Biographies:
Columbia—EJ:Spinoza, EJ:Ezra and Nehemiah, EJ:Jesus, EB:Jesus, Durant:Spinoza, EJ:Graetz, EJ:Wolfson,
                 EJ:Einstein,
Elwes—Spinoza, Colerus:Spinoza, EB:Spinoza RH— — 1D6 = ONE
Script—EJ:Hirsch, Runes:Spinoza,
WST—EJ:Wolf.
Pollock—Spinoza: His Life and Philosophy.
 
 
 

Columbia: Hobbes, Ibn Ezra heresies, Praise or Blame, Durant Tribute [12], G-D, idea of G-D, Idea of God,                                     Hampshire—conatus, Hampshire—libido and conatus,

Durant—Herbert Spencer's words that I can't help, but think they apply to Spinoza: Whoever hesitates to utter
                  that which he thinks the highest truth, lest it should be too much in advance of the time, may reassure
                  himself by  looking at his acts from an impersonal point of view.

Durant's Tribute—Spinoza biography, final causes, Excommunicated, Leviathan,

Dutch Condemn—Condemning the TTP, Opera Posthuma, ,

English Translation of Dutch—Elwes: Condemning the TTP, ,

Ezra and Nehemiah:EJ—

Jesus:EJ—Spinoza serves as bridge between both (Judaism and Christianity) and the coming (in time)
              Universal Religion.

Jesus:EB—Spinoza serves as bridge between both (Judaism and Christianity) and the coming (in time)
               Universal Religion.

Spinoza:EJ—Spinoza,

Graetz:EJ—Jewish historian and Bible scholar.  {Graetz's Censure of Spinoza.}
               Midrashic, Masoretic Text, Septuagint, Tishri,  

Wolfson:EJ—Historian of philosophy.

Einstein:EJ—Discoverer of the theory of relativity, and Nobel Prize winner.

Hampshire—Spinoza and Descartes: Cartesianism—construed not as a set of particular doctrines or propositions,
                 but as a whole vocabulary and a method of argument—dominated philosophical and scientific thought
                 in seventeenth-century Europe (though less in England than elsewhere),-as Aristotelianism, similarly
                 construed, had dominated Europe in previous centuries.

Hampshire—EXTENSION AND ITS MODES. Motion and Rest: Everything which exists in the Universe is to be
                 conceived as a 'modification' or particular differentiation of the unique all-inclusive substance, whose
                 nature is revealed solely under the two infinite attributes, Thought and Extension. But we can and must
                 distinguish the all-pervasive features of the Universe, which can be immediately deduced from the
                 nature of these attributes themselves, from those which cannot be so immediately deduced. 

Hampshire—Affectus—Emotion:  ... The word affectus, although it comes the nearest to the word
                 'emotion' in the familiar sense, represents the whole modification of the person, mental and physical.
                 The 'affection' is a passion (in Spinoza's technical sense) in so far as the cause of the modification or
                 'affection' does not lie within myself, and it is an 'action' or active emotion in so far as the cause does
                 lie within myself. 

Hampshire—Confused ideas to the free man's life of active emotion and adequate ideas must be achieved,
                  if at all, by a method in some respects not unlike the methods of modern psychology; the cure, or method of
                 salvation, consists in making the patient more self-conscious, and in making him  perceive the more or less
                 unconscious struggle within himself to preserve his own internal adjustment and balance; he must be
                 brought to realize that it is this continuous struggle which expresses itself in his pleasures and pains, desires
                 and aversions.  

Hampshire—Good & Bad; Perfect & Imperfect: Spinoza can allow never-the-less that the moral epithets 'good'
                 and 'bad' are popularly and intelligibly used in this quasi-objective sense; so far they have the same use
                 as words like 'pleasant' or 'admirable'; they indicate the appetites and repugnances of the user, or what
                 happen to be the tastes of most normal men. But it is important to notice that in this popular use the epithets
                 must not be interpreted as referring to the intrinsic properties of the things or persons called good or bad;
                 they refer rather to the constitution and reactions of the persons applying the epithets. 

Hampshire—Abstraction: ..., 'the intelligent individual's first aim must be to persuade others to be equally
                 intelligent in the pursuit of their own security; he has a direct interest in freeing others from the passive
                 emotions and from the blind superstitions which lead to war and to the suppression of free thought.
                 But in fact the enlightened and the free are always a minority, and men in general are guided by irrational
                 hopes and fears, and not by pure reason. 

Hampshire—Religious Faith and Philosophy: The dividing-line between religious faith and philosophical truth
                 was, after metaphysics itself, Spinoza's greatest interest; it was a problem which not only involved the whole
                 intellectual history of the Jewish people; it had also dominated his personal life and his own adjustment to
                 the society into which he was born. 

