Since the substance of the thing, in itself, which is my property, is its externality, i.e. its lack of substantiality — it is not, as against me, an end in itself (§ 42) — and since this realized externality is the use or utilization I make of it, the entire use or utilization is the thing in its whole compass, so that, if this use is mine, I am the owner of the thing, of which nothing remains, beyond the entire compass of its use, that could be the property of another.
[zu § 61/62] In use – as annihilation of the singular – the objective nature of the thing emerges.
Using-up – I can take possession of the universal only in representation; if it is to be mine – then taking possession too holds only for others –
The initially immediate modes recede – toward the determinacy of the singularity of immediate existence – as against the universal – toward sign as such.
α) Physical relation of use to the property of the whole; – use is
α) consumption of the whole in the case of individual things, β) in the case of elemental and organic things, air, current – replenishes itself – animal – birds’ feathers – a horse’s strength replenishes itself through rest – propagation of game, domestic animals – the individual is consumed, the species is preserved – γ) use of talents – talents, skills are by their nature a whole – is αα) their formation, generation, ββ) production – working – not merely growing – like animals, which need only feed for that.
β) Legal relation, difference and relation, connection of singularity and universality to one another. – Use, consuming of the singular, but α) singularity is β) universality, force, capacity, substance, the abiding. Possession of both, of use and of the whole, the abiding – property can differ – to the extent that the two are separable – (like whole and part) –
The relation of use to property is the same as that of substance to accident, of the inner to the outer, of force to its manifestation. This latter exists only insofar as it manifests itself; a field is only a field insofar as it bears yield. Whoever, then, has the use of a field is the owner of the whole, and it is an empty abstraction to recognize yet another property in the object itself.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.