science of logic-第33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！


particularity；　of　which　this　universality　constitutes　the　substantial　basis。　In　this　way　it　is　determined
as　genus　and　species。



（a）　The　Categorical　Judgment　

（b）　The　Hypothetical　Judgment　

（c）　The　Disjunctive　Judgment　

D。　THE　JUDGMENT　OF　THE　NOTION　

The　ability　to　form　judgments　of　existence　such　as　'the　rose　is　red'；　'snow　is　white'；　and　so　forth；
will　hardly　count　as　evidence　of　great　powers　of　judgment。　The　judgments　of　reflection　are
rather　propositions；　in　the　judgment　of　necessity　the　object　appears；　it　is　true；　in　its　objective
universality；　but　it　is　only　in　the　judgment　now　to　be　considered　that　its　relation　to　the　Notion　is
found。　In　this　judgment　the　Notion　is　laid　down　as　the　basis；　and　since　it　is　in　relation　to　the
object；　it　is　an　ought…to…be　to　which　the　reality　may　or　may　not　be　adequate。　Therefore　it　is　only　a
judgment　of　this　kind　that　contains　a　true　appreciation；　the　predicates　good；　bad；　true；　beautiful；
correct；　etc。　express　that　the　thing　is　measured　against　its　universal　Notion　as　the　simply
presupposed　ought…to…be　and　is；　or　is　not；　in　agreement　with　it。

The　judgment　of　the　Notion　has　been　called　the　judgment　of　modality　and　it　has　been　regarded　as
containing　that　form　of　the　relationship　between　subject　and　predicate　which　is　found　in　an　external
understanding；　and　to　be　concerned　with　the　value　of　the　copula　only　in　relation　to　thinking。

According　to　this　view；　the　problematical　judgment　is　one　where　the　affirmation　or　denial　is　taken
as　optional　or　possible；　the　assertoric；　where　it　is　taken　as　true；　that　is　as　actual；　and　the
apodeictic；　where　it　is　taken　as　necessary。　It　is　easy　to　see　why　it　is　so　natural　in　the　case　of　this
judgment　to　step　out　of　the　sphere　of　judgment　itself　and　to　regard　its　determination　as　something
merely　subjective。　For　here　it　is　the　Notion；　or　the　subjective；　that　reappears　in　the　judgment　and
stands　in　relationship　to　an　external　actuality。　But　this　subjectivity　is　not　to　be　confused　with
external　reflection；　which　of　course　is　also　something　subjective；　but　in　a　different　sense　from　the
Notion　itself；　on　the　contrary；　the　Notion　that　re…emerges　from　the　disjunctive　judgment　is　the
opposite　of　a　mere　contingent　mode。　The　earlier　judgments　are　in　this　sense　merely　subjective；
for　they　are　based　on　an　abstraction　and　one…sidedness　in　which　the　Notion　is　lost。　The　judgment
of　the　Notion；　on　the　contrary；　is　objective　and　the　truth　as　against　those　earlier　judgments；　just
because　it　has　for　its　basis　the　Notion；　not　the　Notion　in　external　reflection　or　in　relation　to　a
subjective；　that　is　contingent；　thinking；　but　the　Notion　in　its　determinateness　as　Notion。

In　the　disjunctive　judgment　the　Notion　was　posited　as　identity　of　the　universal　nature　with　its
particularisation；　consequently　the　relation　of　the　judgment　was　cancelled。　This　concretion　of
universality　and　particularisation　is；　at　first；　a　simple　result；　it　has　now　to　develop　itself　further　into
totality；　since　the　moments　which　it　contains　are　at　first　swallowed　up　in　it　and　as　yet　do　not
confront　one　another　in　determinate　self…subsistence。　The　defect　of　the　result　may　also　be　more
definitely　expressed　by　saying　that　in　the　disjunctive　judgment；　although　objective　universality　has
completed　itself　in　its　particularisation；　yet　the　negative　unity　of　the　latter　merely　returns　into　the
former　and　has　not　yet　determined　itself　to　the　third　moment；　that　of　individuality。　Yet　in　so　far
as　the　result　itself　is　negative　unity；　it　is　indeed　already　this　individuality；　but　as　such　it　is　only
this　one　determinateness；　which　has　now　to　posit　its　negativity；　sunder　itself　into　the　extremes　and
in　this　way　finally　develop　into　the　syllogism。

