Hegel's Lectures on the History of Philosophy: Volume 1 (of 3) — Georg Hegel — John Shaqi
Hegel's Lectures on the History of Philosophy: Volume 1 (of 3)
Georg Hegel · en
“As eternal, the existent also is unlimited, since it has no beginning
from which it came, nor end in which it ceases. The infinite all is
one, for, if there were two or more, they would limit one another,”
and thus have a beginning and end. The one would be the nothing of the
other and come forth from this nothing. “This one is like itself; for
if it were unlike it would no longer be the one that was posited, but
many. This one is likewise immovable, inasmuch as it does not move
itself, since it does not pass out into anything. In passing out, it
would require to do so into what is full or what is empty; it could
not be into the full, for that is an impossibility, and just as little
could it be into what is empty, for that is the nothing. The one,
therefore, is in this way devoid of pain or suffering, not changing in
position or form, or mingling with what is different. For all these
determinations involve the origination of non-being and passing away
of Being, which is impossible.” Thus here again the contradiction
which takes place when origination and passing away are spoken of, is
revealed.
Now Melissus places opinion in opposition to this truth. The change
and multiplicity extinguished in Being appears on the other side, in
consciousness, as in what is opinionative; it is necessary to say this
if only the negative side, the removal of these moments, the Absolute
as destitute of predicate, is laid hold of. “In sensuous perception the
opposite is present for us; that is to say, a number of things, their
change, their origination and passing away, and their intermingling.
Thus that first knowledge must take its place beside this second,
which has as much certainty for ordinary consciousness as the first.”
Melissus does not seem to have decided for the one or the other, but,
oscillating between both, to have limited the knowledge of the truth to
the statement that, speaking generally, between two opposite modes of
presentation, the more probable opinion is to be preferred, but that
what is so preferred is only to be regarded as the stronger opinion,
and not as truth. This is what Aristotle says of him.