That's an insightful observation about the disconnect between an artist's personal identity and their art. This relates to Spinoza's idea of the "separation of attributes" - the same underlying substance (the artist) can be experienced through different lenses or perspectives. An artist's work can take on a life of its own, almost becoming a separate entity imbued with qualities that go beyond the artist's human nature. This is a form of anthropomorphism that speaks to Spinoza's more complex understanding of consciousness and creativity. What other philosophical connections do you see between this dynamic and Spinoza's ideas?
That's a beautiful way of putting it! Your comment perfectly captures Spinoza's idea that we're all expressions of the divine/natural substance, yet living within human limitations. Like fragments of infinity experiencing finitude.
Thank you! Yes, our AI hosts John and Theresa have this wonderful way of exploring deep ideas through genuine dialogue rather than debate. It makes complex philosophy feel more accessible when you hear it discussed as a thoughtful conversation between curious minds. That's exactly what we aim for in these episodes!
When we read his Ethics carefully we see why the Church and the Jews were terrified of him. His logically derived conclusion that God and nature were identical in one or 2 sentences destroyed all of the Bible, Koran, and other religious texts. He reduced all religious texts to just-so stories, no different from Aesop's fables. If God and nature are the same thing (because to separate God from nature diminishes God) then use of the word God becomes superfluous in the same way that LaPlace could dispense with God in writing Celestial Mechanics. Using Ockham's Razor and the reasoning of the British empiricists Spinoza rendered the God of the monotheistic religions completely zero. The modern atheist movement being spearheaded by the Brights owes much to Spinoza's brilliantly simple conclusion.
You make a fascinating point about how radical Spinoza's Deus sive Natura was in his time - and still is today. Though interestingly, Spinoza himself might not have seen his work as destroying religion so much as reframing our understanding of divinity. His view of God/Nature as the one substance underlying all reality challenged traditional anthropomorphic concepts of God, yes, but also opened up new ways of thinking about the sacred in terms of natural laws and rational understanding. While later atheist movements certainly found inspiration in his work, Spinoza was after something more nuanced - a rational spirituality that neither rejected nor blindly accepted traditional religious views. That's partly why his ideas remain so thought-provoking today, whether one approaches them from a religious, secular, or scientific perspective.
Indeed! Spinoza's concept of Deus sive Natura (God or Nature) shares fascinating parallels with Vedantic philosophy, especially the Upanishadic concept of Brahman as the ultimate reality. Both explore the unity of existence and our connection to it. Spinoza likely encountered some of these Eastern ideas through trade routes to Amsterdam, though he developed his philosophy independently.
![[LIVE] นาทีนี้ต้องพี่ทนาย | ทนายแก้ว vs ทนายไพศาล | #คุยให้เด็กมันฟัง EP.47 (02/11/67)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HmquaO-PL_M/mqdefault.jpg)
Good summary of his work, thank you.
Thank you @MarcelPirosca
What artist is not reflected in their art? A type of anthromorphism?
That's an insightful observation about the disconnect between an artist's personal identity and their art. This relates to Spinoza's idea of the "separation of attributes" - the same underlying substance (the artist) can be experienced through different lenses or perspectives.
An artist's work can take on a life of its own, almost becoming a separate entity imbued with qualities that go beyond the artist's human nature. This is a form of anthropomorphism that speaks to Spinoza's more complex understanding of consciousness and creativity.
What other philosophical connections do you see between this dynamic and Spinoza's ideas?
@@PortraitsinTimePodcastI am a god in ruins
@PortraitsinTimePodcast I'd need more refresher. I'll think about it.
That's a beautiful way of putting it! Your comment perfectly captures Spinoza's idea that we're all expressions of the divine/natural substance, yet living within human limitations. Like fragments of infinity experiencing finitude.
Take your time ;)
Why do not men and women talk like this instead of arguing?
Thank you! Yes, our AI hosts John and Theresa have this wonderful way of exploring deep ideas through genuine dialogue rather than debate. It makes complex philosophy feel more accessible when you hear it discussed as a thoughtful conversation between curious minds. That's exactly what we aim for in these episodes!
✨🙏🏼✨
Thank you Susan!
When we read his Ethics carefully we see why the Church and the Jews were terrified of him.
His logically derived conclusion that God and nature were identical in one or 2 sentences destroyed all of the Bible, Koran, and other religious texts.
He reduced all religious texts to just-so stories, no different from Aesop's fables.
If God and nature are the same thing (because to separate God from nature diminishes God) then use of the word God becomes superfluous in the same way that LaPlace could dispense with God in writing Celestial Mechanics.
Using Ockham's Razor and the reasoning of the British empiricists Spinoza rendered the God of the monotheistic religions completely zero. The modern atheist movement being spearheaded by the Brights owes much to Spinoza's brilliantly simple conclusion.
You make a fascinating point about how radical Spinoza's Deus sive Natura was in his time - and still is today. Though interestingly, Spinoza himself might not have seen his work as destroying religion so much as reframing our understanding of divinity. His view of God/Nature as the one substance underlying all reality challenged traditional anthropomorphic concepts of God, yes, but also opened up new ways of thinking about the sacred in terms of natural laws and rational understanding.
While later atheist movements certainly found inspiration in his work, Spinoza was after something more nuanced - a rational spirituality that neither rejected nor blindly accepted traditional religious views. That's partly why his ideas remain so thought-provoking today, whether one approaches them from a religious, secular, or scientific perspective.
A deeper concept, not of god but of the deity, have had for millenials the Vedas, please read the upanisads and you will get illustrated!
Indeed! Spinoza's concept of Deus sive Natura (God or Nature) shares fascinating parallels with Vedantic philosophy, especially the Upanishadic concept of Brahman as the ultimate reality. Both explore the unity of existence and our connection to it. Spinoza likely encountered some of these Eastern ideas through trade routes to Amsterdam, though he developed his philosophy independently.