phenomenology of mind-第68章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


pretence　of　wanting　to　exclude　the　daylight；　i。e。　to　exclude　the　publicity　of　universal　consciousness；
and　participation　by　every　one。　Actualization　is；　on　the　contrary；　an　exposing　of　what　is　one's　own
in　a　universal　element；　where　it　comes　to　be　and　has　to　be　〃fact〃　for　every　one。

There　is；　then；　as　much　deception　of　itself　as　of　others；　if　it　is　pretended　that　the　〃bare　fact〃　is　one's
sole　concern。　A　consciousness　that　lays　open　a　〃fact〃　soon　learns　that　others　hurry　to　the　spot　and
want　to　make　themselves　busy　there；　like　flies　to　milk　newly　put　out；　and　they　in　their　turn　find　out
in　its　case　that　it　is　not　dealing　with　〃fact〃　qua　object；　but　with　fact　as　〃its　own〃。　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　reciprocally　learn　that　all　are　on　the　alert　and　consider　themselves
invited　to　deal　with　the　matter；　and　that　instead　of　a　mere　abstract　action；　or　a　single　peculiar
action；　something　has　been　elicited　and　exposed　which　was　equally　well　for　others　or　is　a　real
intent。　In　both　cases　the　same　thing　happens；　and　only　appears　to　have　a　different　significance　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　of　the
matter〃；　the　real　intent；　is；　viz。　that　it　is　neither　merely　〃fact〃；　which　is　opposed　to　action　in　general
and　to　individual　action；　nor　action　which　is　opposed　to　permanence　and　is　the　genus　independent
of　these　moments　as　its　species。　Rather　it　is　an　essential　reality　whose　existence　means　the　action
of　the　single　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　（We…sen）；　which　is　spiritual　essence。　Consciousness　learns　that　no　one　of
these　moments　is　subject；　but　rather　gets　dissolved　in　the　universal　objectified　intent。　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　qua　this；　is　no　less
immediately　universal。　The　real　intent　thereby　ceases　to　stand　in　the　relation　of　a　predicate；　loses
the　characteristic　of　lifeless　abstract　universality：　it　is　substance　permeated　by　individuality：　it　is
subject；　wherein　is　individuality　just　as　much　qua　individual；　or　qua　this；　as　qua　all　individuals：　and
it　is　the　universal；　which　has　an　existence　only　as　being　this　action　of　each　and　all；　and　gets　an
actual　reality　in　that　this　consciousness　knows　it　to　be　its　own　individual　reality；　and　the　reality　of
all。　Pure　objectified　intent　is　what　was　characterized　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
self…consciousness。　Here；　however；　the　moments　of　actual　self…consciousness　—　both　so　far　as　we
call　them　its　content　（purpose；　action；　and　reality）；　and　also　in　so　far　as　we　call　them　its　form
（being…for…self　and　being…for…another）　—　are　made　identical　with　the　bare　and　simple　category
itself；　and　the　category　is　thereby　at　the　same　time　the　entire　content。



　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　



1。　It　is　difficult　to　find　a　current　English　equivalent　for　this　term　（die　Sache　Selbst）。　〃Fact　itself〃　or
〃actual　fact〃　does　not　seem　to　convey　much　meaning。　It　seems　best　to　try　to　bring　out　the
significance　implied；　even　though　at　the　sacrifice　of　literal　translation。　




b
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　Reason　as　Lawgiver

SPIRITUAL　essential　reality　is；　in　its　bare　existence；　pure　consciousness；　and　also　this
self…consciousness。　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　〃real
intent〃　gets　its　filling　from　active　self…differentiating　individuality；　for　the　distinctions　within
individuality　compose　the　content　of　that　universal。　The　category　is　implicit　（an　sich）　as　the
universal　of　pure　consciousness；　it　is　also　explicit　（für　sich）；　for　the　self　of　consciousness　is
likewise　its　moment。　It　is　absolute　being；　for　that　universality　is　the　bare　self…identity　of　being。

Thus　what　is　object　for　consciousness　has　（now）　the　significance　of　being　the　true；　it　is　and　it　holds
good；　in　the　sense　of　being　and　holding　good　by　itself　as　an　independent　entity　（an　und　für　sich
selbst）。　It　is　the　〃absolute　fact〃；　which　no　longer　suffers　from　the　opposition　of　certainty　and　its
truth；　between　universal　and　individual；　between　purpose　and　its　reality；　but　whose　existence　is　the
reality　and　action　of　self…consciousness。　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　self…consciousness　and　being　in　a　single　unity。　It　stands　for　what　is　absolute；　for
self…consciousness　cannot　and　will　not　again　go　beyond　this　object　because　it　is　there　at　home　with
itself：　it　cannot；　for　the　object　is　all　power；　and　all　being：　it　will　not；　because　the　object　is　its　self；
or　the　will　of　this　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　（Massen）　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　spheres　（Massen）　of　the　substance　of　ethical　life　are　directly　recognized　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　self…subsistent　reality　（an
und　für　sich　seyendes　Wesen）　could　only　be　self…consciousness　itself。　But　self…consciousness　is
nothing　else　than　this　reality；　for　itself　is　the　self…existence　of　this　reality；　which　is　the　truth　just
because　it　is　as　much　the　self　of　consciousness　as　its　inherent　nature　（sein　Ansich）；　or　pure
consciousness。

Since　self…consciousness　knows　itself　to　be　a　moment　of　this　substance；　the　moment　of
self…existence　（of　independence　and　self…determination）；　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　immediately；　so　the　law　is　valid　for　it　also　immediately；　and　it　says
directly：　〃this　is　right　and　good〃。　The　emphasis　is　on　〃this〃：　there　are　determinate　specific　laws；
there　is　the　〃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　sense…experience；　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　（Massen）　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　connexion；　to　introduce　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　run：　everyone
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
conviction〃。　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；　just　as　anyone　happens　to
know；　intend；　and　understand。　This　contingency　in　the　content　has　universality　merely　in　the
propositional　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；　i。e。　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　immediate　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；　i。e。　a　relation　of　sentiment　or　feeling　（Empfindung）。　Active　love　—　for　an
inactive　love　has　no　existence；　and　is　therefore　doubtless　not　intended　here（1）　—　aims　at　removing
evil　from　someone　and　bringing　him　good。　To　do　this　we　have　to　distinguish　what　the　evil　is；　what
is　the　appropriate　good　to　meet　t