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！
The hollow object； which it produces； now fills it； therefore； with the feeling of emptiness。 Its
activity consists in yearning； which merely loses itself in becoming an unsubstantial shadowy
object； and； rising above this loss and falling back on itself； finds itself merely as lost。 In this
transparent purity of its moments it becomes a sorrow…laden 〃beautiful soul〃； as it is called； its light
dims and dies within it； and it vanishes as a shapeless vapour dissolving into thin air。（7）
This silent fusion of the pithless unsubstantial elements of evaporated life has； however； still to be
taken in the other sense of the reality of conscience； and in the way its process actually appears。
Conscience has to be considered as acting。 The objective moment in this phase of consciousness
took above the determinate form of universal consciousness。 The knowing of self is； qua this
particular self； different from the other self。 Language in which all reciprocally recognize and
acknowledge each other as acting conscientiously — this general equality breaks up into the
inequality of each individual existing for himself； each consciousness is just as much reflected out of
its universality absolutely into itself as it is universal。 By this means there necessarily comes about
the opposition of individuality to other individuals and to the universal。 And this relation and its
process we have to consider。
Or； again； this universality and duty have the absolutely opposite significance； they signify
determinate individuality； exempting itself from what is universal； individuality which looks on pure
duty as universality that has appeared merely on the surface and is turned outwards： 〃duty is
merely a matter of words〃； and passes for that whose being is for something else。 Conscience；
which in the first instance takes up merely a negative attitude towards duty； qua a given
determinate duty； knows itself detached from it。 But since conscience fills empty duty with a
determinate content drawn from its own self； it is positively aware of the fact that it； qua this
particular self； makes its own content。 Its pure self； as it is empty knowledge； is without content
and without definiteness。 The content which it supplies to that knowledge is drawn from its own
self； qua this determinate self； is drawn from itself as a natural individuality。 In affirming the
conscientiousness of its action； it is doubtless aware of its pure self； but in the purpose of its action
— a purpose which brings in a concrete content — it is conscious of itself as this particular
individual； and is conscious of the opposition between what it is for itself and what it is for others；
of the opposition of universality or duty and its state of being reflected into self away from the
universal。
（3） Evil and Forgiveness
While in this way the opposition； into which conscience passes when it acts； finds expression in its
inner life； the opposition is at the same time disparity on its outer side； in the sphere of existence —
the lack of correspondence of its particular individuality with reference to another individual。 Its
special peculiarity consists in the fact that the two elements constituting its consciousness — viz。 the
self and the inherent nature （Ansich） — are unequal in value and significance within it； an inequality
in which they are so determined that certainty of self is the essential fact as against the inherent
nature； or the universal； which is taken to be merely a moment。 Over against this internal
determination there thus stands the element of existence； the universal consciousness； for this latter
it is rather universality； duty； that is the essential fact； while individuality； which exists for itself and
is opposed to the universal； has merely the value of a superseded moment。 The first consciousness
is held to be Evil by the consciousness which thus stands by the fact of duty； because of the lack
of correspondence of its internal subjective life with the universal； and since at the same time the
first consciousness declares its act to be congruency with itself； to be duty and conscientiousness it
is held by that universal consciousness to be Hypocrisy。
The course taken by this opposition is； in the first instance； the formal establishment of
correspondence between what the evil consciousness is in its own nature and what it expressly
says。 It has to be made manifest that it is evil； and its objective existence thus made congruent with
its real nature； the hypocrisy must be unmasked。 This return of the discordance； present in
hypocrisy； into the state of correspondence is not at once brought to pass by the mere fact that； as
people usually say； hypocrisy just proves its reverence for duty and virtue through assuming the
appearance of them； and using this as a mask to hide itself from its own consciousness no less than
from another — as if； in this acknowledgment and recognition in itself of its opposite； eo ipso
congruency and agreement were implied and contained。 Yet even then it is just as truly done with
this recognition in words and is reflected into self； and in the very fact of its using the inherent and
essential reality merely as something which has a significance for another consciousness； there is
really implied its own contempt for that inherent principle； and the demonstration of the
worthlessness of that reality for all。 For what lets itself be used as an external instrument shows
itself to be a thing； which has within it no proper weight and worth of its own。
Moreover； this correspondence is not brought about either by the evil consciousness persisting
onesidedly in its own state； or by the judgment of the universal consciousness。 If the former denies
itself as against the consciousness of duty； and maintains that what the latter pronounces to be
baseness； to be absolute discordance with universality； is an action according to inner law and
conscience； then； in this onesided assurance of identity and concord； there still remains its
discordance with the other； since this other universal consciousness certainly does not believe the
assurance and does not acknowledge it。 In other words； since onesided insistence on one extreme
destroys itself； evil would indeed thereby confess to being evil； but in so doing would at once
cancel itself and cease to be hypocrisy； and so would not qua hypocrisy be unmasked。 It
confesses itself； in fact； to be evil by asserting that； while opposing what is recognized as universal；
it acts according to its own inner law and conscience。 For were this law and conscience not the
law of its individuality and caprice； it would not be something inward； something private； but what
is universally accepted and acknowledged。 When； therefore； any one says he acts towards others
from a law and conscience of his own； he is saying； in point of fact； that he is abusing and
wronging them。 But actual conscience is not this insistence on a knowledge and a will which are
opposed to what is universal； the universal is the element of its existence； and its very language
pronounces its action to be recognized duty。
Just as little； when the universal consciousness persists in its own judgment； does this unmask and
dissipate hypocrisy。 When that universal consciousness stigmatizes hypocrisy as bad； base； and so
on； it appeals； in passing such a judgment； to its own law； just as the evil consciousness appeals to
its law。 For the former law makes its appearance in opposition to the latter； and thereby as a
particular law。 It has； therefore； no antecedent claim over the other law； rather it legitimizes this
other law。 Hence the universal consciousness； by its zeal in abusing hypocrisy； does precisely the
opposite of what it means to do： for it shows that its so…called 〃true duty〃； which ought to be
universally acknowledged； is something not acknowledged and recognized； and consequently it
grants other an equal right of independently existing on its own account。
This judgment ＇of universal consciousness＇； however； has； at the same time； another side to it；
from which it leads the way to the dissolution of the opposition in question。 Consciousness of the
universal does not proceed； qua real and qua acting； to deal with the evil consciousness； for this
latter； rather； is the real。 In opposing the latter； it is a consciousness which is not entangled in the
opposition of individual and universal involved in action。 It stays within the universality of thought；
takes up the attitude of an apprehending intelligence； and its first act is merely that of judgment。
Through this judgment it now places itself； as was just observed； alongside the first consciousness；
and the latter through this likeness between them； comes to see itself in this other consciousness。
For the consciousness of duty maintains the passive attitude of apprehension。 Thereby it is in
contradiction with itself as the absolute will of duty； as the self that determines absolutely from
itself。 It may well preserve itself in its purity； for it does not act； it is hypocrisy； which wants to see
the fact of judging taken for the actual deed； and instead of proving its uprigh