Brief Synopsis Of Spinoza's Concept Of God example essay topic

The Dutch Maimonides: how ironic that this epithet, a name 'synonymous with virtue, respect and religious devotion, should be 'directed at a man vilified and ostracized by the Dutch Jewish 'community for heretical tendencies, and left to die in 'circumstances bordering on the ignominious, among Gentiles. In 'this essay we will give a brief overview of Spinoza's life and 'character then go on to examine his conception of God and then 'evaluate whether a comparison with Maimonides is justified, or 'indeed, warranted. 'Baruch Spinoza (1632-77) grew up in Amsterdam at a 'time when scientific discovery, religious division and profound 'political change, were coursing through the very fabric of Dutch 'society. His antecedents, wealthy and respected merchants in 'Portugal, had finally fled from the oppressive tyranny of the 'Inquisition and gravitated naturally towards the secular and 'tolerant Northern Provinces of the Netherlands. His father, warden 'of the synagogue and pillar of the Jewish the community, gave his 'only son a fine education in Hebraic Law and orthodoxy, in 'preparation for becoming a Rabbi.

However, Jewish orthodoxy, like 'Christian orthodoxy, had been deeply shaken by the new ideas of 'the Renaissance, and such luminaries as Galileo, Bacon and 'Descartes. In was in this atmosphere of revisionism and fierce 'debate that Spinoza found himself increasingly dissatisfied with 'the biblical interpretations he received from the Rabbis. His 'contacts with the unorthodox Christian intellectual community grew 'and he found himself attracted towards the natural science's and 'teachings of Descartes. At the age of twenty four, three years 'after his father's death, Spinoza's scepticism of the 'compatibility of Biblical doctrine with natural science and logic, 'led to the Rabbinical authorities excommunicating him in 1656. As 'might be expected, the young Spinoza took this philosophically and 'set about earning his living in the highly skilled field of lens 'grinding.

Spinoza chose to live a quiet ascetic life, and was, by 'all accounts, a dignified and tranquil man of great personal charm 'and kindness. Spinoza's perceived atheism, however, ensured his 'notoriety; he had the reputation in Europe of being a mysteriously 'subversive thinker, with whom it was dangerous to associate. These 'perceptions were compounded in 1670 with the publication of his 'Theologico-Political Treatise' in which Spinoza advocated 'tolerance, secularism and the ways of peace. The Treatise was 'described as being "forged in Hell by a renegade Jew and the 'Devil" (Scruton: P. 12) and was condemned by various religious 'authorities and formally banned in 1674. After this, despite the 'promptings of his close circle of friends and admirer's, Spinoza 'gave up the idea of publishing his seminal work 'Ethics' believing 'that the hostility engendered by its publication would cloud its 'real meaning: the possibility of freedom of thought in a secular 'state. Spinoza died at the age of fourth four, peacefully and 'without public notice.

The subsequent publication of his 'manuscripts by his philosophical friends, was met with 'incomprehension and abuse, and were generally neglected until the 'end of the eighteenth century. In this secular age it is 'difficult to even come close to comprehending the furore that the 'perceived heresy of Spinoza stirred up. It these notions and 'hypotheses that will we will now examine. 'Spinoza embraced the new learning of the age with all 'the customary zeal of the converted.

Revelation had to be 'displaced by Reason and Science. In his determination to 'construct a complete picture of life and the world, subjected to 'the scientific principles of ordered law and reasoned analysis, 'he went further than any philosopher or theologian before him, 'and applied his rigid logic to the Divine nature, and traditional 'concept of God, thus breaking with the fundamental tenet of 'Judaism. He believed that philosophical truths should be capable 'of exact and certain demonstration no less fully than the truths 'of mathematics and geometry. The universe, which he calls 'indifferently Substance or Nature or God, is there because of 'necessity; it exists because of its own intrinsic nature, not by 'chance or for some purpose of its creator. "In Nature" he writes ' "there is nothing contingent, but all things are determined from 'the necessity of the divine nature to exist and act in a certain 'manner".

(Levine: P 61) Therefore, Nature or God is the ultimate 'cause from which all effects flow, there is only one Substance, 'everything else becoming attributes. There are no differences 'between the physical and mental modes of existence, everything is 'part of a fundamental unity, and exists and behaves from 'necessity. Spinoza insisted God could not be independent from 'this fundamental unity because to do so would be to admit that 'things could be ordered differently: "To imagine God acts for the 'sake of the Good is to set up something outside of God which is 'independent of Him, a model or goal. This is indeed nothing else 'than to subject God to fate, the most absurd thing which can be 'affirmed of Him". (Levine: P. 66) By definition, God could not be 'distinct from the world but immanent within it. 'A natural progression of this line of reasoning, the 'affirmation of necessity and cause and effect, is the negation of 'free will'.

