/lit/ - Literature

>>17654157
this

>>17629045
Spinoza is the Pepe to the Wojak Western ChristKEK civilization

IDK he was pretty much a based Chad and more right wing than most faggot reddit poltards.
Most thinkers are by current standards right wing and unacceptable. It won't be long before all of philosophy is turned into incomprehensible nigger babble.

help me do my homework pls

I want something that can wow my professor but I completely lack the confidence to do any critical thinking in any regard after reading some of my peer's responses. I have to prep myself for commenting on a lesbian radfem peer's own response without making it seem like mansplaining. I'm crunched for time so maybe you guys could help me come up with a 200-300 word response to this question?

** “For although the idea of substance is in me by virtue of the fact that I am a substance, that fact is not sufficient to explain my having the idea of an infinite substance, since I am finite, unless this idea proceeded from some substance which really was infinite.”
What does Descartes mean by this, and how does it relate to his proof of God’s existence? What problem is he raising here, and how does he seek to resolve it? How does his effort relate to the task of creating a firm foundation for knowledge? **

Ik this is supposed to lead a discussion around into Spinoza who I'm actually versed on buy my brain putty isn't flexible with the allotted time for anyone who's not Hume, Spinoza, Leibniz, Hegel and onwards.

>>17457002
>refutes your Semitic fairy tale nonsense

>*makes tradcath zoomer seethe*

What are some prerequisites to him?

Yes.

No.

You should all be celebrating the fact that the world is

I'm Spinoza ama

Done with Descartes and want to jump into Spinoza.

Should I head right into the Ethics, or some other secondary introduction literature? I have considered reading Deleuze's book on him first, is that a good idea?

>>16075216

>words words words words words words words words words

>>15858753
>>15857968
This is beautiful. Belcea arrives at neutral monism similar to Spinoza, James, Russell. The world is just one "substace" rather than a dualism: you can see it either as mental/spiritual or material/physicial, but they're otherwise synoyms. It's just a matter of perspective: if you see things from within, you see the idealism/metal perspective; if you see things from without, you see the realist/physical perspective.

What Belcea calls objective/subjective is actually substace/ideas, and their synthesis is the world from different directions.

A /lit/terati found out Spinoza's neutral monism from a different angle.

>Spinoza’s metaphysics of substance has been called neutral monism; it is a form of monism because it allows for only one substance, and it is neutral because he describes the one substance as both a body and a mind

Based Jews who made the Jews seethe?

>atheist
>prefers to ignore limitations of human mind
>stoic
>egoist
>proto-Nietzschean
Is he officially the most reddit philosopher?

Is it just me or do most philosophers look like they were high when they did their portraits?
They had like that sleepy eyed light smile.
Or was that just how they posed for portraits back then?

Whoa......so he was just an Atheist

Read Baruch Spinoza (pbuh).......

>refutes christcucks and jews
based
>denies the immortality of the soul and the afterlife
cringe

The Ethics of Spinoza (ﷺ)

What's Spinoza's favorite rock band?