Page:Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion volume 1.djvu/194

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

however, the negative is determined as an “Other” in regard to me. This second determination belongs to me likewise; they represent different tendencies; one going toward myself and one toward what is outside myself—the latter of which, however, likewise belongs to me; my tendency to reach out toward what is beyond and my finiteness, are determinations in me; in them I remain self-contained or at home with myself. Thus, in this way the Ego has become affirmative in regard to itself, and it is this which constitutes the other side of this standpoint. My affirmation expresses itself thus: “I am.” This is something distinct from my finiteness, and is the annulling of my finiteness. In respect of the sense of yearning, endeavour, the feeling of obligation generally, it means, “I am what I ought to be;” that is to say, “I am good by nature;” that is to say, “I am, and that inasmuch as I am immediately good.” In this respect, my sole concern is to maintain myself in this state. There is, it is true, also a possibility in me of entering into relation to what is other than myself, a possibility of sin, of faults, &c. This, however, directly assumes the character of something which is subsequent, something external and accidental. “I am,” that is a relation to myself, an affirmation; “I am as I ought to be,” the faultiness is, what the Ego is not; and that is not in what constitutes the root of my nature, but is in fact an accidental complication.

This point of view of affirmation may therefore be considered, doubtless, as implying that I stand related to an external element, and that my goodness may be tarnished. My affirmation in relation to such wrongdoing as is here implied, then, becomes a mediated one too. It becomes affirmation which recovers itself out of such isolation, being mediated through the removal of a faultiness which in itself is only accidental. The goodness of my nature has returned to identity with itself. This reconciliation eliminates nothing intrinsic, it does not touch what belongs to my inmost nature, but only does away with what