Our Study Begins: "All Ashore that's Goin' Ashore!"

Stuart said:

"Without going back and trying to justify, confirm, or explain the following

rough opinion at the moment, my recollection is that I thought Spinoza painted

himself into a kind of stylistic corner in the Emendation and essentially began

over again (with The Ethics) in such a way that the Emendation ends up

functioning as an intro to the Ethics. In short, I think I saw The Ethics as the

finishing "touch" the Emendation left out. The key evidence if I remember

correctly is that the Emendation ends at the point Spinoza has made the case for

a true idea that is needed to begin aright. He doesn't name that idea there. But

the Ethics begins with it (definition of 'substance') and continues on. Just a

suggestion at the moment."

=================

To repeat, the citation above was made by an online Spinoza friend, known to me as "Stuart."  Please use the abbreviation "TEI" in the subject line of any emails or comments you send to me.  That way, the material will automatically land in a folder here.  Send email to "seriousinquiry@roadrunner.com."

I agree with Stuart that TEI makes a good introduction for "Ethics."  I don't see it as a stylistic matter, but rather that we get to know a bit about how Spinoza got into "the Master Game" in the first place.  Also, what was it like for him to make a bit of progress, and toward what?  Did he ever "name" the true idea, or say exactly, in so many words, what it is?  There is a good deal of TEI that is duplicated, more or less, in Ethics, but there are some interesting differences.  For example, in TEI there are 4 kinds of knowledge, which is reduced to 3 in Ethics.  However, it is not our purpose to compare TEI with Ethics, or other works per se.

I think that TEI is mainly concerned with the endeavor to supply the serious student with tools of the mind, such as consciously conscious reflection,  before delving into this "difficult and rare" philosophy of Mr. Spinoza's.  It's in the title.  If we cannot discriminate the nature of a true idea from fiction, hearsay, opinion, or even practical or pure reason (as Kant might mention), then we will have no foundation for a true philosophy. Without the true philosophy, no supreme happiness. What is going on in the mind when we feel the sense of doubt?  Is there any real basis for most of our fears?

The greatest philosophers, like Krishnamurti and Spinoza, realize that we must indeed BEGIN from "the other shore."  But, isn't reaching that far shore our aim?  Without a true idea of our nature, insofar as it may understand this or that thing or idea, we don't know anything "in itself" but only second-hand, by the impressions something makes upon our senses, or by inferences which the mind makes from what it set forth as axiomatic.  Such knowledge is not adequate for objective consciousness.  So, we are going to find out what Spinoza thinks is a "method" for getting at the whole truth regarding our own nature, which for him is inseparable from knowledge of God.  The proper order for Spinoza is reasoning from cause to effect, not the other way around as is the common manner.  This way of moving from the intuitive to the reasonable occurs in us now unconsciously, but we need to blow the covers off of what is going on, and magnify it.  Every day in the media we see the results of reason in service to the passions.  It's not a pretty picture.  How can we come to love truth such that our desires spring from truth rather than chiefly from instinct?  Spinoza, as we see from the very first sentence of TEI is interested in "a love supreme," not just some abstract cyphers such as the Monads speculated about by Leibniz or Kant's categories.  I appreciate the intellectual acumen of such men, but they seem to be pursuing a much different aim that Spinoza.  To me, Spinoza is more akin to Patanjali, the great "keeper" of the Rajah Yoga.

We are going to endeavor to get in touch with the fundamental questions, such as why we think as we do and how more adequate thinking brings joy into our life of a kind previously only glimpsed in the most elated moments.  All the while reflecting on that remark of Krishnamurti's that "it is Truth that frees, not your efforts to be free."  I think it would be vital to include some phone discussion time, so please let's do that.  I'm waiting to see how many individuals wish to make this journey before pulling the parking break and moving ahead into the next few paragraphs.  I would like to know what others think Spinoza meant by fears which contain nothing in themselves either good or bad except insofar as the mind is affecting by them.  Do we harbor such fears, and if so, how do we react to them?