Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (47478)	2/24/2014 11:47:28 PM
From: Greg or e	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 69300

Ah... You stole his tarts... What's he going to do now?

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (47478)	2/25/2014 12:09:46 AM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 69300

Than letter was from SPINOZA. Correspondence of Benedict de Spinoza, Wilder Publications (March 26, 2009), ISBN 1-60459-156-0, letter 73 Elsewhere in the article we find such as this: "Coleridge and Shelley saw in Spinoza's philosophy a religion of nature [5] and called him the "God-intoxicated Man." [6] [7] Spinoza inspired the poet Shelley to write his essay "The Necessity of Atheism." [6]Spinoza was considered to be an atheist because he used the word "God" [Deus] to signify a concept that was different from that of traditional Judeo–Christian monotheism. "Spinoza expressly denies personality and consciousness to God; he has neither intelligence, feeling, nor will; he does not act according to purpose, but everything follows necessarily from his nature, according to law...." [8] Thus, Spinoza's cool, indifferent God [9] differs from the concept of an anthropomorphic, fatherly God who cares about humanity." Nobody pretends that Spinoza is easy to understand. The point is that his "God" of the ALL was nothing like any of the religious fables and had none of their inventive (and fabulous) dogma. Nor was there anything in his philosophy that remotely contradicted any facts of reality or any Science or finding or rationalization of any kind! Of Einstein the same may be said! Neither of them lend the slightest support to the ridiculous or the nonsensical or the self serving.

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (47478)	2/25/2014 12:18:26 AM
From: Solon	Respond to of 69300

"Spinoza expressly denies personality and consciousness to God; he has neither intelligence, feeling, nor will; he does not act according to purpose, but everything follows necessarily from his nature, according to law...." So... A "god" with no intelligence? A "god" with no feeling? A "god" with no will? A god with no purpose? One can see why "Nature" is the closest thing we can imagine for Spinoza's philosophical weltanchaung. Spinoza's god was all that is. That is why he could cheerfully sit and pull the wings off of flies. He was just expressing "god"...as was everything else...