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！
… in that case it would not be an other； nor a relation or relationship … rather it is the other in its
own self； the other of an other； therefore it includes its own other within it and is consequently as
contradiction； the posited dialectic of itself。 Because the first or the immediate is implicitly the
Notion； and consequently is also only implicitly the negative； the dialectical moment with it consists
in positing in it the difference that it implicitly contains。 The second； on the contrary； is itself the
determinate moment； the difference or relationship； therefore with it the dialectical moment consists
in positing the unity that is contained in it。
If then the negative； the determinate； relationship； judgement； and all the determinations falling
under this second moment do not at once appear on their own account as contradiction and as
dialectical。 this is solely the fault of a thinking that does not bring its thoughts together。 For the
material； the opposed determinations in one relation； is already posited and at hand for thought。
But formal thinking makes identity its law； and allows the contradictory content before it to sink
into the sphere of ordinary conception； into space and time； in which the contradictories are held
asunder in juxtaposition and temporal succession and so come before consciousness without
reciprocal contact。
On this point； formal thinking lays down for its principle that contradiction is unthinkable： but as a
matter of fact the thinking of contradiction is the essential moment of the Notion。 Formal thinking
does in fact think contradiction； only it at once looks away from it； and in saying that it is
unthinkable it merely passes over from it into abstract negation。
Now the negativity just considered constitutes the turning point of the movement of the Notion。 It
is the simple point of the negative relation to self； the innermost source of all activity of all animate
and spiritual self…movement； the dialectical soul that everything true possesses and through which
alone it is true； for on this subjectivity alone rests the sublating of the opposition between the
Notion and reality； and the unity that is truth。 The second negative； the negative of the negative； at
which we have arrived； is this sublating of the contradiction； but just as little as the contradiction is
it an act of external reflection； but rather the innermost； most objective moment of life and spirit
through which a subject； a person； a free being； exists。
The relation of the negative to itself is to be regarded as the second premise of the whole
syllogism。 If the terms analytic and synthetic are employed as opposites； the first premise may
be regarded as the analytic moment； for in it the immediate stands in immediate relationship to its
other and therefore passes over； or rather has passed over； into it … although this relation； as
already remarked； is also synthetic； precisely because that into which it passes over is its other。
The second premise here under consideration may be defined as synthetic； since it is the relation
of the differentiated term as such to the term from which it is differentiated。 Just as the first
premise is the moment of universality and communication； so the second is determined by
individuality； which in its relation to its other is primarily exclusive； for itself； and different。 The
negative appears as the mediating element； since it includes within it itself and the immediate
whose negation it is。 So far as these two determinations are taken in some relationship or other as
externally related； the negative is only the formal mediating element； but as absolute negativity the
negative moment of absolute mediation is the unity which is subjectivity and soul。
In this turning point of the method； the course of cognition at the same time returns into itself。 As
self…sublating contradiction this negativity is the restoration of the first immediacy； of simple
universality； for the other of the other； the negative of the negative； is immediately the positive； the
identical； the universal。 If one insists on counting； this second immediate is； in the course of the
method as a whole； the third term to the first immediate and the mediated。 It is also； however； the
third term to the first or formal negative and to absolute negativity or the second negative； now as
the first negative is already the second term； the term reckoned as third can also be reckoned as
fourth； and instead of a triplicity； the abstract form may be taken as a quadruplicity； in this way；
the negative or the difference is counted as a duality。 The third or fourth is in general the unity of
the first and second moments； of the immediate and the mediated。
That it is this unity； as also that the whole form of the method is a triplicity； is； it is true； merely the
superficial external side of the mode of cognition； but to have demonstrated even this； and that too
in a more specific application … for it is well known that the abstract number form itself was
advanced at quite an early period； but； in the absence of the Notion； without result … must also be
regarded as an infinite merit of the Kantian philosophy。
The syllogism； which is threefold； has always been recognised as the universal form of reason； but
for one thing it counted generally for a quite external form that did not determine the nature of the
content； and for another thing； since it progresses in the formal sense merely in the understanding's
determination of identity； it lacks the essential dialectical moment of negativity； yet this moment
enters into the triplicity of determinations because the third is the unity of the first two； and these；
since they are different； can be in the unity only as sublated determinations。 Formalism has； it is
true； also taken possession of triplicity and adhered to its empty schema； the shallow ineptitude
and barrenness of modern philosophic construction so…called； that consists in nothing but fastening
this schema on to everything without Notion and immanent determination and employing it for an
external arrangement； has made the said form tedious and given it a bad name。 Yet the triteness of
this use of it cannot detract from its inner worth and we must always value highly the discovery of
the shape of the rational； even though it was at first uncomprehended。
Now more precisely the third is the immediate； but the immediate resulting from sublation of
mediation； the simple resulting from sublation of difference； the positive resulting from sublation
of the negative； the Notion that has realised itself by means of its otherness and by the sublation of
this reality has become united with itself； and has restored its absolute reality； its simple relation to
itself。 This result is therefore the truth。 It is equally immediacy and mediation； but such forms of
judgement as： the third is immediacy and mediation； or it is the unity of them； are not capable of
grasping it； for it is not a quiescent third； but； precisely as this unity； is self…mediating movement
and activity。 As that with which we began was the universal； so the result is the individual； the
con