Page:Mind (New Series) Volume 6.djvu/367

 HEGEL'S TREATMENT OF THE SUBJECTIVE NOTION. 351 Universals ever be connected ? The answer here given is By the connexion of each with a Universal. This answer pre- supposes the solution of the difficulty it proposes to solve, and is therefore worthless. And so, if we ever tried to explain anything by this principle, we should be involved in a False Infinite. When to take our former example we have connected philosophers and mortality, by using man as a middle term, we should have to find two other middle terms one to connect philosophers and man, the other to connect man and mortal. When we had found these, four more would be required to connect them with the terms which they were to connect, and thus we should only solve one problem by raising two more, and so on for ever. If a Universal will not serve as the middle term, there is only one alternative left, if we are to have a middle term at all the Individual. With the attempt to make the Individual the middle term we reach what Hegel calls the Syllogism of Reflexion. 1 We have already seen that it is impossible that the Universal Judgment should be equivalent to a series of Judgments about mere Individuals. We have now to consider whether the Universal Judgment can be based upon such a series. LAWS OF NATURE. Categorical Laws. To do this is impossible. We saw, in dealing with the Judgments of Inherence and Subsumption, that a Judgment about an Individual could only be valid when it was depend- ent upon a Universal Judgment, and that an Individual Judgment taken by itself is contradictory and inadequate. Since all Individual Judgments must be based upon Uni- versal Judgments, it is obviously out of the question that all Universal Judgments should be based upon Individual Judg- ments. W r hat is to be done now ? We have reached the con- clusion that to demand the mediation of all Universal Judgments is useless. Whether we attempt to mediate, then, by Universals or by Individuals, we find that insuper- able difficulties present themselves. Only one alternative remains to deny the necessity of mediation, at least as a universal requirement. In this way alone shall we be able to escape from our 1 This also is divided by Hegel into three subdivisions (see Note E).