{"id":900137,"date":"2024-05-31T10:50:00","date_gmt":"2024-05-31T08:50:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/grundlinien.de\/?p=900137"},"modified":"2026-08-24T10:30:04","modified_gmt":"2026-08-24T08:30:04","slug":"139","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/grundlinien.de\/en\/139\/","title":{"rendered":"139"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Self-consciousness, in the vanity of every otherwise valid determination and in the pure inwardness of the will, is just as much the possibility of making the universal in and for itself<\/em> its principle, as it is the possibility of making arbitrariness<\/em> — its own particularity — its principle above the universal, and of realizing this through action — of being evil<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conscience, as formal subjectivity, is quite simply on the verge of tipping over into evil<\/em>; morality and evil have their common root in this self-subsistent certainty of itself, knowing and deciding for itself.<\/p>\n

The origin<\/em> of evil<\/em> in general lies in the mystery — that is, in the speculative aspect — of freedom, in its necessity of going out from the naturalness<\/em> of the will and of being inward<\/em> as against it. It is this naturalness of the will which, as the contradiction of itself and incompatible with itself, comes to existence in that opposition, and it is thus this very particularity<\/em> of the will itself that determines itself further as evil. Particularity is, namely, only as the doubled<\/em>, here the opposition of naturalness to the inwardness of the will, which, in this opposition, is only a relative<\/em> and formal being-for-itself, one that can draw its content solely from the determinations of the natural will — desire, drive, inclination, and so on. Of these desires, drives, and so on, it is now said that they can<\/em> be good or<\/em> also evil. But since the will makes them, in this determination of contingency<\/em> which they have as natural, and thus the form that the will here has — particularity — into the determination of its own content, it is thereby opposed to universality<\/em>, as the inner objective, the good, which enters at the same time, along with the will’s reflection into itself and knowing consciousness, as the other extreme to immediate objectivity, the merely natural; and so this inwardness of the will is evil. Man is therefore, at once, evil both in himself<\/em>, or by nature<\/em>, and through his reflection into himself<\/em>, such that neither nature as such — that is, if it were not the naturalness of a will remaining within its particular content — nor the reflection going into itself<\/em>, knowing in general, is, for itself, evil, if it does not hold itself within that opposition. — With this side of the necessity of evil<\/em> it is likewise absolutely united that this evil is determined as that which necessarily ought not to be<\/em>, that is, that it ought to be sublated — not that this first standpoint of division ought not in general to emerge (it is, rather, precisely what constitutes the distinction between the irrational animal and the human being), but that one ought not to remain standing at it, and that particularity ought not to be held fast as essential over against the universal, that it ought to be overcome as null. Further, in this necessity of evil it is subjectivity<\/em>, as the infinity of this reflection, that has this opposition before it and is within it; if it remains standing at it, that is, is evil, then it is thereby for itself<\/em>, holds itself as a single instance, and is itself this arbitrariness. The single subject<\/em>, as such, therefore bears, quite simply, the guilt of evil<\/em>.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Self-consciousness, in the vanity of every otherwise valid determination and in the pure inwardness of the will, is just as much the possibility of making the universal in and for itself its principle, as it is the possibility of making arbitrariness — its own particularity — its principle above the universal, and of realizing this […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[21,13],"tags":[35],"class_list":["post-900137","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-paragraph-en","category-uncategorized","tag-concept"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/grundlinien.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/900137","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/grundlinien.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/grundlinien.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/grundlinien.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/grundlinien.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=900137"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/grundlinien.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/900137\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":900197,"href":"https:\/\/grundlinien.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/900137\/revisions\/900197"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/grundlinien.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=900137"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/grundlinien.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=900137"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/grundlinien.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=900137"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}