grundlinien.de

190

a. The Kind of Need and Satisfaction

The animal has a limited circle of means and ways of satisfying its likewise limited needs. The human being proves, even within this dependence, at the same time his going-beyond it, and his universality — at first through the multiplication of needs and means, and then through the division and differentiation of the concrete need into individual parts and aspects, which become various, particularized, and thereby more abstract needs.

In right, the object is the person; on the moral standpoint, the subject; in the family, the family member; in civil society in general, the citizen (as bourgeois) — here, on the standpoint of needs (compare § 123, Remark), it is the concretum of representation that one calls human being; it is, therefore, only here, and, properly speaking, only here, that there is talk of the human being in this sense.

DE ES

Comments

2 responses to “190”

  1. Eduard Gans (Additions) Avatar
    Eduard Gans (Additions)

    The animal is something particular; it has its instinct and the bounded, insurmountable means of satisfaction. There are insects bound to a particular plant, other animals that have a wider range and can live in various climates; but there is always something limited set against the range that belongs to the human being. The need for dwelling and clothing, the necessity of no longer leaving food raw but making it adequate to oneself and destroying its natural immediacy, means that the human being does not have it as easy as the animal, and as spirit ought not to have it that easy either. The understanding, which grasps distinctions, brings multiplication into these needs, and since taste and utility become criteria of judgment, the needs themselves are also seized by this. In the end it is no longer need but opinion that must be satisfied, and it belongs precisely to education to break down the concrete into its particularities. In the multiplication of needs lies precisely a check on desire, for when people make use of many things, the urge toward any one thing they might need is not so strong, and this is a sign that need in general is not so overpowering.

  2. Hegel (Simple) Avatar
    Hegel (Simple)

    § 190: Humans have more needs than animals

    An animal has few, fixed needs. And it has few, fixed means to meet them. Some insects live on a single plant only.

    With human beings it is different. They multiply their needs. A person does not only want to eat. He wants his food cooked, spiced and on a plate. He splits one need into many single parts.

    Is this a lack?

    No. In this the human being shows that he goes beyond mere nature. He does not have it as easy as an animal. As spirit, he also must not have it so easy.

    Who is “the human being” here?

    In right, he was a person. In morality, he was a subject. In the family, he is a family member. In civil society, he is a citizen. And here, with needs, he is simply “the human being”. Only here do we really speak of the human being in this sense.

    Summary: The human being multiplies his needs and splits them into many parts. In this he goes beyond the animal. With needs, he appears as “the human being”.

Leave a Reply