Chapter 48 Ⅱ.universality of conscience

This pure knowledge is immediately a being-for-other; for as pure self-identity it is immediacy, or being.But this being is at the same time pure universality, the ego of all individuals; In other words, behavior is acknowledged by others and therefore realistic.This being is the element by which conscience stands directly in a relation of equality with all self-consciousness; and this relation of equality does not imply a law without ego, but rather the ego of conscience ( or subject). 〔1.Irregularity of belief] But since the just thing done by conscience is also an existence for him, there seems to be a kind of inequality in conscience.The duty performed by conscience is a definite content; the definite content is, indeed, the self of consciousness, and thus consciousness's knowledge of itself, its identity with itself.But this equivalence, now that it has been realized, that it has been placed in the universal medium of being, ceases to be a kind of knowledge, a kind of distinction which is made and immediately superseded. distinction; rather, distinction is a distinction posited to persist in existence, and action is a definite act which is not identical with all elements of individual self-consciousness and is therefore not necessarily be recognized.

Both sides, the acting conscience on the one hand, and the general consciousness which recognizes this action as duty on the other, are equally free from the determination of this action. Because of this freedom from determinateness, the relation of the two in the common medium in which they relate to each other is rather one of unequal relation; therefore the consciousness that knows the action is, to the acting, A spirit with its own certainty is completely without certainty, in uncertainty.The self-convinced spirit, acting, establishes a determinateness as existing; other consciousness takes this existence as its truth, and thus acquires its certainty; it has expressed by its actions out of what it takes as an obligation.The spirit of self-assurance, however, does not involve any particular obligation; it has passed beyond the point where other consciousnesses think it is real; and for it there is the medium In itself, and also the duty as a being-in-itself, counts only as a temporary moment.So what it set up for them, it set aside again, or rather immediately set it aside.For its actuality for it is not the obligation and determination that is set or established, but that obligation and determination that it has in its absolute self-certainty.

The other consciousnesses therefore do not know whether this conscience is morally good or evil, and it can even be said that they not only cannot know whether this conscience is good or evil, but they must also regard it as evil.For just as conscience is not bound by the determinate character of any duty, nor does it take duties as beings in themselves, so they are not bound by conscience.What conscience sets or furnishes them, they themselves know how to dispose of; conscience is that which expresses only one's self, and not their own; bondage, and they must dissolve it in their own consciousness, annihilate it by judgment and interpretation, and thus preserve their own selves.

But the act of conscience is not just this determination of existence abandoned by the pure ego.That which ought to be valid and recognized as duty can be so only by the belief and knowledge that it is duty, by the knowledge of the self as it is in action. Knowledge.As soon as actual action (dieTat) no longer contains this self, it ceases to be the only thing that constitutes its own essence.If practical action loses this sense of self, its specific existence will be just an ordinary reality, and action will appear to us as a fulfillment of self-interest and desire.Whatever actually exists is now essential simply because it is known: it is known as an individuality expressing itself; and this known is recognized. , and as what is recognized is what should have actual existence.

The ego enters actual or specific existence, becomes the ego (or the subject) itself affirms that the spirit actually exists, becomes his and recognized by others; its immediate action is not something valid and actual; not something specific 2. That which exists in itself is recognized; on the contrary, only that which knows its own self is recognized.The persistent element is universal self-consciousness; the utility of an act is not something that can enter into this persistent element; in the persistent element the utility of an act cannot be maintained and cannot continue to exist; only self-consciousness is recognized What has been done is realistic.

2.language of belief Here again we encounter language as the specific being of spirit.Language is self-consciousness for him, for others, and this self-consciousness is immediately present as self-consciousness, and as this self-consciousness is universal self-consciousness.Language is an ego that separates itself from itself, which, as pure "I = I," becomes its own object, yet remains itself in this objectivity as this ego , and merge directly with other selves to become their self-consciousness; this self is aware of itself when other selves perceive it, and this perception itself is the specific exist.

