inferior　quality。
  When　the　identity　of　subject　and　predicate　are　so　taken　that　at　one　time　one　Notion
  determination　applies　to　the　former　and　the　other　to　the　latter；　and　at　another　time　the　converse
  equally　holds　good；　then　the　identity　is　as　yet　still　only　an　implicit　one；　on　account　of　the
  self…subsistent　diversity　of　the　two　sides　of　the　judgment；　their　posited　unity　also　has　these　two
  sides；　in　the　first　instance　as　different。　But　differenceless　identity　really　constitutes　the　true　relation
  of　the　subject　to　the　predicate。　The　Notion　determination　is　itself　essentially　relation　for　it　is　a
  universal；　therefore　the　same　determinations　possessed　by　the　subject　and　predicate　are　also
  possessed　by　their　relation　itself。　The　relation　is　universal；　for　it　is　the　positive　identity　of　the　two；
  of　subject　and　predicate；　but　it　is　also　determinate；　for　the　determinateness　of　the　predicate　is　that
  of　the　subject；　further；　it　is　also　individual；　for　in　it　the　self…subsistent　extremes　are　sublated　as　in
  their　negative　unity。　However；　in　the　judgment　this　identity　is　not　as　yet　posited；　the　copula　is
  present　as　the　still　indeterminate　relation　of　being　as　such：　A　is　B；　for　in　the　judgment；　the
  elf…subsistence　of　the　Notion　determinatenesses　or　the　extremes；　is　the　reality　which　the　Notion
  has　within　it。　If　the　is　of　the　copula　were　already　posited　as　the　above　determinate　and　pregnant
  unity　of　subject　and　predicate；　as　their　Notion；　it　would　already　be　the　syllogism。
  To　restore　this　identity　of　the　Notion；　or　rather　to　posit　it；　is　the　goal　of　the　movement　of　the
  judgment。　What　is　already　present　in　the　judgment　is；　on　the　one　hand；　the　self…subsistence　of
  subject　and　predicate；　but　also　their　mutually　opposed　determinateness；　and　on　the　other　hand
  their　none　the　less　abstract　relation。　What　the　judgment　enunciates　to　start　with　is　that　the　subject
  is　the　predicate；　but　since　the　predicate　is　supposed　not　to　be　what　the　subject　is；　we　are　faced
  with　a　contradiction　which　must　resolve　itself；　pass　over　into　a　result。　Or　rather；　since　subject
  and　predicate　are　in　and　for　themselves　the　totality　of　the　Notion；　and　the　judgment　is　the　reality
  of　the　Notion；　its　forward　movement　is　only　a　development；　there　is　already　present　in　it　what
  comes　forth　from　it；　so　that　proof　is　merely　an　exposition；　a　reflection　as　a　positing　of　that　which
  is　already　present　in　the　extremes　of　the　judgment；　but　even　this　positing　itself　is　already　present；　it
  is　the　relation　of　the　extremes。
  The　judgment　in　its　immediacy　is　in　the　first　instance　the　judgment　of　existence；　its　subject　is
  immediately　an　abstract　individual　which　simply　is；　and　the　predicate　is　an　immediate
  determinateness　or　property　of　the　subject；　an　abstract　universal。
  This　qualitative　character　of　subject　and　predicate　being　sublated；　the　determination　of　the　one　is
  reflected；　to　begin　with；　in　the　other；　the　judgment　is　now；　secondly；　the　judgment　of　reflection。
  But　this　more　external　conjunction　passes　over　into　the　essential　identity　of　a　substantial；
  necessary　connection；　as　such　it　is；　thirdly；　the　judgment　of　necessity。
  Fourthly；　since　in　this　essential　identity　the　difference　of　subject　and　predicate　has　become　a
  form；　the　judgment　becomes　subjective；　it　contains　the　opposition　of　the　Notion　and　its　reality
  and　the　equation　of　the　two；　it　is　the　judgment　of　the　Notion。
  This　emergence　of　the　Notion　establishes　the　transition　of　the　Judgment　into　the　syllogism。
  A。　THE　JUDGMENT　OF　EXISTENCE
  In　the　subjective　judgment　we　want　to　see　one　and　the　same　object　double；　first　in　its　individual
  actuality；　and　then　in　its　essential　identity　or　in　its　Notion：　the　individual　raised　into　its　universality；
  or；　what　is　the　same　thing；　the　universal　individualised　into　its　actuality。　In　this　way　the　judgment　is
  truth：　for　it　is　the　agreement　of　the　Notion　and　reality。　But　this　is　not　the　nature　of　the　judgment　at
  first；　for　at　first　it　is　immediate；　since　as　yet　no　reflection　and　movement　of　the　determinations　has
  appeared　in　it。　This　immediacy　makes　the　first　judgment　a　judgment　of　existence；　it　can　also　be
  called　the　qualitative　judgment；　but　only　in　so　far　as　quality　does　not　apply　only　to　the
  determinateness　of　being　but　also　includes　the　abstract　universality　which；　on　account　of　its
  simplicity；　likewise　has　the　form　of　immediacy。
  The　judgment　of　existence　is　also　the　judgment　of　inherence；　because　it　is　in　the　form　of
  immediacy；　and　because　the　subject　as　distinguished　from　the　predicate　is　the　immediate；　and
  consequently　the　primary　and　essential　feature　in　a　judgment　of　this　kind；　the　predicate　has　the
