El objetivo principal de este artículo es mostrar el valor de una lectura de la filosofía política de Spinoza desde un enfoque republicano. Spinoza incorpora en su teoría política elementos del léxico, conceptos y problemas del republicanismo, retomándolos y transformándolos de acuerdo con los fundamentos metafísicos de su filosofía y con el contexto holandés de su tiempo. Podemos comprender mejor el sentido y el alcance de esa teoría si situamos a Spinoza en el marco de la tradición republicana. Tras una (...) breve caracterización del republicanismo holandés, el artículo muestra cómo están presentes en el Tratado teológico-político y en el Tratado político los temas y conceptos básicos del republicanismo. Se centra sobre todo en el concepto de libertad, clave de la propuesta de una república democrática. (shrink)

The political philosopher Leo Strauss is famous for contending that any synthesis of reason and revelation is impossible, since they are irreconcilable antagonists. Yet he is also famous for praising the secular regime of liberal democracy as the best regime for all human beings, even though he is well aware that modern philosophers such as Spinoza thought this regime must make use of biblical morality to promote good citizenship. Is democracy, then, both religious and secular? Strauss thought that Spinoza was (...) contradictory in teaching that reason and revelation should be separated from each other while also insisting that a secular democratic politics still requires the biblical morality of charity. The paradox that liberal democracy is both religious and secular, which is central to Spinoza, was dismissed by Strauss as a Machiavellian subterfuge or the cynical attempt to use religion for political purposes. In order to adhere to his dualistic separation of reason and revelation, Strauss turned to ancient Greek political philosophy, particularly the ideas of Plato and Aristotle, as the true ground of liberal democracy since this classical tradition was never exposed to biblical revelation. Yet, the illiberal and hierarchical implications of Greek political thought, which clash with Strauss’s modern views on human individuality and dignity, ultimately take him back to the biblically based philosophies of Spinoza and Kierkegaard, who teach the paradox that the Bible is the true foundation of human freedom. (shrink)

According to a recent interpretive orthodoxy, Spinoza is a profoundly democratic theorist of state authority. I reject this orthodoxy. To be sure, for Spinoza, a political order succeeds in proportion as it harnesses the power of the people within it. However, Spinoza shows that political inclusion is only one possible strategy to this end; equally if not more useful is political exclusion, so long as it maintains what I call the depoliticised acquiescence of those excluded.

For Spinoza, the highest thing we can hope for is acquiescentia in se ipso—acquiescence in oneself. As an ethical ideal, this might appear as a complacent quietism, a licence to accept the way you are and give up hope of improving either yourself or the world. I argue that the opposite is the case. Self-acquiescence in Spinoza’s sense is a very challenging goal: it requires a form of self-understanding that is extremely difficult to attain. It also involves occupying a daring (...) and radical political position, one that obstructs the psychological mechanisms by which political power is typically maintained. (shrink)

As críticas feitas a Espinosa no século XVII são as mesmas dirigidas a Maimônides cinco séculos antes. A maior surpresa não está na permanência das mesmas críticas apesar do tempo – a crítica ao racionalismo e naturalismo dos autores ao se referirem a Deus – mas no uso do pensamento de Maimônides para fundamentar as críticas a Espinosa. A “controvérsia maimonideana” e a “polêmica espinosista” possuem origem sócio-política e assumem a forma teológica daí decorrente. Faremos de modo breve uma comparação (...) entre Espinosa e Maimônides sobre alguns aspectos da profecia, considerando que o Tratado Teológico-político polemiza também com o Moreh. Embora muitos elementos da concepção maimonideana estejam presentes no TTP, a diferença entre os dois autores é espantosa. (shrink)

Up to 1670, when the Theological-Political Treatise was published, Spinoza supported Johan De Witt’s government, against the House of Orange and the orthodox Calvinists. By 1676, while writing the...

Although Spinoza's formative influence on the cultural ideals of the West is widely recognized, especially with reference to liberal democracy, secular humanism, and naturalistic ethics, little has been written about the educational implications of his philosophy. This article explores the pedagogical tenets that are implicit in Spinoza's writings. I argue (1) that Spinoza's ethics is eudaimonistic, aiming at self‐affirmation, full humanity and wellbeing; (2) that the flourishing of individuals depends on their personal resources, namely, their conatus, power, vitality or capacity (...) to act from their own inner natures; and (3) that the combination of the Spinozian conceptions of humanism, liberal democracy, eudaimonistic ethics, and the enlightened and sovereign individual constitute together the grounds for a comprehensive empowering and liberating pedagogy. (shrink)