Baruch Spinoza ´ 8 DownloadOmewhat although it is simplistic and in my opinion silly gets into trouble he discourses on Divine nature in my opinion silly He gets into once he on Divine nature or pan ness is there left at the door and is no longer applicable without issues Spinoza s god suffers rom a ractured nature his substance is removed rom his attributes and his attributes are subject to his nature God isn t ree in Spinoza s system He is subject to His own nature This must entail I suppose that His attributes and His substance are somehow different rom His nature What we have is a god that is made up of various parts What his nature is I can t uite say because I didn t note any discussion of it in here as such Spinoza believes that the world of causal mechanics shares in God s substance His argument seemed to hinge on the idea that an infinite substance cannot be bounded so there can be no other substance save one and that is God s ultimately Of course Spinoza does seem to make distinctions between God s infinite attributes and His substance which must become inite at some point Spinoza does not elaborate on how infinite attributessubstance can become inite It seems that at some point most likely in God infinite substance becomes inite as thought and extension All of this makes Spinoza s pantheism problematic He simply removes a multiplicity of substances rom one place namely The Leadership Gap: What Gets Between You and Your Greatness from a mundane mechanical universe and places multiplicity within God Himself Regardless of whether or not Spinoza does some sleight of hand and uses different terms to describe God s nature his god is ultimately a divided and multiform god so pantheism is only aitting description of Spinozism with very particular caveats and provisos I was probably at my most impatient while reading Spinoza s discourse regarding emotions Here he vacillates uite a bit All emotions in Spinoza s causal universe are simply reactionary states Love is both a negative and positive emotion The Leadership Gap for Spinoza It s positive when it s intellectual whatever the hell that means and negative when it entails compassion and pity which is usually included in the typical definition of love I should enlighten the reader that Spinoza is rather adamant about using his own definitions of words This is something he tries to get across at the very beginning of the works included here His definitions are sometimes uite euivocal though so consistency is a problemor Spinoza especially in his discussion of emotions As Zero to Five: 70 Essential Parenting Tips Based on Science (and What I've Learned So Far) far as love goes one must note that Spinoza s definition is not only idiosyncratic but pretty ridiculous He attempts to make love both an emotion and not an emotion He than once claims that good and evil are simply pleasure and pain and nothing How one can say that pleasure is intellectual I don t uite know but suffice it to say that Spinoza s euivocal and ambivalent use of terminology would never aid someone in putting his ethics into practical use Also his ethical system is so apathetic that I can t see it being anything but a negotiable and capricious Sciences in the early twentyirst century provide evidence that Spinoza's biological understanding of the emotions may also have been essentially on target It was upon this prescient naturalistic scientific oundation that Spinoza developed a new approach to ethics Perhaps the most important heirs to Spinoza's thought are Nietzsche Marx and Freud but the Radical Enlightenment has recently .
Thics Spinoza helped oment deistic thought So I suppose he holds a uniue position in that regard There was a time when I identified with deism I now see it Save the Cupcake! for what it is Deism denies God in practice but accepts Him in theory Atheism denies God in both theory and in practice While I think deism is certainlyar intelligent than atheism it is practically speaking no different so it s little wonder that deism gave way to atheism during it is practically speaking no different so it s little wonder that deism gave way to atheism during age of enlightenment Spinoza is a deist s theologian Since I left deistic thought a long time ago I don t see much that speaks to me now in this kind of writing Ethics presents a monolithic metaphysical system derived Tressed to Kill (Southern Beauty Shop, from axioms and definitions possessing austere beauty and it seems great psychological insight This is especiallyound in Spinoza s enumeration of the basic emotions and the elaborations of these plus his solution to the problems they consistently cause to human beings Apart Tressed to Kill from that Spinoza is enormously invested in an elaborate higher metaphysics melding sublime notions of God man and nature Upon thatoundation after a couple of hundred pages of seamless order political philosophy is dealt with in one page only The result is righteningAt one point by use of his relentless geometrical method Spinoza derives the conclusion that it is perfectly ine or humans to cause serious suffering to animals This seems to be because we are in some curious Spinozistic ashion special If suffering to animals This seems to be because we are in some curious Spinozistic ashion special If is pure philosophical reasoning that makes the assumption that all other things are eualand this is my sense it is interesting But perhaps all other things are never eual there is no ceteris paribus