grundlinien.de

49

In relation to external things, the rational factor is that I possess property; the side of particularity, however, comprises subjective aims, needs, arbitrary will, talents, external circumstances, and so forth (§ 45); on this depends possession merely as such, but this particular side is not yet, within this sphere of abstract personality, posited as identical with freedom. What and how much I possess is therefore a matter of legal contingency.

In respect of personality, the several persons — if we may here speak of several, where no such distinction as yet obtains — are equal. But this is an empty tautological proposition; for the person, as the abstract, is precisely that which is not yet particularized and posited in determinate difference. – Equality is the abstract identity of the understanding, into which reflective thinking, and with it the mediocrity of spirit in general, first falls whenever it encounters the relation of a unity to a difference. |55| Here, equality would be only the equality of abstract persons as such, outside of which, precisely for that reason, everything pertaining to possession — this ground of inequality — falls. – The demand, sometimes made, for equality in the distribution of land, or even of whatever wealth is further available, is an understanding all the more empty and superficial in that this particularity comprises not only external natural contingency but also the entire compass of spiritual nature in its infinite particularity and diversity, as well as in its reason as developed into an organism. – One cannot speak of an injustice of nature in the unequal distribution of possessions and wealth, for nature is not free and is therefore neither just nor unjust. That all human beings should have a livelihood sufficient for their needs is, on the one hand, a moral wish, and, expressed in this indeterminacy, a well-meant one, but, like whatever is merely well-meant in general, it possesses no objective being; on the other hand, a livelihood is something other than possession and belongs to another sphere, that of civil society.

DE ES

Comments

4 responses to “49”

  1. Hegel (Notes) Avatar
    Hegel (Notes)

    Equality (identity) of human beings according to their personality
    b) External things
    Legitimacy – equality in the In-, not in the finite
    – immense difference –
    Victory of the legal – [of] civil society – advantage, benefit –

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

    The equality that one might wish to introduce with respect to the distribution of goods would, since wealth depends on diligence, in any case be destroyed again within a short time. But what cannot be carried out should also not be carried out. For human beings are indeed equal, but only as persons, that is, with regard to the source of their possession. Accordingly, every human being would have to have property. If, therefore, one wishes to speak of equality, it is this equality that must be considered. Falling outside it, however, is the determination of particularity, the question of how much I possess. Here the assertion is false that justice demands that the property of everyone should be equal, for justice demands only that everyone should have property. Rather, particularity is precisely where inequality has its place, and equality here would be a wrong. It is quite true that people frequently develop a desire for the goods of others, but this is precisely the wrong, for right is that which remains indifferent to particularity.

  3. Cross-reference Avatar
    Cross-reference

    Cross-reference:
    From the reading group’s excursuses (in German), the following belong here:

    The Positivity of the Christian Religion (1795/96): Equality

  4. Hegel (Simple) Avatar
    Hegel (Simple)

    § 49: Equal as persons, unequal in possession

    It is rational that I have property. Every human being should be able to have property. But what and how much I own is another question.

    That depends on many things. On my wishes and aims, my talents, my hard work, my luck, the circumstances. For right at this stage, all this is chance.

    Are not all human beings equal?

    As persons, yes. But that is an empty sentence. The person is exactly what is still without any differences. If you speak of equality here, you only say: Persons are persons.

    Everything else is unequal. And that is exactly where possession belongs.

    The demand for equal shares:

    Some demand that we share out land or wealth equally. This demand is empty and shallow. For human beings differ, not only by nature but also in spirit. They have different gifts, plans and paths. Equal shares would soon be gone again, because hard work and skill differ.

    Nor may you complain about nature here. Nature is not free. That is why it is neither just nor unjust.

    And a living?

    People say: Everyone should have what he needs to live. That is well meant. But said in such a general way, it stays a mere wish. Besides, a living is something other than property. It belongs to a later stage, in civil society.

    Summary: Human beings are equal as persons. That is why everyone should be able to have property. How much each has is unequal, and that is no wrong.

Leave a Reply