phenomenology of mind-第39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！


just　not　the　world　of　sense…knowledge　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superseded　or　established　in　truth　as　an　inner　world。　It　is　often　said　that　the　supersensible　is　not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　per　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。

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　（3）　Law　as　the　True　nature　of　Appearance　

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；　i。e。　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；　i。e。　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。　（3）

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　difference　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　what　is　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。

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　（b）　Law　as　Distinction　and　Sameness

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
preliminary　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
ever…varying　actual　existence。　Thereby　appearance　continues　to　keep　one　aspect　which　is　not　in
the　inner　world；　i。e。　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　plurality　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；　e。g。；　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　falling　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　further　content　than　just　the　bare　concept　of　the　law　itself；　a　concept　which　is　therein
set　down　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。

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　（1）　Specific　Law　and　General　Law

In　contrast；　then；　with　determinate　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　characterizing　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　（Wesenheit）；　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　im