Join and be channel member to support my work: ruclips.net/channel/UC4hkfv9BNzYh-IafZd94b9wjoin My ETH crypto wallet wallet : 0x3db70687855fcd93c179d532e9ba59c582ee10bc (to be credited please send email to mindfulphilo@gmail.com )
As a student of Spinoza's philosophy this past 40 plus years, I Now teach Spinoza's works. Freedom from childhood trauma is possible when you understand your emotions.
That's truly inspiring! Spinoza's philosophy offers such a profound way to understand emotions and achieve inner freedom. It's amazing that you're teaching his work after studying it for over 40 years! The connection between emotional understanding and healing from trauma is such an important insight. Wishing you continued health and strength as you contribute to this important work!
“There is no contradiction, freedom is not the opposite of determinism but it’s fulfillment through understanding “ that’s it ! That explains free will in a deterministic world. Thanks for your great work
yes @mehmetkurhan9876 freedom not as the absence of necessity, but as the understanding of it it''s moe like being in harmony with the flow of a river, where freedom isn't about changing its course but about navigating it with awareness, thx for your kind words mehmet
@@DonivanSousa some people think following desires is free will like animals got freewill right. Nope. We got and spiritual being that pertains and flows with god and the creation So just flowing with it encounters with god himself. What’s more freedom than being with god and function as part of the creation itself being out best being with can B. Let God B with U🙏🙏👏🏼
It is truly simple, if this God has a plan, and you have no choice but to follow this plan, since you can't circumvent the will of this god, YOU HAVE NO FREE WILL! Every thought you have every action you take has already been DICTATED, in advance before you were even born! This is the slavery of every Christian, it is also their excuse! It is equally amazing that you think you have free will under the Christian God that has already determined everything in advance, and you still pray, and if the prayer doesn't go the way you hope, it's gods will, if after the prayer your outcome is positive, your prayer worked! Yes there is a conflict, and it is basic simple logic! Your refusal to see it is an extension of the Stockholm syndrome is see in every religious person I have met, heard.....ect. Even the bible calls you slaves, or did you not know that, go look it up! Your God is a slave driver, and the mist effective one ever, because he relies on pure fear, of something you cant even prive exists!
Anthropomorphic conception of the God is there as a mind of the ancient people who were represented by the synagogue and its priests or rabbis who had no idea of the infinite existence of the huge universe which existed in the ancient mind as something that was not beyond the religious compass that the synagogue of the Baruch Spinoza’s time held to measure the universe and its creator and the synagogue’s inability to comprehend it made the phenomenon not more than anthropomorphic having a human personality. When Spinoza challenged the traditional concept of the universe and the anthropomorphic nature of the synagogue and its rabbinical rituals, it was but natural that the ancient religion declared that since the philosopher was speaking against the established religion of the synagogue, he was excommunicated by the rabbis and condemned him eternally and except that what else was availably possible for them in the form of reason versus religion. But reason was not allowed to apply to the religious faith.
Thank you for the video. As much as I admire Spinoza, these Ideas are not new. Eastern philosophies of ancient India and ancient China have similar ideas, so do some Greek philosophers. In the context of Judo-Christian belief systems, however, Spinoza created shockwaves that are still reverberating religious orthodoxies.
Read both and comment. Spinoza was Spinoza who inspired Leibniz setting grounds of modern rationalist thinking. Your guys of Tao never went beyond spirituality.
The Abrahamic God is: * Transcendent - separate from the world * Providential - intervenes in our affairs * Anthropomorphic - has human thoughts & feelings. Spinoza's God is: * Immanent - in nature * Non-intervening * Universal - all is unified & interconnected. I think his determinism is like compatiblism. Our decisions are determined, but they are mostly self-determined by our own brain/mind which works by the cause & effect of neural connections between brain cells.
@@mindphilo It's excellent. I'd also add that Spinoza's view, although worded a little differently, is very much in alignment with Buddhism...interconnectedness, impersonal nature of existence, cause-effect conditions, illusion of free will, etc.
The whole world swallowed a view of a painting of God on the roof of the Sistine Chapel and it's been in the minds of people ever since. Where he brought life into the world by touching the finger of Adam. People have loved and believed it ever since it was first seen and now that photograph is everywhere. Everyone has seen it and all Christians believe it without question.
thank you for your comment u're spot on ;Spinoza’s ideas do mirror non-dualism, emphasizing the unity of all things. what truly matters is how this understanding improves our quality of life, helping us live with more peace and acceptance. It’s about letting this knowledge guide us to a more harmonious existence.
Excellent explanation of Spinozism, bravo! in the video you mentioned it's similarity to some 'Eastern philosophies', singling out Buddhism. Really, Spinoza has a nearly exact understanding of 'God' as only one philosophical system coming from the East. It's referred to as the Spanda shastra. It is a sub-school of what has come down as 'Kashmir Shaivism. This system (developed by Kallatabhatta around 850CE understands the absolute (Siva) as Spanda , the divine pulsation that comprises all existence. samanya spanda (God/natura) and Vaishesika spanda (attributes/modes) in spinoza's system. The text is the Spanda Karika and the brief commentary (vritti) both by Kallatabhatta. There is an English translation by Mark Dyczkowski. I hope those reading this comment will check it out.
The problem is that, if God is everything, then it's not only the sunset, beautiful trees, waves, or colours chosen by an amazing painter, it's also sewage, horrible diseases, murder, cruelty etc. That's why his views were automatically heretical. You can't say God is horrible lowly things without being seen as an enemy of the church. Let's not forget that this same church justified much of their power and wealth, as well as the plundering of western civilization over the rest of the world, as a necessity - of the good we were doing - because we were the people who believed in "God", the "sons of God", and because it was "God's will". So, of course he was excommunicated lol. He was basically speaking truth to power, in the biggest way possible. He tried to hide it behind philosophical terminology and logic, but they weren't having it haha
Spinoza was not Christian, he was born/raised Jewish. He did get expelled from the Jewish community in Amsterdam even before he wrote the Ethics. But yes, Spinoza is arguing against Theism and for pantheism (as correctly understood as the video maker does a great job of presenting.
Plundering of Western civilization? Maybe you meant to write "the imposition of Western civilization". Africans had the land, the missionaries had the Bible. After colonization took place, Africans now have the Bible and the lands now belong to the colonizers.
Excellent! Succinct! Cogent! Congratulations! I understand why he was rejected. He saw far, far more than his contemporaries. That rejection is a badge of honor, expressing that he truly saw beyond. Even today, very few have seen beyond what he saw. But there is more to see. For one, the 'and' principle of post-dualism. For even monism is dual in that it is as to is not. What Spinoza saw is absolutely true: God is all, in all, as all, the doer, the acted upon and the action itself. That's major and that's why he was rejected. But there is more, because all that is also illusory. God is other. That's illusory. God is everything. That's illusory. That's the'and' principle. God opened theRed Sea in Exodus. That's illusory. Moses did it. That's illusory. It opened of its own Accord. That's illusory. It never happened. That's illusory. See what I mean? Existence is illusory. Pre-spinoza God was illusory. Spinoza's God is illusory. The thing is though, in every case, the are both 'real' and 'illusory', at the same time. That's the nature of existence. We're addicted to that
Reality escapes all concepts. But I do enjoy contemplating this big question through the lenses of Spinoza, and the Far East philosophies. The monotheistic Mid East approaches are brazenly anthropomorphic.
Interesting that many artists musicians athletes that we perceive as great often say that their talent comes from god or appears like majic or he finds himself in the zone or in the pocket. Of course today we might call it from the subconscious, muscle memory, inspiration from a thousand things. God, nature, reality. No room for free will in a deterministic world. The word God carries too much baggage . That is the meaning that God is dead. What to replace god, science, philosophy? If Spinoza is right nature holds the answer and time has the key. Self reflection, consciousness, is it rare in this universe so vast perhaps infinitely large or is it common. My dream when I die, when this wave hits the shore that a new wave with the illusion of self is born as my next existence. Time will tell.
