Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Spinoza’s philosophy of freedom

the-tls.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 60 posts

Re: Spinoza’s philosophy of freedom

#41

Post by NoB4Mouth »

NoB4Mouth wrote: post #7

Spinoza was to the medieval Europe what Socrates had been to the Ancient Greece. Their ideas came to free human mindset from the enslavement the religious. Those ideas were a threat to the establishment of their days that were using gods to prey on the masses. No wonder Socrates has to be sentenced to death. Spinoza found refuge in the then tolerant Netherlands. Coincidence or not? Spinoza middle name is Benedictus =…

Edit: Pope Benedictus XVI served as Pope from 2005 to 2013. The current Pope is Francis. Bear with my ignorance of the world's current news. I don't watch TV, nor Facebook-too distractive-. I'm a Hacker News addict. I come here on average 5 times/day.

Re: Spinoza’s philosophy of freedom

#42

Post by chrisvalleybay »

Retra wrote: post #24
meric wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By your definition once 1 is added it’s not a number we can understand.

Yes, but the claim is that there is such a number, not that it can be defined.

A number is simply a state; a concept held by a state machine, such as a human. Numbers do not exist, but to the enumerator.

Re: Spinoza’s philosophy of freedom

#43

Post by rskar »

cicero wrote: post #37
rskar wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you give a citation for that "love for the ancient and medievals was akin to the word passion"? My understanding of that love-to-passion link is by way of Christianity, i.e. love as the motivation for the suffering (of Jesus). Otherwise, etymology doesn't show/suggest that sort of change in the meaning of "love" (e.g. http://www.oed.com/viewdictionaryentry/Entry/110566 ). If anything, there's been a change in t…

The Four Loves by C.S. Lewis [1] is about four different Greek words that are usually translated as "love" in English: storge, philia, eros, and agape. The self-sacrificing love, agape, is what the GP is talking about. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Four_Loves

>The self-sacrificing love, agape, is what the GP is talking about.

Perhaps, but the GP began with "the word love has lost its meaning throughout the ages". I don't think it has. Perhaps "love" can be parsed into several "flavors" (storge, philia, eros, agape, romantic, loyalty, etc.), but at the core it means still about the same (the "flavors" give hint or detail to motivations/context/obligations for the caring/concern/nurturing/keen-interest).

In the phrase (from above) "truly free persons actively avoid love as in love is a passion", I think here passion means something like "intense emotion". "Passion" has taken on new meanings - barely controllable emotion, intense sexual love, arousing great enthusiasm, etc. Only by way of religious context would a word that meant "suffering" get linked to "charity" love (agape). If anything, its other new meanings seem to be about the kinds of suffering from unsatisfied/unsatiated/frustrated desires.

Re: Spinoza’s philosophy of freedom

#44

Post by avogadro »

mseebach wrote: post #40
coliveira wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to make universal statements because the bible is shock full of contradictory statements. Jesus says explicitly that large is the path that leads to damnation and that few will be chosen by him. So, while some will have redemption, the story goes that most of humanity will end up in despair. Of course, other texts can be used to conclude the opposite, which is the normal fashion for bible interpretation.

It means "nobody gets it for free". Nobody gets to say "oh, but I'm the king, I'm pre-redeemed, I can do whatever". Everyone has to work hard every day for redemption, and nobody is ever done.

That is one possible interpretation of the english translation that you happen to be using.

Re: Spinoza’s philosophy of freedom

#45

Post by NoB4Mouth »

krylon wrote: post #39
NoB4Mouth wrote: post #7

Spinoza was to the medieval Europe what Socrates had been to the Ancient Greece. Their ideas came to free human mindset from the enslavement the religious. Those ideas were a threat to the establishment of their days that were using gods to prey on the masses. No wonder Socrates has to be sentenced to death. Spinoza found refuge in the then tolerant Netherlands. Coincidence or not? Spinoza middle name is Benedictus =…

> medieval Europe He lived in the 1600s, that is not medieval, it's Renaissance. (Sorry for nitpicking.)

:) i'm fine with your nitpicking! I read Spinoza in high school - a decade+ back- the accuracy of timing is so porous. @ University i opted for Social Anthropology instead of Philosophy. I still have some remorse about that choice today...

Re: Spinoza’s philosophy of freedom

#48

Post by CoolAndComposed »

I take issue with this is a rather rigid classification of things, that isn't useful, and I hear a lot out of various modern scientist/philosophers.

> There is nothing supernatural; there is nothing outside of or distinct from Nature and independent of its laws and operations.

It's pretty common to associate supernatural with magical because super-natural sounds like beyond the rules of nature, when it can just as easily mean beyond the known rules of nature. If you can't explain events under natural law (rules, whatever), it's practically and effectively supernatural. That doesn't necessarily exclude a future explanation, just because people have been averse or ignorant, to investigate in the past. Straight from history, countless supernatural events have been brought in to the fold.

Otherwise, this guy sounds like he had some contemporary beliefs shared by rationalists.

Re: Spinoza’s philosophy of freedom

#49

Post by rskar »

coliveira wrote: post #32
rskar wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you give a citation for that "love for the ancient and medievals was akin to the word passion"? My understanding of that love-to-passion link is by way of Christianity, i.e. love as the motivation for the suffering (of Jesus). Otherwise, etymology doesn't show/suggest that sort of change in the meaning of "love" (e.g. http://www.oed.com/viewdictionaryentry/Entry/110566 ). If anything, there's been a change in t…

There is a lot of research around this topic, but here is an excerpt of an article from the Univ. of Oxford that touches on this change, that started to happen by the end of the middle ages: "People in every time and culture have fallen in love, but not every culture has written about love or valued it in the same way. 'In the 12th century, romantic love became something that was worth celebrating and exploring in so…

Maybe this is my limitation, but it still looks like "love" means about the same at its core, thru the times - I don't see a "lost meaning" to it. But I do see "flavors" for love, if you will - motivations or contexts for the love. And I accept the point that "not every culture has written about love or valued it in the same way."

Yet the cited article does not indicate "love" as meaning "suffering for someone or something else" or anything like that. Instead, we get something about "tragic love" (an apparent "contradiction in terms"): "In the Middle Ages, the idea that suffering was in some way productive was very widespread."

Earlier in that article: "So what changed in the Middle Ages? 'There was a transformation in culture,’ said Professor Ashe. ‘A series of church reforms in the 12th century took Christianity from a rather austere view of God the Father to a new focus on Christ's humanity. 'The spiritual lives of ordinary people were recognised, and people were encouraged to have a more emotional and personal relationship with God as individuals. And romantic love - giving yourself to another person - provides a justification, in the medieval moral compass, for the pursuit of self-fulfilment as an individual."

And from there, I would argue, "passion" took on a definition of "love" (and not the other way round).

Re: Spinoza’s philosophy of freedom

#50

Post by coliveira »

rskar wrote: post #49
coliveira wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a lot of research around this topic, but here is an excerpt of an article from the Univ. of Oxford that touches on this change, that started to happen by the end of the middle ages: "People in every time and culture have fallen in love, but not every culture has written about love or valued it in the same way. 'In the 12th century, romantic love became something that was worth celebrating and exploring in so…

Maybe this is my limitation, but it still looks like "love" means about the same at its core, thru the times - I don't see a "lost meaning" to it. But I do see "flavors" for love, if you will - motivations or contexts for the love. And I accept the point that "not every culture has written about love or valued it in the same way." Yet the cited article does not indicate "love" as meaning "suffering for someone or som…

From the article: "Love in this world means love for your fellow warriors, and the idea of sacrificing yourself for the group."
Post reply on HN