grundlinien.de

26

The will, α) insofar as it has itself for its own determination and is thus in conformity with its concept and truthful, is the will that is unqualifiedly objective; β) but the objective will, taken as without the infinite form of self-consciousness, is the will submerged in its object or condition, whatever that condition may be in its content – the childlike will, the ethical will, as well as the slavish, the superstitious, and so forth; γ) objectivity, finally, is the one-sided form opposed to the subjective determination of the will, and hence is the immediacy of determinate being as external existence; in this sense the will becomes objective only through the execution of its ends.

These logical determinations of subjectivity and objectivity have been set out here in particular with the intention of remarking expressly, with regard to them, since they will often be used in what follows, that it fares with them as with other differing and opposed determinations of reflection: on account of their finitude, and hence their dialectical nature, they pass over into their opposite.1 With other such determinations of opposition, however, their meaning remains fixed for representation and the understanding, since their identity is still only something inward. |33| In the will, by contrast, such oppositions – which are supposed to be abstract determinations, and at the same time determinations of the will, which can be known only as the concrete – of themselves lead to this identity of theirs and to a confusion of their meanings, a confusion which the understanding encounters only unconsciously. – Thus the will, as freedom existing in itself, is subjectivity itself; this is accordingly its concept, and hence also its objectivity; but finitude is its subjectivity as opposed to objectivity; yet it is precisely in this opposition that the will is not with itself, but entangled with the object, and its finitude likewise consists just as much in its not being subjective, and so forth. – What, therefore, the subjective or the objective aspect of the will is to mean in what follows must in each case be made clear from the context, which contains their position in relation to the totality.

  1. Hegel gives no reference. Subjectivity and objectivity are determinations of reflection: they have their sense only in opposition to one another and therefore exchange it as soon as either is held fast on its own (Encyclopaedia, 3rd ed. § 115 ff.). – See The Grammar of Logical Concepts: reflection and transition. ↩︎

DE ES

Comments

3 responses to “26”

  1. Hegel (Notes) Avatar
    Hegel (Notes)

    [zu § 26] α) Idea, unity of the subjective will and its essence, concept —
    I will my universal essence — rational will — ethical life —
    β) without subjective freedom — heteronomous — Kant — to recognize the merely reflected as a limitation — to let oneself be determined by objects, as by stimuli, etc.
    — This subjectivity, an absolute principle — as a moment of our times

  2. Eduard Gans (Additions) Avatar
    Eduard Gans (Additions)

    It is commonly believed that the subjective and the objective stand fixedly opposed to one another. But this is not the case, since they rather pass over into one another, for they are not abstract determinations like positive and negative, but already have a more concrete meaning. If we first consider the expression subjective, it can mean an end which is only that of a particular subject. In this sense a very bad work of art, one that fails to achieve its object, is merely subjective. But this expression can also refer to the content of the will, in which case it is roughly synonymous with what is arbitrary: the subjective content is that which belongs merely to the subject. Thus, for example, bad actions are merely subjective. But then, equally, that pure, empty I can be called subjective, which has only itself as its object and possesses the power to abstract from all further content. Subjectivity thus has, in part, a wholly particular meaning, and in part a highly legitimate one, in that everything I am to recognize also has the task of becoming mine and of attaining validity within me. This is the infinite avidity of subjectivity, to gather together and consume everything in this simple source of the pure I. No less can the objective be understood in different ways. We can understand by it everything that we make into an object for ourselves, whether real existences or mere thoughts that we set over against ourselves; but one likewise understands by it the immediacy of existence in which the end is to realize itself: even if the end itself is wholly particular and subjective, we nevertheless call it objective once it appears. But the objective will is also that in which there is truth. Thus God’s will, the ethical will, is an objective one. Finally, one can also call objective the will that is wholly immersed in its object — the childlike will, which stands in trust, without subjective freedom, and the slavish will, which does not yet know itself as free and is therefore a will without will. Objective, in this sense, is every will that acts guided by an alien authority and has not yet completed the infinite return into itself.

  3. Hegel (Simple) Avatar
    Hegel (Simple)

    § 26: What “objective” means

    Now the opposite word. In the will, “objective” also means three things.

    First: the will that matches its core. It wants freedom, that is, what it really is. Such a will is objective in the highest sense. In this sense, we also call a will objective when it wants the good and the ethical.

    Second: the will that loses itself entirely in something else. Think of a child that simply trusts its parents and does what they say. Or think of a slave who never even thinks that he could be free. Or of a person who lives wholly inside his superstition. This also includes anyone who merely follows the customs of his people without being present in them himself. This will follows a foreign lead. Strictly speaking, it is a will without a will of its own.

    Third: what exists out there in the world. A plan becomes objective when I carry it out. Then it stands before everyone’s eyes, however self-willed it may be.

    Now comes something strange. For our thinking, many pairs of words stay firmly apart, for example up and down. With subjective and objective, this does not work. They turn into each other.

    Let us look at the first two meanings. The free will is wholly itself, and so wholly subjective. For exactly this reason, it is also objective in the highest sense. We call the slave’s will objective, by contrast, because it is wholly stuck in what is foreign. But it lacks precisely the subjective part, the knowledge of itself.

    From this follows a rule for everything that comes next. Only the context tells us what “subjective” or “objective” means each time. Whoever does not pay attention to this mixes up the meanings without noticing.

    Summary: Objective means: in line with its own core, sunk in something foreign, or made real out in the world. In the will, subjective and objective pass over into each other. So we must pay attention to the context each time.

Leave a Reply