[p. 204]
|204| it separates off, and makes into its object, which is thus not the empty satiety, the simple feeling of self which is lost in desire and restored again in its satisfaction;41) but what vanishes is the pure form of the indifference of the extremes of the drive, or the purpose, content, which is opposed to singularity, and this vanishing of this indifference is, as vanishing of the opposition, being, but filled being. α) it becomes intuiting, through the immediacy which comes to be through the sublating of the opposition (in general the I always passes over in this way into intuiting, and feeling everywhere.) β) the main thing is the content of the object; it separates itself from its drive, thereby it receives another form; it is the drive set at rest, become itself, filled with itself; the lack was the intuiting of the empty I;42) for this was object to itself; it held together the distinctions of the syllogism, was their indifference, their subsisting, – not being as such, it was the first immediate I, but as such. The drive separated from the I, it is released out of the self, or the mere filling held together by being – work of the I, it knows its doing therein, i.e. itself as the I which was previously being in the interior; – as doing (not as in recollection) but such that the content as such is through it; because the distinction as such was its own; the distinction makes up the content, and what alone matters here is that the I [has] posited the distinction out of itself, or knows it as its own, (name and thing are, the former, not the distinction as such of the I, the latter is simple.)
41) In the margin: external self-consciousness, being, and desire – abstract being-for-itself, animal, or not singular satisfaction – but universal – desire is moment, being-for-itself precisely the syllogism enclosed in the self.
42) In the margin: itself as distinguished within itself – (not an external object)
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.