phenomenology of mind-第57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!
each by itself; there is no necessity to be found between them; and no law of their relation to one
another。
c
Observation of the Relation of Self…Consciousness
to its Immediate Actuality —
Physiognomy & Phrenology。 (1)
PSYCHOLOGICAL observation discovers no law for the relation of self…consciousness to
actuality or the world over against it; and owing to their mutual indifference it is forced to fall back
on the peculiar determinate characteristic of real individuality; which has a being in and for itself or
contains the opposition of subjective self…existence (Fürsichseyn) and objective inherent
existence (Ansichseyn) dissolved and extinguished within its own process of absolute mediation。
Individuality is now the object for observation; or the object to which observation now passes。
The individual exists in himself and for himself。 He is for himself; or is a free activity; he is;
however; also in himself; or has himself an original determinate being of his own — a character
which is in principle the same as what psychology sought to find outside him。 Opposition thus
breaks out in his own self; it has this twofold nature; it is a process or movement of consciousness;
and it is the fixed being of a reality with a phenomenal character; a reality which in it is directly its
own。 This being; the 〃body〃 of the determinate individuality; is its original source; that in the making
of which it has had nothing to do。 But since the individual at the same time merely is what he has
done; his body is also an 〃expression〃 of himself which he has brought about; a sign and indication
as well; which has not remained a bare immediate fact; but through which the individual only
makes known what is actually implied by his setting his original nature to work。
If we consider the moments we have here in relation to the view previously indicated; we find a
general human shape and form; or at least the general character of a climate; of a portion of the
world; of a people; just as formerly we found in the same way general customs and culture。 In
addition the particular circumstances and situation are within the universal reality; here this
particular reality is a particular formation of the shape of the individual。 On the other side; whereas
formerly we were dealing with the free activity of the individual; and reality in the sense of his own
reality was put in contrast and opposition to reality as given; here the shape assumed by the
individual stands as an expression of his own actualization established by the individual himself; it
bears the lineaments and forms of his spontaneously active being。 But the reality; both universal as
well as particular; which observation formerly found outside the individual; is here the actual reality
of the individual; his connate body; and within this very body the expression due to his own action
appears。 From the psychological point of view objective reality in and for itself and determinate
individuality had to be brought into relation to one another; here; however; it is the whole
determinate individuality that is the object for observation; and each aspect of the opposition it
entails is itself this whole。 Thus; to the outer whole belongs not merely the original primordial being;
the connate body; but the formation of the body as well; which is due to activity from the inner
side; the body is a unity of unformed and formed existence; and is the reality of the individual
permeated by his reference to self。 This whole embraces the definite parts fixed originally and from
the first; and also the lineaments which arise only as the result of action; this whole so formed is;
and this being is an expression of what is inner; of the individual constituted as a consciousness and
as a process。
This inner is; too; no longer formal; spontaneous activity without any content or determinateness of
its own; an activity With its content and specific nature; as in the former case; lying in external
circumstances; it is an original inherently determinate Character; whose form alone is the activity。
What; then; we have to consider here is the relation subsisting between the two sides; the point to
observe is how this relation is determined; and what is to be understood by the inner finding
expression in the outer。
This outer; in the first place; does not act as an organ making the inner visible; or; in general terms;
a being for another; for the inner; so far as it is in the organ; is the activity itself。 The mouth that
speaks; the hand that works; with the legs too; if we care to add them; are the operative organs
effecting the actual realization; and they contain the action qua action; or the inner as such; the
externality; however; which the inner obtains by their means is the deed; the act; in the sense of a
reality separated and cut off from the individual。 Language and labour are outer expressions in
which the individual no longer retains possession of himself per se; but lets the inner get right
outside him; and surrenders it to something else。 For that reason we might just as truly say that
these outer expressions express the inner too much as that they do so too little: too much —
because the inner itself breaks out in them; and there remains no opposition between them and it;
they not merely give an expression of the inner; they give the inner itself directly and immediately:
too little — because in speech and action the inner turns itself into something else; into an other;
and thereby puts itself at the mercy of the element of change; which transforms the spoken word
and the accomplished act; and makes something else out of them than they are in and for
themselves as actions of a particular determinate individual。 Not only do the products of actions;
owing to this externality; lose by the influence of others the character of being something constant
vis…a…vis other individualities; but by their assuming towards the inner which they contain; the
attitude of something external; separate; independent; and indifferent; they can; through the
individual himself; be qua inner something other than they seem。 Either the individual intentionally
makes them in appearance something else than they are in truth; or he is too incompetent to give
himself the outer aspect be really wanted; and to give them such fixity and permanence that the
product of his action cannot become misrepresented by others。 The action; then; in the form of a
completed product has the double and opposite significance of being either the inner individuality
and not its expression; or; qua external; a reality detached from the inner; a reality which is
something quite different from the inner。 On account of this ambiguity; we must look about for the
inner as it still is within the individual himself; but in a visible or external form。 In the organ;
however; it exists merely as immediate activity as such; which attains its externalization in the act or
deed; that either does or again does not represent the inner。 The organ; in the light of this
opposition; thus does not afford the expression which is sought。
If now the external shape and form were able to express the inner individuality only in so far as
that shape is neither an organ nor action; hence only in so far as it is an inert passive whole; it
would then play the r?le of a subsistent thing; which received undisturbed the inner as an alien
element into its own passive being; and thereby became the sign and symbol of it — an external
contingent expression; whose actual concrete aspect has no meaning of its own — a language
whose sounds and tone…combinations are not the real fact itself; but are capriciously connected
with it and a mere accident so far as it is concerned。
Such a capricious association of factors that are external for one another does not give a law。
Physiognomy; however; would claim distinction from other spurious arts and unwholesome
studies on the ground that in dealing with determinate individuality it considers the necessary
opposition of an inner and an outer; of character as a conscious nature and character as a
definitely embodied organic shape; and relates these moments to one another in the way they are
related to one another by their very conception; and hence must constitute the content of a law。 In
astrology; on the other hand; in palmistry and similar 〃sciences〃; there appears merely external
element related to external element; anything whatsoever to an element alien to it。 A given
constellation at birth; and; when the external element is brought closer to the body itself; certain
given lines on the hand; are external factors making for long or short life; and the fate in general of
the particular person。 Being externalities they are indifferent towards one another; and have none
of the necessity for one another which is supposed to lie in the relation of what is outer to what is
inner。
The hand; to be sure; does not seem to be such a very external thing for fate; it seems rather to
stand to it as something inner。 For fate again is also merely the phenomenal manifestation of what
the specifically determinate individuality inherently is as having originally an inner determinate
constitution。 Now to find out what this individuality is in itself; the palmist; as well as the
physiognomist; takes a shorter cut than; e。g。; Solon; who thought he could only know this from
and after the course of the whole life: the latter looked at the phenomenal explicit reality; while the
former considers the implicit nature (das Ansich)。 That the band; however; must exhibit and reveal
the inherent nature of individuality as regards its fate; is easily seen from the fact that after the
organ of speech it is the hand most of all by which a man actualizes and manifests himself。 It is the
animated artificer of his fortune: we may say of the band it is what a man does; for in it as the
effective organ of his self…fulfilment he is there present as the animating soul; and since he is
ultimately and originally his own fate; the hand will thus express this innate inherent nature。
From this peculiarity; that the organ of activity