Epistemology of Spinoza
Thus, every mode of substance each individual mind or body is determined to be as it is because of the divine essence. Even the finite modes particular thoughts and actions are inevitably and wholly determined by the nature of god. Hence, everything in the world is as it must be; nothing could be other than it is. In the same deductive geometrical form, Book II of the Ethics offers an extensive account of human beings: our existence, our nature, and our activities.
Remember that we are aware of only two of the infinitely many attributes of god, extension and thought, and that each of them independently expresses the entire essence of the one infinite substance. That is, in the natural world god's body , the attribute of extension, modified by varying degrees of motion and rest, produces the face of the universe, which includes all of the particular physical events which are the modes of extension.
This is almost exactly like Descartes's account of the material world. Since they arise from distinct attributes, each of these realms is causally independent of the other and wholly self-contained: the natural world and the mental realm are separate closed systems. Despite the impossibility of any causal interaction between the two, Spinoza supposed that the inevitable unfolding of each these two independent attributes must proceed in perfect parallel with that of the other.
Since the development of each aspect of the divine nature follows with logical necessity from its own fundamental attribute, and since all of the attributes, in turn, derive from the central essential being of one and the same infinite substance, each exhibits the same characteristic pattern of organization even though they have no influence on each other. Thus, for every object of the natural world that exists as a mode of the attribute of extension, there is a corresponding idea in the mind of god that exists as a mode of the attribute of thought.
For every physical event that takes place in the material realm as the result of exclusively physical causes, a corresponding mental event must occur in the infinite intellect as a result of purely mental causes. Since everything flows from the same infinite being, we may suppose that the structure of thought in infinite intellect comprises an accurate representation of the structure of every other attribute. Consider what all of this implies for each of us as a living human being. We are not substances, according to Spinoza , for only god or Nature is truly substantial; we can exist only as modes, depending for our existence upon the reality of the one real being.
Since the one infinite substance is the cause of everything, each of us can only be regarded as a tiny cross-section of the whole. Of course, that cross-section does include elements from each of the infinitely many attributes of that substance. In particular, we know that in each case it involves both a human body, the movements of whose organic parts are all physical events that flow from god via the attribute of extension, and a human mind, the formation of whose ideas are all mental events that flow from god via the attribute of thought.
Although there can be no causal interaction between the mind and the body, the order and connection of their internal elements are perfectly correlated. Thus, in principle, the human mind contains ideas that perfectly represent the parts of the human body. But since many of these ideas are inadequate in the sense that they do not carry with them internal signs of their accuracy, we do not necessarily know our own bodies. II Prop. Spinoza maintained that human beings do have particular faculties whose functions are to provide some degree of knowledge.
I typically assume, for example, that there may be some correlation between thought and extension with regard to sensations produced by the action of other bodies upon my eyes, ears, and fingertips. Even my memory may occasionally harbor some evidence of the order and connection common to things and ideas. And in self-conscious awareness, I seem to achieve genuine knowledge of myself by representing my mind to itself, using ideas to signify other ideas. Near the end of Book II, then, Spinoza distinguished three kinds of knowledge of which we may be capable: First, opinion , derived either from vague sensory experience or from the signification of words in the memory or imagination, provides only inadequate ideas and cannot be relied upon as a source of truth.
Second, reason , which begins with simple adequate ideas and by analyzing causal or logical necessity proceeds toward awareness of their more general causes, does provide us with truth. But intuition , in which the mind deduces the structure of reality from the very essence or idea of god, is the great source of adequate ideas, the highest form of knowledge, and the ultimate guarantor of truth.
Second, starting from the adequate idea of any one existing thing, reason back to the eternal attribute of god from which it derives.
Finally, use this knowledge of the divine essence to intuit everything else that ever was, is, and will be. Indeed, he supposed that the Ethics itself is an exercise in this ultimate pursuit of indubitable knowledge. The last three Books of the Ethics collectively describe how to live consistently on Spinozistic principles. All human behavior results from desire or the perception of pain, so like events of any sort it flows necessarily from the eternal attributes of thought and extension. But Spinoza pointed out a crucial distinction between two kinds of cases: Sometimes I am wholly unaware of the causes that underlie what I do and am simply overwhelmed by the strength of my momentary passions.
