as against universality, and if we have seen, further, that the second relation is that found in reflection, where finiteness lies in the wholly completed abstraction of pure thought, which does not really get to conceive of itself as universal, but remains as “I,” as “this unit;” we have now to consider that relation as it reveals itself in reason.
(.) The rational way of looking at finiteness.
This position is to be considered in the first place in its relation to the form of Reflection at its climax. The transition from that standpoint must by its very nature be dialectical, and must be so made. This, however, belongs to logic. We shall proceed to present it in a concrete manner, and as regards the necessity of the transition shall only appeal to the consequences which follow from this standpoint. According to it, I as finite am a nullity, which is to be annulled, but yet this annulling is all the same not effected or completed if this immediate individuality at the same time remains, and remains in such a way that this “I” alone becomes the affirmative, in the form given to it by the standpoint of Reflection. The finite, which exalts itself to the infinite, is mere abstract identity, inherently empty, the supreme form of untruth, falsehood, and evil. A standpoint must therefore be shown where the Ego in this individuality renounces itself in deed and in truth. I must be particular subjectivity which is in very truth annulled, and thus something objective must be recognised by me which is actually regarded by me as true, and which I recognise as the Affirmative, posited for me, in which I am negated as this particular Ego, but in which my freedom is at the same time maintained. The freedom of reflection is of such a kind that it permits of nothing originating in it, and since it must allow of origination, it proceeds when it posits anything, without law and order; that is to say, permits nothing objective to originate. If something objective is to be really recognised, it is requisite that I should be