Here, the content acquired by language is no longer to educate the upside-down, upside-down, and split self in the world, but to return to itself, to be sure of itself, and to be sure of its own truth in itself. Or the spirit that is sure of its own recognition and is recognized as such knowledge.The language of the ethical spirit is laws and simple commands and as a complaint against the tears shed by necessity: on the contrary, moral consciousness is closed and silent in its own inner depths, because in moral consciousness the ego does not yet have Specific existence, not to say that specific existence has just had an external relationship with the self.Language emerges only as a middle term between independent self-consciousness and recognized self-consciousness, and the particular existing self is immediately universal, plural, and simultaneously plural and simple recognized.What is contained in the language of conscience is the self that knows itself to be essence.The language of conscience expresses only this, and this expression is the true realization of action and its actual validity.Consciousness expresses its belief; action is duty only in light of this belief; and action counts as duty only because the belief is expressed.For the universal self-consciousness is independent of the definite act which merely exists; to the universal self-consciousness this act, as a definite being, is nothing, and only as such What counts as valid is the belief that action is duty; and this belief is reality in language. — Here, to bring an action to fruition does not mean to transform the content of the action from the form of purpose or being-for-itself into the form of abstract reality, but rather to make the content of the action The transformation of the content of the act from the form of certainty into the form of assurance, precisely, the fulfillment of the act means the transformation of the immediate certainty of oneself, knowing that one's own knowledge or being-for-itself is the essence, into Its conviction of duty and its voluntary recognition of duty are the deep security of conscience; this security consists, therefore, in the security that consciousness has convinced itself of its own beliefs as essential.

Some doubts may now arise: Is the assurance that one does act on belief in duty true?Is the realized behavior really an obligation?In fact, such questions are meaningless to the conscience. — because, when you ask the question whether it is true or not, you have assumed that the inner intention is different from the outer intention, in other words, the question must presuppose that the individual self or individual embraces Willing can be dissociated from duty, from the will of the universal and pure consciousness; if this were the case, the will of the universal consciousness would be only words and the will of the individual ego would really be the motive force of action.But this distinction between the general consciousness and the individual self is a distinction which has been superseded, and it is the function of conscience to supersede this distinction.The ego with its own certainty, whose immediate knowledge is law and duty; and its intentions, and only their own, are what is just: the only thing left to do is: this ego must know this, must say out of its conviction that its knowledge and will are just.When the ego utters this conviction or assurance, it at the same time abolishes its particularity; for in uttering it admits its necessary universality; In calling itself knowledge of itself and pure abstract will, that is to say, it calls itself a general knowledge and will which both recognizes and is recognized by other-selves, because it Identical to other selves, and this is because they too are of this pure self-knowledge and will.The essence of the just thing resides in the will of the self with its own certainty, in the knowledge that the self is the essence. —Thus whoever says that he himself acts according to conscience is telling the truth, for his conscience is the knowing and willing self.But it is of essential importance that he must formulate or say this, because this self must at the same time be a universal self.The universality of the ego does not lie in the content of the act, which by virtue of its determinate nature has nothing to do with it; rather it resides in the form of the act; it is this form which can be posited. as actual; form is that self which, as self or subject, is actual in language, which claims to be truth, and which, as such, recognizes and is recognized by all selves. 3.beautiful soul ①

