Erik Morque
Philosophy 213
Midterm question 2
The post Cartesian era of philosophy witnessed Benedict de Spinoza rise to prominence in the late 17th century. revered as one of the great rationalist, Spinoza built upon, and often disagreed with, the philosophical foundation provided by Rene Descartes. Spinoza is best known for Ethics, his metaphysical approach to rational philosophy. within the ethics, Spinoza takes a notably divergent approach from Cartesianism in which he presents the doctrine of the single substance to explain how the universe works.
The single substance doctrine, otherwise known as substance monism is largely presented in part one of Ethics. Spinoza begins part one with a series of definitions. The most important of these definitions is substance. “By substance, I understand what is in itself and is conceived throughout itself, that is, that whose concept does not require the concept of another thing, from which it must be formed.” (ethics part 1, definition 3) in this quote from the ethics, it is evident that Spinoza places great importance on the concept of “substance.” By defining substance as existing through itself, Spinoza establishes that substance is highest form of metaphysical classification. furthermore, by not requiring the concept of another thing in order to understand its own concept, Spinoza essentially indicates that substance stands on its own, independent from all other things. Spinoza, furthermore, goes on to claim that substance is infinite and all things in nature are derivative from it. Spinoza then moves on to explain the concepts of attributes and modes. “by attribute I understand what the intellect perceives of a substance, as constituting its essence.” in this quote Spinoza ...
... middle of paper ...
... substance. Spinoza rejects these claims by Descartes within the single substance doctrine.”the thing extended and the thinking thing are either attributes of god or affections (modes) of the attributes of god” (ethics 1 pg 8) in this quote from the ethics Spinoza explains that mind and body are simply just properties of the same substance and are therefore unified under the single substance doctrine. overall, Spinoza and Cartesianism differ on the foundational premise of monism versus dualism.
In the Post Cartesian era, Benedict de Spinoza offered up a new spin on rationalist philosophy and is considered the father of metaphysical intellect. HIs contribution to philosophy not only questioned Cartesianism, but also basic theology as a whole. HIs single substance theory marked the stark divergence from Cartesianism and a new branch of monistic philosophical thought.
In this paper I shall consider Spinoza’s argument offered in the second Scholium to Proposition 8, which argues for the impossibility of two substances sharing the same nature. I shall first begin by explaining, in detail, the two-step structure of the argument and proceed accordingly by offering a structured account of its relation to the main claim. Consequently I shall point out what I reasonably judge to be a mistake in Spinoza’s line of reasoning; that is, that the definition of a thing does not express a fixed number of individuals under that definition. By contrast, I hope to motivate the claim that a true definition of a thing does in fact express a fixed number of individuals that fall under that definition. I shall then present a difficulty against my view and concede in its insufficiency to block Spinoza’s conclusion. Finally, I shall resort to a second objection in the attempt to prove an instance by which two substances contain a similar attribute, yet differ in nature. Under these considerations, I conclude that Spinoza’s thesis is mistaken.
Peter Abelard was a renowned dialectician from 1079 to 1142. He subjected theological doctrines to logical analysis. In other words, he used rational argument to discover truth. Saint Thomas Aquinas, was a believer in the power of reason, giving St. Augustine's theory an alternate approach. He taught in Paris and Italy during the years 1225 to 1274. Both of these new age thinkers changed the way Catholic followers viewed the "natural world."
Spinoza cites the source of the misconception of freedom as man’s inability to understand himself and the causes of his actions. Spinoza expounds on this confusion, “So, experience itself, no less clearly than reason, teaches that men believe themselves free because they are conscious of their own, and ignorant of the causes by which they are determined, that the decisions of the mind are nothing but the appetites themselves, which therefore vary as the disposition of the body.”(p.157) Spinoza conceives decisions and determination to be the same thing, but considered under different lights. When being considered through the lens of thought, the idea is considered a decision; while through the light of extension, it is considered determination, an action caused by laws of motion and rest. Though considered differently, the source of both of these ideas are caused by the striving of the human will, and thus dependent on
“Cogito ergo sum - I think therefore I am.” A mathematician, scientific thinker, and metaphysician Rene Descartes used this term in his “Meditation on First Philosophy.” This term has become famous especially in western philosophy. However, this term was not Descartes only legacy. His legacies include the development of the Cartesian coordinates, philosophical books, and theories. Even though the distinction between mind and body can be traced to the Greeks, Descartes account of the mind and body relationship has been considered the first and the most influential. Descartes was born in 1596 in France, from 1628 to 1649 Descartes remained in Holland, during this time he composed multiple works that set the scene for all later philosophical study of mind and body. (René Descartes and the legacy of mind/body dualism) “Meditation on First Philosophy,” is one of Descartes famous treatises. First published in the 17th century, it consists of six meditations. In the first meditation Descartes eliminates all belief in things that are not certain, basically he removes everything from the table. Then one by one he examines each belief and determines whether any of these beliefs can be known for sure. Meditations three and five focus on the existence of God. This ontological argument is both fascinating and poorly understood in the philosophical community. Descartes tries to prove God’s existence by using simple but influential foundations. (Nolan). Descartes innate ideas proof and ontological proof of the existence of God is going to be assessed through the summarization of meditation thee and meditation five, while his work is also going to be compared to Anselm’s ontological argument on the existence of God.
