Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
Attention: Starting December 14, 2019 Yahoo Groups will no longer host user created content on its sites. New content can no longer be uploaded after October 28, 2019. Learn More
 

MORE Spinoza

Expand Messages
  • oguzunal
    First of all, Spinoza was not an ethereal man. Spinoza was not a prophet, as we know it. His philosophy can not be named or bordered by any religious point of
    Message 1 of 1 , Oct 24 1:11 AM

       First of all,

       

       Spinoza was not an ethereal man.

       Spinoza was not a prophet, as we know it.

       His philosophy can not be named or bordered by any religious

       point of view.

       Even his pholosophy can not be named or bordered solely by

       pantheism.

       His philosophy can not be named or bordered by panentheism

       at all.

       His pholosophy can not be named or bordered solely by

       atheism.

       

       Not any raligious point of view

       Not pantheism

       Not panentheism

       Not solely an ateism

       

       His philosophy is beyond all these definitions.

       

       May be his philosophy can be named A KIND OF MATERIALISM or

       ATHEISM.

       

       We shouldn't attempt to connect his philosophy to any

       religious or politic ideology or concept.

       

       Yes Novalis said for Spinoza "God intoxicated man",

       But this is not true as far as I understand his philosophy.

       

       Yes German Romantics love him and his philosophy as a kind

       of naturalism.

       But this point of view is insufficient, as far as I

       understand his philosophy.

       

       He says "Deus sive Natura'.

       

       That is to say, All Universe (maybe Multiverse) itself is

       God.

       

       This means that "Dynamiting all Religion", "Dynamiting all religious

       point of view"

       

       Spinoza's God, that is to say "Deus sive Natura" exactly not

       a TRANSCENDENTAL GOD,

       but an IMMANENT GOD.

       

       Religious God is transcendental. Religious God is beyond of

       the universe and all creatures.

       Religious God creates all the universe and all the created

       things. This God designs them, controls them, punishes them, 

       rewards them etc.. Religious God is antrapomorphic.

       

       But Spinoza's God is not transcendental but immanent.

       Spinoza's God has no any plan or program about his creaters

       like Religious God.

       Doesn't care them. Doesn't punishes or rewards them. Doesnt

       promise anything to it's creaters.

       

       Spinoza's God doesn't CREATES anything, but everything

       DERIVES from Spinoza's God, from Natura.

       NATURA NATURATA derives from NATURA NATURANS, unceasingly.

       So energetic, so lively, so colorful.so dynamic, so

       harmonic, so rhythmic and of course so wonderful.

       

       This deriveness is magical. This is extraordinary beautiful

       panorama for sighted people.

       

       Like Blake McBride said, this point of view needs very very

       much effort and practise with "Third Kind of Knowledge of Spinoza and 

       plus Fourth Dimension Looking".

       

       Maybe a kind of Nirvana. But a zen budhist only watchs whole MAYA. 

       

       But spinoza teaches LIVING IN REAL LIFE WITHOUT FORGETTING

       PERSEPECTIVE of ETERNITY.. 

       

       Yes. Spinoza's philosophy teaches to see things from

       perspective of eternity.

       Yes Sphinoza's philosophy teaches people to see their lives

       in a cosmic contex.

       Not only the infinity of space but the eternity of time as

       well.

       

       This perspective of eternity is the most important pillar of

       his philosophy, but this doesn't mean that this extraordinarily beautiful 

       panorama not only for watching like being hypnotized look but more importantly

       for LIVING.

       

       Already The biggest difference between Spinoza and the other

       philosophers is, this LIVING PHILOSOPHY.

       

       Spinoza is a philosohper of daily life. He never advice or

       teaches to live in a glass vase or in a crystal ball.

       Niever says this.

       

       He was never an asocial man and his philosophy is never an

       asocial philosophy, his philosophy is never

       life escapee philosophy.

       

       Spinoza teachs to evreyone to combine their CONATUS' to

       other CONATUS'

       So there is a sociality here, there is an association here,

       there is a philosophy of contact here,

       there is a philosophy of merging powers here.

       

       Luis asks in his mail that "how Spinoza's philosophy can be

       solved teh problem of to

       deal with malignant people and situations (ie., Hitler,

       Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, The Inquisition, 

       Salem Witch trials, psychopaths running around, etc.)?"

       

       My answer is:

       

       "if Spinoza would live here in todays world he probably

       would be an anticapitalist,

       he would be antifaschist, he would be disobeident man

       against all manipulative brain washings of systems,

       always beside of freedom discourses especially he would

       support A REAL DEMOCRASY.

       ('But unfodrtunately I myself can't see any real democrasy

       in this world:)

       

       

       

       Oguz (love from Istanbul)


    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.