the other
in any explanation about such a system It does
not conceive the diversity of philosophical systems
as the progressive evolution of truth rather it sees
only contradiction in that variety The bud disappears
when the blossom breaks through and we might say
that the former is refuted by the latter in the same
way when the fruit comes the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plants existence for
the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the
blossom These stages are not merely differentiated
they supplant one another as being incompatible with
one another But the ceaseless activity of their own
inherent nature makes them at the same time moments
of an organic unity where they not merely do not
contradict one another but where one is as necessary
as the other and this equal necessity of all moments
constitutes from the outset the life of the whole But
contradiction in the case of a philosophical system is
not usually conceived in this way and again the
mind perceiving the contradiction does not commonly
know how to relieve it or keep it free of onesidedness
or to recognise in what seems conflicting and inherently
antagonistic the presence of mutually necessary moments
The demand for such explanations as also the
attempts to satisfy this demand very easily pass for
the essential business philosophy has to undertake
Where could the inmost truth of a philosophical work be
found better expressed than in its purposes and results
and in what way could these be more definitely known
than through their distinction from what is produced
during the same period by others working in the same
field If however such procedure is to pass for more
than the beginning of knowledge if it is to pass for
actually knowing what a philosophical system is then
we must in point of fact, look on it as a device for
avoiding the real business at issue an attempt to combine the appearance of being in earnest and taking
trouble about the subject with an actual neglect of
the subject altogether For the real subjectmatter
is not exhausted in its purpose but in working the
matter out nor is the mere result attained the concrete whole itself but the result along with the process
of arriving at it The purpose by itself is a lifeless
universal just as the general drift is a bare activity in
a certain direction which is still without its concrete
realisation and the naked result is the corpse of the
system which has left its guiding tendency behind it
Similarly the distinctive difference of anything is rather
the boundary the limit of the subject it is found at
that point where the matter stops or it is what
the matter is not To trouble oneself in this
fashion with the purpose and results or again with the
differences the positions taken up and judgments
passed by one thinker and another is therefore an
easier task than perhaps it seems For instead of
laying hold of the matter itself a procedure of that
kind is all the while away from the subject altogether
Instead of dwelling within it and becoming absorbed
by it knowledge of that sort is always grasping at
something else such knowledge instead of keeping to
the subjectmatter and giving itself up to it never gets
away from itself The easiest thing of all is to pass
judgments on what has a solid substantial content it
is more difficult to grasp it and most of all difficult to
do both together and produce the systematic exposition of it
The beginning of culture and of the struggle to get
out of the unbroken immediacy of naive psychical life
has always to be made by acquiring knowledge of
universal principles and points of view by striving
in the first instance, to work up simply to the thought
of the subjectmatter in general not forgetting at the
same time to give reasons for supporting it or refuting
it to apprehend the concrete riches and fullness contained in its various determinate qualities and to know
how to furnish a coherent orderly account of it and
a responsible judgment upon it This beginning of
mental cultivation will however very soon make way
for the earnestness of actual life in all its fullness which
leads to a living experience of the subjectmatter itself
and when in addition conceptual thought strenuously
penetrates to the very depths of its meaning such knowledge and style of judgment will be relegated to
their due place in everyday thought and conversation
The systematic development of truth in scientific
form can alone be the true shape in which truth exists
To help to bring philosophy nearer to the form of science
that goal where it can lay aside the name of love of
knowledge and be actual knowledge that is what I
have set before me The inner necessity that knowledge
should be science Lies in its very nature and the adequate and sufficient reason for this is simply and
solely the systematic exposition of philosophy itself
The external necessity however so far as this is apprehended in a universal way and apart from the
accident of the personal element and the particular
occasioning influences affecting the individual is the
same as the internal it lies in the form and shape in
which the process of time presents the existence of its
moments To show that the time has come to raise
philosophy to the level of scientific system would
therefore be the only true justification of the attempts
which aim at proving that philosophy must assume
this character because the temporal process would
thus bring out and lay bare the necessity of it nay
more would at the same time be carrying out that very
aim itself
When we state the true form of truth to be its scientific
character or what is the same thing when it is maintained that truth finds the medium of its existence in
notions or conceptions alone I know that this seems
to contradict an idea with all its consequences which
makes great pretensions and has gained widespread
acceptance and conviction at the present time A word
of explanation concerning this contradiction seems
therefore not out of place even though at this stage
it can amount to no more than a dogmatic assurance
exactly like the view we are opposing If that is
to say truth exists merely in what or rather exists
merely as what is called at one time intuition at
another immediate knowledge of the Absolute, religion
Being not being in the centre of divine love but
the very Being of this centre of the Absolute itself
from that point of view it is rather the opposite of the
notional or conceptual form which would be required
for systematic philosophical exposition The Absolute
would not be grasped in conceptual form but felt
intuited it is not its conception but the feeling of it
and intuition of it that are to have the say and find
expression
If we consider the appearance of a claim like this in
its more general setting and look at it from the level
which the selfconscious mind at present occupies we
shall find that selfconsciousness has got beyond the substantial fullness of life which it used to carry on in
the element of thought beyond this naive immediacy
of belief beyond the satisfaction and security arising
from the sense of certainty which conscious life possessed regarding its reconciliation with ultimate reality
wherever present whether inner or outer Selfconscious mind has not merely passed beyond that to the
opposite extreme of insubstantial reflection of self into
self but beyond this too It has not merely lost its essential and concrete life it is also conscious of this loss and
of the transitory finitude characteristic of its content
Turning away from the husks it has to feed on and
confessing that it lies in wickedness and sin it reviles
itself for so doing and now desires from philosophy not
so much to bring it to a knowledge of what it is as to
obtain once again through philosophy the restoration
of that comfortably solid and substantial mode of
existence it has lost Philosophy is thus expected not so
much to meet this want by opening up the compact
solidity of substantial existence and bringing this
to the light and level of selfconsciousness is not so
much to get chaotic conscious life brought back to the
orderly ways of thought and the simple unity of the
concept as to run together what thought has divided
asunder suppress the notion with its distinctions and
restore the feeling of existence What it wants from
philosophy is not so much insight as edification The
beautiful the holy the eternal religion love these
are the bait required to awaken the desire to bite
not the notion but ecstasy not the march of cold
necessity in the subjectmatter but ferment and enthusiasm these are to be the ways by which the wealth
of the concrete substance is to be stored and spread
out to view
With this demand there goes the strenuous effort
almost perfervidly zealous in its activity to rescue
mankind from being sunken in what is sensuous
vulgar and of fleeting importance and to raise mens
eyes to the stars as if men had quite forgotten the
divine and were on the verge of finding satisfaction
like worms in mud and water Time was when man
had a heaven decked and fitted out with endless wealth
of thoughts and pictures The significance of all that is
lay in the thread of light by which it was attached to
heaven instead of dwelling in the present as it is here
and now the eye glided away over the present to the
Divine away so to say to a present that lies beyond
The minds gaze had to be directed under compulsion to
what is earthly and kept fixed there and it has needed
a long time to introduce that clearness which only
celestial realities had into the crassness and confusion
shrouding the sense of things earthly and to make
attention to the immediate present as such which was
called Experience of interest and of value Now we
have apparently the need for the opposite of all this
mans mind and interest are so deeply rooted in the
earthly that we require a like power to get them raised
above that level His spirit shows such poverty of
nature that it seems to long for the mere pitiful feeling
of the divine in the abstract and to get refreshment
from that like a wanderer in the desert craving for the
merest mouthful of water By the little which can thus
satisfy the needs of the human spirit we can measure
the extent of its loss
This easy contentment in receiving or stinginess in
giving does not suit the character of science The
man who only seeks edification who wants to envelop
in mist the manifold diversity of his earthly existence
and thought and craves after the vague enjoyment of
this vague and indeterminate Divinity he may look
where he likes to find this he will easily find for
himself the means to get something he can rave over
and puff himself up with But philosophy must beware
of the wish to be edifying
Still less must this kind of contentment which holds
science in contempt take upon itself to claim that raving
obscurantism of this sort is something higher than science
These apocalyptic utterances pretend to occupy the
very centre and the deepest depths they look askance
at all definiteness and preciseness of meaning
and they deliberately hold back from conceptual thinking and the constraining necessities of thought as being
the sort of reflection which they say can only feel at
home in the sphere of finitude But just as there is a
breadth which is emptiness there is a depth which is
empty too as we may have an extension of substance
which overflows into finite multiplicity without the
power of keeping the manifold together in the same
way we may have an insubstantial intensity which
keeping itself in as mere force without actual expression is no better than superficiality The force of mind
is only as great as its expression its depth only as
deep as its power to expand and lose itself when spending and giving out its substance Moreover when this
unreflective emotional knowledge makes a pretext of
having immersed its own very self in the depths of
the absolute Being and of philosophising in all holiness
and truth it hides from itself the fact that instead of
devotion to God it rather by this contempt for aU
measurable precision and definiteness simply confirms in
its own case the fortuitous character of its content and
on the other endows God with its own caprice When
such minds commit themselves to the unrestrained
ferment of sheer emotion they think that by putting
oil over selfconsciousness and surrendering all
understanding they are thus Gods beloved ones to
whom He gives His wisdom in sleep This is the reason
too that in point of fact what they do conceive and
bring forth in sleep is dreams
For the rest it is not difficult to see that our epoch is
a birthtime and a period of transition The spirit of
the age has broken with the world as it has hitherto
existed and with the old ways of thinking and is in
the mind to let them all sink into the depths of the past
and to set about its own transformation It is indeed
never at rest but carried along the stream of progress
ever onward But it is here as in the case of the birth
of a child after a long period of nutrition in silence
the continuity of the gradual growth in size of quantitative change is suddenly cut short by the first breath
drawn there is a break in the process a qualitative
change and the child is born In like manner the
spirit of the time growing slowly and quietly ripe for
the new form it is to assume loosens one fragment after
another of the structure of its previous world That it
is tottering to its fall is indicated only by symptoms
here and there Frivolity and again ennui which are
spreading in the established order of things the undefined foreboding of something unknown all these
are hints foretelling that there is something else approaching This gradual crumbling to pieces vhicli
did not alter the general look and aspect of the whole
is interrupted by the sunrise which in a flash and at
a single stroke brings to view the form and structure
of the new world
But this new world is perfectly realised just as little
as the newborn child and it is essential to bear this
in mind It comes on the stage to begin with in
its immediacy in its bare generality A building is
not finished when its foundation is laid and just as
little is the attainment of a general notion of a whole
the whole itself When we want to see an oak with all
its vigour of trunk its spreading branches and mass
of foliage we are not satisfied to be shown an acorn instead In the same way science the crowning glory of a
spiritual world is not found complete in its initial stages
The beginning of the new spirit is the outcome of an
extensive transformation of manifold forms of spiritual
culture it is the reward which comes after a chequered
and devious course of development and after much
struggle and effort It is a whole which after running
its course and laying bare all its content returns again
to itself it is the resultant abstract notion of the
whole But the actual realisation of this abstract
whole is only found when those previous shapes and
forms which are now reduced to ideal moments of the
whole are developed anew again but developed and
shaped within this new medium and with the meaning
they have thereby acquired
While the new world makes its first appearance
merely in general outline merely as a whole lying
concealed and hidden within a bare abstraction the
wealth of the bygone life on the other hand is still
consciously present in recollection Consciousness
misses in the new form the detailed expanse of content
but still more the developed expression of form by
which distinctions are definitely determined and arranged in their precise relations Without this last
feature science has no general intelligibility and has
the appearance of being an esoteric possession of a few
individuals an esoteric possession because in the
first instance it is only the essential principle or notion
of science only its inner nature that is to be found
and a possession of few individuals because at its
first appearance its content is not elaborated and expanded in detail and thus its existence is turned into
something particular Only what is perfectly determinate in form is at the same time exoteric comprehensible and capable of being learned and possessed
by everybody Intelligibility is the form in which
science is offered to everyone and is the open road
to it made plain for all To reach rational knowledge
by our intelligence is the just demand of the mind
which comes to science For intelligence understanding is thinking pure activity of the self in
general and what is intelligible is something from the first familiar and common to the scientific
and unscientific mind alike enabling the unscientific
mind to enter the domain of science
Science at its commencement when as yet it has
neither got as far as detailed completeness nor perfection of form is exposed to blame on that account
But to suppose this blame to attach to its essential
nature would be as unjust as it is inadmissible not
to be ready to recognise the demand for that further
development in fuller detail In the contrast and
opposition between these two aspects the initial and
the developed stages of science seems to lie the critical
knot which scientific culture at present struggles to
loosen and about which it is so far not very clear
One side parades the wealth of its material and the
intelligibility of its ideas the other pours contempt
at any rate on the latter and makes a parade of the
immediate intuitive rationality and divine quality of
its content Although the first is reduced to silence
perhaps by the inner force of truth alone perhaps too
by the noisy bluster of the other side and though
having regard to the reason and nature of the case it
did feel overborne yet it does not therefore feel satisfied as regards those demands for greater development
for those demands are just but still unfulfilled Its
silence is due only in part to the victory of the other
side it is half due to that weariness and indifference
which are usually the consequence when expectations
are being constantly awakened by promises which are
not followed up by performance
The other side no doubt at times makes an easy
enough matter of getting a vast expanse of content
They haul in a lot of material already familiar and
arranged in order and since they are concerned
more especially about what is exceptional strange and
curious they seem all the more to be in possession of
the rest which knowledge in its own way was finished
and done with as well as to have control over what
was unregulated and disorderly Hence everything
appears brought within the compass of the Absolute
Idea which seems thus to be recognised in everything
and to have succeeded in becoming a system in extension
of scientific knowledge But if we look more closely at
this expanded system we find that it has not been
reached by one and the same principle taking shape in
diverse ways it is the shapeless repetition of one and
the same idea which is applied in an external fashion
to different material the wearisome reiteration of it
keeping up the semblance of diversity The Idea
which by itself is no doubt the truth really never gets any farther than just where it began as long as the
development of it consists in nothing else than such a
repetition of the same formula If the knowing subject
carries round everywhere the one inert abstract form
taking up in external fashion whatever material comes
his way and dipping it into this element then this comes
about as near to fulfilling what is wanted viz a self origination of the wealth of detail and a self determining distinction of shapes and forms as any chance
fancies about the content in question It is rather a
monotonous formalism which only comes by distinction in the matter it has to deal with because this is
already prepared and well known
This monotonousness and abstract universality are
maintained to be the Absolute This formalism insists
that to be dissatisfied therewith argues an incapacity
to grasp the standpoint of the Absolute, and keep a
firm hold on it If it was once the case that the bare
possibility of thinking of something in some other
fashion was sufficient to refute a given idea and the
naked possibility the bare general thought possessed
and passed for the entire substantive value of actual
knowledge we find here similarly all the value ascribed to the general idea in this bare form without
concrete realisation and we see here too the style
and method of speculative contemplation identified
with dissipating and resolving what is determinate
and distinct or rather with hurling it down without
more ado and without any justification into the abyss
of vacuity To consider any specific fact as it is in the
Absolute consists here in nothing else than saying
about it that while it is now doubtless spoken of as
something specific yet in the Absolute in the abstract
identity AA there is no such thing at all for everything is there all one To pit this single assertion that
in the Absolute all is one against the organised
whole of determinate and complete knowledge or of
knowledge which at least aims at and demands complete
development to give out its Absolute as the night in
which as we say all cows are black that is the very
naivete of vacuous knowledge
The formalism which has been deprecated and despised by recent philosophy and which has arisen once
more in philosophy itself will not disappear from
science even though its inadequacy is known and felt
till the knowledge of absolute reality has become
quite clear as to what its own true nature consists in
Having in mind that the general idea of what is to be
done if it precedes the attempt to carry it out facilitates
the comprehension of this process it is worth while to
indicate here some rough idea of it with the hope at
the same time that this will give us the opportunity to
set aside certain forms whose habitual presence is a
hindrance in the way of speculative knowledge
In my view a view which the developed exposition
of the system itself can alone justify everything depends on grasping and expressing the ultimate truth
not as Substance but as Subject as well At the same
time we must note that concrete substantiality implicates and involves the universal or the immediacy of
knowledge itself as well as the immediacy which is
being or immediacy qua object for knowledge If the
generation which heard God spoken of as the One
Substance was shocked and revolted by such a characterisation of his nature the reason lay partly in the instinctive feeling that in such a conception selfconsciousness was simply submerged and not preserved
But partly again the opposite position which maintains thinking to be merely subjective thinking abstract
universality as such is exactly the same bare uniformity is undifferentiated unmoved substantiality
And even if in the third place thought combines with
itself the being of substance and conceives immediacy or intuition as thinking it is still a
question whether this intellectual intuition does not fall
back into that inert abstract simplicity and exhibit
and expound reality itself in an unreal mannerf
The living substance further is that being which is
truly subject or what is the same thing is truly realised
and actual solely in the process of positing
itself or in mediating with its own self its transitions from one state or position to the opposite
As subject it is pure and simple negativity and just
on that account a process of splitting up what is simple
and undifferentiated a process of duplicating and
setting factors in opposition which process in turn
is the negation of this indifferent diversity and of
the opposition of factors it entails True reality is
merely this process of reinstating selfidentity of reflecting into its own self in and from its other and is
not an original and primal unity as such not an immediate unity as such It is the process of its own
becoming the circle which presupposes its end or its
purpose and has its end for its beginning it becomes
concrete and actual only by being carried out and by
the end it involves
The life of God and divine intelligence then can
if we like be spoken of as love disporting witli itself
but this idea falls into edification and even sinks into
insipidity if it lacks the seriousness the suffering the
patience and the labour of the negative Per se the
divine life is no doubt undisturbed identity and oneness
with itself which feels no anxiety over otherness and
estrangement and none over the surmounting of this
estrangement But this per se is abstract generality
where we abstract from its real nature which consists in
its being objective to itself conscious of itself on its own
account and where consequently we
neglect altogether the selfmovement which is the formal
character of its activity If the form is declared to
correspond to the essence it is just for that reason a
misunderstanding to suppose that knowledge can be
content with the per se the essence but can do
without the form that the absolute principle or absolute intuition makes the carrying out of the former or
the development of the latter needless Precisely
because the form is as necessary to the essence as the
essence to it absolute reality must not be conceived
of and expressed as essence alone ie as immediate
substance or as pure selfintuition of the Divine but
as form also and with the entire wealth of the developed
form Only then is it grasped and expressed as really
actual
The truth is the whole The whole however is
merely the essential nature reaching its completeness
through the process of its own development Of the
Absolute it must be said that it is essentially a result
that only at the end is it what it is in very truth
and just in that consists its nature which is to be actual
subject or self becoming selfdevelopment Should it appear contradictory to say that the Absolute has
to be conceived essentially as a result a little consideration will set this appearance of contradiction in its
true light The beginning the principle or the Absolute as at first or immediately expressed is merely the
universal If we say all animals that does not
pass for zoology for the same reason we see at once
that the words absolute divine eternal and so on do
not express what is implied in them and only mere
words like these in point of fact, express intuition as
the immediate Whatever is more than a word like
that even the mere transition to a proposition is a
form of mediation contains a process towards another
state from which we must return once more It is
this process of mediation however that is rejected
with horror as if absolute knowledge were being surrendered when more is made of mediation than merely
the assertion that it is nothing absolute and does not
exist in the Absolute
This horrified rejection of mediation however arises
as a fact from want of acquaintance with its nature
and with the nature of absolute knowledge itself For
mediating is nothing but selfidentity working itself
out through an active selfdirected process or, in
other words, it is reflection into self the aspect in which
the ego is for itself objective to itself. It is pure
negativity or reduced to its utmost abstraction
the process of bare and simple becoming The ego or
becoming in general this process of mediating is
because of its being simple just immediacy coming to
be and is immediacy itself We misconceive therefore
the nature of reason if we exclude reflection or meditation from ultimate truth and do not take it to be a
positive moment of the Absolute. It is reflection
which constitutes truth the final result and yet at
the same time does away with the contrast between
result and the process of arriving at it For this
process is likewise simple and therefore not distinct
from the form of truth which consists in appearing
as simple in the result it is indeed just this restoration
and return to simplicity While the embryo is certainly in itself implicitly a human being it is not so
explicitly it does not take itself to be a human being
it is only the latter in the form of developed and cultivated reason which has made itself
to be what it is implicitly Its actual reality is first
fomid here But this result arrived at is itself simple
immediacy for it is selfconscious freedom which
is at one with itself and has not set aside the opposition
it involves and left it there but has made its account
with it and become reconciled to it
What has been said may also be expressed by saying
that reason is purposive activity Extolling socalled
nature at the expense of thought misunderstood
and more especially the rejection of external purposiveness have brought the idea of purpose in general into
disrepute AU the same in the sense in which Aristotle
too characterises nature as purposive activity purpose
is the inunediate the midisturbed the unmoved which
is selfmoving as such it is subject Its power of
moving taken abstractly is its existence for itself or
pure negativity The result is the same as the beginning solely because the beginning is purpose Stated
otherwise what is actual and concrete is the same
as its inner principle or notion simply because the
immediate qua purpose contains within it the self or
pure actuality The realised purpose or concrete
actuality is movement and process of development
But this very unrest is the self and it is one and
the same with that immediacy and simplicity characteristic of the beginning just for the reason that it is the
result and has returned upon itself while this latter
again is just the self and the self is selfreferring and
selfrelating identity and simplicity
When thinking of the Absolute as subject men have
made use of statements like God is the eternal
the moral order of the world or love etc In such
propositions ultimate truth is just barely stated to be
Subject but not set forth as the process of reflectively
mediating itself within itself In a proposition of that
kind we begin with the word God By itself this is a
meaningless sound a mere name the predicate says
afterwards wliat it is gives it content and meaning
the empty beginning becomes real knowledge only
when we thus get to the end of the statement So far
as that goes why not speak alone of the eternal of
the moral order of the world etc or like the ancients
of pure conceptions such as being the one etc ie
of what gives the meaning without adding the meaningless sound at all But this word just indicates
that it is not a being or essence or universal in general
that is put forward but something reflected into self
a subject Yet at the same time this acceptance of the
Absolute as Subject is merely anticipated not really
affirmed The subject is taken to be a fixed point
and to it as their support the predicates are attached
by a process fallig within the individual knowing
about it but not looked upon as belonging to the point
of attachment itself only by such a process however
could the content be presented as subject Constituted
as it is tbis process cannot belong to the subject but
when that point of support is fixed to start wdth this
process cannot be otherwise constituted it can only be
external The anticipation that the Absolute is subject
is therefore not merely not the realisation of this conception it even makes realisation impossible For it
makes out the notion to be a static point while its
actual reality is selfmovement selfactivity Ç
Among the many consequences that follow from
what has been said it is of importance to emphasise
this that knowledge is only real and can only be set
forth fully in the form of science in the form of system
and further that a socalled fundamental proposition
or first principle of philosophy even if it is true is yet
none the less false just because and in so far as it is
merely a fundamental proposition merely a first principle It is for that reason easily refuted The refutation
consists in bringing out its defective character and
it is defective because it is merely the universal merely
a principle the beginning If the refutation is complete and thorough it is derived and developed from
the nature of the principle itself and not accomplished
by bringing in from elsewhere other coimter assurances
and chance fancies It would be strictly the development
of the principle and thus the completion of its deficiency
were it not that it misunderstands its own purport by
taking account solely of the negative aspect of what it
seeks to do and is not conscious of the positive character of its process and result The really positive
working out of the beginning is at the same time just
as much the very reverse it is a negative attitude towards the principle we start from negative that is to
say of its onesided form which consists in being
primarily immediate a mere purpose It may therefore be regarded as a refutation of what constitutes
the basis of the system but more correctly it should
be looked at as a demonstration that the basis or
principle of the system is in point of fact merely its
beginning
That the truth is only realised in the form of system
that substance is essentially subject is expressed in
the idea which represents the Absolute as Spirit
the grandest conception of all and one which is due
to modern times and its religion Spirit is the only
Reality It is the inner being of the world that which
essentially is and is per se it assumes objective
determinate form and enters into relations with itself
it is externality otherness and exists for self yet
in this determination and in its otherness it is still
one with itself it is selfcontained and selfcomplete
in itself and for itself at once This selfcontainedness
however is first something known by us it is implicit
in its nature it is Substance spiritual It
has to become selfcontained for itself on its own
account it must get knowledge of spirit and must be
consciousness of itself as spirit This means it must
be presented to itself as an object but at the same time
straightway annul and transcend this objective form it
must be its own object in which it finds itself reflected
So far as its spiritual content is produced by its own
activity it is only we the thinkers who know spirit
to be for itself, to be objective to itself but in so far
as spirit laiows itself to be for itself then this selfproduction the pure notion is the sphere and element
in which its objectification takes effect and where it
gets its existential form In tliis way it is in its existence aware of itself as an object in which its own self
is reflected Mind which when thus developed knows
itself to be mind is science Science is its realisation
and the kingdom it sets up for itself in its own
native element
A self having knowledge purely of itself in the absplute antithesis of itself this pure ether as such is the
very soil where science flourishes is knowledge in
universal form The beginning of philosophy presupposes or demands from consciousness that it should
feel at home in this element But this element only
attains its perfect meaning and acquires transparency
through the process of gradually developing it It is
pure spirituality as the universal which assumes the
shape of simple immediacy and this simple element
existing as such is the soil of science is thinking
and can be only in mind Because this medium
this immediacy of mind is the minds substantial
nature in general it is the transfigured essence reflection which itself is simple which is aware of itself
as immediacy it is being which is reflection into itself
Science on its side requires the individual selfconsciousness to have risen into this high ether in order to be
able to live with science and in science and really to
feel alive there Conversely the individual has the
right to demand that science shall hold the ladder to
help him to get at least as far as this position shall show
him that he has in himself this ground to stand on
His right rests on his absolute independence which he
knows he possesses in every type and phase of knowledge for in every phase whether recognised by science
or not and whatever be the content his right as an
individual is the absolute and final form ie he is the
immediate certainty of self and thereby is unconditioned being were this expression preferred If the
position taken up by consciousness that of knowing
about objective things as opposed to itself and about
itself as opposed to them is held by science to be the
very opposite of this position if when in knowing it
keeps within itself and never gets beyond itself science
holds this state to be rather the loss of mind altogether
on the other hand the element in which science consists
is looked at by consciousness as a remote and distant
region in which consciousness is no longer in possession
of itself Each of these two sides takes the other to
be the perversion of the truth For the naive consciousness to give itself up completely and straight
away to science is to make an attempt induced by
some unknown influence all at once to walk on its
head The compulsion to take up this attitude and
move about in this position is a constraining force it
is urged to fall in with without ever being prepared
for it and with no apparent necessity for doing so
Let science be fcr se what it likes in its relation to
naive immediate selfconscious life it presents the appearance of being a reversal of the latter or again
because naive selfconsciousness finds the principle of
its reality in the certainty of itself science bears the
character of unreality since consciousness for itself
is a state quite outside of science Science has for that
reason to combine that other element of selfcertainty
with its own or rather to show that the other element
belongs to itself and how it does so When devoid of
that sort of reality science is merely the content of
mind qua something implicit or potential
purpose which at the start is no more than something
internal not spirit but at first merely spiritual substance This implicit moment has to find
external expression and become objective on its own
account. This means nothing else than that this
moment has to establish selfconsciousness as one with
itself.
It is this process by which science in general comes
about this gradual development of knowing that is set
forth here in the Phenomenology of Mind Knowing
as it is found at the start mind in its immediate and
primitive stage is without the essential nature of mind
is senseconsciousness To get the length of genuine
knowledge or produce the element where science is
found the pure conception of science itself a long
and laborious journey must be undertaken This process towards science as regards the content it will
bring to light and the forms it will assume in the course
of its progress will not be what is primarily imagined by
leading the unscientific consciousness up to the level
of science it will be something different too from
establishing and laying the foundations of science
and anyway something else than the sort of ecstatic
enthusiasm which starts straight of with absolute
knowledge as if shot out of a pistol and makes short
work of other points of view simply by explaining that
it is to take no notice of them
The task of conducting the individual mind from its
unscientific standpoint to that of science had to be
taken in its general sense we had to contemplate
the formative development of the universal
or general individual of selfconscious spirit As to
the relation between these two the particular and
general individual every moment as it gains concrete
form and its own proper shape and appearance finds
a place in the life of the universal individual The
particular individual is incomplete mind a concrete
shape in whose existence taken as a whole one determinate characteristic predominates while the others
are found only in blurred outline In that mind which
stands higher than another the lower concrete form of
existence has sunk into an obscure moment what
was once substantial objective fact is
now only a single trace its definite shape has been
veiled and become simply a piece of shading The individual whose substance is mind at the higher level
passes through these past forms much in the way that
one who takes up a higher science goes through those
preparatory forms of Imowledge which he has long
made his own in order to call up their content before
him he brings back the recollection of them without
stopping to fix his interest upon them The particular
individual so far as content is concerned has also to
go through the stages through which the general mind
has passed but as shapes once assumed by mind
and now laid aside as stages of a road which has been
worked over and levelled out Hence it is that in
the case of various kinds of knowledge we find that
what in former days occupied the energies of men of
mature mental ability sinks to the level of information
exercises and even pastimes for children and in
this educational progress we can see the history of the
worlds culture delineated in faint outline This bygone mode of existence has already become an acquired
possession of the general mind which constitutes the
substance of the individual, and by thus appearing
externally to him furnishes his inorganic nature In
this respect culture or development of mind
regarded from the side of the individual, consists in
his acquiring what hes at his hand ready for him in
making its inorganic nature organic to himself and
taking possession of it for himself Looked at however from the side of universal mind qua general
spiritual substance culture means nothing else than
that this substance gives itself its own self consciousness
brings about its own taherent process and its own reflection into self
Science lays before us the morphogenetic process of
this cultural development in all its detailed fullness
and necessity and at the same time shows it to be
something that has already sunk into the mind as a
moment of its being and become a possession of mind
The goal to be reached is the minds insight into what
knowing is Impatience asks for the impossible wants
to reach the goal without the means of getting there
The length of the journey has to be borne with for every
moment is necessary and again we must halt at every
stage for each is itself a complete individual form
and is fully and finally considered only so far as its
determinate character is taken and dealt with as a
rounded and concrete whole or only so far as the whole
is looked at in the light of the special and peculiar
character which this determination gives it Because
the substance of individual mind nay more because
the universal mind at work in the world has
had the patience to go through these forms in the long
stretch of times extent and to take upon itself the
prodigious labour of the worlds history where it bodied
forth in each form the entire content of itself which
each is capable of grasping and because by nothing
less could that allpervading mind ever manage to
become conscious of what itself is for that reason
the individual mind in the nature of the case cannot
expect by less toil to grasp what its own substance
contains All the same its task has meanwhile been
made much lighter because this has historically been
implicitly accomplished the content is one
where reality has already given place to spiritual possibilities where immediacy has been overcome and
brought under the control of reflection the various
forms and shapes have been already reduced to their
intellectual abbreviations to determinations of thought
pure and simple Being now a
thought the content is the possession of the substance
of mind existence has no more to be changed into the
form of what is inherent and implicit but
only the implicit no longer merely something primitive nor lying hidden within existence but already
present as a recollection into the form of what is
explicit of what is objective to self
We have to state more exactly the way this is done
At the point at which we here take up this movement we
are spared in connection with the whole the process of
cancelling and transcending the stage of mere existence
This process has already taken place What is still to be
done and needs a higher kind of transformation is to
transcend the forms as ideally presented and made
familiar to our minds By that previous negative process
existence having been withdrawn into the minds sub
stance is in the first instance, transferred to the life
of self only in an immediate way The possession
the self has thereby acquired has still the same character of imcomprehended immediacy of passive indifference which existence itself had existence has
in this way merely passed into the form of an ideal
presentation At the same time by so doing it is
something familiar to us something wellknown
something which the existent mind has finished and
done with and hence takes no more to do with and
no further interest in While the activity that is
done with the existent is itself merely the process of
the particular mind of mind which is not comprehending itself on the other hand liowledge is directed
against this ideal presentation which has hereby arisen
against this beingfamiliar and wellknown it
is an action of universal mind the concern of thought
What we are familiar with is not intelligently
known just for the reason that it is familiar When
engaged in the process of knowing it is the commonest
form of selfdeception and a deception of other people
as well to assume something to be familiar and give
assent to it on that very account Knowledge of that
sort with all its talk never gets from the spot but
has no idea that this is the case Subject and object
and so on God nature understanding sensibility etc
are uncritically presupposed as familiar and something
significant and become fixed points from which to start
and to which to return The process of knowing flits
between these secure points and in consequence goes
on merely along the surface Apprehending and demonstrating consist similarly in seeing whether every one
finds what is said corresponding to his idea too whether
it is familiar and seems to him so and so or not
Analysis of an idea as it used to be carried out did
anyhow consist in nothing else than doing away with
its character of familiarity To break up an idea into
its ultimate elements means returning upon its moments
which at least do not have the form of the idea as picked
up but are the immediate property of the self. Doubtless this analysis only arrives at thoughts which are
themselves known elements fixed inert determinations
But what is thus broken up into parts this unreal entity
is itself an essential moment for just because the
concrete fact is selfdivided and turns into unreality
it is something selfmoving selfactive The action
of separating the elements is the exercise of the force
of Understanding the most astonishing and greatest
of all powers or rather the absolute power The
circle which is selfenclosed and at rest and being a
substance holds its own moments is an immediate
condition the immediate continuous relation of elements with their unity and hence arouses no sense of
wonderment But that an accident as such when cut
loose from its containing circumference that what
is bound and held by something else and actual only
by being connected with it should get an existence
all its own gain freedom and independence on its own
account this is the portentous power of the negative
it is the energy of thought of pure ego Death as
we may call that unreality is the most terrible thing
and to keep and hold fast what is dead demands the
greatest force of all Beauty powerless and helpless
hates understanding because the latter exacts from
it what it cannot perform But the life of mind is not
one that shuns death and keeps clear of destruction it endures its death and in death maintains its being
It only wins to its truth when it finds itself in utter
desolation It is this mighty power not by being a
positive which turns away from the negative as when
we say of anything it is nothing or it is false and
being then done with it pass off to something else
on the contrary mind is this power only by looking
the negative in the face and dwelling with it This
dwelling beside it is the magic power that converts
the negative into being That power is just what we
spoke of above as subject which by giving determinateness a place in its substance cancels abstract immediacy
ie immediacy which merely is and by so doing becomes the true substance becomes being or immediacy
that does not have mediation outside it but is this
mediation itself
This process of making what is objectively presented
a possession of pme selfconsciousness of raising it to
the level of universality in general is merely one aspect
of mental development spiritual evolution is not yet
completed The manner of study in ancient times is
distinct from that of the modern world in that the
former consisted in the cultivation and perfecting of
the natural mind Testing life carefully at all points
philosophising about everything it came across the
former created an experience permeated through and
through by universals In modern times however
an individual finds the abstract form ready made
In straining to grasp it and make it his own he rather
strives to bring forward the inner meaning alone
without any process of mediation the production of
the universal is abridged instead of the universal
arising out of the manifold detail of concrete existence
Hence nowadays the task before us consists not so
mucli in getting the individual clear of the level of
sensuous immediacy and making him a substance that
thinks and is grasped in terms of thought but rather
the very opposite it consists in actualising the universal and giving it spiritual vitality by the process of
breaking down and superseding fixed and determinate
thoughts But it is much more difficult to make fixed
and definite thoughts fuse with one another and form a
continuous whole than to bring sensuous existence into
this state The reason hes in what was said before
Thought determinations get their substance and the element of their existence from the ego the power of the
negative or piire reality while determinations of sense
find this in impotent abstract immediacy in mere
being as such Thoughts become fluent and interfuse
when thinking pure and simple this inner immediacy
knows itself as a moment when pure certainty of self
abstracts from itself It does not abstract in the
sense of getting away from itself and setting itself on
one side but of surrendering the fixed quaUty of its
selfaffirmation and giving up both the fixity of the
purely concrete vifhich is the ego as contrasted with
the variety of its content and the fixity of all those
distinctions the various thoughtfunctions principles
etc which are present in the element of pure thought
and share that absoluteness of the ego In virtue of
this process pure thoughts become notions and conceptions and are then what they are in truth selfmoving functions circles are what their substance
consists in are spiritual entities
This movement of the spiritual entities constitutes
the nature of scientific procedure in general Looked
at as the concatenation of their content this movement
is the necessitated development and expansion of that
content into an organic systematic whole By this
movement too the road which leads to the notion
of knowledge becomes itself likewise a necessary and
complete evolving process This preparatory
stage thus ceases to consist of casual philosophical
reflections referring to objects here and there to processes and thoughts of the undeveloped mind as chance
may direct and it does not try to establish the truth
by miscellaneous ratiocinations inferences and consequences drawn from circimiscribed thoughts The
road to science by the very movement of the notion
itself will compass the entire objective world of conscious life in its rational necessity
Further a systematic exposition like this constitutes
the first part of science because the positive existence
of mind qua primary and ultimate is nothing but the
immediate aspect of mind the beginning the beginning but not yet its return to itself The characteristic feature distinguishing this part of science Phenomenology from the others is the element of positive
immediate existence The mention of this distinction
leads us to discuss certain established ideas that usually
come to notice in this connection
The minds immediate existence conscious life has
two aspects cognition and objectivity which is opposed to or negative of the subjective function of
knowing Since it is in the medium of consciousness
that mind is developed and brings out its various
moments this opposition between the factors of conscious life is found at each stage in the evolution of mind
and all the various moments appear as modes or forms
of consciousness The scientific statement
of the course of this development is a science of the
experience through which consciousness passes the
substance and its process are considered as the object
of consciousness Consciousness knows and comprehends nothing but what falls within its experience
for what is found in experience is merely spiritual substance and moreover object of its self Mind however becomes object for it consists in the process
of becoming an other to itself ie an object for its
ovrn self and in transcending this otherness And
experience is called this very process by which the
element that is immediate unexperienced ie abstract
whether it be in the form of sense or of a bare thought
externalises itself and then comes back to itself from
this state of estrangement and by so doing is at length
set forth in its concrete nature and real truth and
becomes too a possession of consciousness
The dissimilarity which obtains in consciousness
between the ego and the substance constituting its
object is their inner distinction the factor of negativity in general We may regard it as the defect
of both opposites but it is their very soul their
moving spirit It was on this accoimt that certain
thinkers long ago took the void to be the principle
of movement when they conceived the moving principle to be the negative element though they had
not as yet thought of it as self While this negative
factor appears in the first instance as a dissimilarity
as an inequality between ego and object it is just as
much the inequality of the substance with itself What
seems to take place outside it to be an activity directed
against it is its own doing its own activity and
substance shows that it is in reality subject When it
has brought out this completely mind has made its
existence adequate to and one with its essential nature
Mind is object to itself just as it is and the abstract
element of immediacy of the separation between
lmowing and the truth is overcome Being is entirely
mediated it is a substantial content that is likewise
directly in the possession of the ego has the character
of self is notion With the attainment of this the
Phenomenology of Mind concludes What mind prepares for itself by the argument of the Phenomenology
is the element of true knowledge In this element the
moments of mind are now set out in the form of thought
pure and simple which knows its object to be itself
They no longer involve the opposition between being
and knowing they remain within the undivided simplicity of the knowing function they are the truth in
the form of truth and their diversity is merely diversity
of the content of truth The process by which they are
developed into an organically connected whole is Logic
and Speculative Philosophy
Now because the systematic statement of the mind's
experience embraces merely its ways of appearing it
may well seem that the advance from that to the
science of ultimate truth in the form of truth is merely
negative and we might readily be content to dispense with the negative process as something altogether
false and might ask to be taken straight to the truth
at once why meddle with what is false at all The
point formerly raised that we should have begun with
science at once may be answered here by considering
the character of negativity in general regarded as
something false The usual ideas on this subject
particularly obstruct the approach to the truth The
consideration of this point will give us an opportunity
to speak about mathematical knowledge which the
unphilosophical mind looks upon as the ideal which
philosophy ought to try to attain but has so far striven
in vain to reach
Truth and falsehood as commonly understood belong
to those sharply defined ideas which claim a completely
fixed nature of their own one standing in solid isolation
on this side the other on that without any community
between them Against that view it must be pointed
out that truth is not like stamped coin that is issued
ready from the mint and so can be taken up and used
Nor again is there something false any more than there
is something evil Evil and falsehood are indeed not
so bad as the devil for in the form of the devil they
get the length of being particular subjects qua false
and evil they are merely universals though they have
a nature of their own with reference to one another
Falsity that is what we are dealing with here would
be otherness the negative aspect of the substance,
which substance qua content of knowledge is truth
But the substance is itself essentially the negative
element partly as involving distinction and determination of content partly as being a process of distinguishing pure and simple ie as being self and knowledge in general Doubtless we can know in a way that
is false To know something falsely means that knowledge is not adequate to is not on equal terms with
its substance Yet this very dissimilarity is the process
of distinction in general the essential moment in knowing It is in fact out of this active distinction that
its harmonious unity arises and this identity when
arrived at is truth But it is not truth in a sense
which would involve the rejection of the discordance
the diversity like dross from pure metal nor again
does truth remain detached from diversity like a finished
article from the instrument that shapes it Difference
itself continues to be an immediate element within
truth as such in the form of the principle of negation
in the form of the activity of Self All the same we
cannot for that reason say that falsehood is a moment
or forms even a constituent part of truth That in
every case of falsity there is something true is an expression in which they are taken to be like oil and water
which do not mix and are merely united externally
Just in the interest of their real meaning precisely
because we want to designate the aspect or moment
of complete otherness the terms true and false must
no longer be used where their otherness has been cancelled and superseded Just as the expressions unity
of subject and object of finite and infinite of
being and thought etc are absurd if subject and
object etc are taken to mean what they are outside
their unity and are thus in that unity not meant to
be what its very expression conveys In the same way
falsehood is not qua false any longer a moment of
truth
Dogmatism as a way of thinking whether in ordinary
knowledge or in the study of philosophy is nothing
else but the view that truth consists in a proposition
which is a fixed and final result or again which is
directly known To questirms like When was Ceesar
born How many feet made a furlong etc
a straight answer ought to be given just as it is absolutely true that the square of the hypotenuse is
equal to the sum of the squares of the other two sides
of a rightangled triangle But the nature of a socalled truth of that sort is different from the nature of
philosophical truth
As regards truth in matters of historical fact to deal
briefly with this subject so far as we consider the
purely historical element it will be readily granted
that they have to do with the sphere of particular
existence with a content in its contingent and arbitrary
aspects features that have no necessity But even
bare trutlis of the kind say like those mentioned are
impossible without the activity of selfconsciousness
To get to know any one of them there has to be a good
deal of comparison books must be consulted or in
some way or other inquiry has to be made Even in
a case of direct perception only when we know it along
with the reasons behind it is it held to be something
of real value although it is merely the naked fact
itself that we are properly speaking supposed to be
concerned about
As to mathematical trutlis we should be still less
inclined to consider anyone a geometer who had got
Euclids theorems by heart without knowing the proofs without if we may say so by way of
contrast getting them into his head Similarly if anyone came to know by measuring many
rightangled triangles that their sides are related in
the way everybody knows ve should regard knowledge
so obtained as unsatisfactory All the same while
proof is essential in the case of mathematical knowledge
it still does not have the significance and nature of
being a moment in the result itself the proof is over
when we get the result and has disappeared Qua
result the theorem is no doubt one that is seen to be
true But this eventuality has nothing to do with
its content but only with its relation to the knowing
subject The process of mathematical proof does not
belong to the object it is a function that takes place
outside the matter in hand Thus the nature of a
rightangled triangle does not break itself up into
factors in the manner set forth in the mathematical
construction which is required to prove the proposition
expressing the relation of its parts The entire process
of producing the result is an affair of knowledge which
takes its own way of going about it In philosophical
knowledge too the way existence qua existence
comes about is different from that whereby
the essence or inner nature of the fact comes into being
But philosophical knowledge for one thing contains
both while mathematical knowledge sets forth merely
the way an existence comes about ie the way the
nature of the fact gets to be in the sphere of knowledge as such For another thing too philosophical
knowledge unites both these particular movements
The inward rising into being the process of substance
is an unbroken transition into outwardness into
existence or being for another and conversely the
coming of existence into being is withdrawal into the
inner essence The movement is the twofold process
in which the whole comes to be and is such that each
at the same time posits the other and each on that
account has in it both as its two aspects Together
they make the whole through their resolving each other
and making themselves into moments of the whole
In mathematical knowledge the insight required is
an external function so far as the subjectmatter dealt
with is concerned It follows that the actual fact is
thereby altered The means taken construction and
proof contain no doubt true propositions but all
the same we are bound to say that the content is
false The triangle in the above example is taken
to pieces and its parts made into other figures to
which the construction gives rise in the triangle It is
only at the end that we find again reinstated the triangle
we are really concerned with it was lost sight of in
the course of the construction and was present merely
in fragments that belonged to other wholes Thus we
find negativity of content coming in here too a negativity which would have to be called falsity just as
much as in the case of the movement of the notion
where thoughts that are taken to be fixed pass away
and disappear
The real defect of this kind of knowledge however
affects its process of knowing as much as its material
As to that process in the first place we do not see any
necessity in the construction The necessity does not
arise from the nature of the theorem it is imposed
and the injunction to draw just these lines an infinite
number of others being equally possible is blindly
acquiesced in without our knowing anything further
except that as we fondly believe this will serve our
purpose in getting at the proof Later on this purposive device then comes out and is therefore merely
external in character just because it is only after the
proof is found that it comes to be known In the same
way again the proof takes a direction that begins anywhere we like without our knowing as yet what relation
iliis beginning has to the result to be brought out In its
Jourse it takes up certain specific elements and relations
md lets others alone without its being directly obvious
fhat necessity there is in the matter An external
purpose controls this process
The evidence peculiar to this defective way of knowing
an evidence on the strength of which mathematics
plumes itself and proudly struts before philosophy
rests solely on the poverty of its purpose and the defectiveness of its material and is on that account
of a kind that philosophy must scorn to have anything
to do with Its purpose or principle is quantity This
is precisely the relationship that is nonessential alien
to the character of the notion. The process of knowledge goes on therefore on the surface does not affect
the concrete fact itself does not touch its inner nature
or notion and is hence not a conceptual way of comprehendmg The material which is to enable mathematics to proffer these welcome treasures of truth
consists of space and numerical units Space
is that kind of existence on which the concrete notion
inscribes the diversity it contains an empty lifeless
element in which its differences likewise subsist in
passive lifeless form What is concretely actual is not
something spatial such as is treated of in mathematics
With uniealities like the things mathematics takes
account of neither concrete sensuous perception nor
philosophy has anything to do In an unreal element of that sort we find then only unreal truth
fixed lifeless propositions We can call a halt at any
of them the next begins of itself de novo without
the first having led up to the one that follows and
without any necessary connexion having in this way
arisen from the nature of the subjectmatter itself
So too and herein consists the formal character of
mathematical evidence because of that principle and
the element where it appHes knowledge advances along
the hues of bare equality of abstract identity For
what is lifeless not being selfmoved does not bring
about distinction within its essential nature does
not come at essential opposition or unlikeness and
hence involves no transition of one opposite element
into its other no qualitative immanent movement no
seZmovement It is quantity a form of difference
that does not touch the essential nature which alone
mathematics deals with It abstracts from the fact
that it is the notion which separates space into its
dimensions and determines the connections between
them and in them It does not consider for example,
the relation of line to surface and when it compares
the diameter of a circle with its circumference it runs
up against their incommensurability ie a relation in
terms of the notion, an infinite element that escapes
mathematical determination
Inamanent or socalled pure mathematics again does
not oppose time qua time to space as a second subjectmatter for consideration Applied mathematics no
doubt treats of time as also of motion and other
concrete things as well but it picks up from experience synthetic propositions ie propositions expressing relations relations determined by their essential nature and merely applies its formulae to
those propositions assumed to start with That the
socalled proofs of propositions like that stating the
equilibrium of the lever the relation of space and time
in gravitation etc which applied mathematics fre
quently gives should be taken and given as proofs is
itself merely a proof of how great the need is for knowledge to have a process of proof seeing that even
where proof is not to be had knowledge yet puts a
value on the mere semblance of it and gets thereby a
certain sense of satisfaction A criticism of these proofs
would be as instructive as it would be significant if
the criticism could strip mathematics of this artificial
finery and bring out its hmitations and thence show
the necessity for another type of knowledge
As to time which we are asked to think of as the
coimterpart to space and as constituting the objectmatter of the other division of pure mathematics it
is the notion itself in the form of existence The principle of quantity of difference which is not determined
by the notion and the principle of equality of abstract
lifeless unity are incapable of dealig with that sheer
restlessness of life and its absolute and inherent process
of differentiation It is therefore only in an arrested
paralysed form only in the form of the quantitative
unit that this essentially negative activity becomes the
second objectmatter of this way of knowing which
itself an external operation degrades what is selfmoving to the level of mere matter in order thus to
get an indifferent external lifeless content
Philosophy on the contrary does not deal with a
determination that is nonessential but with a determination so far as it is an essential factor The abstract
or unreal is not its element and content but the real
what is selfestablishing has life within itself existence
in its very notion It is the process that creates its
own moments in its course and goes through them all
and the whole of this movement constitutes its positive
content and its truth This movement includes
therefore within it the negative factor as well the
element which would be named falsity if it could be
considered one from which we had to abstract The
element that disappears has rather to be looked at
as itself essential not in the sense of being something
fixed that has to be cut off from truth and allowed to
lie outside it heaven knows where just as similarly
the truth is not to be held to stand on the other side
as an immovable lifeless positive element Appearance
is the process of arising into being and passing away
again a process that itself does not arise and does not
pass away but is fer se and constitutes reality and
the lifemovement of truth In this way truth is the
bacchanalian revel where not a soul is sober and
because every member no sooner gets detached than
it eo ipso collapses straightway the revel is just as much
a state of transparent unbroken calm Judged by that
movement the particular shapes which mind assumes
do not indeed subsist any more than do determinate
thoughts or ideas but they are all the same as much
positive and necessary moments as negative and transitory In the entirety of the movement taken as an
unbroken quiescent whole that which gets distinctness
in the course of its process and secures specific existence is preserved in the form of a selfrecollection in
which existence is selfknowledge and selfknowledge
again is immediate existence
It might well seem necessary to state at the outset
the chief points in connexion with the method of this
process the way in which science operates Its nature
however is to be found in what has already been
said while the proper systematic exposition of it is
the special business of Logic or rather is Logic itself
For the method is nothing else than the structure
of the whole in its pure and essential form In regard
however to what has been hitherto currently held
on this point we must be sensible that the system
of ideas bearing on the question of philosophical method
belongs also to a stage of mental culture that has now
passed away This may perhaps seem somewhat roughhanded or revolutionary and I am far from adopting
an attitude of that sort but it is significant that the
scientific regime bequeathed by mathematics a regime
of explanations divisions axioms an array of theorems
with proofs principles and the consequences and conclusions drawn from them all this has already come
to be generally considered as at any rate out of date
Even though there is no clear idea why it is unsuitable
yet little or no use is made of it any longer and even
though it is not condemned outright it is all the same
not in favour And we must have the prejudice and
conviction that what is excellent can turn itself to
practical account and make itself acceptable But
it is not difficult to see that the method of propounding a proposition producing reasons for it and then
refuting its opposite by reasons too is not the form
in which truth can appear Truth moves itself by its
very nature but the method just mentioned is a
form of Imowledge external to its material Hence
it is peculiar to mathematics and must be left to mathematics which as already indicated takes for its principle the relation of quantity a relation alien to the
notion and gets its material from lifeless space and
the equally lifeless numerical unit Or again such
a method adopting a freer style one involving more
of arbitrariness and chance may have a place in ordinary life in a conversation or in supplying matteroffact instruction for the satisfaction of curiosity rather
than knowledge very much like what a preface does
In everyday life the mind finds its content in different
kinds of knowledge experiences of various sorts concrete facts of sense thoughts too and principles and
in general in whatever Ues ready to hand or passes
for a solid stable entity or real being The mind
follows wherever this leads sometimes interrupting the
connection by an unrestrained caprice in dealig with
the content and takes up the attitude of determining
and handlig it in quite an external fashion It runs
the content back to some touclistone of certainty or
other even though it be but the feeling of the moment
and conviction is satisfied if it reaches some familiar
restingplace
But when the necessity of the notion banishes from
its realm the loose procedure of the raisonnements
of conversation as well as the pedantic style of
scientific pomposity its place as we have already
mentioned must not be taken by the disconnected
utterance of presageful surmise and inspiration and
the arbitrary caprice of prophetic utterance for this
does not merely despise that particular form of scientific procedure but contemns scientific procedure
altogether
Now that the triplicity adopted in the system of
Kant a method rediscovered to begin with by instinctive insight but left Kfeless and uncomprehended
has been raised to its significance as an absolute
method true form is thereby set up in its true content
and the conception of science has come to light But
the use this form has been put to in the Kantian system
has no right to the name of science For we see it
there reduced to a lifeless schema to nothing better
than a mere shadow and scientific organisation to a
synoptic table This formalism about which we spoke
before in general terms and whose procedure we wish
here to state more fully thinks it has comprehended
and expressed the nature and life of a given form when
it proclaims a determination of the schema to be its
predicate The predicate may be subjectivity or
objectivity or again magnetism electricity and so on
contraction or expansion East or West and such like
a form of predication that can be multiplied indefinitely
because according to this way of working each determination each mode can be applied as a form or
schematic element in the case of every other and each
will thankfully perform the same service for any other
With a circle of reciprocities of this sort it is impossible
to make out what the real fact in question is or what
the one or the other is We find there sometimes
constituents of sense picked up from ordinary intuition
determinate elements that certainly should mean something else than they express at other times what is
inherently significant viz pure determinations of
thought like subject object substance cause universality etc these are aplied just as uncritically and
unreflectingly as in everyday life are used much as
people employ the terms strong and weak expansion
and contraction As a result that type of metaphysics
is as unscientific as those ideas of sense
Instead of the inner activity and selfmovement of
its own actual life such a simple determination of
direct intuition which means here
senseknowledge is expressed in terms of a superficial
analogy and this external and empty application of
the formula is called construction The same thing
happens here however as in the case of every kind of
formalism A mans head must be indeed dull if he
could not in a quarter of an hour get up the theory
that there are enervating innervating and indirectly
enervating diseases and as many cures and who
could not smce not so long ago instruction of that
sort sufficed for the purpose in as short a time be
turned from being a man who works by rule of thumb
into a theoretical physician Formalism in the case
of speculative Philosophy of Nature
takes the shape of teaching that understanding is
electricity animals are nitrogen or equivalent to south
or north and so on When it does this whether as
baldly as it is here expressed or concocted with even
more terminology such forceful procedure brings
and holds together elements to all appearance far removed from one another the violence done to stable
inert senseelements by connecting them in this way
confers on them merely the semblance of a conceptual
unity and spares itself the trouble of doing what is
after all the important thing expressing the notion
itself the meaning that underlies senseideas All this
sort of thing may strike any one who has no experience
with admiration and wonder He may be awed by the
profound genius he thinks it displays and be delighted
at the happy ingenuity of such characterisations
since they fill the place of the abstract notion with
something tangible and sensuous and so make it more
pleasing and he may congratulate himself on feeling
an instinctive mental affinity for that glorious way of
proceeding The trick of wisdom of that sort is as
quickly acquired as it is easy to practise Its repetition
when once it is familiar becomes as boring as the repetition of any bit of sleightofhand once we see through
it The instrument for producing this monotonous
formalism is no more difficult to handle than the
palette of a painter on which he only two colours
say red and green the former for colouring the surface
when we want a historical piece the latter when we
want a bit of landscape It would be difficult to settlewhich is greater in all this the agreeable ease with
which everything in heaven and earth and under the
earth is plastered with that botch of colour or the
conceit that prides itself on the excellence of its means
for every conceivable purpose the one lends support
to the other What results from the use of this method
of sticking on to everything in heaven and earth to
every kind of shape and form natural and spiritual
the pair of determinations from the general schema
and filing everything in this manner is no less than
an account as clear as noonday of the organised
whole of the universe It is that is to say a synoptic
index like a skeleton with tickets stuck all over it
or like rows of pots standing sealed and labelled in a
grocers stall and is as intelligible as either the one
or the other It has lost hold of the living nature of
concrete fact just as in the former case we have merely
dry bones with flesh and blood all gone and in the latter
what is hidden away in those pots has equally nothmg
to do with living things We have already remarked
that the final outcome of this style of thinking is
at the same time to paint entirely in one kind of
colour for it turns with contempt from the distinctions in the schematic table looks on them as
belonging to the activity of mere reflection and lets
them drop out of sight in the blankness of the Absolute,
and there reinstates pure identity pure formless whiteness Such uniformity of colouring in the schema with
its lifeless determinations this absolute identity and
the transition from one to the other these are one and
all alike the expression of inert lifeless understanding
and an external process of knowledge into the bargain
Not only can what is excellent not escape the fate of
becoming thus devitalised and despiritualised and seeing
its skin flayed and paraded about in this way by lifeless
knowledge and the conceit such knowledge engenders
but further such a fate lets us see the power the
excellent exercises over the heart if not
over the mind Moreover we recognise here
too that process towards universality and determinateness of form which marks the complete attainment of
excellence and which alone makes it possible that this
universality can be turned to superficial uses
Science can become an organic system only by
the inherent life of the notion. In science the determinateness which was taken from the schema and
stuck on to existing facts in external fashion is the
selfdirecting inner soul of the concrete content The
movement of what is partly consists in becoming
another to itself and thus developing explicitly into its
own immanent content partly again it takes this
evolved content this existence it assumes back into itself ie makes itself into a moment and reduces itself to
gjmple determinateness In the first stage of the pro
cess negativity lies in the function of distinguishing
and establishing existence in this latter return into
self negativity consists in the bringing about of determinate simplicity It is in this way that the content
shows its specific characteristic not to be received
from something else and stuck on externally the
content gives itself this determinate characteristic appoints itself of its own initiative to the rank of a moment
and to a place in the whole The pigeonholing process
of understanding retains for itself the necessity and
the notion controUing the content that which constitutes the concrete element the actuality and living
process of the subjectmatter which it labels or rather
understanding does not retain this for itself on the
contrary understanding fails to know it For if it had
as much insight as that it would surely show that it
had It is not even aware of the need for such insight if it were it would drop its schematising process or at least would no longer be satisfied to know
by way of a mere table of contents A table of contents
is all that understanding gives the content itself it
does not furnish at all
If the specific determination say even one like
magnetism is one that in itself is concrete or actual
it all the same gets degraded into something lifeless and
inert since it is merely predicated of another existing
entity and not known as an immanent living principle
of this existence nor is there any comprehension of
how in this entity its intrinsic and peculiar way of
expressing and producing itself takes effect This
the very kernel of the matter formal understanding
leaves to others to add later on Instead of making
its way into the inherent content of the matter in
hand understanding always takes a survey of the
whole assumes a position away from the particular existence about which it is speaking ie it does not see
it at all True scientific knowledge on the contrary
demands abandonment to the very life of the object,
or which means the same thing claims to have before
it the inner necessity controlling the object and to
express this only Steeping itself in its object it
forgets to take that general survey which is merely
a turning of knowledge away from the content back
into itself But being sunk into the material in hand
and following the course that such material takes
true knowledge retmns back into itself yet not before the content in its fullness is taken into itself is
reduced to the simplicity of being a determinate characteristic drops to the level of being one aspect of
an existing entity and passes over into its higher
truth By this process the whole as such taking itself
in its entire sweep emerges out of the wealth where
bare reflection seemed to get lost
In general in virtue of the principle that as we
expressed it before substance is implicitly and in itself
subject all content makes its reflection into itself in
its own special way The subsistence or substance of
anything that exists is its selfidentity for its want
of identity or oneness with itself would be its dissolution But selfidentity is pure abstraction and
this is just thinking When I say Quality I state
simple determinateness by means of its quality one
existence is distinguished from another or is an existence it is for itself something on its own account,
or subsists with itself because of this simple characteristic But by doing so it is essentially Thought
Here we find contained the principle that Being is
Thought here is exercised that insight which is
generally at a discount in the case of the ordinary
nonconceptual way of speaking of the identity of
thought and being In virtue further of the fact that
subsistence on the part of what exists is selfidentity or
pure abstraction it is the abstraction of itself from
itself in other words, is itself its own want of identity
with itself and dissolution its own proper inwardness
and retraction into self its process of coming to be
Owing to the nature which being thus has and so far
as what is has this nature from the point of view of
knowledge this thinking is not an activity which treats
the content as something alien and external it is not
reflection into self away from the content Science is
not that kind of Idealism which stepped into the place
of the Dogmatism of mere assertion and took the shape
of a Dogmatism of mere assurance the Dogmatism
of mere self certainty Rather since knowledge
sees the content go back into its own proper inner
nature the activity of knowledge is absorbed in that
content for it the activity is the immanent self of
the content and is also at the same time returned into
itself for this activity is pure selfidentity in otherness
In this way the knowing activity is the artful device
which pretending to refrain from activity looks on
and watches how specific determinateness with its
concrete fife just where it pretends to be working out
its own selfpreservation and its own private interest
is in point of fact, doing the very opposite is doing
what brings about its own dissolution and makes itself
a moment in the whole
standing was stated from the point of view of the selfconsciousness of substance by what has been here
stated we can see clearly its significance from the point
of view of substance qua being Existence is Quality
selfidentical determinateness or determinate simplicity determinate thought this is existence as regards
Understanding On this account it is fow as Anaxagoras
first took reality to be Those who succeeded him
grasped the nature of existence in a more determinate
way as elSoi or ISea ie as determinate or specific
universality kind or genus The term genus or kind
seems indeed too ordinary and inadequate to express
ideas like beauty holiness eternal which are now the
vogue As a matter of fact however idea means
neither more nor less than kind genus But we often
find in these days that a term which exactly designates a conception is despised and rejected and another
preferred to it which hides and obscures the conception
and thus sounds more edifying even though this is
merely due to its being expressed in a foreign language
Precisely for the reason that existence is designated
a genus or kind it is a naked simple thought vovi
simple abstraction is substance It is on account of
its simplicity its selfidentity that it appears steady
fixed and permanent But this selfidentity is likewise negativity hence that fixed and stable existence carries the process of its own dissolution within
itself The determinateness appears at first to be so
solely through its relation to something else and its
process seems imposed and forced upon it externally
But its having its own otherness within itself and the
fact of its being a selfinitiated process these are
implied in the very simplicity of thought itself For
this is selfmoving thought thought that distinguishes
is inherent inwardness the pure notion Thus then
it is the very nature of understanding to be a process
and being a process it is Rationality
In the nature of existence as thus described to be
its own notion and being in one consists logical
necessity in general This alone is what is rational
the rhythm of the organic whole it is as much knowledge of content as that content is notion and essential
nature In other words, this alone is the sphere and
element of speculative thought The concrete shape
of the content is resolved by its own inherent process
into a simple determinate quality Thereby it is raised
to logical form and its being and essence coincide
its concrete existence is merely this process that takes
place and is eo ipso logical existence It is therefore
needless to apply a formal scheme to the concrete
content in an external fashion the content is in its
very nature a transition into a formal shape which
however ceases to be formalism of an external kind
because the form is the indwelling process of the concrete content itself
This nature of scientific method which consists
partly in being inseparable from the content and
partly in determining the rhythm of its movement
by its own agency finds as we mentioned before its
peculiar systematic expression in speculative philosophy What is here stated describes in effect the
essential principle but cannot stand for more at this
stage than an assertion or assurance by way of anticipation The truth it contains is not to be found in
this exposition which is in part historical in character
And just for that reason too it is not in the least
refuted if anyone assures us on the contrary that this
is not so that the process instead is here so and so if
ideas we are all used to being trutlis accepted or
settled and familiar to everyone are brought to mind
and recoimted or again if something new is served
up and guaranteed as coming from the inner sanctuaries of inspired intuition
Such a view is bomid to meet with opposition The
first instinctive reaction on the part of knowing when
offered somethmg that was unfamiliar is usually to
resist it It seeks by that means to save freedom and
native insight to secure its own inherent authority
against alien avithority for that is the way anything
apprehended for the first time appears This attitude
is adopted too in order to do away with the semblance of a kind of disgrace which would he in the
fact that something has had to be learnt In like
manner again when the unfamiliar or unknown is
received with applause the reaction is in the same
way an exaltation of freedom and native authority
It consists in something analogous to ultrarevolutionary declamation and action
Hence the important thing for the student of science is
to make himself undergo the strenuous toil of conceptual
Ieflection of thinking in the form of the notion. This
demands concentrated attention on the notion as such
on simple and ultimate determinations like beinginitself beingforitself selfidentity and so on for
these are elemental pure selfdetermined functions of
a kind we might call souls were it not that their conceptual nature denotes something higher than that
term contains The interruption by conceptual thought
of the habit of always thinking in figurative ideas
is as annoying and troublesome to this
way of thinking as to that process of formal intelligence
which in its reasoning rambles about with no real
thoughts to reason with The former the habit may
be called materialised thinking a fortuitous mental
state one that is absorbed in what is material and
hence finds it very distasteful at once to hft its self
clear of this matter and be confined to itself alone
The latter the process of raisonnement is on the other
hand detachment from all content and conceited
superiority to it What is wanted here is the effort and
struggle to give up this kind of freedom and instead of
being a merely arbitrary principle directing the content
anyhow this freedom should sink into and pervade the
content should get it directed and controlled by its
own proper nature ie by the self as its own self and
should see this process taking place We must abstain
from interrupting the immanent rhythm of the movement of conceptual thought we must refrain from
arbitrarily interfering with it and introducing ideas
and reflections that have been obtained elsewhere
Restraint of this sort is itself an essential condition of
attending to and getting at the real nature of the
notion.
There are the two aspects in the case of that ratiocinative procedure which mark its contrast from conceptual thinking and call for further notice Raisonnement in the first place adopts a negative attitude towards the content apprehended knows how to refute
it and reduce it to nothingness To see what the
content is not is merely a negative process it is a
dead halt which does not of itself go beyond itself
and proceed to a new content it has to get hold of
something else from somewhere or other in order to
have once more a content It is reflection upon and
into the empty ego the vanity of its own knowledge
Conceit of this kind brings out not only that this content is vain and empty but also that to see this is
itself fatuity too for it is negation with no perception
of the positive element within it In that this reflection does not even have its own negativity as its content
it is not inside actual fact at all but for ever away
outside it On that account it imagines that by asserting mere emptiness it is going much farther than
insight that embraces and reveals a wealth of content
On the other hand in the case of conceptual thinking
as was above indicated the negative aspect falls within
the content itself and is the positive substance of
that content as well by being its inherent character
and moving principle as by being the entirety of what
these are Looked at as a result it is determinate
specific negation the negative which is the outcome of
this process and consequently is a positive content
as well
In view of the fact that ratiocinative thinking has a
content whether of images or thoughts or a mixture of
both there is another side to its process which makes
conceptual comprehension difficult for it The peculiar
nature of this aspect is closely connected with the
essential meaning of the idea above described
in fact expresses the idea in the way this appears as
the process of thinking apprehension For just as
ratiocinative thinking in its negative reference which
we have been describing is nothing but the self into
which the content returns in the same way on the
other hand in its positive cognitive process the self
is an ideally presented subject to which the content
is related as an accident and predicate This subject constitutes the basis to which the content is
attached and on which the process moves to and fro
Conceptual thinking goes on in quite a different way
Since the concept or notion is the very self of the
object, manifesting itself as the development of the
object, it is not a quiescent subject passively supporting accidents it is a selfdetermining active
concept which takes up its determinations and makes
them its own In the course of this process that inert
passive subject really disappears it enters into the
different constituents and pervades the content instead of remaining in inert antithesis to determinateness
of content it constitutes in fact that very specificity
ie the content as differentiated along with the process of bringing this about Thus the solid basis which
ratiocination found in an inert subject is shaken to its
foundations and the only object is this very movement
of the subject The subject supplying the concrete filling
to its own content ceases to be something transcending
this content and cannot have further predicates or
accidents Conversely again the scattered diversity of
the content is brought under the control of the self,
and so bound together the content is not a universal
that can be detached from the subject and adapted
to several indifferently Consequently the content is
in truth no longer predicate of the subject it is the
very substance is the inmost reality and the very
principle of what is being considered Ideational
thinking since its nature consists in dealing
with accidents or predicates and in exercising the
right to transcend them because they are nothing more
than predicates and accidents this way of thinking is
checked in its course since that which has in the proposition the form of a predicate is itself the substance
of the statement It is met by a counterthrust as we
may say Starting from the subject as if this were a
permanent base on which to proceed it discovers by
the predicate being in reality the substance that the
subject has passed into the predicate and has thereby
ceased to be subject and since in this way what seems
to be predicate has become the entire mass of the
content whole and complete thinking cannot wander
and ramble about at will but is restrained and controlled by this weight of content
Usually the subject is first set down as the fixed and
objective self from this fixed position the necessary process passes on to the multiplicity of determinations or predicates Here the knowing ego takes
the place of that subject and is the function of knitting or combining the predicates one with another
and is the subject holding them fast But since the
former subject enters into the determinate constituents themselves and is their very life the subject
in the second case viz the knowing subject finds
that the former which it is supposed to be done with
and which it wants to transcend in order to return into
itself is still there in the predicate and instead of
being able to be the determining agency in the process
of resolving the predicate reflectively deciding whether
this or that predicate should be attached to the former
subject it has really to deal with the self of the content is not allowed to be something on its own account
but has to exist along with this content
What has been said can be expressed in a formal
manner by saying that the nature of judgment or the
proposition in general which involves the distinction
of subject and predicate is subverted and destroyed
by the speculative judgment and the identical proposition which the former becomes by uniting subject
and predicate imphes the rejection and repudiation of
the above relation between subject and predicate
This conflict between the form of a proposition in
general and the unity of the notion which destroys
that form is similar to what we find between metre
and accent in the case of rhythm Rhythm is the
result of what hovers between and unites both So
in the case of the speculative or philosophical judgment the identity of subject and predicate is not
intended to destroy their distinction as expressed in
propositional form their unity is to appear as a
harmony of the elements The form of the judgment
is the way the specific sense appears or is made manifest it is the accent which differentiates the content
of its meaning that the predicate expresses the
substance and the subject itself falls within the universal is the unity wherein that accent dies aAvay
To explain what has been said by examples let us
take the proposition God is Being The predicate is
being it has siibstantive significance and thus
absorbs the meaning of the subject within it Being
is meant to be here not predicate but the essential
nature Thereby God seems to cease to be what he
was when the proposition was put forward viz a fixed
subject Thinking ie ordinary reflection instead
of getting any farther with the transition from subject to predicate in reality finds its activity checked
through the loss of the subject and it is thrown back
on the thought of the subject because it misses this
subject Or again since the predicate has itself been
pronounced to be a subject to be the being to be the
essential reality which exhausts the nature of the subject thinking finds the subject directly present in the
predicate too and now instead of having in the
predicate gone into itself and preserved the freedom
characteristic of ratiocination it is absorbed in the
content all the while or at any rate is required to
be so
Similarly when it is said the real is the universal
the real qua subject passes away in its predicate
The universal is not only meant to have the significance
of a predicate as if the proposition stated that the real
is universal the universal is meant to express the
essential nature of the real Thinking therefore loses
that fixed objective basis which it had in the subject
just as much as in the predicate it is thrown back on
the subject and therein returns not into itself but into
the subject underlying the content
This unaccustomed restraint imposed upon thought
is for the most part the cause of the complaints made
regarding the unintelligibility of philosophical writings
when otherwise the individual has in him the requisite
mental cultivation for understanding them In what
has been said we see the reason for the definite objection
often made against them that a good deal has to be
read repeatedly before it can be understood an accusation which is meant to imply something objectionable
in the extreme and one which if granted to be sound
admits of no further reply It is obvious from the
above what is the state of the case here The philosophical proposition being a proposition calls up the
accepted view of the usual relation of subject and
predicate and suggests the idea of the customary procedure which takes place in knowledge Its philosophical content destroys this way of proceeding and
the ordinary view taken of this process The common
view discovers that the statement is intended in another
sense than it is thinking of and this correction of its
opinion compels knowledge to recur to the proposition
and take it now in some other sense
There is a difficulty which might well be avoided
It consists in mixing up the methods of procedure
followed by speculation and ratiocination when what
is said of the subject has at one time the significance
of its conceptual principle and at another time the
meaning of its predicate or accidental quality The
one mode of thinking invalidates the other and only
that philosophical exposition can manage to become
plastic in character which resolutely sets aside and has
nothing to do with the ordinary way of relating the
parts of a proposition.
As a matter of fact nonspeculative thinking has
its rights too which are justifiable but are disregarded
in the speculative way of stating a proposition Abolishing the form of the proposition must not take place
merely in an immediate manner merely through the
bare content of the proposition On the contrary we
must give explicit expression to this cancelling process
it must be not only that internal restraining and confining of thought within its own substance this
turning of the conception back into itself has to be
expressly brought out and stated This process which
constitutes what formerly had to be accomplished by
proof is the internal dialectical movement of the
proposition itself This alone is the concrete speculative element and only the explicit expression of this
is a speculative systematic exposition Qua proposition the speculative aspect is merely the internal
restriction of thought within its own substance where
the return of the essential principle into itself is not
yet brought out Hence we often find philosophical
expositions referring us to the inner intuition and
thus dispensing with the systematic statement of the
dialectical movement of the proposition which is what
we wanted all the while The proposition ought to express ivhat the truth is in its essential nature the truth
is subject being so it is merely the dialectical movement this selfproducing course of activity maintaining
its advance by returning back into itself In the case
of knowledge in other spheres this aspect of the articulated internal nature of the content is constituted
by proof When dialectic however has been separated
from proof the idea of philosophical demonstration
as a matter of fact vanishes altogether
On this point it may be mentioned that the dialectical
process likewise consists of parts or elements which
are propositions The difficulty indicated seems therefore to recur continually and seems to be a difficulty
inherent in the nature of the case This is like what
happens in the ordinary process of proving anything
the grounds it makes iise of themselves need to be
based on other grounds again and so on ad infinitum
This manner of furnishing grounds and conditions however concerns that type of proof from which the dialectical movement is distinct and hence belongs to the
process of external knowledge As to what this movement is its element is the bare concept this furnishes
a content which is through and through subject impUciter and per se There is to be found therefore no
sort of content standing in a relation as it were to an
underlying subject and getting its significance by
being attached to this as a predicate The proposition
as it appears is a mere empty form
Apart from the sensuously apprehended or ideally
presented self it is in the main the mere
name qua name which denotes the subject pure and
simple the empty unit without any conceptual character For this reason it would eg be expedient to
avoid the name God because this word is not in its
primary use a conception as well but the special name
of an underlying subject its fixed restingplace while
on the other hand being or the one singleness subject etc themselves directly indicate conceptions
Furthermore if speculative trutlis are stated about
that subject God even then their content is devoid
of the immanent notion because that content is merely
present in the form of a passive subject and owing to
this the speculative trutlis easily take on the character
of mere edification From this side too the obstacle
arising from the habit of putting the speculative predicate in the form of a proposition, instead of taking
it as an inherent essential conception is capable of
being made greater or less by the mere way philosophical trutlis are put forward Philosophical exposition
faithfully following its insight into the nature of speculative truth must retain the dialectical form and
exclude everything which is not grasped conceptually
and is a conception
As in the case of the procedure of ratiocination the
study of philosophy finds obstruction too in the un
reasoning conceit that builds itself on wellestablished
trutlis which the possessor considers he has no need
to return upon and reconsider but rather takes
to be fundamental and thinks he can propound
as well as decide and pass sentence by means thereof
In this regard it is especially needful to make once
again a serious business of philosophy In all spheres
of science art skill and handicraft it is never doubted
that in order to master them a considerable amount of
trouble must be spent in learning and in being trained
AS regards philosophy on the contrary there seems still
an assumption prevalent that though every one with
eyes and fingers is not on that account in a position
to make shoes if he only gets leather and a last yet
everybody understands how to philosophise straight
away and pass judgment on philosophy simply because
he possesses the criterion for doing so in his natural reason
as if he did not in the same way possess the standard
for shoemaking too in his own foot It seems as if
the possession of philosophy lay just in the want of
knowledge and study as if philosophy left off where
the latter began It is commonly held to be a formal
kind of knowledge devoid of all substantial content
There is a general failure to perceive that in the case
of any knowledge and any science what is taken for
truth even as regards content can only deserve the
name of truth when philosophy has had a hand in
its production Let the other sciences try as much as
they like to get along by ratiocination or raisonnement
without philosophy they are unable to keep alive
without it or to have any spiritual significance and
truth in them sense we find put forward without any hesitation as
an entirely sufficient equivalent for the long course
of mental discipline for that profound and fruitful
process through which the human spirit attains to
knowledge the direct revelation of the divine and the
healthy common sense of mankind imtroubled and
undisciplined by any other knowledge or by proper
philosophical reflection These are held to be a good
substitute for real philosophy much in the way as chicory
is lauded as a substitute for coffee It is not a very
pleasing spectacle to observe uncultivated ignorance
and barbarity of mind with neither grace nor taste
without the capacity to concentrate its thoughts on an
abstract proposition still less on a connected statement of such propositions confidently proclaiming
itself to be intellectual freedom and toleration and even
the inspiration of genius This last used once upon
a time as every one knows to be all the rage in the
case of poetry as it is now in philosophy Instead
of poetry however the efforts of this form of inspiration
when it had any sense at all resulted in the production
of jejune prose or if it got beyond that it produced
raving nonsense In the same way here in the case of
philosophy philosophising by the light of nature
which thinks itself too good for conceptual thinking
and because of the want of it takes itself to have
direct intuitive ideas and poetical thoughts such
philosophising trades in arbitrary combinations of an
imagination merely disorganised through thinking fictitious creations that are neither fish nor flesh neither
poetry nor philosophy
On the other hand again when instinctive philosophy
follows the more secure course prescribed by healthy
common sense it supplies at tlie very best a rhetorical
melange of commonplace trutlis When it is charged
with the triviality of what it offers it assures us in
reply that the fullness and richness of its meaning lie
deep down in its own heart and that others must feel
this too since with such phrases as the hearts natural
innocence purity of conscience and so on it
supposes it has expressed things that are ultimate and
final to which no one can take exception and about
which nothing further can be required But the very
problem in hand was just that the best must not be
left behind hidden away in secret but be brought out
of the depths and set forth in the light of day It
could quite well from the start have spared itself this
trouble of bringing forward ultimate and final trutlis of
that sort they were long since to be found say in the
Catechism in popular proverbs etc It is an easy
matter to take such trutlis in their indefinite and crooked
inaccurate form and in many cases to point out that
the mind convinced of them is conscious of the very
opposite trutlis When it struggles to get itself out
of the mental embarrassment thereby produced it will
tumble into further confusion and possibly burst out
with the assertion that in short and in fine the matter
is settled the truth is so and so and anything else
is mere sophistry a password used by plain
common sense against cultivated critical reason like
the phrase visionary dreaming by which those
ignorant of philosophy sum up its character once for
all Since the man of common sense appeals to his
feeling to an oracle within his breast he is ready
to meet any one who does not agree He has simply
to explain that he has no more to say to any one who
does not find and feel the same as himself In other
words, he tramples the roots of humanity under foot
For the nature of hiunanity is to impel men to agree
with one another and its very existence hes simply
in the explicit realisation of a community of conscious
life What is antihuman the condition of mere animals
consists in keeping within the sphere of feeling pure and
simple and in being able to communicate only by way
of feelingstates
When a man asks for a royal road to science no more
convenient and comfortable way can be mentioned to
him than to put his trust in healthy common sense
and in order besides to keep abreast of the times and
advance with philosophy let him read reviews of philosophical works and even go the length of reading the
prefaces and first paragraplis of the works themselves
for the latter give the general principles on which everything turns while the reviews besides the historical
references provide over and above the critical judgment
and appreciation which being a judgment passed on
the work goes farther than the work that is judged
This common way a man can take in his dressinggown
But spiritual elation in the eternal the sacred the infinite moves along the highway of truth in the robes
of the high priest a road that from the first is itself immediate being in its innermost the inspiration
of profound and original ideas and flashes of elevated
thought All the same those depths do not yet reveal
the wellspring of inner reality nor again do these
skyrockets illumine the empyrean True thoughts
and scientific insight can only be won by the labour of
the notion. Conceptions alone can produce universality
in the knowing process This vmiversality is critically
developed and completely finished knowledge and not
the common indefiniteness and inadequacy of ordinary
intelligence nor again is it that extraordinary kind
of universality where the powers and potencies of
reason are spoiled and ruined by the indolence and
vanity of genius it is truth successfully arrived at
its own inherent native form and capable of being the
property of every selfconscious reason
Since I have taken the selfdevelopment of conceptions
or notions to be the medium wherein science really
exists and since in those respects to which I have drawn
attention as well as in others current ideas about the
nature of truth and the shape it assumes deviate from
my view and indeed are quite opposed to my position
it is not likely that the consideration of all this will promise well for a favourable reception of an attempt to expound the system of science in this sense. In the meantime I may call to mind that while eg the supreme
merit of Platos philosophy has sometimes been held
to consist in his mytlis which are scientifically valueless
there have also been times spoken of even as times
of mere sentimentality and emotion when the AristoteHan
philosophy has been respected on account of its speculative depth of insight and when the Parmenides of
Plato perhaps the greatest hterary product of ancient
dialectic has been taken to be the positive expression
of the divine life the unveiling and disclosing of its
inmost truth I may reflect too that notwitlistanding much cloudy obscurity which was the product
of ecstasy this misunderstood ecstasy was in point
of fact meant to be nothing else than the activity
of the pure notion furthermore that what is best
in the philosophy of our time takes its value to lie
in its scientific character and even though others
take a different view it is only in virtue of its scientific
character that recent philosophy really gets its worth
acknowledged and accepted Thus then I too may
hope that this attempt to vindicate and claim science
for conceptual thought and systematically to develop
and present science in this its own peculiar medium
will manage to make a way for itself by the inherent
truth of the result accomplished We may rest assured
that it is the nature of truth to force its way to recognition when its time comes and that it only appears
when its time has come and hence never appears too
soon and never finds a public that is not ripe to receive
it and further we may be sure that the individual
thinker requires this result to take place in order to
give him confidence in regard to what is no more as
yet than a matter for himself singly and alone and
in order to find his assurance which in the first instance merely belongs to a particular individual
accepted as something universal In this connection
however it is very often necessary to distinguish the
public from those who take upon themselves to be its
representatives and spokesmen The public takes up
an attitude in many respects quite different from the
latter indeed even opposed to them Whereas the
public goodnaturedly and generously will rather take
the blame upon itself when a philosophical work is
not quite acceptable or intelligible to it these representatives on the contrary convinced of their
own competence put all the blame on the authors
The influence of the work on the public is more silent
than the action of those representatives who are
like the dead burying their dead While the general
level of insight at the present time is in the main
more highly cultivated its curiosity more quickened
and alert and its judgment more swiftly made up
and pronomiced so that the feet of those who will
carry you out are already at the door at the same
time we have often to distinguish from all this the
slower and more gradual effect which rectifies the
direction of attention caught and compelled by imposing assurances corrects too contemptuous censure
and after a little provides a contemporary audience
for one class while another after a temporary vogue
finds no audience with posterity any longer
For the rest at a time when the universal nature of
spiritual life has become so very much emphasised and
strengthened and the mere individual aspect has
become as it should be correspondingly a matter of
indiilerence when too that universal aspect holds by
the entire range of its substance the full measure of the
wealth it has built up and lays claim to it all the share
in the total work of mind that falls to the activity of any
particular individual can only be very small Because
this is so the individual must all the more forget himself as in fact the very nature of science implies and
requires that he should and he must moreover
become and do what he can But all the less must be
demanded of him just as he must expect the less from
himself and ask the less for himself
IT is natural to suppose that before philosopliy
enters upon its subject proper namely the actual
knowledge of what truly is it is necessary to come
first to an understanding concerning knowledge which
is looked upon as the instrument by which to take
possession of the Absolute, or as the means through
which to get a sight of it The precaution seems
legitimate partly because there are various kinds of
knowledge among which one might be better adapted
than another for the attainment of our purpose and
thus a wrong choice is possible partly again because
knowing is a faculty of a definite kind and with a
determinate range without the more precise determination of its nature and limits we might take hold
on clouds of error instead of the heaven of truth
This apprehensiveness is sure to pass even into the
conviction that the whole enterprise which sets out
to secure for consciousness by means of knowledge
what exists fer se is in its very nature absurd and
that between knowledge and the Absolute there lies
a boundary which completely cuts o£E the one from
the other For if knowledge is the instrument by
which to get possession of absolute Reality the suggestion immediately occurs that the application of
an instrument to anything does not leave it as it is
for itself but rather entails in the process and has in view a moulding and alteration of it Or again if
knowledge is not an instrument wliich we actively
employ but a kind of passive medium through wliich
the light of the truth reaches us then here too we
do not receive it as it is in itself, but as it is through
and in this medium In either case we employ a means
which immediately brings about the very opposite
of its own end or rather the absurdity lies in making
use of any means at all It seems indeed open to us
to find in the knowledge of the way in which the instrument operates a remedy for this parlous state for
thereby it becomes possible to remove from the result
the part which in our idea of the Absolute received
through that instrument belongs to the instrument
and thus to get the truth in its purity But this improvement would as a matter of fact only bring us
back to the point where we were before If we take
away again from a definitely formed thing that which
the instrument has done in the shaping of it then the
thing in this case the Absolute stands before us once
more just as it was previous to all this trouble which
as we now see was superfluous If the Absolute were
only to be brought on the whole nearer to us by this
agency without any change being wrought in it like
a bird caught by a limestick it would certainly scorn
a trick of that sort if it were not in its very nature
and did it not wish to be beside us from the start
For a trick is what knowledge in such a case would
be since by all its busy toil and trouble it gives itself
the air of doing something quite different from bringing
about a relation that is merely immediate and so
a waste of time to establish Or again if the examination of knowledge which we represent as a medium
makes us acquainted with tke law of its refraction
it is likewise useless to eliminate tkis examination from
tke result For knowledge is not tke divergence of tke
ray but tke ray itself by wkick tke trutk comes in
contact witk us and if tkis be removed tke bare
direction or tke empty place would alone be indicated
Meanwkile if tke fear of falkng into error introduces
an element of distrust into science wkick witkout any
scruples of tkat sort goes to work and actually does
know it is not easy to understand wky conversely
a distrust skould not be placed in tkis very distrust
and wky we skould not take care lest tke fear of error
is not just tke initial error As a matter of fact
tkis fear presupposes sometking indeed a great deal
as trutk and supports its scruples and consequences
on wkat skould itself be examined beforekand to
see wketker it is trutk It starts witk ideas of Imowledge as an instrument and as a medium and presupposes a distinction of ourselves from tkis knowledge More especially it takes for granted tkat tke
Absolute stands on one side and tkat knowledge on
tke otker side by itself and cut off from tke Absolute
is still sometking real in otker words tkat knowledge
wkick by being outside tke Absolute is certainly also
outside trutk is nevertkeless true a position wkick
wkile calkng itself fear of error makes itself known
ratker as fear of tke trutk
Tkis conclusion comes from tke fact tkat tke
Absolute alone is true or tkat tke True is alone absolute It may be set aside by making tke distinction
tkat a knowledge wkick does not indeed know tke
Absolute as science wants to do is none tke less true
too and tkat knowledge in general tkougk it may
possibly be incapable of grasping the Absolute can
still be capable of truth of another kind But we shall
see as we proceed that random talk like this leads in
the long run to a confused distinction between an
absolute truth and a truth of some other sort and
that absolute knowledge and so on are words
which presuppose a meaning that has first to be got at
With suchlike useless ideas and expressions about
knowledge as an instrument to take hold of the
Absolute, or as a medium through which we have a
ghmpse of truth and so on external relations to which
all these ideas of a knowledge which is divided from the
Absolute and an Absolute divided from knowledge
m the last resort lead we need not concern ourselves
Nor need we trouble about the evasive pretexts which
create the incapacity of science out of the presupposition of such relations in order at once to be rid of
the toil of science and to assume the air of serious
and zealous effort about it Instead of being troubled
with giving answers to all these they may be straightway rejected as adventitious and arbitrary ideas and
the use which is here made of words like absolute
knowledge as also objective and subjective
and innumerable others whose meaning is assumed to
be familiar to everyone might well be regarded as so
much deception For to give out that their significance
is universally familiar and that every one indeed
possesses their notion rather looks like an attempt to
dispense with the only important matter which is just
to give this notion With better right on the contrary
we might spare ourselves the trouble of taking any
notice at all of such ideas and ways of talking which
would have the effect of warding off science altogether
for they make a mere empty show of knowledge
which at once vanishes when science comes on the
scene
But science in the very fact that it comes on the
scene is itself a phenomenon its coming on the
scene is not yet itself carried out in all the length and
breadth of its truth In this regard it is a matter of
indifference whether we consider that it science is the
phenomenon because it makes its appearance alongside
another kind of knowledge or call that other untrue
knowledge its process of appearing Science however
must Kberate itself from this phenomenality and it can
only do so by turning against it For science cannot
simply reject a form of knowledge which is not true
and treat this as a common view of things and then
assure us that itself is an entirely different kind of
knowledge and holds the other to be of no accoimt at
all nor can it appeal to the fact that in this other
there are presages of a better By giviag that assurance it would declare its force and value to he in its
bare existence but the untrue knowledge appeals
likewise to the fact that it is and assures us that to
it science is nothing One barren assurance however is of just as much value as another Still
less can science appeal to the presages of a better
which are to be found present in untrue knowledge
and are there pointing the way towards science for
it would on the one hand be appealing again in
the same way to a merely existent fact and on the
other it would be appealing to itself to the way in
which it exists in untrue knowledge ie to a bad form
of its own existence to its appearance rather than to
its real and true nature For this
reason we shall here undertake the exposition of
knowledge as a phenomenon
Now because this exposition has for its object only
phenomenal knowledge the exposition itself seems
not to be science free selfmoving in the shape proper
to itself but may from this point of view be taken
as the pathway of the natural consciousness which
is pressing forward to true knowledge Or it can be
regarded as the path of the soul which is traversing
the series of its own forms of embodiment like stages
appointed for it by its own nature, that it may possess
the clearness of spiritual life when through the complete experience of its own self it arrives at the knowledge of what it is in itself.
Natural consciousness will prove itself to be only
knowledge in principle or not real knowledge Since
however it immediately takes itself to be the real
and genuine knowledge this pathway has a negative
significance for it what is a realisation of the notion
of knowledge means for it rather the ruin and overthrow of itself for on this road it loses its own truth
Because of that the road can be looked on as the path
of doubt or more properly a highway of despair For
what happens there is not what is usually understood
by doubting a jostling against this or that supposed
truth the outcome of which is again a disappearance
in due course of the doubt and a return to the
former truth so that at the end the matter is taken as
it was before On the contrary that pathway is the
conscious insight into the untruth of the phenomenal
knowledge for which that is the most real which is
after all only the unrealised notion On that account
too this thoroughgoing scepticism is not what doubt
less earnest zeal for truth and science fancies it tas
equipped itself with in order to be ready to deal with
them viz the resolve in science not to deliver itself
over to the thoughts of others on their mere authority
but to examine everything for itself and only follow its
own conviction or still better to produce everything
itself and hold only its own act for true
The series of shapes which consciousness traverses on
this road is rather the detailed history of the process
of training and educating consciousness itself up to
the level of science That resolve presents this mental
development in the simple form of an
intended purpose as immediately finished and complete as having taken place this pathway on
the other hand is as opposed to this abstract intention or untruth the actual carrying out of that
process of development To follow ones own conviction is certainly more than to hand oneself over
to authority but by the conversion of opinion held
on authority into opinion held out of personal conviction the content of what is held is not necessarily
altered and truth has not thereby taken the place of
error If we stick to a system of opinion and prejudice
resting on the authority of others or upon personal
conviction the one differs from the other merely in
the conceit which animates the latter Scepticism
directed to the whole compass of phenomenal consciousness on the contrary makes mind for the first
time quahfied to test what truth is since it brings
about a despair regarding what are called natural
views thoughts and opinions which it is matter of
indifference to call personal or belonging to others
and with which the consciousness that proceeds straight
away to criticise and test is still filled and hampered
thus being as a matter of fact incapable of what it
wants to undertake
The completeness of the forms of unreal consciousness will be brought about precisely through the
necessity of the advance and the necessity of their
connection with one another To make this comprehensible we may remark by way of preliminary
that the exposition of untrue consciousness in its
untruth is not a merely negative process Such a
onesided view of it is what the natural consciousness generally adopts and a knowledge which makes
this onesidedness its essence is one of those shapes
assumed by incomplete consciousness which falls into
the coujse of the inquiry itself and will come before us
there For this view is scepticism which always sees
in the result only pure nothingness and abstracts from
the fact that this nothing is determinate is the nothing
of that out of wliicJi it comes as a resiilt Nothing
however is only in fact the true result when taken
as the nothing of what it comes from it is thus itself
a determinate nothing and has a content The scepticism which ends with the abstraction nothing
or emptiness can advance from this not a step
farther but must wait and see whether there is possibly
anything new offered and what that is in order to
cast it into the same abysmal void When once on
the other hand the result is apprehended as it truly is
as determinate negation a new form has thereby immediately arisen and in the negation the transition
is made by which the progress through the complete
succession of forms comes about of itself
The goal however is fixed for Imowledge just as
necessarily as the succession in the process The terminus is at that point where knowledge is no longer
compelled to go beyond itself where it finds its own
self and the notion corresponds to the object and the
object to the notion The progress towards this goal
consequently is without a halt and at no earUer stage
is satisfaction to be found That which is confined to
a life of nature is unable of itself to go beyond its
immediate existence but by something other than itself it is forced beyond that and to be thus wrenched
out of its setting is its death Consciousness however
is to itself its own notion thereby it immediately
transcends what is limited and since this latter
belongs to it consciousness transcends its own self
Along with the particular there is at the same time
set up the beyond were this only beside what is
limited as in the case of spatial intuition Consciousness therefore suffers this violence at its own hands
it destroys its own limited satisfaction At the feeling
of this violence anxiety for the truth may well withdraw and struggle to preserve for itself that which is
in danger of being lost But it can find no rest
Should that anxious fearfulness wish to remain always
in unthinking indolence thought will agitate the
thoughtlessness its restlessness will disturb that indolence Or let it take its stand as a form of sentiimentality which assures us it finds everything good
in its kind and this assurance likewise will suffer
violence at the hands of reason which finds something not good just because and in so far as it is a
kind Or again fear of the truth may conceal itself
from itself and others behind the pretext that precisely
burning zeal for the very truth makes it so difficult nay impossible to find any other truth except that of
which alone vanity is capable that of being ever so
much cleverer than any ideas which one gets from
oneself or others could make possible This sort of
conceit which understands how to belittle every truth
and turn away from it back into itself and gloats
over this its own private understanding which always
knows how to dissipate every possible thought and to
find instead of all the content merely the barren Ego
this is a satisfaction which must be left to itself
for it flees the universal and seeks only an isolated
existence on its own account.
As the foregoing has been stated provisionally and
in general concerning the manner and the necessity
of the process of the inquiry it may also be of further
service to make some observations regarding the
method of carrying this out This exposition viewed
as a process of relating science to phenomenal knowledge and as an inquiry and critical examination into
the reality of knowing does not seem able to be effected
without some presupposition which is laid down as
¥in ultimate criterion For an examination consists
in applying an accepted standard and on the final
agreement or disagreement therewith of what is tested
deciding whether the latter is right or wrong and
the standard in general and science as well were this
the criterion is thereby accepted as the essence or
inherently real But here where science first
appears on the scene neither science nor any sort of
standard has justified itself as the essence or ultimate
reality and without this no examination seems able
to be instituted
This contradiction and the removal of it will become
more definite it to begin witti we call to mind the abstract determinations of knowledge and of truth as
they are found in consciousness Consciousness we
find distinguishes from itself something to which at
the same time it relates itself or to use the current
expression there is something for consciousness and
the determinate form of this process of relating or of
there being something for a consciousness is knowledge
But from this being for another we distinguish being
in itself or fer se what is related to knowledge is
likewise distinguished from it and posited as also
existing outside this relation the aspect of being
per se or in itself is called Truth What really lies
in these determinations does not further concern us
here for since the object of our inquiry is phenomenal
knowledge its determinations are also taken up in
the first instance, as they are immediately offered to us
And they are offered to us very much in the way we
have just stated
If now oitr inquiry deals with the truth of knowledge
it appears feljat we are inquiring what knowledge is in
itself. But In this inquiry knowledge is our object it
is for us and the essential nature of knowledge were this to come to light would be rather its
being for us what we should assert to be its essence
would rather be not the truth of knowledge but
only om knowledge of it The essence or the criterion
would he in us and what was to be compared with this
standard and decided upon as a result of this comparison would not necessarily have to recognise that
criterion
But the nature of the object which we are examining
surmounts this separation or semblance of separation
and presupposition Consciousness furnishes its own
criterion in itself and the inquiry will thereby be a
comparison of itself with its own self for the distinction just made falls inside itself In consciousness
there is one element for an other or in general consciousness implicates the specific character of the
moment of knowledge At the same time this other
is to consciousness not merely for it but also outside
this relation or has a being in itself ie there is the
moment of truth Thus in what consciousness inside
itself declares to be the essence or truth we have the
standard which itself sets up and by which we are
to measure its knowledge Suppose we call knowledge
the notion and the essence or truth being or the
object then the examination consists in seeing whether
the notion corresponds with the object But if we call
the inner nature of the object, or what it is in itself,
the notion and on the other side understand by object
the notion qua object ie the way the notion is for an
other then the examination consists in our seeing
whether the object corresponds to its own notion It
is clear of course that both of these processes are
the same The essential fact however to be borne in
mind throughout the whole inquiry is that both these
moments notion and object being for another and
being in itself themselves fall within that knowledge
which we are examining Consequently we do not
require to bring standards with us nor to apply our
fancies and thoughts in the inquiry and just by our
leaving these aside we are enabled to treat and discuss
the subject as it actually is in itself and for itself as
it is in its complete reality
But not only in this respect that notion and object
the criterion and what is to be tested are ready to
hand in consciousness itself is any addition of ours
superfluous but we are also spared the trouble of compariag these two and of making an examination in
the strict sense of the term so that in this respect
too since consciousness tests and examines itself all
we are left to do is simply and solely to look on For
consciousness is on the one hand consciousness of the
object, on the other consciousness of itself consciousness of what to it is true and consciousness of its
knowledge of that truth Since both are for the same
consciousness it is itself their comparison it is the
same consciousness that decides and knows whether
its knowledge of the object corresponds with this object
or not The object it is true appears only to be in
such wise for consciousness as consciousness knows it
Consciousness does not seem able to get so to say
behind it as it is not for consciousness but in itself
and consequently seems also unable to test knowledge by it But just because consciousness has in
general knowledge of an object, there is already
present the distinction that the inherent nature what
the object is in itself, is one thing to consciousness
while knowledge or the being of the object for consciousness is another moment Upon this distinction which is present as a fact the examination
turns Should both when thus compared not correspond consciousness seems bound to alter its knowledge in order to make it fit the object But in the
alteration of the knowledge the object itself also in
point of fact, is altered for the knowledge which
existed was essentially a knowledge of the object
with change in the knowledge the object also becomes
different since it belonged essentially to this knowledge Hence consciousness comes to find that what
formerly to it was the essence is not what is fer se
or what was fer se was only fer se for consciousness
Since then in the case of its object consciousness finds
its knowledge not corresponding with this object the
object likewise fails to hold out or the standard for
examining is altered when that whose criterion this
standard was to be does not hold its ground in the
course of the examination and the examination is
not only an examination of knowledge but also of the
criterion used in the process
This dialectic process which consciousness executes
on itself on its knowledge as well as on its object
in the sense that out of it the new and true object
arises is precisely what is termed Experience In
this connection there is a moment in the process
just mentioned which should be brought into more
decided prominence and by which a new light is cast
on the scientific aspect of the following exposition
Consciousness knows something this something is the
essence or what is fer se This object however is also
the fer se the inherent reality for consciousness Hence
comes the ambiguity of this truth Consciousness as
we see has now two objects one is the first fer se the
second is the existence for consciousness of this fer se
The last object appears at first sight to be merely the
reflection of consciousness into itself ie an idea not
of an object, but solely of its knowledge of that first
object But as was already indicated by that very
process the first object is altered it ceases to be what
is fer se and becomes consciously something which is
fer se only for consciousness Consequently then
wtat this real fer se is for consciousness is truth
which however means that this is the essential reality
or the object which consciousness has This new object
contains the nothingness of the first the new object is
the experience concerning that first object
In this treatment of the course of experience there is
an element in virtue of which it does not seem to be
in agreement with what is ordinarily understood by
experience The transition from the first object and
the knowledge of it to the other object in regard to
which we say we have had experience was so stated
tbat the knowledge of the first object the existence for
consciousness of the first ens per se is itself to be the
second object But it usually seems that we learn
by experience the untruth of our first notion by
appealing to some other object which we may happen
to find casually and externally so that in general
what we have is merely the bare and simple apprehension of what is in and for itself On the view above
given however the new object is seen to have come
about by a transformation or conversion of consciousness
itself This way of looking at the matter is our doing
what we contribute by its means the series of experiences through which consciousness passes is lifted
into a scientifically constituted sequence but this does
not exist for the consciousness we contemplate and consider We have here however the same sort of circumstance again of which we spoke a short time ago when
dealing with the relation of this exposition to scepticism
viz that the result which at any time comes about in
the case of an untrue mode of knowledge cannot possibly
collapse into an empty nothing but must necessarily
be taken as the negation of that of which it is a result
a result which contains what truth the preceding
mode of knowledge has in it What we have here is
presented to us in this form since what at first
appeared as object is reduced when it passes into
consciousness to what knowledge takes it to be and
the ultimate entity the real in itself becomes what
this entity per se is for consciousness this latter is
the new object whereupon there appears also a
new mode or embodiment of consciousness of which
the essence is something other than that of the preceding mode It is this circumstance which carries
forward the whole succession of the modes or attitudes
of consciousness in their own necessity It is only
this necessity this origination of the new object
which offers itself to consciousness without consciousness
knowing how it comes by it that to us who watch
the process is to be seen going on so to say behind its
back Thereby there enters into its process a moment
of being per se or of beiag for us which is not expressly
presented to that consciousness which is in the grip of
experience itself The content however of what we
see arising exists for it and we lay hold of and comprehend merely its formal character ie its hare origination for it what has thus arisen has merely the
character of object while for us it appears at the
same time as a process and coming into being
In virtue of that necessity this pathway to science
is itself eo if so science and is moreover as regards its
content Science of the Experience of Consciousness
The experience which consciousness has concerning
itself can by its essential principle embrace nothing less
than the entire system of consciousness the whole
realm of the truth of mind and in such wise that the
aaoments of truth are set forth in the specific and
peculiar character they here possess ie not as abstract
pure moments but as they are for consciousness or as
consciousness itself appears in its relation to them and
in virtue of which they are moments of the whole are
Bmbodiments or modes of consciousness In pressing
forward to its true form of existence consciousness will
come to a point at which it lays aside its semblance of
being hampered with what is foreign to it with what is
only for it and exists as an other it will reach a
position where its appearance becomes identified with
its essence where in consequence its exposition coincides with just this very point this very stage of the
science proper of mind And finally when it grasps
this its own essence it will indicate the nature of absolute knowledge itself
THE knowledge which is at the start or iromediately
our object can be nothing else than just that
which is immediate knowledge knowledge of the immediate of what is We have in dealing with it to
proceed too in an immediate way to accept what is
given not altering anything in it as it is presented
before us and keeping mere apprehension
free from conceptual comprehension
The concrete content which sensuous certainty
furnishes makes this prima facie appear to be the richest
kind of knowledge to be even a knowledge of endless
wealth a wealth to which we can as little find any
limit when we traverse its extent in space and time,
where that content is presented before us as when we
take a fragment out of the abundance it offers us and
by dividing and dividing seek to penetrate its intent
Besides that it seems to be the truest the most authentic
knowledge for it has not as yet dropped anything
from the object it has the object before itself in its
entirety and completeness This bare fact of certainty
however is really and admittedly the abstractest and
the poorest kind of truth It merely says regarding what it knows it is and its truth contains solely tke heing
of the fact it knows Consciousness on its part in the
case of this form of certainty takes the shape merely
of pure Ego In other words, I in such a case am merely
qua pure This and the object likewise is merely qua pure
This I this particular conscious I am certain of this
fact before me not because I qua consciousness have
developed myself in connection with it and in manifold
ways set thought to work about it and not again because the fact the thing of which I am certain in
virtue of its having a multitude of distinct qualities was
replete with possible modes of relation and a variety
of connections with other things Neither has anything
to do with the truth sensuous certainty contains neither
the I nor the thing has here the meaning of a manifold
relation with a variety of other things of mediation in
a variety of ways The I does not contain or imply a
manifold of ideas the I here does not think nor
does the thing mean what has a multiplicity of qualities
Rather the thing the fact is and it is merely because
it is It is that is the essential point for senselfnowledge and that bare fact of heing that simple
immediacy constitutes its truth In the same way
the certainty qua relation the certainty of something is an immediate pure relation consciousness is I
nothing more a pure this the individual consciousnes
knows a pure this or knows what is individual
But when we look closely there is a good deal more
implied in that bare pure being which constitutes the
kernel of this form of certainty and is given out by
it as its truth A concrete actual certainty of sense is
not merely this pure immediacy but an example an
instance of that immediacy Amongst the innumerable
distinctions that here come to light we find in all cases
the fundamental difference viz that in senseexperience pure being at once breaks up into the two thises
as we have called them one this as I and one as object
When we reflect on this distinction it is seen that neither
the one nor the other is merely immediate merely is
in sensecertainty but is at the same time mediated
I have the certainty through the other viz through
the actual fact and this again exists in that certainty through an other viz through the I
It is not only we who make this distinction of essential
truth and particular example of essence and instance
immediacy and mediation we find it in sensecertainty
itself and it has to be taken up in the form in which it
exists there not as we have just determined it One
of them is put forward in it as existing in simple
immediacy as the essential reality the object The
other however is put forward as the nonessential
as mediated something which is not per se in the
certainty but there through something else ego a
state of knowledge which only knows the object because the object is, and which can as well be as not
be The object however is the real truth is the
essential reality it is quite indifferent to whether
it is known or not it remains and stands even
though it is not known while the knowledge does
not exist if the object is not there
We have thiis to consider as to the object whether
in point of fact it does exist in sensecertainty itself as
such an essential reality as that certainty gives it out to
be whether its meaning and notion which is to be
essential reality corresponds to the way it is present
in that certainty We have for that purpose not to
reflect about it and ponder what it might be in
truth but to deal with it merely as sensecertainty
contains it
Sensecertainty itself has thus to be asked What is the
This If we take it in the twofold form of its existence as the Now and as the Here the dialectic it has in
it will take a form as intelligible as the This itself To
the question What is the Now we reply for example,
the Now is nighttime To test the truth of this certainty of sense a simple experiment is all we need
write that truth down A truth cannot lose anything
by being written down and just as little by our preserving and keeping it If we look again at the truth we
have written down look at it noiv at this noontime
we shall have to say it has turned stale and become out
of date
The Now that is night is kept fixed ie it is treated
as what it is given out to be as something which is
but it proves to be rather a something which is not.
The Now itself no doubt maintains itself but as what
is not night similarly in its relation to the day which
the Now is at present it maintains itself as something
that is also not day or as altogether something negative
This selfmaintaining Now is therefore not something
immediate but something mediated for qua something that remains and preserves itself, it is determined through and hy means of the fact that something
else namely day and night is not Thereby it is just
as much as ever it was before Now and in being this
simple fact it is indifferent to what is still associated
with it just as little as night or day is its being it is
just as truly also day and night it is not in the least
affected by this otherness through which it is what it
is A simple entity of this sort whicii is by and
through negation which is neither this nor that, which
is a notthis and with equal indiiTerence this as well
as that a thing of this kind we call a Universal The
Universal is therefore ia point of fact the truth of sensecertainty the true content of senseexperience
It is as a universal too that we give utterance to sensuous fact What we say is This ie the universal
this or we say it is ie being in general Of
course we do not present before our mind in saying so
the universal this or being in general but we utter
what is universal in other words, we do not actually
and absolutely say what in this sense-certainty we
really mean Language however as we see is the
more truthful in it we ourselves refute directly and
at once our own meaning and since universality
is the real truth of sensecertainty and language merely
expresses this truth it is not possible at all for us
even to express in words any sensuous existence which
we mean
The same will be the case when we take the Here
the other form of the This The Here is eg the tree
I turn about and this truth has disappeared and has
changed round into its opposite the Here is not a tree
but a house The Here itself does not disappear it
is and remains in the disappearance of the house tree
and so on and is indifferently house tree The This
is shown thus again to be mediated simflicity in other
words, to be universality
Pure being then remains as the essential element for
this sensecertainty since sensecertainty in its very
nature proves the universal to be the truth of its object
But that pure being is not in the form of something
immediate but of something in which the process of
negation and mediation is essential Consequently it
is not what we intend or mean by being but being
with the characteristic that it is an abstraction the
purely universal and our intended meaning which
takes the truth of sensecertainty to be not something
universal is alone left standing in contrast to this
empty indifferent Now and Here
If we compare the relation in which knowledge and
the object first stood with the relation they have come
to assume in this result it is found to be just the
reverse of what first appeared The object which professed to be the essential reality is now the nonessential element of sensecertainty for the universal
which the object has come to be is no longer such as
the object essentially was to be for sensecertainty
The certainty is now found to lie in the opposite
element namely in knowledge which formerly was
the nonessential factor Its truth lies in the object
as my object or lies in the meaning
in what I mean it is because I know
it Sense certainty is thus indeed banished from the
object but it is not yet thereby done away with it
is merely forced back into the I We have still to
see what experience reveals regarding its reality in
this sense.
