of Nature; Nature remains true to its laws, and does not go beyond them; it is this which constitutes its substantiality, and just in consequence of this it is in the sphere of necessity. But in contrast to this, Man must be actually, for himself, what he potentially is, his potential being must come to be for him actual.
What is good by nature is good in an immediate way, and it is just the very nature of Spirit not to be something natural and immediate; rather, it is involved in the very idea of Man as Spirit that he should pass out of this natural state into a state in which there is a separation between his notion or conception and his immediate existence. In the case of physical Nature this separation of an individual thing from its law, from its substantial essence, does not occur, just because it is not free.
What is meant by Man is, a being who sets himself in opposition to his immediate nature, to his state of being in himself, and reaches a state of separation.
The other assertion made regarding Man springs directly from the statement that Man must not remain what he is immediately; he must pass beyond the state of immediacy; that is the notion or conception of Spirit. It is this passing beyond his natural state, his potential Being, which first of all forms the basis of the division or disunion, and in connection with which the disunion directly arises.
This disunion is a passing out of this natural condition or immediacy; but we must not take this to mean that it is the act of passing out of this condition which first constitutes evil, for, on the contrary, this passing out of immediacy is already involved in the state of nature. Potentiality and the natural state constitute the Immediate; but because it is Spirit it is in its immediacy the passing out of its immediacy, the revolt or falling away from its immediacy, from its potential Being.
This involves the second proposition: Man is by nature evil; his potential Being, his natural Being, is evil. It
