[p. 525]
|525| marriage laws, etc., wholly and solely from the character of the whole and its individuality, and thereby showed the empirical theorists, who believe they recognise the contingencies of their systems of the state and of laws from reason and have taken them from human understanding itself or even from universal experience, in a way comprehensible to them, that the reason and human understanding and experience from which the determinate laws derive are not a reason and human understanding a priori, nor an experience a priori, which would be an absolutely universal one, but wholly and solely the living individuality of a people – an individuality whose highest determinacies are again to be comprehended from a more universal necessity.
As it has been shown above, with regard to science, that every single potency can be fixed and science thereby become positive, so precisely this must be asserted of the ethical individual or the people. For according to necessity the totality, as the subsistence of the scattered determinacies, must present itself in it, and the individual link of the chain under which it is placed in the present must pass away and another enter. As the individual grows in this way, one potency stepping forth more strongly and the other receding, it happens that the parts which have organised themselves in the latter find themselves excluded and dead. This division, in which some reach out towards a new life, while the other, which has settled itself at the stage of a determinacy, stays behind and sees life flee from it, is possible only because the determinacy of a stage has been fixed and made formally absolute. The form of law, which has been given to the determinate custom and which is universality or the negative absolute of identity, gives it the semblance of something in itself; and if the mass of a people is great, then the part of it too that organises itself in that

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