Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

Ethics

by Baruch Spinoza, Edwin M. Curley (Translator), Stuart Hampshire (Introduction), Edwin Curley (Translation)

3.96 of 5 stars 3.96 · rating details · 3,863 ratings · 94 reviews

Published shortly after his death in 1677, Ethics is undoubtedly Spinoza’s greatest work—a fully cohesive philosophical system that strives to provide a coherent picture of reality and to comprehend the meaning of an ethical life. Following a logical step-by-step format, it defines in turn the nature of God, the mind, human bondage to the emotions, and the power of underst...more

Paperback, 186 pages

Published July 26th 2005 by Penguin Classics (first published 1677)

more details... edit details

Get a copy:

More…

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

Thus Spoke Zarathustra by Friedrich Nietzsche

Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant

Best Philosophy Book

24th out of 465 books — 439 voters

The Most Influential Books in History

148th out of 659 books — 1,846 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 3,000)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

Jun 09, 2012 Esteban del Mal rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: my-books-can-beat-up-your-books, non-fiction, magic-beans

If rationality is defined as the capacity to solve problems, anticipate consequences and understand causes of events, one would be hard pressed to find its more complete realization than in the philosophy of Benedict Spinoza. Indeed, in his masterwork, Ethics, Spinoza set out to prove certain theorems which are to be deduced from axioms in the manner of Euclidean geometry. Whether or not he was successful in this endeavor has been a matter for over three intervening centuries of scholarship and...more

42 likes · like · see review

view all 38 comments

John Williams Nathan "N.R." wrote: "Esteban wrote: "Those fuckers don't bother to parse the meaning between "atheist" and "pantheist.""

It's good, then, that you wer...more
Nov 16, 2012 01:57pm

John Williams Esteban wrote: "No. I understand the difference between atheism and pantheism, as do you and, I daresay everyone on this thread and most everyone that...more
Nov 16, 2012 02:07pm

Aug 11, 2012 Hadrian rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: nonfiction, philosophy, better-angels-of-our-nature

Baruch you beautiful magnificent bastard. Within these two hundred dense pages of Euclidean geometric proofs axioms and postulates you manage to construct an ethical system , upend the traditional conception of monotheistic G-dd, and instead make him synonymous with the Laws of Nature. This is the best last expression of scholastic theology, and one of the most influential and astonishing philsophers of ever. It is a system which is both beautiful in its logic and yet kind and sympathetic in its...more

13 likes · like · see review

Feb 15, 2008 Carl rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: philosophy

If I were exiled to a desert island, imprisoned, or otherwise isolated, and there were only book of philosophy I could have to read and re-read for the rest of my life, it would be The Ethics of Spinoza.

Here Spinoza lays out a complete system that encompasses metaphysics, theology, physics, psychology, and ethics. Throughout Spinoza is concerned with what it means to be free, and what sort of beliefs are worthy of a free human being. To be free, he insists, means not to be a slave -- not to any...more

10 likes · like · see review

view all 12 comments

Carl I've been considering this comment carefully, and I'm inclined to agree. It's crucial to be able to affirm power in order to have a coherent ethics an...more
Mar 04, 2008 03:33pm

Yusef Asabiyah "Though the ideality I want is the sort of ideality that can figure in the life of a peculiar sort of animal -- the sort of animal that can have ideal...more
Mar 06, 2008 09:20am

Feb 07, 2011 Ryan rated it 4 of 5 stars

In this work, Spinoza attempts to articulate a full metaphysics, and extrapolate from it knowledge of God, man, and ultimately the nature of the "good life." It is a towering and dense project, and its heights show us the challenges we face when reasoning about an infinite, all-powerful God: rather than use his rhetorical ability to affirm the traditional, comforting picture of a very human God, Spinoza confronts the concept of God in all its implications. For example, such a being could never m...more In this work, Spinoza attempts to articulate a full metaphysics, and extrapolate from it knowledge of God, man, and ultimately the nature of the "good life." It is a towering and dense project, and its heights show us the challenges we face when reasoning about an infinite, all-powerful God: rather than use his rhetorical ability to affirm the traditional, comforting picture of a very human God, Spinoza confronts the concept of God in all its implications. For example, such a being could never make mistakes or even decisions, could never have chosen to make the world in a different way, would not possess our fallible human faculties of doubt, etc. In this and other parts of the book, he is not afraid of following his reasoning to its conclusion, trusting that reason will reveal to him the true nature of God.

