---
date: '2023-10-10'
description: and moral philosophy, relationship with God.
id: Sphinoza
modified: 2026-06-05 15:08:12 GMT-04:00
tags:
  - philos1aa3
  - philosophy
title: Sphinoza
created: '2023-10-10'
published: '2023-10-10'
pageLayout: default
slug: thoughts/Sphinoza
permalink: https://aarnphm.xyz/thoughts/Sphinoza.md
generator:
  quartz: v4.6.0
  hostedProvider: Cloudflare
  baseUrl: aarnphm.xyz
full: https://aarnphm.xyz/llms-full.txt
---
## Ethics (1677)

Deus sive Nature
European considered Sphinoza as Atheist <span>&rArr;</span> but his works mentioned God

## God of the Philosophers/Metaphysicians

- Unmoved Mover of Aristotle (pre-Socratic Ionian Xenophanes)

<span>&rArr;</span> Value of philosophers esteemed, not the value of the normal being

- Not a personal being with loves or being
- but more rationalistic god

Monotheistic

God $\neq$ nature <span>&rArr;</span> God creates nature

Spinoza: God = nature

- powerful, perfect being

Substances

**Aristotle**: Substance is that which exists in itself and not in another

**Descartes**: Two substances, mental and physical (dualism)

**Parmenides**: “Say and think only this: Being is” A single substance, numerically one.

**Spinoza**: Combine the conclusion of Aristotle about what substance is with the argument of Parmenides, that there can be only one _single one substance_

What is this?
One being is alive, infinite, intelligent, all-powerful
material, spacial

> God is not transcend natural, not super nature cause
> God is nature

## Substances

(1D3)

Substance is cause of itself, causa sui

Cause of itself (causa sui) = necessary existence

Something that doesn’t exist but how it can beomce?

Substances has no cause, belongs to the substance it is

It has to exists, essence includes existence

## Monism

> Substance is unique. There exists only one substance. Not one _kind_ of substance, but _numerically one single substance_

1. Something exists
2. What ever exists has a sufficient cause
3. Therefore a causa sui substance must exist, and
4. There is at most one

Why one?

1. If there are two causa sui substances, must be difference
2. If there is a difference, then there must be a cause
3. One causa sui substance cannot cause change in another self-caused being

## Aristotle’s Idea of Substance

Color does not exists in the horse, instead of the form

Horse would exists with itself?

> Nature is not a totality of things

## Mode and Attribute

**Attribute**: That which is intellect perceives of substances as constituting its essence (1D4)

Substances has inf attributes, each attributes has inf mode

**Mode**: The affections of a stubstance; that is, that which is in something else and conceived through somethign else (1D5)

Each mode is connected, can be modified by others

“Mode” = modification, modality way. A mode of substance is a modification of it, some way in which substnace is modified.

“Conceived through” = explained by, made intelligible, reasonable by

## Spinoza’s idea of Substances (=God)

One single, infinite, eternal, complex substance, comprising infinitely many modes of infinitely many attributes

Substances > Attribute > Mode

Invisibility implies corruption

God can’t have parts and pieces

Is god divisible?

Definition 6: By God I emean an absolutely infinite being; that is, substances

Proposition 11:

### Method for the proof of god

Ontological Proof: Explain God as a being that cannot not exist. God’s essence includes existence

Cosmological Proof: God is the first cause, the ultimate cause of everything else. Without God the chain of cause and effect would recede forever, and the world would be without a rational foundation.
Aristotle’s proof of the Unmoved Mover in Metaphysics was this type of proof

Teleological Proof (“Design argument”): Nature shows evidence of intelligent design. <span>&larr;</span> Sphinoza rejects the _Teleological proof_. His three arguments in Proposition 11

#### Reduction of Absurdity (reductio ad absurdum)

```prolog
To prove P:
  assume NP
  show that if NP, then Q & NQ
  Q and NQ is contradiction and is impossible (contradiction=False)
  so not NP
  therefore P
```

First proof: (ontological argument)

1. Suppose God does not exist
2. Axiom 7: If a thing can be conceived as not existing, its essence does not involve existence
3. Prop. 7: Existence belongs to the nature of substance. - Why?
   a. Substance cannot be produced by another
   b. So, from def.1, substance is self-caused, also its essence involves existence
4. The hypothetical non-existence of God reduces to contradiction
5. Therefore, God exists.

Second proof: (cosmological argument)

1. For everything, there must be a cause, either of its existence or its nonexistence.
2. The cause, whether of existence or non-existence, is either in the thing or in another
3. A thing necessarily exists if no cause prevents its existence.
4. So, if God does not exist, there must be a cause of non-existence, and this cause must be in another
5. What causes God not to exist must absolutely exclude God from being, and can therefore have nothing in common with God
6. If two things have nothing in common, one cannot prevent the other’s existence
7. Therefore, no cause prevents God’s existence
8. So, God exists.

> There is nothing of which we can be more certain than the existence of an absolutely infinite or perfect entity