Hampshire—Purpose of the Theological-Political Treatise: In the Preface to the Theological-Political Treatise
                Spinoza declares the main purpose of the book to be the defense of freedom of opinion; he will show that
                public order is not only compatible with freedom of opinion, but that it is incompatible with anything else.
                The argument is a now classical liberal argument, and is still invoked today. 'If deeds only could be made
                the grounds of criminal charges, and words were always allowed to pass free, seditions would be divested of
                every semblance of justification, and would be separated from  mere controversies by a hard and fast line.'  

Hall—Teleological Argument: There remains solidly the option of not going down this path of teleologically,
                 arguing from the structure of the design to the structure of the designer or designers or the designer and
                 the designer's adversary. You don't have to go that way.

Various Biographies—
 
   

Home Page— Encyclopedia Britannica Online, Jewish Encyclopedia Online, Sacred Texts: KJV, JPS, Koran,
              Ism Book, Kemerling, Google, MSN Search, The Virtual Library, 1911 Encyclopedia, Tickle the Fancy,

JBY—Spinoza defined "sorrow, boredom, joy" with one definition. Answer.

JBY—Spinoza also defined "hate, indifference, love" with one definition. Answer.

JBY—Introduction to "A DEDICATION TO SPINOZA'S INSIGHTS": I stumbled upon Spinoza after I studied Calculus
              in college. Spinoza's definitions of sorrow, boredom, joy; hate, indifference, love, seemed to me to lend
              themselves to Calculus expression. The more I studied these equations the more I realized how important
              they were in understanding roller-coaster emotions and everyday relationships—you love not out of altruism,
              but out of self-interest. As I kept studying Spinoza,  I was really hooked when what happened to me is what
              Elwes thought happened to Spinoza.  

JBY—Purpose of "A DEDICATION TO SPINOZA'S INSIGHTS":
                          We all want Joy. 
                          We all want Love. 
                          We all want Peace-of-Mind. 
              To get them, a profound understanding of them helps. 
              Spinoza's insights help provide such understanding. 
              Your understanding minimizes your loss of Peace-of-Mind.  

Spinoza's Dictum—I have made a ceaseless effort not to ridicule,
              not to bewail, not to scorn human actions, but to understand them.

Suggestions—Do not read these Web Pages (and the electronic texts listed below) linearly as you would a
              novel, but rather follow all the links in turn. You will then be putting hypertexting to its fullest and best 
              advantage—the fuller discussion of  a thread. If you do not stick to one thread at a time, this Web Site will be
              very convoluted, confusing, and an annoying maze.

JBY WEB PAGES

SPINOZA  ELECTRONIC  TEXTS

Durant—Spinoza is not to be read, he is to be studied; you must approach him as you would approach Euclid,
              recognizing that in these brief two hundred pages a man has written down his lifetime's thought with stoic
              sculptory of everything superfluous. Do not think to find its core by running over it rapidly... Read the book not
              all at once but in small portions at many sittings. And having finished it, consider that you have but begun to
              understand it.

JBY—I am an eighty-three year old retired Structural Engineer who has for some sixty-odd years studied Spinoza.
 
Humbul Humanities Hub—"A Dedication to Spinoza's Insights—Joseph B. Yesselman's Home Page"—is a
              resource that investigates and participates in the philosophy of the seventeenth-century Dutch thinker
              Benedict de Spinoza (occasionally known as Baruch de Spinoza, or simply Benedict/Baruch Spinoza).
              The site's author is Joseph B. Yesselman, a retired structural engineer who has had a lifelong interest in the
              philosopher in question.

Glossary—holidays, Spinoza's Pantheism, Golden Rule, or else, salmon, Harbinger, ONE, Universal Religion,
              clearly and distinctly, confused, New wine in old  bottles, The Universal Religion, UN Analogous position,
              Sham, Theology, Constitution, Cash Value, Perpetuation-Emotion-Faith, Speculation, Scientific Method,
              religion, Idolatry, ibn Ezra, Organic, James's ONE, Breast, Cash Value: pedagogy, Study Constitution, 
              Love God, Knowledge of G-D—Link, know G-D—Lung, Highest good is to know God: WHY?, Garden of Eden,
              Law of Organisms, Heart and lungs, Catholic-Breast, adequate ideas, brother's keeper, Altruism,
              Specie fish, Nationhood--Symbols, Maimonides, Indivisible, Nationhood, anti-Semitism, anti-Semitism,
              Uzgalis - Hobbes—Spinoza shares with Hobbes a powerful negative analysis of popular religion and the
              view that individuals operate in their own self-interest. Posit and test hypothesis, Right Way of Living, 
              Praise and blame, species 'Man, fish, Synthesize, Posit, Religious Belief/Religious Faith, Paradigm shift, 
              Indivisible—Letter on the infinite, Immanent, Cause, Spinozism, Morality, Spinozism, Free-Choice, 
              better PcM—Whatever is, is, Passover, Holocaust and Dresden Firestorm, Sin, Pity, Spinozistic Hebrew, 
              Jewish Nationalism, Inseparable, World View, belief—hypothesis, Functionalism—Consciousness, 
              Kabbala, Mysticism, Buber's Mysticism, Altruism Does Not Exist—Dawkins:546, Pantheism,

