[p. 520]
|520| terms, now admonishing the right of the state of its determinacy through a slight preponderance of the civil, now making breaches and fissures through the preponderance of the former in the latter, and thus on the one hand reviving every system in general for a time through a more forceful indwelling, on the other reminding all of them, in their separation, of their temporality and dependence, – and also destroys their proliferating expansion and their self-organising by confounding them all at once in single moments, presenting them as drawn into itself and, reborn out of the unity, with the recollection of this dependence and with the feeling of their weakness if they want to be for themselves, letting them go forth again.
This character of positivity of the sciences of right concerns the form through which a potency isolates itself and posits itself as absolute; and from this side, like religion, and whatever else it may be, every philosophical science too can be perverted and contaminated. But we must consider positivity from the side of the matter as well. For although both what we earlier called positive and what we now consider as matter are something particular, nevertheless earlier we considered the external connection of the form of universality with particularity and determinacy, whereas now we consider the particular as such.
And in this respect we must above all take up the cause, against formalism, of that which can be posited as positive according to its matter; for formalism tears apart intuition and its identity of the universal and the particular, sets the abstractions of the universal and the particular over against one another, and what it can exclude from that emptiness but subsume under the abstraction of particularity counts for it as the positive, – without considering that through this opposition the universal becomes

Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.