Rene Descartes, who has been often called the Father of Western Philosophy (Wikipedia Descartes), entered the scene in Europe in the 17th century. Galileo’s imprisonment and the church’s monopoly on knowledge had put a damper on scientific learning throughout Europe. This, coupled with Aristotle’s outdated theories which held much weight in the domain of science and philosophies had spread a growing sense of skepticism throughout the world. Descartes’ Meditations were the first real response to this dangerous approach. He started off by embracing skepticism’s notion that all of his ideas of the world must be shaken and then attempt to build a model from the ground up. Through the series of Meditations he arrives upon a critical point that he says cannot be refuted and begins to model his idea of the world from that point. This point is one of the most the most quoted phrases in philosophy, “Cogito ergo sum”, that is, “I think therefore I am” (Descartes Mediation 2). He states that were...
...rney. Since the philosophies of Descartes and Leibniz were built around this idea of an immaterial, indivisible God, the philosophy that followed seemed to many to be shaky and speculative by their own definition. But considering the time period and the pressure involved in philosophizing at all, we must admire and respect the great advancement in thinking that was prompted by these great men.
Before Spinoza can explain the liberations from these passions he had to explain the strengths of the passions and what one can do to at least litigate the effects of being governed by passions. This lead to the detail discussions of virtue and what it really is and Spinoza’s new concept of what constitutes morality. This was coming out of the seventh century when virtue was defined as in acting in according to duties opposed on one by either a super natural source, for example God or a church. Or from even a modern stand point that if one has free will they must act in accordance’s ...
Throughout the history of metaphysics the question, What is? has always been answered in an incomplete,unsatisfactory or complicated manner, but Spinoza tried to answer this question in an exceptional way simply by describing God and His essence. Based on Spinoza’s views, God’s qualities can be referred to as attributes and modes are merely affections of a substance. This paper will provide a detailed view of Spinoza’s key ontological definition of God as the only substance, his attributes, and their co-relations. The study goes further to explore the major scholarly argument between Spinoza and Descartes, in regard to their view of substance, and its attributes.
David Hume in An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding and Benedict De Spinoza in The Ethics run noteworthy parallels in about metaphysics and human nature. Spinoza and Hume share opinions of apriori knowledge and free will. For human nature, similar concepts of the imagination and morality arise. Although both philosophers derive similar conclusions in their philosophy, they could not be further distanced from one another in their concepts of God. Regarded as an atheist, Spinoza argues that God is the simple substance which composes everything and that nothing is outside of this simple substance. Hume rejects this notion completely and claims that nothing in the world can give us a clear picture of God. Hume rejects the argument from design
Surprisingly dualism has become synonymous with Rene Descartes that often times it is many just referred to by many as Cartesian dualism, as if this was the decisive line of attack to the issue. The theory behind dualism is that the mind and the body, that mind and matter, are two distinct things. Descartes well-thought-out the difficulty of the location of the mind and came to the conclusions that the mind was a completely separate entity from the body. Descartes stated that he is a subject of conscious thought and experience and thus cannot be nothing more than spatially extended matter. The fundamental nature of the human being, or the mind, are unable to be material but are obliged to be no...
The arguments are vast and wide spread. There are still many other philosophers out there who have weighed in on this problem who were not able to be covered in this paper. As you can now clearly see each of these three philosophers had a discourse between one another through their own works in which they tried to reconcile the issues that arose in the others. Interestingly all of these philosophers used God in quite different ways in order to make their argument fit their needs. They also all addressed the idea of substances in different ways, taking it to mean different things. Thus in conclusion neither Descartes, Spinoza, nor Leibniz have arguments that I agree on. Each one has its strong points and its weak points. By tweaking each argument I made them better fit my own understanding and beliefs.
This essay will define Cartesian dualism, explain and critically evaluate Gilbert Ryle’s response to Cartesian dualism in his article, “Descartes’ Myth” and support Ryle’s argument on Descartes’ substance dualism.
Rene Descartes, a 17th century French philosopher believed that the origin of knowledge comes from within the mind, a single indisputable fact to build on that can be gained through individual reflection. His Discourse on Method (1637) and Meditations (1641) contain his important philosophical theories. Intending to extend mathematical method to all areas of human knowledge, Descartes discarded the authoritarian systems of the scholastic philosophers and began with universal doubt. Only one thing cannot be doubted: doubt itself. Therefore, the doubter must exist. This is the kernel of his famous assertion Cogito, ergo sum (I am thinking, therefore I am existing). From this certainty Descartes expanded knowledge, step by step, to admit the existence of God (as the first cause) and the reality of the physical world, which he held to be mechanistic and entirely divorced from the mind; the only connection between the two is the intervention of God.
...ranscendence of God, and ascription of free will to human beings and to God. According to Spinoza, this features made the world unintelligible.