Conscience thus, by virtue of its supremacy over all definite contents of laws and duties, installs in its knowledge and will any content of any kind; The inner voice of its own immediate knowledge is the divine voice of God, and since it knows its specific existence equally directly from this knowledge, it is a divine creativity whose concepts are its life force.This moral genius is at the same time God-worship in itself; for its actions are its contemplation of this divinity in itself. ①In early theological works, Hegel described the beautiful soul as a spirit that wants to escape the fate and create the inner world of God's infinite love.He admits that "such a highly passive subjectivity cannot escape worldly interference".In this "Phenomenology", the beautiful soul is still admiring its own beauty, contemplating its own purity, not taking any actions that would cause limitations, and only expressing itself in language.Hegel seems to be mainly commenting on Jacobi here. - translator

This kind of inner solitary God worship is essentially also the God worship of a (religious) community, and the further development of pure inner knowledge and perception of oneself becomes a link of consciousness.Conscience's intuition of itself is its objective being, and this objective element is the expression of its knowledge and will as a universal.Through this formulation, the self becomes what is actually valid and the action becomes the act of doing something.The reality and persistence of its action is universal self-consciousness; but conscience, when articulated, posits its own certainty as the pure self and thus as the universal self; otherwise Man, by having the word that he himself is expressed and recognized as essence, recognizes action as valid.The spirit and substance by which others are united into a community, then, is the mutual assurance of conscience and good will between them to them, which springs from this mutual purity of purpose. Joy is the pleasure produced by the uprightness shown in the cognition and expression, care and maintenance of such pure and noble things. —As long as this conscience distinguishes its abstract consciousness from its self-consciousness, its life is only concealed in God; What is before itself but which is revealed from outside, that is to say, its actual consciousness and its mediation, is for it different from that which is hidden inside, after all, from the immediate nature of the present and present essence. sex.But when conscience is complete, the distinction between its abstract consciousness and its self-consciousness sublates itself.Conscience knows that abstract consciousness is precisely this ego, this being-for-itself that is certain of itself: it knows that difference is superseded in the immediacy of the relation between the ego and being-in-itself, which is in the Behind the ego is the abstract essence, what is hidden from it.For the relation they form is an indirect relation, when the relations are not one and the same, but are other to each other and united only in a third person; Above means nothing but the unity of the relational.When consciousness transcends thoughtlessness, that is, when it ceases to regard as differences what are not differences, it recognizes the immediacy of the essence as it appears to it as the unity of the essence with its self, and thus recognizes To know its self as animate in-itself, and to know this knowledge of itself is religion, and religion, as intuitive knowledge or actually existing knowledge, is the language of the [religious] community to its own spirit. expression.

