If my hand reaches out for a glass of water and I am thirsty, that means I am acting according to my conatus. That is, if my purpose in doing so was to slake my thirst, and hence, support and persevere in my being. .
In such a case as that, I see nothing wrong with voiding free will, necessarily. That is, my mental state of desiring and my physical state of slaking my thirst through concrete action, may well reflect each other and run in tandem, being essentially of the same process - One mapped out in Thought, the other in Extension. In such a case, I do not personally see the problem in giving up agency. In fact, according to my tradition, such an act of surrendering power, of non-doership, is recommended.
But when it comes to specifically moral activity, this cannot hold. If I raise a gun and fire at an innocent person, this is not the same process. It is not all one: with the intention to kill in my mind, and the physical act within the material setting. There is not such correspondence, because free will, if it has meaning, cannot be so conjoined. I could have chosen differently. I am not a slave to mere causality. Even if it was fated, my mind nevertheless consented. Mind comes first in order. Then physicality. It is one, and then the other. Not the two simultaneously.
Why I Reject Spinoza's Parallelism
Moderator: Moderators
-
Dimmesdale
- Sage
- Posts: 788
- Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 7:19 pm
- Location: Vaikuntha Dham
- Has thanked: 28 times
- Been thanked: 89 times
Why I Reject Spinoza's Parallelism
Post #1
Last edited by Dimmesdale on Sun Apr 21, 2024 11:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." - Albert Einstein
-
Dimmesdale
- Sage
- Posts: 788
- Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 7:19 pm
- Location: Vaikuntha Dham
- Has thanked: 28 times
- Been thanked: 89 times
Re: Why I Reject Spinoza's Parallelism
Post #2What is interesting is that many criminals, being thoughtless, tend to think of themselves as 'driven' by causal forces. Whether it is in the form of 'demons' or drugs, a subculture that inculcates irrationality, or slavish fidelity to bosses, they all seem to be hurtling in a way that is apart from the mind.
It is only the truly self-contemplated person who can really see himself as being guided by the mind. Interestingly, this means not being a Spinozist, ergo, being truly self-contented and self-controlled. This is an irony that even now is putting a gentle smile on my face. Spinoza meant well, but he is far from being the enlightened astute as others paint him out to be, at least here.
It is only the truly self-contemplated person who can really see himself as being guided by the mind. Interestingly, this means not being a Spinozist, ergo, being truly self-contented and self-controlled. This is an irony that even now is putting a gentle smile on my face. Spinoza meant well, but he is far from being the enlightened astute as others paint him out to be, at least here.
"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." - Albert Einstein
