Hegel's Lectures on the History of Philosophy: Volume 1 (of 3)
Georg Hegel · en
those whose philosophy takes a mythical form.” Such is not the form in
which thought allows itself to be stated, but only is a subordinate
mode.
Connected with this, there is a similar method of representing the
universal content by means of numbers, lines and geometric figures.
These are figurative, but not concretely so, as in the case of myths.
Thus it may be said that eternity is a circle, the snake that bites
its own tail. This is only an image, but Mind does not require such
a symbol. There are people who value such methods of representation,
but these forms do not go far. The most abstract determinations
can indeed be thus expressed, but any further progress brings about
confusion. Just as the freemasons have symbols which are esteemed
for their depth of wisdom—depth as a brook is deep when one cannot
see the bottom—that which is hidden very easily seems to men deep,
or as if depth were concealed beneath. But when it is hidden, it may
possibly prove to be the case that there is nothing behind. This is so
in freemasonry, in which everything is concealed to those outside and
also to many people within, and where nothing remarkable is possessed
in learning or in science, and least of all in Philosophy. Thought is,
on the contrary, simply its manifestation; clearness is its nature and
itself. The act of manifestation is not a condition which may be or
may not be equally, so that thought may remain as thought when it is
not manifested, but its manifestation is itself, its Being. Numbers,
as will be remarked in respect of the Pythagoreans, are unsuitable
mediums for expressing thoughts; thus _μονάς_, _δυάς_, _τριάς_ are,
with Pythagoras, unity, difference, and unity of the unity and of
the difference. The two first of the three are certainly united by
addition; this kind of union is, however, the worst form of unity.
In Religion the three make their appearance in a deeper sense as the
Trinity, and in Philosophy as the Notion, but enumeration forms a
bad method of expression. There is the same objection to it as would
exist to making the mensuration of space the medium for expressing the
absolute. People also quote the Philosophy of the Chinese, of the Foï,
in which it is said that thoughts are represented by numbers. Yet the
Chinese have explained their symbols and hence have made their meaning
evident. Universal simple abstractions have been present to all people
who have arrived at any decree of culture.