/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11863771]

So I was reading up on Spinoza today and I think I believe in his system. Is there a "Church of Spinoza" that I can be baptized into or do I just have to refer to myself as a Spinozan?

[Anonymous No.11863784]

Explain what you believe.

[Anonymous No.11863790]

>>11863771
The only religions where you can find anything resembling his ideas are really the eastern ones

[Anonymous No.11863792]

>>11863784
It's complex so it's right.

[Anonymous No.11863805]

>>11863784
>Substance has infinite attributes, the only two of which that matter being thought and extension
>All men have an innate freedom that is displayed in the capacity for moral judgment
>Nothing can be immoral if it produces joy or a higher degree of perfection
>Substance is God

[Anonymous No.11863817]

>>11863792
The biggest problem with Spinoza's system is the system itself. His definitions are astoundingly solid and so are some of his propositions, but the connections between them are untenable in the wake of what we've learned about logic since his time. Geometric reasoning cannot support such an intellectual edifice. Symbolic logic, on the other hand...

[Anonymous No.11863822]

>>11863805
Try Advaita Vedanta Hinduism

[Anonymous No.11863833]

>>11863822
No, I told you in the OP that I believe in Spinoza's system. I don't believe in Hinduism. I've read the Upanishads and the Laws of Manu and find literally nothing endearing in it whatsoever. The only legitimate Eastern worldview is the neo-Confucian synthesis of Buddhist, Confucian, and Daoist traditions. India fetishists can fuck off.

[Anonymous No.11863852]

>>11863805
>only two of which that matter
only two of which we have access to, there is nothing particularly special about thought and extension compared to the other hypothetical attributes
>Nothing can be immoral if it produces joy
I don't think this is right, morality is geared towards self-preservation is it not? Perfect self-activity leads to perfect-joy but not all joy is perfect.

[Anonymous No.11863857]

>>11863852
Check your definitions, Pastor

[Anonymous No.11863860]

>>11863771
Spinoza didn't create a religion he created a metaphysical system. Religion implies organization; Spinoza wasn't even widely published till after he died.

[Anonymous No.11863864]

>>11863817
Logical symbols are just Euclidean shapes though. Checkmate

[Anonymous No.11863867]

>>11863805
>>All men have an innate freedom that is displayed in the capacity for moral judgment
huh

[Anonymous No.11863868]

>>11863864
Logical concepts are non-geometric
*flips chessboard*

[Anonymous No.11863869]

>>11863857
which definition, my son?

[Anonymous No.11863873]

>>11863833
It's not about the idols. It's not fetishism.

[Anonymous No.11863883]

>>11863833
good for you, anon.

[Anonymous No.11863884]

>>11863869
The definition of joy. The proper, Spinozan definition.
>>11863873
This is exactly what I would expect a fetishist to say.

[Anonymous No.11863886]

>>11863868
Spacetime is wholly geometric, what you call "concepts" are an approximate shorthand for intricate shapes.

[Anonymous No.11863892]

>>11863886
You're a fucking moron, go back to /sci/ with the rest of the incels.

[Anonymous No.11863910]

>>11863867
Spinoza was a major advocate for freedom of religion on the grounds that all men are innately free to express the beliefs that they reason to be true.

[Anonymous No.11863917]

>>11863910
WRONG! He was a determinist!

[Anonymous No.11863920]

>>11863892
Butthurt rhombus.

[Anonymous No.11863941]

>>11863917
This is a largely contested area of his thinking. IMO he was more of a parallelist. Basically, the Jewish Malbranche

[Anonymous No.11863955]

>>11863822
Spinoza is closer to Shuddhadvaita than Advaita

[Anonymous No.11863980]

>>11863884
For Spinoza there isn't one type of joy as it can be both passive or active (same with sorrow). Perfect-joy is both active and the increase of autonomy or self-power; for instance, using drugs may cause some mode of passive joy, but the preservation of your health relates to an even greater joy (revolving around self-understanding) that will even trump the sorrow of something like withdrawal. That's how I understood it at least.

[Anonymous No.11863986]

>>11863980
I think Spinoza needs to be updated a little bit for a world where his notions of tolerance have already become widely accepted by governments around the world. WHat he really needs is an emissary to the Alt Right.

[Anonymous No.11864008]

>>11863833
What do any of those offer which is not found in Indian thought?

[Anonymous No.11864029]

>>11864008
None of them advocate pooping on the highway

[Anonymous No.11864050]

>>11864029
Chinese tourists are notorious for pooping in public

[Anonymous No.11864054]

>>11864050
Chinese tourists aren't Neo-Confucians. Neo-Confucianism was pioneered before the Mongols came to China and its extermination is largely the cause of Communist China's woes--the ones unique to Communist China, that is. Feudal China also had famines and failed public works projects that killed lots of people.