  form　of　a　non…self…subsistent　determination　that　has　its　foundation　in　the　subject。
  （a）　The　Positive　Judgment
  （b）　The　Negative　Judgment
  （c）　The　Infinite　Judgment
  B。　THE　JUDGMENT　OF　REFLECTION
  In　the　judgment　that　has　now　arisen；　the　subject　is　an　individual　as　such；　and　similarly　the　universal
  is　no　longer　an　abstract　universality　or　a　single　property；　but　is　posited　as　a　universal　that　has
  gathered　itself　together　into　a　unity　through　the　relation　of　distinct　terms；　or；　regarding　it　from　the
  point　of　view　of　the　content　of　various　determinations　in　general；　as　the　taking　together　of　various
  properties　and　existences。　If　examples　are　to　be　given　of　predicates　of　judgments　of　reflection；
  they　must　be　of　another　kind　than　for　judgments　of　existence。　It　is　in　the　judgment　of　reflection　that
  we　first　have；　strictly　speaking；　a　determinate　content；　that　is；　a　content　as　such；　for　the　content　is
  the　form　determination　which　is　reflected　into　identity　as　distinct　from　the　form　in　so　far　as　this　is　a
  distinct　determinateness…as　it　still　is　in　the　judgment。　In　the　judgment　of　existence　the　content　is
  merely　an　immediate；　or　abstract；　indeterminate　content。　The　following　may　therefore　serve　as
  examples　of　judgments　of　reflection：　man　is　mortal；　things　are　perishable；　this　thing　is　useful；
  harmful；　hardness；　elasticity　of　bodies；　happiness；　etc。　are　predicates　of　this　peculiar　kind。
  They　express　an　essential　determination；　but　one　which　is　in　a　relationship　or　is　a　unifying
  universality。
  This　universality；　which　will　further　determine　itself　in　the　movement　of　the　judgment　of　reflection；
  is　still　distinct　from　the　universality　of　the　Notion　as　such；　true；　it　is　no　longer　the　abstract
  universality　of　the　qualitative　judgment；　but　it　still　possesses　a　relation　to　the　immediate　from　which
  it　proceeds　and　has　the　latter　as　the　basis　of　its　negativity。　The　Notion　determines　the　existent；　in
  the　first　instance；　to　determinations　of　relation；　to　self…continuities　in　the　diverse　multiplicity　of
  concrete　existence…yet　in　such　a　manner　that　the　genuine　universal；　though　it　is　the　inner　essence　of
  that　multiplicity；　is　still　in　the　sphere　of　Appearance；　and　this　relative　nature…or　even　the　mark…of
  this　multiplicity　is　still　not　the　moment　of　being…in…and…for…self　of　the　latter。
  It　may　suggest　itself　to　define　the　judgment　of　reflection　as　a　judgment　of　quantity；　just　as　the
  judgment　of　existence　was　also　defined　as　qualitative　judgment。　But　just　as　immediacy　in　the
  latter　was　not　merely　an　immediacy　which　simply　is；　but　one　which　was　essentially　also　mediated
  and　abstract；　so　here；　too；　that　sublated　immediacy　is　not　merely　sublated　quality；　and　therefore
  not　merely　quantity；　on　the　contrary；　just　as　quality　is　the　most　external　immediacy；　so　is　quantity；
  in　the　same　way；　the　most　external　determination　belonging　to　mediation。
  Further；　as　regards　the　determination　as　it　appears　in　its　movement　in　the　judgment　of　reflection；
  it　should　be　remarked　that　in　the　judgment　of　existence　the　movement　of　the　determination
  showed　itself　in　the　predicate；　because　this　judgment　was　in　the　determination　of　immediacy　and
  the　subject　consequently　appeared　as　the　basis。　For　a　similar　reason；　in　the　judgment　of　reflection；
  the　onward　movement　of　determining　runs　its　course　in　the　subject；　because　this　judgment　has　for
  its　determination　the　reflected　in…itself。　Here　therefore　the　essential　element　is　the　universal　or
  the　predicate；　hence　it　constitutes　the　basis　by　which；　and　in　accordance　with　which；　the　subject　is
  to　be　measured　and　determined。　However；　the　predicate　also　receives　a　further　determination
  through　the　further　development　of　the　form　of　the　subject；　but　this　occurs　indirectly；　whereas　the
  development　of　the　subject　is；　for　the　reason　stated；　a　direct　advance。
  As　regards　the　objective　signification　of　the　judgment；　the　individual；　through　its　universality；　enters
  into　existence；　but　in　an　essential　determination　of　relationship；　in　an　essentiality　which　maintains
  itself　throughout　the　multiplicity　of　the　world　of　Appearance；　the　subject　is　supposed　to　be
  determinate　in　and　for　itself；　this　determinateness　it　possesses　in　its　predicate。　The　individual；　on
  the　other　hand；　is　reflected　into　this　its　predicate　which　is　its　universal　essence；　the　subject　is　in　so
  far　a　concrete　existence　in　the　world　of　Appearance。　The　predicate　in　this　judgment　no　longer
  inheres　in　the　subject；　it　is　rather　the　implicit　being　under　which　this　individual　is　subsumed　as　an
  accidental。　If　the　judgments　of　existen