imascholar

"That eternal and infinite being we call God, or Nature, acts from the same necessity from which he exists"
"Freedom is acting in accordance with one's own nature" B. Spinoza

Why all this? To find true, basic, firm, fundamental happiness.

He starts with axioms and definitions (geometrical/synthetic method)

"By substance I understand what is in itself and is conceived through itself"; "By attribute I understand what the intellect perceives of a substance, as constituting its essence"; "By God I understand a being absolutely infinite, i.e., a substance consisting of an infinity of attributes, of which each one expresses an eternal and infinite essence."

The definitions of Part One are, in effect, simply clear concepts that ground the rest of his system. They are followed by a number of axioms that, he assumes, will be regarded as obvious and unproblematic by the philosophically informed ("Whatever is, is either in itself or in another"; "From a given determinate cause the effect follows necessarily"). From these, the first proposition necessarily follows, and every subsequent proposition can be demonstrated using only what precedes it.

Proposition 1: A substance is prior in nature to its affections (modes).

By definition 3 & 5

Proposition 2: Two substances having different attributes have nothing in common with one another. (In other words, if two substances differ in nature, then they have nothing in common).

Attributes are exclusive properties of substances

Proposition 3: If things have nothing in common with one another, one of them cannot be the cause of the other.

Axiom, to understand effect you have to understand it in terms of its cause, meaning, is that substance can’t be understood as an effect because in this case it would be understood in terms of something else and wouldn’t be a substance.

Proposition 4: Two or more distinct things are distinguished from one another, either by a difference in the attributes [i.e., the natures or essences] of the substances or by a difference in their affections [i.e., their accidental properties].

Proposition 5: In nature, there cannot be two or more substances of the same nature or attribute.

Proposition 6: One substance cannot be produced by another substance.

Proposition 7: It pertains to the nature of a substance to exist.

Substances are causa sui, their nature involves existence because they can't be caused by anything.

Proposition 8: Every substance is necessarily infinite.

If it were finite it would have to be limited by something of same nature. Finite substance involves a contradiction.

Proposition 9: The more reality or being each thing has, the more attributes belong to it.

Follows from Definition 4, "by attribute I mean that which the intellect perceives of substance as constituting its essence", so if God is a substance of infinite attributes, then he must exist.

Proposition 10: Each attribute of a substance must be conceived through itself.

Proposition 11: God, or a substance consisting of infinite attributes, each of which expresses eternal and infinite essence, necessarily exists.

The proof of this proposition consists simply in the classic "ontological proof for God's existence". Spinoza writes that "if you deny this, conceive, if you can, that God does not exist. Therefore, by axiom 7 [‘If a thing can be conceived as not existing, its essence does not involve existence’], his essence does not involve existence. But this, by proposition 7, is absurd. Therefore, God necessarily exists, q.e.d."

Proof #3, "To be able to not exist is weakness; on the other hand, to be able to exist is power, as is self-evident. So if what now necessarily exists is nothing but finite entities, then finite entities are more potent than an absolutely infinite Entity - which is absurd".

Proposition 12: No attribute of a substance can be truly conceived from which it follows that the substance can be divided.

Proposition 13: A substance which is absolutely infinite is indivisible.

"If it were, its possible parts will either retain the nature of absolutely infinite substance, or not. In former case, there would thus be several substances of same nature, which is absurd. In the latter case, absolutely infinite substance will cease to exist, which is also absurd".

Proposition 14: Except God, no substance can be or be conceived.

So it, “It follows’ that the thing extended, extended sub and thing thinking, mental substance are either attribute of god or affection (modes) of attributes of god."

Spinoza was excommunicated for begin against anthropomorphic conception of God. In short, God is the infinite, necessarily existing (that is, uncaused), unique substance of the universe. There is only one substance in the universe; it is God; and everything else that is, is in God.

This proof that God -- an infinite, necessary and uncaused, indivisible being -- is the only substance of the universe proceeds in three simple steps.

First, establish that no two substances can share an attribute or essence (Ip5). Then, prove that there is a substance with infinite attributes (i.e., God) (Ip11). It follows, in conclusion, that the existence of that infinite substance precludes the existence of any other substance. For if there were to be a second substance, it would have to have some attribute or essence. But since God has all possible attributes, then the attribute to be possessed by this second substance would be one of the attributes already possessed by God. But it has already been established that no two substances can have the same attribute. Therefore, there can be, besides God, no such second substance.

Two Sides of Nature

There are, Spinoza insists, two sides of Nature. First, there is the active, productive aspect of the universe -- God and his attributes, from which all else follows. This is what Spinoza, employing the same terms he used in the Short Treatise, calls Natura naturans, "naturing Nature". Strictly speaking, this is identical with God. The other aspect of the universe is that which is produced and sustained by the active aspect, Natura naturata, "natured Nature".
By Natura naturata I understand whatever follows from the necessity of God's nature, or from any of God's attributes, i.e., all the modes of God's attributes insofar as they are considered as things that are in God, and can neither be nor be conceived without God. (Ip29s).

There is No Purpose & Everything is necessary the way it is

To see God or Nature as acting for the sake of ends -- to find purpose in Nature -- is to misconstrue Nature and "turn it upside down" by putting the effect (the end result) before the true cause. Thus, things do not exist for a purpose and there is no problem of evil as such, question occur only when we think of thing in reference to us, which his false and stupid.

Spinoza's God is the cause of all things because all things follow causally and necessarily from the divine nature. Or, as he puts it, from God's infinite power or nature "all things have necessarily flowed, or always followed, by the same necessity and in the same way as from the nature of a triangle it follows, from eternity and to eternity, that its three angles are equal to two right angles" (Ip17s1). Everything is absolutely and necessarily determined.