God is by defined as, “a substance consisting of infinite attributes” in Proposition 11. Spinoza presents 3 Axioms based off his definitions to prove God’s existence. They are as follows: “(e)verything that exists, exists either in itself or in something else”, “(t)hat which cannot be conceived through anything else must be conceived though itself”, and “(t)hat from a given definite cause an effect necessarily follows”. He uses these, along with his Propositions and Definitions to argue God’s existence in four steps.
Firstly, he establishes the uniqueness of a substance. Spinoza uses Definition 3 to prove Proposition 1, 2 and 4, by explaining that that an effect always follows a cause and if there is no cause, it is impossible for an effect to follow. If things do not have anything in common, we cannot use them to understand other things, making them separate. Spinoza further distinguishes the uniqueness of substances in Proposition 1 by using Definition 5 as proof to show that if conception of one thing does not involve the conception of the other thing, substances can be by nature prior to its affections. By proving these Prepositions, he concludes that two substances, which have different attributes and share no cause and effect, have nothing in common, making them unique.
Secondly, he shows how the cause and effect leads to the original substance. Spinoza establishes his primary substance through cause and effect in Proposition 3 and 6. He explains that one substance cannot make another if their attributes are different. In terms of essences, two things with no attributes that are the same must be completely different substances, since it was previously proven that a substance is the ...
... middle of paper ...
...ernal reality; but Spinoza solved this problem by abandoning the Cartesian dualism of thought and extension. The fact that Descartes is a rationalist but still demands some empirical verification makes his argument inconsistent. Spinoza denies Descartes assertion that error is caused by making hasty judgments upon ideas. Spinoza believes that this error could only be due to the confused ideas themselves, because we do not have a bunch of ideas that we choose from as to what is distinct. If we have ideas that are inadequate, then we have inadequate knowledge. Since there is no freedom to affirm or deny ideas, it appears that Spinoza 's view is mentally deterministic. Spinoza develops his own subtle way around this problem by supposing that inadequate ideas will necessarily lead to confused action which will in turn force ideas to clear up and come closer to the truth.
Need Writing Help?
Get feedback on grammar, clarity, concision and logic instantly.Check your paper »
- An argument for Monism-Spinoza In the beginning of the course of unraveling 17th and 18th century profound philosophers we became acquainted with Descartes dualism, by analyzing that extension according to Descartes are two of God’s distinct features in which we ought to perceive. Not only did Spinoza toss the conception that God actively alters the earth through Descartes proclaimed “natural laws”, but unlike Descartes he believed God to be the only definite substance. For Spinoza God and God’s creation weren’t two diverse, distinctive substances instead only god or as he phrased nature is the sole true substance.... [tags: Metaphysics, Ontology, Baruch Spinoza, Existence]
799 words (2.3 pages)
- Spinoza begins Ethics forming an understanding of God through the nature of substance, and the conclusion he ultimately draws is integral in the conception of his metaphysical view. Substance is comprised of and understood through its attributes. No two substances can be of the same nature or attribute due to the fact that distinction between substances relies on a difference in attribute. With this assertion, it follows that no two substances can be understood through or caused by each other. If they are distinct from each other, understanding of one does not rely on understanding of the other.... [tags: Metaphysics, Ontology, Mind, Perception]
1096 words (3.1 pages)
- Baruch de Spinoza, or as later known by Benedictus de Spinoza, was a 17th century philosopher that came under much hostility because of his renunciation of the accepted religious perceptions of god. This is not to say that Spinoza repudiated god’s existence, on the contrary, Spinoza considered himself to believe in god, but in a different more natural sense. Spinoza received much denunciation and criticism for his beliefs from religious figure heads. He was excommunicated from the Jewish community because his ideas were contrary and revolutionary to the traditional Jewish religion.... [tags: Philosophy]
2005 words (5.7 pages)
- If these great thinkers (Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz) were to discuss instead the soul’s connection to the body, what might each say (both on his own behalf and in response to the other). Would they find any places where they might agree. If not, why not. (These are, after all, smart guys!) Though this sort of meeting would strike me as a debate with as furiously disparate and uncompromising ideals as one would find in a meeting of Andrew Weil, Jerry Falwell, and David Duke, I expect that the philosophers would find some surprisingly common ground.... [tags: essays research papers]
695 words (2 pages)
- Essay 2 First we will consider the assigned baseball scenario under Leibniz’s system of metaphysics. In the baseball scenario, the aggregate of the player, bat, pitch, swing and all the other substances in the universe are one and all contingent. There are other possible things, to be sure; but there are also other possible universes that could have existed but did not. The totality of contingent things, the bat, the player, etc., themselves do not explain themselves. Here Leibniz involves the principle of reason; “there can be found no fact that is true or existent, or any true proposition, without there being a sufficient reason for its being so and not otherwise.” There must be, Le... [tags: essays research papers]
1559 words (4.5 pages)
- Explain the reasoning of the Ontological argument as a proof for the existence of God. Ontological arguments, by their nature attempt to prove the existence of God using deductive reasoning to a point of logical necessity. Constructed as an a priori proof Anselm’s ontological argument works from a position of faith in an attempt to strengthen his belief in the existence of God. Anselm asks the question, ‘can what I know about God, be thought of as correct?’ However, the argument does, in some forms, attempt to prove the existence of God reductio ad absurdum.... [tags: Ontology, Ontological argument, Logic, God]
1025 words (2.9 pages)
- The existence of God has been an ongoing question that almost everyone has been searching for an answer.Back in the day when the idea of God was the centre of everyones conversation , Philosophers/Scientist began to argue of God’s existence and what God was like.With little knowledge and evidence to study whether God was real or not people came to realize that after years and years there was just not enough to justify either side which is why one should keep an open mind on topics like this.Our minds are still developing and there are such complex things out there that one day we hope to find a definite answer for.There is going to be objections that discuss on why other philosophers don '... [tags: Existence, God, Theology, Logic]
1259 words (3.6 pages)
- God’s existence plays a major role in Descartes’ arguments in the Meditations, especially the Third and Fifth Mediations. Throughout this essay I will explore Descartes’ arguments on God’s existence and argue that he is not entitled to use God’s existence in this way due to the fact that his argument is circular and that he felt pressured to prove God’s existence due to personal belief and necessity. Had Descartes not proven the existence of God, he would not have be able to prove that anything else is true in life besides his own existence.... [tags: Ontology, Existence, Existence of God, Theology]
1063 words (3 pages)
- Proofing God’s existence Although a person may claim that it is rational or justifiable not to believe in God, the apostle Paul tells us otherwise. In Romans 1:20 he writes that no one has an excuse for not believing in God because all creation declares His person. As well, King David expressed a similar statement in Psalm 19:1 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and God-head; so that they are without excuse….... [tags: Relligion, God, Creation]
1845 words (5.3 pages)
- Proof Of The Exsistence of God Either God exists or He doesn't. There is no middle ground. Any attempt to remain neutral in relation to God's existence is automatically synonymous with unbelief. It is far from a "moot" question, for if God does exist, then nothing else really matters; if He does not exist, then nothing really matters at all. If He does exist, then there is an eternal heaven to be gained (Hebrews 11:16) and an eternal Hell to be avoided (Revelation 21:8). The question for God's existence is an extremely important one.... [tags: essays research papers]
5940 words (17 pages)