Spinoza attempts to apply the rigor of mathematical, objective proof to the practice of philosophy. Of course, this was a common approach in early modern philosophy, especially for the medieval philosophers. However, any attempt to elevate philosophy to the unimpeachable status of mathematics is misguided and doomed to failure. One needn't even raise the objection that the choice of axioms is arbitrary, while these axioms ostensibly set the entire course of what is to be later derived via proof; our languages and concepts are simply too inexact for a mathematical treatment. Even given a common set of philosophical axioms, I highly doubt any two philosophers would come to the same conclusions. Where you take the particular investigation is to some extent a matter of personal choice- the conclusions are not as inexorable as they pretend to be, which amounts to a sort of sophistry, a misrepresentation of the strength of one's position.

That is to say, while the approach may work for geometry, set theory, algebra, and other such abstracted disciplines, you simply cannot attempt to formulate a philosophical "proof" of any statement. An objector would always be able to find fault with the initial assumptions, or else would be forced to engage the "proof" on its own territory and painstakingly try to find some inconsistency within the twisted logic of the argument. Argumentation and language being what they are, there would even be room for dispute on such a level. Thankfully, in contemporary times we have moved beyond this noble but pointless approach to philosophy, for the most part.

Though its title and ultimate aim is ethics, it really is a work of metaphysics first and foremost. Spinoza of course is trying to show how his view of ethics follows unflinchingly from certain basic assumptions about reality. His world-picture is remarkably prescient at times: his vision of the universe in its multiplicity of forms being ultimately various "modes" of a singular "substance" anticipates the ontology of quantum field theory (not to mention its resonance with Taoism.) His omnipotent, omniscient God also requires a deterministic universe that unfolds according to the ironclad logic of the deity, which resembles in my mind the universality of physical law. Some of these concepts were borrowed by later philosophers of a materialist bent, like Deleuze.

Furthermore, his "neutral monist" approach to the mind / body divide is much more appropriate for modern science than Descarte's naive dualism. In this view, the mind and brain are two aspects of the same thing, which recalls for me the modern neurological approach that attempts to find correlations between mental and physical states. The universe is a thinking thing.

I found this book to be a difficult but rewarding read. I don't think it would have lost anything if Spinoza had dropped the mathematical pretenses and just laid out his worldview plainly, but perhaps then it wouldn't have been the same. I think there is a very deep point somewhere in here about the implications of a deterministic worldview, whether this stems from an omnipotent God or an unshakable set of physical laws. (less)

1 like · like · see review

May 12, 2012 Paul Bond rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: reviewed

I idealized philosophy as the art of progressing from mundane, obvious facts to grand cosmic conclusions, all made unanswerable through the authority of logic. I now see that this is a fantasy of philosophy, though never more alluring than in Spinoza's Ethics. In a relatively small book patterned after Euclid's Elements, Spinoza lays claim to not only deep knowledge of the universe, but certain knowledge. It is difficult to keep from being swept up in Spinoza's audacious project. Here, he proves...more

3 likes · like · see review

Jun 04, 2011 Rodrigo rated it 5 of 5 stars

It was...beautiful. Just beautiful.
I'd never read something as delightfully coherent and well structured as this strange little work. The format, if a little dry, was perfect for what it was trying to achieve: creating an entire system of thought based on independently conceived concepts, and their clearly defined relations. Wikipedia tells me that the format is called "Geometric", and that it is modeled after Euclid's "Elements", but that's just a description of the arrangement of the arguments...more

