/lit/ - Literature

>>13050141
>>13050158
this is why you should start with the rationalists

>>12500404
just find a pdf and try to read it, it's not going to reference any earlier works or anything -- that being said it is often considered one of the hardest works of philosophy ever written, so don't be afraid to nope out and come back later

>>11721359
Dualism is over, anon; pick a monism and get to work.

>>11446063
Hegel was working in a tradition that began with Spinoza

>>11313629
>math and science have nothing to do with philosophy
the absolute state of

>>11312634
He literally called his book The Ethics; he was one of the only philosophers to fully entwine his metaphysical and ethical system.

Spinoza is based af

Hume, Spinoza, or Kant

>>11196974
I'm not much of a Spinoza reader (mostly Deleuze), but I do like him. Doesn't Spinoza talk about different types of knowledge? Afaik there are three of them and only the last one is knowledge of essences or whatever it's called. Maybe this involves knowledge of conatus and affectio/affectus for example so that you only truly understand something if you understand all its possible relations and their effects with every possible external factor (including non-liniar and catalytic causality in today's terms).

>>11163399
>At least Leibniz took a position.
Spinoza was so much more explicit about his system than Leibniz, how many levels of psude are you on right now? Spinoza's position was so radical it was commonplace for Spinozans to be executed by the state.

>>11162439
Well Nietzsche was Polish so close enough, I guess...

>>11044622
If mind and body are separate substances with no like properties how would they ever interact with one another?
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dualism/#MinBodHisDua

>>10983654

>>10922046
>t. couldn't understand the Ethics

>>10769786
Spinoza's Ethics is incredibly brilliant, totally worth the study. That being said, it's not easy whatsoever. It's one of the most arcane works of philosophy. He is pretty much alone in his thought; no real Spinozans came before or after.

>>10202954
Without the preceding conversation of "what is substance" this whole conversation is hamstrung.