science of logic-第34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！


content　and　determinateness；　but　the　universality　that　is　fulfilled　or　realised；　the　Notion　that　is
determinate　and　possesses　its　determinateness　in　this　true　way；　namely；　that　it　differentiates　itself
within　itself　and　is　the　unity　of　these　fixed　and　determinate　differences。　It　is　only　thus　that　reason
rises　above　the　finite；　conditioned；　sensuous；　call　it　what　you　will；　and　in　this　negativity　is
essentially　pregnant　with　content；　for　it　is　the　unity　of　determinate　extremes；　as　such；　however；
the　rational　is　nothing　but　the　syllogism。

Now　the　syllogism；　like　the　judgment；　is　in　the　first　instance　immediate；　hence　its　determinations
are　simple；　abstract　determinatenesses；　in　this　form　it　is　the　syllogism　of　the　understanding。　If
we　stop　short　at　this　form　of　the　syllogism；　then　the　rationality　in　it；　although　undoubtedly　present
and　posited；　is　not　apparent。　The　essential　feature　of　the　syllogism　is　the　unity　of　the　extremes；　the
middle　term　which　unites　them；　and　the　ground　which　supports　them。　Abstraction；　in　holding
rigidly　to　the　self…subsistence　of　the　extremes；　opposes　this　unity　to　them　as　a　determinateness
which　likewise　is　fixed　and　self…subsistent；　and　in　this　way　apprehends　it　rather　as　non…unity　than
as　unity。　The　expression　middle　term　is　taken　from　spatial　representation　and　contributes　its　share
to　the　stopping　short　at　the　mutual　externality　of　the　terms。　Now　if　the　syllogism　consists　in　the
unity　of　the　extremes　being　posited　in　it；　and　if；　all　the　same；　this　unity　is　simply　taken　on　the　one
hand　as　a　particular　on　its　own；　and　on　the　other　hand　as　a　merely　external　relation；　and　non…unity
is　made　the　essential　relationship　of　the　syllogism；　then　the　reason　which　constitutes　the　syllogism
contributes　nothing　to　rationality。

First；　the　syllogism　of　existence　in　which　the　terms　are　thus　immediately　and　abstractly
determined；　demonstrates　in　itself　（since；　like　the　judgment；　it　is　their　relation）　that　they　are　not　in
fact　such　abstract　terms；　but　that　each　contains　the　relation　to　the　other　and　that　the　middle　term
is　not　particularity　as　opposed　to　the　determinations　of　the　extremes　but　contains　these　terms
posited　in　it。

Through　this　its　dialectic　it　is　converted　into　the　syllogism　of　reflection；　into　the　second　syllogism。
The　terms　of　this　are　such　that　each　essentially　shows　in；　or　is　reflected　into；　the　other；　in　other
words　they　are　posited　as　mediated；　which　they　are　supposed　to　be　in　accordance　with　the　nature
of　the　syllogism　in　general。

Thirdly；　in　that　this　reflecting　or　mediatedness　of　the　extremes　is　reflected　into　itself；　the　syllogism
is　determined　as　the　syllogism　of　necessity；　in　which　the　mediating　element　is　the　objective　nature
of　the　thing。　As　this　syllogism　determines　the　extremes　of　the　Notion　equally　as　totalities；　the
syllogism　has　attained　to　the　correspondence　of　its　Notion　or　the　middle　term；　and　its　existence　of
the　difference　of　its　extremes；　that　is；　it　has　attained　to　its　truth　and　in　doing　so　has　passed　out　of
subjectivity　into　objectivity。

