05.10.2013 Views

THE UNITY OF IDENTITY AND DIFFERENCE AS THE ...

THE UNITY OF IDENTITY AND DIFFERENCE AS THE ...

THE UNITY OF IDENTITY AND DIFFERENCE AS THE ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

ecomes explicit through the act of synthesis. Similarly, in the development of the<br />

object, the telos only becomes explicit and actual in the process by which the self<br />

assimilates its other. (2) The conception of the whole that emerges from synthesis causes<br />

thought to develop a more explicit conception of the principles of division. This often<br />

leads to revisions or reformulations with regards to the parts. In other words, thought<br />

does not move in a straight line from (a) implicit conception of the whole, to (b) plurality<br />

produced by synthesis, to (c) explicit conception of the whole produces by synthesis of<br />

the parts. The third step leads back to a revised version of first one. Thus thought moves<br />

in a circle, or as Hegel sometimes says, in a circle of circles. In the same way, the object<br />

also develops in a kind of circle. It does not consist in a linear movement from the telos<br />

in its potentiality to the telos in its actuality. As the object becomes increasingly “aware”<br />

of its telos, it becomes increasingly aware of the true nature of the distinction between<br />

itself and its other. As it becomes increasingly aware of the distinction between itself and<br />

its other, it moves more directly towards its telos, thus arriving at a more explicit<br />

awareness or embodiment of its telos. Of course, as with thought, this process may<br />

involve radical upheavals and transformations in the conception of the whole/telos. The<br />

development of the object may not merely consist in the gradual increase in clarity, or in<br />

the gradual increase in the degree to which the telos is embodied and thus actual.<br />

Third, and most importantly, in the same way that the rule governing synthesis and the<br />

rule governing analysis cannot be presented or defined in isolation from one another, so<br />

also the act that divides the self and its other and the act that assimilates the self to the<br />

other can neither exist nor be conceived in isolation from one another. The distinction<br />

between the self and its other always occurs in light of some implicit conception of the<br />

187

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!