2 likes · like · see review

Sep 08, 2010 Mharper Harper rated it 5 of 5 stars

The geometerical structure of the book can put some off- but once over that hilltop the beautiful landscape of Spinoza's soul spreads out before you with ease.
The first part, most notibly his termology, needs to be better defined. (In all fairness this might simply be a problem of modern word usage.) Also, his ontological proof of God is rushed. However, once the book moves into the middle parts in which he defines God, explains determinism and it's nessary implications, and defines what it me...more

like · see review

Dec 16, 2009 Mike Moore rated it 5 of 5 stars

This is the pinacle of the tradition of medieval scholasticism, and one of the greatest works of essentialism. Written in reaction to the birth of modernism through Descartes and Leibniz, Spinoza creates a compelling work organized as a geometric proof for the correctness of a virtuous life. Along the way, he "discovers" concise definitions and formulations for human emotions, virtues, vices, desires and ultimately freedom and bondage. These descriptions are extremely useful, even if the ultimat...more

like · see review

Aug 07, 2012 Meru rated it 4 of 5 stars

A great read for any atheist or agnostic aspiring philosopher, or angry religious person. Spinoza is the only really logical philosopher I have ever read, which is both impressive and mind-numbingly depressing. He presents some great ideas in a very structured way, but expect quite a bit of trouble actually getting through the book. The appendix to part one is the best part, because it's readable and contains most of his major ideas.

1 like · like · see review

Apr 13, 2013 Farah Al-Shuhail rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

الفكرة الرئيسية للكتاب هي برهنة اتصال الجزء بالكل أو ما قد يشير إليه سبينوزا بـ"الجوهر" ويعني بذلك الله, وإتخذ الكاتب اسلوب التسلسل المنطقي طريقاً له في اثبات ذلك.

في الباب الأول ركز سبينوزا على اثبات وجود الله متبعاً نهج علماء الهندسة, فهو يستعين بالبراهين والنتائج العقليه ويزن الأمور بقسطاس المنطق, والمدهش حقاً انه يقنعك بوجود الله دون التطرق - ولو لمره واحدة - إلى الديانات والرسالات والمعجزات والوحي, لذلك اعتبر هذا الباب مناسب للرد على الملحدين كونه منطقي بحت. والجدير بالذكر ان الله عند سبينو...more الفكرة الرئيسية للكتاب هي برهنة اتصال الجزء بالكل أو ما قد يشير إليه سبينوزا بـ"الجوهر" ويعني بذلك الله, وإتخذ الكاتب اسلوب التسلسل المنطقي طريقاً له في اثبات ذلك.

في الباب الأول ركز سبينوزا على اثبات وجود الله متبعاً نهج علماء الهندسة, فهو يستعين بالبراهين والنتائج العقليه ويزن الأمور بقسطاس المنطق, والمدهش حقاً انه يقنعك بوجود الله دون التطرق - ولو لمره واحدة - إلى الديانات والرسالات والمعجزات والوحي, لذلك اعتبر هذا الباب مناسب للرد على الملحدين كونه منطقي بحت. والجدير بالذكر ان الله عند سبينوزا لا يختلف عن الله عند المسلمين, يقول في القضية 5 من الباب الأول: "لا يمكن أن يوجد في الطبيعة جوهران أو عدة جواهر من طبيعة أو صفة واحدة" فهو يستدل بذلك على وحدانية الله, ويقول في القضية 17 من نفس الباب: "إن الله يتصرف بقوانين طبيعته وحدها ولا يخضع لأي قهر" يوافق هذا الرأي النهج الإسلامي ايضاً.

الباب الثاني من الكتاب يناقش طبيعة النفس وأصلها, ويصحح مفاهيم الأشخاص الذين يخضعون لإنفعالاتهم دوماً ويصفون انفسهم مع ذلك بالأحرار, إذ انهم - وإن كانوا يعون اعمالهم - يجهلون الأسباب التي دفعتهم إليها, وخصص الباب الذي يليه للتعمق في اصل الإنفعالات وطبيعتها وترك الحديث عن عبودية الإنسان وحريته في البابين الرابع والخامس.

أشد ما لفت انتباهي في الكتاب معيار الخير والشر, يقول سبينوزا: "أننا لا نسعى إلى شيء ولا نريده ولا نشتهيه ولا نرغب فيه لكوننا نعتقده خيراً, بل نحن, على العكس من ذلك, نعتبره خيراً لكوننا نسعى إليه ونريده ونشتهيه ونرغب فيه." أراه هنا يقدّم سبباً واضحاً لإختلاف معنى الخير والشر لدى البشر. وبقدر ما كانت القراءة لسبينوزا ممتعة ومفيدة كانت صعبة وشاقه, فهو يبسط الأمور المعقدة تارة ويعقد الأمور البسيطة تارة, وعلى الرغم من افكاره المذهلة, واستنتاجاته المدهشة, إلا أنه يفتقر إلى الأمثلة, ولو أردت انتقاد الكاتب على طريقته لقلت:
(1) الفرضيات العظيمة بحاجه إلى أدلة عظيمة.
(2) حشد الأدلة يستند على ذكر تجارب وأمثلة تؤكد الفرضيات.(less)

like · see review

Jan 28, 2011 Mintwitch rated it 4 of 5 stars

Without Spinoza, there is no philosophy.