[Anonymous No.11864082]

>>11864054
China's economy is on track to overtake the US'

[Anonymous No.11864090]

>>11864054
>Chinese people are not exhibiting standard Chinese behavior (which they are notorious for) in situation X because they don't currently follow my favorite snowflake religio-political ideology

Imagine being on this many levels of mental gymnastics unironically

[Anonymous No.11864097]

>>11864008
>>11864029
>>11864050
>>11864054
>>11864082
Fucking lol

[Anonymous No.11864105]

>>11864082
I'm well aware of the history of modern China, all the way back to the arrival of Catholic missionaries in the Far East back in the 15th century. China's Christian population is on track to be the largest in the world by 2030, and this has everything to do with the Boxer Rebellion. I'm a firm believer in achaeo-futurism and am completely convinced that, if China had never suffered a Communist revolution (and assuming the Nationalists had failed), it would have been able to overtake Japan's economy in the early 20th century. If not for the national strife that defined Chinese life prior to Mao's unification of the country in 1948, China would already be on top of the world. Imagine if, rather than simply collapsing into secular anarchy, a new Emperor had been crowned when the Qin Dynasty fell. Just think of the possibilities. They're fucking enormous. We know that China had it in itself to become a global superpower by the end of the century. An emperor who appointed ministers capable of enforcing the traditional 5 relationships in a just and effective manner would have ensured national prosperity for another millennium.
>>11864090
I don't believe in "Standard X Behavior" because I'm familiar with the work of Deleuze and Guattari.

[Anonymous No.11864124]

>>11864008
there is no wei wu wei in vedanta

[Anonymous No.11864125]

>>11864105
>China's Christian population is on track to be the largest in the world by 2030, and this has everything to do with the Boxer Rebellion

[king stannis baratheon first o(...) !9fB.6ikQAA No.11864169]

DO NOT DO IT

[Anonymous No.11864220]

>>11864124
Yes there is you massive pseud, the idea of non-action or actionless action is discussed even more extensively in Indian thought than daoism and a bunch of different areas of Indian thought from Vedanta, Tantra, Yoga and Indian Buddhism all offer their own takes on it. This is brought up anytime any of them talk about karma in relation to spiritual liberation and enlightenment. Action that takes place without generating karma is actionless action, action without desire and so on. Most of the schools of Indian thought talk about how karma no longer binds one who is liberated and that this kind of person acts freely, without volition and desire, proceeding in accordance with nature in exactly the same way as Daoism. Here are two textual examples from Vedanta texts talking about this same concept:

Vivekachudamani:

>The sun which appears to be, but is not actually, swallowed by Rahu, is said to be swallowed, on account of delusion, by people, not knowing the real nature of the sun. Similarly, ignorant people look upon the perfect knower of Brahman, who is wholly rid of bondages of the body etc., as possessed of the body, seeing but an appearance of it.
>In reality, however, he rests discarding the body, like the snake its slough; and the body is moved hither and thither by the force of the Prana, just as it listeth. As a piece of wood is borne by the current to a high or low ground, so is his body carried on by the momentum of past actions to the varied experience of their fruits, as these present themselves in due course.
>The man of realisation, bereft of the body-idea, moves amid sense-enjoyments like a man subject to transmigration, through desires engendered by the Prarabdha work. He himself, however, lives unmoved in the body, like a witness, free from mental oscillations, like the pivot of the potter’s wheel.

Yoga Vasistha:

>They did not indulge in vain exultation when they defeated their enemies nor did they give way to despair and grief when they were defeated. They were engaged in natural activities, allowing all actions to proceed from them nonvolitionally. Follow their example, O Rama. Let your personality be egoless and let appropriate actions spontaneously proceed from you

I have to go to bed now but if you want to try again I can have fun exposing you as a pseud again tomorrow.

[Anonymous No.11864232]

>>11863917
Reason* reason makes you a determiner

[Anonymous No.11864267]

>>11864220
>Let your personality be egoless and let appropriate actions spontaneously proceed from you
Typical India fetishist, equating "appropriate actions" with Daoist concepts of non-action

[Anonymous No.11864790]

Bump

[Anonymous No.11866132]

>>11864220
All I see is street shitting

[Anonymous No.11866165]

>>11864008
I'll bite. Hindu thought differs from Spinozan thought on first principles. Hindu thought separates the mind and the body -- Spinozans hold such a separation is impossible. Hindu thought comes with anthropomorphic deities. Spinozans call that nonsense. Hindu thought preserves free will. Spinozans reject it.

(IIRC there are a handful of Indian philosophers, not necessarily Hindu theologians, who reach similar conclusions as Spinoza. You may be talking about these guys)

Those are just a couple. Spinoza LOOKS similar to a lot of Eastern traditions, but that doesn't mean he jives well with any of them.

[Anonymous No.11866383]

>>11866165
Eastern wisdom can be applied universally.