conflicting with the law； are bound to come out just for the reason that the freedom of the
individual and the developing circumstances are indifferent towards what merely is； both in the
sense of the original inner as well as the external ossiform structure； and also because the individual
can be something else than he is in his original internal nature； and still more than what he is as a
skull…bone。
We get； then； the possibility that a given bump or hollow on the skull may denote both something
actual as well as a mere disposition； one indeed so little determined in any given direction as to
denote something that is not actual at all。 We see here； as always； the same result of a bad excuse；
viz。 that it is itself ready to be used against what it is intended to support。 We see the thinking that
merely 〃conjectures〃 brought by the very force of facts to say in unintelligent fashion the very
opposite of what it holds to — to say that there is something indicated by such and such a bone；
but also just as truly not indicated at all。
What hovers before this way of 〃conjecturing〃 when it makes this excuse is the true thought…a
thought； however； which abolishes that way of 〃conjecturing〃； — that being as such is not at all the
truth of spirit。 As the disposition is an original primordial being； having no share in the activity of
mind； just such a being is the skull…bone on its side。 What merely is； without participating in
spiritual activity； is a thing for consciousness； and so little is it the essence of mind that it is rather
the very opposite of it； and consciousness is only actual for itself by the negation and abolition of
such a being。
From this point of view it must be regarded as a thorough denial of reason to give out a skull…bone
as the actual existence of conscious life； and that is what it is given out to be when it is regarded as
the outer expression of spirit； for the external expression is just the existent reality。 It is no use to
say we merely draw an inference from the outer as to the inner； which is something different； or to
say that the outer is not the inner itself but merely its expression。 For in the relation of the two to
one another the character of the reality which thinks itself and is thought of by itself falls just on the
side of the inner； while the outer has the character of existent reality。
When； therefore； a man is told； 〃You （your inner being） are so and so； because your skull…bone is
so constituted；〃 this means nothing else than that we regard a bone as the man's reality。 To retort
upon such a statement with a box on the ear — in the way mentioned above when dealing with
psysiognomy — removes primarily the 〃soft〃 parts of his head from their apparent dignity and
position； and proves merely that these are no true inherent nature； are not the reality of mind； the
retort here would； properly speaking； have to go the length of breaking the skull of the person who
makes a statement like that； in order to demonstrate to him in a manner as palpable as his own
wisdom that a bone is nothing of an inherent nature at all for a man。； still less his true reality。
The untutored instinct of self…conscious reason will reject without examination phrenology — this
other observing instinct of self…conscious reason； which having succeeded in malting a guess at
knowledge has grasped knowledge in the soulless form that the outer is an expression of the inner。
But the worse the thought； the less sometimes does it strike us where its badness； definitely lies；
and the more difficult it is to explain it。 For a thought is said to be the worse； the barer and emptier
the abstraction； which thought takes to be the essential truth。 But in the antithesis here in question
the component parts are individuality conscious of itself； and the abstraction of a bare thing； to
which externality has been reduced — the inner being of mind taken in the sense of a fixed soulless
existence and in opposition to just such a being。
With the attainment of this； however； rational observation seems in fact to have also reached its
culminating point； at which it must take leave of itself and turn right about； for it is only when
anything is entirely bad that there is an inherent and immediate necessity in it to wheel round
completely into its opposite。 Just so it may be said of the Jews that it is precisely because they
stand directly before the door of salvation； that they are and have been the most reprobate and
abandoned： — what the nation should be in and for itself； this； the true inner nature of its self； it is
not conscious of being； but puts away beyond itself。 By this renunciation it creates for itself the
possibility of a higher level of existence； if once it could get the object thus renounced back again
to itself； than if it had never left its natural immediate state of existence — because spirit is all the
greater the greater the opposition out of which it returns into itself； and such an opposition spirit
brings about for itself； by doing away with its immediate unity； and laying aside its self…existence； a