We are free in determination. We are not 100% free, we are limited by natural law. We can choose our path under those natural law. This natural law limiting us.
Natural law hampers our freedom if we see freedom as being free from connection with things - as a result of our separation from our surroundings. If we see freedom as being connected to. or in touch with, everything, it takes on a different meaning.
Reality escapes all concepts. But I do enjoy contemplating this big question through the lenses of Spinoza, and the Far East philosophies. The monotheistic Mid East approaches are brazenly anthropomorphic.
The biggest stumbling block in this belief is the idea of good and evil being just nature expressing itself. No blame no praise, just action and reaction. The person that feels no guilt, no remorse for cheating, stealing, murdering, is a sociopath, a danger or monster. Can this be God too? There are cases where a person goes from a well adjusted member of society, caring about his fellow man to become a monster, a rapist, drunkard, liar, until the tumor in his brain is discovered and removed. Evil in a tumor?
Spanoza' theory of knowledge challenges the Chritian garden of Eden. God wanted us to remain free and angelic. Stanza states the more knowledge a person has, the closer to God we get.
Max Planck, the originator of Quantum Theory had a similar thought. "As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter."
@@danielpaulson8838 Absolutely not! He would say the exact same thing as he has said. God in this pantheistic view is the ground of being, the pure potentiality out of which all existence, including laws of physics emerge. That's much deeper than the quantum fields which themselves emerge from the laws of physics.
@@Madelro100 well then you still have the option of looking at all the ingredients that are in the restaurant and if you happen to have a good imagination or are a good cook you could probably create something else out of all the ingredients but then again you still don't get to choose what ingredients are in the restaurant but you would have the free will to create something from the ingredients that are there.
@@Madelro100 oh yeah and always look at the back side of the menu too sometimes people might just not know that there's other options cuz I didn't look at the back side of the.menu lol.
“While Galileo spent the rest of his life under house arrest, Baruch Spinoza (who had been excommunicated by the Jews, discriminated against by the Christians, and tolerated by the Dutch, did work that helped Newton).”
All these thoughts are as old as 2000 years before Spinoza. Pls read Upanishands, Brahmasutra and Advaita, Vishistadwaita philosophy of Shankara and Ramanuja, a bit much closer to Vishitadawita, Ramanuja and vedanta desika. Buddha experimented and taught different practical philosophy as he was on the quest of 'why there is sorrow?' in the world
WE HUMAN BEINGS have trillions of living things feeding inside and outside us, just as the Earth does. The Earth is warm and it keeps us alive, all the creatures microscopic and massive are living off this planet. Occasionally it gets a little angry and will show us it's anger with an earthquake or volcano. Do you think we treat our planet well?
Spinoza philosophy is a song of love for an unknown God. I thing, like Spinoza, that God is part of all quantic atoms. Yet this is a reflex of our feelings, our human feelings. God is an inexplicable mystery. At 86 I think that when we will understand what life is, then we will know what eternity feels and may be what God is.
welcome to the channel , At 86, your wisdom shines through-perhaps understanding life and eternity is indeed the key to glimpsing the divine. Thank you for sharing this with us
I'm gonna have to pose the argument that Spinoza's God is the biblical God. The problem isn't the Bible. The problem is the dogmatic and religiosity that has often plagued every society throughout history. It's the very position that Christ himself challenged. And to explain why the biblical God is Spinoza's God, read Paul's letter to the Romans, in verse 20 of the first chapter, which says: For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God. At no point in time was the biblical God ever known to have physical, or human attributes. As John himself says, no one has ever seen God. The idea of man created in his image is a reflection of our divine nature. Not God's humanistic attributes. When God is anthropomorphized, like for example, being referenced as the Father, or being referenced as having hands, it's always to give meaning to his position, or symbolize a certain idea of God, because we could never understand what God is. Even his gender is just an "idea", rather than a fact. I could go further, but my biggest concern is why when I usually present this argument people take a hard position to interpret the Bible the way that violent natured, and archaic religious leaders interpreted it. Just as Hebrews explains that God tried every which way to communicate to people, he spoke to them in signs, miracles and wonders, he had to appeal to ancient people in the way they could understand. If you read the Bible, the people of Israel were afraid of God, when his voice boomed from the mountains and the earth trembled and thunder and lightning followed. So they asked Moses to speak for them because they were afraid. It's not that you have to take the stories literally. It's that it's trying to appeal to the people in a way they can understand, because they never understood, nor do we to this very day, understand what, or who God is. What the Bible is trying to explain to us is that God is all there is. Just as Spinoza himself explains it. What we are looking at is an illusion. As Einstein said it himself, we are the universe experiencing ourselves through the individual. It's like a self optical delusion. The apostle Paul says it this way, for now in this present moment, we are looking through a dark mirror. Like you yourself, are a reflection of me. We're all reflections of each other, but what we are looking at is the abyss. The emptiness that Buddhism teachers. Or God, as the Bible reflects. If you want to call it consciousness then call it that. Words are also illusions. Symbols. They're just there to get us to understand a deeper understanding. I wish people would really take the time to meditate on these things rather than argue and bicker and condemn each other. Everyone does it, in one way or the other. So I'm not calling out anyone in particular. Cheers.
everything, including religious belief, is determined by prior causes. The challenge is not in the scripture itself but in freeing ourselves from dogmatic constraints to see the necessity and interconnectedness in all things, which Spinoza identifies as God , a concept not the same as the biblical God.
@@Mark.Allen1111 and Jesus teachings too. It's all over the place. Unfortunately, religious people have hijacked its message. And they dictated so much of it that folks like Spinoza completely rejected it. But I agree with a lot of what he argues. I just think that the message was hidden in plain sight. And to this day, the message continues to unravel. There's layers to it. I just don't talk about it unless people are willing to hear it.
At about 10:15 minutes a term is introduced which sounds like the "immanence of god" but I don't think that is the term introduced. The "CC" function is not available on this video. What is the term introduced at that point?
What Spinoza meant is that wherever One looks at nature, One sees a part of 'God in the nature' as nature was created by God that reflects part of the character of God. God an animal? No, the character of nature is part of God where the general characters of nature created can only be created by the character of A Creator that's passed down genetically from where God is Nature.
Thank you! Great podcast! Why God has to be impersonal when all humans are persons capable to think and endowed with different gifts (like yours🙂)? Spinoza is a great thinker, but in general points he requires our faith just like religion does.
I have an issue with a part of this video. The classical theism of Christianity, going back to Saint Augustine, Justin the Philosopher, Thomas Aquinas, and the Apostle Paul, was non-anthropomorphic. They conceived of God as non-anthropomorphic, and as non-corporeal. It is true that traditional rabbinical Judaism often viewed God as anthropomorphic, but Mimonedes changed that, and he lived long before Spinoza. Other than that It is a cool video, but I think this is a big inaccuracy. Hoping you see my comment.
This is not to say that they do not conceive of God as personal, but that he has no physical form, is not a physical entity, has no body, and is not conceived of as "a man in the sky with a beard".
thk you to point out that many classical theists, including the figures you mentioned, rejected an anthropomorphic or corporeal view of God. but Spinoza’s critique wasn’t aimed merely at classical theology or Maimonides’ intelectualized God. i think his philosophy sought to strip away any lingering notions of divine personality, will, or purpose, which he saw as human projections-even in the non-corporeal God of thinkers like Aquinas or Maimonides. I hope this clarifies Spinoza’s perspective. I’m glad you enjoyed the video thank you again
yes , even the argue that the concept of a "personal" God is itself anthropomorphic... Spinoza’s God is impersonal-an infinite, eternal substance that expresses itself through the laws of nature. so attributing personality or intentionality to God (even without physical traits) reflects a human tendency to project our own experiences onto the divine.