A　The　Syllogism　of　Existence

1。　The　syllogism　in　its　immediate　form　has　for　its　moments　the　determinations　of　the　Notion　as
immediate。　Hence　they　are　the　abstract　determinatenesses　of　form；　which　are　not　yet　developed
by　mediation　into　concretion；　but　are　only　single　determinatenesses。　The　first　syllogism　is；
therefore；　strictly　the　formal　syllogism。　The　formalism　of　the　syllogising　process　consists　in
stopping　short　at　the　determination　of　this　first　syllogism。　The　Notion；　differentiated　into　its
abstract　moments；　has　individuality　and　universality　for　its　extremes；　and　appears　itself　as　the
particularity　standing　between　them。　On　account　of　their　immediacy　they　are　merely　self…related
determinatenesses；　and　one　and　all　a　single　content。　Particularity　constitutes　the　middle　term　in
the　first　instance　since　it　unites　immediately　within　itself　the　two　moments　of　individuality　and
universality。　On　account　of　its　determinateness　it　is　on　the　one　hand　subsumed　under　the　universal；
while　on　the　other　hand　the　individual；　as　against　which　it　possesses　universality；　is　subsumed
under　it。　But　this　concretion　is　in　the　first　instance　merely　a　duality　of　aspect；　on　account　of　the
immediacy　in　which　the　middle　term　presents　itself　in　the　immediate　syllogism。　it　appears　as　a
simple　determinateness；　and　the　mediation　which　it　constitutes　is　not　yet　posited。　Now　the
dialectical　movement　of　the　syllogism　of　existence　consists　in　the　positing　in　its　moments　of　the
mediation　that　alone　constitutes　the　syllogism。

（a）　First　Figure　of　the　Syllogism　I…P…U

（b）　The　Second　Figure　P…I…U　

（c）　The　Third　Figure　I…U…P　

（d）　The　Fourth　Figure　U…U…U　

B　The　Syllogism　of　Reflection

The　course　of　the　qualitative　syllogism　has　sublated　what　was　abstract　in　its　terms　with　the　result
that　the　term　has　posited　itself　as　a　determinateness　in　which　the　other　determinateness　is　also
reflected。　Besides　the　abstract　terms；　the　syllogism　also　contains　their　relation；　and　in　the
conclusion　this　relation　is　posited　as　mediated　and　necessary；　therefore　each　determinateness　is　in
truth　posited　not　as　an　individual；　separate　one；　but　as　a　relation　to　the　other；　as　a　concrete
determinateness。

The　middle　term　was　abstract　particularity；　by　itself　a　simple　determinateness；　and　was　a　middle
term　only　externally　and　relatively　to　the　self…subsistent　extremes。　Now　it　is　posited　as　the　totality
of　the　terms；　as　such　it　is　the　posited　unity　of　the　extremes；　but　in　the　first　instance　it　is　the　unity　of
reflection　which　embraces　them　within　itself…an　inclusion　which；　as　the　first　sublating　of　immediacy
and　the　first　relating　of　the　terms；　is　not　yet　the　absolute　identity　of　the　Notion。

The　extremes　are　the　determinations　of　the　judgment　of　reflection；　individuality　proper　and
universality　as　a　connective　determination　or　a　reflection　embracing　a　manifold　within　itself。　But
the　individual　subject　also　contains；　as　we　have　seen　in　the　case　of　the　judgment　of　reflection；
besides　the　bare　individuality　which　belongs　to　form；　determinateness　as　universality　absolutely
reflected　into　itself；　as　presupposed；　that　is　here　still　immediately　assumed；　genus。

From　this　determinateness　of　the　extremes　which　belongs　to　the　progressive　determination　of　the
judgment；　there　results　the　precise　content　of　the　middle　term；　which　is　essentially　the　point　of
interest　in　the　syllogism　since　it　distinguishes　syllogism　from　judgment。　It　contains　（1）　individuality；
but　（2）　individuality　extended　to　universality　as　all；　（3）　universality　which　forms　the　basis　and
absolutely　unites　within　itself　individuality　and　abstract　universality…that　is；　the　genus。　It　is　in　this
way　that　the　syllogism　of　reflection　is　the　first　to　possess　genuine　determinateness　of　form；　in
that　the　middle　term　is　posited　as　the　totality　of　the　terms；　the　immediate　syllogism　is　by　contrast
indeterminate；　because　the　middle　term　is　still　only　abstract　particularity　in　which　the　moments　of
its　Notion　are　not　yet　posited。　This　first　syllogism　of　reflection　may　be　called　the　syllogism　of
allness。

（a）　The　Syllogism　of　Allness

（b）　The　Syllogism　of　Induction

（c）　The　Syllogism　of　Analogy



C　The　Syllogism　of　Necessity

The　mediating　element　has　now　determined　itself　（1）　as　simple　determinate　universality；　like　the
particularity　in　the　syllogism　of　existence；　but　（2）　as　objective　universality；　that　is　to　say；
universality　which　contains　the　entire　determinateness　of　the　distinguished　extremes　like　the　allness
of　the　syllogism　of　reflection；　a　fulfilled　yet　simple　universality…the　universal　nature　of　the　fact；
the　genus。

