phenomenology of mind-第26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！


which　unity　is　just　as　essential　to　them　as　negation。　The　process　of　distinguishing　them；　so　far　as　it
does　not　leave　them　indifferent；　but　effectually　excludes；　negates　one　from　another；　thus　falls
outside　this　simple　〃medium〃。　And　this；　consequently；　is　not　merely　an　〃also〃；　an　unity　indifferent　to
what　is　in　it；　but　a　〃one〃　as　well；　an　excluding　repelling　unity。　

The　〃One〃　is　the　moment　of　negation；　as；　in　a　direct　and　simple　manner；　relating　itself　to　itself；　and
excluding　an　other：　and　is　that　by　which　〃Thinghood〃　is　determined　qua　Thing。　In　the　property　of　a
thing　the　negation　takes　the　form　of　a　specific　determinateness；　which　is　directly　one　with　the
immediacy　of　its　being；　an　immediacy　which；　by　this　unity　with　negation；　is　universality。　Qua　〃one〃；
however；　negation；　the　specific　quality；　takes　a　form　in　which　it　is　freed　from　this　unity　with　the
object；　and　exists　per　se　on　its　own　account。　

These　moments　taken　together　exhaust　the　nature　of　the　Thing；　the　truth　of　perception；　so　far　as　it
is　necessary　to　develop　it　here。　It　is　（1）　a　universality；　passive　and　indifferent；　the　〃also〃　which
forms　the　sole　bond　of　connection　between　the　qualities；　or　rather　constituent　elements；　〃matters〃；
existing　together；　（2）　negation；　likewise　in　a　simple　form；　or　the　〃one〃；　which　consists　in　excluding
properties　of　an　opposite　character；　and　（3）　the　many　properties　themselves；　the　relation　of　the
two　first　moments…the　negation；　as　it　is　related　to　that　indifferent　element；　and　in　being　so　expands
into　a　manifold　of　differences；　the　focal　point　of　particularity　radiating　forth　into　plurality　within　the
〃medium〃　of　subsistence。　Taking　the　aspect　that　these　differences　belong　to　a　〃medium〃　indifferent
to　what　is　within　it；　they　are　themselves　universal；　they　are　related　merely　to　themselves　and　do　not
affect　each　other。　Taking；　however；　the　other　aspect；　that　they　belong　to　the　negative　unity；　they　at
the　same　time　mutually　exclude　one　another；　but　do　no　necessarily　in　the　shape　of　properties　that
have　a　separate　existence　apart　from　the　〃also〃　connecting　them。　The　sensuous　universality；　the
immediate　unity　of　positive　being　and　negative　exclusion；　is　only　then　a　property；　when　oneness
and　pure　universality　are　evolved　from　it　and　distinguished　from　one　another；　and　when　that
sensuous　universality　combines　these　with　one　another。　Only　after　this　relation　of　the　unity　to　those
pure　essential　moments　is　effected；　is　the　〃Thing〃　complete。　

This；　then；　is　the　way　the　〃Thing〃　in　perception　is　constituted；　and　consciousness　is　perceptual　in
character　so　far　as　this　〃Thing〃　is　its　object：　it　has　merely　to　〃take〃　the　object　（capio…per…ception）
and　assume　the　attitude　of　pure　apprehension；　and　what　comes　its　way　in　so　doing　is　truth　（das
Wahre）。　If　it　did　something　when　taking　the　given；　it　would　by　such　supplementation　or　elimination
alter　the　truth。　Since　the　object　is　the　true　and　universal；　the　self…same；　while　consciousness　is　the
variable　and　non…essential；　it　may　happen　that　consciousness　apprehends　the　object　wrongly　and
deceives　itself。　The　percipient　is　aware　of　the　possibility　of　deception；　for；　in　the　universality
forming　the　principle　here；　the　percipient　is　directly　aware　of　otherness；　but　aware　of　it　as　null　and
naught；　as　what　is　superseded。　His　criterion　of　truth　is　therefore　self…sameness；　and　his　procedure
is　that　of　apprehending　what　comes　before　him　as　self…same。　Since；　at　the　same　time；　diversity　is　a
fact　for　him；　his　procedure　is　a　way　of　relating　the　diverse　moments　of　his　apprehension　to　one
another。　If；　however；　in　this　comparison　a　want　of　sameness　comes　out；　this　is　not　an　untruth　on
the　part　of　the　object　（for　the　object　is　the　self…same）；　but　on　the　part　of　perception。　

