grundlinien.de

17

The contradiction which arbitrariness is (§ 15) manifests itself, as the dialectic of the drives and inclinations, in the appearance that they mutually interfere with one another, such that the satisfaction of one requires the subordination or sacrifice of the satisfaction of another, and so on. Furthermore, since a drive is merely a simple direction of its own determinacy and thus does not have its measure within itself, this subordinating or sacrificing determination is the contingent decision of arbitrariness, whether it proceeds with a calculating understanding as to which drive yields more satisfaction, or according to any other arbitrary consideration.

DE ES

Comments

2 responses to “17”

  1. Hegel (Notes) Avatar
    Hegel (Notes)

    [zu § 17] Drive is contingent; its being-negated must likewise be posited.
    To abandon oneself to a single drive — is destructive — this is its dialectic — to regard it as purely positive — nothing negative, nothing to be limited, is its one-sidedness. To limit [it] — not to leave it in its [mere] being — 68

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

    Drives and inclinations are, in the first instance, the content of the will, and only reflection stands above them; but these drives themselves become driving, press upon one another, disturb one another, and all want to be satisfied. If, setting aside all the others, I simply immerse myself in one of them, I find myself in a destructive restrictedness, for I have thereby given up precisely my universality, which is a system of all the drives. But just as little is anything achieved by a mere subordinating of the drives, which is what the understanding usually arrives at, because no measure for this ordering can be given here, and the demand therefore usually runs out into the tedium of general commonplaces.

Leave a Reply