THE UNITY OF IDENTITY AND DIFFERENCE AS THE ...

see further a connection between the dichotomy between unity and plurality and the
dichotomy between the infinite and the finite.
The following passage further emphasizes the parallels between these
dichotomies, and it identifies pure reason, as conceived by Kant, with one side of these
dichotomies, with unity and infinity. Hegel says:
This real opposition is, on the side, the plurality of being or the finite, and
opposite to it the infinite as negation of plurality and, in positive terms, as pure
unity. This absolute concept [Begriff], construed in this way, presents in this
unity, that which is called pure reason. 278
Here we see three sets of oppositions: plurality vs. unity, the finite vs. the infinite, and
being vs. pure reason. The practical philosophy that characterizes empiricism begins
with being, with plurality, and with finitude. By contrast, the principle of Kant’s
practical philosophy is the infinite – i.e. unity or pure reason itself.
While Hegel argues that empiricism proves incapable of explaining unity in terms
of plurality, he argues that Kant’s philosophy proves incapable of explaining plurality in
terms of unity. Beginning with a plurality of rights, duties, and goals, empiricism fails to
determine the ultimate right, duty, or goal. It thus also fails to determine the complex
relation between our various prima facie practical commitments. By contrast, Hegel
argues that Kant’s practical philosophy fails to explain the plurality of our rights and
duties on the basis of pure reason alone.
278 Werke 2, pp. 454-5.
258