The　proximate　diremption　of　this　unity　is　the　judgment　in　which　it　is　posited　first　as　subject；　as　an
immediate　individual；　and　then　as　predicate；　as　the　determinate　relation　of　its　moments。



（a）　The　Assertoric　Judgment　

（b）　The　Problematic　Judgment　

（c）　The　Apodetic　Judgment　



。。。　This　judgment；　then；　is　truly　objective；　or　it　is　the　truth　of　the　judgment　in　general。　Subject　and
predicate　correspond　to　each　other　and　have　the　same　content；　and　this　content　is　itself　the
posited　concrete　universality；　it　contains；　namely；　the　two　moments；　the　objective　universal　or
the　enus；　and　the　individualised　universal。　Here；　therefore；　we　have　the　universal　which　is　itself
and　continues　itself　through　its　opposite　and　is　a　universal　only　as　unity　with　this　opposite。　A
universal　of　this　kind；　such　as　the　predicate　good；　suitable；　correct；　etc。；　is　based　on　an
ought…to…be　and　at　the　same　time　contains　the　correspondence　of　existence　to　that　ought…to…be；
it　is　not　this　ought…to…be　or　the　genus　by　itself；　but　this　correspondence　that　is　the　universality
which　constitutes　the　predicate　of　the　apodeictic　judgment。

The　subject　likewise　contains　these　two　moments　in　immediate　unity　as　the　fact。　But　it　is　the　truth
of　the　fact　that　it　is　internally　split　into　what　it　ought…to…be　and　what　it　is；　this　is　the　absolute
judgment　on　all　actuality。　It　is　because　this　original　partition；　which　is　the　omnipotence　of　the
Notion；　is　just　as　much　a　return　into　its　unity　and　an　absolute　relation　of　the　ought…to…be　and　being
to　each　other　that　makes　what　is　actual　into　a　fact；　its　inner　relation；　this　concrete　identity；
constitutes　the　soul　of　the　fact。

The　transition　from　the　immediate　simplicity　of　the　fact　to　the　correspondence　which　is　the
determinate　relation　of　its　ought…to…be　and　its　being…or　the　copula…is　now　seen；　on　closer
examination；　to　lie　in　the　particular　determinateness　of　the　fact。　The　genus　is　the　universal　in　and
for　itself；　which　as　such　appears　as　the　unrelated；　while　the　determinateness　is　that　which　in　that
universal　is　reflected　into　itself；　yet　at　the　same　time　is　reflected　into　an　other。　The　judgment
therefore　has　its　ground　in　the　constitution　of　the　subject　and　thereby　is　apodeictic。　Hence　we
now　have　before　us　the　determinate　and　fulfilled　copula；　which　formerly　consisted　in　the
abstract　'is'；　but　has　now　further　developed　itself　into　ground　in　general。　It　appears　at　first　as　an
immediate　determinateness　in　the　subject；　but　it　is　no　less　the　relation　to　the　predicate　which　has
no　other　content　than　this　very　correspondence；　or　the　relation　of　the　subject　to　the　universality。

Thus　the　form　of　the　judgment　has　perished；　first　because　subject　and　predicate　are　in　themselves
the　same　content；　secondly　because　the　subject　through　its　determinateness　points　beyond　itself
and　relates　itself　to　the　predicate；　but　also；　thirdly；　this　relating　has　passed　over　into　the
predicate；　alone。　constitutes　its　content；　and　is　thus　the　posited　relation；　or　the　judgment　itself。
Thus　the　concrete　identity　of　the　Notion　which　was　the　result　of　the　disjunctive　judgment　and
which　constitutes　the　inner　basis　of　the　Notion　judgment…which　identity　was　at　first　posited　only　in
the　predicate…is　now　restored　in　the　whole。

