In this paper I’m going to argue that both, Spinoza and Kant, construct the argument “for the impossibility of self-destruction” and examine how the concept of suicide relates to the concept of humanity in both philosophers. I will argue that Kant’s and Spinoza’s argument for the impossibility of self-destruction follows from the “external cause” premise and not from “the same subject” premise....

In Hegel au Spinosa:' Pierre Macherey challenges the influence of Hegel's reading of Spinoza by stressing the degree to which Spinoza eludes the grasp of the Hegelian dialectical progression of the history of philosophy. He argues that Hegel provides a defensive misreading of Spinoza, and that he had to "misread him" in order to maintain his subjective idealism. The suggestion being that Spinoz...

Axiom 6 of Part I of Spinoza’s Ethics, in the most widely used English translation, reads: “a true idea must agree with its object.” Spinoza also claims in Part II of the Ethics that every idea has an object with which it is parallel in an “order and connection” of causes (E2p7, E2p11, E2p13)—and, indeed, with which it is identical or “one and same” (E2p7s, E2p21s). Jonathan Bennett has maintai...

There are several senses in which one may speak of limits in relation to Physics. For the purposes of this essay, it is most useful to begin with the technological limitations of practical human activity. In this context, Physics both provides positive and negative information. Physical laws tell us how to achieve some goals, and informs us that others are forever out of reach. An excellent his...

Some of Spinoza’s most well-known doctrines concern what kinds of beings there are and how they are related to each other. For example, he claims that: (1) there is only one substance; (2) this substance has infinitely many attributes; (3) this substance is God or nature; (4) each of these attributes express the divine essence; and (5) all else is a mode of the one substance. These claims have ...

The title of this paper raises two questions, each of which I would like to address in turn. The first question is: What exactly is an immanent ethics (as opposed to an ethics that appeal to transcendence)? The second question is: What is the philosophical question of desire? My ultimate question concerns the link between these two issues: What relation does an immanent ethics have to the quest...

I In a short piece written most likely in the 1690s and given the title by Loemker of “On Wisdom,” Leibniz says the following: “...we see that happiness, pleasure, love, perfection, being, power, freedom, harmony, order, and beauty are all tied to each other, a truth which is rightly perceived by few.” Why is this? That is, why or how are these concepts tied to each other? And, why have so few ...