/lit/ - Literature

bump

Aristotle.

It's incredibly dense and not worth reading just to check off the box for 17th century rationalists. Spinoza is somewhat insular from later philosophy so you can wait to return and dig into the Ethics when you want with. He's a unqiue thinker

It's one of the most important and influential books of modern philosophy. It's also pretty difficult. If you wanted some historical context, Nadler's "A Book Forged In Hell" and Stewart's "The Courtier and the Heritic" are good places to start (pretty fast reads, the latter is maybe a bit lighter). If you want some really substantial context, you can't do better than Jonathan Israel's magnificent series on the Enlightenment (starting with The Radical Enlightenment).

better off going straight from Descartes to Hume and Hegel. Then Kant and Nietzsche. Then diving straight into phenomenology with Husserl and Heidegger. After that, follow your ego.

>>10771340
to be fair though, I've never read Spinoza, so maybe he's worth a look. I'd personally go for Schopenhauer before I touched Spinoza.

>>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.

>>10769786
Ethics is a reaction to Principles of First Philosophy by Descartes, not Meditations

God-tier philosophy.

You're probably going to struggle getting it at first, so read it in companion with a reader's guide. I used the one by Beth Lord, which you can get pdf off b-ok.

>>10771830
>pantheism
>God-tier

Pick one and one only

Hey op, he's one of the GOAT philosophers. I used the secondary "Behind the Geometrical Method: A Reading of Spinoza's Ethics" as I worked through it. Very worth it!

Btw don't listen to the earlier anon who recd "The Courtier and the Heritic" - this is pop historical fiction pseudo psychology garbage.

>>10772085
Who are the GOAT Philosophers in your opinion?

Two things to keep in mind:

1) Spinoza works from God (as substance) to then explain man
2) He doesn't believe in the superiority of mind over body; thought and extension are parallel attributes of God that we partake in (the only two we can know, in fact), and make mind and body operate reciprocally.

>>10772338
Spinoza, Leibniz, and Kant are the greatest of all time. The letter of their philosophies may no longer be applicable, but the spirit of their philosophy is immortal.

>>10769786
>mfw brainlets around me think Ethics is hard to read

>>10769786
We're like all connected, man.

>>10773155
>Monadology
Boring

Deontology is the gentleman's ethics so Kant is goat for anyone interested in following rules, but if you're Chad and have read Nietzche you won't be interested in that. If you live in the 21st century and have a computer you should probably just be reading information integration theory, quantum field theory, sociobiology, and Roosh V.

>>10773395
>Kant is goat for anyone interested in following rules, but if you're Chad and have read Nietzche you won't be interested in that
this post is quality bait anon, good work.

>>10769786
>2018
>still reading kikes
Stop letting these parasites control the discourse, especially on issues as important as ethics and God

Isn't this guy a one of (((them)))?

Is Spinoza harder or easier to read than Ulysses/GR?

I'm traveling to The Netherlands this spring and I'd like to read something related to the region. I've considered The Fall by Camus and Spinoza's Ethics. My only background in philosophy is Plato, some of Kierkegaard (most of which went over my head), and Descartes. Will I be able to "into" Ethics? I'm of average intelligence.

You could follow a companion while reading it, such as Nadler - Spinoza's Ethics: an introduction.
It is hard to parse Spinoza at the beginning but when you get the handle on it he is very compelling. I enjoy reading him.

>>10771525
He was just the most weirdest guy, a correct weird ass guy.

>>10772044
>misreading Spinoza
>you
You don't have to pick both, they are already picked for you.

free bump

>>10771525
Jonathan Israel argued that he was one of the most influential figures of the enlightenment, influential and notorious in his time. But it's true that it's difficult expand his philosophical system.

Just read it, maybe alongside secondary literature and some history books. It's difficult at first but achievable and worth it, don't be scared off.

>>10774313
Do you know anything about 17th century philosophy?