After witnessing the perfect movement rom high lown abstract principles to the justification of extreme cruelty to animals I hope so Spinoza doesn t hold back but something goes wrongAt a higher level the notions of body and thought being just two of the limitless modes of what he refers to as God but the only two accessible to our understanding is very engaging and evocative Einstein said the God he believed in was the Spinozist God The Ethics was a major influence on enlightenment philosophy and is a classic statement of the non existence of ree will Maybe it s a book you should read if you really want to and pass over without guilt if you don t In any case I enjoyed it That which is infinite cannot be divided Pure Poetry The Continental Philosophers Who Have poetry The continental philosophers who have impressed me have been Locke or his political philosophy Hume The Gingerbread Man and the Leprechaun Loose at School for his consistency Nietzscheor his radical creativity Spinoza or his alluring materialism and Kant or his comprehensive reconciliation of materialism and idealism Of the lot I have studied and known Kant Life changing if you let it be A reasonable The Gingerbread Man Loose in the School faith depends on our willingness to disband the temporal certaintiesor the permanent possibilities Spinoza s view The Cutting Room: A Novel of Suspense from nowhere is a scientist s heaven This book is now crammed into my nightstand collection along with other sacred texts. Een laid largely at hiseet Nevertheless Spinoza's last words in the Ethics sound a note of caution and perhaps even of warning All things excellent are as difficult as they are rare Time however is inally catching up with Spinoza and the journey through his philosophy is well worth the effort as his views now than ever capture the contemporary scientific imagination and ethical sensibilit. I have given this 4 star because of its IMPORTANCE IN PHILOSOPHICAL INTELLECTUAL HISTORY AS WELL AS ITS in philosophical intellectual history as well as its in the history of the body and emotions Its legacy continues to weigh heavy on the world we live in Even where I may disagree it is either through tense intellectual wrangling that creates knots in my own mind or through recourse to modern knowledge that Spinoza could not have had access to as such it is a tour de orce so even on that score alone it is a work that is a pleasure to tangle with American novelist and Professor Of Philosophy Rebecca of philosophy Rebecca Goldstein has chosen to discuss Baruch Spinoza s Ethics on FiveBooks as one of the top ive on her subject Reason and its Limitations saying that He is of course one of the great 17 century rationalists someone who made all the claims or reason that have ever been made There is great ambiguity in him He was called a God intoxicated man by the poet Novalis But he was also perhaps one of the most effective atheists of all time The ull interview is available here I didn t care or Spinoza to put it simply First of all and probably most importantly is I can t stand The Cake House fatalism I hate it in philosophy and I really hate it in theology Spinoza supports absolute causality even down to human emotions His trivializing of human and divine nature is so annoying and problematic that it is surprising that he became so influential While he gets some things right that Descartes got wrong namely by countering the inane method of Cartesian doubt he gets so many other things wrong that I cannot say he was much better than Descartes I doind it befuddling that often people will cite Descartes and Spinoza as pioneers of modern philosophy This is a surprising assertion because The Essential Tantra: A Modern Guide to Sacred Sexuality firstly philosophy has never taken a prolonged hiatus since Pythagoras and the Pre Socratics It is surprising secondly because I do not see much that they brought to the table that was new and constructive I think the people who place them in a uniue position in the history of philosophy intend to mean that their output contributed to skepticism and enlightenment notions I still don t see much that was novel however Skepticism was already a component of philosophy If these same people mean to get across that they beget systems that were not overtly religious than that would not constitute airst either Certainly philosophy even during the Christian centuries was never bound to only theological matters Much of Ockham whom I ve read was not always overtly religious philosophically speaking So I definitely don t think that non religious philosophy started with these two It might be that they are considered The Wisdom of Psychopaths: What Saints, Spies, and Serial Killers Can Teach Us About Success first in developing particular methods and systems Even here I don t see where they are uniue in the history of philosophySpinoza is often called a pantheist while this is a suitable description to a degree his pantheism is not consistent and is incredibly problematic Asar as mundane mechanics go his pantheism works Baruch Spinoza places The Outlandish Adventures of Liberty Aimes freedom as the ultimate aim and central value of the life well lived His philosophy is marked by the most thorough going naturalism of any of its period so much so that a number of its central tenets remain a matter of lively debate today Spinoza's commitment to the searchor a comprehensive understanding of all things inspired Einstein Further discoveries in the neuro.