REMARK 2.

This is a critique in relation to Kant, and is reserved for consideration elsewhere. I cannot help pointing out, however, that we have here a considerable light on Hegel's attitude to the doctrine of the Immortality. In reference to the usual argument that the soul being one and simple, is indestructible by dissolution of parts, Kant observes that the soul, though extensively simple, may still vanish by process of remission as regards its intensity. To this Hegel rejoins: the usual argument treats the soul as a Thing, and applies in its characterisation the category of extensive Quantum; Kant, therefore, has an equal right to apply that of intensive Quantum the soul, however, is not Ding (thing) but Geist (Spirit), and to the Spirit,' these are Hegel's own words, there belongs certainly Being, but of a quite other intensity than that of intensive Quantum, rather of such an intensity that in it the form of immediate Being and every category of the same are as sublated; not only, then, was remotion of the category of extensive Quantum to be conceded, but that of Quantum in general was to be withdrawn: it is something further yet, however, to perceive how, in the eternal nature of the Spirit, there-being, consciousness, finitude, is, and arises therefrom, without this Spirit becoming thereby a thing.'

6

c. The Alteration of the Quantum.

The distinction of extensive and intensive Quantum is indifferent to the determinateness (specific nature) of Quantum as such. But in general Quantum is the determinateness which is explicitly set as sublated, the indifferent limit, the determinateness which is just as much the negation of itself (as always in another). This

distinction is developed in extensive magnitude, but intensive magnitude is the There-being (the actual existent specialty) of this externality which Quantum is within itself; (it is the appearance as it were, the realisation in a kind of outward mortal state of the notion.) This distinction (of Quantum as negation of its own determinateness) is set as its (Quantum's) contradiction within itself the contradiction to be simple self to self-referent determinateness which is the negation of itself the contradiction to have its determinateness not in it, but in another Quantum.

‘A Quantum, therefore, is explicitly set as, in its Quality, in absolute continuity with its externality, with its otherwiseness. Every quantitative determinateness, therefore, not only can be exceeded, it not only can be altered, but it is explicitly, expressly this, that it must alter itself. Quantitative determinateness continues itself so into its otherwiseness, that it has its Being only in this continuity with another; it is not a beënt, but a becoment limit.

The One is infinite, or the self to self-referent negation, therefore the repulsion of itself from itself. (This is very fine, and not hard to see.) The Quantum is equally infinite, explicitly set as the self to self-referent negativity; it repels itself from itself. But it is a determinate one, the one which has gone over into Therebeing and into the limit; therefore the repulsion of the determinateness from itself, not the production of its own Like, of what is like and equal to its own self, as the repulsion of the One, but of its otherwiseness; it is now explicit in itself to dispatch itself beyond itself and become another. It consists in this, to increase or decrease itself; it is the externality of determinateness in itself.

The Quantum, therefore, dispatches itself beyond itself; this other which it becomes is firstly itself a Quantum; but equally as a limit non-beënt, that drives itself beyond itself. The limit which in this transition has again arisen is, therefore, directly only such a one as again sublates itself and passes into another, and so on into the infinite.

6

C.

QUANTITATIVE INFINITUDE.

a. Its Notion.

The Quantum alters itself and becomes another Quantum; the further determination of this alteration, that it proceeds in infinitum, lies in this, that the Quantum is constituted as contradicting itself in itself. The Quantum becomes another; it continues itself, however, into its otherwiseness: the other, therefore, is also a Quantum. But this is the other not only of a, but of the Quantum itself, the negative of it as of a limited something; consequently, its unlimitedness, infinitude. The Quantum is a Sollen, a To-be-to; it implies to-be-determined-for-itself, and such self-determinedness is rather determinedness in another; and conversely it is sublated determinedness in another, it is indifferent self-subsistence.

Finitude and Infinitude receive thus at once each in itself a double, and that an opposed import. The Quantum is finite, firstly, as limited in general; secondly, as self-dispatch beyond itself, as determinedness in another. Its Infinitude, again, is, firstly, nonlimitedness; secondly, its return into itself, indifferent Being-for-self. If we directly compare these moments, there results, that the determination of the Finitude

of the Quantum, the self-dispatch into another, in which its determination is supposed to lie (and lies), is equally determination of the Infinite; the negation of the limit is the same Beyond over the determinateness, in such wise that the Quantum has in this negation, the Infinite, its ultimate determinateness. The other moment of the Infinitude is the Being-for-self that is indifferent to the limit; the Quantum itself, however, is just so limited, that it is what is for itself indifferent to its limit, and so to other Quanta and its Beyond. The Finite and the Infinite (that Infinite which is to be separated from the Finite, -the spurious Infinite) have, in Quantum, each already in it the moment of the other.

The qualitative and the quantitative Infinites distinguish themselves by this, that in the former the antithesis of Finite and Infinite is qualitative, and the transition of the Finite into the Infinite, or the reference of both to each other, lies only in the notion, only in the In itself. The qualitative determinateness is as immediate, and refers itself to the otherwiseness essentially as to a something that is other to it; it is not explicit as having in itself its negation, its other. Quantity, on the contrary, is, as such, sublated determinateness; it is explicit as being unequal with itself and indifferent to itself, and so as alterable. The qualitative Finite and Infinite stand, therefore, absolutely, i. e., abstractly opposed to each other; their unity is the internal reference that is implied at bottom: the Finite continues itself, therefore, only in itself, and not in it, into its other. On the contrary, the quantitative Finite refers itself in itself into its infinite, in which it has its absolute determinateness. This their reference is set out at first hand in the Quantitative Infinite Progress.

b. The Quantitative Infinite Progress.

The Progress into the Infinite is in general the expression of contradiction, here of that contradiction which the quantitative Finite or Quantum in general implies. It is that alternation of Finite and Infinite which was considered in the qualitative sphere, with the difference that, as just remarked above, in the quantitative sphere, the limit dispatches itself and continues itself in itself into its Beyond; consequently, conversely also the quantitative Infinite is explicit as having the Quantum in itself, for the Quantum is in its Beingout-of-self at the same time itself; its externality belongs to its determination.

'The infinite Progress is indeed only the expression of this contradiction, not its solution; but because of the continuity of the one determinateness into its other, it brings forward an apparent solution in a union of both. As this progress is first expressed, it is the Aufgabe of the Infinite (i.e. at once the giving up and the problem proposed; both sides of the English puzzle or riddle are, as it were, glanced at), not the attainment of the same,-its recurrent production, without getting beyond the Quantum itself, and without the Infinite becoming positive and present. The Quantum has it in its notion to have a Beyond of itself. This Beyond is, firstly, the abstract moment of the nonbeing of the Quantum; this latter eliminates itself in itself; thus it refers itself to its Beyond as to its Infinitude, as in the qualitative moment of the antithesis. But, secondly, the Quantum stands in continuity with this Beyond; the Quantum consists just in this, to be the other of itself, to be external to its own self: this, that is external, therefore, is just so not another