The force of its truth thus Hes now in the I in the
immediate fact of my being conscious of seeing hearing
and so on the disappearance of the particular Now
and Here that we mean is prevented by the fact that
keep hold on them The Now is daytime because I
see it the Here is a tree for a similar reason Sensecertainty however goes through in this connection
the same dialectic process as in the former case I tins
I see the tree and assert the tree to be the Here
another I however sees the house and maintains the
Here is not a tree but a house Both trutlis have the
same authenticity the immediacy of seeing and the
certainty and assurance both have as to their specific
way of knowing but the one certainty disappears in
the other
In all this what does not disappear is the I qua
universal whose seeing is neither the seeing of this tree
nor of this house but just seeing simpliciter which is
mediated through the negation of this house etc
and in being so is all the same simple and indifferent
to what is associated with it the house the tree and
so on I is merely universal like Now Here or This in
general No doubt I mean an individual I but
just as little as I am able to say what I mean by
Now Here so it is impossible in the case of the I too
By saying this Here this Now an individual
thing I say all Thises Heres Nows or Individuals
In the same way when I say I this individual I
I say quite generally all Is every one is what I say
every one is I this individual I When philosophy
is requested by way of putting it to a crucial test a
test which it could not pqssibly sustain to deduce
to construe to find a priori or however it is put
a socalled this thing or this particular man it is quite
fair to ask that this demand should say what this
thing or what this I it means but to say this is
quite impossible
Sensecertainty discovers by_ejperimce therefore
that its essential nature lies neither in the object nor in the I and that the immediacy peculiar to it is
neither an immediacy of the one nor of the other
For in the case of both what I mean is rather
something nonessential and the object and the I are
universals in which that Now and Here and I which
I mean do not hold out do not exist We arrive
in this way at the result that we have to put the whole
of sensecertainty as its essential reality and no longer
merely one of its moments as happened in both cases
where first the object as against the I and then the I
was to be its true reality Thus it is only the whole
sense certainty itself which persists therein as immediacy
and in consequence excludes from itself all the opposition which in the foregoing had a place there
This pure immediacy then has nothing more to do
with the fact of otherness with Here in the form of a
tree passing into a Here that is not a tree with Now
in the sense of daytime changing into a Now that is
nighttime or with there being an other I to which
something else is object Its truth stands fast as a
selfidentical relation making no distinction of essential
and nonessential between I and object and into
which therefore in general no distinction can find its
way I this I assert then the Here as tree and do
not turn round so that for me Here might become not
a tree and I take no notice of the fact that another I
finds the Here as nottree or that I myself at some other
time take the Here as nottree the Now as notday
I am directly conscious I intuit and nothing more
am pure intuition I am seeing looking For myself
I stand by the fact the Now is daytime or again by
the fact the Here is tree and again do not compare
Here and Now themselves with one another I take my stand on one immediate relation the Now
day
Since then this certainty will cease to exist if m
direct its attention to a Now that is night or an I to whoi
it is night let us go to it and try to point to the No
that is asserted We must let ourselves foint it oh
for the truth of this immediate relation is the trul
of this ego which restricts itself to a Now or a Here
Were we to examine this truth afterwards or stand at
a distance from it it would have no meaning at all
for that would do away with the immediacy which is
of its essence We have therefore to enter the same
point of time or of space indicate them show them to
ourselves ie turn ourselves into the very same I the
very same This which is the subject knowing with certainty Let us then see how that immediate is constituted which is shown to us
The Now is pointed out this Now Now
it has already ceased to be when it is pointed out
The Now that is is other than the one indicated and we
see that the Now is just this to be no longer the very
time when it is The Now as it is shown to us is one
that has been and that is its truth it does not have
the truth of being of something that is No doubt
this is true that it has been but what has been is in
point of fact not genuinely real it is not and the
point in question concerned what is concerned
being
In thus pointing out the Now we see then merely a
process which takes the following course First I point
out the Now and it is asserted to be the truth I point
it out however as something that has been or as something cancelled and done away with I thus annul
and pass beyond that first truth and in the second place
I now assert as the second truth that it has been that
it is superseded But thirdly what has been is not I
then supersede cancel its having been the fact of its
being annulled the second truth negate thereby the
negation of the Now and return in so doing to the first
position that Now is The Now and pointing out
the Now are thus so constituted that neither the one
nor the other is an immediate simple fact but a process
with diverse moments in it A This is set up it is
however rather an other that is set up the This is
superseded and this otherness this cancelling of the
former, is itself again annulled and so turned back to
the first But this first reflected thus into itself is not
exactly the same as it was to begin with namely something immediate rather it is a something reflectedintoself a simple entity which remains in its otherness
what it is a Now which is any number of Nows And
that is the genuinely true Now the Now is simple daytime which has many Nows within it hours A Now
of that sort again an hour is similarly many minutes
and this Now a minute in the same way many Nows
and so on Showing indicating pointing out the
Now is thus itself the very process which expresses
what the Now in truth really is namely a result or a
plurality of Nows all taken together And the pointing out is the way of getting to know of experiencing
that Now is a universal
The Here pointed out which I keep hold of is likewise
a this Here which in fact is not this Here but a
Before and Behind an Above and Below a Eight and
Left The Above is itself likewise this manifold
otherness above below etc The Here which
was to be pointed out disappears in other Heres and
these disappear similarly What is pointed out held
fast and is permanent is a negative This which only
is so when the Heres are taken as they should be but
therein cancel one another it is a simple complex
of many Heres The Here that is meant would be
the point But it is not rather when it is pointed out
as being as having existence that very act of pointing out
proves it to be not immediate knowledge but a process
a movement from the Here meant through a
plurality of Heres to the universal Here which is a
simple plurality of Heres just as day is a simple plurality
of Nows
It is clear from all this that the dialectic process
involved in sensecertainty is nothing else than the
mere history of its process of its experience and sensecertainty itself is nothing else than simply this history
The naive consciousness too for that reason is of itself
always coming to this result which is the real truth in
this case and is always having experience of it but
is always forgetting it again and beginning the process
all over It is therefore astonishing when in defiance of
this experience it is announced as universal experience nay even as a philosophical doctrine the outcome in fact of scepticism that the reality or being of
external things in the sense of Thises particular
sense objects has absolute validity and truth for consciousness One who makes such an assertion really
does not know what he is saying does not know that
he is stating the opposite of what he wants to say The
truth for consciousness of a This of sense is said
to be universal experience but the very opposite is
universal experience Every consciousness of itself
cancels again as soon as made such a truth as eg the
Here is a tree or the Now is noon and expresses the
very opposite the Here is not a tree but a house And
similarly it straightway cancels again the assertion
which here annuls the first and which is also just such
an assertion of a sensuous This And in all sensecertainty what we find by experience is in truth merely as
we have seen that This is a universal the very
opposite of what that assertion maintained to be
universal experience
We may be permitted here in this appeal to universal
experience to anticipate with a reference to the practical sphere In this connection we may answer those
who thus insist on the truth and certainty of the reality
of objects of sense by saying that they had better be
sent back to the most elementary school of wisdom
the ancient Eleusinian mysteries of Ceres and Bacchus
they have not yet learnt the inner secret of the eating
of bread and the drinking of wine For those who are
initiated into these mysteries not only come to doubt
the being of things of sense but get into a state of
despair about them altogether and they themselves
partly bring about the nothingness of those things
partly they see those things accomplish their own
nothingness Even animals are not shut off from this
wisdom but show they are deeply initiated into it
For they do not stand stock still before things of sense
as if these were things fer se with being in themselves
they despair of this reality altogether and in complete
assurance of the nothingness of things they fallto without more ado and eat them up And all nature proclaims as animals do these open secrets these mysteries revealed to all which teach what the truth
of things of sense is
Those who put forward such assertions really themselves say if we bear in mind what we remarked before
the direct opposite of what they mean a fact
which is perhaps best able to bring them to reflect on
the nature of the certainty of senseexperience They
speak of the existence of external objects which can
be more precisely characterised as actual absohitely
particular wholly personal individual things each
of them not like anything or anyone else this is the
existence which they say has absolute certainty and
truth They mean this bit of paper I am writing
on or rather have written on but they do not say what
they mean If they really wanted to say this bit of
paper which they mean and they wanted to say so
that is impossible because the This of sense which is
meant cannot be reached by language which belongs
to consciousness ie to what is inherently universal In
the very attempt to say it it would therefore cruinble
in their hands those who have begun to describe it
would not be able to finish doing so they would have to
hand it over to others who would themselves in the last
resort have to confess to speaking about a thing that has
no being They mean then doubtless this bit of
paper here which is quite different from that bit over
there but they speak of actual things external or sensible
objects absolutely individual real and so on that is
they say about them what is simply universal Consequently what is called mispeakable is nothing else than
what is untrue irrational something barely and simply
meant
If nothing is said of a thing except that it is an actual
tiling an external object this only makes it the most
universal of all possible things and thereby we express
its likeness its identity with everything rather than
its difference from everything else When I say
an individual thing I at once state it to be really
quite a universal for everything is an individual thing
and in the same way this thing is everything and
anything we like More precisely as this bit of paper
each and every paper is a this bit of paper and I have
thus said all the while what is universal If I want however to help out speech which has the divine nature
of directly turning the mere meaning right round
about making it into something else and so not letting
it ever come the length of words at all by pointing out
this bit of paper then I get the experience of what is
in point of fact, the real truth of sensecertainty I
point it out as a Here which is a Here amongst other
Heres or is in itself simply many Heres together ie
is a universal I take it up then as in truth it is
and instead of knowing something immediate I take
something truly I ferceive
In this as in the preceding section apprehension is effected under
conditions of sense But whereas in the preceding type of consciousness
the universality which knowledge implies and requires no sooner appeared
than it melted away here in Perception we start from a certain stahility
in the manner of apprehension and a certain constancy in the content
apprehended The universality in this case satisfies more completely the
demands of knowledge The problem for further analysis is to find the
form which the universal here assumes and to determine the way in which
the unity of the object the thing holds together its essential differences
The result shows that the unity of the thing qua unity is only admissible
as an unqualified or nonsensuous unity It is an universal but as such
not conditioned by sense it is a pure or unconditioned universal a
thought proper Being undetermined bysense it transcends senseapprehension and so transcends perception proper and compels the mind to
adopt another cognitive attitude in order to apprehend it This new attitude is Understanding
The following section is thus indirectly an analysis of the principle
and a criticism of the position of pure sensationalism It shows that the
doctrine esse est percipi must give way to the principle esse est
ilitelligi
IMMEDIATE certainty does not make the truth its
own for its truth is something universal whereas
certainty wants to deal with the This Perception on the
other hand takes what exists for it to be a universal
Universality being its principle in general its moments
immediately distinguished within it are also universal
is a universal and the object is a universal That
principle has arisen and come into being for us who
are tracing the course of experience and our process
of apprehending what perception is therefore is no
longer a contingent series of acts of apprehension as
is the case with the apprehension of sensecertainty
it is a logicalty necessitated process With the origination of the principle both the moments which as
phenomena merely fell at our feet as bare facts
have come into being the one the process of
pointing out and indicating the other the same
process but as a simple fact the former the process
of perceiving the latter the object perceived The
object is in its essential nature the same as the process the latter is the unfolding and distinguishing of
the elements involved the object is these same elements taken and held together as a single totality
For us tracing the process or in itself the universal
qua principle is the essence of perception and as
against this abstraction both the moments distinguished that which perceives and that which is
perceived are what is nonessential But in point of
This expression refers to the distinction already made in the Introduction between the point of view of the Fhenoincnology and that of the
actual consciousness whose procedure is being analysed in the Phenomenology That is for us which we ie the philosophical we are
aware of by way of anticipation but which has not yet been evolved objectively and explicitly it is intelligible but not yet intellectually realised
That is in itself" which is implicit inherent or potential
and hence not yet explicitly developed The terms for us and in
itself are thus strictly alternative the former looks at the matter from
the point of view of the philosojjhical subject the latter from the
point of view of the object discussed by the philosopher The implicit
nature of the object can only be for us who are thinking about the
object and what m have in mind can only be implidtly true of the
object. The alternative disappears when the explicit nature of the object
is what we explicitly take the object to be
fact because both are themselves the universal ol
the essence they are both essential but since they
are related as opposites only one can in the relation
constituting perception be the essential moment
and the distinction of essential and nonessential has
to be shared between them The one characterised as
the simple fact the object, is the essence quite indifferent as to whether it is perceived or not perceiving on the other hand being the process is the
insubstantial the inconstant factor which can be as
well as not be is the nonessential moment
This object we have now to determine more precisely and to develop this determinate character from
the result arrived at the more detailed development
does not fall in place here Since its principle the
universal is in its simplicity a mediated principle the
object must express this explicitly as its own inherent
natiue The object shows itself by so doing to be
the thing with many properties The wealth of senselfnowledge belongs to perception not to immediate
certainty where all that wealth was merely something alongside and by the way for it is only perception that has negation distinction multiplicity in
its very nature
The This then is established as not This or as superseded and yet not nothing but a determinate nothing a nothing with a certain content viz
the This The senseelement is in this way itself still
present but not in the form of some particular that
is meant as had to be the case in immediate certainty but as a universal as that which will have the
character of a property Cancellig superseding brings
out and lays bare its true twofold meaning which we
found contained in the negative to supersede is at once to negate and to preserve The nothing
being a negation of the This preserves immediacy and
is itself sensuous but a universal immediacy Being
however is a universal by its having in it mediation or
negation When it brings this explicitly out as a factor
in its immediacy it is a specifically distinct determinate
property As a result there are many such properties
set up at once one the negation of the other Since
they are expressed in the simple form of the universal,
these determinate characters which strictly speaking
become properties only by a further additional characteristic are selfrelated are indifferent to each other
each is by itself free from the rest The simple selfidentical universality however is itself again distinct
and detached from these determinate characteristics it
has It is pure selfrelation the medium wherein all
these characteristics exist in it as in a bare simple
unity they interpenetrate without affecting one another
for just by participating in this universality they are
indifferent to each other each by itself
This abstract universal medium which we can call
Thinghood in general or pure essential reality is
nothing else than the Here and Now as this on
analysis turned out to be viz a simple togetherness of
many Heres and Nows But the many in the present
case are in their determinateness themselves simply
universals This salt is a simple Here and at the same
time manifold it is white and also pungent also
cubical in shape also of a specific weight and so on
All these many properties exist in a simple Here
where they inter penetrate each other None of these
has a different Here from the others each is every
where in the same Here where the others are And
at the same time without being divided by different
Heres they do not affect each other in their interpenetration its being white does not affect or alter the
cubical shape it has and neither affects its sharp
outline and so on on the contrary since each is
simple relation to self it leaves the others alone and is
related to these merely by being also along with them
a relation of mere indifference This Also is thus
the pme universal itself the medium the Thinghood keeping them together
In this relation which has emerged it is merely the
character of positive universality that is first noticed
and developed But there is still a side presented to
view which must also be taken into account It is
this If the many determinate properties were utterly
indifferent to each other and were entirely related to
themselves alone they would not be determinate for
they are so merely in so far as they are distinguished
and related to others as their opposites In view of
this opposition however they cannot exist together
in the bare and simple unity of their medium
which unity is just as essential to them as negation
The process of distinguishing them so far as it does not
leave them indifferent but effectually excludes negates
one fjom another thus falls outside this simple
medium And this consequently is not merely an
also an unity indifferent to what is in it but a
one as well an excluding repelling unity
The One is the moment of negation as in a
direct and simple manner relating itself to itself and
excluding an other and is that by Vvfliich Thinghood
qua Thing is determined In the case of the property
negation becomes specified assumes a determinate
character which is directly one with the inxmediacy
of being an immediacy which by this unity with
negation is universality Qua the one however
negation takes a form in which it is freed from this unity
with the object and exists jer se on its own account.
These moments taken together exhaust the nature of
the Thing the truth of perception so far as it is necessary to develop it here It is a universality passive
and indifferent the also which forms the sole bond
of connection between the qualities or rather constituent elements matters existing together
negation likewise in a simple form or the one which
consists in excluding properties of an opposite character
and the many properties themselves the relation of
the two first moments the negation as it is related
to that indifferent element and in being so expands
into a manifold of differences the focal point of particularity radiating forth into plurality within the
medium of subsistence Taking the aspect that
these differences belong to a medium indifferent to
what is within it they are themselves universal they
are related merely to themselves and do not affect each
other Taking however the other aspect that they
belong to the negative unity they at the same time
mutually exclude one another but do so necessarily in
the shape of properties that have a separate existence
apart from the also connecting them The sensuous
universality the immediate unity of positive being and
negative exclusion is only then a property when
oneness and pure universality are evolved from it and
distinguished from one another, and when that sensuous
universality combines these with one another Only
after this relation of the unity to those pure essential
moments is eiiccted is the Thing complete
This then is the way the Thing in perception is
constituted and consciousness is perceptual in character
so far as this Thing is its object it has merely to
take the object ccvpio QTeeption and assume the
attitude of pure apprehension and what comes its way
in so doing is truth If it did something
when taking the given it would by such supplementation or elimination alter the truth Since the object
is the true and universal the selfsame while consciousness is the variable and nonessential it may
happen that consciousness apprehends the object
wrongly and deceives itself The percipient is aware of
the possibility of deception for in the universality
forming the principle here the percipient is directly
aware of otherness but aware of it as null and naught
as what is superseded His criterion of truth is therefore
sclsameness and his procedure is that of apprehending
what comes before him as selfsame Since at the same
time diversity is a fact for him his procedure is a
way of relating the diverse moments of his apprehension
to one another If however in this comparison a want
of sameness comes out this is not an untruth on the
part of the object for the object is the selfsame but
on the part of perception
Let us now see what sort of experience consciousness
forms in the course of its actual perception We who
are analysing the process find this experience already
contained in the development just given of the object
and of the attitude of consciousness towards it The
experience will be merely the development of the contradictions that appear there
The object which I apprehend presents itself as
purely one and single also I am aware of the property in it a property which is universal
thereby transcending the particularity of the object.
The first form of being in which the objective reality
has the sense of a one was thus not its true being
and since the object is the true fact here the untruth falls
on my side and the apprehension was not correct On
account of the universality of the property
I must rather take the objective entity as a community
in general I further perceive now the
property to be determinate opposed to another and
excluding this other Thus in point of fact, I did not
apprehend the object rightly when I defined it as a
commonness or community with others or as continuity and must rather taking account of the determinateness of the projerty divide the continuity and set
down the object as a one that excludes In the
divided one I find many such properties which are
not attached to one another but indifferent to one
another Thus I did not apprehend the object correctly
when I took it for something that excludes The object
instead just as formerly it was merely continuity in
general is now a universal common medium where many
properties in the form of sense universals subsist each
for itself and on its own account, and qua determinate
excluding the others The simple and true fact which
I perceive is however in virtue of this result not a
universal medium either but the particular property
by itself which again in this form is neither a property nor a determinate being for it is now neither
attached to a distinct one nor in relation to others
But the particular quality is a property only when
attached to a one and determinate only by relation
to others By being this bare relation of self to self it
remains merely sensuous existence in general smce it
no longer contains the character of negativity and the
mode of consciousness, which is now aware of a bemg
of sense is merely a way of meaning or
intending ie it has left the attitude of perception
entirely and gone back into itself But sense existence
and meaning themselves pass over into perception I
am thrown back on the beginning and once more
dragged into the same circuit that supersedes itself in
every moment and as a whole
Consciousness then has to go over this cycle again
but not in the same way as on the first occasion For
it has found out regarding perception that the truth
and outcome of perception is its dissolution is reflection
out of and away from the truth into itself In this way
consciousness becomes definitely aware of how its
perceptual process is essentially constituted viz that
this is not a simple bare apprehension but in its
apprehension is at the same time reflected out of
the true content back into itself This return of
consciousness into itself which is immediately involved
and implicated in that pure apprehension for this
return to self has proved to be essential to perception
alters the true content Consciousness is aware that
this aspect is at the same time its own and takes it upon
itself and by so doing consciousness will thus get the
true object bare and naked
In this way we have now in the case of perception
as happened in the case of sensuous certainty the
aspect of consciousness being forced back upon itself
but in the first instance, not in the sense in which
this took place in the former case ie not as if the
truth of perception fell within it Rather consciousness
is aware that the untruth that comes out there falls
within it By knowing this however consciousness is
able to cancel and supersede this untruth It distinguishes its apprehension of the truth from the untruth
of its perception corrects this untruth and so far as
itself takes in hand to make this correction the truth
qua truth of perception certainly falls within its own
consciousness The procedure of consciousness, which
we have now to consider is thus so constituted that
it no longer merely perceives but is also conscious of
its reflection into self and keeps this apart from the
simple apprehension proper
To begin with then I am aware of the thing as a
one and have to keep it fixed in this true character
as one If in the course of perceiving something crops
up contradicting that then I must take it to be due
to my reflection Now in perception various different
properties also turn up which seem to be properties
of the thing But the thing is a one and we are
aware in ourselves that this diversity by which the
thing ceases to be a unity falls in us This thing then
is in point of fact, merely white to our eyes also sharp
to our tongue and also cubical to our feeling and so
on The entire diversity of these aspects comes not
from the thing but from us and we find them falling
apart thus from one another, because the organs they
affect are quite distinct inter se the eye is entirely distinct from the tongue and so on We are consequently
the universal medium where such elements get dissociated and exist each by itself By the fact then
that we regard the characteristic of being a universal medium as our reflection we preserve and maintain the
selfsameness and truth of the thing its being a one
These diverse aspects which consciousness puts to
its side of the account are however each by itself
just as it appears in the universal medium specifically
determined White is only in opposition to black and
so on and the thing is a one just by the fact that
it is opposed to other things It does not however
exclude others from itself so far as it is one for to
be one is to be in a universal relation of self to
self and hence by the fact of its being one it is
rather like all It is through the determinate characteristic that the thing excludes other things Things
themselves are thus determinate in and for themselves they have properties by which they distinguish themselves from one another. Since the property is the special and peculiar property the proper
property of the thing or a specific characteristic in
the thing itself the thing has several properties For
in the first place the thing is true being is a being inherently in itself and what is in it is so as its own
essential nature and not on account of other things
Hence in the second place the determmate properties
are not on account of other things and for other
things but inherent in that thing itself They are
however determinate properties in it only by the fact
that they are several and maintain their distinction
from one another. And in the third place since they are
thus within thinghood they are selfcontained each
in and for itself and are indifferent to one another It
is then in truth the thing itself which is white and
also cubical and also sharp and so on in other words,
the thing is the also the general medium wherein
the many properties subsist externally to one another
without touching or aSecting one another and without
cancellig one another and so taken the also is
accepted as the true being of the thing
Now on this mode of perception arising consciousness is at the same time aware that it reflects
itself also into itself and that in perceiving the opposite
moment to the also crops up This moment
however is the unity of the thing with itself an unity
which excludes distinction from itself. It is consequently this unity which consciousness has to take
upon itself for the thing as such is the subsistence
of many different and independent properties Thus
we say of the thing it is white and also cubical
and also sharp and so on But so far as it is white
it is not cubical and so far as it is cubical and also
white it is not sharp and so on Putting these properties into a one belongs solely to consciousness which
therefore has to avoid letting them coincide and be
one ie one and the same property in the thing In
the long run it introduces the idea of in-so-far
to meet the difficulty and by this means it keeps
the qualities apart and preserves the thing in the
sense of the also Quite properly consciousness
at first makes itself responsible for the oneness
in such a way that what was called a property is represented as being free matter In this
way the thing is raised to the level of a true also
since it thus becomes a collection of component
elements materials or matters and instead of being
a one becomes a mere enclosure a circumscribing
surface
All expression dreiwu from the physics of Hegels day
If we look back on what consciousness formerly
took upon itself and now takes upon itself what it
previously ascribed to the thing and now ascribes to it
we see that consciousness alternately makes itself as
well as the thing into both a pure atomic manyless
one and an also resolved into independent constituent elements materials or matters Consciousness
thus finds through this comparison that not only its way
of taking the truth contains the diverse moments
of apprehension and return upon itself but that
the truth itself the thing manifests itself in this twofold manner Here we find as a result of experience
that the thing exhibits itself in a determinate and
specific manner to the consciousness apprehending it
but at the same time is reflected back into itself out
of that manner of presenting itself to consciousness
in other words, the thing contains within it opposite
aspects of truth a truth whose elements are in
antithesis to one another
Consciousness then gets away also from this second
form of perceptual procedure that namely which takes
the thing as the true selfsame and itself as the reverse
as the factor that leaves sameness behind and goes
back into self Its object is now the entire process
which was previously shared between the object and
consciousness The thing is a one reflected
into self it is for itself but it is also for an
other and further it is an other for itself as it is
for another The thing is hence for itself and also
for another a being that has difference of a twofold
kind But it is also one Its being one however
contradicts the diversity it has Consciousness would
consequently have again to make itself answerable for
putting the diversity into the one and would have to
keep this apart from the thing It would thus be
compelled to say that the thing in-so-far as it is
for itself is not for another But the oneness belongs
to the thing itself too as consciousness has found out
the thing is essentially reflected into self The also
the distinction of elements indifferent to one another
falls doubtless within the thing too qua oneness
but since both are different they do not fall within
the same thing but in different things The contradiction which is found in the case of the objective
content as a whole is assigned to and shared by two
objects The thing is thus doubtless as it stands
selfsame but this unity with itself
is disturbed by other things In this way the unity
of the thing is preserved and at the same time the
otherness that is external to the thing and also outside consciousness
Now although the contradiction in the object is
in this way allotted to different things yet the isolated
individual thing will still be affected with distinction
The different things have a subsistence on their own
account and the conflict between them takes
place on both sides in such a way that each is not
different from itself but only from the other Each
however is thereby characterised as a something distinctive and contains in it essential distinction from
the others but at the same time not in such a way
that this is an opposition within its being on the contrary it is by itself a simple determinate characteristic
which constitutes its essential character distinguishing
it from others As a matter of fact since the diversity
lies in it this diversity does indeed necessarily assume
the form of a real distinction of manifold quaUties
within it But because the determinate characteristic
gives the essence of the thing by which it is distinguished
from others and has a being all its own this further
manifold constitution is something indifferent The
thing thus no doubt contains in its unity the quaHfying
in-so-far in two ways which have however unequal significance and by that qualification this
oppositeness becomes not a real opposition on the part
of the thing itself but so far as the thing comes into
a condition of opposition through its absolute distinction
this opposition belongs to the thing with reference
to an other thing lying outside it The further manifoldness is doubtless necessarily in the thing too and
cannot be left out but it is unessential to the thing
This determinate characteristic which constitutes
the essential character of the thing and distinguishes
it from all others is now so defined that thereby
the thing stands in opposition to others but must
therein preserve itself for itself It is, however
a thing a selfexistent one only so far as it does not
stand in relation to others For in this relation the
connection with another is rather the point emphasised
and connection with another means giving up selfexistence means ceasing to have a being on its own
account. It is precisely through the absolute character
and its opposition that the thing relates itself to others
and is essentially this process of relation and only
this The relation however is the negation of its
independence and the thing collapses through its
own essential property
The necessity of the experience which consciousness
has to go through in finding that the thing is destroyed
just by the very characteristic which constitutes its
essential nature and its distinctive existence on its own
account, may as regards the bare principle it imphes be
shortly stated thus The thing is set up as having a being
of its own, as existing for itself or as an absolute
negation of all otherness hence it is absolute negation
merely relating itself to itself But this kind of negation
is the cancelling and superseding of itself or means
that it has its essential reality in an other
In point of fact the determination of the object^
as it the object has turned out contains nothing
else It aims at having an essential property constituting its bare existence for itself but with this
bare selfexistence it means also to embrace and contain
diversity which is to be necessary but is at the same
time not to constitute its essential characteristic
But this is a distinction that only exists in words
the TCOMessential which has all the same to be necessary
cancels its own meaning or is what we have just called
the negation of itself
With this the last qualifying in-so-far," which
separated selfexistence and existence for another
drops away altogether The object is really in one
and the same respect the opposite of itself for itself
so far as it is for another and for another so far
as it is for itself. It is for itself reflected into self
one but all this is asserted along with its opposite
with its being for another and for that reason is asserted
merely to be superseded In other words, this existence
for itself is as much unessential as that which alone was
meant to be unessential viz the relation to another
By this process the object in its pure characteristics
in those features which were to constitute its essential
nature is superseded just as the object in its sensible
mode of existence became transcended From being
sensible it passed into being a universal but this
universal because derived from sense is essentially
conditioned by it and hence is in general not a genuine
selfidentical universality but one affected with an
opposition For that reason this universality breaks
up into the extremes of singleness and universality
of the one of the properties and the also of
the free constituents or matters These pure determinations appear to express the essential nature itself
but they are merely a selfexistence which is fettered
at the same time with existence for an other Since
however both essentially exist in a single unity we
have before us now unconditioned absolute universality
and it is here that consciousness first truly passes into
the sphere of Understanding of Intelligence
Sensible singleness thus disappears in the dialectic
process of immediate certainty and becomes universality but merely sensuous universality The stage
of meaning has vanished and perceiving takes the
object as it inherently is in itself, or put generally
as a universal Singleness therefore makes its appearance there as true singleness as the inherent nature
of the one or as reflectedness into self This
is still however a conditioned selfexistence alongside
which appears another selfexistence the universality
opposed to singleness and conditioned by it But
these two contradictory extremes are not merely alongside one another but within one unity or what is
the same thing the common element of both selfexistence is entirely fettered to its opposite ie
is at the same time not an existenceforself The
Sophistry of perception seeks to save these moments
from their contradiction tries to keep them fixed by
distinguishing between aspects by using terms like
also and so far as and seeks in like manner to
lay hold on the truth by distinguishing the unessential
element from an essential nature opposed thereto But
these expedients instead of keeping away deception
from the process of apprehension prove rather to be
of no avail at all and the real truth which should
be got at through the logic of the perceptual process
proves to be in one and the same aspect the opposite of what those expedients imply and consequently
to have as its essential content undifferentiated and indeterminate universality
These empty abstractions of singleness and its
antithetic universality as also of essence that
is attended with a nonessential element an element
which is all the same necessary are powers the
interplay of which constitutes perceptual understanding
often called sound common sense
This healthy common sense which takes itself for
the solid substantial type of conscious life is in the
sphere of perception merely the interplay of these
abstractions it is always poorest where it pretends to
be richest In that it is tossed about by these unreal
entities bandied from one to the other and by its
sophistry endeavours to affirm and hold fast alternately
now one then the exact opposite it sets itself against
the truth and imagines philosophy has merely to do
with things of the intellect merely
manipulates ideas As a matter of fact philosophy
does have to do with them too and knows them to be
the pure essential entities the absolute powers and
ultimate elements But in doing so pliilosophy knows
them at the same time in their determinate and
specific constitution and is therefore master over
them while that perceptual understanding takes them
for the real truth and is led by them from one
mistake to another It does not get the length of
being aware that there are such simple essentialities
operating within it and dominating its activity it
thinks it has always to do with quite solid material
and content just as sensecertainty is unaware that
its essence is the empty abstraction of pure being
But in point of fact it is these essential elements in
virtue of which perceptual understanding makes its way
hither and thither through every kind of material
and content they are its principle of coherence and
control over its varied material they alone are what
constitutes for consciousness the essence of sensuous
things what determines their relation to consciousness
and they are that in the medium of which the process of
perceiving with the truth it contains runs its course
The course of this process a perpetual alternate determining of the truth and superseding of this determination constitutes properly speaking the constant everyday life and activity of perceptual intelligence of the
consciousness that thinks it lives and moves in the truth
In that process it advances without halt or stay
till the final result is reached when these essential
ultimate elements or determinations are all alike
superseded but in each particular moment it is
merely conscious of one given characteristic as the
truth and then again of the opposite It no doubt
suspects their unessentiality and to save them from
the impending danger it takes to the sophistry of
now asserting to be true what it had just affirmed
to be not true What the nature of these untrue
entities wants really to force this understanding to
do viz to bring together and thereby cancel and
transcend the ideas about that universality and
singleness about also and one about that
essentiality which is necessarily connected with
an unessentiality and an unessential that is
yet necessary understanding strives to resist by
leaning for support on the quahfying terms insofar a diiierence of aspect or by making itself
answerable for one idea in order to keep the other
separate and preserve it as the true one But the
very nature of these abstractions brings them together
as they stand and of their own accord Sound common
sense robs these abstractions of their real nature
They compel understanding to go round in their
whirlig circle When understanding tries to give
them truth by at one time taking their untruth upon
itself at another by calling deception a mere appearance due to the uncertainty and unrehability of
things and again by separating the essential from
what is necessary and yet is to be unessential holding the former to be their truth as against the latter
when understanding takes this lie it does not secure
them their truth but convicts itself of untruth
The term force holds primarily with reference to the realm of
Nature whether physical or vital but it is also used more or less
analogically in reference to other spheres eg morality It is the
objective counterpart of the activity of understanding it is objectively
the same kind of relation of unity to differences which is subjectively
realised when the mind understands Force is a selfconditioned
principle of unity the differences are the expressions of force the
unity evolves the diiferences out of itself Understanding similarly is a
selfconditioned process it consists in reducing differences to some
ultimate unity which is capable of deriving or etplaining those
differences from itself The unconditioned universal to which we are
led by the analysis of perception takes shape therefore as force
The question is How are the elements of this unconditioned universal
related and how do they hold together The answer is found in the
highest achievement of the operation of understanding the establishment
of a kingdom of laws which in its entirety is the meaning of the world
so far as understanding goes But laws pej se are looked on as an
inner realm which merely appears in the detailed particulars which
those laws control and in which those laws are made manifest The
differences in fact are phenomena the laws per se are behind the
scenes the world as a whole thus becomes distinguished into a realm
of phenomena and a realm of noumena These two realms set a new
problem to the mind and must again be brought together in a completer
way than understanding can do This new state of consciousness is
selfconsciousness
In this section we have at once an analysis of empiricism and a criticism
of the Kantian solution of the problem of empiricism It is shown that
if phenomena are appearances of noumena then the noumena do appear
and are in fact nothing except so far as they appear otherwise the
noumena so far being hidden are worse than appearances they are
illusion The phenomena arc not merely appearances to the mind but
appearances of something that does make itself manifest If phenomena
are thus not external to and still less independent of noumena noumena
are just as truly immanent in phenomena Treated in any other way
noumena can at best be only another kind of phenomena and this raises
anew precisely the problem which the opposition of phenomena or noumena
was intended to solve Phenomena are related to noumena as the trees
to the wood not as a compound to its atoms The solution of the difficulty is thus only to be found in the type of consciousness which contains
both and this Hegel says is selfconsciousness
CONSCIOUSNESS lias found seeing and hearing
etc pass away in the dialectic process of senseexperience and has at the stage of perception arrived
at thoughts which however it brings together in
the first instance in the unconditioned universal This
unconditioned element again if it were taken as inert
essence bare and simple would itself be nothing else
than the onesided extreme of selfexistence for the nonessential would then stand over
against it But if thus related to the latter it would
be itself unessential and consciousness would not have
got disentangled from the deceptions of perception
whereas this universal has proved to be one which
has passed out of such conditioned separate existence
and returned into itself
This unconditioned universal which henceforward
is the true object of consciousness is still object of
consciousness consciousness has not yet grasped its
principle or notion qua notion There is an essential
distinction between the two which must be drawn On
the one hand consciousness is aware that the object
has passed from its relation to an other back into itself
and thereby become inherentlj and implicitly
notion but on the other hand consciousness is not
yet the notion explicitly or for itself and consequently
it does not know itself in that reflected object We
who are analysing experience found this object arise
through the process of consciousness in such a way
that consciousness is implicated and involved in the
development of the object, and the reflection is the same
on both sides ie there is only one reflection But
because in this movement consciousness had as its
content merely the objective entity and not consciousness as such the result has to be given an objective
significance for consciousness consciousness however
still withdrawing from what has arisen so that the
latter in objective form is the essential reality to
consciousness
Understanding has indeed eo if so done away with
its own untruth and the untruth in its object What
has thereby come to view is the notion of the
truth as implicit inherent truth which is not yet
notion or lacks a consciously explicit existence for
itself and is something which understanding allows to have its way without knowing
itself in it It works out its own reality for itself so
that consciousness has no share in its process of free
realisation but merely looks on and apprehends that
realisation as a naked fact It is consequently
our business in the first instance to step into its place
and be the notion which works up into shape what
is contained in the result With this complete formation of the object, which is presented to consciousness
as a bare existent fact mere conscious
awareness becomes for the first time conceptual consciousness conscious comprehension
The result arrived at was an unconditioned universal
in the first instance in the negative and abstract sense
that consciousness negated its onesided notions and
abstracted them it surrendered them This result
however has inherently a positive significance it
has established the unity of existenceforself and
existenceforanother in other words, absolute opposites are immediately posited as one and the same
reality At first this seems to affect merely the formal
relation of the moments to one another But to be
forself and to be foranother constitutes the content
itself as well because the opposition looked at truly
can have no other nature than what has come about in
the result viz that the content taken in perception
for truth belongs in point of fact, solely to the form
and is dissipated into its unity This content is
at the same time universal there can be no other
content which by its peculiar constitution would
refuse to return into this unconditioned universality
Such a content would be some specific way or other
of being foritself and taking up a relation to something else But to be in general forself and to
stand in relation to something else constitutes the
very nature and meaning of that whose truth lies in
being unconditionally universal and the result is
through and through universal
Since however this unconditioned universal is an
object for consciousness the distinction of form and
content makes its appearance within it and in the
shape of content the moments have the aspect in
which they were first presented that of being on
one side a universal medium of many substantial
elements and on the other a unit reflected into self
where their substantial independence is overthrown
and done away with The former dissolves the independence of the thing is the condition of passivity
which consists in being something for something else
the latter is its individual subsistence its being something on its own account We have to see
what shape these moments take in the unconditioned
universal which is their essential nature It is obvious
at the outset that by existing only in this universal
they do not in general he any longer apart from one
another, but rather are in themselves essentially selfcancellig aspects and what is established is only
their transition into one another
One moment then appears as universal medium
or as the subsistence of independent constituents as the
reality that has stepped aside The independence of
these constituent elements however is nothing else
than this medium ie this universal is simply and
entirely the plurality of such diverse universals That
the universal is per se in undivided unity with this
plurality means however that these elements are each
where the other is they mutually permeate one another
without touching one another because conversely
the manifold diversity is equally independent Along
with that too goes the fact that they are absolutely
pervious and porous or are cancelled and superseded
To be thus superseded again or the reduction of this
diversity to bare and simple selfexistence is nothing
else than the medium itself and this is the independence
of the different elements In other words, the elements
set up as independent pass directly over into their
unity and their unity directly into its explicit diversity
and the latter back once again into the reduction to
unity This process is what is called Force One
of its moments where Force takes the form of a
dispersion of the independent elements each with a
being of its own, is the Expression of Force when
however force takes the form of that wherein they
disappear and vanish it is Force proper force withdrawn from expressing itself and driven back into itself
But in the first place force driven back into itself must
express itself and secondly in that expression it
is still force existing within itself as much as in thus
being within itself it is expression
When we thus keep both moments in this immediate
unity it is Understanding to which the conception of
force belongs that is properly speaking the principle
which carries the different moments qua different
For per se they should not be different the distinction
consequently exists only in thought Stated otherwise
only the mere conception of force has been put forward
in the above not its realisation In point of fact,
however force is the unconditioned universal which
is in itself just what it is for something else or which
holds its difference within itself for it is nothing else
than existenceforanother Hence for force to be
what it truly is it has to be completely set free from
thought and put forward as the substantial reality
of these differences that is first the substance qua
the entire force remaining essentially selfcontained and then its differences as substantial
entities or as moments subsisting each on its own
account. Force as such force as driven back within
itself is in this way by itself an excluding unit for
which the unfolding of the elements or differences is
another thing subsisting separately and thus there
are set up two sides distinct and independent But
force is also the whole or it remains what in its very
conception it is that is to say these differences remain mere forms superficial vanishing moments
differences between force proper withdrawn into itself
and force unfolded and expressed in independent constituent elements would at the same time have no
being at all if they had no subsistence ie force
would have no being if it did not really exist in these
opposite ways But to exist in this way as opposite
aspects means nothing else than that both moments
are themselves at the same time independent It is
this process we have now to deal with the process by
which both moments get themselves fixed as independent and then cancel their independence again
Looked at broadly it is manifest that this process is
nothing else than the process of perceiving where the
aspects both percipient and content perceived are at
once inseparably united as regards the process of
grasping the truth and yet by that very fact each aspect
is at the same time reflected into itself is something on
its own account. In the present case these two aspects
are elements or moments of force they subsist within one
unity just as much as this unity which appears as the
middle term for the distinct and independent extremes
always gets broken up into these very extremes which
only become such through this taking place Thus
the process which formerly took the shape of the
self-negation of contradictory conceptions here assumes
objective form and is a movement of force the result of
which is to bring out the unconditioned universal
as something which is not objective which is the inner
unperceived being of things
Force as thus determined since it is taken as
force or as reflected into itself is the one side of its
notion and meaning but a substantiated extreme
and moreover the extreme established with the characteristic of oneness In virtue of this the subsistence
of the elements which have arisen falls outside it
and is something other than it Since of necessity it
has to he this subsistence ie to express externaUse
itself its expression takes the form that the other
approaches it and incites it But in point of fact,
since it must necessarily express itself it has within
itself this other which to begin with took up a position
as something outside it The latter this other must be
retracted in order that force should be established as
a single one and its essential nature which consists
in selfexpression put forward as an other approaching
it externally Force itself is rather this universal
medium for the subsistence of the moments as constituent elements or, in other words, it has expressed
or externalised itself and what was to be something
outside it attracting or inciting it is really force itself
It exists now as the medium of the constituent elements
which have been evolved But at the same time it is
in its very nature one and single and has essentially
the form of being that in which these various elements
are superseded This oneness is in consequence now
something other than external to force since force
takes its place as the medium for the elements to
exist in and force therefore has this its essential being
outside itself Since however it must of necessity be
this essential nature which as yet it is not affirmed to
be this other comes forward soliciting or inciting it
to reflect into self to turn this pseudoexternal factor
into an aspect of itself in other words, this other
cancels its external expression In point of fact,
however it is force itself that is thus reflected into self
that is the sublation of the external expression The
oneness vanishes as it appeared viz as something
external force is that very other is force thrust back
into itself
What took the character of an external other and
incited force at once to expression and to return into
self turns out directly to be itself force for the other
shows itself to be luiiversal medium as well as one and
single and shows this in such a way that each of the
forms assumed appears at the same time to be merely
a vanishing moment Consequently force in that
there is an other for it and it is for an other has as a
whole not yet developed its complete meaning There
are two forces present at the same time the notion
of both is no doubt the same notion but it has passed
out of its unity into duality Instead of the opposition
continuing to be entirely and essentially a mere moment it appears to have escaped from the control
of the unity and to have become owing to this diremption two quite independent forces We have now to
see more precisely what sort of situation this independence introduces
To begin with the second force stands towards the
force incited in the character of inciting force and
moreover with respect to its content plays the part of
universal medium But since that second force consists essentially in an alternation of these two moments
and is itself force it is likewise in point of fact, their
universal medium only then when it is incited or
solicited to being so and in the same way too it is
negative unity or incites and leads to the retraction of
force only by being incited thereto As a result this
distinction which took place between one force re
garded as inciting and the other as incited turns
also into one and the same reciprocal interchange of
characteristics
The interplay of the two forces in this way arises
from and consists in the two being thus determined with
opposite characteristics in their being for one another
in virtue of this determination and in the complete and
direct exchange of their characteristics a transition from
one to the other whereby alone these determinations
in which the forces seem to appear independently have
being For example, the inciting force is set up as
universal medium and on the other hand the force
incited as a force repressed But the former is universal medium just by the very fact of the latter being
repressed that is to say this latter is really what incites the former and makes it the medium it claims
to be The former gets the character it has only through
the other and is an inciting force only so far as it
is incited by the latter to be so And it loses just as
readily this character given to it for this character passes
or rather has already passed into the character of the
other The former acting in an external way takes
the part of universal medium but only by its having
been incited by the other force to do so This means
however that the latter gives it that position and is
really itselj essentially universal medium it gives the
inciting agency this character just because this other
character is essentially its own ie because it is really
its own self
To complete our insight into the principle of
this process we may notice further that the distinctions themselves reveal distinction in a twofold
manner They are on the one hand distinctions of
content since one extreme is force reflected into itself
while the other is a medium for the constituent elements
involved on the other hand they appear as distinctions of form since one incites and the other is incited
the former being active the latter passive As regards
the distinction of content they are in a general way distinct or distinct for us who are analysing the process
as regards form however they are independent in
their relation they break away from one another of
themselves and stand opposed In the perception of
the movement of force consciousness becomes aware
that the extremes in both these aspects are nothing
fer se that rather these sides in which their distinction
of nature was meant to consist are merely vanishing
moments an immediate transition of each into its
opposite For us however who are analysing the
process it was also true as stated above that per se
the distinctions qiia distinctions of content and form
vanished and on the side of form the active inciting or independent factor was in its very nature
the same as what from the side of content was
presented as repressed force force driven back into
itself the passive incited or related factor was from
the side of form the same as what from the side of
content took shape as universal medium for the many
constituent elements
From this we see that the notion of Force becomes
actual when resolved into two forces and we see
too how it comes to be so These two forces exist
as independent entities but their existence lies in a
movement each towards each of such a kind that in
order to be each has in reality to get its position
purely through the other that is to say their being
has purely the significance of disappearance They
are not like extremes that keep to themselves something positively fixed and merely transmit an external
property to one another through their common medium
and by external contact they are what they are
solely in this medium and in their contact with
each other We have there immediately both force
as it is independently force repressed within itself
and also its expression force inciting and force
being incited These moments are thus not divided
and set up as two extremes offering each other only
an opposite pole rather their true nature is simply
and solely to be each through the other and to be in
the first instance no more than just what each is thus
through the other since it is just that They have
thus in point of fact, no substances of their own which
could support and maintain them The notion of force
rather maintains itself as the essence in its very actuality force when actual exists wholly and only in its
expression and this at the same time is nothing else
than a process of cancelling itself This actual force
when represented as detached from its expression and
existing by itself is force driven back into itself but
this feature is itself in point of fact, as appears from
the foregoing merely a moment in the expression of
force The true nature of force thus remains merely
the thought or idea of force the moments in its realisation its substantial independence and its process
rush without let or hindrance together into one single
undivided unity a unity which is not force withdrawn
into itself for this is merely one of those moments but
is its notion qua notion The realisation of force is
then at the same time dissipation or loss of reality
it has thereby become something quite different viz
this universality which understanding knows from the
start or immediately to be its essential nature and
which shows itself too to be the essence of it in what
is supposed to be its reality in the actual substances
So far as we look on the first universal as the notion
of understanding where force does not yet exist for
itself the second is now its essential reality as it is
revealed in and for itself Or conversely if we look
on the first universal as the immediate which should
be an actual object for consciousness then this second
has the characteristic of being the negative of sensuously objective force it is force in the form in which
in its true being force exists merely as object for
understanding The first Vtould be force withdrawn
into itself ie force as substance the second however
is the inner being of things qua imier which is one
and the same with the notion qua notion
This true being of things has here the characteristic
that it does not exist immediately for consciousness
rather consciousness takes up a mediated relation to
the inner in the form of understanding it looks through
the intervening play of forces into the real and true
backgromid of things The middle term combining the
two extremes understanding and the inner of things
is the explicitly evolved being of force which is now
and henceforth a vanishing process for understanding
itself Hence it is called Appearance
for being which is per se straightway nonbeing we
call a show a semblance It is however
not merely a show but appearance a totality of
seeming This totality as totality or universal
is what makes up the inner world the play of forces
in the sense of its rejlection into itself There consciousness has before itself in objective form the things of
perception as they truly are ie as moments turning
without halt or separate subsistence directly into their
opposite the one changing immediately into the
universal the essential becoming at once something
unessential and vice versa This play of forces is
consequently the development of the negative but
its true nature is the positive element viz the
universal the implicit object the object existing
per se
The being of this object for consciousness is mediated
through the movement of appearance by which the
content of perception and the sensuous objective
world as a whole get merely negative significance
There consciousness is turned back upon itself as the
truth but being consciousness it again makes this
truth into an inner being of the object, and distinguishes
this reflection of things from its own reflection into
self just as the mediating process likewise is for
it still an objective process This inner natme is
therefore for it an extreme placed over against it
But it is on that accotmt the truth for it because
therein as in something essentially real it possesses at
the same time the certainty of its own self the moment
of its own selfexistence But it is not yet conscious of this basis its selfexistence for the independence its being on its own account, vhich should have
the inner world within it would be nothing else than
the negative process This negative process however
is for consciousness still objective vanishing appearance and not yet its own proper selfexistence Hence the inner is no doubt taken to be
notion but consciousness does not yet know the nature
of the notion.
Within this inner truth this absolute universal which
has got rid of the opposition between universal and
particular and become the object of understanding
is a supersensible world which henceforth opens up as
the true world lying beyond the sensuous world which
is the world of appearance Away remote from the
changing vanishing present hes the permanent
beyond an immanent inherent reality which is the first and therefore imperfect
manifestation of Reason ie it is merely the pure
element where the truth finds its abode and its
essential being
Our object henceforward has thus the form of a
syllogistic inference whose extremes are the
inner being of things and understanding and its middle
term the sphere of appearance The course of this
inferential process however furnishes the further
characterisation of what understanding detects in the
inner world by the aid of the middle term and gives
rise to the experience understanding goes through
regarding this relation of the combined and mutually
inferrible terms
The inner world is so far for consciousness a bare and
simple beyond because consciousness does not as yet
find itself in it It is empty for it is merely the nothingness of appearance and positively the naked universal
This type of inwardness suits those who say that the
inner being of things cannot be known but the reason
for the position would have to be taken in some other
sense Certainly there is no laiowledge to be had of this
Cp Goethe m innern der Natur etc
inner world as we have it here not however owing
to reason being too shortsighted or limited or whatever you care to call it on this point there is as yet
nothing known at this stage we have not gone deep
enough for that yet but on account simply of the nature
of the case because in the void there is nothing known
or putting it from the point of view of the other side
because its very characteristic lies in being beyond consciousness
The result is of course the same if you place a blid
man amid the wealth of the supersensible world if it
has a wealth whether this be a content peculiarly its
own or whether consciousness itself be this content
and if you place one with sight in absolute darkness
or if you like in pure light supposing the supersensible
world to be this The seeing man sees in that pure
light as little as in absolute darkness and just as much
as the blind man in the ample fulness which lay before
him If there were really nothing further ado with the
inner sphere and with our being bound up along with
it by means of the world of appearance then there
would be nothing left but to stop at the phenomenal
world ie take something for truth about which we
know that it is not true Or in order that there may be
something in this empty void which while it originally
came about as a state devoid of objective things has
however since it is emptiness pure and simple to
be taken to be also devoid of all mental relations and
distinctions of consciousness qua consciousness in order
that in this complete vacuity which is even called the
holy of hohes the inner sanctuary there may yet be
something we should be driven to fill it up with dreamings appearances produced by consciousness itself It
would have to be content with being treated so badly for
it would not deserve anything better since even dreams
are something better than its own barren emptiness
The inner world or the supersensible beyond has
however arisen it comes to us out of the sphere of
appearance and the latter is its mediating agency in
other words, appearance is its essential nature and
in point of fact, its fillig The supersensible is the
established truth of the sensible and perceptual
The truth of the sensible and the perceptual hes
however in being appearance The supersensible is
then appearance qua appearance We distort the proper
meanmg of this if we take it to mean that the supersensible is therefore the sensible world or the world
as it is for immediate sensecertainty and perception
For on the contrary appearance is just not the world
of senseknowledge and perception as positively being
but this world as superseded or established in truth as
an inner world It is often said that the supersensible
is not appearance but by appearance is thereby meant
not appearance but rather the sensible world taken as
itself real actuality
Understanding which is our object here finds itself
in this position that for it the inner world has come
about to begin with only as the implicit inherent
being universal and still without a filling The play
of forces has simply and solely this negative significance
of not being something jer se and its only positive
significance is that of being the mediating agency but
outside understanding The relation of understanding
to the inner world through mediation is however its
own process by which the inner world will be found
to receive fullness of content
The play of forces is what understanding has directly
to do with but the real truth for it is the inner world
bare and simple The movement of force is consequently
the truth only by being in like manner something simple
Regarding this play of forces however we saw that its
peculiarity lay in this that the force which is awakened
into activity by another force is just on that account
the inciting agency for this other force which thereby
itself only then becomes an inciting force We have
here in this way merely direct and immediate interchange or complete exchange of the characteristic which
constitutes the sole content of what comes before
us viz the fact of being either universal medium or
negative unity It ceases immediately on its entrance
in determinate form to be what it was on entering
it awakens or incites by its appearance in determinate shape the other side which thereby gives itself
expression ie the latter is now directly what the first
was to be Each of these two sides the relation of
inciting and the relation of the opposed determinate
content is on its own account an absolute process of
permutation and transposition But these two relations
are again themselves one and the same and the formal
distinction of being incited and of inciting to activity is
the same as the distinction of content ie the distinction between the incited factor as such viz the passive
medium on the one side and the inciting factor viz the
active medium the negative unity or the one on
the other side In this way there disappears all distinction of contrasted and opposed particular forces
which were meant to be present in this process for
they rested solely on the above distinctions And along
with both those distinctions the distinction between
the forces collapses likewise into merely one There
is thus neither force nor inciting and being incited
to action nor the characteristic of being a stable
medium and a unity reflected into self there is neither
a particular which is something on its own account,
nor are there diverse opposites What is found in
this flux of thoroughgoing change is merely difference
as universal difference or difference into which the
various opposites have been resolved This difference
as universal consequently is what constitutes the
ultimate simple element in that play of forces and is
the resultant truth of that process It is the Law of
Force
The absolute flux of the world of appearance passes
into bare and simple difference through its relation to
the simplicity of the inner being the simplicity apprehended by understanding The inner being is in the
first instance merely the implicit universal This
implicit simple universal however is essentially absolute universal difterence as well for it is the outcome
of the change itself or change is its very nature
But change when planted in the inner reality as it
change truly is forthwith is taken up into that reality
as equally absolute universal difference at peace
with itself and remaining at one with itself In
other words, negation is an essential moment of
the universal and negation or mediation in the
universal is universal difference This difference is
expressed in the law which is the stable presentment or
picture of unstable appearance The supersensible
world is in this way a quiescent kingdom of laws
no doubt beyond the world of perception for this
exhibits the law only through incessant change but
likewise present in it and its direct immovable copy
or image
This kingdom of laws is indeed the truth for understanding and that truth finds its content in the
distinction which lies in the law At the same time
however this kingdom of laws is only the prehminary
truth and does not give all the fullness of the world of
appearance The law is present therein but is not all
the appearance present under ever varying circumstances the law has an evervarying actual existence
Thereby appearance continues to keep one aspect which
is not in the inner world ie appearance is not yet in
very truth established as appearance as that whose independent being has been done away with This defect
in the law has to be brought out in the law itself
What seems defective in it is that while it no doubt
has difference within it it contains this in a merely
universal indeterminate way So far however as it
is not law in general but a law it has determinateness within it and as a result there are found an
indeterminate plurality of laws But this pluiality
is rather itself a defect it contradicts the principle
of understanding for which since it is consciousness of
the simple inner being truth is the inherently universal
unity It must therefore let the many laws coalesce
into a single law just as eg the law by which a stone
falls and that by which the heavenly bodies move have
been conceived as one law When the laws thus
coincide however they lose their specific character
The law becomes more and more abstract and superficial and in consequence we find as a fact not the unity
of these various determinate laws but a law which
leaves out their specific character just as the one law
which combines in itself the laws of fallig terrestrial
bodies and of the movements of celestial bodies does
not in point of fact, express both kinds of laws The
unification of all laws in universal attraction expresses
no fiuther content than just the bare concept of the
law itself a concept which is therein set doAvn as existing Universal attraction says merely that everything
has a constant distinction for anything else Understanding pretends by that to have found a universal
law which gives expression to universal reality as such
but in point of fact, it has merely found the conception
of law itself although in such a way that it at the same
time thereby declares all reality to be in its very nature
conformed to law The idea of universal attraction
has therefore to this extent great importance that it
is directed against that unthinking way of representing
reality to which everything appears in the shape of
accident and chance and for which determinateness
specificity takes the form of sensuous independence
In contrast then with determmate laws stands
universal attraction or the bare conception of law
In so far as this pure conception is looked on as
the essentially real or as the true inner being the
determinateness characterising the specific law itself
belongs still to the sphere of appearance or rather to
sensible existence But the pure conception of law
transcends not merely the law which being itself a
determinate law stands contrasted with other determinate laws but also transcends law as such The
determinateness of which we spoke is itself strictly
a mere vanishing moment which can no longer come
forward here as an essential entity for it is
only the law which is the truth here but the conception
of law is turned against the law itself That is to say
in the law distinction itself is immediately apprehended
and taken up into the universal thereby however
making the moments whose relation it expresses
subsist as mutually indifferent and inherently real
entities These parts of the distinction found in
the law are however at the same time themselves
determinate aspects The pure concept of law as
universal attraction must to get its true significance
be so apprehended that in it as the absolutely single
and simple the distinctions which are present in law
as such return again themselves into the inner being
qua bare and simple unity This unity is the inner
necessity of the law
The law is thereby present in a twofold form In
one case it is there as law in which the differences are
expressed as independent moments in the other
it is in the form of a simple withdrawal into itself
which agaia can be called Force but in the sense not
of repressed force spoken of above but force in
general or the concept of force an abstraction which
absorbs the distinctions involved in what attracts and
is attracted In this sense, eg simple electricity
is force the expression of difference falls however
within the law this difference is positive and negative
electricity In the case of the motion of fallig bodies
force is the simple element gravity which has the law
that the magnitudes of the different factors in the
motion the time spent and the space traversed are to one another in the relation of root and square
Electricity itself is not difference fer se is not in its
essential natuie a twofold entity consisting of positive
and negative electricity hence it is often said it has
the law of being so and so in the way indicated or
again that it has the property of expressing itself in
this fashion This property is doubtless the essential
and peculiar property of this force ie it belongs to
it necessarily But necessity is here an empty phrase
force must just because it must duplicate itself
in this manner Of course if positive electricity is
given negative electricity is inherently necessary
for the positive element only is by being related to
a negative in other words, the positive element in
its very self involves difference from itself just in the
same way as the negative does But that electricity
as such should break itself up into parts in this
way this is not in itself a necessity Electricity
qua simple force is indifferent to its law to be
in the form of positive and negative and if we
call the former its notion and the latter its being
then its notion is indifferent to its being it merely
has this as a property which just means that this is
not per se necessary to it This indifference takes
another form when it is said that to be positive and
negative is involved in the definition of electricity
or that this is neither more nor less than its notion and
its essence Its being in that case would mean its
existence in general But in that definition the necessity
of its existence is not contained it exists either because
we find it ie its existence is not necessary at all or
else it exists through other forces ie the necessity
of its existence is an external necessity But in that
the determinateness of being through another is what
the necessity consists in we are back again to the
plurality of determinate laws which we have just left
in order to consider law as law It is only with the
latter that we can compare its notion as notion or its
necessity This necessity however has in all these
forms shown itself to be just an empty phrase ¥
There is still another way than that just indicated
in which the indifference of law and force or of notion
and being is found In the law of motion eg it
is necessary for motion to be broken up into the
elements time and space or again into distance and
velocity Since motion is merely the relation of these
factors motion the universal has in this way certainly
distinct parts in its own self But now these parts
time and space or distance and velocity do not express
in themselves this origination from a single unity
They are indifferent the one to the other Space is
thought of as able to be without time time without
space and distance at least without velocity just as
their magnitudes are indifferent the one to the other
since they are not related like positive and negative
and consequently do not refer to one another by
their very nature The necessity of partition into
distinct factors then we certainly do have here but
not the necessity of the parts as such for one another
On that account however that first necessity too is
itself a merely delusory false necessity For motion is
not itself thought of as something simple or as bare
essence but as from the first divided into elements
time and space are in themselves its independent parts
or its real elements in other words, distance and velocity
are modes of being or ways of thinking each of which
can very well be without the other and motion is
consequently no more than their superficial relation
not their true nature If it is represented as simple
essence or as force motion is no doubt gravity
but this does not properly spealdng contain these
distinctions
The distinction is then in both cases no distinction
of an inherent or essential kind Either the universal
force is indifferent to the division into parts which
is found in the law or else the distinctions the parts of
the law are indifferent to one another Understanding
however does have the notion of this distinction per se
just by the fact that law is in part the inner being the
inherent nature but is in it at the same time distinguished That this distinction is in this way mner
distinction is shown by the fact that law is bare and
simple force or is the notion of that distinction and
thus is a distinction of the notion. But still this
inner distinction falls to begin with only within understanding and is not yet established in the fact
itself. It is thus only its own necessity to which
understanding gives expression the distinction that
is to say is one which it makes only so as at the same
time to express that the distinction is not to be a
distinction in the nature of the fact itself This
necessity which is merely verbal is thus a rehearsal
of the moments which make up the cycle of necessity
They are no doubt distinct but their distinction is at
the same time explicitly stated to be not a distinction
of the fact itself and consequently is itself again straightway cancelled and transcended This process is called
Explanation A law is expressed from this its inherently universal element or the ground in the sense
of force is distinguished but regarding this distinction it is asserted that it is no distinction rather that
the ground has entirely the same constitutive nature
as the law For example, the particular occurrence
of lightning is apprehended as universal and this
universal is expressed as the law of electricity the
explanation thereupon merges the law in force as the
essence of the law This force is then so constituted
that when it finds expression opposite electrical discharges appear and these again disappear into one
another In other words, force has exactly the same
constitutive character as law both are thus declared
to be in no way distiuct The distinctions are pure
universal expression or law and pure force but both
have the same content the same constitutive character
thus the distinction between them qua distinction of
content ie of fact is also again withdrawn
In this tautological process understandiug as the
above shows holds fast to the changeless unity of its
object and the process takes effect solely within understanding itself not in the object It is an explanation
that not only explains nothing but is so plain that
while it makes as if it would say something different
from what is already said it really says nothing at all
but merely repeats the same thing over again So far
as the fact itself goes this process gives rise to
nothing new the process is only of account as a
process of understanding In it however we now get
acquainted with just what we missed in the case of
the law absolute change itself for this process
when looked at more narrowly is directly the opposite
of itself It sets up that is a distinction which is
not only for us no distinction but which it itself cancels
as distinction This is the same process of change
which was formerly manifested as the play of forces
In the latter we found the distinction of inciting and
incited force or force expressing itself and force withdrawn into itself but these were distinctions which in
reality were no distinctions and therefore were also
immediately cancelled again We have here not merely
the naked unity so that no distinction could be set
up at all the process we have is rather this that
a distinction is certainly made but because it is no
distinction it is again superseded
Thus then with the process of explaining we see
the ebb and flow of change which was formerly characteristic of the sphere of appearance and lay outside
the inner world finding its way into the region of the
supersensible itself Our consciousness however has
passed from the inner being as an object over to understanding on the other side and finds the changing
process there
The change is in this way not yet a process of the
fact itself but rather presents itself before us as pure
change just by the content of the moments of change
remaining the same Since however the notion qua
notion of understanding is the same as the inner nature
of things this change becomes for understanding the
law of the inner world Understanding thus learns
that it is a law in the sphere of appearance for distinctions to come about which are no distinctions In other
words, it learns that what is selfsame is selfrepulsive
and similarly that the distinctions are only such as
in reality are none and cancel one another or
that what is not selfsame is selfattractive Here we
have a second law whose content is the opposite of
what formerly was called law viz the invariable and
unchanging selfidentical distinction for this new
law expresses rather the process of like becoming
unlike and unlike becoming like The notion demands
of the unreflective mind to bring both laws together and
become conscious of their opposition Of course the
second is also a law an inner selfidentical bemg
but it is rather a selfsameness of the unlike a constancy
of inconstancy In the play of forces this law turned
out to be just this absolute transition and pure change
the selfsame force spht into an opposition that in the
first instance appeared as a substantial independent
distinction which however in point of fact proved
to be none For it is the selfsame which repels itself
from itself and this element repelled is in consequence
essentially selfattracted for it is the same the
distinction made since it is none thus cancels itself
again The distinction is hence set forth as a distinction on the part of the fact itself or as an absolute
objective distinction and this distinction on the part
of the fact is thus nothing but the selfsame that which
has repelled itself from itself and consequently only
set up an opposition which is none
By means of this principle the first supersensible
world the changeless kingdom of laws the immediate
ectype and copy of the world of perception has turned
round into its opposite The law was in general like
its differences selfidentical now however it is
established that each side is on the contrary the
opposite of itself The selfidentical repels itself from
itself and the selfdiscordant sets up to be selfsame
In truth with a characteristic of this kind distinction is only inner distinction or immanent distinction
since the like is unlike itself and the unlike like
itself
This second supersensible world is in this way the
inverted world and moreover since
one aspect is already present in the first supersensible
world the inverted form of this first The inner
being is thereby in its character of appearance completed For the first supersensible world was only the
immediate raising of the world of perception into the
element of universality It had its necessary counterpart in this world of perception which still retains as
its own the principle of change and alteration The
first kingdom of laws dispenses with this principle but
preserves it in the form of an inverted world
By the law of this inverted world then the selfsame in the first world is the unlike of itself and the
unlike in the first is equally unlike to itself or
it becomes like itself Expressed in determinate
moments this will assume the form that what by
the law of the first is sweet is in this inner inverted
reality sour what is there black is here white
What by the law of the first was north pole in the case
of the magnet is in its other supersensible inner
world viz in the earth south pole while what was
there south pole is here north pole Similarly what
by the first law is in the case of electricity the
oxygen pole becomes in its other supersensible reality
hydrogen pole and conversely what is there the pole
of hydrogen becomes here the pole of oxygen To take
another sphere of experience revenge on an enemy
is according to the primitive immediate law the
supreme satisfaction of injured individuality This
law however that of standing up against one who
does not treat me as a substantial self letting him see
that I am a substantial being and even doing away with
him as a reality this law is converted by the principle
of the other world into the very opposite viz into the
reinstatement of myself as the true reality through
the removal of the alien hostile being in selfdestruction If now this inversion which is brought out
in the punishment of crime is made into a law it also
is again only the law of a world which has an inverted
supersensuous world standing in antithesis to itself
where that which is despised in the former comes to
honour and that which in the former is honoured
meets with contempt The punishment which by
the law of the former disgraces a man and annihilates
him turns round in its inverted world into the pardoning grace which preserves his being and brings him to
honour
Looked at on the surface this inverted world is the
antithesis of the first in the sense that it has the latter
outside itself and repels that world from itself as
an inverted reality that the one is the sphere of appearance while the other is the inherent being that
the one is the world as it is for an other the other again
the world as it is for itself In this way to use the
previous examples what tastes sweet is properly
or inwardly in the thing sour or what is north pole
in the case of the actual magnet belonging to the
sphere of appearance would be in the inner or essential
being south pole What is shown to be oxygen pole
The primitive procedure of individual vengeance finds its inner
meaning revealed in the ethically justifiable jrocedure of punishment
But ethical punishment is really selfpunishment
Punishment however Hegel goes on to say has an inner meaning of
its own too
in electricity as a phenomenon would be hydrogen
pole in the case of electricity not fallig within the sphere
of appearance Or again an act which m appearance
is a crime would m its inner nature be capable of being
really good a bad act may have a good intention
punishment is only in appearance punishment in
itself or in another world it might well be for the
criminal a benefit But such oppositions of inner and
outer appearance and supersensible in the sense of two
sorts of reality are no longer to be found here The
differences repelled are not divided anew and assigned
to two substances such as would support them and lend
them a separate subsistence the result of which would
be that understandiag would leave the iuner region
and fall back again on its previous position The one
aspect or substance would be once more the world of
perception where the one of those two laws would carry
on its existence and in opposition to it an inner world
just such a sensible world as the first but in the sphere
of ideas one that could not be indicated seen heard
and tasted as a sensible world and yet would be thought
of as such a sensible world But in point of fact, if
the one element set up is a perceived reality and
its inherent being as its inverted form is at the
same time a sensuously represented element then
sour which would be the inherent nature of the
sweet thing is a real thing just as much as the latter
would be a sour thing black which would be the inherent nature of white is the actual black the north pole
which is the true reality of the south pole is the north
pole present in the same magnet the oxygen pole
the inherent nature of the pole of hydrogen is the
given oxygen pole of the same voltaic pile The actual
crime however finds its inversion and its inherent
nature qua possibility in the intention as such but
not in a good intention for the truth of intention
is simply the deed itself The crime so far as its
content goes recoils upon itself finds its inversion
in actual punishment this is the reconcihation of
the law with the reality set up against it in crime
Finally the actual punishment carries its inverted
reality with it in such a way that it is a kind of realisation of the law whereby the activity which the law
exercises in the form of punishment is cancelled in the
process a manner of realisation through which the
law from being actively operative becomes again
quiescent and authoritative and the conflict of individuality with it and of it with individuality is extinguished
From the idea then of inversion which constitutes the essential nature of one aspect of the
supersensible world we must dissociate the sensuous
idea of keeping distinctions substantively fixed in a
different element that sustains them and this absolute
notion of distinction must be set forth and apprehended
purely as inner distinction selfrepulsion of the selfsame as selfsame and likeness of the unlike as unlike
We have to think pure flux opposition within opposition itself or Contradiction For in the distinction
which is an internal distinction the opposite is not
only one of two factors if so it would not be an
opposite but a bare existent it is the opposite of an
opposite or the other is itself directly and immediately
present within it No doubt I put the opposite here
and the other of which it is the opposite there that
is I place the opposite on one side taking it by itself
without the other Just on that account howev
since I have here the opposite all by itself, it is the
opposite of its own self that is it has in point of fact
the other immediately within itself Thus the supersensible world which is the inverted world has at the
same time reached out beyond the other world and has
in itself that other it is to itself conscious of being
inverted ie it is the inverted form
of itself it is that world itself and its opposite in a
single unity Only thus is it distinction as internal
distinction or distinction fer se in other words, only
thus is it in the form of Infinity
By means of infinity we see law attaining the form of
inherent necessity and so realising its complete nature
and all moments of the sphere of appearance are
thereby taken up into the inner realm That the simple
and ultimate nature of law is necessity means according
to the foregoing analysis that it is a selfidentical
element which however is inherently distinction
or that it is selfsameness which repels itself from itself
breaks asunder into two factors What was called
simple force duplicates itself and through its infinity
is law It means that what is thus sundered
constituting as it does the parts which are thought of
as in the law puts itself forward as subsisting as stable
and if the parts are considered without the conception
of internal distinction then space and time, or distance
and velocity which appear as moments of gravity
are just as much indifferent and without necessary
relation to one another as to gravity itself or again
as this bare gravity is indifferent to them or as simple
electricity is indifferent to positive and negative But
by this conception of internal distinction this unlike
and indifferent factor space and time, etc becomes
a distinction which is no distinction or merely a
distinction of what is selfsame and whose essence lies
in tinity They are reciprocally awakened into activity
as positive and negative by each other and their being
lies rather in their setting themselves up as notbeing
and cancellig themselves in the common unity Both
the factors distinguished subsist they are per se and
they are fer se as opposites that is are the oppositea
of themselves they have their antithesis withia them
and are merely one single unity
This bare and simple infinity or the absolute notion
may be called the ultimate nature of life the soul of
the world the universal lifeblood which courses everywhere and whose flow is neither disturbed nor checked by
any obstructing distinction but is itself every distinction
that arises as well as that into which all distinctions are
dissolved pulsating within itself but ever motionless
shaken to its depths but still at rest It is self identical
for the distinctions are tautological they are distinctions that are none This selfidentical reality stands
therefore in relation solely to itself To itself which
means this is an other to which the relation points
and relation to itself is more strictly breaking asunder
in other words, that very selfidentity is internal
distinction These sundered factors have hence each
a separate being of their own each is an opposite
of an other and thus with each the other is therein
if so facto expressly given or it is not the opposite of
an other but only the pure opposite and thus each
is therefore in itself the opposite of itself Or agam
each is not an opposite at all but exists purely for
itself a pure selfidentical reality with no distinction
in it This being so we do not need to ash still less to
treat anxiety over such a question as philosophy or
even regard this as a question philosophy cannot
answer how distinction or otherness is to come out
of this pure essence how these are to be really got out
of it For the process of disruption has already taken
place distinction has been excluded from the selfidentical entity and put on one side so far as it is concerned what should have been taken as the selfidentical is thus already one of the sundered elements
instead of being the absolute essential reality
That the selfidentical breaks asunder means therefore
juSt as truly that it supersedes itself as already sundered
that it cancels itself qua otherness The unity which
people usually have in mind when they say distinction
cannot come out of unity is in point of fact, itself merely
one moment of the process of disruption it is the abstraction of simplicity which stands in contrast with distinction But in that it is abstraction is merely one
of the two opposed elements the statement thus already
imphes that the unity is the process of breaking asunder
for if the unity is a negative element an opposite then
it is put forward precisely as that which contains
opposition withiu it The different aspects of diremption and of becoming selfidentical are therefore likewise
merely this process of self cancelling For since the
selfidentical element which should first divide itself
asunder or pass into its opposite is an abstraction ie
is already itself a sundered element its diremption is eo
if so a cancelling of what it is and thus the cancellig
of its being srmdered The process of becoming selfidentical is likewise a process of diremption what
becomes identical with itself thereby opposes itself to
disruption that is itself thereby puts itself on
one side in other words, it becomes really something
sundered
Infinitude this absolute unrest of pure selfmovement
such that whatever is determined in any way eg
as being is really the opposite of this determinateness
has from the start been no doubt the very soul of
all that has gone before but it is in the inner world
that it has first come out explicitly and definitely The
world of appearance or the play of forces aheady
shows its operation but it is in the first instance as
Explanation that it comes openly forward And since
it is at length an object for consciousness and consciousness is aware of it as what it is consciousness is in this
way Self consciousness Understandings function of
explaining furnishes in the first instance merely the
description of what selfconsciousness is Understanding cancels the distinctions present in Law distinctions which have aheady become pure distinctions
but are still indifferent and puts them inside a single
unity Force To bring about this identification however is at the same time and immediately a process
of diremption for understanding removes the distinctions and sets up the oneness of force only by
the fact that it creates a new distinction of force and
law which at the same time however is no distinction
And in spite of the fact that this distinction is at the
same time no distinction it goes on to deal with it and
to cancel this distinction again since it lets force have
just the same constitutive character as law This
process or necessity is however in this form still a
necessity and a process of understanding or the process
as such is not the object of understanding instead
understanding has as its objects in that process positive
and negative electricity distance velocity force of
attraction and a thousand other things objects which
make up the content of the moments of the process
It is just for that reason that there is so much satisfaction
in explanation because consciousness being there if
we may use such an expression in direct conununion
with itself enjoys itself only No doubt it there seems
to be occupied with something else but in point of
fact it is busied all the while merely with itself
In the opposite law as the inversion of the first
law or in internal distinction infinitude doubtless
becomes itself object of understanding But once
more understanding fails to do justice to infinity as
such since understanding assigns again to two worlds
or to two substantial elements that which is distinction per se the selfrepulsion of the selfsame and
the selfattraction of unlike factors To understanding
the process as it is found in experience is here an
event that happens and the selfsame and the unlike
are predicates whose reality is an underlying substratum What is for understanding an object in a
covering veil of sense now comes before us in its
essential form as a pure notion This apprehension
of distinction as it truly is the apprehension of infinitude as such is something for us observing the
course of the process or is implicit immanent The
exposition of its notion belongs to science Consciousness however in the way it immediately has this
notion again appears as a peculiar form or new attitude
of consciousness, which does not recognise its own
essential nature in what has gone before but looks
upon it as something quite different
In that this notion of infinitude is its object it
is thus a consciousness of the distinction as one which
at the same time is at once cancelled Consciousness
is for itself and on its own account, it is a distinguishiag
of what is undistinguished it is Selfconsciousness I
distinguish myself from myself and therein I am
immediately aware that this factor distinguished from
me is not distinguished I the selfsame being thrust
myself away from myself but this which is distinguished which is set up as unlike me is immediately on its being distinguished no distinction for me
Consciousness of an other of an object in general is
indeed itself necessarily selfconsciousness reflectedness
into self consciousness of self in its otherness The
necessary advance from the previous attitudes of consciousness, which found their true content to be a thing
something other than themselves brings to light this
very fact that not merely is consciousness of a thing
only possible for a selfconsciousness but that this selfconsciousness alone is the truth of those attitudes But
it is only for us who trace this process that this truth
is actually present it is not yet so for the consciousness
immersed in the experience Selfconsciousness has in
the first iustance become a specific reality on its own
account, has come into being for itself it is
not yet in the form of unity with consciousness in general
We see that in the inner being of the sphere of
appearance understanding gets to know in truth nothing
else but appearance itself not however appearance in
the shape of a play of forces but that play of forces
in its absolutely universal moments and in the process
of those moments in fact understanding merely
experiences itself Kaised above perception con
sciousness reveals itself ¥united and bound up with
the supersensible world through the mediating agency
of the realm of appearance through which it gazes into
this background that hes behind appearance The
two extremes the one that of the pure inner region
the other that of the inner being gazing into this pure
inner region are now merged together and as they
have disappeared qua extremes the middle term the
mediating agency qua something other than these
extremes has also vanished This curtain of appearance therefore hanging before the inner world is withdrawn and we have here the inner being the ego gazing
into the inner reali the vision of the imdistinguished
selfsame reality which repels itself from itself affirms
itself as a divided and distinguished inner reality but
as one for which at the same time the two factors have
immediately no distinction what we have here is Selfconsciousness It is manifest that behind the socalled
curtain which is to hide the inner world there is nothing
to be seen unless we ourselves go behind there as much
in order that we may thereby see as that there may be
something behind there which can be seen But it is
clear at the same time that we cannot without more
ado go straightway behind there For this knowledge
of what is the truth of the idea of the realm of appearance and of its inner being is itself only a result arrived
at after a long and devious process in the course of
which the modes of consciousness meaning perception and understanding disappear And it
will be equally evident that to get acquainted with
what consciousness knows when it is knowing itself
requires us to fetch a still wider compass What follows
will set this forth at length
The analysis of experience up to this point has been occupied with the
relation of consciousness to an object admittedly different in nature
from the mind aware of it This external opposition however breaks
down under analysis and we are left with the result that consciousness
does and must find itself in unity with its object a unity which implies
identity of nature between consciousness and its object consciousness
becomes certain of itself in its object This is not merely a result but
the truest expression of the initial relation with which experience
starts It is therefore the ground of the possibility of any relation
between the terms in question consciousness of self is the basis of the
consciousness of anything whatsoever This is Hegels reinterpretation of
the Kantian analysis of experience
But this result is again really the startingpoint for a further analysis
of experience but of experience at a higher level of realisation Consciousness of self is to begin with a general attitude a definite type
of experience which requires elucidation It has its own conditions
and forms of manifestation Selfconsciousness being supreme must
realise itself in relation to nature to other selves similar to the self
and to the Ultimate Being of the world These are different kinds
of content with which consciousness is to find its oneness and they furnish
different forms in which the same principle is manifested The argument
seeks to show that these forms are also different degrees of realisation of
selfconsciousness The outcome of the argument is that self consciousness
is truly realised only when it is universal selfconsciousness when consciousness is certain of itself throughout all reality and explicitly finds
there only itself This result takes the form as we shall see of what is
called Reason
The immediately succeeding section takes up the first stage of the
development of selfconsciousness the consciousness of self in relation to
nature This takes the shape of Desire Instinct Impulse etc and
involves the category of Life This relationship vihile undoubtedly
implying the sense of self in the object and consciousness of unity with
it is the least satisfying and the least complete of all the modes of selfconsciousness It points the way therefore to the fuller sense of self
obtained when the self is aware of itself in relation to another self
IN the kinds of certainty hitherto considered the
truth for consciousness is something other than
consciousness itself The conception however of this
truth vanishes in the course of our experience of it
What the object immediately was in itself whether
mere being in sensecertainty a concrete thing in
perception or force in the case of understanding
it turns out in truth not to be this really but instead
this inherent nature proves to be a way in
which it is for an other The abstract conception of
the object gives way before the actual concrete object
or the first immediate idea is cancelled in the course of
experience Mere certainty vanished in favour of the
truth There has now arisen however what was not
established in the case of these previous relationships
viz a certainty which is on a par with its truth for the
certainty is to itself its own object and consciousness is
to itself the truth Otherness no doubt is also found
there consciousness that is makes a distinction but
what is distinguished is of such a kind that consciousness at the same time holds there is no distinction made
If we call the movement of knowledge conception and
knowledge qua simple unity or Ego the object we see
thatÈnot only for us tracing the process but likewise for knowledge itself the object corresponds to the
conception or if we put it in the other form and call
conception what the object is in itself, while applying
the term object to what the object is qua object oi for an
other it is clear that being initself and being for
an other are here the same For the inherent being is consciousness yet it is still just as much
that for which an other viz what is in-itself is
And it is for consciousness that the inherent nature
of the object, and its being for an other are
one and the same Ego is the content of the relation
and itself the process of relating It is Ego itself which
is opposed to an other and at the same time reaches
out beyond this other which other is all the same
taken to be only itself
With selfconsciousness then we have now passed
into the native land of truth into that kingdom where
it is at home We have to see how the form or attitude
of selfconsciousness in the first instance appears
When we consider this new form and type of knowledge
the knowledge of self in its relation to that which
preceded namely the knowledge of an other we find
indeed that this latter has vanished but that its
moments have at the same time been preserved and
the loss consists in this that those moments are here
present as they are implicitly as they are in themselves The being which meaning dealt with
particularity and the universality of perception
opposed to it as also the empty inner region of
understanding these are no longer present as substantial elements but as moments of selfconsciousness ie as abstractions or differences which
are at the same time of no account for consciousness
itself or are not differences at all and are purely
vanishing entities
What seems to have been lost then is only the
principal moment viz the simple fact of having
independent subsistence for consciousness But in
reality selfconsciousness is reflection out of the bare
being that belongs to the world of sense and perception
and is essentially the return out of otherness As selfconsciousness it is movement but since it is only its
self as such which it distinguishes from itself the
difference is straightway taken to be superseded qua
otherness The distiuction is not and selfconsciousness
is only the lifeless tautology Ego is Ego I am I
since for selfconsciousness the distinction does not
also have the shape of being it is not selfconsciousness For selfconsciousness then otherness is a fact
it does exist as a distinct moment but the unity
of itself with this difference is also a fact for selfconsciousness and is a second distinct moment With
that first moment selfconsciousness occupies the
position of consciousness and the whole expanse of the
world of sense is conserved as its object but at the
same time only as related to the second moment the
unity of selfconsciousness with itself And consequently the sensible world is regarded by selfconsciousness as having a subsistence which is however
only appearance or forms a distinction from selfconsciousness that per se has no being This opposition
of its appearance and its truth finds its real essence
however only in the truth in the unity of selfconsciousness with itself This unity must become
essential to selfconsciousness ie self consciousness is
the state of Desire in general Consciousness has qua
selfconsciousness henceforth a twofold object the one
immediate the object of sensecertainty and of perception which however is here found to be marked by the
character of negation the second viz itself which is
the true essence and is found in the first instance only
in the opposition of the first object to it Self consciousness presents itself here as the process in which this
opposition is removed and oneness or identity with
itself established
For us or impUcitly the object which is the
negative element for selfconsciousness has on its
side returned into itself just as on the other side
consciousness has done Through this reflection into
self the object has become Life What self consciousness distinguishes as having a being distinct from
itself has in it too so far as it is affirmed to he not
merely the aspect of sensecertainty and perception
it is a being reflected into itself and the object of immediate desire is something living For the inherent
reality the general result of the relation of the
understanding to the inner nature of things is the
distinguishing of what cannot be distinguished or
is the unity of what is distinguished This vmity
however is as we saw just as much its recoil from
itself and this conception breaks asunder into the
opposition of selfconsciousness and fife the former
is the unity for which the absolute unity of differences
exists the latter however is only this unity itself
so that the unity is not at the same time for itself
Thus according to the independence possessed by
consciousness is the independence which its object
in itself possesses Selfconsciousness which is absolutely for itself and characterises its object directly
as negative or is primarily desire will really therefore
find through experience this objects independence
The determination of the principle of Mfe as
obtained from the conception or general result
with which we enter this new sphere is sufficient
to characterise it without its nature being evolved
further out of that notion Its circuit is conapleted
in the following moments The essential element
is infinitude as the supersession of all distinctions the pure rotation on its own axis itself at
rest while being absolutely restless infinitude the very
selfdependence in which the differences brought out
in the process are all dissolved the simple reality
of time which in this selfidentity has the solid
form and shape of space The differences aU the same
hold as differences in this simple universal medium
for this universal flux exercises its negative activity
merely when it is the sublation of them but it could not
transcend them unless they had a subsistence of their
own Precisely this flux is itself as selfidentical
independence their subsistence or their substance in
which they accordingly are distinct members parts
which have being in their own right Being no longer
has the significance of mere abstract being nor has
their naked essence the meaning of abstract universality
their being now is just that simple fluent substance
of the pure movement within itself The difference
however of these members inter se consists in general
in no other characteristic than that of the moments of
infinitude or of the mere movement itself
The independent members exist for themselves To
be thus for themselves however is really as much their
reflection directly into the unity as this unity is the
breaking asunder into independent forms The unity
is sundered because it is absolutely negative or infinite
unity and because it is subsistence difference likewise
has independence only in it This independence of
form for the form is a sundered element appears
as a determinate entity as what is for another and
the sublation of diremption takes effect so farthrough
another But this sublation lies just as much in
the actual form itself For just that flux is the
substance of the independent forms This substance
however is infinite and hence the form itself in its
very subsistence involves diremption or sublation of
its existence for itself
If we distinguish more exactly the moments contained here we see that we have as first moment the
subsistence of the independent forms or the suppression
of what distinction inherently involves viz that the
forms have no being per se and no subsistence
The second moment however is the subjection
of that subsistence to the infinitude of distinction
In the fiist moment there is the subsisting persisting mode or form by its being in its own right or
by its being in its determinate shape an infinite substance it comes forward in opposition to the universal
substance disowns this fluent continuity with that
substance and insists that it is not dissolved in this
universal element but rather on the contrary preserves
itself by and through its separation from this its inorganic nature and by the fact that it consumes this
inorganic nature Life in the universal fluid medium
quietly silently shaping and moulding and distributing
the forms in all their manifold detail becomes by
that very activity the movement of those forms or
passes into life qua Process The mere universal
flux is here the inherent being the outer being the
other is the distinction of the forms assumed But
this flux this fluent condition becomes itself the other
in virtue of this very distinction because now it exists
for or in relation to that distinction which is selfconditioned and selfcontained and
consequently is the endless infinite movement by which
that stable medium is consumeds life as a living
process
This inversion of character however is on that account
again invertedness in itself as such Wliat is consumed
is the essential reality the Individuality which preserves itself at the expense of the universal and gives
itself the feeling of its unity with itseH precisely
thereby cancels its contrast with the other by means of
which it exists for itself The unity with self which it
gives itself is just the fluent continuity of difierences or universal dissolution But conversely the
cancelling of individual subsistence at the same time
produces the subsistence For since the essence of the
individual form universal life and the selfexistent
entity in itself are simple substance each cancels this
its own simplicity or its essence by putting the other
within itself ie it sunders that simplicity and this
disruption of fluent undifferentiated continuity is
just the setting up the affirmation of individuality
The simple substance of life therefore is the diremption
of itself into shapes and forms and at the same time the
dissolution of these substantial differences and the
resolution of this diremption is just as much a
process of diremption a dismemberment Thus
both the sides of the entire movement which were
before distinguished viz the setting up of individual forms lying apart and imdisturbed in the universal
medium of independent existence and the process of
life collapse into one another The latter is just as
much a formation of independent individual shapes
as it is a way of cancellig a shape assumed and the
former the setting up of individual forms is as much
a cancelling as an articulation of them The fluent
continuous element is itself only abstraction of the
real essence or is actual only as a definite shape or
form and that it articulates itself is once more a
breaking up of the articulated form or a dissolution of it
The entire circuit of this activity constitutes Life It
is neither what is expressed to begin with the immediate
continuity and concrete solidity of its essential nature
nor the stable subsisting form the discrete individual which exists on its own account nor the bare
process of this form nor again is it the simple combination of all these moments It is none of these it is
the whole which develops itself resolves its own
development and in this movement simply preserves
itself
Since we started from the first immediate unity and
returned through the moments of formdetermination
and of process to the unity of both these moments
and thus again back to the first simple substance we see
that this reflected unity is other than the first As
opposed to that immediate unity the unity expressed
as a mode of being this second is the universal unity
which holds all these moments sublated within itself.
It is the simple genus which in the movement of life
itself does not exist in this simpUcity for itself but in
this result points life towards what is other than itself
namely towards Consciousness for which life exists as
this unity or as genus
This other life however for which the genus as such
exists and which is geniis for itself namely selfconsciousness exists in the first instance only in the form
of this simple essential reality and has for object itself
qua pure Ego In the course of its experience which
we are now to consider this abstract object will grow in
richess and will be unfolded in the way we have seen
in the case of life
The simple ego is this genus or the bare universal
for which the differences are insubstantial only by its
being the negative essence of the moments which have
assumed a definite and independent form And selfconsciousness is thus only assured of itself through sublating
this other which is presented to selfconsciousness as
an independent life selfconsciousness is Desire Convinced of the nothingness of this other it definitely
affirms this nothingness to be for itself the truth of this
other negates the independent object and thereby
acquires the certainty of its own self as true certainty a
certainty which it has become aware of in objective
form
In this state of satisfaction however it has experience of the independence of its object Desire
and the certainty of its self obtained in the gratification
of desire are conditioned by the object for the certainty exists through cancellig this other in order
that this cancelling may be effected there must be this
other Selfconsciousness is thus unable by its negative
relation to the object to abolish it because of that
relation it rather produces it again as well as the
desire The object desired is in fact something other
than selfconsciousness the essence of desire and
through this experience this truth has become realised
At the same time however selfconsciousness is likewise
absolutely for itself exists on its own account and it
is so only by sublation of the object and it must
come to feel its satisfaction for it is the truth On
account of the independence of the object, therefore it
can only attain satisfaction when this object itself
efiectually brings about negation within itself The
object must fer se effect this negation of itself for it is
inherently something negative and must be
for the other what it is Since the object is in its
very self negation and in being so is at the same time
independent it is Consciousness In the case of life
which is the object of desire the negation either lies
in an other namely in desire or takes the form of
determinateness standing in opposition to an other
external individuum indifferent to it or appears as
its inorganic general nature The above general iudependent nature however in the case of which negation takes the form of absolute negation is the genus
as such or as selfconsciousness Selfconsciousness
attains its satisfaction only in another selfconsciousness
It is in these three moments that the notion of selfconsciousness first gets completed pure undifferentiated ego is its first inmaediate object This immediacy
is itself however thoroughgoing mediation it has its
being only by cancelling the independent object in
other words it is Desire The satisfaction of desire is
indeed the reflection of selfconsciousness into itself
is the certainty which has passed into objective truth
But the truth of this certainty is reaUy twofold
reflection the reduplication of selfconsciousness Consciousness has an object which impUcates its own otherness or affirms distinction as a void distinction and
therein is independent The individual form dis
tinguished which is only a living form certainly cancels
its independence also in the process of life itself but
it ceases along with its distinctive difference to be what
it is The object of selfconsciousness however is still
independent in this negativity of itself and thus it
is for itself genus universal flux or continuity in the
very distinctiveness of its own separate existence it
is a living selfconsciousness
A selfconsciousness has before it a self consciousness
Only so and only then is it selfconsciousness in actual
fact for here first of all it comes to have the unity of
itself in its otherness Ego which is the object of its
notion is in point of fact not object The object of
desire however is only independent for it is the
universal ineradicable substance the fluent selfidentical essential reality When a selfconsciousness is the
object the object is just as much ego as object
With this we already have before us the notion
of Mind or Spirit What consciousness has further
to become aware of is the experience of what mind
is this absolute substance which is the unity of
the different selfrelated and selfexistent selfconsciousnesses in the perfect freedom and independence of
their opposition as component elements of that substance Ego that is we a plurality of Egos and
we that is a single Ego Consciousness first finds
in selfconsciousness the notion of mindts turningpoint where it leaves the particoloured show of the
sensuous immediate passes from the dark void of the
transcendent and remote supersensuous and eps
into the spiritual daylight of the present
The selves conscious of self in another self are of course distinct and
separate from each other The difference is in the first instance, a
question of degree of selfassertion and self maintenance one is stronger
higher more independent than another and capable of asserting this at
the expense of the other Still even this distinction of primary and
secondary rests ultimately on their identity of constitution and the
course of the analysis here gradually brings out this essential identity as
the true fact The equality of the selves is the truth or completer
realisation of self in another self the affinity is higher and more ultimate
than the disparity Still the struggle and conflict of selves must be gone
through in order to bring out this result Hence the present section
The background of Hegels thought is the remarkable human phenomenon of the subordination of one self to another which we have in all
forms of servitude whether slavery serfdom or voluntary service
Servitude is not only a phase of human history it is in principle a
condition of the development and maintenance of the consciousness of
self as a fact of experience
Selfconsciousness exists in itself and for itself in
that and by the fact that it exists for another
selfconsciousness that is to say it is only by being
acknowledged or recognised The conception of this
its unity in its duplication of infinitude realising itself
in selfconsciousness has many sides to it and encloses
within it elements of varied significance Thus its
moments must on the one hand be strictly kept apart
in detailed distinctiveness and on the other in this
distinction must at the same time also be taken as not distinguished or must always be accepted and understood in their opposite sense This double meaning of
what is distinguished lies in the nature of selfconsciousness of its being infinite or directly the
opposite of the determinateness in which it is fixed
The detailed exposition of the notion of this spiritual
unity in its duplication will bring before us the process
of Recognition
Selfconsciousness has before it another selfconsciousness it has come outside itself This has a
double significance First it has lost its own self since
it finds itself as an other being secondly it has thereby
sublated that other for it does not regard the other as
essentially real but sees its own self in the other
It must cancel this its other To do so is the sublation of that first double meaning and is therefore a
second double meaning First it must set itself to
sublate the other independent being in order thereby
to become certain of itself as true being secondly it
thereupon proceeds to sublate its own self for this
other is itself
This sublation in a double sense of its otherness in
a double sense is at the same time a return in a double
sense into its self For firstly through sublation it
gets back itself because it becomes one with itself again
through the cancellig of its otherness but secondly it
likewise gives otherness back again to the other selfconsciousness for it was aware of being in the other it
cancels this its own being in the other and thus lets the
other again go free
This process of selfconsciousness in relation to
another selfconsciousness has in this manner been
represented as the action of one alone But this action
on the part of the one has itsilf the double significance
of being at once its own actirn and the action of that
other as well For the other is likewise independent
shut up within itself and there is nothing in it which
is not there through itself The first does not have the
object before it in the way that object primarily
exists for desire but as an object existing independently for itself over which therefore it has no
power to do anything for its own behoof if that object
does not per se do what the first does to it The process
then is absolutely the double process of both selfconsciousnesses Each sees the other do the same as
itself each itself does what it demands on the part of
the other and for that reason does what it does only so
far as the other does the same Action from one side
only would be useless because what is to happen can
only be brought about by means of both
The action has then a double entente not only in the
sense that it is an act done to itself as well as to the
other but also inasmuch as it is in its undivided
entirety the act of the one as well as of the other
In this movement we see the process repeated which
came before us as the play of forces in the present case
however it is found in consciousness What in the
former had effect only for us contemplating experience
holds here for the terms themselves The middle
term is selfconsciousness which breaks itself up into
the extremes and each extreme is this interchange of
its own determinateness and complete transition into
the opposite While qua consciousness it no doubt
comes outside itself still in being outside itself it is
at the same time restrained within itself it exists for
itself and its selfexternalisation is for consciousness Consciousness finds that it immediately is and is not
another consciousness as also that this other is for
itself only when it cancels itself as existing for itself and
has selfexistence only in the selfexistence of the other
Each is the mediating term to the other through
which each mediates and unites itself with itself and
each is to itself and to the other an immediate selfexisting reality which at the same time exists thus for
itself only through this mediation They recognise
themselves as mutually recognising one another
This pure conception of recognition of duplication
of self consciousness within its unity we must now
consider in the way its process appears for selfconsciousness It will in the first place present the aspect of the
disparity of the two or the breakup of the
middle term into the extremes which qua extremes
are opposed to one another and of which one is merely
recognised while the other only recognises
Selfconsciousness is primarily simple existence for
self selfidentity by exclusion of every other from
itself It takes its essential nature and absolute object
to be Ego and in this immediacy in this bare
fact of its self existence it is individual That which
for it is other stands as unessential object as object
with the impress and character of negation But the
other is also a self consciousness an individual
makes its appearance in antithesis to an individual
Appearing thus in their immediacy they are for each
other in the manner of ordinary objects They are
independent individual forms modes of consciousness
that have not risen above the bare level of life for the
existent object here has been determined as life They
are moreover forms of consciousness which have not yet
accomplished for one another the process of absolute abstraction of uprooting all immediate existence and of
being merely the bare negative fact of selfidentical consciousness or, in other words, have not yet revealed
themselves to each other as existing purely for themselves ie as selfCOnsciousness Each is indeed certain
of its own self but not of the other and hence its own
certainty of itself is still without truth For its truth
would be merely that its own individual existence for
itself would bts shown to it to be an independent object
or which is the same thing that the object would be
exhibited as this pure certainty of itself By the notion
of recognition however this is not possible except in
the form that ss the other is for it so it is for the other
each in its self through its own action and again through
the action of the other achieves this pure abstraction
of existence for self
The presentjjition of itself however as pure abstraction
of selfconscio|usness consists in showing itself as a pure
negation of itsi objective form or in showing that it is
fettered to no\ determinate existence that it is not
bound at all hj\ the particularity everywhere characteristic of existence as such and is not tied up with
life The process of bringing all this out involves a
twofold action laction on the part of the other and
action on the part of itself In so far as it is the others
action each aimsl at the destruction and death of the
other But in thris there is implicated also the second
kind of action Çlfactivity for each imphes that it
risks its own life The relation of both selfconsciousnesses is in this way so constituted that they prove
themselves and each other through a lifeanddeath
struggle They ixlust enter into this struggle for they
must bring their certainty of fhemselves the certainty
of being for themselves to the level of objective truth
and make this a fact both in the case of the other and
in their ovm case as well And it is solely by risking
life that freedom is obtained only thus is it tried
and proved that the essential nature of selfconsciousness is not bare existence is not the merely immediate
form in which it at first makes its appearance is not
its mere absorption in the expanse of life Rather it
is thereby guaranteed that there is nothing present
but what might be taken as a vanishiing moment
that selfconsciousness is merely pure sef existence
beingforself The individual who has not staked
his ife may no doubt be recognised as a Person but
he Jias not attained the truth of this recognition as an
independent selfconsciousness In the same way each
must aim at the death of the other as it risks its own
life thereby for that other is to it of no more worth
than itself the others reality is presented to the former
as an external other as outside itself it must cancel
that externality The other is a purely existent consciousness and entangled in manifold \vays it must
regard its otherness as pure existence for itself or as
absolute negation
This trying and testing however by a struggle to
the death cancels both the truth which was to result
from it and therewith the certainty of self altogether
For just as life is the natural position of consciousness independence without absolute negativity so
death is the natural negation of consciousness
negation without independence which thus remains
without the requisite significance of actual recognition Through death doubtless there has arisen
the certainty that both did stake their life and held
it lightly both in their own case and in the case of
the other but that is not for those who underwent
this struggle They cancel their consciousness which
had its place in this alien element of natural existence
in other words, they cancel themselves and are sublated
as terms or extremes seeking to have existence on their
own account But along with this there vanishes from
the play of change the essential moment viz that of
breaking up into extremes with opposite characteristics and the middle term collapses into a lifeless
unity which is broken up into lifeless extremes merely
existent and not opposed And the two do not mutually
give and receive one another back from each other
through consciousness they let one another go quite
indifferently like things Their act is abstract negation
not the negation characteristic of consciousness, which
cancels in such a way that it preserves and maintains
what is sublated and thereby survives its being sublated
In this experience selfconsciousness becomes aware
that life is as essential to it as pure selfconsciousness
Tn immediate selfconsciousness the simple ego is
absolute object which however is for us or in itself
absolute mediation and has as its essential moment
substantial and solid independence The dissolution of
that simple unity is the result of the first experience
through this there is posited a pure selfconsciousness
and a consciousness which is not purely for itself but
for another ie as an existent consciousness consciousness in the form and shape of thinghood Both
moments are essential since in the first instance,
they are unlike and opposed and their reflection into
unity has not yet come to light they stand as two
opposed forms or modes of consciousness The one is
independent whose essential nature is to be for itself
the other is dependent whose essence is life or existence
for another The former is the Master or Lord the
latter the Bondsman
The master is the consciousness that exists for itself
but no longer merely the general notion of existence for
self Rather it is consciousness which while existing
on its own account, is mediated with itself through an
other consciousness viz bound up with an independent
being or with thinghood in general The master brings
himself into relation to both these moments to a thing
as such the object of desire and to the consciousness
whose essential character is thinghood and since the
master qua notion of selfconsciousness is an immediate relation of selfexistence but is now moreover at
the same time mediation or a beingforself which is
for itself only through an other he the master stands
in relation a immediately to both mediately to
each through the other The master relates himself to
the bondsman mediately through independent existence
for that is precisely what keeps the bondsman in
thrall it is his chain from which he could not in the
struggle get away and for that reason he proves himself
dependent shows that his independence consists in
being a thing The master however is the power
controlling this state of existence for he has shown in
the struggle that he holds existence to be merely
something negative Since he is the power dominating the negative nature of existence while this
existence again is the power controlling the other
the bondsman the master holds far consequence
his other in subordination In the same way the
naster relates himself to the thing mediately through
he bondsman The bondsman being a selfconsciousaess in the broad sense also takes up a negative attitude
to things and cancels them but the thing is at the
same time independent for him and in consequence
he cannot with all his negating get so far as to annihilate
it outright and be done with it that is to say he
merely works on it To the master on the other hand
by means of this mediatiag process belongs the immediate relation in the sense of the pure negation of it
in other words he gets the enjoyment What mere desire
did not attain he now succeeds in attaining viz to have
done with the thing and find satisfaction in enjoyment
Desire alone did not get the length of this because of the
independence of the thing The master however who
has interposed the bondsman between it and himself
thereby relates himself merely to the dependence
of the thing and enjoys it without qualification and
without reserve The aspect of its independence he
leaves to the bondsman who labours upon it
In these two moments the master gets his recognition
through an other consciousness for in them the latter
aiSrms itself as unessential both by working upon the
thing and on the other hand by the fact of being
dependent on a determinate existence in neither case
can this other get the mastery over existence and
succeed in absolutely negating it We have thus here
this moment of recognition viz that the other consciousness cancels itself as selfexistent and ipso facto
itself does what the first does to it In the same way
we have the other moment that this action on the part
of the second is the action proper of the first for what
is done by the bondsman is properly an action on the
part of the master The latter exists only for himself
that is his essential nature he is the negative power
without qualification a power to which the thing is
naught and his is thus the absolutely essential action in
this situation while the bondsmans is not so his is an
unessential activity But for recognition proper there
is needed the moment that what the master does to the
other he should also do to himself and what the bondsman does to himself he should do to the other also
On that accomit a form of recognition has arisen that
is onesided and unequal
In all this the unessential consciousness is for the
master the object which embodies the truth of his
certainty of himself But it is evident that this object
does not correspond to its notion for just where the
master has effectively achieved lordship he really
finds that something has come about quite different
from an independent consciousness It is not an independent but rather a dependent consciousness that he
has achieved He is thus not assured of selfexistence
as his truth he finds that his truth is rather the unessential consciousness and the fortuitous unessential
action of that consciousness
The truth of the independent consciousness is accordingly the consciousness of the bondsman This doubtless appears in the first instance outside it and not as the
truth of selfconsciousness But just as lordship showed
its essential nature to be the reverse of what it wants
to be so too bondage will when completed pass
into the opposite of what it immediately is being
a consciousness repressed within itself it will enter into
itself and change round into real and true independence
We have seen what bondage is only in relation to
lordship But it is a selfconsciousness and we have now
to consider what it is in this regard in and for itself
In the first instance, the master is taken to be the
essential reality for the state of bondage hence for it
the truth is the independent consciousness existing for
itself although this truth is not yet taken as inherent
in bondage itself Still it does in fact contain within
itself this truth of pure negativity and selfexistence
because it has experienced this reality within it For
this selfconsciousness was not in peril and fear
for this element or that nor for this or that moment
of time it was afraid for its entire being it
felt the fear of death it was in mortal terror of its
sovereign master It has been in that experience
melted to its inmost soul has trembled throughout
its every fibre the stable foundations of its whole being
have quaked within it This complete perturbation
of its entire substance this absolute dissolution of all
its stability into fluent continuity is however the
simple ultimate nature of selfconsciousness absolute negativity pure selfreferrent existence which
consequently is involved in this type of consciousness
This moment of pure selfexistence is moreover a fact
for it for in the master this moment is consciously
his object Further this bondsmans consciousness
is not only this total dissolution in a general way
in serving and toiling the bondsman actually carries
this out By serving he cancels in every particular
moment his dependence on and attachment to natural
existence and by his work removes this existence away
The feeling of absolute power however realised both
in general and in the particular form of service is
only dissolution implicitly and albeit the fear of his lord
is the beginning of wisdom consciousness is not therein
aware of being selfexistent Through work and
labour however this consciousness of the bondsman
comes to itself In the moment which corresponds to
desire in the case of the masters consciousness the
aspect of the nonessential relation to the thing seemed
to fall to the lot of the servant since the thing there
retained its independence Desire has reserved to itself
the pure negating of the object and thereby unalloyed
feeling of self This satisfaction however just for that
reason is itself only a state of evanescence for it lacks
objectivity or subsistence Labour on the other hand is
desire restrained and checked evanescence delayed and
postponed in other words, labour shapes and fashions
the thing The negative relation to the object passes into
the form of the object, into something that is permanent and remains because it is just for the labourer
that the object has independence This negative
mediating agency this activity giving shape and form
is at the same time the individual existence the pure
selfexistence of that consciousness which now in the
work it does is externalised and passes into the condition of permanence The consciousness that toils and
serves accordingly comes by this means to view that
independent being as its self
But again shaping or forming the object has not
only the positive significance that the bondsman
becomes thereby aware of himself as factually and
objectively selfexistent this type of consciousness
has also a negative import in contrast with its first
moment the element of fear For in shaping the thing
it only becomes aware of its own proper negativity its
existence on its own account, as an object tkrough the
fact that it cancels the actual form confronting it
But this objective negative element is precisely the
alien external reality before which it trembled Now
however it destroys this extraneous alien negative
affirms and sets itself up as a negative in the element
of permanence and thereby becomes aware of being
objectively for itself In the master this selfexistence
is felt to be an other is only external in fear
the self existence is present implicitly in fashioning the thing selfexistence comes to be felt explicitly as its own proper being and it attains the
consciousness that itself exists in its own right and on
its own account. By the fact that
the form is objectified it does not become something other than the consciousness moulding the thing
through work for just that form is his pure selfexistence which therein becomes truly realised Thus
precisely in labour where there seemed to be merely
some outsiders mind and ideas involved the bondsman
becomes aware through this rediscovery of himself by
himself of having and being a mind of his own
For this reflection of self into self the two moments
fear and service in general as also that of formative
activityTare necessary and at the same time both must
exist in a universal manner Without the discipline
of service and obedience fear remains formal and
does not spread over the whole known reality of
existence Without the formative activity shaping the
thing fear remains inward and mute and consciousness
does not become objective for itself Should consciousness shape and form the thing without the initial state
of absolute fear then it has merely a vain and futile
mind of its own for its form or negativity is
not negativity perse and hence its formative activity
cannot furnish the consciousness of itself as essentially
real If it has endured not absolute fear but merely
some slight anxiety the negative reality has remained
external to it its substance has not been through and
through infected thereby Since the entire content
of its natural consciousness has not tottered and
shaken it is still inherently a determinate mode of
being having a mind of its own is
simply stubbornness a type of freedom
which does not get beyond the attitude of bondage
The less the pure form can become its essential nature
the less is that form as overspreading and controlling
particulars a universal formative activity an absolute
notion it is rather a piece of cleverness which has
mastery within a certain range but does not wield
universal power and dominate the entire objective
reality
The previous section has established the self as ultimately a free self
But even this is abstract at first and hence the attempt to maintain it
must pass through different stages These attempts have taken historical
expression in European civilisation but these are merely instances of an
experience that is strictly found in all mankind Hegel however selects
the forms assumed in European history and has these in mind throughout the succeeding analysis The terms Stoicism and Scepticism refer
primarily to the forms which these assumed in Greece and Rome The last
stage of independent and free selfhood he names faute de mieux the
unhappy consciousness The background of historical material for
this type of mind is found in the religious life of the Middle Ages and
the mental attitude assumed under the dominion of the Roman Catholic
Church and the Peudal Hierarchy The social and political dissolution
of the Roman Empire has its counterpart in the mental chaos and
dissolution of Scepticism the craving of free mind for absolute stability
and constancy amid change and uncertainty found expression in an
organised attempt on the part of the Church to establish permanent connection between mans mental insecurity and an Immutable Reality
The two poles of the antithesis were far removed from each other and
the method or methods adopted to bring about the union reflect the
profound contrast of the opposing elements It is the inner process of
free mind in this realm of abstract subjective piety which Hegel analyses
in the part termed the unhappy consciousness unhappy because
craving complete consciousness of self and never at this stage attaining it
The end of this movement and therefore the disappearance of all the
onesidedness of abstract individual freedom of self is found when through
the above struggle there dawns on the self the consciousness of its complete
and explicit unity with reality in every shape and form This is the
beginning of the absolute sovereignty of Mind the Consciousness of
Reason as supreme The change to this new condition found historical
expression in the Reformation and the Renaissance
Independent selfconsciousness partly finds its essential reality in the bare abstraction of Ego On the
other hand when this abstract ego develops further
and forms distinctions of its own, this differentiation
does not become an objective inherently real content for
that selfconsciousness Hence this selfconsciousness
does not become an ego which truly differentiates itself
in its abstract simplicity or one which remains identical
with itself in this absolute differentiation The repressed and subordinated type of consciousness on the
other hand becomes in the formative activity of work
an object to itself in the sense that the form given to
the thing when shaped and moulded is his object he
sees in the master at the same time selfexistence as
a real mode of consciousness But the subservient
consciousness as such finds these two moments fall
apart the moment of itself as independent object
and the moment of this object as a mode of consciousness and so its own proper reality Since however
the form and the self existence are for us or objectively
in themselves one and the same and since in the notion
of independent consciousness the inherent reality is
consciousness the phase of inherent existence or thinghood which received its shape and
form through labour is no other substance than consciousness In this way we have a new attitude or
mode of consciousness brought about We have now a
consciousness which takes itself to be infinitude or
one whose essential nature is pure process of consciousness It is one which thinlis or is free selfconsciousness
For thinking does not consist in being an abstract ego
but in being an ego which has at the same time the
significance of inherently existing in itself or which
relates itself to objective reality in sucli a way that
this signifies the selfexistence of that consciousness
for which it is an object The object does not for
thinking proceed by way of presentations or figures
but of notions conceptions ie of a differentiated
reality or essence which being an immediate content
of consciousness is nothing distinct from it What is
presented shaped and constructed and existent as such
has the form of being something other than consciousness
A notion however is at the same time an existent and
this distinction so far as it falls in consciousness itself
is its determinate content But in that this content is
at the same time a conceptually constituted a comprehended content consciousness remains
immediately aware within itself of its unity with this
determinate existent so distinguished not as in the
case of a presentation where consciousness from the first
has to take special note that this is the idea of the object
on the contrary the notion is for me eo ipso and at once
my notion In thinking I am free because I am not in
an other but remain simply and solely in touch with
myself and the object which for me is my essential
reality is in undivided unity my selfexistence and
my procedure in dealing with notions is a process
within myself
It is essential however in this determination of the
above attitude of selfconsciousness to keep hold of
the fact that this attitude is thinking consciousness in
general that its object is immediate unity of the self's implicit inherent existence and of its existence explicitly
for self The selfsame consciousness which repels itself
from itself becomes aware of being an element existing
in itself But to itself it is this element to begin with
only as universal reality ia general and not as this
essential reality appears when developed in all the
manifold details it contains when the process of its
being brings out all its fullness of content
This freedom of selfconsciousness as is well known
has been called Stoicism in so far as it has appeared
as a phenomenon conscious of itself in the course of
the history of mans spirit Its principle is that consciousness is essentially that which thinks is a thinking
reality and that anything is really essential for consciousness or is true and good only when consciousness
in dealing with it adopts the attitude of a thinking
being
The manifold selfdifferentiating expanse of life with
all its individualisation and complication is the object
upon which desire and labour operate This varied activity has now contracted itself into the simple distinction
which is found in the pure process of thought What
has still essential reality is not a distinction in the
sense of a determinate thing or in the shape of a consciousness of a determinate kind of natural existence
in the shape of a feeling or again in the form of desire
and its specific purpose whether that purpose be set
up by the consciousness desiring or by an extraneous
consciousness What has the more essential significance
here is solely that distinction which is a thoughtconstituted distinction or which when made is not distinguished from me This consciousness in consequence
takes a negative attitude towards the relation of lordship and bondage Its action in the case of the master
results in his not simply having his truth in and through
the bondsman and in that of the bondsman in not
finding his truth in the will of his master and in service
The essence of this consciousness is to be free on the
throne as well as in fetters throughout all the dependence that attaches to its individual existence and to
maintain that stolid lifeless unconcern which persistently
withdraws from the movement of existence from
effective activity as well as from passive endurance
into the simple essentiality of thought Stubbornness
is that freedom which makes itself secure in a solid
singleness and keeps vjithin the sphere of bondage
Stoicism on the other hand is the freedom which ever
comes directly out of that sphere and returns back into
the pure universality of thought It is a freedom which
can come on the scene as a general form of the worlds
spirit only in a time of universal fear and bondage a
time too when mental cultivation is universal and
has elevated culture to the level of thought
Now while this selfconsciousness finds its essential
reality to be neither something other than itself nor
the pure abstraction of ego but ego which has within it
otherness otherness in the sense of a thoughtconstituted distinction so that this ego in its otherness
is turned back directly into itself yet this essential
nature is at the same time only an abstract reality
The freedom of selfconsciousness is indifferent towards
natural existence and has therefore let this latter go
and remain free The reflection is thus duplicated
Freedom of thought takes only pure thought as its
truth and this lacks the concrete fillig of life It is
therefore merely the notion of freedom not living
freedom itself for it is to begin with only thinking in
general that is its essence the form as such which has
turned away from the independence of things and gone
back into itself Since however individuality when acting should show itself to be alive or when thinking
should grasp the living world as a system of thought
there ought to he in thought itself a content to supply
the sphere of the ego in the former case with what is
good and in the latter true in order that there should
throughout be no other ingredient in what consciousness
has to deal with except the notion which is the real
essence But here by the way in which the notion as an
abstraction cuts itself off from the multiplicity of things
the notion has no content in itself the content is a
datum is given Consciousness no doubt abolishes the
content as an external a foreign existent by the fact
that it thinks it but the notion is a determinate notion
and this determinateness of the notion is the alien element
the notion contains within it Stoicism therefore got
embarrassed when as the expression went it was
asked for the criterion of truth in general ie properly
speaking for a content of thought itself To the question
what is good and true it responded by giving again the
abstract contentless thought the true and good are
to consist in reasonableness But this selfidentity of
thought is simply once more pure form in which
nothing is determinate The general terms true and
good wisdom and virtue with which Stoicism has to
stop short are therefore in a general way doubtless
elevating but seeing that they cannot actually and in
fact reach any expanse of content they soon begin to
get wearisome
This thinking consciousness in the way in which it is
thus constituted as abstract freedom is therefore only
incomplete negation of otherness Withdrawn from existence solely into itself it has not there fully vindicated
itself as the absolute negation of this existence It holds
the content indeed to be only thought but in doing so
also takes thought as a specific determinate thought
and at the same time the general character of the
content
Scepticism is the realisation of that of which Stoicism
is merely the notion and is the actual experience of
what freedom of thought is it is in itself and essentially
the negative and must so exhibit itself With the
reflection of selfconsciousness into the simple pure
thought of itself independent existence or permanent
determinateness has in contrast to that reflection
dropped as a matter of fact out of the infinitude of
thought In Scepticism the entire unessentiality and
unsubstantiality of this other becomes a reality for
consciousness Thought becomes thinking which
wholly annihilates the being of the world with
its manifold determinateness and the negativity of
free selfconsciousness comes to be in the case of
these manifold forms which life assumes real negativity
It is clear from the foregoing that just as Stoicism
answers to the notion of independent consciousness
which appeared as a relation of lordship and bondage
Scepticism on its side corresponds to its realisation to
the negative attitude towards otherness to desire and
labour But if desire and work could not carry out for
selfconsciousness the process of negation this polemical
attitude towards the manifold substantiality of things
will on the other hand be successful because it turns
against them as a free selfconsciousness and one
complete within itself beforehand or expressed more
definitely because it has inherent in itself thought or
the principle of infinitude where the independent elements in their distinction from one another are held to
be merely vanisliing quantities The differences which
in the pure thinking of self are only the abstraction of
differences become here the whole of the differences
and every differentiated existent becomes a difference
of selfconsciousness
With this we get determined the action of Scepticism
in general as also its mode and nature It shows the
dialectic movement which is sensecertainty perception
and understanding It shows too the unessentiality of
that which holds good in the relation of master and
servant and which for abstract thought itself passes
as determinate That relation involves at the same
time a determinate situation in which there are found
even moral laws as commands of the sovereign lord
The determinations in abstract thought however are
scientific notions into which formal contentless thought
expands itself attaching the notion as a matter of fact
in merely an external fashion to the existence independent of it and holding as valid only determinate
notions albeit they are still pure abstractions
Dialectic as a negative process taken immediately
as it stands appears to consciousness in the first
instance, as something at the mercy of which it is, and
which does not exist through consciousness itself In
Scepticism on the other hand this negative process is
a moment of selfconsciousness which does not simply
find its truth and its reality vanish without selfconsciousness knowing how but rather which in
the certainty of its own freedom itself lets this other
so claiming to be real vanish Selfconsciousness here
allows not only the objective as such to disappear before
the negations of Scepticism but also its own attitude
and relation to the object where the object is held
to be objective and rendered valid ie its attitude of
perception as also its process of securing wliat is in danger
of being lost viz sophistry with its selfconstituted and
selfestablisbed truth By means of this selfconscious
negation selfconsciousness procures for itself the
certainty of its own freedom brings about the experience of that freedom and thereby raises it into the
truth What vanishes is what is determinate the
difference which no matter what its nature or whence
it comes sets up to be fixed and unchangeable The
difference has nothing permanent in it and must vanish
before thought because to be differentiated just means
not to have being in itself but to have its essential
nature solely in an other Thinking however is the
insight into this character of what is differentiated
it is the negative function in its simple ultimate
form
Sceptical selfconsciousness thus discovers in the
flux and alternation of all that would stand secure in
its presence its own freedom as given by and received
from its own self It is aware of being this arapala of
selfthinking thought the unalterable and genuine
certainty of its self This certainty does not arise as a
result out of something extraneous and foreign which
stowed away inside itself its whole complex development a result which would thus leave behind the
process by which it came to be Kather consciousness
itself is thoroughgoing dialectical restlessness this
mlee of presentations derived from sense and thought
whose differences collapse into oneness and whose
identity is similarly again resolved and dissolved for
this identity is itself determinateness as contrasted with
nonidentity This consciousness however as a matter
of fact instead of being a selfsame consciousness
is here neither more nor less than an absolutely
fortuitous embroglio the giddy whirl of a perpetually
selfcreating disorder This is what it takes itself to be
for itself maintains and produces this selfimpellig
confusion Hence it even confesses the fact it
owns to being an entirely fortuitous individual consciousness a consciousness which is empirical which is
directed upon what admittedly has no reality for it
which obeys what in its regard has no essential
being which realises and does what it knows to have
no truth But while it passes in this manner for an
individual isolated contingent in fact animal life
and a lost selfconsciousness it also on the contrary
again turns itself into universal selfsameness for it
is the negativity of all singleness and all difference
From this selfidentity or rather within its very self it
falls back once more into that contingency and confusion for this very selfdirected process of negation
has to do solely with what is single and individual and
is occupied with what is fortuitous This form of
consciousness is therefore the aimless fickleness and
instability of going to and fro hither and thither
from one extreme of selfsame selfconsciousness to the
other of contingent confused and confusing consciousness It does not itself bring these two thoughts of
itself together It finds its freedom at one time in the
form of elevation above all the whirling complexity
and all the contingency of mere existence and again
at anot_ time likewise confesses to fallig back upon
what is unessential and to being taken up with that
It lets the unessential content in its thought vanish
but in that very act it is the consciousness of some
thing unessential It announces absolute disappearance
but the announcement is and this consciousness is the
evanescence expressly announced It announces the
nulhty of seeing hearing and so on yet itself sees
and hears It proclaims the nothingness of essential
ethical principles and makes those very trutlis the
sinews of its own conduct Its deeds and its words
behe each other continually and itself too has the
doubly contradictory consciousness of immutability and
sameness and of utter contingency and nonidentity
with itself But it keeps asunder the poles of this
contradiction within itself and bears itself towards
the contradiction as it does in its purely negative
process in general If sameness is shown to it it points
out unlikeness nonidentity and when the latter which
it has expressly mentioned the moment before is held
up to it it passes on to indicate sameness and
identity Its talk in fact is like a squabble among
selfwilled children one of whom says a when the other
says B and again B when the other says a and who
through being in contradiction with themselves procure
the joy of remaining in contradiction with one another
In Scepticism consciousness gets in truth to know
itself as a consciousness containing contradiction within
itself From the experience of this proceeds a new
attitude which brings the two thoughts together which
Scepticism holds apart The want of intelligence which
Scepticism manifests regarding itself is bound to vanish
because it is in fact one consciousness which possesses
these two modes wjthin it This new att le consequently is one which is aware of being the double
consciousness of itself as selfhberating unalterable
selfidentical and as utterly selfconfounding self
perverting and this new attitude is the consciousness
of this contradiction within itself
In Stoicism selfconsciousness is the bare and simple
freedom of itself In Scepticism it realises itself
negates the other side of determinate existence but
in so doing really doubles itself and is itself now a
duality In this way the duplication which previously
was divided between two individuals the lord and the
bondsman is concentrated into one Thus we have here
that dualising of selfconsciousness within itself which
lies essentially in the notion of mind but the tmity
of the two elements is not yet present Hence the
Unhapfy Consciousness the Alienated Soul which is
the consciousness of self as a divided nature a
doubled and merely contradictory being
This unhappy consciousness divided and at variance
within itself must because this contradiction of its
essential nature is felt to be a single consciousness always have in the one consciousness the other
also and thus must be straightway driven out of each
in turn when it thinks it has therein attained to the
victory and rest of unity Its true return into itself or
reconciliation with itself will however exhibit the
notion of mind endowed with a life and existence of
its own, because it implicitly involves the fact that, qua
single and undivided it is a double consciousness It
is itself the gazing of one selfconsciousness into another
ar itself is both and the unity of both is
essence but objectively and consciously it is not
yet this essence itself is not yet the unity of both
Since in the first instance, it is the immediate the
implicit unity of both while for it they are not one and
the same but opposed it takes one namely the simple
unalterable as essential the other the manifold and
changeable as the rmessential For it both are realities
foreign to each other Itself because consciousness of
this contradiction assumes the aspect of changeable
consciousness and is to itself the imessential but as
consciousness of unchangeableness of the ultimate
essence it must at the same time proceed to free itself
from the imessential ie to liberate itself from itself
For though in its own view it is indeed only the changeable and the unchangeable is foreign and extraneous
to it yet itself is simple and therefore unchangeable
consciousness of which consequently it is conscious as
its essence but still in such wise that itself is again in
its own regard not this essence The position which it
assigns to both cannot therefore be an indifference of
one to the other ie cannot be an indifference of
itself towards the unchangeable Rather it is immediately both itself and the relation of both assumes for
it the form of a relation of essence to the nonessential so
that this latter has to be cancelled but since both are
to it equally essential and are contradictory it is only
the conflicting contradictory process in which opposite
does not come to rest in its own opposite but produc
itself therein afresh merely as an opposite
Here then there is a struggle against an enemy
victory over whom really means being worsted where
to have attained one result is really to lose it in the
opposite Consciousness of life of its existence and
action is merely pain and sorrow over this existence
and activity for therein consciousness finds only consciousness of its opposite as its essence and of its own
nothingness Elevating itself beyond this it passes to
the unchangeable But this elevation is itself this same
consciousness It is therefore immediately consciousness of the opposite viz of itself as single individual
particular The unchangeable which comes to consciousness is in that very fact at the same time affected
by particularity and is only present with this latter
Instead of particularity having been abolished in the
consciousness of immutability it only continues to
appear there still
In this process however consciousness experiences
just this appearance of particularity in the unchangeable and of the unchangeable in particularity Consciousness becomes aware of particularity in general in
the immutable essence and at the same time it there
finds its own particularity For the truth of this
process is precisely that the double consciousness is one
and single This unity becomes a fact to it but in the
first instance the unity is one in which the diversity of
both factors is still the dominant feature Owing to
this consciousness has before it the threefold way in
which particularity is connected with unchangeableness In one form it comes before itself as opposed
to the unchangeable essence and is thrown back
to the beginning of that struggle which is from
first to last the principle constituting the entire
situation At another time it finds the unchangeable appearing in the form of particularity so that
the latter is an embodiment of unchangeableness into
which in consequence the entire form of existence
passes In the third case it discovers itself to be this
particular fact in the unchangeable The first unchangeable is taken to be merely the alien external
Being which passes sentence on particular existence
since the second unchangeable is a form or mode of
particularity like itself f the unchangeable becomes in
the third place spirit has the joy of finding
itself therein and becomes aware within itself that its
particularity has been reconciled with the universal J
What is set forth here as a mode and relation of the
unchangeable came to light as the experience through
which selfconsciousness passes in its unhappy state
of diremption This experience is now doubtless not its
own onesided process for it is itself unchangeable consciousness and this latter consequently is a particular consciousness as well and the process is as much a
process of that unchangeable consciousness which
makes its appearance there as certainly as the other
For that movement is carried on in these moments
an unchangeable now opposed to the particular in
general then being itself particular opposed to the
other particular and finally at one with it But this
consideration so far as it is our affair ¤ is here out of
place for thus far we have only had to do with unchangeableness as unchangeableness of consciousness,
which, for that reason is not true immutability but
is still affected with an opposite we have not had
before us the unchangeable per se and by itself we do
not, therefore know how this latter will conduct itself
What has here so far come to light is merely this t Christ ¤ e the philosophical observer
that to consciousness which is our object here the
determinations above indicated appear in the unchangeable
For this reason then the unchangeable consciousness
also preserves in its very form and bearing the character
and fundamental features of diremption and separate
selfexistence as against the particular consciousness
For the latter it is thus altogether a contingency a mere
chance event that the unchangeable receives the form
of particularity just as the particular consciousness
merely happens to find itself opposed to the unchangeable and therefore has this relation fer naturam
Finally that it finds itself in the unchangeable appears
to the particular consciousness to be brought about
partly no doubt by itself or to take place for the
reason that itself is particular but this union both
as regards its origin as well as in its being appears
partly also due to the unchangeable and the opposition
remains within this unity itself In point of fact,
through the unchangeable assuming a definite form the
beyond as a moment has not only remained but
really is more securely established For if the remote
beyond seems indeed brought closer to the individual
by this particular form of realisation on the other
hand it is henceforward fixedly opposed to the individual a sensuous impervious unit with all the
hard resistance of what is actual The hope of becoming one therewith must remain a hope ie without
fulfilment without present fruition for between the
hope and fulfilment there stands precisely the absolute
contingency or immovable indifference which is involved in the very assumption of determinate shape
and form the basis and foundation of the hope By
the nature of this existent unit through the particular
reality it has assumed and adopted it comes about
of necessity that in course of time it becomes a
thing of the past something that has been somewhere
far away and absolutely remote it remains
If at the beginning the bare notion of the sundered
consciousness involved the characteristic of seeking to
cancel it qua particular consciousness and become the
unchangeable consciousness the direction its effort
henceforth takes is rather that of cancelling its relation
to the pure unchangeable without shape or embodied
form and of adopting only the relation to the unchangeable which has form and shape For the oneness
of the particular consciousness with the unchangeable
is henceforth its object and the essential reality for it
just as in the mere notion of it the essential object was
merely the formless abstract unchangeable and the
relation found in this absolute disruption characteristic
of its notion is now what it has to turn away from The
external relation however primarily adopted to the
formed and embodied unchangeable as being an alien
extraneous reality must be transmuted and raised to
that of complete and thoroughgoing fusion and identification
The process through which the unessential consciousness strives to attain this oneness is itself a triple
process in accordance with the threefold character of
the relation which this consciousness takes up to its
transcendent and remote reality embodied in specific
form In one it is a pure consciousness at another
time a particular individual who takes up towards
actuality the attitude characteristic of desire and labour and in the third place it is a consciousness
of its selfexistence its existence for itself We
have now to see how these three modes of its being are
found and are constituted in that general relation
In the first place then regarded as pure consciousness
the unchangeable embodied in definite historical form
seems since it is an object for pure consciousness to
be established as it is in its selfsubsistent reality
But this its reality in and for itself has not yet come
to light as we already remarked Were it to be in
consciousness as it is in itself and for itself this would
certainly have to come about not from the side of
consciousness but from the unchangeable But this
being so its presence here is brought about through
consciousness only in a onesided way to begin with
and just for that reason is not found in a perfect
and genuine form but constantly weighted and encumbered with imperfection with an opposite
But although the unhappy consciousness does not
possess this actual presence it has at the same time
transcended pure thought so far as this is the abstract
thought of Stoicism Avhich turns away from particulars
altogether and again the merely restless thought of
Scepticism so far in fact as this is merely particularity in the sense of aimless contradiction and
the restless process of contradictory thought It has
gone beyond both of these it brings and keeps
together pure thought and particular existence but has
not yet risen to that level of thinking where the
particularity of consciousness is harmoniously reconciled
with pure thought itself It rather stands midway
at the point where abstract thought comes in
contact with the particularity of consciousness qua
particularity Itself is this act of contact it is the
union of pure thought and particularity Moreover
this thinking individuality or pure thought exists for
it and for it too the unchangeable is essentially
a particular existence But that this its object the
unchangeable which assumes essentially the form of
particularity is its own self the self which is particularity of consciousness this is not established for it
In this first condition consequently in which we
treat it as piue consciousness it takes up towards its
object an attitude which is not that of thought but
rather since it is indeed in itself pure thinking particularity and its object is just this pure thought but pure
thought is not their relation to one another as such
it so to say merely gives itself up to thought devotes
itself to thinking and is the
state of Devotion Its thinking as such
is no more than the passing clang of ringing bells
or a cloud of warm incense a kind of thinking
in terms of music that does not get the length of
notions which would be the sole immanent objective
mode of thought This boundless pure inward feeling comes to have indeed its object but this object
does not make its appearance in conceptual form and
therefore comes on the scene as something external
and foreign Hence we have here the inward movement of pure emotion which feels itself but
feels itself in the bitterness of souldiremption It is
the movement of an infinite Yearning which is assured
that its nature is a pure emotion of this kind a pure
thought which thinks itself as particularity a yearning
that is certain of being known and recognised by this
object for the very reason that this object thinks
itself as particularity At the same time however this
nature is the miattainable beyond which in being
seized escapes or rather has already escaped The
beyond has aheady escaped for it is in part the unchangeable thinking itself as particularity and consciousness therefore attains itself therein immediately
attains itself but as something opposed to the unchangeable instead of grasping the real nature
consciousness merely feels and has fallen back upon
itself Since in thus attaining itself consciousness
cannot prevent itself from being this opposite it
has merely laid hold of what is unessential instead of
having seized true reality Thus just as on one side
when striving to find itself in the essentially real it only
lays hold of its own divided state of existence so too
on the other side it cannot grasp that other the
essence as particular or as concrete That other
cannot be foundwhere it is sought for it is meant to
be just a beyond that which can not be found
When looked for as particular it is not a universal a
thoughtconstituted particularity not notion but
particular in the sense of an object, or a concrete actual
an object of immediate senseconsciousness of sense
certainty and for that reason it is one which has
disappeared Consciousness therefore can only come
upon the grave of its own life But since this is itself
an actuality and since it is contrary to the nature of
actuality to afford a lasting possession the presence
even of that tomb is merely the source of trouble toil
and struggle a fight which must be lost But since consciousness has found out by experience that the grave
of its actual unchangeable Being has no concrete actuality that the vanished particularity qua vanished
is not true particularity it will give up looking for the
unchangeable particular existence as something actual
or will cease trying to hold on to what has thus vanished Only so is it capable of finding particularity in
a true form a form that is universal
In the first instance, however the withdrawal of the
emotional life into itself is to be taken in such a way
that this life of feeling in its own regard has actuality
qua particular existence It is pure emotion which
for us or per se has found itself and satiated itself for
although it is no doubt aware in feeling that the
ultimate reality is cut off from it yet in itself this
feeling is self feeling it has felt the object of its own
pure feeling and this object is its own self It thus
comes forward here as selffeeling or as something
actual on its own account. In this return into self
we find appearing its second attitude the condition
of desire and labour which ensures for consciousness
the inner certainty of its own self which as we
saw it has obtained by the process of cancellig
and enjoying the alien external reality existence in
the form of independent things The unhappy consciousness however finds itself merely desiring and toiling it is not consciously and directly aware that so to
find itself rests upon the inner certainty of its self and
that its feeling of real being is this selffeeling Since it
does not in its own view have that certainty its inner
life really remains still a shattered certainty of itself
that confirmation of its own existence which it would
receive through work and enjoyment is therefore just
as tottering and insecure in other words, it must consciously nullify this certification of its own being so as to find therein confirmation indeed but confirmation
only of what it is for itself viz of its disunion
The actual reality on which desire and work are
directed is from the point of view of this consciousness
no longer something in itself null and void something
merely to be destroyed and consumed but rather
something like that consciousness itself a reality broken
in sunder which is only in one respect essentially null
but in another sense also a consecrated world This
reality is a form and embodiment of the unchangeable
for the latter has conserved in itself particularity and
because qua unchangeable it is a universal its particularity as a whole has the significance of all actuality
If consciousness were for itself an independent
consciousness and reality were taken to be in and for
itself of no account then consciousness would attain in
work and enjoyment the feeling of its own independence
by the fact that its consciousness would be that which
cancels reality But since this reality is taken to be
the form and shape of the unchangeable consciousness
is unable of itself to cancel that reality On the contrary seeing that consciousness manages to nullify
reality and to obtain enjoyment this must come
about through the unchangeable itself when it disposes
of its own form and shape and delivers this up for
consciousness to enjoy
Consciousness on its part appears here likewise as
actual though at the same time as internally shattered
and this diremption shows itself in the course of toil
and enjoyment to break up into a relation to reality
or existence for itself and into an existence in itself
That relation to actuality is the process of alteration
or acting the existence for itself which belongs
to the particular consciousness as such But therein
it is also in itself this aspect belongs to the unchangeable beyond This aspect consists in faculties and
powers an external gift which the unchangeable
here hands over for consciousness to make use of
In its action accordingly consciousness in the first
instance, has its being in the relation of two extremes
On one side it takes its stand as the active present
and opposed to it stands passive reality
both in relation to each other but also both withdrawn
into the unchangeable and firmly established in themselves From both sides therefore there is detached
merely a superficial element to constitute their opposition they are only opposed at the surface and the play
of opposition the one to the other takes place
there
The extreme of passive reality is sublated by the
active extreme Actuality can however on its own
side be sublated only because its own changeless essence
sublates it repels itself from itself and hands over to
the mercy of the active extreme what is thus repelled
Active force appears as the power wherein actual
reality is dissolved For that reason however this
consciousness to which the inherent reality or ultimate
essence is an other regards this power which is the
way it appears when active as the beyond that
which hes remote from its self Instead therefore of
returning out of its activity into itself and instead of
having confirmed itself as a fact for its self consciousness reflects back this process of action into the other
extreme which is thereby represented as purely universal as absolute might from which the movement in
every direction started and which is the essential life
of the self-disintegrating extremes as they at first
appeared and of the process of change as well
In that the unchangeable consciousness contemns
its specific shape and form and abandons it entirely
while on the other hand the individual consciousness
gives thanks ie denies itself the satisfaction of
being conscious of its independence and refers the
essential substance of its action to the beyond and
not to itself by these two moments in which both
parts give themselves up the one to the other there
certainly arises in consciousness a sense of its own unity
with the unchangeable But at the same time this
unity is affected with division is again broken within
itself and out of this unity there once more comes the
opposition of universal and particular For consciousness no doubt in appearance renounces the satisfaction of its selffeeling but it gets the actual satisfaction of that feeling for it has been desire work and
enjoyment qua consciousness it has willed has acted
has enjoyed Its thanks similarly in which it recognises the other extreme as its true reality and cancels
itself is its own very act which counterbalances the
action of the other extreme and meets with a like act
the benefit handed over If the former yields to consciousness merely its superficial content consciousness
expresses thanks all the same and when it gives up its
own action ie its very essence it properly speaking
does more thereby than the other which only renounces
an outer surface The entire process therefore is
reflected into the extreme of particularity not merely
in actual desire labour and enjoyment but even in
the expression of thanks where the reverse seems to
take place Consciousness feels itself therein as this
particular individual and does not let itself be deceived
by the semblance of its renunciation for the real
truth of that procedure is that it has not given itself up
What has come about is merely the double reflection
into both extremes and the result is to repeat the
cleavage into the opposed consciousness of the unchangeable and the consciousness of a contrasted
opposite in the shape of willing performing enjoying
and of selfrenunciation itself or in general of selfexistent particularity
With this has come to light the third attitude in the
movement of this consciousness an attitude which
follows from the second and is such as in truth has
proved itself independent by its willing and by its performance In the first situation we had only a notion
of actual consciousness the inward emotion which is
not yet real in action and enjoyment The second is
this actualisation as an external express action and
enjoyment With the return out of this stage however
it is that which has got to know itself as a real and
efiective consciousness or that whose truth consists
in being in or for itself But herein the enemy is
discovered in its special and most peculiar form
In the battle of emotion this individual consciousness
has the sense of being merely a tune an abstract
moment In work and enjoyment which are the
reaUsation of this unsubstantial existence it can
readily forget itself and the consciousness of its own
proper life found in this realisation is overborne by
grateful recognition But this overthrow of its proper
distinctiveness is in truth a return of consciousness into
itself and moreover into itself as the genuine reality one term consists in so relating this reality to absolute
universal Being as to show it to be mere nothingness
The course of this relation we have still to consider
To begin with as regards the contrasted relation of
consciousness in which its reality is taken to be immediately naught its actual performance thus becomes
a doing of nothing at all its enjoyment becomes
a feeling of its own unhappiness In consequence
activity and enjoyment lose aU universal content and
significance for in that case they would have a substantiality of their own and both withdraw into the
state of particularity to which consciousness is
directed in order to cancel them Consciousness
discovers itself as this concrete particular in the
functions of animal life These latter instead of
being performed unconsciously and naturally as
something which fer se is of no significance and
can acquire no importance and essential value for
spirit these latter since it is in them that the enemy
is seen in his proper and pecuUar shape are
rather an object of strenuous concern and serious
occupation and become precisely the most important
consideration t Since however this enemy creates
itself in its very defeat consciousness by giving the
enemy a fixedness of being and of meaning instead of
getting rid of him really never gets away from him
and finds itself constantly defiled And since at the
same time this object of its exertions instead of being
something essential is the very meanest instead of being
a universal is the merest particular we have here
The conception of the nothingness of the individual in the sight
of God before us merely a personality confined within
its
narrow self and its petty activity a personality brooding over itself as unfortunate as it is pitiably destitute
But all the same both of these both the feeling of its
misfortune and the poverty of its own action are points
of connection to wbicb to attach the consciousness of
its unity with the unchangeable For the attempted
immediate destruction of its actual existence is effected
through the thought of the unchangeable and takes
place in this relation to the unchangeable The mediate
relation constitutes the essence of the negative process
in which this consciousness directs itself against its
particularity of being which however qyui relation is
at the same time in itself positive and wiU bring this
its unity to light as an objective fact for this consciousness itself
This mediate relation is consequently a connected
inferential process in which particularity
esuablifihing itself at first in opposition to the inherent
esseAce is bound together and united with this other
term only through a third term Through this
middle term the one extreme unchangeable consciousntssl has a being for the unessential consciousness
in which at the same time is also involved that the
latter likense has a being for the former solely through
that middle term and this naiddle term is thus one
which presents both extremes to one another and acts
as the minister of each in turn in dealig with the
other This medium is itself a conscious being for it
is an action mediating consciousness as such the content this action is the destruction and annihilation
which consciousness has in view in dealig with its
particularity
In the middle term then this consciousness gets
freed from action and enjoyment in the sense of its
own action and enjoyment It puts away from itself
qua selfexistent extreme the substance of its will
and throws on to the mediating term or the ministering
agency its own proper freedom of decision and herewith the guilt of its own act This mediator being
in direct communication with the unchangeable Being
renders service by advising what is just and right
The act since this foUows upon obedience to a deliverance enunciated by another ceases as regards the performance or the willing of the act to be the agents own
proper deed There is still left however to the subordinate consciousness its objective aspect namely
the fruit of its labour and enjoyment These therefore it casts away as well and just as it disclaimed
its own will so it contemns such reality as it received
in work and in enjoyment It renounces these partly
as being the accomplished truth of its selfcoiiseious
independence since it seeks to do something Çquite
foreign to itself thinking and speaking what for id has
no sense or meaning f partly too as being ef ternal
property siace it demits somewhat of the pojssession
acquired through its toil It also gives up the enjoyment it had since with its fastings and its mortifications it once more absolutely denies itself that enjoyment
Through these moments the negative abandonment
first of its own right and power of decision then of its
property and enjoyment and finally the positive mo
The Priesthood f
t Cp the use in the Church services of Latin instead oi the vernacular
religious processions etc
ment of carrying on what it does not understand
it obtains completely and in truth the consciousness of
inner and outer freedom or reality in the sense of its
own existence for itself It has the certainty of having
in truth stripped itself of its Ego and of having turned
its immediate selfconsciousness into a thing into
an objective external existence
It could ensure its selfrenunciation and selfabandonment solely by this real and vital sacrifice of its
self For only thereby is the deception got rid of
which Ues in inner acknowledgment of gratitude
through heart sentiment and tongue an acknowledgment which indeed disclaims all power of independent
selfexistence and ascribes this power to a gift from
above but in this very disclaimer retains for itself its
own proper and peculiar life outwardly in the possession
it does not resign inwardly in the consciousness of the
decision which itself has resolved upon and in the consciousness of its own selfconstituted content which it
has not exchanged for a content coming from without
and fillig it with meaningless ideas and phrases
But in the sacrifice actually accomplished while consciousness has cancelled the action as its own act it
has also implicitly demitted and put ofi its unhappy
condition Yet that this demission has implicitly
taken place is effected by the other term of the logical
process here involved the term which is the
inherent and ultimate reality That sacrifice of the
subordinate term however was at the same time
not a onesided action it involves the action of the
other For giving up ones own will is only in one
aspect negative in principle or in itself, it is at the same time positive positing and affirming the will
as an other and specifically affirming the will as not a
particular but universal This consciousness takes the
positive significance of the negatively affirmed particular will to be the will of the other extreme the
will which because it is simply an other for consciousness assumes the form of advice or counsel not
through itself but through the third term the mediator
Hence its will certainly becomes for consciousness
universal will inherent and essential will but is not
itself in its own view this inherent reality The giving
up of its own will as particular is not taken by it
to be in principle the positive element of universal
will Similarly its surrender of possession and enjoyment has merely the same negative significance
and the universal which it thereby comes to find
is in its view not its own doing proper This unity
of objectivity and independent selfexistence which hes
in the notion of action and which therefore comes for
consciousness to be the essential reality and object
as this is not taken by consciousness to be the principle
of its action neither does it become an object for consciousness directly and through itself Rather it
makes the mediating minister express this still
halting certainty that its unhappy state is only imflicitly the reverse ie is only implicitly action bringing selfsatisfaction in its act or blessed enjoyment
that its pitiable action too is only imflicitly the reverse
namely absolute action that in principle action is
only really action when it is the action of some
particular individual But for its self action and its
own concrete action remain something miserable and
insignificant its enjoyment pain and the sublation of
these positively considered remains a mere beyond
But in this object where it finds its own action and
existence qua this particular consciousness to be inherently existence and action as such there has arisen
the idea of Reason of the certainty that consciousness is
in its particularity inherently and essentially absolute
or is all reality
FREE CONCRETE MIND Reason is the first stage in the analysis of concrete mind of universal
self conscious of itself in its object and conscious of the object as
universal Keason is not a mere function of mind but a stage of
mind It therefore possesses its own peculiar content and operates in
a process peculiar to itself Its aim is to become completely conscious
of its own nature and to acquire this it must develop itself through
its various phases The process of development is from immediate to
mediate from what it is implicitly to what it is explicitly The first step
therefore is reason as immediate where universal self is simply and
directly aware of itself in a universal object The operation of concrete
mind at this stage is found where reason observes The analysis of
observation as this operates in the various domains covered by the
empirical sciences is thus the subjectmatter of the following section
The processes of these various sciences are assumed in Hegels analysis
Observation must change in character with the objects observed hence
the difference between observation of inorganic and organic nature observation of mind and of the relation of mind and nature The difficulties
reason has to face in this operation and the contradictions into which it
falls in seeking to find laws etc to satisfy its aim form the substance of
the following analysis
The nature of reason as here conceived is the source and origin of
philosophical Idealism whether the idealism be onesided or absolute
Idealism is in fact the philosophical expression of the principle of reason
just as the various empirical sciences may be said to be the development
in the several ways which experience dictates of the operation of rational
observation Hence the introductory pages of the following analysis are
devoted to a statement of the character of true and false idealism
The historical material behind the abstract argument elaborated here
is provided by the awakened scientific spirit that appeared after the
WITH the thought which consciousness has laid
hold of that the individual consciousness is taherently absolute reality consciousness turns back into
itself In the case of the unhappy consciousness the
inherent and essential reality is a beyond remote
from itself But the process of its own activity has in
its case brought out the truth that individuality when
completely developed individuality which is a concrete
actual mode of consciousness is made the negative of
itself ie the objective extreme in other words, has
forced it to make explicit its selfexistence and turned
this into an objective fact In this process it has itself
become aware too of its xmity with the universal
a unity which seeing that the individual when sublated is the universal is no longer looked on hy us
as falling outside it and which since consciousness
maintains itself in this its negative condition is inherently in it as such its very essence Its truth is
what appears in the process of synthesis where the
extremes were seen to be absolutely held apart as the
middle term proclaiming to the unchangeable consciousness that the isolated individual has renounced
itself and to the individual consciousness that the unchangeable consciousness is no longer for it an extreme
but is one with it and reconciled to it This mediating
term is the unity directly aware of both and relating
them to one another and the consciousness of their
unity which it proclaims to consciousness and thereby
to itself is the certainty and assurance of being all
truth
From the fact that selfconsciousness is Reason
its hitherto negative attitude towards otherness turns
round into a positive attitude So far it has been
concerned merely with its independence and freedom
it has sought to save and keep itself for itself at the
expense of the world or its own actuality both of
which appeared to it to involve the denial of its own
essential nature But qua reason assured of itself, it is
at peace so far as they are concerned and is able to
endure them for it is certain its self is reality certain
that all concrete actuality is nothing else but it Its
thought is itself eo ipso concrete reality its attitude
towards the latter is thus that of Idealism To_it
looking at itself ia this way it seems as if how for the
first time the world had come into being Formerly
it did not understand the world it desired the world
and worked upon it then withdrew itself from it and
retired into itself abolished the world as itself
was concerned and abolished itself qua consciousness
both the consciousness of that world as essentially
real as well as the consciousness of its nothingness and
unreality Here for the first time after the grave of
its truth is lost after the annihilation of its concrete
actuality is itself done away with and the individuality
of consciousness is seen to be in itself absolute reality
t discovers the world as its own new and real world
which in its permanence possesses an interest for it just
is previously the interest lay only in its transitoriness
The subsistence of the world is taken to mean the actual
presence of its own truth it is certain of finding only
itself there
Reason is the conscious certainty of being all reality
This is how Idealism announces its principle Just as
consciousness assuming the form of reason immediately
and inherently contains that certainty within it in the
same way idealism also directly proclaims and expresses
that certainty I am I in the sense that the I which
is object for me is sole and only object is all reality and
all that is present The I which is object to me here is
not what we have in selfconsciousness in general nor
again what we have in free independent selfconsciousness in the former it is merely empty object in general
in the latter it is merely an object that withdraws itself
from other objects that still hold their own alongside it
In the present instance the objectego is object which
is consciously known to exclude the existence of any
other whatsoever Selfconsciousness however is not
merely from its own point of view but also in
its very self all reality primarily by the fact
that it becomes this reality or rather demonstrates itself
to be such It demonstrates itself to be this by the way
in which otherness as inherently real first disappears in the course of the dialectic movement of
meaning perceiving and understanding
and afterwards in the movement through the
independence of consciousness in Lordship and Servitude through the idea of freedom sceptical detachment
and the struggle for absolute hberation on the part of
the self-divided consciousness where otherness so far
as being stUl for consciousness vanishes for the latter itself There appeared two aspects one after the other
the one where the essential reality or the truly real
present to consciousness had the characteristic of
existence the other where it had the character of only
being an object for consciousness But both lead back
to one single truth that what is or the real per se
only is so far as it is an object for consciousness
and that what is for consciousness is also inherently
real The mode of consciousness which this truth
constitutes has forgotten the process by which this
result has been reached the pathway to it lies away
behind This consciousness comes on the scene directly
in the form of reason in other words, this reason
appearing thus immediately comes before us merely
as the certainty of that truth It is merely assured
of being all reality it does not however itself comprehend this fact for that forgotten pathway by which
it arrives at this position is the process of comprehending what is involved in this mere assertion which
it makes And just on that account any one who has
not taken this route finds the assertion uninteUigible
when he hears it expressed in this abstract form
although as a matter of concrete experience he makes
the same assertion himself
The kind of Idealism which does not trace the path
to that result but starts off with the bare assertion of
this truth is consequently a mere assurance which
does not understand its own nature, and cannot make
itself intelligible to any one else It announces an
intuitive certainty to which there stand in contrast
other equally intuitive certainties that have been lost
along that very pathway Hence the claims and
assurances made by these other certainties are equally entitled to a place alongside the assurance of that
certainty Reason takes its stand on the selfconsciousness of each individual consciousness I am I my object
and my essential reality is ego and no one will deny
reason this truth But since it rests on this appeal it
sanctions the truth of the other certainty viz there
is for me an other an other qua ego is to me object
and true reality or since I am object and reality to
myself I am only so by my withdrawing myself from
the other altogether and appearing alongside it as an
actuality
Only when reason comes forward as a reflection from
this opposite certainty does its assertion regarding
itself appear in the form not merely of a certainty and
an assurance but of a truth and a truth not alongside
others but the only truth Its appearing directly and
immediately is the abstract form of its actual presence
the essential nature and inherent reality of which is an
absolute notion ie the process of its own development
Consciousness will determine its relation to otherness
or its object in various ways according as it is at
one or other stage in the development of the worldspirit into selfconsciousness How the worldspirit
immediately finds and determines itself and its object
at any given time or how it appears to itself depends
on what it has come to be on what it has come from or
on what it already implicitly and inherently is
Reason is the certainty of being all reality This
its inherent nature this reality is still however
through and through a universal the pure abstraction
of reality It is the first positive character which selfconsciousness fer se is aware of being and ego is therefore merely the pure inner essence of existence in other
words, is the Category bare and simple The category
which usually had the significance of being the inmost
essence of existence leaving existence quite undetermined or without determination by contrast to consciousness is here the essential natme or simple imity
of existence merely in the sense of a reality that thinks
To put it otherwise the category means this that existence and selfconsciousness are the same being the same
not as a matter of comparison but really and truly
in and for themselves It is onlj a onesided unsound
idealism which lets this imity again appear on one side
as consciousness with a reality fcr se over against it on
the other
But now this category or simple imity of selfconsciousness and being has difference within it for its
verv natiue consists just in this in being immediately
one and identical with itself in otherness or in absolute
ditTerence Difference therefore is but completely
transparent a difference that is at the same time none
It appears in the form of a plurality of categories
Since idealism declares the unity of selfconsciousness
to be all reality and at once takes it for the essentially
real without fiist having comprehended its absolutely
negative natiue only an absolutely negative reality
contains within its very being negation determinateness or difference still more incomprehensible than
the former is this auz that in the category there are
differences kinds or species of categories This assurance in general as also the assurance as to any
determinate nimiber of kinds of categories is a new form
of assiuance which however itself implies that we are
no longer to accept it as an assurance For since difference starts in the pure ego in pure understanding itself.
