Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit:
140.
ARGUMENT:
the Notion of this movement exhibits a two fold difference - one a difference of
content - one extreme - the force reflected into itself - the other the medium of the -
'matters'
and as a difference of form - since one solicits and the other is solicited - the former
active the other passive
according to the difference of content they are distinguished for us -
but according to the difference of form they are independent - and in their relation
keep themselves separate and opposed to one another
these extremes are vanishing moments - the immediate transition of each into its
opposite
this truth becomes apparent to consciousness in its perception of the movement of
Force
but for us the differences are differences of form and content - vanished in themselves
on the side of form the essence of the active - soliciting was the same as that on the
side of content - Force driven back into itself
COMMENTARY:
consciousness in relation to its object - which we now understand as force -
we can only theoretically separate consciousness and its object
consciousness in itself is without object makes no sense - what is reflected in such
consciousness?
the object without consciousness is simply unknown - nothing can be said of it -
so we come to consciousness in the world - and consciousness in relation to it object
the key notion here is relation
consciousness and the object are the two terms of the relation
the relation is the unity of the object and consciousness
and the unity is what the object (the world outside of consciousness) is to
consciousness
and what the object becomes in its relation with consciousness
we can call the immediate relation experience
this experience is the connection between consciousness and its object
it is the unity
experience (the relation) is the ground on which consciousness operates
its operation is reflection
consciousness' reflection on this relation - on experience - is its 'knowledge'
the point is reflection is a reflection of the relation
not the object per se -
not consciousness per se
consciousness and the object really are abstractions out of the relation
the relation is in itself - an unknown - even though it comes into being as
consciousness in the world -
that is as the world as we know it - the world we operate in
we abstract from this to consciousness and its object
we abstract that is the internal dimension and the external dimension
but the real game is what is dead centre - the relation
that is the ground of being
now I think we can only approach this ground of being in terms of its dimensions - the
internal and the external
I don't think logically we can speak directly about the relation that is the unity
we can only speak logically in terms of its dimensions - with the understanding that
the real focus is what we don't know - the relation
nevertheless in fact in practice we do regard the object in terms of consciousness - and
we speak of consciousness as an object
what I think this shows is that we use the categories that we make as best we can
to cover the ground as best we can
reflection on this - which is what philosophy is - shows us very quickly that such
interchanging of subjective / internal categories and objective / external categories -
brakes down
and we are in analysis left point blank with what we do not know
this can lead to despair or creativity - the usual response though is to proceed as if
everything is in order - and to try and make something of it that satisfies our needs
most I think would admit that on reflection this approach is an illusion but a necessary
one