Sort of. Ibn 'al-Arabi is very similar, but much more expansive and complex of course. Spinoza keeps it simple. The real corollary is the Spandashastra by Kallatabhata 850CE from Kashmir.
yes Spinoza says nothing happens by chance; everything is a result of the necessary unfolding of cause and effect in the natural world. If quantum mechanics suggests that even at the smallest scales, events are determined by prior states, this aligns with Spinoza's belief that all things are interconnected and governed by the same rational order. Sounds like the universe is playing a very sophisticated game of hide and seek ;-)
I GIVE you the end of a golden string; Only wind it into a ball, It will lead you in at Heaven’s gate, Built in Jerusalem’s wall.… William Blake Upon birth our consciousness was restricted to only smelling. We associated the person attending to us as the source of food. That's perhaps is where consciousness started for humans. One sure thing about consciousness is the fact that it is ever expanding. There is really no end to the unfoldment of ment. The more we learn about the sciences, philosophy and religion the better we will be able to separate the truth from the false. And the truth shall set you free ( from dogma, erroneous concepts of life, God and everything good)
Yesvery interesting if I understand your remark correctly, we might also not need dialectic; no need for a thesis or antithesis when you can see the whole picture from the start.
Even theists casually say that God is omnipresent. Omnipresence implies Spinosa"s God . I don't see much difference between Spinoza's God and Advaita Vedanta. 🙏🕉️
My entire life I have been saying thank God I’m not religious. It’s difficult to escape God when everyone around you has a common conception of God. It’s a conception of thought. I don’t think you can get rid of it. I listen to Jordan Peterson debate Sam Harris. I agree with Harris. Then I say thank God I’m not religious and I realize Peterson is right.
Spinoza might say that this struggle reflects the natural human condition-seeking to understand the infinite within the finite. Whether you side with Harris or Peterson, it seems like the debate itself has deepened your understanding, and perhaps that's where the real value lies. welcome to the channel
The definition of religion is that to which we are bound so it is hard to escape it. It is better than eliminative materialism or trans humanism. The Church kept the dark occult out of the mainstream before the age of reason and religion will protect humanity from whatever atheistic horrors are in the pipeline.
@@mindphiloIt is more likely the finite is within the infinite rather than the reverse. Spinoza got in trouble with his synagogue because, even though he had a great love for god, he could only see him as immanent, not transcendent. For that he was banished from his synagogue. He was a good person and a person of great courage in a perilous time when a person’s views could have gotten them killed. His close friend was murdered in front of the Town Hall and Spinoza had to be held back from going to his defense, as he would have suffered a similar fate.
La vida es una tómbola de luz y de color. La vida es un unicórnio viviendo en una nube con arcoíris. ¿Puede la poesía cambiar el mundo? Veremos. La vida es un descanso después haber escalado a la cima. Mira a tu alrededor, ¿no es la realidad maravillosa?. Oye a tu alrededor, ¿no es el sonido y el silencio maravilloso?. La vida es increible y es lo único que tenemos. Vivir entendiendo la naturaleza de Dios te da lo que los bienes materiales no pueden darte. Se puede ser feliz con poco entendiendo la naturaleza de Dios. Te cambia el entendimiento. Te cambia aprender la realidad. Es imposible ser la misma persona después de entender Dios existe. Lo repito y lo repetiré porque no puede ser más importante. Fracasé y sigo fracasando pero todavía puedo tener éxito. Para tener éxito necesito superar la más severa y devastadora censura de la historia, y no se entiende. La gente es como es y entiende lo que entiende. Tengo que aceptar la realidad y esperar suerte. Espero un cambio positivo porque el barco se hunde y lo intento mantener a flote. ¿Qué puedo hacer?, entiendo la realidad y se la solución al problema. Se me está robando todo y tampoco se entiende. ¿Por qué a mi no se me puede ofrecer un premio Nóbel? Merezco premios Nóbeles por mi contribución al bienestar de la humanidad con conocimiento. ¿Tengo yo la culpa de que la humanidad esté engañada?, ¿tengo yo la culpa de las guerras en el mundo?. ¿Quién tiene la culpa de que la humanidad no sepa todavía Dios existe porque lógicamente es imposible la existencia de la creación o finitud sin el creador o infinitud?. Mi verdad es el ateísmo es una falacia lógica que asume Dios es la idea religiosa del creador de la creación y concluye erróneamente el creador no existe porque una idea particular de Dios no existe. El verdadero Dios es imposible de entender. ¿Un objeto en movimiento en una trayectoria finita atraviesa finitos o infinitos puntos?. Gracias.
I refer to my answer a few moments ago... " It seems the more 'educated learned knowledged' a human being becomes the more stupid ignorant & foolish they become. Starter: A new human is created on Earth, he is the first. Let's name him Adam. Now he has all the free will he wants, eat sleep work play do whatever but all that is just living human life. Time passes and...looh & behold a woman is made for him let's call her Eve. They pretty much could do not Anything out of free will, but were told in no uncertain terms 'not to eat of tree of knowledge' for that was forbidden fruit. But 'free will kicked in' and they ate the apple bringing them Death. That means...if you do what is 'forbidden' then you pay the consequences. Free will remains it has gone No Where, but at the same the retribution or punishment for your indiscretions will last many life times...side by side your will. So we all have 'free will' but at the same time all have retribution suffering or punishment to bear from past actions deeds. * It's a dual carriage way, of good and bad, a never ending perpetual story...going round & round & round & round..unstoppable !!! !!!! Q. Have you free will or not ? Yes...."!
We believe there is God the Creator of the Universe, but we don't feel that Almighty God has to send anyone or any power to the world for human beings to preach his ideals etc.
I think its a interesting indepth topic, although i can say i dont agree with the lack of free will. As we live we evolve, there are many beliefs. What is the hogher power, i can argue the prime consciousness or the source of all life or both. I believe he dodnt see the nature in the nature of being and living. Life is not life unless its free to live. I can agree we all live has an equal importance in thw circle of life self defined. We as people hold our role, its not about being greater than or less than, it's about being. Interestingly enough i have been thinking similar to some of the concepts.
He (Spinoza) saw freedom not as the ability to do whatever we want, but as understanding the necessity of things and aligning our lives with that understanding.
@@mindphilo I comprehend the principles, to me there is something missing. It's not puppets on a string to crudely put it. There was an interesting proposal made by a young man on another channel. Can't it be both? Do we experience nexus events in the midst of free will. Things that need to happen vs things that happen. Learning to advance the state of being. Not the core, but rather the extension, the extended consciousness. There's lots of factors to consider, stress doesn't help to ponder. He was in stress.
From Spinoza’s view, everything is determined by the nature of existence, which might make free will seem limited. However, from my perspective, even though we have free will, our choices are known in advance by God. This means that while we experience freedom in making choices, God already knows what those choices will be. It’s a nuanced balance between our personal agency and divine omniscience. Nevertheless, this is merely my own perspective on how divine foreknowledge and human free will might interact, similar to how Thomas Aquinas and Jonathan Edwards approached the issue.
This is the same as finance. I have the money to retire. If the other 8 billion people in the world, also have the money to retire. No one can retire. I have free will. If the other 8 billion people in the world, also have free will. Then no one has free will. You could think of it that way. I know you could think of it 8 billion otherways too. Why? Because we have free will. But we really don’t.
@@mindphilo it's is a interesting perspective, the book of life? Life is a story, stories have ups and downs. Relevance, of knowing and not knowing. If everything has a reason and a reason for a purpose... What is the purpose, to find the best way to exist and be nature.
Its not what is God Its Who Is God..and we have freewill because when we choose to Love It Makes Our Love Real so We Are Real Companions For God..not the sound of one hand clapping as it would be if We had no freewill..
