Spinoza

Method

Spinoza brought something new to continental rationalism, which Descartes had begun. In common with Descartes, Spinoza thought we can achieve exact knowledge of reality by following the method of geometry. Descartes had worked out the basic form of this method for philosophy, starting with clear and distinct first principles and attempting from these to deduce the whole content of knowledge. What Spinoza added to Descartes’ method was a highly systematic arrangement of principles and axioms. Whereas Descartes method was simple, Spinoza set out literally to write a geometry of philosophy, that is, a complete set of axioms or theorems (about two hundred and fifty) that would explain the whole system of reality the way geometry explains the relations and movements of things. In geometry, conclusions are demonstrated, and Spinoza believed that our theory of the nature of reality could also be demonstrated. Spinoza would not agree that his definitions were arbitrary, for he believed, as did Descartes, that our rational powers are capable of forming ideas that reflect the true nature of things; “every definition or clear and distinct idea,” says Spinoza, “is true.” It must follow, therefore, that a complete and systematic arrangement of true ideas will give us a true picture of reality, for “the order and connection of ideas is the same as the order and connection of things.” 

The order of things also provides the pattern for the order for which the philosopher should arrange his subjects. It is of utmost of importance to observe this order carefully if we are to understand the various aspects of nature accurately. If, for example, we say that things depend for their nature upon God, we must first know all that we can about God before we can understand things. For this reason Spinoza could find little value in Francis Bacon’s method, which consisted of enumerating observations of visible events and drawing conclusions from these observations by induction. Nor would he use Aquinas’ method of accounting for the existence of God by first of all analyzing the nature of our ordinary experience with things and persons. At this point, too, Spinoza rejects Descartes’ approach for Descartes started with a clear and distinct idea of his own existence and from the formula “I think, therefore I am,” proceeded to deduce the other parts of his philosophy. Because in the true nature of things God is prior to everything else, Spinoza believed that philosophy must formulate ideas about God first so that these ideas could appropriately effect the conclusions we draw about such matters as human nature, ways of behaving, and the relation between mind and body. And because Spinoza had such novel things to say about God, it was inevitable that he would say novel things also about human nature. Spinoza, therefore, begins his philosophy with the problem of the nature and existence of God. 

God 

Spinoza offered a unique conception of God, in which he identified God with the whole cosmos. His famous formula was Deus sive Natura, God or Nature, as if to say that these two words are interchangeable. Although this pantheism could be found in such biblical descriptions of God as He “in whom we live and move and have our being,” Spinoza stripped the idea of God of earlier meanings by emphasizing not the “relation” between God and humanity but a basic “unity” between them: “Whatever is,” he said, “is in God, and nothing can exist or be conceived without God.” The clue to Spinoza’s unique conception of God is found in his definition: “God I understand to be a being absolutely infinite, that is, a substance consisting of infinite attributes, each of which express eternal and infinite essence.” Spinoza’s special thoughts revolve around the ideas of “substance” and its “attributes.” 

Substance and Attributes

 Through an intricate sequence of arguments Spinoza arrives at the conclusion that the ultimate nature of reality is a single substance. This substance is infinite. That such a substance does exist and that it is infinite follow from our ability to think certain ideas clearly and distinctly. Spinoza defines “substance” as “that which is in itself and is conceived through itself: I mean that the conception of which does not depend on the conception of another thing from which it must be formed.” Substance, then, has no external cause but has the cause of itself within itself. So far this is only a “conception,” an idea of a self-caused infinite substance. This idea, however, includes not only what this substance is like but also that it exists. The very idea of substance includes its existence, for “existence appertains to substance,” and “therefore from it mere definition its existence can be concluded.” Still, Spinoza was certain that we can go with assurance from our idea of this perfect substance to its existence, saying that “if anyone says that he has a clear and distinct, that is, a true idea of substance and nevertheless doubts whether such a substance exists, he is like one who says that he has a true idea and yet doubt whether it may not be false.” That the substance is one and infinite follows from the previous definition Spinoza has given of substance. There is therefore a single substance with infinite attributes. 

An “attribute,” says Spinoza, is “that which an intellect perceives as constituting the essence of substance.” If God is defined as a “substance consisting of infinite attributes,” it would appear that there would be an infinite number of substances or that God would possess infinite essence. But Spinoza could very well mean here that since an attribute is “that which an intellect perceives,” it is possible for the intellect to perceive the single substance in an infinite number of ways. Actually, says Spinoza, we can know only two attributes of substance, namely, thought and extension. Descartes thought that these two attributes indicated the existence of two substances, thereby leading him to affirm the dualism of mind and body. Spinoza saw these two attributes as different ways of expressing the activity of a single substance. God is therefore substance perceived as infinite thought and infinite extension. Being infinite, God contains everything.