So we now see self-consciousness returning to its own deepest inner essence, all its external phenomena disappearing as external, that is to say, self-consciousness has returned to the intuition of "I = I" Go, in this intuition I am all essential and specific beings.Self-consciousness has sunk into this conception of itself, because it has reached its extreme apex, and has reached such a point that what it relies on to be real or to remain conscious The different moments, not only these pure extremes for us, but what it is for itself, and what it thinks is in itself and what it thinks is objective, all evaporate. Dissipates into abstractions that have no basis or substance for this consciousness itself; and all that consciousness has thought to be essential now returns to such abstractions. —Purified to this degree of purity, consciousness is in its poorest form, and the only poverty it has is itself a passing away; substance dissolves into absolute certainty, which is The absolute untruth that collapses upon itself; this is the absolute self-consciousness in which consciousness sinks. If we examine this sinking from within self-consciousness itself, we find that the substance existing in itself is knowledge for consciousness, its knowledge.As consciousness, self-consciousness splits into itself and opposes that object which it regards as essence; but this object is precisely what is completely transparent, its self, and its consciousness is only its its own knowledge.All vital activities and all spiritual essences have returned to this ego and lost their distinction from myself.The moments of consciousness are thus such extreme abstractions that none of them stand, but, on the contrary, each is lost in the other and produces the other.This is the process of alternation between the distressed consciousness and itself, but this time, the alternation is known to the self-consciousness itself, and it is carried out within itself. The self-consciousness knows that it is the rational concept. Earth is a rational concept.This absolute certainty of self-consciousness is thus immediately transformed into the silenced sound for itself as consciousness, into its objectivity of being-for-itself; It hears its own words, and the echoes of these words return only to itself.This return does not therefore mean that self-consciousness is here in itself and for itself; for the essence for it is not being-in-itself, but itself; The thing cannot be a negation of the actual self any more than the self can be actual.Self-consciousness lacks the power to externalize, to make itself a thing and to sustain being.Self-consciousness lives in fear that its actions and existence will tarnish the integrity of its own inner heart; and in order to ensure the purity of its heart, it avoids contact with reality, and it clings to powerlessness, thinking that it is powerless Rejecting its ego, sharpened to the final abstraction, is incapable of giving itself substantiality, or, in other words, incapable of transforming one's thinking into being and trusting in the absolute difference between thinking and being.The empty object of its own creation thus fills it with emptiness; its action becomes a longing which cannot but be lost in the process of becoming itself an object without essence, and which waits until the Falling back into itself, this process of loss finds itself nothing but a lost thing;—in this transparent purity of its ground, it becomes a wretched torment. The so-called beautiful soul gradually extinguished, like a wisp of smoke, diffused in the air, and disappeared without a trace. Ⅲ.sin and its forgiveness But this noiseless confluence of impotent essences of evaporated life needs to be grasped in another sense of the reality of conscience and in the phenomenon of its movement; Consider conscience as behavior. —As stated above, the objective moment in this consciousness is defined as universal consciousness; knowledge of itself, as this self, is distinguished from other selves; language, (in in which all selves mutually recognize each other as acting conscientiously), this universal equality resolves into individual inequalities of being-for-itself, each consciousness detached from its universality and fully returning to itself; thus , the opposition between the individual and the