Scholars and scientists have screwed up spinoza . People who have shallow knowledge of his philosophy equates his god with nature and that is preposterous. Spinoza's' philosophy was an answer to Descartes mind body dualism. He was dual aspects monist which means that existence is neither fundamentally mental nor physical , both mentality and physicality are aspects of the one third unified primordial identify thta he calls god . His dual aspects monism seems to be redundant. Idealism is much more coherent that brings down everything to mind . Unlike idealism that says reality is essentially mental , spinoza says that both mentality and physicality can be boiled down to third mysterious thing he calls god . Now why resort to any third thing to make sense of both mentality and physicality. Idelaism is the evolved stage of dual aspects monism . He can also be interrupted as an idealist , if by god he means the mind at large.
while it's true that his philosophy was a response to Descartes' dualism, (Descartes will be the subject of my next episode) Spinoza’s concept of God as something beyond just nature or mind is what makes his work so unique. Idealism offers a different approach, but Spinoza's idea of a unified substance that encompasses both mental and physical aspects adds a layer of depth that many find compelling. The debate between these views is what keeps the discussion so rich and interesting
@@mindphilowhy resort to a third mysterious thing to make sense of physicality and mentality. Is not a non dualistic understanding more coherent than a multi aspects monism like advait vendanta which espouses monistic idelaism along with a few schools of Mahayana Buddhism or schopenhauer objective idealism .
@@sumitrashankarchamoli8547 the first two lines of the Tao are helpful: The God that can be defined is not the eternal God, the name that can be named is not the eternal name'. Everything about God is wonderful, including that God is not! What an awesome entity, God, whose activities are from eternity to eternity, yet God is not!
There is no god god is.There is no freedom only a concatenation of events . Events are entropy. There is no beginning and no end only entropic transition. Dimly comprehended in consciousness.
@@mindphilo Curious if you’re gonna delete, respond, or ignore, but I came her for philosophical review, not political opinion stated as fact. If you’re gonna throw a claim like genocide around, you should support it with evidence, not state it in passing in a philosophy video. History will show whether or not there was a genocide in Gaza. People have been claiming that for a year now, along with starvation, so I have a lot of skepticism, but I hope there are real investigations into the matter. I have no doubt war crimes have been committed on both sides (you can’t name a modern war without war crimes btw), but on what grounds does that take the jump to genocide? If the power dynamic were flipped, Hamas would’ve committed genocide against the Jews already. While I’m sure the IDF can do better (as can Hamas), how is Israel supposed to respond to a religious death cult that openly works towards their destruction and has a strategy designed to maximize civilian death to turn liberal values against liberals? I consider myself liberal fwiw, and am haunted by the videos coming out of Gaza (and Syria, and Ukraine, and the Congo, and war in general), but wish your political commentary contained the depth and nuance of your philosophical commentary or was left out altogether.
God is a guide to darkness. So God has to the light. And light comes from the Sun. Therefore everything about God came from the Sun. Without the Sun nothing can be possible. Every religions are mostly based on the source of the light i,e.the Sun.
‘Gods’ are a construct of ignorant times when humans did not have the knowledge of Nature’s creation and put their own stories to it…varying over time and place. King Akhenaten was one of the first to believe in one ‘god’ over many. It was the Sun. This word cannot, in integrity, be used in a different way, to define the Life Force Energy that is ALL of our AweFully AMazeSing, SenseSationAll, MagicAll, PowerFull, wHOLeY Divine NATURE A-Parent…’inside/outside/upside/down’. 💝 (Sation…old word meaning to sow/plant)
This conception of God sounds no different than the stoics logos or the taoists tao or star wars force. An impersonal potent Force. Not like the personal potent force of the Jews which is utterly separate from creation is the creator of creation.
I think the bible says the same thing From the tree if good abd evil thiu shall not eat.. Christ explaines this later in revelations Because I am the sloga and the imegs
I think you are contradicting yourself. If you believe you are part of God then there should not be any questions about free will or determinism!! As Nisargadatta Maharaj said, “The pure subjectivity is neither an entity nor a non-entity, as all ideas of entity are within the consciousness.”
@Malibu-ku2to yeah greaet point, But contradicting myself! Well, I’m not literally part of Spinoza, so I guess I’m safe 😄 Spinoza may argues that everything, including our thoughts and actions, is part of God or Nature. This doesn’t eliminate the debate around free will or determinism-it reframes it. Spinoza would say that what we call 'free will' is just our awareness of desires, while we remain unaware of the external causes shaping them. So, we feel autonomous, but we are actually part of an infinite chain of cause and effect in Nature. nisarrgadatta’s view on pure subjectivity adds another layer to this, by pointing out the illusory nature of the distinction between 'entity' and 'non-entity.' In his view i think, even the idea of an individual self making choices-whether free or determined-is itself an illusion. and to To be honest, I haven’t explore deeply Nisargradatta’s work-just skimmed a few articles-but his ideas on subjectivity seem to fit nicely with this discussion. thank you
Join and be channel member to support my work:
ruclips.net/channel/UC4hkfv9BNzYh-IafZd94b9wjoin
My ETH crypto wallet wallet : 0x3db70687855fcd93c179d532e9ba59c582ee10bc
(to be credited please send email to mindfulphilo@gmail.com )
As a student of Spinoza's philosophy this past 40 plus years, I Now teach Spinoza's works. Freedom from childhood trauma is possible when you understand your emotions.
Followed your account
That's truly inspiring! Spinoza's philosophy offers such a profound way to understand emotions and achieve inner freedom. It's amazing that you're teaching his work after studying it for over 40 years! The connection between emotional understanding and healing from trauma is such an important insight. Wishing you continued health and strength as you contribute to this important work!
Thanks!
I've so much of reverence for this Great Man🙏 . Reminds me of the Buddha and Adwaita philosophy.
“There is no contradiction, freedom is not the opposite of determinism but it’s fulfillment through understanding “ that’s it ! That explains free will in a deterministic world. Thanks for your great work
yes @mehmetkurhan9876 freedom not as the absence of necessity, but as the understanding of it it''s moe like being in harmony with the flow of a river, where freedom isn't about changing its course but about navigating it with awareness, thx for your kind words mehmet
@@mehmetkurhan9876 really ? In this case better not call it free will, but something else. You can not ignore or twist the meaning of word “free”.
@@DonivanSousa some people think following desires is free will like animals got freewill right. Nope. We got and spiritual being that pertains and flows with god and the creation So just flowing with it encounters with god himself. What’s more freedom than being with god and function as part of the creation itself being out best being with can B. Let God B with U🙏🙏👏🏼
It is truly simple, if this God has a plan, and you have no choice but to follow this plan, since you can't circumvent the will of this god, YOU HAVE NO FREE WILL!
Every thought you have every action you take has already been DICTATED, in advance before you were even born! This is the slavery of every Christian, it is also their excuse!
It is equally amazing that you think you have free will under the Christian God that has already determined everything in advance, and you still pray, and if the prayer doesn't go the way you hope, it's gods will, if after the prayer your outcome is positive, your prayer worked!
Yes there is a conflict, and it is basic simple logic!
Your refusal to see it is an extension of the Stockholm syndrome is see in every religious person I have met, heard.....ect.
Even the bible calls you slaves, or did you not know that, go look it up!
Your God is a slave driver, and the mist effective one ever, because he relies on pure fear, of something you cant even prive exists!
Anthropomorphic conception of the God is there as a mind of the ancient people who were represented by the synagogue and its priests or rabbis who had no idea of the infinite existence of the huge universe which existed in the ancient mind as something that was not beyond the religious compass that the synagogue of the Baruch Spinoza’s time held to measure the universe and its creator and the synagogue’s inability to comprehend it made the phenomenon not more than anthropomorphic having a human personality. When Spinoza challenged the traditional concept of the universe and the anthropomorphic nature of the synagogue and its rabbinical rituals, it was but natural that the ancient religion declared that since the philosopher was speaking against the established religion of the synagogue, he was excommunicated by the rabbis and condemned him eternally and except that what else was availably possible for them in the form of reason versus religion. But reason was not allowed to apply to the religious faith.
