phenomenology of mind- 第54部分

Matter；　on　the　contrary；　is　not　a　thing　that　exists；　it　is　being　in　the　sense　of　universal　being；　or　being
in　the　way　the　concept　is　being。　Reason；　still　instinctive；　correctly　draws　this　distinction　without
being　conscious　that　it　（reason）；　by　the　very　fact　of　its　testing　the　law　in　every　sense…particular；
cancels　the　merely　sensuous　existence　of　the　law；　and；　when　it　construes　the　moments　of　the　law
as　forms　of　matter；　their　essential　nature　is　taken　to　be　something　universal；　and　specifically
expressed　as　a　non…sensuous　element　of　sense；　an　incorporeal　and　yet　objective　existence。　

We　have　now　to　see　what　turn　its　result　takes；　and　what　new　shape　this　activity　of　observation
will；　in　consequence；　assume。　As　the　outcome　and　truth　of　this　experimentation　we　find　pure　law；
which　is　freed　from　sensuous　elements；　we　see　it　as　a　concept；　which；　while　present　in　sense；
operates　there　independently　and　unrestrained；　while　enveloped　in　sense；　is　detached　from　it　and　is
a　concept　bare　and　simple。　This；　which　is　in　truth　result　and　essence；　now　comes　before　this
consciousness　itself；　but　as　an　object；　moreover；　since　the　object　is　not　exactly　a　result　for　it　and　is
unrelated　to　the　preceding　process；　the　object　is　a　specific　kind　of　object；　and　the　relation　of
consciousness　to　it　takes　the　form　of　another　kind　of　observation。　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　a　（2）
　　　　　　　　　　Observation　of　Organic　Nature

Such　an　object　which　sustains　the　procedure　in　the　simple　activity　of　the　notion　is　an　organism。　

Organic　existence　is　this　absolutely　fluid　condition　wherein　determinateness；　which　would　only　put
it　in　relation　to　an　other；　is　dissolved。　Inorganic　things　involve　determinateness　in　their　very
essence；　and　on　that　account　a　thing　realizes　the　completeness　of　the　moments　of　the　notion　only
along　with　another　thing；　and　hence　gets　lost　when　it　enters　the　dialectic　movement。　In　the　case　of
an　organic　being；　on　the　other　hand；　all　determinate　characteristics；　by　means　of　〃which　it　is
palpable　to　another；　are　held　under　the　control　of　the　simple　organic　unity；　none　of　them　comes
forward　as　essential　and　capable　of　detaching　itself　from　the　rest　and　relating　itself　to　an　other
being。　What　is　organic；　therefore；　preserves　itself　in　its　very　relation。　

The　aspects　of　law　on　which　the　instinct　of　reason　directs　its　observation　here　are；　as　we　see　from
the　above；　in　the　first　instance　organic　nature　and　inorganic　nature　in　their　relation　to　one　another。
The　latter　means　for　organic　nature　just　the　free　play…a　freedom　opposed　to　the　simple　notion　of
organic　natureloosely　connected　characteristics　in　which　individuated　nature　is　at　once　dissolved；
and　out　of　the　continuity　of　which　the　individuated　unit　of　nature　at　the　same　time　breaks　away　and
exists　separately。　Air；　water；　earth；　zones　and　climate　are　universal　elements　of　this　sort；　which
make　up　the　indeterminate　simple　being　of　natural　individualities；　and　in　which　these　are　at　the
same　time　reflected　into　themselves。　Neither　the　individuality　nor　the　natural　element　is　absolutely
self…contained。　On　the　contrary：　in　the　independent　detachment；　which　observation　finds　these
assuming　towards　one　another；　they　stand　at　the　same　time　in　essential　relation　to　one　another；　but
in　such　a　way　that　their　independence　and　mutual　indifference　form　the　predominating　feature；　and
only　in　part　become　abstractions。　Here；　then；　law　appears　as　the　relation　of　an　element　to　the
formative　process　of　the　organic　being；　which　at　one　moment　has　the　element　over　against　itself；　at
another　exhibits　it　within　its　own　self…determining　organic　structure。　But　laws　like　these：　animals
belonging　to　the　air　are　of　the　nature　of　birds；　those　belonging　to　water　have　the　constitution　of
fish；　animals　in　northerly　latitudes　have　thick　coats　of　hair；　and　so　on…such　laws　exhibit　a　degree　of
poverty　which　does　not　do　justice　to　the　manifold　variety　of　organic　nature。　Besides　the　fact　that
the　free　activity　of　organic　nature　can　readily　divest　its　forms　of　determinate　characters　like　theses
and　everywhere　presents　of　necessity　exceptions　to　such　laws　or　rules；　as　we　might　call　them；　the
characterization　of　those　very　animals　to　which　they　do　apply　is　so　very　superficial　that　even　the
necessity　of　the　〃laws〃　can　be　nothing　else　but　superficial　too；　and　does　not　carry　us　further　than
what　is　implied　in　speaking　of　the　〃great　influence〃　of　environment　on　the　organism。　And　this　does
not　tell　us　what　properly　is　due　to　that　influence　and　what　is　not。　Such　like　relations　of　organic
beings　to　the　elements　they　live　in　cannot　therefore　be　strictly　called　laws　at　all。　For；　on　the　one
hand；　such　a　relation；　when　we　look　at　its　content；　does　not　exhaust；　as　we　saw；　the　range　of　the
organic　beings　considered；　and　on　the　other；　the　terms　of　the　relation　itself　stand　indifferently　apart
from　one　another　and　express　no　necessity。　In　the　concept　of　an　acid　lies　the　notion　of　a　base；　just
as　the　notion　of　positive　electricity　implies　that　of　negative；　but　even　though　we　do　find　as　a　fact　a
thick　coat　of　hair　associated　with　northerly　latitudes；　the　structure　of　a　fish　with　water；　or　that　of
birds　with　air；　there　is　nothing　in　the　notion　of　the　north　implying　the　notion　of　a　thick　covering　of
hair；　the　notion　of　the　structure　of　fish　does　not　lie　in　the　notion　of　the　sea；　nor　that　of　birds　in　that
of　the　air。　Because　of　this　free　detachment　of　the　two　notions　from　one　another　there　are；　as　a　fact
also　land　animals　with　the　essential　characters　of　a　bird；　of　fish；　and　so　on。　The　necessity；　just
because　it　cannot　be　conceived　to　be　an　inner　necessity　of　the　object；　ceases　also　to　have　a
foothold　in　sense；　and　can　be　no　longer　observed　in　actual　reality；　but　has　quitted　the　sphere　of
reality。　Finding　thus　no　place　in　the　real　object　itself；　it　becomes　what　is　called　a　〃teleological
relation〃；　a　relation　which　is　external　to　what　is　related；　and　consequently　the　very　reverse　of　a
law　of　its　constitution。　It　is　an　idea　entirely　detached　from　the　necessity　of　nature；　a　thought　which
leaves　this　necessity　of　nature　behind　and　floats　above　it　all　by　itself。　（4）　