it is thereby affirmed that here immediacy making
assurances finding something given must be abandoned
and reflective comprehension begin But to pick up the
various categories again in any sort of way as a kind of
happy find hit upon eg in the different judgments
and then to be content so to accept them must really
be regarded as an outrage on scientific thinking
Where is understanding to be able to demonstrate
necessity if it is incapable of doing so in its own case
itself being pure necessity
Now because in this way the pure essential being
of things as well as their aspect of difference belongs to
reason we can strictly speaking no longer talk of
things at all ie of something which would only be
present to consciousness by negatively opposing it
For the many categories are species of the pure category which means that the pure category is still their
genus or essential nature and not opposed to them
But they contain and imply the ambiguity which otherness too in its aspect of plurality involves as against
the pure category They in point of fact, contradict the pure category by this plurality and the pure
category must sublate them in itself a process by which
it constitutes itself the negative unity of the different
elements Qua negative unity however it puts away
from itself and excludes both the diverse elements as
such and that previous immediate imity as such it is
then individual singleness a new category which is an
exclusive form of consciousness ie stands in relation
to something else an other This individuality is its
transition from its notion to an external reality the
pure schema which is at once a consciousness and in consequence of its being a single individual and an
excluding unit points to the presence of an external
other But the other of this category is merely the
other categories iirst mentioned viz pure essential
reality and pure difference and in this category ie
just in affirming the other or in this other itself consciousness is likewise the other too Each of these
various moments points and refers to an other at the
same time however they do not involve any absolute
otherness The pure category refers to the species
which pass over into the negative category the category of excluision individuality this latter however
points back to them it is itself pure consciousness
which is aware in each of them of being always this
clear unity with itself a unity however that in the
same way is referred to an other which in being
disappears and in disappearing is once again brought
into being
We see pure consciousness here affirmed in a twofold
form In one case it is the restless activity which
passes hither and thither through all its moments
seeing in them that otherness which is sublated in
the process of grasping it in the other case it is the
imperturbable unity certain of its own truth That
restless activity constitutes the other for this unity
while this unity is the other for that activity and
within these reciprocally determining opposites consciousness and object alternate Consciousness thus
at one time finds itself seeking about hither and thither
and its object is what absolutely exists per se and is
the essentially real at another time consciousness is
aware of being the category bare and simple and the
object is the movement of the different elements Con
sciousness however qua essential reality is the whole
of this process of passing out of itself qua simple
category into individuality and the object and of viewing this process in the object cancelling it as distinct
appropriating it as its own and declaring itself as this
certainty of being all reality of being both itself and
its object
Its first declaration is merely this abstract empty
phrase that everything is its own For the certainty
of being all reality is to begin with the pure category
Reason knowing itself in this sense in its object is what
finds expression in abstract empty idealism it merely
takes reason as reason appears at first and by its
pointing out that in all being there is this bare consciousness of a mine and by expressing things as
sensations or ideas it fancies it has shown that abstract
mine of consciousness to be complete reality It is
bound therefore to be at the same time absolute
Empiricism because for the filling of this empty mine
ie for the element of distinction and all the further
development and embodiment of it its reason needs
an impact operating from without in which
lies the fons ei origo of the multiplicity of sensations or
ideas This kind of idealism is thus jiist such a selfcontradictory equivocation as scepticism only while
the latter expresses itself negatively the former does so
in a positive way But it fails just as completely as
scepticism to lik up its contradictory statements about
pure consciousness being all reality while all the time
the alien impact or senseimpressions and ideas are
equally reality It oscillates hither and thither from
one to the other and tumbles into the false or the sensuous infinite Since reason is all reality in the
sense of the abstract mine and the other is an
externality indifferent to it there is here affirmed
just that sort of knowledge of an other on the
part of reason which we met with before in the form
of intending or meaning perceiving
and understanding which grasps what is meant
and what is perceived Such a kind of knowledge is
at the same time asserted by the very principle of this
idealism itself not to be true knowledge for only the
unity of apperception is the real truth of knowledge
Pure reason as conceived by this idealism if it is to get
at this other which is essential to it ie really is per se
but which it does not possess in itself is thus thrown
back on that knowledge which is not a knowledge of
the real truth It thus condemns itself knowingly and
voluntarily to being an rmtrue kind of knowledge and
cannot get away from meaning and perceiving
which for it have no truth at all It falls into a direct
contradiction it asserts that the real has a twofold
nature consists of elements in sheer opposition is
the unity of apperception and a thing as well
whether a thing is called an alien impact or an empirical
entity or sensibility or the thing in itself," it remains
in principle precisely the same viz something external
and foreign to that imity
This idealism falls into such a contradiction because
it asserts the abstract notion of reason to be the truth
Consequently reality comes directly before it just as
much in a form which is not strictly the reality of
reason at all whereas reason aU the while is intended
to be all reality Reason remains in this case a restless search which in its very process of seeking declares
that it is utterly impossible to have the satisfaction of
finding But actual concrete reason is not so inconsequent as this Being at first merely the certainty that
it is all reality it is in this notion well aware that
qua certainty qua ego it is not yet in truth all reality
and thus reason is driven on to raise its formal certainty
into actual truth and give concrete filling to the empty
mine
This consciousness whicti takes being to mean what
is its own now seems indeed to adopt once again the
attitude of meaning and perceiving but not in
the sense that it is certain of what is a mere other
but in the sense that it is certain of this other being
itself Formerly consciousness merely happened to
perceive various elements in the thing and had a
certain experience in so doing But here it settles
itself the observations to be made and the experience
to be had Meaning and perceiving which formerly
were superseded so far as we were concerned
are now superseded by consciousness in its own behalf Eeason sets out to know the truth to find in
the form of a notion what for meaning and perceiving is a thing ie it seeks in thinghood to have
merely the consciousness of its own self Reason has
therefore here a universal interest in the world because it is the certainty of having the present within it
or is certain that the actual present is rational It
seeks its other while knowing that it there possesses
nothing else but itself it seeks merely its own infinitude
While at first merely surmising that it is in the world
of reality or knowing this only in a general way to be
its own domain it goes forward on this understanding
and appropriates everywhere and at all points its own
assured possession It plants the symbol of its sovereignty on the heights and in the depths of reality
But this superficial mine is not its final and supreme
interest The joy of universal appropriation finds still
in its property an otherness and externality which
does not involve abstract reason Eeason has the
presentiment of being a deeper reality than pure ego is
and must demand that difference the manifold diversity
of being should itself become its very own that the ego
should look at and see itself as concrete reality and
find itself present in objectively embodied form and in
the shape of a thing." But if reason probes and gropes
through the inmost recesses of the life of things and
opens their every vein so that even reason itself may
gush out of them then it will not achieve this desired
result it must for its purpose have first brought about
in itself its own completion in order to be able after
that to experience what its completion means
Consciousness observes ie reason wants to find
and to have itself in the form of existent object to he
in concrete sensuouslypresent form The consciousness
thus observing fancies and indeed says that it
wants to discover not itself but on the contrary the
inner being of things qua things That this consciousness means this and says so lies in the fact that it is
reason but reason as such is for it not as yet object
If it were to know reason to be equally and at once
the essence of things and of itself and knew that
reason can only be actually present in consciousness
in the shape and embodiment peculiarly appropriate to
reason then it would descend into the depths of its
own being and seek reason there rather than in things
If it had found reason there it would again turn from
that and be directed upon concrete reality in order to
see therein its own sensuous expression but would
at the same time take that sensuous form to be essentially a notion
Reason as it immediately appears in the form of
conscious certainty of being all reality takes its reality
in the sense of immediacy of being and also takes
the imity of ego with this objective existence in
the sense of an immediate unity a unity in which it
has not yet separated and then again united
the moments of being and ego or, in other words, a
unity which reason has not yet come to understand It
therefore when appearing as conscious observation turns
to things with the idea that it is really taking them as
sensuous things opposed to the ego But its actual
procedure contradicts this idea for it knows things
it transforms their sensuous character into conceptions
ie just into a kind of being which at the same time is
ego it transforms thought into an existent thought or
being into a thoughtconstituted being and in fact
asserts that things have truth merely as conceptions
In this process it is only what the things are that
consciousness in observation takes account of we
however who are tracing the nature of this experience are interested in what conscious observation itself
is The outcome of its process however will be that
this consciousness becomes aware of being for itself
what it is in itself ie becomes aware of being to itself
what in the meantime it is to us
We have to consider the operation of this observa
This paragraph is a passing remark and refers to the method of the
Logic
tional phase of reason in all the various moments of its
activity It takes up this attitude towards Nature
Mind and finally towards the relation of both in the
form of senseexistence and in all these it seeks to
find itself as a definitely existing concrete actuality
a
Observation op Nature
When the unreflective consciousness speaks of observation and experience as being the fountain of truth
the phrase may possibly sound as if the whole business
were a matter of tasting smellig feeling hearing
and seeing It forgets in its zeal for tasting smelling
etc to say that in point of fact, it has really and
rationally determined for itself already the object thus
sensuously apprehended and this determination of the
object is, at least as important for it as that apprehension It will also as readily admit that its whole
concern is not simply a matter of perceiving and will
not allow eg the perception that this penknife lies
beside this snuffbox to pass for an observation
What is perceived should at least have the significance
of a universal and not of a sensuous particular
this
The universal here regarded is in the first instance,
merely selfsameness its movement is merely the
uniform recurrence of the same operation The consciousness which thus far finds in the object merely
universality or the abstract mine must take upon
itself the movement peculiar to the object and since
it is not yet at the stage of understanding that object
it must at least be the recollection of it a recollection
which expresses in a universal way what in actual fact
is merely given in the form of a particular This superficial method of gettuag out of particularity and this
equally superficial type of universality into which
the sense element is merely taken up without the sense
element havmg in itself become a universal this description of things is not as yet a process effected in the
object itself The process really takes place solely in
the function of describing The object as it is described
has consequently lost interest while the one object is
being described another must be kept in view and
continually sought so as not to put a stop to the
process of description If it is no longer easy to find
new and whole things then there is nothing for it but
to turn back upon those already found in order to
divide them still further break them up into component parts and look out for any new aspects of thinghood that still remain in them There can be no stopping this restlessly active instinct in dealing with its
material To find a new genus of distinctive significance
or even to discover a new planet which although
an individual entity yet possesses the nature of a
universal can only fall to the lot of those who are
lucky enough to do so But the boundary lie of what
like elephant oak gold is markedly distinctive the
Ime of demarcation of what is genus and species passes
through many stages into the endless particularisation
of the chaos of plants and animals kinds of rocks or
metals forms of earth etc etc that only art and craft
can bring to light In this reali where universality
means indeterminateness where particularity now approximates to singleness and again at this point and
that even descends to it entirely there is offered an
inexhaustible supply of material for observation and
description to deal with Here where a boundless
field is opened up it can have found at the boundary
line of the universal, not an immeasurable wealth but
instead merely the limitations of nature and of its own
operation It can no longer know whether what seems
to have being per se is not a chance accident What
bears the impress of a confused or unformed feeble
image that has barely got out of elementary indeterminateness cannot claim even to be described
While this seeking and describing seem to be concerned merely with things we see that in point of fact
it is not carried on at the level of senseperception
Rather what enables things to be known is more important for that process than the range of sense properties still left over qualities which of course the
thing itself cannot do without but which consciousness
dispenses with Through this distinction into what is
essential and what is unessential the notion rises out of
the dispersion of sensibility and knowledge thereby
makes it clear that it has to do with its own self at least
quite as essentially as with things This duality in
the observed object produces a certain hesitation
as to whether what is essential and necessary for
knowledge is also so in the case of things On the
one hand the qualifying marks have merely to serve
the purpose of knowledge in distinguishing things mter
se on the other hand however it is not the unessential
quality of things that has to be known but that feature
in virtue of which they themselves break away from the
general continuity of being as a whole get cut off from
others and stand by themselves The distinguishing
marks must not only have an essential relation to
knowledge but also be the essential characteristics of
things and the system of marks devised must conform
to the system of nature itself and merely express this
system This follows necessarily from the very principle
and meaning of reason and the instinct of reason for
it operates in observation merely as an instinct has also
in its systems attained this unity a unity where its
objects are so constituted that they carry their own
essential reality with them involve an existence on
their own account and are not simply an incident of a
given particular time or a particular place The
distinguishing marks of animals for example are
taken from their claws and teeth for in point of fact,
not only does knowledge distinguish thus one animal
from another but each animal itself separates itself
off thereby it preserves itself for its own sake by means
of these weapons and keeps itself detached from the
universal nature A plant on the other hand never gets
the length of existing for its own sake it touches merely
the boundary line of individuality This line is where
plants show the semblance of diremption and separation by the possession of different sexcharacters this
furnishes therefore the principle for distinguishing
plants inter se What however stands on a still lower
level cannot of itself any longer distinguish itself from
another it gets lost when the contrast comes into
play Being per se and being in a relation come into
conflict a thing in the latter case is something
different from a thing in the former state whereas the
individuum is what it is by preserving itself in relation to another What however is incapable of this and
becomes in chemical fashion something other than it is
empirically confuses knowledge and gives rise to the
same doubt as to whether knowledge is to hold to
the one side or the other since the thing has itself
no selfconsistency and these two sides fall apart
within it
In those systems where the elements involve general
selfsameness this character connotes at once what
is self same for knowledge and for things themselves
as well But the expansion of these selfidentical
characteristics each of which describes undisturbed
the entire circuit of its course and gets full scope to do
as it likes necessarily leads as readily to its very opposite
leads to the confusion of these characteristics For the
qualifying mark the general characteristic is the unity
of opposite factors viz of what is determinate and of
what is per se universal It must therefore break
asunder into this opposition If now on one side the
characteristic overmasters the universality in which its
essence lies on the other side again this universality
equally keeps that characteristic under control forces
the latter on to its boundary Une and there mingles
together its distinctions and its essential constituents
Observation which kept them apart in orderly fashion
and thought it had hold there of something stable
and fixed finds the principles overlapping and dominating one another sees confusions formed and transitions made from one to another here it finds united
what it took at first to be absolutely separated and
there separated what it considered connected Hence
when observation thus holds by the unbroken selfsameness of being it has here just in the most general
determinations given eg in the case of the essential
marks of an animal or a plant to see itself tormented
with instances which rob it of every determination
silence the universality it reached and reduce it again
to unreflective observation and description
Observation which confines itself in this way to what
is simple or restricts the sensuously dispersed elements
by the universal thus finds its principle confused
by its object because what is determined must by
its very nature get lost in its opposite Reason therefore must pass from that inert characteristic which
had the semblance of stability and go on to observe
it as it really is in truth viz as relating itself to
its opposite What are called essential marks are
passive characteristics which when expressed and
apprehended as simple do not bring out what constitutes
their real nature which is to be vanishing moments
of its process of withdrawing and betaking itself into
itself Since the instinct of reason now arrives at the
point of looking for the characteristic in the light of
its true nature that of essentially passing over into
its opposite and not existing apart by itself and for
its own sake it seeks after the Law and the notion
of law It seeks for them moreover as existing
reality but this feature of concrete reality will in
point of fact disappear before reason and the aspects
of the law will become for it mere moments or abstractions so that the law comes to light in the nature
of the notion, which has destroyed within itself the
indifferent subsistence of sensuous reality
To the consciousness observing the truth of the law
is given in experience in the way that sense existence
is object for consciousness the truth is not given iu and
for itself If however the law does not have its truth
in the notion it is something contingent not a necessity
in fact not a law But its being essentially in the form of a notion does not merely not contradict its being present for observation to deal with but really gives it on
that account necessary existence and makes it an object
for observation The universal in the sense of a rational
universality is also universal in the sense imlied
in the above notion its being is for consciousness it
presents itself there as the real the objective present
the notion sets itself forth in the form of thinghood and
sensuous existence But it does not on that account
lose its nature and fall into the condition of immovable
subsisting passivity or mere adventitious
succession What is universally normal is also universally valid what ought to be as a matter of fact is too
and what merely should be and is not has no real truth
The instinct of reason is entirely within its rights when it
stands firm on this point and refuses to be led astray by
entia intellectus which merely ought to be and would have
truth in the sense of this ought to be even though
they are to be met with nowhere in experience and
declines to be turned aside by the hypothetical suggestions and all the other impalpable unrealities designed
in the interest of an everlasting ought to be which
never is For reason is just this certainty of having
reality and what this consciousness is not aware of as an
existent entity ie what does not appear is nothing
for consciousness here at all
The true nature of law viz that it essentially is
reality will no doubt again assume for consciousness
if it stops at the level of observation the form
of an opposite over against the notion and the inherently universal in other words, this consciousness
does not take such an object as its law to be a reality of reason it ttinks it has got there something external
and foreign But it contradicts its own idea by actually
and in fact not taking its universality to mean that all
individual things of sense must have given evidence of
the law to enable the truth of the law to be asserted
To assert that stones when raised from the ground and
let go fall does not at all require us to make the experiment with aU stones It means most likely that this
experiment must have been tried with a good many
and from that we can by analogy draw an inference
about the rest with the greatest probability or with
perfect right Yet analogy not only gives no perfect
right but on account of its very nature contradicts
itself so often that the inference to be drawn from
analogy itself rather is that analogy is not at Hberty to
draw an inference Probability which is what analogy
would come to loses when face to face with truth
every distinction of less and greater be the probability as great as it may it is nothing as against
truth The instinct of reason however takes as a
matter of fact laws of that sort for truth It is when
reason does not find necessity in them that it resorts
to making this distinction and lowers the truth of the
matter to the level of probability in order to bring out
the imperfect way in which truth is presented to the
consciousness that as yet has no insight into the pure
notion for universality is before it there merely iu the
form of simple immediate universality But at the same
time on accoimt of this universality the law has truth
for consciousness That a stone falls is true for consciousness because it is aware of the stone being heavy
ie because in weight taken by itself as such the stone
has that essential relation to the earth expressed in the
fact of falling Consciousness thus finds in experience
the objective being of the law but has it there in the
form of a notion as well and only because of both
factors together is the law true for consciousness The
law therefore is accepted as a law because it presents
itself in the sphere of appearance and is at the same
time in its very nature a notion
The instinct of reason in this type of consciousness
because the law is at the same time inherently a notion
proceeds to give the law and its moments a purely
conceptual form and proceeds to do this of necessity
but without knowing that this is what it seeks to do
It puts the law to the test of experiment As the law
first appears it is enveloped in particulars of sense and
the notion constituting its nature is involved with
empirical elements The instinct of reason sets to work
to find out by experiment what follows in such and such
circumstances By so doing the law seems only to be
plunged still further into sense but sense existence
really gets lost in the process The inner purport of
this investigation is to find pure conditions of the law
and this means nothing else even if the consciousness
stating the fact were to think it meant something
different than completely to bring out the law in
conceptual shape and detach its moments entirely
from determinate specific existence For example
negative electricity which is known at first say in
the form of resinelectricity while positive electricity
comes before us as glasselectricity these by means of
experiments lose altogether such a significance and
become purely positive and negative electricity neither
of which is bound up any longer with things of a particular kind andwe can no longer say that there are
bodies which are electrical positively others electrical
negatively In the same way the relationship of acid
and base and their reaction constitute a law in which
these opposite factors appear as bodies Yet these
sundered things have no reality the power which
tears them apart cannot prevent them entering at the
same time into a process for they are merely this
relation They cannot subsist and be indicated by
themselves apart like a tooth or a claw That it is
their very natuje to pass over directly into a neutral
product makes their existence lie in being cancelled
and superseded or makes it into a universal and
acid and base possess truth merely qua universal
Just then as glass and resin can be equally well positively
as negatively electrified in the same way acid and base
are not attached as properties or quaUties to this or that
reality each thing is only relatively acidulate and
basic what seems to be an absolute base or an absolute
acid gets in the socalled Synsomates the opposite significance to another
The result of the experiments is in this way to cancel
the moments or inner significations as properties of
specific things and free the predicates from their sub j ects
These predicates are found merely as universal and in
truth that is what they are Because of this selfsubsistence they therefore get the name of kinds of matter
A term employed by a chemist Winterl at the beginning of the
nineteenth century to denote combinations intermediate in character
between physical mixtures and chemical combinations In synsomates
the bodies undergo in the product eg a change of colour specific density
and even weight these changes do not take place in mere physical mixtures and yet they do not constitute chemical combination Examples
of synsomates are the blending of water and alcohol and amalgams of
minerals
which is neither a body nor a property of a body
certainly no one would call acid positive and negative electricity heat etc bodies
Matter on the contrary is not a thing that exists it
is being in the sense of universal being or being in the
way the concept is being Reason still instinctive
correctly draws this distinction without being conscious
that it reason by the very fact of its testing the law
in every senseparticular cancels the merely sensuous
existence of the law and when it construes the moments of the law as forms of matter their essential
natuje is taken to be something universal and specifically expressed as a nonsensuous element of sense an
incorporeal and yet objective existence
We have now to see what turn its result takes and
what new shape this activity of observation will in
consequence assume The outcome and truth of this
experimentation is found to be fure law freed from
sensuous elements we find it as a concept which while
present in sense operates there independently and unrestrained while enveloped in sense is detached from
it and is a concept bare and simple This which is in
truth the essential result now comes before this consciousness itself but as an object moreover since
the object is not a result really for it and is unrelated
to the preceding process the object is a peculiar
kind of object and its relation to consciousness takes
the form of another kind of observation Such an object
where the simple activity of the notion is the principle
of the process within it is an Organism a
Observation of Organic Nature
Organic existence is this absolutely fluid condition
wherein the determinateness which alone would make
it a definite entity for an other is dissolved Inorganic
things involve determinateness in their very essence
and on that account a thing realises the completeness
of the moments of the notion only along with another
thing and hence gets lost when it enters the dialectic
movement In the case of an organic being on
the other hand all determinate characteristics by
means of which it is palpable to another are held under
the control of the simple organising unity none of
them comes forward as essential and capable of detaching itself from the rest and relating itself to an other
organic being What is organic therefore preserves
itself ia its very relation
The aspects of law on which the instinct of reason
directs its observation here are as we see from the
above in the first instance organic nature and inorganic nature in their relation to one another The
latter means for organic nature just the free play a
freedom opposed to the formal principle of organic nature
of those loosely floating characteristics in which
nature in its individual components is at once dissolved
and out of the continuity of which the individuated
elements of nature are at the same time resolved and exist
separately Air water earth zones and climate are universal elements of this sort which make up the indeterminate simple being of natural individuaUties and in
which these are at the same time reflected into themselves Neither the individuality nor the natural element
is absolutely selfcontained On the contrary in tke
independent detachment which observation finds these
assuming towards one another they stand at the same
time in essential relation to one another but in such a
way that their independence and mutual indifierence
form the predominating feature and only in part
become abstractions Here then law appears as the
relation of an element to the formative process of the
organic being which at one moment has the element
over against itself at another exhibits it within its own
selfdetermining organic structure But laws like these
animals belonging to the air are of the nature of birds
those belonging to water have the constitution of fish
animals in northerly latitudes have thick coats of hair
and so on such laws indicate a degree of poverty which
does not do justice to the manifold variety of organic
nature Besides the fact that the free activity of organic
nature can readily divest its forms of determinate characters like these and everywhere presents of necessity
exceptions to such laws or rules as we might call
them the characterisation of those very animals to
which they do apply is so very superficial that even
the necessity of the laws can be nothing else but
superficial too and does not carry us further than what
is implied in speaking of the great influence of environment on the organism And this does not tell us
what properly falls under that influence and what does
not Such like relations of organic beings to the elements they live in cannot therefore be strictly called
laws at all For on the one hand such a relation when
we look at its content does not exhaust as we saw the
range of the organic beings considered and on the other
the terms of the relation itself stand indifferently apart
from one another and convey no necessity In the concept of an acid lies the notion of a base just as the
notion of positive electricity implies that of negative
but even though we do find as a fact a thick coat of hair
associated with northerly latitudes the structure of a fish
with water or that of birds with air there is nothing in
the notion of the north implying the notion of a thick
covering of hair the notion of the structure of fish does
not he in the notion of the sea nor that of birds in that
of the air Because of this free detachment of the
two notions from one another, there are as a fact also
land animals with the essential characters of a bird of
fish and so on The necessity just because it cannot be
conceived to be an inner necessity of the object, ceases
also to have a foothold in sense and can be no longer
observed ia actual reality but has quitted the sphere
of reality Finding thus no place in the real object
itself it becomes what is called a teleological relation
a relation which is external to what is related and consequently the very reverse of a law of its constitution
It is an idea entirely detached from the necessity of
nature a thought which leaves this necessity of nature
behind and floats above it aU by itself
If the relation above alluded to of organic existence
to the elemental conditions of nature does not express its true beiag the notion of Purpose on the other
hand does contain it The observing attitude does
not indeed take the reXo to be the genuine essence
of organic existence this notion seems to it to fall
outside the real nature of the organism and is then
merely that external teleological relation above men
Cp with the above the oscillation between the mechanical and
teleolofrical conception of law in theoretical biology
tioned Yet looking at how the organic being was
previously characterised the organic is in point of fact
just realised concrete purpose For since itself maintains itself in relation to another it is just that kind of
natural existence in which nature reflects itself into the
notion and the moments of necessity separated out by
Understanding a cause and an effect an active
and a passive are here brought together and combined into a single unity In this way we have here not
only something appearing as a result of necessity but
because it has returned to itself the last or the result
is just as much the first which starts the process and
is to itself the purpose which it realises What is organic
does not produce something it merely conserves itself
or what is produced is as much there already as
produced
We must elucidate this principle more fully both as
it is in itself and as it is for the instinct of reason, in
order to see how reason finds itself there but does not
know itself in what it finds The concept of purpose
then which rational observation has reached is while
reason has apprehended it in consciousness given to
reason as something actually real as well it is not
merely an external relation of the actual but its inner
being This actual which is itself a purpose is related
purposively to an other ie its relation is a contingent
one with respect to what both are immediately prima
facie they are both selfsubsistent and indifferent to one
another The real nature of their relation however
is something different from what they thus appear to
be and its effect has another meaning than senseperception directly finds The necessity inherent in
the process is concealed and comes out at the end but
in such a way that this very end shows it to have been
also the first The end however shows this priority of
itself by the fact that nothing comes out of the alteration the act produced but what was there already
Or again if we start from what is first this in coming
to the end or the result of its act merely returns to
itself and just by so doing it demonstrates itself to be
that which has itself as its end that is to say qua first
it has already returned to itself or is selfcontained is
in and for itself What then it arrives at by the process of its action is itself and its arriving merely at
itself means feeling itself is its seHfeeling Thus we
have here no doubt the distinction between what it
is and what it seeks but this is merely the semblance
of a distinction and consequently it is a notion in its
very nature
This is exactly however the way selfconsciousness
is constituted It distinguishes itself in the same
manner from itself without any distinction being thereby established Hence it is that it finds in observation of organic nature nothing else than this kind
of reality it finds itself in the form of a thing, as a
life and yet between what it is itself and what it has
found draws a distinction which is however no distinction Just as the instinct of an animal is to seek
and consume food but does not thereby get beyond
itself similarly the instinct of reason in its seeking merely finds reason itself An animal ends with
selffeeling The instinct of reason on the other
hand is at the same time self consciousness But
because it is merely instinct it is put on one side as
against consciousness and in the latter finds its opposite
Its satisfaction is therefore broken in two by this
opposite it finds itself viz the purpose and also finds
this purpose in the shape of a thing. But the purpose
is seen to he in the first instance, apart from the thiug
presenting itself as a purpose In the second place this
purpose qua purpose is at the same time objective
it is taken to fall therefore not withm the observing
consciousness but within another intelligence
Looked at more closely there hes in the notion of the
thing this character as well that of being in itself a
purpose It preserves itself this at once means it
is its nature to conceal the necessity controlling it
and presents that necessity in the form of a contingent relation For its freedom its being on its own
account, means just that it behaves towards its
necessary condition as something indifferent It thus
sets itself out to be something whose notion falls
apart from its existence In the same way reason
is compelled by letting its own proper notion fall
outside it to look at itself as a thing as that towards
which it is indifferent and which in consequence is
reciprocally indifferent towards it reason and towards
its own notion Qua instinct it continues to remain
within this state of being this condition of indifierence and the thing expressing the notion
remains for it something other than this notion and
the notion other than the thing Thus for reason the
thing organised is only a purpose per se in the sense
that the necessity which lies concealed within the
action of the thing for the active agency there takes
up the attitude of being indifferent and isolated falls
outside the organism itself
Since however the organic qua purpose per se
cannot behave in any other way than as organic the
fact of its being per se a purpose is also apparent and
sensibly present and as such it is observed What is
organic shows itself when observed to be something
selfpreserving returning and returned into itself But
in this state of being observation does not recognise
the concept of purpose and does not Ltiow that the
notion of purpose is not in an intelligence anywhere
else but just exists here and in the form of a thing.
Observation makes a distinction between the concept
of purpose and selfexistence and selfpreservation
which is not a distinction at all That it is no
distinction is something of which it is not aware
what it is aware of is an act which appears contingent
and indifferent towards what is brought about by that
act and towards the unity which is all the while the
principle connecting both that act and this purpose
are taken to fall asunder
On this view the special function of the organic is
to be the inner operating activity lying in between its
first and last purpose so far as this action imphes the
character of singleness So far however as the action
has the character of universality and the active agent
is equated with what is the outcome of its operation
this purposive action as such would not seem to belong
to the function of organic beings That individual
action which is merely a means comes owing to its
individual form to be determined by an entirely
individual or contingent necessity What an organic
being does for the preservation of itself as an individual
or of itself qua genus is therefore quite lawless as
regards this immediate content for notion and
universal fall outside it Its action would accordingly be empty agency without any content in
it it would not even be the efficiency of a machine
for this has a purpose and its activity in consequence a definite content If it were deserted in this
way by the universal it would be an activity of a
mere being qua being ie would be an activity not
forthwith reflected into itself like that of an acid or a
base one which could not be cut off from its immediate existence nor give up this existence that gets lost
when related to its opposite but would be able to preserve itself The kind of being whose activity is here
under consideration is however set down as a thing
preserving itself in its relation to its opposite The
activity as such is nothing but the bare insubstantial
form of its independent existence on its own account;
and the purpose of the activity its substance a substance which is not simply a determinate being but the
universal does not fall outside the activity It is an
activity reverting into itself by its own nature, and is
not turned back into itself by any alien external
agency
This union of universality and activity however
is not a matter for this attitude of observation because
that unity is essentially the inner movement of what is
organic and can only be apprehended conceptually
Observation however seeks the moments in the form
of existence and diuation and because the organic
whole consists essentially in not containing the moments
in that form and in not letting them be found within
it in that way this observing consciousness by its
way of looking at the matter transforms the opposition
into one which conforms and is adapted to its own
point of view
An organism comes before the observing consciousness
in this maimer as a way of relating two fixed and existing moments as a relation of elements in an opposition wtose two factors seem in one respect really given
in observation while in another respect as regards their
content they express the opposition of the organic
concept of purpose and actual reality But because the
notion as such is there effaced this takes place in an
obscure and superficial way where thought sinks to the
level of mere ideal presentation Thus we see the
notion taken much in the sense of what is inner reality
in the sense of what is outer and their relation gives
rise to the law that the outer is the expression of the
inner
Let us consider more closely this inner with its
opposite and their relation to one another In the first
place we find that the two factors of the law no longer
have such an import as we found in the case of previous
laws where the elements appeared as independent
things each being a particular body nor again
in the second place do we find that the universal
is to have its existence somewhere else outside what
actually is On the contrary the organic being is in
undivided oneness and as a whole the fundamental
fact it is the content of inner and outer and is
the same for both The opposition is on that account
of a purely formal character its real sides have the
same ultimate principle inherently constituting them
what they are At the same time however since inner
and outer are also opposite realities and each is a
distinct being for observation they each seem to observation to have a peculiar content of their own This
peculiar content since it consists of the same substance or the same organic unity can however in
point of fact, be only a different form of that unity
of that substance and this is indicated by observation when it says that the outer is merely the expression
of the inner
We have seen in the case of the concept of purpose
the same characteristic features of the relation viz
the indifferent independence of the diverse factors
and their unity in that independence a unity in which
they disappear
We have now to see what shape and embodiment
inner and outer assume in actually existing The inner
as such must have an outer being and an embodiment
just as much as the outer as such for the inner
is an object or is affirmed as being and is there for
observation to deal with
The organic substance qua inner is the Soul simply
the pure notion of purpose or the universal which in
dividing into its discrete elements remains all the same
a universal fluent continuity and hence in its being
appears as action or the movement of vanishing reality
while on the other hand the outer opposed to that
existing inner subsists in the passive being of the
organic The law as the relation of that inner to this
outer consequently expresses its content now by setting
forth universal moments or simple essential elements
and again by setting forth the realised essential nature
or the form and shape actually assumed Those
first simple organic properties to call them so are
Sensibility Irritability and Reproduction These properties at least the two first seem indeed to refer not
to the organism in general but merely to the animal
organism The vegetable level of organic life too
expresses in point of fact only the bare and simple
notion of organism which does not develop and evolve
its moments Hence in regard to those moments so
far as observation has to take account of them we must
confine ourselves to the organism which presents them
existing in developed form
As to these moments then they are directly derived
from the notion of selfpurpose of a being whose
end is its own self For Sensibility expresses in
general the simple notion of organic reflection into
itself or the universal continuity of this notion
Irritability again expresses organic elasticity the
capacity to exercise the function of reacting simultaneously with selfreflection and expresses in contrast
to the previous state of being passively and inertly
within itself the condition of being explicitly actualised
a realisation where that abstract existence for its
own sake comes to be an existence for something else
Reproduction however is the operation of this entire
selfreflected organism its activity as having its purpose
in itself its activity qua genus wherein the individual
repels itself from itself where it repeats by procreation
either the organic parts or the whole individual Reproduction taken in the sense of selfpreservation in
general expresses the formal principle or conception
of the organic or the fact of Sensibility but it is
properly speaking the realised notion of organic existence or the whole which either qua individual returns
into itself through the process of producing individual
parts of itself or qua genus does so through the production of distinct individuals
The other significance of these organic elements
viz as outer is their embodiment in a given shape
here they assume the form of actual but at the same time universal parts or appear as organic systems
Sensibility is embodied in the form for instance of a
nervous system irritability of a muscular system reproduction of an intestinal system for tte preservation of the individual and the species
Laws peculiar to organic life accordingly concern a
relation of the organic moments taking account of
their twofold significance viz of being in one respect
a part of definite organic formation or embodiment
and ia another respect a continuous universal element
of a determinate kind running through all those
systems Thus in giving expression to a law of that
sort a specific kind of sensibility eg would find qua
moment of the whole organism its expression in a
determinately formed nervous system or it would also
be connected with a determinate reproduction of the
organic parts of the individual or with the propagation
of the whole and so on Both aspects of such a law
can be observed The external is in its very conception
being for another sensibility eg finds its immediately
realised form in the sensitive system and qua universal property it is in its outer expressions an objective
fact as well The aspect which is called inner has
its own outer aspect which is distinct from what is
in general called the outer
Both the aspects of an organic law would thus
certainly be open to observation but not the laws
of their relation And observation does not manage to
do that not because qua observation it would be too
shortsighted and should not proceed empirically but
should start from the Idea for such laws if they
were something real must as a matter of fact be
actual and must thus be observable it is rather because
the thought of laws of this sort proves to have no
truth at all
It was put forward as a law that the universal
organic property had formed itself in an organic system
into a thing and there found its own embodied image
and copy so that both were the same reality present
in the one case as universal moment in the other as
thing But besides the inner aspect is also for itself a
relation of several aspects and hence to begin with
the idea of a law is presented as the thought of a
relation of universal organic activities or properties to
one another Whether such a law is possible has to be
decided from the nature of the property in question
Such a property however being universal and of a
fluid nature is on the one hand not something restricted
like a thing keeping itself within the distinction of
a definite mode of existence which is to constitute
its shape and form sensibility goes beyond the nervous
system and pervades all the other systems of the
organism On the other hand such a property is a
universal moment which is essentially undivided and
inseparable from reaction or irritability and reproduction For being reflection into self it eo ipso already
implies reaction Merely to be reflected into itself is
to be a passive or lifeless being and not sensibility
just as action which is the same as reaction when not
reflected into self is not irritability reflection in action
or reaction and action or reaction in reflection is just
that whose unity constitutes the organic being a
unity which is synonymous with organic reproduction
It follows from this that in every form of reality
there must be present the same quantity of sensibility
since we are considering in the first instance, the
relation of sensibility and irritability to one another
as of irritability and that an organic phenomenon can be
apprehended and determined or if we like explained
just as much in terms of the one as of the other What
one man takes for high sensibility another may just
as rightly consider high irritability and an irritability
of the same degree If they are called factors and
this is not to be a meaningless phrase it is thereby expressly stated that they are moments of the
notion in other words, the real object the essential
nature of which this notion constitutes contains them
both alike within it and if the object is in one way
characterised as very sensitive it can be also spoken of
in the other way as likewise irritable
If they are distinguished as they must be they are
so in priaciple and their opposition is qualitative But
when besides this true distiaction they are also set
down as existent and presented as different as they
would be if made aspects of the law then they
appear quantitatively distinct Their peculiar qualitative opposition thus passes into quantity and hence
arise laws of this sort eg that sensibility and irritability
stand in inverse quantitative relations so that when
the one increases the other diminishes or better taking
directly the quantity itself as the content that the
magnitude of something increases as its smallness
diminishes
Should a more specific content be given to this law
however by saying for example that the size of a
hole increases the more we decrease what it is filled
with then this inverse relation might be just as well
changed into a direct relation and expressed in the
form that the quantity of a hole increases in direct
ratio to the amount of things we take away a tautological proposition whether expressed as a direct or an
inverse relation so expressed it comes merely to this
that a quantity increases as this quantity increases
The hole and what fills it and is removed from it are
qualitatively opposed but the real content there and its
specific quantity are in both one and the same and
similarly the increase of quantity and decrease of smallness are the same and their meaningless opposition
runs into a tautology In like manner the organic
moments are equally inseparable in their real content
and in their quantity which is the quantity of that
reality The one decreases only with the other and only
increases with it for one has hterally a significance only
so far as the other is present Or rather it is a matter of
indifference whether an organic phenomenon is considered as irritability or as sensibility this is so in
general and hlvcwise when its quantity is in question
just as it is indifferent whether we speak of the increase
of a hole as an increase of the hole qua emptiuess
or as an increase of the filling removed from it Or
again a number say three is equally great whether
I take it positively or negatively and if I increase
the three to four the positive as well as the negative
becomes four just as the south pole in the case of a
magnet is precisely as strong as its north pole or a
positive electricity or an acid is exactly as strong as its
negative or the base on which it operates
An organic existence is also such a magnitude or
quantity like the number three or a magnet etc It is
that which is increased or diminished and if it is
increased then both its factors are increased as much
as both poles of the magnet or both kinds of electricity
increase if the potential of a magnet or of one of the
electric currents is raised
That both are just as little different in intension and
extension that the one cannot decrease in extension
and increase in intension while the other conversely
has to diminish its intension and increase in extension
this comes from the same notion of an unreal and
empty opposition The real intension is absolutely as
great as the extension and vice versa
What really happens in framing a law of this kind is
obviously that at the outset irritability and sensibility
are taken to constitute the specifically determinate
organic opposition This content however is lost sight
of and the opposition goes off into a formal opposition of
quantitative increase and diminution or of different
intension and extension an opposition which has no
longer anything to do with the nature of sensibility and
irritability and no longer expresses it Hence this
mere playing at lawmaking is not confined to organic
moments but can be carried on everywhere with everything and rests in general on want of acquaintance with
the logical nature of these oppositions
Lastly if instead of sensibility and irritability
reproduction is brought into relation with one or other
of them then here too we fail to find any occasion for
framing laws of this kind for reproduction does not
stand in any opposition to those moments as they are
opposed to one another and since the making of such
laws assumes this opposition there is no possibility
here of its even appearing to take place
The lawmaking just considered implies the differences of the organism taken in the sense of moments of
its notion and strictly speaking should be an a priori
process But it essentially involves this idea that those
differences have the significance of being present as
something given and the attitude of mere observation has properly to confine itself merely to their
actual existence Organic reality necessarily has within
it such an opposition as its notion expresses and which
can be determined as irritability and sensibility as
these again both appear distinct from reproduction
The aspect in which the moments of the notion of
organism are here considered their Externality is the
proper and peculiar immediate externality of the inner
not the outer which is the outer embodied form of the
whole organism the inner is to be considered in relation
to this later on
If however the opposition of the moments is apprehended as it is found in actual existence then sensibility
irritability reproduction sink to the level of common
properties which are universals just as indifferent towards one another as specific weight colour hardness
etc In this sense, it may doubtless be observed that
one organic being is more sensitive or more irritable
or has a greater reproductive capacity than another
just as we may observe that the sensibility etc of one
is in kind different from that of another that one
responds differently from another to a given stimulus
eg a horse behaves differently towards oats from what
it does towards hay and a dog again differently towards
both and so on These differences can as readily be
observed as that one body is harder than another
and so on
But these sense properties hardness colour etc as
also the phenomena of responding to the stimulus of
oats of irritability under a certain kind of load or of
breeding a number and specific kind of young all such
properties and phenomena when related to one another
and compared inter se essentially defy the attempt to
reduce them to law For the characteristic of their
being sensuous facts consists just in their existing in
complete indifference to one another and in manifesting
the freedom of nature emancipated from the control of
the notion, rather than the unity of a relation in
exhibiting natures irrational way of availing itself of
the accidental element of quantity in order to flit
hither and thither between the moments of the notion,
rather than in setting forth these moments themselves
It is the other aspect in which the simple moments
of the notion of organism are compared with the moments
of the definite existent embodiment that would at last
furnish the law proper for expressing the true outer as
the copy of the inner
Now because those simple moments are properties that
permeate and pervade the whole they do not yet work
themselves out of the organic being into such a real
separate expression as to form what we call an individual system constituting a definite shape
Or again if the abstract idea of organism is truly
expressed in those three moments merely because they
are nothing stable but transitory moments of the
notion and its process the organism on the other hand
qua a definite embodiment is not exhaustively expressed in those three determinate systems in the way
anatomy analyses and describes them So far as such
systems are to be found in their actual reality and
rendered legitimate by being so found we must also
bear in mind that anatomy not only puts before us
three systems of that sort but a good many others as
well
Thus then apart from this the sensitive system as a
whole must mean something quite different from what
is called a nervous system the irritable system something different from the muscular system the reproductive from the intestinal mechanism of reproduction
In the systems constituting an embodied form
the organism is apprehended from the abstract side of
lifeless physical existence so taken its moments are
elements of a corpse and fall to be dealt with by
anatomy they do not appertain to knowledge dealing
with the living organism Qua parts of that nature
they have really ceased to he for they cease to be
processes Since the being of an organism consists
essentially in universality or reflection into self the
being of its totality like its moments cannot consist
in an anatomical system The actual expression of the
whole and the externalisation of its moments are really
found only as a process and a movement running
throughout the various parts of the embodied organism
and in this process what is extracted as an individual
system and fixated so appears essentially as a fleeting
moment So that the reality which anatomy finds
cannot be taken for its real being but only that reality
as a process a process in which alone even the anatomical parts have a significance
We see then that the moments of the inner being
of the organism taken separately by themselves are not
capable of furnishing aspects of a law of organic being
since in a law of that sort they refer to an objective
existence are distinguished from one another, and thus
each aspect would not be able to be equaUy named in
place of the other Further we see that when placed
on one side they do not find in the other aspect their
realisation in a fixed system for this fixed system is as
little something that could convey truly the general
nature of organic existence as it is the expression of
those moments of the inner fife of the organism The
essential nature of what is organic since this is inherently something universal lies rather in having
its moments universal in concrete reality as well ie in
having them as permeating processes and not in giving
a copy of the universal in an isolated thing
In this manner the idea of a law in the case of
organic existence shps altogether from our grasp The
law wants to take and express the opposition in the
form of static inactive aspects and bring out in the
case of those aspects the characteristic determining
their relation to one another The inner to which
falls the universality appearing in the process and the
outer to which belong the parts of the static form of
the organism were to constitute the corresponding sides
of the law but they lose in being kept asunder in this
way their organic significance And at the bottom
of the idea of law hes just this that its two aspects
should have a subsistence each on its own account
indifferent to the other and the relation of the two
sides should be shared between them and have a
correspondingly twofold determinate nature But really
each aspect of the organism consists inherently in being
simple universality wherein all determinations are dissolved and in being the process of dissolving them
If we quite see the difference between this way of
framing laws and previous forms it will clear up its
nature completely Turning back to the process of per
ceiving and that of understanding intelligence which
reflects itself into itself and by so doing determines
its object we see that understanding does not there
have before itself in its object the relation of these
abstract determinations universal and individual essential and external on the contrary it is itself the actual
transition the relational process and to itself this transition does not become objective Here on the other hand
the organic unity ie just the relation of those opposites
is itself the object and this relation is a pure process
of transition This process in its simplest form is
directly universality and since universality passes into
different factors whose relation it is the purpose of the
law to express its moments take the form of being
universal objects of this mode of consciousness and the
law runs the outer is an expression of the inner
Understanding has here grasped the thought of the
law itself whereas formerly it merely looked for laws in
a general way and their moments appeared before it in
the shape of a definite and specific content and not in
the form of thoughts of laws
As regards content no laws should then be admitted
in this connection which merely accept and passively
adopt distinctions barely existent and put them into
the form of universality but only such laws as directly
maintain in these distinctions the restless activity of the
notion as well and consequently possess at the same time
necessity in the relation of the two sides Yet because
that very object organic unity directly combines
the function of endlessly superseding or the absolute
negation of existence with inactive quiescent existence and because the nature of the moments is essentially a condition of pure transition there are thus not
to be found any sucli merely existent aspects as are
required for the law
To get such aspects intelligence must take its stand
on the other moment of the organic relation viz on
the fact that organic existence is reflected into itself
But this mode of being is so completely reflected into
self that it has no specific character no determinateness of its own as against something else left over
The immediate sensuous being is directly one with the
determinate quality as such and hence expresses
therein a qualitative distinction eg blue as against red
acid as against alkaloid etc But the organic being
that has returned into itself is completely indifferent
towards an other its existence is simple universality
and refuses to offer observation any permanent sense
distinctions or what is the same thing shows its
essential characteristic to be merely the changing flux
of whatever determinate qualities there are Hence the
way distinction qua actually existing expresses itself is
just this that it is an indifferent distinction ie a
distinction in the form of quantity In this however
the notion is extinguished and necessity disappears
The content however the filling of this indifferent
existence the flux and interchange of sense determinations when gathered into the simplicity of an
organic determination expresses at the same time
the fact that the content does not have that determinate character of the immediate property and the
qualitative feature falls solely within the aspect of
quantity as we saw above
Although the objective element apprehended in the
form of a determinate character of organic existence
has thus the notion inherent in it and thereby is distin
guished from the object offered to understanding which
in apprehending the content of its laws proceeds in a
purely perceptive manner yet apprehension in the former
case falls back entirely into the principle and manner
of mere percipient understanding for the reason that
the object apprehended is used to constitute moments
of a law For by this means what is apprehended
receives and keeps the character of a fixed determinate
quality the form of an immediate property or a passive
phenomenon it is further subsumed under the aspect
of quantity and the nature of the notion is suppressed
The exchange of a merely perceived object for one reflected into itself of a mere sense character for an
organic thus loses once more its value and does so by
the fact that understanding has not yet cancelled the
process of framing laws
If we compare what we find as regards this exchange
in the case of a few examples we see it may be something
that perception takes for an animal with strong muscles
characterised as an animal organism of high irritability or what perception takes to be a condition of
great weakness characterised as a condition of high
sensibility or if we prefer it as an abnormal
affection and moreover a raising of it to a higher
power expressions which translate sensuous facts into
Teutonised Latin instead of into terms of the notion.
That an animal has strong muscles may also be expressed
by understanding in the form that the animal possesses a great muscular force great weakness meaning
similarly a slight force Characterisation ui terms
of irritability has this advantage over determination
by reference to force that the latter expresses indeterminate the former determinate reflection into self
for the peculiar force characteristic of muscles is just
irritability and irritability is also a preferable determination to strong muscles in that as in the case
of force reflection into self is at once imlied in it In
the same way weakness or slight force organic
passivity is expressed in a determinate manner by
sensibility But when this sensibility is so taken by
itself and fixed and the element of quantity is still bound
up with it and qua greater or less sensibility is opposed
to a greater or less irritability each is reduced entirely
to the level of sense and put into the ordinary form
of a sense property their principle of relation is not
the notion but on the contrary it is the aspect of
quantity into which the opposition is now cast thus
becoming a distinction not constituted by thought
While in this way the indeterminate nature of the expressions force strength weakness would indeed
be got rid of there now arises the equally futile and indeterminate process of dealing with opposites of a higher
and lower degree of sensibility and irritability as they
increase and decrease relatively to one another The
greater or less sensibility or irritability is no less a
sensuous phenomenon grasped and expressed without
any reference to thought than strength and weakness
are sense determinations not constituted by thought
The notion has not taken the place of those nonconceptual expressions instead strength and weakness
have been given a filling by a characteristic which
taken by itself alone rests on the notion and has the
notion as its content but loses entirely this origin and
character
Owing to the form of simplicity and immediacy then
in which this content is made an element of a law and
through the element of quantity which constitutes the
principle of distinction for such determinations the
reality which originally is a notion and is put forward
as such retains the character of sense perception and
remains as far removed from knowledge as
when characterised in terms of strength or weakness of
force or through immediate sense properties
There is still left to consider what the outer side of
the organic being is when taken by itself alone and how
in its case the opposition of its inner and outer is determined just as at first we considered the inner of
the whole in relation to its own proper outer
The outer looked at by itself is the embodied form
and shape in general the system of Life
articulated in the element of existence and at the same
time essentially the existence of the organism as it is
for an other objective reality in its aspect of selfexistence This other appears in the first instance as
its outer inorganic nature If these two are looked at in
relation to a law the inorganic nature cannot as we
saw before constitute the aspect of a law beside the
organic being because the latter exists absolutely for
itself and assumes a universal and free relation to
inorganic nature
To define more exactly however the relation of these
two aspects in the case of the organic form this form
in which the organism is embodied is in one aspect
turned against inorganic nature while in an other
it is for itself and reflected into itself The real organic
being is the mediating agency which brings together
and xmites the selfexistence of life its being for itself
with the outer in general with what simply and inherently is
The one extreme selfexistence is however the inner
in the sense of an infinite one which takes the
moments of the embodied shape itself out of their subsistence and connection with outer nature and withdraws
these moments back into itself it is that which having
no content looks to the embodied form of the organism
to provide its content and appears there as the process
of that form In this extreme where it is mere negativity or pure individual existence the organism
finds its absolute freedom whereby it is made quite secure and indifferent towards the fact of its being relative to another and towards the specific character
belonging to the moments of the form of the organism
This free detachment is at the same time a freedom of
the moments themselves it is the possibility of their
appearing in existence and of being apprehended and
just as they are detached and indifferent in regard
to what is outer so too are they towards one another
for the simple nature of this freedom consists in mere
being or in their bare substance This notion or pure
freedom is one and the same life no matter how varied
and diverse the ways in which the shape assumed by
the organism its being for another may disport itself
it is a matter of indifference to this stream of life what
sort of mills it drives
In the first place we must now note that this notion
is not to be taken here as it was formerly when we
were considering the inner proper in its character as
a process or development of the moments we must
take it in its form as bare and simple inner which
constitutes the purely universal aspect as against the
concrete Uving reality it is the element in which the
existing members of the organic shape find their sub
sistence For it is this shape we are considering here
and in it the essential nature of life appears as the
simple fact of subsistence That being so the existence for another the specific character of the real
embodied form is taken up into this simple universality in which its nature lies a specificity that is
likewise of a simple universal nonsensuous kind and
can only be that which finds expression in number
Number is the middle term of the organic form
which liks indeterminate life with actual concrete life
simple like the former and determinate like the latter
That which in the case of the former the inner would
have the sense of number would require to express the
outer after its manner as multiform reality kinds of
life colour and so on in general as the whole host of
differences which are developed as phenomena of life being the inner while the other is the outer in such a
way that each again has in it an inner and an outer
are compared with reference to the inner both sides
have we find that the inner of the first is the notion in
the sense of the restless activity of abstraction the
second has for its inner however inactive universality
which involves also the constant characteristic
number Hence if because the notion develops its
moments in the former this aspect made a delusive
promise of laws owing to the semblance of necessity
in the relation the latter directly disclaims doing
so since number shows itself to be the determining feature of one aspect of its laws For number is just that
entirely inactive inert and indifferent characteristic
in which every movement and relational process is
extinguished and which has broken the bridge leadiag to the living expression of impulses manner of life and
whatever other sensuous existence there is
This way of considering the embodied organic shape
as such and the inner qua inner merely of that embodied form is however in point of fact, no
longer a consideration of organic existence For
both the aspects which were to be related are
merely taken indifferent to one another and thereby
reflection into self the essential nature of organism is
done away with What we have done here is rather to
transfer that attempted comparison of inner and outer
to the sphere of inorganic nature The notion with its
iniinity is here merely the inner essence which lies
hidden away within or falls outside in selfconsciousness
and no longer as in the case of the organism possesses
its objectivity in the actual present This relation
of inner and outer has thus still to be considered in its
own proper sphere
In the first place that inner element of the form and
shape assumed being the simple individual existence
of an inorganic thing is the specific gravity As a
simply existing fact this can be observed just as much
as the characteristic of number which is the only one
suited to it or properly speaking can be found by
comparing observations and it seems in this way to
furnish one aspect of the law The embodied form
colour hardness toughess and an innumerable host
of other properties would together constitute the
outer aspect and would have to give expression to the
characteristic of the inner number so that the one
should find its counterpart in the other
Now because negativity is here taken not in the sense
of a movement of the process but as ai inoperative
unity or as selfexistence pure and simple it
appears really as that by which the thing resists the
process and maintains itself within itself and in a
condition of indifierence towards it By the fact
however that this simple selfexistence this bare
beingforitself is an inactive indifference towards an
other specific gravity appears as one property alongside others and therewith all necessary relation
on its part to this plurality or, in other words, all
conformity to law ceases
The specific gravity in the sense of this simple inner
aspect does not contain difference in itself or the
difference it has is merely nonessential for its bare
simplicity just cancels every distinction of an essential
kind This nonessential difference quantity was thus
bound to find its other or counterpart in the other
aspect the plurality of properties since it is only by
doing so that it is difference at all When this plurality
itself is held together within the simple form of opposition and is determined say as cohesion so that this
cohesion is self existence in otherness as specific gravity
is pure selfexistence then cohesion here is primarily
this pure conceptually constituted characteristic as
against the previous characteristic The mode of
framing the law would thus be what we discussed
above in dealing with the relation of sensibility to
irritability
Furthermore cohesion qua conception of selfexistence in otherness is merely the abstraction of the
aspect opposed to specific gravity and as such has no
existential reality For selfexistence in its other is
the process wherein the inorganic would have to express its selfexistence as a form of selfconservation
which again would prevent it emerging from the process as a constituent moment of a product Yet this
goes directly against its nature which has no purpose or universality in it Rather its process is
simply the specific way of bringing out how its
selfexistence in the sense of its specific gravity cancels
itself This determinate mode of procedure which in
that case would constitute the true principle imlied
in its cohesion is itself however entirely indifferent to
the other notion that of the determinate quantity of
ts specific gravity If the mode of procedure were
left entirely out of account and attention confined to
the idea of quantity we might be able to think of a
feature like this the greater specific weight as it is
a higher intensiveness of being would
resist entering into the process more than a less
specific weight But conversely freedom of selfexistence shows itself only in the facility to
meddle with and enter into everything and maintain
itself throughout this manifold variety That intensity
without extension of relations is an abstraction with no
substance in it for extension constitutes the existence
of intensity The selfconservation of the inorganic
element in its relation lies however as already mentioned outside its nature since it does not contain
the principle of movement within it or because its being
is not absolute negativity and not a notion
When this other aspect of the inorganic on the other
hand is considered not as a process but as an inoperative being it is ordinary cohesion It is a simple
sense property standing on the one side over against
the liberated moment of otherness which lies scattered
over a plurality of properties indifferent_to and apart
from one another, and appears amongst these as specific
gravity or weight The multiplicity of properties
together then constitutes the other side to the latter
specific gravity In its case however as in the case
of the multiplicity number is the only characteristic
feature which not merely does not bring out a relation
and a transition from one to another of these properties
but consists essentially in having no necessary relation
its nature is rather to make manifest the absence of all
conformity to law for it expresses the determinate
character as one that is nonessential Thus we see
that a series of bodies whose distinction is expressed
as a numerical difference of their specific weights by
no means runs parallel to a series where the difference
is constituted by other properties even if for purposes
of simpHfication we select merely one or two of them
For as a matter of fact it could only be the tout ensemble
of the properties which would have to constitute the
other parallel aspect here In order to make this into
a connected single compact whole observation finds
before it the quantitative determinations of these various
properties but on the other hand their differences
come to light as qualitative In this compound then
what would have to be characterised as positive or
negative and would be cancelled each by the other
in general the internal arrangement and exposition of
the equation which would be very composite would belong to the notion The notion however is excluded from
operating just by the way in which the properties are
found lying they are to be picked up as mere existent
entities In this condition of mere being none is negative in its relation to another the one exists just as
much as the other and in no other fashion does it
indicate its presence in the arrangement of the
whole
In the case of a series with concurrent differences
whether the relation is meant to be that of simultaneous
increase on both sides or of increase in the one and
decrease in the other interest centres merely in the last
simple expression of this combined whole which would
constitute the one aspect of the law with specific gravity
for the opposite But this one aspect qua resultant
fact is nothing else than what has been already
mentioned viz an individual property say like
ordinary cohesion alongside and indifferent to which
the others specific gravity among them are found
lying and every other can be selected equally rightly
ie equally wrongly to stand as representative of the
entire other aspect one as well as the other would
merely represent or stand for German vorstellen
the essential reality but would not actually
be the fact itself Thus it seems that the
attempt to find series of bodies which should in their
two aspects run continuously and simply parallel and
express the essential nature of the bodies in a law holding of these aspects must be looked at as an aim that
is ignorant alike of what it is about and of the means
for carrying it through
At a previous stage the relation between the
inner and outer phases in the organic form set
before observation was forthwith transferred to the
sphere of the inorganic The determinate condition to
which this is due can now be stated more precisely
and there arises thence a further form and relation in
this connection What seems to present the possibility
of such a comparison of inner and outer in the case of
the inorganic drops away altogether when we come to
the organic The inorganic inner is an inner bare and
simple which comes before perception as a merely
existent property Its characteristic determination
is therefore essentially quantity and qua existent
property it appears indifferent towards the outer or
the plurality of other sense properties The selfexistence of the living organism however does not
stand on one side opposed to its outer it has the
principle of otherness within itself If we characterise selfexistence as a simple selfpreserving relation
to self its otherness is negativity bare and simple
and organic unity is the unity of selfidentical selfrelation and pure negativity This unity is qua
unity the inner phase of the organic the organic is
thereby inherently universal it is a genus The
freedom of the genus with reference to its reaUsation is
however something different from the freedom of
specific gravity with reference to embodied form That
of the latter is freedom in the sphere of existence
in the sense that it takes its stand on
one side as a particular property But because it is an
existent freedom it is also only a determinate character
essentially belonging to this one embodied form or
through which this form qua reality is a determinate
entity The freedom however of the genus is a universal
freedom and indifferent to this embodied form or
towards its realisation The characteristic feature
attaching to the selfexistence as such of the inorganic
is therefore subordinated in the case of the organic to
its selfexistence while in the case of the inorganic it
is subordinated to its mere existence Hence although
in the case of the latter that determinate characteristic
appears at the same time only as a property yet it
possesses the value of being essential because qua bare
negative it stands over against concrete existence
which is being for another and this simple negative
in its final form as a particular characteristic is a
number The organic however is an individual entity
which is itself pure negativity and hence eradicates
within it the fixed determinateness of number which
suits the indifference of mere being So far as it has
in it the moment of indifferent being and thereby of
number this numerical element can therefore only be
regarded as a side issue within it but not as the essential
nature of its living activity
But now though pure negativity the principle of
the process does not fall outside organic existence
and though the organic does not possess negativity as
an adjectival characteristic attached to its inner nature
the singleness of the individual organism being instead
inherently universal yet this pure singleness is not
therein developed and realised in its various moments
as if these were themselves abstract or universal On
the contrary this developed expression makes its
appearance outside that universality which thus falls
back into mere immanence and inwardness and between
the concrete realisation the embodied form ie the
selfdeveloping individual singleness of the organism
and the organic universal the genus appears the determinate or specific universal the species The existential form to which the negativity of the universal, the negativity of the genus attains is merely
the explicitly developed movement of a process carried
out among the parts of the given shape assumed by the
If the genus had the different parts within
itself as an unbroken simple unity so that its simple
negativity as sucli were at the same time a movement
carried on through parts equally simple and directly universal in themselves which were here actual as such
moments then the organic genus would be consciousness But the simple determinate character qua
determinateness of the species is present in an unconscious manner in the genus concrete realisation starts
from the genus what finds express realisation is not
the genus as such ie not really thought This genus
qua actual organic fact is merely represented by a
deputy Number which is the representative here
seems to designate the transition from the genus into the
individual embodiment and to set before observation
the two aspects of conceptual necessity one in the form of
a simple characteristic the other in the form of an organic
shape with all its manifold variety fully developed
This representative however really denotes the indifference and freedom of the universal and the individual as regards one another the genus puts the
individual at the mercy of mere quantitative difference
a nonessential element but the individual qua Hvitig
shows itself equally independent of this difference True
universality in the way specified is here merely
inner nature qua characteristic determining the species
it is formal universality and in opposition to the latter
that true universality takes its stand on the side of
organic individual singleness which is a living individual
entity by means of that universality and owing to
its umer nature is not troubled by its determinate character as a species But this singleness is not at the
same time a universal individual ie one in which
universality would have external realisation as well
this falls outside the living organic whole This
universal individual however in the way it is immediately the individual of the natural embodiments of
organic life is not consciousness itself its existence
qua single organic living individual cannot fall outside
that universal if it is to be consciousness
We have then here a connected system where one
extreme is the universal life qua universal or genus the
other being that same life qua a single whole or universal
individual the mediating term however is a combination of both the first seeming to fit itself into it as
determinate universality or as species the other as
single whole proper or individual singleness And since
this connected system belongs altogether to the aspect
of the organic embodiment it comprehends within it
too what is distinguished as inorganic nature
Since now the universal life qua the simple essence
of the genus develops from its side the distinctions of
the notion, and has to exhibit them in the form of
a series of simple determining characteristics this
series is a system of distinctions set up indifferently
or is a numerical series Whereas formerly the organic in the form of something individual and
single was placed in opposition to this nonessential
distinction of quantity a distinction which neither
expresses nor contains its living nature and while precisely the same has to be stated as regards the inorganic
taking into account its entire existence developed in
the plurality of its properties it is now the universal
individual which is not merely to be looked on as free
from every articulation of the genus but also as the
power and might inherent in the genus The genus
disperses into species after the manner of the uni
versality characteristic of number or again it may adopt
as its principle of division particular characteristics of
its existence like figure colour etc While prosecuting
this aim the genus meets with violence at the hands
of the universal individual the earth which in the
role of universal negativity establishes the distinctions
as they exist within itself the nature of which owing
to the substance they belong to is different from the
nature of that genus and makes good these distinctions
as against the process of generic systematisation This
action on the part of the genus comes to be quite a
restricted business which it can only carry on inside
those mighty elements and which is left with gaps and
arrested and interrupted at all points through their
unbridled violence
It follows from all this that in the embodied organic
existence observation can only meet with reason in the
sense of hf e in general which however in its differentiating process involves really no rational sequence and
articulation and is not a thoroughly grounded system
of shapes and forms If in the process of connecting
the moments which organic embodiment involves the
mediating term which contains the species and its
realisation in the form of a single individuality had within it the two extremes of inner universality and universal
individuality then this middle term would have in
the movement of its reality the expression and the
nature of universality and would be selfsystematising
development It is thus that consciousness takes as
the middle term between universal spirit and its in
dividuation or senseconsciousness the system of shapes
assumed by consciousness as an orderly selfconstituted
whole of the life of spirit the system of forms of
conscious life which is dealt with in this treatise and
which finds its objective existential expression as the
history of the world But organic nature has no history
it drops from its universal life immediately into the
indidduation of existence and the moments of simple
determinateness and individual living activity which are
united in this realisation bring about the process of
change merely as a contingent movement wherein each
plays its own part and the whole is preserved But
the energy thus exerted is restricted so far as itself is
concerned merely to its own focus because the whole
is not present in it and the whole is not there because
the whole is not as such here for itself
Besides the fact then that reason in observing
organic nature only comes to see itself as universal life
in general it comes to see the development and realisation of this life merely by way of systems distinguished
quite generally in the determination of which the
essential reality hes not in the organic fact as such but
in the universal individual the earthj and among these
distinctions of earth it comes to see that development
and realisation in the form of sequences which the
genus attempts to establish
Since then in its realisation the universality found
in organic life lets itself drop directly into the extreme of individuation without any true selfreferring
process of mediation the thing before the observing
mind is merely a wouldbe meaning and if reason
can be at the trouble to observe what is thus meant
here it is confined to describing and recording natures
meanings and incidental suggestions This irrational
freedom of fancying and thinking doubtless will
produce on all sides beginnings of laws traces of necessity hints and allusions to order and sequence ingenious
and specious relations of all kinds But in relating the
organic to the different facts of the inorganic elements
zones climates so far as regards law and necessary
connection observation never gets further than the
idea of a great influence So too on the other side
where individuality has not the significance of the
earth but of the oneness immanent in organic life this
in immediate unity with the universal no doubt constitutes the genus but its simple unity is just for that
reason determined merely as a number and hence lets
go the qualitative appearance here observation cannot
get further than making clever remarks bringing out
interesting points of connection making friendly advances to the notion But clever remarks do not amount
to a knowledge of necessity interesting points of connection stop short at being simply of interest while
the interest is still nothing but arbitrary opinion
about the rational and the friendliness of the
individual in making allusion to a notion is a childlike friendliness which is childish if as it stands it is to
be or wants to be worth anything
Observation of selfConsciousness in its pure Logical and Psychological Laws
Observation can be directed upon the selfconscious process of mind in
two ways it may consider the minds thinking relation to reality and it
may consider the minds active or biotic relation to reality The result
of observation here as in the foregoing cases finds expression in a number
of laws which it frames The laws in the first case are laws of
thought or connected logical laws in the latter case we have laws of
psychic events psychological laws
The analysis in this section shows the inadequacy of observation as
such to deal with its material in both cases It fails in the first case
because laws of thought have no meaning apart from the reality
with which thought is necessarily concerned laws of thought are laws of
thinking and thinking is both form and content observation gives
each law an absolute being of its own, as if it were detached from the
unity of selfconsciousness whereas this unity is the fundamental principle of each and all the laws which only exist in and by the single process
of that unity Hence a type of logic confined to observing laws of
thought is necessarily untrue Observation again fails in the second case
because it is impossible to separate mind from its total environment
Observational or empirical psychology therefore is incapable of giving an
adequate account of mind the constitution of the environment enters
into and in part determines the constitution of the psychic events and the
latter cannot be explained even as events without interpreting the former
at the same time
Observation op SelfConsciousness in its pure
form and in its relation to external reality
Logical and Psychological Laws
Observation of nature finds the notion realised in
inorganic nature laws whose moments are things
which at the same time are in the position of abstractions But this notion is not a unity reflected
into self The life of organic nature on the other
hand is just this condition of self reflected simplicity
The opposition within itself in the sense of the opposition
of universal and individual does not make its appearance
in the essential nature of life itself with one factor apart
from the other the essential reality is not the genus
selfsundered and selfmoved in its undifferentiated
element and remaining at the same time for itself
undifferentiated in its opposition Observation finds
this free notion whose universality has just as absolutely
within it developed individuality only in the notion
which itself exists as notion ie in selfconsciousness
Since observation now turns in upon itself and directs
itself on the concrete notion as a free notion it finds
to begin with the Laws of Thought This kind of
individuality which thought is in itself, is the abstract
movement of the negative a movement returned entirely to the condition of abstract simplicity and the
laws are outside reality
To say they have no reality means ordinarily
nothing else than that they are without any truth They are intended to be too not indeed entire truth
but still formal truth But what is purely formal
without reality is an ens intellectus or empty abstraction without the internal distinction which would be
nothing else but the content
On the other hand however since they are laws of
pure thought while the latter is the inherently universal and thus a kind of knowledge which immediately
contains being and therein all reality these laws are
absolute notions and are in one and the same sense the
essential principles of form as well as of things Since
selfdirecting selfmoving universality is the simple
notion in a state of diremption this notion has in this
manner a content in itself and one which is all content
though not sensuous not a being of sense It is a content which is neither in contradiction with the form
nor altogether separated from it rather it is essentially
the form itself for the latter is nothing but the
universal dividing itself into its pure moments
In the way in which this form or content however
comes before observation qua observation it gets
the character of a content that is found given ie
one which merely is It becomes a passively existing
centre of relations a multitude of detached necessities
which as a definitely fixed content are to have truth
just as they stand with their specific characteristic
and thus ia point of fact, are withdrawn from the
form
This absolute truth of fixed characteristics or of a
plurality of different laws contradicts however the
unity of selfconsciousness contradicts the unity of
thought and form in general What is declared to be
a fixed and inherently constant law can be merely a
moment of the self-referring selfreflecting unity can
come on the scene merely as a vanishing element
When rescued however by the process of considering
them from the movement imposing this continuous
connection and when reinstated individually and
separately it is not the content that they lack for they
have a specific content they lack rather the form
which is their essential nature In point of fact it is not
for the reason that they have to be merely formal and
are not to have any content that these laws are not the
truth of thought it is rather for the opposite reason
It is because in their specific condition simply as a
content with the form removed they want to pass for
something absolute In their true nature as vanishing
moments in the unity of thought they would have
to be taken as knowledge or as thinking process
but not as laws of knowledge Observing however
neither is nor knows that knowledge itself observation
transforms its nature into the shape of an objective
being ie apprehends its negative character merely as
laws of knowledge
It is sufficient for our purpose here to have demonstrated the invalidity of the socalled laws of thought
from the general nature of the case It falls to speculative philosophy to go more intimately and fully into
the matter and there they show themselves to be what
in truth they are single vanishing moments whose
truth is simply the whole oiE the thinking process
the process of knowledge itself
This negative unity of thought exists for its own sake
or rather it is just that condition of being for itself and
on its own account, the principle of individuality and
in its reality it is an acting function of consciousness Consequently the mental attitude of observation will
by the nature of the case be led on towards this
as being the reality of those laws of thought
Since this connection is not a fact for observation the
latter supposes that thought with its laws remains
standing separately on one side and that on the other
side it obtains another objective being in what is
now the object observed viz that acting consciousness
which exists for itself in such a way as to cancel otherness and find its reality in this direct awareness of
itself as the negative
In the active practical reality of consciousness
observation thus finds opened up before it a new field
Psychology contams the collection of laws in virtue of
which the mind takes up different attitudes towards
the different forms of its reality given and presented
to it in a condition of otherness The mind adopts
these various attitudes partly with a view to receiving
these modes of its reality into itself and conforming to
the habits customs and ways of thinking it thus
comes across as being that wherein mind is reality and
as such object to itself partly with a view to knowing
its own spontaneous activity in opposition to them
to follow the bent of its own inclinations affections and
emotions and carry off thence what is merely of particular and special moment for itself and thus make
what is objective conform to itself In the former it
behaves negatively towards itself as single and individual mind in the latter negatively towards itself
as the universal being
In the former aspect independence or selfdependence gives what is met with merely the form of
conscious tadividuality in general and as regards
the content remains within the general reality given
in the second aspect however it gives the reality at
least a certain special modification which does not
contradict its essential content or even a modification
by which the individual qua particular reality and
peculiar content sets itself against the general reality
This opposition becomes a form of wrongdoing when
the individual cancels that reality in a merely particular manner or when it does so in a manner that
is general and thus for all when it puts another world
another right law and custom in place of those aheady
there
Observational psychology which in the first instance
states what observation finds regarding the general
forms brought to its notice in the active functioning consciousness discovers all sorts of faculties inclinations
and passions and since while narrating what this
collection contains the remembrance of the unity of
selfconsciousness is not to be suppressed observational
psychology is bound to get the length at least of wonderment that such a lot and such a miscellany of things
can happen to be somehow alongside one another in
the mind as in a kind of bag more especially when they
are seen to be not lifeless inert things but restless active
processes
In telling over these various faculties observation
keeps to the universal aspect the unity of these
multifarious capacities is the opposite aspect to this
universality is the actual concrete individuality
To take up again the different concrete individualities
and to describe how one man has more inclination
for this the other for that how one has more intelligence
than the other all this is however something much
more uninteresting than even to reckon up the species
of insects mosses and so on For these latter give
observation the right to take them thus individually
and disconnectedly because they belong
essentially to the sphere of fortuitous detailed particulars To take conscious individuality on the other
hand as a particular phenomenal entity and treat it
in so wooden a fashion is selfcontradictory because
the essential nature of individuality Ues in the universal
element of mind Since however the process of
apprehending it causes it at the same time to pass into
the form of universality to apprehend it is to find its
law and seems in this way to have a rational purpose
in view and a necessary function to fulfil
The moments constituting the content of the law
are on the one hand individuality itself on the other its
universal inorganic nature viz the given circumstances
situation habits customs religion and so forth
from these the determinate individuality is to be understood and comprehended They contain something
specific determinate as well as universal and are at
the same time something lying at hand which furnishes
material for observation and on the other side expresses itself in the form of individuality
The law of this relation of the two sides has now to
contain and express the sort of effect and influence these
determinate circumstances exert on individuality This
individuality however just consists both in being
the universal and hence in passively and directly
assimilating and blending with the given universals
the customs habits etc thus becoming conformed to
them as also in taking up an attitude of opposition
towards them and thus transforming and transmuting
them and again in behaving towards them in its individual character with complete indifference neither
allowing them to exert an influence over it nor setting
itself actively against them On that account what is to
have an influence on individuality the sort of influence
it is to have which properly speaking means the
same thing depends entirely on individuality itself
Consequently to say that this individuality has become
this specifically determinate individuality means nothing else than saying it has been this all along Circumstances situation customs and so on which show
themselves on one side as something given and on the
other as within this specific individuality reveal merely
their own indeterminate nature which is not the point
under consideration If these circumstances style of
thought customs the whole state of the world in short
had not been then assuredly the individual would not
be what he is for all the individuals that find a place
in this state of the world go to constitute this universal
substance what it is
The way in which the condition of the world becomes
particularised in any given individual however and
such an individual has to be understood and comprehended could have been no other than the way in which
it particularises itself as a determinate universal and
in this determinate form alone could it have operated
on the individual as it does Only so could it have
made the individual the specific particular individual
he is If the external element is so constituted in
and for itself as it appears in individuality the latter
would be comprehended from the nature of the former
We should have a double gallery of pictures one of
which would be the reflection of the other the one
the gallery of external circumstance completely en
compassing circumscribing and determining the individual the other the same gallery translated into the
form in which those circumstances are in the conscious
individual the former the spherical surface the latter
the centre reflectively representing that surface within it
But the spherical surface the world for the individual
carries on the face of it this double meaning it is in
and for itself the actual world and situation and it is
the world of the individual. It is the world of the
individual either in so far as this individual could
be merely fused and blended with it had let that
world just as it is pass into its own nature, and had
taken up towards it merely the attitude of a formal
consciousness or on the other hand it is the world
of the individual in the sense in which the given has
been transformed and transmuted by that individual
Since reality is capable of haviag this twofold meaning on account of this freedom of the individual, the
world of the individual is only to be understood from
the individual himself and the influence of reality upon
the individual a reality which is represented as having
a being all its own receives through
this individual absolutely the opposite significance
the individual either lets the stream of reality flowing
in upon it have its way or breaks off and diverts the
current of its influence In consequence of this however psychological necessity becomes an empty
phrase so empty that there is the absolute possibility
that what should have had this influence could equally
well not have had it
Herewith drops out of account that existence which
was to be something aU by itself and was meant to con
Stitute one aspect and that the universal aspect of a
law Individuality is what its world in the sense of
its own world is Individuality itself is the cycle of
its own action in which it has presented and established
itself as reality and is simply and solely a unity of
what is given and what is constructed a unity whose
aspects do not fall apart as in the idea of psychological
law into a world given per se and an individuality existing for itself Or if those aspects are thus considered
each by itself there is no necessity to be found between
them and no law of their relation to one another
TO ITS immediate ACTUALITY PHYSIOGNOMY AND In the previous section observation was directed upon the relation of
mind to external reality the natural environment of individuality The
relation of mind to its own physical embodiment furnishes a further
object for observation to take up How observation operates in dealing
with this relation forms the subject of the analysis in the present section
Up to and at the time at which Hegel wrote the discussion of this
relation took the form of what are now looked upon either as spurious
sciences or at best as falling within the scope of physiology or psychophysics Those pseudosciences were Physiognomy and Phrenology or
Cranioscopy Both had in one form or another engaged the attention of
reflective minds from the earliest times But about the latter half of the
eighteenth century they gained unusual public prominence in Germany
France and England through the eloquence and conviction of their
exponents so much so that in Germany a law was passed forbidding
the promulgation of phrenology as being dangerous to religion and in
England a law of George II reenacted a statute of Elizabeth imposing the
severest penalties on physiognomists The chief exponents and propagandists of these studies of the human individual were Lavater in physiognomy and Gall along with his pupil
Spurzheim in phrenology The personal character and influence of the
first combined with his rhetorical eloquence compelled the attention
not only of the popular mind but of men of outstanding intelligence
while Gall lectured publicly and went from one University to another
expounding the generalisations discovered or made
It was impossible therefore for any philosopher who attempted to
discuss comprehensively the methods and procedure of observational
science to ignore the claims made by these pseudosciences or to refuse
to examine the validity of the laws they proposed to formulate This
was all the more necessary because the object they dealt with the
relation of mind to its physical embodiment was and is unquestionably
an important fact of experience and presents a serious problem to philo
sopty especially to idealism Hence we have in the following section an
elaborate analysis of the observational sciences of physiognomy and
phrenology an analysis the length of which can only be explained and
justified by the historical circumstances above indicated The ruthless
criticism the bitterness of the attack upon and the contempt for the
claims of these sciences displayed throughout Hegels analysis are only
explicable in view of the scientific and philosophical pretentions of the
expounders of these sciences
Observation op the relation of SelfConsciousness
to its immediate actuality physiognomy and
Phrenology
Psychological observation discovers no law for the
relation of selfconsciousness to actuality or the world
over against it and owing to their mutual indifference
and independence it is forced to fall back on the
peculiar determinate characteristic of real individuality
which has a being in and for itself or contains the opposition of subjective selfexistence and
objective inherent existence dissolved and
extinguished within its own process of absolute mediation Individuality alone is now the object for observation or the object to which observation now passes
The individual exists in himself and for himself
He is for himself or is a free activity he is however
also in hunself or has himself an original determinate
being of his own a characteristic which is in principle
the same as what psychology sought to find outside him
Opposition thus breaks out in his own self it has
this twofold nature it is a process or movement of
consciousness and it is the fixed being of a reality with
a phenomenal character a reality which in it is directly
its own This being the body of the determinate individuality is its ultimate and original source or condition that in the making of which it has had nothing
to do But since the individual at the same time merely
is what he has done his body is also an expression
of himself which he has brought about a sign and
indication as well which has not remained a bare
immediate fact but only points to and lets us see
what is meant by his setting his original nature to
work
If we consider the moments we have here in relation
to the view previously indicated we find a general
human shape and form or at least the general character
of a chmate of a portion of the world of a people just
as formerly we found in the same way general customs
and culture In addition too the particular circumstances and situation come within the universal reality
here this particular reality is a particular formation
of the shape and mould of the individual. On the
other side just as the free activity of the individual
and reality in the sense of his own reality were formerly
placed in contrast and opposition to reality as given
here the shape assumed by the individual stands as
an expression of his own actualisation established by
the individual himself it bears the lineaments and forms
of his spontaneously active being But the universal
as well as particular reality which observation formerly
met with outside the individual is here the reality of
the individual, his conate body and within this
very body the expression due to his own action
appears From the psychological point of view
objective reality in and for itself and determinate
individuality had to be brought into relation to one
another here however it is the whole determinate
individuality that is the object for observation and
each aspect of the opposition it entails is itself this
whole ThuSj to the outer whole belongs not merely
the original primordial being the conate body but the
formation of the body as well which is due to activity
from the iimer side the body is a unity of unformed
and formed existence and is the reality of the individual
pervaded and permeated by his reference to self This
whole embraces the definite and specific parts fixed
originally and from the first and also the lines or
lineaments which only arise as the result of action
this whole so formed is and this being is an expression
of what is inner and within of the individual constituted
as a consciousness and as a process
This inner is too no longer formal spontaneous
activity without any content or determinateness of its
own, an activity with its content and specific nature
as in the former case lying in external circumstances
it is an origiaal inherently determinate Character whose
form is just the activity What then we have to consider here is the relation subsisting between the two
sides the point to observe is how this relation is
determined and what is to be understood by the inner
finding expression in the outer
This outer in the first place does not act as an organ
making the inner visible or in general terms a being
for another for the inner so far as it is in the
organ is the activity itself The mouth that speaks
the hand that works with the bones too if we care to
add them are the operative organs effecting the actual
realisation and they contain the action qua action
or the inner as such the externality however which
the inner obtains by their means is the deed the act
in the sense of a reality separated and cut off from
the individual Language and labour are outer expressions in which the individual no longer retains
possession of himself fer se but lets the inner get right
outside him and puts it in the hands of another For
that reason we might just as truly say that these outer
expressions express the irmer too much as that they do
so too little too much because the iuner itself breaks
out in them and there remains no opposition between
them and it they not merely give an expression of
the inner they give the inner itself directly and immediately too little because in speech and action the
inner turns itself into something else into an other
and thereby puts itself at the mercy of change and
alteration which transmute and distort the spoken
word and the accomplished act and make something
else out of them than they are in and for themselves
as actions of a particular determinate individual Not
only do the products of actions owing to this externality
lose by the influence of others the character of being
something constant as regards other individualities but
by their assuming towards the inner which they contain the attitude of something external separate independent and indifferent they can through the individual himself be qua inner something other than
they seem Either the individual intentionally makes
them to all appearance something else than they are
in truth or he is too incompetent to give himself the
outer aspect he really wanted and to give them such
fixity and permanence that the product of his action
cannot become transformed and distorted by others
The action then in the form of a completed product
has the double and opposite significance of being either
the inner individuality and not its expression or qua
external a reality detached from the inner a reality
which is something quite different from the former
On account of this twofold meaning we must look
about for the inner as it still is within the individual
himself but in a visible or external form In the
organ however it exists merely as immediate activity
as such which attains its externalisation in the act or
deed that either does or again does not represent the
inner The organ in the light of this opposition thus
does not afiord the expression which is sought
If now the external shape and form were able to
express the inner individuality only in so far as that
shape is neither an organ nor action hence only in so
far as it is an inert passive whole it would then play
the role of a persisting or subsistent thing which
received undisturbed the inner as an alien element into
its own passive being and thereby became the sign and
symbol of it an external contingent expression whose
actual concrete aspect has no meaning of its own
a language whose accents and combinations are not the
real fact itself but are arbitrarily and capriciously
connected with it and a mere accident so far as it is
concerned
Such a capricious association of factors that are external for one another does not give a law Physiognomy
however would claim distinction from other spurious
arts and unwholesome studies on the ground that in dealing with determinate individuality it considers the necessary opposition of an inner and an outer of character as
a conscious nature and character as a definitely embodied organic shape and relates these moments to
one another in the way they are related to one another
by their very conception and hence must constitute
the content of a law In astrology on the other hand
in palmistry and such like kinds of knowledge there
appears merely external element related to external
element anything whatsoever to an element alien to it
A given constellation at birth and when the external
element is brought closer to the body itself certaia
given lines on the hand are external factors making for
long or short life and the fate in general of the particular
person Being externalities they are indifferent towards
one another and have none of the necessity for one
another which ought to he in the relation of what is
outer to what is inner
The hand to be sure does not seem to be such a
very external thing for fate it seems rather to stand
to it as something inner For fate again is also merely
the phenomenal manifestation of what the specifically
determinate individuality inherently is as having an
inner determinate constitution originally and from the
start Now to find out what this individuality is in itself, the palmist as well as the physiognomist takes
a shorter cut than eg Solon who thought he could
only know this from and after the course of the whole
life the latter looked at the phenomenal explicit
reality while the former considers the implicit nature
That the hand however must exhibit
and reveal the inherent nature of individuality as regards its fate is easily seen from the fact that after
the organ of speech it is the hand most of all by
which a man actualises and manifests himself It is
the lively artificer of his fortune we may say of the
hand it is what a man does for in it as the effective
organ of his selffulfilment he is there present as the
animating soul and since he is ultimately and originally his own fate the hand will thus express this
innate inherent nature
From this peculiarity that the organ of activity is
at once a form of being and the operation effected
within it or again that the inner inherent being is itself
explicitly present in it and has a being for others
we come upon a further aspect of it different from the
preceding For if the organs in general proved to be
incapable of being taken as expressions of the inner for
the reason that in them the operation is present as a
process while the operation as a deed or act is merely
external and inner and outer in this way fall apart
and are or can be alien to one another the organ
must in view of the peculiarity now considered be
again taken as also a middle term for both since this
very fact that the operation takes place and is present
in it constitutes eo ipso an external attribute of it
and indeed one that is different from the deed or act
for the former holds by the individual and remains with
him
This mediating term uniting inner and outer is in
the first place itself external too But then this externality is at the same time taken up into the inner it
stands in the form of simple unbroken externaUty opposed to dispersed and disintegrated externality which
either is a single performance or condition contingent for
the individuality as a whole or else in the form of a total
externality is fate or destiny split up into a plurality
of performances and conditions The mere lines of
the hand then the ring and compass of the voice as
also the individual peculiarity of the language used or
again this idiosyncracy of language as expressed where
the hand gives it more durable existence than the voice
can do viz in writing especially in the particular style
of handwriting all this is an expression of the inner
so that as against the multifarious externality of action
and fate this expression again stands in the position
of simple mere externality plays the part of an inner
in relation to the externality of action and fate Thus
then if at first the specific nature and innate peculiarity
of the iadividual along with what these become as the
result of cultivation and development are regarded as
the inner reality as the essence of action and of fate
this inner being gets its appearance in external fashion
to begin with from the mouth hand voice handwriting
and the other organs and their permanent characteristics
Thereafter and not till then does it give itself further
outward expression when realised in the world
Now because this middle term assumes the nature
of an outer expression which is at the same time
taken back into the inner its existence is not confined
to the immediate organ carrying out the action this
middle term is rather the movement and form of countenance and figure in general which perform no outward
act These lineaments and their movements on this
principle are the checked and restrained action that
stops at the individual and as regards his relation
to what he actually does constitute his own personal
inspection and observation of the action expression in
the sense of reflection upon the actual expression
The individual is therefore not a mute and silent
spectator on the occasion of his external action
since he is there reflected into himself at the same
time and gives articulate expression to this selfreflection This theoretical activity the individuals
conversing with himself on the matter is also perceptible to others for his speaking is itself an outer expression la this inner then which in being expressed remains
an inner observation finds the individual reflected out
of Ms actual reality and we have to see how the case
stands with this necessity involved in the unity here
His being thus reflected is to begin with different
from the act itself and therefore can he and be taken
for something other than the deed is We look at a
mans face and see whether he is in earnest with what
he says or does Conversely however wkat is here
intended to be an expression of the inner is at the
same time an existent objective expression and hence
itself falls to the level of mere existence which is
absolutely contingent for the selfconscious individual
It is therefore no doubt an expression but at the
same time only in the sense of a sign or symbol so
that to the content expressed the peculiar nature of
that by which it is expressed is completely indifferent
The inner in thus appearing is doubtless an invisible
made visible but without being itself attached to this
appearance It can just as well make use of some other
appearance as another inner can adopt the same kind
of appearance Lichtenberg therefore is right in saying Suppose the physiognomist ever did have a man
in his grasp it would merely require a courageous
resolution on the mans part to make himself again incomprehensible for centuries
In the previous case f the immediately given circumstances formed a sphere of existence from which individuality selected what it could or what it wanted
either submitting to or transmuting this given existence
for which reason this did not contain the necessity and
inner nature of individuality Similarly here the
immediate being in which individuality clothes its
appearance is one which either expresses the fact of its
being reflected back out of reality and existing within
itself or which is for it merely a sign indifferent to what
is signified and therefore signifying in reality nothing
it is as much its countenance as its mask which can be
put off when it likes Individuality permeates its own
shape moves speaks in the shape assumed but this
entire mode of existence equally well passes over into a
state of being indifferent to the will and the act Individuality effaces from it the significance it formerly
had of being that wherein individuality is reflected
into itself or has its true nature and instead puts
its real nature rather in the will and the deed
Individuality abandons that condition of being
reflected into self which finds expression in lines and
lineaments and places its real nature in the performance
the work done Herein it contradicts the relationship
which the instinct of reason engaged in observing
selfconscious individuality establishes in regard to
what its inner and outer should be This point of
view brings us to the special idea at the basis of the
science of physiognomy if we care to call it so The
opposition this form of observation comes upon is in
form the opposition of practical and theoretical both
falling inside the practical aspect itself the opposition
of individuality making itself real in action in the
most general sense of action and individuality as
being in this action at the same time reflected thence
into self and taking the action for its object Observation apprehends and accepts this opposition in the
same inverted form in whicb it is when it makes
its appearance To observation the deed itself and
the performance whether it be that of speech or
a more solid reality stand for the contingent nonessential outer while the individualitys existence within itself passes for the essential inner Of the two
aspects which the practical mind involves intention
and act the pondering over the action and the action
itself observation selects the former as the true inner
the latter is to have its more or less unessential
esternalisation in the act its true outer expression however is to be had in the form in which the individual
is embodied This latter expression is the sensuous
immediate presence of the individual selfconscious
agent the inwardness which is to be the true and
internal aspect is the personal peculiarity of the intention and the individual singleness of his selfexistence both together the mind as subjectively meant
Thus what observation takes for its object is an existence that is meant and there it looks for laws
The primary way of thinking about and giving the
meaning of the presumptive presence of mind is
that of natural physiognomy hasty judgment formed
at a glance regarding the inner nature and the
character of its form and shape The object of this
kind of guesswork thinking is so constituted that its
very nature involves its being in truth something other
than merely sensuous and immediate Certainly what
is really present is just this condition of being in sensuous
form reflected out of sense into self it is the visible as
a sensuous presentment of the invisible which constitutes the object of observation But this very sensuous
immediate presence is an actuality of mind only as it
is for subjective conjecture and observation from tbis point of view occupies itself with
its presumed existence with physiognomy
handwriting sound of voice etc
This sort of existence refers to just such a supposed
or presumed inner It is not the murderer
the thief that is to be known it is the capacity to be
a murderer a thief The definitely marked abstract
attribute is thereby lost in the particular individuals
concrete infinite characteristic nature which now demands more skilful delineations than the former qualifications supply Such skilful delineations no doubt say
more than the qualification murderer thief or
goodhearted unspoiled and so on but are a long
way short of their aim which is to express the existence
that is meant the single individuality as far short as
the delineations of the form and shape which go further
than a flat brow a long nose etc For the individual
shape and form like the individual selfconsciousness is
qua presumed existence inexpressible The science
of knowing men which takes to do with a supposititious human being like the science of physiognomy
which deals with its presumptive reality and seeks to
raise to the level of demonstrable knowledge those uncritical assertions of natural physiognomy is therefore
something with neither foundation nor finality it
cannot manage to say what it means because it
merely means or presumes and its content is
merely what is presumed or meant
The socalled laws this kind of science sets out to
find are relations holding between these two presumed
or supposed aspects and hence can amount to no more
than an empty fancying Again too since this
pretence at knowledge which takes upon itself to deal
with the reality of mind finds its object to be just
the fact that mind is reflected from sense existence
back into self and determinate existence is an indifferent accident for it it is bound to be aware at
once that by the socalled laws discovered it really
means nothing at all but that strictly speaking all
this is mere chatter or merely a fancy or opinion
of its own, an expression which brings out the truth
that to state ones opinion ones fancy and not to
convey thereby the fact itself but merely a fancy
of ones own are one and the same thing In content however such observations cannot differ from
these It always rains at our annual fair says the
dealer And every time too says the housewife
when I am drying my washing
Lichtenberg who characterises physiognomic observation in this way makes this remark If any one
says You act certainly like an honest man but I can
see from your figure you are forcing yourself to do so
and are a rogue at heart without a doubt every brave
fellow to the end of time when accosted in that fashion
will retort with a box in the ear
This retort is very striking for the reason that it
refutes the fundamental assumption of such a guesswork method of conjecture viz that the
reality of a man is his face etc
The true being of a man is rather his act individuality is real ia the deed and a deed it is which
cancels both the aspects of what is meant or pre
sumed to be In the one aspect wiiere wliat is
presumed or imagined takes the form of a passive
bodily being individuality puts itself forward in action
as the negative essence whicb only is so far as it cancels
being Then furthermore the act does away with the
inexpressibleness of what selfconscious individuality
really means in regard to such meaning this individuality is endlessly determined and determinable
This false infinite this endless determining is abolished
in the performance of the act The act is something simply determinate universal to be grasped
as an abstract distinctive whole it is murder theft a
benefit a deed of bravery and so on and what it is
can be said of it It is such and such and its
being is not merely a symbol it is the fact itself.
