Spinoza on the politics of philosophical understanding Susan James and Eric Schliesser angels and philosophers: with a new interpretation of Spinoza's common notions

Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 111 (3pt3):497-518 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this paper I offer three main challenges to James (2011). All three turn on the nature of philosophy and secure knowledge in Spinoza. First, I criticize James's account of the epistemic role that experience plays in securing adequate ideas for Spinoza. In doing so I criticize her treatment of what is known as the ‘conatus doctrine’ in Spinoza in order to challenge her picture of the relationship between true religion and philosophy. Second, this leads me into a criticism of her account of the nature of philosophy in Spinoza. I argue it is less piecemeal and less akin to what we would recognize as ‘science’ than she suggests. Third, I argue against James's core commitment that Spinoza's three kinds of knowledge differ in degree; I claim they differ in kind. My argument will offer a new interpretation of Spinoza's conception of ‘common notions’. Moreover, I argue that Spinozistic adequate knowledge involves something akin to angelic disembodiment

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 76,391

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-12-24

Downloads
116 (#109,315)

6 months
6 (#133,567)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Eric Schliesser
University of Amsterdam

Citations of this work

Newton and Spinoza: On motion and matter (and God, of course).Eric Schliesser - 2012 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 50 (3):436-458.

Add more citations