If　the　relation；　above　alluded　to；　of　organic　existence　to　the　elemental　conditions　of　nature　does　not
express　its　true　being；　the　notion　of　Purpose；　on　the　other　hand；　does　contain　it。　The　observing
attitude　does　not　indeed　take　the　to　be　the　genuine　essence　of　organic　existence；　this　notion　seems
to　it　to　fall　outside　the　real　nature　of　the　organism；　and　is　then　merely　that　external　teleological
relation　above　mentioned。　Yet　looking　at　how　the　organic　being　was　previously　characterized；　the
organic　is　in　point　of　fact　just　realized　concrete　purpose。　For　since　itself　maintains　itself　in　relation
to　another；　it　is　just　that　kind　of　natural　existence　in　which　nature　reflects　itself　into　the　notion；　and
the　moments　of　necessity　separated　out　＇by　Understanding＇…a　cause　and　an　effect；　an　active　and　a
passive…are　here　brought　together　and　combined　into　a　single　unity。　In　this　way　we　have　here　not
only　something　appearing　as　a　result　of　necessity；　but；　because　it　has　returned　to　itself；　the　last　or
the　result　is　just　as　much　the　first　which　starts　the　process；　and　is　to　itself　the　purpose　which　it
realizes。　What　is　organic　does　not　produce　something；　it　merely　conserves　itself；　or　what　is
produced　is　as　much　there　already　as　produced。　

We　must　elucidate　this　principle　more　fully；　both　as　it　is　in　itself　and　as　it　is　for　the　instinct　of
reason；　in　order　to　see　how　reason　finds　itself　there；　but　does　not　know　itself　in　what　it　finds。　The
concept　of　purpose；　then；　which　rational　observation　has　reached；　is；　while　reason　has
apprehended　it　in　consciousness；　given　to　reason　as　something　actually　real　as　well；　it　is　not　merely
an　external　relation　of　the　actual；　but　its　inner　being。　This　actual；　which　is　itself　a　purpose；　is　related
purposively　to　an　other；　i。e。　its　relation　is　a　contingent　one　with　respect　to　what　both　are
immediately；　prima　facie　they　are　both　self…subsistent　and　indifferent　to　one　another。　The　real
nature　of　their　relation；　however；　is　something　different　from　what　they　thus　appear　to　be；　and　its
effect　has　another　meaning　than　sense…perception　directly　finds。　The　necessity　inherent　in　the
process　is　concealed；　and　comes　out　at　the　end；　but　in　such　a　way　that　this　very　end　shows　it　to
have　been　also　the　first。　The　end；　however；　shows　this　priority　of　itself　by　the　fact　that　nothing
comes　out　of　the　alteration　the　act　produced；　but　what　was　there　already。　Or；　again；　if　we　start
from　what　is　first；　this；　in　coming　to　the　end　or　the　result　of　its　act；　merely　returns　to　itself；　and；　just
by　so　doing；　it　demonstrates　itself　to　be　that　which　has　itself　as　its　end；　that　is　to　say；　qua　first　it
has　already　returned　to　itself；　or　is　self…contained；　is　in　and　for　itself。　What；　then；　it　arrives　at　by　the
process　of　its　action　is　itself；　and　its　arriving　merely　at　itself　means　feeling　itself；　is　its　self…feeling。
Thus　we　have　here；　no　doubt；　the　distinction　between　what　it　is　and　what　it　seeks；　but　this　is
merely　the　semblance　of　a　distinction；　and　consequently　it　is　a　notion　in　its　very　nature。　

This