In Dr. Oliver’s Atheism and Philosophy class I made a video presentation on Spinoza’s God. The name comes from Albert Einstein, who, when asked if he believed in God, replied “I believe in Spinoza’s God.” For the record, so do I. The God of Spinoza is nature, alone. There is no supernatural. There is no creator. The universe is but one substance, which is infinite and indivisible. All that we see in the physical world is simply a modification of that one substance, and mode of expression of it. We and the trees and the birds and the bees and the streams and the rocks are all a part of this One. We are a part of nature, of God, not apart from it, and share a connection with all things. (If you’d like to see my presentation, you can find it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npSgQPq5Nfw)
“God” is an ambiguous term, which we by necessity define for
ourselves. We (many of us) personalize our god, as a way of relating to Him or
Her. We think of Him or Her as wanting something for us, of wanting us to behave
in a certain way. So, as a believer in Spinoza’s God, I ask, what does She want
of me? What She wants is for me to live in harmony with nature. That’s how to
live a good life, and find blessedness, the peace that passes all understanding,
shalom, Islam, nirvana. She wants me to use my intellect to understand the
world; to accept the causal mechanisms of nature, and act in accordance with
them. Reason, rational thought, will provide me with clear and distinct answers
to my questions about life.
Acting in accordance with nature can be restated as God’s
purpose for mankind. We all see our god differently, but all gods require
harmony with nature for the peace they promise. Living in harmony with nature
is what the gods demand.
In Ancient Philosophy class, we are studying the Milesians,
the first philosophers; Thales, Anaximander, and Anaximenes. The conception of
an Absolute principle of unity in the universe, which is deeper than any of the
special forms of existence, was the earliest form of Greek philosophy. It began
with the search for what was abiding in the flux of things. What is the source,
the first principle, of all things? What is the permanent reality which
underlies the diversity and change of the visible world around us? The
Milesians had different answers, but they all shared the belief that all
things, men and birds and trees and rocks, have a common element. One way to
make sense of the world is to see it as having a common underlying reality – a connection
between all things.
Reading chapter seven, I can’t help but feel that appreciating
nature, and protecting and preserving it, requires, if not a religious conception,
a mythological one. I love the quote from Black Elk (p. 105). “We should
understand well that all things are the work of the Great Spirit. We should
know that He is within all things: the trees, the grasses, the rivers, the
mountains, ….” Thales, based on Greek mythology, supposedly said that "all
things are full of gods." Myths convey ultimate truths.
Weekly
Participation Summary
09/07
This weekly essay post
09/07
Comment on Levi’s essay on stewardship
09/08
Comment on Heather’s Post – You Can Make a Difference
09/09
Comment on Kathryn’s Post “An Economic Solution …”
09/10
Comment on How Wm James Can Save Your Life
Week
Three Point Total – 5
I enjoyed our Zoom discussion of Spinoza today, and do hope you're right that his system allows enough freedom of self-directed attention to liberate us from fatal necessity. I worry that attending to our preferred thoughts when we might instead attend to others may be as far as it goes for Spinoza, whereas for James that's just the beginning. To complete the circuit, attentive thought must connect to willful action and the possibility of alternatively-directed outcomes in the "open and pluralistic" universe. Otherwise, the freedom in question is an intellectual affair -- the freedom of understanding and acceptance in the face of implacable fate, an internal freedom of attention unmoored from events in the world.
ReplyDeleteBut never mind the metaphysics of free will; it's enough that we find sufficient motive, in whatever philosophy we avow, to affirm a sense of responsible relatedness to the rest of nature. If Spinoza works for you, to that end, then I endorse your Spinozism.
The danger for someone like me lies in the littleness of my knowledge. I in fact know very little about Spinoza or James at this moment in time. I find hints in what I do know that appeal to me, and I (perhaps) rush to connections and conclusions that appeal to me that I may not reach if I had a more complete understanding of their thought. It's great that a beginner like me has a seasoned philosopher like you to guide me as I ponder these things and help me not go too far afield.
Delete