Abstract
Spinoza’s own words seem to commit him to necessitarianism. Nonetheless attempts have been made to make room for contingency in Spinozism. Two impressive arguments of this kind are Curley 1969 and Newlands 2010. Both these arguments appeal to Spinoza’s claim that all finite things are locked in an infinite nexus of causal relations (1p28). The question central to this paper is whether contingency can indeed be derived from an infinity of causal ancestors. The goal of the paper is twofold. First, I aim to present an alternative reading of the relation between infinity and Spinoza’s concept of contingency. On my reading, while the infinity of the causal ancestry of finite things does not ground any objective metaphysical contingency on their part, it is a condition which must obtain if they are to appear as contingent. Second, I aim to challenge the derivations of contingency from infinity mentioned above. I will do so by targeting Curley’s assumption that propositions rather than things are the main bearers of modality. On Newlands’ interpretation, the conceivability of things as either contingent or necessary makes the world more perfect than it would otherwise have been. By drawing upon Spinoza’s analysis of “negative” properties (such as evil), I question whether beliefs about contingency contribute to the perfection of the world in virtue of truly attributing the property of objective contingency to things.
Bennett, J. 1984. A Study of Spinoza’s Ethics. Cambridge.Search in Google Scholar
–. 2001. Learning from Six Philosophers. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar
Boehm, O. 2016. “The Principle of Sufficient Reason, the Ontological Argument and the Is/Ought Distinction”. European Journal of Philosophy, 24(3), 556–79.10.1111/ejop.12130Search in Google Scholar
Curley, E. 1969. Spinoza’s Metaphysics: An Essay in Interpretation. Cambridge, MA.10.4159/harvard.9780674330450Search in Google Scholar
Curley, E./Walski, G. 1999. “Spinoza’s Necessitarianism Reconsidered”. In New Essays on the Rationalists. Eds. G. Rocco/C. Huenemann. New York, 241–62.10.1093/0195165411.003.0011Search in Google Scholar
Della Rocca, M. 1996. Representation and the Mind Body Problem. New York.Search in Google Scholar
Garrett, D. 1991. “Spinoza’s Necessitarianism”. In God and Nature: Spinoza’s Metaphysics. Ed. Y. Yovel. Leiden.10.1093/oso/9780195307771.003.0007Search in Google Scholar
–. 2018. Nature and Necessity in Spinoza’s Philosophy. New York.10.1093/oso/9780195307771.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Griffin, M. V. 2008. “Necessitarianism in Spinoza and Leibniz”. In Interpreting Spinoza: Critical Essays. Ed. C. Huenemann. New York.10.1017/CBO9780511487200.006Search in Google Scholar
Koistinen, O. 2003. “Spinoza’s Proof of Necessitarianism”. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 67(2), 283–310.10.1111/j.1933-1592.2003.tb00291.xSearch in Google Scholar
Leibniz, G. W. 1885. Monadology. In Die philosophischen Schriften, vol. 6. Ed. C. I. Gerhardt. Berlin.10.1007/978-94-010-1426-7_68Search in Google Scholar
Lovejoy, A. O. 1933. The Great Chain of Being. Cambridge, MA.Search in Google Scholar
Lin, M. 2007. “Spinoza’s Arguments for the Existence of God”. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 75(2), 269–97.10.1111/j.1933-1592.2007.00076.xSearch in Google Scholar
Mellor, D. H. 2004. “For Facts as Causes and Effects”. In Causation and Counterfactuals. Eds. J. Collins/N. Hall/L. Paul. Cambridge, MA.Search in Google Scholar
Mason, R. 1997. The God of Spinoza – A Philosophical Study. Cambridge.10.1017/CBO9780511583230.012Search in Google Scholar
Newlands, S. 2010. “The Harmony of Spinoza and Leibniz”. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 81(1), 64–104.10.1111/j.1933-1592.2010.00354.xSearch in Google Scholar
Newlands, S. 2017. “Spinoza and the Metaphysics of Perfection”. In Spinoza’s Ethics: A Critical Guide. Ed. Y. Melamed. Cambridge.10.1017/9781316339213.014Search in Google Scholar
Peterman, A. 2015. “Spinoza on Extension”. Philosopher’s Imprint 15(14), 1–23.Search in Google Scholar
Särmann, S. 2018. “Infinity in Spinoza’s Therapy of the Passions”. In Infinity in Early Modern Philosophy. Eds. O. Nachtomy/R. Winegar. Cham.10.1007/978-3-319-94556-9_6Search in Google Scholar
Schmid, S. 2008. “Wahrheit und Adäquatheit bei Spinoza”. Zeitschrift für Philosophische Forschung, 62(2), 209–32.10.3196/004433008784718364Search in Google Scholar
Spinoza, B. 1925. Spinoza Opera. Ed. C. Gebhardt. Heidelberg.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1988. The Collected Works of Spinoza. Vol. I. Ed./trans. E. Curley. Princeton.Search in Google Scholar
–. 2016. The Collected Works of Spinoza. Vol. II. Ed./trans. E. Curley. Princeton.Search in Google Scholar
Steinberg, D. 1981. “Spinoza’s Theory of the Eternity of the Mind”. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 11(1), 35–68.10.4324/9781315187983-23Search in Google Scholar
Steinberg, J. 2017. “Two Puzzles Concerning Spinoza’s Conception of Belief.” European Journal of Philosophy 26(1), 261–82.10.1111/ejop.12218Search in Google Scholar
Williams, B. 1992. Shame and Necessity. Oakland.10.1525/9780520915282Search in Google Scholar
Wolf, A. 1926. “Spinoza’s Conception of the Attributes of Substance.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 27, 177–92.10.1525/9780520319349-005Search in Google Scholar
© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
