returned　into　itself　and　indifferent　to　others。　This　indifference　of　a　number　to　others　is　an　essential
  determination　of　it　and　constitutes　the　implicit　determinedness　of　the　number；　but　also　the　number's
  own　externality。　Number　is　thus　a　numerical　one　as　the　absolutely　determinate　one；　which　at　the
  same　time　has　the　form　of　simple　immediacy　and　for　which；　therefore；　the　relation　to　other　is
  completely　external。　Further；　one　as　a　number　possesses　determinateness　（in　so　far　as　this　is　a
  relation　to　other）　as　the　moments　of　itself　contained　within　it；　in　its　difference　of　unit　and　amount；
  and　amount　is　itself　a　plurality　of　ones；　that　is；　this　absolute　externality　is　in　the　one　itself。　This
  contradiction　of　number　or　of　quantum　as　such　within　itself　is　the　quality　of　quantum；　in　the　further
  determinations　of　which　this　contradiction　is　developed。
  Remark　1：　The　Species　of　Calculation　in　Arithmetic；　Kant's　Synthetic　Propositions　a　priori
  Remark　2：　The　Employment　of　Numerical　Distinctions　for　Expressing　Philosophical
  Notions
  B　Extensive　and　Intensive　Quantum
  （a）　Their　Difference
  （b）　Identity　of　Extensive　and　Intensive　Magnitude
  Remark　1：　Examples　of　This　Identity
  Remark　2：　The　determination　of　degree　as　applied　by　Kant　to　the　soul
  （c）　Alteration　of　Quantum
  C　Quantitative　Infinity
  （a）　Its　Notion
  （b）　The　Quantitative　Infinite　Progress
  Remark　1：　The　High　Repute　of　the　Progress　to　Infinity
  Remark　2：　The　Kantian　Antinomy　of　the　Limitation　and　Nonlimitation　of　the　World
  （c）　The　Infinity　of　Quantum
  Remark　1：　The　Specific　Nature　of　the　Notion　of　the　Mathematical　Infinite
  Remark　2：　The　Purpose　of　the　Differential　Calculus　Deduced　from　its　Application
  Remark　3：　Further　Forms　Connected　With　the　Qualitative　Determinateness　of　Magnitude
  Chapter　3　The　Quantitative　Relation　or　Quantitative　Ratio
  A　The　Direct　Ratio
  B　Inverse　Ratio
  C　The　Ratio　of　Powers
  Remark
  In　the　Remarks　above　on　the　quantitative　infinite；　it　was　shown　that　this　infinite　and　also　the
  difficulties　associated　with　it　have　their　origin　in　the　qualitative　moment　which　makes　its
  appearance　in　the　sphere　of　quantity；　and　also　how　the　qualitative　moment　of　the　ratio　of　powers
  in　particular　is　the　source　of　various　developments　and　complexities。　It　was　shown　that　the　chief
  obstacle　to　a　grasp　of　the　Notion　of　this　infinite　is　the　stopping　short　at　its　merely　negative
  determination　as　the　negation　of　quantum；　instead　of　advancing　to　the　simple　affirmative
  determination　which　is　the　qualitative　moment。　The　only　further　remark　to　be　made　here　concerns
  the　intrusion　of　quantitative　forms　into　the　pure　qualitative　forms　of　powers　in　of　thought　in
  philosophy。　It　is　the　relationship　particular　which　has　been　applied　recently　to　the　determinations　of
  the　Notion。　The　Notion　in　its　immediacy　was　called　the　first　power　or　potence；　in　its　otherness
  or　difference；　in　the　determinate　being　of　its　moments；　the　second　power；　and　in　its　return　into
  itself　or　as　a　totality；　the　third　power。　It　is　at　once　evident　that　power　as　used　thus　is　a　category
  which　essentially　belongs　to　quantum　…　these　powers　do　not　bear　the　meaning　of　the　potentia；　the
  dynamis　of　Aristotle。　Thus；　the　relationship　of　powers　expresses　determinateness　in　the　form　or
  difference　which　has　reached　its　truth；　but　difference　as　it　is　in　the　particular　Notion　of　quantum；
  not　as　it　is　in　the　Notion　as　such。　In　quantum；　the　negativity　which　belongs　to　the　nature　of　the
  Notion　is　still　far　from　being　posited　in　the　determination　proper　to　the　Notion；　differences　which
  are　proper　to　quantum　are　superficial　determinations　for　the　Notion　itself　and　are　still　far　from
  being　determined　as　they　are　in　the　Notion。　It　was　in　the　infancy　of　philosophic　thinking　that
  numbers　were　used；　as　by　Pythagoras；　to　designate　universal；　essential　distinctions…and　first　and
  second　power；　and　so　on　are　in　this　respect　not　a　whit　better　than　numbers。　This　was　a　preliminary
  stage　to　comprehension　in　the　element　of　pure　thought；　it　was　not　until　after　Pythagoras　that
  thought　determinations　themselves　were　discovered；　i。e。；　became　on　their　own　account　objects
  for　consciousness。　But　to　retrogress　from　such　determinations　to　those　of　number　is　the　action　of　a
  thinking　which　feels　its　own　incapacity；　a　thinking　which；　in　Opposition　to　current　philosophical
  culture　which　is　accustomed　to　thought　determinations；　now　also　makes　itself　ridiculous　by
  pretending　that　this　impotence　is　something　new；　superior；　and　an　advance。
  There　is　as　little　to　be　said　against　the　expression　power　when　it　is　used　only　as　a　symbol；　as　there