But at other times I have adequate knowledge of the motives for what I do and can engage in deliberate action because I recognize my place within the grander scheme of reality as a whole. It is in this fashion that moral value enters Spinoza's system. Good or evil just is what serves or hinders the long-term interests of life. Since my actions invariably follow from emotion or desire, I always do what I believe to be the good, which will truly be so if I have adequate ideas of everything involved.
Project MUSE - Spinoza’s Epistemological Methodism
The greatest good of human life, then, is to understand one's place in the structure of the universe as a natural expression of the essence of god. For example, Farabi discussed differences in body and temperament, as well as variations in aptitude for learning certain sciences or industries.
Some people were prepared for learning some kinds of sciences, and others had aptitude for learning other kinds.
There were also differences in the quantity, speed, and rate of learning. Existence of such differences in human beings did not determine or govern their fates. For example, it is possible that an active intellect could create different aptitudes in two different people. Further, the individual nature of human beings could result in different abilities for learning. However, these factors could not force a person to work or learn Farabi, b, p. Thus, differences among human beings that were secondary, such as in environment or education could affect factors such as social circumstances, social class, happiness, and interpretation of happiness ibid, p.
Spinoza regarded a human being as a finite mode of God, existing simultaneously in God as a mode of thought and as a mode of extension of one substance Audi , p.
An encyclopedia of philosophy articles written by professional philosophers.
Spinoza maintained that the body and the mind constituted a single individual expressed in the attributes of thoughts and extension of form. Since the fundamental modifications of the single individual was expressed in the attributes, thoughts, ideas and other modifications, such as desires and volitions were presupposed to be an idea of their object. As the attributes of extension in physical or material form was that which extended itself, altogether, it constituted the single thing Allison, Spinoza determined the means through which and the extent to which human beings, as finite forms of existence, were capable of attaining freedom.
Freedom here was understood as the capacity to act rather than be governed by the passions Allison, Spinoza defined a thing as free when its actions were determined by its nature alone. Only God - whose actions were determined entirely by the necessity of His own nature, and for whom nothing was external - was completely free in this sense. Nevertheless, human beings could achieve a relative freedom.
Log in to Wiley Online Library
Only at that level do we cease to be victims of emotions, which we do not properly understand and cannot control. In such a rigid and deterministic world there might seem to be no room for human free will. However, Spinoza found its place by abstracting from the dimension of time. Freedom became the capacity to see the world under the heading of eternity, and without bondage to emotions and desires. These themselves were the result of ignorance of the causes whereby we had been determined. Activity and agency were the result of adequate cognition. In other words, it ceased to be true that one was individually in control of them.
In so far as in the thoughts went, the course of events was displayed as it turned out Blackburn , p.
For Spinoza, the will could not be separated from the intellect. There was no such thing as free will, because the human mind was determined in willing by a cause other than itself.gatsbybuild.co.uk/emociones-secuestradas-top-novel.php
Spinoza’s Epistemological Views
Thus, Spinoza explained that their will could only be a necessary cause of action, and not a free cause of action I, prop, XXXII- cited in Scott, Spinoza said that the will could not be called a free cause, but only a necessary one Curley , p. These sciences were so infallible that even a person who had vocally denied them could not deny them in their mind. Evidence that was contrary to this did not exist. This knowledge was instinctively produced for each person from the time of his or her birth.
Sometimes human beings did not pay attention to thoughts in their minds unless there were words to explain the meaning of those thoughts. Awareness of these things could be compendious and knowledge would expand through hearing of words that explained those thoughts Farabi , p. Shared primary contemplative matters among human beings were divided into three groups: first, practical skills, second, judgments of practical intellect and third, judgments of speculative intellect.
- mimamsa: Epistemology: Rationalism - Spinoza ();
- Introduction to Ways of Knowing and Meaning. Epistemology!
- Sin in the Second City: Madams, Ministers, Playboys, and the Battle for Americas Soul;
- Other Subject Areas.
- The Truth About Mary Magdalene.