Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit:
168.
ARGUMENT:
for us the object which for self-consciousness is the negative element has returned
into itself just as on the other side consciousness has -
through this reflection into itself the object has become Life
what self-consciousness distinguishes from itself as having being - is being reflected
into itself - and the object of immediate desire is a living thing
for the in-itself or the universal the result of the relation of the Understanding to the
inwardness of things is the distinguishing of what is not to be distinguished - or the
unity of what is distinguished
to the extent that consciousness is independent so too is its object - but only implicitly
self-consciousness which is simply for itself - and directly characterizes its object as a
negative element - or is primarily desire - will therefore on the contrary learn through
experience that the object is independent
COMMENTARY:
self-consciousness - recognizes what it is not -
this recognition is a direct logical result of the nature of self-consciousness
self-consciousness recognizes itself as conscious - that which it is not - as not-conscious
that which is outside of it (the outside of essential internality) is the object - for the
subject
the recognition of internality - is the key - this recognition just is self-consciousness
if 'x' knows what 'x' is - it follows 'x' knows what it is not
if this is not the case - then we do not in fact have an 'x' - that is we have an undefined
entity
internality is defined - and self-aware - therefore it knows that what it is not - is not
aware
for consciousness the object is the result of a logical operation
this knowledge which recognizes the object - the external - the world outside of
consciousness - is no grand metaphysical scheme - it is a simple logical operation
substance is not the issue - it is an issue of form - logical form
substance comes later as a posit of consciousness
consciousness' recognition of the obeject has nothing at all to do with experience -
experience is predicated on this logic
NB.
desire I think is the ground or the reason for action
we only know of desire in any determinate sense in terms of the object desired
and if we reflect here we are forced to ask why - why this?
so the issue is not settled - on the contrary it brings into sharp focus the fact that we
do not know
that is we do not know what desire is
and this I would suggest is the origin of and the force of desire
desire is not knowing
