Baruch Spinoza: Philosophical Perspectives - Coursework Example

Baruch Spinoza: Philosophical Perspectives Today Baruch Spinoza is regarded as one of the foremost philosophers of the 17th century. Still, during Spinoza’s lifetime he was largely ignored as an important thinker. Modern theorists and philosophers, however, now recognize him as one of the most prominent rationalist thinkers. He is additionally credited with being one of the progenitors of the Enlightenment. This essay examines Spinoza’s background in terms of how it influences his philosophical perspectives. The essay then examines Spinoza’s philosophical perspectives, arguing that Spinoza largely embraced a deterministic vision of the world and equated God with an infinite substance. Spinoza was born in 1632 in Amsterdam, Netherlands into a Jewish family (Nadler 2001, p. 10). His early development was characterized by traditional Jewish traditions. These traditions included education in the Torah, giving Spinoza an early background in intellectual subjects. Through Spinoza’s surroundings, most prominently his family life, he was able to learn a number of languages, including Hebrew, Portuguese, Dutch, and French. While Spinoza was a great student he ultimately did not end up pursuing further education in the Jewish tradition. Instead, at the age of 17 he joined his family’s importing business (Nadler 2001, p. 32). While Spinoza’s Jewish studies greatly contributed to his intellectual development, his study of Latin with Francis van den Enden perhaps more prominently shaped his perspectives in philosophy. Van den Enden was a recognized free thinker and a radical democrat whose books were banned for containing information regarding atheism. He is recognized for having introduced Spinoza to the ideas of then formative philosopher Rene Descartes. After Spinoza’s father died, Spinoza began boarding with Van den Enden and began teaching at his boarding school. It was during this period that Spinoza increasingly began to develop his rationalist ideas. Once again Spinoza would return to the family importing business, but after experience tremendous hardship would leave it to his younger brother. At age twenty-three Spinoza experienced a tremendous event as he was expelled from the Jewish community. In these regards, Jewish religious official convened and agreed that because of his heretical views, and despite the best efforts of the community to change his mind, there was no other option but to expel him. While little is precisely known about Spinoza’s actions during this period there is the assumption that in large part his views directly opposed those in the Jewish tradition. One anecdotal account confirms that Spinoza indicated that God was an actual body; because of this statement he was attacked by a man with a knife who believed Spinoza was a heretic. Undoubtedly this contributed to Spinoza’s future intellectual development, as he would spend the next twenty-years of his life working and studying as a private scholar. By 1660 Spinoza had started his substantial philosophical writings, including the Ethics (Nadler 2001, p. 45). The Ethics would be the work that Spinoza ultimately would become most recognized. In terms of philosophy Spinoza’s works span a wide array of thematic concerns. Still, if there is a central thorough-put in these works it is Spinoza’s ardent embrace of rationalism. As Spinoza had a significant religious upbringing a large amount of his philosophy examines religious concepts. Among Spinoza’s texts that examine this issue, perhaps most prominent is his work Theologico-Political Treatise. In this work Spinoza argues that Biblical scripture should be understood through a strict interpretation of Biblical texts, rather than by mediation that is involved through interpretations by church leaders. In this way Spinoza writes, “It is further evident from the fact that most of them assume as a basic principle for the understanding of Scripture and for extracting its true meaning that it is throughout truthful and divine--a conclusion which ought to be the end result of study and strict examination; and they lay down at the outset as a principle of interpretation that which would be far more properly derived from Scripture itself, which stands in no need of human fabrications” (Spinoza as cited in Curley 1985, p. 34). In this instance Spinoza is indicating that as religious leaders recognize the scripture is divinely inspired, then there should be a strict effort made to recognize this divine authority. While Spinoza’s argument that the scripture should be the only thing contributing to Biblical knowledge was slightly sensational, perhaps more radical was his view on the existence of God. In Spinoza’s Ethics he presents an ontological argument that there is an infinite substance in the universe. While other philosophers, such as Anselm and Descartes, used similar proofs to establish the existence of God, Spinoza’s argument refrains from making this claim. Ultimately then Spinoza makes the radical assumption that the only thing that can be known about the existence of a divine power is that there is an infinite substance. While Spinoza’s religious philosophy gained him the most recognition during his time, his most influential writing was in other areas. Spinoza would later gain much esteem for his perspectives on the mind and psychology. In many degrees Spinoza’s perspectives here are in direct contradiction to those advanced by Descartes. In terms of the essence of the mind, Descartes had argued in terms of a strict mind and body dualism. Spinoza contradicts this point, arguing instead that the mind operates as more of an extension of the human body. Spinoza additionally believed that the "the human Mind is a part of the infinite intellect of God" (Spinoza 2008, as cited in Della Rocca, p. 70). While this notion does not directly conflict with Descartes’ position, one recognizes that Spinoza has further situated God as a sort of symbolic infinite essence. Another prominent area of investigation within Spinoza’s philosophy of mind is in terms of free will vs. determinism. In these regards Spinoza largely embraces a deterministic concept of the universe. Spinoza states, “In the Mind there is no absolute, or free, will, but the Mind is determined to will this or that by a cause which is also determined by another, and this again by another, and so to infinity” (Spinoza as cited in Curley 1985, p. 55). In this way Spinoza views reality as perpetually unfolding because of earlier causal motivations. Again one comes to recognizes Spinoza’s vision of the universe as containing a sort of infinite essence. In these regards, Spinoza doesn’t