Let　us　now　see　what　sort　of　experience　consciousness　forms　in　the　course　of　its　actual　perception。
We；　who　are　analysing　the　process；　find　this　experience　already　contained　in　the　development　（just
given）　of　the　object　and　of　the　attitude　of　consciousness　towards　it。　The　experience　will　be　merely
the　development　of　the　contradictions　that　appear　there。　

The　object　which　I　apprehend　presents　itself　as　purely　〃one〃　and　single：　also；　I　am　aware　of　the
〃property〃　（Eigenschaft）　in　it；　a　property　which　is　universal；　thereby　transcending　the　particularity
of　the　object。　The　first　form　of　being；　in　which　the　objective　reality　has　the　sense　of　a　〃one〃；　was
thus　not　its　true　being；　and　since　the　object　is　the　true　fact　here；　the　untruth　falls　on　my　side；　and
the　apprehension　was　not　correct。　On　account　of　the　universality　of　the　property　（Eigenschaft）
I　must　rather　take　the　objective　entity　as　a　community　（Gemeinschaft）　in　general。　I　further
perceive　now　the　property　to　be　determinate；　opposed　to　another　and　excluding　this　other。　Thus；
in　point　of　fact；　I　did　not　apprehend　the　object　rightly　when　I　defined　it　as　a　〃commonness〃　or
community　with　others；　or　as　continuity；　and　must　rather；　taking　account　of　the　determinateness
of　the　property；　isolate　parts　within　the　continuity　and　set　down　the　object　as　a　〃one〃　that
excludes。　In　the　disintegrated　〃one〃　I　find　many　such　properties；　which　do　not　affect　one　another；
but　are　indifferent　to　one　another。　Thus　I　did　not　apprehend　the　object　correctly　when　I　took　it　for
something　that　excludes。　The　object；　instead；　just　as　formerly　it　was　merely　continuity　in　general；　is
not　a　universal　common　medium　where　many　properties　in　the　form　of　sense　universals　subsist；
each　for　itself　and　on　its　own　account；　and；　qua　determinate；　excluding　the　others。　The　simple　and
true　fact；　which　I　perceive；　is；　however；　in　virtue　of　this　result；　not　a　universal　medium　either；　but
the　particular　property　by　itself；　which；　again；　in　this　form；　is　neither　a　property　nor　a　determinate
being；　for　it　is　now　neither　attached　to　a　distince　〃one〃　nor　in　relation　to　others。　But　the　particular
quality　is　a　property　only　when　attached　to　a　〃one〃；　and　determinate　only　in　relation　to　others。　By
being　this　bare　relation　of　self　to　self；　it　remains　merely　sensuous　existence　in　general；　since　it　no
longer　contains　the　character　of　negativity；　and　the　mode　of　consciousness；　which　is　now　aware　of
a　being　of　sense；　is　merely　a　way　of　〃meaning〃　（Meinen）　or　〃intending〃；　i。e。　it　has　left　the　attitude　of
perception　entirely　and　gone　back　into　itself。　But　sense　existence　and　〃meaning〃　themselves　pass
over　into　perception：　I　am　thrown　back　on　the　beginning；　and　once　more　dragged　into　the　same
circuit；　that　supersedes　itself　in　every　moment　and　as　a　whole。　

