phenomenology of mind-第22部分

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！


we　should　assert　to　be　its　essence　would　rather　be；　not　the　truth　of　knowledge；　but　only　our
knowledge　of　it。　The　essence　or　the　criterion　would　lie　in　us；　and　that　which　was　to　be　compared
with　this　standard；　and　on　which　a　decision　was　to　be　passed　as　a　result　of　this　comparison；　would
not　necessarily　have　to　recognize　that　criterion。　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　15

But　the　nature　of　the　object　which　we　are　examining　surmounts　this　separation；　or　semblance　of
separation；　and　presupposition。　Consciousness　furnishes　its　own　criterion　in　itself；　and　the　inquiry
will　thereby　be　a　comparison　of　itself　with　its　own　self　；　for　the　distinction；　just　made；　falls　inside
itself。　In　consciousness　there　is　one　element　for　an　other；　or；　in　general；　consciousness　implicates
the　specific　character　of　the　moment　of　knowledge。　At　the　same　time　this　〃other〃　is　to
consciousness　not　merely　for　it；　but　also　outside　this　relation；　or　has　a　being　in　itself；　i。e。　there　is
the　moment　of　truth。　Thus　in　what　consciousness　inside　itself　declares　to　be　the　essence　or　truth
we　have　the　standard　which　itself　sets　up；　and　by　which　we　are　to　measure　its　knowledge。

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　16

Suppose　we　call　knowledge　the　notion；　and　the　essence　or　truth　〃being〃　or　the　object；　then　the
examination　consists　in　seeing　whether　the　notion　corresponds　with　the　object。　But　if　we　call　the
inner　nature　of　the　object；　or　what　it　is　in　itself；　the　notion；　and；　on　the　other　side；　understand　by
object　the　notion　qua　object；　i。e。　the　way　the　notion　is　for　an　other；　then　the　examination　consists
in　our　seeing　whether　the　object　corresponds　to　its　own　notion。　It　is　clear；　of　course；　that　both　of
these　processes　are　the　same。　The　essential　fact；　however；　to　be　borne　in　mind　throughout　the
whole　inquiry　is　that　both　these　moments；　notion　and　object；　〃being　for　another〃　and　〃being　in
itself〃；　themselves　fall　within　that　knowledge　which　we　are　examining。　Consequently　we　do　not
require　to　bring　standards　with　us；　nor　to　apply　our　fancies　and　thoughts　in　the　inquire；　and　just　by
our　leaving　these　aside　we　are　enabled　to　treat　and　discuss　the　subject　as　it　actually　is　in　itself　and
for　itself；　as　it　is　in　its　complete　reality。　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　17

But　not　only　in　this　respect；　that　notion　and　object；　the　criterion　and　what　is　to　be　tested；　are　ready
to　hand　in　consciousness　itself；　is　any　addition　of　ours　superfluous；　but　we　are　also　spared　the
trouble　of　comparing　these　two　and　of　making　an　examination　in　the　strict　sense　of　the　term；　so
that　in　this　respect；　too；　since　consciousness　tests　and　examines　itself；　all　we　are　left　to　do　is　simply
and　solely　to　look　on。　For　consciousness　is；　on　the　one　hand；　consciousness　of　the　object；　on　the
other；　consciousness　of　itself；　consciousness　of　what　to　it　is　true；　and　consciousness　of　its
knowledge　of　that　truth。　Since　both　are　for　the　same　consciousness；　it　is　itself　their　comparison；　it
is　the　same　consciousness　that　decides　and　knows　whether　its　knowledge　of　the　object
corresponds　with　this　object　or　not。　The　object；　it　is　true；　appears　only　to　be　in　such　wise　for
consciousness　as　consciousness　knows　it。　Consciousness　does　not　seem　able　to　get；　so　to　say；
behind　it　as　it　is；　not　for　consciousness；　but　in　itself；　and　consequently　seems　also　unable　to　test
knowledge　by　it。　But　just　because　consciousness　has；　in　general；　knowledge　of　an　object；　there　is
already　present　the　distinction　that　the　inherent　nature；　what　the　object　is　in　itself；　is　one　thing　to
consciousness；　while　knowledge；　or　the　being　of　the　object　for　consciousness；　is　another　moment。
Upon　this　distinction；　which　is　present　as　a　fact；　the　examination　turns。　Should　both；　when　thus
compared；　not　correspond；　consciousness　seems　bound　to　alter　its　knowledge；　in　order　to　make　it
fit　the　object。　But　in　the　alteration　of　the　knowledge；　the　object　itself　also；　in　point　of　fact；　is
altered；　for　the　knowledge　which　existed　was　essentially　a　knowledge　of　the　object；　with　change　in
the　knowledge；　the　object　also　becomes　different；　since　it　belonged　essentially　to　this　knowledge。
Hence　consciousness　comes　to　find　that　what　formerly　to　it　was　the　essence　is　not　what　is　per　se；
or　what　was　per　se　was　only　per　se　for　consciousness。　Since；　then；　in　the　case　of　its　object
consciousness　finds　its　knowledge　not　corresponding　with　this　object；　the　object　likewise　fails　to
hold　out；　or　the　standard　for　examining　is　altered　when　that；　whose　criterion　this　standard　was　to
be；　does　not　hold　its　ground　in　the　course　of　the　examination；　and　the　examination　is　not　only　an
examination　of　knowledge；　but　also　of　the　criterion　used　in　the　process。　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　18