Thank you for the video. As much as I admire Spinoza, these Ideas are not new. Eastern philosophies of ancient India and ancient China have similar ideas, so do some Greek philosophers. In the context of Judo-Christian belief systems, however, Spinoza created shockwaves that are still reverberating religious orthodoxies.
Indeed u right
It sounds like he's read the Tao Te Ching written in about 500 BC by Lao Tzu.
Spinoza was a natural Taoist.
Read both and comment. Spinoza was Spinoza who inspired Leibniz setting grounds of modern rationalist thinking. Your guys of Tao never went beyond spirituality.
How do you describe the difference between the Toa and the Doa?
I also like Bruno
The materialist likes Walter R.
ok
The Abrahamic God is:
* Transcendent - separate from the world
* Providential - intervenes in our affairs
* Anthropomorphic - has human thoughts & feelings.
Spinoza's God is:
* Immanent - in nature
* Non-intervening
* Universal - all is unified & interconnected.
I think his determinism is like compatiblism. Our decisions are determined, but they are mostly self-determined by our own brain/mind which works by the cause & effect of neural connections between brain cells.
I was born an atheist, because I could not accept the " GOD ' in the cloud story, now I fully acept Spinoza GOD.
i m glad that my content helps
me too
@@mindphilo It's excellent. I'd also add that Spinoza's view, although worded a little differently, is very much in alignment with Buddhism...interconnectedness, impersonal nature of existence, cause-effect conditions, illusion of free will, etc.
This theory makes more sense , that all religions together !
;-)
Fate and Freewill both exists
@petergalan6945 Are you familiar with "all religions?" I doubt your assertion as anything but resentful condescension.
The whole world swallowed a view of a painting of God on the roof of the Sistine Chapel and it's been in the minds of people ever since. Where he brought life into the world by touching the finger of Adam. People have loved and believed it ever since it was first seen and now that photograph is everywhere. Everyone has seen it and all Christians believe it without question.
We can certainly choose what to do in certain situations, but in the end it is God who decides.
If you pay attention, you will understand this.
"I believe in Spinoza's God." Words to deterministically live by.
His thinking definitely mirrors those of non dualism. What’s important is the impact this knowledge has on you quality of life
thank you for your comment u're spot on ;Spinoza’s ideas do mirror non-dualism, emphasizing the unity of all things. what truly matters is how this understanding improves our quality of life, helping us live with more peace and acceptance. It’s about letting this knowledge guide us to a more harmonious existence.
@@mindphilo
❤️
welcome cheri
Great lecture. Thank you very much 😊
Human consciousness keeps on growing, from the experience in childhood to adulthood to mysticism and wisdom or pure consciousness.
No GOD,
No Freewill,
Causes and Consequences,
You're on your own,
You are what you do.
You're definitely channeling your inner Spinoza-straight to the point ;-)
We are alone. We have to be strong
We're united with everything. Spinoza proves this.
We're not alone at all... that's impossible according to Spinoza.
Excellent explanation of Spinozism, bravo! in the video you mentioned it's similarity to some 'Eastern philosophies', singling out Buddhism. Really, Spinoza has a nearly exact understanding of 'God' as only one philosophical system coming from the East. It's referred to as the Spanda shastra. It is a sub-school of what has come down as 'Kashmir Shaivism. This system (developed by Kallatabhatta around 850CE understands the absolute (Siva) as Spanda , the divine pulsation that comprises all existence. samanya spanda (God/natura) and Vaishesika spanda (attributes/modes) in spinoza's system. The text is the Spanda Karika and the brief commentary (vritti) both by Kallatabhatta. There is an English translation by Mark Dyczkowski. I hope those reading this comment will check it out.
Great , Thank you 🙏🙏
You're welcome 😊
Fascinating. I needed to listen to this. Thank you for sharing.
Glad you enjoyed it!
The problem is that, if God is everything, then it's not only the sunset, beautiful trees, waves, or colours chosen by an amazing painter, it's also sewage, horrible diseases, murder, cruelty etc. That's why his views were automatically heretical. You can't say God is horrible lowly things without being seen as an enemy of the church. Let's not forget that this same church justified much of their power and wealth, as well as the plundering of western civilization over the rest of the world, as a necessity - of the good we were doing - because we were the people who believed in "God", the "sons of God", and because it was "God's will". So, of course he was excommunicated lol. He was basically speaking truth to power, in the biggest way possible. He tried to hide it behind philosophical terminology and logic, but they weren't having it haha
Exactly the heart of Spinoza's conflict with the Church
Spinoza was not Christian, he was born/raised Jewish. He did get expelled from the Jewish community in Amsterdam even before he wrote the Ethics. But yes, Spinoza is arguing against Theism and for pantheism (as correctly understood as the video maker does a great job of presenting.
Plundering of Western civilization? Maybe you meant to write "the imposition of Western civilization". Africans had the land, the missionaries had the Bible. After colonization took place, Africans now have the Bible and the lands now belong to the colonizers.
Excellent! Succinct! Cogent! Congratulations!
I understand why he was rejected. He saw far, far more than his contemporaries. That rejection is a badge of honor, expressing that he truly saw beyond. Even today, very few have seen beyond what he saw. But there is more to see. For one, the 'and' principle of post-dualism. For even monism is dual in that it is as to is not. What Spinoza saw is absolutely true: God is all, in all, as all, the doer, the acted upon and the action itself. That's major and that's why he was rejected. But there is more, because all that is also illusory. God is other. That's illusory. God is everything. That's illusory. That's the'and' principle. God opened theRed Sea in Exodus. That's illusory. Moses did it. That's illusory. It opened of its own Accord. That's illusory. It never happened. That's illusory. See what I mean? Existence is illusory. Pre-spinoza God was illusory. Spinoza's God is illusory. The thing is though, in every case, the are both 'real' and 'illusory', at the same time. That's the nature of existence. We're addicted to that
Glad you enjoy the episode & welcome
Reality escapes all concepts.
But I do enjoy contemplating this big question through the lenses of Spinoza, and the Far East philosophies.
The monotheistic Mid East approaches are brazenly anthropomorphic.
well explained thank you
Glad you liked it
Interesting that many artists musicians athletes that we perceive as great often say that their talent comes from god or appears like majic or he finds himself in the zone or in the pocket. Of course today we might call it from the subconscious, muscle memory, inspiration from a thousand things. God, nature, reality. No room for free will in a deterministic world. The word God carries too much baggage . That is the meaning that God is dead. What to replace god, science, philosophy? If Spinoza is right nature holds the answer and time has the key. Self reflection, consciousness, is it rare in this universe so vast perhaps infinitely large or is it common. My dream when I die, when this wave hits the shore that a new wave with the illusion of self is born as my next existence. Time will tell.
Love this
Thank you
Yes, well said, well thought and well done!
thank you & welcome
We are free in determination.
We are not 100% free, we are limited by natural law. We can choose our path under those natural law. This natural law limiting us.
Natural law hampers our freedom if we see freedom as being free from connection with things - as a result of our separation from our surroundings. If we see freedom as being connected to. or in touch with, everything, it takes on a different meaning.
Reality escapes all concepts.
But I do enjoy contemplating this big question through the lenses of Spinoza, and the Far East philosophies.
The monotheistic Mid East approaches are brazenly anthropomorphic.
The biggest stumbling block in this belief is the idea of good and evil being just nature expressing itself. No blame no praise, just action and reaction. The person that feels no guilt, no remorse for cheating, stealing, murdering, is a sociopath, a danger or monster. Can this be God too? There are cases where a person goes from a well adjusted member of society, caring about his fellow man to become a monster, a rapist, drunkard, liar, until the tumor in his brain is discovered and removed. Evil in a tumor?
Spanoza' theory of knowledge challenges the Chritian garden of Eden. God wanted us to remain free and angelic. Stanza states the more knowledge a person has, the closer to God we get.
পেমেন্ট ছাড়া এই ট্রাকে থাকা অসম্ভব প্লীজ গো ❤
I think today, he would say that god is the quantum fields from which all emerges.
