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！
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 self…conscious individual （Leben） 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〃； i。e。
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； how。 ever；
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 acknow… ledged lies rather my equality； my identify； with every one — the opposite of
exclusion。
Again； what I possess is a thing； i。e。 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 self…contradictory 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 as the other； i。e。 is not
self…contradictory。 The standard of law which reason has within itself therefore fits every case in
the same way； and is in point of fact no standard at all。 It would； too； turn out rather strange； if
tautology； the principle of contradiction； which is allowed to be merely a formal criterion for
knowledge of theoretical truth； i。e。 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 （geistigen
Wesen） 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
obtained。 But the substance in question is the consciousness of itself as absolute essentiality
（Wesenheit）； 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 isolation； 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 thereby expresses itself as consciousness。
So far as both these moments are more precise determinations of the consciousness of the real
intent （Sache selbst） they can be looked on as forms of that honesty of nature （Ehrlichkeit） which
now； as always 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。
Without this honesty of nature； however； laws do not 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 an invalid establishment and mere de facto existence of actual laws； and in
the other an equally invalid 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 ethical substance； 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 this individual； or 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 established within the spiritual reality； and makes that spirit concrete； actual； and
self…conscious。
Spiritual reality （das geistige Wesen） is thus； in the first place； for self…consciousness in the shape
of a law implicitly existing。 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 （an und für sich）； the
pure and absolute will of all which takes the form of immediate existence。 This will is； again； not a
command which merely ought to be； it is and has validity； it is the universal ego of the category；
ego which is immediately reality； and the world is only this reality。 Since； however； this existing law
is absolutely valid； the obedience given by self…consciousness is not service rendered to a master；
whose orders are mere caprice and in which it does not recognize 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 belief； while it no doubt sees the essential
nature； still gazes at an alien essence — not its own。 The ethical self…consciousness is directly at
one with the essential reality； in virtue of the universality of