of its operation； this purposive activity as such would not belong to organic beings。 That single
activity； which is merely a means； comes； owing to its individual form； to be determined by an
entirely individual or contingent necessity。 What an organic being does for the preservation of itself
as an individual； or of itself qua genus； is； therefore； quite lawless as regards this immediate
content： for notion and universal fall outside it。 Its activity would accordingly be empty functioning
without any content in it； it would not even be the functioning of a machine； for this has a purpose
and its activity in consequence a definite content。 If it were deserted in this way by the universal； it
would be an activity of a mere being qua being； i。e。 would be an activity like that of an acid or a
base； not forthwith reflected into itself…a function which could not be cut off from its immediate
existence； nor give up this existence （which gets lost in the relation to its opposite）； but could
preserve itself。 The kind of being whose functioning is here under consideration is； however； set
down as a thing preserving itself in its relation to its opposite。 The activity as such is nothing but the
bare insubstantial form of its independent existence on its own account； and the purpose of the
activity； its substancessubstance； which is not simply a determinate being； but the universal…does
not fall outside the activity。 It is an activity reverting into itself by its own nature； and is not turned
back into itself by any alien； external agency。
This union of universality and activity； however； is not a matter for this attitude of observation；
because that unity is essentially the inner movement of what is organic； and can only be
apprehended conceptually。 Observation； however； seeks the moments in the form of existence
and duration； and because the organic whole consists essentially in not containing the moments in
that form； and in not letting them be found within it in that way； this observing consciousness； by its
way of looking at the matter； transforms the opposition into one which conforms and is adapted to
its own point of view。
An organism comes before the observing consciousness in this manner as a relation of two fixed
and existing momentsas a relation of elements in an opposition； whose two factors seem in one
respect really given in observation； while in another respect； as regards their content； they express
the opposition of the organic concept of purpose and actual reality。 But because the notion as such
is there effaced； this takes place in an obscure and superficial way； where thought sinks to the level
of mere ideal presentation。 Thus we see the notion taken much in the sense of what is inner； reality
in the sense of what is outer； and their relation gives rise to the law that 〃the outer is the expression
of the inner〃。
Let us consider more closely this inner with its opposite and their relation to one another。 In the
first place we find that the two factors of the law no longer have such an import as we found in the
case of previous laws； where the elements appeared as independent things； each being a particular
body； nor； again； in the second place； do we find that the universal is to have its existence
somewhere else outside what actually is。 On the contrary； the organic being is； in undivided
oneness and as a whole； the fundamental fact； it is the content of inner and outer； and is the same
for both。 The opposition is on that account of a purely formal character； its real sides have the
same ultimate principle inherently constituting them what they are。 At the same time； however；
since inner and outer are also opposite realities and each is a distinct being for observation； they
each seem to observation to have a peculiar content of their own。 This peculiar content； since it
consists of the same substance； or the same organic unity； can； however； in point of fact； be only a
different form of that unity； of that substance； and this is indicated by observation when it says that
the outer is merely the expression of the inner。
We have seen in the case of the concept of purpose the same characteristic features of the
relation； viz。 the indifferent independence of the diverse factors； and their unity in that
independence； a unity in which they disappear。
We have now to see what shape and embodiment inner and outer assume in actually existing。 The
inner as such must have an outer being and an embodiment； just as much as the outer as such； for
the inner is an object； or is affirmed as being； and as present for observation to deal with。
The organic substance qua inner is the Soul simply； the pure notion of purpose or the universal
which in dividing into its discrete elements remains all the same a universal fluent continuity； and
hence in its being appears as activity or the movement of vanishing reality； while； on the other
hand； the outer； opposed to that existing inner； subsists in the passive being of the organic。 The
law； as the relation of that inner to this outer； consequently expresses it content； now by setting
forth universal moments； or simple essential elements； and again by setting forth the realized
essential nature or the form and shape actually assumed。 Those first simple organic properties； to
call them so； are Sensibility； Irritability； and Reproduction。 These properties； at least the two first；
seem indeed to refer not to any and every organism； but merely to the animal organism。 Moreover；
the vegetable level of organic life expresses in point of fact only the bare and simple notion of an
organism； which does not develop and evolve its moments。 Hence in regard to those moments； so
far as observation has to take account of them； we must confine ourselves t the organism which
presents them existing in developed form。
As to these moments； then； they are directly derived from the notion of self…purpose； of a being
whose end is its own self。 For Sensibility expresses in general the simple notion of organic
reflexion into itself； or the universal continuity of this notion。 Irritability； again； expresses organic
elasticity； the capacity to exercise the function of reacting simultaneously with self…reflexion； and
expresses； in contrast to the previous state of being passively and inertly within itself； the condition
of being explicitly actualized…a realization； where that abstract existence for its own sake is an
existence for something else。 Reproduction； however； is the operation of this entire self…reflected
organism； its activity as having its purpose in itself； its activity qua genus； wherein the individual
repels itself from itself； where in procreating it repeats either the organic parts or the whole
individual。 Reproduction； taken in the sense of self…preservation in general； expresses the formal
principle or conception of the organic； or the fact of Sensibility； but it is； properly speaking； the
realized notion of organic existence； or the whole； which either qua individual returns into itself
through the process of producing individual parts of itself； or qua genus does so through the
production of distinct individuals。
The other significance of these organic elements； viz。 as outer； is their embodiment in a given
shape； here they assume the form of actual but at the same time universal parts； or appear as
organic systems。 Sensibility is embodied in the form； for instance； of a nervous system； irritability；
of a muscular system； reproduction； of an intestinal system for the preservation of the individual
and the species。
Laws peculiar to organic life； accordingly； concern a relation of the organic moments； taking
account of their twofold significanceviz。 of being in one respect a part of definite organic
formation or embodiment； and in another respect a continuous universal element of a determinate
kind； running through all those systems。 Thus in giving expression to a law of that sort； a specific
kind of sensibility； e。g。 would find； qua moment of the whole organism； its expression in a
determinately formed nervous system； or it would also be connected with a determinate
reproduction of the organic parts of the individual or with the propagation of the whole； and so on。
Both aspects of such a law can be observed。 The external is in its very conception being for
another； sensibility； e。g。 finds its immediately realized form in the sensitive system； and； qua
universal property； it is in its outer expressions an objective fact as well。 The aspect which is called
〃inner〃 has its own outer〃 aspect； which is distinct from what is in general called the outer。
Both the aspects of an organic law would thus certainly be open to observation； but not the laws
of their relation。 And observation is inadequate to perceive these laws； not because； qua
observation； it is too short…sighted； i。e。 not because； instead of proceeding empirically； we ought to
start from the 〃Idea〃for such laws； if they were something real must； as a matter of fact； be
actual； and must thus be observable； it is rather because the thought of laws of this sort proves to
have no truth at all。
The relation assumed the role of a law in the case where the universal organic property had
formed itself in an organic system into a thing and there found its own embodied image and copy；
so that both were the same reality； present； in the one case； as universal moment； in the other； as
thing。 But besides； the inner aspect is also by itself a relation of several aspects； and hence to begin
with there is presented the idea of a law as a relation of the universal organic activities or
properties to one another。 Whether such a law is possible has to be decided from the nature of
such a property。 Such a property； however； being universal and of a fluid nature； is； on the one
hand； not something restricted like a thing； keeping itself within the distinction of a definite mode of
existence； which is to constitute its shape and form： sensibility goes beyond the nervous system
and pervades all the other systems of the organism。 On the other hand； such a property is a
universal moment； which is essentially undivided； and inseparable from reactio