F orce an d U n d e r s ta n d in g

C a te g o ria l A s c e n t: F a c t- - > In f in ite C oncept

T h e o re tic a l E n titie s

Law and

o d a lity

H o lis m : P la y o f F o rc e s

Id e n tity a s c o n s is tin g in d iffe re n c e

!"

Force #allegorical for theoretical entities generally": a" Force and its E$pression #%&sser&ng"' (" The Play of Forces' c" Law and E$planation' Appearance and *eality: a" First +&persensi(le ,orld' (" First In-erted #second s&persensi(le" ,orld' c" +econd In-erted ,orld'

)"

."

Fo&r cr&cial/ interlin0ed distinctions are p&t in play: a" 1etween two distinctions: i" the distinction (etween observable and theoretical entities/ and ii" on the other the distinction (etween appearance and reality' (" 1etween two ways of concei-ing appearances: i" as a 0ind of thing distinct from realities/ and ii" as aspects of those realities/ ways in which the real shows &p or is e$pressed' c" 1etween i" (roadly inferential relations and ii" inference as a process #2mo-ement3"' 4the Harman point5 d" 1etween two ways of &nderstanding the inferential relations #or mediations" that concept&ally artic&late o&r 0nowledge: i" as a special 0ind of reality (ehind appearances/ and ii" as something that is implicit in and e$pressed (y them' 6" The first conception of a s&persensi(le world is what one gets (y r&nning together the distinction (etween o(ser-a(le and theoretical things or states of affairs with the distinction (etween appearance and reality'

7" The act&al/ o(ser-a(le manifestations of theoretical o(8ects9the prod&cts of the play of forces9 ser-e for the :nderstanding only as premises/ from which to ma0e inferences a(o&t the o(8ects whose interactions they e$press' These are o(8ects indi-id&ated solely (y the inference-s&pporting laws they are s&(8ect to' The tr&e essence of this first conception of the s&persensi(le world is ta0en consist in those laws: the ;calm realm of laws<' Immediacy 2-anishes3 for the :nderstanding in playing only this mediating role' =" Our object is th&s from now on the syllogism 4+chl&>5 which has for its e$tremes the inner (eing of Things/ and the :nderstanding/ and for its middle term appearance? (&t the mo-ement 41eweg&ng5 of this syllogism yields the f&rther determination of what the :nderstanding descries in this inner world thro&gh the middle term/ and the e$perience from which the :nderstanding learns a(o&t the close-lin0ed &nity of these terms' 4!675 @" The first conception of the s&persensi(le world as inverted treats the semantic conditions of intelligi(ility that artic&late the concepts/ what ma0es them determinate/ as another world' Here we can thin0 of Tractarian +ach-erhalten as a nim(&s s&rro&nding the Tatsachen'

Infinity: !=A' From the idea/ then/ of in-ersion/ which constit&tes the essential nat&re of one aspect of
the s&persensi(le world/ we m&st eliminate the sens&o&s idea of fi$ing the differences in a different s&staining element? and this a(sol&te Botion of the difference m&st (e represented and &nderstood p&rely as inner difference/ a rep&lsion of the selfsame/ as selfsame/ from itself/ and li0eness of the &nli0e as &nli0e' ,e ha-e to thin0 p&re change/ or thin0 antithesis within the antithesis itself/ or contradictionCTh&s the s&persensi(le world/ which is the in-erted world/ has at the same time o-erarched the other world and has it within it? it is for itself the in-erted world/ i'e' the in-ersion of itself? it is itself and its opposite in one &nity' Dnly th&s is it difference as inner difference/ or difference in its own self/ or difference as an infinity' !=!' ,e see that thro&gh infinity/ law completes itself into an immanent necessity/ and all the moments of 4the world of5 appearance are ta0en &p into the inner world' That the simple character of law is infinity means/ according to what we ha-e fo&nd/ #a" that it is self-identical/ (&t is also in itself different? or it is the selfsame which repels itself from itself or s&nders itself into two' ,hat was called simple Force d&plicates itself and thro&gh its infinity is law' #(" ,hat is th&s dirempted/ which constit&tes the parts tho&ght of as in the law/ e$hi(its itself as a sta(le e$istenceC 1&t #c" thro&gh the Botion of inner difference/ these &nli0e and indifferent moments/ space and time/ etc' are a difference which is no difference/ or only a difference of what is selfsame/ and its essence is &nity' As positi-e and negati-e they stim&late each other into acti-ity/ and their (eing is rather to posit themsel-es as not-(eing and to s&spend themsel-es in the &nity' The two disting&ished moments (oth s&(sist? they are implicit and are opposites in themsel-es/ i'e' each is the opposite of itself? each has its EotherE within it and they are only one &nity' !=)' This simple infinity/ or the a(sol&te BotionCwhose omnipresence is neither dist&r(ed nor interr&pted (y any difference/ (&t rather is itself e-ery difference/ as also their s&persession? it p&lsates within itself (&t does not mo-e/ inwardly -i(rates/ yet is at rest' It is self-identical/ for the differences are ta&tological? they are differences that are none' This self-identical essence is therefore related only to itself? Eto itselfE implies relationship to an EotherE/ and the relation-to-self is rather a self-s&ndering? or/ in other words/ that -ery selfidenticalness is an inner difference' These s&ndered moments are th&s in and for themsel-es each an opposite9of an other? th&s in each moment the EotherE is at the same time e$pressed? or each is not the opposite of an EotherE (&t only a p&re opposite? and so each is therefore in its own self the opposite of itself' In other words/ it is not an opposite at all/ (&t is p&rely for itself/ a p&re/ self-identical essence that has no difference in it' !=.' Infinity/ or this a(sol&te &nrest of p&re self-mo-ement/ in which whate-er is determined in one way or another/ e'g' as (eing/ is rather the opposite of this determinateness/ this no do&(t has (een from the start the so&l of all that has gone (efore? (&t it is in the inner world that it has first freely and clearly shown itself' Appearance/ or the play of Forces/ already displays it/ (&t it is as Ee$planationE that it first freely stands forth? and in (eing finally an o(8ect for conscio&sness/ as that which it is/ conscio&sness is th&s self-

conscio&sness' The :nderstandingEs Ee$planationE is primarily only the description of what selfconscio&sness is'