Is God rational or irrational; and Spinoza's pantheism? (discussion)

  • Thread starter Thread starter thephilosopher6
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

thephilosopher6

Guest
Baruch Spinoza was a Jewish Philosopher who lived from 1632 - 1677, around the time of the enlightenment. His view of God was very pantheistic (though some would debate this), although he never used the word and it was only first coined after his death. Many so called “Rationalist” have picked up the idea. Many modern day scientist such as Albert Einstein believed in Spinoza’s version (he was agnostic but he thought if there is a God it was probably Spinoza’s). Michio Kaku, a famous Asian American physicist, also believes in the God of Spinoza.

So my question is, is the God of Abrahamism, specifically the God of Christianity irrational? Should we just be Atheist or turn to the God of Spinoza? And even if the God of Christianity is irrational and illogical, should we still have faith even then, similar to how the Philosopher Kierkegaard proposed? Or should we turn to those Philosophers such as Aquinas who argues using scholasticism that the God of Christianity is rational? I hope to see some meaningful answers and possibly some dialogue or debate in this thread today. 🙂
 
thephilosopher6 said:
Baruch Spinoza was a Jewish Philosopher who lived from 1632 - 1677, around the time of the enlightenment. His view of God was very pantheistic (though some would debate this), although he never used the word and it was only first coined after his death. Many so called “Rationalist” have picked up the idea. Many modern day scientist such as Albert Einstein believed in Spinoza’s version (he was agnostic but he thought if there is a God it was probably Spinoza’s). Michio Kaku, a famous Asian American physicist, also believes in the God of Spinoza.

So my question is, is the God of Abrahamism, specifically the God of Christianity irrational? Should we just be Atheist or turn to the God of Spinoza? And even if the God of Christianity is irrational and illogical, should we still have faith even then, similar to how the Philosopher Kierkegaard proposed? Or should we turn to those Philosophers such as Aquinas who argues using scholasticism that the God of Christianity is rational? I hope to see some meaningful answers and possibly some dialogue or debate in this thread today. 🙂
Click to expand...
Oh!, please describe the God of Spinoza. What does Spinoza says about his God?
 
ProdglArchitect said:
For the sake of brevity and the discussion, please define what you understand Spinoza’s “God” to be.
Click to expand...
“That eternal and infinite being we call God, or Nature, acts from the same necessity from which he exists” - Baruch Spinoza

That pretty much sums up his view of God. God is infinite. God is eternal. God is the universe. It’s a pantheistic monistic philosophy.

Do I believe in this view of God? No, because it is contrary to the teachings of the Catholic Church. I’m simply made this thread to maybe start a discussion about the nature and logic of God.
 
thephilosopher6 said:
You can read about it in Spinoza’s Ethics which you can easily find online.
Click to expand...
:hmmm:

“By God I understand: a thing that is absolutely infinite. i.e. a substance consisting of an infinity of attributes, each of which expresses an eternal and infinite essence. I say “absolutely infinite” in contrast to “infinite in its own kind”. If something is infinite only in its own kind , there can be attributes that it doesn’t have: but if something is absolutely infinite its essence or nature contains every positive way in which a thing can exist -which means that it has all possible attributes.”

Then, in your understanding, how does Spinoza get to the “rational” conclusion that God is the universe? Let’s discuss it, why not?
 
JuanFlorencio said:
:hmmm:

“By God I understand: a thing that is absolutely infinite. i.e. a substance consisting of an infinity of attributes, each of which expresses an eternal and infinite essence. I say “absolutely infinite” in contrast to “infinite in its own kind”. If something is infinite only in its own kind , there can be attributes that it doesn’t have: but if something is absolutely infinite its essence or nature contains every positive way in which a thing can exist -which means that it has all possible attributes.”

Then, in your understanding, how does Spinoza get to the “rational” conclusion that God is the universe? Let’s discuss it, why not?
Click to expand...
I am not an expert on Spinoza. However I’d be happy to discuss him. Spinoza sees God’s essence as mere existence. Similar to how Aquinas saw God. However, Spinoza takes this view of God very… “radically”… if you will… to pantheism… He sees everything else as having existence. God is mere existence. He is absolute infinity, as is said in the quote above. He has all attributes and such. Things exist. God is existence. Therefore everything is God. “God is nature”, as Spinoza would say. I’m just starting to re-read his Ethics I read it about a year ago as a “side project” for another Philosopher I was about to look into.
 
thephilosopher6 said:
I am not an expert on Spinoza. However I’d be happy to discuss him. Spinoza sees God’s essence as mere existence. Similar to how Aquinas saw God. However, Spinoza takes this view of God very… “radically”… if you will… to pantheism… He sees everything else as having existence. God is mere existence. He is absolute infinity, as is said in the quote above. He has all attributes and such. Things exist. God is existence. Therefore everything is God. “God is nature”, as Spinoza would say. I’m just starting to re-read his Ethics I read it about a year ago as a “side project” for another Philosopher I was about to look into.
Click to expand...
If you look around you, would you say that you (the infinite God) are looking at yourself (your infinite perfections)?

Spinoza starts his Ethics with a series of “axioms” and definitions, but how can you make sure that they apply to you and your surroundings?
 
Creation from “nothing” has always been a problem for me. It makes no sense. At the very least it is creation from God’s volition, God’s energy, God’s whatever it is that is required. Almost as if we cannot say, “all things are God” but we can say, "God is all things.

Have you ever heard of creation by “subtraction”? A white light contains all colors, but when you put up a filter, such as an old slide with a picture, you block some of the light to create an image on the screen.
 
JuanFlorencio said:
If you look around you, would you say that you (the infinite God) are looking at yourself (your infinite perfections)?

Spinoza starts his Ethics with a series of “axioms” and definitions, but how can you make sure that they apply to you and your surroundings?
Click to expand...
Interesting. However, I do believe Spinoza sees different degrees of attributes in different substances. God is the ultimate substance because he is simply existence. Everything shares in this existence but has its own substance and so different attributes and different consciousness.
 
Michael_Mayo said:
Creation from “nothing” has always been a problem for me. It makes no sense. At the very least it is creation from God’s volition, God’s energy, God’s whatever it is that is required. Almost as if we cannot say, “all things are God” but we can say, "God is all things.

Have you ever heard of creation by “subtraction”? A white light contains all colors, but when you put up a filter, such as an old slide with a picture, you block some of the light to create an image on the screen.
Click to expand...
Creation from nothing is a hard problem. Now we’re going down an almost Idealistic worldview that matter does not exist in the way we perceive it. Idealism, as far as I know, is compatible with Catholic doctrine. Though most Catholic prefer Aquinas metaphysics and epistemology over Idealism.
 
thephilosopher6 said:
Interesting. However, I do believe Spinoza sees different degrees of attributes in different substances. God is the ultimate substance because he is simply existence. Everything shares in this existence but has its own substance and so different attributes and different consciousness.
Click to expand...
Check his definitions again: for him there is only one substance, and all you know is modes and attributes of such substance.
 
Wrong question. “Is man irrational?” should be asked. There is no answer other than “at times, yes.”
 
thephilosopher6 said:
Interesting. However, I do believe Spinoza sees different degrees of attributes in different substances. God is the ultimate substance because he is simply existence. Everything shares in this existence but has its own substance and so different attributes and different consciousness.
Click to expand...
This is also what I heard from a someone who studied Spinoza’s philosophy. I would have to agree, if only to preserve my Catholic faith (because of course I will never accept pantheism).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top