In Ethics, Spinoza's magnum opus, he attempts to define everything: Nature, man, god, you name it, Spinoza lays it out in a rigorous, theorem-to-proof form, what Spinoza (rightfully) called "Geometric form." Fortunately, Spinoza's arguments are so well ordered, and so simply stated, that reading the text is far easier than it probably was to write. And, I might add, far clearer than the average Geometry proof.

Unfortunately, English is a messy, muddy langu...more

like · see review

Sep 20, 2012 Chris Leo rated it 3 of 5 stars

Spinoza attempts to demonstrate, primarily, the existence of God based upon a series of arguments. What differs about Spinoza's method of demonstration is that he uses a format reminiscent of Euclidean geometry to 'prove' his assertions.

Therein lies the rub; this method of argument may irk some. It seems slightly odd to me to set about proving God's existence or morality, both of which involve a degree of interpretation, using methods reserved for mathematics.

The first 100 or so pages can be a...more

like · see review

Mar 03, 2013 Matt rated it 4 of 5 stars

I’ve never been so ambivalent about a book before. It’s infuriating, but hints at brilliance. It’s fundamentally flawed, but an attempt at perfection. It’s just better than me.

Spinoza uses Euclid’s geometric proof process. He applies it to Descartes’ foundation to demonstrate God’s existence and what that means for our lives. As with Euclid, Spinoza begins with definitions to each book, sets some axioms and then proceeds to make his proof through propositions, definitions, demonstrations, coroll...more I’ve never been so ambivalent about a book before. It’s infuriating, but hints at brilliance. It’s fundamentally flawed, but an attempt at perfection. It’s just better than me.

Spinoza uses Euclid’s geometric proof process. He applies it to Descartes’ foundation to demonstrate God’s existence and what that means for our lives. As with Euclid, Spinoza begins with definitions to each book, sets some axioms and then proceeds to make his proof through propositions, definitions, demonstrations, corollaries and scholiums. Though just shy of 200 pages, it is an incredibly dense book and any comments on the substance have to be accompanied with the disclaimer that they are summations of disciplined arguments and, quite frankly, I may have just got it wrong. Reading Spinoza is not fun. It’s not easy. It’s math homework. And most people who read Spinoza are probably liberal arts majors. And they are liberal arts majors for a reason.

But the fundamental problem I had with Spinoza was his literal attempt to prove metaphysical ideas through geometric proofs. Geometry is set up for it. There are physical characteristics which, by definition, set the terms of a proof. A line has infinite points. The sum of a triangle’s interior angles equals 180°. He attempts the same with ideas much less definable. He makes definitions which in turn lead to proofs which prove his definition.

For example, in Book 1, Spinoza begins with his definition that a “thing is said to be finite in its own kind that can be limited by another of the same nature.” (D2). This leads to the proposition that any substance which exists must necessarily be infinite (P8) because it is the essence of a substance to exist (P7). Since two substances of the same nature cannot exist (P5), there is one infinite substance of that nature. Existence is the essence of that substance (P7, Schol.2) and all attributes must come from this substance (P10). Therefore, infinite attributes comes from an infinite substance, which, by definition exists. (P11). Spinoza defines God as that absolute infinite substance consisting of an infinite number of attributes (D6). By defining “finite” in a way that requires an “infinite”, he creates God before he even has to prove it. Thus, by page 7, Spinoza gets to his homerun proposition, Proposition 11, that God exists and is infinite.

Anyway, this is a Goodreads review and not an attempt at a Philosophy 101 paper. Spinizoa’s purpose is to get to the title of the book: ethics. How are we to live our lives? By Books IV and V, Spinoza lays out his understanding of Human Bondage and Human Freedom. It’s ultimately a stoic vision reminiscent of Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius with some Cartesian additions. A good life consists in understanding the reality of God and overcoming emotions. The closer we come to understanding our reality, we gain an intellectual satisfaction deeper than mere emotional happiness. Ideally, we train ourselves through rational thought to understand God through our intuition.