individual and the individual and the universal will inevitably appear, and this opposition and its movement should also be investigated. — Or it can also be said that this universality and duty have the opposite meaning, that is to say, duty means a specific individuality freed from the universal, for which pure duty is regarded as universality. It is nothing but universality that floats away from the surface and turns outward: duty is only what is entrusted in words, nothing but a being for him.Conscience, since it originally had only a negative relation to this specific ready-made duty, knows itself to be independent of duty; , it is positively aware that it is itself, as this self, that constitutes its own content; its pure self, as empty knowledge, has no content and no determination.It gives itself the content it derives from its self, that particular self, from its individuality as nature, and when it says how sincere and insincere its actions are Conscience, of course, is conscious of its pure self, but in the purpose of its actions, that is, in the content of reality, it is conscious of itself as this particular individual being, such an antithesis, That is, the opposition between its being-for-itself and its being-for-other, between universality or duty and its turning away from duty and returning to itself. 1.Sincerity vs Hypocrisy If the opposition to which conscience reaches in acting is expressed in the inner life of conscience, it is also expressed outwardly, as an inconsistency in a particular element of being, its particular individuality and other Individual inconsistencies. —The peculiarity of conscience lies in the fact that the two moments constituting its consciousness, namely the ego and being-in-itself, have two unequal values ​​for it, specifically, the determination that its Self-certainty is the essence, while being-in-itself or the universal is only a link.In this way, this internal determination is opposed to the objective existence element or universal consciousness, because for universal consciousness, universality or duty is the essence, while the individuality that exists for itself in opposition to the universal is It can only be regarded as the part that has been sublated.From the standpoint of such a duty-minded consciousness, the first kind is evil, because it shows that its inner life is inconsistent with the universal; , comes from the sense of duty and conscience, so it is hypocrisy. This movement of opposites initially only formally establishes the unity between what is inherently evil and what it professes without; it must then be shown that it is inherently evil and precisely because It is evil and its essence is consistent with its objective existence, and hypocrisy must be exposed. —The inconsistency inherent in hypocrisy, this return or transformation into consistency, is not brought about by the means which are commonly said to be due to the fact that it recognizes the falsity of duty and virtue. Representation and use it as a mask for its own consciousness and that of aliens, even if it has proved its respect for duty and virtue; as if in this verbal acknowledgment of its counterpart it contained identity itself. and consistency. —But when it says so, it at the same time relinquishes this recognition and returns to itself; and its use of what exists in itself only as a being for other is itself Including its true contempt for what exists in itself already includes its desire to represent this existence in itself to everyone as something without essence.For everything that can be used as an external instrument shows something that has no real weight in itself. In addition, the inconsistency contained in the false substitution can neither be consistent through the one-sided insistence of evil consciousness on itself, nor can it be consistent through the judgment of universal consciousness. —If the consciousness of evil denies that it violates the consciousness of duty, and insists that what the consciousness of duty calls bad and absolutely inconsistent with the general consciousness is an action in accordance with internal laws and conscience, then in this one-sidedness of