Addition. T he geological organism is devoid o f ideality, for it is the bare

system o f shape. T h e subjectivity o f plant-life n ow exhibits this ideality

however. As the ideality which is present in all its members, life is es­

sentially living being however, and this living being is merely stimulated

20 from without. Consequently, the causal relationship falls away here, for

in life in general, all the determinations o f the understanding cease to be

+ valid. The nature o f these categories has to be perverted i f they are still

to be employed here. Then it can be said that living being is its ow n

cause. To assert the sublime proposition that, ‘Everything lives in

+ nature,’ is supposed to be speculative. The N otion o f life, or life in itself,

is o f course everywhere; it is to be clearly distinguished from real life

however, which is the subjectivity o f living being, in w hich each part

has a vitalized existence. It is only as a whole that the geological organism

is alive therefore, not in its singularity. Its animation is m erely implicit,

and does not have the presence o f existence. L iving being also differenti­

ates itself into subjective and inanimate being however. O n the one hand 5

it constitutes the prerequisite o f its being framed within the individual,

by expressing itself in lignification and bones, as is the case w ith the geo­

logical organism as a whole. O n the other hand, living being is also the

shape which has substantial form dwelling within it. This form is not

only determinative on account o f the spatial relationships o f the separate 10

parts, but is also the productive restlessness w hich determines the process

o f physical properties in order to bring forth shape. +

The plant is the primary subject which is for itself, and yet still has

its origin in immediacy. It is how ever the feeble and infantine life which +

is not yet intrinsically differentiated. As w ith every living being, it lies 15

in the nature o f a plant to be particularized. T h e particularity o f the

animal is at the same time so constituted however, that the subjectivity

which is opposed to it as soul is also universal, while the particular being

o f the plant is identical w ith its general animation in an entirely immediate

manner. This particular being is not a state which m ight be distinguished 20

from the internal life o f the plant, for the quality o f the plant completely

pervades its general vegetative nature, and is not distinct from it, as it is

in the animal. The members o f the plant are only particular in relation

to one another therefore, not in relation to the whole. These members

are wholes in their own right, as they are in the inanimate organism, 25

where they are also still external to one another in stratifications. As

the plant now posits itself as its other, and so perpetually idealizes this

contradiction, this is merely a formal separation however. That which it

posits as the other is not truly another, for it is the same individual as the subject.1 30

The growth w hich predominates in vegetable being is therefore self­

augmentation as a change o f form. Animal grow th is m erely a change in

size however, in which at the same time there is a persistent unity o f

shape, for the totality o f the members is taken up into the subjectivity.