This relation is at once seen to be inadequate in reference to the two sides. The finite is the positing agent, it remains the affirmative, the relation is a positive one, and the Being of the finite is what is primarily the basis, which is the point of departure, and which is the abiding element. It is to be remarked further, that when we say the Being of the finite is the Being of the Infinite, the Being of the finite, which is itself the Being of the Infinite, is in this way the major premiss of the syllogism, and the mediation between the Being of the finite and that of the Infinite is not shown. It is a proposition without mediation, and that is precisely the opposite of what is demanded.
This mediation contains a further determination besides. The Being of the finite is not its own Being, but that of the Other, that of the Infinite; it is not through the Being of the finite that the Infinite arises, but out of the not-being of the finite; this is the Being of the Infinite. The mediation is of such a kind that the finite stands before us as affirmation. Looked at more closely, the finite is that which it is as negation; thus it is not the Being, but the not-being of the finite; the mediation between the two is rather the negative nature in the finite, and thus the true moment of mediation is not expressed in this proposition. The deficiency in the form of the syllogism is that this true content, this element which belongs essentially to the notion, cannot be expressed in the form of a single syllogism. The Being of the Infinite is the negation of the finite; the destiny of the finite is simply to pass over into the Infinite, and thus the other propositions which belong to a syllogism do not permit of being superadded. The defect here is that the finite is pronounced to be affirmative and its relation to the Infinite is declared to be positive, while it is yet essentially negative, and this dialectic escapes the form of the syllogism of the understanding.
If the finite presupposes the Infinite, the following