Spinoza and Descartes both believe intuition is the way to true understanding. Descartes asks the reader to meditate on clear and distinct truths which open the door for this understanding. Spinoza uses Spock-like deduction to train the mind to reach intuitive understanding. Though I was put off by Spinoza’s convenient definitions, it is still a masterful rational effort at defining and building a way to understand our world. Just don’t expect it to be enjoyable.

(less)

like · see review

Aug 29, 2012 Huda AbuKhoti rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy

سبينوزا أبهرني.. لم أكن أتوقع من هذا الكتاب أن يكون مقنعًا لهذه الدرجة، أظن أن المنطقية الهندسية البحتة رفعت من مستوى تقبل المحتوى بصورة عظيمة.. كانت قراءة ممتعة و فريدة من نوعها

عالج الكتاب خمس مواضيع متتابعة و مرتبطة ارتباطًا وثيقًا.. فبدأ بالميتافيزيقيا ثم انتقل إلى معالجة الأخلاق لذلك من الصعب جدًّا فهم المحتوى لفصل من الفصول دون قراءة سابقيه

الفصل الأول يتحدث عن الله و الأمر الذي أثار اندهاشي هو أن الاستنتاجات التي وصل إليها سبينوزا في معظمها توافق الأفكار الإسلامية بصورة عجيبة! فالله لدى سبي...more سبينوزا أبهرني.. لم أكن أتوقع من هذا الكتاب أن يكون مقنعًا لهذه الدرجة، أظن أن المنطقية الهندسية البحتة رفعت من مستوى تقبل المحتوى بصورة عظيمة.. كانت قراءة ممتعة و فريدة من نوعها

عالج الكتاب خمس مواضيع متتابعة و مرتبطة ارتباطًا وثيقًا.. فبدأ بالميتافيزيقيا ثم انتقل إلى معالجة الأخلاق لذلك من الصعب جدًّا فهم المحتوى لفصل من الفصول دون قراءة سابقيه

الفصل الأول يتحدث عن الله و الأمر الذي أثار اندهاشي هو أن الاستنتاجات التي وصل إليها سبينوزا في معظمها توافق الأفكار الإسلامية بصورة عجيبة! فالله لدى سبينوزا ليس محدودًا بزمان و لا مكان، و لا بالصفات البشرية المعهودة، و لكن جميع المخلوقات متصلة بالله بصورة من الصور و إن كانت محدودة.
الأمر الذي لا حظته عند استناد سبينوزا للعلم في وقته و الذي كان في القرن السابع عشر تقريبًا هو الفكرة الخاطئة عن الكون و الذي كان يعتقد به أن الكون لا متناهٍ و بذلك اختلط عليه تعريف الله سبحانه و تعالى و ساواهما بالتعريف. فبذلك خذله علم الإنسان المحدود و مع أن هذه الفلسفة قد تكون منطقية في زمانه إلا أنها مخالفة للعلم في وقتنا الحاضر

الفصل الثاني عالج الروح و الجسد، و قد اتصل اتصالًا وثيقًا بتعريفه لله.. بالمختصر اقترح سبينوزا أن الروح و الجسد وجهان لعملة واحدة، فقد اعتبر الجسد امتدادًا من الله و الذي اعتبره جوهرًا لا متناهيًا و امتدادًا أما الروح فهي صفة من صفاته اللا متناهية.
الأمر الجميل في فكرة سبينوزا هي أن العلم الحديث يوافقه الرأي تمامًا في كثير من أفكاره.. فها هو يصرح بتأثير الحالة النفسية على الجسد و أعضاء الجسد المختلفة على النفسية الإنسانية و الذي تم اثباته علميًّا في العصر الحديث. و بذلك هو يضحد فكرة ديكارت القائلة بانفصالهما. نقطة أخرى طرحها هنا أن "الإنسان يفكر" مخالفًا بذلك فكرة ديكارت القائلة بأن "الإنسان هو الفكر"
يجب الانتباه أن الفكر لدى سبينوزا مختلف بماهيته عن ديكارت، فهو مجموعة من الأفكار التي تعبر على الإنسان و قد تتغير بتغير الزمان أما الفكرة الديكارتية فإنها تقول بأن النفس الإنسانية هي الفكر و الفكر يعبر عن ماهية الإنسان.
هذا التعريف الذكي جدًّا للفكر عند سبينوزا يفسر "إنسانية" المجانين و الأطفال، فإنهم حسب التعريف الديكارتي لا يرتقون إلى المستوى الإنساني مما يثير الامتعاض و عدم القبول لدى معظم البشر.