It is this and the individual human being is what
the act is In the bare simplicity of this being the
individual has for others a definite essential nature
of a certain general kind and ceases to be merely
something that is meant or presumed to be this
or that No doubt he is not there put forward in the
form of mind but when it is a question of his being
qua being and the twofold being of bodily shape
and act are pitted against one another each claiming to be his true reality the deed alone is to be
affirmed as his genuine being not his figure or shape
which would express what he means to convey
by his acts or what any one might conjecture he
merely could do In the same way again when his
performance and his inner possibfiity capacity or
intention are opposed the former alone is to be regarded
as his true reality even if he finds things turn out
different from what he expected and fancies when
he turns from the act to what is in his mind that he is
something else in his inner mind than what he is in
the act Individuality which commits itself to the
objective element when it sets out to do something
no doubt puts itself at the mercy of that element to
be altered and perverted as the latter decides But
what settles the character of the act is just this whether
the deed is a real thing that holds together or whether
it is merely a pretended or supposed performance
which is in itself null and void and passes away Objectification does not alter the act itself it merely
shows what the deed is ie whether it is or whether it
is nothing
The breaking up of this being into intentions and
subtleties of that sort by which the real man ie his
deed is to be reduced again to and explained in
terms of his conjectured being as even the individual himself may produce particular intentions
to explain his own reality all this must be left to idle
fancying and presuming to furnish at its leisure
If this idle thinking will set its ineffective wisdom to
work and will deny the agent the character of reason
and use him so badly as to want to declare his figure
and his lineaments to be his real being instead of his
act then it may expect to get the retort above spoken
of a retort which shows that figure is not the inherent
being but is at any rate an object that can be pretty
roughly handled
If we look now at the range of relations as a whole
in which selfconscious individuality can be observed
standing towards its outer aspect there will be one
left which has still to come before observation as an
object In psychology it is the external reality of
things wtiich in the life of mind is to have its counterpart
conscious of itself and make the mind inteiligible
In physiognomy on the other hand mind or spirit is
to be known in its own proper outer physical aspect
a form of being which may be called the language or
utterance of mind the visible invisibility of its inner
nature There is still left the further character of the
aspect of reality that individuality expresses its nature
in its immediate actuality an actuality that is definitely
fixed and purely existent
This last relation of mind to its reality is distinguished from the physiognomic by the fact that this
is the speaking presence of the individual, who in his
practical active outer expression brings to light and
manifests at the same time the expression wherein he
reflects himself into himself and contemplates himself
an expression which is itself a movement passive
lineaments which are themselves essentially a mediated
form of existence In the feature still to be considered
however the outer phase is in the end an entirely
inactive objectivity which is not in itself a speaking
sign but presents itself on its own account, separate
from the selfconscious process and has the form of a
bare thing
In the first place in regard to the relation of the inner
to this its outer it is clear that that relation seems
boimd to be understood in the sense of a causal connection since the relation of one immanent and inherent entity to another qua a necessary relation is
causal connection
Now for spiritual individuality to have an elfect
on the body it must qua cause be itself corporeal
The corporeal aspect however wherein it acts as a
cause is the organ not the organ of action on external
reality but of the action of the self-conscious being
within itself operating outward only on its own body It
is at the same time not easy to see what these organs can
be If we merely think of organs in general the organ
for work and toil would at once occur to us so too
the organ of sex and so on But organs of that sort
are to be considered as instruments or parts which
mind qua one extreme possesses as a means for dealing
with the other extreme which is an outer object
In the present case however an organ is to be rmderstood to be one wherein the selfconscious individual
as an extreme maintains himself on his own account
and for himself against his own proper actuality which is
opposed to him the individual not being at the same
time turned upon the outer world but reflected in his
own action and where further his aspect of existence
is not an existence objective for some other individual
In the case of physiognomy too the organ is no doubt
considered as an existence reflected into self and
criticising the action But in this case the existence is
objective in character and the outcome of the physiognomical treatment is that selfconsciousness treats its
own reality as something to which it can be indifferent
This indifference disappears in the fact that this very
state of being reflected into self is directly active
thereby that existence occupies and maintains a
necessary relation to it But to operate effectually
on that existence it must itself have a being though not
properly speaking an objective being and it must be
shown to be an organ in this sense.
In ordinary life anger eg as an internal action
of that sort is located in the liver Plato even assigns the liver something still higher something
which to many is even the highest function of all viz
prophecying or the gift of uttering in an irrational
manner things sacred and eternal But the process
which goes on in the individuals liver heart and so
on cannot be regarded as one wholly internal to the
individual wholly reflected into his self rather it is
there in such a form that his Body is from the first
smitten with it and the process assumes a physical
existence becomes an animal force reacting on and
directed towards external reality
The nervous system on the other hand is the
immediate stability of the organism in its process of
movement The nerves themselves no doubt are
again organs of that consciousness which from the fust is
immersed in its outward impulses Brain and spinal
cord however may be looked at as the immediate
presence of selfconsciousness a presence selfcontained not an object and also not transient In
so far as the moment of being which this organ has
is a being for another is an objective existence it is
a being that is dead and is no longer the presence of
selfconsciousness This selfcontained existence however is by its very nature a fluent stream wherein the
circles that are made in it immediately break up and
dissolve and where no distinction is expressed as
permanent or real Meanwhile as mind itself is not
an abstractly simple entity but a system of processes
wherein it distinguishes itself into moments but in the
very act of distinguishing remains free and detached
and as mind articulates its body as a whole into a
variety of functions and designates one particular
part of the body for only one function so too one can
represent to oneself the fluent state of its internal existence its existence within itself as something that is
articulated into parts Moreover it seems bound to be
thought of in this way because the selfreflected being
of mind in the brain itself is again merely a middle
term between its pure essential nature and its bodily
articulation an intermediate link which thereby forms
the nature of both and thus from the side of the latter
must also again have in it the actual articulation
The psychoorganic being has at the same time the
necessary aspect of a stable subsistent existence The
former must retire qua extreme of selfexistence and
have this latter as the other extreme over against it
an extreme which is then the object on which the
former acts as a cause If now brain and spinal
cord are that bodily selfexistence of miad the skull
and vertebral column form the other extreme separated
of viz the solid fixed stable thing
When however any one thinks of the proper place
where mind exists it is not the back that occurs to
him but merely the head Since this is so we can in
examining a form of knowledge like what we are at
present dealig with content ourselves with this reason
not a very bad one in the present case in order
to confine the existence of mind to the skuU Should
it strike any one to take the vertebral column for the
seat of mind in so far as by it too knowledge and action
doubtless are sometimes partly induced and partly
educed this would prove nothing in defence of the view
that the spinal cord must be taken as well for the
indwelling seat of mind and the vertebral column for
the existential counterpart because this proves too
much For we may bear in mind that there are
also other approved external ways for succouring the
activity of mind in order to stimulate or inhibit its
activity
The vertebral column then drops rightly if we
like out of account and our construing that the
skull alone does not in fact contain the organs of mind
is just as good as many other doctrines construed by
philosophy of nature For this was previously excluded from the notion of this relation and on that
account the skull was adopted as the aspect of existence
or if we may not recall what the state of the case
essentially and in principle involves even experience
teaches us clearly that as we do not see with the eye
qua organ so it is not with the skull that we commit
murder steal write poetry etc
We must on that account refrain too from using the
expression organ when speaking of that significance
of the skull which we have still to mention For
although it is a common thing to hear people say
that to reasonable men it is not words but facts that
really matter yet that does not give us permission to
describe a thing in terms not appropriate to it For
this is at once stupidity and deceit pretending merely
not to have the right word and hiding from itself
that in reality it has not got hold of the fact itself
the notion If the latter were there it would soon
find the right word
What has been here determined is in the first instance,
merely that just as the brain is the cafut vivum the
skull is the cafut mortuum
It is in this ens mortuum then that the mental
processes and specific functions of the brain would
have to find their external reality manifested and
set forth a reality which is none the less in the individual himself For the relation of those processes
and functions to what being an ens mortuum does not
contam mind indwelling within it there is offered m
the first instance, the external and mechanical factor
the fixed solid element above mentioned so that the
organs proper and these are in the brain here press
the skull out round there make it broad or force it
flat or in whatever way we care to state the effect thus
exerted Being itself a part of the organism it must
be supposed to have in it too as is the case in every
bone an active Uving formative influence so that
from this point of view it really from its side presses
the bram and fixes its external boundary which it is
the better able to do being the harder In that shape
however the relation of the activity of the one to the
other would always maintain the same character
for whether the skull is the determining factor or the
factor determined this would effect no alteration in
the general causal connection only that the skull would
then be made the immediate organ of selfconsciousness
because its aspect of existenceforself would find
expression in its causal function But since selfexistence in the sense of organic living activity belongs to
both in the same manner the causal connection between
them in point of fact drops altogether
This development of the two however would be
inwardly connected and would be an organic preestablished harmony which leaves the two interrelated
aspects free as regards one another each with its own
proper form and shape without this shape needing to
correspond to that of the other and still more so as
regards the relation of the shape and the quality
just as the form of the grape and the taste of wine are
mutually independent of one another
Since however the character of selfexistence turns
on the brain while that of existence turns on the
feature of skull there is also a causal connection to be
set up between them inside the organic unity a
necessary relation between them as external for one
another ie a relation itself external whereby their
form and shape is determined the one through the
other
As regards the characteristic however in virtue
of which the organ of selfconsciousness would operate
causally on the opposite aspect all sorts of statements
can be made For the question concerns the peculiarity
of a cause which is considered in regard to what for
it is indifferent its formal shape and quantity a
cause whose inner nature and selfexistence are to be
precisely what leave quite imaffected the immediately
existing aspect The organic selfformation of the skull
is to begin with indifferent to the mechanical influence
exerted and the relationship in which these two processes stand since the former consists in relating itself
to itself is just this very indeterm in ateness and boundlessness Furthermore even though the brain accepted
the distinctions of mind and took them into itself
as existential distinctions and were a plurality of
inner organs occupying each a different space it
would be left undecided whether a mental element
would according as it was originally stronger or
weaker either be bound to possess in the first case
a more expanded brainorgan or in the latter case
a more contracted brain organ or just the other
way about But it is contradictory to nature for the
brain to be such a plurality of internal organs for
nature gives the moments of the notion an existence
of their own and hence puts the fluent simplicity of
organic life clear on one side and its articulation and
division with its distinctions on the other so that in
the way they have to be taken here they assume the
form of particular anatomical facts
The same holds good in regard to the question
whether the improvement of the brain would enlarge
or diminish the organ whether it would make it
coarser and thicker or finer By the fact that it remains
imdetermined how the cause is constituted it is left
in the same way undecided how the effect exerted
on the skull comes about whether it is a widening
or a narrowing and shrinking of it Suppose this effect
is named in perhaps more distinguished phrase a
solicitation we cannot say whether this takes place
by swelling like the action of a cantharidesplaster
or by shrivelling like the action of vinegar
In defence of all views of that kind plausible reasons
can be adduced for the organic relation which quite
as much exerts its influence finds one fit as well as
another and is indifferent to all this wit of mere
understanding
It is however not the interest of observation to
seek to determine this relation For it is in any case
not the brain in the sense of a physical part which
takes its stand on one side but brain in the sense
of the existential form of selfconscious individuality
This individuality qua abiding character and selfmoving conscious activity exists for itself and within
itself Opposed to this existence within itself and on
its own account, stand its reality and its existence for
another Its own peculiar existence is the essential
nature and is subject having a being in the brain
this being is subsumed under it and gets its value and
worth merely through its inherent and indwelling significance The other aspect of selfconscious individuality
however that of its existence is being qua independent
and subject or qua a thing viz a bone the real existence of man is his skullbone This is the relationship
and the sense which the two aspects of this relation
have when the mind adopts the attitude of observation
Observation has now to deal with the more specific
and determinate relation of these aspects The skullbone doubtless in general has the significance of being
the immediate reality of mind But the manysidedness
of mind gives its existence a corresponding variety of
meanings What we have to find out is the specific
meaning of the particular regions into which this
existence is divided and we have to see how the
reference to mind is denoted in them
The skullbone is not an organ of activity nor even
a process of utterance We neither commit theft
murder etc with the skullbone nor does it ia the
least contort the face to suit the deed in such cases
so that the skull should express the meaning in the language of gesture Nor does this existential form possess
the value even of a sign and symbol Look and gesture
tone even a pillar or a post stuck up on a desert
island proclaim at once that they stand for something
else than what they merely are at first sight They
forthwith profess to be signs since they have in them
a characteristic which points to something else by
the fact that it does not belong peculiarly to them
Doubtless too in the case of a skull there is many an idea that may occur to us like those of Hamlet over
Yoricks sJoill but the skullbone by itself is such an
indifferent object such a harmless thing that there is
nothing else to be seen in it or to be thought about
it directly as it is except simply the fact of its being a
skull It no doubt reminds us of the brain and its
specific nature and skulls with other formations but
it does not recall a conscious process since there is
impressed on it neither a look or gesture nor anything
which would show traces of derivation from a conscious activity For it is that form of reality which
in the case of individuality is intended to set forth and
make manifest another aspect of a kind that would
no longer be an existence reflecting itself into itself but
bare immediate existence
While further the skull does not itself feel there
seems still a possibility of providing it with a more
determinate significance in the fact that specific
feelings or sensations might enable us through their
being contiguous or in proximity to it to find out
what the skull may mean to convey and since a conscious mode of mind has its feeling in a specific
region of the skull it may be thought perhaps that
this localisation on the shape of the skull may indicate what that mode is and what its peculiar nature
Just as eg many people complain of feeling a paiuful
tension somewhere in the head when thinking intensely
or even when thinking at all so it might be that stealig
committing murder writing poetry and so on could
each be accompanied with its own proper feeling
which would over and above be bound to have its
peculiar localisation This locality of the brain which
WQuld in this manner be more disturbed and exercised
would also most likely modify further the contiguous
locality of the bone of the skull or again this latter
locality would from sympathy or conformity not be
inert but would enlarge or diminish or in some other
way assume a corresponding form
What however makes such a hypothesis improbable
is this feeling in general is something indeterminate
and that feeling in the head as the centre might well
be the general feeling that accompanies all suffering
so that mixed up with the thiefs murderers poets
tickling or pain in the head there would be other feelings
too and they would permit of being distinguished from
one another, or from those we may call bodily feelings
as little as an illness can be determined from the symptom of headache if we restrict its meaning merely to
the bodily element
In point of fact, from whatever side we look at the
matter all necessary reciprocal relation between them
ceases to be of any account and so too any intimation
the one might give of the other in virtue of such a
relation If the relation is still to hold what is left to
form a sort of necessary relation is a preestablished
harmony of the corresponding features of the two sides
a harmony which leaves the factors in question quite
detached and rests on no inherent principle for one
of the aspects has to be a nonmental reality a bare
thing
Thus then on one side we have a number of passive
regions of the skull on the other a number of mental
properties the variety and character of which will
depend on the condition of psychological investigation
The poorer the idea we have of mind the easier the
matter becomes in this respect for in part the fewer
become tke mental properties and in part the more
detaciied fixed and ossified and consequently more
akin to features of the bone and more comparable with
them But while much is doubtless made easier by this
miserable representation of the mind, there still remains
a very great deal to be found on both sides there remains for observation to deal with the entire contingency
of their relation When every faculty of the soul every
passion and for this too must be considered here the
various shades of characters which hypersubtle psychology and knowledge of mankind are accustomed
to talk about are each and aU assigned their place on
the sll and their contour on the skullbone the
arbitrariness and artificiality of this procedure are
just as glaring as if the children of Israel who had
been likened to the sand by the seashore for multitude had each assigned and taken to himself his own
symbolic grain of sand
The skull of a murderer has not this organ or sign
but this bump But this murderer has in addition a
lot of other properties and other bumps too and along
with the bumps hollows as well Bumps and hollows
there is room for selection And again his murderous
propensity can be referred to some bump or hollow
or another and this in turn to some mental quality
or another for the murderer is neither this abstract
of a murderer nor does he have merely one protuberance
and one depression The observations offered on this
point must therefore sound just about as sensible as
those of the dealer about the rain at the annual fair
and of the housewife at her washing time Dealer and
housewife might as well make the observation that it
always rains when some neighbour passes by or when
they liave roast pork From the point of view of
observation a given determinate characteristic of mind
is just as indifferent to and independent of a given
specific formation of the skull as the rain in regard to
circumstances like these For of the two objects thus
under observation the one is an arid entity esisting
on its own account, an ossified quality of mind
as the other is an arid entity inherently existing in
itself Such an ossified entity as they both are is
completely indifferent to everything else It is just
as much a matter of indifference to a high bump whether
a murderer is in close proximity as to the murderer
whether flatness is near him
There is of course no getting over the possibility
that still remains that a bump at a certain place is
connected with a certain property passion etc We
can think of the murderer with a high bump here at
this place on the skull the thief with one there From
this point of view phrenology is capable of much greater
extension than it has yet had For in the first instance
it seems to be restricted merely to the connection of
a bump with a property in one and the same individual
in the sense that this individual possesses both But
phrenology fer naturam for there must be such a
subject as well as a physiognomy fer naturam goes a
long way beyond this restriction It does not merely
affirm that a cunning fellow has a bump like a fist lying
behind the ear but also puts forward the view that
not the unfaithful wife herself but the other party to
this conjugal transaction has a bump on the brow
In the same way one may too imagine and conjecture the man living under the same roof with the
murderer or even ones own neighbour or going still
further afield conjecture ones fellowcitizens etc
with high bumps on some part of the skull just as
well as one may picture to oneself the flying cow that
was caressed by the crab riding on a donkey and
afterwards etc etc But if possibility is taken not in
the sense of a possibility of imagining and conjecturing and picturing but in the sense of inner
possibility or possibility of conceiving then the object
is a reality of the kind which is a mere thing and is
and should be deprived of the significance of reality
and can thus only have the sense of it for imaginative
or figurative thinking
The observer may in spite of the indifference of
the two sides to one another set to work to determine correlations supported partly by the general
rational principle that the outer is the expression of
the inner and partly by the analogy of the skulls of
animals which may doubtless have a simpler character than men but of which at the same time it becomes just so much the more difficult to say what
character they do have in that it cannot be so easy for
any mans imagination to think himself really into the
nature of an animal Should the observer do so he
will find in giving out for certain the laws he maintains
he has discovered a firstrate means of assistance
in a distinction which we too must necessarily take
note of at this point
The being of mind cannot be taken at any rate to be
something completely rigid and innnovable Man is
free It will be admitted that the minds original
primordial being consists merely in dispositions which
mind has to a large extent under its control or which
require favourable circumstances to draw them out
ie an original being of mind can be equally well spoken
of as a being which does not as such exist at all
Were observations to conflict with what strikes any one
as a law which he is sure of and can give out for certain should it happen to be fine weather at the annual
fair or on the housewifes washing day then dealer and
housewife might say that it properly speaking should
rain and the conditions are really all that way So too
in the case of observing the skull it might be said when
those contradictory observations occur that the given
individual ought properly to be what according to the
law his skuU proclaims him to be and that he has an
original disposition which however has not been
brought olt and fulfilled this quality is not reaUy
present but it should be there The law and the
oughttobe rest on observation of actual showers of
rain and observation of the actual sense and meaning
in the case of the given specific character of the skull
but if the reality is not present the empty possibility
is of just as much significance
This mere possibility ie the nonactuality of the
law proposed and hence the observations conflicting
with the law are bound to come out just for the reason
that the freedom of the individual and the circumstances
gradually evolved are indifferent towards what merely
is both in the sense of the original umer as well as the
external ossiform structure and also because the individual can be something else than he is in his original
internal nature and still more than what he is as a
skullbone
We get tlen the possibility that a given bump or
hollow on the skull may denote both something actual
as well as a mere disposition one indeed so little deter
mined in any given direction as to denote something
that is not actual at all We find the excuse made
which comes off badly as a prevarication always does
that it is itself there for use against what it ought to
assist We see the thinking that merelj means and
conjectures brought by the very force of facts to
say in unintelligent fashion the very opposite of what
it holds to to say that there is something indicated
and signified by such and such a bone but also just as
truly not indicated at all
What hovers before this way of conjecturing when
it makes this shift is the true thought a thought however which abolishes that way of conjecturing that
being as such is not at all the truth of spirit As the
disposition is an original primordial being having no
share in the activity of mind just such a being is
the skullbone on its side What merely is without
participating in spiritual activity is for consciousness
a thing and so little is it the essence of mind that it is
rather the very opposite of it and consciousness is
only actual and concrete by the negation and abolition
of such a being
From this point of view it must be regarded as a
thorough denial and flaunting of reason to give out a
skullbone as the actual existence of conscious life and
that is what it is given out to be when it is regarded
as the outer form of spirit for the external shape is
just the existent reality It is no use to say we merely
draw an inference from the outer as to the inner which
is something different or to say that the outer is
not the inner itself but merely its expression For in
the relation of the two to one another the character
of selfreflecting and self reflected reality falls just on
the side of the inner while the outer has the character
of existent reality
When therefore a man is told You your inner being
are so and so because your skullbone is so constituted
this means nothiag else than that we regard a bone as
the mans reality To retort upon such a statement
with a box in the ear in the way mentioned above
when dealing with physiognomy brings out primarily
the soft parts of his head from their apparent state
and position and proves merely that these are no true
inherent nature are not the reality of mind the retort
here had better go the length of breaking the skull
of the person who makes a statement like that in order
to demonstrate to him quite as palpably as his own
wisdom that a bone is nothing of an inherent nature
at all for a man still less his true reality
The untutored instinct of selfconscious reason will
reject without examination a phrenology this other
instinct of selfconscious reason its instinct for observation which having got scarcely within sight of
knowledge has grasped the subject in the soulless form
that the outer is an expression of the inner But the
worse the thought the less sometimes does it strike us
where its badness definitely hes and the more dificult
is it to put ones finger on it For a thought is said to
be the worse the barer and emptier the abstraction
which thought takes to be the essential truth But in
the antithesis here in question the component parts
are individuality conscious of itself and the abstraction
of a bare thing to which externality has been reduced
the inner being of mind taken in the sense of a fixed
soulless existence and in opposition to that abstract
being
With the attainment of this however rational
observation seems in fact to have also reached its
culminating point at which it must take leave of itself
and turn right about for it is only when anything is
entirely bad that there is an inherent and immediate
necessity in it to wheel round completely into its opposite
Just so it may be said of the Jews that it is precisely
because they stand directly before the door of salvation
that they are and have been the most reprobate and
abandoned what the nation should be in and for
itself this the true inner nature of its self it is not conscious of being but puts away beyond itself By this
process of deprivation and renunciation it creates for
itself the possibility of a higher level of existence if
once it could get the object thus renounced back again
to itself than if it had never left its natiiral immediate
state of existence because spirit is all the greater the
greater the opposition out of which it returns into
itself and such an opposition spirit brings about for
itself by doing away with its immediate unity and
laying aside its selfexistence the possession of a separate life of its own. But if such a consciousness does
not mediate and reflect itself the middle position or
term where it has a determinate existence is the fatal
unholy void since what should give it substance and
filling has been turned into a rigidly fixed extreme It
is thus that this last stage of reasons function of
observation is its very worst and for that reason its
complete reversal becomes necessary
For the survey of the series of relations dealt with up
to this point which constitute the content and object
of observation shows that even in its first form in
observation of the relations of inorganic nature sensuous
being vanished from its ken The moments of natmes
condition present themselves as pure abstractions and
as bare and simple notions which should be kept connected with the existence of things but this gets
lost so that the abstract moment proves to be a pure
movement and a universal This free selfcomplete
process retains the significance of something objective
but now appears as a unit In the process of the inorganic the unit is the inner with no existence When
the process does have existence qua unit as one and
single it is an organism
The unit qua selfexistent or negative entity stands
in antithesis to the universal throws ofi its control
and remains independent by itself so that the notion
being only realised in the condition of absolute dissociation fails to find in organic existence its genuine expression in the sense that it is not there in the form
of a universal it remains an outer or what is the
same thing an inner of organic nature
The organic process is merely free implicitly it is
not so explicitly for itself The explicit phase of its
freedom appears in the idea of purpose has its existence
in the form of something else of a selfdirecting aim
and guidance that hes outside the mere process
Reasons function of observation thus turns its attention
to this aim and guidance to mind to the notion actually
existuig as universality or to the purpose existing in the
form of purpose and what constitutes its own essential
nature is now the object before it
Reason here in the activity of observation is directed
first to the pure abstract form of its essential nature
But since reason in its apprehension of the object thus
working and moving amidst its own distinctions takes
this object as something that exists observation becomes
aware of laws of thought relations of one constant
factor to another constant element The content of
these laws being however merely moments they pass
away into the single one of selfconsciousness
This new object taken in the same way as existent is
the contingent individual selfconsciousness The process of observation therefore keeps within the conjectured meaning of mind and within the contingent
relation of conscious to unconscious reality Mind
alone in itself is the necessity of this relation
Observation therefore attacks it at closer quarters
and compares its realisation through will and action
with its reality when it contemplates and is reflected
into itself a reality which is itself objective This
external aspect although an utterance of the individual
which he himself contains is at the same time qua
symbol something indifferent to the content which it is
intended to denote just as what finds for itself the
symbol is indifferent to this symbol
For this reason observation finally passes from this
variable form of utterance back to the permanent fixed
being and in principle declares that externality is the
outer immediate reality of mind not in the sense of an
organ and not like a language or a symbol but in the
sense of a lifeless thing What the very first form of
observation of inorganic nature did away with and
superseded viz the idea that the notion should appear
in the shape of a thing, this last form of observation
reinstates so as to turn the reality of mind itself into
a thing or expressing it the other way about so as to
give lifeless being the significance of mind expressing what our notion of observation was at the
outset viz that rational certainty means objectivity
of reason that the certainty of reason seeks itself as an
objective reality
This does not indeed mean that mind which is
represented by a skull is defined as a thing There
shall be no materialism as it is called in this idea
mind rather must be something very different from
these bones of the skull But that mind is means
nothing else than that it is a thing When being as
such or thingness is predicated of the mind, the
true and genuine expression for this is therefore that
mind is such an entity as a bone is Hence it must
be considered as supremely important that the true
expression has been found for the bare statement
regarding mind that it is When the statement
is ever made about mind that it is has a being is a
thing an individual reality we do not mean it is something we can see or knock about or take in our hands
and so on but that is what we say and what the statement really amounts to is consequently conveyed in
the expression that the existence of mind is a bone
This result has now a twofold significance one is
its true meaning in so far as the result is a completion
of the outcome of the preceding movement of selfconsciousness The unhappy selfconsciousness renounced its selfsufficiency its independence and
wrung out its distinctive self existence into the shape
of a thing. By doing so it left the level of selfconsciousness and reverted to the condition of mere consciousness ie to that phase of conscious life for which
the object is an existent a thing But what is thing
in this case is selfconsciousness thing here is the
unity of ego and being the Category When the
object before consciousness is determined thus consciousness possesses reason Consciousness as well as
selfconsciousness is in itself properly reason in an
implicit form but only that consciousness can be said
to liave reason whose object has the character of being
the category From this however the knowledge of
what is reason is still distinct
The category which is the immediate unity of being
and self must traverse both forms
and the conscious attitude of observation is just where
the category is set forth in the form of being In its
result consciousness expresses that whose unconscious
implicit certainty it is in the shape of a proposition
the proposition which lies in the very notion of reason
This proposition is the infinite judgment that the self
is a thing a judgment that cancels and transcends
itself
Through this result then the category gets the added
characteristic of being this selfcancellig opposition
The pure category which is present to consciousness
in the form of being or immediacy is still an unmediated
a merely given object and the attitude of consciousness
is also direct has no mediation in it That infinite
judgment is the moment which brings about the transition of immediacy into mediation or negativity
The given present object is therefore characterised as
a negative object while consciousness in its relation
towards it assumes the form of seconsciousness
or the category which traversed the form of being in
the process of observation is now set up in the form of
selfexistence has now a distinctive being for its own
sake Consciousness no longer seeks to find itself
immediately but to produce itself by its own activity
Consciousness itself is the purpose and end of its own
action as in the process of observation it has to do
merely with things
The other meaning of the result is the one already
considered that of unsystematic observation
This has no other way of understanding and expressing
what it is about than by declaring the reality of selfconsciousness to consist in the skullbone just as it
appears in the form of a thing of sense stiU retaining
its character as an object for consciousness In stating
this however it has no clear consciousness as to what
the statement involves and does not grasp the determinate character of the subject and predicate in the
proposition and of their relation to one another still
less does it grasp the proposition in the sense of a selfresolving infinite judgment and a notion Rather in
virtue of a deeper lying selfconsciousness of mind
which has the appearance here of being an innate
sincerity and honesty of nature the ignominiousness of
such an irrational crude thought as that of taking a
bone for the reality of selfconsciousness is concealed
and the very senselessness of introducing all sorts of
relations of cause and effect, symbol organ etc
which are perfectly meaningless here and of hiding
away the glaring folly of the proposition behind distinctions derived from them all this puts a gloss on that
thought and whitewashes its naked absurdity
Brainfibres and the like looked at as forms of the
being of mind are from the first an imagined a merely
hjrpothetical actuality not an existent reality not felt
seen in short not true reality If they do exist if
they are seen they are lifeless objects and then nq
longer pass for the being of mind But objectivity
proper must take an immediate a sensuous form so
that in this objectivity qua lifeless for the bone is
Kfeless so far as it is in the living being itself mind
is definitely established as real as actual
The principle involved in this idea is that reason
claims to be all thinghood even thinghood of a purely
objective kind It is this however in conceptu only
the notion is its truth and the purer the notion itself
is the more silly an idea does it become if its content
does not take the shape of a notion but of a
mere presentation or idea if the selfsuperseding judgment is not taken with the consciousness of its infinity but is taken as a stable and permanent proposition the subject and predicate of which
hold good each on its own account, self fixed as self
thing as thing while one has to be the other all the
same
Reason essentially the notion is immediately parted
asunder into itself and its opposite an opposition which
just for that reason is immediately again superseded
But by presenting itself in this way as both itself and
its opposite and when held fast in the entirely
particular moment of this disintegration reason is
apprehended in an irrational form and the purer the
moments of this opposition are the more glaring is the
appearance of this content which is either solely a content for consciousness or solely expressed by consciousness in a naive form
The depth which mind brings out from within but
carries no further than to make it a presentation
and let it remain at this level and the
ignorance on the part of this consciousness as to what
it really says are the same kind of connection of higher
and lower which in the case of the living being nature
naively expresses when it combines the organ of its
highest fulfilment the organ of generation with the
organ of urination The infinite judgment qua infinite
would correspond to the fulfilment of life that comprehends itself while the consciousness of life that
remains at the level of presentation would correspond
to urination
The Realisation of Eational SelfConsciousness
Through Its Own Activity
In this section we have the second form in which rational experience
is realised In observation mind is directly aware of itself aa in conscious unity with its object it makes no effort of its own to realise this
unity it finds the unity by looking on so to say But it may have the
same experience by creating through its own effort an object constituted
and determined solely by its self Here it does not find the unitj of itself
and its object it makes the object at one with itself by moulding the
character and content of the object after its own nature. As contrasted
with observation which may be called the operation of theoretical
reason this new way of having a rational experience may be called the
operation of practical reason In the first we have reason in the form
of rational knowledge and science in the second reason is the sense of
rational action and practice
It is this second way of establishing the experience of reason which is
analysed in the following sections The immediately succeeding section
describes the experience in its general features We have here the sphere
of conscious purpose and the foundation of moral and social life
Selfconsciousness found the thing in the form of
itself and itself in the form of a thing that is to say
selfconsciousness is explicitly aware of being in itself
the objective realitj It is no longer the immediate
certainty of being all reality it is rather that certainty
for which the immediate in general assumes the form of
something sublated so that the objectivity of the immediate is regarded now as merely something superficial
whose inner core and essence is selfconsciousness
The object therefore to which selfconsciousness is
positively related is a selfconsciousness The object
has the form and character of a thing, ie is independent but selfconsciousness has the conviction that
this independent object is not alien to itself it
knows straightway that itself is inherently and essentially recognised by the object Selfconsciousness is
mind which has the assmance of having in the
duplication of its selfconsciousness and in the independence of both its unity with its own self This
certainty has to be brought out now in all its truth
what selfconsciousness holds as a fact viz that implicitly in itself and in its inner certainty it is has to
enter into full consciousness and become explicit for it
What the general stages of this actualisation will be
can be indicated in a general way by reference to the
road thus far traversed Just as reason when exercised in observation repeated in the medium of categories tKe
movement of consciousness as such namely sensecertainty perception and understanding the course
of reason here too will again traverse the double movement of selfconsciousness and from independence
pass over into its freedom To begin with this active
reason is aware of itself merely as an individual and
must being such demand and bring forth its reality in
an other Thereupon however its consciousness being
hfted into universality it becomes universal reason
and is consciously aware of itself as reason as something
already recognised in and for itself which within its mere
consciousness unites all selfconsciousness It is again
the simple ultimate spiritual reality which by
coming at the same time to consciousness is the real
substance into which preceding forms return and in
wliich they find their ground so that they are with
reference to the latter merely particular moments of
its process of coming into being moments which indeed
break loose and appear as forms on their own account
but have in fact only existence and actuality when
borne and supported by it and only retain their truth
in so far as they are and remain in it
If we take this final result of the process as it is when
really accomplished this end which is the notion that
has just come before us viz recognised selfconsciousness which has the certainty of itself in the other free
selfconsciousness and finds its truth precisely there
in other words, if we bring this merely inward and unevolved mind to light as the substance that has de
viz in descriptive observation of nature as such I viz in observation of nature as the external reality of mind
veloped into its concrete existence we shall find that
in this notion there is opened up before us the realm
of the Social Order the Ethical World For
this latter is nothing else than the absolute spiritual
unity of the essential substance of individuals
in their independent realisation of themselves as individuals it is an inherently universal selfconsciousness
which is aware of being so concrete and real in an other
consciousness that this latter has complete independence is looked on as a thing and the universal selfconsciousness is aware precisely therein of its unity with
that thing and is only then selfconsciousness when
thus in unity with this objective being This
ethical substance when taken in its abstract universality is only the conception of law thoughtconstituted
law but even so it is immediately actual selfconsciousness it is Custom The single individual conversely is only a this a given existent unit since he
is aware of the universal consciousness as his own being
in his own particular individuality seeing that his action
and existence are the universal custom
In point of fact the notion of the realisation
of selfconscious reason of having a sense of
complete unity with another in his independence of
having for my object an other in the form of a thing,"
found detached and apart from me and the negative of
myself and of taking this as my selfexistence finds its actual fulfilment in the life of a
nation Reason appears here as the fluent universal
substance as unchangeable simple thingness which
at the same time breaks up into many entirely independent beings just as light bursts asunder into stars as
innumerable luminous points each giving light on its
own account, and whose absolute selfexistence is dissolved not merely implicitly
but explicitly for themselves within the simple
independent substance They are conscious within
themselves of being these individual independent beings
through the fact that they surrender and sacrifice their
particular individuality and that this universal substance is their soul and essence as this universal again
is the action of themselves as individuals and is the
work and product of their own activity
The purely particular activity and business of the
individual refer to needs and wants which he has as
a part of nature ie as a mere existent particular That
even these its commonest functions do not come to
nothing but have reality is brought about by the
universal sustaining medium the might of the entire
nation
It is not merely however this form of subsistence
for his activity in general that the individual gets in
the universal substance but likewise also his content
what he does is what all are capable of doing is the
custom all follow This content in so far as it is completely particularised is in its concrete reality not
confined to the single individual but involves and
embraces the activity of all The labour of the individual for his own wants and necessities is just as much
a satisfaction of those of others as of himself and the
satisfaction of his own he attains only by the labour of
others
As the individual in his own particular work if so
facto accomplishes unconsciously a universal work so
again he also performs the universal task as his conscious
object The whole becomes in its entirety his work for
which he sacrifices himself and precisely by that means
receives back his own self from it
There is nothing here which could not be reciprocal
nothing in regard to which the independence of the
individual might not in dissipating its existence on its
own account in negating itself give itself
its positive significance of existing for itself This unity
of existing for another or making self a thing and
of existence for self this universal substance utters its
universal language in the customs and laws of a nation
But this existent unchangeable nature is
nothing else than the expression of the particular individuality which seems opposed to it the laws give
expression to that which each individual is and does
the individual knows them not merely to be what constitutes his universal objective nature as a thing but
knows himself too in that form or knows it to
be particularised in his own individuality and in
each of his feUowcitizens In the universal mind there
fore each is certain of himself only because he finds in
the actual reality nothing but himself he is as certain
of the others as of himself I apprehend and see in all of
them that they are in their own eyes only
these independent beings just as I am I see in their
case the free unity with others in such wise that just
as this unity exists through me so it exists through the
others too I see them as myself myself as them
In a free nation therefore reason is in truth realised
It is a present living mind where the individual not
only finds his determinate nature ie his universal and
particular being expressed and given to him in the form
of a thing," but himself is this real being and has
also attained his constitutive character and position
The wisest men of antiquity for that reason declared
that wisdom and virtue consist in living in accordance
with the customs of ones own nation
From this happy state however of having attained
its determinate nature and of living in it the selfconsciousness which in the first instance is only immediately and in principle mind has broken away or
perhaps it has not yet attained it for both can be said
with equal truth
Reason must pass out of and leave this happy condition For only implicitly or immediately is the life of
a free nation real ob j ective ethical order In
other words, the latter is a merely existent social order
and in consequence this universal mind is also something particular The totality of customs and laws is a
specifically determinate ethical substance which casts
off this restricted Limitation only when it reaches the
higher moment namely when it becomes conscious
regarding its own nature only with this knowledge
does it get its absolute truth and not as it is immediately
in its bare existence In this latter form it is partly
restricted and circumscribed partly the absolute limitation consists just in this that mind is there in the form
of existence
Hence further the individual as he immediately
finds his existence in the actual objective social order
in the life of his nation has a soKd imperturbable confidence the universal mind has not here resolved itself
into its abstract moments and thus too he does not
think of himself as existing in singleness and independence When however he has once arrived at this knowledge as indeed he must this immediate unity with
mind this undifferentiated existence in the substance
of mind his sense of naive confidence is lost Isolated
by himself he is himself now the central essential reality
no longer universal mind The element of this singleness of selfconsciousness is no doubt in universal mind
itself but merely as a vanishing quantity which as
it appears with an existence of its own, is straightway resolved within the universal and only becomes
consciously felt in the form of that sense of confidence
When the individual gets fixity in the form of singleness and every moment being a moment of the
essential reality must manage to reveal itself as essential the individual has thereby set himself in opposition
to the laws and customs These latter are looked on
as merely a thought without absolutely essential significance an abstract theory without reality while he qua
this particular ego is in his own view the living truth
Or again we can say as above stated that self
consciousness has not yet attained this happy state of
being ethical substance the mind of a nation For
after leaving the process of rational Observation mind
at first is not yet as such actually realised through
itself it is merely afiirmed as inner nature and essence
or as abstraction In other words, mind is first immediate As immediately existing however it is particular It is practical consciousness which steps into
the world it finds lying readymade with the intention of
duplicating itself in the determinate form of an individual of producing itself as this particular individual
and creating this its own existential counterpart and
thus becoming conscious of this unity of its own
actual reality with the objective world Selfconsciousness possesses the certainty of this unity it
holds that the unity is implicitly already
present or that this union and agreement between itself
and thinghood objective existence is akeady a fait
accompli and has only to become expressly so through
its own agency or that its making that unity is at the
same time and as much its finding the unity Since this
unity means happiness the individual is thus sent forth
into the world by his own spirit to seek his happiness
If then we for our part find the truth of this rational
selfconsciousness to be ethical substance that selfconsciousness on its part finds here the beginning of its
moral experience of the world Looking at it as not
having yet had such experience this process drives it in
that direction and what is cancelled in the process are
the particular moments which selfconsciousness takes as
valid in isolation They have the form of an immediate
willprocess or impulse of nature which attains its
satisfaction this satisfaction itself being the content of a
new impulse Looking at selfconsciousness however
as having lost the happiness of being in the substance
these natural impulses are bound up with a consciousness that their purpose is the true vocation and
essential nature of selfconsciousness Ethical substance
has sunk to the level of a floating selfless adjective
whose living subjects are individuals which have to fill
up their universality through themselves and to provide
for their vocation out of the same source
Taken in the former sense then those forms and
modes are the process by which the ethical substance
comes to be and precede this substance in the latter
they succeed it and disclose for selfconsciousness
what its vocation is In the former aspect the immediacy or raw brute impulses get lost in the process
of finding out what their truth is and their content
passes over to a higher In the latter aspect however
the false idea of consciousness, which puts its vocation
in that immediacy passes to a higher idea In the
former case the goal which they attain is the immediate ethical substance while in the latter the
end is the consciousness of that substance such a consciousness as knows the substance to be its own essential
being and to that extent this process would be the
development of morality a higher state or
attitude than the former But these modes
at the same time constitute only one side of the development of morality that namely which belongs to selfexistence or in which consciousness cancels its purposes they do not constitute the side where morality
arises out of the substance itself Since these moments
cannot yet have the signification of being made into
purposes in opposition to the lost social order they hold here no doubt in their simple uncriticised content and the end towards which they work
is the ethical substance but since with our time is more
directly associated that form of these moments in
which they appear after consciousness has lost its
ethical customconstituted life and in the
search for it repeats those forms they may be represented more after this latter manner of expression ¥
Selfconsciousness which is merely at first the notion
of mind takes this path with the specific characteristic
of being to itself the essential reality qua individual
mind and its purpose therefore is to give itself
actualisation as individual and to enjoy itself qua
individual in so doing other There arises therefore within its consciousness an opposition between itself qua positive and
something which no doubt exists but for it not in the
sense of existing substantially Consciousness appears
sundered into this objective reality found lying at
its hand and the purpose which it carries out by
the process of cancelling that objectivity and which
it makes the actual fact instead of the given object
Its primary purpose however is its immediate abstract
existence for itself its seeing itself as this particular
individual in another or in looking upon another selfconsciousness as itself The experience of what the
truth of this purpose is places selfconsciousness on a
higher plane and henceforth it is to itself purpose
in so far as it is at once universal and has the law
immediately within it In carrying out this law of its
heart however it learns that here the individual cannot preserve himself but rather the good can only be
performed through the sacrifice of the individual and
so it passes into Virtue The experience which virtue
goes through can be no other than that of finding that
its purpose is already implicitly carried out
that happiness Ues immediately in action itself and
action is just the good The principle and notion of
this entire sphere of experience viz that thinghood
is the independent selfexistence of mind becomes in
the course of this experience an objective fact for selfconsciousness When selfconsciousness has foundthis
principle it is aware of itself as reality in the sense of
directly selfexpressing Individuality which no longer
finds any resistance in a reality opposed to it and whose
object and purpose are merely this function of selfexpression
a
Pleasure and Necessity
The succeeding three sections discuss the procedure of onesided subjective individualism the attempt to realise the individual and jct not
transcend the particular individuality The first thought of selfconsciousness vihen it seeks to realise or objectify itself as a mere individual
is to make the objective element return directly to itself and bring a
sense of increase of its own individual being or private Pleasure This
is all its interest in the practical realisation of its purposes But the realisation of purposes is an expression of the life of reason and reason means
universality and systematic connection of the content realised Hence to
seek solely private satisfaction or pleasure by a process which is inherently universal is a contradiction in terms This contradiction the
individual discovers in the shape of a sharp and painful contrast between
its private feeling of individuation on the one hand and a network of
uniersal connections on the other the contrast between pleasure and
necessity Both fall within the individuals experience as a rational
agent and hence this necessity is his own necessity as much as the
pleasure is his own pleasure In the opposition between these factors
there is no question as to which must triumph and which must surrender
This is the type of experience analysed in the following section It is
an experience that constantly recurs in the lifehistory of most if not all
human beings at one stage or another in their development The analysis
contained in this section is indirectly a searching criticism of Hedonism
in all its forms
Selfconsciousness which is aware of being the
reality has its object within itself but an object which
at first is merely its own and is not yet
in actual existence Existence stands opposed to it as a
reality other than its own and the aim of selfconsciousness consists in carrying out what it is for itself so
as to see itself as another independent being This first
purpose is to become conscious in that other selfconsciousness of itself as an individual to turn this
other into its own self It has the assurance that this
other already is essentially itself
In so far as it has risen above the substance of ethical
life and the quiescent state of thought and attained its
conscious independence it has left behind the law of
custom and of substantial existence the kinds of knowledge acquired through observation and the sphere of
theory these lie behind it as a gray shadow that is
just vanishing For this latter is rather a knowledge
of something the independent existence
and actuality of which are other than those of selfconsciousness Instead of being the seemingly heavenborn spirit of universality in knowledge and action
wherein the feeling and enjoyment of being an individual
are stilled the earthborn spirit has made its way to this
new level of seLfconsciousness and holds that being
alone as true reality which is the reality of individual
consciousness Intellect and science are despised
Those highest gifts possessed by men
The devil will now its master be
And it must be oerthrown
It plunges into life and carries to its completion the
pure individuality in which it appears It does not
so much make its own happiness as take it directly and
enjoy it The gray shades of science laws and principles which alone stand between it and its own reality
vanish like a lifeless mist that cannot support the
living certainty of its reality It takes to itself life
much as a ripe fruit is plucked which comes to meet the
hand that takes it f
Its action is only in one respect an act of Desire it
does not proceed to abolish the objective fact in its
entirety but merely concerns itself with the form of
its otherness or objectivity which is an unreal appearance for it holds this to be inherently and implicitly
the same reality as its own self The sphere in which
desire and its object subsist independently and indifferent towards each other is that of living existence
the enjoyment of desire cancels this existence so far as
concerns its being object of desire But here this
element which gives to both separate and distinct
actuality is rather the category a form of being which
has essentially the character of a presentation It
is therefore the consciousness of independence it
may be natural consciousness or the consciousness
developed into a system of laws which preserves individuals each for himself This separation does not in
itself hold for selfconsciousness which knows the other
as its own proper selfhood It attains therefore to the enjoyment of Pleasure to the consciousness of its
actualisation in a consciousness which appears as independent or to the intuition of the unity of both independent selfconsciousnesses It succeeds in its purpose
but only to learn there what the truth of that purpose is
It conceives itself as this individual selfexistent being but the actualisation of this purpose
is just the cancelling of the purpose For it comes consciously to be not object in the sense of a given particular
individual but rather as unity of its self and the other
selfconsciousness consequently as cancelled and transcended individual ie as universal
The pleasure enjoyed has indeed the positive significance that the self has become aware of itself as
objective selfconsciousness but the negative import
is there as well that of having cancelled itself And
since it took its realisation in the former sense only
its experience comes consciously before it as contradiction in which the acquired reality of its individual
existence finds itself destroyed by the negative element
which stands without reality and without content over
against the former and yet is the force which consumes
it This negative element is nothing else than the notion
of what this individuality inherently is This individuality is however as yet the poorest form of selfrealising
mind for it is still simply the abstraction of reason
or is the merely immediate unity of beingforself
and beinginself of expUcit and implicit self Its essential nature is only that
of the abstract category Still it has no longer the form
of immediate simple heing as in the case of Observation
where it is abstract being or when affirmed as something
alien is thinghood in general Here in the case before
us there has entered into this thinghood selfexistence
and mediation It comes on the scene
here therefore in the form of a circular process whose
content is the developed pure relation of simple ultimate elements The actualisation attained in the case
of this individuality consists therefore in nothing else
than its having turned out this cycle of abstractions
from the restricted confines of simple selfconsciousness
and put them into the sphere and condition of selfexistence where they appear spread out in detail as
distinct objects
The sort of object then that selfconsciousness in its
pleasurable enjoyment takes to be its true reality is
the detailed expansion of those bare essential elements
of pure unity of bare difference and of their relation
Further than this the object which individuality finds
to be its true nature has no content It is what is
called Necessity For Necessity Fate or the like is
just that about which we are unable to say what it is
doing what its definite laws and its positive content
actually are because it is the absolute pure notion itself
viewed as being relation bare and simple but imperturbable irresistible and immovable whose work is
merely the nothingness of individual existence It is
this firm unbending connexion because the connecting
factor consists in pure essentialities or empty abstractions Unity Difference and Relation are categories
each of which is nothing as it stands by itself but only
in its relation to its opposite and they therefore cannot
come apart from one another. They are by their own
notion related to each other for they are the pure
notions themselves and this absolute relation and
bare abstract process constitute Necessity The merely particular individuality which has ia the first instance
only the pure notion of reason for its content instead
of having escaped from dead theory and plunged into
actual life has thus only precipitated itself into consciousness of its own lifelessness and finds its lot to be
merely naked and alien necessity lifeless actuality
The transition takes place from the form of oneness
to that of universality from one absolute abstraction
into the other it proceeds from that purpose of pure
explicit existenceforself which has cast off fellowship
and communion with others into the sheer opposite
ie into equally abstract implicit immanent existence
into mere beinginitself This appears consequently
in such form that the individual is simply reduced to
naught and the utter atomicity of separate individual
existence is pulverised on the equally hard but
continuous actuality
Since it is qua consciousness the xmity of itself and its
opposite this transition is still a fact for it Its purpose
and its realisation as well as the contradiction of what
constituted its essential nature and what inherently
that nature is all this it is consciously aware of It
learns the double meaning which lies in what it does
when it sought to take and possess its life it
took life but thereby rather laid hold on death
This transition of its living being into lifeless necessity
appears to it therefore a perversion which is mediated
by no agency at all The mediating factor would
have to be that in which both sides would be one where
consciousness thus knew the one moment in the other
found its purpose and action in Fate and its fate in its
purpose and action saw its own true nature in this
Necessity But for consciousness the meaning of this unity
here is just pleasure itself or siraple particular feeling
and the transition from the moment of this its purpose
into the moment of its true nature is for it a mere leap
into the opposite For these moments are not contained
and combined in feeling but only in the bare pure self
which is a universal or thought Consciousness therefore through the experience in which its truth ought to
have come to light has instead become to itself a dark
riddle the consequences of its deeds are to it not really
its own deeds What happens to it is found to be not
the experience of what it inherently is the transition
is not a mere alteration in form of the same content
and essential nature presented now as content and
true reality of consciousness thereafter as object or
intuitively perceived essence of itself The abstract
necessity thus gets the significance of the merely negativing uncomprehended power of universality on which
individuality is broken in pieces
The appearance of this mode of selfconsciousness
goes as far as this stage The last moment of the existence of this mode is the thought of the loss it suffers at
the hands of necessity or the thought of itself as a
being entirely alien to itself Selfconsciousness in itself however has survived this loss for this
necessity or pure universality is its own proper nature
This reflection of consciousness into self the
knowledge that itself is necessity is a new mode or
attitude of consciousness
The Law of the Heart and the Frenzy
OF Selfconceit
The following section is an analysis of the mood of moral Sentimentalism It is a mood of all times and appears in many forms but
about Hegels time it became prominent in the Romantic school and was
frankly adopted as a practical attitude by certain of its representatives
Perhaps one of the most remarkable historic examples of sentimentalism
was Rousseau to whom so much in the Romantic movement may be
traced In the literature of Hegels time and indeed in all literature
no more perfect type of sentimentalism can be found than Goethes
Werther With such instances as these in our minds the succeeding
analysis requires neither explanation nor comment
The Law op the Heart and the Frenzy
OP self conceit
Necessity is for tMs new mode of consciousness what in
truth selfconsciousness finds necessity in its own case to
be In its new attitude selfconsciousness regards itself as
the necessary element It knows that it has the universal
the law immediately within itself a law which because
of this characteristic of being immediately within consciousness as it is for itself is called the Law of the
Heart This mode or attitude of consciousness is for
itself qua individual essential reality as the former mode
similarly was but in the present case it is richer by
the characteristic that this selfexistence is taken as
necessary or universal
The law therefore which is primarily the law proper
of selfconsciousness or a heart which however has in
it a law is the purpose which the self proceeds to realise
It remains to be seen whether its realisation corresponds
to its notion and whether it will therein come to find
this its law to be the essential ultimate fact
Opposed to this heart stands a reality For in the
heart the law is in the first place merely for itself
it is not yet actualised and thus too is something other
than what the notion is This other is thereby characterised as a reality which is the antithesis of what is to
be realised and consequently is the contradiction of
the law and the individual This reality is thus on the
one hand a law by which the particular individuality is crushed and oppressed a violent ordinance of the
world which contradicts the law of the heart and on
the other hand a humanity suffering under that ordinance a humanity which does not follow the law of
the heart but is subjected to an alien necessity
This reality appearing in opposition to the present
mode of consciousness is as is evident nothing but the
foregoing dixemption of individuality and its truth
a relation of gruesome necessity under which the
former is crushed We who trace the process see the
preceding movement therefore as in opposition to
the new form because the latter has essentiaUy arisen
from it and the moment whence the new form comes
to the present stage is necessary for it The new
mode however looks on that moment as something
lying at hand something simply met with since it
has no consciousness of its origin and takes its real
essence to consist rather in being independent in being
for itself or negatively disposed towards this positive
implicit immanent content
The aim and object of this individuality is thus to
cancel and transcend this necessity which contradicts
the law of the heart as also to do away with the suffering thereby arising There is in consequence no longer
here the frivolity of the former mode which merely
wanted some particular pleasure it is the earnestness
of a high purpose which seeks its pleasure in displaying
the excellence of its own true nature and in bringing
about the welfare of mankind What it realises is itself
the law and its pleasure is at the same time universal
a pleasure which all hearts feel To it both are inseparable its pleasure is what conforms to the law and
the realisation of the law of all mankind prepares the
way for its particular pleasure For within its own
self individuality and necessity are immediately and
directly one the law is a law of the heart Individuality
is not yet removed from its place and the unity of
both has not been brought about by the process mediating that unity has not yet been established by discipline The realisation of the inxmediate undisciplined
nature passes for a display of excellence and for bringing
about the wellbeing of mankind
The law again which is opposed to the law of the
heart is divided from the heart and exists on its own
account. Mankind which is bound to it does not live
in the blissful unity of the law with the heart but either
lives in dismal separation and suffering or at least in
deprivation of the enjoyment of itself in obeying
the law and without the consciousness of its own
excellence in overstepping it Because that alldominating diviae and human ordinance is divided from
the heart it is regarded by the latter as a delusion
which ought to lose what it still possesses namely
power and objectivity It may indeed in its content
agree by chance with the law of the heart and then the
latter can acquiesce in it But for the heart it is not
the bare conformity to law as such which constitutes
the essential fact but the consciousness of itself
which the heart thereby obtains the fact that it
has therein found satisfaction Where the content
of universal necessity however does not agree with the
heart necessity is also as regards its content nothing
in itself and must give way before the law of the heart
The individual then fulfils carries out the law of
his heart This law becomes a universal ordinance and
pleasure becomes a reality which as it stands conforms
to law But in this realisation the law has in point
of fact, escaped the individual and thus there arises
immediately only that relation which ought to be cancelled The law of the heart ceases through its very
reaUsation to be a law of the heart For it thereby
takes on the form of actually being and is now universal power which holds this particular heart to be
a matter of iadiiierence so that the individual in establishing his own ordinance no longer finds it to be his own
By realising his law he consequently brings about not
his law but since the realisation is inherently and implicitly his own but explicitly alien and external
merely this he gets involved and entangled in the
actual ordinance and indeed entangled in it not
merely as something alien to himself but as a hostile
overpowering dominion
By this act he takes his place in or rather as the
general element of existent actuality and his act is in
his own regard intended to have the value of a universal ordinance But thereby he has let himself get
detached from his own self qua universality he lives
grows on his own account and gets rid of individuality
The individual who recognises universality merely
in the form of his own immediate selfsubsistence
does not therefore find himself in this
liberated and independent universality while all the
same he belongs to it because the latter is his doing
This doing thus has the reverse significance it contradicts the universal ordinance For the individuals act
is intended to be that of his individual heart and not
independent universal reality and at the same time
he has in fact recognised and acknowledged this latter
for the act has the import of setting up his essential
nature as free and independent reality that is to say
of recognising reality to be his own essential being
The individual has by the very principle of his action
determined the more special manner in which actual
universality to which he has leagued himself gets turned
against him His act qua actuality belongs to the
universal its content however is his own individuality
which being this particular individuality wants to preserve itself in opposition to universality It is not any
specific law whose establishment was in question on
the contrary the immediate unity of the individual
heart with universality is the idea raised to the dignity
of a law and claiming to be valid that every heart
must know its own self in what is universal law
But only the heart of this individual has established
its reality in his act which in his view expresses his
selfexistence or his pleasure The act is
intended to stand immediately for what is universal
that is to say it is in truth something particular and
has merely the form of universality its particular
content is as such to pass for universal Hence others
find in this content not the law of their heart fulfilled
but rather that of some one else and even in view of
the universal law that each is to find his own heart in
what is law they turn against that reality which he set
up just as he on his side turned against theirs The
individual therefore finds as at first merely the rigid
law so now the hearts of men themselves opposed to
his excellent intentions and detesting them
Because this type of consciousness finds universality in
the first place merely as immediate and knows necessity
as necessity of the heart the nature of actualisation and
effective activity is to it unknown This consciousness
is unaware that effective realisation involves objective
existence and is in truth the inherently universal in
which the particular life of consciousness, which commits
itself to it in order to have being in the sense of an
immediate individual life is really submerged Instead of obtaining this particular life of its own in that
objective existence it thus becomes estranged from
itself But that in which it does not know itself is no
longer dead necessity but necessity animated by universal individuality It took this divine and human
ordinance which it discovered in operation to be a
dead reality wherein not only its own self which
claims the position of a particular individual insists on
being a particular heart with a life of its own and
opposed to the universal but those as well who fall
within this reality had no consciousness of themselves
Now however it finds that reality animated by the
consciousness of all and a law for all hearts It learns
through experience that the reality in question is an
ordinance infused and endowed with life and learns
this indeed just by the fact that it actualises the law
of its own heart For this means nothing else than that
individuality becomes its own object in the form of
universality without however knowing itself therein
Thus then what the experience of this mode of selfconsciousness reveals as the truth contradicts what this
mode takes itself to be. What however it takes itself
to be has for it the form of absolute universality and
what is inunediately one with consciousness of self is
the law of the heart At the same time the stable
living ordinance is likewise its own true nature and
work it produces nothing else but that the latter
is in direct immediate union with selfconsciousness
In this way selfconsciousness here has the characteristic of belonging to a twofold antithetic essence
it is inherently contradictory and torn to distraction in
its inmost being The law of this individual heart is
only that wherein selfconsciousness knows itself but
the universal and accepted ordinance has by actualising
that law become Likewise its own essential nature and
its own reality What thus contradicts itself within
its consciousness has for it in both cases the character
of essence and of being its own reality
When it gives expression to this moment of conscious
destruction and thereby expresses the result of its experience it shows itself to be this inner perversion of
itself, to be consciousness gone crazy its own essence
being at once not essence its reality directly unreality
The madness here cannot be taken to mean that in
general something unessential is regarded as essential
something unreal as real so that what for one is essential or actual might not be so for another and thus
the consciousness of real and of unreal or of essential
and unessential would fall apart If something in
point of fact is real and essential for consciousness in
general but for me is not so then in being conscious
of its nothingness I have since I am consciousness in
general at the same time the consciousness of its
reality and since they both are fixed and rooted within
me this is a union which is madness in general In
this state however there is only one object deranged for
consciousness not consciousness as such within itself
and for itself But in the result of the process of experience which has here come about consciousness is
in its law aware of its self as this individual reality
and at the same time since precisely this same essential
fact this same reality is estranged from it it is qua
selfconsciousness qua absolute reality aware of its
unreality In other words, both aspects are held in
their contradiction to be directly its essence which is
thus in its inmost being distracted
The heartthrob for the welfare of mankind passes
therefore into the rage of frantic selfconceit into the
fuiy of consciousness to preserve itself from destruction
and to do so by casting out of its life the perversion
which it really is and by straining to regard and to
express that perversion as something else The universal
ordinance and law it therefore now speaks of as an
utter distortion of the law of its heart and of its happiness a perversion invented by fanatical priests by
riotous revelling despots and their minions who seek
to indemnify themselves for their own degradation by
degrading and oppressing in their turn a distortion
practised to the nameless misery of deluded mankind
Consciousness in this its frenzy proclaims individuality
to be deranging mad and perverted but this is an
alien and accidental individuality It is the heart
however or the particular consciousness immediately
seeking to be universal that is thus raving and
perverted and the outcome of its action is merely
that this contradiction comes to its consciousness For
the truth in its view is the law of its heart something
merely intended which has not outlasted as the permanent ordinance has done but rather collapses when
it comes face to face with this latter This its law ought
to have reality herein the law has for it the sense of
reality is a valid ordinance purpose and essential
nature but that reality that very law as valid or
dinance is at once and at the same time for it nothingness and void
Similarly its own reality proper itself as particular
consciousness is in its view the essential truth Its
purpose however is to establish that particularity as
existent It thus prima facie and in the first instance
takes its self qua not individual to be the truly real or
purpose in the sense of law and hence precisely a
universality which it is to be objectively as a conscious
fact This its notion comes by its own act to be its
object Its individual self is thus discovered to be
unreal and unreality it finds out to be its reality It is
thus not an accidental and alien individuality but just
this particular heart in every respect inherently perverted and perverting
Since however the directly universal individuality
is that condition of perversion this universal ordinance
being the law of all hearts and so of the perverted consciousness is no less itself in its very nature the perverted element as indeed raging frenzy declared On
the one hand this ordinance proves itself to be a law for
all hearts by the resistance which the law of one heart
meets with from other individuals The accepted and
established laws are defended against the law of
a single individual because they are not empty
necessity unconscious and dead but have spiritual
substance and universality in which those in whom
this spiritual substance is realised five as individuals
and are conscious of their own selves Hence even
when they complain of this ordinance as if it went
contrary to their own inmost law and maintain in
opposition to it the claims of the heart in point of fact
they inwardly cUng to it as being their essential nature
and if they are deprived of this ordinance or put themselves outside the range of its influence they lose everything Since then it is precisely in this that the reality
and power of public ordinance consist the latter appears
as the essence selfidentical and everywhere alive and
individuality appears as its form
On the other hand however this ordinance is the sphere
of perversion For in that this ordinance is the law of
all hearts in that all individuals are immediately this
universal it is a reality which is only that of selfexisting
individuality ie of the heart When consciousness
therefore sets up the law of its heart it finds itself resisted by others and the latter in opposing it are doing
nothing else but setting up in their turn and making
valid their own law The universal which comes out
therefore is only a universal resistance and struggle of
all against one another in which each makes good his
own individuality but at the same time does not
come off successfully because each individuality meets
with the same opposition and each is reciprocally dissipated by the others What appears as public ordinance
is thus this state of war of each against all in which
every one for himself wrests what he can executes evenhanded justice upon the individual lives of others and
establishes his own individual existence which in its
turn vanishes at the hands of others We have here
the Course of tJie World the mere semblance of a constant
regular trend which is only a pretence of universality and
whose content is rather the meaningless insubstantial
sport of setting up individual beings as fixed and stable
and then dissipating them
If we put both sides of the universal ordinance over
against one another and consider them we see that
this later universaKty has for its content restless individuality which regards opinion or the merely particular as law the real as unreal and the unreal as real
That universality is however at the same time the side
of realisation of the ordinance for to it belongs the
independent selfexistence of individuality
The other side is the universal in the sense of stable
passive essence but for that very reason the universal
is only something inner which is not indeed absolutely
nonexistent but still not an actual reality and can
itself only become actual by cancelKng the individuality
that has presumed to claim actuality This type of consciousness, which becomes aware of itself in the law
in what is inherently true and good not as particular
or individual but only as essentially real yet knows
individuality to be what is perverted and perverting
and hence feels bound to surrender and sacrifice particularity of consciousness this type of consciousness is
Virtue
The mood of moral sentimentalism is reduced to coDfusion and contradiction but the subjective individualism in which it is rooted is not yet
eradicated Individualism now takes refuge in another attitude which
claims to do greater justice to the inherent universality of rational
selfrealisation but yet clings to its particular individuality as an inalienable possession It now tries to make the realisation of universal purposes in the shape of the Good depend solely on its own activity the
objective sphere in which the good is to be carried out being regarded
as at once external to its ends opposing its activity and yet requiring
these ends to be carried out in order to have any moral significance Individualism looks on the good as its private perquisite and makes a
personal merit and glory out of its action in carrying out the good
This external realm is the Course of the World which in itself is
thought to contain no goodness and which only gets a value if the good
is realised in it The worlds course is thus to owe its goodness to the
efforts of the individual A struggle ensues for the situation is contradictory and the issue of the struggle goes to prove that the individual
is not the fans et origo boni that goodness does not await his efforts and
that in fact the course of the world is at heart good the soul of the world
is righteous
The attitude analysed here is that of abstract moral idealism the mood
of moral strenuousness the mood that constantly seeks the improvement
and perfectibility of mankind It is found in many forms but particularly wherever there is any strong enmity between the ideal life
and the life of the world
In the first mode of active reason selfconsciousness
felt it was pure individuality and over agaiast this
stood empty universality In the second the two
factors in the antithesis had each both the moments
within them both law and individuality the one
factor the heart was their immediate unity the other
their opposition Here in the relation of virtue and
the course of the world both members are each severally
unity and antithesis of the moments are each a
process but in an opposite direction of law and individuality inter se For the virtuous consciousness law
is the essential element and individuality the one to be
superseded and cancelled both in the case of its own
conscious life as well as in that of the course of the
world In the former case the private individuality
claimed by any one has to be brought under the discipline and control of the universal, the inherently good
and true It remains there however still a personal consciousness True cultivation and discipline consist solely
in the surrender of the entire personality as a way of
making sure that in point of fact individual peculiarities
are no longer asserted and insisted on In this individual surrender individuality as it is found in the
worlds process is at the same time annihilated for
individuality is also a simple moment common to
both
In the worlds process individuality adopts a position
the reverse of what it is in the case of the virtuous
consciousness viz that of making itself the essential
factor and subordinating to its own ends the inherently good and true Further the course of the world too
does not as regards virtue mean merely a universal
thus overturned and perverted through individuality
absolute law and order form likewise a common moment consciously found to be in the worlds process
not however in the sense of an existing actual fact
but as the inmost essence of the process That regulative order therefore has not properly speaking
to be first produced by virtue for the production of
it means qua action a consciousness of individuality
and consists rather in superseding the latter By thus
cancelling indi\iduality however the inherent nature
of the worlds process merely gets room as it were to
enter real existence independently on its own account
The general content of the actual course of the world
has already made itself known Looked at more closely
it is again nothing else than the two preceding movements
of selfconsciousness From them has come virtues shape
and mould for since they originate it virtue has them
before it its aim however is to supersede its source
and origin and realise itself or be for itself become
objectively explicit The way of the world is thus
from one point of view particular individuality seeking
its pleasure and enjoyment finding itself overthrown
in doing so and as a result satisfying the demands of
the universal. But this satisfaction like the rest of the
moments of this relationship is a perverted state and
process of the universal. The real fact is merely the
particular pleasure and enjoyment while the universal
is opposed to it a necessity which is only the empty
shape of iiniversality a merely negative reaction the
form of an act without any content
The other moment of the worlds process is individuality which wants to be a law independently and
on its own account, and under the influence of this
conceit upsets the established regular order The universal law no doubt manages to hold its own against
this sort of conceit and no longer appears in the form
of an empty opposite over against consciousness does
not play the role of a lifeless necessity but is a necessity
operating within the conscious life itself But in the
sense in which it is a reality existing in a conscious state
of absolute contradiction it is madness while in the
sense in which it is an objective reality it is simply
utter perversion The universal then in both aspects
proves to be the might that moves them but the
existential form this force assumes is merely that of
general perversion
It is from virtue that the universal is now to receive its true reality by cancelling individuality the
principle of perversion Virtues purpose is by this
means to transmute again the perverted worlds process
and bring out its true inner nature This true being is
in the worldprocess merely in the form of its implicit
inherent nature it is not yet actual and hence virtue
merely believes it Virtue proceeds to raise this faith
to sight without however enjoying the fruit of its
labour and sacrifice For so far as it is individuality it
is the active carryingon of the contest which it wages
with the worlds process Its purpose and true nature
however he in conquering the reality of the worlds
process and the existence of the good thereby effec
tuated carries with it the cessation of its action ie of
the consciousness of individuality
How this struggle itself will come off what virtue
finds out in the course of it whether by the sacrifice
which virtue takes upon itself to undergo the worlds process succumbs while virtue triumplis all this must
be decided from the nature of the living weapons the
combatants carry For the weapons are nothing else
than the essential being of the combatants themselves
a being which only makes its appearance for them both
reciprocally What their weapons are is in this way
aheady evident from what is inherently imlied in this
struggle
The universal is an authentic element for the virtuous
consciousness as a matter of belief it is implicitly
or inherently true not yet an actual but an abstract
universality It plays the part of purpose in the case of
this consciousness and of inner principle in that of the
worlds process Precisely by having this character the
universal also manifests itself in the relation of virtue to
the worlds process for virtue first wills to carry out
the good and does not in the first instance claim reality
for it This characteristic can also be looked at in this
way the good in that it comes on the scene in the
struggle with the worlds process thereby manifests itself
in the form of what is for another as something which
is not selfcontained for otherwise
it would not want to get at its own truth by vanquishing
its opposite By having its being only when it is for
another is meant the same as was shown in the opposite
way of looking at it viz that it is to begin with an
abstraction which only attains reality in a relation and
has no reality of itself as it stands
The good or universal as it appears here is then
what is called Gifts Capacities Powers It is a mode or
form of spiritual life where it is presented as a universal
which requires the principle of individuality to give it
life and movement and in individuality finds its realisation This universal is afplied well by the principle
of individuality so far as this principle dwells in the
consciousness of virtue and misused by it so far as it
is in the worlds process a passive instrument which
can be regulated and directed by the hand of free individuality quite irrespective of the use it is put to
and can be misused for the production of a reality
which means its ruin a lifeless material deprived of its
own independence a material that can be formed in
this way or that or even to its own destruction
Since this universal is at the beck and call equally of
the virtuous consciousness as well as of the course of the
world it is not apparent whether with this equipment
virtue wUl get the better of vice The weapons are the
same these capacities and powers Virtue has it is
true carefully ensconced its belief in the original unity of
its purpose and the essential nature of the worlds process
and the reserve thus placed in ambush is intended to
fall on the rear of the enemy during the fight and per se
accomplish its own purpose so that thereby the knight
of virtue finds as a matter of fact that his part in waging
this warfare is properly speaking a mere shamfight
which he cannot take seriously because he puts all his
strength and confidence in the good being selfsufficient
and real per se ie in the good bringing about its own
fulfilment a shamfight which he dare not even allow
to become serious For what he turns against the
enemy and finds turned against himself and what
both in his own case and as regards his enemy as well
he runs the risk of getting wasted and damaged in the
struggle is not the good itself he fights to keep and
carry that out what is exposed to the hazard of the
contest is merely gifts and capacities that are indifferent
to the issue But these in point of fact, are nothing
else than just that universal from which individuality
has been eliminated and which is to be conserved and
actualised by the struggle
This universal however is at the same time directly
realised and if so facto made actual by the very notion
of the contest it is the inherent essential nature the
universal and its actualisation means merely that it
is at the same time for an other The two aspects
mentioned above in each of which it became an
abstraction are no longer separated it is in and
through the struggle that the good is primarily affirmed
and established in both forms
The virtuous consciousness however enters into conflict with the way of the world as if this were a factor
opposed to the good What the conflict brings to light
is the universal not merely as an abstract universal
but as one animated by individuality and existing for
an other in other words the universal in the sense
ofÈthe actually real good Wherever virtue comes to
grips with the worlds process it always hits upon places
where goodness is found to exist the good as the inherent nature of the worlds process is inseparably interwoven with all the manifestations of it with all the
ways in which the worlds process makes its appearance
and where it is real the good has its own existence
too Virtue thus finds the worlds process invulnerable
All the moments which virtue was to jeopardise in itself
when dealing with the worlds process all the moments
which it was to sacrifice these are just so many
ways in which goodness exists and consequently are
inviolable relations The conflict can therefore only
be an oscillation between conserving and sacrificing
or rather there can be no place for either sacrificing ones
own or doing harm to what comes from elsewhere
Virtue is not merely like the combatant whose sole
concern in the fight is to keep his sword wellburnished
but it has even started the fight simply to preserve its
weapons And not merely is it unable to use its own
weapons but it must also preserve intact those of its
enemy and protect them against its own attack seeing
they are aU noble parts of the good on behalf of which
it enters the field of battle
This enemy on the other hand has as its essential element not the inherent universal but individuality Its force is thus the negative principle before
which nothing stands nothing is absolutely sacred
but which can risk and endure the loss of everything
and anything In so doing it feels victory to be assured
as much from its very nature as by the contradiction
in which its opponent gets entangled What is to
virtue implicit and inherent is taken merely as an explicit objective fact in the case of the worlds process
The latter is detached from every moment which virtue
finds fixed and to which it is fast secured The worldprocess has such a moment under its power and has
consequently in its control the tethered knight of virtue
bound thereto by the fact that this moment is held to
be merely one which the worlds process can as readily
cancel as let be This knight of valour cannot work
himself loose from it as he might from a cloak thrown
round him and get free by leaving it behind for it is
to him the essential element which there is no getting
rid of
Finally as to the ambush out of which the inherent
good is cunningly and craftily to fall on the rear of the
worlds process this hope is vain and foolish from its
very nature The worlds process is the mind sure of itself
and ever on the alert that can never be got at from
behind but fronts breast forward every quarter for
it consists in this that everything is an objective element
for it everything stands before it But when the iaherent
goodness is for its enemy then it finds itself in the
struggle we have seen so far however as it is not for
its enemy but subsists in itself, it is the passive instrument of gifts and capacities material without reality
If represented as object it would be a dormant consciousness remaining in the background no one knows
where
Virtue will thus be overpowered by the worlds process
because the abstract unreal essence is in fact virtues own
purpose and because its action as regards reality rests
on distinctions that are solely a matter of words Virtue
wanted to consist in the fact of bringing about the
realisation of goodness through sacrificing individuality
but the aspect of reality is itself nothing else than the
aspect of individuality The good was meant to be
what is implicit and inherent and opposed to what is
but the implicit and inherent taken in its real truth is
simply heing itself The implicitly inherent element is
primarily the abstraction of essence as against actual
reality but the abstraction is just what is not true
but a distinction merely for consciousness this means
however it is itself what is called actual for the actual
is wtat essentially is for an other or it is being But
the consciousness of virtue rests on this distinction
of implicitness and explicit being a distraction without any true validity
The worlds process was to be the perversion of the
good because it took individuality for its principle
But this latter is the principle of actual reality for it
is just that mode of consciousness by which what is
implicit and inherent is for an other as well The worlds
process transmutes and perverts the unchangeable but
does so in fact by transmuting it out of the nothingness
of abstraction into the being of reality
The way of the world is then victorious over what in
opposition to it constitutes virtue it is victorious over
that whose nature is an unreal abstraction But it is
not victorious over something real but over the production of distiactions that are no distinctions over this
pompous talk about the best for mankind and the oppression of humanity about sacrifice for goodness sake
and the misuse of gifts Imaginaryidealities and purposes
of that sort faU on the ear as idle phrases which exalt
the heart and leave the reason a blank which edify but
build up nothing that endures declamations whose only
definite announcement is that the individual who
professes to act for such high ends and indulges in such
fijie phrases holds himself for a fine creature a swollen
enlargement which gives itself and others a mighty
size of a head but big from inflation with emptiness
Virtue in the olden time had its secure and determinate significance for it found the fullness of its content
and its solid basis in the substantial life of the nation
and had for its purpose and end a concrete good that
existed and lay at its hand it was also for that reason
not directed against actual reality as a general perversity and not turned against a worldprocess The
virtue above considered however is removed from
that substantial life and is outside it a virtue with no
essential being a virtue merely in idea and in words
and one that is deprived of all that content
The vacuousness of this rhetorical eloquence in conflict with the worlds process would be at once discovered
if it could be stated what all its eloquent phrases amount
to They are therefore assumed to be familiar and wellunderstood The request to say what then this wellknown is would be either met by a new swell of
phrases or in reply there would be an appeal to the
heart which inwardly tells what they mean
which is tantamount to an admission of inability to
say what the meaning is
The fatuousness of that style of eloquence seems too
in a quasiunconscious manner to have got the length
of being an acknowledged certainty for the cultivated
minds of our time since all interest in the whole mass
of those rhetorical spreadeagle phrases has disappeared
a loss of interest which is betrayed in the sheer wearisomeness they produce
The result then arising from this opposition consists in the fact that consciousness lets the idea of an
inherent good which yet has no actual reality slip from
it like a mere cloak Consciousness has learned in the
course of its struggle that the worlds process is not so
bad as it looked for the reality of the worlds process is
that of the universal. With the discovery of this it is
seen that there is no way of producing the good through
the sacrifice of individuality the means for doing so
have gone for individuality is precisely the explicit
actualisation of what is implicitly and inherently real
ie the universal and the perversion ceases to be
looked at as a perversion of goodness for it is just the
transmuting of the good qua bare purpose into actual
reality The moving process of individuality is the
realising of the universal.
In point of fact, however what as worldprocess
stood opposed to the consciousness of the inherently
and implicitly real has likewise been vanquished and
has disappeared with the attainment of the above
result The selfexistence of individuality was there
in opposition to the inner essential nature the universal and made its appearance as a reality cut off
from the inherent implicit nature Since however it
has come out that reality is in undivided unity with
the universal the selfexistence of the worlds process
proves to have no longer a being just as the inherent
nature of virtue is merely an aspect too The individuality of the worlds process may
doubtless think it acts merely for itself or selfishly it
is better than it thinks its action is at the same time
one that is universal and with an inherent being of its
own. If it acts selfishly it does not know what it is
doing and if it insists that aU men act selfishly it
merely asserts that all men are unaware as to what
action is If it acts for itself this is just the explicit
bringing into reality of what is at first implicit
and inherent The purpose of its selfexistence of its
being for itself which it fancies opposed to the inherent nature its futile ingenuity and cunning as also
its finespun explanations which so knowingly demonstrate the existence of selfishess everywhere all these
have as much vanished as the purpose of the inherent
element and its rhetorical eloquence
Thus then the effort the struggle the activity of
individuality is inherently an end in itself the use of
powers the play of their outward manifestations that
is what gives them life otherwise they would be lifeless
potential and merely implicit The inherent
implicit nature is not an abstract universal without existence and never carried into effect it is itself immediately
this actual present and this living actuality of the process of individuality
Individuality which takes Itself to be Eeal
IN AND FOR Itself
The following section gives a general description of individuality
which seeks to realise itself not in the onesided ways analysed in the
three preceding sections but as a complete concrete whole Here individuality does not regard itself abstractlj and hence does not treat the
sphere of its realisation as in any way alien to itself. It is completely one
with the objective world where it carries out its ends and finds both itself
adequate to its own realisation and the world sufficient and allsufficient
for the embodiment of its ends In this sphere we have as it were
the very antithesis of the preceding state of mind There the good was
opposed to the course of the world the latter being dependent for its
goodness on individual effort Here it is as if the world were made up
of the activity of individuals and were wholly adequate to satisfy and
embody all their ends Naturally therefore individuals take themselves
here to be real just as they are and have merely to express or develop
their own content in order to objectify their ends The objective world
is their activity realised is themselves externalised
This condition of individuality is the immediate preparation for the
social order of the life of a free spiritual community and is the anticipation of that community a community where the individual is universalised through union with the whole and the whole particularised in
the individual
Individuality which takes Itself to be Real
IN AND FOR Itself
Selfconsciousness lias now grasped its own principle
which at first sight was only our notion of it viz the
notion that when consciously certain of itself, it is all
reality Its purpose and nature henceforward consist
in the interpenetration of the universal elements its
gifts and capacities and individual existence The
particular moments of this process of complete concrete
permeation preceding the unity in which they now combine in a single fused whole were found in the purposes
hitherto considered These have now ceased to be the abstractions and chimeras belonging to those earlier empty
modes of the self-consciousness of mind modes whose
true nature hes simply in the wouldbe life of the
heart fancy and mere rhetoric and not in reason
which is now sure of its own reality as it stands an
und fur sich and no longer seeks to take up the position
of being only a purpose in opposition to immediately
existent sensible reality but on the contrary has the
category as such as the object of its consciousness
This means that the character of being for itself on
its own account or of negative selfconsciousness with which reason started is cancelled This
selfconsciousness at that stage fell in with a reality
which would be its own negative and by cancelling
which it would consciously realise its purpose Now
that purpose and inherent nature have
proved to be the same as objective existence for another
and the given reality objective truth is no longer
divided from subjective certainty The purpose set
up may now be taken for certainty of self and the
realisation of that purpose for truth or again purpose may be taken for the truth and reality for certainty The essential nature and purpose as it stands
constitute the certainty of immediate
reality itself the interpenetration of the inherent implicit nature and the explicit distinctive nature
of the universal and individuality Action is
fer se its truth and reality and the manifestation or
expression of individuality is its purpose taken just as
it stands
With the attainment of such a conception therefore
selfconsciousness has returned into itself and passed
from those opposite characteristics which the category
presented and which its relation to the category had
when it was observing and when it was active Its
object is now the category pure and simple in other
words, it is itself the category become conscious of itself
Its account with its previous forms is now closed they
lie behind it in the past they do not come forward as
a world found ready to hand but are developed solely
within itself as transparent moments Yet they still
fall apart at this stage as a movement of distinct
moments which has not yet got combined into its own
substantial unity But throughout all these moments
self consciousness holds firmly to that simple unity of
self with objective existence which is its constitutive
nature or generic attribute It starts anew from itself and is occupied not with
something external but with itself Since individuality
is in itself actuality the material of operation and the
purpose of action He in the action itself Action consequently has the appearance of a circular process
which moves freely in vacuo within itself which unimpeded now enlarges and then contracts and is quite
content to play simply within itself and with itself
When individuality manifests and displays its form and
shape this means that it simply assumes and receives
this form that is its element it is just the light of
day to which consciousness wants to show itself here
Action alters nothing opposes nothing it is the mere
form of transition from a condition of being invisible
to one of being visible and the content brought thus
to daylight and laid bare is nothing else than what
this action already is implicitly It is implicit
that is its form as unity in thought and it is actual
that is its form as imity in existence while it is itself
content merely in virtue of its maintaining this character
of simplicity in spite of the aspect of change process and
transition
Society as a Hekd of Individuals
Deceit Actual Fact
This section seems at first sight a strained interpretation of the life of
society There seems at first glance nothing in a society corresponding
to the view here put forward But a little reflection will show that the
conception of society here analysed is a necessary and universal element
in every society In order to form a free spiritual community individuals
must be each complete in himself be real just as they are as concrete
individuals So conceived the component individuals of a society are
separate cells of the organism of a society all self complete all implicitly
universal and capable of being universalised but jun individuals all
distinct Together they form the elements out of which the compact
structure of a society is made and without their being so together as
they are thus constituted that structure would be impossible Their
togetherness as individual units each selfcontained is not merely the
basis of complete social life but the primd facie aspect of social life and
the original primitive condition of social individuality Here each seeks
to realise his own ends quite naturally and spontaneously and is hardly
aware and is almost indiflferent to the universal result which his implicitly universal nature must bring about Each acts in his own
interest little knowing that his interest must lead to the universal good
His attitude is not strictly selfishess it is selfinterest and such an
interest all his ends mist have because they are the ends of his self
The reality he brings about has to be expressed He never questions its
right to be just because he is selfcomplete the reality is indeed a
genuine reality a reality with a universal character It is so much
actual fact for him which he takes or makes and accepts just because
it has a universal significance All the individuals are in the same position
each is in touch with and is only concerned about actual fact Each is
thus equally honest with himself in seeking his own interest in being
concerned with his own actual fact and each is equally honourable
as regards others in so doing But still each is throughout focussing the
meaning of the whole exclusively in himself and is not consciously going
beyond himself for in a sense he does not need or wish to do so AU the same this very fact he deals with has a universal significance and
holds for others and can only be a fact if it does Hence in so keeping up this individual interest in actual fact each is really deceiving
himself as to its true meaning and deceiving others at the same time
The situation is one of unconscious selfsophistication and unconscious
deceiving of others as to their true inner spiritual affinity This social
attitude is thus bound to prove inadeqnate and give way to the fuller
social consciousness of a concrete community
Social life as here analysed may be said to be society as it is conceived
by the abstract Political Economist The economic order of society is a
necessary moment in the life of society but the economic man is little
better than an anthropotherion The section may be regarded as a
satirical analysis of such an abstract entity it is also an indirect
criticism of the futility of opposing egoism and altruism
The position in which individuals are when acting in the manner above
described corresponds precisely to that of a herd of animals Hence
the title of the present section
Society as a Heed op Individuals
Deceit Actual Fact
The above substantial individuality to begin with is
again particular and determinate Absolute reality which
it knows itself to be, is thus in the way it is consciously
aware of that reality abstract and universal without
filling and content merely the empty thought of this
category We have to see how this conception of substantial individuality is made explicit in its various
moments and how it gets to be conscious of its true
nature
The conception of this individuality as it takes itself
as such to be all reality is in the first instance a
mere result its own movement and reality are not
yet set forth it is here in its immediacy as something purely and simply implicit Negativity however
which is the same as what appears as movement
and process is inherent in this implicit nature
as a specific quality and being the simple implicit
nature comes to be a definite compass or range of
being Individuality confronts us therefore as an
original determinate nature original in virtue of its
being implicit originally determinate in virtue of the
negative moment lying in that implicitness which
negative element is thereby a quality This limitation
cannot however limit the action of consciousness for
this consists at the present stage in thorough and complete selfreference relation to what is other than itself which would be a limitation is now overcome
The character inherent originally by nature is thus
merely an undefined simple principle a transparent
universal element in which individuality finds itself free
and at one with itself as well as unfolds its diversity
without restraint and in realising itself is simply in
reciprocal relation with itself We have here something
similar to what we find in the case of indeterminate
animal life this breathes the breath of life let us say
in water as its element or air or earth and within
these again in still more determinate conditions every
aspect of its life is affected by the specific element and
yet animal life still keeps these aspects within its power
and itself a unity in spite of the limitations of the
element and remains qua the given particular organisation animal life throughout the same general fact of
animal life
This determinate original nature of consciousness in which it finds itself freely and wholly
appears as the immediate and only proper content of
the piupose of the individual. That content is indeed
a definite content but is only content so far as we take
the implicit nature in isolation In truth however it is
reality permeated by individuality actuality
in the way consciousness qua individual
contains this within itself and is to begin with taken
as existing but not yet as acting So far as action is
concerned however that determinateness is in one
respect not a hmitation it wants to overcome for
looked at as an existent quality that determinateness
is simply the colour of the element where it moves in
another respect however the negativity is determinateness merely in the case of what exists But
acting is nothing else than this negativity Hence
when individuality acts its specific determinateness is
dissipated into the general process of negation into the
sum and substance of all determinateness
The simple original nature now breaks up in
action and the consciousness of action into the distinction which action implies To begin with action
is here an object an object too still belonging to consciousness it is present as a purpose and thus opposed
to a given reality The other moment is the process
of this statically presented purpose the process of
actualisation of the purpose bringing the purpose to
bear on the entirely formal reality and hence is the
idea of the transition itself In other words, this second
moment is the means The third moment is finally
the object no longer as immediately and subjectively
presented purpose but as brought to light and established as something other than and external to the
acting subject
These various aspects must be viewed in the light of
the general principle of this sphere of consciousness
The content throughout remains the same without
any difference whether between individuality and
existence in general or between purpose as against
individuality in the sense of an original nature or
between purpose and the given reality or between
the means and that reality as absolute purpose
or finally between the reality moulded by the agent
as against the purpose the original nature or the
means
At the outset then the nature of individuality in its
original determinate form its immediate essence is not
yet affirmed as active and in this shape is called special
capacity talent character and so on This peculiar
colouring of mind must be looked at as the only content
of its purpose and as the sole and only reality If we
thought of consciousness as going beyond that as seeking
to bring into reality another content then we should
think of it as a nothing working away towards nothing
This original nature is moreover not merely the
substance of its purpose but implicitly the reality as
well which otherwise assumes the appearance of being
a given material on which to act of being found ready
at hand for action to work up into some determinate
form That is to say acting is simply transferring from
a state not yet explicitly expressed to one fully expressed the inherent being of that reality opposed to
consciousness has sunk to the level of a mere empty
appearance a mere seeming This mode of consciousness by determining itself to act thereby refuses
to be led astray by the semblance of reality on the
part of what is presented to it and has likewise to
abandon its dealings with idle thoughts and purposes and keep its hold on the original content of its
own nature. No doubt this content first exists as a
fact for consciousness when it has made that content
actual but the distinction between something which
while for consciousness is only inside itself and a reality
outside consciousness existing in itself has broken down
Consciousness must act only that what it inherently
and implicity is may be for it explicitly or acting
is just the process of mind coming to be qua consciousness What it is implicity therefore it knows from
its actual reality Hence it is that an individual
cannot know what he is till he has made himself real
by action
Consciousness however seems on this view to be
tmable to determine the purpose of its action before
action has taken place but before action occurs it
must in virtue of being consciousness have the act in
front of itself as entirely its own ie as a purpose The
individual therefore who is going to act seems to
find himself in a circle where each moment already
presupposes the others and hence seems unable to find a
beginning because it only gets to know its own original
nature the nature which is to be its purpose by first
acting while in order to act it must have that purpose
beforehand But just for that reason it has to start
straight away and whatever the circumstances are
without troubling further about beginning means or
end proceed to action at once For its essential and
implicit nature is beginning means and
end all in one As beginning it is found in the circumstances of the action and the interest which the individual finds in something is just the answer to the
question whether he should act and what is to be done
in a given case For what seems to be a reality confronting him is implicitly his own original fundamental
nature which has merely the appearance of an objective
being an appearance which hes in the notion of
action involving as this does selfdiremption but
which expressly shows itself to be his own original
nature by the interest the individual finds therein
Similarly the how the means is determined as it stands
Talent is likewise nothing but individuality with a definite original constitution looked
at as the subjective internal means or transition of
purpose into actuality The actual means however
and the real transition are the unity of talent with the
nature of the fact as present in the interest felt The
former talent expresses that aspect of the means
which concerns action the latter the fact found
of interest that which concerns content both are
individuality itself as a fused whole of acting and
existing What we find then is first circumstances
given ready to hand which are impUcitly the original
nature of the individual next the interest which
afnrms them as its own or as its purpose and
finally the connection and sublation of these opposite
elements in the means This connexion itself still falls
within consciousness and the whole just considered is
one side of an opposition This appearance of opposition which still remains is removed by the transition
ie by the means For the means is a unity of inner
and outer the antithesis of the determinate character
it has qua inner means viz talent it therefore abolishes
this character and makes itself this unity of action
and existence equally an outer viz the actually
realised individuality ie individuality which is
established for individuality itself as the objectively
existent The entire act in this way does not go beyond
itself either as circumstances or as purpose or means
or as work performed
In this notion of work however the distinction which
lay within the original nature seems to enter The
work done is something determinate like the original
nature it expresses because being cut loose by the
process of acting and become an existing reality the
negation imlied in this process remains in it as a
quality Consciousness however as against the work
is specifically that in which this quality as a general
process of negation as acting is to be found It is
thus the universal as opposed to the specific determinateness of the work performed it can therefore
compare one kind of work with another and thence
apprehend individualities themselves as different An
individual who is of wider compass in his work has
either stronger energy of will or a richer nature ie
a nature whose original constitution is
less limited while another has a weaker and a poorer
nature
In contrast with this purely quantitative difference
which is not an essential difference good and bad
would express an absolute difference but this is not
in place here Whether taken in one way or another
action is equally carried on there is a process of displaying and expressing an individuality and for that
reason it is all good it would properly speaking be
impossible to say what bad is to be here What
would be called a bad work is the individual life of a
certain specific nature which is therein realised It
would only be degraded into a bad work by a reflective
comparison which however is quite empty and futile
since this goes beyond the essential meaning and nature
of work which is a selfexpression of individuality
and then seeks to find and demand from it heaven
knows what else The comparison could have to do only
with the distinction above mentioned But this being
a distinction of quantity is in itself not an essential
one and is only made here because of differences in
works and individualities which might be compared
with one another But these do not affect one another
each is concerned simply with itself The following paragraph is somewhat parenthetical
what could be used as an ultimate standard of judgment regarding the work and conversely Both
however correspond to each other there is nothing
for individuality which is not obtained through it or
there is no reality which is not its nature and its
action and no action nor inherent substance of individuality which is not real And only these moments
are to be compared
There is therefore in general no ground for feeling
elevated or for lamenting or repenting all that sort
of thing arises from a reflection which imagines another
content and another inner nature than is to be found
in the original nature of the individual and the actual
carrying of it out into reality Whatever it is that
the individual does and whatever happens to him
that the individual has done and is that himself
He can only have the consciousness of the mere transference of his self from the darkness of possibility to the
daylight of the present from a state abstract and implicit to the significance of actual being and can have
only the certainty that what seems to him in the
second state is nothing else than what lay dormant in
the former The consciousness of this imity is no doubt
likewise a comparison but what is compared is just a
mere appearance of opposition a formal appearance
which for reason qua selfconscious and aware that
individuality is inherently actuality is nothing more than
seeming The individual therefore knowing that he can
find in his objective actuality nothing but its unity with
himself or can find only the certainty of himself in its
very truth and knowing that he thus always attains
his purpose can experience only a sense of joy in
himself
That then is the conception consciousness has of
itself when it is sure of its being an absolute identification a complete permeation of individuality and existence Let us see whether this notion is confirmed and
supported by its experience and whether its reality
agrees with this notion
The work produced is the reality which consciousness
gives itself. It is there that the individual becomes
consciously what he is implicitly and in such wise that
the consciousness which becomes aware of the individual
in the work performed is not the particular consciousness but universal consciousness He has placed himself
by his work quite outside in the element of universality in the characterless qualityless region of existence The consciousness which withdraws from its work
is in point of fact universal because it becomes
in this opposition between work and consciousness
absolute negativity the process of action and stands
over against its work which is determinate and
particular It thus goes beyond itself qtca work and
is itself the indeterminate region which its work still
leaves void and unfilled If their unity was in the above
notion still preserved this took place just through
the work being cancelled qua objectively existing product But it has to be and we have to see how individuality will retain its universality in the existence of
the work and will know how to get satisfaction
To begin with we have to consider by itself the
work which has come into being It has carried with it
the entire nature of the individual. Its existence is
therefore itself an action in which all distinctions
interpenetrate and are resolved The work is thus thrown
out into a subsisting form where the specific character
of the original nature does in fact come out as against
other determinate natures encroaches on them just
as these do in their turn and is lost as a vanishing
moment in this general process Although in the conception of individuality as here dealt with the various
moments circumstances purpose means and realisation are all alike and the original specific nature stands
for no more than a universal element on the other hand
when this element takes on an objective existence its
determinate character as such comes to light in the
work done and preserves its truth in its dissolution
Looked at more closely this dissolution is such that in
this specific character the individual as a particular
individual has become consciously real but the
specific character is not merely the content of reality
but form as well or reality as such is as a whole just
this determinateness of being opposed to selfconsciousness On this view it is seen to be an alien reality
Avhich has disappeared out of the notion, and is merely
found given The work is ie it is for other individuals
and for them it is an external an alien reality in whose
place they have to put their own in order to get by
their action consciousness of their unity with reality
In other words, the interest which they take in that
work owing to their original constitution is other than
the peculiar interest of this work which thereby is
turned into something different The work is thus in
general something transitory which is extinguished by
the counteraction of other powers and interests and
displays the reality of individuality in a transitory
form rather than as fulfilled and accomplished
Consciousness then by doing work becomes aware
of that contrast between being and acting which in the
earlier forms of consciousness was at the same time
the beginning of action and is here merely a result
This contrast however was in fact likewise the ultimate principle involved when consciousness proceeded
to act as an implicitly real individuality for action
presupposed the determinate original nature as the
ultimate implicit element and the mere process of performing the act for the sake of this performance took
that nature as its content Mere action is however
the selfidentical form with which consequently the
specific determinateness of the original nature does
not agree It is matter of indifference here as elsewhere which of the two is called notion and which
reality The original nature is the thought element
the implicit factor as against the action in which
it first gets its reality or again the original nature
is the existence both of individuality as such and
of individuality in the form of work while action
is the original notion as pure and simple transition as
the process of becoming This lack of correspondence
between idea and reality which lies in its essence consciousness learns in its work in work consciousness
becomes aware of itself as it in truth is and its empty
notion of itself disappears
In this fundamental contradiction characteristic of
work which contains the truth of this individuality
that takes itself to be inherently real all the aspects of
individuality thus appear again as contradictory In other
words, work being the content of the entire individuality put forth by action which is the negative unity and
holds in its grasp all the elements now sets them free
when it is given existence As subsisting they stand indifferently over against each other The notion and its
reality are thus separated into purpose and the original
essential nature It is an accident that
the purpose should have a true being or that the implicit inherent nature should be made a purpose
Similarly again notion and reality fall apart as transition to actuaUty and as purpose in other words, it is
an accident that the means expressing the purpose
should actually be chosen While finally should these
inner moments taken together have some intrinsic
unity or not the action of the individual is once more
an accident so far as actuality in general is concerned
fortune decides in favour of a badly determined purpose and badly selected means just as much as against
them
If now consciousness hereby becomes aware in its work
of the opposition between willing and performance between purpose and means and again between this inward
nature taken all together and actual reality an opposition which as a whole shows the fortuitous character
of the action of consciousness still the unity and the
necessity of this action are just as much present
too This latter aspect transcends the former and
experience of the fortuitousness of the action is itself
only a fortuitous kind of experience The necessity of
the action consists in this that purpose is directly related to actuality and the unity of these is the very
notion of action the act takes place because action
is fer se and of itself the essence of actuality In work
there no doubt comes out the fortuitousness which
characterises accomplishment when contrasted with
willing and the process of performing and this experience which seems as if it must be the truth
contradicts that notion of the act Still if we look
at the content of this experience taken in its completeness that content is seen to be the transitory work
What persists is not the transitoriness rather this is
itself actual and is bound up with the work and vanishes with it the negative falls away along with the
positive whose negation it is
The very notion of substantially and inherently real
individuality contains within it this transience of
transitoriness For
that wherein the work disappears or what disappears
in the work is the objective reality and this was to
give experience as it was called its supremacy over
the notion which individuality has about itself Objective reality however is a moment which itself has
no longer independent truth in this mode of consciousness it consists solely in the unity of this
consciousness with action and the real work is only
that unity of action and existence of willing and
performance On account of the certainty fundamental
to its action consciousness takes the actual reality
contrasted with that conscious certainty to be something which is only jor consciousness The opposition cannot any longer stand before consciousness
where this is for itself and independent as against the
actual reality for consciousness here is selfconsciousness returned into itself and with all opposition gone
On the contrary the opposition and the negativity
manifested in the case of work thus affect not only
the content of the work or again the content of consciousness but actual reality as such and hence affect
both the opposition present merely in virtue of that
reality and in it and the disappearance of the work
In this way consciousness turns from its transient work
back upon itself and asserts its own notion and its
certainty to be the permanent and abiding fact as
against the experience of the fortuitousness of action
In point of fact it comes to know its essential principle
or notion in which actuality is only a moment
something for consciousness not something in and for
itself it finds that reality to be a passing moment
of significance therefore merely as being in general
whose universality is one and the same as action This
unity this identity is the true work it is the real fact
the actual fact itself which absolutely
asserts itself and is experienced as the lasting element
independent of that fact which is the accident of
individual action as such the accident of circumstances
means and actuality
The real fact itself stands opposed to these moments only so far as they claim to have a value in
isolation but is essentially their unity because identifying fusing actuaUty with individuality It is too an
action and qua doing pure action in general and
thereby just as much action of this particular individual and this action because still appertaining to
the individual in opposition to actuality has the sense
of a purpose Similarly it is the transition from this
specific character to the opposite and finally it is a
reality which is present objectively for consciousness
The actual fact thus expresses the essential spiritual
substance in which all these moments as independently
valid are cancelled and transcended and so hold good
only as universal and in which the certainty consciousness has regarding itself is a fact a real object
before consciousness an object born of selfconsciousness as its own without ceasing to be a free
independent object in the proper sense The thing
found at the stage of sensecertainty and perception
now gets its significance through selfconsciousness and
through it alone On this rests the distinction between
a thing A process is gone
through here corresponding to what we find in the case
of senseexperience and perception
Selfconsciousness then has attained its true conception of itself when this stage of real fact is reached
fact is the interpenetration of individuality and objectivity In it selfconsciousness has arrived at a consciousness of its own substance At the same time as
we find selfconsciousness here it is a consciousness
which has just arisen and hence is immediate and this
is the specific way in which we find spirit at the present
stage it has not yet reached its truly real substance
The fact itself takes in this immediate consciousness
the form of bare and simple essence
which being universal contains all its various moments
in itself and belongs to them but again is also
indifferent towards them taken as specific moments
and is independent by itself and as this free and
independent simple abstract fact passes for the
essentially real The various moments of the
oricinal determinateness the moments of the fact
of tJiis particular individual his purpose means action
and actual reality are on the one hand particular
moments for this consciousness which it can abandon
and give up for the fact itself on the other hand
however they all have the fact itself as their essential nature but only in such a way that it being their
abstract universal can find itself in each of them and
be their predicate The fact itself is not yet subject but those moments stand for subject because they belong
to the aspect of particularity while fact itself is only
at this stage bare universality Fact is the genus
which finds all these moments to be species of itself
and in that way is independent of them
Consciousness is called honest when it has on
the one hand attained this idealisation
which fact expresses and on the other possesses the
truth in the fact qua this formal universality Consciousness when so characterised takes to do solely
with fact and hence occupies itself with its various
moments or species And when it does not reach the
¥ fact in one of these moments does not find the
real fact in one meaning it just on that account
lays hold of the fact in another and consequently
always really secures that satisfaction which should
belong to this mode of consciousness by its very nature
However things turn out it
achieves and secures the fact itself for the latter
being this universal genus of those moments is the
predicate of all
Should it not bring a purpose into reality it may have
at least willed the purpose ie may turn purpose qua
purpose mere doing which does nothing into the fact
itself and can therefore maintain and feel satisfied that
at least there has always been something attempted
something done Since the universal contains within
it even the negative or the transitoriness this too
the nothingness of work is itself its doing It has
stimulated others towards this and still finds satisfaction
in the disappearance of its reality just as bad boys
enjoy a personal pleasure in getting their ears boxed because they are the cause of its being done Or again
suppose it has not so much as tried to carry out the
fact itself and done nothing at all then it has not
even cared the fact itself is for it just the unity
of its decision with reality it asserts that the reality
was nothing else than its own wish in the matter
Finally suppose something of interest
has come its way entirely without its help then for it
this reality is the fact itself just by the interest
which it finds in the fact although that reality was
not brought about by its doing If it is a piece of
luck which has befallen the individual personally
he reckons it his own act and his own desert if it is
on the other hand a mere event which does not concern him further he makes it likewise his own and an
interest where he has done nothing is held as a party
interest which he has taken up and defended or maintained for or against
The Honesty or Honour ableness of this mode
of consciousness as well as the satisfaction which it
meets with at every point really consists as the above
makes clear in this that it does not bring together its
ideas regarding the fact itself Fact itself is just
as much its own affair as no work at all
or mere action and bare purpose or again a reality
involving no action at all it makes one meaning after
another the subject of this predicate and forgets one
after the other By its having merely willed or
again in not having wanted fact itself has now
the meaning of empty purpose and of the merely ideal
thoughtimity of willing and performance The consolation for the annihilation of the purpose which was
at all events willed or at all events simply done as well
as the satisfaction of having given others something to
do makes the simple doing or the entirely bad work the
essential reality for that must be called a bad work
which is no work at all Finally in the case of finding
through good luck the reality at hand this existence
without any act becomes the fact itself
The true meaning of this Honesty however lies in
not being so honest as it seems For it cannot be so
unintelligent as to let these various moments fall apart
in that way it must have an immediate consciousness
regarding their opposition because they are absolutely
related to one another Bare action is essentially
action of this individual and this action is likewise
essentiallyan actuaUty or a fact Conversely actuality
essentially is only as his own action and as action in
general as well and just as his own action is action in
general so it is only reality in general While then
he thinks he has only to do with the fact itself as
abstract reality there is also present this idea that he
has to do with it as his ovn doing But precisely
so far as it is only a matter of being busy about doing
something he is not really in earnest on the point
but rather is dealing with a fact and with fact as
his own Since finally he seems to will merely his own
fact and his own action it is again a matter of dealing with fact in general or actuality substantial and
abiding
Just as fact and its moments appear at this stage
as content they are likewise necessary also as forms in
consciousness They come forward as content merely
to pass away again each making room for the other
They have therefore to be present in the determinate
result as cancelled and sublated forms so taken however they are aspects of consciousness Fact itself
is present as the inherent nature or its reflection into
self the ousting of the moments by each other there
finds expression however in their being established in
consciousness not per se but only for another consciousness One of the moments of the content is exposed
by it to the light and presented as an object for
others Consciousness however is at the same time reflected therefrom back upon itself and the opposite
is thus equally present within it is retained for
itself as its own There is too not one of them which
could be merely and solely put outside and another
merely retained within rather consciousness operates
alternately with them for it has to make one as well
as another essential for itself and for others The whole
is the moving process of permeating individuality with
the universal In that this consciousness finds this
whole however to be merely the simple ultimate
nature and thus the abstraction of fact
itself the moments of this whole appear as distinct
outside the fact and outside one another As a single
whole it is only exhaustively exhibited by the process
of alternately exposing its elements to view and keeping
them within itself Since in this alternation consciousness
has in its process of reflection one moment for itself
and keeps it as essential while another is merely externally implied or is for others there thus enters a play
of individualities with one another where they both
deceive and find deceived themselves and one another
reciprocally
An individuality then sets to work to carry out
something by so doing it seems to have made something
into an actual fact It acts by so doing it comes out
before others and thinks it is occupied with reality
Others therefore take its action to be an interest in the
fact as such and take the end of the act to be the
carrying out of the fact fer se regardless of whether
this is done by the former individuality or by them
When on this account they point out that this fact
has been already brought about by themselves or if not
offer and actually furnish their assistance then they see
that consciousness has rather left the position where they
think it to be it is its own action and effort which
arouses its interest in the fact and when they come
to know that this was the fact itself they feel themselves deceived In reality however their haste to
render assistance was itself nothing else than their
desire to see and manifest their own action and not
the fact itself ie they wanted to deceive the
other individual just in the way they complain of
having been deceived Since there has now been
brought to light that its own action and effort the play
of its powers is taken for the fact itself consciousness
seems to be occupied in its own way on its own account and not on that of others and only troubles about
action qua its own action and not about action qua an
action of others and hence seems to let the others in
their turn keep to their own fact But they go wrong
again that consciousness has already left the point
where they thought it was It does not take the matter
in hand to be fact in the sense of this its own f articular fact but fact qua fact qua something universal
which is for all Hence it interferes in the action and
work of ethers and if consciousness can no longer
take their work out of their hands it is at least
interested in the matter and shows this by its
concern to pass judgment When it stamps the
result with the mark of its approval and praise this is
meant to imply that in the case of work it does not
merely praise the work itself but at the same time its
own generosity and moderation in not having destroyed the work as work nor spoiled it by finding
fault Since it shows an interest in the work it
enjoys its own self therein and in the same way the
work which it found fault with is welcomed for just this
enjoyment of its own action which is thereby procured
Those however who regard themselves as or profess
to be deceived by this interference with others wanted
really themselves to deceive in the same way They
give out their efforts and doings as something only for
themselves in which they merely have themselves and
their own nature in view But since they do something and thus express their nature bring themselves
to the light of day they directly contradict by their
deed the pretext of wanting to exclude the daylight
ie to exclude the publicity of universal consciousness
and participation by every one Actualisation is on
the contrary an exposing of what is ones own in a
universal element where it comes to be and has to be
fact for every one
Consciousness then is as much deception of itself as
of others if it is pretended that the bare fact is its
sole concern A consciousness that lays open a fact
soon learns that others want to hurry to the spot and
make themselves busy there like flies to new milk
and they in their turn find out in its case that it is
not dealing with fact qua object but with its own
fact On the other hand if only action itself the use
of powers and capacities or the expression of a given
individuality is to be the essential thing they recipro
cally learn that all are affected and consider themselves invited to deal with the matter and that instead
of a mere abstract action or a particular peculiar action
something has been elicited and exposed which was likewise for others or is a fact itself In both cases the
same thing happens and only appears to be different
by contrast with that which was accepted and
assumed to hold on the matter Consciousness finds
both sides to be equally essential moments and thereby learns what the nature of the fact itself is viz
that it is neither merely fact which is opposed to
action in general and to the particular action nor action
which is opposed to permanence and which might be
the genus independent of these moments as its species
but rather that fact itself is an essential reality
whose existence means the action of the particular individual and of all individuals and whose action is
immediately for others or is a fact and is only
fact in the sense of an action of each and all the
essential reality which is the essence of all beings
which is spiritual essence Consciousness
learns that no one of these moments is subject
but rather gets dissolved in the universal fact
itself The moments of individuality which were
taken as subject one after another by this unreflective
incoherent stage of consciousness coalesce and concentrate into simple individuality which while a this
a particular is likewise directly universal Fact
itself thereby ceases to stand in the relation of a
predicate loses the characteristic of lifeless abstract
universality it is substance permeated by individuality subject wherein individuality is just as much
individual or this particular individuality as all in
dividuals and the universal which has an existence
only as being this action of each and all gets an actual
reality in that this particular consciousness knows it
to be its own individual reality and the reality of all
Pure fact itself is what was characterised above as
the category being which is the ego or ego which
is being but in the sense of thought which is still distinguished from actual selfconsciousness Here however the moments of actual selfconsciousness beingforself and beingforanother so far as we call them
its content purpose action and reality and also in so
far as we call them its form are made identical with
the bare and simple category itself and the category
is thereby at the same time the entire content
The nest step in the development of individuality is to bring out the
universal conditions of its coexistence with other individualities This
it can do because it is complete in itself and is essentially selfconscious
reason These conditions are many because of the diversity of its own
content and of the relations in which it stands and are yet the conditions of individuality which is one and single Hence their plurality
never implies a separation the conditions limit each others operation
and their precise operation must be determined
These then are the two stages in determining the general conditions
or laws of coexistence of individuality the enunciation of different
laws by and for rational individuality the relation of these laws inter
se and to the single principle from which they all proceed Both stages
owe their existence to the activity of reason Reason promulgates laws
and criticises tests the validity of the laws Spiritual essential reality is in its bare existence
pure consciousness and also a particular selfconsciousness The originally determinate nature of the
individual has lost its positive significance of being
inherently the element and purpose of his activity it
is merely a superseded moment while the individual
is a self in the sense of a universal self Conversely the
formal fact itself gets its content and filling in active
individuality with the distinctions it draws within itself for these distinctions compose the content of
that universal The category is implicit as
the universal of pure consciousness it is also explicit
for the self of consciousness is likewise its
moment It is absolute being for that universality is
the bare selfidentity of being
Thus the significance of what is object for consciousness lies in its being the truth it is and it holds good
in the sense of being and holding good by itself as an
independent entity It is the
absolute fact which no longer suffers from the opposition between what is certain and what is true between
universal and particular between purpose and its
reality but whose existence is the reality and action
of selfconsciousness This fact is therefore the
ethical substance and consciousness of it is ethical
consciousness Its object is likewise taken to be the
truth for it combines selfconsciousness and being in a single unity It stands for what is absolute
for selfconsciousness cannot and will not again
go beyond this object because it is there at home
with itself it cannot for the object is all its power
and all its being it will not because the object is its
self or the will of this particular self It is the real
object inherently as object for it contains and involves the distinction which consciousness implies It
divides itself into areas or spheres which are
the determinate laws of the absolute reality viz the
ethical substance These spheres however do not
obscure the notion for the moments being bare consciousness and self are kept contained within it a
unity which constitutes the inner nature of these
spheres and no longer lets these moments in this
distinction fall apart from one another.