separate life of its own。 But if such a consciousness does not mediate and reflect itself； the middle
position or term where it has a determinate existence is the fatal unholy void； since what should
give it substance and filling has been turned into a rigidly fixed extreme。 It is thus that this last stage
of reason's function of observation is its very worst； and for that reason its complete reversal
becomes necessary。
For the survey of the series of relations dealt with up to this point； which constitute the content and
object of observation； shows that even in its first form； in observation of the relations of inorganic
nature； sensuous being vanished from its ken。 The moments of its relation （i。e。 that of inorganic
nature） present themselves as pure abstractions and as simple notions； which should be kept
connected with the existence of things； but this gets lost； so that the abstract moment proves to be
a pure movement and a universal。 This free； self…complete process retains the significance of
something objective； but now appears as a unit。 In the process of the inorganic the unit is the inner
with no existence。 When the process does have existence qua unit； as one and single； it is an
organism。
The unit qua self…existent or negative entity stands in antithesis to the universal； throws off its
control； and remains independent by itself； so that the notion； being only realized in the condition of
absolute dissociation； fails to find in organic existence its genuine expression； in the sense that it is
not there； in the form of a universal； it remains an 〃outer〃； or； what is the same thing； an 〃inner〃 of
organic nature。
The organic process is merely free implicitly （an sich）； it is not so explicitly； 〃for itself〃 （für sich）。
The explicit phase of its freedom appears in the idea of purpose； has existence as another inner
nature as a self…directing wisdom that lies outside that mere process。 Reason's function of
observation thus turns its attention to this wisdom； to mind； to the notion actually existing as
universality； or to the purpose existing in the form of purpose； and what constitutes its own
essential nature is now the object before it。
Reason here in the activity of observation is directed first to the pure abstract form of its essential
nature。 But since reason； in its apprehension of the object thus working and moving amidst its own
distinctions takes this object as something that exists； observation becomes aware of laws of
thought； relations of one constant factor to another constant factor。 The content of these laws
being； however； merely moments； they run together into the single one of self…consciousness。
This new object； taken in the same way as existent； is the contingent individual self…consciousness。
The process of observation； therefore； keeps within the 〃conjectured〃 meaning of mind； and within
the contingent relation of conscious to unconscious reality。 Mind alone in itself is the necessity of
this relation。 Observation； therefore； attacks it at closer quarters； and compares its realization
through will and action with its reality when it contemplates and is reflected into itself； a reality
which is itself objective。 This external aspect； although an utterance of the individual which he
himself contains； is at the same time； qua symbol； something indifferent to the content which it is
intended to denote； just as what finds for itself the symbol is indifferent to this symbol。
For this reason； observation finally passes from this variable form of utterance back to the
permanent fixed being； and in principle declares that externality is the outer immediate reality of
mind； not in the sense of an organ； and not like a language or a symbol； but in the sense of a
lifeless thing。 What the very first form of observation of inorganic nature did away with and
superseded； viz。 the idea that the notion should appear in the shape of a thing； this last form of
observation reinstates so as to turn the reality of mind itself into a thing； or expressing it the other
way about； so as to give lifeless being the significance of mind。
Observation has thus reached the point of explicitly expressing what our notion of observation was
at the outset； viz。 that rational certainty means objectivity of reason； that the certainty of reason
seeks itself as an objective reality。
One does not； indeed； suppose that mind； which is represented by a skull； is defined as a thing。
There is not meant to be any materialism； as it is called； in this idea； mind rather must be something
very different from these bones of the skull。 But that mind is； means nothing else than that it is a
thing。 When being as such； or thingness； is predicated of the mind； the true and genuine
expression for this is； therefore； that mind is such an entity as a bone is。 Hence it must be
considered as supremely important that the true expression has been found for the bare statement
regarding mind — that it is。 When the statement is ever made about mind； that it is； has a being； is
a thing； an individual reality； we do not mean it is somethi