الفصلان الثالث و الرابع كانا الفصلين الأكثر امتاعًا.. أحببتهما جدًّا و كنت أعيد قراءة مقاطعهما و استنتاجاته.. فهما زبدة هذا الكتاب نوعًا ما.. حيث يصنف الانفعالات و تعريفاتها، فلم يترك انفعالًا من انفعالات البشر حتى تلك الناجمة عن الإدمان على الكحول إلا و عرفها تعريفًا شافيًا و بين مدى تأثيرها على اختيارات و قناعات البشر.. و أهم استنتاجاته أيضًا أن الإنسان هو الذي يتحكم بمدى تأثير لانفعالات العرضية على نفسه و اختياراته

الفصل الأخير كان بمثابة الخاتمة للكتاب.. فبين كيف يستطيع الانسان السيطرة على هذه الانفعالات.. كما أنه اقترح أن الإنسان نوعًا ما أبدي بما أن أفكار الأبدية راودته.. فبذلك يجب أن تصل روحه و جسده لهذه الفكرة، و إن لم يكن قد حدد ماهية و وقت حدوث ذلك

كنت لأعطيه الخمس نجمات لكنني وجدت بعض الأفكار الخاطئة فيه فلن أستطيع فعل ذلك
لكنه كتاب ممتع بالفعل(less)

2 likes · like · see review

Sep 01, 2010 Ronny rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: philosophy, religion

I'm not sure which edition/translation of this book I read... The book's title is somewhat misleading,as what Spinoza presents his his own system of happiness from first principles. He asks the question "what is the greatest good and how to achieve it?" and tries to answer it using a rigorous axiomatic method. Unfortunately, at times he seems to play word games (like his definition of God), makes leaps of logic and uses terms in a different way, which hinders understanding. If you read any editi...more

1 like · like · see review

May 27, 2012 Alexander rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: jewtopia, psy-ops, wax-museum-of-metaphysics, the-unquiet-dead, ecognosis

Don't be cowed by the metaphysical tail-chasing of Books I, II, and V.

The piston-huffing, steampunk clockwork of Axioms, Proofs, Scholia, and Corollaries can pound the reader's nerves like the mechanized hammer in a belfry. Even hardcore Spinozists may differ on how or whether these moving parts all click into place, so don't be miffed if you feel you've wandered into some weird Kabbalah seminar MC'd by a Jewy mathlete poking at his graphing-calculator.

Or perhaps my slow-moving brain simply can'...more

5 likes · like · see review

Jul 26, 2012 Cassandra Silva rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: all-time-favorites, philosophy

This book was incredibly surprising. I had heard a bit about Spinoza and perhaps had a very wrong view of his outlook/philosophy due to some lets just say pre conceived notions. Spinoza's God is amazing. If I had to choose a form of god to believe in it would be this. His point by point approach, and linking of each axiom was absolutely candy to my brain. I loved his approach and found it so clean cut. A god that had been stripped of its human tenancies, a god of nature, a god defined. Finally!...more

2 likes · like · see review

Apr 27, 2011 Brian Clulow rated it 5 of 5 stars

I got a lot out of this book but to truly understand all of the points would probably require reading it at least 5 times. The propositions and proofs on emotion, the self, motivation, and free will were enlightening. Until now I've always followed the Platonic philosophy that absolute good exists. Spinoza has changed that view. The mind's view of the world consists solely of its knowledge of the body's interaction with external causes. Good can only be interpreted in the context of that relatio...more

like · see review

Jun 30, 2011 Scott Gates rated it 5 of 5 stars

Proposition 14 is the John 3:16 of Ethics: God is infinite, and all substance is ultimately reliant on him. To say that there is any substance outside of God is an absurdity. God is the only substance. Everything was not created by God, but actually is God. This is extreme monism.