its consistency There is also inconsistency between it and other consciousnesses in the guarantee, because other consciousnesses do not believe and recognize its guarantee. ——Or conversely, if the consciousness of evil cancels its one-sided insistence on an extreme, then of course it admits that it is evil because of this, but when it admits that it is evil, it should directly abandon itself and not It would be hypocrisy, let alone expose itself as hypocrisy.In fact, since it insists that it acts against the accepted general consciousness but in accordance with its internal laws and conscience, it admits that it is evil.For if this law and conscience were not derived from its individual and arbitrary laws, it would not be possible to say that it is something intrinsic, unique, rather than universally recognized.So when a man says he treats others according to his own laws and conscience, he is really saying that he abuses others.But actual conscience does not thus persist in acting in accordance with knowledge and will as opposed to the universal; on the contrary, the element of its particular existence is rather the universal, and its language consists in declaring its Conduct is a generally recognized duty. Likewise, hypocrisy cannot be uncovered and eliminated simply by the insistence of the general consciousness on its judgments. —When the general consciousness denounces hypocrisy as bad, vile, etc., it does so only on its own laws, just as the evil consciousness relies on its own laws.For its law, being presented in opposition to the law of the evil consciousness, is also a special law; and therefore does not have any advantage over the law of the evil consciousness, but makes the law of the evil consciousness legitimate.The general consciousness, with its zeal to eliminate hypocrisy, does exactly the opposite of what it intends to do—that is, it insists on its own judgment and, in consequence, calls it a true duty. What is and should be universally recognized is shown as something that is not recognized, thus giving the consciousness of evil the right to also be a being-for-itself. 2.moral judgment But this judgment of general consciousness has at the same time another aspect from which it leads to the elimination of existing antagonisms. —The universal consciousness does not present itself as a real and active consciousness in contrast to the consciousness of evil,—for in fact the consciousness of evil is the real consciousness,—as opposed to the consciousness of evil, in this way It is something that is not entangled in the opposition of individuality and universality that arises in action.Universal consciousness rests in the universality of thought, limited to understanding, and its first act is nothing but judgment. —By this judgment, it now juxtaposes, equates itself, as we have just pointed out, with the former consciousness, and, owing to this identity with one another, it begins to intuit in this former consciousness itself.For the attitude taken by the consciousness of duty is passive, of understanding; but since it is limited to passive understanding, it is in contradiction with itself as the absolute will to duty, as what the absolute itself determines. .It preserves its purity very well indeed, for it does not act; it is such a hypocrisy that wants to make judgments deeds, and to prove its excellence in words without deeds. integrity.The consciousness of duty is therefore, in its actual state, exactly the same as that which is accused of paying lip service to duties.In both consciousnesses the real side is likewise different from their verbal side, the one being different from the verbal because it acts with a selfish purpose, the other so Unlike verbal speech, because it does not produce action at all, but the necessity of action is contained in the talk of duty itself, because talk of duty without action has no meaning. But judging should also be seen as an active act of thought, and it also has an active content; thanks to this aspect, the existing contradictions in the consciousness of understanding and the identity, the identity of consciousness of understanding and consciousness of action become