If　we　examine　the　positive　element　of　this　result　which　effects　the　transition　of　the　judgment　into
another　form；　we　find；　as　we　have　seen；　that　subject　and　predicate　in　the　apodeictic　judgment　are
each　the　whole　Notion。　The　unity　of　the　Notion　as　the　determinateness　constituting　the　copula
that　relates　them；　is　at　the　same　time　distinct　from　them。　At　first；　it　stands　only　on　the　other　side　of
the　subject　as　the　latter's　immediate　constitution。　But　since　it　is　essentially　that　which　relates
subject　and　predicate；　it　is　not　merely　such　immediate　constitution　but　the　universal　that
permeates　both　subject　and　predicate。　While　subject　and　predicate　have　the　same　content；　the
form　relation；　on　the　other　hand；　is　posited　through　this　determinateness；　determinateness　as　a
universal　or　particularity。　Thus　it　contains　within　itself　the　two　form　determinations　of　the
extremes　and　is　the　determinate　relation　of　subject　and　predicate；　it　is　the　fulfilled　copula　of　the
judgment；　the　copula　pregnant　with　content；　the　unity　of　the　Notion　that　has　re…emerged　from
the　judgment　in　which　it　was　lost　in　the　extremes。　Through　this　impregnation　of　the　copula　the
judgment　has　become　the　syllogism。




THE　DOCTRINE　OF　THE　NOTION
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　Section　One：　Subjectivity
Chapter　3　The　Syllogism

We　have　found　the　syllogism　to　be　the　restoration　of　the　Notion　in　the　judgment；　and
consequently　the　unity　and　truth　of　both。　The　Notion　as　such　holds　its　moments　sublated　in　unity；
in　the　judgment　this　unity　is　internal　or；　what　is　the　same　thing；　external；　and　the　moments；　although
related；　are　posited　as　self…subsistent　extremes。　In　the　syllogism　the　Notion　determinations　are
like　the　extremes　of　the　judgment；　and　at　the　same　time　their　determinate　unity　is　posited。

Thus　the　syllogism　is　the　completely　posited　Notion；　it　is　therefore　the　rational。　The　understanding
is　regarded　as　the　faculty　of　the　determinate　Notion　which　is　held　fast　in　isolation　by　abstraction
and　the　form　of　universality。　But　in　reason　the　determinate　Notions　are　posited　in　their　totality
and　unity。　Therefore；　not　only　is　the　syllogism　rational；　but　everything　rational　is　a　syllogism。
The　syllogistic　process　has　for　a　long　time　been　ascribed　to　reason；　yet　on　the　other　hand　reason　in
and　for　itself；　rational　principles　and　laws；　are　spoken　of　in　such　a　way　that　it　is　not　clear　what　is
the　connection　between　the　former　reason　which　syllogises　and　the　latter　reason　which　is　the
source　of　laws　and　other　eternal　truths　and　absolute　thoughts。　If　the　former　is　supposed　to　be
merely　formal　reason；　while　the　latter　is　supposed　to　be　creative　of　content；　then　according　to　this
distinction　it　is　precisely　the　form　of　reason；　the　syllogism；　that　must　not　be　lacking　in　the　latter。
Nevertheless；　to　such　a　degree　are　the　two　commonly　held　apart；　and　not　mentioned　together；　that
it　seems　as　though　the　reason　of　absolute　thoughts　was　ashamed　of　the　reason　of　the　syllogism　and
as　though　it　was　only　in　deference　to　tradition　that　the　syllogism　was　also　adduced　as　an　activity　of
reason。　Yet　it　is　obvious；　as　we　have　just　remarked；　that　the　logical　reason；　if　it　is　regarded　as
formal　reason；　must　essentially　be　recognisable　also　in　the　reason　that　is　concerned　with　a　content；
the　fact　is　that　no　content　can　be　rational　except　through　the　rational　form。　In　this　matter　we　cannot
look　for　any　help　in　the　common　chatter　about　reason；　for　this　refrains　from　stating　what　is　to　be
understood　by　reason；　this　supposedly　rational　cognition　is　mostly　so　busy　with　its　objects　that　it
forgets　to　cognise　reason　itself　and　only　distinguishes　and　characterises　it　by　the　objects　that　it
possesses。　If　reason　is　supposed　to　be　the　cognition　that　knows　about　God；　freedom；　right　and
duty；　the　infinite；　unconditioned；　supersensuous；　or　even　gives　only　ideas　and　feelings　of　these
objects；　then　for　one　thing　these　latter　are　only　negative　objects；　and　for　another　thing　the　first
question　still　remains；　what　it　is　in　all　these　objects　that　makes　them　rational。　It　is　this；　that　the
infinitude　of　these　objects　is　not　the　empty　abstraction　from　the　finite；　not　the　universality　that　lacks
content　and　determinateness；　but　the　universality　that　is　fulfilled　or　reali