This　syllogism　is　pregnant　with　content；　because　the　abstract　middle　term　of　the　syllogism　of
existence　posited　itself　as　determinate　difference　to　become　the　middle　term　of　the　syllogism　of
reflection；　while　this　difference　has　reflected　itself　into　simple　identity　again。　This　syllogism　is
therefore　the　syllogism　of　necessity；　for　its　middle　term　is　not　some　alien　immediate　content；　but
the　reflection…into…self　of　the　determinateness　of　the　extremes。

These　possess　in　the　middle　term　their　inner　identity；　the　determinations　of　whose　content　are　the
form　determinations　of　the　extremes。　Consequently；　that　which　differentiates　the　terms　appears　as
an　external　and　unessential　form；　and　the　terms　themselves　as　moments　of　a　necessary
existence。

In　the　first　instance　this　syllogism　is　immediate；　and　thus　formal　in　so　far　as　the　connection　of　the
terms　is　the　essential　nature　as　content；　and　this　content　is　present　in　the　distinguished　terms　in
only　a　diverse　form；　and　the　extremes　by　themselves　are　merely　an　unessential　subsistence。　The
realisation　of　this　syllogism　has　so　to　determine　it　that　the　extremes　also　shall　be　posited　as　this
totality　which　initially　the　middle　term　is；　and　that　the　necessity　of　the　relation　which　is　at　first　only
the　substantial　content；　shall　be　a　relation　of　the　posited　form。

（a）　The　Categorical　Syllogism

（b）　The　Hypothetical　Syllogism

（c）　The　Disjunctive　Syllogism



In　this　way　then　the　formalism　of　the　syllogistic　process；　and　with　it　the　subjectivity　of　the
syllogism　and　of　the　Notion　in　general；　has　sublated　itself。　This　formal　or　subjective　side　consisted
in　the　fact　that　the　mediating　factor　of　the　extremes　is　the　Notion　as　an　abstract　determination；　and
this　latter　is　distinct　from　the　extremes　whose　unity　it　is。　In　the　consummation　of　the　syllogism；　on
the　other　hand；　where　objective　universality　is　no　les　'　s　posited　as　totality　of　the　form
determinations；　the　distinction　of　mediating　and　mediated　has　disappeared。　That　which　is　mediated
is　itself　an　essential　moment　of　what　mediates　it；　and　each　moment　appears　as　the　totality　of　what
is　mediated。

The　figures　of　the　syllogism　exhibit　each　determinateness　of　the　Notion　individually　as　the　middle
term；　which　at　the　same　time　is　the　Notion　as　an　ought…to…be；　a　demand　that　the　mediating　factor
shall　be　the　Notion's　totality。　But　the　different　genera　of　the　syllogism　exhibit　the　stages　of
impregnation　or　concretion　of　the　middle　term。　In　the　formal　syllogism　the　middle　term　is　only
posited　as　totality　by　all　the　determinatenesses；　though　each　singly；　functioning　as　the　mediating
factor。　In　the　syllogisms　of　reflection　the　middle　term　appears　as　the　unity　that　gathers　together
externally　the　determinations　of　the　extremes。　In　the　syllogism　of　necessity　it　has　likewise
determined　itself　to　the　unity　that　is　no　less　developed　and　total　than　simple；　and　the　form　of　the
syllogism　which　consisted　in　the　difference　of　the　middle　term　from　its　extremes　has　thereby
sublated　itself。

Thus　the　Notion　as　such　has　been　realised；　more　exactly；　it　has　obtained　a　reality　that　is
objectivity。　The　first　reality　was　that　the　Notion；　as　within　itself　negative　unity；　sunders　itself；　and
as　judgment　posits　its　determinations　in　a　determinate　and　indifferent　difference；　and　in　the
syllogism　sets　itself　in　opposition　to　them。　In　this　way　it　is　still　the　inwardness　of　this　its　externality；
but　the　outcome　of　the　course　of　the　syllogisms　is　that　this　externality　is　equated　with　the　inner
unity；　the　various　determinations　return　into