Related to this, and moreover to this, there is no Logos or realm of Ideas for Spinoza, no higher template against which reality should be measured for its authenticity. Existence as we know it is the pure form. “By rea...more

1 like · like · see review

May 05, 2009 Jacob rated it 4 of 5 stars

When the conatus doctrine is matched with Spinoza's general dynamistic approach to individuation, they produce the most naturalistic and, in my opinion, sensible foundation for ethical theory. Unfortunately all of the buildup and followup is mired in, what seems to be, a strange attempt to reject his religious competitors while preserving all of their intuitive practices: belief in an necessarily existing being, the love of God and the promotion of a strangely defined blessedness, salvation and...more

like · see review

Feb 17, 2009 Joshua Nomen-Mutatio rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: ethics-and-or-metaethics, philosophy, religion, theology, cognitive-science-and-or-psychology

Here's video footage of a pretty good discussion of a great, frequently glossed over, and far too often underappreciated philosopher who is one of my favorite philosophers of all time:

Spinoza, A Discussion

Steven Nadler is an excellent authority on Spinoza and has written a few books on him. I really like Catherine Wilson as well from this and now have several of her books and articles on my to-read list.

The other guys are sort of annoying and make some rather disagreeable points in my opinion....more

6 likes · like · see review

Aug 27, 2012 Paul rated it 5 of 5 stars

The most sublime and elegant philosophical masterpiece I've read...It not only left me in awe and wonder of Spinoza's brilliant metaphysics but it probably influences me accept Monism. While the Geometric Method of Spinioza's ethics is intimidating to many general readers, I am amazed that Spinoza was willing to articulate his work with the degree of rigor, yet leave us dumbstruck by the enigmatic propositions, axioms, definitions, and QED...

like · see review

May 25, 2013 Elise Ashby rated it 4 of 5 stars

An incredibly dense read, there is not an excess word to be found requiring the reader to do a lot of the leg work themselves. That being said, I found it worth the effort as the world view which eventually comes through has permanently influenced my thinking. The structure of the book which was at first off putting becomes rather beautiful in it's clarity. I would also recommend it for anyone who takes an interest in Schopenhauer.

like · see review

May 01, 2013 Andrew Cutler rated it 5 of 5 stars

Spinoza has been called the 'philosophers philosopher' and indeed he offers a philosophical vision that may be closest to a eastern philosophical system, mistaken for a pantheist, while technically a pan-antheist, Spinoza was ex-communicated from his Jewish community for holding and spreading these ideas. He worked as a lens grinder for all those new 'science gadgets' that took lenses and died with lungs full of glass dust.

like · see review

Jul 20, 2012 Amblingbooks.com marked it as to-read

Shelves: audiobooks, philosophy

First published in 1677, Spinoza's Ethics uses a logical step-by-step format to build a major critique of the traditional foundations of philosophy and lay out an ethical system in which reason is the highest principle.

Listen to Ethics on your smartphone, notebook or desktop computer.

like · see review

Oct 08, 2012 David Hastings rated it 5 of 5 stars

El señor Espinosa, cuyos ancestros, como los de todo gran hombre, parecen haber provenido de tierras hispánicas, nos relata en un lenguaje poético y desestructurado., ideas vagas sobre porqué debe uno evitar todo pensamiento, ya que la naturaleza aleatoria del universo impide que podamos tomar decisiónes relevantes para nuestro futuro.

like · see review

Nov 10, 2010 Willa Geertsema rated it 5 of 5 stars

One of the most brilliant works ever written.... Spinoza is the ultimate mystic dressed up as atheist. His incredible mathematical logic manages to bring you as close to God as is possible through any book. It is somewhat baffling that I grew up in his country without ever having been taught any of his philosophy!

like · see review

Oct 09, 2012 Adrian Hart rated it 3 of 5 stars

Spinoza takes a highly mathematical and scientific approach to questions of theology and ethics and the big questions about life. The language is highly esoteric and most certainly doesn't make for light reading, this is one of those books you gotta read a few times to fully understand

like · see review

Oct 31, 2011 Patrick rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Benedict de Spinoza's Ethics, first published in 1677, constitutes a major systematic critique of the traditional and religious foundations of philosophical thought. In it, Spinoza follows a logical step-by-step format consisting of definitions, axioms, propositions, proofs, and corollaries to create a comprehensive inquiry into the truth about God, nature, and humans' place within the universe. From these broad metaphysical themes, Spinoza derives what he considered to be the highest principles...more

like · see review

Nov 12, 2012 Eric Eisberg rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: philosophy

I really liked a lot of Spinoza's ideas, especially regarding pantheism and freedom being attained through escaping our passions. I did not, however, like his style. I found it plodding. Still, a worthwhile read.

like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 99 100 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

Recommend it | Stats | Recent status updates

combine
Other Editions (93)

More editions...