merely believe that the mind is constricted by causal factors, but that nature is also linked to such causality. This vision of reality is similar that which would later be adopted by 19th century American transcendentalist thinkers, such as Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau. In both instances, there is additionally the recognition that through a close meditation on nature humans can bring themselves into greater contact with the processes of these deterministic forces. Within this same spectrum of investigation is the nature of human emotion. As Spinoza has indicated, human action is motivated out of causal and deterministic forces this view is extended to emotions. Still, Spinoza further articles his perception on human emotion, comparing them in a way that is similar to contemporary notions of cognitive thought. Spinoza writes, “The Affects, therefore, of hate, anger, envy, etc., considered in themselves, follow from the same necessity and force of nature as any other singular things. And therefore they acknowledge certain causes, through which they are understood, and have certain properties, as worthy of our knowledge as the properties of any other thing, by the mere contemplation of which we are pleased” (Spinoza 2002, p. 409). In this statement, one witnesses Spinoza’s vision of human emotions as operating under the same causal circumstances as nature. There is also the recognition that the emotions can be equated with human thought processes. This view of the human emotions as constituting cognitive processes is a consideration that continues into the 20th century. In terms of counter perspectives to this view, psychoanalysis has presented human emotions as partially motivated out of irrational repressive urges. Additionally, the behaviorist school of thought considered human emotions in terms of more habitual patterns of action. While Spinoza’s concept of the mind largely establishes the foundation for his work, these perceptions would extend to his larger perspectives on metaphysics. When examining Spinoza’s perspectives on metaphysics there is a clear recognition of how his ideas greatly diverge from those in the Jewish and Christian traditions and in some instances can even be read as heretical. One such prominent consideration is the way that Spinoza implements the term God. For Spinoza, God and nature are terms that can be interchanged as they refer to the same infinite essence. As Spinoza further develops his metaphysics he offers a general deconstruction of perceived reality. In accomplishing this task he articulates the notion of a substance. For Spinoza a substance is that which exists without reference to another object. This is contrasted with the notion of an object, such as a pencil or a door, which take their essence from being specifically related to these concepts. In these regards, Spinoza writes, “By substance I understand what is in itself and is conceived through itself, i.e., that whose concept does not require the concept of another thing, from which it must be formed” (Spinoza, p. 45). For Spinoza this substance then can be equated with the eternal essence of the universe. While substance is the underlining essence of the universe Spinoza recognizes that human perception of reality is composed of a variety of ideas. In this way he argues that the two prevailing modes of perception are thought and extension. Through thought and extension humans are able to attribute essences to specific objects. Ultimately one recognizes that Spinoza’s embracement of a singular substance in the universe is distinct from Descartes idea of a division between the mind and body. Other humanist perspectives have also criticized Spinoza’s notion of substance; Schopenhauer argues, “that concept of substance…with the definition of which Spinoza accordingly begins…appears on close and honest investigation to be a higher yet unjustified abstraction of the concept matter” (Schopenhaur 2001, p. 76). Additionally, Spinoza’s perspective also directly conflicts with much Western religious thought that posits a God figure rather than an innate essence of reality. A number of historical and contemporary criticisms have been levied against Spinoza. From an overarching perspective one recognizes that Spinoza’s philosophy is largely rooted in the rationalist school of thought. In this way Spinoza believes that truth can be attained through rational insights. While this rationalist perspective would be embraced by thinkers such as Descartes, empirical philosophers such as David Hume argued that knowledge can only be derived through experience. The philosopher Immanuel Kant would eventually emerge and try to fuse together Spinoza’s rationalism with Hume’s empiricism. While these criticisms constitute the most overarching critiques, there is additionally the recognition that philosophers have taken issue with specific ideas in Spinoza’s doctrines. Perhaps the most prominent criticism has been that levied by philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer. To a large extent Schopenhauer criticizes the terminology Spinoza uses as a foundation for his thought processes. Schopenhauer writes, “Thus he calls ‘God’ that which is everywhere called ‘the world’; ‘justice’ that which is everywhere called ‘power’; and ‘will’ that which is everywhere called ‘judgement’ (Schopenhauer 2001, p. 76). In this way there is the insinuation that the linguistic assumptions with which Schopenhauer has reached his conclusions runs contrary to the assumptions espoused by other prominent philosophers and scientists. In conclusion, this essay has examined philosopher Baruch Spinoza. Within this context of investigation Spinoza’s background has been considered in terms of the influence it had on the development of his philosophical ideas. The essay additionally considers Spinoza’s philosophical perspectives. Perhaps most thematic in his work is the embracement of rationalism. Through this rationalist lens Spinoza posits that God can be equated to an infinite essence. Spinoza further contends that human thoughts and actions are motivated out of a causal force. While many of Spinoza’s ideas have gone out of fashion, today he still stands as one of the foundational thinkers of the Enlightenment movement. References Curley, E. (1985). The Collected Works of Spinoza. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Della Rocca, M. (2008). Spinoza, New York: Routledge. Nadler, S. (2001). Spinoza: A Life. London: Cambridge University Press. Schopenhauer, A. (2001) Parerga and Paralipomena, Vol. 1. London: Oxford University Press. Spinoza, B. (2002) Spinoza: Complete Works. New York: Hackett Publishing Company. Read More