Abstract Freedom produces a duality of will: Negative Will vs Definite Will
Negative Will: Pure negativity that wills nothing. Examples are provided of the French Revolution radicals and Brahmin ascetics
Definite Will: Wills an abstract universality (e.g. money, success), and is therefore not a will (will must be concrete)
Both are sublated by definite freedom (ss. 7) i.e. the "willfull self-limiting for another"
Free will is only arrived at when the will has itself as its object
(ss. 13 - 15) describes Thought vs Will
Thought is inifinite -> it abstracts, shares -> a will, which is finite
Will is finite -> it limits, restricts by utilizing, making concrete -> a thought
The two chains of causation above form a cycle/loop between thought and will
(ss. 19) science of right = apprehension of thought into a rational system (like the law)
(ss. 20 - 24) free will can only exist as absolute infinite will; only absolute infinite will has itself as its object -> colloquial (individualistic) free will is only a potential for free will
(ss. 27) the actual actuality (i.e. final cause or essence) of will is the realization of free will; will itself is free will which wills free will (will's natural tendency is to want to be free)
(ss. 33) free will wills itself through the state, civil society, and family
(ss. 35) "personality" -> subjectivity that has its own subjectivity as its object (this seems similar to Heidegger's concept of "Dasein": the being that raises the question of being. Both Dasein and personality describe a unique type of subjectivity (not really though, because subjectivity is ontic and Dasein is ontological, but wfc))
(ss. 36) I.e. personality is capable of enacting the golden rule, “treat others how you want to be treated”. This is “abstract right”
(ss. 38) Abstract right is negative right because it presents itself as a prohibition. It has the potential to become positive right (e.g. where an individual insists on their rights), but in immediacy, it’s negative (categorical imperative / golden rule)
(ss. 40) The individual personality possesses property through right, and in doing so relates to others through the circulation & division of property, i.e. contract. personality exists as a duality between contract and wrongdoing/crime.
(ss. 43) The personality, in distinguishing and alienating itself from the external world, aims to subjugate the external world through the right of acquisition of property. Hegel remarks in an aside that this is also self-alienation, since that which makes up its individuality — its skills, talents, memories, tastes, etc. — is also just a substantial part of the external world; This part becomes important when alienation is discussed more formally.
(ss. 44) In acquiring property (the “right of appropriation”), the personality satisfies individual caprice, thus making itself an actual personality because it now has itself as its object.
(ss. 45-46) What’s created in that process is private property i.e. the property of the actual individual personality. Hegel notes that common property (of a private nature, like companies owned in shares) is still optional, and still allows for individual will to express itself. He criticizes Plato’s ideal state, which forbids private property, for failing to break down (understand) the personality in its different determinate moments. He also repeats Erasmus' critique of Platonic communism, which is that a society of friends that can't trust each other to own personal property are no longer friends.
(ss. 47) Hegel’s “Spirit” is comparable to Freud’s “Death drive”; Human beings possess the rational ability to live or die at will, we can overcome the caprice of animals. Our ability to sacrifice our life through reason is what gives us a “right to life” that animals don’t have; in the same way that will gives us the right to property. For Hegel, this is an argument in favor of the body being premised by the soul.
(ss. 48) but the (Gnostic) belief that the soul is independent from the body is equally sophistic, since there’s no meaningful distinction between an infringement or violation of your body and an infringement or violation of will.
(ss. 49-52) the rational personality makes itself actual through active possession. Active possession is the actual work that is done to subjugate materials to make them your property.
(ss. 53) in property, the relation of the will to its object exists in 3 phases: active possession, use, and relinquishment
(ss. 54-58) active possession. The act of the will modifying, changing the object’s form, or giving it form. This activity is positive because it involves attaching a predicate to the object, the predicate of ownership. Hegel also points out that active possession is an example of understanding, since both possession and understanding are the force that gives things form and substance (see ss. 45-46 notes and line 12 of Notes on Charles Sanders Peirce (American Philosopher, Father of Pragmatism)for more on Understanding)
(ss. 59-64) use. The will, in using the object, negates the object's positive aspects to subsume it to the positive aspects of its will. This is property in its negative aspect. Hegel brings up the distinction between total use and partial use to emphasize that partial use by itself is not sufficient for an object to be considered property. Hegel mentions that the classical Roman system of dividing property rights between dominium utile and dominium directum doesn't violate the equation between property and use, because the rents/fines that the lord (directum) charges to the vassal (utile) are a part of the lord's will, so it's the lord's property. For more on dominium utile and dominium directum, see From Masters of Slaves to Lords of Servants
(ss. 65) relinquishment exists as the unity (sublation) of use (ss. 59) and possession (ss. 54), forming a triad between infinite, negative, and positive aspects of ownership. (ss. 66-67) The freedom of labor as opposed to serfdom/slavery allows the personality to engage in property, sociality, and religion -- allowing Spirit to return into itself, and exist in its truth -- by giving it the power to relinquish his or her labor-time. The ability to relinquish something is essential to true ownership.
(ss. 68-69) a work of art or an invention is produced mentally but can be reproduced mechanically, and different stages of production exist on a spectrum between producing an original work of art and manual labor. Plagiarism is difficult to identify concretely, and more or less comes down to establishing intent. Hegel also remarks how in his time, the accusation of Plagiarism has fallen out of fashion, which is ironically very different from America today. I wonder what changed?
Transition from Property to Contract:
(ss. 71-76) Contract is an arbitrary agreement between two wills that can take the form of either gifts or exchange. This is distinct from marriage and distinct from the state, since at this stage the contract's counterparty must be an individual or the community.
Exchange = Real contract: both parties surrender and both acquire property
Gift = Formal contract: one party surrenders and the other acquires property
Exchange necessitates value, the universal aspect of the property that makes equivalent their qualitative difference. This is why property damage annuls a contract (laesio enormis)
(ss. 78) stipulation mediates the distinction between property and possession, common will and actualization, covenant and performance etc. Stipulation is the performance wherein the will acknowledges that it accepts the contract, by performing its terms.