Genres

Philosophy

431 users

Non Fiction

66 users

Classics

43 users

Religion

13 users

Literature > Jewish

7 users

Philosophy > Theory

6 users

Literature > 17th Century

4 users

Psychology

4 users

Academic > School

4 users

Science

3 users

See top shelves...

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About Baruch Spinoza

"Baruch or Benedict de Spinoza (Portuguese: Bento de Espinosa, Latin: Benedictus de Spinoza) (November 24, 1632 – February 21, 1677) was a Dutch philosopher of Portuguese Jewish origin. Revealing considerable scientific aptitude, the breadth and importance of Spinoza's work was not fully realized until years after his death. Today, he is considered one of the great rationalists of 17th-century phi...more "Baruch or Benedict de Spinoza (Portuguese: Bento de Espinosa, Latin: Benedictus de Spinoza) (November 24, 1632 – February 21, 1677) was a Dutch philosopher of Portuguese Jewish origin. Revealing considerable scientific aptitude, the breadth and importance of Spinoza's work was not fully realized until years after his death. Today, he is considered one of the great rationalists of 17th-century philosophy, laying the groundwork for the 18th century Enlightenment and modern biblical criticism. By virtue of his magnum opus, the posthumous Ethics, in which he opposed Descartes' mind–body dualism, Spinoza is considered to be one of Western philosophy's most important philosophers. Philosopher and historian Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel said of all modern philosophers, "You are either a Spinozist or not a philosopher at all." All of Spinoza's works were listed on the Index Librorum Prohibitorum (List of Prohibited Books) by the Roman Catholic Church.

Spinoza lived quietly as a lens grinder, turning down rewards and honors throughout his life, including prestigious teaching positions, and gave his family inheritance to his sister. Spinoza's moral character and philosophical accomplishments prompted 20th century philosopher Gilles Deleuze to name him "the 'prince' of philosophers." Spinoza died at the age of 44 of a lung illness, perhaps tuberculosis or silicosis exacerbated by fine glass dust inhaled while tending to his trade."

-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baruch_...

"Baruch (or Benedictus) Spinoza is one of the most important philosophers—and certainly the most radical—of the early modern period. His thought combines a commitment to Cartesian metaphysical and epistemological principles with elements from ancient Stoicism and medieval Jewish rationalism into a nonetheless highly original system. His extremely naturalistic views on God, the world, the human being and knowledge serve to ground a moral philosophy centered on the control of the passions leading to virtue and happiness. They also lay the foundations for a strongly democratic political thought and a deep critique of the pretensions of Scripture and sectarian religion. Of all the philosophers of the seventeenth-century, perhaps none have more relevance today than Spinoza."

-http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/sp...

(less)

More about Baruch Spinoza...

Books by Baruch Spinoza

The Ethics/Treatise on the Emendation of the Intellect/Selected Letters

A Spinoza Reader: The Ethics and Other Works

More…

Share This Book

Facebook Twitter Your website

Trivia About Ethics

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

Quotes from Ethics

“I should attempt to treat human vice and folly geometrically... the passions of hatred, anger, envy, and so on, considered in themselves, follow from the necessity and efficacy of nature... I shall, therefore, treat the nature and strength of the emotion in exactly the same manner, as though I were concerned with lines, planes, and solids.” — 8 people liked it

“These are the prejudices which I undertook to notice here. If any others of a similar character remain, they can easily be rectified with a little thought by anyone.” — 1 person liked it

More quotes…

title link	preview: Ethics
avg rating	preview: Ethics Goodreads rating: 3.96 (3863 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/205218.Ethics?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1311644135l/205218.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/205218.Ethics?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]Ethics by Baruch Spinoza[/url]

Ethics

Friend Reviews

Community Reviews

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website