These laws or groups of the substance of
ethical life are directly recognised and acknowledged
We cannot ask for their origin and justification nor is
there something else to search for as their warrant for
something other than this independent selfsubsistent
reality could only
be selfconsciousness itself But selfconsciousness is
nothing else than this reality for itself is the selfexistence of this reality which is the truth just because it is
as much the self of consciousness as its inherent nature
or pure consciousness
Since selfconsciousness knows itself to be a moment
of this substance the moment of selfexistence of independence and selfdetermination it expresses the existence of the law within itself in the form the healthy
natural reason knows immediately what is right and
good As healthy reason knows the law immedi
ately so the law is valid for it also immediately
and it says directly this is right and good this
a particular for there are determinate specific laws
the this is fact itself with a concrete filling and
content
What is thus given immediately must likewise be
accepted and regarded as immediate As in the case
of the immediacy of senseexperience so here we have
also to consider the nature of the existence to which
this immediate certainty in ethical experience gives
expression to analyse the constitution of the immediately existing areas of ethical reality
Examples of some such laws will show what we want
to know and since we take them in the form of declarations of the healthy reason knowing them we
have not in this connection first to bring to notice
the moment which has to be made good in their case
when looked at as immediate ethical laws
Every one ought to speak the truth In this duty
as expressed unconditionally the condition will at once
be granted viz if he knows the truth The command
will therefore now rim every one should speak the
truth at all times according to his knowledge and conviction about it The healthy reason this very ethical
consciousness which knows immediately what is right
and good will explain that this condition had all the
while been so bound up with that universal maxim
that it meant the command to be taken in that sense
It thereby admits however in point of fact, that in
the very expression of the maxim it eo ipso really
violated it The healthy reason said each should
speak the truth it intended however he must
speak the truth according to his knowledge and con
viction That is to say it spoke otherwise than it
intended and to speak otherwise than one intends
means not speaking the truth The improved untruth
or inaptitude now takes the form each must speak
the truth according to his knowledge and conviction
about it on each occasion Thereby however what
was universally necessary and absolutely valid and
this the proposition wanted to express has turned
round into what is really a complete contingency For
speaking the truth is left to the chance whether I know
it and can convince myself of it and there is
nothing more in the statement than that truth and
falsehood are to be spoken as they come just as any
one happens to know intend and understand This
contingency in the content has universality merely in
the prepositional form of the expression but as an
ethical maxim the proposition promises a universal
and necessary content and thus contradicts itself by
the content being contingent Finally if the maxim
were to be improved by saying that the contingency
of the knowledge and the conviction as to the truth
should be dropped and that the truth too ought to
be known then this would be a command which contradicts straightway what we started from Healthy
reason was at first assumed to have the immediate
capacity of expressing the truth now however we are
saying that it ought to know the truth ie that it
does not immediately know how to express the truth
Looking at the content this has dropped out in the
demand that we should know the truth for this
demand refers to knowing in general we ought to
know What is demanded is therefore strictly speaking something independent of every specific content
But here the whole point of the statement concerned a
definite content a distinction involved in the substance
of the ethical life Yet this inherent determination of
that substance is a content of such a kind as turned
out really to be a complete contingency and when we
try to get the required universality and necessity by
making the law refer to the knowledge instead of
to the content then the content really disappears
altogether
Another celebrated command runs Love thy
neighbour as thyself It is directed to an individual
standing in relation to another individual and asserts
this law as a relation of a particular individual to a
particular individual ie a relation of sentiment or
feeling Active love for an inactive
love has of course no existence and is therefore
doubtless not intended here aims at removing evil
from some one and bringing him good To do this
we have to distinguish what the evil is what is the
appropriate good to meet this evil and what in general
his wellbeing consists in ie we have to love him
intelligently Unintelligent love will do him harm
perhaps more than hatred Intelligent veritable welldoing is however in its richest and most
important form the intelligent universal action of the
state an action compared with which the action of a
particular individual as such is something altogether
so trifling that it is hardly worth talking about The
action of the state is in this connection of such great
weight and strength that if the action of the individual
were to oppose it and either sought to be straightway
and deliberately criminal or out of love for
another wanted to cheat the universal out of the right
and claim which it has upon him such action would
be useless and would inevitably be annihilated Hence
all that welldoing which lies in sentiment and feeling
can mean is something wholly and solely particular
it amounts to merely a temporary relief which is as
contingent as it is momentary Chance determines not
merely its occasion but also whether it is a work at all
whether it is not at once dissipated again and whether
it does not itself really turn to evil Thus this sort of
action for the good of others which is given out as
necessary is so constituted that it may just as likely not
exist as exist is such that if the occasion by chance
arises it may possibly turn out a work may possibly
be good but just as likely may not This law therefore has as little of a universal content as the first
above considered and fails to express anything substantial something objectively real per se which it should do if it is to be an absolute
ethical law In other words, such laws never get
further than the ought to be they have no actual
reality they are not laws but merely commands
It is however in point of fact, clear from the very
nature of the case that we must renounce all claim to
an absolute universal content For every specific determination which the bare and simple substance and
its very nature consists in being simple might get is
inadequate to its nature The command itself in its
simple absoluteness expresses immediate ethical existence the distinction appearing in it is a specific
determinate element and thus a content standing
under the absolute universality of this simple existence
Since then an absolute content must thus be renounced formal universality is the only kind that is
possible and suitable and this means merely that it is
not to contradict itself For universality devoid of
content is formal and an absolute content amounts
to a distinction which is no distinction ie means
absence of content
In default of all content there is thus nothing left with
which to make a law but the bare form of universality
in fact the mere tautology of consciousness a tautology
which stands over against the content and consists in
a knowledge not of the content actually existing the
content proper but of its ultimate essence only a
knowledge of its selfconsistency The ethical being is
consequently not itself if so facto a content but only a
standard for deciding whether a content is capable of
being a law or not when the content does not
contradict itself Reason as lawgiver is reduced to
being reason as criterion instead of laying down
laws reason now only tests what is laid down A difference within the bare and simple ethical substance is for it an accident which in the case of
determinate commands as we saw appeared as
contingency in the knowledge of the circumstances
and contingency in action The comparison of that
simple existence with the determinateness which was
inadequate to its nature took place in us and the
simple substance was then seen to be formal universality
or pure consciousness which holds itself free from and in
opposition to content and is a knowledge of that content as something that is specific and determinate The
universality in this way remains the same as what
fact itself was But in consciousness this universality
is an other it is no longer the genus inert and void
of thought but is related to the particular and valid as
its force and truth
This consciousness at first seems the same process of
testing which formerly we carried on and its action
seems unable to be anything else than has already
taken place a comparison of the universal with the
determinate particular which would yield as formerly
their mutual incongruity But the relation of content
to universal is different here since this universal has
got another significance It is jornml universality of
which the specific consent is capable for in that universality the content is considered merely in relation to itself When we were applying the test the
universal solid substance stood over against that
specificity which proved to be a contingent element
of the consciousness into which the substance entered
Here one term of the comparison has vanished the
universal is no longer the existing substance with a
value all its own is no longer substantive right per se
but simple knowledge or form which compares a
content merely with itself and looks at it to see if
it is a tautology Laws are no longer given but examined and tested and the laws for that consciousness which apphes the test are already given It
picks up and accepts their content as simply there
without going into the consideration as was done
before of the particularity and contingency attaching
to its reality instead of this it takes its stand by the
command as command and takes up an attitude towards this command just as direct and simple as the
fact of its being a standard and criterion for criticizing it
For that reason however this process of testing does
not get very far Just because the standard is a tautology and indifferent to the content it accepts one
content just as readily as the opposite Suppose the
question is ought it to be a law without qualification
that there should be property
without qualification and not because of utiHty for
other ends The essential ethical truth there consists
just in the fact that the law should be merely a selfconsistent whole and through being
identical with itself have its ground in its own essential nature and not be something conditioned Pro
perty fer se does not contradict itself. It is a specifically
determinate isolated element or merely selfconsistent
and selfidentical Absence of property absence of ownership of things or again community of goods contradicts itself just as little That
something belong to nobody at all or to the first best
man who puts himself in possession or again to all
together and to each according to his need or in
equal portions that is a simple characteristic a formal
thought like its opposite property
If no one is master of a thing and it is looked at
as a necessary object for human requirement then it
necessarily becomes the possession of some particular
individual and the contradiction would rather lie in making a law out of the freedom of the thing By the thing
being without an owner is meant however not absolute
freedom from ownership but that it shall come into
some ones possession according to the need of the
individual, and moreover not in order to be kept but
directly to be used But to make provision for need in
such an entirely casual haphazard manner is contradictory to the nature of the conscious being with whom
alone we have here to do For such a being has to
think of his need in a universal way to look to his existence in its entirety and procure himself a permanent
lasting good This being so the idea that a thing is to
become by chance the possession of the first selfconscious individual who happens to need it
is inconsistent with itself
In a communistic society where provision would be
made in a way which is universal and permanent either
each comes to have as much as he requires in which
case there is a contradiction between this inequality
and the essential nature of consciousness whose principle is the equality of individuals or acting on this
last principle there is an equal division of goods and
in this case the share each gets has no relation to his
needs and yet this is solely what share ie fair
share really means
But if when taken in this way absence of property
seems contradictory this is only because it has not been
left in the form of a simple determinate characteristic
The same result is found in the case of property if this
is resolved into separate moments The particular thing
which is my property has by being so the value of something universal established and permanent This however contradicts its nature which consists in its being
used and passing away At the same time its value lies
in being mine which all others acknowledge and keep
themselves away from But just in my being acknowledged lies rather my equality my identity with every
one the opposite of exclusion Again what I possess
is a thing ie an existence which is there for others in
general quite universally and without any condition that
it is for me alone That I possess it contradicts the general
nature of its thinghood Property therefore contradicts
itself on all hands just as much as absence of property
each has within it both these opposite and selfcontradictory moments universality and particularity
But each of these determinate characteristics presented simply as property or absence of property
without further developing its implications is as simple
in the one case as the other ie is not selfcontradictory
The standard of law which reason has within itself therefore fits every case in the same way and is in point
of fact on standard at all It would too tutur on
rather strange if tautology the principle of contradiction which is allowed to be merely a formal criterion
for knowledge of theoretical truth ie something which
is quite indifferent to truth and untruth alike were to
be more than this for knowledge of practical truth
In both the above moments of what fills up the
previous emptiness of spiritual reality
the attempt to establish immediate determinate characteristics within the substance of the ethical life and
then to know whether these determinations are laws
has cancelled itself The outcome then seems to be
that neither determinate laws nor a knowledge of these
can be effectively obtained But the substance in
question is the consciousness of itself as absolute
essentiality a consciousness therefore which
can give up neither the difference falling within that
substance nor the knowledge of this difference That
giving laws and testing laws have turned out futile
indicates that both taken individually and in isolatign are merely unstable moments of the ethical consciousness and the process in which they appear has
the formal significance that the substance of ethical
life is thereby shown to be consciousness
So far as both these moments are more precise determinations of the consciousness of fact as such Sache
sellist they can be looked on as forms of that honesty
of nature which now as was the case with
its formal moments is much occupied with a content
which ought to be good and right and with testing
definite fixed truth of this sort and supposes itself to
possess in healthy reason and intelligent insight the
force and validity of ethical commands have validity as essential realities of consciousness and
the process of testing likewise does not hold good as an
activity inside consciousness Rather these moments
when they appear directly as a reality each by itself
express in the one case the illegitimate establishment and
mere de facto existence of actual laws and in the other
an equally illegitimate independence and detachment
from them The law as determinate has an accidental
content this means here that it is a law made by a
particular individual conscious of an arbitrary content
To legislate immediately in that way is thus tyrannical
insolence and wickedness which makes caprice into
a law and morality into obedience to such caprice
obedience to laws which are merely laws and not at
the same time commands So too the second process
testing the laws so far as it is taken by itself means
moving the immovable and the insolence of knowledge which treats absolute laws in a spirit of intellectual detachment and takes them for a caprice that
is alien and external to it
In both forms these moments are negative in relation to the substance of the moral life to the real
spiritual nature In other words, the substance does
not find in them its reality but instead consciousness contains the substance still in the form of its
own immediacy and the substance is as yet only
a process of willing and knowing on the part of a
given particular individual ie the ought of an unreal command and a knowledge of formal universality
But since these modes were cancelled consciousness
has passed back into the universal and those oppositions have vanished The spiritual reality is actual substance precisely through these modes not holding good
individually but merely as cancelled and transcended
and the unity where they are merely moments is the
self of consciousness which is henceforth affirmed and
established within the spiritual reality and makes that
spirit concrete actual and selfconscious
Spiritual reality is thus in the
first place for selfconsciousness in the shape of a law
implicitly existuig The universality present in the
process of testing which was of a formal kind and not
inherently existent is transcended The law is too
an eternal law which does not have its ground in the
will of a given individual but has a being all its own
the pure and absolute will of all
which takes the form of immediate existence This will
is again not a conunand which merely ought to be it
is and has validity it is the universal ego of the
categorj ego which is immediately reality and the
world is only this reality Since however this existing law is absolutely valid the obedience given by
selfconsciousness is not service rendered to a master
whose orders might be mere caprice and in which
it might not recognise its own nature. On the contrary the laws are thoughts of its own absolute consciousness thoughts which are its own immediate possession Moreover it does not believe in them for
beUef while it no doubt sees the essential nature
still gazes at an alien essence not its own The
ethical selfconsciousness is directly at one with the
essential reality in virtue of the universality of its
own self Belief on the other hand begins with a
particular consciousness it is a process in which this
consciousness is always approaching this imity without
ever being able to find itself at home with its real
nature its true essence The above consciousness on
the other hand has transcended itself as particular
this mediating process is completed and only because
of this is it immediate selfconsciousness of ethical
substance
The distinction then of selfconsciousness from the
essential nature is completely transparent
Because of this the distinctions found within that
nature itself are not accidental characteristics On the
contrary because of the unity of the essence with selfconsciousness from which alone discordance incongruity might have come they are articulated groups
of the unity permeated by its own life
unsundered spirits transparent to each other stainless
forms and shapes of heaven that preserve amidst their
differences the untarnished innocence and concord of
their essential nature
Selfconsciousness again stands likewise in a simple
and clear relation to those different laws They are
and nothing more this is what constitutes the consciousness of its relation to them Thus Antigone takes
them for the unwritten and unerring law of the gods
Not now indeed nor yesterday but for aye
It lives and no man knows what time it came
They are When I ask for their origin and confine
them to the point whence they arose that puts me
beyond them for it is I who am now the universal
while they are the conditioned and hmited If they
are to get the approval and sanction of my insight I
have already shaken their immovable nature their
inherent constancy and regarded them as something which is perhaps true but possibly may also be not
true so far as I am concerned True ethical sentiment consists just in holding fast and unshaken by
what is right and abstaining altogether from what
would move or shake it or derive it Suppose a deposit
has been made over to me on trust it is the
property of another and I recognise it because it is
so and remain inunovable in this relation towards it
But if I keep the deposit for myself then according
to the principle I use in testing laws tautology I undoubtedly do not commit a contradiction for in that
case I do not regard it any longer as the property of
another To keep anjthing which I do not look on as
the property of some one else is perfectly consistent
Changing the point of view is not contradiction for
what we have to do with is not the point of view but
the object and content which is not to contradict itself
Just as I can as I do when I give something away
in a present alter the view that something is mine
into the view that it is the property of another without being thereby guilty of a contradiction so too I
can proceed the other way about It is not then
because I find something not contradicting itself that
it is right but it is right because it is the right That
something is the property of another this Ues at the
basis of what I do I have not to reason why
nor to seek out or hit upon thoughts of all kinds connections aspects I have to think neither of giving
laws nor of testing them By all such thoughtprocesses on my part I should stultify that relation
since in point of fact I could if I liked make the opposite suit my indeterminate tautological knowledge just
as well and make that the law But whether this or
the opposite determination is the right that is settled
just as it stands I might for my
own part have made the law whichever I wanted
and neither of them just as well and am by my beginning to test them thereby already on an immoral
track That the right is there for me just as it stands
this places me within the substance of ethical reality
and in this way that substance is the essence of selfconsciousness But selfconsciousness again is its
actualisation and its existence its self and its will
In the preceding section there is analysed the attempt on the part of
individuality to operate as its own legislator and judge of laws holding
for individuals Individuality may claim the privilege of enunciating
laws universal in character but having their source and inspiration solely in
the single individual Such laws can at best only be regulative and
cannot be constitutive of the substance of individuality for the substance of individuality necessarily involves other individuals within it
In short individuality is itself only realised as a part of a concrete whole
of individuals its life is drawn from common life in and with others
To attempt to enunciate laws from itself as if it could create the conditions
of its own inherent universality can only issue in one result laws are
furnished without the content which gives those laws any meaning or else
the laws and the content remain from first to last external to one another
But if laws are purely formal they cease to be laws ie constitutive
conditions of individuality Hence the attempt above described is sure
to break down by its own futility What is wanted to give the laws
meaning is the concrete substance of social life and when this concrete
substance is provided ipso facto the attempt of individuality to create
laws disappears for these laws are already found in operation in social life
Only such laws have reality But this involves the further step that individuality is only realised only finds its true universal content in and
with the order of a society Here alone is individuality what it is in
truth at once a particular focus of selfconsciousness and a realisation of
universal mind This condition where individuality is conscious of itself
only in and with others and conscious of the common life as its own is
the stage of spiritual existence Spiritual existence and social life thus go
together The following section begins the analysis of this phase of
experience which extends from the simplest form of sociality the Family
up to the highest experience of universal mind Keligioii
The immediately succeeding section may be taken as the keystone of
t e whole arch of experience traversed in the Phenomenology Here it is
pointed out that all the preceding phases of experience have not merely
been preparing the way for what is to follow but that the various aspects
hitherto treated as separate moments of experience are in reality abstractions from the life of concrete spirit now to be discussed and analysed
It is noteworthy that from this point onwards the argument is less
negative in its result either directly or indirectly and is more systematic
and constructive This is no doubt largely because hitherto individual
mind as such has been under review and this is an abstraction from social
mind or spiritual existence
The term Spirit seems better to render the word Geist used
here than the word mind would do Up to this stage of experience
the word mind is sufficient to convey the meaning But spirit is
mind at a much higher level of existence
Reason is spirit when its certainty of being all reality
JL\ has been raised to the level of truth and reason
is consciously aware of itself as its own world and of the
world as itself The development of spirit was indicated
in the preceding movement of mind
where the object of consciousness the category pure
and simple rose to be the notion of reason When
reason observes this pure unity of ego and existence
the unity of subjectivity and objectivity of foritselfness
and initselfness this unity is immanent has the
character of implicitness or of being and consciousness
of reason finds itself But the true nature of observation is rather the transcendence of this instinct of
finding its object lying directly at hand and passing
beyond this unconscious state of existence The directly
perceived category the thing simply
found enters consciousness as the selfexistence of the
ego ego which now knows itself in the objective realit
and knows itself there as the self But this feature of
the category viz of being foritself as opposed to
being immanent within itself is equally onesided
and a moment that cancels itself The category
therefore gets for consciousness the character which it
possesses in its universal truth it is selfcontained essential reality This
character still abstract which constitutes the nature
of absolute fact of fact itself is to begin with
spiritual reality and its mode of
consciousness is here a formal \cnooo gef that reality
a knowledge which is occupied with the varied and
manifold content thereof This consciousness is still
in point of fact, a particular individual distinct from
the general substance and either prescribes arbitrary
laws or pretends to possess within its own knowledge
as such the laws as they absolutely are
and takes itself to be the power that passes judgment on
them Or again looked at from the side of the substance, this is seen to be the selfcontained and selfsufficient spiritual reality which is not yet a consciousness of its own self The selfcontained and selfsufficient reality however which is at once aware of being
actual in the form of consciousness and presents itself
to itself is Spirit
Its essential spirtual being has been above
designated as the ethical substance spirit however
is concrete ethical actuality Spirit is the
self of the actual consciousness to which spirit stands
opposed or rather which appears over against itself as
an objective actual world that has lost however all
sense of strangeness for the self just as the self has lost
all sense of having a dependent or independent existence
by itself cut off and separated from that world
Being substance and universal selfidentical permanent
essence spirit is the immovable irreducible
basis and the starting point for the action of all and
every one it is their purpose and their goal because
the ideally implicit nature of all selfconscious
nesses This substance is likewise the universal product
wrought and created by the action of each and all and
giving them unity and likeness and identity of meaning
for it is self existence the self action
Qua substanceselfrvY oHibending righteous selfsameness self identity but qua foritself selfexistent and
selfdetermined its continuity is resolved
into discrete elements it is the selfsacrificing soul of
goodness the benevolent essential nature in which
each fulfils his own special work rends the continuum
of the universal substance and takes his own share
of it This resolution of the essence into individual
forms is just the aspect of the separate action and the
separate self of all the several individuals it is the
moving soul of the ethical substance the resultant
universal spiritual being Just because this substance
is a being resolved in the self it is not a lifeless
essence but actual and alive
Spirit is thus the selfsupporting absolutely real
ultimate being All the previous modes of
consciousness are abstractions from it they are
constituted by the fact that spirit analyses itself
distinguishes its moments and halts at each individual
mode in turn The isolating of such moments presupposes spirit itself and requires spirit for its subsistence in other words, this isolation of modes only exists
within spirit which is existence Taken in isolation
they appear as if they existed as they stand But their
advance and return upon their real ground and essential
being showed that they are merely moments or vanishing
quantities and this essential being is precisely this movement and resolution of these moments Here where
spirit the reflection of these moments into itself has
become established our reflection may briefly recall
them in this connexion they were consciousness selfconsciousness and reason Spirit is thus Consciousness
in general which contains senseexperience perception
and understanding so far as in analysing its own self it
holds fast by the moment of being a reality objective
to itself and by abstraction eliminates the fact that this
reality is its own self objectified its own selfexistence
When again it holds fast by the other abstract moment
produced by analysis the fact that its object is its own
self become objective to itself is its selfexistence then it
is Self consciousness But as immediate consciousness of
its inherent and its explicit being of its immanent self
and its objective self as the unity of consciousness and
selfconsciousness it is that type of consciousness
which h Reason it is the consciousness which as
the word have indicates has the object in a shape
which is implicitly and inherently rational or is categorised but in such a way that the object is not yet
taken by the consciousness in question to have the
value of a category Spirit here is that consciousness
from the immediately preceding consideration of which
we have arrived at the present stage Finally when
this reason which spirit has is seen by spirit to be
reason which actually is to be reason which is actual
in spirit and is its world then spirit has come to its
truth it is spirit the essential nature of ethical life
actually existent
Spirit so far as it is the immediate truth is the
ethical life of a nation the individual which is a
world It has to advance to the consciousness of
what it is immediately it has to abandon and transcend
the beautiful simplicity of ethical life and get to a knowledge of itself by passing through a series of stages
and forms The distinction between these and those
that have gone before consists in their being real
spiritual individualities actualities proper and
instead of being forms of consciousness they are forms
of a world
The living ethical world is spirit in its truth As it
first comes to an abstract knowledge of its essential
nature ethical life is destroyed in the
formal universality of right or legality Spirit
being now sundered within itself traces one of its worlds
in the element of its objectivity as in a crass solid
actuality this is the realm of Culture and Civilisation
while over against this in the element of thought is
traced the world of Belief or Faith the realm of the
Inner Life and Truth Both worlds However
when in the grip of the notion when gasped by
spirit which after this loss of self through selfdiremption penetrates itself are thrown into confusion and revolutionised through individual Insight
and the general diffusion of this attitude
known as the Enlightenment And the
realm which had thus been divided and expanded into
the present and the remote beyond into the here
and the yonder turns back into self consciousness
This selfconsciousness again taking now the form of
Morality the inner moral life apprehends itself as the
essential truth and the real essence as its actual self
no longer puts its world and its ground and basis away
outside itself but lets everything fade into itself and
in the form of Conscience is spirit sure and
certain of itself
The ethical world the world rent asunder into the
here and the yonder and the moral point of view
are then individual forms
of spirit whose process and whose return
into the self of spirit a self simple and selfexistent
will be developed When these attain
their goal and final result the actual selfconsciousness
of Absolute Spirit will make its appearance
Spirit in its ultimate simple truth is consciousness
and breaks asunder its moments from one another.
An act divides spirit into spiritual substance on the
one side and consciousness of the substance on the
other and divides the substance as well as consciousness The substance appears in the shape of a universal
inner nature and purpose standing in contrast to itself
qua particularised reality The middle or mediating
term infinite in character is selfconsciousness which
being implicitly the unity of itself and that substance
becomes so now explicitly unites the universal
inner nature and its particular realisation raises the
latter to the former and becomes ethical action and
on the other hand brings the former down to the latter
and carries out the purpose the substance presented
merely in thought In this way it brings to light the
unity of its self and the substance and produces this
unity in the form of a work done and thus as actual
concrete fact
When consciousness breaks up into these elements
the simple substance has in part preserved the attitude
of opposition to selfconsciousness in part it thereby
manifests in itself the very nature of consciousness,
which consists in distinguishing its own content within
itself manifests a world articulated into separate
areas The substance is thus an ethical being
split up into distinct elemental forms a human and
a divine law In the same way the selfconsciousness appearing over against the substance assigns itself
in virtue of its inner nature to one of these powers
and qua involving knowledge gets broken up into
ignorance of what it is doing on the one hand
and knowledge of this on the other a knowledge which
for that reason proves a deception It learns therefore
through its own act at once the contradictory nature of
those powers into which the inner substance divided itself and their mutual overthrow as well as the contradiction between its knowledge of the ethical character of
its act and what is truly and essentially ethical and so
finds its own destruction In point of fact, however
the ethical substance has by this process become actual
concrete selfconsciousness in other words this particular self has become selfsufficient and selfdependent
but precisely thereby the
ethical order has been overthrown and destroyed
The first step in the analysis of spirit is to take spirit as a realised actual
social order immediately given as a historical fact and present directly to
the minds of the individuals composing it This is social life as an established routine of human adjustments where the natural characteristics and
constitution of its moral individuals are absorbed and built into the single
substance of the living social whole It is spirit as an objectively
embodied whole of essentially spiritual individuals without any consciousness of opposition to one another or to the whole and with an
absolute unbroken sense of their own security and fulfilment within
the substance of social mind It is spirit at the level of naive acquiescence in the law and order of conventional life
But such a selfcomplete type of experience has various levels of
realisation It cannot exist except through the union of opposing
elements and the central principle of all experience selfconsciousness
which assumes here such a concrete form has abundant material on which
to exercise its function of creating and imiting distinctions The first
level is determined by the fact that the substance of social life is constituted out of the quasinatural phenomena of human genus and species
of race and nationality on the one hand and the purely natural element
of specialised individual sex on the other These two aspects go together
the sexrelations of individuals maintain race and nationality the nation
lives in and through its sexually distinct individuals The social order as
an order is realised and maintained in the medium of these elements
The fact that this order is an order of universal mind gives it a permanence an inviolability an absoluteness which are inseparable from it
so inseparable that the order is looked on as having its roots in the
Absolute Mind and as deriving its authority from it The social order on
this aspect consists of a divinely established and divinely sanctioned
regime the gods are the guardians of the city of the hearth and the
home On the other hand the expression of this order varies and is
enunciated from time to time in the history of a community The
order in this sense is made by man the law of the social order thus
becomes a human law determined by human conditions and human ends
it is a round of conventions and customs These two forms of order are
inseparable in the life of a community and they subsist together and side by side at this level of social consciousness They may lead to conflict in
the life of the individual in the community and have to be reconciled by
force or otherwise and they become associated and connected with the
fundamental differences of individuality above referred to
The analysis of this level of social life constituted as above furnishes
the argument of the following section
The simple substance of spirit being consciousness
divides itself into parts In other words, just as consciousness of abstract sensuous existence passes over
into perception so does immediate certainty of real
ethical existence and just as for sense perception
bare being becomes a thing with many properties so for ethical perception a given act becomes
a reality involving many ethical relations For the
former again the unnecessary plurality of properties concentrates itself into the form of an essential
opposition between individual and universal and
still more for the latter which is consciousness purified and substantial the plurality of ethical moments
is reduced to and assumes a twofold form that of a law
of individuality and a law of universality Each of
these areas or masses of the substance remains however spirit in its entirety If in senseperception
things have no other substantial reality than the
two determinations of individual and universal these
determinations express in the present instance merely
the superficial opposition of both sides to one another
Individuality in the case of the subject we
are here considering has the significance of selfconsciousness in general not of any particular consciousness
we care to take The ethical substance is thus in this determination actual concrete substance Absolute Spirit
realised in the plurality of distinct consciousnesses
definitely existing It this spirit is the community
which as we entered the stage of the
practical embodiment of reason in general came
before us as the absolute and ultimate reality
and which here comes objectively before itself in its
true nature as a conscious ethical reality and
as the essential reality for that mode of consciousness we are now dealing with It is spirit which is
for itself since it maintains itself by being reflected in
the minds of the component individuals and which
is in itself or substance since it preserves them within
itself Qua actual substance that spirit is a Nation
qua concrete consciousness it is the Citizens of
a nation This consciousness has its essential being in
simple spirit and is certain of itself in the actual
realisation of this spirit in the entire nation it has
its truth there directly not therefore in something
unreal but in a spirit which exists and makes itself
felt
This spirit can be named Human Law because it
has its being essentially in the form of selfconscious actuality In the form of universality that
spirit is law known to everybody familiar and recognised and is everyday present Customary Convention
in the form of particularity it is the concrete
certainty of itself in any and every individual and the
certainty of itself as a single individuality is that spirit
in the form of Government Its true and complete
nature is seen in its authoritative validity openly and
unmistakably manifested an existence which takes
the form of unconstrained independent objective fact
and is immediately apprehended with conscious certainty in this form
Over against this power and publicity of the ethical
secular human order there appears however another
power the Divine Law For the ethical power of the
state being the movement of selfconscious action
finds its opposition in the simple immediate essential being of the moral order qua actual concrete
universality it is a force exerted against the independence of the individual and qua actuality in general
it finds inherent in that essential being something other
than the power of the state
We mentioned before that each of the opposite
ways in which the ethical substance exists contains
that substance in its entirety and contains all moments
of its contents If then the community is that substance in the form of selfconsciously realised action
the other side has the form of immediate or directly
existent substance The latter is thus on the one
hand the inner principle or universal possibility
of the ethical order in general but on the other hand
contains within it also the moment of selfconsciousness
This moment which expresses the ethical order in this
element of immediacy or mere being which in other
words, is an immediate consciousness of self both as
regards its essence and its particular thisness in an
other and hence is a natural ethical community
this is the Family The family as the inner indwelling
principle of sociality operating in an unconscious way
stands opposed to its own actuality when explicitly conscious as the basis of the actuality of a nation it stands
in contrast to the nation itself as the immediate ethical
existence it stands over against the ethical order
which shapes and preserves itself by work for universal
ends the Penates of the family stand in contrast to
the universal spirit
Although the ethical existence of the family has the
character of immediacy it is within itself an ethical
entity but not so far as it is the natural relation of its
component members or so far as their connexion is one
immediately holding between individual concrete beings
For the ethical element is intrinsically universal and
this relation established by nature is essentially just
as much a spiritual fact and is only ethical by being
spiritual Let us see wherein its peculiar ethical character consists.
In the first place because the ethical element is
the intrinsically universal element the ethical relation
between the members of the family is not that of sentiment or the relationship of love The ethical element in
this case seems bound to be placed in the relation of the
individual member of the family to the entire family
as the real substance so that the purpose of his action
and the content of his actuality are taken from this
substance are derived solely from the family life
But the conscious purpose which dominates the action
of this whole so far as that purpose concerns that
whole is itself the individual member The procuring
and maintaining of power and wealth turn in part
merely on needs and wants and are a matter that has
to do with desire in part they become in their higher
aspect something which is merely of mediate significance
This aspect does not fall within the family itself but
concerns what is truly universal the community it
acts rather in a negative way on the family and consists
in setting the individual outside the family in subduing
his merely natural existence and his mere particularity
and so drawing him on towards virtue towards living
in and for the whole The positive purpose peculiar
to the family is the individual as such Now in order
that this relationship may be ethical neither the
individual who does an act nor he to whom the act
refers must show any trace of contingency such as
obtains in rendering some particular help or service
The content of the ethical act must be substantial in
character or must be entire and universal hence it
can only stand in relation to the entire individual to
the individual qua universal And this again must not
be taken as if it were merely in idea that an act of
service furthered his entire happiness whereas the
service taken as an immediate or concrete act
only does something particular in regard to him
Nor must we think that the service really takes
him as its object and deals with him as a whole
in a series of efforts as if it were a process of education
and produces him as a kind of work where apart from
the purpose which operates in a negative way on the
family the real act has merely a limited content
Finally just as little should we take it that the service
rendered is a help in time of need by which in truth
the entire individual is saved for it is itself an entirely
casual act which can as well be as not be the occasion
of which is an ordinary actuality The act then
which embraces the entire existence of the blood relation does not concern the citizen for he does not belong
to the family nor does it deal with one who is going
to be a citizen and so will cease to have the significance
of a mere particular individual it has as its object and
content this specific individual belonging to the family
takes him as a universal being divested of his sensuous
or particular reality The act no longer concerns the
living but the dead one who has passed through the
long sequence of his broken and diversified existence
and gathered up his being into its one completed
embodiment who has lifted himself out of the unrest of
a life of chance and change into the peace of simple
universality Because it is only as citizen that he is
real and substantial the individual when not a citizen
and belonging to the family is merely unreal insubstantial shadow
This condition of universality which the individual
as such reaches is mere being death it is the immediate
issue of a natural process and is not the action of a
conscious mind The duty of the member of a family
is on that account to attach this aspect too in order
that this last phase of being also this universal being
may not belong to nature alone and remain something
irrational but may be something actually done and the
right of consciousness be asserted in it Or rather the
significance of the act is that because in truth the peace
and universality of a selfconscious being does not belong
to nature the apparent claim which nature has made to
act in this way may be given up and the truth reinstated
What nature did in the individuals case concerns
the aspect in which his process of becoming universal
is manifested as the movement of an existent It
takes effect no doubt within the ethical community
and has this in view as its purpose death is the fulfilment and final task which the individual as such undertakes on its behalf But so far as he is essentially a
particular individual it is an accident that his death
was connected directly with his labour for the universal
whole and was the outcome of his toil partly because
if it was so it is the natural course of the negativity
of the individual qua existent in which consciousness
does not return into itself and become selfconscious
or again because since the process of the existent consists in becoming cancelled and transcended and attaining
the stage of independent selfexistence death is the
aspect of diremption where the selfexistence which is
obtained is something other than that being which
entered on the process
Because the ethical order is spirit in its immediate
truth those aspects into which its conscious life breaks
up fall also into this form of immediacy and the
individuals particularity passes over into this abstract
negativity which being in itself without consolation or
reconcilement must receive them essentially through
a concrete and external act
Bloodrelationship therefore supplements the abstract
natural process by adding to it the process of consciousness by interrupting the work of nature and rescuing
the bloodrelation from destruction or better because
destruction the passing into mere being is necessary
it takes upon itself the act of destruction
Through this it comes about that the universal being
the sphere of death is also something which has returned
into itself something selfexistent the powerless bare
particular unity is raised to universal individuality
The dead individual by his having detached and
liberated his being from his action or his negative unity
is an empty particular merely existing passively for
some other at the mercy of every lower irrational
organic agency and the chemical physical forces
of abstract material elements both of which are now
stronger than himself the former on account of the life
which they have the latter on account of their negative
nature The family keeps away from the dead this
dishonouring of him by the desires of unconscious
organic agencies and by abstract elements puts its
own action in place of theirs and weds the relative
to the bosom of the earth the elemental individuality that passes not away Thereby the family makes
the dead a member of a community f which prevails over
and holds under control the powers of the particular
material elements and the lower living creatures which
sought to have their way with the dead and destroy him
This last duty thus accomplishes the complete
divine law or constitutes the positive ethical act
towards the given individual Every other relation
towards him which does not remain at the level of love
but is ethical belongs to human law and has the negative significance of lifting the individual above the confinement within the natural community to which he
belongs as a concrete individual But now though
human right has for its content and power the actual
ethical substance consciously aware of itself the entire
nation while divine right and law derive theirs from
the particular individual who is beyond the actual yet
he is still not without power His power lies in the
abstract pure universal the shadowy individual which
seizes upon the individuality that cuts itself loose from
the element and constitutes the selfconscious reality of
the nation and draws it back into the pure abstraction
which is the essential nature of the shadowy individual
while at the same time the latter is its ultimate ground
The description here refers to the process of bodily corruption
t ie the earth
as well How this power is made explicit in the nation
itself will come out more fully as we proceed
Now in the one law as in the other there are differences
and stages For since these laws involve the element
of consciousness in both cases distinction is developed
within themselves and this is just what constitutes
the peculiar process of their life The consideration of
these differences brings out the way they operate and
the kind of selfconsciousness at work in both the universal essential principles of the ethical world
as also their connection and transition into one another
The community the higher law whose validity is
open to the light of day makes its concrete activity
felt in government for in government it is an
individual whole Government is concrete actual spirit
reflected into itself the self pure and simple of the
entire ethical substance This simple force allows
indeed the community to unfold and expand into
its component members and to give each part
subsistence and selfexistence of its own
Spirit finds in this way its realisation or its objective
existence and the family is the medium in which this
realisation takes effect But spirit is at the same time
the force of the whole combining these parts again
within the unity which negates them giving them
the feeling of their want of independence and keeping them aware that their life only lies in the whole
The community may thus on the one hand organise
itself into the systems of property and of personal
independence of personal right and right in things
and on the other hand articulate the various ways of
working for what in the first instance are particular
ends those of gain and enjoyment into their own
special guilds and associations and may thus make
them independent The spirit of universal assemblage and association is the single and simple principle and the negative essential factor at work in the
segregation and isolation of these systems In order
not to let them get rooted and settled in this isolation
and thus break up the whole into fragments and let
the common spirit evaporate government has from
time to time to shake them to the very centre by War
By this means it confounds the order that has been
established and arranged and violates that right to
independence while the individuals who being absorbed therein get adrift from the whole striving after
inviolable selfexistence and personal
security are made by the task thus imposed on
them by government to feel the power of their lord
and master death By thus breaking up the form
of fixed stability spirit guards the ethical order from
sinking into merely natural existence preserves
the self of which it is conscious and raises that
self to the level of freedom and its own powers The
negative essential being shows itself to be the might
proper of the community and the force it has for selfmaintenance The community therefore finds the true
principle and corroboration of its power in the inner
nature of divine law and in the kingdom of the nether
world
The divine law which holds sway in the family has
also on its side distinctions within itself the relations
among which make up the living process of its realisation
Amongst the three relationships however of husband
and wife parents and children brothers and sisters the relationship of husband and wife is to begin with the
primary and immediate form in which one consciousness recognises itself in another and in which each
finds reciprocal recognition Being natural selfknowledge knowledge of self on the basis of nature and
not on that of ethical life it merely represents and
typifies in a figure the life of spirit and is not spirit
itself actually realised This figurative representation
however gets its realisation in an other than it is
This relationship therefore finds itself realised not in
itself as such but in the child an other in whose
coming into being that relationship consists and with
which it passes away And this change from one
generation onwards to another is permanent in and as
the life of a nation
The reverent devotion of husband and wife
towards one another is thus mixed up with a natural
relation and with feeling and their relationship is not
inherently selfcomplete similarly too the second relationship the reverent devotion of parents and children
to one another The devotion of parents towards their
children is affected and disturbed just by its being
consciously realised in what is external to themselves
viz the children and by seeing them become something on their own account without this returning to
the parents independent existence on the part of the
children remains a foreign reality a reality all their
own The devotion of children again towards their
parents is conversely affected by their coming into being
from or having their essential nature in what is external
to themselves viz the parents and passes away
and by their attaining independent existence and a
selfconsciousness of their own solely through separation
from the source whence they came a separation in
which the spring gets exhausted
Both these relationships are constituted by and hold
within the transience and the dissimilarity of the two
sides which are assigned to them
An unmixed intransitive form of relationship however holds between brother and sister They are the
same blood which however in them has entered into
a condition of stable equilibrium They therefore
stand in no such natural relation as husband and wife
they do not desire one another nor have they given
to one another nor received from one another, this
independence of individual being they are free
individualities with respect to each other The feminine
element therefore in the form of the sister premonises
and foreshadows most completely the nature of ethical
life sittliches Weseri She does not become conscious
of it and does not actualise it because the law of the
family is her inherent implicit inward nature which
does not lie open to the daylight of consciousness but
remains inner feeling and the divine element exempt
from actuality The feminine life is attached to these
household divinities Penates and sees in them
both her universal substance and her particular
individuality yet so views them that this relation of
her particular being to them is at the same time not
the natural one of pleasure
As a daughter the woman must now see her parents
pass away with natural emotion and yet with ethical
resignation for it is only at the cost of this condition that she can come to that individual existence
of which she is capable She thus cannot see her
independent existence positively attained in her relation
to her parents The relationships of mother and wife
however are individualised partly in the form of something natural which brings pleasure partly in the form
of something negative which finds simply its own
evanescence in those relationships partly again the
individualisation is just on that account something
contingent which can be replaced by an other particular individuality In a household of the ethical
kind a womans relationships are not based on a
reference to this particular husband this particular child
but to a husband to children in general not to feeling
but to the universal The distinction between her
ethical life while it determines her particular existence and brings her pleasure and that of her
husband consists just in this that it has always a
directly universal significance for her and is quite alien
to the impulsive condition of mere particular desire
On the other hand in the husband these two aspects
get separated and since he possesses as a citizen
the selfconscious power belonging to the universal
life the life of the social whole he acquires thereby
the rights of desire and keeps himself at the same time
in detachment from it So far then as particularity is
implicated in this relationship in the case of the wife
her ethical life is not purely ethical so far however
as it is ethical the particularity is a matter of
indifference and the wife is without the moment
of knowing herself as this particular self in and through
an other
The brother however is in the eyes of the sister a
being whose nature is unperturbed by desire and is
ethically like her own her recognition in him is pure
and unmixed with any sexual relation The indifference
characteristic of particular existence and the ethical
contingency thence arising are therefore not present
in this relationship instead the moment of individual
selfhood recognising and being recognised can here
assert its right because it is bound up with the balance
and equilibrium resulting from their being of the same
blood and from their being related in a way that
involves no mutual desire The loss of a brother is
thus irreparable to the sister and her duty towards
him is the highest
This relationship at the same time is the limit at
which the circumscribed life of the family is broken up
and passes beyond itself The brother is the member
of the family in whom its spirit becomes individualised
and enabled thereby to turn towards another sphere
towards what is other than and external to itself
and pass over into consciousness of universality The
brother leaves this immediate rudimentary and therefore strictly speaking negative ethical life of the family
in order to acquire and produce the concrete ethical
order which is conscious of itself
He passes from the divine law within whose realm
he lived over to the human law The sister however
becomes or the wife remains director of the home
and the preserver of the divine law In this way both
the sexes overcome their merely natural being and
become ethically significant as diverse forms dividing
between them the different aspects which the ethical
substance possesses Both these universal factors of
tihe ethical world have their specific individuality in
naturally distinct selfconsciousnesses for the reason
that the spirit at work in the ethical order is the im
mediate unity of the substance of ethical life with
selfconsciousness an immediacy which thus appears
as the existence of a natural difference at once as
regards its aspect of reality and of difference
It is that aspect which in the notion of spiritual
reality came to light as original determinate nature
when we were dealing with the stage of Individuality
which is real to itself This moment loses the indeterminateness which it still has there and the contingent diversity of constitution and capacities It
is now the specific opposition of the two sexes whose
natural character acquires at the same time the significance of their respective ethical determinations
The distinction of the sexes and of their ethical
content remains all the same within the unity of the
ethical substance and its operation is just the constant
process of that substance The husband is sent forth
by the spirit of the family into the life of the community
and finds there his selfconscious reality Just as the
family thereby finds in the community its universal
substance and subsistence conversely the community
finds in the family the formal element of its own realisation and in the divine law its power and confirmation
Neither of the two is alone selfcomplete Human law
as a living and active principle proceeds from the divine
the law holding on earth from that of the nether world
the conscious from the unconscious mediation from
immediacy and returns too whence it came The
power of the nether world on the other hand finds its
realisation upon earth it comes through consciousness
to have existence and efficacy
The universal elements of the ethical life are thus
the ethical substance qua universal and that sub
stance qua particular consciousness Their universal
actuality is the nation and the family while they get
their natural self and their operative individuality in
man and woman Here in this content of the ethical
world we see attained those purposes which the previous
insubstantial modes of conscious life set before them
What Reason apprehended only as an object has
become Selfconsciousness and what selfconsciousness
merely contained within it is here explicit true reality
What Observation knew an object given externally and
picked up and one in the constitution of which the subject knowing had no share is here a given ethical condition a custom found lying ready at hand but a reality
whifch is at the same time the deed and the product of
the subject finding it The individual who seeks the
pleasure of enjoying his particular individuality
finds it in the family life and the necessity in which
that pleasure passes away is his own selfconsciousness
as a citizen of his nation Or again it is knowing the
la\v of his own heart f as the law of all hearts knowing the consciousness of self to be the recognised and
universal ordinance of society it is virtue J which
enjoys the fruits of its own sacrifice which brings about
what it sets out to do viz to bring the essential nature
into the light of the actual present and its enjoyment
lies in this universal life Finally consciousness of
fact as such gets satisfaction in the
real sub tance which contains and maintains in positive
form tt abstract aspects of that empty category
That su stance finds a genuine content in the powers
of the i chical order a content that takes the place of
those iasubstantial commands which the healthy human reason wanted to give and to know and in
consequence thus gets a concrete inherently determinate
standard for testing not the laws but what is done
The whole is a stable equilibrium of all the parts
and each part a spirit in its native element a spirit
which does not seek its satisfaction beyond itself but
has the satisfaction within itself for the reason that
itself is in this balanced equipoise with the whole This
condition of stable equilibrium can of course only be
living by inequality arising within it and being brought
back again to equipoise by Righteousness and Juscice
Justice however is neither an alien principle
holding somewhere remote from the present nor the
realisation unworthy of the name of justice of mutual
malice treachery ingratitude etc which in the unintelligent way of chance and accident would fulfil
the law by a kind of irrational connection without any controlling idea action by commission and
omission without any consciousness of what was
involved On the contrary being justice in human law
it brings back to the whole to the universal life of
society what has broken away separately from the
harmony and equilibrium of the whole the ic dependent classes and individuals In this way justice is the
government of the nation and is its allpervading essential life in a consciously present individual form and
is the personal selfconscious will of all
bThat justice however which restores to equilibrium
the universal when getting the mastery over lie particular individual is similarly the simple singV jpirit
of the individual who has suffered wrong it is not
broken up into the two elements one who has suffered wrong and a far away remote reality The
individual himself is the power of the nether world
and that reality is his fury wreaking vengeance
upon him For his individuality his blood still lives
in the house his substance has a lasting actuality
The wrong which can be brought upon the individual
in the realm of the ethical world consists merely in this
that a bare something by chance happens to him The
power which perpetrates on the conscious individual
this wrong of making him into a mere thing is nature
it is the universality not of the community but the
abstract universality of mere existence And the
particular individual in wiping out the wrong suffered
turns not against the community for he has not
suffered at its hands but against the latter As we
saw those who consciously share the blood of the individual remove this wrong in such a way that what
has happened becomes rather a work of their own
doing ana hence bare existence the last state gets
alo to be something willed and thus an object of
gratification
The ethical realm remains in this way permanently
a world without blot or stain a world untainted by any
internal dissension So too its process is an untroubled
transition from one of its powers to the other in such a
way that each preserves and produces the other We
see it no doubt divided into two ultimate elements and
their realisation but their opposition is rather the
confirming and substantiation of one through the other
and where they directly come in contact and affect each
other as actual factors their mediating common element
straightway permeates and suffuses the one with the other The one extreme universal spirit conscious
of itself becomes through the individuality of man
linked together with its other extreme its force and
its element with unconscious spirit On the other
hand divine law is individualised the unconscious
spirit of the particular individual finds its existence in
woman through the mediation of whom the spirit of
the individual comes out of its unrealisedness into
actuality out of the state of unknowing and unknown and rises into the conscious realm of universal
spirit The union of man with woman constitutes the
operative mediating agency for the whole and constitutes the element which while separated into the
extremes of divine and human law is at the same time
their immediate union This union again turns both
those first mediate connections into one and
the same synthesis and unites into one process the
twofold movement in opposite directions one from
reality to unreality the downward movement of
human law organised into independent members to
the danger and trial of death the other from unreality to reality the upward movement of the law of
the nether world to the daylight of conscious existence
Of these movements the former falls to man the latter
to woman
A fundamental condition of social order is that it is maintained by
action on the part of the individual members of a society action is a
fundamental principle of distinction between individuals is the way they
make their contribution to social life and ia also the way by which the
continuance of social life is ceaselessly broken and reconstituted In a
comprehensive sense therefore action is the principle by which distinction
in unity is carried out in social life The consideration of its significance
is thus an essential problem for the analysis of social mind Action must
be considered at once with reference to individuality and also with reference to those conceptions of social order as containing both divine and
human law In the following section this analysis is undertaken
The specific historical background of Hegels thought in this section
and to some extent in the preceding section is supplied by the social life
of the Greek city state The Greek city state has been taken as the type
so to say of spiritual existence realised as a selfcomplete ethical order
But the social life of Greece is here in large measure read and interpreted
in the light of the dramatisation of Greek ethical conceptions by the
great Greek tragedians especially Sophocles This accounts for the repeated reference to the purely dramatic conception of the destiny or
the pathic element in the life of the individual whose spiritual
existence is completely bound up with the established social order It is
in Greece that we find most fully realised the allsufficiency of the state
for the individual which Hegel has here in view a sufficiency which
was at once the strength and beauty as well as the pathos and weakness
of Greek social life
With this and the preceding section should be read Hegels Philosophy
of History Part II The Greek World
In the form presented by the opposition of elements
in the realm just dealt with self consciousness has not
yet come to its rights as a particular individuality
Individuality there has on one side the sense of merely
universal will on the other of consanguinity of the
family This particular individual has merely the significance of shadowy unreality There is as yet no performance of an act The act however is the realised self
It breaks in upon the untroubled stable organisation
and movement of the ethical world What there appears
as ordinance and harmony between both its constituent
elements each of which confirms and complements the
other becomes through the performing of an act a
transition of opposites into one another by which each
proves to be the annihilation rather than the confirmation of its self and its opposite It becomes the process
of negation or destruction the eternal necessity of awful
destiny which engulfs in the abyss of its bare identity
divine and human law alike as well as both the selfconscious factors in which these powers subsist
and to our view passes over into the absolute selfexistence of mere particular selfconsciousness
The basis from which this movement proceeds and
on which it takes effect is the kingdom of the ethical
order But the activity at work in this process is selfconsciousness Being ethical consciousness it is the pure and simple direction of activity towards the
essential principle of the ethical life it is Duty There
is no caprice and likewise no struggle no indecision in
it since it has given up legislating and testing laws
the essential ethical principle is for it something
immediate unwavering without contradiction There
is therefore neither the painful spectacle of finding itself in a collision between passion and duty nor
the comic spectacle of a collision between duty and
duty a collision which so far as content goes is the
same as that between passion and duty for passion
can also be presented as a duty because duty when
consciousness withdraws into itself and leaves its
immediate essential substance comes to be
the formal universal into which one content fits equally
well with another as we found before The collision
of duties is however comical because it brings out
the contradiction inherent in the idea of an absolute
standing opposed to another absolute expresses something absolute and then directly the annihilation of
this socalled absolute or duty The ethical consciousness however knows what it has to do and is decided
whether it is to belong to divine or human law This
directness which characterises its decision is something
immanent and inherent and hence has
at the same time the significance of a natural condition
of being as we saw Nature not the accident of
circumstances or choice assigns one sex to one law the
other to the other law or conversely both the ethical
powers themselves establish their individual existence
and actualisation in the two sexes
Thus then because on the one side the ethical
order consists essentially in this immediate directness
of decision and therefore only the one law is for consciousness the essential reality while on the other side
the powers of the ethical order are actual in the self of
conscious life in this way these forces acquire the
significance of excluding one another and of being
opposed to one another They are explicit in selfconsciousness just as they were merely implicit in the
realm of the ethical order The ethical consciousness
because it is decisively on the side of one of them is
essentially Character There is not for it equal
essentiality in both The opposition therefore appears
as an unfortunate collision of duty merely with
reality on which right has no hold The ethical consciousness is qua selfconsciousness in this opposition
and being so it at once proceeds either to subdue by
force this reality opposing it to the law which it
accepts or to get round this reality by craft Since
it sees right only on its own side and wrong on the
other so of these two that which belongs to divine
law detects on the other side mere arbitrary fortuitous
human violence while what appertains to human law
finds in the other the obstinacy and disobedience of
subjective selfsufficiency For the commands of
government have a universal sense and meaning
open to the light of day the will of the other law
however is the inner concealed meaning of the realm
of darkness a meaning which appears
expressed as the will of a particular being and in
contradicting the first is malicious offence
There arises in this way in consciousness the opposition between what is known and what is not known
just as in the case of substance there was an opposition
between the conscious and the unconscious and the
absolute right of ethical selfconsciousness comes into
conflict with the divine right of the essential reality
Selfconsciousness qua consciousness takes the objective
actuality as such to have essential being Looking at its substance however it is the unity of itself
and this opposite and the ethical selfconsciousness is
consciousness of that substance the object qua
opposed to selfconsciousness has therefore entirely
lost the characteristic of having essential being
by itself Just as the spheres of conscious life where
the object is merely a thing are long past and
gone so too are these spheres where consciousness
sets up and establishes something from out itself and
turns a particular moment into the essential reality
Against such onesidedness actual concrete
reality has a power of its own it takes the side of
truth against consciousness and shows consciousness
itself what the truth is The ethical consciousness
however has drunk from the cup of the absolute
substance forgotten all the onesidedness of isolating
selfexistence all its purposes and peculiar notions
and has therefore at the same time drowned in
this Stygian stream all essentiality of nature and all the
independence claimed by the objective reality Its
absolute right therefore when it acts in accordance
with ethical law is to find in this actualisation nothing
else than the fulfilment and performance of this law
itself and that the deed should manifest nothing but
ethical action
The ethical being absolute essence and absolute
power at once cannot endure any perversion of its
content If it were merely absolute essence without
power it might undergo perversion at the hands of
individuality But this latter being ethical consciousness has renounced all perverting when it gave up its
onesided subjectivity Conversely again
mere power might be perverted by the essential reality
if power were still a subjectivity of that kind On
account of this unity individuality is a pure form of
the substance which is the content and action consists
in transition from thought over into reality merely as
the process of an unreal opposition whose moments
have no special and particular content distinct from
one another, and no essential nature of their own The
absolute right of ethical consciousness is therefore that
the deed the mode and form of its realisation should
be nothing else than it knows it to be
But the essential ethical reality has split asunder
into two laws and consciousness taking up an undivided single attitude towards law is assigned only
to one Just as this simple consciousness takes its
stand on the absolute right that the essential reality has
appeared to it qua ethical as that reality inherently is so
too this essence insists on the right belonging to its
reality ie the right of having a double form This
right of the essential reality does not however at the
same time stand over against and opposed to selfconsciousness as if it were to be found anywhere else
rather it is the essential nature of selfconsciousness
Only there has it its existence and its power and its
opposition is the act of selfconsciousness itself For
the latter just because it is a self to itself and proceeds
to act lifts itself out of the state of simple immediacy
and itself sets up the division into two By the act it
gives up the specific character of the ethical life that of being pure and simple certainty of immediate truth
and sets up the division of itself into self as active and
reality over against it and for it therefore negative
By the act it thus becomes Guilt For the deed is its
doing and doing is its inmost nature And the guilt
acquires also the meaning of Crime for as simple
ethical consciousness it has turned to and conformed
itself to the one law but turned away from the other
and thus has broken the latter by its deed
Guilt is not an external indifferent entity with
the double meaning that the deed as actually manifested
to the light of day may be an action of the guilty self or
may not be so as if with the doing of it there could be
connected something external and accidental that did not
belong to it from which point of view therefore the
action would be innocent Rather the act is itself this
diremption this affirming itself for itself and establishing
over against this an alien external reality That such a
result takes place is due to the deed itself and is the
outcome of it Hence innocence is an attribute merely
of the want of action a state like the mere
being of a stone and one which is not even true of a
child
Looking at the content however the ethical act contains the element of wrongdoing because it does not
cancel and transcend the natural allotment of the two
laws to the two sexes but rather being an undivided
attitude towards the law keeps within the sphere of
natural immediacy and qua acting turns this onesidedness into guilt by merely laying hold of one side of the
essential reality and taking up a negative relation
towards the other ie violating it Where in the
general ethical life guilt and crime deeds and actions come in will be more definitely brought out later
Meantime so much is at once clear that it is not this
particular individual who acts and becomes guilty
For he qua this particular self is merely a shadowy
reality he is merely qua universal self and individuality is purely the formal aspect of doing anything
at all while its content is the laws and customs which
are determined for the individual the laws and customs
of his class or station He is the substance qua genus
which by its determinateness becomes no doubt a
species but the specific form remains at the same time the
generic universal Selfconsciousness within the life of
a nation descends from the universal only down as far
as specific particularity but not as far as the single individuality which sets up an exclusive self establishes in its
action a reality negative to itself On the contrary the
action of that selfconsciousness rests on secure confidence
in the whole into which there enters nothing alien or
foreign neither fear nor hostility
Ethical selfconsciousness now comes to find in its
deed the full explicit meaning of concrete real action as
much when it followed divine law as when it followed
human The law manifest to it is in the essential
reality bound up with its opposite the essential
reality is the unity of both but the deed has merely
carried out one as against the other But being
bound up with this other in the inner reality the fulfilment of the one calls forth the other in the shape of
something which having been violated and now become
hostile demands revenge an attitude which the deed
has made it take up In the case of action only one
phase of the decision is in general in evidence The
decision however is inherently something negative
which plants an other in opposition to it something
foreign to the decision which is clear knowledge
Actual reality therefore keeps concealed within itself
this other aspect alien to clear knowledge and does
not show itself to consciousness as it fully and truly is
In the story of OEdipus the son does
not see his own father in the person of the man who
has insulted him and whom he strikes to death nor
his mother in the queen whom he makes his wife In
this way a hidden power shunning the light of day
waylays the ethical selfconsciousness a power which
bursts forth after the deed is done and seizes the doer
in the act For the completed deed is the removal of the
opposition between the knowing self and the reality over
against it The ethical consciousness cannot disclaim the
crime and its guilt The deed consists in setting in motion
what was unmoved and in bringing out what in the
first instance lay shut up as a mere possibility and
thereby linking on the unconscious to the conscious
the nonexistent to the existent In this truth therefore the deed comes to the light it is something in
which a conscious element is bound up with what is
unconscious what is peculiarly ones own with what
is alien and external it is an essential reality divided
in sunder whose other aspect consciousness discovers
and also finds to be its own aspect but as a power
violated by its doing and roused to hostility against it
It may well be that the right which kept itself in
reserve is not in its peculiar form present to the consciousness of the doer but is merely implicit present
in the subjective inward guilt of the decision and
the action But the ethical consciousness is more
complete its guilt purer if it knows beforehand the
law and the power which it opposes if it takes them
to be sheer violence and wrong to be a contingency in
the ethical life and wittingly like Antigone commits
the crime The deed when accomplished transforms
its point of view the very performance of it eo ipso
expresses that what is ethical has to be actual for
the realisation of the purpose is the very purpose of
acting Acting expresses precisely the unity of reality
and the substance it expresses the fact that actuality
is not an accident for the essential element but
that in union with that element is given to no right
which is not true right On account of this actuality
and on account of its deed ethical consciousness must
acknowledge its opposite as its own actuality it must
acknowledge its guilt To acknowledge this is expressly to indicate that the
severance between ethical purpose and actuality has
been done away it means the return to the ethical
frame of mind which knows that nothing counts
but right Thereby however the agent surrenders
his character and the reality of his self and has
utterly collapsed His being lies in belonging to
his ethical law as his substance in acknowledging
an opposite however he has ceased to find his substance in this law and instead of reality this has
become an unreality a mere sentiment a frame of
mind The substance no doubt appears as the pathic
element in the individuality and the individuality t The element that so permeates his being as to constitute his controlling necessity and destiny
appears as the factor which animates the substance
and hence stands above it But the substance is a
pathic element which is at the same time his character the ethical individuality is directly and inherently one with this its universal exists in it alone
and is incapable of surviving the destruction which this
ethical power suffers at the hands of its opposite
This individuality however has all the same the certainty that that individuality whose pathic element is this opposite power the substance suffers no
more harm than it has inflicted The opposition of the
ethical powers to one another and the process of the
individualities setting up these powers in life and
action have reached their true end merely in the fact
that both sides undergo the same destruction For
neither of the powers has any advantage over the
other that it should be a more essential moment of
the substance common to both The fact of their being
equally and to the same degree essential and subsisting
independently beside each other means their having no
separate self in the act they have a selfnature but a
different self which contradicts the unity of the self
and cancels their claim to independent right and thus
brings about their necessary destruction Character
too in part looking at its pathic element the
substance belongs to one alone in part when we look
at the aspect of knowledge the one character like the
other is divided into a conscious element and an unconscious and since each itself calls forth this opposition and the want of knowledge is by the act also
its doing each falls into the guilt which consumes it
The victory of one power and its character and the
defeat of the other side would thus be merely the
part and the incomplete work which steadily advances
till the equilibrium between the two is attained It is
in the equal suppression of both sides that absolute
right is first accomplished and the ethical substance
as the negative force devouring both sides in other
words omnipotent and righteous Destiny makes its
appearance
If both powers are taken according to their specific
content and its individualisation we have the scene
presented of a contest between them as individuated
On its formal side this is the struggle of the ethical
order and of selfconsciousness with unconscious nature
and a contingency due to this nature The latter has a
right as against the former because this is only objective spirit merely in immediate unity with its substance
On the side of content the struggle is the rupture of
divine and human law The youth goes forth from the
unconscious life of the family and becomes the individuality of the community ie Ruler But that he
still shares the natural life from which he has torn
himself away is seen in the fact that he emerges therefrom only to find his claim affected by the contingency
that there are two brothers who with equal right take
possession of the community t the inequality due to
the one having been born earlier and the other later
an inequality which is a natural difference has no
importance for them when they enter the ethical life of
society But government as the single soul the self of
the national spirit does not admit of a duality of individuality and in contrast to the ethical necessity of
this unity nature appears as by accident providing
Eteocles and Polynices v Edipus at Colonus
t viz the throne of their Father Edipus
more than one These two brothers therefore become
disunited and their equal right in regard to the
power of the state is destructive to both for they
are equally wrong Humanly considered he has
committed the crime who not being in actual possession
seizes on the community at the head of which the other
stood While again he has right on his side who knew
how to seize the other merely qua particular individual
detached from the community and banish him while
thus powerless out of the community he has
merely laid hands on the individual as such not the
community not the essential nature of human right
The community attacked and defended from a point
of view which is merely particular maintains itself
and both brothers find their destruction reciprocally
through one another For individuality which involves
peril to the whole in the maintenance of its own selfexistence has thrust its own self out of
the community and is disintegrated in its own nature.
The community however will do honour to the one
who is found on its side the government the reestablished singleness of the self of the community
will punish by depriving of the last honour him
who already proclaimed its devastation on the walls
of the city He who came to affront the highest
spiritual form of conscious life the spirit of the community must be stripped of the honour of his entire
and complete nature the honour due to the spirit of
the departed
But if the universal thus lightly knocks off the
highest point of its pyramid and doubtless triumplis
victoriously over the family the rebellious principle of individuation it has thereby merely put itself
into conflict with divine law the selfconscious with
the unconscious spirit For the latter this unconscious
spirit is the other essential power and therefore the
power undestroyed but only insulted by the former
It finds however only a bloodless shade to lend it help
towards actually carrying itself out in the face of that
masterful and openly enunciated law Being the law
of weakness and of darkness it therefore gives way
to begin with before law which has force and publicity for the strength of the former is effective
in the nether realm not on earth and in the light
of day But the actual and concrete which has taken
away from what is inward its honour and its power has
thereby consumed its own real nature The spirit which
is manifest to the light of day has the roots of its power
in the lower world the certainty felt by a nation a
certainty of which it is sure and which makes itself
assured finds the truth of its oath binding all its
members into one solely in the mute unconscious
substance of all in the waters of forgetfulness In
consequence the fulfilment of the public spirit
turns round into its opposite and learns that its
supreme right is supreme wrong its victory rather
its own defeat The slain whose right is injured
knows therefore how to find means of vengeance
which are of the same reality and strength as the
power at whose hands it has suffered These powers
are other communities whose altars the dogs or birds
defiled with the corpse of the dead which is not raised
into unconscious universality by being restored as is
its due to the ultimate individuum the elemental earth but instead has remained above ground in the
sphere of reality and has now received as the force
of divine law a selfconscious actual universality
They rise up in hostility and destroy the community
which has dishonoured and destroyed its own power
the sacred claims the piety of the family
Eepresented in this way the movement of human and
divine law finds the expression of its necessity in individuals in whom the universal appears as a pathic
element and the activity of the movement as action of
individuals which gives the appearance of contingency
to the necessity of the process But individuality and
its action constitute the principle of individuation in
general a principle which in its pure universality was
called inner divine law As a moment of the visible
community it does not merely exhibit that unconscious
activity of the nether world its operation is not simply
external in its existence it has an equally manifest
visible existence and process actual in the actual nation
Taken in this form what was represented as a simple
process of the pathic element as embodied in individuals assumes another look and crime and the
resulting ruin of the community assume the proper
form of their existence
Human law then in its universal mode of existence
is the community in its efficient operation in general
is the manhood of the community in its actual
efficient operation is government It has its being its
process and its subsistence by consuming and absorbing
into itself the separatist action of the household gods
the individualisation into insular independent
families which are under the management of womanland and by keeping them dissolved in the fluent
continuum of its own nature. The family at the same
time however is in general its element the individual
consciousness its universal operative basis Since the
community gets itself subsistence only by breaking in
upon family happiness and dissolving individual
selfconsciousness into the universal it creates its
enemy tor itself within its own gates creates it in
what it suppresses and what is at the same time essential to it womankind in general Womankind the
everlasting irony in the life of the community changes
by intrigue the universal purpose of government into
a private end transforms its universal activity into
a work of this or that specific individual and perverts
the universal property of the state into a possession
and ornament for the family Woman in this way
turns to ridicule the grave wisdom of maturity which
being dead to all particular aims to private pleasure
personal satisfaction and actual activity as well
thinks of and is concerned for merely what is universal
she makes this wisdom the laughingstock of raw and
wanton youth an object of derision and scorn unworthy of their enthusiasm She asserts that it is
everywhere the force of youth that really counts
she upholds this as of primary significance extols a
son as one who is the lord and master of the mother
who has borne him a brother as one in whom the
sister finds man on a level with herself a youth as
one through whom the daughter deprived of her
dependence on the family unity acquires the satisfaction and the dignity of wifehood
The community however can preserve itself only
by suppressing this spirit of individualism and because
the latter is an essential element the community like
wise creates it as well and creates it too by taking
up the attitude of seeking to suppress it as a hostile
principle Nevertheless since by cutting itself off
from the universal purpose this hostile element is
merely evil and in itself of no account it would be
quite ineffective if the community did not recognise
the force of youth manhood which while immature
still remains in the condition of particularity as the
force of the whole For the community the whole
is a nation it is itself individuality and really only is
something for itself by other individualities being for
it by its excluding these from itself and knowing itself
independent of them The negative side of the community suppressing the isolation of individuals within
its own bounds but originating activity directed beyond
those bounds finds the weapons of its warfare in individuals War is the spirit and form in which the essential
moment of ethical substance the absolute freedom of
ethical selfconsciousness from all and every kind of
existence is manifestly confirmed and realised While
on the one hand war makes the particular spheres of
property and personal independence as well as the
personality of the individual himself feel the force of
negation and destruction on the other hand this
engine of negation and destruction stands out as that
which preserves the whole in security The individual
who provides pleasure to woman the brave youth
the suppressed principle of ruin and destruction
comes now into prominence and is the factor of primary
significance and worth It is now physical strength
and what seems like the chance of fortune that decide
as to the existence of ethical life and spiritual necessity
Because the existence of the ethical life thus rests on
physical strength and the chances of fortune it is
eo ipso settled that its overthrow has come While
only household gods in the former case gave way
before and were absorbed in the national spirit here
the living individual embodiments of the national
spirit fall by their own individuality and disappear
in one universal community whose bare universality
is soulless and dead and whose living activity is
found in the particular individual qua particular The
ethical form and embodiment of the life of spirit has
passed away and another mode appears in its place
This disappearance of the ethical substance and its
transition into another mode are thus determined by
the ethical consciousness being directed upon the law
essentially in an immediate way It lies in this character of immediacy that nature at all enters into the
acts which constitute the ethical hfe Its realisation
simply reveals the contradiction and the germ of
destruction which He hid within that very peace and
beauty belonging to the gracious harmony and unbroken equilibrium of the ethical spirit For the
essence and meaning of this immediacy contains a
contradiction it is at once the unconscious peace of
nature and the selfconscious unresting peace of spirit
On account of this naturalness the ethical life of
a nation is in general a kind of individuality determined
by and therefore limited by nature and thus finds
its dissolution in and gives place to another type of
individuality This characteristic being given a positive
existence is a limitation but at the same time is the
negative element in general and the self of individuality
Since however this determinateness passes away
the life of spirit and this substance conscious of itself
in all its component individuals are lost The determinate character comes forth and stands apart as a formal
universality in the case of all the component individuals and no longer dwells within them as a living
spirit instead the uniform solidarity of its individuality
has burst into a plurality of separate points
A further step in the realisation of the principle of coherent sociality
is reached when the individual is invested with the universality of the
social order by definite enactments of the controlling agency of the
social whole His contingency as an individual is removed by his being
expressly treated as a focal unity of the whole order whose very existence is staked on maintaining him as a unit with a universal significance
and which stands or falls by maintaining him in this condition The
universal order is in this case no longer merely implicit merely a matter
of routine and custom it is openly and objectively expressed in and
through each individual component of society The form this takes is
the differentiation of the social substance into a totality of persons each
and all invested with express universal or legally acknowledged significance This is the sphere of legal personality or of individuality constituted by a system of Rights It is a supreme achievement of social
existence and the highest attainment of coherent social experience Hence
the present section
This is a condition or stage in every developed community But the
specific historical material for this section is derived from the lawconstituted social order of the Roman Empire especially the Empire under the
Antonines Here whether by coincidence or otherwise the culmination of
imperial rule and the golden age of law synchronised The triumph of
Roman imperial government and the perfecting of the system of Roman
jurisprudence were accomplished during the same period of time about
AD 131235 There is every reason to suppose that the two necessarily
arose and fell together and that the decline and disappearance of the
Roman lawconstituted state should thus prepare the way for a further
achievement of the social spirit of humanity Hence the historical justification for the transition to the next stage of social life that of selfdiscordant spiritual existence
The general comprehensive unity into which the
living immediate unity of individuality and the ethical
substance falls back is the soulless community
which has ceased to be the unself conscious substance
of individuals and in which they now each in his
separate individual existence count as selves and
substances with a being of their own The universal
being thus split up into the atomic units of a
sheer plurality of individuals this inoperative lifeless
spirit is a principle of equality in which all count
for as much as each ie have the significance of
Persons What in the realm of the ethical life was
called the hidden divine law has in fact come out of
concealment to the light of actuality In the former
the individual was and was counted actual merely
as a blood relation merely as sharing in the general
life of the family Qua particular individual he was
the selfless departed spirit now however he has
come out of his unreality Because the ethical substance is only objective true spirit only implies spirit
the individual on that account turns back to the immediate certainty of his own self he is that substance
qua positive universal but his actuality consists in being
a negative universal self
We saw the powers and forms of the ethical world
sink in the bare necessity of mere Destiny This
power of the ethical world is the substance turning
itself back into its ultimate and simple nature But
that absolute being turning back into itself that very
necessity of characterless Destiny is nothing else
than the Ego of selfconsciousness
This is taken henceforth as what is absolutely real
as the ultimate selfcontained reality To be so acknowledged is its substantiality but this is abstract
universality because its content is this rigid self not
the self dissolved in the substance
Personality then has here risen out of the life
and activity of the ethical substance It is the condition in which the independence of consciousness
has actual concrete validity The unrealised abstract
thought of such independence which arises through
renouncing actuality was at an earlier stage before
our notice in the form of Stoical selfconsciousness
Just as the latter was the outcome of Lordship and
Bondage 3 the mode in which selfconsciousness exists
immediately so personality is the outgrowth of the
immediate life of spirit which is the universal controlling
will of all as well as their dutiful obedience and
submissive service What in Stoicism was implicit
merely in an abstract way is now an explicit concrete world Stoicism is nothing else than the mood
of consciousness which reduces to its abstract form
the principle of legal status the principle of the sphere
of right an independence devoid of the qualities of
spirit By its flight from actuality it attained
merely the idea of independence it is absolutely subjective exists solely for itself in that it does not link
its being to anything that exists but rather wants to give up every kind of existence and places its essential
meaning in the unity of mere thinking In the same
manner the right of a person is not linked on to a
richer or more powerful existence of the individual qua
individual nor again connected with a universal living
spirit but rather is attached to the mere unit of its
abstract reality or to that unit qua selfconsciousness
in general
Now just as the abstract independence of Stoicism set
forth the stages of its actualisation so too this last form
of independence Personality will recapitulate the process of the former mode The former Stoicism passes
over into the state of sceptical confusion into a fickle
instability of negation which without adopting any permanent form strays from one contingent mode of being
and thinking to another dissipates them indeed in
absolute independence but just as readily creates their
independence once more In fact it is simply the
contradiction of consciousness claiming to be at once
independent and yet devoid of independence In like
manner the personal independence characteristic of
the sphere of right is really a similar universal confusion
and reciprocal dissolution of this kind For what passes
for the absolute essential reality is selfconsciousness
in the sense of the bare empty unit of the person As
against this empty universality the substance has the
form of what supplies the filling and the content and
this content is now left completely detached and disconnected for the spirit which kept it in subjection
and held it in its unity is no longer present The
empty unit of the person is therefore as regards its
reality an accidental existence a contingent insubstantial process and activity that comes to no durable IUL UB
subsistence Just as was the case in Scepticism the
formalism of right is thus by its very conception
without special content it finds at its hand the fact of
possession a fact subsisting in multiplicity and imprints thereon the abstract universality by which it is
called property the same sort of abstraction as
Scepticism made use of But while the reality so determined is in Scepticism called a mere appearance a
mere semblance and has merely a negative value in
the case of right it has a positive significance The
negative value in the former case consists in the real
having the meaning of self qua thought qua inherent
universal the positive significance in the latter case
however consists in its being mine in the sense of the
category as something whose validity is admitted recognised and actual Both are the same abstract universal The actual content the proper value of what is
mine whether it be an external possession or again
inner riches or poverty of mind and character is not
contained in this empty form and does not concern it
The content belongs therefore to a peculiar specific
power which is something different from the formal
universal is chance and caprice Consciousness of
right therefore in the course of the very process of
making its claim good finds that it loses its own reality
discovers its complete lack of inherent substantiality
and that to describe an individual as a person is to use
an expression of contempt
The free and unchecked power possessed by the
content takes determinate shape in this way The
absolute plurality of dispersed atomic personalities is
by the nature of this characteristic feature gathered
at the same time into a single centre alien t
them and just as devoid of the life of spirit
That central point is in one respect like the atomic
rigidity of their personality a merely particular
reality but in contrast to their empty particularity
it has the significance of the entire content and hence
is taken to be the essential element while again in
contrast to their pretended absolute but inherently
insubstantial reality it is the universal power and
absolute actuality This lord and master of the world
takes himself in this way to be the absolute person
comprising at the same time all existence within himself
for whom there exists no higher type of spirit He is a
person but the sole and single person who has challenged confronted and conquered all These all
constitute and establish the triumphant universality
of the one person for this particular as such is truly
what it is only qua universal plurality of particular
units cut off from this plurality the solitary and
single self is in fact a powerless and unreal self
At the same time it is the consciousness of the content which is antithetically opposed to that universal
personality This content however when liberated
from its negative power means chaos of spiritual
powers which when let loose as elemental independent
agencies break out into wild extravagances and excesses
and fall on one another in mad destruction Their helpless selfconsciousness is the powerless inoperative enclosure and the arena of their chaotic tumult But this
master and lord of the world aware of his being the
sum and substance of all actual powers is the titanic
selfconsciousness which takes itself to be the living
God Since however he exists merely qua formal self
which is unable to tame and subdue those powers his
procedure and his selfenjoyment are equally gigantic
extravagance
The lord of the world becomes really conscious of
what he is viz the universal might of actuality by
that power of destruction which he exercises against
the contrasted selfhood of his subjects For his power
is not the spiritual union and concord in which the
various persons might get to know their own selfconsciousness Rather they exist as persons separately
for themselves and all continuity with others is excluded from the absolute punctual atomicity of their
nature They are therefore in a merely negative
relation a relation of exclusion both to one another
and to him who is their principle of connection or
continuity Qua this continuity he is the essential
being and content of their formal nature a content
however foreign to them and a being hostile in
character which abolishes just what they take to be
their very essence viz bare subjectivity without any
content mere empty independent existence each on its
own account. And again qua the continuity of their
personality he destroys this very personality itself
Juridical personality thus finds itself rather without
any substance of its own, since content alien to it
is imposed on it and holds good within it and does
so there because such content is the reality of that
type of personality On the other hand the passion for
destroying and turning over everything on this unreal
field gains for itself the consciousness of its complete
supremacy But this self is barren desolation and
Cp with the above Hobbes Leviathan The historical reference
here is to the apotheosis of the Roman Emperors
hence is merely beside itself and is indeed the very
abandonment and rejection of its own selfconsciousness
Such then is the constitution of that aspect in
which selfconsciousness qua absolute being is actual
The consciousness however that is driven back
into itself out of this actuality thinks this its insubstantiality makes it an object of thought Formerly
we saw the stoical independence of pure thought pass
through Scepticism and find its true issue in the
unhappy consciousness the truth about what
constitutes its inherent and explicit nature its final
reality If this knowledge appeared at that stage
merely as the onesided view of a consciousness qua
consciousness here the actual truth of that view has
made its appearance The truth consists in the fact that
this universal accepted objectivity of self consciousness
is reality estranged from it This objectivity is the
universal actuality of the self; but this actuality
is directly the perversion of the self as well it is
the loss of its essential being The reality of the self
that was not found in the ethical world has been
gained by its reverting into the person What in the
case of the former was all harmony and union comes
now on the scene no doubt in developed form but selfestranged
SPIRIT IN SELFESTRANGEMENT THE DISCIPLINE OF The life of spirit as found in the social selfconsciousness has two
fundamental factors the universal spirit or social whole as such and the
individual member as such The interrelation of these constitutes the
spiritual existence of society Each by itself is abstract but the realisation of complete spiritual life through and in each is absolutely essential for
spiritual fulfilment In the preceding analysis of spirit one form of this
process has been considered the realisation of the objective social order
in and through individuals In the succeeding section with its various
subsections the other process of securing the same general result is
analysed we have the movement by which starting from the individual spirit the realisation of complete spiritual existence is established
The former starts from the compact solidarity of the social substance and
results in the establishment of separate and individually complete legal
personalities The latter process starts from the rigidly exclusive unity of
the individual self and issues in the establishment of a social order of
absolutely universal and therefore absolutely free wills Both processes
are per se abstract necessary though they are hence as we shall find
a further stage in the evolution of spirit has still to appear
The process of spirit in this second stage assumes from the start a
conscious contrast between the individual spirit and a universal spiritual
whole a contrast which while profound the individual seeks to remove
because the universality of spiritual existence which he seeks to attain is
implicitly involved in his very being as a spiritual entity His spiritual
life seems to begin with rent in twain so complete is the sense of the
opposition of these factors constituting his life His true life his objective
embodiment seems outside him altogether and yet is felt to be his own
self He seems estranged from his complete self and the estrangement
seems his own doing because the substance from which he is cut off is
felt to be his own The contrast is the deepest that spirit can possibly
experience just because spirit is and knows itself to be selfcontained and
self complete the only reality The contrast can only be removed by
effort and struggle for the individual spirit has to create or recreate for
itself and by its own activity a universal objective spiritual realm which it implies and in which alone it can be free and feel itself at home The
struggle spirit goes through is thus the greatest in the whole range of its
experience for the opposition to be overcome is the profoundest that
exists Since its aim is to achieve the highest for itself nothing sacred
can be allowed to stand in its way It will make any sacrifice and if
necessary produce the direst spiritual disaster a spiritual reign of
terror to accomplish its result
The movement of spirit here analysed covers every form of the individual's struggle for a substantial spiritual life It embraces the
intellectual economic religious and the ethical in the narrower
sense of these terms it embraces all that we mean by culture and
civilisation Hence the various parts of the argument spiritual discipline enlightenment the pursuit of wealth belief and superstition absolute freedom
The process of spiritual life passed under critical review here is familiar
to a greater or less extent in every age and every society But the
actual historical material present to the mind of the writer is derived
from the period of European history embracing the entrance of
Christianity and Christian philosophy into European civilisation after the
fall of the Roman Empire and the intellectual humanistic awakening
of the Renaissance which led on to the ecclesiastical revolution known as
the Reformation the rationalistic movement of the eighteenth century
the socalled Enlightenment which preceded and culminated in the
French Revolution the supreme outburst of spiritual emancipation known
in European history These two periods far removed as they are in time
have much in common They embody principles of spiritual development fundamentally alike and are therefore freely drawn upon in the
analysis regardless of historicity
Much of Hegels analysis of the first stage of this spiritual movement has also directly in view the character of Rameau in Diderots
dialogue Le neveu de Rameau This remarkable work was written in
1760 but was first brought to the notice of the literary public by Goethe
who translated and published the work in 1805 It thus came into
Hegels hands while he was writing the Phenomenology and this perhaps
accounts for the repeated references to it in the argument The term
self estranged spirit with which he heads this section occurs in Goethes
translation Rameau is an extreme type of such a spirit
The ethical substance preserved and kept opposition
enclosed within its simple conscious life and this consciousness was in immediate unity with its own
essential nature That nature has therefore the
simple characteristic of something merely existing
for the consciousness which is directed immediately
upon it and whose custom it is Consciousness does not stand for a particular excluding
self nor does the substance mean for it an existence
shut out from it with which it would have to establish
its identity only through estranging itself and yet at
the same time have to produce that estrangement But
that mind whose self is absolutely insular absolutely
discrete finds its content over against itself in the form
of a reality that is just as impenetrable as itself and
the world here gets the characteristic of being something external negative to selfconsciousness Yet
this world is a spiritual reality it is essentially the
fusion of individuality with being This its existence
is the work of selfconsciousness but likewise an
actuality immediately present and alien to it which
has a peculiar being of its own, and in which it does
not know itself This reality is the external element
and the free content of the sphere of legal right But
this external reality which the master of the world
of legal right takes control of is not merely this elementary irreducible entity casually lying before the self
it is his work but not in a positive sense rather
negatively so It preserves its existence by selfconsciousness of its own accord relinquishing itself and
giving up its essentiality the condition which in that
waste and ruin which prevail in the sphere of right the
external force of the elements let loose seems to bring
upon selfconsciousness These elements by themselves
are sheer ruin and destruction and cause their own overthrow This overthrow however this their negative
nature is just the self it is their subject their action
and their process Such process and activity again
through which the substance becomes actual are the
alienation of personality for the immediate self ie the
self without estrangement and holding good as it stands
is without substantial content and the sport of these
raging elements Its substance is thus just its relinquishment and the relinquishment is the substance
ie the spiritual powers forming themselves into a
coherent world and thereby securing their subsistence
The substance in this way is spirit selfconscious
unity of the self and the essential nature but both also
take each other to mean and to imply alienation Spirit
is consciousness of an objective reality which exists
independently on its own account. Over against
this consciousness stands however that unity of the
self with the essential nature consciousness pure and
simple over against actual consciousness On the one
side actual selfconsciousness by its selfrelinquishment
passes over into the real world and the latter back again
into the former On the other side however this
very actuality both person and objectivity is can
celled and superseded they are purely universal This
its alienation is pure consciousness or the essential
nature The present has at once its opposite in its
beyond which consists in its thinking and its being
thought just as this again has its opposite in what
is here in the present which is its actuality alienated
from it
Spirit in this case therefore constructs not merely one
world but a twofold world divided and selfopposed
The world of the ethical spirit is its own proper present
and hence every power it possesses is found in this
unity of the present and so far as each separates itself
from the other each is still in equilibrium with the
whole Nothing has the significance of a negative of
selfconsciousness even the spirit of the departed
is in the lifeblood of his relative is present in the self
of the family and the universal power of government
is the will the self of the nation Here however what is
present means merely objective actuality which has its
consciousness in the beyond each particular moment
as an essential entity receives this and thereby actuality
from an other and so far as it is actual its essential
being is something other than its own actuality Nothing has a spirit selfestablished and indwelling within
it rather each is outside itself in what is alien to it
The equilibrium of the whole is not the unity which
abides by itself nor its inwardly secured tranquillity
but rests on the alienation of its opposite The whole
is therefore like each particular moment a selfestranged reality It breaks up into two spheres
in one kingdom selfconsciousness is actually both the
self and its object and in another we have the kingdom
of pure consciousness which being beyond the former
has no actual present but exists for Faith is matter
of Belief Now just as the ethical world passes from
the separation of divine and human law with its various
forms and its consciousness gets away from the division
into knowledge and the absence of knowledge and returns into the principle which is its destiny into the self
which is the power to destroy and negate this opposition so too both these kingdoms of selfalienated
spirit will return into the self But while the former was
the first self holding good directly the particular person
this second which returns into itself from its selfrelinquishment will be the universal self the consciousness grasping the conception and these spiritual worlds
all of whose moments insist on being a fixed reality and
an unspiritual subsistence will be dissolved in the light
of pure Insight This insight being the self grasping
itself completes the stage of culture It takes up
nothing but the self and everything as the self ie it
comprehends everything extinguishes all objectiveness
and converts everything implicit into something explicit everything which has a being in itself into what
is for itself When turned against belief against faith
as the faraway region of inner being lying in the distant
beyond it is Enlightenment This enlightenment also terminates selfestrangement in this
region whither spirit in selfalienation turns to seek its
safety as to a region where it becomes conscious of a
peace adequate to itself Enlightenment upsets the
household arrangements which spirit carries out in the
house of faith by bringing in the goods and furnishings
belonging to the world of the Here and Now a world
which that spirit cannot refuse to accept as its own
property for its conscious life likewise belongs to that
world In this negative task pure insight realises itself
at the same time and brings to light its own proper
object the unknowable absolute Being and utility
Since in this way actuality has lost all substantiality
and there is nothing more implicit in it the kingdom
of faith as also that of the real world is overthrown
and this revolution brings about absolute freedom the
stage at which the spirit formerly estranged has gone
back completely into itself leaves behind this sphere
of culture and passes over into another region the land
of the inner or subjective moral consciousness The sphere of spirit at this stage breaks up into two
regions The one is its real world its selfestrangement
the other is constructed and set up in the ether of pure
consciousness and is exalted above the first This
second world being constructed in opposition and
contrast to that estrangement is just on that account
not free from it on the contrary it is only another
form of that very estrangement which consists precisely
in having a conscious existence in two sorts of worlds
and embraces both Hence it is not selfconsciousness
of Absolute Being in and for itself not Religion which
is here dealt with it is Belief Faith in so far as faith
is a flight from the actual world and thus is not a selfcomplete experience Such flight
from the realm of the present is therefore directly in
its very nature a dual state of mind Pure consciousness
is the sphere into which spirit rises but it is not only
the element of faith but of the notion as well Consequently both appear on the scene together at the
same time and the latter comes before us only in antithesis to the former
The spirit of this world is spiritual essence permeated
by a selfconsciousness which knows itself to be directly
present as a self existent particular and has that essence
as its objective actuality over against itself But the
existence of this world as also the actuality of selfconsciousness depends on the process that selfconsciousness divests itself of its personality by so doing
creates its world and treats it as something alien
and external of which it must now take possession
But the renunciation of its selfexistence is itself the
production of objective actuality and in doing so
therefore selfconsciousness ipso facto makes itself
master of this world
To put the matter otherwise selfconsciousness is
only something definite it only has real existence so
far as it alienates itself from itself By doing so it puts
itself in the position of something universal and this
its universality actualises it establishes it objectively
makes it valid This equality of the self with all selves
is therefore not the equality that was found in the case
of right selfconsciousness does not here as there
get immediate recognition and acknowledgment merely
because it is on the contrary its claim to be rests on
its having made itself by that mediating process of selfalienation conform to what is universal The spiritless
formal universality which characterises the sphere of
right takes up every natural form of character as well
as of existence and sanctions and establishes them
The universality which holds good here however is
one that has undergone development and for that
reason it is concrete and actual
The means then whereby an individual gets objective validity and concrete actuality here is the formative process of Culture The alienation on the part
of spirit from its natural existence is here the individuals true and original nature his very substance The relinquishment of this natural state is
therefore both his purpose and his mode of existence
it is at the same time the mediating process the transition of the thoughtconstituted substance to concrete
actuality as well as conversely the transition of determinate individuality to its essential constitution This
individuality moulds itself by culture to what it
inherently is and only by so doing is it then something
per se and possessed of concrete existence The extent
of its culture is the measure of its reality and its power
Although the self qua this particular self knows itself
here to be real yet its concrete realisation consists
solely in cancelling and transcending the natural self
The original determinateness of its nature is therefore
reduced to a matter of quantity to a greater or less
energy of will a nonessential principle of distinction But purpose and content of the self belong
to the universal substance alone and can only be
something universal The specific particularity of a given nature which becomes purpose and content
is something powerless and unreal it is a kind of
being which exerts itself foolishly and in vain to
attain embodiment it is the contradiction of giving
reality to the bare particular while reality is ipso
facto something universal If therefore individuality
is falsely held to consist in particularity of nature and
character then the real world contains no individualities
and characters individuals are all alike for one another
the pretence of individuality in that case
is precisely the mere presumptive existence
which has no permanent place in this world where only
renunciation of self and therefore only universality
get actual reality What is presumed or conjectured to
be passes therefore simply for what
it is for a kind of being Kind is not quite the
same as Espece the most horrible of all nicknames
for it signifies mediocrity and denotes the highest
degree of contempt f A kind and to be good of
its kind are German expressions which add an air of
honesty to this meaning as if it were not so badly
meant and intended after all or which indeed do not
yet involve a clear consciousness of what kind and
what culture and reality are
That which in reference to the particular individual
appears as his culture is the essential moment of
spiritual substance as such viz the direct transition
of its ideal thoughtconstituted universality into
actual reality or otherwise put culture is the single
soul of this substance in virtue of which the essen
Espece se dit de personues auxquelles on ne trouve ni qualite ni
merite Littre tially inherent becomes something explicitly
acknowledged and assumes definite objective existence The process in which an individuality cultivates
itself is therefore ipso facto the development of
individuality qua universal objective being that
is to say it is the development of the actual
world This world although it has come into being
by means of individuality is in the eyes of selfconsciousness something that is directly alienated and
estranged and for selfconsciousness takes on the form
of a fixed undisturbed reality But at the same time
selfconsciousness is sure this is its own substance and
proceeds to take it under control This power over its
substance it acquires by culture which looked at from
this aspect appears as selfconsciousness making itself
conform to reality and doing so to the extent permitted
by the energy of its original character and talents
What seems here to be the individuals power and force
bringing the substance under it and thereby doing
away with that substance is the same thing as the
actualisation of the substance. For the power of the
individual consists in conforming itself to that substance
ie in emptying itself of its own self and thus establishing itself as the objectively existing substance Its
culture and its own reality are therefore the process of
making the substance itself actual and concrete
The self is conscious of being actual only as transcended as cancelled The self does not here constitute
the unity of consciousness of self and object rather
this object is negative as regards the self By means
of the self qua inner soul of the process the substance
is so moulded and worked up in its various moments
that one opposite puts life into the other each opposite
by its alienation from the other gives the other stability
and similarly gets stability from the other At the
same time each moment has its own definite nature
in the sense of having an insuperable worth and significance and has a fixed reality as against the other
The process of thought fixes this distinction in the
most general manner possible by means of the absolute
opposition of good and bad which are poles
asunder and can in no way become one and the same
But the very soul of what is thus fixed consists in its
immediate transition to its opposite its existence
lies really in transmuting each determinate element into
its opposite and it is only this alienation that constitutes the essential nature and the preservation of the
whole We must now consider this process by which
the moments are thus made actual and give each other
life the alienation will be found to alienate itself and
the whole thereby will take all its contents back
into the ultimate principle it implies
At the outset we must deal with the substance
pure and simple in its immediate aspect as an organisation of its moments they exist there but are inactive
their soul is wanting We have here something like
what we find in nature Nature we find is resolved
and spread out into separate and separable elements
air water fire earth Of these air is the unchanging
factor purely universal and transparent water the
reality that is for ever being dissolved and given up
fire its pervading active unity which is ever dissolving
opposition into unity as well as breaking up simple
unity into opposite constituents earth is the tightly
compact knot of these separated factors the subject
in which these realities are where their processes take
effect that which they start from and to which they
return In the same way the inner essential nature
the simple life of spirit that pervades selfconscious
reality is resolved spread out into similar general areas
or masses spiritual masses in this case and appears as
a whole organised world In the first area or mass it is
the inherently universal spiritual being selfidentical
in the second it is selfexistent being it has become
inherently selfdiscordant sacrificing itself abandoning itself the third which takes the form of selfconsciousness is subject and possesses in its very
nature the fiery force of dissolution In the first
case it is conscious of itself, as immanent and implicit
as existing per se in the second it finds independence
selfexistence developed and carried out
by means of the sacrifice of what is universal But
spirit itself is the self containedness and self completeness of the whole which splits up into substance
qua constantly enduring and substance engaged in selfsacrifice and which at the same time resumes substance
again into its own unity a whole which is at once a
flame of fire bursting out and consuming the substance
as well as the abiding form of the substance consumed
We can see that the areas of spiritual reality here
referred to correspond to the Community and the
Family in the ethical world without however possessing the native familiarity of spirit which the latter
have On the other hand if destiny is alien to this spirit
selfconsciousness is and knows itself here to be the
real power underlying them
We have now to consider these separate members
of the whole in the first instance as regards the way
they are presented qua thoughts qua essential inherent
entities falling within pure consciousness and also
secondly as regards the way they appear as objective
realities in concrete conscious life
In the first form the simplicity of content found in
pure consciousness the real is the Good the selfidentical
immediate unchanging and primal nature of every consciousness the independent spiritual power inherent in
its essence alongside which the activity of the mere
selfexistent consciousness is only byplay Its other
is the passive spiritual being the universal so far
as it parts with its own claims and lets individuals
get in it the consciousness of their particular existence
it is a state of nothingness a being that is null and
void the Bad This absolute breakup of the real into
these disjecta membra is itself a permanent condition
while the first member is the foundation startingpoint and result of individuals which are there purely
universal the second member on the other hand is
a being partly sacrificing itself for another and on
that very account is partly their incessant return to
self qua individual and their constant development of
a separate being of their own
But secondly these bare ideas of Good and Bad are
similarly and immediately alienated from one another
they are actual and in actual consciousness appear as
moments that are objective In this sense the first
state of being is the Power of the State the second its
Resources or Wealth The statepower is the simple
spiritual substance as well as the achievement of all
the absolutely accomplished fact wherein individuals
find their essential nature expressed and where their
particular existence is simply and solely a consciousness
of their own universality It is likewise the achievement and simple result from which the sense of its
having been their doing has vanished it stands as
the absolute basis of all their action where all their
action securely subsists This simple pervading substance of their life owing to its thus determining their
unalterable selfidentity has the nature of objective
being and hence only stands in relation to and exists
for another It is thus ipso facto inherently the
opposite of itself Wealth or Eesources Although
wealth is something passive is nothingness it is
likewise a universal spiritual entity the continuously created result of the labour and action of all
just as it is again dissipated into the enjoyment of
all In enjoyment each individuality no doubt becomes
aware of selfexistence aware of itself as particular
but this enjoyment is itself the result of universal action
just as reciprocally wealth calls forth universal labour
and produces enjoyment for all The actual has
through and through the spiritual significance of being
directly universal Each individual doubtless thinks he
is acting in his own interests when getting this enjoyment for this is the aspect in which he gets the sense
of being something on his own account and for that
reason he does not take it to be something spiritual
Yet looked at even in external fashion it becomes
manifest that in his own enjoyment each gives enjoyment to all in his own labour each works for all as
well as for himself and all for him His selfexistence
is therefore inherently universal and selfinterest is
merely a supposition that cannot get the length of
making concrete and actual what it means or sup
poses viz to do something that is not to further the
good of all
Thus then in these two spiritual potencies selfconsciousness finds its own substance content and
purpose it has there a direct intuitive consciousness
of its twofold nature in one it sees what it is inherently
in itself in the other what it is explicitly for itself At the same time qua spirit it is the negative
unity uniting the subsistence of these potencies with the
separation of individuality from the universal or that
of reality from the self Dominion and wealth are
therefore before the individual as objects he is aware
of ie as objects from which he knows himself to be
detached and between which he thinks he can choose
or even decline to choose altogether In the form of this
detached bare consciousness he stands over against the
essential reality as one which is merely there for him
He then has the reality qua essential reality within
itself In this bare consciousness the moments of the
substance are taken to be not statepower and wealth but
thoughts the thoughts of Good and Bad But further
selfconsciousness is a relation of his pure consciousness
to his actual consciousness of what is thought to the
objective being it is essentially Judgment What is
Good and what is Bad has already been brought out in
the case of the two aspects of actual reality by determining what the aspects primarily are the one is statepower the other wealth But this first judgment this
first distinction of content cannot be looked at as a
spiritual judgment for in that first judgment the
one side has been characterised as only the inherently
existing or positive and the other side as only
the explicit selfexistent and negative But qua
spiritual realities each permeates both moments pervades both aspects and thus their nature is not exhausted in those specific characteristics positive and
negative The selfconsciousness that has to do with
them is selfcomplete is in itself and for itself It must
therefore relate itself to each in that twofold form in
which they appear and by so doing this nature of
theirs which consists in being selfestranged determinations will come to light
Now selfconsciousness takes that object to be good
and to exist per se in which it finds itself and that
to be bad when it finds the opposite of itself there
Goodness means its identity with objective reality
badness their disparity At the same time what is for
it good and bad is per se good and bad because
it is just that in which these two aspects of being per
se and of being for it are the same it is the real
indwelling soul of the objective facts and the judgment
is the evidence of its power within them a power which
makes them into what they are in themselves What
they are when spirit is actively related to them their
identity or nonidentity with spirit that is their real
nature and the test of their true meaning and not how
they are identical or diverse taken immediately in themselves apart from spirit ie not their inherent being
and selfexistence in abstracto The active relation of
spirit to these moments which are first put forward
as objects to it and thereafter pass by its action into
what is essential and inherent becomes at the same
time their reflection into themselves in virtue of
which they obtain actual spiritual existence and their
spiritual meaning comes to light But as their first
immediate characteristic is distinct from the relation of
spirit to them the third determinate moment their
own proper spirit is also distinguished from the
second moment Their second inherent nature Das
zweite Ansich derselben their essentiality which comes
to light through the relation of spirit to them
must in the first instance turn out different from the
immediate inherent nature for indeed this mediating
process of spiritual activity puts in motion the immediate characteristic and turns it into something
else
As a result of this process the selfcontained conscious mind doubtless finds now in the Power of the
State its reality pure and simple and its subsistence
but it does not find its individuality as such it finds its
inherent and essential being but not what it is for
itself Rather it finds there its action qua individual
action rejected and denied and subdued into obedience
The individual thus recoils before this power and turns
back into himself it is the reality that suppresses
him and is the bad For instead of being identical
with him that with which he is at one it is something
utterly in discordance with individuality In contrast
with this Wealth and Riches are the good they tend
to the general enjoyment they are there simply to be
disposed of and they ensure for every one the consciousness of his particular self Riches means in its very
nature universal beneficence if it refuses any benefit
in a given case and does not gratify every need this
is merely an accident which does not detract from its
universal and necessary nature of imparting to every
individual his share and being a thousandhanded
benefactor and badness with a content which is the reverse of what
they had for us Selfconsciousness has up till now
however been related to its objects only incompletely
viz only according to the criterion of the self-existent
But consciousness is also real in its inherent nature and
has likewise to take this aspect for its point of view and
criterion and by so doing round off completely the
judgment of selfconscious spirit According to this
aspect statepower expresses its essential nature the
power of the state is in part the quiet insistence of law
in part government and prescription which appoints
and regulates the particular processes of universal
action The one is the substance pure and simple the
other its action which animates and sustains itself and
all individuals The individual thus finds therein his
ground and nature expressed organised and exercised
As against this the individual by the enjoyment of
riches does not get to know his own universal nature
he only gets a transitory consciousness and enjoyment
of himself qua particular and selfexisting and discovers
his discordance his want of harmony with his own
essential nature The conceptions good and bad thus
receive here a content the opposite of which they had
before
These two ways of judging find each of them an
identity and a disagreement In the first case consciousness finds the power of the state out of agreement with it
and the enjoyment that came from wealth in accord
with it while in the second case the reverse holds
good There is a twofold attainment of identity
and a twofold form of disagreement there is an
opposite relation established towards both the essential
realities We must pass judgment on these different
ways of judging as such to this end we have to
apply the criterion already brought forward The
conscious relation where identity or agreement is
found is according to this standard the good that
where want of agreement obtains the bad These two
types of relation must henceforth be regarded as modes
or forms of conscious existence Conscious life through
taking up a different kind of relation thereby becomes
itself characterised as different comes to be itself good
or bad It is not simply distinct in virtue of the fact
that it took as its constitutive principle either existence
for itself or mere being in itself for both are
equally essential moments of its life that dual way
of judging above discussed presented those principles
as separated and contained therefore merely abstract
ways of judging Concrete actual conscious life has
within it both principles and the distinction between
them falls solely within its own nature, viz inside the
relation of itself to the real
This relation takes opposite forms in the one there
is an active attitude towards statepower and wealth
as to something with which it is in accord in the other it
is related to these realities as to something with which
it is at variance A conscious life which finds itself at
one with them has the attribute of Nobility In the
case of the public authority of the state it beholds
what is in accord with itself and sees that it has there
its own nature pure and simple and the region for the
exercise of its own powers and takes up the position
of open willing and obedient service in its interests
as well as that of inner reverence towards it In the
same way in the sphere of wealth it sees that wealth
secures for it the consciousness of selfexistence of
realising the other essential aspect of its nature hence
it looks upon wealth likewise as something essential in
relation to itself acknowledges him from whence the
enjoyment comes as a benefactor and considers itself
under a debt of obligation
The conscious life involved in the other relation again
that of disagreement has the attribute of Baseness It
remains at variance with both those essential elements
It looks upon the authoritative power of the state as a
chain as something suppressing its separate existence
for its own sake and hence hates the ruler obeys only
with secret malice and stands ever ready to burst out
in rebellion It sees too in wealth by which it attains
to the enjoyment of its own independent existence
merely something discordant or out of harmony with
its permanent nature since through wealth it only gets
a sense of its particular isolated existence and a consciousness of passing enjoyment this type of mind
loves wealth but despises it and with the disappearance
of enjoyment of what is inherently evanescent regards
its relation to the man of wealth as having ceased too
These relations now express in the first instance, a
judgment the determinate characterisation of what both
those facts statepower and wealth are as objects for
consciousness not as yet what they are in their
complete objective nature The
reflection which is presented in this judgment is partly
at first for us who are philosophising an affirmation
of the one characteristic along with the other and
hence is a simultaneous cancelling of both it is not
yet the reflection of them for consciousness itself
Partly again they are at first immediate essential
entities they have not become this nor is there in
them consciousness of self that for which they are is
not yet their animating principle they are predicates
which are not yet themselves subject On account
of this separation the entirety of the spiritual
process of judgment also breaks asunder into two
existent modes of consciousness each of which has
a onesided character Now just as at the outset the
indifference of the two aspects in the process of selfestrangement one of which was the inherent essential
being of pure consciousness viz the determinate
ideas of good and bad the other their actual existence in the form of statepower and wealth passed
to the stage of being related the one to the other
passed to the level of judgment in the same way this
external relation must be raised to the level of their
inner unity must become a relation of thought to
actual reality In this way the spirit animating both
the forms of judgment will make its appearance This
takes place when judgment passes into inference
becomes the mediating process in which the middle
term necessitating and connecting both sides of the
judgment is brought forward
The noble type of consciousness then finds itself in
the judgment related to statepower in the sense
that this power is indeed not a self as yet but at first
is universal substance in which however this form of
mind feels its own essential nature to exist is conscious of
its own purpose and absolute content By taking up a
positive relation to this substance it assumes a negative
attitude towards its own special purposes its particular content and individual existence and lets
them disappear This type of mind is the heroism of
Service the virtue which sacrifices individual being
to the universal and thereby brings this into existence
the type of personality which renounces possession and
enjoyment acts for the sake of the prevailing power
and becomes a concrete reality in this way
Through this process the universal becomes united
and bound up with existence in general just as the
individual consciousness makes itself by this renunciation essentially universal That from which this consciousness alienates itself by submitting to serve is its
consciousness immersed in mere existence but the being
alienated from itself is the inherent nature By thus
shaping its life in accord with what is universal it
acquires a Reverence for itself and gets reverence
from others The power of the state however which
to start with was merely universal in thought the
inherent nature becomes through this very process
universal in fact becomes actual power It is actually
so only in getting that actual obedience which it obtains
through selfconsciousness judging it to be the essential
reality and through the self being freely surrendered
to it The result of this action binding the essential
reality and self indissolubly together is to produce a
twofold actuality a self that is truly actualised and a
statepower whose authority is accepted as true
Owing to this alienation implied in the idea of
sacrifice statepower however is not yet a selfconsciousness that knows itself as statepower It
is merely the law of the state its inherent principle that is accepted the statepower has as yet
no particular will For as yet the selfconsciousness
rendering service has not alienated its pure selfhood and made it an animating influence in the
exercise of statepower the serving attitude merely
gives the state its bare being sacrifices merely
its existence to the state not its essential nature
This type of selfconsciousness passes thus for something that is in conformity with the essential nature
and is acknowledged and accepted because of its inherent reality The others find their essential nature
operative in it but not their independent existence
find their thinking their pure consciousness fulfilled
but not their specific individuality It has a value
therefore in their thoughts and is honoured accordingly Such a type is the haughty vassal he is active
in the interests of the statepower so far as the latter
is not a personal will a monarch but merely an
essential will His selfimportance lies only in the
honour thus acquired only in the general opinion thinking of his concern for the essential will not in an individuality gratefully thinking of his services for he has
not helped this individuality the monarch to get independence The language he would use were he to
occupy a direct relation to the personal will of the
statepower which thus far has not arisen would take
the form of counsel imparted in the interests of
what is the best for all
Statepower has therefore still at this stage no
will to meet the advice and does not decide between
the different opinions as to what is universally the best
It is not yet governmental control and on that account
is in truth not yet real statepower Individual selfexistence the possession of an individual will that
is not yet qua will surrendered is the inner separatist spiritual principle of the various classes and
stations a spirit which keeps for its own behoof
what suits itself best in spite of its words about
the universal best and this claptrap about what
is universally the best tends to be made a substitute for action bringing it about The sacrifice of
existence which takes place in the case of service
is indeed complete when it goes so far as death But
the constant danger of a death which the individual
survives leaves a specific kind of existence and hence
a particular selfreference still untouched and this
makes the counsel imparted in the interests of the
universally best ambiguous and open to suspicion
it really means in point of fact, retaining the claim
to a private opinion of his own and a separate individual
will as against the power of the state Its relation to
the latter is therefore still one of discordance and
it possesses the characteristic found in the case of the
base type of consciousness it is ever at the point of
breaking out into rebellion
This contradiction which has to be got rid of in
this form of discordance and opposition between the
independence of the individual conscious life and
the universality belonging to stateauthority contains
at the same time another aspect That renunciation
of existence when it is complete as it is in death
is one that does not revert to the conscious life that
makes the sacrifice it simply is this conscious life
does not survive the renunciation and exist by itself as
an objective fact it merely passes away
in the unreconciled opposition That alone is true
sacrifice of individuality therefore in which it gives itself
up as completely as in the case of death but all the
while preserves itself in the renunciation It comes
thereby to be actually what it is implicitly the identical
unity of self with its opposed self In this way by the
inner withdrawn and separatist spiritual principle the
self as such coming forward and abrogating itself the
statepower becomes ipso facto raised into a proper self
of its own without this alienation of self the deeds of
honour the actions of the noble type of consciousness
and the counsels which its insight reveals would continue to maintain the ambiguous character which as
we saw kept that secret reserve of private intention
and selfwill in spite of its overt pretensions
This estrangement however takes place in Language
in words alone and language assumes here its peculiar
role Both in the sphere of the general social order
where language conveys laws and commands and in the sphere of actual life where it appears as conveying advice the content of what it
expresses is the essential reality and language is the form
of that essential content Here however it takes
the form in which qua language it exists to be its content and possesses authority qua spoken word it is
the power of utterance qua utterance which just in
speaking performs what has to be performed For
it is the existence of a pure self qua self in speech