  is　against　the　use　of　numbers　or　any　other　kind　of　symbols　for　Notions…but　also　there　is　just　as
  much　to　be　said　against　them　as　against　all　symbolism　whatever　in　which　pure　determinations　of
  the　Notion　or　of　philosophy　are　supposed　to　be　represented。
  Philosophy　needs　no　such　help　either　from　the　world　of　sense　or　from　the　products　of　the
  imagination；　or　from　subordinate　spheres　in　its　own　peculiar　province；　for　the　determinations　of
  such　spheres　are　unfitted　for　higher　spheres　and　for　the　whole。　This　unfitness　is　manifest　whenever
  categories　of　the　finite　are　applied　to　the　infinite；　the　current　determinations　of　force；　or
  substantiality；　cause　and　effect；　and　so　on；　are　likewise　only　symbols　for　expressing；　for　example；
  vital　or　spiritual　relationships；　i。e。　they　are　untrue　determinations　for　such　relationships；　and　still
  more　so　are　the　powers　of　quantum　and　degrees　of　powers；　both　for　such　and　for　speculative
  relationships　generally。
  If　numbers；　powers；　the　mathematical　infinite；　and　suchlike　are　to　be　used　not　as　symbols　but　as
  forms　for　philosophical　determinations　and　hence　themselves　as　philosophical　forms；　then　it　would
  be　necessary　first　of　all　to　demonstrate　their　philosophical　meaning；　i。e。　the　specific　nature　of　their
  Notion。　If　this　is　done；　then　they　themselves　are　superfluous　designations；　the　determinateness　of
  the　Notion　specifies　its　own　self　and　its　specification　alone　is　the　correct　and　fitting　designation。
  The　use　of　those　forms　is；　therefore；　nothing　more　than　a　convenient　means　of　evading　the　task　of
  grasping　the　determinations　of　the　Notion；　of　specifying　and　of　justifying　them。
  Section　Three：　Measure
  Abstractly　expressed；　in　measure　quality　and　quantity　are　united。　Being　as　such　is　an　immediate
  identity　of　the　determinateness　with　itself。　This　immediacy　of　the　determinateness　has　sublated
  itself。　Quantity　is　being　which　has　returned　into　itself　in　such　a　manner　that　it　is　a　simple
  self…identity　as　indifference　to　the　determinateness。
  But　this　indifference　is　only　the　externality　of　having　the　determinateness　not　in　its　own　self　but　in　an
  other。　Thirdly；　we　now　have　self…related　externality；　as　self…related　it　is　also　a　sublated　externality
  and　has　within　itself　the　difference　from　itself…the　difference　which；　as　an　externality　is　the
  quantitative；　and　as　taken　back　into　itself　is　the　qualitative；　moment。
  In　transcendental　idealism　the　categories　of　quantity　and　quality　are　followed；　after　the　insertion　of
  relation；　by　modality；　which　may　therefore　be　mentioned　here。　This　category　has　there　the
  meaning　of　being　the　relation　of　the　object　to　thought。　According　to　that　idealism　thought　generally
  is　essentially　external　to　the　thing…in…itself。　In　so　far　as　the　other　categories　have　only　the
  transcendental　character　of　belonging　to　consciousness；　but　to　the　objective　element　of　it；　so
  modality　as　the　category　of　relation　to　the　subject；　to　this　extent　contains　relatively　the
  determination　of　reflection…into…self；　i。e。　the　objectivity　which　belongs　to　the　other　categories　is
  lacking　in　the　categories　of　modality；　these；　according　to　Kant；　do　not　in　the　least　add　to　the
  concept　as　a　determination　of　the　object　but　only　express　the　relation　to　the　faculty　of　cognition。
  The　categories　which　Kant　groups　under　modality　…　namely；　possibility；　actuality　and　necessity　will
  occur　later　in　their　proper　place；　Kant　did　not　apply　the　infinitely　important　form　of　triplicity　…　with
  him　it　manifested　itself　at　first　only　as　a　formal　spark　of　light　…　to　the　genera　of　his　categories
  （quantity；　quality；　etc。）；　but　only　to　their　species　which；　too；　alone　he　called　categories。
  Consequently　he　was　unable　to　hit　on　the　third　to　quality　and　quantity。
  With　Spinoza；　the　mode　is　likewise　the　third　after　substance　and　attribute；　he　explains　it　to　be　the
  affections　of　substance；　or　that　element　which　is　in　an　other　through　which　it　is　comprehended。
  According　to　this　concept；　this　third　is　only　externality　as　such；　as　has　already　been　mentioned；
  with。　Spinoza　generally；　the　rigid　nature　of　substance　lacks　the　return　into　itself。
  The　observation　here　made　extends　generally　to　those　systems　of　pantheism　which　have　been
  partially　developed　by　thought。　The　first　is　being；　the　one；　substance；　the　infinite；　essence；　in
  contrast　to　this　abstraction　the　second；　namely；　all　determinateness　in　general；　what　is　only　finite；
  accidental；　perishable；　non…essential；　etc。　can　equally　abstractly　be　grouped　together；　and　this　is
  what　usually　happens　as　the　next　step　in　qui