Insofar as it is the existent will which alone can be violated, but this will, in its existence, has entered the sphere of a quantitative extent as well as qualitative determinations, and is accordingly variable, it likewise makes a difference for the objective side of crimes whether such existence and its determinacy is violated in its entire extent altogether — thus in the infinity equal to its concept (as in murder, slavery, compulsion in religion, and so on) — or only in respect of a part, and according to which qualitative determination.

The Stoic view, that there is only one virtue and one vice, the Draconian legislation that punishes every crime with death, as well as the crudeness of formal honor, which places infinite personality in every violation, have this in common: that they remain at the abstract thinking of the free will and of personality, and do not take it in its concrete and determinate existence, which it must have as an Idea. — The distinction between robbery and theft relates to the qualitative aspect that in the former, my ego, too, as present consciousness — thus as this subjective infinity — is violated, and personal violence is perpetrated against me. — Some qualitative determinations, such as danger to public security, have their ground in more specifically determined relations, but are also often grasped only by the detour of consequences rather than from the concept of the matter itself — just as a more dangerous crime, in itself, in its immediate character, is a more severe violation with respect to extent or quality. — The subjective moral quality relates to the higher distinction of the extent to which an occurrence and deed is a deed at all, and concerns its subjective nature itself, of which more later.