the particular selfexistent selfconsciousness comes as
such into existence so that its particular individuality
is something for others Ego qua this particular pure
ego is nonexistent otherwise in every other mode of
expression it is absorbed in some concrete actuality
and appears in a shape from which it can withdraw
it turns reflectively back into itself away from its act as
well as from its physiognomic expression and leaves
such an incomplete existence in which there is always
at once too much as well as too little lying soulless behind Speech however contains this ego in its
purity it alone expresses I qua self Its existence in
this case is qua existence a form of objectivity which has
in it the true nature of existence Ego is this particular
ego but at the same time universal its appearing
is ipso facto and at once the alienation and disappearance of this particular ego and in consequence its
remaining all the while universal The I that expresses itself is apprehended as an ego it is a kind
of infection in virtue of which it establishes at once a
unity with those who are aware of it a spark that
kindles a universal consciousness of self That it is
perceived as a fact by others means eo ipso that
its existence is itself dying away this its otherness
is taken back into itself and its existence lies just in
this that qua selfconscious Now as it exists it has
no subsistence and that it subsists just through its
disappearance This disappearance is therefore itself
ipso facto its continuance it is its own cognition of
itself and its knowing itself as something that has
passed into another self that has been perceived and
apprehended and is universal
Spirit maintains this form of reality here because
the extremes too whose unity spirit is have directly
the character of being realities each on its own
account. Their unity is disintegrated into rigid aspects each of which is an actual object for the
other and each is excluded from the other The
unity therefore appears in the role of a mediating
term which is excluded and distinguished from the
separated reality of the two sides it has therefore
itself the actual character of something objective
apart and distinguished from its aspects and objective
for them ie the unity is an existent objective fact The spiritual substance comes as such into existence only
when it has been able to take as its aspects those selfconsciousnesses which know this pure self to be a reality
claiming immediate validity and therein immediately
know too that they are such realities merely through
the process of alienation Through that pure self
the moments of substance get the transparency of a
selfknowing category and become clarified so far as
to be moments of spirit through the mediating process
spirit comes to exist in spiritual form Spirit in this way
is the mediating term presupposing those extremes
and produced through their existence but it is also
the spiritual whole breaking out between them
which sunders its self into them and creates each
solely in virtue of that contact with the whole which
belongs to its very principle The fact that both
extremes are from the start and in their very nature
transcended and disintegrated brings out their unity
and this is the process which fuses both together interchanges their characteristic features and binds them
together and does so in each extreme This mediating
process consequently actualises the principle of each
of the two extremes or makes what each is inherently
in itself its controlling and moving spirit
Both extremes the stateauthority and the noble
type of consciousness are disintegrated by this latter
In statepower the two sides are the abstract universal
which is obeyed and the individual will existing on its
own account, which however does not yet belong to
the universal itself In nobility the two sides are
the obedience in giving up existence or the inherent
maintenance of selfrespect and honour and on the
other hand a self which exists purely for its own sake
and whose selfexistence is not yet done away with
the selfwill that remains always in reserve These
two moments into which the extremes are refined
and which therefore find expression in language
are the abstract universal which is called the universal
best and the pure self which by rendering service
abrogated the life of absorption in the manifold variety
of existence Both in principle are the same for
pure self is just the abstract universal and hence their
unity acts as their mediating term But the self is to
begin with actual only in consciousness as one extreme
while the inherent nature is actualised in
stateauthority as the other extreme That statepower
not merely in the form of honour but in reality should
be transferred to it is lacking in the case of consciousness while in the case of stateauthority there is
lacking the fact that it was obeyed not merely as a
socalled universal best but as will in other words,
as statepower which is the self regulating and deciding The unity of the principle in which statepower still remains and into which consciousness
has been refined becomes real in this mediating process and this exists qua mediating term in the simple
form of speech All the same the aspects of this
unity are not yet present in the form of two selves
as selves for statepower comes first to be inspired with
active selfhood This language is therefore not yet
spiritual existence in the sense in which spirit completely knows and expresses itself
Nobility of consciousness because the extreme form
of self assumes the role of creating the language by
which the separate factors related are formed into
active spiritual wholes The heroism of dumb service
passes into the heroism of flattery This reflection
of service in express language constitutes the selfconscious selfdisintegrating mediating term and reflects back into itself not only its own special extreme
but reflects the extreme of universal power back into
this self too and makes that power which is at first
implicit into an independent selfexistence and gives
it the individualistic form of selfconsciousness Through
this process the indwelling spirit of this statepower
comes into existence that of an unlimited monarch
It is unlimited the language of flattery raises
power into transparent clearlyacknowledged universality this moment being the product of language
of transparent spiritualised existence is a purified
form of self identity It is a monarch for flattering
language likewise puts individualistic selfconsciousness
on its pinnacle what conscious nobility abandons
as regards this aspect of pure spiritual unity is
the pure essential nature of its thought its ego
itself The naked particularity of its ego which
otherwise is only imagined flattery brings out more
definitely into relief as an actual existence by giving
the monarch a proper name For it is in the name
alone that the distinction of the individual from every
one else is not imagined but is actually made by all
By having a name the individual passes for a pure
individual not merely in his own consciousness of himself but in the consciousness of all By its name
then the monarch becomes absolutely detached from
every one exclusive and solitary and in virtue of it is
unique as an atom that cannot commute any part of its
essential nature and has nothing like itself This name
is thus its reflection into itself or is the actual reality
which universal power has inherently within itself
through the name the power is the monarch Conversely he this particular individual thereby knows
himself this individual self to be universal power
knows that the nobles not only are ready and prepared for the service of the stateauthority but are
grouped as an ornamental setting round the throne
and that they are for ever telling him who sits thereon
what he is
The language of their professed praise is in this way
the spirit that unites together the two extremes in
the case of statepower itself This language reflects
in itself the abstract power and gives to it the
moment peculiar to the other extreme an isolated
self of its own, willing and deciding on its own
account, and consequently gives it selfconscious existence Or again by that means this selfconscious
particular being comes to be aware of itself for certain
as the supreme authority This power is the central
focal self into which through relinquishing their own
inner certainty of self the many separate centres of selfhood are fused together into one
Since however this proper spirit of statepower
subsists by getting its realisation and its nourishment
from the homage of action and thought rendered by
the nobility it is a form of independence in internal
selfestrangement The noble the extreme form of
self existence keeps back the other extreme of actual
universality and keeps it back for the universality
of thought which was relinquished The power of
the state has passed over to and fallen upon the noble
It falls to the noble primarily to make the state
Cp Letat cest moi
authority truly effective in his existence as a self on
his own account that authority ceases to be the inert
being it appeared to be qua extreme of abstract and
merely implicit reality
Looked at per se statepower reflected back into
itself or becoming spiritual means nothing else than
that it has come to be a moment of selfconscious life
ie is only by being sublated Consequently it is now
the real in the sense of something whose spiritual meaning lies in being sacrificed and squandered it exists
in the sense of wealth It continues no doubt to
subsist at the same time as a form of reality over
against wealth into which in principle it is forever
passing but it is a reality whose inherent principle
is this very process of passing over owing to the
service and the reverence rendered to it and by
which it arises into its opposite into the condition of relinquishing its power Thus from its point
of view the special and peculiar self which
constitutes its will becomes by the selfabasement of
the nobility a universal that renounces itself becomes
completely an isolated particular a mere accident
which is the prey of every stronger will What remains
to it of the universally acknowledged and incommunicable independence is the empty name
While then the nobility may adopt the attitude of
something that can in a similar way stand related to the
universal power its true nature lies rather in retaining
its own separateness of being when rendering its service
but in what is properly the abnegation of its personality its true being lies in actually cancelling and rending
in pieces the universal substance Its spirit is the
attitude of thoroughgoing discordance
on one side it retains its own will in the honour it
receives on the other hand it gives up its will in part
it alienates its inner nature from itself and arrives
at the extreme of discordance with itself in part it
subdues the universal substance to itself and puts this
entirely at variance with itself. It is obvious that as a
result its own specific nature which kept it distinct
from the socalled base type of mind disappears and
with that this latter type of mind too The base type
has gained its end that of subordinating universal
power to selfcentred isolation of self
Endowed in this way with universal power selfconsciousness exists in the form of universal beneficence
or from another point of view universal power is wealth
that again is itself an object for consciousness For
wealth is here taken to be the universal put in subjection which however through this first transcendence
is not yet absolutely returned into the self Self has
not as yet its self as such for object but the universal
essential reality in a state of sublation Since this
object has first come into being the relation of consciousness towards it is immediate and consciousness
has thus not yet set forth its want of congruity with
this object we have here the nobility preserving its
own selfcentred existence in the universal that has
become nonessential and hence acknowledging the
object and feeling grateful to its benefactor
Wealth has within it from the first the aspect of selfexistence It is not the selfless universal
of statepower or the unconstrained simplicity of the
natural life of spirit it is statepower as holding its
own by effort of will in opposition to a will that wants
to get the mastery over it and get enjoyment out of it
But since wealth has merely the form of being essential this onesided selfexistent life which has no
being in itself which is rather the sublation of inherent
being is the return of the individual into himself to
find no essential reality in his enjoyment It thus itself
needs to be given animation and its reflective process
of bringing this about consists in its becoming something real in itself as well as for itself instead of
being merely for itself wealth which is the sublated
essential reality has to become the essentially real
In this way it preserves its own spiritual principle in
itself
It will be sufficient here to describe the content of
this process since we have already explained at length
its form Nobility then stands here in relation not
to the object in the general sense of something essential what is alien to it is selfexistence itself It finds
itself face to face with its own self as such in a state of
alienation as an objective solid actuality which it has
to take from the hands of another selfcentred being
another equally fixed and solid entity Its object is
selfexistence ie its own being but by being an object
this is at the same time ipso facto an alien reality
which is a selfcentred being on its own account, has a
will of its own ie it sees its self under the power of
an alien will on which it depends for the concession of
its self
From each particular aspect selfconsciousness can
abstract and for that reason even when under
an obligation to one of these aspects retains the
recognition and inherent validity of selfconsciousness
as an independent reality Here however it finds
that as regards its own ego its own proper and
peculiar actuality it is outside itself and belongs to
an other finds its personality as such dependent on
the chance personality of another on the accident of a
moment of an arbitrary caprice or some other sort of
irrelevant circumstance
In the sphere of legal right what lies in the power
of the objective being appears as an incidental content
from which it is possible to make abstraction and the
governing power possessed does not affect the self as
such rather this self is recognised But here the self sees
its selfcertainty as such to be the most unreal thing of
all finds its pure personality to be absolutely without
the character of personality The sense of its gratitude is therefore a state in which it feels profoundly
this condition of being utterly outcast and feels also
the deepest revolt as well Since the pure ego sees itself
outside self and torn in sunder everything that gives
continuity and universality everything that bears the
name of law good and right is thereby torn to pieces
at the same time and goes to wreck and ruin all
identity and concord break up for what holds sway is
the purest discord and disunion what was absolutely
essential is absolutely unessential what has a being on
its own account has its being outside itself the pure
ego itself is absolutely disintegrated
Thus since this consciousness receives back from
the sphere of wealth the objective form of being a
separate selfexistence and cancels that objective
character it is in principle not only like the preceding reflection not completed but is consciously unsatisfied the reflection since the self receives itself as an
objective fact is the immediate contradiction that has
taken root in the pure ego as such Qua self however
it at the same time ipso facto rises above this contradiction it is absolutely elastic and again cancels this
sublation of itself repudiates this repudiation of itself
wherein its selfexistence is made to be something alien
to it revolts against this acceptance of itself and in the
very reception of itself is selfexistent
Since then the attitude of this type of consciousness
is bound up with this condition of utter disintegration
the distinction constituting its spiritual nature that
of being nobility and opposed to baseness falls away
and both aspects are the same
The spirit of welldoing that characterises the action
of wealth may further be distinguished from that of
the conscious life accepting the benefit it confers and
deserves special consideration
The spirit animating wealth had an unreal insubstantial independence wealth was something to be given
up By communicating what it has however it passes
into something essential and inherent since it fulfils its
nature in sacrificing itself it cancels the aspect of particularity of merely seeking enjoyment for ones own
particular self and being thus sublated qua particular
the type of spirit here is universality or essentially real
What it imparts what it gives to others is selfexistence It does not hand itself over however as a
natural selfless object as the frankly and freely offered
condition of unconscious life but as selfconscious as
a reality keeping hold of itself it is not like the power
of an inorganic element which is felt by the consciousness receiving its force to be inherently transitory it
is the power over self a power aware that it is independent and voluntary and knowing at the same time that
what it dispenses becomes the self of some one else
Wealth thus shares reprobation with its clientele
but in place of revolt appears arrogance For in
one aspect it knows as well as the self it benefits
that its selfexistence is a matter of accident but
itself is this accident in whose power personality is
placed In this mood of arrogance which thinks it
has secured through a dole an alien ego nature
and thereby brought its inmost being into submission it overlooks the secret rebellion of the other
self it overlooks the fact of all bonds being completely cast aside overlooks this pure disintegration in which the selfidentity of what exists for
its own sake having become sheer internal discordance
all oneness and concord all subsistence is rent asunder
and in which in consequence the thoughts and intentions of the benefactor are the first to be shattered
It stands directly in front of this abyss cleaving
it to the innermost this bottomless pit where every
solid base and stay have vanished and in the depths
it sees nothing but a common thing a display of whims
on its part a chance result of its own caprice Its
spirit consists in quite unreal imagining in being superficiality forsaken of all true spiritual import
Just as selfconsciousness had its own manner of
speech in dealing with statepower in other words, just
as spirit took the form of expressly and actually mediating between these two extremes selfconsciousness has
also a mode of speech in dealing with wealth but
still more when in revolt does it adopt a language of
its own. The form of utterance which supplies wealth
with the sense of its own essential significance and
thereby makes it master of itself is likewise the language
of flattery but of ignoble flattery for what it gives
out to be the essential reality it knows to be a reality
without an inherent nature of its own, to be something
at the mercy of another The language of flattery
however as already remarked is that of a onesided
spirit To be sure its constituent elements are on the
one hand a self moulded by service into a shape where
it is reduced to bare existence and on the other the
inherent reality of the power dominating the self
Yet the bare principle the pure conception in which
the mere self and the inherent reality that
pure ego and this pure reality or thought are one
and the same thing this conceptual unity of the
two aspects between which the reciprocity takes effect
is not consciously felt when this language is used
The object is consciously still the inherent reality
in opposition to the self in other words, the object is
not for consciousness at the same time its own proper
self as such
The language expressing the condition of disintegration wherein spiritual life is rent asunder is however
the perfect form of utterance for this entire stage of
spiritual culture and development the formative process
of moulding selfconsciousness and expresses
the spirit in which it most truly exists This selfconsciousness which finds befitting the rebellion that
repudiates its own repudiation is eo ipso absolute selfidentity in absolute disintegration the pure activity
of mediating pure selfconsciousness with itself. It
is the oneness expressed in the identical judgment
where one and the same personality is subject as well
as predicate But this identical judgment is at the
same time the infinite judgment for this personality
is absolutely split in two and subject and predicate
are entities utterly indifferent one to the other which
have nothing to do with each other with no necessary
unity so much so that each has the power of an independent personality of its own. What exists as
a self on its own account has for its object its
own selfexistence which is object in the sense of an
absolute other and yet at the same time directly in
the form of itself itself in the sense of an other not
as if this had an other content for the content is the
same self in the form of an absolute opposite with
an existence completely all its own and indifferent
We have then here the spirit of this real world
of formative culture conscious of its own nature as
it truly is and conscious of its ultimate and essential
principle
This type of spiritual life is the absolute and universal
inversion of reality and thought their entire estrangement the one from the other it is pure culture What
is found out in this sphere is that neither the concrete
realities statepower and wealth nor their determinate conceptions good and bad nor the consciousness
of good and bad the consciousness that is noble and
the consciousness that is base possess real truth it
is found that all these moments are inverted and transmuted the one into the other and each is the opposite
of itself
The universal power which is the substance
since it gains a spiritual nature peculiarly its own
through the principle of individuality accepts the
possession of a self of its own merely as a name by
which it is described and even in being actual power
is really so powerless as to have to sacrifice itself
But this selfless reality given over to another this
self that is turned into a thing is in fact the return
of the reality into itself it is a selfexistence that is
there for its own sake the existential form of spirit
The principles belonging to these realities the thoughts
of good and bad are similarly transmuted and reversed
in this process what is characterised as good is bad
and vice versa The consciousness of each of these
moments by itself the conscious types judged as noble
and base these are rather in their real truth similarly the reverse of what these specific forms should be
nobility is base and repudiated just as what is repudiated
as base turns round into the nobleness that characterises
the most highly developed form of free selfconsciousness
Looked at formally everything is likewise in its
external aspects the reverse of what it is internally
for itself and again it is not really and in truth what
it is for itself but something else than it wants to be
selfexistence on its own account is strictly speaking
the loss of self and alienation of self is really selfpreservation
The state of things brought about here then is
that all moments execute justice on one another all
round each is just as much in a condition of inherent
alienation as it fancies itself in its opposite and in this
way reverses its nature
Spirit truly objective however is just this unity
of absolutely separate moments and in fact comes
into existence as the common ground the mediating
agency just through the independent reality of these
selfless extremes Its very existence lies in universal
talk and depreciatory judgment rending and tearing
everything before which all those moments are broken
up that are meant to signify something real and to
stand for actual members of the whole and which at
the same time plays with itself this game of selfdissolution This judging and talking is therefore the
real truth which cannot be got over while it overpowers everything it is that which in this real world
is alone truly of importance Each part of this world
comes to find there its spirit expressed or gets to be
spoken of with spirit and finds said of it what it is
The honest soul takes each moment as a permanent
and essential fact and is an uncultivated unreflective
condition which does not think and does not know that
it is just doing the very inverse The distraught and
disintegrated soul is however aware of inversion it
is in fact a condition of absolute inversion the conceptual principle predominates there brings together
into a single unity the thoughts that lie far apart in
the case of the honest soul and the language clothing
its meaning is therefore full of esprit and wit
The content uttered by spirit and uttered about
itself is then the inversion and perversion of all conceptions and realities a universal deception of itself
and of others The shamelessness manifested in stating
this deceit is just on that account the greatest truth
This style of speech is the madness of the musician who
piled and mixed up together some thirty airs Italian
French tragic comic of all sorts and kinds now in a
deep undertone he descended to the depths of hell then
contracting his throat to a high piping falsetto he rent
the vault of the skies raving and soothing haughtily imperious and mockingly j eering by turns The placid
soul that in simple honesty of heart takes the music
of the good and true to consist in harmony of
sound and uniformity of tone ie in a melodious
chord regards this style of expression as a fickle
fantasy of wisdom and folly a melee of so much skill
and low cunning composed of ideas as likely to be right
as wrong with as complete a perversion of sentiment
with as much consummate shamefulness in it as absolute frankness candour and truth It is not able
to refrain from bringing out the sound of every note
and running up and down the whole gamut of feeling
from the depths of contempt and repudiation to the
highest pitch of admiration and stirring emotion
A vein of the ridiculous will be diffused through the
latter which takes away from their nature the
former will find in their very candour a strain of
atoning reconcilement will find in their shuddering
depths the allpowerful qualities which give spirit a
self
If we consider by way of contrast to the mode of
utterance indulged in by this selftransparent distracted
type of mind the language adopted by that simple
placid consciousness of the good and the true we find
that it can only speak in monosyllables when face to
face with the frank and selfconscious eloquence of the
mind developed under the influence of culture for
it can say nothing to the latter that the latter does
not know and say If it gets beyond speaking in
monosyllables then it says the same thing that the
cultivated mind expresses but in doing so commits t The philosopher in Diderots Dialogue
in addition the folly of imagining that it is saying
something new something different Its very syllables
disgraceful base are this folly already for the other
says them of itself This latter type of mind perverts
in its mode of utterance everything that sounds the
same because this selfsameness is merely an abstraction
but in its actual reality is intrinsically and inherently
perversion On the other hand again the unsophisticated mind takes under its protection the good and
the noble ie what retains its identity of meaning in
being objectively expressed and takes care of it in the
only way here possible that is to say the good must
not lose its value because it may be linked with what is
bad or mingled with it for to be thus associated with
badness is its condition and necessity and the wisdom
of nature lies in this fact Yet this unsophisticated
mind while it intended to contradict has merely
in doing so gathered into a trifling form the meaning of what spirit said and put it in a manner which
by turning the opposite of noble and good into the
necessary condition of noble and good means in an
unthinking way to state something else than that
the socalled noble and good is by its very nature the
reverse of itself or that what is bad is conversely
something excellent
If the naive consciousness makes up for this barren
soulless idea by the concrete reality of what is excellent
when it produces an example of what is excellent
whether in the form of a fictitious case or a true story
and thus shows it to be not an empty name but an
actual fact then the universal reality of perverted
action stands in sharp contrast to the entire real world
where that example constitutes merely something quite isolated and particular merely an espece a sort
of thing And to represent the existence of the good
and the noble as an isolated particular anecdote
whether fictitious or true is the bitterest thing that
can be said about it
Finally should the naive mind require this entire
sphere of perversion to be dissolved and broken up it
cannot ask the individual to withdraw out of it for even
Diogenes in his tub with his pretence of withdrawal
is under the sway of that perversion and to ask this
of the particular individual is to ask him to do precisely what is taken to be bad viz to care for the self as
particular But if the demand to withdraw is directed
at the universal individual it cannot mean that reason
must again give up the culture and development of
spiritual conscious life which has been reached that
reason should let the extensive riches of its moments
sink back into the naivete of natural emotion and
revert and approximate to the wild condition of the
animal consciousness which is also called the natural
state of innocence On the contrary the demand for
this dissolution when addressed to the spirit realised in
culture can only mean that it must qua spirit return
out of its confusion into itself and win for itself a
still higher level of conscious life
In point of fact, however spirit has already accomplished this result To be conscious of its own distraught
and torn condition and to express itself accordingly
this is to pour scornful laughter on its existence on
the confusion pervading the whole and on itself as well
it is at the same time this whole confusion dying away
and yet apprehending itself to be doing so This
selfapprehending vanity of all reality and of every
definite principle reflects the real world into itself in a
twofold form in the particular self of consciousness
qua particular and in the pure universality of consciousness in thought According to the one aspect
mind thus come to itself has directed its gaze into the
world of actual reality and makes that reality its own
purpose and its immediate content from the other
side its gaze is in part turned solely on itself and
against that world of reality in part turned away from
it towards heaven and its object is the region beyond
the world
In respect of that return into self the vanity of all
things is its own peculiar vanity it is itself vain It is
self existing for its own sake a self that knows not only
how to sum up and chatter about everything but with
esprit and wit to hit off the contradiction that lies
in the heart of the all so solid seeming reality and the
fixed determinations which judgment sets up and that
contradiction is their real truth Looked at formally it
finds everything estranged from itself selfexistence
is cut off from essential being what is
intended and the purpose are separated from real
truth and from both again existence for another what
is ostensibly put forward is cut off from the proper
meaning the real fact the true intention
It thus knows exactly how to put each moment in
antithesis to every other knows in short how to express
correctly the perversion that dominates all of them
it knows better than each what each is no matter
how it is constituted Since it apprehends what
is substantial from the side of that disunion and
contradiction of elements combined within its nature
but not from the side of this union itself it under
stands very well how to pass judgment on this
substantial reality but has lost the capacity of truly
grasping it
This vanity needs at the same time the vanity of all
things in order to get from them consciousness of itself
it therefore itself creates this vanity and is the soul
that supports it Statepower and wealth are the
supreme purposes of its strenuous exertion it is aware
that through renunciation and sacrifice it is moulded
into universal shape that it attains universality and
in possessing universality finds general recognition and
acceptance statepower and wealth are the real and
actually acknowledged sources of power But its gaining acceptance thus is itself vain and just by the fact
that it gets the mastery over them it knows them to be
not real by themselves knows rather itself to be the
power within them and them to be vain and empty
That in possessing them it thus itself is able to stand
apart from and outside them this is what it expresses
in spirited languages and to express this is therefore
its supreme interest and the true meaning of the whole
process In such utterance this self in the form of
a pure self not associated with or bound by determinations derived either from reality or thought comes
consciously to be a spiritual entity having a truly
universal significance and value It is the condition in
which the nature of all relationships is rent asunder and
it is the conscious rending of them all But only by selfconsciousness being roused to revolt does it know its own
peculiar torn and shattered condition and in its knowing this it has ipso facto risen above that condition In
that state of selfconscious vanity all substantial content
comes to have a negative significance which can no
longer be taken in a positive sense The positive object
is merely the pure ego itself and the consciousness
that is rent in sunder is inherently and essentially this
pure selfidentity of selfconsciousness returned to
itself
The spiritual condition of selfalienation exists in the
sphere of culture as a fact But since this whole has
become estranged from itself there lies beyond this
sphere the nonactual region of pure consciousness of
thought Its content consists of what has been reduced
purely to thought its absolute element is thinking
Since however thinking is in the first instance the
element of this sphere consciousness has merely these
thoughts but it does not as yet think them or does not
know that they are thoughts to consciousness they
appear in the form of presentations they are objects
in the form of ideas For it comes out of the sphere
of actuality into that of pure consciousness but is
itself still to all intents and purposes in the sphere
of actuality with the determinateness that implies
The conscious state of being rent and torn to pieces is
still essentially and inherently the selfidentity of
pure consciousness not as a fact that itself is aware
of but only as presented to us who are considering its
condition It has thus not as yet completed within
itself the process of rising above this condition it is
simply there and it still has within itself the opposite
The contrast between these two elements is found both in the preReformation period and in the eighteenth century period in the latter
the contrast assumes perhaps its acutest form principle by which it is conditioned without as yet
having become master of that principle through a
mediating process Hence the essential content of its
thought is not taken to be an essential object merely
in the form of abstract immanence Ansich but in the
form of a common object an object that has merely
been elevated into another element without having
lost the character of an object that is not constituted
by thought
It is essentially distinct from the immanent nature
which constitutes the essential being of the stoic type
of consciousness The significant factor for Stoicism
was merely the form of thought as such which has
any content foreign to it that is drawn from reality
In the case of the consciousness just described
however the form of thought is not the significant
element Similarly it is essentially distinct from the
inherent principle of the virtuous type of conscious life
here the essential fact stands no doubt in a relation
to reality it is the essence of reality itself but it
is no more than an unrealised essence of it In
the above type of consciousness the essence although
no doubt beyond reality stands all the same for an
actual real essence In the same way the inherently
right and good which reason as lawgiver establishes
and the universal operating when consciousness tests
and examines laws neither of these has the character
of actual reality
Hence while pure thought fell within the sphere of
spiritual culture as an aspect of the estrangement
characteristic of this sphere as the standard in fact
for judging abstract good and abstract bad it has
become enriched by having gone through the process
of the whole with the element of reality and thereby
with content This reality of its essential being however is at the same time merely a reality of pure
consciousness not of concrete actual consciousness
it is no doubt lifted into the element of thought but
this concrete consciousness does not yet take it for a
thought it is beyond the reality peculiar to this consciousness for it means flight from the latter
In the form in which Religion here appears
for it is religion obviously that we are speaking
about as the belief which belongs to the realm
of culture religion does not yet appear as it is truly
and completely It has already
come before us in other phases viz as the unhappy consciousness as a form of conscious process
with no substantial content in it So too in the
case of the ethical substance it appeared as a belief
in the netherworld But a consciousness of departed
spirits is strictly speaking not belief not the inner
essence subsisting in the element of pure consciousness
away beyond the actual there the belief has itself an
immediate existence in the present its element its
substance is the family
But at the stage we are now considering religion is
in part the outcome of the substance, and is the pure
consciousness of that substance in part this pure
consciousness is alienated from its concrete actual
consciousness the essence from its existence It is thus
doubtless no longer the insubstantial process of consciousness but it has still the characteristic of opposition to reality qua the given reality in general and of
opposition to the reality of selfconsciousness in particular It is essentially therefore merely a belief
This pure consciousness of Absolute Being is a consciousness in alienation Let us see more closely what is
the characteristic of that whose other it is we can only
consider it in connection with this other In the first
instance this pure consciousness seems to have over
against it merely the world of actuality But since
its nature is to flee from this actuality and thereby is
characterised by opposition it has this actuality inherent
within its own being pure consciousness is therefore
essentially in its very being selfalienated and belief
constitutes merely one side of it The other side has
already arisen too For pure consciousness is reflection
out of the world of culture in such a way that the
substantial content of this sphere as also the separate
fragments into which it falls are shown to be what they
inherently are essential modes of spiritual life absolutely restless processes or determinate moments which
are at once cancelled in their opposite Their essential
nature bare consciousness is thus the bare simplicity
of absolute distinction distinction which as it stands
is no distinction Consequently it is pure selfexistence
not of a particular self but essentially universal self
whose being consists in a restless process invading and
pervading the stable existence of actual fact In it is
found the certainty that knows itself at once to be the
truth there we have pure thought in the sense of
absolute notion with all its power of negativity which
annihilates every objective existence that would claim
to stand over against consciousness and turns it into
a form of conscious existence
This pure consciousness is at the same time simple
and undifferentiated as well just because its distinction
is no distinction Being this form of bare and simple
reflection into self however it is the element of belief
in which spirit has the special feature of positive
universality of what is inherent and essential in contrast
with that selfexistence on the part of selfconsciousness
Forced back upon itself away from this unsubstantial world whose being is mere dissolution spirit in
its undivided unity is when we consider its true
meaning at once the absolute movement the ceaseless
process of negating its appearance as well as the essential substance thereof satisfied within itself and the
positive stability of that appearance But bearing as
they inherently do the characteristic of alienation both
these moments fall apart in the shape of a twofold
consciousness The former is pure Insight the spiritual
process concentrated and focussed in selfconsciousness
a process which has over against it the consciousness
of something positive the form of objectivity or presentation and which directs itself upon this presented
object The proper and peculiar object of this insight
is however merely pure ego The bare consciousness
of the positive element of unbroken selfidentity finds
its object on the other hand in the inner reality as
such
Pure insight has therefore in the first instance, no
content within it because it exists for itself by
negating everything in it to belief on the other hand
belongs the content but without insight While the
former does not get away from selfconsciousness the
latter to be sure has its content as well in the element
of pure self consciousness but only in presentation not
in conceptions in pure consciousness not in pure selfconsciousness Belief is as a fact in this way pure consciousness of the essential reality ie of the bare
and simple inner nature and is thus thought the
primary factor in the nature of belief which is generally
overlooked The immediateness which characterises
the presence of the essential reality within it is due
to the fact that its object is essence inner nature
ie pure thought f This immediateness however so
far as thinking enters consciousness or pure consciousness enters into selfconsciousness maintains the significance of an objective being that lies beyond consciousness
of self It is because of the significance which immediacy and simplicity of pure thought thus retain in
consciousness that the essential reality in the case of
belief drops into being an objectively presented idea
instead of being the content of thought
and comes to be looked at as a supersensible world
which is essentially an other for selfconsciousness
In the case of pure insight on the other hand the
entrance of pure thought into consciousness has the
opposite character objectivity has the significance
of a content that is merely negative that cancels
itself and returns into the self that is to say only the
self is properly object to self or to put it otherwise
the object only has truth so far as it has the form of
self
As belief and pure insight fall in common within
pure consciousness they also in common involve the
minds return out of the concrete sphere of spiritual
culture There are three aspects therefore from
which they show what they are In one aspect each
is outside every relation and has a being all its own
in another each takes up an attitude towards the
concrete actual world standing in antithesis to pure
consciousness while in the third form each is related
to the other inside pure consciousness
In the case of belief the aspect of complete being of
being inandforitself is its absolute object whose
content and character we have already come to know
For it lies in the very notion of belief that this object
is nothing else than the real world lifted into the universality of pure consciousness The articulation of
this world therefore constitutes the organisation belonging to pure universality also except that the
parts in the latter case do not alienate one another
when spiritualised but are complete realities all by
themselves are spirits returned into themselves and
selfcontained
The process of their transition from one into the
other is therefore only for us who are analysing
the process an alienation of the characteristic nature
in which their distinction lies and only for us the
observers does it constitute a necessary series for
belief however their distinction is a static diversity
and their movement simply a historical fact
To deal shortly with the external character of their
form as in the world of culture statepower or the
good was primary so here the first and foremost
moment is Absolute Being spirit absolutely selfcontained so far as it is simple eternal substance f But
in the process of realising its constitutive notion which
consists in being spirit that substance passes over into
The persons of the Trinity
t God transcendent God as Substance
a form where it exists for an other its self identity
becomes actual Absolute Being actualised in selfsacrifice it becomes a self but a self that is transitory and
passes away Hence the third stage is the return of
self thus alienated the substance thus abased into its
first primal simplicity of nature Only when this is
done is spirit presented and manifested as spirit f
These distinct ultimate Realities when brought back
by thought into self out of the flux of the actual world
are changeless eternal spirits whose being lies in thinking the unity which they constitute While thus
torn away from selfconsciousness these Realities all
the same lay hold on it for if the Ultimate Reality
were to be fixed and unmoved in the form of the first
bare and simple substance it would remain alien to
selfconsciousness But the laying aside the emptying of this substance and afterwards its spirit involves the element of concrete actuality and thereby
participates in the believing selfconsciousness or the
believing attitude of consciousness belongs to the real
world
According to this second condition the believing type
of consciousness partly finds its actuality in the real
world of culture and constitutes its spirit and its
existence which have been described partly however belief takes up an attitude of opposition to this
its own actuality looks on this as something vain
and is the process of cancelling and abolishing it
This process does not consist in the believing consciousness having ingenious views about the perverted
condition of that reality for it is bare and simple t God as Absolute Spirit and Subject
consciousness which reckons esprit and wit as something vain and empty because this still has the real
world for its purpose On the contrary in opposition
to its placid realm of thought stands concrete actuality
as a soulless form of existence which on that account
has to be overcome in external fashion This obedience
through service and rewards by cancelling senseknowledge and action brings out the consciousness of unity
with the self complete and self existing Being though
not in the sense of an actual perceived unity This
service is merely the incessant process of producing the
sense of unity a process that never completely reaches
its goal in the actual present The religious communion
no doubt does so for it is universal selfconsciousness
But for the individual selfconsciousness the realm of
pure thought necessarily remains something away
beyond its sphere of reality or again since this
remote region by the emptying the kenosis of the
eternal Being has entered the sphere of actuality its
actuality is sensuous nonconceptual But one sensuous
actuality is ever indifferent and external to another and
what lies beyond has thus only received the further
character of remoteness in space and time. The essential notion however the concrete actuality of spirit
directly present to itself remains for belief an inner
principle which is all and effects all but never itself
comes to the light
In the case of pure insight however the principle
the essential notion is alone the real and this
third aspect of belief that of being an object for pure
insight is the specific relation in which the notion here
appears Pure insight itself has similarly to be considered partly by itself partly in re
lation to the real world so far as the real world is still
present in positive shape viz in the form of a sense of
vanity and lastly in that relation to belief already
mentioned
We have already seen what pure insight by itself
is Belief is unperturbed pure consciousness of spirit
as the ultimate Reality pure insight is the selfconsciousness of spirit as the ultimately real it knows
the essentially real therefore not qua essence but qua
Absolute Self Its aim thus is to cancel every other
kind of independence which falls without selfconsciousness whether that be the independence of the actually
objective or of the inherently real and to mould it into
conceptual form It is not merely the certainty of selfconscious reason assured of being all truth it knows
that it is so
In the form, however in which the notion of pure
insight meets us first it is not yet realised As a
phase of consciousness it appears in consequence as
something contingent as something isolated and particular and its inmost constitutive nature appears as
some purpose that it has to carry out and realise
It has to begin with the intention of making pure
insight universal ie of making everything that is
actual into a notion and a notion for every selfconsciousness The intention is pure for its content
is pure insight and this insight is similarly pure
for its content is merely the absolute notion which
finds no opposition in an object and is not restricted
in itself In the unrestricted notion there are found at
once both the aspects that everything objective is
to signify the selfexistent selfconsciousness and that
this is to signify something universal that pure insight
is to be the property of all selfconsciousnesses This
second feature of the intention is so far a result of
culture in that in culture the distinctions of objective
spirit the parts and express determinations of its world
have come to naught as well as the distinctions which
appeared as originally determinate natures Genius
talent special capacities in general belong to the world
of actuality in so far as this world contains still the
aspect of being a herd of selfconscious individuals
where in confusion and mutual violence individuals
cheat and struggle with one another over the contents
of the real world
The above distinctions doubtless have no place in it
as genuine especes Individuality neither is contented
with unreal fact nor has special content and purposes
of its own. It signifies merely something universally
acknowledged and accepted viz cultivated and developed and the question of distinction is reduced to
a matter of less or more energy a distinction of quantity
ie a nonessential distinction This last difference
however has come to nothing by the fact that the
distinction in the state where consciousness was completely torn asunder turned round into an absolutely
qualitative distinction What is there the other for the
ego is merely the ego itself In this infinite judgment
all the onesidedness and peculiarity of the original
selfexisting self is extinguished the self knows itself
qua pure self to be its own object and this absolute
identity of both sides is the element of pure insight
Pure insight therefore is the simple ultimate being
undifferentiated within itself and at the same time the
universal achievement and production and a universal
possession of all In this simple spiritual substance
selfconsciousness gives itself and maintains for itself in
every object the sense of this its own particularity or
of action just as conversely the individuality of selfconsciousness is there identical with itself and universal
This pure insight is then the spirit that calls to
every consciousness be for yourself what you are
essentially in yourself rational
The peculiar object on which pure insight directs
the active force of the notion is belief this being a form
of pure consciousness like itself and yet opposed to it in
that element But at the same time pure insight has a
relation to the actual world for like belief it is a return
from the actual world into pure consciousness We
have first of all to see how its activity is constituted
as contrasted with the impure intentions and the perverted forms of insight found in the actual world t
We have touched already on the placid type of conscious life which stands in contrast to this turmoil of
alternate selfdissolution and selfevolution it constitutes the aspect of pure insight and intention
This unperturbed consciousness however as we saw
has no special insight regarding the sphere of culture
The latter has itself rather the most painful feeling
and the truest insight about itself the feeling that
everything made secure crumbles to pieces that every
element of its existence is shattered to atoms and every
bone broken moreover it consciously expresses this feeling in words pronounces judgment and gives luminous
utterance concerning all aspects of its condition Pure
Enlightenment is the universalisation of the principle
of pure insight and hence is logically the outcome of the preceding
analysis
insight therefore can have here no activity and content
of its own, and thus can only take up the formal
attitude of truly apprehending this ingenious insight
proper to the world and the language it adopts Since
this language is a scattered and broken utterance and
the pronouncement a fickle mood of the moment which
is again quickly forgotten and is only known to be a
whole by a third consciousness this latter can be
distinguished as pure insight only if it gathers those
several scattered traces into a universal picture and
then makes them the insight of all
By this simple means pure insight will resolve the
confusion of this world For we have found that the
fragments and determinate conceptions and individualities are not the essential nature of this actuality
but that it finds its substance and support alone in the
spirit which exists qua judging and discussing and that
the interest of having a content for this ratiocination
and parleying to deal with alone preserves the whole
and the fragments into which it falls In this language
which insight adopts its selfconsciousness is still particular a self existing for its own sake but the emptiness of its content is at the same time emptiness of the
self knowing that content to be vain and empty Now
since the consciousness placidly apprehending all these
sparkling utterances of vanity makes a collection of
the most striking and penetrating phrases the soul
that still preserves the whole the vanity of witty
criticism goes to ruin with the other form of vanity
the previous vanity of existence The collection shows
most people a better wit or at least shows every
one a more varied wit than their own and shows
that better knowledge and judging in general aresome
thing universal and are now universally familiar
Thereby the single and only interest which was still found
is done away with and individual light is resolved
into universal insight
Still however knowledge of essential reality stands
secure above vain and empty knowledge and pure
insight to begin with appears in genuinely active form
in so far as it enters into conflict with belief
The various negative forms which consciousness
adopts the attitude of scepticism and that of theoretical
and practical idealism are inferior attitudes compared
with that of pure insight and the expansion of pure
insight enlightenment for pure insight is born of the
substance of spirit it knows the pure self of consciousness to be absolute and enters into conflict with the
pure consciousness of the Absolute Being of all reality
Since belief and insight are the same pure consciousness but in form are opposed the reality in the case
of belief being a thought not a notion and hence something absolutely opposed to selfconsciousness while the
reality in the case of pure insight is the self they are
such that inter se the one is the absolute negative of the
other
As appearing the one against the other all content
falls to belief for in its unperturbed element of
thought each moment obtains definite subsistence
Pure insight however is in the first instance without
any content it involves rather the complete disappearance of content but by its negative attitude
towards what it excludes it will make itself real and
give itself a content
It knows belief to be opposed to insight opposed
to reason and truth Just as for it belief is in general
a tissue of superstitious prejudices and errors so it
further sees the consciousness embracing all this content
organised into a realm of error in which false insight
is the general sphere of consciousness immediate
naively unperturbed and inherently unreflective Yet
all the while this false insight does have within it
the moment of selfreflection the moment of selfconsciousness separated from its simple naivete and keeps
this reflection in the background as an insight remaining by itself and as an evil intention by which that
that former conscious state is befooled That mental
sphere is the victim of the deception of a Priesthood
which carries out its envious vanity jealous of being
alone in possession of insight and carries out its
other selfish ends as well At the same time this
priesthood conspires with Despotism which takes up
the attitude of being the synthetic crude
unity of the real and this ideal kingdom a singularly
amorphous and inconsistent type of being and stands
above the bad insight of the multitude and the bad
intention of the priests and even combines both of
these within itself As the result of the stupidity and
confusion produced amongst the people by the agency
of priestly deception despotism despises both and
draws for itself the advantage of undisturbed control
and the fulfilment of its desires its humours and its
whims Yet at the same time it is itself in this same
state of murky insight is equally superstition and error
Enlightenment does not attack these three forms of
the enemy without distinction For since its essential
nature is pure insight which is per se universal its
true relation to the other extreme is that in which it
is concerned with the common and identical element in
both The aspect of individual existence isolating itself
from the universal naive consciousness is the antithesis
of it and cannot be directly affected by it The will
of a deceiving priesthood and an oppressive despot is
therefore not primarily the object on which it directs
its activity its object is the insight that is without
will and without individualised isolated selfexistence
the notion of rational selfconsciousness
which has its existence in the total mental sphere
but is not yet there in the fullness of its true
meaning Since however pure insight rescues
this genuinely honest form of insight with its naive
simplicity of nature from prejudices and errors it
wrests from the hands of bad intention the effective
realisation of its powers of deception for the exercise
of which the incoherent and undeveloped
consciousness of the general sphere provides the basis
and raw material while isolated selfexistence finds its
substance in the simple consciousness as a whole
The relation of pure insight to the naive consciousness of absolute Reality has now a double aspect On
one side pure insight is inherently one and the same
with it On the other side however this naive consciousness lets absolute Reality as well as its parts dispose
themselves at will in the simple element of its thought
and subsist there and lets them hold only as its inherent
nature and hence hold good in objective form In this
immanent being it disowns however independent existence for its own sake In so far as according to the
first aspect this belief is for pure insight inherently
and essentially pure selfconsciousness and has to
become so expressly merely for itself pure insight
finds in this constitutive notion of belief the element
in which instead of false insight it realises itself
Since from this point of view both are essentially
the same and the relation of pure insight takes effect
through and in the same element the communication
between them is direct and immediate and their give
and take an unbroken interfusion Whatever pins and
bolts may be otherwise driven into consciousness it is in
itself this simplicity of nature in which everything is
resolved forgotten and unconstrained and which
therefore is absolutely amenable to the activity of the
notion. The communication of pure insight is on that
account comparable to a silent extension or the expansion say of vapour in the unresisting atmosphere It is
a penetrating infection which did not previously make
itself noticeable as something distinct from and opposed
to the indifferent medium into which it insinuates its
way and hence cannot be averted Only when the infection has become widespread is that consciousness alive
to it which unconcernedly yielded to its influence For
what this consciousness received into itself was doubtless
something simple homogeneous and uniform throughout it but was at the same time the simplicity of selfreflected negativity which later on also develops by its
nature into something opposed and thereby reminds
consciousness of its previous state This simple uniformity is the notion which is simple knowledge that
knows both itself and its opposite this opposite being
however cancelled as opposite within the selfknowledge of the notion. In the condition therefore in
which consciousness becomes aware of pure insight
this insight is already widespread The struggle with
it betrays the fact that the infection has done its work
The struggle is too late and every means taken
merely makes the disease worse for the disease has
seized the very marrow of spiritual life viz consciousness in its ultimate principle or its
pure inmost nature itself There is therefore no
power left in conscious life to surmount the disease
Because it affects the very inmost being whatever individual expressions remain are repressed and allowed
to subside and the superficial symptoms are smothered
This is immensely to its advantage for it does not
now squander its power in useless fashion nor does
it show itself unworthy of its true nature which is
the case when it breaks out into symptoms and particular eruptions antithetic to the content of belief
and the connexion of its external reality Rather
being now an invisible and unperceived spirit it
insinuates its way through and through the noble
parts and soon has got complete hold over all the
vitals and members of the unconscious idol and then
some fine morning it gives its comrade a shove with
the elbow when bash crash and the idol is lying
on the floor On some fine morning whose noon
is not red with blood if the infection has penetrated
to every organ of spiritual life It is then the memory
alone that still preserves the dead form of the spirits
previous state as a vanished history vanished men
know not how And the new serpent of wisdom raised
on high before bending worshippers has in this manner
painlessly stripped off merely a shrivelled skin
But this silent steady working of the loom of spirit
in the inner region of its substance its own action hidden from itself is merely one side of the realising
of pure insight Its expansion does not only consist
in like going along with like and its realisation is not
merely an unresisted expansion The action of the
principle of negation is at the same time essentially a
developed process of selfdistinction which being a
conscious action must set forth its moments in a
definitely manifested expression and must make its
appearance in the form of sheer noise and a violent
struggle with an opposite as such
We have therefore to see how pure insight and pure
intention maintains its negative attitude towards that
other which it finds standing opposed to it
Pure insight and intention operating negatively
can only be since its very principle is all essentiality
and there is nothing outside it the negative of itself.
As insight therefore it passes into the negative of pure
insight it becomes untruth and unreason and as intention it passes into the negative of pure intention becomes
a lie and sordid impurity of purpose
It involves itself in this contradiction by the fact
that it engages in a strife and thinks to do battle with
some alien external other It merely imagines this for
its nature as absolute negativity lies in having that
otherness within its own self The absolute notion is
the category it is the principle that knowledge and
the object of knowledge are the same In consequence
what pure insight expresses as its other what it pronounces to be an error or a lie can be nothing else than
its own self it can only condemn what itself is What
is not rational has no truth or what is not comprehended
through a notion conceptually determined is not
When reason thus speaks of some other than itself is it
in fact speaks merely of itself it does not therein go
beyond itself
This struggle with the opposite therefore combines
in its meaning the significance of being its own actualisation This consists just in the process of unfolding its
moments and taking them back into itself One part
of this process is the making of the distinction in which
the insight of reason opposes itself as object to itself
so long as it remains in this condition it is at variance
with itself Qua pure insight it is without any content
the process of its realisation consists in itself becoming
content to itself for no other can be made its content
because it is the category become selfconscious But
since this insight in the first instance thinks of the
content as in its opposite and knows the content
merely as a content and does not as yet think of it as
its own self pure insight misconceives itself in it The
complete attainment of insight therefore has the
sense of a process of coming to know that content as
its own which was to begin with opposed to itself
Its result however will be thereby neither the reestablishment of the errors it has fought nor merely
its original notion but an insight which knows the
absolute negation of itself to be its own proper reality
to be its self or an insight which is its selfunderstanding
notion
This feature of the struggle of enlightenment with
errors that of fighting itself in them and of condemning that in them which it asserts this is something
for us who observe the process or is what enlightenment
and its struggle are in themselves implicitly The first
aspect of this struggle however the contamination
and defilement of enlightenment through its pure self
identity accepting the attitude and function of destructive negation this is how belief looks upon it belief
finds it simply lying unreason and malicious intent
just as enlightenment in the same way regards belief as
error and prejudice
As regards its content it is in the first instance
empty insight whose content appears an external
other to it It meets this content consequently
in the shape of something not yet its own as something that exists quite independent of it and is
found in belief
Enlightenment then conceives its object in the
first instance and generally in such a way as to take
it as pure insight and failing to recognise itself there
interprets it as error In insight as such consciousness
apprehends an object in such a manner that it becomes
the inner being of conscious life or becomes an object
which consciousness permeates in which consciousness
maintains itself keeps within itself and is present to
itself and by its thus being the process of that
object brings the object into being It is precisely
this which enlightenment rightly declares belief to be
when enlightenment says that the Absolute Reality
professed by belief is a being that comes from beliefs
own consciousness is its own thought something
produced from and by consciousness Enlightenment
consequently interprets and declares it to be error to
be a madeup invention about the very same thing as
enlightenment itself is
Enlightenment that seeks to teach belief this new
wisdom does not in doing so tell it anything new
For the object of belief itself is just this too viz a pure
essential reality of its own peculiar consciousness so
that this consciousness does not put itself down for lost
and negated in that object but rather puts trust in it
and this just means that it finds itself there as this particular consciousness finds itself therein to be selfconsciousness If I put my trust in any one his certitude
of himself is for me the certitude of myself I know
my selfexistence in him I know that he acknowledges it and that it is for him both his purpose
and his real nature Trust however is belief because
its consciousness has a direct relation to its object
and thus sees at once that it is one with the object
and in the object
Further since what is object for me is something
in which I know myself I am at the same time in that
object really in the form of another self consciousness
ie one which has become in that object alienated
from its own particular individuation from its natural
and contingent existence but which partly continues
therein to be selfconsciousness and partly is there an
essential consciousness just like pure insight
In the notion of insight there lies not merely this
that consciousness knows itself in the object it looks
at and finds itself directly there without first quitting
the thought element and then returning into itself the
notion implies as well that consciousness is aware of
itself as being also the mediating process aware of itself
as active as the agency of production Through this
it gets the thought of this unity of self as self and
object
This very consciousness is also belief Obedience and
action make a necessary moment through which the
certainty of existence in Absolute Keality comes about
This action of belief does not indeed make it appear as if
Absolute Reality is itself produced thereby But the
Absolute Reality for belief is essentially not the abstract
reality that lies beyond the believing consciousness it
is the spirit of the religious communion it is the unity
of that abstract reality and selfconsciousness The
action of the communion is an essential moment in
bringing about that it is this spirit of the communion
That spirit is what it is by the productive activity
of consciousness or rather it does not exist without
being produced by consciousness For essential as this
process of production is it is as truly not the only
basis of Absolute Reality it is merely a moment
The Absolute Reality is at the same time selfcomplete
and selfcontained
From the other side the notion of pure insight is
seen to be something else than its own object for
just this negative character constitutes the object
Thus from the other side it also expresses the
ultimate Reality of belief as something foreign
to selfconsciousness something that is not bone of
its bone but is surreptitiously foisted on it like a
changeling child But here enlightenment is entirely
foolish belief discovers it to be a way of speaking
which does not know what it is saying and does not
understand the facts of the case when it talks about
priestly deception and deluding the people It speaks
about this as if by means of some hocuspocus of conjuring priestcraft there were foisted on consciousness
as true Reality something that is absolutely foreign
and absolutely alien to it and yet says all the while
that this is an essential reality for consciousness that
consciousness believes in it trusts in it and seeks
to make it favourably disposed towards itself ie that
consciousness therein sees its pure ultimate Being just
as much as its own particular and universal individuality
and creates by its own action this unity of itself with
its essential reality In other words, it directly declares that to be the very inmost nature of consciousness which it declares to be something alien to consciousness
How then can it possibly speak about deception
and delusion By the fact that it directly expresses
about belief the very opposite of what it asserts of
belief it ipso facto really reveals itself to be the
transparent lie How are deception and delusion
to take place where consciousness in its very truth
has directly and immediately the certitude of itself
where it possesses itself in its object since it just as
much finds as produces itself there The distinction
no longer exists even in words
When the general question has been raised whether
it is permissible to delude a people the answer as a
fact had to be that the question is pointless because it is impossible to deceive a people in this matter
Brass in place of gold counterfeit instead of genuine
coin may doubtless have been disposed of in many an
instance many a one has stuck to it that a battle lost
was a battle won and lies of all sorts about things
of sense and particular events have been credited for
a time but in the knowledge of that inmost reality
where consciousness finds the direct certainty of its
own self the idea of delusion is entirely baseless
Let us see further how belief finds enlightenment
in the case of the different moments of its own con
scious experience to which the view just noted referred
in the first instance only in a general way These
moments are pure thought or qua object absolute
Being per se then its relation
as a form of knowledge to absolute Being the ultimate basis of its belief and finally its relation to absolute Being in its acts ie its and worship service
Just as pure insight has misconceived itself in belief as a
whole and denied its own nature, we shall find it taking
up in these moments too an attitude similarly perverted
and distorted
Pure insight assumes towards the absolute Reality
of the believing mind a negative attitude This
Being is pure thought and pure thought is established
within itself as object or as the true Being in the
believing consciousness this immanent and essential
reality of thought preserves at the same time for the
selfexistent consciousness the form of objectivity but
merely the empty form it exists in the character of
something consciously presented To pure insight
however since it is pure consciousness in its aspect of
self existing for itself this other appears as something
negative of selfconsciousness This might again be
taken either as the pure essential reality of thought
or even as the being found in senseexperience the
object of sensecertainty But since it is at the same
time for the self and this self qua self which has an
object is an actual consciousness for insight the peculiar
object as such is an ordinary existing thing of sense
This its object appears before it when it examines
the ideas found in belief It condemns these ideas
and in doing so condemns its own proper object It
really commits a wrong however against belief in
so apprehending the object of belief as if it were its
own ob j ec t According to this account it states regarding
belief that its absolute Being is a piece of stone a block
of wood having eyes and seeing not or again some
breadpaste which is obtained from gram grown on
the field and transformed by men and set aside for that
purpose or in whatever other ways belief anthromorphoses absolute Being making it objective and
representable
Enlightenment proclaiming itself as the pure and
true here turns what is held to be eternal life and holy
spirit into a concrete passing thing of sense and contaminates it with the inherent nothingness of senseexperience with an aspect and point of view which is not to
be found at all in the worshipping attitude of belief
so that enlightenment simply calumniates it by speaking of such an aspect What belief reveres is for belief
assuredly neither stone nor wood nor breaddough nor
any other sort of thing of time and sense If enlightenment thinks it worth while to say its object all the same
is this as well or even that belief is this in its inherent
nature and in truth then belief also knows that something which it is as well but for it this something
lies outside its worship on the other hand however
belief does not in general look on such things as stones
etc as having an inherent and essential being at all
the Absolute Reality of pure thought is for it alone
something inherent
The second moment is the relation of belief as a
form of knowing consciousness to this ultimate Reality
As pure thinking consciousness belief has this Reality immediately within itself But pure consciousness is
just as much a mediate relation of conscious certainty to
truth a relation constituting the basis of belief For
enlightenment this ground comes at the same time to
be regarded as a chance knowledge of chance occurrences The ground of knowledge however is the conscious universal and in its ultimate meaning is absolute
spirit which in abstract pure consciousness or thought
as such is merely absolute Being but qua selfconsciousness is the knowledge of itself Pure insight sets up this
conscious universal selfknowing spirit pure and simple
likewise as a negative element for selfconsciousness
Doubtless this insight is itself pure mediate thought ie
thought mediating itself with itself, it is pure knowledge but since it is pure insight or pure knowledge
which does not yet know itself ie for which as yet there
is no awareness that it is this pure process of mediation
this process seems to insight like everything else constituting it to be something external an other When
realising its inherent principle then it develops this
moment essential to it but that moment seems to it to
belong to belief and to be in its character of an
external other a fortuitous knowledge of just such
common historical actualities It thus here charges
religious belief with basing its certainty on some particular historical evidence which considered as historical evidence would assuredly not even warrant that
degree of certainty about the matter which we get
regarding any event mentioned in the newspapers It
further makes the imputation that the certainty in the
case of religious belief rests on the accidental fact of the
preservation of all this evidence on the preservation of
this evidence partly by means of paper and partly
through the skill and honesty in transferring what is
written from one paper to another and lastly rests upon
the accurate interpretation of the sense of dead words
and letters As a matter of fact however it never
occurs to belief to make its certainty depend on such
evidence and such fortuitous circumstances Belief in
its conscious assurance occupies a naive unsophisticated
attitude towards its absolute object knows it with a
purity which never mixes up letters paper or copyists
with its consciousness of the Absolute Being and does
not make use of things of that sort to effect its union
with the Absolute On the contrary this consciousness
is the selfmediating selfrelating ground of its knowledge it is spirit itself which bears witness of itself
both in the inner heart of the individual consciousness
as well as through the presence everywhere and in all
men of belief in it If belief wants to appeal to historical
evidences in order to get also that kind of foundation
or at least confirmation for its content which enlightenment speaks of and is really serious in thinking and
acting as if that were an important matter then it
has eo ipso allowed itself to be corrupted and led astray
by the insinuations of enlightenment the efforts it
makes to secure a basis or support in this way are
merely indications that show how it has been affected
and contaminated by enlightenment
There still remains the third aspect the active relation of consciousness to Absolute Being its forms of
service This action consists in cancelling the particularity of the individual, or the natural form of its selfexistence whence arises its certainty of being pure
self consciousness of being as the result of its action ie as a selfexisting conscious individual
one with ultimate Keality
Since in this action purposiveness and end get distinguished and pure insight likewise takes up a negative attitude towards this action and denies itself just
as it did in the other moments it must as regards
purposiveness present the appearance of being stupid
and unintelligent since insight united with intention
accordance of end with means appears to it as an
other as really the opposite of what insight is As
regards the end however it has to make badness
enjoyment and possession its purpose and prove itself
in consequence to be the impurest kind of intention
since pure intention qua external an other is equally
impure intention
Accordingly we find that, so far as concerns purposiveness enlightenment thinks it foolish when the
believing individual seeks to obtain the higher consciousness where there is no entanglement with natural
enjoyment and pleasure by positively denying itself
natural enjoyment and pleasure and proving through
its acts that it makes no denial of its contempt for
them but rather that the contempt is quite genuine
In the same way enlightenment finds it foolish for
consciousness to absolve itself of its characteristic
of being absolutely individual excluding all others
and possessing property of its own, by itself demitting
its own property for thereby it shows in reality that
this isolation is not really serious It shows rather
that itself is something that can rise above the natural
necessity of isolating itself and of denying in this
absolute isolation of its own individual existence that
the others are one and the same with itself
Pure insight finds both purposeless as well as wrong
It is purposeless to renounce a pleasure and give away a
possession in order to show oneself independent of
pleasure and possession hence in the opposite case
insight will be obliged to proclaim the man a fool who
in order to eat employs the expedient of actually
eating Insight again thinks it wrong to deny oneself a meal and give away butter and eggs not for
money nor money for butter and eggs but just to give
them away and get no return at all it understands a
meal or the possession of things of that sort to be a
selfs proper object an end of a self and hence in fact
understands itself to be a very impure intention which
ascribes essential value to enjoyment and possessions
of this kind As pure insight it further maintains the
necessity of rising above the condition of nature
above covetousness and its ways it only finds it
foolish and wrong that this supremacy should have
to be demonstrated by action In other words this
pure intention is in reality a deception which pretends
to and demands an inner elevation but declares that it is
superfluous foolish and even wrong to be in earnest in
the matter to put this uplifting into concrete expression
into actual shape and form and demonstrate its truth
Pure insight thus denies itself both as pure insight
for it abrogates directly purposive action and as
pure intention for it denies the intention of proving
its independence of the ends of particular existence
Thus then enlightenment makes belief learn what
it means It takes on this appearance of being bad
because just by the fact of relation to an external other
it gives itself a negative reality it presents itself as the
opposite of itself Pure insight and intention have to
adopt this relational attitude however for that is their
actualisation
This realisation appeared in the first instance, as a
negative reality Perhaps its positive reality is better
constituted Let us see how this stands
When all prejudice and superstition have been
banished the question arises what next What is
the truth enlightenment has diffused in their stead
It has already given expression to this positive content
in its process of exterminating error for that alienation
of itself is equally its positive reality
In dealing with what for belief is Absolute Spirit
it interprets whatever sort of determination it discovers
there as being wood stone etc as particular concrete
things of sense Since in this way it conceives in general
every characteristic ie every content and filling to
be a finite fact to be a human entity and a mental
presentation absolute Being on its view turns out
to be a mere vacuum to which can be attributed
no characteristics no predicates at all In fact to
marry such a vacuity with universal predicates would
be essentially reprehensible and it is just through
such a union that the monstrosities of superstition
have been produced Reason pure insight is doubtless not empty itself since the negative of itself is
present consciously to it and is its content it is
on the contrary rich in substance but only in particularity and restrictions The enlightened function of
reason of pure insight consists in allowing nothing of
that sort to appertain to Absolute Reality nor attributing anything of that kind to it this function well knows
how to put itself and the wealth of finitude in their
place and deal with the Absolute in a worthy manner
In contrast with this colourless empty Reality there
stands as a second aspect of the positive truth of
enlightenment the particularity in general of conscious
life and of all that is a particularity excluded from
an absolute Being and standing by itself as something entirely selfcontained Consciousness which
in its very earliest expression is sensecertainty and
mere opining here comes back after the whole course
of its experience to this same point and is once again
a knowledge of what is pure negative of itself a knowledge of sense things ie of existent entities which
stand in indifference over against its own selfexistence
But here it is not an immediate naive consciousness
it has become to itself immediate While at first the prey
to every sort of entanglement into which it is plunged
by its gradually unfolding and now led back to its
first form by pure insight it has arrived at this first state
as the result and outcome of the process This sensecertainty resting as it does on an insight into the
nothingness of all other forms of consciousness and
hence the nothingness of whatever is beyond senseexperience this sensecertainty is no longer a mere
opining it is rather absolute truth This nothingness
of everything that transcends sense is doubtless merely
a negative proof of this truth But no other is admissible or possible for the positive truth of senseexperience in itself is just the unmediated selfexistence of
the notion itself qua object and an object in the form of
otherness the positive truth is that it is absolutely
certain to every consciousness that it is and that
there are other real things outside it and that in its
naive existence it as well as these things too are in and
for themselves or absolute
Lastly the third moment of the truth of enlightenment is the relation of the particular entities to Absolute Being is the relation of the first two moments
to one another Insight qua pure insight of what is
identical or unrestricted also transcends the unlike or
diverse ie transcends finite reality or transcends itself
qua mere otherness The beyond of this otherness it
takes to be the void to which it thus relates the facts
of sense In determining this relation both the terms
do not enter the relation as its content for the one is
the void and thus a content is only to be had through
the other through sense reality The form the relation
assumes however to the determination of which the
aspect of immanent and ultimate being contributes can be shaped just as we please for the form
is something inherently and essentially negative and
therefore something selfopposed being as well as
nothing inherent and ultimate as well as
the opposite or what is the same thing the relation of
actuality to an inherent essential being qua something
beyond is as much a negating as a positing of that
actuality Finite actualities can therefore properly
speaking be taken just in the way people have need of
them Sense facts are thus related now positively to
the Absolute qua something ultimate and sense
reality is itself ultimate per se the Absolute makes
them fosters and cherishes them Then again they
are related to it as an opposite that is to their own
nonbeing in this case they are not something ultimate they have being only for an other Whereas
in the preceding mode of consciousness the conceptions
involved in the opposition took shape as good and bad
in the case of pure insight they pass into the more
abstract forms of what is per se and what is
for an other being
Both ways of dealing with the positive as well as the
negative relation of finitude to what is ultimate
are however equally necessary as a matter of fact
and everything is thus as much something per se
as it is something for an other in other words
everything is useful
Everything is now at the mercy of other things lets
itself now be used by others and exists for them
and then again it so to say gets up on its hind legs
fights shy of the other exists for itself on its own account,
and on its side uses the other too
From this as a result man being the thing conscious
of this relation derives his true nature and place As
he is immediately man is good qua natural consciousness per se absolute qua individual and all else exists
for him and further since the moments have the
significance of universality for him qua selfconscious
animal everything exists to pleasure and delight
him and as he first comes from the hand of God
he walks the earth as in a garden planted for him
He is bound also to pluck the fruit of the tree of
knowledge of good and evil he claims to have a use
for it which distinguishes him from every other being
for as it happens his inherently good nature is so
constituted that the superfluity of delight does it
harm or rather his particularity contains as a factor
in its constitution a principle that goes beyond it
his particularity can overreach itself and destroy itself
To prevent this he finds reason a useful means for duly
restraining this selftranscendence or rather for preserving himself when he does go beyond determinate
limits for such is the force of consciousness The
enjoyment of this conscious and essentially universal
being must in manifold variety and duration be itself
universal and not something determinate The principle of measure or proportion has therefore the determinate function of preventing pleasure in its variety
and duration from being quite broken off ie the
measure is determined with respect to immoderation
As everything is useful for man man is likewise
useful too and his characteristic determination consists in making himself a member of the human herd
of use for the common good and serviceable to all
The extent to which he looks after his own interests is
the measure with which he must also serve the purpose
of others and so far as he serves their turn he is taking
care of himself the one hand washes the other But
wherever he finds himself there he is in his right he
makes use of others and is himself made use of
Different things are serviceable to one another in
different ways All things however have this reciprocity of utility by their very nature by being related to
the Absolute in the twofold manner the one positive
whereby they have a being all their own the other
negative and thereby exist for others The relation to
Absolute Keality or Keligion is therefore of all forms
of profitableness the most supremely profitable for
it is profiting pure and simple it is that by which
all things stand by which they have a being all their
own and that by which all things fall have an
existence for something else
enlightenment as much an abomination as its negative
attitude towards belief This enlightened insight into
absolute Reality that sees nothing in it but just
absolute Reality the etre supreme the great Void
this intention to find that everything in its immediate existence is inherently real or good
and finally to find the relation of the particular conscious entity to the Absolute Being Religion exhaustively summed up in the conception of profitableness
all this is for belief utterly and simply revolting
This special and peculiar wisdom of enlightenment
necessarily seems at the same time to the believing
mind to be sheer insipidity and the confession of
insipidity because it consists in knowing nothing of
absolute Being or what amounts to the same thing
in knowing this entirely accurate platitude regarding it that it is merely absolute Being and again
in knowing nothing but finitude taking this moreover to be the truth and thinking this knowledge
about finitude qua truth to be the highest knowledge
attainable
Belief has a divine right as against enlightenment
the right of absolute selfidentity or of pure thought
and it finds itself utterly wronged by enlightenment for enlightenment distorts all its moments and
makes them something quite different from what they
are in it Enlightenment on the other hand has
merely a human right as against belief and can only
put in a human claim for its own truth for the wrong
it commits is the right of disunion of discordance
and consists in perverting and altering a right that
belongs to the nature of selfconsciousness in opposition to the simple ultimate essence or thought But
since the right of enlightenment is the right of selfconsciousness it will not merely retain its own right
too in such a way that two equally valid rights of spirit
would be left standing in opposition to one another
without either satisfying the claims of the other it
will maintain the absolute right because selfconsciousness is the negative function of the notion
a function which does not merely operate on its own
account, but also gets control over its opposite And
because belief is a mode of consciousness it will not be
able to balk enlightenment of that right
For enlightenment does not operate against the
believing mind with special principles of its own, but
with those which belief itself implies and contains
Enlightenment merely brings together and presents to
belief its own thoughts the thoughts that lie scattered
and apart within belief all unknown to it Enlightenment merely reminds belief when one of its own forms
is present of others it also has but which it is always
forgetting when the one is there Enlightenment shows
itself to belief to be pure insight by the fact that it
in a given determinate moment sees the whole brings
forward the opposite element standing in direct relation to that moment and converting the one into the
other brings out the principle operating negatively on
both thoughts the notion It appears therefore to
belief to be distortion and lies because it shows up the
other side in the moments of belief Enlightenment
seems in consequence directly to make something
else out of them than they are in their own particularity but this other is equally essential and in
reality is to be found in the believing mind itself only
the latter does not think about it but keeps it some
where else Hence neither is the result foreign to
belief nor can belief reject its truth
Enlightenment itself however which reminds belief
of the opposite of its various separate moments is just
as little enlightened regarding its own nature. It takes
up a purely negative attitude to belief so far as it
excludes its own content from its own pure activity and
takes that content to be negative of itself Consequently
neither in this negative in the content of belief does it
recognise itself nor for this reason does it bring together the two thoughts the one which it contributes
and the one against which it brings the first Since
it does not know that what it condemns in the case of
belief is directly its very own thought it has its own
being in the opposition of both moments only one of
which viz in every case the one opposed to belief
it acknowledges but cuts off the other from the first
just as belief does Enlightenment consequently does
not bring out the unity of both as their unity ie the
notion but the notion arises before it and comes to light
of its own accord in other words, enlightenment finds the
notion merely as something lying ready at hand For
in itself the process of realising pure insight is just this
that insight whose essential nature is the notion comes
before itself to begin with in the shape of an absolute other and repudiates itself for the opposite of the
notion is an absolute opposite and then out of this
otherness comes to itself or comes to its notion
Enlightenment however is merely this process it
is the activity of the notion in still unconscious form
an activity which no doubt comes to itself qua object
but takes this object for an external other and does not
even know the nature of the notion, ie does not know
that it is the undifferentiated element which absolutely
divides itself
As against belief then insight is the power of the
notion in so far as this is the active process of relating
the moments lying apart from one another in belief a
way of relating them in which the contradiction in them
comes to light Herein lies the absolute right of the
power which insight exercises over belief but the
actuality which it gives this power lies just in the
fact that the believing state of consciousness is itself
the notion and thus itself recognises and accepts the
opposite which insight produces and presents before it
Insight therefore has and retains right against belief
because it makes valid in belief what is necessary to
belief itself and what belief contains within it
At first enlightenment asserts the moment of the
notion to be an act of consciousness it maintains in the
face of belief that the absolute Keality belief accepts is a
Reality of the believers consciousness qua a self or that
this absolute Reality is produced through consciousness
To the believing mind its absolute Being is just as it is in
itself for the believer at the same time not as a foreign
thing standing there no one knows how or whence
it came there The trust and confidence of belief consists just in finding itself in absolute Reality as a particular personal consciousness and its obedience and
service consist in acting so as to bring out that Reality
as its own Absolute Enlightenment strictly speaking
only reminds belief of this if belief goes beyond the
action of consciousness and gives expression to the ultimate nature of absolute Being in abstracto
But while enlightenment no doubt puts alongside the
onesidedness of belief the opposite moment viz the
action of belief in contrast to being and being is all
belief thinks about here and yet does not itself in
doing so bring those opposite thoughts together enlightenment isolates the pure moment of action and
declares that what belief takes to be per se ultimate
is merely a product of consciousness The
isolated separate act opposed to this ultimate Being
is however a contingent action and qua presentative activity is a creating of fictions presented
figurative ideas that have no being in themselves And
this is how enlightenment regards the content of belief
Conversely however pure insight equally says
the very opposite Since insight lays stress on the
moment of otherness which the notion contains it
declares the essential Reality for belief to be one
which is not in any way due to consciousness is
away beyond consciousness foreign to it and unknown To belief too that Reality has the same
character On one side belief trusts in it and gets
in doing so the assurance of its own self on the other
side it is unsearchable in all its ways and unattainable
in its being
Further enlightenment maintains against the believing mind a right which the latter concedes when
enlightenment treats the object of the believers
veneration as stone and wood or in short some finite
anthropomorphic feature For since this consciousness is divided within itself in having a beyond remote
from actuality and an immediate present embodiment of
that remote beyond there is also found in it as a
matter of fact the view that sensethings have a value
and significance in and for themselves
But belief does not bring together these two ideas of
what is in and for itself viz that at one time what is
in and for itself is for belief pure essential Reality
and at another time is an ordinary thing of sense
Even its own pure consciousness is affected by this last
view for the distinctions of its supersensuous world
because dispensing with the notion are a series of independent shapes and forms and their activity is a
happening ie they exist merely in idea merely as
presentations and have the characteristic of senseexistence
Enlightenment on its side isolates actuality in the
same way treating it as a reality abandoned by spirit
isolates specific determinateness as some fixed immovable finite element as if it were not a moment
in the spiritual process of the real itself were neither
nothing nor something with a being all its own but
something evanescent and transitory
It is clear that the same is the case with regard
to the ground of knowledge The believing mind
recognises itself to be an accidental knowledge for in
belief the mind adopts an attitude towards contingencies and absolute Reality itself comes before belief
in the form of a presented idea of ordinary actual
fact Consequently belief is also a kind of certainty
which does not carry the truth within it and it confesses itself to be an unsubstantial consciousness of
this kind far short of being well assured of itself and
authentically secure This moment however belief
forgets in its immediate spiritual knowledge of absolute
Reality
Enlightenment however which reminds belief of
all this thinks again merely of the contingency of
the knowledge and forgets the other thinks only
of the mediating process which takes effect through
an alien third term and does not think on that process wherein the immediate is itself the third term
through which it mediates itself with the other viz
with itself
Finally on the view enlightenment takes of the
action of belief the rejection of enjoyment and possessions is looked upon as wrong and purposeless
As to the wrong thus done enlightenment preserves
the harmony of the believing attitude in this that
belief acknowledges the actual reality of possessing
property keeping hold of it and enjoying it In insisting on its property it behaves with all the more
stubborn independence and exclusiveness and in its
enjoyment with all the more frank selfabandonment
since its religious act of giving up pleasure and property
takes effect beyond the region of this actuality and
purchases for it freedom to do as it likes so far as that
other sphere is concerned This service that consists
in sacrificing natural impulses and enjoyments in
point of fact has no truth owing to this opposition
The retention and the sacrifice subsist together side by
side The sacrifice is merely a sign which performs
real sacrifice only as regards a small part and hence
in point of fact only representatively suggests sacrifice
As for purposiveness enlightenment finds it pointless and stupid to throw away a possession in order to
feel and to prove oneself to be free from all possession
to renounce an enjoyment in order to think and demonstrate that one is rid of all enjoyment The believing mind itself takes the absolute act for a universal
one Not only does the action of its absolute Reality as its object appear something universal but the
individual consciousness too has to prove itself detached entirely and altogether from its sensuous nature
But throwing away a particular possession giving up
and disclaiming a particular enjoyment is not acting
universally in this way And since in the action it
is essentially the purpose which is a universal
and the performance which is a particular process
that had to stand in all their incompatibility before
consciousness that action shows itself to be of a kind
in which consciousness has no share and consequently
this way of acting is seen to be too naive to be an action
at all It is too naive to fast in order to prove oneself quite indifferent to the pleasures of the table
too naive to rid oneself like Origen of other bodily
pleasure in order to show that pleasure is finished
and done with The act itself proves to be an external
and a particular function But desire is deeply rooted
within the inner life and is a universal element its
pleasure neither disappears with the instrument for
getting pleasure nor by abstention from particular
pleasures
But enlightenment on its side here isolates the unrealised inwardness as against the concrete actuality
just as in the case of the devotion and direct intuition
of belief enlightenment holds fast to the externality
of things of sense as against the inward attitude of
belief Enlightenment finds the main point in the
intention in the thought and thereby finds no need
for actually bringing about the liberation from natural
ends On the contrary this inner sphere is itself the
formal element that has its concrete fulfilment in
natural impulses which are justified simply by the
fact that they fall within that they belong to universal
being to nature
Enlightenment then holds irresistible sway over
belief by the fact that the latter finds in its own
constitution the very moments to which enlightenment
gives significance and validity Looking more closely
at the action exerted by this force its operation on
belief seems to rend asunder the unity and happy
harmony of trustfulness and immediate confidence
to pollute its spiritual life with lower thoughts drawn
from the sphere of sense to destroy the feeling of calm
security in its attitude of submission by introducing
the vanity of understanding of selfwill and selffulfilment But in point of fact, enlightenment really
brings to pass the abolition of that state of unthinking
or rather uncomprehended cleavage which
finds a place in the nature of belief The believing
mood weiglis and measures by a twofold standard
it has two sorts of eyes and ears uses two voices to
express its meaning it duplicates all ideas without
comparing and squaring the sense and meaning in
the two forms used Or we may say belief lives its
life amidst two sorts of perceptions the one the perceptions of thought which is asleep purely uncritical and
uncomprehending the other those of waking consciousness living solely and simply in the world of sense
and in each of them it manages to carry on a household
all its own
Enlightenment illuminates that world of heaven
with ideas drawn from the world of sense pointing
out there this element of finitude which belief cannot
deny or repudiate because it is selfconsciousness and
in being so is the unity to which both kinds of ideas
belong and in which they do not fall apart from one
another for they belong to the same indivisible simple
self into which belief has passed and which constitutes
its life
Belief has by this means lost the content which
furnished its rilling and collapses into an inarticulate
state where the spirit works and weaves within itself
Belief is banished from its own kingdom this kingdom
is sacked and plundered since every distinction and
expansion of it has rent the waking consciousness in its
innermost nature and claimed every one of its parts
for earth and returned them to the earth that owns
them Yet belief is not on that account satisfied
for this illumination has everywhere brought to light
only what is individual with the result that only
insubstantial realities and finitude forsaken of spirit
make any appeal to spirit
Since belief is without content and cannot continue
in this barren condition or since in getting beyond
finitude which is the sole content it finds merely the
empty void it is a sheer longing its truth is an empty
beyond for which there is no longer any appropriate
content to be found for everything is appropriated and
connected in other ways
Belief in this manner has in fact become the same
as enlightenment the conscious attitude of relating
a finite that inherently exists to an unknown and unknowable Absolute without predicates the difference
is merely that the one is enlightenment satisfied while
belief is enlightenment unsatisfied f It will yet be t ie the contrast between belief and enlightenment becomes a contrast inside enlightenment itself
seen whether enlightenment can continue in its state
of satisfaction that longing of the troubled beshadowed spirit mourning over the loss of its spiritual
world lies in the background Enlightenment has
on it this stain of unsatisfied longing in its empty
Absolute Being we find this in the form of the pure
object in passing beyond its individual nature to an
unfulfilled beyond the fleck appears as an act and a
process in the selflessness of what is useful it is
seen in the form of an object fulfilled Enlightenment
will remove this stain by considering more closely
the positive result which constitutes the truth in its
case we shall find that the stain is implicitly removed
already
The spirit that sullenly works and weaves without
further distinctions within itself has thus passed into
itself away beyond consciousness which again has
arrived at clearness as to itself The first moment
of this clearness of mind is determined in regard to
its necessity and constitution by the fact that pure
insight or insight that is implicitly and per se notion
actualises itself it does so when it gives otherness
or determinateness a place in its own nature. In this
manner it is negative pure insight ie the negation of
the notion; this negation is equally pure and herewith has arisen the pure and simple thing the Absolute Being that has no further determination of any
sort If we define this more precisely insight in the
sense of absolute notion is a distinguishing of distinctions that are not so any longer of abstractions or pure
notions that no longer support themselves but find a
fixed hold and a distinction only by means of the whole
life of the process This distinguishing of what is not
distinguished consists just in the fact that the absolute
notion makes itself its object and as against that
process asserts itself to be the essence The essence
hereby dispenses with the aspect wherein abstrac
The outcome is at once positive and negative materialism and
agnosticism on the secular side it is pure utilitarianism tions or distinctions are kept apart and hence becomes pure thought in the sense of a pure thing
This now is just the dull silent unconscious working
and weaving of the spirit at the loom of its own being
to which belief as we saw sank back when it lost all
distinction in its content And this is at the same time
that movement of pure selfconsciousness in regard to
which the essence is intended to be the absolutely external beyond For because this pure selfconsciousness is a
movement working with pure notions with distinctions
that are no distinctions pure selfconsciousness collapses in fact into that unconscious working and
weaving of spirit ie into pure feeling or pure thinghood
The selfalienated notion for the notion still stands
here at the level of such alienation does not however
know this identical nature constituting both sides the
movement of selfconsciousness and its absolute Reality
does not know the identity of their nature which in
point of fact gives them their very substance and subsistence Since the notion is not aware of this insight
absolute Reality has significance and value merely in
the form of an objective beyond while the consciousness
making these distinctions and in this way keeping
the ultimate reality outside itself is treated as a finite
consciousness
Regarding that Absolute Being enlightenment itself
falls out with itself in the same way as it did formerly
with belief and is divided between the views of two
parties One party proves itself to be victorious by
the fact that it breaks up into two parties for in that
fact it shows it possesses within it the principle it
combats and consequently shows it has abolished
the onesidedness with which it formerly made its
appearance The interest which was divided between
it and the other now falls entirely within it and forgets
the other because that interest finds lying in it alone
the opposition on which attention is directed At
the same time however the opposition has been lifted
into the higher victorious element where it is cleared
up and set forth So that the schism that arises in
one party and seems a misfortune demonstrates rather
its good fortune
The pure essence itself has in it no distinction consequently distinction is reached by two such pure
essences being put forward for consciousness to be
aware of or by a twofold consciousness of the pure
reality The pure absolute essence is only in pure
thought or rather it is pure thought itself and thus
absolutely beyond the finite beyond selfconsciousness
and is merely the ultimate essence in a negative sense
But in this way it is just being the negative of selfconsciousness Being negative of selfconsciousness it
is also related to selfconsciousness It is external
being which placed in relation to selfconsciousness
within which distinctions and determinations fall preserves within it the distinctions of being tasted seen
and so on and the relationship is that of senseexperience and perception
Taking the point of departure from this senseexistence into which that negative beyond necessarily
passes but abstracting from those various ways in
which consciousness is related to senseexistence there
is left pure matter as that in which consciousness weaves
and moves inarticulately within itself In dealing with
this the essential point to note is that pure matter is
merely what remains over when we abstract from seeing
feeling tasting etc ie it is not what is seen tasted
felt and so on it is not matter that is seen felt or
tasted but colour a stone salt and so on Matter is
really a pure abstraction and being so we have here
the pure essential nature of thought or pure thought
itself as the Absolute without predicates undetermined
having no distinctions within it
The one kind of enlightenment calls absolute Being
that predicateless Absolute which exists in thought
beyond the actual consciousness from which this enlightenment started the other calls it matter If they
were distinguished as Nature and Spirit or God the
unconscious inner working and weaving would have
nothing of the wealth of developed life required in
order to be nature while Spirit or God would have
no selfdistinguishing consciousness Both as we saw
are entirely the same notion the distinction lies not
in the objective fact but purely in the diversity of
startingpoint adopted by the two thoughtconstructions and in the fact that each keeps to a special point
of view in the thoughtprocess If they rose above
that their thoughts would coincide and they would
find what to the one is as it holds a horror and to
the other a folly is one and the same thing For to
the one absolute Being in its pure thought or
directly for pure consciousness is outside finite consciousness is the negative beyond of finite mind If
it would reflect that in part that simple immediacy
of thought is nothing else than pure being that in part
again what is negative for consciousness is at the same
time related to consciousness that in the negative
judgment the copula is also connects and holds
together the two separated factors it would come to
see that this beyond which the nature of an external
existence implies stands in a relation to consciousness
and that in so doing this means the same as what is
called pure matter The missing moment of the
present would then be secured
The other enlightenment starts from senseexistence
it then abstracts from the sensuous relation of tasting
seeing etc and turns senseexistence into purely
inherent being Ansich absolute matter something
neither felt nor tasted This being has in this way
become the inner reality of pure consciousness the
ultimately simple without predicates it is the pure
notion qua notion whose being is in itself, or it is pure
thought within itself This insight in its conscious
activity does not go through the process of passing
from being which is purely being to an opposite in
thought which is the same as mere being or does not
go from the pure positive to the opposite pure negative
since the positive is really pure simply and solely
through negation while the negative qua pure is selfidentical and one within itself and precisely on that
account positive
Or again these two have not come to the notion
found in Descartes metaphysics that in themselves being
and thought are the same they have not arrived at
the thought that being pure being is not a concrete
actual reality but pure abstraction and conversely that
pure thought selfidentity or inner essence is partly
the negative of selfconsciousness and consequently
is being and partly qua immediate simple entity is
likewise nothing else than being Thought is thinghood or thinghood is thought
The real essence is here divided asunder in such a way
that to begin with it appertains to two specifically
distinct modes of thinking In part the real must hold
distinction in itself in part just by so doing both ways
of considering it merge into one for then the abstract
moments of pure being and the negative by which
their distinction is expressed are united in the object
with which these modes of treatment deal
The universal common to both is the abstraction
of pure selfthinking of pure quivering within the
self This simple motion of rotating on its own
axis is bound to resolve itself into separate moments
because it is itself only motion by distinguishing its
own moments This distinguishing of the moments
leaves the unmoved unity behind as the empty shell
of pure being that is no longer actual thought has
no more life within it for qua distinction this process
is all the content The process which thus puts itself
outside that unity thereby constitutes however the
shifting change a change that does not return into
itself of the moments of beinginitself of beingforanother and of beingforself actual reality in the
way this is object for the concrete consciousness of pure
insight constitutes Utility
Bad as utility may look to belief or sentimentality or
even to the abstraction that calls itself speculation and
takes to do with the ultimate the inherent nature
yet it is that in which pure insight finds its realisation
and itself is the object for insight an object which
insight now no longer repudiates and which too it
does not put down as the void or the pure beyond For
pure insight as we saw is the living notion itself the
selfsame pure personality distinguishing itself within
itself in such a way that each of the distinguished
elements is itself pure notion ie is eo ipso not distinct
it is simple undifferentiated pure selfconsciousness
which is for itself as well as in itself within an immediate
unity Its inherent being its being in itself is therefore
not fixed and permanent but at once ceases in its
distinction to be something distinctive A being of that
kind however which is immediately without support
and cannot stand of itself has no being in itself no
inherent existence it is essentially for something else
which is the power that consumes and absorbs it But
this second moment opposed to that first one disappears immediately too like the first or rather qua
being merely for some other it is the very process of
disappearing and is definitely affirmed as being that
has turned back into itself as being for itself This
simple beingf orself however qua selfidentity is rather
an objective being or is thereby for an other
This nature of pure insight in thus unfolding and
making explicit its moments in other words insight
qua object finds expression in the useful the profitable
What is useful is a thing something that subsists in
itself this being in itself is at the same time only a pure
moment it is in consequence absolutely for something
else but is equally for an other merely as it is in itself
these opposite moments return into the indivisible
unity of beingforself While however the useful
doubtless expresses the notion of pure insight it is all
the same not insight as such but insight as conscious
presentation or as object for insight It is merely the
restless shifting change of those moments of which
one is indeed being returned into itself but merely as
being for itself ie as abstract moment appearing on
one side over against the others The useful itself does
not consist in the negative fact of having these moments
in their opposition at the same time undivided in
one and the same respect of having them as a form of
thought per se in the way they are qua pure insight
The moment of beingforself is doubtless a phase of
usef ulness but not in the sense that it swamps the other
moments beingperse and beingforanother if so it
would be the whole self In dealing with the useful
pure insight thus takes as object its own peculiar
notion in the pure moments constituting its nature
it is the consciousness of this metaphysical principle
but not yet its conceptual comprehension it has not
yet itself got to the unity of being and notion Because
the useful still appears before insight in the form of an
object, insight has a world not indeed any longer a
world all by itself and selfcontained but still a world
all the same which it distinguishes from itself Only
since the opposites have come forth on the summit of
the notion, the next step will be for them to collide
with one another and for enlightenment to experience
the fruits of their deeds
When we look at the object reached in relation to
this entire sphere of spiritual life we found the actual
world of culture summed up in the vanity of selfconsciousness in independent selfexistence whose
content is drawn from the confusion characteristic
of culture and which is still the individual notion
not yet the selfconscious universal notion
Returned into itself however that individual notion
is pure insight pure consciousness qua pure self or
negativity just as belief too is pure consciousness qua
pure thought or positivity Belief finds in that self the
moment that makes it complete but perishing through
being thus completed it is in pure insight that we now
see both moments as absolute Being which is purely
thoughtconstituted or is a negative entity and as
matter which is the positive entity
This completion still lacks that actual reality of
selfconsciousness which belongs to the vain and empty
type of consciousness the world out of which thought
raised itself up to itself What is thus wanting is
reached in the aspect of utility so far as pure
insight secures positive objectivity there pure insight
is thereby a concrete actual consciousness satisfied
within itself This objectivity now constitutes its
world and is become the final and true outcome of the
entire previous world ideal as well as real The first
world of spirit is the expansive realm of spirits
selfdispersed existence and of certainty of self in
separate individual shapes and forms just as nature
disperses its life in an endless multiplicity of forms and
shapes without the generic principle of all the forms being
present therein The second world contains the generic
principle and is the realm of the ultimate inherent
nature or the essential truth over against
that individual certainty The third world however
that of the profitable or the useful is the truth which is
certainty of self as well The realm of the truth of belief
lacks the principle of concrete actuality or of certainty
of self in the sense of this individual self But again
concrete actuality or certainty of self qua this individual
lacks the ultimate inherent nature In the obj ect
of pure insight both worlds are united The useful
is the object so far as selfconsciousness sees through it
and individual certainty of self finds its enjoyment
its selfexistence in it selfconsciousness sees into it
in this manner and this insight contains the true essence
of the object which consists in being something permeable to sight something seen through in other words,
in being for an other This insight is thus itself true
knowledge and selfconsciousness directly finds in this
attitude universal certainty of itself as well has its pure
consciousness in this attitude in which truth as well as
immediateness and actuality are united Both worlds
are reconciled and heaven is transplanted to the earth
below
Consciousness has found its notion in the principle
of utility But that notion is partly an object still
partly for that very reason still a purpose of which
consciousness does not yet find itself to be immediately
possessed Utility or profitableness is still a predicate
of the object, not a subject not its immediate and sole
actuality It is the same thing that appeared before
when we found that selfexistence beingforself had
not yet shown itself to be the substance of the remaining
moments a process by which the useful would be
primarily nothing else than the self of consciousness
and this latter thereby in its possession
This resumption of the form of objectivity which
characterises the useful has however already taken
effect implicitly and as the outcome of this immanent
internal revolution there comes to light the actual
revolution of concrete actuality the new mode of
conscious life absolute freedom
This is so because in point of fact there is here no more
than an empty semblance of objectivity separating
selfconsciousness from actual possession For in part
all the worth and permanence of the various specific
members of the organisation of the world of actuality
and belief have as a whole returned into this simple
determination which is their ground and their indwelling spirit in part however this determinate element
has nothing peculiarly its own left for itself, it is instead
pure metaphysic pure notion or knowledge of selfconsciousness That is to say from the inherent and specific nature of the useful qua object consciousness
learns that its inherent nature its beinginitself is
essentially a being for another mere being per se
since it is selfless is ultimately and in truth a passive
entity or something that is for another self The object
however is present to consciousness in this abstract
form of purely immanent being of pure beinginitself
for consciousness is the activity of pure insight the
separate moments of which take the pure form of
notions
Selfexistence beingforself however into which being
for another returns in other words the self is not a self
of what is called object a self all its own and different
from the ego for consciousness qua pure insight is not
an individual self over against which the object in the
sense of having a self all its own could stand but the
pure notion the gazing of the self into self the literal
and absolute seeing itself doubled The certainty of
itself is the universal subject and its notion knowing
itself is the essential being of all reality If the useful
was merely the shifting change of the moments without
returning into its own proper unity and was hence
still an object for knowledge to deal with then it ceases
to be this now For knowing is itself the process and
movement of those abstract moments it is the universal self the self of itself as well as of the object, and
being universal is the unity of this process a unity
that returns into itself This brings on the scene spirit in the form of absolute
freedom It is the mode of selfconsciousness which
clearly comprehends that in its certainty of self lies the
essence of all the component spiritual parts of the
concrete sensible as well as of the supersensible world
or conversely that essential being and concrete actuality consist in the knowledge consciousness has of
itself.
It is conscious of its pure personality and with that
of all spiritual reality and all reality is solely spirituality the world is for it absolutely its own will and
this will is universal will And further this will is not
the empty thought of will which is constituted by
giving a silent assent or an assent through a representative a mere symbol of willing it is a concretely embodied universal will the will of all individuals as such
For will is in itself the consciousness of personality of
every single one and it has to be as this true concrete
actual will as selfconscious essential being of each and
every personality so that each single and undivided
does everything and what appears as done by the whole
is at once and consciously the deed of every single
individual
This undivided substance of absolute freedom puts
itself on the throne of the world without any power
being able to offer effectual resistance For since in
very truth consciousness is alone the element which
furnishes spiritual beings or powers with their substance their entire system which is organised and
maintained through division into separate spheres and
distinct wholes has collapsed into a single whole when
once the individual consciousness conceives the object
as having no other nature than that of selfconscious
ness itself or conceives it to be absolutely the notion
What made the notion an existential object was the
distinguishing it into separate and separately subsisting areas or groups when however the object becomes
a notion there is nothing fixedly subsisting left in it
negativity permeates and pervades all its moments
It exists in such a way that each individual consciousness rises out of the sphere assigned to it finds no
longer its inmost nature and function in this isolated
area but grasps itself as the notion of will grasps all
the various groupings as the essential expression of this
will and is in consequence only able to realise itself
in a work which is a work of the whole In this absolute
freedom all social ranks or classes which are the
component spiritual factors into which the whole is
differentiated are effaced and annulled the individual
consciousness that belonged to any such group and
exercised its will and found its fulfilment there has removed the barriers confining it its purpose is the
universal purpose its language universal law its work
universal achievement
The object and the element distinguished have here
lost the meaning of utility of profitableness which was
a predicate of all real being consciousness does not
commence its process with the object as a sort of alien
element after dealing with which it then and only then
returns into itself the object it is aware of is consciousness itself The opposition thus consists solely in the
distinction of individual and universal consciousness
But the individual itself is directly on its own view
that which had merely the semblance of opposition
it is universal consciousness and will The ulterior
beyond that lies remote from this its actual reality
hovers over the corpse of the vanished and departed
independence of what is real or believed to be and
hovers there merely as an exhalation of stale gas of the
empty elre supreme
By doing away with the various distinct spiritual
groups and the restricted and confined life of individuals
as well as both its worlds there thus remains merely the
process of the universal selfconsciousness within itself
as an interaction of its content a reciprocal interaction
between its universal form and personal consciousness
The universal will goes into itself is subject vised and
becomes individual will to which the universal law and
universal work stand opposed But this individual consciousness is equally and immediately conscious of
itself as universal will it is fully aware that its own
objective content is a law given by that will a work
performed by that will in exercising and carrying out
its activity in creating objectivity it is thus doing
nothing individual but executing laws and functions of
the state
This process is consequently the interaction of consciousness with itself in which it lets nothing break
away and assume the shape of a detached object
standing over against it It follows from this that it
cannot arrive at a positive accomplishment of anything
either in the way of universal operations in language
or in actual reality either in the shape of laws and
universal regulations of conscious freedom or of deeds
and works of active freedom
The accomplished result at which this freedom that
gives itself consciousness might manage to arrive
would consist in the fact that such freedom qua universal
substance made itself into an object and an abiding
existence This objective otherness would there be the
differentiation which enabled it to divide itself into
stable spiritual groups and into separate fragments or
members These wholes or spheres would partly be the
thoughtconstituted factors of a power that is differentiated into legislative judicial and executive but
partly they would be the substantial elements we found
in the real world of spiritual culture and since the
content of universal action would be more closely taken
note of they would be the particular areas or spheres of
labour which are further distinguished as specific social
ranks or classes Universal freedom which would have
differentiated itself in this manner into its various parts
and by the very fact of doing so would have made itself
an existing substance would thereby be free from particular individualities and could apportion the plurality
of individuals to its several parts
The activity and being of personality would however
find itself by this process confined to a branch of the
whole to one kind of action and existence when placed
in the element of existence personality would bear the
meaning of a determinate personality it would cease
to be in reality universal selfconsciousness Neither
by the idea of submission to selfimposed laws addressed
in part to universal selfconsciousness nor by its being
represented when legislation and universal action take
place does selfconsciousness here let itself be mistaken
about the actual truth that itself lays down the law
and itself accomplishes a universal and not a particular
task For in the case where the self is merely represented and ideally presented there it is not
actual where it is by proxy it is not Just as the individual selfconsciousness does not find
itself in this universal work of absolute freedom qua
existing substance as little does it find itself in the deeds
proper and specific individual acts of will performed by
this substance For the universal to pass into a deed it
must gather itself into the single unity of individuality
and put an individual consciousness in the forefront for
universal will is an actual concrete will only in a self
that is single and one Thereby however all other individuals are excluded from the entirety of this deed and
have only a restricted share in it so that the deed would
not be a deed of real universal selfconsciousness
Universal freedom can thus produce neither a positive
achievement nor a deed there is left for it only negative action it is merely the rage and fury of disappearance and destruction
But the highest reality of all and the reality most of
all opposed to absolute freedom or rather the sole
object it is yet to become aware of is the freedom and
singleness of actual selfconsciousness itself For that
universality which does not let itself attain the reality of
organic differentiation and whose purpose is to maintain
itself in unbroken continuity distinguishes itself within
itself all the while because it is process or consciousness
in general Moreover on account of its own peculiar
abstraction it divides itself into extremes equally
abstract into the cold unbending bare universality
and the hard discrete absolute rigidity and stubborn
atomic singleness of actual selfconsciousness Now
that it is done with exterminating and destroying
express organisation and subsists on its own behalf
this is its sole object an object that has no other content
left no other possession existence and external exten
sion but is merely this knowledge of itself as absolutely
pure and detached individual self The point at which
the object can be laid hold of and understood is solely
its abstract existence in general
The relation then of these two since they exist for
themselves indivisibly and absolutely and thus cannot
arrange for a common part to act as a means for connecting them is pure negation entirely devoid of mediation the negation moreover of the individual as a factor
existing within the universal The sole and only work
and deed accomplished by universal freedom is therefore
death a death that achieves nothing embraces nothing
within its grasp for what is negated is the unachieved
unfulfilled punctual entity of the absolutely free self
It is thus the most coldblooded mean and meaningless
death of all with no more significance than cleaving
a head of cabbage or swallowing a draught of water
In this single expressionless syllable consists the
wisdom of the government the intelligence of the
general will when carrying out and executing its plans
The government is itself nothing but the selfestablished
focus the individual embodiment of the general will
Government a power to will and perform proceeding
from a single centre wills and performs at the same time a
determinate order and action In doing so it on the
one hand excludes other individuals from a share in
its deed and on the other thereby constitutes itself
a form of government which is a specifically determinate
will and eo ipso opposed to the universal will By
no manner of means therefore can it put itself forward
as anything but a faction The victorious faction
only is called the government and just in that it
is a faction lies the direct necessity of its overthrow
and its being government makes it conversely into a
faction and hence guilty When the universal will holds
to this concrete action of the government and holds this to
be a crime which the government has committed against
the universal will then the government on its side has
nothing tangible and external left whereby to establish
and show the guilt of the will opposing itself to it for
what thus stands opposed to it as concrete actual universal will is merely unreal abstract will bare intention
Being suspected therefore takes the place or has the
significance and effect of being guilty and the external
reaction against this reality that lies in bare inward
intention consists in the fatuous barren destruction
of this particular existent self in whose case there is
nothing else to take away but its mere existence
In this its characteristically peculiar performance
absolute freedom becomes objective to itself and
selfconsciousness finds out what this freedom is.
In itself it is just this abstract selfconsciousness
which destroys all distinction and all fixedness of
distinction within itself. It is object to itself in this
shape the terror of death is the direct apprehension
of this its negative nature This its
reality however finds absolute free selfconsciousness quite different from what its own notion of itself
was viz that the universal will is merely the positive
substance of personality and that this latter knows
itself in it only positively knows itself preserved there
Rather for this self consciousness which qua pure
insight completely separates its positive and negative
nature separates the unpredicated Absolute qua pure
thought and qua pure matter the absolute transition
from the one to the other is found here present within
its reality The universal will qua absolutely positive
concrete selfconsciousness because it is this selfconscious actuality raised to the level of pure thought or
abstract matter turns round into the negative entity
and shows itself at the same time to be what cancels
and does away with self thinking or self consciousness
Absolute freedom qua pure selfidentity of universal
will thus carries with it negation but in doing so
contains distinction in general and develops this again
as concrete actual difference For pure negativity finds
in the selfidentical universal will the element of subsistence or the substance in which its moments get
their realisation it has the matter which it can turn into
the specific nature of the substance and in so far as this
substance has manifested itself to be the negative element
for the individual consciousness the organisation of the
spiritual groups or masses of the substance, to which
the plurality of conscious individuals is assigned thus
takes shape and form once more These individuals
who felt the fear of death their absolute lord and master
submit to negation and distinction once more arrange
themselves into groups and return to a restricted and
apportioned task but thereby to their substantial
reality
Out of this tumult spirit would be thrown back
upon its startingpoint the ethical world and the real
world of spiritual culture which would thus have been
merely refreshed and rejuvenated by the fear of the
lord that has again entered their hearts Spirit
would have anew to traverse and continually repeat
this cycle of necessity if only complete interpenetration of selfconsciousness and the substance were
the final result In such an interpenetration selfconsciousness might seek to experience the force of its
universal nature operating negatively upon it would
try to know and find itself not as this particular selfconsciousness but only as universal and hence too
would be able to endure the objective reality of universal spirit a reality excluding selfconsciousness qua
particular
But this is not the form the final result assumes For
in absolute freedom there was no reciprocal interaction
either between an external world and consciousness
which is absorbed in manifold existence or sets itself
determinate purposes and ideas or between consciousness
and an external objective world be it a world of reality
or of thought What that freedom contained was the
world absolutely in the form of consciousness as a
universal will and along with that selfconsciousness
gathered out of all the dispersion and manifoldness of
existence or all the manifold ends and judgments of
mind and concentrated into the bare and simple self
The form of culture which it attains in interaction with
that essential nature is therefore the grandest and
the last is that of seeing its pure and simple reality
immediately disappear and pass away into empty
nothingness In the sphere of culture itself it does
not get the length of viewing its negation or alienation
in this form of pure abstraction its negation is negation with a filling and a content either honour and
wealth which it gains in the place of the self that it
has alienated from itself or the language of esprit and
insight which the distraught consciousness acquires or
again the negation is the heaven of belief or the element of utility belonging to the stage of enlightenment All
these determinate elements disappear with the disaster
and ruin that overtake the self in the state of absolute
freedom its negation is meaningless death sheer
horror of the negative which has nothing positive in
it nothing that gives a filling
At the same time however this negation in its actual
manifestation is not something alien and external
It is neither that universal background of necessity in
which the moral world is swamped nor the particular
accident of private possession the whims and humours
of the owner on which the distraught consciousness
finds itself dependent it is universal will which in
this its last abstraction has nothing positive and
hence can give nothing in return for the sacrifice
But just on that account this will is in unmediated
oneness with selfconsciousness it is the pure positive
because it is the pure negative and that meaningless
death the insubstantial vacuous negativity of self in
its inner constitutive principle turns round into absolute positivity For consciousness the immediate unity
of itself with universal will its demand to see and find
itself as a determinate particular focus in the universal
will is changed and converted into the absolutely opposite experience What it loses there is abstract being
the immediate existence of that insubstantial focus and
this vanished immediacy is the universal will as such
which it now knows itself to be, so far as it is superseded
and cancelled immediacy so far as it is pure knowledge
or pure will By this means it knows that will to be
itself and knows itself to be essential reality but not
as the immediate essence not will as revolutionary government or anarchy struggling to establish an anarchical constitution nor itself as a centre of this faction or
the opposite the universal will is its pure knowing and
willing and it is universal will qua this pure knowledge
and volition It does not lose itself there for pure
knowledge and volition is it qua atomic point of consciousness It is thus the interaction of pure knowledge
with itself pure knowledge qua essential reality is
universal will while this essence is simply and solely
pure knowledge Selfconsciousness is thus pure knowledge of essential reality in the sense of pure knowledge
Furthermore qua particular self it is merely the form
of the subject or concrete real action a form which by
it is known as form In the same way objective reality
being is for it absolutely selfless form for that
objective reality would be what is not known this
knowledge however knows knowledge to be the essential fact
Absolute freedom has thus squared and balanced
the opposition of universal and particular will with
its own nature. The selfalienated type of mind
driven to the acme of its opposition where pure volition
and the purely volitional agent are still kept distinct
reduces that opposition to a transparent form and
therein finds itself
Just as the realm of the real and actual world
passes over into that of belief and insight absolute
freedom leaves its selfdestructive sphere of reality
and passes over into another land of selfconscious spirit
where in this unreality freedom is taken to be and is
accepted as the truth In the thought of this truth
spirit refreshes and revives itself so far as spirit is thought
and remains so and knows this being which self
consciousness involves viz thought to be the complete
and entire essence of everything The new form and
mode of experience that now arises is that of the Moral
Life of Spirit
SPIRIT IN THE CONDITION OF BEING CERTAIN OF ITSELF The following section deals with the final and highest stage in the life
of finite spiritual experience as realised in the concrete form of a historical
society Here the substance of the social order is the real content of the
self-conscious individual that substance has become subjectified we
have therefore a selfcontained spiritual subject TJie discordance involved in the sphere of culture and enlightenment is overcome by the
self knowing and realising itself as a completely universal self determining free will its world within itself and its self its own world Each
reflects the whole the totality of social life in itself so perfectly that
what it does is transparently the doing of the whole as much as its own
doing Such a sphere of spiritual existence is Morality the allsufficient
spiritual order of the finite spirit as an individual The meaning assigned
to morality here is that expressed by Kant when he says that morality
is the relation of actions to the autonomy of the will ie to possible
universal legislation through maxims of the will In other words, all the
universality constituting the interrelations of finite spirits in a society
are epitomised in the soul of the acting individual who can thus quite
legitimately look upon itself as the selfregulating source of all universal
conditions of action
It is inevitable that such a concrete mode of experience should have
various aspects and should pass through various stages in the process of
fully realising its nature The individual may lay exclusive stress on the
self completeness which he possesses through being the source and origin
of his own laws His self legislative function just because it carries with
it the sense of universality may appear so supremely important that all
the actual detail of his life comes to be treated as external indifferent and
contingent This detail no doubt is essential to give body and substance
to his spiritual individuality but the universality of his will so far transcends each and every detail of content as to seem by itself the sole and
allsufficient reality of his being The content of his life only enters into
consideration as an element to be regulated and made to conform to the
universal the relation so constituted between content and universal is found in the consciousness of Duty Since the content is thus subordinate though absolutely essential to give even meaning to the idea and
the fulfilment of duty and since the universal is the supremely important fact not merely is duty to be fulfilled for dutys sake but the
duty in question is pure duty The good will is the purely universal
will and is the only will in the world from this point of view The historical material the writer has in mind is a moral attitude
which came into prominence at the time of the Romantic movement
towards the end of the eighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenth
century It found its philosophical expression in the moral theories of
Kant and Fichte and Lessing may be taken as a typical representative in
literature of the same attitude
The ethical order of the community found its consummation and its truth in the type of spirit existing
in mere solitude and separation within it the individual
self This legal person however has its substance and
its fulfilment outside that ethical order The process
of the world of culture and belief does away with this
abstraction of a mere person and by the completion
of the process of estrangement by reaching the extremity of abstraction the self of spirit finds the substance become first the universal will and finally its
own possession Here then knowledge seems at last
to have become entirely at one with the truth at which
it aims for its truth is this knowledge itself All
opposition between the two sides has vanished and
that too not for us who are tracing the process not
merely implicitly but actually for selfconsciousness
itself That is to say knowledge has itself got the
mastery over the opposition which consciousness had
to face This rests on the opposition between certainty
of self and the object Now however the object for it
is the certainty of self knowledge just as the certainty of itself as such has no longer ends of its own,
is no longer conditioned and determinate but is pure
knowledge
Selfconsciousness thus now takes the knowledge of
itself to be the substance itself This substance is for
it at once immediate and absolutely mediated in one indivisible unity It is immediate just in the way
the ethical consciousness knows and itself does its
duties and is bound to the substance as to its own
nature but it is not character just as that ethical
consciousness which in virtue of its immediacy is
a determinate type of spirit belongs merely to one
of the essential features of ethical life and has
the peculiarity of not being conscious explicit knowledge It is again absolute mediation as involving the
conscious processes of culture and belief for it is essentially the movement of the life of self to transcend the
abstract form of immediate existence and become consciously universal and yet to do so neither by simply
estranging and rending itself as well as reality nor by
fleeing from it Rather it is directly and immediately
present in its very substance for this substance is its
knowledge it is the pure certainty of self become transparently visible And just this very immediacy which
constitutes its actual reality is the entire actuality
for the immediate is being and qua pure immediacy
immediacy made transparent by thoroughgoing negation this immediacy is pure being is being in general
is all being by the characteristic of being the simple essence of merely as knowledge What consciousness did not know
would have no sense and can be no power in its life
Into its selfconscious knowing will all objectivity the
whole world has withdrawn It is absolutely free in
that it knows its freedom and just this very knowledge
of its freedom is its substance its purpose its sole and
only content
a
Selfconsciousness knows and accepts duty as the
Absolute It is bound by that alone and this substance is its own conscious life pure and simple duty
cannot for it take on the form of something alien
and external When thus shut up and confined within
itself however moral selfconsciousness is not yet
affirmed and looked at as consciousness The object
is immediate knowledge and being thus permeated
purely by the self is not object But this knowledge
being essentially mediation and negativity there is implied in its very conception relation to some otherness
and thus it is consciousness This other because duty
constitutes its sole essential purpose and objective content is a reality completely devoid of significance for
consciousness But again because this consciousness is
so entirely confined within itself it takes up towards
this otherness a perfectly free and detached attitude
and the existence of this other is therefore an existence completely set free from selfconsciousness and in
like manner relating itself merely to itself The
freer selfconsciousness becomes the freer also is the
negative object of its consciousness The object is thus
a complete world within itself with an individuality of
its own, an independent whole of laws peculiar to itself as well as an independent procedure and an unfettered active realisation of those laws It is altogether a nature a nature whose laws and also whose
action belong to itself as a being which is not disturbed about the moral selfconsciousness just as the
latter is not troubled about it
Starting with a specific character of this sort there
is formed and established a moral outlook or point of
view which consists in a process of relating the implicit aspect of morality and the
explicit aspect This relation
presupposes both thorough reciprocal indifference and
specific independence as between nature and moral
purposes and activity and also on the other side
a conscious sense of duty as the sole essential fact
and of nature as entirely devoid of independence and
essential significance of its own. The point of view or
attitude of the moral life consists in the development
of these moments which are involved in this relation of
such entirely antithetic and contradictory presuppositions
To begin with then the moral consciousness in
general is presupposed It takes duty to be the essential reality itself is actual and active and in its
actuality and action fulfils duty But this moral consciousness at the same time finds before it the assumed
freedom of nature it learns by experience that nature
is not concerned about giving consciousness a sense of
the unity of its reality with that of nature and hence
discovers that nature may let it become happy but
perhaps also may not The nonmoral consciousness
on the other hand finds by chance perhaps its realisa
tion where the moral consciousness sees merely an occasion for acting but does not see itself enjoying through
its action the success of performance and the satisfaction
of achievement It therefore finds reason for bewailing
a situation where there is no correspondence between
itself and existence and lamenting the injustice which
confines it to having its object merely in the form of
pure duty but refuses to let it see this object and itself
actually realised
The moral consciousness cannot renounce happiness
and drop this element out of its absolute purpose
The purpose which is expressed as duty pure and
simple essentially implies retention of individual selfconsciousness and maintenance of its claims Individual
conviction and knowledge thereof constituted a fundamental element in morality This element in the objectified purpose in duty fulfilled is the particular consciousness seeing itself as actually realised In other words,
this moment is that of enjoyment which thus lies in the
very principle of morality not indeed of morality in
the sense of immediate feeling and sentiment but in
the principle of the actualisation of morality Owing
to this however enjoyment is also involved in moral
sentiment for morality seeks not to remain sentiment
as opposed to action but to act or realise itself Thus
the purpose expressed as a whole along with the consciousness of its elements or moments is that duty
fulfilled shall be both a purely moral act and a realised individuality and that nature the aspect of particularity in contrast with abstract purpose shall be
one with this purpose
While experience must necessarily bring to light the
disharmony between the two aspects seeing that nature
is detached and apart nevertheless duty is alone the essential fact and nature by contrast is devoid of selfhood That purpose in its entirety which the harmony
of the two constitutes contains within it actuality itself.
