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！
congruency and agreement were implied and contained。 Yet even then it is just as truly done with
this recognition in words and is reflected into self； and in the very fact of its using the inherent and
essential reality merely as something which has a significance for another consciousness； there is
really implied its own contempt for that inherent principle； and the demonstration of the
worthlessness of that reality for all。 For what lets itself be used as an external instrument shows
itself to be a thing； which has within it no proper weight and worth of its own。
Moreover； this correspondence is not brought about either by the evil consciousness persisting
onesidedly in its own state； or by the judgment of the universal consciousness。 If the former denies
itself as against the consciousness of duty； and maintains that what the latter pronounces to be
baseness； to be absolute discordance with universality； is an action according to inner law and
conscience； then； in this onesided assurance of identity and concord； there still remains its
discordance with the other； since this other universal consciousness certainly does not believe the
assurance and does not acknowledge it。 In other words； since onesided insistence on one extreme
destroys itself； evil would indeed thereby confess to being evil； but in so doing would at once
cancel itself and cease to be hypocrisy； and so would not qua hypocrisy be unmasked。 It
confesses itself； in fact； to be evil by asserting that； while opposing what is recognized as universal；
it acts according to its own inner law and conscience。 For were this law and conscience not the
law of its individuality and caprice； it would not be something inward； something private； but what
is universally accepted and acknowledged。 When； therefore； any one says he acts towards others
from a law and conscience of his own； he is saying； in point of fact； that he is abusing and
wronging them。 But actual conscience is not this insistence on a knowledge and a will which are
opposed to what is universal； the universal is the element of its existence； and its very language
pronounces its action to be recognized duty。
Just as little； when the universal consciousness persists in its own judgment； does this unmask and
dissipate hypocrisy。 When that universal consciousness stigmatizes hypocrisy as bad； base； and so
on； it appeals； in passing such a judgment； to its own law； just as the evil consciousness appeals to
its law。 For the former law makes its appearance in opposition to the latter； and thereby as a
particular law。 It has； therefore； no antecedent claim over the other law； rather it legitimizes this
other law。 Hence the universal consciousness； by its zeal in abusing hypocrisy； does precisely the
opposite of what it means to do： for it shows that its so…called 〃true duty〃； which ought to be
universally acknowledged； is something not acknowledged and recognized； and consequently it
grants other an equal right of independently existing on its own account。
This judgment ＇of universal consciousness＇； however； has； at the same time； another side to it；
from which it leads the way to the dissolution of the opposition in question。 Consciousness of the
universal does not proceed； qua real and qua acting； to deal with the evil consciousness； for this
latter； rather； is the real。 In opposing the latter； it is a consciousness which is not entangled in the
opposition of individual and universal involved in action。 It stays within the universality of thought；
takes up the attitude of an apprehending intelligence； and its first act is merely that of judgment。
Through this judgment it now places itself； as was just observed； alongside the first consciousness；
and the latter through this likeness between them； comes to see itself in this other consciousness。
For the consciousness of duty maintains the passive attitude of apprehension。 Thereby it is in
contradiction with itself as the absolute will of duty； as the self that determines absolutely from
itself。 It may well preserve itself in its purity； for it does not act； it is hypocrisy； which wants to see
the fact of judging taken for the actual deed； and instead of proving its uprightness and honesty by
acts does so by expressing fine sentiments。 It is thus constituted entirely in the same way as that
against which。 the reproach is made of putting its phrases in place of duty。 In both alike the aspect
of reality is distinct from the express statements — in the one owing to the selfish purpose of the
action； in the other through failure to act at all； although the necessity of acting is involved in the
very speaking of duty； for duty without deeds is altogether meaningless。
The act of judging； however； has also to be looked at as a positive act of thought and has a
positive content： this aspect makes the contradiction present in the apprehending consciousness；
and its identity with the first consciousness； still more complete。 The active consciousness declares
its specific deed to be its duty； and the consciousness that passes judgment cannot deny this； for
duty as such is form void of all content and capable of any。 In other words； concrete action；
inherently implying diversity in its manysidedness； involves the universal aspect； which is that which
is taken as duty； just as much as the particular； which constitutes the share and interest the
individual has in the act。 Now the judging consciousness does not stop at the former aspect of
duty and rest content with the knowledge which the active agent has of this； viz。 that this is his
duty； the condition and the status of his reality。 It holds on to the other aspect； diverts the act into
the inner realm； and explains the act from selfish motives and from its inner intention； an intention
different from the act itself。 As every act is capable of treatment in respect of its dutifulness； so；
too； each can be considered from this other point of view of particularity； for as an act it is the
reality of an individual。
This process of judging； then； takes the act out of the sphere of its objective existence； and turns it
back into the inner subjective sphere； into the form of private or individual particularity。 If the act
carries glory with it； then the inner sphere is judged as love of fame。 If it is altogether conformity
with the position of the individual； without going beyond this position； and is so constituted that the
individuality in question does not have the position attached to it as an external feature； but through
itself supplies concrete filling to this universality； and by that very process shows itself to be
capable of a higher station…then the inner nature of the act is judged as ambition； and so on。 Since；
in the act in general； the individual who acts comes to see himself in objective form； or gets the
feeling of his own being in his objective existence and thus attains enjoyment； the judgment on the
act finds the inner nature of it to be an impulse towards personal happiness； even though this
happiness were to consist merely in inner moral vanity； the enjoyment of a sense of personal
excellence； and in the foretaste and hope of a happin