Critique Of Baruch Spinoza

2139 Words9 Pages
Critique of Baruch de Spinoza’s Tractatus Theologico-Politicus Treatise A great metaphysician and rationalist, Baruch de Spinoza’s work played a significant role in the 18th century Enlightenment and in contemporary Western thought. Spinoza viewed philosophy as “the pursuit of wisdom and of the knowledge of the right way of life,” that we can only achieve human happiness by discovering ‘true good,’ attainable only through knowledge (Hampshire, Spinoza, 13). Spinoza intertwines politics, ethics, epistemology, metaphysics and philosophy of mind together into his works in an unprecedented fashion. Such works include A Treatise on Religious and Political Philosophy, Ethics, Political Treatise, Treatise on the Improvement of Understanding, and Theological-Political Treatise, of which I will be critiquing and applying Spinoza’s rationale in this writing to the recent uprisings and revolutions of Tunisia and Egypt. In his Theologico-Political Treatise, Spinoza focuses mostly upon religion, his ultimate intent is to alter perception of Scripture and religion, that it is merely a human written document but of such importance that freedom of its study and speculation of is actually necessary for public peace and piety. But the most relevant aspect I find in this treatise is its aim in strengthening individual freedom and advocacy of democracy. Much like Hobbes’ view on natural rights, Spinoza derived that humans have the sovereign right and will to do whatever their environment allows them to do, but will act in accordance to their best interest. Unlike Hobbes, Spinoza argues this natural right of the individual is not determined by reason, but by desire and power (Spinoza, TTP, 201). He defends this by declaring that man is not “naturally conditioned” to act in accordance to reason, but on the contrary, born ignorant, and this behavior must be learned.
Open Document