This　dialectic　process　which　consciousness　executes　on　itself…on　its　knowledge　as　well　as　on　its
object　—　in　the　sense　that　out　of　it　the　new　and　true　object　arises；　is　precisely；　what　is　termed
Experience。　In　this　connection；　there　is　a　moment　in　the　process　just　mentioned　which　should　be
brought　into　more　decided　prominence；　and　by　which　a　new　light　is　cast　on　the　scientific　aspect　of
the　following　exposition。　Consciousness　knows　something；　this　something　is　the　essence　or　is　per
se。　This　object；　however；　is　also　the　per　se；　the　inherent　reality；　for　consciousness。　Hence　comes
ambiguity　of　this　truth。　Consciousness；　as　we　see；　has　now　two　objects：　one　is　the　first　per　se；　the
second　is　the　existence　for　consciousness　of　this　per　se。　The　last　object　appears　at　first　sight　to
be　merely　the　reflection　of　consciousness　into　itself；　i。e。　an　idea　not　of　an　object；　but　solely　of　its
knowledge　of　that　first　object。　But；　as　was　already　indicated；　by　that　very　process　the　first　object
is　altered；　it　ceases　to　be　what　is　per　se；　and　becomes　consciously　something　which　is　per　se　only
for　consciousness。　Consequently；　then；　what　this　real　per　se　is　for　consciousness　is　truth：　which；
however；　means　that　this　is　the　essential　reality；　or　the　object　which　consciousness　has。　This　new
object　contains　the　nothingness　of　the　first；　the　new　object　is　the　experience　concerning　that　first
object。　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　19

In　this　treatment　of　the　course　of　experience；　there　is　an　element　in　virtue　of　which　it　does　not　seem
to　be　in　agreement　with　what　is　ordinarily　understood　by　experience。　The　transition　from　the　first
object　and　the　knowledge　of　it　to　the　other　object；　in　regard　to　which　we　say　we　have　had
experience；　was　so　stated　that　the　knowledge　of　the　first　object；　the　existence　for　consciousness
of　the　first　ens　per　se；　is　itself　to　be　the　second　object。　But　it　usually　seems　that　we　learn　by
experience　the　untruth　of　our　first　notion　by　appealing　to　some　other　object　which　we　may　happen
to　find　casually　and　externally；　so　that；　in　general；　what　we　have　is　merely　the　bare　and　simple
apprehension　of　what　is　in　and　for　itself。　On　the　view　above　given；　however；　the　new　object　is
seen　to　have　come　about　by　a　transformation　or　conversion　of　consciousness　itself。　This　way　of
looking　at　the　matter　is　our　doing；　what　we　contribute；　by　its　means　the　series　of　experiences
through　which　consciousness　passes　is　lifted　into　a　scientifically　constituted　sequence；　but　this　does
not　exist　for　the　consciousness　we　contemplate　and　consider。　We　have　here；　however；　the　same
sort　of　circumstance；　again；　of　which　we　spoke　a　short　time　ago　when　dealing　with　the　relation　of
this　exposition　to　scepticism；　viz。　that　the　result　which　at　any　time　comes　about　in　the　case　of　an
untrue　mode　of　knowledge　cannot　possibly　collapse　into　an　empty　nothing；　but　must　necessarily　be
taken　as　the　negation　of　that　of　which　it　is　a　result…a　result　which　contains　what　truth　the　preceding
mode　of　knowledge　has　in　it。　In　the　present　instance　the　position　takes　this　form：　since　what　at　first
appeared　as　object　is　reduced；　when　it　passes　into　consciousness；　to　what　knowledge　takes　it　to
be；　and　the　implicit　nature；　the　real　in　itself；　becomes　what　this　entity　per　se；　is　for　consciousness；
this　latter　is　the　new　object；　whereupon　there　appears　also　a　new　mode　or　embodiment　of
consciousness；　of　which　the　essence　is　something　other　than　that　of　the　preceding　mode。　It　is　this
circumstance　which　carries　forward　the　whole　succession　of　the　modes　or　attitudes　of
consciousness　in　their　own　necessity。　It　is　only　this　necessity；　this　origination　of　the　new
object…which　offers　itself　to　consciousness　without　consciousness　knowing　how　it　comes　by　it…that
to　us；　who　watch　the　process；　is　to　be　seen　going　on；　so　to　say；　behind　its　back。　Thereby　there
enters　into　its　process　a　moment　of　being　per　se；　or　of　being　for　us；　which　is　not　expressly
presented　to　that　consciousness　which　is　in　the　grip　of　experience　itself。　The　content；　however；　of
what　we　see　arising；　exists　for　it；　and　we　lay　hold　of　and　comprehend　merely　its　formal　character；
i。e。　its　bare　origination；　for　it；　what　has　thus　arisen　has　merely　the　character　of　object；　while；　for
us；　it　appears　at　the　same　time　as　a　process　and　coming　into　being。　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　20

In　virtue　of　that　necessity　this　pathway　to　science　is　itself　eo　ipso　science；　and　is；　moreover；　as
regards　its　content；　Science　of　the　Experience　of　Consciousness。　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　21

The　experience　which　consciousness　has　concerning　itself　can；　by　its　essential　principle；　embrace
nothing　less　than　the　entire　system　of　consciousness；　the　whole　realm　of　the　truth　of　mind；　and　in
such　wise　that　the　moments　of　truth　are　set　forth　in　the　specific　and　peculiar　character　they　here
possess…　i。e。　not　as　abstract　pure　moments；　but　as　they　are　for　consciousness；　or　as　consciousness
itself　appears　in　its　relation　to　them；　and　in　virtue　of　which　they　are　moments　of　the　whole；　are
embodiments　or　modes　of　consciousness。　In　pressing　forward　to　its　true　form　of　existence；
consciousness　will　come　to　a　point　at　which　it　lays　aside　its　semblance　of　being　hampered　with
what　is　foreign　to　it；　with　what　is　only　for　it　and　exists　as　an　other；　it　will　reach　a　position　where
appearance　becomes　identified　with　essence；　where；　in　consequence；　its　exposition　coincides　with
just