Consciousness；　then；　has　to　go　over　this　cycle　again；　but　not　in　the　same　way　as　on　the　first
occasion。　For　it　has　found　out；　regarding　perception；　that　the　truth　and　outcome　of　perception　is　its
dissolution；　is　reflection　out　of　and　away　from　the　truth　into　itself。　In　this　way　consciousness
becomes　definitely　aware　of　how　its　perceptual　process　is　essentially　constituted；　viz。　that　this　is
not　a　simple　bare　apprehension；　but　in　its　apprehension　is　at　the　same　time　reflected　out　of　the　true
content　back　into　itself。　This　return　of　consciousness　into　itself；　which　is　immediately　involved　and
implicated　in　that　pure　apprehension　—　for　this　return　to　self　has　proved　to　be　essential　to
perception　—　alters　the　true　content。　Consciousness　is　aware　that　this　aspect　is　at　the　same　time　its
own；　and　takes　it　upon　itself　and　by　so　doing　consciousness　will　thus　get　the　true　object　bare　and
naked。　

In　this　way　we　have；　now；　in　the　case　of　perception；　as　happened　in　the　case　of　sensuous
certainty；　the　aspect　of　consciousness　being　forced　back　upon　itself；　but；　in　the　first　instance；　not　in
the　sense　in　which　this　took　place　in　the　former　case　—　i。e。　not　as　if　the　truth　of　perception　fell
within　it。　Rather　consciousness　is　aware　that　the　untruth；　that　comes　out　there；　falls　within　it。　By
knowing　this；　however；　consciousness　is　able　to　cancel　and　supersede　this　untruth。　It　distinguishes
its　apprehension　of　the　truth　from　the　untruth　of　its　perception；　corrects　this　untruth；　and；　so　far　as
itself　takes　in　hand　to　make　this　correction；　the　truth；　qua　truth　of　perception；　certainly　falls　within
its　own　consciousness。　The　procedure　of　consciousness；　which　we　have　now　to　consider；　is　thus
so　constituted　that　it　no　longer　merely　perceives；　but　is　also　conscious　of　its　reflection　into　self；　and
keeps　this　apart　from　the　simple　apprehension　proper。　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　2。　The　Contradictoriness　of　the　Perception　of　“Things”

To　begin　with；　then；　I　am　aware　of　the　〃thing〃　as　a　one　and　have　to　keep　it　fixed　in　this　true
character　as　one〃。　If　in　the　course　of　perceiving　something　crops　up　contradicting　that；　then　I　must
take　it　to　be　due　to　my　reflection。　Now；　in　perception　various　different　properties　also　turn　up；
which　seem　to　be　properties　of　the　thing。　But　the　thin　is　a　〃one〃；　and　we　are　aware　in　ourselves
that　this　diversity；　by　which　the　thing　ceases　to　be　a　unity；　falls　in　us。　This　thing；　then；　is；　in　point　of
fact；　merely　white　to　our　eyes；　also　tart　to　our　tongue；　and　also　cubical　to　our　feeling；　and　so　on。
The　entire　diversity　of　these　aspects　comes　not　from　the　thing；　but　from　us；　and　we　find　them
falling　apart　thus　from　one　another；　because　the　organs　they　affect　are　quite　distinct　inter　se；　the
eye　is　entirely　distinct　from　the　tongue；　and　so　on。　We　are；　consequently；　the　universal　medium
where　such　elements　get　dissociated；　and　exist　each　by　itself。　By　the　fact；　then；　that　we　regard　the
characteristic　of　being　a　universal　medium　as　our　reflection；　we　preserve　and　maintain　the
self…sameness　and　truth　of　the　thing；　its　being　a　〃one〃。　

These　diverse　aspects；　which　consciousness　puts　to　its　side　of　the　account；　are；　however；　each　by
itself　just　as　it　appears　in　the　universal　medium；　specifically　determined。　White　is　only　in　opposition
to　black；　and　so　on；　and　the　thing　is　a　〃one〃　just　by　the　fact　that　it　is　opposed　to　other　things。　It
does　not；　however；　exclude　others　from　itself；　so　far　as　it　is　〃one〃；　for　to　be　〃one〃　is　to　be　in　a
universal　relation　of　self　to　self；　and　hence　by　the　fact　of　its　being　〃one〃　it　is　rather　like　all。　It　is
through　the　determinate　characteristic　that　the　thing　excludes　other　things。　Things