It is, at the same time the thought of actuality The
harmony of morality and nature or seeing that nature
is taken account of merely so far as consciousness finds
out natures unity with it the harmony of morality and
happiness is thought of as necessarily existing it is
postulated For to postulate or demand means that
something is thought to be which is not yet actual
a necessity affecting not the conception qua conception
but existence But the requirement or necessity is at the
same time essentially a relation through the conception
The existence demanded thus belongs not to something
present in the mind of some chance individual consciousness but is implied in the very notion of morality
itself whose true content is the unity of pure with
individual consciousness It falls to the individual
consciousness to see that this unity is for it an actuality happiness as regards the content of the purpose
and existence in general as regards its form The existence thus demanded the unity of both is therefore not a wish nor looked at qua purpose is it of
such a kind as to be still uncertain of attainment
the purpose is rather a demand of reason or an immediate certainty and presupposition of reason
The first experience above referred to and this postulate are not the only experience and postulate a whole
round of postulates comes to light For nature is not
merely this completely detached external mode in
which as a bare pure object consciousness has to
realise its purpose Consciousness is per se essentially
something for which this other detached reality exists
ie it is itself something contingent and natural This
nature which is properly its own is sensibility which
taking the form of volition in the shape of Impulses and
Inclinations has by itself a determinate essential being
of its own, ie has specific particular purposes and
thus is opposed to abstract will with its pure purpose In
contrast with this opposition however pure consciousness rather takes the relation of sensibility to it the
absolute unity of sensibility with it to be the essential
fact Both of these pure thought and sensibility
are essentially and inherently one consciousness and
pure thought is just that for which and in which this
pure unity exists but for it qua consciousness the
opposition between itself and its impulses holds In
this conflict between reason and sensibility the essential thing for reason is that the conflict should be resolved and that the unity of both should come out as
a result not the original unity which consisted in
both the opposites being in one individual but a unity
which arises out of the known opposition of the two
So attained such a unity is then the actual morality for
in it is contained the opposition through which the self
is a consciousness or first becomes concrete and in
actual fact self and at the same time universal In
other words, we find there expressed that process of
mediation which as we see is essential to morality
Since of the two factors in opposition sensibility is
otherness out and out is the negative while on the
other hand pure thought of duty is the ultimate
essence which cannot possibly be surrendered in any
respect it seems as if the unity produced can be brought
about only by doing away with sensibility But since
sensibility is itself a moment of this process of producing the unity is the aspect of actuality we have
in the first instance, to be content to express the unity
in this form sensibility should be in conformity with
morality
This unity is likewise a postulated existence it is not
there as a fact for what is there is consciousness or
the opposition of sensibility and pure consciousness
All the same the unity is not a something per se
like the first postulate in which free external nature
constitutes an aspect and the harmony of nature with
moral consciousness in consequence falls outside the
latter Rather nature is here that which lies within
consciousness and we have here to deal with morality
as such with a harmony which is the
active selfs very own Consciousness has therefore
of itself to bring about this harmonious unity and
to be always making progress in morality The
completion of this result however is pushed away
into the remote infinite because if it actually entered
the life of consciousness as an actual fact the moral
consciousness would be done away with For morality
is only moral consciousness qua negative force sensibility has merely a negative significance for the consciousness of pure duty it is something merely not in
conformity with duty By attaining that harmony
however morality qua consciousness ie its actuality
passes away just as in the moral consciousness or
actuality its harmony vanishes The completion is
therefore not to be reached as an actual fact it is to
be thought of merely as an absolute task or problem
ie one which remains a problem pure and simple
Nevertheless its content has to be thought as some
thing which unquestionably has to be and must not
remain a problem whether we imagine the moral
consciousness quite cancelled in the attainment of this
goal or not Which of these exactly is the case cannot very well be clearly distinguished in the dim distance of infinitude to which the attainment of the end
has to be postponed just because we cannot decide
the point We shall be strictly speaking bound to
say that a definite idea on the matter ought to be
of no interest and ought not to be sought for because
this leads to contradictions the contradiction in speaking of an undertaking that at once ought to remain an
undertaking and yet ought to be carried out and the
contradiction in speaking of a morality which is not
consciousness ie which is no longer actual By
adopting the view however that morality when completed would contain a contradiction the sacredness
of moral truth would be seriously affected and an
unconditional duty would appear something unreal
The first postulate was the harmony of morality and
objective nature the final purpose of the world the
other was the harmony of morality and will in its senVgjuous form in the form of impulse etc the final
purpose of selfconsciousness as such The former is
the harmony in the form of implicit immanent existence the latter the harmony in the form of explicit
selfexistence That however which connects these
two extreme final purposes which are thought and
operates as their mediating ground is the process of
concrete action itself They are harmonies whose
moments in their abstract distinctiveness from each
other have not yet become definitely objective this
takes place in concrete actuality in which the aspects
appear in consciousness proper each as the other of
the other The postulates arising by this means contain harmonies which are now completely realised and
objective whereas formerly they were merely separated
into implicit and explicit immanent and selfexistent
The moral consciousness qua bare and simple knowledge and willing of pure duty is brought by the
process of acting upon an object opposed to that
abstract simplicity into relation with the manifold
actuality which various cases present and thereby
assumes a moral attitude varied and manifold in
character Hence arise on the side of content the
plurality of laws generally and on the side of form
the contradictory powers of intelligent knowing consciousness and of a being devoid of consciousness
To begin with as regards the plurality of duties it is
merely the aspect of pure or bare duty in them which
in general appeals to the moral consciousness as being
of significance the many duties qua many are determinate and therefore are not as such anything
sacred for the moral consciousness At the same time
however being necessary in virtue of the very nature
of action which implicates a manifold actuality and
hence manifold types of moral attitude those many
duties must be looked on as having a substantial
existence and value Furthermore since they can only
exist in a moral consciousness they exist at the same
time in another consciousness than that for which only
pure duty qua bare duty is sacred and selfsufficient
It is thus postulated that there is another consciousness which renders them sacred or which knows them
as duties and wills them so The first maintains pure
duty indifferent towards all specific content and duty
consists merely in being thus indifferent towards it
The other however contains the equally essential relation to the process of action and the necessity therefore of determinate content since duties for this
other mean determinate duties the content is thus for
it just as essential as the form in virtue of which
the content is a duty at all This consciousness is
consequently such that in it the universal and the
particular are through and through one its essential
principle is thus the same as that of the harmony of
morality and happiness For this opposition between
morality and happiness expresses in like manner the
separation of the self-identical moral consciousness from
that actuality which qua manifold existence opposes and
conflicts with the simple nature of duty While however the first postulate expresses merely the objective
existential harmony between morality and nature
because nature is therein the negative of selfconsciousness is the aspect of existence this inherent harmony
on the other hand is now affirmed essentially as a
mode of consciousness For existence now appears as
the content of duty as that in the determinate duty
which gives it specific determinateness The immanent
harmony is thus the unity of elements which qua simple
ultimate elements are essentially thoughtcreated and
hence cannot exist except in a consciousness This
latter becomes now a master and ruler of the world
who brings about the harmony of morality and happiness and at the same time sanctifies duties in their
multiplicity To sanctify these duties means this
much that the consciousness of pure duty cannot
straightway and directly accept the determinate or
specific duty as sacred but because a specific duty
owing to the nature of concrete action which is something specific and definite is all the same necessary
its necessity falls outside that consciousness and holds
inside another consciousness which thus mediates or
connects determinate and pure duty and is the reason
why that specific duty also has validity
In the concrete act however consciousness proceeds
to work as this particular self as completely individual
it directs its activity on actual reality as such and takes
this as its purpose for it wants to perform something
definite Duty in general thus falls outside it and
within another being which is the consciousness and
sacred lawgiver of pure duty The consciousness which
acts just because it acts accepts the other consciousness that of bare duty and admits its validity immediately this pure duty is thus a content of another
consciousness and is only indirectly or in a mediate
way sacred for the active consciousness viz in virtue
of this other consciousness
Because it is established in this manner that the
validity the bindingness of duty as something wholly
and absolutely sacred falls outside the actual consciousness this latter thereby stands altogether on one side
as the incomplete moral consciousness Just as in
regard to its knowledge it is aware of itself as that
whose knowledge and conviction are incomplete and contingent in the same way as regards its willing it feels
itself to be that whose purposes are affected with sensibility On account of its un worthiness therefore it
cannot look on happiness as something necessary but
as a something contingent and can only expect happiness as the result of grace
But though its actuality is incomplete duty is still so
far as its pure will and knowledge are concerned held
to be the essential truth In principle therefore so far
as the notion is opposed to actual reality in other
words, in thought it is perfect The absolute truth
duty is however just this object of thought and is
something postulated beyond the actual It is therefore the thought in which the morally imperfect knowledge and will are held to be perfect and since it
takes this imperfection to have full weight in which
consequently happiness is meted out according to
worthiness ie according to the merit ascribed
This completes the meaning of the moral attitude
For in the conception of moral selfconsciousness the
two aspects pure duty and actual reality are affirmed
of a single unity and thereby the one like the other is
put forward not as something selfcomplete but as a
moment or as cancelled and transcended This becomes consciously explicit in the last phase of the moral
attitude or point of view Consciousness we there saw
places pure duty in another form of being than its own
consciousness ie it regards pure duty partly as something ideally presented partly as what does not by itself
hold good indeed the nonmoral is rather what is
held to be perfect In the same way it affirms itself to
be that whose actuality not being in conformity with
duty is transcended and qua transcended or in the
presented idea of what is absolute pure duty no longer
contradicts morality
For the moral consciousness itself however its moral
attitude does not mean that consciousness therein develops its own proper notion and makes this its object
It has no consciousness of this opposition either as
regards the form or the content thereof the elements
composing this opposition it does not relate and compare
with one another but goes forward on its own course
of development without being the connecting principle
of those moments For it is only aware of the essence
pure and simple ie the object so far as this is
duty so far as this is an abstract object of its pure
consciousness qua pure knowledge in other words, it is
only aware of this object as itself Its procedure is thus
merely that of thinking not conceiving is by way of
thoughts not notions Consequently it does not yet find
the object of its actual consciousness transparently
clear to itself it is not the absolute notion which
alone grasps otherness as such its absolute opposite
as its very self Its own reality as well as all objective
reality no doubt is held to be something unessential
but its freedom is that of pure thought in opposition
to which therefore nature has likewise arisen as something equally free Because both are found in like manner
within it both the freedom which belongs to external
being and the inclusion of this existence within consciousness its object comes to be an existing object
which is at the same time merely a thoughtproduct
In the last phase of its attitude or point of view the
content is essentially so constituted that its being has
the character of something presented an idea and this
union of being and thinking is expressed as what in fact
it is viz Presentation
When we look at the moral view of the world in such
a way that this objective result is nothing else than
the very principle or notion of moral selfconsciousness which it makes objective to itself there arises
through this consciousness concerning the form of its
origin another mode of exhibiting this view of the world
The first stage which forms the starting point is the
actual moral selfconsciousness or is the fact that there is
such a selfconsciousness at all For the notion establishes moral selfconsciousness in the form that for it all
reality in general has essential being only so far as such
reality is in conformity with duty and that notion
establishes this essential element as knowledge ie in
immediate unity with the actual self This unity is thus
itself actual is a moral actual consciousness The latter
now qua consciousness presents its content to itself as
an object viz as the final purpose of the world as the
harmony of morality with all reality Since however it
represents this unity as object and is not yet the complete notion which has the object as such in its grasp
this unity is taken to be something negative of or
opposed to selfconsciousness ie the unity falls outside
it as something beyond its actual reality but at the
same time of such a nature as to be also existent
though merely thought of
This selfconsciousness which qua selfconsciousness
is something other than the object thus finds itself left
with the want of harmony between the consciousness of
duty and actual reality a reality too which is its own
The proposition consequently now runs thus there is
no morally complete actual selfconsciousness and
since what is moral only is in the long run so far as
it is complete for duty is the pure unadulterated
ultimate element and morality consists merely
in conformity to this pure principle the second proposition runs there is no morally actual existence
at all
Since however in the third place it is a self it is
inherently the unity of duty and actual reality This
unity thus becomes its object as completed morality
but as something beyond its actual reality and yet
a beyond which still ought to be real
In this final stage and last expression of the synthetic
unity of the two first propositions the selfconscious
reality as well as duty is only affirmed as a transcended or superseded moment For neither of them is
alone neither is isolated on the contrary these factors
whose essential characteristic lies in being free from
one another, are thus each in that unity no longer free
from the other each is transcended Hence as regards content they become as such object each of them
holds good for the other and as regards form they
become such that this interchange on their part is at the
same time merely in idea is merely ideally presented
Or again the actually nonmoral because it is at the
same time pure thought and elevated above its own
actual reality is in idea still moral and is taken to be
entirely sufficing In this way the first proposition that
there is a moral selfconsciousness is reinstated but
bound up with the second that there is none that is
to say there is one but merely in idea In other
words, there is indeed none but it is all the same
allowed by some other consciousness to pass for one
The first stage fails as it stands to do complete justice to the full meaning of morality Both elements in the spiritually complete individual are
essential and each has to be recognised The universal must be objectified
in nature external nature and sensibility and nature must be
subjectivised in spirit Another condition or stage of the moral consciousness therefore is found where the equality of value of the
elements of the moral consciousness is admitted without these elements
being completely fused into a single and total attitude The universal is
realised in many ways and forms and each is accepted in turn as the true
moral reality The mind passes from one to the other when one is
accepted the other is set aside The moral consciousness tries so to say to
hide from itself the endless diversity of its appearances simply because it
clings tenaciously to the idea that the inherent self completeness of itself
is a unity per se which can only admit diversity on sufferance Formerly
it eliminated all diversity by eliminating the source of diversity nature
Here it is forced to admit diversity and yet cannot give up the claim to
be an abstract single unity independent of difference Thus its condition
here is a mixture of selfrealisation and self sophistication a condition
which Hegel characterises as Dissemblance and which borders upon
and may pass into Hypocrisy Hegel regards this attitude as the
inevitable outcome of the preceding
In the moral attitude of experience we see on one
side consciousness itself produce its object in a conscious way We find that neither does it pick up the
object as something external nor does the object come
before it in an unconscious manner Rather consciousness throughout proceeds on a certain basis and from
this establishes the objective reality It thus knows this
objective element to be itself for it is aware of itself as
the active agent producing this object It seems in
consequence to attain here its peace and satisfaction
for this can only be found where it does not need to go
any more beyond its object because this object no
longer goes beyond it On the other side however it
really puts the object away outside itself as something
beyond itself But this latter selfcontained entity is
at the same time put there as something that is not
detached from selfconsciousness but really there on
behalf of and by means of it
The moral attitude is therefore in fact nothing else
than the developed expression of this fundamental contradiction in its various aspects It is to use a Kantian
phrase which is here most appropriate a perfect
Consciousness in developing this situation proceeds by fixing
definitely one moment passing thence immediately
over to another and doing away with the first But
in the way it has now set up this second moment it
also shifts this again and really makes
the opposite the essential element At the same time
it is conscious of its contradiction and of this displacement for it passes from one moment immediately in
its relation to this very moment right over to the opposite Because a moment has for it no reality at all it
affirms that very moment as real or what comes
to the same thing in order to assert one moment
as per se existent it asserts the opposite as the per se
existent It thereby confesses that as a matter of fact
it is in earnest about neither of them The various
moments of this fraudulent process we must look at
more closely
Let us allow the assumption that there is an actual
moral consciousness to rest on its own basis in the first
instance, because the assumption is not directly made
with reference to something preceding and let us turn
to the harmony of morality and nature the first
postulate It is to be immanent not explicitly for
actual conscious life not really present the present
is rather simply the contradiction between the two
In the present morality is taken to be something
at hand and actual reality to be so situated or
placed that it is not in harmony with morality
The concrete moral consciousness however is active
consists in acting that is what constitutes the
actuality of its morality In the very process of acting however that place or semblance is immediately
displaced is dissembled for action is nothing else
than the actualisation of the inner moral purpose
nothing but the production of an actuality constituted
and determined by purpose in other words, the production of the harmony of moral purpose and reality
itself At the same time the performance of the
action is a conscious fact it is the presence of
this unity of reality and purpose and because in the
completed act consciousness realises itself as a given
particular consciousness or sees existence return into
itself qua particular and in this consists the nature
of enjoyment there is eo ipso also contained in the
realisation of moral purpose that form of its realisation
which is called enjoyment and happiness
Action thus as a fact fulfils directly what it was
asserted could not take place at all fulfils what was to
be merely a postulate was to He merely beyond
Consciousness therefore expresses through its deed that
it is not in earnest in making the postulate since the
meaning of acting is really that it makes a present fact
of what was not to be in the present And since the
harmony is postulated for the sake of the action for
what is to become actual through action must be implicit otherwise the actuality would not be possible
the connexion of action with the postulate is so constituted that for the sake of the action ie for the sake
of Wie actual harmony of purpose and reality this harmony is put forward as not actual as far away as
beyond
Since action does take place the want of adaptation
between purpose and reality is thus in general not taken
seriously Action itself on the other hand does seem
to be taken seriously But as a matter of fact the
actual deed done is the action of a particular consciousness and so is itself merely something particular and
the result contingent The end of reason however
being the allcomprehensive universal end is nothing
short of the entire world a final purpose which goes
far beyond the content of this particular act and
therefore is to be placed altogether above anything
actually done Because the universal best ought to be
carried out nothing good is done In point of fact,
however the nothingness of actual action and the
reality of the entire purpose alone which are here upheld these are on all hands again shifted or dissembled The moral act is not something contingent
and restricted its essential nature lies in pure duty
This pure duty constitutes the sole entire purpose and
the act whatever may be the limitation of the content
being the actualisation of that purpose is the accomplishment of the entire absolute purpose Or if again
we take the reality in the sense of nature which has
laws of its own and stands over against pure duty and
take it in such a way that duty cannot realise its law
within nature then since duty as such is the essential
element we are when acting not in fact concerned about
the accomplishment of pure duty which is the whole purpose for the accomplishment would then rather have
as its end not pure duty but the opposite viz reality
But there is again a shifting from the position that
it is not reality with which we have to do For by the
very notion of moral action pure duty is essentially an
active consciousness Action thus ought certainly to take
place absolute duty ought to be expressed in the whole
of nature and moral law to become natural law
If then we allow this highest good to stand for the
essentially real consciousness is not altogether in earnest
with morality For in this highest good nature has
not a different law from what morality has Moral
action itself in consequence drops for action takes
place only under the assumption of a negative or opposing element which is to be cancelled by means of
the act But if nature conforms to the moral law then
undoubtedly this moral law would be violated by
acting by cancelling what already exists
On that mode of interpretation then there has arisen
as the essential situation one which renders moral action
superfluous and in which moral action does not take
place at all Hence the postulate of the harmony
between morality and reality a harmony involved in
the very notion of moral action which means bringing
the two into agreement finds on this view too an expression which takes the form because moral action
is the absolute purpose the absolute purpose is that
moral action do not take place at all
If we put these moments together through which consciousness has gone on presenting its ideas of its moral
life we see that it cancels each one again in its opposite
It starts from the position that for it morality and
reality do not make a harmony but it is not in earnest
with that for in the moral act it is conscious of the
presence of this harmony But neither is it in earnest
with this action since the action is something particular while it has such a high purpose the highest
good This however is once more merely a dissemblance of the actual fact for thereby all action and all
morality would fall to the ground In other words, it
is not strictly in earnest with moral action on the con
trary it really feels that what is most to be wished
for the absolutely desirable is that the highest good
were carried out and moral action superfluous
From this result consciousness must go on still further in its contradictory procedure and must of necessity again dissemble the abolition of moral action
Morality is the inherently essential in order
that it may have place the final end of the world
cannot be carried out rather the moral consciousness must exist for itself and must find lying before
it a nature opposing it But it must per se be
completed This leads to the second postulate of the
harmony of itself and sensibility the nature immediately within it Moral selfconsciousness sets up its
purpose as pure purpose as independent of inclinations
and impulses so that this bare purpose has abolished
within itself the ends of sensibility But this cancelling of the element of sense is no sooner set up
than it is again dissembled The moral consciousness
acts it brings its purpose into reality and selfconscious sensibility which should be done away with
is precisely the mediating element between pure consciousness and reality is the instrument used by
the former for the realisation of itself or is the organ
of what is called impulse inclination It is thus
not really in earnest in cancelling inclinations and
impulses for these are just selfconsciousness making
itself actual Moreover they ought not to be suppressed but merely to be in conformity with reason
They are too in conformity with it for moral action
is nothing else than selfrealising consciousness consciousness taking on the form of an impulse ie it
is immediately the realised actually present harmony
of impulse and morality But in point of fact, the
impulse is not only this empty conscious form which
might possibly have within itself a spring of action
other than the impulse in question and be driven on
by that For sensibility is a kind of nature which contains within itself its own laws and springs of action
consequently morality cannot seriously mean to be
the inciting motive
the angle of inclination for inclinations For since these
latter have their own fixed character and peculiar content the consciousness to which they were to conform
would rather be in conformity with them a conformity
which moral selfconsciousness declines to adopt The
harmony between the two is thus merely implicit and
postulated
In moral action the realised or present harmony of
morality and sensibility was set up at one moment and
at the next is displaced The harmony is in a misty
distance beyond consciousness where there is nothing
more to be accurately distinguished or grasped for to
grasp this unity which we have just tried to do has
proved impossible
In this merely immanent or implicit harmony however consciousness gives up itself altogether This immanent state is its moral completion where the struggle
of morality and sensibility has ceased and the latter is
in conformity to the former in a way which cannot be
made out On that account this completion is again
merely a dissemblance of the actual case for in
point of fact morality would be really giving up itself
in that completion because it is only consciousness of
absolute purpose qua pure and simple purpose ie in
opposition to all other purposes Morality is both the
activity of this pure purpose and at the same time
the consciousness of rising above sensibility of being
mixed up with sensibility and of opposing and struggling
with it That this moral completion is not taken seriously is directly expressed by consciousness in the fact
that it shifts this completion away into infinity ie
asserts that the completion is never completed
Thus it is really only the middle state of being incomplete that is admitted to have any value a state nevertheless which at least ought to be one of progress towards completion Yet it cannot be so for advancing
in morality would mean approaching its annihilation and
disappearance For the goal would be the nothingness
above mentioned the abolition of morality and consciousness itself but to come ever nearer and nearer
to nothing means to decrease Besides advancing
would in general in the same way as decreasing
introduce distinctions of quantity into morality but
these are quite inadmissible in such a sphere In
morality qua mode of consciousness which takes the
ethical end to be pure duty we cannot think at all of
difference least of all of the superficial difference of
quantity there is only one virtue only one pure duty
only one morality
Since then it is not moral completion that is taken
seriously but rather the middle state ie as just explained the condition of no morality we thus come
by another way back to the content of the first postulate For we cannot perceive how happiness is to be
demanded for this moral consciousness on the ground
of its worthiness to be happy It is well aware of its
not being complete and cannot therefore in point of
fact, demand happiness as a desert as something of
which it is worthy It can ask happiness to be given
merely as an act of free grace ie it can only ask for
happiness as such and as a substantive element by itself it cannot expect it except as the result of chance
and caprice not because there is any absolute reason
of the above sort The condition of nonmorality
herein expresses just what it is that it is concerned
not about morality but about happiness alone without reference to morality
By this second aspect of the moral point of view the
assertion of the first aspect wherein disharmony between morality and happiness is presupposed is also
cancelled One may pretend to have found by experience
that in the actual present the man who is moral often
fares badly while the man who is not often comes off
happily Yet the middle state of incomplete morality
the condition which has proved to be the essential one
shows clearly that this perception that morality fares
badly this experience which ought to be but is not is
merely a dissemblance of the real facts of the case
For since morality is not completed ie since morality
in point of fact is not what can there be in experience
that morality should fare badly
Since at the same time it has come out that the
point at issue concerns happiness alone it is manifest
that in making the judgment the man who has no
morality comes off well there was no intention to
convey thereby that there is something wrong in such
a case The designation of an individual as one devoid
of morality necessarily falls to the ground when morality
in general is incomplete such a characterisation rests
indeed on pure caprice Hence the sense and content
of that judgment of experience is simply this that
happiness as such should not have fallen to some who
got it ie the judgment is an expression of envy which
is assuming the covering cloak of morality The reason
however why we think good luck as we call it should
fall to the lot of others is good friendship which ungrudgingly grants and wishes them and wishes itself
too this favour this accident of good fortune
Morality then in the moral consciousness is not
completed This is what is now established But its
essence consists in being merely what is complete and
so pure morality incomplete morality is therefore
impure in other words, is Immorality Morality itself thus exists in another being than the actual concrete consciousness This other is a holy moral legislator
Morality which is not completed in consciousness
the morality which is the reason for making those
postulates means in the first instance, that morality
when it is set up as actual in consciousness stands in
relation to something else to an existence and thus
itself preserves and implies otherness or distinction
whence arises a manifold plurality of moral commands
The moral selfconsciousness at the same time however
looks on these many duties as unessential for it is
concerned with merely the one pure duty and this
plurality of duties so far as they are determinate duties
have no true reality for selfconsciousness They can
thus have their real truth accepted only in another
consciousness and are what they are not for the actual
moral selfconsciousness sacred through a holy lawgiver
But this too is again merely a dissembling of the
actual fact For moral self consciousness is to itself
the absolute and duty is simply and solely what it
knows to be duty It however recognises only pure
duty as duty what is not sacred in its view is not in
itself sacred at all and what is not per se sacred cannot
be rendered so by some being that is sacred Moral
consciousness further is not really serious in allowing
something to be made sacred by another consciousness
than its own For only that is without qualification
sacred in its eyes which is made sacred through its own
action and is sacred within it It is thus just as little
in earnest in treating this other being as a holy being
for this would mean that within it something was to
attain an essential significance which for the moral
consciousness ie in itself has none
If the sacred being was postulated in order that duty
might have binding validity within the moral consciousness not qua pure duty but as a plurality of
specific duties then this must again be dissembled and
the other being must be solely sacred in so far as
only pure duty has binding validity within the moral
consciousness Pure duty has also in point of fact,
validity and bindingness only in another being not in
the moral consciousness Although within the latter
pure morality seems alone to hold good still this must
be put right in another form for it is at the same
time a natural consciousness Morality is in it
affected and conditioned by sensibility and thus is not
by itself selfcontained but a contingent result of free
will in it however qua pure will morality is a contingency of knowledge Taken by itself therefore
morality is in another being is selfcomplete only in
another reality than the actual moral consciousness morality because in its case morality does not stand in
relation to nature and sensibility Yet the reality of pure
duty lies in its actualisation in nature and sensibility
The moral consciousness accounts for its incompleteness
by the fact that morality in its case has a positive relation to nature and sensibility since it holds an essential
moment of morality to be that morality should have
simply and solely a negative relation towards nature
and sensibility The pure moral being on the other
hand because far above the struggle with nature and
sense does not stand in a negative relation to them
Thus in point of fact, the positive relation to them
alone remains in its case ie there remains just what
a moment ago passed for the incomplete for what was
not moral Pure morality however entirely cut off
from actual reality so as likewise to be even without
positive relation to reality would be a blank unreal
abstraction where the very notion of morality which
consists in thinking of pure duty and in willing and
doing would be absolutely done away with This other
being so purely and entirely moral is again therefore
a mere dissemblance of the actual fact and has to be
given up
In this purely moral being however the moments of
the contradiction in which this synthetic ideational
process is carried on come closer together So likewise do the opposites taken up alternately now this
and also that and also the other opposites which are
allowed to follow one after the other with one opposite
constantly set aside by another yet without these
ideas ever being brought together So close do they
come that consciousness here has to give up its moral
view of the world and retreat within itself
It knows its morality as incomplete because it is
affected by an opposing sensibility and nature which
partly perturb morality as such and partly give rise
to a plurality of duties by which in concrete cases
of real action consciousness finds itself embarrassed
For each case is the concrete focus of many moral
relations just as an object of perception in general
is a thing with many qualities And since a determinate
duty is a purpose it has a content its content is a
part of the purpose and so morality is not pure
morality This latter then has its real existence in
some other being But such reality means nothing
else than that morality is here self complete in itself
and for itself for itself ie is morality of a consciousness in itself ie has existence and actuality
In that first incomplete consciousness morality is
not realised and carried out It is there something
immanent and implicit in the sense of a mere thoughtelement for it is associated with nature and sensibility with the actuality of external existence and
conscious life which constitutes its content and nature
and sensibility are morally nothing In the second
morality is present as completed and not in the form
of an unrealised thoughtelement But this completion
consists just in the fact that morality has reality in a
consciousness in the sense of free reality objective existence in general is not something empty but filled out
full of content That is to say the completion of morality
is placed in this that what a moment ago was characterised as morally nothing is found present in morality and
inherent in it It is at one time to have validity simply
and solely as the unrealised thoughtelement a product
of pure abstraction but on the other hand is just as
certainly to have in this form no validity at all its
true nature is to consist in being opposed to reality
detached altogether therefrom and empty and then
again to consist in being actual reality
The syncretism or fusion of these contradictions
which is expressed in extenso in the moral attitude of
experience collapses internally since the distinction on
which it rests its distinction from something which
must be thought and stated as a necessity and is yet at
the same time not essential passes into one which does
not any longer exist even in words What at the end
is affirmed to be something with different aspects both
to be nothing and also real is one and the very same
existence and reality And what is to be absolute only
as something beyond actual existence and actual consciousness and at the same time to be only in consciousness and so qua beyond nothing at all this absolute is
pure duty and the knowledge that pure duty is the essentially real The consciousness which makes this distinction that is no distinction which announces actuality to
be at once what is nothing and what is real pronounces
pure morality to be both the ultimate truth and also to be
devoid of all true reality and expresses together in one
and the same breath ideas which it formerly separated
such a consciousness itself proclaims that it is not in
earnest with this characterisation and separation of the
moments of self and inherent reality It shows on the
contrary that what it announces as absolute existence
apart from consciousness it really keeps enclosed
within the self of selfconsciousness and that what
it gives out as something entirely in thought or absolutely inherent and implicit it just for that reason
takes to be something which has no truth at all
It becomes clear to consciousness that placing these
moments apart from each other is mentally displacing them is a dissemblance and it would be
hypocrisy were it really to keep to this But being
pure moral selfconsciousness it flees from this discordance between what it represents and what constitutes
its essential nature flees from this untruth which gives
out as true what it holds to be untrue and turning
away with abhorrence it hastens back into itself The
consciousness which scorns such a moral idea of the
world is pure Conscience it is in its inmost
being simply spirit consciously assured or certain
of itself spirit which acts directly in the light
of this assurance which acts conscientiously without the intervention of those ideas and finds
its true nature in this direct immediacy
While however this sphere of dissemblance is nothing
else than the development of moral selfconsciousness in
its various moments and is consequently its reality
so too this selfconsciousness by returning into itself
will become in its inmost nature nothing else This
returning into itself indeed simply means that it has
come to be conscious that its truth is a pretended
truth a mere pretence As returning into itself it had
to be always giving out this pretended truth as its real
truth for it had to express and display itself as an
objective idea but it had to know all the same that
this is merely a dissemblance It would consequently
be in point of fact, hypocrisy all the while and its
abhorrence of such dissemblance would be itself the first
expression of hypocrisy
The onesidedness of each of the preceding stages is removed when the
moral consciousness assumes the attitude of Conscience Here the individual is at once selflegislating and yet sure of the unity and selfcompleteness of its own will in the midst of all diversity of moral content
The immediacy involved in the idea of a selflegislating will appears in
the perceptual directness of the action of conscience it sees what is
right and does the right without hesitation But it is not an abstract
faculty of willing independent of the varied content of the individual's
moral experience The universality of the individual permeates and pervades all the content of his being and makes him a concrete moral
individuality at home with himself in the smallest detail as well as in the
larger issues of his selfcomplete spiritual existence Conscience as Butler
says is a system or constitution analogous in the case of the individual to the objectified system of the state and its institutions The
selfdeception of the second onesided phase of moral experience seems also
to have no place in Conscience for Conscience is the transparent and selfrevealing unity in all the content of moral individuality Only on this
condition can it be absolutely confident and certain of itself in all its
functions and this certainty of itself is the inalienable characteristic of
conscience It thinks it cannot be deceived about itself can neither
delude itself nor others but freely realises all that it professes to be and
professes to be all that it realises It is thus the supreme achievement of
finite spiritual existence but it has no meaning apart from the existence
of finite spirit in the form of society
Its very conditions however give rise to delusion and deception
of another kind For so complete is its world and its life that it may
attempt to cut itself off from the concrete substance of actual society which
alone makes possible the existence of conscience It then tries to cultivate
goodness in solitary isolation from the actual social whole This is the
attitude of the beautiful soul a type of spiritual life cultivated by the
Moravians and familiar during the Romantic movement Novalia is
the bestknown example the classical interpretation of the mood was given in Goethes Meisters Lehrjahre Bk 6 It has the selfconfidence
and individual inspiration of Conscience but frankly rejects the concrete objectivity which secures for Conscience liberation from mere subjectivity The very rejection of objectivity is the only achievement of
the beautiful soul and is held to be the greatest triumph of its selfconscious freedom It flees from concrete moral action and luxuriates in
a state of selfhypnotised inactivity Still it takes up this attitude in the
interests of pure goodness and hence in withdrawing from the lowly
deeds of the daily moral life it indulges all the more in the selfcloistered
cult of the beauty of holiness It is moral individualism turned into
mystic selfabsorption Hegels analysis brings out that this type of
spirit is in principle as it was in fact the direct ally of moral evil For
its refusal to act means indifference to all action good and bad alike
and the rejection of the demands of duty is precisely immorality
its selfclosed isolation destroys the very principle of true morality
universality of will recognition and acknowledgment by others of the
claims of the individual will
But this extremity of finite spiritual experience is the opportunity of
Absolute Spirit The attitude of this mystical moral individuality is
indirectly an indication of the finitude of the moral point of view and
therefore of its failure to supply the absolute selfcompleteness which
spirit requires The very consciousness by finite spirit of its inherent
incompleteness is implicitly a consciousness of the Absolute Spirit The
consciousness of Absolute Spirit is the attitude of experience known as
Religion
The antinomy in the moral view of the world viz that
there is a moral consciousness and that there is none
or that the validity the bindingness of duty has its
ground beyond consciousness and conversely only takes
effect in consciousness these contradictory elements
had been combined in the idea in which the nonmoral
consciousness is to pass for moral its contingent knowledge and will to be accepted as fully sufficing and
happiness to be its lot as a matter of grace Moral selfconsciousness took this selfcontradictory idea not upon
itself but transferred it to another being But this
putting outside itself of what it must think as necessary is as much a contradiction in form as the other
was in content But that which appears as contradictory and that in the division and again dissolution
of which lies the round of activity peculiar to the
moral attitude are inherently the same for pure duty
qua pure knowledge is nothing else than the self of
consciousness and the self of consciousness is existence
and actuality and in the same way what is to be
beyond actual consciousness is nothing else than pure
thought is in fact the self Because this is so selfconsciousness for us or per se passes back into itself
and becomes aware that that being is its self in which
the actual is at once pure knowledge and pure duty It takes itself to be absolutely valid in its contingency
to be that which knows its immediate particular
existence as pure knowledge and action as the true
objective reality and harmony
This self of Conscience the phase of spiritual life
immediately certain of itself as absolute truth and
objective being is the third type of spiritual self It
is the outcome of the third sphere of the spiritual
world and may be shortly contrasted with the
two former types of self
The totality or actuality which is revealed as the
final result of the ethical world the world of the social
order is the self of a Person ethical personality its
existence lies in its being recognised and acknowledged
As the person is the self devoid of substance its existence is abstract reality too The person has a definite
standing and that directly and unconditionally
its self is the point in the sphere of its existence which
is immediately at rest That point is not torn away
from its universality the two the particular focus
and its universality are therefore not in a relational
process with regard to one another the universal is
in it without distinction and is neither the content of
the self, nor is the self filled by itself
The second self is the final truth and outcome of a
world of culture is spirit that has recovered itself after
and through disruption is absolute freedom In this
self the former immediate unity of individual existence and universality finds its elements separated from
one another. The universal which remains at the same
time a purely spiritual entity the state of recognition or
universal will and universal knowledge the universal is
object and content of the self, and its universal actuality But the universal has not there the form of existence detached from the self in this mode of self it
therefore gets no filling no positive content no world
Moral selfconsciousness indeed lets its universal
aspect get detached so that this aspect becomes a
nature of its own and at the same time it retains this
universality within itself in a superseded form But it
is merely a game of dissembling it constantly interchanges these two characteristics In the form of Conscience with its certainty of itself it first finds the
content to fill the former emptiness of duty as well as
the emptiness of right and the empty universal will
And because this certainty of self is at the same time
immediacy it finds in conscience definite existence
Having reached this level of its truth moral selfconsciousness then leaves or rather supersedes this
state of internal division and selfseparation whence
arose dissimulation the separation of its inherent being
from the self of pure duty qua pure purpose from
reality qua a nature and a sensibility opposed to mere
purpose It is when thus returned into itself concrete moral spirit which does not make for itself a bare
abstract standard out of the consciousness of pure duty
a standard to be set up against actual conscious life on
the contrary pure duty as also the sensuous nature
opposed to pure duty are superseded moments This
mode of spirit in its immediate unity is a moral being
making itself actual and an act is immediately a concrete embodiment of morality
Given a case of action it is an objectVe reality for
the knowing mind The latter qua cor science knows
it in a direct concrete manner and at the same time
it is merely as conscience knows it to be When knowledge is something other than its object it is contingent
in character Spirit however which is sure of its self
is not at all an accidental knowledge of that kind is
not a way of producing inside its own being ideas from
which reality is divorced On the contrary since the
separation between what is essential or inherent and
self has been given up a case of moral action falls
just as it is per se directly within immediate conscious
certainty the sensible feeling form of knowledge and
it merely is per se as it is in this form of knowledge
Action then qua realisation is in this way the
pure form of will the bare conversion of reality in
the sense of a given case into a reality that is performed
and done the conversion of the bare state of objective
knowledge into one of knowledge about reality as something produced and brought about by consciousness
Just as sensuous certainty is directly taken up or
rather converted into the essential life and substance
of spirit this other transformation is also simple and
unmediated a transition made through pure conception
without changing the content the content being conditioned by some interest on the part of the consciousness knowing it
Further conscience does not break up the circumstances of the case into a variety of duties It does not
operate as the positive general medium in which the
manifold duties each for itself would keep their substantial existence undisturbed If it did so either no action
could take place at all because of each concrete case in
general containing opposition and in the specific case of
morality opposition of duties and hence there would
always be one side injured one duty violated when the
act took definite shape or else if action did take
place the violation of one of the conflicting duties
would be the actual result brought about Conscience
is rather the negative single unity it is the absolute
self which does away with this variety of substantial
moral constituents It is simple action in accordance
with duty action which does not fulfil this or that
duty but knows and does what is concretely right It
is therefore in general and for the first time in moral
experience moral action as action and into this the
previous stage of mere consciousness of morality without action has passed
The concrete shape which the act takes may be
analysed by a conscious process of distinction into a
variety of properties ie in this case into a variety of
moral relationships and these may either be each
expressly held to be absolute as each must be if it
is to be duty or again subjected to comparison and
criticism In the simple moral action arising from
conscience duties are shed so promiscuously that
the isolated independence of all these separate entities
is immediately destroyed and the process of critically
considering and worrying about what our duty is finds
no place at all in the unshaken certainty of conscience
Just as little again do we find in conscience that
fluctuating uncertainty of mind which puts now socalled pure morality away from itself assigning it
to some other holy being and takes itself to be unholy
and then again on the other hand puts this moral
purity within itself and places in that other the connexion of the sensuous with the moral element
It renounces all these semblances and dissem
blances characteristic
of the moral point of view when it gives up thinking that there is a contradiction between duty and
actual reality According to this latter state of mind
I act morally when I am conscious of performing
merely pure duty and nothing else but that ie in fact
when I do not act When however I really act I am
conscious of an other of a reality which is there
before me and one which I want to bring about I have
a definite end and fulfil a definite duty There is something else therein than the pure duty which alone
was supposed to be kept in view
Conscience on the other hand is the sense that when
the moral consciousness declares pure duty to be the
essence of its action this bare purpose is a dissemblance
of the actual fact For the real fact is that bare duty
consists in the empty abstraction of pure thought and
finds its reality and content solely in some definite
actual existence an actuality which is actuality of
consciousness itself not of consciousness in the sense
of a thoughtentity but as an individual Conscience
for its own part finds its truth to lie in the direct certainty regarding itself This immediate concrete certainty of itself is true reality Looking at this certainty
from the point of view of the opposition which consciousness involves its own immediate particularity
constitutes the content of moral action and the form
of moral action is just this very self as a pure process
viz as the process of knowing in other words, is private
individual conviction
Looking more closely at the unity and the significance
of the moments of this stage we find that moral
consciousness conceived itself merely in the form of
the inherent principle or as ultimate essence qua
conscience however it lays hold of its explicit individual selfexistence or its self The
contradiction involved in the moral point of view
is resolved ie the distinction which lay at the basis
of its peculiar attitude proves to be no distinction and
melts into the process of pure negativity This process
of negativity is however just the self a single simple
self which is at once pure knowledge and knowledge
of itself as this individual conscious life This self
constitutes therefore the content of what formerly
was the empty essence for it is something actual and
concrete which no longer has the significance of being
a nature alien to the ultimate essence a nature independent and with laws of its own. As the negative
element it introduces distinction into the pure essence
a definite content and one too which has a value
in its own right as it stands
Further this self is qua pure selfidentical knowledge
the universal without qualification so that just this
knowledge being its very own knowledge being conviction constitutes duty Duty is no longer the universal appearing over against and opposed to the self
duty is known to have in this condition of separation
and opposition no validity It is now the law which
exists for the sake of the self, and not the self for the
sake of the law The law and duty however have
for that reason not only the significance of existing
on their own account but also of being inherent
and essential for this knowledge is in virtue of
its identity with itself just what is inherently essential This inherent being gets also separated in consciousness from that direct and immediate unity with
selfexistence so contrasted and opposed it is objective
being it is being for something else
Duty itself now qua duty deserted by the self is
known and thought to be merely a moment it has
ceased to mean absolute being it has become degraded to something which is not a self does not exist
on its own account, and is thus what exists for something else But this existingforsomethingelse remains
just for that reason an essential moment because self
qua consciousness constitutes and establishes the
opposition between existenceforself and existenceforanother and now duty essentially means something immediately actual and is no longer a mere
abstract consciousness of duty
This existence for something else is then the inherently essential substance distinguished from the
self Conscience has not given up pure duty the
abstract implicit essence pure duty is the essential
moment of relating itself qua universality to others
Conscience is the common element of distinct selfconsciousnesses and this is the substance in which the act
secures subsistence and reality the moment enabling
recognition by others to take place The moral selfconsciousness does not possess this moment of recognition of pure consciousness which has definite existence and on that account really does not act at
all does not effectually actualise anything Its inherent nature is for it either the abstract unreal essence
or else existence in the form of a reality which has no
spiritual character The actual reality of conscience
however is one which is a self ie an existence conscious
of itself the spiritual element of being recognised
Doing something is therefore merely the translation
of its particular content into that objective element
where it is universal and is recognised and this very
fact that the content is recognised makes the deed an
actuality The action is recognised and thereby real
because the actual reality is immediately bound up
with conviction or knowledge or, in other words,
knowledge of its purpose is immediately and at once
the element of existence universal recognition For
the essence of the act duty consists in the conviction
conscience has about it This conviction is just the
inherent principle itself it is inherently universal selfconsciousness in other words, is recognition and hence
reality The result achieved under conviction of duty
is therefore directly one which has substantial solid existence Thus we hear nothing more there about good
intention not coming to anything definite or about the
good man faring badly What is known as duty is
carried out completely and becomes an actual fact just
because what is dutiful is the universal for all selfconsciousnesses that which is recognised acknowledged and thus objectively is Taken separately and
alone however without the content of self this duty
is existenceforanother the transparent element which
has merely the significance of an unsubstantial ultimate
factor in general
If we look back on the sphere where in general
spiritual reality made its appearance we find that
the principle involved was that the utterance of
individuality is the absolutely real the ultimately
selfsufficing But the shape which in the first instance, gave expression to this notion was the
honest consciousness which was occupied and concerned with abstract fact itself This fact
itself was there a predicate In conscience however
it is for the first time a Subject which has put all
aspects of consciousness in it and for which all these
moments substantiality in general external existence
and essence of thought are contained in this certainty of itself The fact itself has substantiality
in general in the ethical order external
existence in culture selfknowing essence of thought
in morality and in conscience it is the Subject
which knows these moments within itself While the
honest consciousness is for ever grasping merely the
bare and empty fact itself conscience on the other
hand secures the fact itself in its fullness a fullness
which conscience of itself supplies Conscience has
this power through its knowing the moments of consciousness as moments and controlling them because
it is their negative essential principle
When conscience is considered in relation to the
particular features of the opposition which appears in
action and when we consider its consciousness regarding the nature of those features its attitude towards
the reality of the particular case where action takes
effect is in the first instance, that of knowledge So
far as the aspect of universality is present in such
knowledge it is the business of conscientious action
qua knowledge to compass the reality before it in
an unrestricted exhaustive manner and thus get to
know exactly the circumstances of the case and give
them due consideration This knowledge however
since it is aware of universality as a moment is in
consequence a kind of knowledge of these circumstances which is conscious all the while of not embracing
them is conscious of not being conscientious in its procedure The genuinely universal and pure relation of
knowledge would be one towards something not opposed a relation to itself But action through the opposition essentially implied in action is related to what
negates consciousness to a reality existing per se Contrasted with the simple nature of pure consciousness
the absolute other externality multiplicity per se is
a sheer plurality of circumstances which breaks up indefinitely and spreads in all directions backwards in
their conditions sidewards in their associations forwards in their consequences
The conscientious mind is aware of this state of affairs
and of its relation thereto and knows it is not acquainted
to the full and complete extent required with the case
in which its action takes effect and knows that its
pretence of conscientiously weighing and considering
all the circumstances is futile This acquaintance with
and consideration of all the circumstances however
are not entirely absent but they are merely present
as a moment as something which is only for others
and the conscientious mind holds its incomplete knowledge to be sufficient and complete merely because it
is its own knowledge
In a similar way is constituted the process in
connection with the universality of the essential
principle the universality by which the content is
characterised when determined through pure consciousness Conscience when it goes on to act takes
up a relation to the various sides of the case The
case breaks up into separate elements and the relation
of pure consciousness towards it does the same
whereby the multiplicity characteristic of the case
becomes a multiplicity of duties Conscience knows
that it has to select and decide amongst them
for none of them specifically in its content is an
absolute duty only duty pure and simple is so But
this abstract entity has in its realisation come to denote
selfconscious ego Spirit certain of itself is at rest
within itself in the form of conscience and its real
universality its duty lies in its bare conviction concerning duty This bare conviction as such is as empty
as pure duty pure in the sense that nothing within it
no definite content is duty Action however has to
take place the individual must determine to do something or other and spirit which is certain of itself
in which the inherent principle has attained the significance of selfconscious ego knows it has this determination this specific content within the immediate
certainty of its own self This certainty being a
determination and a content is natural consciousness ie the various impulses and inclinations
Conscience admits no content as absolute for it because it is absolute negativity of all that is definite
It determines from itself alone The circle of the self,
however within which determinateness as such falls is
socalled sensibility in order to get a content out
of the immediate certainty of self there is no other
means to be found except sensibility
Everything that in previous modes of experience was
presented as good or bad law and right is something
other than immediate certainty of self it is a universal which is now a relative entity an existenceforanother Or looked at otherwise it is an object which
while connecting and relating consciousness with itself
comes between consciousness and its own proper truth
and instead of that object being the immediacy of consciousness it rather cuts consciousness off from itself
For conscience however certainty of self is the
pure direct and immediate truth and this truth is
thus its immediate certainty of self presented as
content ie its truth is altogether the caprice of the
individual, and the accidental content of his unconscious natural existence his sensibility
This content at the same time passes for essential
moral reality for duty For pure duty as was found
when testing and examining laws is utterly indifferent
to every content and gets along with any Here it has
at the same time the essential form of selfexistence of
existing on its own account and this form of individual
conviction is nothing else than the sense of the emptiness of pure duty and the consciousness that this is
merely a moment that its substantial independence is
a predicate which finds its subject in the individual
whose caprice gives pure duty content can connect
every content with this form and attach its feeling of
conscientiousness to any content
An individual increases his property in a certain way
It is a duty that each should see to the maintenance
of himself and family and no less ensure the possibility
of his being serviceable to his neighbours and of doing
good to those standing in need The individual is aware
that this is a duty for this content is directly contained
in the certainty he has of himself He perceives
further that he fulfils this particular duty in this particular case Other people possibly consider the specific
way he adopts as fraud they hold by other sides
of the concrete case presented while he holds firmly to this particular side of it by the fact of his being
conscious that the increase of property is a pure and
absolute duty
In the same way there is fulfilled by the individual
as a duty what other people call violence and wrongdoing the duty of asserting ones independence
against others and again the duty of preserving
ones life and maintaining the possibility of being
useful to ones neighbours Others call this cowardice
but what they call courage really violates both
these duties But cowardice cannot be so stupid and
thoughtless as not to know that the maintenance
of life and the possibility of being useful to others
are duties so inept as not to be convinced of the
dutifulness of its action and not to know that
dutifulness consists in knowledge Otherwise it would
commit the absurdity of being without morality Since
morality lies in the consciousness of having fulfilled
ones duty this will not be lacking when the action is
what is called cowardice any more than when it is what
is called courage As the abstraction called duty
is capable of every content it is quite equal to this
latter content The agent acting knows what he does
to be duty and since he knows this and conviction as
to duty is just dutifulness he is thus recognised and
acknowledged by others The act thereby becomes
accepted as valid and has actual existence
It is of no avail to object to this freedom which puts
one kind of content as well as any other into this universal inert receptacle of pure duty and pure knowledge by asserting that another content ought to have
been put there For whatever the content be each
content has upon it the stain of determinateness from
which pure knowledge is free which pure knowledge
can disregard just as readily as it can take up every
determinateness in turn Every content through its
being determinate stands on the same footing with
every other even though it seems to have precisely the
character that the particularity in the content is
cancelled It may well seem since in concrete cases
duty breaks regularly into opposition and by doing
so sunders the opposites particularity and universality that the duty whose content is the universal
as such contains on that account ipso facto the nature
of pure duty and that thus form and content are here
entirely in accord On this view it might seem that
eg acting for the universal good for what is the best
for all is to be preferred to acting for what is the best
for the individual But this universal duty is in its
entirety what is present as selfcontained actual substance in the form of established law and right
and holds good independently of the individual's
knowledge and conviction and immediate interest It
is thus precisely that against the form of which morality
as a whole is directed As regards its content however
even this is determinate in character in so far as the
universally best is opposed to the individual best
Consequently its law is one from which conscience
knows itself to be absolutely free and it gives itself the
absolute privilege to add and pare to neglect as well
as fulfil it
Then again the above distinction of duty towards
the individual and duty towards the universal is not
something fixed and final when we look at the nature of
the opposition in question On the contrary what the
individual does for himself is to the advantage of the
universal as well The more he looks after his own
good not only is there the greater possibility of his usefulness to others his very reality consists merely in
his living and existing in connection with others His
individual enjoyment means ultimately and essentially
putting what is his own at the disposal of others
and helping them to secure their enjoyment In fulfilling duty to individuals and hence duty to self duty
to the general thus also gets fulfilled Weighing considering comparing duties should this appear here
would take the line of calculating the advantage which
the general would get from any given action But there
can be no such process partly because morality would
thereby be handed over to the inevitable contingency
characteristic of mere insight partly because it is
precisely the nature of conscience to have done with
all this calculating and weighing of duties and to
decide directly from itself without reasons of any
kind
In this way then conscience acts and maintains
itself in the unity of its essential being and its
objective existence for itself in the unity of pure
thought and individuality it is spirit certain of itself
which inherently possesses its own truth within itself,
in its knowledge a knowledge in the sense of knowledge of its duty It maintains its being therein by
the fact that the positive element in the act the
content as well as form of duty and the knowledge of
duty belong to the self to the certainty of itself
What however seeks to come before the self with an
inherent being of its own is held to be not truly
real merely a transcended element only a moment
Consequently it is not universal knowledge in general that has a value but what is known of the circumstances It puts into duty which is the universal immanent essence the content which it derives from its
natural individuality for the content is one that is
present in its own being This content in virtue of
the universal medium wherein it exists becomes the
duty which it carries out and empty bare duty is
through this very fact affirmed to be something transcended a moment This content is its emptiness
transcended and cancelled ie is the fulfilling of pure
duty
But at the same time conscience is detached from
every possible content It absolves itself from every
specific duty which would try to pass for a law In
the strength of its certainty of itself it has the majesty
of absolute selfsufficiency of absolute avrdpKeia to
bind or to loose This selfdetermination is at once
therefore absolute conformity to duty Duty is the
knowledge itself this pure and simple selfhood however is the immanent principle and essence for this
inherent principle is pure self identity and selfidentity
lies in this consciousness
This pure knowledge is immediately objective is
existenceforanother for qua pure self identity it is
immediacy it is objective being This being however
is at the same time pure universality the selfhood of
all in other words, action is acknowledged and hence
actual This being forms the element by which conscience directly stands on a footing of equality with
every selfconsciousness and this relation means not
an abstract impersonal law but the self of conscience
In that this right which conscience does is at the
same time however a fact for others a disparity seems
to affect conscience The duty which it fulfils is
a determinate content that content is no doubt
the self of consciousness and so its knowledge of itself
its identity with its self But when fulfilled when
planted in the general element of existence this identity
is no longer knowledge no longer this process of distinction which directly and at the same time does away
with its distinctions Rather in the sphere of existence distinction is set up as subsistent and the act is a
determinate specific one not identical with the element
of everybodys selfconsciousness and hence not necessarily acknowledged and recognised Both aspects
conscience qua acting and the general consciousness
acknowledging this act to be duty stand equally loose
from the specific character belonging to this deed On
account of this freedom and detachment the relation
of the two within the common medium of their connection is rather a relationship of complete disparity as a
result of which the consciousness doing and owning
the act finds itself in complete uncertainty regarding
the spirit which does the act and is certain of itself
This spirit acts and places in existence a particular
determinate characteristic others hold to this existence
as its truth and are therein certain of this spirit it has
therein expressed what it takes to be its duty But it
is detached and free from any specific duty it has
therefore left the point where other people think it
actually to be and this very medium of existence
and duty as inherently existing are held by it to be
merely transitory moments What it thus places
before them it also displaces again or rather has
eo ipso immediately displaced For its reality is
for it not the duty and determinate content thus
put forward but rather is the reality which it has
in its absolute certainty of itself
The other selfconsciousnesses do not know then
whether this particular conscience is morally good or is
wicked or rather not merely can they not know this
conscience but they must take it to be also wicked
For just as it stands loose to the determinate content
of duty and detached from duty as inherently existing
so do they likewise What is placed before them they
themselves know how to displace or dissemble it
is something expressing merely the self of another
individual not their own they do not merely know
themselves to be detached and free from it but have
to resolve and dissipate it within their own consciousness reduce it to nothingness by judgments and
explanations in order to preserve their own self
But the act of conscience is not merely this determination of existence a determinate content forsaken
by the pure self What ought to be binding as duty and
get recognised as such only is so through knowledge
and conviction as to its being duty by knowledge of
self in the deed done When the deed ceases to have
in it this element of self it ceases to be what is alone
its essential nature Its existence if deserted by this
consciousness of self would be an ordinary reality and
the act would appear to us a way of fulfilling ones pleasure and desire What ought to exist has here essentiality only by its being known to be individuality
giving itself expression And its being thus known is
the fact acknowledged and recognised by others and
is that which as such ought to have existence
The self enters existence as self The spirit which is
certain of itself exists as such for others its immediate
act is not what is accepted and real what is acknowledged by others is not the determinate element not
the inherent being but solely and simply the self knowing itself as such The element which gives permanence and stability is universal selfconsciousness
What enters this element cannot be the effect of
the act the latter does not last there and maintains
no permanence only selfconsciousness is what is
recognised and gains concrete reality
Here again then we see Language to be the form
in which spirit finds existence Language is the way
selfconsciousness exists for others it is selfconsciousness which is there immediately present as such and
in the form of this actual universal selfconsciousness
Language is self separating itself from itself which
comes objectively before itself as the pure ego identical
with ego which at once maintains itself in this objective
form as this actual self and at the same time fuses
directly with others and is their selfconsciousness The
self perceives itself at the same time that it is perceived
by others and this perceiving is just existence which
has become a self
The content which language has here obtained is
no longer the self we found in the world of culture
perverted perverting and distraught It is spirit which
having returned to itself is certain of itself certain in
itself of its truth of its own act of recognition and of
being recognised as this knowledge The language of
the ethical spirit of society is law and simple command
and complaint which is but a tear shed over necessity
Moral consciousness on the other hand remains dumb
shut up within its inner life for self has no existence as yet in its case rather existence and self there stand
in the first instance, in external relation to each other
Language however comes forward merely as the
mediating element between independent selfconsciousnesses recognised and acknowledged and the existent
self means immediately universal recognition means
recognition in manifold ways and in this very manifoldness simple recognition What the language of
conscience contains is the self knowing itself as
essential reality This alone is what that language
expresses and this expression is the true realisation
of doing anything and renders the act valid
and acceptable Consciousness expresses its conviction in this conviction alone is the action duty it
holds good as duty too solely by the conviction being
expressed For universal selfconsciousness stands
detached from the specific act which merely exists
the act qua existence means nothing to it what
it holds of importance is the conviction that the act is
a duty and this appears concretely in language
To realise the act means here not translating its
content from the form of purpose or subjectivity into
the form of abstract reality it means translating it
from the form of immediate certainty of self which
takes its knowledge its selfexistence to be the essential
fact into the form of the assurance that consciousness
is convinced of its duty and being conscience knows
of itself what duty is This assurance thus guarantees
that it is convinced of its conviction being the essential
fact
Whether the assurance that it acts from conviction
of duty is true whether that really is duty which is
done these questions or doubts have no meaning if
directed against conscience In the case of the question whether the assurance is true it would be assumed
that the inner intention is different from the one put
forward ie that the willing of a particular self can
be separated from duty from the will of the universal
and pure consciousness the latter will would in that
case be a matter of words while the former would be
strictly the real moving principle of the act But such
a distinction between the universal consciousness and
the particular self is precisely what has been cancelled
and the superseding of it constitutes conscience Immediate knowledge on the part of self which is certain
of itself is law and duty Its intention by being its own
intention is what is right All that is required is that
it should know this and state its conviction that its
knowledge and will are the right The expression of
this assurance ipso facto cancels the form of its particularity It recognises thereby the necessary universality of the self. In that it calls itself conscience it
calls itself pure selfknowledge and pure abstract will
ie it calls itself a universal knowledge and will which
acknowledges and recognises others is like them for
they are just this pure selfknowledge and will and
which is on that account also recognised by them In
the willing of the self which is certain of itself in this
knowledge of the self as the essential reality lies the
essence of the right
When any one says therefore he is acting from
conscience he is saying what is true for his conscience
is the self which knows and wills He must however
necessarily say so for this self has to be at the same
time universal self It is not universal in the content
o f the act for this content is per se indifferent on
account of its being specific and determinate The
universality lies in the form of the act It is this form
which is to be affirmed as real the form is the self
which as such is actual in language pronounces itself to
be the truth and just by so doing acknowledges all
other selves and is recognised by them
Conscience then in its majestic sublimity above any
specific law and every content of duty puts whatever
content there is into its knowledge and willing It
becomes moral genius and originality which takes the
inner voice of its immediate knowledge to be a voice
divine and since in such knowledge it directly knows
existence as well it is divine creative power which
contains living force in its very conception It is in
itself, too divine worship service of God for its
action consists in beholding this its own proper
divinity
This solitary worship this service of God in solitude of soul is at the same time essentially service of
God in public on the part of a religious community
and pure inward selfknowledge and perception of self
pass to being a moment of consciousness To behold
itself is to exist objectively and this objective element
is the utterance of its knowledge and will in a universal
way Through such expression the self becomes established and accepted and the act becomes an effective
deed a deed carrying out a definite result What gives
reality and subsistence to its deed is universal selfconsciousness When however conscience finds expression this puts the certainty of itself in the form of pure
self and thereby as universal self Others let the act
hold as valid owing to the explicit terms in which the
self is thus expressed and acknowledged to be the
essential reality The spirit and the substance of their
community are thus the mutual assurance of their
conscientiousness of their good intentions the rejoicing
over this reciprocal purity of purpose the quickening
and refreshment received from the glorious privilege of
knowing and of getting expression of fostering and
cherishing a state so altogether excellent and desirable
So far as this sphere of conscience still distinguishes
its abstract consciousness from its selfconsciousness
its life is merely hid in God God is indeed immediately present to its mind and heart to its self But
what is revealed its actual consciousness and the
mediating process of this consciousness is to it something other than that hidden inner life and the immediacy of Gods presence But with the completion of
conscience the distinction between its abstract consciousness and its selfconsciousness is done away It
knows that the abstract consciousness is just this self
this individual selfexistence which is certain of itself
that the very difference between the terms is abolished
in the immediateness of the relation of the self to the
ultimate Being which when placed outside the self is
the abstract essence and a Being concealed from it
For a relation is mediate when the terms related are
not one and the same but each is a different term for
the other and is one only with the other in some third
term an immediate relation however means in fact
nothing else than the unity of the terms Having
risen above the meaningless position of holding these
distinctions which are not distinctions at all to be
still such consciousness knows the immediateness of
the presence of ultimate Being within it to be the unity
of that Being and its self it thus knows itself to be
the living inherent reality and takes its knowledge to
be Religion which qua kno wedge viewed as an object
or knowledge with an objective existence is the utterance of the religious communion regarding its own
spirit
We see then here selfconsciousness withdrawn into
the inmost retreats of its being with all externality as
such gone and vanished from it returned into the
intuition of ego as altogether identical with ego an
intuition where this ego is all that is essential and all
that exists It is absorbed in this conception of
itself for it is driven to the extreme limit of its
extreme positions and in such a way that the moments
distinguished moments through which it is real or still
consciousness are not merely for us these bare extremes rather what it is for itself and what to it
is inherent and what is for it existence all these
moments evaporate into abstractions They have no
longer stability no substantial existence for this phase
of consciousness Everything that was hitherto for
consciousness essential has reverted into these abstractions When clarified to this degree of transparency
consciousness exists in its poorest form and the
poverty constituting its sole and only possession is
itself a process of disappearance This absolute certainty into which the substance has been resolved is
absolute untruth which collapses within itself it is
absolute selfconsciousness in which consciousness with
its relation of self and object is submerged and goes
under within the inherent and essential substance is for
consciousness knowledge in the sense of its knowledge
Being consciousness it is split up into the opposition
between itself and the object which is for it the
essentially real But this very object is what is perfectly
transparent is its self and its consciousness is merely
knowledge concerning itself All life and all spiritual
truth have returned into this self and have lost their
difference from the ego The moments of consciousness are therefore these extreme abstractions of which
none holds its ground but each loses itself in the
other and produces it We have here the process of
the unhappy soul in restless change with self
in the present case however this is a conscious experience going on inside itself fully conscious of being
the notion of reason while the unhappy soul above
spoken of was only reason implicitly The absolute
certainty of self thus finds itself qua consciousness
converted directly into a dying sound a mere objectification of its subjectivity or selfexistence But this
world so created is the utterance of its own voice which
in like manner it has directly heard and the echo of
which only returns to it This return does not therefore
mean that the self is there in its true reality an und
fiir sick for the real is for it not an inherent being is
no per se but its very self Just as little has consciousness
itself existence for the objective aspect does not succeed
in becoming something negative of the actual self in the
same way as this self does not reach complete actuality
It lacks force to externalise itself the power to make
itself a thing and endure existence It lives in dread of
staining the radiance of its inner being by action and existence And to preserve the purity of its heart it
flees from contact with actuality and steadfastly perseveres in a state of selfwilled impotence to renounce a
self which is pared away to the last point of abstraction
and to give itself substantial existence or, in other
words, to transform its thought into being and commit
itself to absolute distinction that between thought and
being The hollow object which it produces now
fills it therefore with the feeling of emptiness Its
activity consists in yearning it merely loses itself in
becoming an unsubstantial shadowy object and rising
above this loss and falling back on itself finds itself
merely as lost In this transparent purity of its moments
it becomes a sorrowladen beautiful soul as it is
called its light dims and dies within it and it vanishes
as a shapeless vapour dissolving into thin air
This silent fusion of the pithless unsubstantial elements of evaporated life has however still to be taken
in the other sense of the reality of conscience and in
the way its process actually appears Conscience has
to be considered as acting The objective moment in
this phase of consciousness took above the determinate
form of universal consciousness The knowing of self
is qua this particular self different from another self
Language in which all reciprocally recognise and
acknowledge each other as acting conscientiously
this general equality breaks up into the inequality of
each individual existing for himself each consciousness turns from its universality back into itself each is
just as much reflected absolutely into itself as it is
universal By this means there necessarily comes about
the opposition of individuality to other individuals
and to the universal And this relation and its procedure we have to consider
Or again this universality and duty have the absolutely opposite significance they signify determinate
individuality exempting itself from what is universal
individuality which looks on pure duty as universality
that has appeared merely on the surface and is turned
on its outside duty is merely a matter of words
and passes for that whose being is for something
else Conscience which in the first instance takes up
merely a negative attitude towards duty qua a given
determinate duty feels itself detached from it But
since conscience fills empty duty with a determinate content drawn from its own self it is positively aware of
the fact that it qua this particular self makes its own
content Its pure self as it is empty knowledge is
without content and without definiteness The content
which it supplies to that knowledge is drawn from
its own self qua this determinate self is drawn from
itself as a natural individuality In speaking of
the conscientiousness of its action it is doubtless
aware of its pure self but in the purpose of its action
a purpose which brings in a concrete content it is
conscious of itself as this particular individual and is
conscious of the opposition between what it is for itself
and what it is for others of the opposition of universality or duty and its state of being reflected into self
away from the universal
While in this way the opposition into which conscience passes when it acts finds expression in its inner
life the opposition is at the same time disparity on
its outer side in the sphere of existence the disparity
or discordance of its particular individuality with
reference to another individual Its special peculiarity
consists in the fact that the two elements constituting
its consciousness viz the self and the inherent nature
Ansich are unequal in value and significance within
it in being accepted as valid they are so determined
that certainty of self is the essential fact as against the
inherent nature or the universal which is taken to be
merely a moment Over against this internal determination there thus stands the element of existence the
universal consciousness and for this latter it is rather
universality duty which is the essential fact while
individuality which exists for itself and is opposed to
the universal has merely the value of a superseded
moment The first consciousness is held to be Evil by
the consciousness which thus stands by the fact of duty
because of the lack of congruity or identity of its internal
subjective life with the universal and since at the same
time the first consciousness declares its act to be identity
with itself, to be duty and conscientiousness it is held
by that universal consciousness to be Hypocrisy
The course taken by this opposition is in the first
instance, the formal reinstatement of the identity between what the evil consciousness is in its own nature
and what it declares itself to be. It has to be made
manifest that it is evil and its objective existence thus
made congruent with its real nature the hypocrisy
must be unmasked This return of the disparity
present in hypocrisy into the state of congruency or
identity is not at once brought to pass by the mere
fact that as people usually say hypocrisy just
proves its reverence for duty and virtue through
assuming the appearance of them and using this as
a mask to hide itself from its own consciousness
no less than from another as if in this acknowledgment and recognition in itself of its opposite
eo ipso congruency and agreement were implied and
contained Yet even then it is just as truly done with
this recognition in words and is reflected into self
and in the very fact of its using the inherent and
essential reality merely as something which has a
significance for another consciousness there is really
implied its own contempt for that inherent principle
and the demonstration of the worthlessness of that
reality for all For what lets itself be used as an
external instrument shows itself to be a thing which
has within it no proper weight and worth of its own.
Moreover this congruency or identity is not
brought about either by the evil consciousness persisting onesidedly in its own state or by the judgment
of the universal consciousness If the former disclaims
the consciousness of duty and maintains that what
the latter pronounces to be baseness to be absolute
discordance with universality is an action according
to inner law and conscience then in this onesided
assurance of identity and concord there still remains
its want of agreement with the other since this other
universal consciousness certainly does not believe the
assurance and does not acknowledge it In other
words, since onesided insistence on one extreme
destroys itself evil would indeed thereby confess
to being evil but in so doing would at once cancel
itself and cease to be hypocrisy and so would not
qua hypocrisy be unmasked It confesses itself in fact
to be evil by asserting that while opposing what is
recognised as universal it is acting according to inner
law and conscience For were this law and conscience
not the law of its particularity and caprice it would
not be something inward something private but what
is universally accepted and acknowledged When
therefore any one says he acts towards others from a
law and conscience of his own he is saying in point of
fact, that he is abusing and wronging them But actual
conscience is not this insistence on a knowledge and a
will which are opposed to what is universal the universal is the element of its existence and its very language
pronounces its action to be recognised duty
Just as little when the universal consciousness
emphasises and persists in its own judgment does this
unmask and dissipate hypocrisy When that universal
consciousness stigmatises hypocrisy as bad base and
so on it appeals in passing such a judgment to
its own law just as the evil consciousness on its side
does too For the former law makes its appearance in
opposition to the latter and thereby is a particular law
It has therefore no antecedent claim over the other
law rather it legitimises this other law Hence the
universal consciousness by thus emulating the other
does precisely the opposite of what it means to do
for it shows that its socalled true duty which
ought to be universally acknowledged is something
not acknowledged and recognised and consequently it
grants the other an equal right of independently existing on its own account.
This judgment of universal consciousness however
has at the same time another side to it from which it
leads the way to the dissolution of the opposition in
question Consciousness of the universal does not
proceed qua real and qua acting to deal with the evil
consciousness for this latter rather is the real
In opposing the latter it is a consciousness which is not
entangled in the opposition of particular and universal
involved in action It stays within the universality of
thought takes up the attitude of an apprehending
intelligence and its first act is merely that of judgment
Through this judgment it now places itself as was just
observed alongside the first consciousness and the
latter through this identity this likeness between them
comes to see itself in this other consciousness For
in the attitude of apprehension consciousness of duty
is passive Thereby it is in contradiction with itself as
the absolute will of duty as the self that determines
absolutely from itself It may well preserve itself in its
purity for it does not act it is hypocrisy which wants
to see the fact of judging taken for the actual deed
and instead of proving its uprightness and honesty
by acts does so by expressing fine sentiments It is
thus constituted entirely in the same way as that
against which the reproach is made of putting its
phrases in place of duty In both cases alike the
aspect of reality is distinct from the express statements
in the one case owing to the selfish purpose of the
action in the other through failure to act at all a
result which is inevitable when there is mere talk about
duty for duty without deeds is altogether meaningless
The act of judging however has also to be looked
at as a positive act of thought and has a positive content this aspect makes the contradiction present in
the apprehending consciousness and its identity with
the first consciousness still more complete The active
consciousness declares its specific deed to be its duty
and the consciousness that passes judgment cannot deny this for duty as such is form void of all content and
capable of any In other words, concrete action inherently implying diversity in its manysidedness involves
the universal aspect which is that which is taken as
duty just as much as the particular which constitutes
the share and interest the individual has in the act
The consciousness expressing its judgment does not
now stop at the former aspect of duty and rest content
with the knowledge which the active agent has of this
viz that this is its duty the condition and the status
of its reality It holds on to the other aspect diverts
the act into the inner realm and explains the act from
selfish motives and from its inner intention an intention different from the act itself As every act is
capable of treatment in respect of its dutifulness so
too each can be considered from this other point of
view of particularity for as an act it is the actuality
of an individual
This process of judging then takes the act out of
the sphere of its objective existence and turns it back
into that of the inner realm into the form of specific
and individual particularity If the act carries glory
with it then the inner aspect is judged as love of fame
If it altogether fits in with the position and status of
the individual, without going beyond this position and
is so constituted that the individuality in question does
not have the position hanging on to it as an external
appendage but through itself supplies the content to
this universality and by that very process shows itself to
be capable of a higher status then the inner nature
of the act is judged as ambition and so on Since in
the act in general the individual who acts comes to
see himself in objective form or gets the feeling of his
own being in his objective existence and thus attains
enjoyment the judgment on the act finds the inner
nature of it to be an impulse towards personal and
private happiness even though this happiness were to
consist merely in inner moral vanity the enjoyment of
a sense of personal excellence and in the foretaste and
hope of a happiness to come
No act can escape being judged in such a way
for duty for dutys sake this bare purpose is something unreal What reality it has lies in the deed of
some individuality and the action thereby has in it the
aspect of particularity No hero is a hero to his valet
not however because the hero is not a hero but because
the valet is the valet with whom the hero has to do
not as a hero but as a man who eats drinks and dresses
who in short appears as a particular individual with
certain personal wants and idiosyncrasies In the same
way there is no act in which that process of judgment
cannot oppose the particular aspect of the individuality
to the universal aspect of the act and set the valet of
morality against the hero who does the act
The consciousness that so passes judgment is in consequence itself base and mean because it divides the
act up and brings out and holds on to its inherent inconsistency and selfdiscordance It is furthermore
hypocrisy because it gives out this way of judging not
as another fashion of being wicked but as the correct
consciousness of the act sets itself up in its unreality
in this vanity of knowing well and better far above
the deeds it decries and wants to find its mere words
without deeds taken for an admirable kind of reality
the agent on whom it passes judgment it is recognised
by the latter as the same as himself This latter does not
merely find himself apprehended as something alien or
external to and unlike or discordant with that other
but rather finds the other in its peculiar constitutive
character identical with himself Seeing this similarity
and giving this expression he openly declares himself to
the other and expects in like manner that the other
having in point of fact put itself on the same level will
respond in the same terms on its side will give voice to
the likeness found within it and that thus the state of
mutual recognition will be brought about His confession is not an attitude of abasement or humiliation
before the other is not flinging himself away For to
give the matter expression in this way has not the
onesided character which would fix and establish his
disparity with the other on the contrary it is solely
because of seeing the likeness of the other to him that
he gives himself utterance In making his confession
he announces from his side their common likeness and
does so for the reason that language is the existence of
spirit as an immediate self He thus expects that the
other will make its own contribution to this manner of
existence
But the admission on the part of the one who is
wicked I am so is not followed by a reply making
a similar confession This was not what that way
of judging meant at all far from it It repels
this community of nature and is the hardheartedness which keeps to itself and rejects all continuity
with the other By so doing the scene is changed The
one who made the confession sees himself thrust off and
takes the other to be in the wrong when he refuses to
let his own inner nature go forth in the objective shape
of an express utterance opposes and contrasts the
beauty of his own soul with the wicked individual and
opposes to the confession of the penitent the stiffnecked attitude of the self-consistent equable character
and the rigid silence of one who keeps himself to
himself and refuses to throw himself away for some one
else Here we find asserted the highest pitch of revolt
to which a spirit certain of itself can reach For it
beholds itself qua this bare selfknowledge in another
conscious being and in such a way that the external
form of this other is not an unessential thing as
in the case of an object of wealth but thought
knowledge itself is what is opposed to it It is this
absolutely unbroken continuity of pure knowledge
which refuses to establish communication with an
other which had ipso facto by making its confession
renounced separate isolated selfexistence had affirmed
its particularity to be cancelled and thereby established itself as continuous with the other ie established itself as universal The other however retains
in its own case and reserves to itself its uncommunicative isolated independence in the case of the
individual making the confession it retains just the
very thing which that individual has already cast
away It thereby proves itself to be a form of
consciousness which has forsaken and denies the very
nature of spirit for it does not understand that spirit
in the absolute certainty of itself is master and lord
over every deed and over all reality and can reject and
cast them off and make them as if they had never been
At the same time it does not see the contradiction it is
committing in not allowing a rejection which has been
made in express language to pass for genuine rejection
while itself has the certainty of its own spiritual life not
in a concrete real act but in its inner nature and
finds the objective existence of this inner being in the
mere utterance of its own judgment It is thus its own
self which checks that others return from the act to the
spiritual objectivity of spoken utterance and to spiritual
identity and agreement and by its stiffness produces the
discordance and dissimilarity which still remain
Now so far as the spirit which is certain of itself in the
form of a beautiful soul does not possess the faculty of
relinquishing the selfabsorbed uncommunicative knowledge of itself it cannot attain to any identity with
the consciousness that is repulsed and so cannot succeed in seeing the unity of its self in another life cannot
reach objective existence The equality comes about
therefore merely in a negative way as a state of being
devoid of spiritual character The beautiful soul
then has no concrete reality it subsists in the contradiction between its pure self and the necessity felt by
this self to externalise itself and turn into something
actual it exists in the immediacy of this rooted and
fixed opposition an immediacy which alone is the middle
term mediating and reconciling an opposition which
has arisen to its pure abstraction and is pure being or
empty nothingness Thus the beautiful soul being
conscious of this contradiction in its unreconciled
immediacy is unhinged disordered and runs to madness passes away in yearning and is consumed in
pining inanition Thereby it gives up as a fact its
stubborn insistence on its own isolated selfexistence
but only to bring forth the soulless spiritless unity of
abstract being
The true that is to say the selfconscious and actual
balance or adjustment of the two sides is necessitated
by and already contained in the foregoing Breaking the hard heart and raising it to the level of universality is the same process which appeared in the
case of the consciousness that expressly made its
confession The wounds of the spirit heal and leave
no scars behind The deed is not something imperishable the spirit takes it back into itself and the
aspect of particularity present in it whether in the
form of an intention or of an existential negativity and
limitation immediately passes away The process of
actually realising self the form of its act is merely a
moment of the whole and the same is true of the
knowledge functioning through judgment and establishing and maintaining the distinction between the
particular and universal aspects of action The evil consciousness spoken of definitely yields up and relinquishes itself or sets itself down as a moment being
drawn into the way of express confession by seeing
itself in another This other however must have its
onesided unaccepted and unacknowledged judgment
broken down just as the former has to abandon its
onesided unacknowledged existence in a state of particularity and isolation And as the former displays
the power of spirit over its reality so this other must
manifest the power of spirit over its constitutive and
determinate notion
The latter however renounces thought that divides
and separates and the rigid imperviousness of uncom
municative selfexistence for the reason that in point
of fact, it sees itself in the first That which in this
way abandons its reality and makes itself into a
superseded particular this shows itself
thereby to be in fact universal It turns away from
its external reality back into itself as inner essence
and there the universal consciousness thus knows and
finds itself
The forgiveness it extends to the first is the renunciation of self of its unreal being since it identifies this
unreal nature and that other element of real action
and recognises what was called bad a determination
assigned to action by thought to be good or rather it
lets go and gives up this distinction of determinate
thought with its self determining isolated judgment just
as the other foregoes determining the act in isolation and
for its own private behoof The word of reconciliation is
the objectively existent spirit which sees and immediately apprehends the pure knowledge of itself qua
universal being in its opposite in the pure knowledge
of itself qua absolutely selfconfined single individual
a reciprocal recognition which is Absolute Spirit
Absolute Spirit enters existence merely at the culminating point at which its pure knowledge about itself
is the opposition and interchange with itself Knowing that its pure knowledge is the abstract essential
reality Absolute Spirit is this knowing duty in absolute
opposition to the knowledge which knows itself qua
absolute singleness of self to be the essentially real
The former is the pure continuity of the universal,
which knows the individuality that thinks itself the
real to be inherently null and naught to be evil The
latter again is absolute discreteness which thinks
itself absolute in its pure oneness and thinks the
universal is the unreal which exists only for others
Both aspects are refined and clarified to this degree of
purity where there is no self less existence left no negative of consciousness in either of them where instead
the one element of duty is the self identical character
of its selfknowledge and the other element of evil
equally has its purpose in its own inner being and its
reality in its own mode of utterance The content of
this utterance is the substance that gives it subsistence
the utterance is the assurance and asseveration of the
certainty of spirit within its own self
These spirits both certain of themselves have each
no other purpose than its own pure self and no other
reality and existence than just this pure self But they
are still different and the difference is absolute because
holding within this element of the pure notion The
difference is absolute too not merely for its tracing the
experience but for the notions themselves which stand
in this opposition For while these notions are indeed
determinate and specific relatively to one another
they are at the same time in themselves universal so
that they compass the whole range of the self and this
self can have no other content than this its own determinate constitution which neither transcends the self
nor is more restricted than it For the one aspect the
absolutely universal is pure selfknowledge as well as the
other the absolute discreteness of single individuality
and both are merely this pure selfknowledge Both
determinate aspects then are cognitive pure notions
which know qua notions whose very constitution consists in immediately knowing or, in other words, whose
relationship and opposition is the Ego Because of this
they are for one another these absolutely opposed
elements it is what is completely inner that has in this
way come into opposition to itself and entered objective
existence they constitute pure knowledge which owing
to this opposition takes the form of consciousness But
as yet it is not self consciousness It obtains this actualisation in the course of the process through which this
opposition passes For this opposition is really itself the
indiscrete continuity and identity of ego ego and each
by itself inherently cancels itself just through the
contradiction in its pure universality which while
implying continuity and identity at the same time still
resists its identity with the other and separates itself
from it Through this relinquishment of separate selfhood the knowledge which in its existence is in a state
of diremption returns into the unity of the self it is the
concrete actual Ego universal knowledge of self in its
absolute opposite in the knowledge which is internal
to and within the self and which because of the very
purity of its separate subjective existence is itself
completely universal The reconciling affirmation the
yes with which both egos desist from their existence
in opposition is the existence of the ego expanded into
a duality an ego which remains therein one and identical with itself and possesses the certainty of itself
in its complete relinquishment and its opposite it is
God appearing in the midst of those who know themselves in the form of pure knowledge
The appearance of Absolute Spirit as a principle constituting on its
own account a distinctive stage of experience is at once a demand of
the preceding development and a condition of making experience selfcomplete Finite or socialised spiritual existence is at its best incapable
of establishing the truth that Spirit is the only reality for the more
finite spirit approximates to the state of claiming to be selfcontained the
more is it dependent on universal selfconsciousness A transfinite or
Absolute Spiritual Being as such is thus necessary to realise and sustain
the fullness of meaning which finite spirit possesses Moreover if the
truth is the whole and only so is truth selfcomplete and self explaining
and if reality is essentially spiritual then experience only finds its
complete meaning realised in the principle of Absolute Spirit Hence
the final stage of the Phenomenology of experience is the appearance
therein of Absolute Spirit Moreover Absolute Spirit in its own
distinctive existence could only appear at the end of the process of
experience for the whole of that process is required to reveal and to
constitute the substance of which the Absolute consists But the peculiarity of the stage now reached is that here the Absolute operates in its
undivided totality to form a definite type of experience or in the
language of the text we have the Absolute here conscious of its self No
doubt in all the previous stages consciousness selfconsciousness
reason spirit the Absolute has been implied as a limiting principle
at once substantiating and determining the boundaries of each stage
hence each stage had an Absolute of its own, the character of which was
derived in each case from the peculiarity of the stage in question Now
however we have the Absolute by itself, in its single selfcompleteness as
the sole formative factor of a certain type of experience
The Absolute then in its own selfcomplete reality appears as the
constitutive principle of experience The experience here is the selfconsciousness of Absolute Spirit it appears to itself in all its objects
Since all the modes of finitude hitherto considered consciousness selfconsciousness etc are embraced in its single totality it may use each and
all of these various modes as the media through and in which to appear When it appears in and through these modes of finitude we have the
attitude of Religion Since these modes as we saw differ the religious
attitude differs and accordingly we have various types or forms of
religion
Each of these forms in and through which the Absolute appears is
circumscribed in its nature and process each is per se inadequate to the
revelation of complete absolute selfconsciousness hence the variety of
religions is necessitated by and is indirectly due to the failure of any one
type and the inadequacy of every single type to reveal the Absolute completely A form of appearance or selfmanifestation of the Absolute is
therefore demanded which will reveal Absolute Spirit adequately to itself
as it essentially is in itself. Here it will know itself so to say face to
face and with perfect completeness This form is Absolute KnowledgeHence Religion and Absolute Knowledge are the final stages in the
argument of the Phenomenology The former is dealt with in the immediately succeeding section and its various subsections the latter
forms the subject of the concluding section of the work
IN the forms of experience hitherto dealt with
which are distinguished broadly as Consciousness
Selfconsciousness Reason and Spirit Religion also
the consciousness of Absolute Being in general has no
doubt made its appearance But that was from the
point of view of consciousness when it has the Absolute
Being for its object Absolute Being however in its
own distinctive nature the Selfconsciousness of Spirit
has not appeared in those forms
Even at the plane of Consciousness viz when this
takes the shape of Understanding there is a consciousness of the supersensuous of the inner being
of objective existence But the supersensible the
eternal or whatever we care to call it is devoid of
selfhood It is merely to begin with something universal which is a long way still from being spirit knowing
itself as spirit
Then there was Selfconsciousness which came to
its final shape in the bereft soul the unhappy
consciousness that was merely the pain and sorrow
of spirit wrestling to get itself out into objectivity
once more but not succeeding The unity of individual
selfconsciousness with its unchangeable Being which
is what this stage arrives at remains in consequence
a beyond something afar off The immediate existence of Reason which we found
arising out of that state of sorrow and the special
shapes which reason assumes have no form of religion
because selfconsciousness in the case of reason knows
itself or looks for itself in the direct and immediate
present
On the other hand in the world of the Ethical Order
we met with a type of religion the religion of the
nether world This is belief in the fearful and unknown darkness of Fate and in the Eumenides of
the spirit of the departed the former being pure
negation taking the form of universality the latter
the same negation but in the form of particularity
Absolute Being is then in the latter shape no doubt
the self and is present as there is no other way for
the self to be except present But the particular
self is this particular ghostly shade which keeps the
universal element Fate separated from itself. It is
indeed a shade a ghost a cancelled and superseded
particular and so a universal self But that negative
meaning has not yet turned round into this latter
positive significance and hence the self so cancelled
and transcended still directly means at the same time
this particular being this insubstantial reality Fate
however without self remains the darkness of night
devoid of consciousness, which never comes to draw
distinctions within itself and never attains the clearness of selfknowledge
This belief in a necessity that produces nothingness this belief in the nether world becomes belief
in Heaven because the self which has departed must
be united with its universal nature must unfold what
it contains in terms of this universality and thus
become clear to itself This kingdom of belief however we saw unfold its content merely in the element
of reflective thought without bringing out
the true notion and we saw it on that account perish in its final fate viz in the religion of
enlightenment Here in this type of religion the supersensible beyond which we found in understanding
is reinstated again but in such a way that selfconsciousness rests and feels satisfied in the mundane present
not in the beyond and thinks of the supersensible
beyond void and empty unknowable and devoid of
all terrors neither as a self nor as power and
might
In the religion of Morality it is at last reinstated
that Absolute Reality is a positive content but that
content is bound up with the negativity characteristic
of the enlightenment The content is an objective
being which is at the same time taken back into the
self and remains there enclosed and is a content with
internal distinctions while its parts are just as immediately negated as they are posited The final destiny
however which absorbs this contradictory process is
the self conscious of itself as the controlling necessity
of what is essential and actual
Spirit knowing its self is in religion primarily and immediately its own pure selfconsciousness Those modes
of it above considered objective spirit spirit
estranged from itself and spirit certain of its self
together constitute what it is in its condition of
consciousness the state in which being objectively
opposed to its own world it does not therein apprehend
and consciously possess itself But in Conscience it
brings itself as well as its objective world as a whole
into subjection as also its idea and its various specific
conceptions f and is now selfconsciousness at home
with itself Here spirit represented as an object
has the significance for itself of being Universal Spirit
which contains within itself all that is ultimate and
essential and all that is concrete and actual yet is
not in the form of freely subsisting actuality or of the
detached independence of external nature It has a
shape no doubt the form of objective being in that
it is object of its own consciousness but because
this being is put forward in religion with the essential
character of being selfconsciousness the form or shape
assumed is one perfectly transparent to itself and
the reality spirit contains is enclosed in it or transcended
in it just in the same way as when we speak of all
reality its reality is universal reality in the sense
of a product of thought
Since then in religion the peculiar characteristic
of what is properly consciousness of spirit does not
have the form of detached and external otherness
the existence of spirit is distinct from its selfconsciousness and its actual reality proper falls outside religion
There is no doubt one spirit in both but its consciousness does not embrace both together and religion
appears as a part of existence of acting and of striving
whose other part is the life lived within its own actual
world As we now know that spirit in its own world
and spirit conscious of itself as spirit ie spirit in the
sphere of religion are the same the completion of
religion consists in the two forms becoming identical
with one another not merely in its reality being grasped
and embraced by religion but conversely it as spirit conscious of itself becomes actual to itself and real
object of its own consciousness
So far as spirit in religion presents itself to itself,
it is indeed consciousness and the reality enclosed
within it is the shape and garment in which it clothes
its idea of itself The reality however does not in
this presentation get proper justice done to it that
is to say it does not get to be an independent and free
objective existence and not merely a garment And
conversely because that reality lacks within itself its
completion it is a determinate shape or form which
does not attain to what it ought to reveal viz spirit
conscious of itself That its form might express spirit
itself the form would have to be nothing else than spirit
and spirit would have to appear to itself or to be actual
as it is in its own essential being Only thereby too
would be attained what may seem to demand the
opposite that the object of its consciousness has at
the same time the form of free and independent reality
But only spirit which is object to itself in the shape
of Absolute Spirit is as much aware of being a free and
independent reality as it remains therein conscious of
itself
Since in the first instance selfconsciousness and consciousness simply religion and spirit as it is externally in
its world or the objective existence of spirit are distinct
the latter consists in the totality of spirit so far as its
moments are separated from each other and each is
set forth by itself These moments however are
consciousness selfconsciousness reason and spirit
spirit that is qua immediate spirit which is not yet
consciousness of spirit Its totality taken all together
constitutes the mundane existence of spirit as a whole spirit as such contains the previous separate embodiments in the form of universal determinations of its
own being in those moments just named Religion
presupposes that these have completely run their
course and is their simple totality their absolute Self
and soul
The course which these traverse is moreover in
relation to religion not to be pictured as a temporal
sequence It is only spirit in its entirety that is in
time and the shapes assumed which are specific
embodiments of the whole of spirit as such present
themselves in a sequence one after the other For
it is only the whole which properly has reality and
hence the form of pure freedom relatively to anything else the form which takes expression as
time But the moments of the whole consciousness
selfconsciousness reason and spirit have because they
are moments no existence separate from one another.