Max Planck, the originator of Quantum Theory had a similar thought.
"As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter."
@@danielpaulson8838 Absolutely not! He would say the exact same thing as he has said. God in this pantheistic view is the ground of being, the pure potentiality out of which all existence, including laws of physics emerge. That's much deeper than the quantum fields which themselves emerge from the laws of physics.
For me it's always been like a menu you're free to choose from what's on the menu but you're not free to choose what's on the menu.
@@kellykizer6718 What if some things aren t in the menú?
@@Madelro100 well then you still have the option of looking at all the ingredients that are in the restaurant and if you happen to have a good imagination or are a good cook you could probably create something else out of all the ingredients but then again you still don't get to choose what ingredients are in the restaurant but you would have the free will to create something from the ingredients that are there.
@@Madelro100 oh yeah and always look at the back side of the menu too sometimes people might just not know that there's other options cuz I didn't look at the back side of the.menu lol.
Thank you for sharing this with us. 🙏
welcome @ejsomo2020
Thats why I call God " The One "
But the one could be paralleled or divisible.. you may called him the one and unique
@@mindphilo Its not a matematical concept
God is a supposition that can neither be proved or disproved but about whose reality there is not the slightest reason to suppose.
This is good stuff seems very esoteric to me the wisdom is on point
Thanks @foxxcharmer Glad you enjoyed it Spinoza’s wisdom does have that esoteric vibe, doesn’t it?appreciate the feedback!
What's the ending music's classical tune and composer's name?
Beethoven
ruclips.net/video/1XO1uv49ivM/видео.html
@@mindphilo Thats right! Thanks even though Beethoven was after Spinoza died
Amazing video.
Glad you think so
Love The Idea and The Interpretation….🌞
Thanks for listening
Outstanding presentation, thank you
Glad you enjoyed it!
How does the clock work?
Great theory which is not easy to understand !
We create our reality ,every one for himself!
“While Galileo spent the rest of his life under house arrest, Baruch Spinoza (who had been excommunicated by the Jews, discriminated against by the Christians, and tolerated by the Dutch, did work that helped Newton).”
"God is not Santa Clause."--Lois W.
All these thoughts are as old as 2000 years before Spinoza. Pls read Upanishands, Brahmasutra and Advaita, Vishistadwaita philosophy of Shankara and Ramanuja, a bit much closer to Vishitadawita, Ramanuja and vedanta desika. Buddha experimented and taught different practical philosophy as he was on the quest of 'why there is sorrow?' in the world
Fantastic presentation.
Glad you liked it!
WE HUMAN BEINGS have trillions of living things feeding inside and outside us, just as the Earth does. The Earth is warm and it keeps us alive, all the creatures microscopic and massive are living off this planet. Occasionally it gets a little angry and will show us it's anger with an earthquake or volcano. Do you think we treat our planet well?
thx GOD is everywhere
monism ;-)
Spinoza philosophy is a song of love for an unknown God. I thing, like Spinoza, that God is part of all quantic atoms. Yet this is a reflex of our feelings, our human feelings. God is an inexplicable mystery. At 86 I think that when we will understand what life is, then we will know what eternity feels and may be what God is.
welcome to the channel , At 86, your wisdom shines through-perhaps understanding life and eternity is indeed the key to glimpsing the divine. Thank you for sharing this with us
I'm gonna have to pose the argument that Spinoza's God is the biblical God. The problem isn't the Bible. The problem is the dogmatic and religiosity that has often plagued every society throughout history. It's the very position that Christ himself challenged.
And to explain why the biblical God is Spinoza's God, read Paul's letter to the Romans, in verse 20 of the first chapter, which says:
For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God.
At no point in time was the biblical God ever known to have physical, or human attributes. As John himself says, no one has ever seen God.
The idea of man created in his image is a reflection of our divine nature. Not God's humanistic attributes. When God is anthropomorphized, like for example, being referenced as the Father, or being referenced as having hands, it's always to give meaning to his position, or symbolize a certain idea of God, because we could never understand what God is. Even his gender is just an "idea", rather than a fact.
I could go further, but my biggest concern is why when I usually present this argument people take a hard position to interpret the Bible the way that violent natured, and archaic religious leaders interpreted it.
Just as Hebrews explains that God tried every which way to communicate to people, he spoke to them in signs, miracles and wonders, he had to appeal to ancient people in the way they could understand.
If you read the Bible, the people of Israel were afraid of God, when his voice boomed from the mountains and the earth trembled and thunder and lightning followed. So they asked Moses to speak for them because they were afraid. It's not that you have to take the stories literally. It's that it's trying to appeal to the people in a way they can understand, because they never understood, nor do we to this very day, understand what, or who God is.
What the Bible is trying to explain to us is that God is all there is. Just as Spinoza himself explains it. What we are looking at is an illusion. As Einstein said it himself, we are the universe experiencing ourselves through the individual. It's like a self optical delusion. The apostle Paul says it this way, for now in this present moment, we are looking through a dark mirror. Like you yourself, are a reflection of me. We're all reflections of each other, but what we are looking at is the abyss. The emptiness that Buddhism teachers. Or God, as the Bible reflects.
If you want to call it consciousness then call it that. Words are also illusions. Symbols. They're just there to get us to understand a deeper understanding.
I wish people would really take the time to meditate on these things rather than argue and bicker and condemn each other. Everyone does it, in one way or the other. So I'm not calling out anyone in particular.
Cheers.
everything, including religious belief, is determined by prior causes. The challenge is not in the scripture itself but in freeing ourselves from dogmatic constraints to see the necessity and interconnectedness in all things, which Spinoza identifies as God , a concept not the same as the biblical God.
@@mindphilo I get what you're saying but I strongly disagree. You just have to read it. Cheers.
Not the same as the biblical, but similar to Paul’s writings.
@@Mark.Allen1111 and Jesus teachings too. It's all over the place.
Unfortunately, religious people have hijacked its message. And they dictated so much of it that folks like Spinoza completely rejected it. But I agree with a lot of what he argues. I just think that the message was hidden in plain sight. And to this day, the message continues to unravel.
There's layers to it. I just don't talk about it unless people are willing to hear it.
@@migol1984 your perspective is excellent and there are human beings that appreciate what you have to say. Thanks for your comments.
Fantastic video
Thanks again
A great thinker
At about 10:15 minutes a term is introduced which sounds like the "immanence of god" but I don't think that is the term introduced. The "CC" function is not available on this video. What is the term introduced at that point?
yes the immanence of God.
@@mindphilo
Pronounce it correctly then!
I couldn't change the video after it was published
Brilliant. I realize that Spinoza took my ideas ... lol
;-) verify your birth year
You copied me then he copied you then gave it to Bruno, some how it spread around the universe and now even spirits can be seen.
I usually won't listen unless the words are theirs.
What Spinoza meant is that wherever One looks at nature, One sees a part of 'God in the nature' as nature was created by God that reflects part of the character of God. God an animal? No, the character of nature is part of God where the general characters of nature created can only be created by the character of A Creator that's passed down genetically from where God is Nature.
Peter asked this very same thing. Jesus answered, “That which is Good!”
No theories ,awareness!
If you don't understand this then you weren't supposed to.
Saying that gave me a comforting feeling of safety.
Thank you! Great podcast! Why God has to be impersonal when all humans are persons capable to think and endowed with different gifts (like yours🙂)? Spinoza is a great thinker, but in general points he requires our faith just like religion does.
yes more as a rational force of nature than a personal entity. I’m glad you enjoyed the podcast
I have an issue with a part of this video. The classical theism of Christianity, going back to Saint Augustine, Justin the Philosopher, Thomas Aquinas, and the Apostle Paul, was non-anthropomorphic. They conceived of God as non-anthropomorphic, and as non-corporeal. It is true that traditional rabbinical Judaism often viewed God as anthropomorphic, but Mimonedes changed that, and he lived long before Spinoza. Other than that It is a cool video, but I think this is a big inaccuracy. Hoping you see my comment.
