<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: 112	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://grundlinien.de/en/112/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://grundlinien.de/en/112/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2026 10:52:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Hegel (Simple)		</title>
		<link>https://grundlinien.de/en/112/#comment-3552</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hegel (Simple)]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2026 10:52:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://grundlinien.de/?p=900110#comment-3552</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[§ 112: My deed concerns others

When I carry out my purpose, it does not stay with me. It enters the world. And in the world live other people with wills of their own.

What follows from this?

My deed always has to do with the will of others. It changes something in their lives. It can help them or harm them. It can please them or not.

A difference from right:

Right only forbids. It says: Leave the other his property. What else the other wants is none of its business. In morality, this is different. Here the welfare of others matters too. Here I can want to do them good.

Three sides of a deed:

So a deed that I have carried out has three sides. It exists outside in the world. It should be right. And it concerns the will of others.

On the moral standpoint, these three sides often fall apart. They contradict each other. That is why morality is a field of tensions. Here, we cannot fully resolve them.

Summary: Every deed concerns the will of others. So in morality, their welfare matters too. The three sides of the deed easily come into contradiction.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>§ 112: My deed concerns others</p>
<p>When I carry out my purpose, it does not stay with me. It enters the world. And in the world live other people with wills of their own.</p>
<p>What follows from this?</p>
<p>My deed always has to do with the will of others. It changes something in their lives. It can help them or harm them. It can please them or not.</p>
<p>A difference from right:</p>
<p>Right only forbids. It says: Leave the other his property. What else the other wants is none of its business. In morality, this is different. Here the welfare of others matters too. Here I can want to do them good.</p>
<p>Three sides of a deed:</p>
<p>So a deed that I have carried out has three sides. It exists outside in the world. It should be right. And it concerns the will of others.</p>
<p>On the moral standpoint, these three sides often fall apart. They contradict each other. That is why morality is a field of tensions. Here, we cannot fully resolve them.</p>
<p>Summary: Every deed concerns the will of others. So in morality, their welfare matters too. The three sides of the deed easily come into contradiction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Eduard Gans (Additions)		</title>
		<link>https://grundlinien.de/en/112/#comment-2079</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Eduard Gans (Additions)]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 May 1833 13:27:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://grundlinien.de/?p=900110#comment-2079</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;In connection with abstract right it had been said that it contains only prohibitions, so that the strictly rightful action has, with regard to the will of others, only a negative determination. In morality, by contrast, the determination of my will in relation to the will of others is positive, that is, the subjective will has, in what it realizes, the will that is in itself as something inward. Here there is present a bringing-forth or an alteration of existence, and this stands in relation to the will of others. The concept of morality is the inward relation of the will to itself. But here there is not merely &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; will; rather, the objectification carries within it at the same time the determination that the single will sublates itself therein, and thus, precisely because the determination of one-sidedness falls away, two wills and a positive relation of these to one another are posited. In right it does not matter whether the will of others wants something in relation to my will, which gives itself existence in property. In morality, by contrast, it is a matter of the welfare of others as well, and this positive relation can first occur here.&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In connection with abstract right it had been said that it contains only prohibitions, so that the strictly rightful action has, with regard to the will of others, only a negative determination. In morality, by contrast, the determination of my will in relation to the will of others is positive, that is, the subjective will has, in what it realizes, the will that is in itself as something inward. Here there is present a bringing-forth or an alteration of existence, and this stands in relation to the will of others. The concept of morality is the inward relation of the will to itself. But here there is not merely <em>one</em> will; rather, the objectification carries within it at the same time the determination that the single will sublates itself therein, and thus, precisely because the determination of one-sidedness falls away, two wills and a positive relation of these to one another are posited. In right it does not matter whether the will of others wants something in relation to my will, which gives itself existence in property. In morality, by contrast, it is a matter of the welfare of others as well, and this positive relation can first occur here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Hegel (Notes)		</title>
		<link>https://grundlinien.de/en/112/#comment-2080</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hegel (Notes)]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Dec 1822 08:06:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://grundlinien.de/?p=900110#comment-2080</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;Objectivity – here is &lt;em&gt;universal subjectivity&lt;/em&gt; –&lt;br /&gt;
The external existence of the subject is essentially at once the will of others&lt;br /&gt;
– &lt;em&gt;being for another&lt;/em&gt; – i.e. subjective will&lt;br /&gt;
Presupposition, material – &lt;em&gt;other subjectivity&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
conditioned doing – bringing-forth of an alteration of existence, i.e. a determination that has a relation to the will of others –&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Objectivity – here is <em>universal subjectivity</em> –<br />
The external existence of the subject is essentially at once the will of others<br />
– <em>being for another</em> – i.e. subjective will<br />
Presupposition, material – <em>other subjectivity</em><br />
conditioned doing – bringing-forth of an alteration of existence, i.e. a determination that has a relation to the will of others –</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
