/lit/ - Literature

>>20759865
He was refuted in his time by Leibniz

His monad makes no sense.

>>20759865
It’s curious to me that every eulogy on here directed at Spinoza, Hegel, et al, reads like a posturing fiction.

Why are Hume, Kripke, Wittgenstein, et al safe from such obscurantism, is it because they write legibly so no one can posture about how groundbreaking their ideas are?

>>20759934
Spinoza wrote very clearly, it's just that his philosophy is closer to Kabbalah than it is to logic, no matter how much he would disagree with that opinion.

>>20759865
Spinoza has been refuted and BTFO by Jay Dyer.

>>20759865
>why isnt he talked about more?
He's one of the most famous and influential philosophers of all time, who's been tremendously important (in weird ways) to major philosophers in our day such as Deleuze. But he's not talked about more because Hume refuted rationalism in the 18th century, forcing metaphysicians to take an entirely different, less mathematical and more psychological track.

I agree though that he was a genius who BTFOed all philosophy that came before him.

>Yet most people believe that the ignorant violate the order of Nature rather than conform to it; they think of men in Nature as a state within a state. They hold that the human mind is not produced by natural causes but is directly created by God and is so independent of other things that it has an absolute power to determine itself and to use reason in a correct way. But experience teaches us only too well that it is no more in our power to have a sound mind than to have a sound body. Again, since each thing, as far as in it lies, endeavours to preserve its own being, we cannot have the slightest doubt that, if it were equally in our power to live at reason's behest as to be led by blind desire, all would be led by reason and would order their lives wisely, which is by no means the case. For everyone is drawn by his own pleasure. Nor do theologians remove this difficulty by maintaining that the cause of this weakness in human nature is the vice or sin whose origin was the fall of our first parent. For if the first man, too, had as much power to stand as to fall, and if he was in his right mind and with his nature unimpaired, how could it have come about that knowingly and deliberately he fell?

>Their answer is that he was deceived by the Devil. But who was it who deceived the Devil? Who, I ask, caused the one who was the most outstanding of all intelligent creatures to become so insane that he willed to be greater than God? Did not he, who had a sound mind, endeavour to preserve himself and his own being, as far as in him lay? Again, how could it have come about that the first man himself, being of sound mind and master of his own will, allowed himself to be led astray and beguiled? If he had the power to use reason aright, he could not have been deceived, for, as far as in him lay he must have endeavoured to preserve his own being and his sound mind. But, by hypothesis, this was in fact within his power; therefore he must have preserved his sound mind and could not have been deceived. His history, however, shows this to be false; and so it must be admitted that it was not in the power of the first man to use reason aright, and that, like us, he was subject to passions.

>>20760267
>he was a genius who BTFOed all philosophy that came before him.
wrong desu

>>20760267
>Hume refuted rationalism in the 18th century
And Quine refuted empiricism.

>>20760267
>Jew trying as hard as he can to refute Christianity
How typical.
All his arguments have been destroyed by the Church Fathers.

>>20760314
He's trying to refute Judaism, idiot. It got him excommunicated from the Amsterdam synagogue.

>>20760351
Not only that, but Spinoza being declared cherem was, in part, in order to defend Christianity from attack by philosophers. Spinoza's philosophy was seen by many Jews as an attack on the shared Judeo-Christian religion.

>>20760438
>shared Judeo-Christian religion.
no such thing

>>20760438
There is nothing shared between Traditionalist Catholicism and Rabbinism, heretic.

>>20760439
>>20760447
I'm not sure what "Traditionalist Catholicism" has to do with this. The vast majority of Christians in the are that Spinoza lived were Calvinists, and the Rabbinical and Calvinist authorities of the day had come to an agreement that Judaism and Christianity were the same religion, with one form for the Jew and one for the Gentile. The entire reason that the Jews kicked Spinoza out was because they were scared that not doing so would be perceived as them rejecting this idea of a shared religion.

>>20760455
>come to an agreement that Judaism and Christianity were the same religion
that's wrong desu.
https://youtu.be/ul1OmFub9jY

>>20760464
Did you respond to the wrong post? I don't see what the opinions of a Greek Orthodox priest has to do with the opinions of 17th century Dutch Calvinist theologians.

>>20760473
I'm just saying it's wrong desu

>>20760130
I think monism and modalism were addressed long before Jay Dyer was born.

>>20760447
Nostra Aetate suggests>>20760473
otherwise.

>>20760487
I think it's pretty obvious why refuting the account of the Fall in Genesis would pose a problem for Christianity as well as Judaism.

>>20759865
Ha

>>20760521
If wasn’t refuted

>>20760554
Neetzsche shamelessly plagiarized him tho

>>20760554
Nietzsche was a spinozist

>>20760267
>major philosophers in our day such as Deleuze

>>20760130
Jay Dyer couldn't even refute that 1 + 1 doesn't equal 3, let alone any serious philosopher

>>20761101
What are you talking about
Jay doesn't deny mathematics. In fact he even uses numbers as proof of God.

>>20761101
What?

>>20759865
>My son is taking a course in philosophy, and last night we were looking at something by Spinoza – and there was the most childish reasoning! There were all these Attributes, and Substances, all this meaningless chewing around, and we started to laugh. Now, how could we do that? Here’s this great Dutch philosopher, and we’re laughing at him. It’s because there was no excuse for it! In that same period there was Newton, there was Harvey studying the circulation of blood, there were people with methods of analysis by which progress was being made! You can take every one of Spinoza’s propositions, and take the contrary propositions, and look at the world – and you can’t tell which is right.
Richard Feynman

>>20760447
You're all retards who believe in made up shit. Seems similar enough to me

>>20759934
>Hume
opinion discarded

>>20761115
What an embarrassing quote and I'm not even a Spinozoist. These materialist reductionists are so tedious and boring.

>>20761145
Not embarrassing. Here's one from Wolfgang Pauli:
>What you said was so confused that one could not tell whether it was nonsense or not.

>>20761178
nta but come on, spinoza wrote very clearly

>>20760097
His system is logically airtight. The only problem is that he builds it on top the most embarrassing ontological argument ever

>>20760487
You might think that it's wrong, but most Christians today, and the Christians around Spinoza in his day, disagree with you.

>>20760881
Deleuze is one of the most important thinkers of the 20th century. Centuries from now, just as we reduce the 18th century to "Kant and Hegel", people will reduce the 20th century to "Deleuze and Foucault".

>>20761366
>18th century to "Kant and Hegel"
Hegel was the 19th

>>20761366
>but most Christians today, and the Christians around Spinoza in his day, disagree with you.
Jesus said
>I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No man may come to the Father but through Me.
That excludes Judaism and any other religion that is not Christianity.

>>20761379
>1770-1830
This is why these century-groupings fucking suck, because people will happily argue both as he literally lived half of his life in one and half of his life in the other.

>>20761384
And the Dutch Calvinists argued that you could get to Jesus through Judaism, but not through things like Greek or Italian Pope-Worship.

>>20761394
Judaism explicitly rejects the divinity of Jesus Christ.
Also Orthodox don't have a pope. They have patriarchs, but even they aren't treated as infallible like the pope is for catholics.

>>20761400
Not that anon but you're arguing about nothing. Nobody here is arguing the point you're trying to refute. Christianity makes you a genuine imbecile.

>>20761432
>Christianity makes you a genuine imbecile
not true desu