The action, furthermore, as translated into external existence, which develops in every direction according to its connection within external necessity, has manifold consequences. The consequences, as the shape that has the purpose of the action for its soul, belong to the action (are what pertains to it) — but at the same time, as the purpose that has been posited into externality, the action is abandoned to external powers, which attach to it something quite other than what it is for itself, and roll it onward into remote, alien consequences. It is likewise the right of the will to impute to itself only the former, since only these lie in its purpose.
What are contingent and what are necessary consequences contains an indeterminacy, arising from the fact that inner necessity, in the finite, enters into existence as external necessity, as a relation of individual things to one another, things which, as self-subsistent, are indifferent to one another and come together only externally. The principle of despising the consequences in one’s actions, and the other principle of judging actions by their consequences and making these the measure of what is right and good — both are equally abstract understanding. The consequences, as the action’s own immanent shaping, only manifest its nature and are nothing other than the action itself; the action cannot, therefore, disown and despise them. But conversely, there is likewise comprised among them what externally intervenes and is contingently added, which does not concern the nature of the action itself. — The development of the contradiction that the necessity of the finite contains is, in existence, precisely the turning of necessity into contingency, and conversely. To act therefore means, from this side, to abandon oneself to this law. — Herein lies the fact that it redounds to the criminal’s advantage if his action has less evil consequences, just as a good action must put up with having had no, or fewer, consequences, and that a crime from which the consequences have more fully developed is charged the more heavily to its account. — The heroic self-consciousness (as in the tragedies of the ancients, Oedipus and the like) has not yet advanced, out of its solid integrity, to the reflection that distinguishes deed and action, the external occurrence from purpose and knowledge of the circumstances, nor to the splintering of the consequences, but takes upon itself the responsibility in the entire compass of the deed.

Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.