[lit-ideas] Re: Magritte on Spinoza

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Paul <Robert.Paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Nov 17, 2004 11:10 PM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Magritte on Spinoza

Kindly help me with my imperfect understanding.
--------------------------------------
Spinoza believed that the whole of nature (Nature) followed of necessity from
God's essence. 

This is the shortest version I can come up with. 

What it means to to say that something happens 'of necessity' depends on what
kind(s) of necessity one believes in. I think that the only kind of necessity is
logical necessity, and that one should not expect to find necessary connections
of this sort (e.g. the 'connection' between the premises of a valid argument and
its conclusion) existing among things in the world. (Apparently Spinoza and
others see no difference here.)

But one can say this without saying that nothing that happens in the world is
'necessitated' or determined, and that everything 'could have been otherwise'
(whatever that is supposed to mean).

There's a difference between saying that the team that scores the most points
will win and saying that the Lions will score the most points. The former is a
mild conceptual truth, the latter a prediction about events in the world.
Whether a belief in determinism requires a belief in necessary connection isn't
clear. The jury is still out on this and there is a backlog of similar cases.
Usually people who believe in determinism try to avoid a commitment to what Hume
found so objectionable in Descartes, viz., the belief that causal connections
are necessary connections. (NB: I have programmed my mail program to filter out
posts from Donal on this subject on the grounds that one edition of our
correspondence is enough.)



A.A. I can see Nature, as in the environment, however flawed it is, coming from 
God's essence.  Man's actions coming from God's essence fly in the face of 
God's love.  Illustrations need not be recounted.  While I would of necessity 
support Hume, the atheist, I would think that causal connections are necessary 
connections.  Beat a dog and that dog will bite you is a necessary connection.  
Treat a dog well and it will be your friend is another causal connection.  
Otherwise we are saying something can come from nothing.

BTW, I rented the movie Garfield (yes, with all its trailers for preschool 
kids).  I mention it because, probably stating the obvious, Garfield the cat is 
a purely Nietzschean character, not a humble bone in his body.  I wonder if 
ultimately a real life Nietzschean character would be as much a caricature.  I 
rented Garfield for its funny lines and dance sequences.  I have to say I liked 
it, even the requisite animal escape.  Children would not get the jokes I don't 
think.
 

Andy Amago





Robert Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: