The philosophy of Spinoza as contained in the first, second, and fifth parts of the "Ethics" and in extracts from the third and fourth

51쪽

be manifest nough speciali is attention e aidio this also that matte is very here the Same, and that paris remo distinguished incit, excepi in sociaras e conceive matter tot affecte in different Ways, Whencerit paris are ni modally, ut o reatly distinguished For example, ater, in s far ascit is Water, e Conceive to e divided, and iis paris to beseparate from ne nother; ut not so in sociar asit is corporea substance, for in sociar ascit is that, itis neither separated nor divideo. Furthermore, ater, in sociar ascit is ater, is generate an destroyed; but in sociar ascit is substance, it is either generaled

io the secon argument also inasmuch ascit, too is basedipo the assumptio that matter, in sociar ascitis substance, is divisibi and compose of paris Andeven ere What have sat no true Udo not know

from the necessit os his essen Ce. Wherefore, thereis no reason for saying that God is actedispo bysomething else, o that extende substanc is un-

orthy of the divine nature even i it e supposed tobe divisibie provide it be admitte tot eterna and

infinite. But of this enough for the present. PROP. 6. Fram the necessis of the divine narure

52쪽

anyone, is ni he ii conside the fac that romthe definitio gi ven o anything the understandincin- fere svndry properties, hicii reali do necessarii follo. from it that is, from the ver essence of the thino: an infers the more propertim, the more realit thedefinitio of the hin expresses that is, the more realit the essence of the thin define implies. Since the divine nature, hoWever has absolutet infinite attributes des. 63, of hic also ach expresses in iis hin an infinite essence, there must necessarilyfrom it necessit resul in infinite way an infinit of things that is es that an come illiin the scope ofan infinite intellect) Q. E. D.

Proj.-That, simplffrom the necessit of the divine nature, or whicli amounts to the fame hing solelyfrom the law of that nature, there follows absolutelyan infinit of things, we have just shown in prop. I 6 an in prop. Is e proved that noth in canae orae conceived ithout God but that ali hings are in God heresore there cante nothingiuiside of him, Whereb he an e determine or constratne to

53쪽

PROP. In O GOD. 39Cause except the perfectio of his nature, hichelther externali or internali incites God to action. Corauar a.-Ι follows seCond that Godolone is a re cause For Godolone exist solet from thenecessit of his nature II and 4 cor. I), and Cis

solet from the necessit of his nature υν Me precering proposition), and theresore des. 7 he alone is a free

cause Q. E. D. M olium.-other suppos that God is a re causebecause e can, a the thinh bring it about thalthe things Whicli, have sal folio fro his nature, that is, hicli are in his poWer, hould notoah placeor e produce by him. ut his is the fame assaying that God an cause it noto follo fromthe natur os a triangle that iis three an gles equaltW right an gles O that he an mahe an effect notio follo fro iis ive causeri hicli is absurd. Furthermore, I Wili ho below, Without the helmos this proposition that either intellectinor,ill belongio the nature o God. ano , incleed that there areman who hin the can prove that the highest intellec an fre Willielon to the nature o God forthe say the can apprehen nothin more perfeci, hicli the can attribute to the nature o God than

that hicli is in us the ighest perfection. Further, even i thendo conceive God as actuali intelligent in the highes degree stili, the do no belleve that heca mahe at the things exist Whichine actuali apprehend for the thin the would thereb destro thepo eri God. f the say, he had create ali thething that re in his intellect he would then have

been abierio create nothin more, hicli the thin is inconsistent illi the omnipotence of God and there- fore have the preferre to assume a God indifferent

54쪽

to ali hings, an no creatin anythin except What, by a certain independent volition, he has decree tocreate. Butes thin have hown clearly enough see I 63 that rom the supreme power o infinite natureo God an infinit of things-that is, at things-must necessarii have flowed in an infinit os Ways, o mustalways folio by the fame necessit jus a from thenaturei a triangle it has rom ali ternity followedan willo ali ternit solio that iis three an gles equat two right angies. Wherefore the omnipoten Ceos God has been froni ternit actuat, an to alleternit Mil rem ain in the fame actuality. An thus there is established -at eas in m opinion-farmore perfeci omnipotenCe o God. Indeed, in opponent appea to deny allo meo spea plainlyὶ the omnipotence of Od. For the are force to admit that God apprehenos a creatable an infinit of things hich, nevertheless, he Will neve be able to

hends, he would accordin to them, exhaustiis Wn omnipotence an render imself imperfeci. That, therefore, the may maintain God tot perfeci, theyare reduce to the necessit of at the fame time maintaining that he anno do ali the things t whicli hispo er extenos than hicli I do no se What can beimagine more absurdis more inconsistent With the omnipotence of God Further, o sa here omethingalso os intellec an Nili, hicli e commoni attribute to οὐ i intellec and wili do belon to theeterna essence of God by both these attributes there musti understood ometh in other than that hichmen Commoni understand by them. For the intellec and wili, hich. Would Constitute the essetace of God, ould have to differ entiret from ou intellect

55쪽

and will, nor could the agree illi them in nythingbut nam e cius a the og, a signis the odiaC, agrees With dog, an animal that barks. Whiches,ill prove thus Q intellec belon to the divine nature it,ill noti possibi for it to be, as ou intellectris in the opinion os manyi, by nature posterior O, Orsimultaneous illi, the things it perceives in asinuchas God is prior torali hings by his causalit 16 cor. ID: ut on the contrary the truth and the format 'essence of things is lia it is, becauserit exist assuch objectivel in the intellectis God. Whence

God's intelleet, in sociar ascit is conceived a Constitutin God' essence, is reatly the cause of things,as et of thei essen eras of thei existen ceri hicli Seem to have been recogniged by those ho have maintaine God' intellect, ill and oKer tot onean the fame. Since there fore God 's intellectris the sole cause of things, that is as e have hoWn), both of thei essence and of thei existence, it must necessarii differ from themas et in iis essencerus in iis existence For the effect differs rom iis cause, simplyin that hic it has rom iis cause For example, aman is ille cause of the existence of another man, butnoti his essence, for his is an terna truth ohere- fore, in thei essenc the ma absolutet agree, buti thei existenc the must differ and ence, is the existence of the ne hould Comerio an end thato the ther ould notis that account Come to anenda ut i the essence of the ne could be destroyed an become false, the essen ce of the ther ould bedestroye as etl sheresore, a thin whicli is the

'Formal, i. e. havin what we ould nomcal objective exist- enceri objective, i. e. existin in the in by Way of representa

56쪽

cause os both the essence and the existence of any effect must differ rom suci, an effectos eli in iis essenCeras in iis existence. ut God' intellectris thecause of both the essence and the existence of our intellectu heresore God' intellect in s sar ascit is conceived a constituting the divine essen ce, differs from ou intellectins et in iis esse ncerus in iis existenCeri nor an it agree illi it in nything ut inname, a We maintained. illi regar to ill the

ient, cause of MI Mino. Proof-Al things that are, are in God, and must beconceived through God 16 in thereiore i 6, cor I), God is the cause of the thing that re in himself whichris the firsi potnt. In the secon place, ulside

secon potnt God therefore, is the immanent, and no the transient, cause of at things Q. E. D. PROP. I9. God is eterna that is, at Me attribuus of

eternat. In the secon place by the attributes of God that must e understood hich def. 4 expresses theessen ce of the divine substance, that is that hichae-longs to substance this very thing, I say the attributes must theniselves imply. ut to the nature os substance as I ave abead prope fram pros. Deternit be- long therefore ach of iis attributes must implyeternity, andience ali are eternat Q. E. D.

57쪽

PROP. IJ o ooD. 43SMolium.-The truth of this proposition also appearsas Clearly a possibi from the way in hicli I have prove the existence of God i 13. From his proosit appears, I say that the existenceis God like his es- SenCe, is an eternat truth. oreover se ' Principies of rusian Philosopo,' prop. 19. Phave prove in another Way also the eternit os God, and there is nonee o repeatiniit here. PROP. o. The existence of God an his essene areone and Me fame Minx.

his attributes are eternat, that is defra), ach ne os his attributes expresses existence Therefore the fame attributes of Godoliat des. 4 express God' eternalessenCe expressint the fame time his eternat existence that is the fame hin that constitutes the essenCe os God constitutes at the fame time his existencea encei and his essene are onerand the fame thing. Q. E. D. Corouar I.-Henc it follows, first that God' existence, lihe his essence, is an terna truth. Corouar a.-It folioWs, seCond that God, o allthe attributes of God are immutabie For i theywere Change a regard thei existence, the would

absurd.

PROP. I. ver his tria folD- rom Me absoluunatur os an auribus o God must amos ave exissedandiem infinite Iohanis, through Me satiau, Mute is is eurnia anae infinite. Proow-Conceive, fiso can provideo ou eny the propositioni, in an attribute o God an a sollo ing rom iis own absolute nature anything that is finite, o has determinate existence or duration as,

58쪽

for instance, the dea os God in thought. Butthought, nasmuchos it is supposed to e an attributem God, is necessarii sit in iis nature infinite. No , in sociar ascit has an de of God, tris supposed tot finite But des et it cannot e conceived asfinite unies it be determine by though itseli Butno by though itself, in s far ascit constitutes theide os God sor in s sarcit is supposed tote finite it is, then, determine by thought in sociar ascit cloes no constitute the idea o God, hicli ho ever II),

must necessarii exist There is, therefore, thoughtthat does no constitute the idea o God, and lience, fro iis nature, in sociar ascit is absolute thought theide of Go does no necessarii follo forcit is conceived a constitutin and a no constituting the idea of God); hichris contrar tomur hypothesis. Where- fore is the de of God in thought, o anythinii any attribute of God-it is jus the fame haleveri taken, sor the proo is generale follows rom the absolute natur of the attribute iself, it must necessarii be infinite : hich was therarsi potnt. In the secon place that hicli thus follows romthe necessit of the natur os an attribute cannothave a determinate duration. Is ou den it, let athing whicli follows rom the necessit of the natureo some attributei supposed tote in ome attributeos God, e. q. the de of God in thought an let it besupposed totaVe atine time no existed, o tot notgoin to exist Since thought is supposedo be anattributei God i must both necessarii exis and beimmutable ii, and o, cor a). Wherefore, heyonditie limits of the duration os the idea o God sor it is

supposed to have atine time no existed, o tot not

59쪽

ideat God. ut his is contrar totur hypothesis: for it is assume iliat though bein granted the idea o God necessarii follows Therefore, the de ofGod in thought, o anyth in that necessarii folio sfroin the absolute naturem an attribute o God Canno have a determinate duration, ut through thesai attribule, is eternat; hich was the secondioint. Note, that this sanae must be affirme o anything, that in an attributei God necessarii follows romthe absolute nature o God. PROP. a. maleve solum 'o an auribus of d, in o far as it is modi edu a modification offucis a nature that is necessarib existi an is insinuethrouo Me attribute, mus also necessaria exist anile in iv. Proj-The proo of this propositio proceed in the fame way a that of the preceding PROP. 23 Mer mode inicis necessa EF existi andis in tu, must necessaria fouom, euher rem Meabsolute nature of some auribule of God, o fram omeauribus modi dira modi cation that necessaria existianiis in ite. Proof- mode is in somethingislse through,hich

alone, and through Godolone an it e conceived. Is thereiore a mode be conceived to necessarii existan tot infinite, both these characteristic must benecessarii inferre or perceived through ome attribute of God in sociar a this is conceivedo expressinfinit an necessit of existence, iura des 8is Me fame hing eternity that is de . 6 and 193, insociar ascit is considere absolutely. A mode there- fore, that necessarii exist an is infinite, must folio from the absolute nature of some attribute of

60쪽

or through ome modificatio that follows rom iis absolute nature, that is θ Me precering proposition), that necessarii exist an is infinite. Q. E. D. PROP. 24. The essence of Me Mino producedi Goddoes no involve existence.

Proof-This is manifest rom des. I. For that thenatur of which considered, that is in itseli involves

existence, is iis Wn cause, and exist solet irom thenecessit oscit nature.

Corolla .-Ηenc it follows that God is not onlya cause for things eginning to exist, ut also forthei continuin in existenceri or toras a scholasticterm), God is a cause for the eiv of things. For