circle are all figures。 The possibility of the difference of all things in association with perfect unity in
the Notion lies in the manner in which the particular in them is combined with the universal。 In the
Absolute this altogether disappears； because it pertains to the very idea of the Absolute that the
particular in it is also the universal； and the universal the particular； and further that by means of this
unity form and existence are also one in it。 Consequently； in regard to the Absolute； from the fact
of its being the Absolute； there likewise follows the absolute exclusion from its existence of all
difference； and that at once。” （14）
In the former of the two above…named works； the “Journal of Speculative Physics；” Schelling
began by again bringing forward the Substance of Spinoza； simple； absolute Existence； inasmuch
as he makes his starting…point the absolute identity of the subjective and objective。 Here； like
Spinoza； he employed the method of geometry； laying down axioms and proving by means of
propositions； then going on to deduce other propositions from there； and so on。 But this method
has no real application to philosophy。 Schelling at this point laid down certain forms of difference；
to which he gave the name of potencies； adopting the term from Eschenmayer； who made use of it
（p。 514）；（15） they are ready…made differences； which Schelling avails himself of。 But philosophy
must not take any forms from other sciences； as here from mathematics。 With Schelling； the
leading form is that which was brought into remembrance again by Kant； the form of triplicity as
first； second； and third potency。
Schelling； like Fichte； begins with I = I； or with the absolute intuition； expressed as proposition or
definition of the Absolute； that Reason is the absolute indifference of subject and object： so that it
is neither the one nor the other； for both have in it their true determination； and their opposition；
like all others； is utterly done away with。 The true reality of subject and object is placed in this
alone； that the subject is not posited in the determination of subject against object； as in the
philosophy of Fichte； it is not determined as in itself existent； but as subject…object； as the identity
of the two； in the same way the object is not posited according to its ideal determination as object；
but in as far as it is itself absolute； or the identity of the subjective and objective。 But the
expression “indifference” is ambiguous； for it means indifference in regard to both the one and
the other； and thus it appears as if the content of indifference； the only thing which makes it
concrete； were indifferent。 Schelling's next requirement is that the subject must not be hampered
with reflection； that would be bringing it under the determination of the understanding； which；
equally with sensuous perception； implies the separateness of sensuous things。 As to the form of its
existence； absolute indifference is with Schelling posited as A = A； and this form is for him the
knowledge of absolute identity； which； however； is inseparable from the Being or existence of the
same。（16）
Thus； therefore； opposition； as form and reality or existence； no doubt appears in this Absolute；
but it is determined as a merely relative or unessential opposition： “Between subject and object no
other than quantitative difference is possible。 For no qualitative difference as regards the two is
thinkable；” because absolute identity “is posited as subject and object only as regards the form
of its Being； not as regards its existence。 There is consequently only a quantitative difference left；”
i。e。 only that of magnitude： and yet difference must really be understood as qualitative； and must
thus be shown to be a difference which abrogates itself。 This quantitative difference； says
Schelling； is the form actu： “The quantitative difference of subjective and objective is the basis of
all finitude。 Each determined potency marks a determined quantitative difference of the subjective
and objective。 Each individual Being is the result of a quantitative difference of subjectivity and
objectivity。 The individual expresses absolute identity under a determined form of Being： “so that
each side is itself a relative totality； A = B； and at the same time the one factor preponderates in
the one； and the other factor in the other； but both remain absolute identity。（17） This is insufficient；
for there are other determinations； difference is undoubtedly qualitative； although this is not the
absolute determination。 Quantitative difference is no true difference； but an entirely external
relation； and likewise the preponderance of subjective and objective is not a determination of
thought； but a merely sensuous determination。
The Absolute itself； in so far as the positing of difference is taken into account； is defined by
Schelling as the quantitative indifference of subjective and objective： in respect to absolute identity
no quantitative difference is thinkable。 “Quantitative difference is only possible outside of absolute
identity； and outside of absolute totality。 There is nothing in itself outside of totality； excepting by
virtue of an arbitrary separation of the individual from the whole。 Absolute identity exists only
under the form of the quantitative indifference of subjective and objective。” Quantitative
difference； which appears outside of absolute identity and totality； is therefore； according to
Schelling； in itself absolute identity； and consequently thinkable only under the form of the
quantitative indifference of the subjective and objective。 “This opposition does not therefore occur
in itself； or from the standpoint of speculation。 From this standpoint A exists just as much as B
does； for A like B is the whole absolute identity； which only exists under the two forms； but under
both of them alike。 Absolute identity is the universe itself。 The form of its Being can be thought of
under the image of a line；” as shown by the following scheme：
＋ ＋
A = B A = B
A = A
“in which the same identity is posited in each direction； but with A or B preponderating in
opposite directions。” （18） If we go into details； the main points from an elementary point of view
are the following。
The first potency is that the first quantitative difference of the Absolute； or “the first relative
totality is matter。 Proof： A = B is not anything real either as relative identity or as relative duplicity。
As identity A = B； in the individual as in the whole； can be expressed only by the line；〃 — the first
dimension。 “But in that line A is posited throughout as existent；” i。e。 it is at the same time related
to B。 “Therefore this line presupposes A = B as relative totality throughout； relative totality is
therefore the first presupposition； and if relative identity exists； it exists only through relative
totality；〃 — this is duplicity； the second dimension。 “In the same way relative duplicity
presupposes relative identity。 Relative identity and duplicity are contained in relative totality； not
indeed actu； but yet potentia。 Therefore the two opposites must mutually extinguish each other in
a third” dimension。 “Absolute identity as the immediate basis of the reality of A and B in matter； is
the force of gravitation。 If A preponderates we have the force of attraction； if B preponderates we
have that of expansion。 The quantitative positing of the forces of attraction and expansion passes
into the infinite； their equilibrium exists in the whole； not in the individual。” （19） From matter as the
first indifference in immediacy Schelling now passes on to further determinations。
The second potency （A2） is light； this identity itself posited as existent； in so far as A = B； A2 is
also posited。 The same identity； “posited under the form of relative identity；” i。e。 of the polarity
which we find appearing “in A and B； is the force of cohesion。 Cohesion is the impression made
on matter by the self…hood” of light “or by personality； whereby matter first emerges as particular
out of the universal identity； and raises itself into the realm of form。” Planets； metals and other
bodies form a series which under the form of dynamic cohesion expresses particular relations of
cohesion； in which on the one hand contraction preponderates； and on the other hand expansion。
Those potencies appear with Schelling as north and south； east and west polarity： their
developments further appear as north…west； south…east； &c。 He counts as the last potency
Mercury； Venus； the Earth； &c。 He continues： “Cohesion outside of the point of indifference I term
passive。 Towards the negative side” （or pole） “fall some of the metals which stand next to iron；
after them the so…called precious metals；” then the “diamond； and lastly carbon； the greatest
passive cohesion。 Towards the positive side； again； some metals fall； in which the cohesive nature
of iron gradually diminishes；” i。e。 approaches disintegration； and lastly “disappears in nitrogen。”
Active cohesion i