dominating one another； sees confusions formed and transitions made from one to another； here it
finds united what it took at first to be absolutely separated； and there separated what it considered
connected。 Hence； when observation thus holds by the unbroken self…sameness of being； it has
here； just in the most general determinations given…e。g。 in the case of the essential marks of an
animal or a plant…to see itself tormented with instances； which rob it of every determination； silence
the universality it reached； and reduce it again to unreflective observation and description。
Observation； which confines itself in this way to what is simple； or restricts the sensuously
dispersed elements by the universal； thus finds its principle confused by its object； because what is
determined must by its very nature get lost in its opposite。 Reason； therefore； must pass from that
inert characteristic which had the semblance of stability； and go on to observe it as it really is in
truth； viz。 as relating itself to its opposite。 What are called essential marks are passive
characteristics； which； when expressed and apprehended as simple； do not bring out what
constitutes their real naturewhich is to be vanishing moments of its process of withdrawing and
betaking itself into itself。 Since the instinct of reason now arrives at the point of looking for the
characteristic in the light of its true naturethat of essentially passing over into its opposite and not
existing apart by itself and for its own sakeit seeks after the Law and the notion of law。 It seeks
for them； moreover； as existing reality； but this feature of concrete reality will in point of fact
disappear before reason； and the aspects of the law will become for it mere moments or
abstractions； so that the law comes to light in the nature of the notion； which has destroyed within
itself the indifferent subsistence of sensuous reality。
To the consciousness observing； the truth of the law is given in 〃experience〃； in the way that sense
existence is object for consciousness； the truth is not given in and itself。 If； however； the law does
not have its truth for in the notion； it is something contingent； not a necessity； in fact； not a law。 But
its being essentially in the form of a notion does not merely not contradict its being present for
observation to deal with； but really gives it on that account necessary existence； and makes it an
object for observation。 The universal in the sense of a rational universality is also universal in the
sense implied in the above notion： its being is for consciousness； it presents itself there as the real；
the objective present； the notion sets itself forth in the form of thinghood and sensuous existence。
But it does not； on that account； lose its nature and fall into the condition of immovable subsisting
passivity； or mere adventitious （gleichgültig） succession。 What is universally valid is also
universally effective： what ought to be； as a matter of fact； is too； and what merely should be； and
is not； has no real truth。 The instinct of reason is entirely within its rights when it stands firm on this
point； and refuses to be led astray by entia intellectus which merely ought to be and； qua ought；
should be allowed to have truth even though they are to be met with nowhere in experience； and
declines to be turned aside by the hypothetical suggestions and all the other impalpable unrealities
designed in the interest of an everlasting 〃ought to be〃 which never is。 （1） For reason is just this
certainty of having reality； and what consciousness is not aware of as a real self （Selbstwesen）； i。e。
what does not appear； is nothing for consciousness at all。
The true nature of law； viz。： that it essentially is reality； no doubt again assumes for consciousness
which remains at the level of observation； the form of an opposite over against the notion and the
inherently universal； in other words； this consciousness does not take such an object as its law to
be a reality of reason； it thinks it has got there something external and foreign。 But it contradicts its
own idea by actually and in fact not taking its universality to mean that all individual things of sense
must have given evidence of the law to enable the truth of the law to be asserted。 The assertion
that stones； when raised from the ground and lot go； fall； does not at all require us to make the
experiment with all stones。 It means most likely that this experiment must have been tried at least
with a good many； and from that we can by analogy draw an inference about the rest with the
greatest probability or with perfect right。 Yet analogy not only gives no perfect right； but； on
account of its nature； contradicts itself so often that the inference to be drawn from analogy itself
rather is that analogy does not permit an inference to be drawn。 Probability； which is what analogy
would come to； loses； when face to face with truth； every distinction of less and greater； be the
probability as great as it may it is nothing as against truth。 The instinct of reason； however； takes；
as a matter of fact； laws of that sort for truth。 It is when reason does not find necessity in them that
it resorts to making this distinction； and lowers the truth of the matter to the level of probability； in
order to bring out the imperfect way in which truth is presented to the consciousness that as yet
has no insight into the pure notion； for universality is before it there merely in the form of simple
immediate universality。 But； at the same time； on account of this universality； the law has truth for
consciousness。 That a stone falls is true for consciousness； because it is aware of the stone being
heavy； i。e。 because in weight； taken by itself as such； the stone has that essential relation to the
earth expressed in the fact of falling。 Consciousness thus finds in experience the objective being of
the law； but has it there in the form of a notion as well； and only because of both factors together is
the law true for consciousness。 The law； therefore； is accepted as a law because it presents itself in
the sphere of appearance and is； at the same time； in its very nature a notion。
The instinct of reason in this type of consciousness； because the law is at the same time inherently
a notion； proceeds to give the law and its moments a purely conceptual form； and proceeds to do
this of necessity； but without knowing that this is what it seeks to do。 It puts the law to the test of
experiment。 As the law first appears； it is enveloped in particulars of sense； and the notion
constituting its nature is involved with empirical elements。 The instinct of reason sets to work to
find out by experiment what follows in such and such circumstances。 By so doing the law seems
only to be plunged still further into sense； but sense existence really gets lost in the process。 The
inner purport of this investigation is to find pure conditions of the law； and this means nothing else
（even if the consciousness stating the fact were to think it meant something different） than
completely to bring out the law in conceptual shape and detach its moments entirely from
determinate specific existence。 For example； negative electricity； which is known at first； say； in the
form of resin…electricity； while positive electricity comes before us as glass…electricitythese； by
means of experiments； lose altogether such a significance； and become purely positive and
negative electricity； neither of which is bound up any longer with things of a particular kind； and we
can no longer say that there are bodies which are electrical positively； others electrical negatively。
In the same way the relationship of acid and base and their reaction constitute a law in which these
opposite factors appear as bodies。 Yet these sundered things have no reality； the power which
tears them apart cannot prevent them from entering forthwith into a process； for they are merely
this relation。 They cannot subsist and be indicated by themselves apart； like a tooth or a claw。 That
it is their very nature to pass over directly into a neutral product makes their existence lie in being
cancelled and superseded； or makes it into a universal； and acid and base possess truth merely
qua Universal。 Just； then； as glass and resin can be equally well positively as negatively electrified；
in the same way acid and base are not attached as properties or qualities to this or that reality；
each thing is only relatively acidulate and basic； what seems to be an absolute base or an absolute
acid gets in the so…called Synsomates （2） the opposite significance in relation to an other。
The result of the experiments is in this way to cancel the moments or inner significations as
properties of specific things； and free the； predicates from their subjects。 These predicates are
found merely as universal； and in truth that is what they are。 Because of this self subsistence they
therefore get the name of kinds of 〃matter〃； which is neither a body nor a property of a body；
certainly no one would call acid； positive and negative electricity； heat； （3） etc。； bodies。
Matter； on the contrary； is not a thing that exists； it is being