Hegel's Lectures on the History of Philosophy: Volume 1 (of 3)
Georg Hegel · en
How Anaxagoras enunciated the Notion of the _νοῦς_, Aristotle (De
anim. I. 2) goes on to tell: “Anaxagoras maintains that the soul is
the principle of movement. Yet he does not always express himself
fully about the soul and _νοῦς_: he seems to separate _νοῦς_ and soul
from one another, and still he makes use of them as though they were
the same existence, only that by preference he makes the _νοῦς_ the
principle of everything. He certainly speaks frequently of the _νοῦς_
as of the cause of the beautiful and right, but another time he calls
it the soul. For it is in all animals, in large as well as small, the
higher kind and the lower; it alone of all existence is the simple,
unadulterated and pure; it is devoid of pain and is not in community
with any other.”[83] What we therefore have to do is to show from the
principle of motion, that it is the self-moving; and this thought is,
as existent for itself. As soul, the self-moving is only immediately
individual; the _νοῦς_, however, as simple, is the universal. Thought
moves on account of something: the end is the first simple which
makes itself result; this principle with the ancients is grasped as
good and evil, i.e. end as positive and negative. This determination
is a very important one, but with Anaxagoras it was not fully worked
out. While in the first place the principles are material, from these
Aristotle then distinguishes determination and form, and thirdly he
finds in the process of Heraclitus, the principle of motion. Then in
the fourth place there comes the reason why, the determination of end,
with the _νοῦς_; this is the concrete in itself. Aristotle adds in
the above-mentioned passage (p. 192), “according to these men” (the
Ionians and others) “and in reference to such causes” (water, fire,
&c.), “since they are not sufficient to beget the nature of things,
the philosophers are, as already said, compelled by the truth to go on
to the principle following (_ἐχομένην_). For neither the earth nor any
other principle is capable of explaining the fact that while on the
one hand all is good and beautiful, on the other, something else is
produced, and those men do not seem to have thought that this was so;
nor is it seemly to abandon such matters to hazard (_αὐτομάτῳ_) and to
chance.” Goodness and beauty express the simple restful Notion, and
change the Notion in its movement.