mechanical relation defined above； so that the organs proper — and these are in the brain — here
press the skull out round； there make it broad； or force it flat； or in whatever way we care to state
the effect thus exerted。 Being itself a part of the organism； it must be supposed to have in it too； as
is the case in every bone； an active； living； formative influence； so that； from this point of view； it
really； from its side； presses the brain； and fixes its external boundary — which it is the better able
to do being the harder。 In that case； however； the relation of the activity of the one to the other
would always maintain the same character； for whether the skull is the determining factor or the
factor determined； this would effect no alteration in the general causal connexion； only that the
skull would then be made the immediate organ of self…consciousness； because in it qua cause the
aspect of existence…for…self would find expression。 But； since self…existence in the sense of organic
living activity belongs to both in the same manner； the causal connexion between them in point of
fact drops altogether。
This development of the two； however； would be inwardly connected； and would be an organic
preestablished harmony； which leaves the two interrelated aspects free as regards one another；
each with its own proper form and shape； without this shape needing to correspond to that of the
other； and still more so as regards the relation of the shape and the quality — just as the form of
the grape and the taste of wine are mutually independent of one another。
Since； however； the character of self…existence appertains to the aspect of brain； while that of
existence to the feature of skull； there is also a causal connexion to be set up between them inside
the organic unity — a necessary relation between them as external for one another； i。e。 a relation
itself external； whereby their form and shape are determined the one through the other。
As regards the condition； however； in which the organ of self…consciousness would operate
causally on the opposite aspect； all sorts of statements can be made。 For the question concerns
the constitution of a cause which is considered in regard to its indifferent existence； its shape and
quantity； a cause whose inner nature and self…existence are to be precisely what leave quite
unaffected the immediately existing aspect。 The organic self…formation of the skull is； to begin with；
indifferent to the mechanical influence exerted； and the relationship in which these two processes
stand； since the former consists in relating itself to itself； is just this very indeterminateness and
boundlessness。 Furthermore； even though the brain accepted the distinctions of mind； and took
them into itself as existential distinctions； and were a plurality of inner organs occupying each a
different space； it would be left undecided whether a mental element would； according as it was
originally stronger or weaker； either be bound to possess in the first case a more expanded
brain…organ； or in the latter case a more contracted brain…organ； or just the other way about。 But it
is contradictory to nature for the brain to be such a plurality of internal organs； for nature gives the
moments of the notion an existence of their own； and hence puts the fluent simplicity of organic life
clear on one side； and its articulation and division with its distinctions on the other； so that； in the
way they have to be taken here； they assume the form of particular anatomical facts。
The same holds good in regard to the question whether the improvement of the brain would
enlarge or diminish the organ； whether it would make it coarser and thicker or finer。 By the fact
that it remains undetermined how the cause is constituted； it is left in the same way undecided bow
the effect exerted on the skull comes about； whether it is a widening or a narrowing and shrinking
of it。 Suppose this effect is named in perhaps more distinguished phrase a 〃solicitation〃； we cannot
say whether this takes place by swelling like the action of a cantharides…plaster； or by shrivelling
like the action of vinegar。
In defence of all views of that kind plausible reasons can be adduced； for the organic relation；
which quite as much exerts its influence； finds one fit as well as another； and is indifferent to all this
wit of mere understanding。
It is； however； not the interest of observation to seek to determine this relation。 For it is in any
case not the brain in the sense of a physical part which takes its stand on one side； but brain in the
sense of the existential form of self…conscious individuality。 This individuality； qua abiding character
and self…moving conscious activity； exists for itself and within itself。 Opposed to this existence
within itself and on its own account stand its reality and its existence for another。 Its own peculiar
existence is the essential nature； and is subject； having a being in the brain； this being is subsumed
under it； and gets its value merely through its indwelling significance。 The other aspect of
self…conscious individuality； however； that of its existence； is being qua independent and subject；
or qua a thing； viz。 a bone： the real existence of man is his skull…bone。 This is the relationship and
the sense which the two aspects of this relation have when the mind adopts the attitude of
observation。
Observation has now to deal with the more determinate relation of these aspects。 The skull…bone
doubtless in general has the significance of being the immediate reality of mind。 But the
many…sidedness of mind gives its existence a corresponding variety of meanings。 What we have to
find out is the specific meaning of the particular regions into which this existence is divided； and we
have to see how the reference to mind is denoted in them。
The skull…bone is not an organ of activity； nor even a process of utterance。 We neither commit
theft； murder； etc。； with the skull…bone； nor does it in the least distort its face to suit the deed in
such cases； so that the skull should express the meaning in the language of gesture。 Nor does this
existential form possess the value even of a symbol。 Look and gesture； tone； even a pillar or a post
stuck up on a desert island； proclaim at once that they stand for something else than what they
merely are at first sight。 They forthwith profess to be symbols； since they have in them a
characteristic which points to something else by the fact that it does not belong peculiarly to them。
Doubtless； even in the case of a skull； there is many an idea that may occur to us； like those of
Hamlet over Yorick's skull； but the skull…bone by itself is such an indifferent object； such an
innocent thing； that there is nothing else to be seen in it or to be thought about it directly as it is；
except simply the fact of its being a skull。 It no doubt reminds us of the brain and its specific
nature； and skull with other formations； but it does not recall a conscious process； since there is
impressed on it neither a look or gesture； nor anything which would show traces of derivation from
a conscious activity。 For it is that sort of reality which； in the case of individuality； is intended to
exhibit an aspect of another kind； one that would no longer be an existence reflecting itself into
itself； but bare immediate existence。
While； further； the skull does not itself feel； there seems still a possibility of providing it with a more
determinate significance in the fact that specific feelings might enable us； through their being in
proximity to it； to find out what the skull may mean to convey； and when a conscious mode of
mind has its feeling in a specific region of the skull； it may be thought perhaps that this spot of the
skull may indicate by its shape what that mode is and what its peculiar nature。 Just as； e。g。； many
people complain of feeling a painful tension somewhere in the head when thinking intensely； or
even when thinking at all； so it might be that stealing； committing murder； writing poetry； and so on；
could each be accompanied with its own proper feeling； which would over and above be bound to
have its peculiar localization。 This locality of the brain； which would in this manner be more
disturbed and exercised； would also most likely develop further the contiguous locality of the bone
of the skull； or again this latter locality would； from sympathy or conformity； not be inert； but
would enlarge or diminish or in some other way assume a corresponding form。
What； however； makes such a hypothesis improbable is this： feeling in general is something
indeterminate； and that feeling in the head as the centre might well be the general feeling that
accompanies all suffering； so that mixed up with the thief's； murderer's； poet's tickling or pain in the
head there would be other feelings too； and they would permit of being distinguished from one
another； or from those we may call merely bodily feelings； as little as an illness can be determined
from the symptom of headache； if we restrict its meaning merely to the bodily element。
In point of fact； from whatever side we look at the matter； all necessary reciprocal re