This is not to say that they do not conceive of God as personal, but that he has no physical form, is not a physical entity, has no body, and is not conceived of as "a man in the sky with a beard".
thk you to point out that many classical theists, including the figures you mentioned, rejected an anthropomorphic or corporeal view of God. but Spinoza’s critique wasn’t aimed merely at classical theology or Maimonides’ intelectualized God. i think his philosophy sought to strip away any lingering notions of divine personality, will, or purpose, which he saw as human projections-even in the non-corporeal God of thinkers like Aquinas or Maimonides. I hope this clarifies Spinoza’s perspective. I’m glad you enjoyed the video thank you again
yes , even the argue that the concept of a "personal" God is itself anthropomorphic... Spinoza’s God is impersonal-an infinite, eternal substance that expresses itself through the laws of nature. so attributing personality or intentionality to God (even without physical traits) reflects a human tendency to project our own experiences onto the divine.
Nothing that is is without and nothing without is
This is almost what Sikhs believe in . One of Sikh friend explained this from their holy book called granth
@@bekindbehuman9613 Indeed. It is as if Spinoza translated the worldview of Guru Nanak (b. 1469 - d. 1539).
Bog svestì ì Bog podsvesti . Ujediniti . 11:17 11:18
God is a word
Every suggestion that Spinoza made, Ibn al-ʿArabī first suggested it.
Sort of. Ibn 'al-Arabi is very similar, but much more expansive and complex of course. Spinoza keeps it simple. The real corollary is the Spandashastra by Kallatabhata 850CE from Kashmir.
i like this
this is helpful
Spinoza's necessitarianism solves Quantum Mechanics measurement problem i.e. Superdeterminism
yes Spinoza says nothing happens by chance; everything is a result of the necessary unfolding of cause and effect in the natural world. If quantum mechanics suggests that even at the smallest scales, events are determined by prior states, this aligns with Spinoza's belief that all things are interconnected and governed by the same rational order. Sounds like the universe is playing a very sophisticated game of hide and seek ;-)
@@mindphilo yes sophisticated game of hide and seek indeed ie. The hidden variables can only be found at the moment of the big bang :)
;-) the universe is the ultimate prankster
I GIVE you the end of a golden string;
Only wind it into a ball,
It will lead you in at Heaven’s gate,
Built in Jerusalem’s wall.…
William Blake
Upon birth our consciousness was restricted to only smelling. We associated the person attending to us as the source of food. That's perhaps is where consciousness started for humans. One sure thing about consciousness is the fact that it is ever expanding. There is really no end to the unfoldment of ment. The more we learn about the sciences, philosophy and religion the better we will be able to separate the truth from the false. And the truth shall set you free ( from dogma, erroneous concepts of life, God and everything good)
yes the more we learn ... the more we are free
I feel like Spinoza unifies Hegel’s dialectic and makes it into one thing which is “understanding”
Yesvery interesting if I understand your remark correctly, we might also not need dialectic; no need for a thesis or antithesis when you can see the whole picture from the start.
@mehmetkurhan9876 that's how I'm thinking and I'm a Christian, I believe in God
thank
welcome
Einstein himself lectured and wrote extensively later in his career regarding Spinoza. Deus Sive Natura
yes
“God does not play dice with the Universe” according to Albert. What would Baruch say?
;-) Spinoza will say the God aka universe ...
Thanks, I prefer the Mozart’s version of God.
Even theists casually say that God is omnipresent. Omnipresence implies Spinosa"s God .
I don't see much difference between Spinoza's God and Advaita Vedanta. 🙏🕉️
So how I believe
My entire life I have been saying thank God I’m not religious. It’s difficult to escape God when everyone around you has a common conception of God. It’s a conception of thought. I don’t think you can get rid of it. I listen to Jordan Peterson debate Sam Harris. I agree with Harris. Then I say thank God I’m not religious and I realize Peterson is right.
Spinoza might say that this struggle reflects the natural human condition-seeking to understand the infinite within the finite. Whether you side with Harris or Peterson, it seems like the debate itself has deepened your understanding, and perhaps that's where the real value lies. welcome to the channel
So Spinoza’s way out of this problem is to understand that the finite is the infinite? To yoke or yoga the two?
The definition of religion is that to which we are bound so it is hard to escape it. It is better than eliminative materialism or trans humanism. The Church kept the dark occult out of the mainstream before the age of reason and religion will protect humanity from whatever atheistic horrors are in the pipeline.
@@mindphiloIt is more likely the finite is within the infinite rather than the reverse. Spinoza got in trouble with his synagogue because, even though he had a great love for god, he could only see him as immanent, not transcendent. For that he was banished from his synagogue. He was a good person and a person of great courage in a perilous time when a person’s views could have gotten them killed. His close friend was murdered in front of the Town Hall and Spinoza had to be held back from going to his defense, as he would have suffered a similar fate.
@@ALavin-en1kr let me change the terminology so you know what I mean. Finite/exterior experience. Infinite/interior experience.
❤
good podcast i feel God sometimes
welcome
La vida es una tómbola de luz y de color. La vida es un unicórnio viviendo en una nube con arcoíris. ¿Puede la poesía cambiar el mundo? Veremos. La vida es un descanso después haber escalado a la cima. Mira a tu alrededor, ¿no es la realidad maravillosa?. Oye a tu alrededor, ¿no es el sonido y el silencio maravilloso?. La vida es increible y es lo único que tenemos. Vivir entendiendo la naturaleza de Dios te da lo que los bienes materiales no pueden darte. Se puede ser feliz con poco entendiendo la naturaleza de Dios. Te cambia el entendimiento. Te cambia aprender la realidad. Es imposible ser la misma persona después de entender Dios existe. Lo repito y lo repetiré porque no puede ser más importante. Fracasé y sigo fracasando pero todavía puedo tener éxito. Para tener éxito necesito superar la más severa y devastadora censura de la historia, y no se entiende. La gente es como es y entiende lo que entiende. Tengo que aceptar la realidad y esperar suerte. Espero un cambio positivo porque el barco se hunde y lo intento mantener a flote. ¿Qué puedo hacer?, entiendo la realidad y se la solución al problema. Se me está robando todo y tampoco se entiende. ¿Por qué a mi no se me puede ofrecer un premio Nóbel? Merezco premios Nóbeles por mi contribución al bienestar de la humanidad con conocimiento. ¿Tengo yo la culpa de que la humanidad esté engañada?, ¿tengo yo la culpa de las guerras en el mundo?. ¿Quién tiene la culpa de que la humanidad no sepa todavía Dios existe porque lógicamente es imposible la existencia de la creación o finitud sin el creador o infinitud?. Mi verdad es el ateísmo es una falacia lógica que asume Dios es la idea religiosa del creador de la creación y concluye erróneamente el creador no existe porque una idea particular de Dios no existe. El verdadero Dios es imposible de entender. ¿Un objeto en movimiento en una trayectoria finita atraviesa finitos o infinitos puntos?. Gracias.
Not "what's" God? Who's God? 🙏❤👑
hi depends ...
Who's God? suggesting a more personal or relational approach..
What's God? inquires about the nature or essence of God..
I refer to my answer a few moments ago...
" It seems the more 'educated learned knowledged' a human being becomes the more stupid ignorant & foolish they become.
Starter: A new human is created on Earth, he is the first. Let's name him Adam. Now he has all the free will he wants, eat sleep work play do whatever but all that is just living human life. Time passes and...looh & behold a woman is made for him let's call her Eve.
They pretty much could do not Anything out of free will, but were told in no uncertain terms 'not to eat of tree of knowledge' for that was forbidden fruit.
But 'free will kicked in' and they ate the apple bringing them Death.
That means...if you do what is 'forbidden' then you pay the consequences. Free will remains it has gone No Where, but at the same the retribution or punishment for your indiscretions will last many life times...side by side your will.
So we all have 'free will' but at the same time all have retribution suffering or punishment to bear from past actions deeds.
