Spinoza was really confusing.
Though we did get together on thursday to discuss his selection in the book, I am still not sure I completely understand what is going on with him. This is of course due to the fact that I never fully understand everything until Dr. J gives her lecture on the matter (but then again so do most people).
That being said I want to touch on the Spinoza's thoughts on freedom. When coming to the United States, I was amazed at how people used certain words so loosely (in a way I still am). Words like love and friendship. Words that to me have heavy importance and meaning seemed to just get throwned around. When reading Spinoza description of freedom, I felt the same way.
For Spinoza freedom is not our comteporary idea of the word. this is not a problem because in my opinion our contemporary idea of the world is a tad problematic (but that's for another post). In fact when Spinoza talks of freedom, he is talking in reference to God (Nature), but not in a way we would imagine. You see Spinoza does not believe in free will. He sees human life as being predetermined. So it would be safe to assume that he believed in faith and destiny. But even this is not the problem. I don't care about the fact that he believes in destiny. I care about the fact that he uses the word freedom to describe the acceptance of having a destiny.
Puzzled I decided to stop trying to see things through my eyes, and attempt to see them through his. For him, realizing that our future is predestined, is more than just that. It is a sense of "relief" that comes with it, and a decrease in worry about what might happen next, because if you realize that your destiny has already been mapped out, then everything that happens is as it should have.
There is a lot that bothers me with this, but I cannot seem to formulate words to describe it. So I want to know how you guys understand this. How do you guys perceive his notion of Freedom equally an understanding of no free will, when in relation to God (Nature)?
Nellie,
ReplyDeleteI struggle with this too. It seems to me that by "freedom" Spinoza is referring to living a life in accordance with reason, which will lead one to somehow embrace one's destiny. Furthermore, I think that you are right to emphasize God, because it seems to me that Spinoza holds this so called third kind of knowledge, i.e. intuitive knowledge of God as nature, to be essential to freedom.
Moreover, I too see a contradiction in Spinoza. I'm not even sure that I feel comfortable saying that Spinoza does not believe in free will, because after all he does believe that we can learns to accept our destiny, and this acceptance (and the possibility of not having it) suggests some kind of free will. I have a very similar problem with the Stoics.
Nellie, I understand what you mean when you refer to how Americans throw around the word "freedom." Though I haven't really thought of this before, feeling "free" is actually a very special and rare feeling. I do, however, think that Spinoza uses the term more in an elevated, idealistic way and is not guilty of throwing it around like we spoiled Americans do. The idea of feeling free that Spinoza talks about was one of the most appealing parts of his philosophy to me. "Freedom of mind" is "blessedness," which Spinoza also calls "highest pleasure," "accompanied by the idea of himself and his own virtue," and "the highest possible contentment." It seems interesting to me that this idea of ultimate freedom does not in fact mean free will, but this is because free will may not actually be reasonable. To be aligned with God/Nature is to understand things and therefore accept that things are as they are. While it's not the kind of freedom we necessarily value in this society, I think his idea of freedom is actually amazingly idealistic and inspiring. But that's just me!
ReplyDeleteNellie,
ReplyDeleteI do agree that Spinoza’s idea of freedom is quite unconventional, with reference to our understanding of the word. As Karissa said, Spinoza’s idea of freedom is the “Freedom of mind,” which is “blessedness,” “the highest pleasure.” By saying that we don’t have a free will, I believe Spinoza means we have no hand in determining what the future should be. Since every occurrence is predetermined, one should tag along with everything that happens in life, having the “freedom of mind” that everything that happens is meant to happen, rather than “worrying” or expressing “anxiety” about what the future holds.
Karissa's explanation of Spinoza's freedom was about how i read it, it still leaves me more confused than before. If we take Spinoza's idea of freedom to be true, and that it is not freedom as we experience but rather freedom of the mind, and given that we do not have any effect on the future, it seems like he is begging the question of whether or not our freedom of the mind actually exists. If our actions have no effect on the future if every occurrence is predetermined, how does that account for our perceived notion of choice of actions? It seems like the two are connected and if we don't have control of one then we dont have control of the other, hence no freedom of the mind
ReplyDelete