[p. 234]
|234| [is] intelligence, thinks itself, knows itself as universal –99) a universal knowing that is also my knowing, or as on one that is recognised. In coercion he restored the common will to existing, and sublated my singular will, which I only recognise; my will as such is for me equal to the universal; and since it is violated, its existence taken from it, I restore it – so that I [sublate] the being of the other, who posited his will, which is opposed to me who did not perform, as the universal will. I thereby commit crime. Violence, robbery, theft, insult and so on. – Verbal insult sublates him as100) a universal; I do not say he has done me this or that bad thing, but he is this; the term of abuse posits him in general as something sublated – judgement posits the tree as green; it is green, i.e. it [is] not subject but universal; so the term of abuse makes his whole into something null in itself. – Or real injury sublates him as will; – be it that I steal from him, rob him; – there I attack his unconscious existence, and do not respect what is his, his will in general, but act against it; – here I act openly against his existing, self-expressing will; the former baser, the latter more injurious – open murder finally,101) (not through treachery) [is] on the whole least base, but the greatest violation. – For baseness is conduct towards another as non-existent, or that which keeps [the] form of inwardness, so that my deed does not come to light,
99) In the margin: something is violated that was posited as common will by myself.
100) In the margin: culpa, dolus
101) In the margin: Theft [violates] not the knowing will, – secretly, but the violation greater, for it is in the knowing will in its completeness – in robbery I attack his intelligence only as existence; – not his pure being – life; – absolute power over a life, master, this infinite
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.