more fully. —Consciousness to act claims that this particular act of itss is duty, while consciousness to judge cannot deny it; The conduct of man, which is itself diverse because of its many aspects, has both a general aspect called duty and a particular aspect constituting individual interest and share in enjoyment.Judging consciousness now does not rest on the side of duty, it is not satisfied with the knowledge of the action: knowledge of the position and relation of its actuality which is its duty; on the contrary, it has On the other hand, to look into the heart through behavior, and to explain it in terms of inner intentions and selfish motives quite different from the behavior itself.Just as every action can be considered from its obligatory character, so every action can be considered from another point of view, from its specificity, for an action, being an action, is always a personal reality. —This judging consciousness then traces the action back from its specific being to the inner side of the action-consciousness, or to the particular form of the individual. ——For example, when a certain behavior has a reputation, the judgmental consciousness determines that the inner aspect of this behavior is an intention to gain fame; ——When a certain behavior is in line with the individual's social identity When it shows that the status of this individuality is not attached to its own external regulations, but is only a kind of universality won by its own practice, so as to show that this individuality has the ability to enjoy a higher status, the judgment consciousness It is determined that the inner aspect of this behavior is a kind of ambition and so on.Judging consciousness recognizes the inner aspect as a pursuit of personal happiness when the agent in general acts can contemplate himself in terms of its objectivity, or can achieve a self-feeling of himself in relation to his particular being. Impulse, whether this happiness refers only to the moral vanity of the heart, or the conscious enjoyment of one's own superior qualities, or the pleasure of a presentiment in the hope of a certain happiness. —No act escapes such a judgment, because a pure end, such as duty for duty's sake, has no reality; sexual aspect. ——As the proverb says, "A servant has no hero in his eyes";①But this is not because the person whom the servant serves is not a hero, but because the person who serves the hero is only a servant②, when a hero deals with his servant He does not act as a hero but as a man who needs to eat, drink, and clothe. In a word, what the hero expresses before his servants is the individuality of his private needs and appearances. sex.Likewise, in the eyes of the judging consciousness, there is no action in which it does not find the individual aspect of the individual in opposition to the universal aspect of the action, and does not regard the actor as a servant of morality. ①This is a French idiom: "iln Cyapasdeherospourlevaletdecham bre."——The original editor ② Goethe adopted Hegel's idea in 1809. (OttiliensTagebuch, Wahlverwandtschaften, 2Teil, 5Kapitel.) - Original editor This sense of judgment, therefore, is base in itself, because it cuts behavior apart, creates its own inconsistency and persists as such.Moreover, this sense of judgment is hypocritical, because it does not regard such judgment as another way of doing evil, but instead pretends to be a correct sense of action, because in this unreality of its boasting of its good and better knowledge In both sex and vanity it exalts itself far above despised practical action, and because it insists on its inactionless rhetoric as a sublime reality. —Because it thus puts itself on the same level as the consciousness of action which it judges, it is recognized by the consciousness of action as being identical with itself.The consciousness of action not only knows itself to be understood by the judging consciousness as something foreign and alien, but from its side it feels that the judging consciousness is in its nature equal and identical to itself.The action consciousness then confesses to the judging consciousness that it sees and utters this equivalence, and hopes that the judging consciousness, which has placed itself on the same level as it, will also answer it with such words as it said, It can also express its equivalence in the answer, so that a situation of mutual recognition emerges.Its frank confession is not a kind of humiliation, humiliation, or discouragement of its judgment consciousness; because its speaking is not a one-sided speaking, which will lead to its inequality with the other party, on the contrary, it speaks like this, All to show that it recognizes the other's equality with itself.