Human behaviour is subject to the same laws of 'science and nature in that it is predetermined by a 'cause', which 'in turn becomes an 'effect'. All emotions, passions and desires 'are as mechanical and inevitable as all that happens in the 'physical world, they are a necessary attribute of the fundamental 'Unity of Nature. For Spinoza there were no concepts of 'good' or 'evil', these were relative concepts only given meaning from the 'narrow standpoint of our own personal feelings. All events and 'actions were a series of natural occurrences, necessary, 'determined, and causally related to the rest of experience. It 'was from these assertions, which on the surface appear to be 'atheistic and mechanistic in substance, that the controversy 'and revulsion about Spinoza's thinking emanated. It was only in 'later years, when Spinoza's Ethics was reassessed, that the true 'nature of his system of thought appeared.

In these later 'interpretations, it becomes clear that Spinoza had more in common 'with Maimonides and the Jewish-Alexandrian Philosophy, than either 'Descartes or Bacon. 'The doctrine of Spinoza, for all its apparent 'Mechanism and ruthless Logic, its frank acceptance of the Necessity 'governing life and the world, is literally shot through with 'religious intensity. Many commentator's feel that this religious 'fervour is embodied in one of Spinoza's most famous phrases: the 'Intellectual Love of God. For Spinoza, God or Nature is a single 'system, and to understand any particular part of it is necessarily 'to come to understand more of the whole.

By seeking to understand 'ourselves and the causes of our various emotions and reactions, it 'inevitably follows that we learn more about Nature; and as nature 'is interchangeable with God, to understand God must mean to 'understand Nature; therefore the more we understand individual 'things, the more we understand God. A more simple exercise in 'metaphysics we couldn't ask for! However, we digress; the ultimate 'goal in this process is the attainment of the third and highest 'level of intuitive knowledge, whereby a person acquires an almost 'ecstatic, in the religious sense, view of the world. Spinoza seems 'to feel that in such an intuitive vision the world would appear to 'us as a complete, unbroken expression of one Substance, in which 'all divisions, all separateness, all independence, would have 'disappeared. To elaborate further: "To understand God must mean to 'understand Nature; at the third and highest level of intuitive 'knowledge every individual detail of the natural world is shown as 'related to the whole structure of Nature; the more we take 'pleasure, as philosophical naturalists, in tracing in detail the 'order of natural causes, the more we can be said to have an 'intellectual love of God" (Hampshire: P. 169) Spinoza sought to 'prove, through logical deduction, that to be rational is 'necessarily to love God, and that to love God is to be rational. 'From this brief synopsis of Spinoza's concept of God, we can 'deduce that, contrary to being atheistic, or even irreligious, 'Spinoza was in fact imbued with a quite remarkable religious 'fervour.

His belief in Monotheism and his insistence on the reign 'of universal Law and Necessity, which advocates an attitude of 'acquiescence and resignation and highlights the insignificance of 'Mankind in the grand scheme of things, has parallels in Jewish 'Philosophy stretching back to the Book of Job. It is these aspects 'of Spinoza's philosophy which draw comparisons with that other 'great thinker of Judaism: Maimonides. 'Maimonides (1135-1204) published his 'Guide for the 'Perplexed' in 1190. Its purpose was to harmonize Judaism with 'philosophy, and to reconcile the Bible and Talmud with Aristotle.

'The 'Guide' ws intended for the sophisticated, well read Jew, 'whose education made then uneasy by the apparent disagreement of 'Aristoleian philosophical teaching with the ideas expressed in the 'Bible and Rabbinic writings. Maimonides explained the apparent 'contradictions by highlighting the use of homonymous terms, which 'obscured the true meaning of the metaphor's and allegories found 'in the Bible. His approach was deliberately apologetic and 'concord ist in order to mitigate the storm of controversy his 'conclusions would undoubtedly stir up. However, there are 'remarkable similarities in both Spinoza's and Maimonides 'conception of the nature of God. Both of them sought to remove the 'anthropomorphic qualities of God, for Maimonides this endowment of 'God with Human attributes was tantamount to idolatry, he writes: ' "thus as we shall see, it is only by a study of physics that we 'come to understand that affection is a defect and must be 'removed from the conception of God.

It is therefore a duty to 'study both physics and metaphysics for a true knowledge of God" ' (Husik: P. 243) Also similar was their belief in the Uniformity of 'Nature, the belief that every cause has an effect and that God or 'Nature was the immediate Cause of every particular event in the 'world. However, it would be wrong to stress the congruence of 'these general similarities; within their systems of thought lie 'markedly different approaches to deductive reasoning, which the 'intervening years can only partly explain. Maimonides sought to 'reconcile his faith within the traditional structure of Talmudic 'and Biblical teachings. Spinoza needed to go further, to break the 'shackles of religious dogma in order to prove that God or Nature 'existed out of necessity, a necessity that could be proved by pure 'logic. Suffice to say both men trod the same path, in search 'of a means to reconcile Reason with Revelation, and arrived at 'different destinations but with the same conclusion: "the joyous 'acceptance of man's complete dependence on the supreme Power which 'governs the universe" (Levine: P. 77) ' ' '

Bibliography

'STUART HAMPSHIRE SPINOZA 1951 'ISAAC HUSIK A HISTORY OF MEDIEVAL JEWISH PHILOSOPHY 1974 'ISRAEL LEVINE FAITHFUL REBELS 1971 'ROGER SCRUTON SPINOZA 1986.