toes.”
“Because thinking of yourself is supposed to be egoism?”
“Something like that, yes. When Spinoza uses the word ethics, he means both
the art of living and moral conduct.”
“But even so ... the art of living demonstrated geometrically?”
“The geometrical method refers to the terminology he used for his formulations.
You may recall how Descartes wished to use mathematical method for philosophical
reflection. By this he meant a form of philosophic reflection that was constructed
from strictly logical conclusions. Spinoza was part of the same rationalistic tradition.
He wanted his ethics to show that human life is subject to the universal laws of nature.
We must therefore free ourselves from our feelings and our passions. Only then will
we find contentment and be happy, he believed.”
“Surely we are not ruled exclusively by the laws of nature?”
“Well, Spinoza is not an easy philosopher to grasp. Let’s take him bit by bit.
You remember that Descartes believed that reality consisted of two completely sepa-
rate substances, namely thought and extension.”
“How could I have forgotten it?”
“The word ‘substance’ can be interpreted as ‘that which something consists of,’
or that which something basically is or can be reduced to. Descartes operated then
with two of these substances. Everything was either thought or extension.
“However, Spinoza rejected this split. He believed that there was only one
substance. Everything that exists can be reduced to one single reality which he simply
called Substance. At times he calls it God or nature. Thus Spinoza does not have the
dualistic view of reality that Descartes had. We say he is a monist. That is, he reduces
nature and the condition of all things to one single substance.”
“They could hardly have disagreed more.”
“Ah, but the difference between Descartes and Spinoza is not as deep-seated as
many have often claimed. Descartes also pointed out that only God exists indepen-
dently. It’s only when Spinoza identifies God with nature—or God and creation—that
he distances himself a good way from both Descartes and from the Jewish and
Christian doctrines.”
“So then nature is God, and that’s that.”
“But when Spinoza uses the word ‘nature,’ he doesn’t only mean extended
nature. By Substance, God, or nature, he means everything that exists, including all
things spiritual.”
“You mean both thought and extension.”
“You said it! According to Spinoza, we humans recognize two of God’s
qualities or manifestations. Spinoza called these qualities God’s attributes, and these
two attributes are identical with Descartes’s ‘thought’ and ‘extension.’ God—or
nature—manifests itself either as thought or as extension. It may well be that God has
infinitely more attributes than ‘thought’ and ‘extension,’ but these are the only two
that are known to man.”
“Fair enough, but what a complicated way of saying it.”
“Yes, one almost needs a hammer and chisel to get through Spinoza’s language.
The reward is that in the end you dig out a thought as crystal clear as a diamond.”
“I can hardly wait!”
“Everything in nature, then, is either thought or extension. The various
phenomena we come across in everyday life, such as a flower or a poem by Words-
worth, are different modes of the attribute of thought or extension. A ‘mode’ is the
particular manner which Substance, God, or nature assumes. A flower is a mode of