它通过它的坦白招认，从它这一方面，说出了它们的等同性或一致性；而它所以要说出这种等同性，乃是因为语言就是精神亦即直接的自我的特定存在；所以它盼望对方也从对方那一方面对这种特定存在作出贡献。 但是尽管恶的意识坦白招认："我就是这个样子"，对方却没有在回答中作出这同样的招认。上述那只作道德判断的意识，压根儿就没曾那么想过；情况恰恰相反！它拒绝承认在本性上的这种共同性，它是一付硬心肠，它是自为的，维护它自己而抛弃它与对方的连续性。——这样一来，场面就倒转了。那坦白招认了的意识，发现自己碰了钉子，发现对方是很不公正的；因为对方拒绝把自己的内心生活表现出来使之成为言语这样的特定存在，竟而夸耀自己灵魂的优美，以示不同于恶的意识，竟而摆出"坚贞不屈"的品格那样的桀傲倔强和决不迁就别人而矜持自负的缄默寡言以对抗别人的坦白认错。在这里，我们看到具有自身确定性的精神已达到了最高度的激怒；因为它直观地认识到自己乃是这种在对方之中的自我的单纯知识，具体地说，它认识到即便从外形上说这个对方或他物也不象在财富中那样是一种无本质的东西、一种事物，相反，这个和它相对立的他物就是思想，就是知识自身；可是恰恰这个纯粹知识的绝对流动的连续性却拒绝同它沟通交往，——尽管它在它的坦白招认中早已放弃了孤立的自为存在，破除了它的特殊性，从而使自己与对方有了连续性，有了共同的东西。但是对方，竟在自己本身方面保留着它那不进行沟通交往的自为存在，同时认为在坦白认错的意识方面还保留着已被认错意识抛弃了的东西。这样，对方（判断的意识）就表明自己是一种既被精神遗弃又遗弃了精神的意识；因为它没认识到，精神在其绝对自身确定性中乃是凌驾于一切行动和一切现实之上的主宰，能够抛弃它们并且能使它们根本不发生。同时还因为它没认识到它已陷于自相矛盾之中，因为，它一方面不把在语言中实际做了的那种抛弃当成真正的抛弃，另一方面它本身以为它的精神的确定性不在实际行为中而是在它的内在本性中，而它的内在本性的特定存在又是表述它的判断的那种语言，这是一个自相矛盾。因此，它自己在阻碍着它的对方使之不能从实际行为返回于语言这一精神性的特定存在，使之不能与精神达到一致，并且正是由于这种生硬态度它才又制造出本来还存在着的不一致性。 现在，具有自身确定性的精神，作为优美的灵魂，既然还没有力量把关于它自身的、坚持不移的知识加以外化，它就不能同那遭受拒绝的意识达到一致，因而就不能达到它自己与别的意识在直观上的统一，不能达到特定存在；因此这时候所达到的一致只是消极的，只是一种无精神的存在。这种没有现实性的优美灵魂于是就处于矛盾之中，处于坚持不移的对立的直接性之中；这里所说的矛盾，是指它的纯粹自我与纯粹自我之必须外化为存在和必须转化为现实这个必然性之间的矛盾，这里所说的直接性，是指对立中的直接性，这种直接性是发展到了纯粹抽象程度的对立中的惟一沟通和解的中项，是纯粹存在或者说纯粹虚无。而在这种情况下的优美灵魂，由于意识到了它的这种没有得到和解的直接性中的矛盾，就使精神错乱陷于疯狂，并且忧伤憔悴抑郁而死。①这样一来，它就事实上抛弃了它对它的自为存在的顽强坚持，但它造成的结果呢，则只是无精神的抽象存在的统一性而已。 ①按这是指当时浪漫主义的代表人物诺瓦里斯本人的情况（Novalis，1772-1801）而言。 - translator 3.宽恕与和解 双方之间真正的亦即自觉的和现实的和解，按其必然性来说，早在先前的意识中就包含着了。使硬心肠折服并使之上升为普遍性的那种运动正就是在坦白招认的意识那里表现过了的运动。医治精神的创伤，不留丝毫疤痕。已实践了的行为，并不是什么一成不变不可消失的东西，精神已经把它撤消了，收回于其自身中去了；实践了的行为中的个别性方面，不论作为意图或是作为意图的实际否定和限制，乃是直接消逝着的东西。有所行为以求实现的自我〔恶的意识〕，或者说，精神的行为的形式，只不过是整体的一个环节；同样，那通过判断而对行为进行规定并对行为的个别方面和普遍方面进行区别的知识，也只不过是整体的一个环节。前者，恶的意识，由于它从对方中直观地认识了自己，被诱致采取了实际认错的行动，可以说已对其自身或自己进行了这种外化运动，已使自己外化为环节。但是后者，对方，正如前者之抛弃其片面的没有得到承认的、处于特殊的自为存在状态中的特定存在那样，也必须抛弃它的片面的没有得到承认的判断；而且就象前者已显示精神力量是在它的现实之上那样，它也必须显示精神力量是在它的特定概念之上。 但是后者，对方，其所以抛弃它的分解剖析的思想并且抛弃这种思想中的自为存在的坚固性质，乃是因为事实上它在前者之中直观地认识了它自己。这后一意识，既然抛弃了它的现实，并使自己成为扬弃了的这个特殊物，它事实上就已经把自己呈现为一个普遍物；它已从它的外在现实返回于自身，返回于本质；因为这样，所以普遍意识就能在它那里认识到其自己。——它对前一意识所表示的宽恕，实际上就是它对它自己的放弃，对它的非现实的本质的放弃；因为它把当初曾是现实的行为的那一意识同它的非现实的本质等同起来，并把那曾被称为恶的东西——行为在思想中曾取得恶的东西这一规定——当作好的东西予以承认，或者说得更明确些，因为它就象作为它的对方的那另一意识之放弃其对行为所作的自为着的规定活动那样，放弃了它在被规定的思想与它的起规定作用的自为着的判断活动之间所作的区别。——和解这个词就是这样一种实际存在着的精神，这种精神在它的对方中，亦即在作为绝对存在于其本身的个别性的那种纯粹自身知识中，直观地认识到作为普遍本质的那种纯粹自身知识，——这种精神就是一种相互承认，也就是绝对的精神。 绝对精神只在最高点上才进入实际存在，即是说，只当它的纯粹自身知识即是它与它自身的相互对立和相互交替时才进入实际存在。绝对精神，对于它的纯粹知识之是抽象本质是有所认知的，因而它是这样一种认知着的义务，它与另一种知识绝对对立，而这另一种知识乃是知道它自己这个自我的绝对个别性即是本质的知识。前一种知识是普遍物的纯粹连续性，它知道那知道自己是一本质的个体性自在地说来是无物，是罪恶。但后一种知识则是绝对间断性，它知道它自己在它的纯粹单一中是绝对的，并且知道上述普遍物是非现实的东西，只是为他而存在的东西。双方都净化到了这样的纯粹地步，以至它们都不复含有无自我的实际存在，都不复含有意识的否定物，而勿宁说，在这种纯粹状态下，前者，认知着的义务，乃是精神的自身知识的自身等同性格，而后者，恶的意识，也同样以它的自身存在（Insichsein，内心意图）当作它的目的，以它的话语当作它的现实；这种话语的内容乃是精神赖以存在下去的实体；话语本身乃是精神之相信自己在其本身之中这一确定性的保证。——这两种对其自身具有确定性的精神，除它们的纯粹自我外别无目的，同样，除它们的这个纯粹自我外别无实在性和实际存在。但是它们毕竟还是互有差别，而且它们的差别是绝对的，因为它们的差别是包含于这种纯粹概念的元素之中的。并且，它们的差别不仅是对我们（考察此处精神现象的人）而言的差别，而且也是对这样对立着的概念本身而言的差别。因为，这两个概念固然是彼此对立的特定概念，但同时又自在地是普遍的概念，所以它们两者构成着全部范围的自我，而这个自我除了它的这种既不多于其自己也不少于其自己的规定性而外别无任何内容；因为，一个规定性、绝对普遍性，正如另一规定性、个别性的绝对间断性一样，也是纯粹自身知识，而且两者都仅仅是这种纯粹的自身知识。因此两种规定性都是这样的认知着的纯粹概念：这纯粹概念，其规定性本身就是直接知识，换句话说，其联系和对立就是我（Ich）。这样，它们彼此看来都是这种绝对对立的东西；这样同自己对立并进入实际存在的东西，乃是完全内在的东西；它们所构成的纯粹知识，由于有这种对立，就被设立为意识。但意识还不是自我意识。它要在这种对立所经历的对立中才实现为自我意识。 因为这种对立倒不如说本身就是"我＝我"的无间断的连续性和同一性；而且，每个我恰恰由于它的纯粹普遍性的矛盾而自为地在其本身中把自己扬弃掉了，至于我的纯粹普遍性所以有矛盾，那是因为这纯粹普遍性虽然一方面意味着它与对方的同一性而另一方面却还违抗它与对方的同一性而从对方分离出来。通过这个外化运动，这种在其实际存在中一分为二的知识就复归于自我的统一；它就是现实的我，就是在其绝对对方中、在自身存在着的知识中的普遍的自身知识，而自身存在着的知识，由于其分离出来的孤立的自身存在所具有的纯粹性的缘故，本身乃是完全普遍的东西。两个我都是在和解性的"是的"（Ja）中抛弃它们互相对立着的实际存在的，这个"是的"就是发展到了一分为二的那个我的实际存在，而这一分为二的我在它的这个实际存在中则保持着自身同一并在它的完全外化和它的对方中取得它对其自身的确定性；——这个我，就是出现于知道自己是纯粹知识的那些自我之间的上帝。