Reaction Paper On Spinoza

This paper will examine Robert C. Solomon's Emotions and Choices article, to best identify what anger is, and to what extent a rational human being is responsible for their anger. Firstly, Solomon's argument must be described. A quick summation of Solomon's argument can be found in the following four points: Emotions are judgements, emotions are chosen, emotions serve a purpose, and emotions are rational.1 To quote Solomon, he explains that “Emotions are not occurrences, and do not happen to us. They ... may be chosen like an action.”2

Descartian dualism is one of the most long lasting legacies of Rene Descartes’ philosophy. He argues that the mind and body operate as separate entities able to exist without one another. That is, the mind is a thinking, non-extended entity and the body is non-thinking and extended. His belief elicited a debate over the nature of the mind and body that has spanned centuries, a debate that is still vociferously argued today. In this essay, I will try and tackle Descartes claim and come to some conclusion as to whether Descartes is correct to say that the mind and body are distinct.

Throughout the history of metaphysics the question, What is? has always been answered in an incomplete,unsatisfactory or complicated manner, but Spinoza tried to answer this question in an exceptional way simply by describing God and His essence. Based on Spinoza’s views, God’s qualities can be referred to as attributes and modes are merely affections of a substance. This paper will provide a detailed view of Spinoza’s key ontological definition of God as the only substance, his attributes, and their co-relations. The study goes further to explore the major scholarly argument between Spinoza and Descartes, in regard to their view of substance, and its attributes.

This essay will critically discuss and analyse how Descartes makes his argument for the separability of the mind and body in the Meditations on First Philosophy. In this text, Descartes argues for the distinction between the mind and body through reasoning that they are two very distinct and non-identical substances. Furthermore, he argues that because they are so clearly distinct from each other that the mind does not need to rely on the body to exist and that the body does not need to mind to exist, therefore, the mind and body can be separated. Firstly, he provides reasoning that they are different substances through doubting the existence of all material things around him, including his own body. Furthermore, while he can doubt the existence of his material body Descartes claims that there is no way for him to doubt the existence of his own mind. Secondly, he provides an argument that the mind and body are distinct substances due to them having other different properties; he does this by arguing that the body is divisible into parts while the mind is not. Therefore, because the mind and body do not have the same properties they are non-identical substances. Thirdly, he provides an argument that builds atop the first two, this argument is that because he can conceive so clearly that his mind and body are different they must be separable in some way.

This book is divided into three parts. The first, 'Emotional Strategies: An Existentialist Perspective ' observes in some detail the ways in which we engage the world through sixteen different emotions, with several of their permutations. Following Heidegger; who believes that emotions tunes us to the world and Sartre; who reasons that emotions have a purpose, Solomon claims that we are responsible for our emotions. This coincides with the fundamental Stoic insight that we “are” our emotions. Aristotle discussed certain emotions at length, notably anger, which he described in remarkably modern terms. Commonly classified as a basic negative and destructive emotion, emotional reactions can usefully be read as, and ultimately even identified with, strategies we adopt as a way of dealing with the challenges of our lives- for example, prompting us to fight for justice and protecting our rights. Thus even

he greatest plea for reason is its fairmindedness (Obejective views) but at the same time shows its lapse in weakness. With morals we associate the importance and consequences of our decisions along with morals so it is for this reason that ethics can not be purely objective. Without, the belief in an absolute moral code ethics regarding reason has to always associate with context therefore certain uses of reasoning can be better than others when talking about context. Through our previous example we use emotion to judge the severity of the crisis. In the U.S protestors of all sorts took the internet and the streets to protest the idleness of America. These protestors showed a ‘motivation’ for what they believed is right in a democracy where

Morality is a complicated matter, one which requires rationality, but is often driven by emotions. A person’s behavior is almost completely driven by emotions and often times emotions are what tell us when something might be wrong or right. Motivation also comes from emotions, so without feelings of anger, depression, frustration and the like we would hardly ever do anything in order to change things in our lives (Shafer-Landau, 2015, p. 258). Virtue ethics then is concerned with what makes a person virtuous versus vicious when it comes to making moral decisions, with emotions playing an important role. In this paper, I support Aristotle’s emphasis on emotions as a key to being virtuous, especially since emotions tell us what is important and motivate us to act (Shafer-Landau, 2015, p. 257-258).

In Meditation six: Concerning the Existence of Material Things, and the Real Distinction between Mind and Body, Rene Descartes wrote of his distinctions between the mind and the body, first by reviewing all things that he believed to be true, then assessing the causes and later calling them into doubt, and then finally by considering what he must now believe. By analyzing Descartes’ writing, this paper will explicate Descartes’ view on bodies and animals, and if animals have minds. Before explicating the answer to those questions, Descartes’ distinctions between the mind and the body should first be summarized and explained.

Abstract The article focuses on one of the most serious accusations brought against Descartes and modern philosophy, namely “the dualism of substance”. The accusers claim that the human body and soul were viewed as completely separate; consequently, their relationship as such and the united being of man become incomprehensible. As has been shown above, the idea of the separation of the soul from the body did not originate with Descartes; it was formulated much earlier, and repeated by a disciple of Descartes’, Henry Leroy, known as Regius. When Descartes became aware of

Baruch Spinoza was born in 1632 and was a student of Descartes. Spinoza thought that there was only one substance that can be understood in infinite ways. He thought that God must be the only substance so everything that exists was a part of him. He questioned Christianity and Judaism and criticized it. He felt like the Bible wasn't about God, and also believes that everything happens when it needs to and not through God. Spinoza also felt that because the world was a part of God that there was no free will and everything was already determined before it happened. Spinoza was excommunicated for heresy, which was belief contrary to Christianity by his Jewish community.

Aristotle presents a short analysis of the rational part of the soul, dividing it into two parts, a part that uses reason and a part that obeys reason. He sees life as supported by activity and not just the capacity to do something.

Spinoza’s philosophy as espoused in the Ethics was a response to Descartes’ dualism. Through works such as the Ethics, Spinoza seeks to address the main flaws in Descartes’ philosophy.

Building off his established idea of the Cogito, Descartes continues to formulate an idea of how the world operates. He arrives upon one of the most widely held metaphysical opinions, especially among a majority of the world’s religions, which is mind-body dualism. Mind-body dualism states that there are two types of entities in the world; those which have extension and measurable qualities such as the body and existing separately is the non physical mind.

Over the last 2 decades it has been understood that collaboration of different areas play a huge role understanding human behavior. In the other hand, being rational, according to the Oxford definition, is “being able to think sensibly or logically. Using reason and logic”. If emotions did not affect our rationality, how can we possibly have so much crime and at the same time, so much success from others? The same answer is applied to this part of the question; emotions alone do not affect our rationality. It is a complex system of interconnected networks including emotions, cognitions, physiology, psychology and more.

Our conclusions on any occasion are direct consequences of any developed concept in our minds. We see the world as we want to see it through our personal perceptions. When we are categorizing anything as desirable or otherwise, we judge using the concepts that we hold to us. Although different concepts may shape different conclusions, they are all influenced by beliefs and experiences. So, to what extent do our beliefs modify the conclusions that we may reach? The knowledge obtained through out someone’s life through their experiences, or belief system direct decision making almost completely. In my essay I will explore how Ethics and Human sciences correlate with this topic. I will also implement and tie in the connections of Reason and link these concepts with belief and experiences.