* It's a dual carriage way, of good and bad, a never ending perpetual story...going round & round & round & round..unstoppable !!! !!!!
Q. Have you free will or not ? Yes...."!
We believe there is God the Creator of the Universe, but we don't feel that Almighty God has to send anyone or any power to the world for human beings to preach his ideals etc.
I think its a interesting indepth topic, although i can say i dont agree with the lack of free will. As we live we evolve, there are many beliefs. What is the hogher power, i can argue the prime consciousness or the source of all life or both. I believe he dodnt see the nature in the nature of being and living. Life is not life unless its free to live. I can agree we all live has an equal importance in thw circle of life self defined. We as people hold our role, its not about being greater than or less than, it's about being.
Interestingly enough i have been thinking similar to some of the concepts.
He (Spinoza) saw freedom not as the ability to do whatever we want, but as understanding the necessity of things and aligning our lives with that understanding.
@@mindphilo I comprehend the principles, to me there is something missing. It's not puppets on a string to crudely put it. There was an interesting proposal made by a young man on another channel. Can't it be both? Do we experience nexus events in the midst of free will. Things that need to happen vs things that happen. Learning to advance the state of being. Not the core, but rather the extension, the extended consciousness. There's lots of factors to consider, stress doesn't help to ponder. He was in stress.
From Spinoza’s view, everything is determined by the nature of existence, which might make free will seem limited. However, from my perspective, even though we have free will, our choices are known in advance by God. This means that while we experience freedom in making choices, God already knows what those choices will be. It’s a nuanced balance between our personal agency and divine omniscience. Nevertheless, this is merely my own perspective on how divine foreknowledge and human free will might interact, similar to how Thomas Aquinas and Jonathan Edwards approached the issue.
This is the same as finance. I have the money to retire. If the other 8 billion people in the world, also have the money to retire. No one can retire.
I have free will. If the other 8 billion people in the world, also have free will. Then no one has free will.
You could think of it that way. I know you could think of it 8 billion otherways too. Why? Because we have free will. But we really don’t.
@@mindphilo it's is a interesting perspective, the book of life? Life is a story, stories have ups and downs. Relevance, of knowing and not knowing. If everything has a reason and a reason for a purpose... What is the purpose, to find the best way to exist and be nature.
Its not what is God Its Who Is God..and we have freewill because when we choose to Love It Makes Our Love Real so We Are Real Companions For God..not the sound of one hand clapping as it would be if We had no freewill..
Every tribe6 even now have its.myth.... Thebee for example is their. ancestor
Scholars and scientists have screwed up spinoza . People who have shallow knowledge of his philosophy equates his god with nature and that is preposterous. Spinoza's' philosophy was an answer to Descartes mind body dualism. He was dual aspects monist which means that existence is neither fundamentally mental nor physical , both mentality and physicality are aspects of the one third unified primordial identify thta he calls god . His dual aspects monism seems to be redundant. Idealism is much more coherent that brings down everything to mind . Unlike idealism that says reality is essentially mental , spinoza says that both mentality and physicality can be boiled down to third mysterious thing he calls god . Now why resort to any third thing to make sense of both mentality and physicality. Idelaism is the evolved stage of dual aspects monism . He can also be interrupted as an idealist , if by god he means the mind at large.
while it's true that his philosophy was a response to Descartes' dualism, (Descartes will be the subject of my next episode) Spinoza’s concept of God as something beyond just nature or mind is what makes his work so unique. Idealism offers a different approach, but Spinoza's idea of a unified substance that encompasses both mental and physical aspects adds a layer of depth that many find compelling. The debate between these views is what keeps the discussion so rich and interesting
@@mindphilowhy resort to a third mysterious thing to make sense of physicality and mentality. Is not a non dualistic understanding more coherent than a multi aspects monism like advait vendanta which espouses monistic idelaism along with a few schools of Mahayana Buddhism or schopenhauer objective idealism .
@@sumitrashankarchamoli8547 the first two lines of the Tao are helpful: The God that can be defined is not the eternal God, the name that can be named is not the eternal name'. Everything about God is wonderful, including that God is not! What an awesome entity, God, whose activities are from eternity to eternity, yet God is not!
There is no god god is.There is no freedom only a concatenation of events . Events are entropy. There is no beginning and no end only entropic transition. Dimly comprehended in consciousness.
There is no causation, only correlation.
4:33 glad you mentioned it
;-)
@@mindphilo Curious if you’re gonna delete, respond, or ignore, but I came her for philosophical review, not political opinion stated as fact.
If you’re gonna throw a claim like genocide around, you should support it with evidence, not state it in passing in a philosophy video.
History will show whether or not there was a genocide in Gaza. People have been claiming that for a year now, along with starvation, so I have a lot of skepticism, but I hope there are real investigations into the matter. I have no doubt war crimes have been committed on both sides (you can’t name a modern war without war crimes btw), but on what grounds does that take the jump to genocide?
If the power dynamic were flipped, Hamas would’ve committed genocide against the Jews already. While I’m sure the IDF can do better (as can Hamas), how is Israel supposed to respond to a religious death cult that openly works towards their destruction and has a strategy designed to maximize civilian death to turn liberal values against liberals? I consider myself liberal fwiw, and am haunted by the videos coming out of Gaza (and Syria, and Ukraine, and the Congo, and war in general), but wish your political commentary contained the depth and nuance of your philosophical commentary or was left out altogether.
So, you consider Israel a liberal state? Your start logic was shaky enough-then you ignored it declared itself exclusively Jewish... No sense
@@mindphilo are you deleting my response or is that RUclips?
i didn't delete your comment; I saw it and responded.
❤
welcome
Just don't blame one nation every one is guilty
no ... children and innocents women from both sides aren't ...
God is a guide to darkness. So God has to the light. And light comes from the Sun. Therefore everything about God came from the Sun. Without the Sun nothing can be possible. Every religions are mostly based on the source of the light i,e.the Sun.
‘Gods’ are a construct of ignorant times when humans did not have the knowledge of Nature’s creation and put their own stories to it…varying over time and place. King Akhenaten was one of the first to believe in one ‘god’ over many. It was the Sun. This word cannot, in integrity, be used in a different way, to define the Life Force Energy that is ALL of our AweFully AMazeSing, SenseSationAll, MagicAll, PowerFull, wHOLeY Divine NATURE A-Parent…’inside/outside/upside/down’. 💝
(Sation…old word meaning to sow/plant)
This conception of God sounds no different than the stoics logos or the taoists tao or star wars force. An impersonal potent Force. Not like the personal potent force of the Jews which is utterly separate from creation is the creator of creation.
I think the bible says the same thing
From the tree if good abd evil thiu shall not eat..
Christ explaines this later in revelations
Because I am the sloga and the imegs
Beethoven
I think you are contradicting yourself.
If you believe you are part of God then there should not be any questions about free will or determinism!!
As Nisargadatta Maharaj said, “The pure subjectivity is neither an entity nor a non-entity, as all ideas of entity are within the consciousness.”
@Malibu-ku2to yeah greaet point, But contradicting myself! Well, I’m not literally part of Spinoza, so I guess I’m safe 😄
Spinoza may argues that everything, including our thoughts and actions, is part of God or Nature. This doesn’t eliminate the debate around free will or determinism-it reframes it. Spinoza would say that what we call 'free will' is just our awareness of desires, while we remain unaware of the external causes shaping them. So, we feel autonomous, but we are actually part of an infinite chain of cause and effect in Nature.
nisarrgadatta’s view on pure subjectivity adds another layer to this, by pointing out the illusory nature of the distinction between 'entity' and 'non-entity.' In his view i think, even the idea of an individual self making choices-whether free or determined-is itself an illusion.
and to To be honest, I haven’t explore deeply Nisargradatta’s work-just skimmed a few articles-but his ideas on subjectivity seem to fit nicely with this discussion. thank you
… like suffering of people of Gaza…😢