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！
totality determined in and for itself and not conditioned by externality。 In the first process； the
mutual externality of the different extremes that constitute the whole reality； or the distinction
between the implicitly determinate Notion and its existent determinateness； is sublated； in the
second； the externality of the real unity； the union as merely neutral； is sublated； more precisely；
the formal activity in the first instance sublates itself in equally formal bases or indifferent
determinatenesses； whose inner Notion is now the indrawn absolute activity as inwardly
self…realising； that is； the activity that posits the determinate differences within itself and through this
mediation constitutes itself as real unity — a mediation which is thus the Notion's own mediation； its
self…determination； and in respect of its reflection thence into itself； an immanent presupposing。
The third syllogism； which on the one hand is the restoration of the preceding processes； on the
other hand sublates the last remaining moment of indifferent bases the wholly abstract external
immediacy； which in this way becomes the Notion's own moment of self…mediation。 The Notion
which has thus sublated all the moments of its objective existence as external； and posited them
within its simple unity； is thereby completely liberated from objective externality； to which it relates
itself only as to an unessential reality。 This objective free Notion is end。
THE DOCTRINE OF THE NOTION
Section Two： Objectivity； continued
Chapter 3 Teleology
Subjective End … The Means … The Realised End
Where purposiveness is discerned； an intelligence ＇Verstand＇ is assumed as its author； and for
the end we therefore demand the Notion's own free Existence。 Teleology is especially contrasted
with mechanism； in which the determinateness posited in the object； being external； is essentially
one in which no self…determination is manifested。 The opposition between causae efficientes
and causae finalis； between merely efficient and final causes； relates to this distinction； and this
distinction； taken in a concrete form； is also made the criterion for deciding whether the absolute
essence of the world is to be conceived as blind natural mechanism or as an intelligence that
determines itself in accordance with ends。 The antinomy between fatalism； along with
determinism and freedom； is likewise concerned with the opposition of mechanism and
teleology； for the free is the Notion in its Existence。
Earlier metaphysics has treated these concepts as it has treated others； it has for one thing
presupposed a certain conception of the world and laboured to show that one or the other
concept fitted it； while the opposite one was defective because it failed to explain that conception；
and again； while doing this； it has not examined the concept of mechanical cause and of end； to see
which possesses truth in and for itself。 When this has been established independently； the
objective world may present us with mechanical and final causes； but their existence is not the
standard of truth： on the contrary； truth is the criterion that decides which of these existences is
the true one。 just as the subjective understanding also exhibits errors in itself； so the objective
world also exhibits aspects and stages of truth that by themselves are still one…sided； incomplete
and only relationships in the sphere of Appearance。 If mechanism and purposiveness stand
opposed to one another； they cannot for that very reason be taken as indifferent concepts； each
of which is correct on its own account； possessing as much validity as the other； the only question
being where one or the other may be applied。 This equal validity of both rests merely on the fact
that they are； that is to say； that we have them both。 But since they are opposed； the necessary
preliminary question is； which of the two is the true one； and the higher and real question is；
whether their truth is not a third concept； or whether one of them is the truth of the other。
But the relation of end has proved to be the truth of mechanism — what exhibited itself as
chemism is included with mechanism in so far as end is the Notion in free Existence； and to end
stands opposed in general the unfreedom of the Notion； its submergence in externality； both of
them； therefore； mechanism and chemism； are included under natural necessity； for in the former
the Notion does not exist in the object。 Since the object as mechanical does not contain
self…determination； while in chemism the Notion either has a one…sided Existence in a state of
tension； or； in emerging as the unity that disjoins the neutral object into tensed extremes； is external
to itself in so far as it sublates this disjunction。
The more the teleological principle was linked with the concept of an extramundane intelligence
and to that extent was favoured by piety； the more it seemed to depart from the true investigation
of nature； which aims at cognising the properties of nature not as extraneous； but as immanent
determinatenesses and accepts only such cognition as a valid comprehension。 As end is the
Notion itself in its Existence； it may seem strange that the cognition of objects from their Notion
appears rather as an unjustified trespass into a heterogeneous element； whereas mechanism； for
which the determinateness of an object is a determinateness posited in it externally and by another
object； is held to be a more immanent point of view than teleology。 Of course mechanism； at
least the ordinary unfree mechanism； and also chemism。； must be regarded as an immanent
principle in so far as the external determinant is itself again just such another object； externally
determined and indifferent to such determining； or； in the case of chemism； the other object is one
likewise chemically determined； in general； an essential moment of the totality always lies in
something outside it。 These principles therefore remain confined within the same natural form of
finitude； yet though they do not seek to go beyond the finite and lead only to finite causes in their
explanation of phenomena； which themselves demand a further progress； at the same time they
expand themselves； partly into a formal totality in the concept of force； cause； and similar
determinations of reflection which are supposed to denote a primariness； and partly also through
the abstract universality of a sum total of forces； a whole of reciprocal causes。 Mechanism
shows itself to be a striving for totality in the fact that it seeks to grasp nature by itself as a whole
that for its Notion does not require any other…a totality that is not found in end and the
extra…mundane intelligence associated with it。
Now purposiveness shows itself in the first instance as a higher being in general； as an
intelligence that externally determines the multiplicity of objects by a unity that exists in and for
itself； so that the indifferent determinatenesses of the objects become essential through this
relation。 In mechanism they become so through the mere form of necessity； their content being
indifferent； for they are supposed to remain external； an