Just as spirit was distinct from its moments
we have further in the third place to distinguish
from these moments their specific individuated character Each of those moments in itself we saw
broke up again in a process of development all
its own and took various shapes and forms as
eg in the case of consciousness sensuous certainty
and perception were distinct phases These latter
aspects fall apart in time from one another, and belong
to a specific particular whole For spirit descends
from its universality to assume an individual form
through specification by determination This determination or mediate element is consciousness self
consciousness and so on Now the forms assumed by
these moments constitute individuality Hence these
exhibit and reveal spirit in its individuality or concrete reality and are distinguished in time from one
another, though in such a way that the succeeding retains within it the preceding
While therefore religion is the completion of the
life of spirit its final and complete expression into
which as being their ground its individual moments
consciousness selfconsciousness reason and spirit
return and have returned they at the same time
together constitute the objectively existing realisation
of spirit in its totality as such spirit is real only as the
moving process of these aspects which it possesses a
process of distinguishing them and returning back into
itself In the process of these universal moments is contained the development of religion generally Since
however each of these attributes was set forth and
presented not only in the way it in general determines
itself but as it is in and for itself ie as within its
own being running its course as a distinct whole there
has thus arisen not merely the development of religion
generally those independently complete processes pursued by the individual phases and stages of spirit
contain at the same time the determinate forms of
religion itself Spirit in its entirety spirit in religion
is once more the process from its immediacy to the
attainment of a knowledge of what it implicitly or
immediately is and is the process of attaining the state
where the shape and form in which it appears as an
object for its own consciousness will be perfectly
identical with and adequate to its essential nature
and where it will behold itself as it is
In this development of religion then spirit itself assumes definite forms which constitute the distinctions
involved in this process and at the same time a determinate or specific form of religion has likewise an actual
spirit of a specific character Thus if consciousness
selfconsciousness reason and spirit belong to selfknowing spirit in general in a similar way the specific
shapes which selfknowing spirit assumes appropriate
and adopt the distinctive forms which were specially
developed in the case of each of the stages consciousness selfconsciousness reason and spirit The
determinate shape assumed in a given case by religion appropriates from among the forms belonging
to each of its moments the one adapted to it and makes
this its actual spirit This one determinate attitude
of religion pervades and permeates all aspects of its
actual existence and stamps them with this common
feature
In this way the arrangement now assumed by the
forms and shapes which have thus far appeared is
different from the way they appeared in their own
order On this point we may note shortly at the outset what is of chief importance In the series we considered each moment exhaustively elaborating its
entire content evolved and formed itself into a single
whole within its own peculiar principle And knowledge
was the inner depth or the spirit wherein the elements
having no subsistence of their own possessed their
substance This substance however has now at
length made its appearance it is the deep life of spirit
certain of itself it does not allow the principle belonging to each individual form to get isolated and
become a whole within itself rather it collects all
these moments into its own content keeps them together and advances within this total wealth of
its concrete actual spirit while all its particular
moments take into themselves and receive together
in common the like determinate character of the whole
This spirit certain of itself and the process it goes
through this is their true reality the independent
self subsistence which belongs to each individually
Thus while the previous linear series in its advance
marked the retrogressive steps in it by knots but
thence went forward again in one linear stretch
it is now as it were broken at these knots these
universal moments and radiates into many lines
which being bound together into a single bundle
combine at the same time symmetrically so that the
similar distinctions in which each separately took
shape within its own sphere meet together
For the rest it is selfevident from the whole argument how this coordination of universal directions
just mentioned is to be understood so that it becomes superfluous to remark that these distinctions
are to be taken to mean essentially and only moments
of the process of development not parts In the case
of actual concrete spirit they are attributes of its
substance in religion on the other hand they are
only predicates of the subject In the same way
indeed all forms in general are in themselves or for
us contained in spirit and contained in every spirit
But the main point of importance in dealing with its
reality is solely what determinate character it has in
its consciousness in which specific character it has
expressed its self or in what shape it knows its essential
nature
The distinction made between actual spirit and that
same spirit which knows itself as spirit or between
itself qua consciousness and qua selfconsciousness is
transcended and done away with in the case where spirit
knows itself in its real truth Its consciousness and
its selfconsciousness have come to terms But as
religion is here to begin with and immediately this
distinction has not yet reverted to spirit It is merely
the conception the principle, of religion that is established at first In this the essential element is
selfconsciousness which is conscious of being all
truth and which contains all reality within that truth
This selfconsciousness being consciousness and so
aware of an object], has itself for its object Spirit
which knows itself in the first instance immediately
is thus to itself spirit in the form of immediacy and
the specific character of the shape in which it appears
to itself is that of pure simple being This being this
bare existence has indeed a filling drawn neither
from sensation or manifold matter nor from any other
onesided elements purposes and determinations its
filling is solely spirit and is known by itself to be all
truth and reality Such filling is in this first form not
in agreement or identity with its own shape spirit qua
ultimate Reality is not in accord with its consciousness
It is actual only as Absolute Spirit when it is also
to itself in its truth as it is in its certainty of itself
or when the extremes into which spirit qua consciousness falls exist for one another in spiritual shape
The embodiment adopted by spirit qua object of its
own consciousness remains filled by the certainty of
spirit and this selfcertainty constitutes its substance
Through this content the degrading of the object to
bare objectivity to the form of something that negates
selfconsciousness disappears The immediate unity of
spirit with itself is the fundamental basis or pure
consciousness inside which consciousness breaks up
into its constituent elements viz an object with subject
over against it In this way shut up within its pure
selfconsciousness spirit does not exist in religion as
the creator of a nature in general rather what it
produces in the course of this process are its forms and
shapes qua spirits which together constitute all that it
can reveal when it is completely manifested And this
process itself is the development of its perfect and complete actuality through the individual aspects thereof
ie through its imperfect modes of realisation
The first realisation of spirit is just the principle
and notion of religion itself religion as immediate
and thus Natural Religion Here spirit knows itself
as its object in a natural or immediate shape The
second realisation is however necessarily that of
knowing itself in the shape of transcended and superseded natural existence ie in the form of self This
is the Religion of Art or productive activity For the
shape it adopts is raised to the form of self through
the productive activity of consciousness by which
this consciousness beholds in its object its own action
ie sees the self The third realisation finally cancels
the onesidedness of the first two the self is as much an
immediate self as the immediacy is a self If spirit
in the first is in the form of consciousness and in
the second in that of selfconsciousness it is in the
third in the form of the unity of both it has then the
shape of what is completely selfcontained Anund
Fursicliseyns and since it is thus presented as it
is in and for itself this is the sphere of Revealed Religion Although spirit however here reaches its
true shape the very shape assumed and the conscious
presentation are an aspect and phase still unsurmounted
and from this spirit has to pass over into the life of the
Notion, in order therein completely to resolve the form
of objectivity in the notion which embraces within
itself this its own opposite
It is then that spirit has grasped its own principle
the notion of itself, as so far only we who analyse
spirit have grasped it and its form the element of
its existence since this form is the notion is then
spirit itself
The arrangement of the analysis of Religion and the divisions into
the various subsections are as indicated in the preceding note
determined by the general development of experience That development
is from the immediate through mediation to the fusion of immediacy and
mediation The stages of the development of experience are Consciousness
Selfconsciousness Reason the latter leading to its highest level finite
Spiritual existence The development of Religion follows these various
ways in which objects are given in experience and the three chief divisions
of Religion are determined accordingly Natural Religion is religion at
the level of Consciousness Art Religion at the level of Selfconsciousness Revealed Religion is Religion at the level of Reason and Spirit
Each of these is again subdivided and the subdivision follows more or
less closely the various subdivisions of these three ultimate levels of experience Consciousness Thus in Natural Religion we have Religion
at the level of Sensecertainty Light Religion at the level of Perception Life and Religion at the level of Understanding the reciprocal
relation constituted by the play of forces appears as the relation of the
Artificer to his own product
The general principle is not worked out in detail with the same
obviousness in the case of the other two primary types of Religion Art
and Revealed Religion But the same general method of development is
pursued in these cases
The historical material before the mind of the writer is as might be
expected the various religions which have historically appeared amongst
mankind These religions are treated however as illustrations of principles dominating the religious consciousness in general rather than
as merely historical phenomena
With the succeeding argument should be read Hegels Philosophy of
Religion Part II Sections I and II and Part III
Spirit knowing spirit is consciousness of itself
and is to itself in the form of objectivity It is
and is at the same time self existence
It is for self it is the aspect of selfconsciousness
and is so in contrast to the aspect of its consciousness
the aspect by which it relates itself to itself as object
In its consciousness there is the opposition and in
consequence the specificity of the form in which it
appears to itself and knows itself. It is with this
specificity that we have alone to do in considering
religion for its essential unspecified principle its
abstract notion has already come to light The
distinction of consciousness and selfconsciousness
however falls at the same time within this notion
The form or shape of religion does not contain the
existence of spirit in the sense of its being nature
detached and free from thought nor in the sense
of its being thought detached from existence The
shape assumed by religion is existence contained and
preserved in thought as well as a thoughtcontent
which is consciously existent
It is by the determinate character of this form
in which spirit knows itself that one religion is distinguished from another But we have at the same
time to note that the systematic exposition of this
knowledge about itself in terms of this particular
specific character does not as a fact exhaust the whole
meaning of a given actual religion The series of
different religions which will come before us just as
much sets forth again merely the different aspects of a
single religion and indeed of every particular religion
and the ideas the conscious processes which seem to
mark off one concrete religion from another make their
appearance in each All the same the diversity must
also be looked at as a diversity of religion For while
spirit lives in the distinction of its consciousness and
its selfconsciousness the process it goes through
finds its goal in the transcendence of this fundamental
distinction and in giving the form of selfconsciousness
to the given shape which is object of consciousness
This distinction however is not eo ipso transcended
by the fact that the shapes which that consciousness
contains have also the element of self in them and that
God is represented as self consciousness The consciously
presented self is not the actual concrete self In order
that this like every other more specific determination
of the form may in truth belong to this form it has
partly to be put into this form by the action of selfconsciousness and partly the lower determination must
show itself to be cancelled and transcended and comprehended by the higher For what is consciously
presented only ceases to be something
presented and alien external to its knowledge by
the self having produced it and so viewing the determination of the object as its own determination and
hence seeing itself in that object By this operation
the lower determination that of being something presented has at once vanished for doing anything is a
negative process which is carried through at the expense
of something else So far as that lower determination
still continues to appear it has withdrawn into what is
without any essential significance just as on the other
hand where the lower still predominates while the
higher is also present the one coexists in a selfless
way alongside of the other While therefore the
various ideas falling within a particular religion no
doubt exhibit the whole course its forms take the
character of each is determined by the particular unity
of consciousness and selfconsciousness that is to
say by the fact that selfconsciousness has taken
into itself the determination belonging to the object
of consciousness has by its own action made that
determination altogether its own and knows it to be
the essential one as compared with the others
The truth of belief in a given determination of the
religious spirit shows itself in this that the actual spirit
is constituted after the same manner as the form in
which spirit beholds itself in religion thus eg the incarnation of God which is found in Eastern religion
has no truth because the concrete actual spirit of this religion is without the reconciliation this principle implies
It is not in place here to return from the totality
of specific determinations back to the particular determination and show in what shape the plenitude of all
the others is contained within it and within its particular form of religion The higher form when put
back under a lower is deprived of its significance for
selfconscious spirit belongs to spirit merely in a superficial way and is for it at the level of a presentation
The higher form has to be considered in its own peculiar
significance and dealt with where it is the principle of
a particular religion and is certified and approved by
its actual spirit
a
Spirit as the absolute Being which is selfconsciousness or the selfconscious absolute Being which
is all truth and knows all reality as itself is to begin
with merely its notion and principle in contrast to
the reality which it acquires in the process of its conscious activity And this conception is as contrasted
with the clear daylight of that explicit development
the darkness and night of its inner life in contrast to
the existence of its various moments as independent
forms and shapes this notion is the creative secret of
its birth This secret has its revelation within itself
for existence has its necessary place in this notion
because this notion is spirit knowing itself and thus
possesses in its own nature the moment of being consciousness and of presenting itself objectively We have
here the pure ego which in externalising itself in
seeing itself qua universal object has the certainty of
self in other words, this object is for the ego the
fusion of all thought and all reality v
When the first and immediate cleavage is made withinX
selfknowing Absolute Spirit its form assumes that
character which belongs to immediate consciousness
or to sensecertainty It beholds itself in the form of
being but not being in the sense of what is without
spirit containing only the contingent qualities of sensation the kind of being that belongs solely to sense certainty Its being is filled with the content of spirit
It also includes within it the form which we found in
the case of immediate selfconsciousness the form of
lord and master with reference to the self consciousness
of spirit which retreats from its object
This being having as its content the notion of
spirit is then the mode of spirit in relation simply
to itself the form of having no special form at all
In virtue of this characteristic this mode is the pure
allcontaining allsuffusing Light of the East which
preserves itself in its formless indeterminate substantiality Its counterpart its otherness is the equally
simple negative Darkness The processes of its own
selfabandonment its creations in the unresisting
element of its counterpart are bursts of Light At the
same time in their ultimate simplicity they are its
way of becoming something for itself its return from
its objective existence streams of fire consuming its
embodiment The distinction which it gives itself no
doubt thrives abundantly on the substance of existence
and grows into and assumes the diverse forms of nature
But the essential simplicity of its thought rambles
and roves about inconstant and inconsistent enlarges
its bounds to measureless extent and its beauty
heightened to splendour is lost in its sublimity f
The content which this state of mere being involves
its perceptive activity is therefore an unreal byplay on this substance which merely rises without
descending into itself to become subject and secure
firmly its distinctions through the self Its determinations are merely attributes which do not succeed
in attaining independence they remain merely names
of the One called by many names This One is clothed
with the manifold powers of existence and with the
shapes of reality as with a soulless selfless ornament
they are merely messengers of its mighty power
claiming no will of their own visions of its glory voices
in its praise
This revel of heaving life must however assume
the character of distinctive selfexistence and give
enduring subsistence to its fleeting forms Immediate
being in which it places itself over against its own
consciousness is itself the negative destructive agency
which dissolves its distinctions It is thus in truth
the Self and spirit therefore passes on to know itself
in the form of self Pure Light scatters its simplicity
as an infinity of separate forms and presents itself as
an offering to selfexistence that the individual may
have sustainment in its substance Selfconscious spirit passing away from abstract
formless Essence and going into itself or, in other
words, having raised its immediacy to the level of
Self makes its simple unity assume the character
of a manifold of selfexisting entities and is the Religion
of spiritual SensePerception Here spirit breaks up into
an innumerable plurality of weaker and stronger richer
and poorer spirits This Pantheism which to begin
with consists in the quiescent stability of these spiritual
atoms passes into a process of active internal hostility
The innocence which characterises the flower and plant
religions and which is merely the selfless idea of Self
gives way to the seriousness of struggling warring life
to the guilt of animal religions the quiescence and
impotence of merely contemplative individuality pass
into the destructive violence of separate selfexistence
It is of no avail to have removed the lifelessness
of abstraction from the things of perception and to
have raised them to the level of realities of spiritual
perception the animation of this spiritual kingdom
has death in the heart of it owing to the fact of determinateness and the inherent negativity which invades
and trenches upon their innocent and harmless indifference to one another Owing to this determinateness
and negativity the dispersion of passive plantforms
into manifold entities becomes a hostile process in
which the hatred stirred up by their independent selfexistence rages and consumes
The actual selfconsciousness at work in this dispersed and disintegrated spirit takes the form of a
multitude of individualised mutuallyantipathetic folkspirits who fight and hate each other to the death and
consciously accept certain specific forms of animals as
their essential reality their god for they are nothing
else than spirits of animals their animal life separate
and cut off from one another, and with no universality
consciously present in them
The characteristic of purely negative independent
selfexistence however consumes itself in this active
hatred towards one another and through this process involved in its very principle spirit enters
into another shape Independent selfexistence cancelled and abolished is the form of the object, a form
which is produced by the self or rather is the self
produced the selfconsuming self ie the self that
becomes a thing The agent at work therefore
retains the upper hand over these animal spirits
merely tearing each other to pieces and his action is
not merely negative but composed and creative
The consciousness of spirit is thus now the process
which is above and beyond the immediate inherent
universal nature as well as transcends the abstract
selfexistence in isolation Since the implicit inherent
nature is relegated through opposition to the level of
a specific character it is no longer the proper form of
Absolute Spirit but a reality which its consciousness
finds lying over against itself as an ordinary existing
fact and cancels at the same time this consciousness
is not merely this negative cancelling selfexistent being
but produces its own objective idea of itself selfexistence put forth in the form of an object. This
process of production is all the same not yet perfect
production it is a conditioned activity the forming
of a given material
c
Spirit then here takes the form of the artificer
and its action when producing itself as object but
without having as yet grasped the thought of itself
is an instinctive kind of working like bees building
their cells
The first form because immediate has the abstract
character of understanding and the work accomplished is not yet in itself endued with spirit The
crystals of Pyramids and Obelisks simple combinations
of straight lines with even surfaces and equal relations
of parts in which incommensurability of curvature is
set aside these are the works produced in strict geometrical form by this artificer Owing to the purely
abstract intelligible nature of the form it is not in itself
the true significance of the form it is not the spiritual
self Thus either the works produced only receive
spirit into them as an alien departed spirit one that
has forsaken its living suffusion and permeation with
reality and being itself dead enters into these lifeless
crystals or they take up an external relation to spirit
as something which is itself external and not there as
spirit they are related to it as to the orient Light
which throws its significance on them Egyptian religions
artificer starts the separation of the implicit essential
nature which becomes the material it works upon
and independent selfexistence which is the aspect
of selfconsciousness at work this division has become
objective in the result achieved Its further endeavour
has to be directed to cancelling and doing away with
this separation of soul and body it must strive to
clothe and give embodied shape to soul per se and
endow the body with soul The two aspects since
they are brought closer to one another bear towards
each other in this condition the character of ideally
presented spirit and of enveloping shell Spirits
oneness with itself contains this opposition of individuality and universality Since the aspects of the
work produced become closer by performance of it there
comes about thereby at the same time the other fact
that the work gets nearer to the selfconsciousness
performing it and that the latter attains in the work
knowledge of itself as it truly is In this way however
the work merely constitutes to begin with the abstract
side of the activity of spirit which does not yet perceive the content of this activity within itself but in its
work which is a thing The artificer as such spirit
in its entirety has not yet appeared the artificer is
still the inner hidden reality which qua entire is
present only as broken up into active selfconsciousness
and the object it has produced
The surrounding habitation external reality which
to begin with is raised merely to the abstract form of
the understanding, is worked up by the artificer and
made into a more animated form The artificer employs plant life for this purpose which is no longer
sacred as in the previous case of inactive impotent
pantheism rather the artificer who holds himself
to be the selfexistent reality takes that plant life
as something to be used and degrades it to an external aspect to the level of an ornament But it is
not turned to use without some alteration for the
worker producing the selfconscious form destroys at the
same time the transitoriness inherently characteristic
of the immediate existence of this life and brings its
organic forms nearer to the more exact and more universal forms of thought The organic form which
left to itself grows and thrives in particularity being
on its side subjugated by the form of thought elevates
in turn these straightlined and level shapes into more
animated roundedness a blending which becomes the
root of free architecture
This dwelling the aspect of the universal element
or inorganic nature of spirits also includes within it
now a form of individuality which brings nearer to
actuality the spirit that was formerly separated from
existence and external or internal thereto and thus
makes the work to accord more with active selfconsciousness The worker lays hold first of all on the
form of selfexistence in general on the forms of animal
life That he is no longer directly aware of himself in
animal life he shows by the fact that in reference to
this he constitutes himself the productive force and
knows himself in it as being his own work whereby the
productive force at the same time is one which is superseded and becomes the hieroglyphic symbol of another
meaning the hieroglyph of a thought Hence also
this force is no longer solely and entirely used by the
worker but becomes blended with the shape embody
ing thought with the human form Still the work
lacks the form and existence where self as self appears
it also fails to express in its very nature that it includes
within itself an inner meaning it lacks language
the element in which the sense and meaning contained
are actually present The work done therefore even
when quite purified of the animal aspect and bearing
the form and shape of selfconsciousness alone is
still the silent soundless form which needs the rays
of the rising sun in order to have a sound which when
produced by light is even then merely noise and not
speech shows merely an outer self not the inner selff
Contrasted with this outer self of the form and shape
stands the other form which indicates that it has in
it an inner being Nature turning back into its essential being degrades its multiplicity of life ever
individualising itself and confounding itself in its
own process to the level of an external encasing shell
which is the covering for the inner being And still
this inner being is primarily mere darkness the unmoved the black formless stone
Both representations contain inwardness and existence the two moments of spirit and both kinds
of manifestation contain both moments at once in a
relation of opposition the self both as inward and as
outward Both have to be united The soul of the
statue in human form does not yet come out of the
inner being is not yet speech objective existence of
self which is inherently internal and the inner being
of multiform existence is still without voice or sound t The statues of Memnon still draws no distinctions within itself and is still
separated from its outer being to which all distinctions
belong The artificer therefore combines both by
blending the forms of nature and selfconsciousness
and these ambiguous beings a riddle to themselves
the conscious struggling with what has no consciousness
the simple inner with the multiform outer the darkness
of thought mated with clearness of expression these
break out into the language of a wisdom that is
darkly deep and difficult to understand
With the production of this work the instinctive
method of working ceases which in contrast to selfconsciousness produced a work devoid of consciousness
For here the activity of the artificer which constitutes
selfconsciousness comes face to face with an inner
being equally selfconscious and giving itself expression He has therein raised himself by his work
up to the point where his conscious life breaks asunder
where spirit greets spirit In this unity of selfconscious
spirit with itself so far as it is aware of being embodiment and object of its own consciousness its blending
and mingling with the unconscious condition of immediate forms of nature become purified These
monsters in form and shape word and deed are resolved
and dissolved into a shape which is spiritual an outer
which has entered into itself an inner which expresses itself out of itself and in itself they pass into
thought which brings forth itself preserves the shape
and form suited to thought and is transparent existence Spirit is Artist
Spirit has raised the shape in which it is object
for its own consciousness into the form of consciousness itself and spirit sets such a form before itself
The artificer has given up the external synthesising
activity that blending of the heterogeneous forms of
thought and nature When the shape has gained the
form of selfconscious activity the artificer has
become a spiritual workman
If we next ask what the actual spirit is which finds
in the religion of art the consciousness of its Absolute
it turns out that this is the ethical or objective spirit
This spirit is not merely the universal substance of
all individuals but when this substance is said to
have as an objective fact for actual consciousness
the form of consciousness this amounts to saying that
the substance which is individualised is known by
the individuals within it as their proper essence and
their own achievement It is for them neither the
Light of the World in whose unity the selfexistence
of selfconsciousness is contained only negatively
only transitorily and beholds the lord and master
of its reality nor is it the restless waste and destruction
of hostile nations nor their subjection to casts
which together constitute the semblance of organisation
of a completed whole where however the universal
freedom of the individuals concerned is wanting
Rather this spirit is a free nation in which custom
and order constitute the common substance of all
whose reality and existence each and every one knows
to be his own will and his own deed
The religion of the ethical spirit however raises
it above its actual realisation and is the return from
its objectivity into pure knowledge of itself Since an
ethically constituted nation lives in direct unity with its
own substance and does not contain the principle
of pure individualism of selfconsciousness the religion
characteristic of its sphere first appears in complete form in severance from its stable security
For the reality of the ethical substance rests partly
on its quiet unchangeableness as contrasted with
the absolute process of selfconsciousness and consequently on the fact that this selfconsciousness has
not yet left its serene life of customary convention
and its confident security therein and gone into itself
Partly again that reality rests on its organisation into
a plurality of rights and duties as also on its organised
distribution into groups of stations and classes each
with its particular way of acting which cooperates
to form the whole and hence rests on the fact that
the individual is contented with the limitation of his
existence and has not yet grasped the unrestricted
thought of his free self But that serene immediate
confidence in the substance of this ethical life returns
to trust in self and to certainty of self and the plurality
of rights and duties as well as the restricted particular
action this involves is the same dialectic process in
the sphere of the ethical life as the plurality of things
and their various qualities a process which only
comes to rest and stability in the simplicity of spirit
certain of self
The complete fulfilment of the ethical life in free
selfconsciousness and the destined consummation
of the ethical world are therefore found when
individuality has entered into itself the condition is
one of absolute levity on the part of the ethical spirit
it has dissipated and resolved into itself all the firmly
established distinctions constituting its own stability
and the separate components of its own articulated
organisation and being perfectly sure of itself has
attained to boundless cheerfulness of heart and the
freest enjoyment of itself This simple certainty of
spirit within itself has a double meaning it is quiet
stability and solid truth as well as absolute unrest and
the disappearance of the ethical order It turns round
however into the latter for the truth of the ethical
spirit lies primarily just in this substantial objectivity
and trust in which the self does not think of itself as
free individual and where the self therefore in this
inner subjectivity in becoming a free self falls to the
ground Since then its trust is broken and the substance of the nation cracked spirit which was the
connecting medium of the unstable extremes has now
come forward as an extreme that of selfconsciousness
taking itself to be essential and ultimate This is spirit
certain within itself which mourns over the loss of its
world and now produces out of the abstraction of self
its own essential being raised far above actual reality
At such an epoch art in absolute form comes on the
scene At the earlier stage it is instinctive in its operation being absorbed and steeped in existence it
works out of and works into this element it does not
find its substance in the free life of an ethical order
and hence too the self operating does not consist of
free spiritual activity
Later on spirit goes beyond art in order to gain its
higher manifestation viz that of being not merely
the substance born and produced out of the self, but
of being in its manifestation object of this self it
seeks at that higher level not merely to bring forth
itself out of its own notion but to have its very notion
as its form so that the notion and the work of art produced may know each other reciprocally as one and
the same
Since then the ethical substance has withdrawn
from its objective existence into its bare self consciousness this is the aspect of the notion, or the activity
with which spirit brings itself forward as object It
is pure form because the individual in ethical obedience
and service has so worked off every unconscious
existence and every fixed determination as the substance has itself become this fluid and undifferentiated
entity This form is the night in which the substance
was betrayed and made itself subject It is out of
this night of pure certainty of self that the ethical
spirit rises again in a shape freed from nature and its
own immediate existence
The existence of the pure notion into which spirit
has fled from its bodily shape is an individual which
spirit selects as the vessel for its sorrow Spirit acts
in this individual as his universal and his power from
which he suffers violence as his element of Pathos by having given himself over to which his selfconsciousness loses freedom But that positive power
belonging to the universal is overcome by the pure
self of the individual, the negative power This pure
activity conscious of its inalienable force wrestles
with the unembodied essential being Becoming its
master this negative activity has turned the element of
pathos into its own material and given itself its content
and this unity comes out as a work universal spirit
individualised and consciously presented
a
The first work of art is because immediate abstract
and particular On its own side it has to move away
from this immediate and objective phase towards selfconsciousness while on the other side the latter for
itself endeavours in the cult to do away with the
distinction which it at first gave itself in contrast to its
own spirit and by so doing to produce a work of art
inherently endowed with life
The first way in which the artistic spirit keeps as far
as possible removed from each other its form and its
active consciousness is immediate in character the
form assumed is there as a thing in general It
breaks up into the distinction of particularity which
contains the form of the self, and universality which
represents the inorganic elements in reference to the
form adopted and is its environment and habitation
This shape assumed obtains its pure form the form
belonging to spirit by the whole being raised into the
sphere of the pure notion It is not the crystal belonging as we saw to the level of understanding a form
which housed and covered a lifeless element or is shone
upon externally by a soul Nor again is it that commingling of the forms of nature and thought which first
arose in connection with plants thoughts activity here
being still an imitation Rather the notion strips off the remnant of root branches and leaves still clinging
to the forms purifies the forms and makes them into
figures in which the crystals straight lines and surfaces
are raised into incommensurable relations so that the
animation of the organic is taken up into the abstract
form of understanding and at the same time its
essential nature incommensurability is preserved for
understanding
The indwelling god however is the black stone
extracted from the animal encasement and suffused
with the light of consciousness The human form strips
off the animal character with which it was mixed up
The animal form is for the god merely an accidental
vestment the animal appears alongside its true formt
and has no longer a value on its own account, but has
sunk into being a significant sign of something else has
become a mere symbol By that very fact the form
assumed by the god in itself casts off even the need for
the natural conditions of animal existence and hints
at the internal arrangements of organic life melted down
into the surface of the form and pertaining only to this
surface
The essential being of the god however is the unity of
the universal existence of nature and of selfconscious
spirit which in its actuality appears confronting the
former At the same time being in the first instance
a particular form its existence is one of the elements
of nature just as its selfconscious actuality is a particular national spirit But the former is, in this
unity that element reflected back into spirit nature
made transparent by thoughts and united with self
therefore
within it its natureelement as something transcended
as a shadowy obscure memory The utter chaos and
confused struggle amongst the elements existing free
and detached from each other the nonethical disordered realm of Titans is vanquished and banished
to the outskirts of selftransparent reality to the
cloudy boundaries of the world which finds itself in
the sphere of spirit and is at peace These ancient
gods firstborn children of the union of Light with
Darkness Heaven Earth Ocean Sun earths aimless
typhonic Fire and so on are supplanted by forms and
shapes which do but darkly recall those earlier titans
and which are no longer things of nature but spirits
clarified by the ethical life of selfconscious nations
This simple form has thus destroyed within itself
restless endless individuation the individuation both
in the life of nature which operates with necessity
only qua universal essence but is contingent in its
actual existence and process and also in the life of
a nation which is scattered and broken into particular spheres of action and into individual centres
of selfconsciousness and has an existence manifold in action and meaning All this individuation
the simplicity of this form has abolished and brought
together into an individuality at peace with itself
Hence the condition of unrest stands contrasted with
this form confronting quiescent individuality the
essential reality stands selfconsciousness which being
its source and origin has nothing left over for itself
except to be pure activity What belongs to the substance the artist gave entirely along with his work
to himself however as a specific individuality there
belongs in his work no reality He could only have
conferred completeness on it by relinquishing his
particular nature divesting himself of his own being
and rising to the abstraction of pure action
With the first and immediate act of production the
separation of the work and his selfconscious activity
is not yet healed again The work is therefore
not by itself really a spiritual entity it is a whole only
when its process of coming to be is taken along with it
The obvious and common element in the case of a
work of art that it is produced in consciousness and
is made by the hand of man is the aspect of the
notion existing qua notion and standing in contrast
to the work produced And if this notion qua the
artist or spectator is unselfish enough to declare the
work of art to be per se absolutely spiritual and to
forget himself qua agent or onlooker then as against
this the notion of spirit has to be insisted on spirit
cannot dispense with the moment of being conscious of
itself This moment however stands in contrast
to the work because spirit in this its primary disruption gives the two sides their abstract and specifically contrasted characteristics of doing something
and of being a thing and their return to the unity
they started from has not yet come about
The artist finds out then in his work that he did
not produce a reality like himself No doubt there
comes back to him from his work a consciousness in
the sense that a wondering multitude honours it as the
spirit which is their own true nature But this way
of animating or spiritualising his work since it renders
him his selfconsciousness merely in the form of admiration is rather a confession that the work is not
animated in the same manner as the artist Since
the work comes back to him in the form of gladness
in general he does not find in it the pain of his
selfdiscipline and the pain of production nor the
exertion and strain of his own toil People may
moreover judge the work or bring him offerings and
gifts or endue it with their consciousness in whatever
way they like if they with their knowledge set themselves over it he knows how much more his act is than
what they understand and say if they put themselves
beneath it and recognise in it their own dominating
essential reality he knows himself as the master of this
The work of art hence requires another element
for its existence God requires another way of going
forth than this in which out of the depths of his
creative night he drops into the opposite into externality to the character of a thing with no selfconsciousness This higher element is that of Language
a way of existing which is directly selfconscious
existence When individual selfconsciousness exists
in that way it is at the same time directly a form of
universal contagion complete isolation of independent selfexistent selves is at once fluent continuity
and universally communicated unity of the many
selves it is the soul existing as soul The god
then which takes language as its medium of embodiment is the work of art inherently spiritualised
endowed with a soul a work which directly in
its existence contains the pure activity which was
apart from and in contrast to the god when existing
as a thing In other words, self consciousness when
its essential being becomes objective remains in direct
relation with itself. It is, when thus at home with itself in its essential nature pure thought or devotion
whose inwardness gets at the same time express existence in the Hymn The hymn keeps within it
the individuality of selfconsciousness and this individual character is at the same time perceived to
be there universal Devotion kindled in every one
is a spiritual stream which in all the manifold selfconscious units is conscious of itself as one and the same
function in all alike and a simple state of being Spirit
being this universal selfconsciousness of every one
holds in a single unity its pure inwardness as well as
its objective existence for others and the independent
selfexistence of the individual units
This kind of language is distinct from another
way God speaks which is not that of universal selfconsciousness The Oracle both in the case of the
god of the religions of art as well as of the preceding religions is the necessary and the first form
of divine utterance For its very principle implies
that God is at once the essence of nature and of
spirit and hence has not merely natural but spiritual
existence as well In so far as this moment is implied
primarily in its principle and is not yet realised in
religion the language used is for the religious selfconsciousness the speech of an alien and external
selfconsciousness The selfconsciousness which remains alien and foreign to its religious communion
is not yet there in the way its essential principle requires it should be The self is simple selfexistence
and thereby is altogether universal selfexistence
that self however which is cut off from the selfconsciousness of the communion is primarily a mere particular self
The content of this its own peculiar and individual
form of speech is supplied from the general determinate
character which the Absolute Spirit as such adopts
in its religion Thus the universal spirit of the East
which has not yet particularised its existence utters
about the Absolute equally simple abstract and
universal statements whose substantial content is
sublime in the simplicity of its truth but at the same
time appears because of this universality trivial to
the selfconsciousness developing further
The further developed self which advances to being
distinctively for itself rises above the pure pathos
of unconscious substance gets the mastery over the
objectivity of the principle of Light in Eastern religion
and knows that simplicity of abstract truth to be the
inherent reality which does not
possess the form of contingent existence through an
utterance of an alien self but is the sure and unwritten
law of the gods a law that lives for ever and no man
knows what time it came
As the universal truth revealed by the Light
of the world has here returned into what is within or
what is beneath and has thus got rid of the form of
contingent appearance so too on the other hand in
the religion of art because Gods form or shape has
taken on consciousness and hence particularity in
general the peculiar utterance of God who is the
spirit of an ethically constituted nation is the Oracle
which knows its special circumstances and situation
and announces what is serviceable to its interests
Reflective thought however satisfies itself as to the
universal truths enunciated because these are known
as the essential implicit reality of the nations life
and the utterance of them is thus for such reflection
no longer a strange and alien speech but is its very
own Just as that wise man of old searched in
his own thought for what was worthy and good but
left it to his Daimon to find out and decide the
petty contingent content of what he wanted to know
whether it was good for him to keep company with
this or that person or good for one of his friends to
go on a journey and such like unimportant things
in the same way the universal consciousness draws the
knowledge about the contingent from birds or trees
or fermenting earth the steam from which deprives
the selfconscious mind of its powers of discrimination
For what is accidental is something undiscerned undiscriminated and extraneous and hence the ethical
consciousness lets itself as if by a throw of the dice
settle the matter in a manner that is similarly undiscriminating and extraneous If the individual by his
understanding determines on a certain course and
selects after consideration what is useful for him it
is the specific nature of his particular character which
is the ground of this selfdetermination This basis is
just what is contingent and that knowledge which his
understanding supplies as to what is useful for the
individual is hence just such a knowledge as that of
oracles or of the lot only that he who questions
the oracle or lot thereby shows the ethical sentiment
of indifference to what is accidental while the former
on the contrary treats the inherently contingent as an
essential concern of his thought and knowledge Higher
than both however is to make careful reflection the
oracle for contingent action but yet to recognise that this very act reflected on is something contingent because it refers to what is opportune and has a relation
to what is particular
The true selfconscious existence which spirit receives
in the form of speech which is not the utterance of
extraneous and so accidental ie not universal selfconsciousness is the work of art which we met with
before It stands in contrast to the statue which
has the character of a thing." As the statue is existence in a state of rest the other is existence in a state
of transience In the case of the former objectivity
is set free and dispenses with the immediate presence
of the self proper in the latter on the other hand
objectivity is too much bound up with the self attains
insufficiently to definite embodiment and is like time
no longer there just as soon as it is there
The religious Cult constitutes the process of the two
sides a process in which the divine embodiment in
motion within the pure feelingelement of selfconsciousness and its embodiment at rest in the element of
thinghood reciprocally abandon the different character
each possesses and the unity which is the underlying
principle of their being becomes an existing fact Here
in the Cult the self gives itself a consciousness of the
Divine Being descending from its remoteness into it
and this Divine Being which was formerly the unreal
and merely objective thereby receives the proper
actuality of selfconsciousness
This principle of the Cult is essentially contained
and present already in the flow of the melody of the
Hymn These hymns of devotion are the way the
self obtains immediate pure satisfaction through and
within itself. It is the soul purified which in the
purity it thus attains is immediately and only absolute
Being and is one with absolute Being The soul
because of its abstract character is not consciousness
distinguishing its object from itself and is thus merely
the night of its existence and the place prepared for its
form The abstract Cult therefore raises the self into
being this pure divine element The soul brings about
the attainment of this purity in a conscious way
Still it is not yet the self which has descended to the
depths of its being and knows itself as evil It is
something that merely is a soul which cleanses its
exterior with the washing of water and robes it in
white while its innermost traverses the path set before
itself of labour punishment and reward the way of
spiritual discipline of altogether relinquishing its particularity the road by which it reaches the mansions
and the fellowship of the blest
This ceremonial cult is in its first form merely in
secret ie is merely a performance accomplished subjectively in idea and unrealised It has to become a
real act for an unreal act is a contradiction in terms
Consciousness proper thereby rises to the level of its
pure selfconsciousness The essential Being has in it
the significance of a free object through the actual
cult this object turns back to the self and in so far as
in pure consciousness it has the significance of absolute
Being dwelling in its purity beyond actual reality
this Being descends through this mediating process
of the cult from its universality into individual form
and thus combines and unites with actual reality
The way the two sides make their appearance in the
act is of such a character that the selfconscious aspect
so far as it is actual consciousness finds the absolute
Being manifesting itself as actual nature On the one
hand nature belongs to self consciousness as its
possession and property and stands for what has no
existence per se On the other hand nature is its
proper immediate reality and particularity which
is equally regarded as not truly real and essential
and is abrogated At the same time that external
nature has the opposite significance for its pure
consciousness viz the significance of being the inherently real for which the self sacrifices its own
relative unreality just as conversely the self sacrifices
the unessential aspect of nature to itself The act is
thereby a spiritual movement because it is this doublesided process of cancelling the abstraction of absolute
Being in the way devotion determines the object and
making it something concrete and actual and on the
other hand of cancelling the actual in the way the
agent determines the object and the self acting and
raising it into universality
The practice of the religious Cult begins therefore
with the pure and simple offering up or surrender of a possession which the owner apparently
considers quite useless for himself and spills on the
ground or lets rise up in smoke By so doing he renounces before the ultimate Being of his pure consciousness all possession and right of property and enjoyment
thereof renounces personality and the reversion of
his action to his self and instead reflects the act
into the universal into the absolute Being rather
than into himself Conversely however the objective
ultimate Being too is annihilated in that very process The animal offered up is the symbol of a god
the fruits consumed are the actual living Ceres and
Bacchus In the former die the powers of the upper
law the Olympians which has blood and actual life
in the latter the powers of the lower law the Furies
which possesses in bloodless form secret and crafty
power
The sacrifice of the divine substance so far as it is
active belongs to the side of selfconsciousness That
this concrete act may be possible the absolute Being
must have from the start implicitly sacrificed itself This
it has done in the fact that it has given itself definite
existence and made itself an individual animal and fruit
of the earth The self actively sacrificing demonstrates
in actual existence and sets before its own consciousness this already implicitly completed selfrenunciation
on the part of absolute Being and replaces that immediate reality which absolute Being has by the
higher viz that of the self making the sacrifice For
the unity which has arisen and which is the outcome
of transcending the particularity and separation of the
two sides is not merely negative destructive fate but
has a positive significance It is merely for the abstract
Being of the netherworld that the sacrifice offered to it is
wholly surrendered and devoted and in consequence
it is only for that Being that the reflection of personal
possession and individual selfexistence back into the
Universal is marked distinct from the self as such At
the same time however this is only a trifling part
and the other act of sacrifice is merely the destruction
of what cannot be used and is really the preparation
of the offered substance for a meal the feast that
cheats the act out of its negative significance The
person making the offering at that first sacrifice reserves the greatest share for his own enjoyment
and reserves from the latter sacrifice what is useful
for the same purpose This enjoyment is the negative
power which supersedes the absolute Being as well as
the unity and this enjoyment is at the same time the
positive actual reality in which the objective existence
of absolute Being is transmuted into selfconscious
existence and the self has consciousness of its unity
with its Absolute
This cult for the rest is indeed an actual act although
its meaning lies for the most part only in devotion
What pertains to devotion is not objectively produced
just as the result when confined to the feeling of enjoyment is robbed of its external existence The Cult
therefore goes further and replaces this defect in the
first instance by giving its devotion an objective subsistence since the cult is the common task or the individual task for each and all to do which produces
for the honour and glory of God a House for Him
to dwell in and adornment for His presence By
so doing the external objectivity of statuary is
partly cancelled for by thus dedicating his gifts and
his labours the worker makes God well disposed towards him and looks on his self as attached and appertaining to God Furthermore this course of action is
not the individual labour of the artist this particularity is dissolved in universality But it is not only
the honour of God which is brought about and the
blessing of His countenance and favour is not only
shed in idea and imagination on the worker the
work has also a meaning the reverse of the first which
was that of selfrenunciation and of honour done to
what is alien and external The Halls and Dwellings of God are for the use of man the treasures preserved
there are in time of need his own the honour which
God enjoys in his decorative adornment is the honour
and glory of a refined artistic and highspirited nation
At the festival season the people adorn their own
dwellings their own garments and their establishments too with the furnishings of elegance and grace
In this manner they receive a return for their gifts
from a responsive and grateful God and receive the
proofs of His favour wherewith the nation became
bound to the God because of the work done for Him
not as a hope and a deferred realisation but rather
in testifying to His honour and in presenting gifts the
nation finds directly and at once the enjoyment of its
own wealth and adornment
That nation which approaches its god in the cult of
the religion of art is an ethically constituted nation
knowing its State and the acts of the State to be the
will and the achievement of its own activity This
universal spirit confronting the selfconscious nation
is consequently not the Light of the world which
being selfless does not contain the certainty of the
individual selves but is only their universal ultimate
Being and the dominating imperious power wherein
they disappear The religious cult of this simple unembodied ultimate Being gives back therefore to its
votaries in the main merely this that they are the
nation of their god It secures for them merely their
stable subsistence and their bare substance as a whole
it does not secure for them their actual self this is
indeed rejected For they revere their god as the
empty profound not as spirit The cult however of
the religion of art on the other hand dispenses with
that abstract simplicity of the absolute Being and
therefore with its profundity But that Being
which is directly at one with the self is inherently
spirit and comprehending truth although not yet
known explicitly in other words it does not know the
depths of its nature Because this Absolute then
implies self consciousness finds itself at home with it when it appears and in the cult this consciousness
receives not merely the general title to its own subsistence but also its selfconscious existence within it
just as conversely in a despised and outcast nation
whose mere substance is acknowledged the absolute
Being has not a selfless reality but in the nation whose
self is acknowledged as living in its substance
From the ceremonial cult then selfconsciousness
that is at peace and satisfied in its ultimate Being
turns away as also does the god that has entered into
selfconsciousness as into its place of habitation This
place is by itself the night of mere substance or
its pure individuality but no longer the strained and
striving individuality of the artist which has not yet
reconciled itself with its essential Being that gradually
becomes objective it is substance satisfied having
its pathos within it and in want of nothing because
it comes back from mere intuition from objectivity
which is overcome and superseded
This pathos is by itself the Being of the
Orient a Being however which has now set and
disappeared within itself and has its own setting
selfconsciousness within it and so contains existence
and reality
It has here traversed the process of its actualisation
Descending from its pure essentiality and becoming
an objective force of nature and the expressions of this
force it is an existence relative to an other an objective
existence for the self by which it is consumed The
silent inner being of selfless nature attains in its fruits
the stage where nature duly prepared and digested
is offered as material for the life which has a self In its being useful for food and drink it reaches its highest
perfection For therein it is the possibility of a higher
existence and comes in touch with spiritual existence
In its metamorphosis the spirit of the earth has developed and become partly a silently energising substance partly spiritual ferment in the first case it is
the feminine principle the nursing mother in the other
the masculine principle the selfdriving force of selfconscious existence
In this enjoyment then that orient Light of the
world is discovered for what it really is Enjoyment
is the Mystery of its being For mysticism is not
concealment of a secret or ignorance it consists
in the self knowing itself to be one with absolute Being
and in this latter therefore becoming revealed Only
the self is revealed to itself or what is manifest is
so merely in the immediate certainty of itself But
it is just in such certainty that simple absolute Being
has been placed by the cult As a thing that can be
used it has not only existence which is seen felt smelt
tasted it is also object of desire and by actually
being enjoyed it becomes one with the self and
thereby disclosed completely to this self and made
manifest
When we say of anything it is manifest to reason to
the heart it is in point of fact still secret for it still
lacks the actual certainty of immediate existence both
the certainty regarding what is objective and the
certainty of enjoyment a certainty which in religion
however is not only immediate and unreflecting but
at the same time fully cognitive certainty of self
What has thus been through the cult revealed to
selfconscious spirit within itself is simple absolute
Being and this has been revealed partly as the process
of passing out of its dark night of concealment up to the
level of consciousness to be there its silently nurturing
substance partly however as the process of losing
itself again in nether darkness in the self and of
waiting above merely with the silent yearning of motherhood The more conspicuous moving impulse however
is the variously named Light of the East and its
tumult of heaving life which having likewise desisted
from its abstract state of being has first embodied
itself in objective existence in the fruits of the earth
and then surrendering itself to selfconsciousness
attained there to its proper realisation and now it
curvets and careers about in the guise of a crowd of
excited fervid women the unrestrained revel of nature
in selfconscious formJ
Still however it is only Absolute Spirit in the sense
of this simple abstract Being not as spirit per se that
is discovered to consciousness ie it is merely immediate spirit the spirit of nature Its selfconscious
life is therefore merely the mystery of the Bread and
the Wine of Ceres and Bacchus not of the other the
strictly higher gods of Olympus whose individuality
includes as an essential moment selfconsciousness as
such Spirit has not yet qua selfconscious spirit offered
itself up to it and the mystery of bread and wine is
not yet the mystery of flesh and blood
This unstable divine revel must come to rest as
an object and the enthusiasm which did not reach
consciousness must produce a work which confronts f As found in the mysteries of Bacchus and Dionysus it as the statue stands over against the enthusiasm of
the artist in the previous case a work too that is
equally complete and finished yet not as an inherently
lifeless but as a living self Such a cult is the Festival
which man makes in his own honour though not imparting to a cult of that kind the significance of
the Absolute Being for it is the ultimate Being that
is first revealed to him not yet Spirit not such a
Being as essentially takes on human form But this
cult provides the basis for this revelation and lays
out its moments individually and separately Thus
we here get the abstract moment of the living embodiment of ultimate Being just as formerly we had
the unity of both in the state of unconstrained emotional fervency In the place of the statue man thus
puts himself as the form elaborated and moulded
for perfectly free movement just as the statue is the
perfectly free state of quiescence If every individual
knows how to play the part at least of a torchbearer
one of them comes prominently forward who is the
very embodiment of the movement the smooth elaboration the fluent energy and force of all the members
He is a lively and living work of art which matches
strength with its beauty and to him is given as a
reward for his force and energy the adornment with
which the statue was decorated in the former type of
religion and the honour of being amongst his own
nation instead of a god in stone the highest bodily
representation of what the essential Being of the
nation is
In both the representations which have just come
before us there is present the unity of selfconsciousness
and spiritual Being but they still lack their due balance
and equilibrium In the case of the bacchic revelling
enthusiasm the self is beside itself in bodily beauty of
form it is spiritual Being that is outside itself The
gloominess of consciousness in the one case and its
wild stammering utterance must be taken up into the
transparent existence of the latter and the clear but
spiritless form of the latter into the emotional inwardness of the former The perfect element in which the
inwardness is as external as the externality is inward is
once again Language But it is neither the language of
the oracle entirely contingent in its content and altogether individual in character nor is it the emotional
hymn sung in praise of a merely individual god nor
is it the meaningless stammer of delirious bacchantic
revelry It has attained to its clear and universal
content and meaning Its content is clear for the
artificer has passed out of the previous state of entirely
insubstantial enthusiasm and worked himself into a
definite shape which is his own proper existence permeated through all its movements by selfconscious
soul and is that of his contemporaries Its content is
universal for in this festival which is to the honour
of man there vanishes the onesidedness peculiar to
figures represented in statues which merely contain a
national spirit a determinate character of the godhead
The finely built warrior is indeed the honour and glory
of his particular nation but he is a physical or corporeal individuality in which are sunk out of sight the
expanse and depth of meaning the seriousness of significance and the inner character of the spirit which
underlies the particular mode of life the cravings
the needs and the customs of his nation In relinquishing all this for complete corporeal embodiment spirit has laid aside the particular impressions
the special tones and chords of that nature which it
as the actual spirit of the nation includes Its nation
therefore is no longer conscious in this spirit of its
special particular character but rather of having laid
this aside and of the universality of its human
existence
The national spirits which find their being in the
form of some particular animal coalesce into one single
spirit Thus it is that the separate artistically beautiful national spirits combine to form a Pantheon
the element and habitation of which is Language
Pure intuition of self in the sense of universal human
nature takes when the national or tribal spirit is
actualised this form the national spirit combines with
the others which together with it constitute through
nature and natural conditions one people in a common
undertaking and for this task builds up a collective
nation and with that a collective heaven This
universality to which spirit attains in its existence
is nevertheless merely this first universality which
to begin with starts from the individuality of ethical
life has not yet overcome its immediacy has not yet
built up a single state out of these separate national
elements The ethical life of an actual national spirit
rests partly on the simple confiding trust of individuals
in the whole of their nation partly in the direct share
which all in spite of differences of position take in the
decisions and acts of its government In the union not
in the first instance to secure a permanent order but
merely for a common act that freedom of participation
on the part of each and all is for the nonce set aside
This first community of life is therefore an assemblage
of individualities rather than the dominion and control of
abstract thought which would rob the individuals of
their selfconscious share in the will and act of the
whole
The assembly of national spirits constitutes a circle
of forms and shapes which now embraces the whole of
nature as well as the whole ethical world They are too
under the supreme command rather than the supreme
dominion of one By themselves they are the universal
substances embodying what the selfconscious essential
reality inherently is and does This however constitutes the moving force and in the first instance,
at least the centre with which those universal entities
are concerned and which to begin with seems to unite
in a merely accidental way all that they variously
accomplish But it is the return of the divine Being to
selfconsciousness which already contains the reason
that self consciousness forms the centre for those divine
forces and conceals their essential unity in the first
instance under the guise of a friendly external relation
between both worlds
The same universality which belongs to this content
has necessarily also that form of consciousness in which
the content appears It is no longer the concrete acts
and deeds of the cult it is an action which is not
indeed raised as yet to the level of the notion, but
only to that of ideas the synthetic connection of selfconscious and external existence The element in
which these presented ideas exist language is the
earliest language the Epic as such which contains
the universal content at any rate universal in the sense
of completeness of the world presented though not
in the sense of universality of thought The Minstrel
is the individual and actual spirit from whom
as a subject of this world it is produced and by whom
it is borne His pathos is not the deafening powers
of nature but Mnemosyne Kecollection a gradually
evolved inwardness the memory of an essential
mode of being once directly present He is the organ
and instrument whose content is passing away
it is not his own self which is of any account
but his muse his universal song What however is
present in fact has the form of an inferential process
where the one extreme of universality the world of
gods is connected with individuality the minstrel
through the middle term of particularity The middle
term is the nation in its heroes who are individual
men like the minstrel but only ideally presented and
thereby at the same time universal like the free extreme
of universality the gods
In this Epic then what is inherently established in
the cult the relation of the divine to the human is
set forth and displayed as a whole to consciousness
The content is an act of the essential Being conscious of itself Acting disturbs the peace of the substance, and awakens the essential Being and by
so doing its simple unity is divided into parts
and opened up into the manifold world of natural
powers and ethical forces The act is the violation
of the peaceful earth it is the trench which vivified
by the blood of the living calls forth the spirits of the
departed who are thirsting for life and who receive
it in the action of selfconsciousnesst There are two sides to the business the universal activity is concerned
to accomplish the side of the self in virtue of which
it is brought about by a collection of actual nations
with the prominent individualities at the head of them
and the side of the universal in virtue of which it is
brought about by their substantial forces The relation of the two however took formerly the character
of being the synthetic connection of universal and
individual ie of being the process of ideal presentation
On this specific character depends the judgment regarding this world
The relation of the two is by this means a commingling of both which illogically divides the unity of
the action and in a needless fashion throws the act
from one side over to the other The universal powers
assume the form of individual beings and thus have in
them the principle from which action comes when
they effect anything therefore this seems to proceed as entirely from them and to be as free as in
the case of men Hence both gods and men have
done one and the same thing The seriousness with
which those divine powers go to work is ridiculously
unnecessary since they are in point of fact the moving
force of the individualities engaged in the acts while
the strain and toil of the latter again is an equally useless effort since the former direct and manage everything Overzealous mortal creatures who are as
nothing are at the same time the mighty self that
brings into subjection universal beings violates the
gods and procures for them actual reality and an interest in acting Just as conversely these powerless
gods these impotent universal beings which procure
their sustenance from the gifts of men and through
men first get something to do are the natural inner
principle and the substance of all events as also the
ethical material and the pathos of action If their
cosmic natures first get reality and a sphere of effectual
operation through the free self of individuality it is also
the case that they are the universal which withdraws
from and avoids this connection remains unrestricted
and unconstrained in its own character and by the
inexhaustible elasticity of its unity extinguishes the
atomic singleness of the individual acting and his
various aspects preserves itself in its purity and dissolves all that is individual in the current of its own
continuity
Just as the gods fall into this contradictory relation
with the antithetic nature having the form of self in
the same way their universality comes into conflict
with their own specific character and the relation in
which it stands to others They are the eternal and
resplendent individuals who exist in their own calm
and are removed from the changes of time and the
influence of alien forces But they are at the same
time determinate elements particular gods and thus
stand in relation to others But that relation to others
which in virtue of the opposition it involves is one of
strife is a comic selfforgetfulness of their eternal
nature The determinateness they possess is rooted
in the divine subsistence and in its specific limitation
has the independence of the whole individuality owing
to this their characters at once lose the sharpness of
their distinctive peculiarity and in their ambiguity
blend together
One purpose of their activity and their activity
itself being directed against an other and so against
an invincible divine force are a contingent and futile
piece of bravado which passes away at once and transforms the pretence of seriousness in the act into a
harmless selfconfident piece of sport with no result
and no issue If however in the nature of their divinity
the negative element the specific determinateness of
that nature appears merely as the arbitrariness of
their activity and as the contradiction between the
purpose and result and if that independent selfconfidence outweiglis and overbalances the element of determinateness then by that very fact the pure force of
negativity confronts and opposes their nature and moreover with a power to which it must finally submit and
over which it can in no way prevail They are the universal and the positive as against the individual self of
mortals which cannot hold out against their power and
might But the universal self for that reason hovers
over these mortal selves and over this whole world of
ideal presentation to which the entire content belongs
and is for them the empty form of bare Necessity not
determined conceptually a mere event to which they
stand related selfless and sorrowing for these determinate natures do not find themselves in this purely
formal necessity
This necessity however is the unity of the notion,
a unity dominating and controlling the contradictory independent subsistence of the individual moments
a unity in which the inconsistency and fortuitousness
of their action is coherently regulated and the sportive character of their acts receives its serious value
in those moments themselves The content of the
world of ideal presentation carries on its process in the
midst unrestrained and detached by itself gathering
round the individuality of some hero who however
feels the strength and splendour of his life broken
and mourns the early death he sees ahead of him For
the actual individuality firmly fixed in itself is isolated
and excluded to the utmost point and severed into its
elements which have not yet found each other and
united The one individual element the abstract unreal
moment is necessity which takes no share in the life
of the mediating term just as little as does the other
the concrete real individual element the minstrel
who keeps himself outside it and disappears in what
he ideally presents Both extremes must get nearer
the content the one necessity has to get filled with
it the other the language of the minstrel must have
a share in it And the content formerly left to itself
must preserve in it the certainty and the fixed character
of the negative
This higher language that of Tragedy gathers and
keeps more closely together the dispersed and disintegrated moments of the inner essential world and the
world of action The substance of the divine falls
apart in accordance with the nature of the notion, into
its shapes and forms and their movement is likewise in
conformity with that notion In regard to form the language here ceases to be narrative in virtue of the fact
that it enters into the content just as the content
ceases to be merely one that is ideally presented The
hero is himself the spokesman and the representation
given brings before the audience who are also spectators selfconscious human beings who know their
own rights and purposes the power and the will belonging to their specific nature and who know how to
state them They are artists who do not express with
unconscious naivete and naturalness the merely external aspect of what they begin and what they decide
upon as is the case in the language accompanying
ordinary action in actual life they make the very
inner being external they prove the righteousness of
their action and the pathos controlling them is
soberly asserted and definitely expressed in its universal
individuality free from all accident of circumstance
and the particular peculiarities of personalities Lastly
it is in actual human beings that these characters get
existence human beings who impersonate heroes
and represent them in actual speech not in the form
of a narrative but speaking in their own person Just
as it is essential for a statue to be made by human
hands so is the actor essential to his mask not as an
external condition from which artistically considered
we have to abstract or so far as abstraction must
certainly be made we thereby state just that art does
not yet contain in it the true and proper self
The general ground on which the movement of these
shapes produced from the notion takes place is the consciousness of the first form of language where the
content is ideally presented and its detail spread
out without reference to self It is the commonalty
in general whose wisdom finds utterance in the Chorus
of the Elders in the powerlessness of this chorus the
generality finds its representative because the common
people itself compose merely the positive and passive
material for the individuality of the government
confronting it Lacking the power to negate and
oppose it is unable to hold together and keep within
bounds the riches and varied fullness of divine life
it allows each individual moment to go off its own way
and in its hymns of honour and reverence praises each
individual moment as an independent god now this
god and now again another Where however it
detects the seriousness of the notion, and perceives
how the notion proceeds to deal with these forms
shattering them as it goes along and where it comes
to see how badly its praised and honoured gods come
off when they venture on the ground where the notion
holds sway there it is not itself the negative power
actively setting to work but keeps itself within
the abstract selfless thought of such power confines
itself to the consciousness of alien and external destiny
and produces the empty wish to tranquillize and feeble
ineffective talk intended to appease In its terror
before the higher powers which are the immediate
arms of the substance in its terror before their struggle
with one another and before the simple and uniform
action of that necessity which crushes them as
well as the living beings bound up with them in its
compassion for these living beings whom it knows at
once to be the same with itself it is conscious of
nothing but ineffective horror of this whole process
conscious of equally helpless pity and in fine the mere
empty peace of surrender to necessity whose work is
apprehended neither as the necessary act of character
nor as the action of the absolute Being within itself
Spirit does not appear in its dissociated multiplicity
on the plane of this spectacular consciousness the indifferent ground as it were of presentation it comes
on the scene in the simple diremption of the notion. Its
substance manifests itself therefore merely torn asunder
into its two extreme powers These elementary universal
beings are at the same time selfconscious individu
alities heroes who put their conscious life into one
of these powers find therein determinateness of character and procure their effective activity and reality
This universal individualisation descends again as
will be remembered to the immediate reality of existence
proper and is presented before a crowd of spectators
who find in the chorus their image and counterpart
or rather their own thought giving itself expression
The content and movement of spirit which is object
to itself here have been already considered as the nature
and realisation of the substance of ethical life In its
form of religion spirit attains to consciousness about
itself or reveals itself to its consciousness in its purer
form and its simpler mode of embodiment If then the
ethical substance by its very principle broke up as regards its content into two powers which were defined
as divine and human law law of the nether world and
law of the upper world the one the family the other
state sovereignty the first bearing the impress and
character of woman the other that of man in the
same way the previously multiform circle of gods
with its wavering and unsteady characteristics confines itself to these powers which owing to this feature
are brought closer to individuality proper For the
previous dispersion of the whole into manifold abstract
forces which appear hypostatised is the dissolution
of the subject which comprehends them merely as
moments in its self and individuality is therefore only
the superficial form of those entities Conversely
a further distinction of characters than that just named
is to be imputed to contingent and inherently external
personality ethical substance gets divided in its form ie with respect to knowledge Spirit when acting appears qua
consciousness over against the object on which its
activity is directed and which in consequence is determined as the negative of the knowing agent The agent
finds himself thereby in the opposition of knowing and not
knowing He takes his purpose from his own character
and knows it to be essential ethical fact but owing to
the determinateness of his character he knows merely
the one power of substance the other remains for him
concealed and out of sight The objectively present
reality therefore is one thing in itself, and another
for consciousness The higher and lower right come to
signify in this connection the power that knows and
reveals itself to consciousness and the power concealing
itself and lurking in the background The one is the
aspect of light the god of the Oracle who as regards
its natural aspect Light has sprung from the allilluminating Sun knows all and reveals all Plicebus
and Zeus who is his Father But the commands of
this truthspeaking god and his proclamations of what
is are really deceptive and fallacious For this knowledge is in its very principle directly not knowledge
because consciousness in acting is inherently this
opposition He who had the power to unlock the
riddle of the sphinx and he too who trusted with
childlike confidence are therefore both sent to
destruction through what the god reveals to them
The priestess through whose mouth the gracious god
speaks J is in nothing different from the equivocal
sisters of fate who drive their victim to crime by J In the Delphic Oracle The witches in Macbeth
their promises and who by the doubletongued
equivocal character of what they give out as a certainty
deceive the King when he relies upon the manifest
and obvious meaning of what they say There is a
type of consciousness that is purer than the latter which
believes in witches and more discriminating more
thorough and more solid than the former which puts its
trust in the priestess and the gracious god This
type of consciousness therefore lets his revenge tarry
for the revelation which the spirit of his father makes
regarding the crime that did him to death and institutes
other proofs in addition for the reason that the spirit
giving the revelation might possibly be the devil
This mistrust has good grounds because the knowing
consciousness takes its stand on the opposition between
certainty of itself on the one hand and the objective
essential reality on the other Ethical Tightness
which insists that actuality is nothing per se in opposition to absolute law finds out that its knowledge is
onesided its law merely a law of its own character and
that it has laid hold of merely one of the powers of
the substance. The act itself is this inversion of what
is subjectively known into its opposite into objective
existence turns round what is right from the point of
view of character and knowledge into the right of the
very opposite with which the former is bound up in
the essential nature of the substance turns it into the
Furies who embody the right of the other power
and character awakened into hostility The lower
right sits with Zeus enthroned and enjoys equal respect
and homage with the god revealed and known
gods of the chorus is limited and restricted by the acting individuality The one is the substance the power
presiding over the hearth and home and the spirit
worshipped by the family as well as the universal
power dominating state and government Since this
distinction belongs to the substance as such it is when
ideally presented not individualised as two distinct
forms of the substance], but has in actual reality
the two persons of its characters On the other hand
the distinction between knowing and not knowing
f alls within each of the actual self consciousnesses and
only in abstraction in the element of universality does
it get divided into two individual shapes For the self
of the hero only exists as a whole consciousness and
hence includes essentially the whole of the distinction belonging to the form but its substance is determinate
and only one side of the content distinguished belongs
to him Hence both sides of consciousness, which have
in concrete reality no separate individuality peculiarly
their own receive when ideally represented each its
own particular form the one that of the god revealed
the other that of the Furies keeping themselves concealed In part both enjoy equal honour while again
the form assumed by the substance Zeus is the necessity of the relation of the two to one another The
substance is the relation that knowledge is for itself
but finds its truth in what is simple that the
distinction through and in which actual consciousness
exists has its basis in that inner being which destroys
it that the clear conscious assurance of certainty
has its confirmation in forgetfulness
Consciousness disclosed this opposition by action
through doing something Acting in accordance with
the knowledge revealed it finds out the deceptiveness
of that knowledge and being committed in view of the
inner meaning to one of the attributes of substance
it did violence to the other and thereby gave the latter
right as against itself When following that god who
knows and reveals himself it really seized hold of what
is not revealed and repents of having trusted the
knowledge whose equivocal character since this is its
very nature had to come also before it and admonition thereanent to be found The frenzy of the priestess
the inhuman shape of the witches the voices of trees
and birds dreams and so on are not ways in which
truth appears they are admonitory signs of deception of want of discernment of the individual and
accidental character of knowledge Or what comes to the
same thing the opposite power which consciousness has
violated is present as express law and authentic right
whether law of the family or law of the state while
consciousness on the other hand pursued its own proper
knowledge and hid from itself what was revealed
The truth however of the opposing powers of content
and consciousness is the final result that both are
equally right and hence in their opposition which
comes about through action are equally wrong The
process of action proves their unity in the mutual overthrow of both powers and the selfconscious characters
The reconciliation of the opposition with itself is the
Lethe of the netherworld in the form of Death or
the Lethe of the upper world in the form of absolution
not from guilt for consciousness cannot deny its guilt
because the act was done but from the crime and of the
atoning consolation and peace of soul which absolution
gives Both are forgetfulness the disappearance of the
reality and action of the powers of the substance, its component individualities and of the powers of the abstract
thought of good and evil For none of them by itself
is the real essence this consists in the undisturbed
calm of the whole within itself the immovable unity of
Fate the quiescent existence and hence want of activity
and vitality in the family and government and the
equal honour and consequent indifferent unreality
of Apollo and the Furies and the return of their spiritual
life and activity into Zeus solely and simply
This destiny completes the depopulation of Heaven
of that unthinking mixture of individuality and
ultimate Being a blending whereby the action of
this absolute Being appears as something incoherent
inconsistent contingent unworthy of itself for individuality when attaching in a merely superficial
way to absolute Being is unessential The expulsion
of such unreal insubstantial ideas which was demanded
by the philosophers of antiquity thus already has its
beginning in tragedy in general through the fact that
the division of the substance is controlled by the notion
and hence individuality is the essential individuality
and the specific determinations are absolute characters
The selfconsciousness represented in tragedy knows
and acknowledges on that account only one highest
power Zeus This Zeus is known and acknowledged
only as the power of the state or of the hearth and home
and in the opposition falling inside knowledge merely
as the Father of the particular knowledge assuming a definite shape he is the Zeus acknowledged
in the taking of oatlis the Zeus of the Furies the Zeus
of what is universal of the inner being dwelling in
concealment The further moments taken from the
notion and dispersed in the form of ideal
presentation moments which the chorus
permits to hold good one after the other are on the
other hand not the pathos of the hero they sink to
the level of passions in the hero to the level of accidental insubstantial moments which the impersonal
chorus no doubt praises but which are not capable of
constituting the character of heroes nor of being
expressed and regarded by them as their real nature
But further the persons of the divine Being itself
as well as the characters of its substance coalesce into
the simplicity of what is devoid of consciousness This
necessity has in contrast to selfconsciousness the characteristic of being the negative power of all the forms
that appear a power in which they do not recognise
themselves but perish therein The self appears as
merely allotted amongst the different characters and
not as the mediating factor of the process But selfconsciousness the simple certainty of self is in point of fact
the negative power the unity of Zeus the unity of the
substantial essence and abstract necessity it is the
spiritual unity into which everything returns Because
actual selfconsciousness is still distinguished from the
substance and Fate it is partly the chorus or rather
the crowd looking on whom this movement of the
divine life fills with fear as being something alien and
strange or in whom this movement as something
closely touching themselves produces merely the emotion of passive pity Partly again so far as consciousness cooperates and belongs to the various characters
this alliance is of an external kind is a hypocrisy
because the true union that of self fate and substance
is not yet present The hero who appears before the onlookers breaks up into his mask and the actor into
the person of the play and the actual self
The selfconsciousness of the heroes must step forth
from its mask and be represented as knowing itself to
be the fate both of the gods of the chorus and of the
absolute powers themselves and as being no longer
separated from the chorus the universal consciousness
Comedy has then first of all the aspect that actual
selfconsciousness represents itself as the Fate of the
gods These elemental Beings are qua universal
moments no definite self and are not actual They
are indeed endowed with the form of individuality
but this is in their case merely put on and does not
really and truly suit them The actual self has no
such abstract moment as its substance and content
The subject therefore is raised above such a moment
as it would be above a particular property and when
clothed with this mask gives utterance to the irony
of such a property trying to be something on its own
account. The pretentious claims of the universal
abstract nature are shown up and discovered in the
actual self it is seen to be caught and held in a concrete reality and lets the mask drop just when it wants
to be something right The self appearing here in its
significance as something actual plays with the mask
which it once puts on in order to be its own person
but it breaks away from this seeming and pretence
just as quickly again and comes out in its own nakedness and usual character which it shows not to be
distinct from the proper self the actor nor again from
the onlooker assumes individuality becomes in its content more
serious and hence more petulant and bitter in so far
as the content possesses its more serious and necessary
meaning The divine substance combines the meaning
of natural and ethical essentiality
As regards the natural element actual selfconsciousness shows in the very fact of applying elements of
nature for its adornment for its abode and so on and
again in feasting on its own offering that itself is the
Fate to which the secret is disclosed no matter what
its position with regard to the independent substantiality of nature In the mystery of the bread and
wine it makes its very own this selfsubsistence of
nature together with the significance of inner reality
and in Comedy it is conscious of the irony lurking in
this meaning
So far again as this meaning contains the essence
of ethical reality it is partly the nation in its two
aspects of the state or Demos proper and individual
family life partly however it is selfconscious pure
knowledge or rational thought of the universal. Demos
the general mass which knows itself as master and
governor and is also aware of being the insight
and intelligence which demand respect exerts compulsion and is befooled through the particularity of
its actual life and exhibits the ludicrous contrast
between its own opinion of itself and its immediate
existence between its necessity and contingency its
universality and its vulgarity If the principle of its
individual existence cut off from the universal breaks
out in the proper form of actual reality and openly
usurps and administers the commonwealth to which it
is a secret harm and detriment then immediately there
is disclosed the contrast between the universal in the
sense of an abstract theory and that with which
practice is concerned there stands exposed the entire
emancipation of the ends and aims of the mere individual from all universal order and the scorn the
mere individual shows for such order
Kational thinking removes contingency of form and
shape from the divine Being and in opposition to
the uncritical wisdom of the chorus a wisdom
giving utterance to all sorts of ethical maxims and
stamping with validity and authority a multitude of
laws and specific conceptions of duty and of right
rational thought lifts these into the simple Ideas of
the Beautiful and the Good The process of this
abstraction is the consciousness of the dialectic involved in these maxims and laws themselves and hence
the consciousness of the disappearance of that absolute
validity with which they previously appeared Since
the contingent character and superficial individuality
which mere presentation lent to the divine Beings
vanish they are left as regards their natural aspect
with merely the nakedness of their immediate existence
they are Clouds f a passing vapour like those presentations Having passed in accordance with their essential
character as determined by thought into the simple
thoughts of the Beautiful and the Good these latter
submit to being filled with every kind of content The
force of dialectic knowledge J puts determinate laws
and maxims of action at the mercy of the pleasure and
levity of youth led astray therewith and gives weapons
of deception into the hands of solicitous and apprehensive old age restricted in its interests to the individual
details of life The pure thoughts of the Beautiful
and the Good thus display a comic spectacle through
their being set free from opinion which contains both
their determinateness in the sense of content and also
their absolute determinateness the firm hold of consciousness upon them they become empty and on that
very account the sport of the private opinion and
caprice of any chance individuality
Here then the Fate formerly without consciousness consisting in mere rest and forgetfulness and
separated from selfconsciousness is united with selfconsciousness The individual self is the negative
force through which and in which the gods as also
their moments nature as existent fact and the
thoughts of their determinate characters pass away
and disappear At the same time the individual self
is not the mere vacuity of disappearance but preserves
itself in this very nothingness holds to itself and is
the sole and only reality The religion of art is fulfilled and consummated in it and is come full circle
Through the fact that it is the individual consciousness in its certainty of self which is shown to be
this absolute power this latter has lost the form of
something ideally presented separated from
and alien to consciousness in general as were the
statue and also the living embodiment of beauty or
the content of the Epic and the powers and persons
of Tragedy Nor again is the unity the unconscious unity of the cult and the mysteries rather
the self proper of the actor coincides with the part he impersonates just as the onlooker is perfectly
at home in what is represented before him and sees
himself playing in the drama before him What this
selfconsciousness beholds is that that which assumes
the form of essentiality as against selfconsciousness is
resolved and dissolved within its thought its existence
and action and is quite at its mercy It is the return
of everything universal into certainty of self a certainty which in consequence is this complete loss of
fear of everything strange and alien and complete
loss of substantial reality on the part of what is alien
and external Such certainty is a state of spiritual
good health and of selfabandonment thereto on the
part of consciousness in a way that outside this kind
of comedy is not to be found anywhere
Through the Religion of Art spirit has passed from
the form of Substance into that of Subject for art
brings out its shape and form and imbues it with
the nature of action or establishes in it the selfconsciousness which merely disappears in the awesome substance and in the attitude of simple trust
does not itself comprehend itself This incarnation in
human form of the Divine Being begins with the
statue which has in it only the outward shape of
the self, while the inner life thereof its activity falls
outside it In the case of the cult however both
aspects have become one in the outcome of the religion of art this unity in being completely attained
has at the same time also passed over to the extreme
of self in the type of spirit which becomes perfectly
certain of itself in the individual existence of consciousness all essential content is swallowed up and
submerged The proposition which gives this lighthearted action expression runs thus The Self is
Absolute Being The Being which was substance and
in which the self was the accidental element has dropped
to the level of a predicate and in this self consciousness
over against which nothing appears in the form of objective Being spirit has lost its aspect of consciousness
This statement The Self is Absolute Being
belongs as is evident on the face of it to the nonreligious the concrete actual spirit and we have to
recall what the form thereof is which gives expression
to it This form will contain at once the movement of
that spirit and its conversion which lowers the self
to the note of a predicate and raises substance into
subject This we must understand to take place in
such a way that the converse statement does not
per se or for us make substance into subject or
what is the same thing does not reinstate substance
again so that the consciousness of spirit is carried back
to its commencement in natural religion but rather
in such a way that this conversion is brought about
for and through selfconsciousness itself Since this
latter consciously gives itself up it is preserved and
maintained in thus relinquishing itself and remains
the subject of the substance; but as being likewise
relinquished it has at the same time the consciousness of this substance In other words, since
by thus offering itself up it produces substance as
subject this subject remains its own very self If
then taking the two propositions in the first the
subject merely disappears in substantiality and in the
second the substance is merely a predicate and both
sides are thus present in each with contrary inequality
of value the result hereby effected is that the union
and transfusion of both natures subject and substance become apparent In this union both with
equal value and worth are at once essential and also
merely moments Hence it is that spirit is equally
consciousness of itself as its objective substance as
well as simple selfcontained selfconsciousness
The religion of art belongs to the spirit animating
the ethical sphere the spirit which we formerly saw
sink and disappear in the condition of right ie in
the proposition The self as such the abstract person
is absolute Being In ethical life the self is absorbed
in the spirit of its nation it is universality filled
to the full Simple abstract individuality however
rises out of this content and its lightheartedness clarifies
and rarifies it till it becomes a person and attains
the abstract universality of right Here the substantial
reality of the ethical spirit is lost the abstract insubstantial spirits of national individuals are gathered
together into a pantheon not into a pantheon represented in idea whose impotent form lets
each alone to do as it likes but into the pantheon of
abstract universality of pure thought which disembodies them and bestows on the spiritless self on the
individual person complete existence on its own account.
But this self through its being empty has let the
content go this consciousness is Being merely within itself Its own very existence the legal recognition
of the person is an unfulfilled empty abstraction
It thus really possesses merely the thought of itself
in other words, as it there exists and knows itself as
object it is something unreal Consequently it is
merely stoic independence the independence of thought
and this finds by passing through the process of
scepticism its ultimate truth in that form we called
the unhappy self consciousness the soul of despair
This knows how the case stands with the actual
claims to validity which the abstract legal person puts forward as also with the validity of these claims in
pure thought in Stoicism It knows that a vindication of such claims means really being altogether lost
it is just this loss become conscious of itself and is the
surrender and relinquishment of its knowledge about
itself We see that this unhappy consciousness constitutes the counterpart and the complement of the perfectly happy consciousness that of comedy All divine
reality goes back into this latter type of consciousness
it means in other words, the complete relinquishment
and emptying of substance The former on the contrary is conversely the tragic fate that befalls certainty
of self which aims at being absolute at being selfsufficient It is consciousness of the loss of everything
of significance in this certainty of itself and of the loss
even of this knowledge or certainty of self the loss of
its substance as well as of self it is the bitter pain
which finds expression in the cruel words God is
dead
In the condition of right or law then the ethical
world has vanished and its type of religion has
passed away in the mood of Comedy The unhappy consciousness the soul of despair is just the
knowledge of all this loss It has lost both the worth
and dignity it attached to its immediate personality
as a legal person as well as that attaching to its personality when reflected in the medium of thought in
the case of Stoicism Trust in the eternal laws of the
Gods is silenced just as the oracles are dumb whose
work it was to know what was right in particular
cases The statues set up are now corpses in stone
whence the animating soul has flown while the hymns of praise are words from which all belief has gone
The tables of the gods are bereft of spiritual food and
drink and from his games and festivals man no
more receives the joyful sense of his unity with the
divine Being The works of the muse lack the force
and energy of the spirit which derived the certainty and
assurance of itself just from the crushing ruin of gods and
men They are themselves now just what they are for
us beautiful fruit broken off the tree a kindly fate
has passed on those works to us as a maiden might offer
such fruit off a tree It is not their actual life as they
exist that is given us not the tree that bore them
not the earth and the elements which constituted
their substance nor the climate that determined their
constitutive character nor the change of seasons which
controlled the process of their growth So too it is
not their living world that Fate preserves and gives
us with those works of ancient art not the spring and
summer of that ethical life in which they bloomed and
ripened but the veiled remembrance alone of all this
reality Our action therefore when we enjoy them
is not that of worship through which our conscious
life might attain its complete truth and be satisfied to
the full our action is external it consists in wiping
off some drop of rain or speck of dust from these fruits
and in place of the inner elements composing the
reality of the ethical life a reality that environed
created and inspired these works we erect in prolix
detail the scaffolding of the dead elements of their
outward existence language historical circumstances
etc All this we do, not in order to enter into their
very life but only to represent them ideally or pictorially within ourselves But just as the
maiden who hands us the plucked fruits is more than
the nature which presented them in the first instance
the nature which provided all their detailed conditions
and elements tree air light and so on since in a higher
way she gathers all this together into the light of her
selfconscious eye and her gesture in offering the
gifts so too the spirit of the fate which presents us
with those works of art is more than the ethical life
realised in that nation For it is the inwardising in
us in the form of conscious memory
of the spirit which in them was manifested in an
outward external way it is the spirit of the tragic
fate which collects all those individual gods and attributes of the substance into the one Pantheon into
the spirit which is itself conscious of itself as spirit
All the conditions for its production are present
and this totality of its conditions constitutes the development of it its notion or the inherent production of it The cycle of the creations of art embraces
in its scope all forms in which the absolute substance relinquishes itself The absolute substance is
in the form of individuality as a thing as an object
existing for sense experience as mere language or
the process of that form whose existence does not
get away from the self and is a purely evanescent
object as immediate unity with universal selfconsciousness when inspired with enthusiasm as mediated
unity when performing the acts of the cult as
corporeal embodiment of the self in a form of
beauty and finally as existence lifted into ideal
representation and the expansion of this
existence into a world which at length gathers its
content together into universality a universal which
is at the same time pure certainty and assurance
of itself These forms and on the other side the
world of personality and legal right the wild and
desert waste of content with its constituent elements
set free and detached as also the thoughtconstituted
personality of Stoicism and the unresting disquiet of
Scepticism these compose the periphery of the circle
of shapes and forms which attend an expectant and
eager throng round the birthplace of spirit as it
becomes selfconsciousness Their centre is the yearning agony of the unhappy despairing selfconsciousness
a pain which permeates all of them and is the common birthpang at its production the simplicity of
the pure notion which contains those forms as its
moments
Spirit here has in it two sides which are above represented as the two converse statements one is this
that substance empties itself of itself and becomes selfconsciousness the other is the converse that selfconsciousness empties itself of itself and makes itself
into the form of thing or makes itself universal
self Both sides have in this way met each other
and in consequence their true union has arisen The
relinquishment or kenosis on the part of the
substance, its becoming selfconsciousness expresses
the transition into the opposite the unconscious
transition of necessity in other words, that it is
implicitly selfconsciousness Conversely the emptying
of selfconsciousness expresses this that implicitly it
is Universal Being or because the self is pure selfexistence which is at home with itself in its opposite
that the substance is selfconsciousness explicitly for
the self and just on that account is spirit Of this spirit
which has left the form of substance behind and enters
existence in the shape of selfconsciousness we may
say therefore if we wish to use terms drawn from
the process of natural generation that it has a real
mother but a potential or an implicit father For
actual reality or selfconsciousness and implicit being
in the sense of substance are its two moments and
by the reciprocity of their kenosis each relinquishing
or emptying itself of itself and becoming the other
spirit thus comes into existence as their unity
In so far as selfconsciousness in a onesided way
grasps only its own relinquishment although its object
is thus for it at once both existence and self and it
knows all existence to be spiritual in nature yet true
spirit has not become thereby objective for it For
so far being in general or substance would not
necessarily from its side be also emptied of itself and
become selfconsciousness In that case then all existence is spiritual reality merely from the standpoint of
consciousness not inherently in itself Spirit in this
way has merely a fictitious or imaginary existence
This fanciful imagination is fantastic extravagance
of mind which introduces into nature as well as
history the world and the mythical ideas of early
religions another inner esoteric meaning different
from what they on the face of them bear directly to
consciousness and in particular in the case of religions another meaning than the selfconsciousness
whose religions they were could find and admit to
be there But this meaning is one that is borrowed
a garment which does not cover the nakedness of the
outer appearance and secures no belief and respect it is no more than murky darkness and a peculiar
crazy twist of consciousness
If then this meaning of the objective is not to be bare
fancy and imagination it must be inherent and essential
ie must at once arise in consciousness as
springing from the very notion and must come forward
in its necessity It is thus that selfknowing spirit has
arisen it has arisen by means of its necessary process
through the knowledge of immediate consciousness
ie of consciousness of the immediately existing object This notion which being immediate had also
for consciousness the form of immediacy has in
the second place taken on the form of selfconsciousness essentially and inherently ie by just the same
necessity of the notion by which being or immediacy the
abstract object of senseconsciousness renounces itself
and becomes for consciousness Ego The immediate
entity or objectively existent necessity is however different from the subjective thinking entity
or the knowledge of necessity a distinction which
at the same time does not he outside the notion for the
simple unity of the notion is itself immediate being
The notion is at once what empties or relinquishes itself
or the explicit unfolding of directly apprehended necessity and is also at home with itself in that
necessity knows it and comprehends it The immediate
inherent nature of spirit which takes on the form of
selfconsciousness means nothing else than that the
concrete actual worldspirit has reached this knowledge
of itself. It is then too that this knowledge first enters
its consciousness and enters it as truth How that
came about has already been explained
consciousness inherently and necessarily and has done
so too as a conscious fact this position appears now
as the belief of the world the belief that spirit exists
in fact as a definite selfconsciousness ie as an actual
human being that spirit is an object for immediate
experience that the believing mind sees feels and hears
this divinity Taken thus it is not an imagination
not a fancy it is actual in the believer Consciousness
in that case does not set out from its own inner life
does not start from thought and enclose the thought of
God along with existence rather it sets out from immediate present existence and finds God there
The moment of immediate existence is present as an
element in the notion and present in such a way that
the religious spirit on the return of all ultimate reality
into consciousness has become simple positive self just
as the actual spirit as such in the case of the unhappy
consciousness was just this simple selfconscious negativity The self of the definitely existent spirit has in
that way the form of complete immediacy It is neither
set up as something thought or imaginatively represented nor as something produced as is the case with
the immediate self both in natural religion and in
religion as art Rather this concrete God is beheld
sensuously and immediately as a self as a real individual human being only so is it a selfconsciousness
This incarnation of the Divine Being its having
essentially and directly the form of selfconsciousness
is the simple content of Absolute Religion Here the
Divine Being is known as spirit this religion is the
Divine Beings consciousness concerning itself that
it is Spirit For spirit is knowledge of itself in its state of selfrelinquishment the absolute Reality
which is the process of retaining its harmony and
identity with itself in its otherness This however
is Substance so far as in its accidents substance at the
same time turns back into itself and does so not as
being indifferent towards something unessential and consequently finding itself in some alien element but as
being there within itself ie so far as it is subject or
self
In this form of religion the Divine Being is on that
account revealed Its being revealed obviously consists
in this that what it is is consciously known It is
however known just in its being known as spirit as a
Being which is essentially selfconsciousness
There is something in the object always concealed
from consciousness when the object is for consciousness
an other something alien and extraneous and when
consciousness does not know the object as its self This
concealment this secrecy ceases when the Absolute
Being qua spirit is object of consciousness For here in
its relation to consciousness the object is in the form of
self ie consciousness at once and immediately knows
itself there or is manifest revealed to itself in the
object Itself is manifest to itself merely in its own
certainty of self the object it has is the self self however is nothing alien and extraneous but inseparable
unity with itself the immediate universal It is the pure
notion pure thought or selfexistence beingforself
which is immediately being and therewith beingforanother and qua this beingforanother is immediately turned back into itself and is at home with itself
It is thus the truly and solely revealed
The Good the Righteous the Holy Creator of Heaven and Earth etc all these are predicates of a subject
universal moments which have their hold on this
central point and only are when consciousness goes
back into thought
As long as it is they that are known their ground and
essential being the Subject itself is not yet revealed
and in the same way the specific determinations of the
universal are not this universal itself The Subject itself
and consequently this pure universal too is however
revealed as self for this self is just this inner being
reflected into itself the inner being which is immediately
given and is the proper certainty of that other self for
which it is object To be in its notion that which reveals
and is revealed this is then the true form of spirit and
moreover this form its notion is alone its very essence
and its substance Spirit is known as selfconsciousness
and to this selfconsciousness it is directly revealed for
it is this selfconsciousness itself The divine nature
is the same as the human and it is this unity which is
intuitively apprehended
Here then we find as a fact consciousness or the
general form in which Being is aware of Being the
shape which Being adopts to be identical with its selfconsciousness This shape is itself a selfconsciousness
it is thus at the same time an existent object and this
existence possesses equally directly the significance of
pure thought of Absolute Being
The absolute Being existing as a concrete actual selfconsciousness seems to have descended from its eternal
pure simplicity but in fact it has in so doing attained
for the first time its highest nature its supreme reach of
being For when the notion of Being has reached its
simple purity of nature it is then both the absolute
abstraction which is pure thought and hence the pure
singleness of self and immediacy or objective being on
account of its pure simplicity
What is called senseconsciousness is also just this pure
abstraction it is this kind of thought for which being is
the immediate The lowest is thus at the same time the
highest the revelation which has appeared entirely on
the surface is just therein the deepest that can be
made That the Supreme Being is seen heard etc as
an existent selfconsciousness this is in very truth
the culmination and consummation of its notion And
through this consummation the Divine Being is given
to sense exists immediately in its character as Divine
Being
This immediate existence is at the same time not
solely and simply immediate consciousness it is religious consciousness This immediacy means not only
an existent selfconsciousness but also the purely
thoughtconstituted or Absolute Being and these
meanings are inseparable What we the philosophers
are conscious of in our conception that objective
being is ultimate essence is the same as what the
religious consciousness is aware of This unity of being
and essence of thought which is immediately existence is immediate knowledge on the part of this religious consciousness just as it is the inner thought or
the mediated reflective knowledge of this consciousness
For this unity of being and thought is selfconsciousness
and actually exists in other words, the thoughtconstituted unity has at the same time this concrete shape
and form of what it is God then is here revealed as
He is He actually exists as He is in Himself He is real
as Spirit God is attainable in pure speculative know
ledge alone and only is in that knowledge and is merely
that knowledge itself for He is spirit and this speculative knowledge is the knowledge furnished by revealed religion That knowledge knows God to be thought
or pure Essence and knows this thought as actual
being and as real existence and existence as the negativity the reflection of itself hence as Self a particular
this and a universal self It is just this that revealed
religion knows
The hopes and expectations of preceding ages pressed
forward to and were solely directed towards this revelation the vision of what Absolute Being is and the discovery of themselves therein This joy the joy of seeing
itself in Absolute Benig becomes realised in selfconsciousness and seizes the whole world For the Absolute
is Spirit it is the simple movement of those pure
abstract moments which expresses just this that
Ultimate Keality is then eo ipso known as Spirit when it
is seen and beheld as immediate selfconsciousness
This conception of spirit knowing itself to be spirit
is still the immediate notion it is not yet developed
The ultimate Being is spirit in other words, it has
appeared it is revealed This first revelation is itself
immediate but the immediacy is likewise thought
or pure mediation and must therefore exhibit and set
forth this moment in the sphere of immediacy as such
Looking at this more precisely spirit when selfconsciousness is immediate is a particular this it is
an individual selfconsciousness set up in contrast to the
universal selfconsciousness It is a one a repelling and
excluding unit which appears to that consciousness for
which it exists in the impervious form of a sensuous
other an unreduced opposite in the sphere of sense
This other does not yet know spirit to be its own in
other words, spirit in its form as an individual self
does not yet exist as equally universal self as all self
Or again the shape it assumes has not as yet the form
of the notion, ie of the universal self of the self which
in its immediate actual reality is at once transcended
is thought universality without losing its reality in
this universality
The preliminary and similarly immediate form of this
universality is however not at once the form of thought
itself of the notion as notion it is the universality of
actual reality it is the ajlness the collective totality
of the selves and is the elevation of existence into the
sphere of presentative or figurative thought just as in general to take a concrete example
the this of sense when transcended is first of all
the thing of perception and is not yet the
universal of understanding
This individual human being then which Absolute
Being is revealed to be goes through in its own case as
an individual the process found in sense existence He
is the immediately present God in consequence His
being passes over into His having been Consciousness
for which God is thus sensuously present ceases to see
Him to hear Him it has seen Him it has heard Him
And it is by the mere fact that it has seen and heard
Him that it first becomes itself spiritual consciousness
or, in other words, He has now arisen in the life of
Spirit as He formerly rose before consciousness as an
object existing in the sphere of sense For a consciousness which sees and hears Him by sense is one which is
itself merely an immediate consciousness which has not
cancelled and transcended the disparateness of objectivity has not withdrawn it into pure thought but
accepts this objectively presented individual and not
itself as spirit In the disappearance of the immediate
existence of what is known to be Absolute Being immediacy preserves its negative moment Spirit remains
the immediate self of actual reality but in the form
of the universal selfconsciousness of a religious communion a self consciousness which rests in its own
proper substance just as in it this substance is universal subject it is not the individual subject by
himself but the individual along with the consciousness
of the communion and what he is for this communion
is the complete whole of the individual spirit
The terms past and distance are however
merely the imperfect form in which the immediateness
gets mediated or made universal this is merely dipped
superficially in the element of thought is kept there
as a sensuous mode of immediacy and not made one
with the nature of thought itself. It is lifted out of
sense merely into the region of ideation of pictorial
presentation for this is the synthetic external connexion of sensuous immediacy and its universality or
thought
Imaginative presentation constitutes the characteristic
form in which spirit is conscious of itself in this religious
communion This form is not yet the self consciousness
of spirit which has reached its notion as notion the
mediating process is still incomplete In this connexion
of being and thought then there is a defect spiritual
life is still cumbered with an unreconciled diremption into
a hither and a yonder a here and a beyond
The content is the true content but all its moments
when placed in the element of mere presentation have
the character not of being conceptually comprehended
but of appearing as completely independent aspects
externally related to one another
In order that the true content may also preserve its
true form when before consciousness the latter must
necessarily pass to a higher plane of mental development where the Absolute Substance is not intuitively
apprehended but conceptually comprehended and where
consciousness is for itself brought to the level of its
selfconsciousness in the way this has already taken
place objectively or for us who have analysed the process of experience
We have to consider this content as it exists in its
consciousness Absolute Spirit is content that is how
it exists in the form of its truth But its truth consists
not merely in being the substance or the inherent
reality of the religious communion nor again in coming
out of this inwardness into the objectivity of perceptual and presentational thought but in becoming
concrete actual self reflecting itself into self and
being Subject This then is the process which Spirit
realises in its communion this is its life What this
selfrevealing spirit is in and by itself is therefore not
brought out by the rich and full content of its lif e being
so to say untwined and reduced to its original and
primitive strands to the ideas for instance presented
before the minds of the first imperfect religious communion or even to what the actual human being incarnating the Divine Spirit has spoken This
reversion to the primitive and elementary is based on
the instinct to get at the notion and ultimate principle
but it confuses the origin in the sense of the immediate
existence of the first historical appearance with the
pure simplicity of the notion. By thus impoverishing
the life of spirit by clearing away the idea of the
communion and its action with regard to its idea
there arises therefore not the notion but bare externality and particularity merely the historical manner
in which spirit once upon a time appeared the soulless
recollection of an ideally presented historical figure and
its pastf
Spirit is content of its consciousness to begin with in
the form of pure substance in other words, it is content
of its pure consciousness This element of thought is
the process of descending into existence the sphere of
particularity The middle term between these two is
their synthetic connexion the consciousness of passing
into otherness the process of ideal presentation as such
The third stage is the return from representation in idea
and from that otherness in other words, it is the element of selfconsciousness itself
These three movements constitute the life of spirit
Its resolution into separate parts when it enters the
form of presentation consists in its taking on a determinate mode of being this determinateness however
is nothing but one of its moments Its detailed process
thus consists in spreading its nature over its various
moments entering every one each being an element in
its composition and since each of these spheres is t The life aud work of the historical Jesus
selfcomplete this reflection into itself is at the same
time the transition into another sphere of its being
Ideal presentation constitutes the middle term between
pure thought and selfconsciousness as such and is
merely one of the determinate forms At the same tune
however as has been shown the character belonging
to such presentation that of being synthetic connexion is spread over all these elements and is their
common characteristic
The content itself which we have to consider has
partly been met with already as the idea or presentation of the unhappy and the believing types of
consciousness In the case of the unhappy despairing
consciousness however the peculiarity lies in the content being produced from consciousness and longingly
desired wherein the spirit can never be satiated nor
find rest because the content is not yet its own content
inherently and essentially or in the sense of being its
substance In the case of the believing consciousness again this content has been regarded as the impersonal Being of the World as the essentially objective
content of presentative thought a pictorial thinking
that seeks to escape the actual world altogether and
consequently has not the certainty of selfconsciousness
a certainty which is cut off from it partly as being
conceit of knowledge partly as being pure insight
The consciousness of the religious communion on the
other hand possesses the content as its substance just
as the content is the certainty the communion has of
its own spiritual life
Spirit represented at first as substance in the element of pure thought is thus primarily the eternal
Being simple selfidentical which does not, however
have this abstract meaning of Being but the meaning of
Absolute Spirit Yet spirit consists not in being a meaning not in being the inner but in being the actual the
real Simple eternal Being would therefore be spirit
merely in empty phrase if it stopped at ideational pictorial thought and went no further than the expression
of simple eternal Being Simple Being however
because it is abstraction is in point of fact the inherently
negative is indeed the negativity of reflective thought
or negativity as found in Being per se ie it is absolute
distinction from itself its pure process of becoming
its other Qua essential Being it is merely in itself
purely implicit or for us but since this purity of form
is just abstraction or negativity it is for itself, it is the
self the notion It is thus objective and since presentational thinking apprehends and expresses as an
event what has just been expressed as the necessity of
the notion, it will be said that the eternal Being produces for itself an other But in this otherness it has
likewise ipso facto returned into itself again for the
distinction is distinction in itself ie the distinction is
directly distinguished merely from itself and is thus the
unity returned into itself
There are thus three moments to be distinguished
immanent absolute Being explicit Selfexistence which
is the antithesis the express otherness of Being and
for which that Being is object and Self existence
or Selfknowledge in that other in that antithetic
expression The absolute Being beholds only itself
in its Self existence in its objective otherness In
thus emptying itself in this kenosis it is merely
within itself the independent Selfexistence which
excludes itself from absolute Being is the knowledge of
itself on the part of absolute Being It is the Word
the Logos which when spoken empties the speaker of
himself outwardises him and leaves him behind emptied
but is at the same time immediately heard and understood and only this act of hearing or perceiving himself
is the actual existence of the Word Hence then the
distinctions which are set up are immediately resolved
just as they are made and are directly made just as they
are resolved and the truth and the reality consist
precisely in this selfclosed circular process
This movement within itself is what the absolute Being
qua Spirit expresses Absolute Being when not grasped
as Spirit is merely an empty abstraction just as
spirit which is not grasped as a process in this way is
merely an empty word Since its moments are taken
purely as moments they are notions in restless activity
which are merely in being inherently their own opposite
and in finding their rest in the whole But the presentative pictorial thought of the religious communion
is not this conceptual thinking it has the content
without its necessity and instead of the form of the
notion it brings into the realm of pure consciousness the
natural relations of Father and Son Since it thus even
when thinking proceeds by way of figurative ideas absolute Being is indeed revealed to it but the moments of
this Being owing to this externally synthetic presentational thinking fall of themselves apart from one another,
so that they are not related to each other through their
own very notion while again this figurative thinking
retreats from the pure object it deals with and takes up
a merely external relation towards it The object is
externally revealed to it from an alien source and in
this thought of Spirit it does not find its own self does
not recognise the nature of pure selfconsciousness In
so far as the form of presentative thinking and that way
of thinking by means of relationships derived from nature
have to be transcended and especially the method of
taking the moments of the process in which the life of
Spirit consists as isolated fixed immovable substances
or subjects instead of transient moments this transcendence is to be looked at as a compulsion on the part
of the notion, in the way we formerly pointed out when
dealing with another aspect But since it is only an
instinct it mistakes its own real character rejects the
content along with the form and what comes to the
same thing degrades the content into a historical
imaginative idea and an heirloom handed down by
tradition In this way there is retained and preserved
only what is purely external to the sphere of belief and
hence a lif eless entity devoid of knowledge while the
inner element in belief has passed away because this
would be the notion knowing itself as notion
The Absolute Spirit ideally presented in pure ultimate
Being is indeed not the abstract pure Being rather
just by the fact that this is merely a moment in
the life of Spirit it is lowered to the level of constituent element The representation of Spirit in this
element however has inherently the same defect as
regards form which ultimate Being as such has Ultimate Being is abstraction and therefore the negative
of its simplicity is an other in the same way
Spirit in the element of ultimate Being is the form of
simple unity which on that account is essentially and
at the same time a process of turning to otherness
Or what is the same thing the relation of the eternal Being to its self existence its objective existence for
Itself is that of pure thought a directly simple relation
In this simple beholding of itself in the Other otherness
is not as such set up independently it is distinction
in the way distinction in pure thought is immediately
no distinction a recognition of Love where lover and
beloved are not in their very being opposed to each other
at all Spirit which is expressed in the element of pure
thought is essentially just this not to be merely in
that element but to be concrete actual for otherness ie
cancelling and superseding pure conception thoughtconstituted conception lies in the very notion of Spirit
The element of pure thought because it is an abstract
element is itself rather the other of its own simplicity
and hence passes over into ideal presentation proper
the element where the moments of the pure notion
at once preserve a substantial existence in opposition
to each other and are subjects as well which do not
exist for a third thing in indifference towards each other
but being reflected into themselves break away from
one another, and stand confronting each other
Merely eternal or abstract Spirit then becomes
an other to itself it enters existence and in the first
instance, enters immediate existence It creates a World
This Creation is the word which pictorial presentative thought uses to convey the absolute movement
which the notion itself goes through or to express
the fact that the absolutely simple or pure thought
because it is abstract thought is really the negative and
hence opposed to itself the other of itself or because
to state the same in another way what is put forward
as ultimate Being is simple immediacy bare objective
existence but qua immediacy or existence is without
Self and lacking thus inwardness is passive or has
a relative existence exists for another This relative
existence is at the same time a world Spirit in the
character of existing for another is the undisturbed
separate subsistence of those moments formerly enclosed
within pure thought is therefore the dissolution of
their simple universality and their dispersion into their
own particularity
The world however is not merely Spirit thus thrown
out and scattered in all its plenitude with an external
order imposed on it for since Spirit is essentially simple
Self this self is likewise present therein It is objectively
existent spirit which is individual self that has consciousness and distinguishes itself as other as world
from itself In the way this individual self is thus
immediately established at first it is not yet conscious
of being Spirit it thus does not exist as Spirit it may
be called innocent but not strictly good In
order that in fact it may be self and Spirit it has
first to become objectively an other to itself in the
same way that the Eternal being manifests itself as the
process of being selfidentical in its otherness Since
this spirit is determined as only immediately existing
or dispersed in the diverse multiplicity of its conscious
life its becoming other means that knowledge is
centred on itself concentrates itself upon its subjective
content Immediate existence turns into thought or
merely senseconsciousness turns round into consciousness of thought and moreover because that thought
has coie from immediacy or is conditioned thought it is
not pure knowledge but thought which contains otherness and is thus the selfopposed thought of good
and evil Man is pictorially represented by the religious
mind in this way it happened once as an event with
no necessity about it that he lost the form of harmonious
unity with himself by plucking the fruits of the tree of
the knowledge of good and evil and was driven from the
state of conscious innocence from Paradise from the
garden with all its creatures and from nature offering
its bounties without mans toil
Since this selfcentredness on the part of the existent
consciousness directly gives rise to disharmony with
itself Evil appears as the first actual expression of the
self-centred consciousness And because the thoughts of
good and evil are utterly opposed and this opposition is
not yet broken down this consciousness is essentially and
merely evil At the same time however owing to just
this very opposition there is present also the good consciousness opposing the one that is evil and again their
relation to each other In so far as immediate existence
turns round into thought and selfabsorption selfcentredness is just thought while again the transition to otherness on the part of Being is thereby
more precisely determined the fact of becoming evil
can be removed further backwards away out of the
actually existing world and transferred to the very
earliest realm of thought It mav thus be said that it was the very firstborn Son of Light Lucifer who by
becoming selfcentred fell but that in his place another
was at once created Such a form of expression as
fallen belonging merely to figurative thought and
not to the notion just like the term Son once more
transmutes and lowers the moments of the notion to
the level of imaginative thought or, in other words,
drags pictures and presentations into the realm of
thought
In the same way it is matter of indifference to coordinate a multiplicity of other angelic shapes and forms
with the simple thought of otherness in the Being of the
Eternal and transfer to them that condition of selfcentredness This coordination must all the same
win approval for the reason that through it this
moment of otherness does express diversity as it
should do not indeed as plurality in general but as
determinate diversity so that one part is the Son
that which is simple and knows itself to be ultimate
Being while the other part involves the abandonment
the emptying of self existence and merely lives to praise
that Being To this part may then also be assigned the
resumption once again of the self-existence relinquished
and that selfcentredness characteristic of evil In
so far as this condition of otherness falls into two parts
Spirit might as regards its moments be more exactly
expressed numerically as a Quaternity a four in one or
because the multiplicity breaks up itself again into two
parts viz one part which has remained good the
other which has become evil might be expressed as
a Quinity
Counting the moments however can be regarded as
altogether useless since for one thing what is distinguished is itself just as truly one and single viz
the thought of distinction which is only one thought
as the thought is this element distinguished the second
over against the first For another thing it is useless to count because the thought which grasps the
many in one has to be dissolved out of its universality
and must be distinguished into more than three or
four distinct components This universality appears in
contrast to the absolute determinateness of the abstract
unit the principle of number as indeterminateness in
relation to number as such so that we can only speak in
this connexion of numbers in general ie not of a
specific number of distinctions Hence in general it is
here quite superfluous to think of number and counting
just as in other connexions the bare difference of
magnitude and multitude says nothing at all and falls
outside conceptual thought
Good and Evil were the specific distinctions of
thought which we found Since their opposition is not
yet broken down and they are represented as essential
realities of thought each of them independent by itself
man is the self with no essential reality of his own and
the mere ground which keeps them together and on
which they exist and war with one another But these
universal powers of good and evil belong all the same
to the self or the self is their actualising principle From
this point of view it thus comes about that as evil is
nothing else than the natural existence of spirit becoming selfabsorbed and selfcentred conversely good
enters into actual reality and appears as an objectively
existing selfconsciousness The idea of the transition
of the Divine Being into otherness is in general merely
indicated and hinted at when Spirit is interpreted in
terms of pure thought for figurative thinking this idea
here comes nearer its realisation the realisation is
taken to consist in the Divine Being humbling Itself and renouncing its abstract nature and unreality
The other aspect that of evil is taken by imagination
as an event extraneous and alien to the Divine Being
to grasp evil in the Divine Being as the wrath of God
that is the supreme effort the severest strain of
which figurative thought wrestling with its own limita
tions is capable an effort which since it dispenses with
the notion remains a fruitless struggle
The alienation of the Divine Nature is thus set up in
its double sided form the self of Spirit and its simple
thought are the two moments whose absolute unity is
Spirit itself Its alienation with itself consists in the
two falling apart from each other and in the one having
an unequal value as against the other This disparateness
is therefore twofold in character and two connections
arise which have in common the moments just given
In the one the Divine Being stands for what is essential
while natural existence and the self are unessential
and are to be cancelled In the other on the contrary it
is selfexistence which passes for what is essential and the
Divine pure and simple for unessential Their mediating
though empty ground is existence in general the bare
community of their two moments
The dissolution of this opposition does not take
effect through the struggle between the two elements
which are represented as separate and independent
Beings Just in virtue of their independence each must
inherently through its own notion dissolve itself in
itself The struggle takes place first in that quarter
where both cease to be this mixture of thought and
independent existence and confront each other merely
as thoughts For in that case being determinate notions
they essentially exist merely in the relation of opposition qua independent on the other hand they have
their essential nature outside opposition their movement is thus free selfdetermined and peculiar to
themselves Just as the movement then of both is
inherently movement because it has to be regarded
in themselves it is set going only by that element of
the two which has the character of being inherently
essential as contrasted with the other This is represented as a spontaneous action but the necessity for
its selfabandonment lies in the notion that what is
inherently essential and gets this specific character
merely through opposition has just on that account
no real independent subsistence Therefore that element which has for its essence not independent selfexistence but simple being is what empties and abandons
itself gives itself unto death and so reconciles Absolute
Being with its own self For in this process it manifests
itself as spirit the abstract Being is estranged from
itself it has natural existence and actual individual
reality This its otherness or its being sensuously
present is taken back again by the second process of
selfabandonment of becoming other and is affirmed
as superseded as universal Thereby the Divine
Being has come to itself in the sphere of the sensuous present the immediate existence of actual reality
has ceased to be something alien or external to the
Divine by being sublated by its becoming universal
this death of immediacy is therefore its rising anew
as Spirit When the selfconscious Being cancels and
transcends its immediate present it is universal selfconsciousness This notion of the transcended individual self which is Absolute Being immediately
expresses therefore the establishment of a communion
which while hitherto having its abode in the sphere of
pictorial presentation now returns into itself as the Self
and Spirit thus passes from the second element constituting it figurative presentation and goes over to the
third selfconsciousness as such
sentative thinking adopts as it goes along we find in
the first place the expression that the Divine Being
puts on human nature Here it is eo ipso asserted
that implicitly and inherently the two are not separate
just as in the statement that the Divine Being from
the beginning empties Itself of Itself that its objective
existence is selfabsorbed centres in Itself and becomes
evil it is not asserted but implied that per se this evil
existence is not something alien to the Divine nature
Absolute Being would be merely an empty name if in
very truth there were any other being external to it if
there were an absolute fall from it The aspect of
selfcentredness selfabsorption really constitutes the
essential moment of the self of Spirit
That this selfcentredness whence primarily comes
its reality belongs to the Divine Being while this is
for us a notion and so as far as it is a notion appears
to presentative thinking as an inconceivable historical
fact The inherent and essential nature assumes for
figurative thought the form of a bare objective fact
external and indifferent to God The thought however
that those apparently mutually repugnant moments
absolute Being and selfexistent Self are not inseparable
comes also before this figurative way of thinking since
it does possess the real content but that thought appears
afterwards in the form that the Divine Being empties
Itself of Itself and is made flesh This figurative idea which
in this way is still immediate and hence not spiritual ie
it takes the human form assumed by the Divine to be
merely in the first instance a particular form not yet a
universal form becomes spiritual for this consciousness
in the process whereby God who has assumed shape
and form surrenders again His external His immediate
existence and returns to His inner Being The Divine
Being is then Spirit when it is reflected into itself
The reconciliation of the Divine Being with its
antithesis as a whole and specifically with the thought
of this other evil is thus presented here in a figurative
way When this reconciliation is expressed conceptually by saying it consists in the fact that evil is
inherently the same as what goodness is or again
that the Divine Being is the same as nature in its entire
extent just as nature separated from God is simply
nothingness then this must be looked at as an unspiritual mode of expression which is bound to give
rise to misunderstandings When evil is the same as
goodness then evil is just not evil nor goodness good
on the contrary both are really done away with evil
in general selfcentred selfexistence and goodness selfless simple abstraction Since in this way they are both
expressed in terms of their notion the unity of the two
is at once apparent for selfcentred selfexistence is
simple knowledge and what is selfless simple abstraction is as much pure selfexistence centred within itself
Hence if it must be said that good and evil in their
conception ie so far as they are not good and evil are
the same just as certainly it must be said that they are
not the same but absolutely different for simple selfexistence or again pure knowledge is equally pure
negativity or per se absolute distinction It is only
these two propositions that make the whole complete and when the first is asserted and asseverated
it must be met and opposed by insisting on the other
with immovable obstinacy Since both are equally
right they are both equally wrong and their wrong
consists in taking such abstract forms as the same
and not the same identity and nonidentity to
be something true fixed real and in resting on them
Neither the one nor the other has truth their truth is
just their movement the process in which simple
sameness is abstraction and thus absolute distinction
while this again being distinction per se is distinguished
from itself and so is selfidentity Precisely this is
what we have in the case of the sameness of the Divine
Being and Nature in general and human nature in
particular the former is Nature so far as it is not essentially Being Nature is divine in its essential Being
But it is in Spirit that we find both abstract aspects
affirmed as they truly are viz as cancelled and preserved at once and this way of affirming them cannot
be expressed by the judgment by the soulless word
is the copula of the judgment In the same way
Nature is nothing outside its essential Being God but
this nothing itself is all the same it is absolute abstraction pure thought or selfcentredness and with its
moment of opposition to spiritual unity it is the principle
of Evil The difficulty people find in these conceptions
is due solely to sticking to the term is and forgetting
the character of thought where the moments as much
are as they are not are the process which is Spirit
It is this spiritual unity unity where the distinctions are
merely in the form of moments or are transcended and
maintained which became known to presentative
thinking in that atoning reconciliation spoken of
above And since this unity is the universality of
selfconsciousness selfconsciousness has ceased to be
figurative or pictorial in its thinking the process has
turned back into it in universal selfconsciousness Spirit is its own community The movement of this community being that
of selfconsciousness which distinguishes itself from its
figurative idea consists in explicitly bringing out what
has implicitly become established The dead Divine
Man or Human God is implicitly universal selfconsciousness he has to become explicitly so for this
self consciousness Or since this self consciousness
constitutes one side of the opposition involved in
ideal presentation viz the side of evil which takes
natural existence and individual selfexistence to be
the essential reality this aspect which is presented as
independent and not yet as a moment has on account
of its independence to raise itself in and for itself to the
level of Spirit it has to reveal the process of Spirit in
this aspect
This particular selfconsciousness is Spirit in natural
form natural spirit self has to withdraw from this
natural existence and enter into itself become selfcentred that means it has to become evil But this
aspect is already per se evil entering into itself
consists therefore in persuading itself that natural
existence is what is evil By presentational picturethinking the world is supposed actually to become
evil and be evil as an actual fact and the atoning
reconcilement of the Absolute Being is viewed as an
actual existent phenomenon By selfconsciousness as
such however this figurative presentation of the
truth as regards its form is considered to be merely
a moment that is already superseded and transcended
for the self is the principle of negation and hence
knowledge a knowledge which is a pure act of consciousness within itself This moment of the nega
tive must in like manner find expression as regards
the content Since that is to say the Absolute Being
is inherently and from the start reconciled with itself
and is a spiritual unity in which the parts constituting
the presentation are sublated are moments what we
find is that each element of the presentation receives
here the opposite significance to that which it had before
By this means each meaning finds its completion in the
other and the content is then and thereby a spiritual
content Since the specific determinateness of each is
just as much its opposite unity in otherness spiritual
reality is achieved and completed just as formerly we
saw opposite meanings combined and united objectively
or in themselves and even the abstract forms of the
same and not the same identity and nonidentity cancelled one another and were transcended
If then from the point of view of figurative thought
the natural selfconsciousness rooted and fixed in itself
was the real evil that process of becoming fixed in
itself is in the sphere of selfconsciousness the knowledge
of evil as something that per se belongs to existence
This knowledge is certainly a process of becoming evil
but merely of the thought of evil and is therefore recognised as the first moment of reconciliation For being a
return into self out of the immediacy of nature which is
specifically the principle of evil it is a forsaking of that
immediacy and a dying to sin It is not natural existence as such that consciousness forsakes but natural
existence that is at the same time known to be evil
The immediate process of fixing itself within itself of
becoming selfcentred is just as much a mediate
process it presupposes itself ie is its own ground
and principle the reason for fixing itself in self is
because nature has per se already done so On
account of evil man must be turned back into himself
but evil is itself the process of doing so of fixing
himself in self This first movement is just on that
account itself merely immediate is its bare and simple
notion because it is the same as what its ground or
reason is The movement or the process of passing
into otherness must therefore come out afterwards in
its own more peculiar form
Beside this immediacy then the mediation of ideal
presentation is necessary Implicitly and essentially
the knowledge of nature as the untrue inadequate expression of spirits existence and this universality of self
which has thereby arisen within the life of the self
these constitute the reconciliation of spirit with itself
This implicit state is apprehended by the selfconsciousness that does not think conceptually in the form of an
objective existence and as something presented to it
figuratively Conceptual comprehension
therefore does not mean for it a grasping of
this conception which knows natural existence
when cancelled and transcended to be universal and thus
reconciled with itself but rather a laying hold of that
ideal presentation the imaginative idea that
the Divine Being is reconciled with its existence through
an event the event of Gods emptying Himself of Himself relinquishing His Divine Being through His factual
Incarnation and His Death The laying hold of this
idea now expresses more specifically what was formerly
called in figurative thinking spiritual resurrection or the
process by which Gods individual self consciousness
becomes the universal becomes the religious communion The death of the Divine Man qua death is abstract
negativity the immediate result of the process which
terminates only in the universality belonging to nature
In spiritual selfconsciousness death loses its natural
significance it passes into its true principle or conception the conception just mentioned Death then
ceases to signify what it means directly the nonexistence of this particular individual and becomes
transformed and transfigured into the universality
of spirit which lives in its own communion dies there
daily and daily rises again
That which belongs to the sphere of pictorial thought
viz that Absolute Spirit qua individual or rather qua
particular embodies and presents in its objective existence the nature of spirit is thus here transferred to selfconsciousness itself to the sphere where knowledge maintains itself in its otherness in its opposite This selfconsciousness does not therefore really die as the particular
person is represented to have really died its particularity succumbs and expires in its universality ie in its
knowledge which is true Being reconciling itself with
itself That primary and prior element of presentative
thinking is thus here set forth as transcended has in
other words, returned into the self into its notion
What was in the former merely an existent entity has
come to assume the form of Subject By that very fact
the first element too pure thought and the spirit eternal
therein are no longer away beyond and outside the
mind thinking pictorially nor beyond the self rather
the return of the whole into itself consists just in containing all moments within itself When the death
of the mediator is laid hold of by the self brought within its grasp this means the sublation and transcendence of his factuality of his particular independent
existence this particular selfexistence has become
universal selfconsciousness
On the other side the universal just because of this
is selfconsciousness and the pure or abstract unreal
Spirit of bare thought has become concrete and actual
The death of the mediator is death not merely of his
natural aspect of his particular self existence what dies
is not merely the outer encasement which being
stripped of true Being is eo ipso dead but also the
abstraction of the Divine Being For the mediator as
long as his death has not yet accomplished the reconciliation is something onesided which takes as true Being
the simple abstract element of thought not concrete
reality This onesided extreme of self has not yet
equal worth and value with ultimate Being the self first
gets this as Spirit When the mediator as imaginatively
presented dies his death implies at the same time the
death of the mere abstraction of Divine Being which is
not yet affirmed as a self That death is the bitterness
and pain of the unhappy consciousness when it feels
that God himself is dead This harsh utterance is the
expression of inmost selfknowledge which has self bare
and simple for its content it is the return of consciousness into the depth of darkness where Ego is nothing but bare identity of Ego a darkness distinguishing
and knowing nothing more outside it This feeling thus
means in point of fact, the loss of the Substance and of
its objective existence over against consciousness But
at the same time it is the pure subjectivity of Substance
the pure certainty and inner assurance of itself which
it lacked when it was object or immediacy pure ultimate
Being This knowledge is thus the process of spiritualisation whereby Substance becomes Subject by which its
abstraction and lifelessness have expired and Substance
therefore has become concrete and real simple universal
selfconsciousness
In this way then Spirit is Spirit knowing its own self
It knows itself that, which is for it object exists or,
in other words, its objectively presented idea is the true
absolute content As we saw the content expresses
just Spirit itself. It is at the same time not merely
content of self consciousness and not merely object for
selfconsciousness it is also concrete actual Spirit
It is this by the fact of its passing through and realising
the three elements of its nature this movement
through the content of its whole self in this way constitutes its actual reality What moves itself that is
Spirit it is the subject of the movement and it is
likewise the moving process itself or the substance
through which the subject makes its way We saw
how the notion of spirit arose when we entered the
sphere of religion it was the process of selfassured
spirit which forgives and pardons evil and in so doing
puts aside its own simplicity of nature and rigid unchangeableness it was to state it otherwise the
process in which what is absolutely in opposition
recognises itself as the same as its opposite and this
knowledge breaks out into the yea yea with which
one extreme meets the other The religious consciousness to which the Absolute Being is revealed sees this
notion and does away with the distinction of its self
from what it beholds and as it is Subject so it is also
Substance and is thus itself Spirit just because and in
so far as it is this process
This religious communion however has not yet
achieved its complete selfconsciousness Its content
in general is put before it in the form of an objective pictorial idea so that this disruption or opposition still attaches even to the actual spiritual character
of the communion to its return out of its presentative
way of thinking just as the element of pure thought
itself was also hampered with that opposition This
spiritual communion too is not aware what it is it is
spiritual selfconsciousness which is not object to itself
in this form or does not develop into clear consciousness of itself Eather so far as it is consciousness it
has before it ideal presentations those picturethoughts
which w r ere considered
We see selfconsciousness at its last turningpoint
become inward to itself and attain to knowledge of its
inner being of its selfcentredness We see it relinquish
and empty itself of its natural existence and reach pure
negativity But the positive significance viz that this
negativity or pure inwardness of knowledge is just as
much the self identical Absolute Being put otherwise
that Substance has here attained to being absolute
selfconsciousness this is for the devotional consciousness an objective other something external It
grasps this aspect that the knowledge which becomes
purely inward is inherently absolute simplicity or
Substance as the idea of something which is not
thus by its very conception but as the act of satisfaction obtained from an other In other words, it
is not really aware as a fact that this depth of
pure self is the power by which the abstract Ultimate Being is drawn down from its abstractness and raised to the level of self by the strength and force
of this pure devotion The action of the self hence
retains towards it this negative significance because
the relinquishment of itself on the part of substance
is for the self an ultimate reality something per se
the self does not at once grasp and comprehend it
or does not find it in its own action as such
Since this unity of Ultimate Being and Self has been
essentially and inherently brought about consciousness
too has this idea of its reconciliation but in the form
of an imaginative idea It obtains satisfaction by
attaching in an external way to its pure negativity the
positive significance of the unity of itself with absolute
Being Its satisfaction thus itself remains hampered with
the opposition of an external beyond Its own peculiar
reconciliation therefore enters its consciousness as
something remote something far away in the future
just as the reconciliation which the other self achieved
appears as away in the distance of the past Just
as the individual godman has an implicit a potential
father and only an actual mother in like manner
we may say the universal godman the spiritual communion has as its father its own proper action and
knowledge while its mother is eternal Love which it
merely feels but does not behold as an actual immediate
object present in its consciousness Its reconciliation
therefore is in its heart but still with its conscious life
sundered in twain and its actual reality shattered
What falls within its consciousness as the inherent
and essential element the aspect of pure mediation
is the reconciliation that lies beyond while what
appears as actually present in its consciousness as the aspect of immediacy and of existence is the world
which has yet to await transfiguration The world is
no doubt implicitly reconciled with the Divine Being
and that Being no doubt knows that it no longer regards
the object as alienated from itself but as one with itself
in its Love But for selfconsciousness this immediate
presence has not yet the form and shape of spiritual
reality Thus the spirit of the communion is in its
immediate consciousness separated from its religious
consciousness which declares indeed that these two
modes of consciousness implicitly and inherently are
not separated but this is an implicitness which is not
realised or has not yet become an absolute explicit
selfexistence as well
VIII Spirit manifested in revealed religion has not as
JL yet surmounted its attitude of consciousness as
such or what is the same thing its concrete selfconsciousness is not at this stage the object it is aware of
Spirit as a whole and the moments distinguished in
it fall within the sphere of presentative thinking are
presentations with the form of objectivity The content
of this presentational thought is Absolute Spirit All
that remains to be done now is to cancel and transcend this bare form or better because the form
appertains to consciousness as such its true meaning
must have come out in the shapes and modes consciousness has already assumed
The surmounting of the object of consciousness in this
way is not to be taken onesidedly as meaning that the
object shows itself returning into the self It has a more
definite and specific meaning it means that the object
as such presents itself to the self as a vanishing factor
and furthermore that the emptying the relinquishment of selfconsciousness itself establishes thinghood and that this laying aside of selfconsciousness
has not merely negative but positive significance a
significance not merely for us or per se but for selfconsciousness itself The negative of the object, its
cancelling its own existence gets for selfconsciousness
a positive significance or selfconsciousness knows this
nothingness of the object because on the one hand
selfconsciousness itself relinquishes itself for in doing
so it establishes itself as object or by reason of the
indivisible unity characterising its selfexistence sets up
the object as its self On the other hand there is also
this other moment in the process that selfconsciousness
has just as really cancelled and done away with this
selfrelinquishment and objectification and has resumed
them into itself and is thus at home with itself in its
otherness This is the movement of consciousness
and in this process consciousness is the totality of its
moments
Consciousness at the same time had to take up a
relation to the object in all its aspects and phases and
grasp its meaning from the point of view of each of
them This totality of its determinate characteristics
makes the object per se and inherently a spiritual
reality and it becomes so in truth for consciousness
when the latter apprehends every individual one of
them as self ie when it takes up towards them the
spiritual relationship just spoken of.
The object is, then partly immediate existence a
thing in general corresponding to immediate consciousness partly an alteration of itself its relatedness
or existenceforanotherand existenceforself determinateness corresponding to perception partly essential
being or in the form of a universal corresponding to
intelligence or understanding The object as a whole is the mediated result the conclusion or the passing of
universality into individuality through specification
as also the reverse process from individual to universal
through cancelled individuality or specific determination
These three specific aspects then determine the ways
in which consciousness must get to know the object in
the form of self This knowledge of which we are
speaking is however not knowledge in the sense of
pure conceptual comprehension of the object; here this
knowledge is to be taken as a developing process has
to be taken in its various moments and set forth
in the manner appropriate to consciousness as such
and the moments of the notion proper of pure and
absolute knowledge are to assume the form of modes
or attitudes of consciousness For that reason the
object does not yet when present in consciousness as
such appear as the inner essence of Spirit in the way
this has just been expressed The procedure consciousness adopts in regard to the object is not that of
considering it either in this totality as such or in the
pure conceptual form it is partly that of a mode or
attitude of consciousness in general partly a multitude
of such modes which we who analyse the process gather
together and in which the totality of the moments of
the object and of the procedure of consciousness can
be shown merely resolved into their separate elements
To understand this method of grasping the object
where apprehension is a form or mode of consciousness
we have here only to recall the previous forms of consciousness which came before us earlier in the argument
As regards the object then so far as it is immediate
an indifferent objective entity we saw Reason at the
stage of Observation seeking and finding itself in
this indifferent thing ie we saw it conscious that its
activity is there of an external sort and at the same
time conscious of the object merely as an immediate
ob j ect We saw too its specific character take expression
at its highest stage in the infinite judgment the
being of the ego is a thing And further the ego is an
immediate thing of sense When ego is called a soul
it is indeed represented also as a thing but a thing in the
sense of something invisible impalpable etc ie in fact
not as an immediate entity and not as that which is
generally understood by a thing That judgment then
ego is a thing taken at first glance has no spiritual
content or rather is just the absence of spirituality
In its conception however it is in fact the most
luminous and illuminating judgment and this its inner
significance which is not yet made evident is what
the two other moments to be considered express
The thing is ego In point of fact, thing is transcended
in this infinite judgment The thing is nothing in itself it only has significance in a relation only through the
ego and its reference to the ego This moment came
before consciousness in pure insight and enlightenment
Things are simply and solely useful profitable and only
to be considered from the point of view of their utility
The trained and cultivated selfconsciousness which
has traversed the region of spirit in selfalienation
has by giving up itself produced the thing as its self
it retains itself therefore still in the thing and knows
the thing to have no independence in other words
knows that the thing has essentially and solely a relative
existence Or again to give complete expression to the
relationship ie to what here alone constitutes the
nature of the object the thing stands for something that
is selfexistent sensecertainty senseexperience is announced as absolute truth but this selfexistence is
itself declared to be a moment which merely disappears
and passes into its opposite into a being at the mercy
of an other
But knowledge of the thing is not yet finished at this
point The thing must become known as self not merely
in regard to the immediateness of its being and as
regards specific determinateness but also in the sense
of essence or inner reality This is found in the case
of Moral Self consciousness This mode of experience
thinks of its knowledge as the absolute essential element
knows no other objective being than pure will or pure
knowledge It is nothing but merely this will and this
knowledge Any other possesses merely nonessential
being ie being that has no inherent nature per se
but only its empty husk In so far as the moral
consciousness in its view of the world lets existence
drop out of the self, it just as truly reclaims and takes
this existence back again into the self In the form of
conscience finally it is no longer this incessant alternation between the placing and the displacing dissembling of existence and self it knows that its
existence as such is this pure certainty of its own self
the objective element into which qua acting it puts forth
itself is nothing else than pure knowledge of itself by
itself
These are the moments which compose the reconciliation of spirit with its own consciousness proper By
themselves they are particular and separate and it is
their spiritual unity alone which furnishes the power
for this reconciliation The last of these moments is
however necessarily this unity itself and as we see
binds them all in fact into itself Spirit certain of itself
in its objective existence takes as the element of its
existence nothing else than this knowledge of self
The declaration that what it does it does in accordance
with the convictions of duty this statement is the
warrant for its own action and makes good its conduct
Action is the first inherent division of the simple unity
of the notion, and the return out of this division
This first movement turns round into the second since
the element of recognition is put forward as simple
knowledge of duty in contrast to the distinction and
diremption that He in action as such and in this way
form a rigid reality confronting action In pardon
however we saw how this rigid fixity gave way and
renounced its claims Reality has here qua immediate
existence no other significance for selfconsciousness
than that of being pure knowledge similarly qua
determinate existence or qua relation what is self opposed
is a knowledge partly of this purely individual self partly
of knowledge qua universal Herein it is established
at the same time that the third moment universality
or the essence means for each of the two opposite factors
merely knowledge Finally they also cancel the empty
opposition that still remains and are the knowledge of
ego as identical with ego this individual self which is
immediately pure knowledge or universal
This reconciliation of consciousness with selfconsciousness thus proves to be brought about in a doublesided way in the one case in the religious mind in the
other case in consciousness itself as such They are
distinguished inter se by the fact that the one is
this reconciliation in the form of implicit immanence
the other in the form of explicit selfexistence As
we have considered them they at the beginning fall
apart In the order in which the modes or types of
consciousness came before us consciousness has reached
the individual moments of that order and also their
unification long before ever religion gave its object
the shape and mould of actual selfconsciousness The
unification of both aspects is not yet brought to light
it is this that winds up this series of embodiments of
spiritual life for in it spirit gets to the point where it
knows itself not only as it is inherently in itself or in
terms of its absolute content nor only as it is objectively
for itself in terms of its bare form devoid of content or
in terms of selfconsciousness but as it is in its selfcompleteness as it is inherently and explicitly in itself and
for itself
This unification has however already taken place by
implication and has done so in religion in the return
of the objective presentation into self consciousness but not according to the proper form for the
religious aspect is the aspect of the essentially independent and stances in contrast to the process of
selfconsciousness The unification therefore belongs to
this other aspect which by contrast is the aspect of reflection into self is that side which contains its self and
its opposite and contains them not only implicitly an
sick or in a general way but explicitly or
expressly developed and distinguished The content
as well as the other aspect of selfconscious spirit so far
as it is the other aspect have been brought to light
and are here in their completeness the unification
still awanting is the simple unity of the notion. This
notion is also already given with the aspect of selfconsciousness but as it previously came before us
above it like all the other moments has the form of
being a particular mode or type of consciousness It is
that part of the embodiment of selfassured spirit which
keeps within its essential principle and was called the
beautiful soul That is to say the beautiful soul is
its own knowledge of itself in its pure transparent unity
selfconsciousness which knows this pure knowledge
of pure inwardness to be spirit is not merely intuition
of the divine but the selfintuition of God Himself
Since this notion keeps itself fixedly opposed to its
realisation it is the onesided form which we saw before
disappear into thin air but also take a positive external embodiment and advance further Through the
process of realisation this selfconsciousness bereft of
objective content ceases to hold fast by itself the
abstract determinateness of the notion over against its
fulfilment is cancelled and done away with Its selfconsciousness attains the form of universality and what
remains is its true notion the notion that has attained
its realisation the notion in its truth ie in unity with
its externalisation It is knowledge of pure knowledge
not in the sense of an abstract essence such as duty is
but in the sense of an essential being which is this
particular knowledge this individual pure selfconsciousness which is at the same time an object for the
object is the self existing self
This notion obtained its fulfilment partly from the
acts performed by the spirit that is sure of itself partly
from religion In the latter it obtained the absolute
content qua content or in the form of an ideal presentation or of otherness for consciousness On the
other hand in the first the form is just the self for
that mode contains the active practical spirit sure of
itself the self accomplishes the life of Absolute Spirit
This mode as we see is that simple notion which
however gives up its eternal inner Being takes upon
itself objective existence or acts The power of diremption or of coming forth out of its inwardness lies in the
purity of the notion, for this purity is absolute abstraction or negativity In the same way the notion finds
its element of reality or the objective being it contains
in pure knowledge itself for this knowledge is simple
immediacy which is being and existence as well as
essence the former negative thought the latter positive
thought This existence finally is just as much that
state of reflection into self which comes out of pure
existence both qua existence and qua duty and this
is the state of evil This process of going into self
constitutes the opposition lying in the notion and is
thus the appearance on the scene of pure knowledge of
the essence a knowledge giving rise to no action and
no reality But to make its appearance in this opposition is to participate in it pure knowledge of essence
has inherently relinquished its simplicity for it is the
diremption or negativity which constitutes the notion
So far as this process of diremption is the process of
becoming selfcentred it is the principle of evil so far
as it is the inherently essential it is the principle of
constant goodness
Now what in the first instance takes place implicitly
and inherently is at once objectively for consciousness
and is duplicated as well is both for consciousness
and is its selfexistence or its own proper action The
same thing that is already inherently established thus
repeats itself now as knowledge thereof on the part
of consciousness and as conscious action Each finds
the other lay aside the independence of character
with which each appears confronting the other This
waiving of independence is the same renunciation of
the onesidedness of the notion as constituted implicitly
the beginning but it is now its own act of renunciation just as the notion renounced is its own notion
That implicit nature of the beginning is in truth
as much mediated because it is negativity it now
establishes itself as it is in its truth and the negative
element exists as a determinate quality which each has
for the other and is inherently and essentially selfcancelling selftranscending The one of the two parts
of the opposition is the disparity between existence
within itself in its individuality and universality the
other disparity between its abstract universality and
the self The former lets its selfexistence perish and
relinquishes itself makes confession the latter renounces
the rigidity of its abstract universality and thereby puts
away its lifeless self and its inert universality so
that the former is completed through the moment of
universality which is the essence and the latter through
universality which is self By this process of action
spirit has come to light in the form of pure universality
of knowledge which is selfconsciousness as selfconsciousness which is simple unity of knowledge It is
through action that spirit is spirit so as definitely to
exist it raises its existence into the sphere of thought
and hence into absolute opposition and returns out of
it through and within this very opposition
Thus then what was in the case of religion objective
content or a way of ideally presenting an other is here
the action proper of the self. The notion is the connecting principle securing that the content is the action
proper of the self. For this notion is as we see the
knowledge that the action of the self within itself is all
that is essential and all existence the knowledge of this
Subject as Substance and of the Substance as this
knowledge of its action What we have done here in
addition is simply to gather together the particular
moments each of which in principle exhibits the life
of spirit in its entirety and again to fix and secure
the notion in the form of the notion, whose content
was disclosed in those moments and had already presented itself in the form of a mode or type of consciousness
This last embodiment of spirit spirit which at once
gives its complete and true content the form of self
and thereby realises its notion and in doing so
remains within its own notion this is Absolute Knowledge It is spirit knowing itself in the form of spirit
it is conceptual comprehensive knowledge through
notions Truth is here not merely in itself absolutely
identical with certainty it has also the typical form of
certainty of self or in its existence ie for spirit
knowing it it is in the form of knowledge of itself
Truth is the content which in the case of religion is
not as yet at one with its certainty This identification however is secured when the content has received
the form and character of self By this means what
constitutes the very essence viz the notion comes to
have the nature of existence ie assumes the form of
what is objective to consciousness Spirit appearing
before consciousness in this element of existence or
what is here the same thing produced by it in this
element is systematic Science knowledge have then come about in such a way that this
knowledge is pure selfexistence of selfconsciousness
It is ego which is this concrete ego and no other
and at the same time from its very nature is mediated
or sublated universal ego It has a content which it
distinguishes from itself for it is pure negativity or
selfdiremption it is consciousness This content in its
distinction is itself the ego for it is the process of superseding itself or the same pure negativity which constitutes ego Ego is in it qua distinguished reflected into
itself only then is the content conceptualy comprehended when ego in its otherness is still at
home with itself More precisely stated this content
is nothing else than the very process just spoken of
for the content is the spirit which traverses the whole
range of its own being and does this for itself qua
spirit by the fact that it possesses the form of the
notion in its objectivity
As to the actual existence of this notion science
does not appear in time and in reality till spirit has
arrived at this stage of being conscious regarding itself
Qua spirit which knows what it is it did not exist before
and is not to be found at all till after the completion
of the task of mastering and overcoming the imperfection
of its form the task of procuring for its consciousness
and making itself aware of the shape of its inmost
essence and in this manner squaring its selfconsciousness with its consciousness Spirit in and for itself
spirit in its selfcontained reality is when distinguished
into its separate moments selfexistent knowledge
conceptual comprehension in general which as such has
not yet reached the substance or is not in itself absolute
knowledge
Now in actual reality the knowing substance is
arrived at earlier than its form earlier than the form
of the notion. For the substance is the undeveloped
inherent nature the fundamental notion in its inert
simplicity the state of inwardness or the self of spirit
not yet objectivified What is there what does exist
is in the shape of unexpressed simplicity the undeveloped immediate or the object of presentative
consciousness in general Because knowledge
is a spiritual state of consciousness, which is only aware
of what implicitly and inherently is so far as this is a
being for the self and a being of the self or a notionknowledge has on this account merely a barren object
to begin with in contrast to which the substance and the
consciousness of this substance are richer in content
Revelation in such a case is in fact concealment for
the substance is here still selfless existence and nothing
but certainty of self is manifest or revealed to it To
begin with therefore it is only the abstract moments
that fall to selfconsciousness when dealing with the
substance But since these moments are pure activities
and must move forward by their very nature selfconsciousness enriches itself till it has torn from consciousness the entire substance and absorbed into itself
the entire structure of the substance with all its
constituent elements Since this negative attitude
towards objectivity is positive as well establishes and
fixes the content it goes on till it has produced these
elements out of itself and thereby reinstated them once
more as objects of consciousness In the notion
knowing itself as notion the moments thus make their
appearance prior to the whole in its complete fulfilment
the movement of these moments is the process by which
the whole comes into being In consciousness on the
other hand the whole but not as comprehended conceptually is prior to the moments
Time is just the notion definitely existent and presented to consciousness in the form of empty pure
intuition Hence spirit necessarily appears in time
and it appears in time so long as it does not grasp its
pure notion ie so long as it does not annul time
Time is the pure self in external form apprehended in
intuition and not grasped and understood by the
self it is the notion directly apprehended through
intuition When this notion grasps itself it supersedes
the time character conceptually comprehends intuition
and is intuition comprehended and comprehending
through conceptions Time therefore appears as spirits
destiny and necessity where spirit is not yet complete
within itself it is the necessity compelling spirit to
increase and enrich the share selfconsciousness has in
consciousness to put into motion the immediacy of
the inherent nature which is the form in which the
substance is present in consciousness or conversely to
realise and make manifest what is inherent regarded
as inward and immanent to make manifest that which
is at first within ie to vindicate and secure for it the
certainty of self
For this reason it must be said that nothing is consciously known which does not fall within experience
or as it is also expressed which is not felt to be true
which is not given as an inwardly revealed eternal
verity as a sacred object of belief or whatever other
expressions we care to employ For experience just
consists in this that the content and the content is
spirit in its inherent nature is substance and so object
of consciousness But this substance in which spirit
consists is the development of itself explicitly to what
it is inherently and implicitly and only by this process
of reflecting itself into itself is it then essentially and
in truth spirit It is inherently the movement which
constitutes the process of knowledge the transforming
of that implicit inherent nature into explicitness and
objectivity of Substance into Subject of the object of
consciousness into the object of selfconsciousness ie
into an object that is at the same time superseded and
transcended in other words, into the notion This
transforming process is a cycle that returns into itself
a cycle that presupposes its beginning and reaches its
beginning only at the end So far as spirit then is of
necessity this process of selfdistinction it appears as a
single whole intuitively apprehended over against its
simple selfconsciousness And since that whole is
the aspect distinguished it is distinguished into the
intuitively apprehended pure notion Time and the
content the inherent implicit nature Substance qua
subject involves the necessity at first an inner necessity
to set forth in itself what it inherently is to show itself
to be spirit The completed systematic expression in
objective form becomes then at the same time the reflection of substance the development of it into a
self or subject Consequently until and unless spirit
is inherently completed completed as a worldspirit
it cannot reach its completion as selfconscious spirit
The content of religion therefore expresses earlier in
time than speculative science what spirit is but science
alone is the perfect form in which spirit truly knows
itself
The process of carrying forward this form of know
ledge of itself constitutes the task which spirit accomplishes in the concrete actual shape of History The
religious communion in so far as it is at the outset the
substance of Absolute Spirit is the crude form of consciousness, which has an existence all the harsher and
more barbaric the deeper is its inner spirit and its
inarticulate stolid self has all the harder task in dealing
with its essence the unconceived content alien to its
consciousness Not till it has surrendered the hope of
cancelling that foreignness by an external ie alien
method does it turn to itself to its own peculiar world
in the actual present It turns thither because to
supersede that alien method means returning into
selfconsciousness It thus discovers this world in the
living present to be its own property and so has
taken the first step to descend from the ideal intelligible world the world of the intellect or rather
to endue the abstract element of the intellect with
concrete selfhood Through observation on the
one hand it finds existence in the shape of thought
and comprehends existence and conversely it finds
in its thought existence When in the first instance, it has thus itself expressed in an abstract way
the immediate unity of thought and existence of
abstract Being and Self and when it has expressed the
primal principle of Light in a purer form viz as
unity of extension and existence for existence is
an ultimate simple term more akin to thought than
Light and in this way has revived again in
thought the Substance of the Orient f the Absolute
Substance of Eastern Religions thereupon spirit at
once recoils in horror from this abstract unity from this selfless substance and maintains as against it the
principle of subjective Individuality But after spirit
has relinquished this principle and brought it under
the ordeal of culture has thereby made it an objective
existence and established it throughout the whole
of existence has arrived at the idea of Utility and
in the sphere of absolute freedom has found the key to
existence to be Individual WillJ after these stages
spirit then brings to light the thought that lies in its
inmost depths and expresses ultimate Reality in the
form Ego Ego
This Ego identical with Ego is however an
inward selfreflecting process for since this identity
qua absolute negativity is absolute distinction the selfidentity of the Ego stands in contrast to this absolute
distinction which being pure distinction and at the
same time objective to the self that knows itself
has to be expressed as Time In this way just as
formerly ultimate Eeality was expressed as unity of
thought and extension it would here be interpreted as
unity of thought and time But distinction left to itself
unresting unhalting time really collapses upon itself it
is the objective quiescence the stable continuity of
extension while this latter is pure identity with self
is Ego
Again Ego is not merely self it is identity of self
with itself This identity however is complete and immediate unity with self in other words this Subject is
just as much Substance Substance by itself alone
would be void and empty Intuition or
the intuition of a content which qua specific would I Kant Fichte
have merely a contingent character and would be
devoid of necessity Substance would only stand for
the Absolute in so far as Substance was thought of or
intuited as absolute unity and all content would
as regards its diversity have to fall outside the Substance and be due to reflection a process which does
not belong to Substance because Substance would not
be Subject would not be conceived as Spirit as reflecting about self and reflecting itself into self If
nevertheless a content were to be spoken of then on
the one hand it would only exist in order to be
thrown into the empty abysm of the Absolute, while
on the other it would be picked up in external fashion
from sense perception Knowledge would appear to
have come by things by what is distinct from knowledge
itself and to have got at the distinctions between the
endless variety of things without any one understanding
how or where all this came from
Spirit however has shown itself to be neither the
mere withdrawal of selfconsciousness into its pure
inwardness nor the mere absorption of selfconsciousness into blank Substance devoid of all distinctions
Spirit is the movement of the self which empties itself
of self and sinks itself within its own substance and
qua subject both goes out of that substance into itself
making its substance an object and a content and also
supersedes this distinction of objectivity and content
That first reflection out of immediacy is the subjects
distinction of self from its substance the notion in a
state of selfdiremption the subjectification of the self,
and the coming of the pure ego into being Since this
distinction is the action pure and simple of Ego Ego
the notion is the necessity for and the uprising of
existence which has the substance for its essential
nature and subsists on its own account. But this
subsisting of existence for itself is the notion established
and realised in determinate form and is thereby the
notions own inherent movement that of descending
into the bare and simple substance which is only subject by being this negativity and going through this
process
Ego has not to take its stand on the form of selfconsciousness in opposition to the form of substantiality
and objectivity as if it were afraid of emptying itself
and becoming objective The power of spirit lies rather
in remaining one with itself when giving up itself
and because it is selfcontained and selfsubsistent in
establishing as mere moments its explicit selfexistence
as well as its implicit inherent nature Nor again is
Ego a tertium quid which casts distinctions back into the
abysm of the Absolute, and declares them all to mean
the same there On the contrary true knowledge
lies rather in the seeming inactivity which merely
watches and considers how the element distinguished
proceeds how it is selfmoved by its very nature and
returns again into its own unity
With absolute knowledge then Spirit has wound up
the process of its various forms and modes so far as in
assuming these various shapes and forms it is affected
with the insurmountable distinction which consciousness
implies ie the distinction of consciousness from its
object or content Spirit has attained the pure element
of its existence the notion The content is in view of the
freedom of its own existence the self that empties and
gives up itself to objectivity in other words, that
content is the immediate unity of selfknowledge The
pure process of thus relinquishing itself to externality
constitutes when we consider this process in its bearing
on the content the necessity of this content The
diversity of content is qua determinate and specific
due to relation and is not inherent it is its restless
activity of cancelling and superseding itself or its
negativity Thus the necessity or diversity like its free
existence is the self too and in this selfform in
which existence is immediately thought the content
is a notion Seeing then that Spirit has attained
the notion it unfolds its existence and develops its
processes in this ether of its life and is Systematic
Science The moments of its process are set forth in
Science no longer as determinate modes or forms of
consciousness but since the distinction which consciousness implies has reverted to and has become a
distinction within the self as determinate notions
and as the organic selfexplaining and selfconstituted
process of these conceptions While in the Phenomenology of Mind each moment is the distinction of knowledge and truth and the process in which that distinction
is cancelled and transcended on the other hand Systematic Science does not contain this distinction and
supersession of distinction Rather since each moment
has the form of the notion, it unites the objective form of
truth and the knowing self in an immediate unity In
Science the individual moment does not appear as the
process of passing back and forward from consciousness
or presentation to selfconsciousness and conversely
there the pure form liberated from the condition of being
an appearance in mere consciousness the pure notion
with its further development depends solely and purely
on its characteristic and specific nature Conversely
again there corresponds to every abstract moment of
absolute Science a form or mode in which mind as a
whole makes it appearance As the mind that actually
exists and historically appears is not richer than Science
so too mind in its actual content is not poorer To
know the pure notions of Science in the form in which
they are modes or types of consciousness this constitutes the aspect of their reality in which its essential
element the notion appearing there in its simple
mediating activity as thinking breaks up and separates the moments of this mediation and exhibits its
content by reference to the internal and immanent
opposition of its elements
Science contains within itself this necessity of relinquishing and divesting itself of the form of the pure
notion and necessarily involves the transition of the
notion into consciousness For Spirit that knows itself
is just for the reason that it grasps its own notion
immediate identity with itself and this in the distinction it implies is the certainty of what is immediate or is
senseconsciousness the beginning from which we
started This process of releasing itself from the form of
its self is the highest freedom and security of its knowledge of itself
All the same this relinquishment of self and abandonment to externality are still incomplete This
process expresses the relation of the certainty of
its self to the object an object which just by
being in relation has not yet attained its full
freedom Systematic knowledge is aware not only
of itself but also of the negative of itself or
its limit Knowing its limit means knowing how
to sacrifice itself This sacrifice is the emptying of
self the selfabandonment in which Spirit sets forth in
the form of free and unconstrained fortuitous contingency its process of becoming Spirit intuitively
apprehending outside it its pure self as Time and likewise its existence as Space This last form into which
Spirit passes Nature is its living immediate process of
development Nature Spirit divested of self and given
over to externality is in its actual existence nothing
but this eternal process of abandoning its own independent subsistence and the movement which reinstates
Subject
The other aspect however in which Spirit comes into
being History is process in terms of knowledge a conscious selfmediating process Spirit given over to and
emptied into Time But this form of abandonment is
similarly an emptying of itself by itself the negative
is negative of itself This way of becoming presents a
tardy procession and succession of spiritual shapes and
forms a gallery of pictures each of which is endowed
with the entire wealth of Spirit and moves so tardily
just for the reason that the self has to permeate and
assimilate all this wealth of its substance Since its
accomplishment consists in Spirit knowing what it is
in fully comprehending its substance this knowledge
means its subjectification a state in which Spirit leaves
its external existence behind and gives itself over to the
attitude of Recollection In this subjectification Spirit is engulfed in the darkness and night of
its own selfconsciousness its vanished existence is
however conserved therein and this superseded existence the previous state but born anew from the womb of knowledge is the new stage of existence a
new world and a new type and mode of Spirit Here it
has to begin all over again at its immediacy as freshly
as before and thence rise once more to the measure of
its stature as if for it all that preceded were lost
and as if it had learned nothing from the experience
of the spirits that preceded But recollection has conserved that experience and is the inner
being and in fact the higher form of the substance.
While then this phase of Spirit begins all over again
its formative development apparently starting solely
from itself yet at the same time it commences at a
higher level The realm of spirits developed in this way
and assuming definite shape in existence constitutes a
succession where one detaches and sets loose the other
and each takes over from its predecessor the empire
of the spiritual world The goal of the process is
the revelation of the depth of spiritual life and this is
the Absolute Notion This revelation consequently
means superseding its depth is its extension or
spatial embodiment the negation of this subjectivity
of the ego a negativity which is its selfrelinquishment
its externalisation or its substance and this revelation
is also its temporal embodiment in that this externalisation in its very nature relinquishes externalises itself
and so exists at once in its spatial extension as well
as in its depth or the self The goal which is Absolute
Knowledge or Spirit knowing itself as Spirit finds its
pathway in the recollection of spiritual forms as they are
in themselves and as they accomplish the organisation
of their spiritual kingdom Their conservation looked
at from the side of their free phenomenal existence in the
sphere of contingency is History looked at from the
side of their conceptually comprehended organisation
it is the Science of phenomenal knowledge of the ways
in which knowledge appears Both together or History
comprehended conceptually form at once the recollection
and the golgotha of Absolute Spirit the reality the
truth the certainty of its throne without which it were
lifeless solitary and alone Only This chalice of Gods plenitude
Yields foaming His Infinitude