JBY—EMOTION is a change in one's °PERPETUATION. Its intensity is proportional to the change:
              If the change is negative, it is SORROW.
              If the change is zero, it is BOREDOM.
              If the change is positive, it is JOY.

JBY—FAITH is belief that an external object will cause a change in one's °PERPETUATION. The intensity
             is proportional to the change.
             If the change to be caused is negative, it is HATE.
             If the change to be cause is zero, it is INDIFFERENCE.
             If the change to be cause is positive, it is LOVE.

ONE—Hear, O Israel, G-D our LORD is G-D the Only ONE:
              Foundation Rock for Jewish philosophy.
              Compare 1D6 - equivalent Foundation Rock for Spinoza's philosophy.
 
JBY—Organic: Scripture and Spinoza declare that G-D is ONE to establish that EVERYTHING is bound into one grand               ORGANIC interdependence; from this intuition, by deduction, "in working clothes", logically flows the Golden               Rule "love your neighbor..."  

JBY—Religion: Religion is an ever-evolving hypothesis designed to find PEACE-OF-MIND. As long as people have               non-understood wants, they will suffer loss of peace-of-mind. That is why religion, drugs, alcohol, opiates, etc.               persists throughout the world.

JBY—Idolatry: Idolatry is taking the infinite as finite. 
              Taking the finite as infinite is pantheism. 

Martin Buber—Mysticism: The unity which the ecstatic experiences when he has brought all his former multiplicity               into oneness is not a relative unity, bounded by the existence of other individuals. It is the absolute, unlimited               oneness which includes all others. .... 

JBY—Mysticism: .... 2. Imagine as you drive down a main arterial highway that you are part of the blood-traffic               —where each vehicle has its assigned task for the perpetuation of your society. When you stop at a red light,               feel you are a corpuscle of the blood stopping at a heart valve. FEEL the organic interdependence of the               Parts. .... 

Quantum Mechanics—The fundamental physical theory developed in the 1920s as a replacement for classical
              mechanics. In quantum mechanics waves {mind} and particles {body} are two aspects of the same underlying
              entity {substance}. The particle associated with a given wave is its quantum. Also, the states of bound systems
              like atoms or molecules {modes} occupy only certain distinct energy levels; the energy is said to be
              quantized. 

JBY—Religion: Religion is an ever-evolving hypothesis designed to find PEACE-OF-MIND.

Dimont—Constitution: The founding fathers and the American people had a steadfast belief in the {Hebrew Bible}.                The development of constitutional  law through the body of decisions by the Supreme Court has acted, in               a sense, like a Talmud in interpreting and clarifying the Constitution, and those decisions have come to               function in American  political  life  much  as: the Talmud has in Jewish life. 

Jammer—Spinozism: Rejecting the traditional theistic concept of God, Spinoza denied the existence of a cosmic               purpose on the grounds that all events in nature occur according to immutable laws of cause and effect. The               universe is governed by a mechanical or mathematical order and not according to purposeful or moral               intentions.

JBY—Idolatry: Idolatry is taking the infinite as finite.

JBY—Evolving Holidays:

                       PAGAN                                       JUDAISM                     CHRISTIANITY               UNIVERSAL RELIGION

          Pagan Winter Solstice Festival ------------> Hanukkah ------------------> Christmas-----------------> Nature Renewal Day

          Pagan Spring Festival -------------------------> Passover --------------------> Easter---------------------->  Man Renewal Day

          Pagan Free Time Festival --------------------> Shavuoth--------------------> Pentecost---------------->  United Nations Day

          Pagan Harvest Festival -------------------------> Sukkoth----------------------> Thanksgiving---------->  Thanksgiving

Shirley's—Linguistic play & Metaphors; This might be called its linguistic play and manipulation. Spinoza employs
               many of the same terms prevalent in traditional Jewish and Christian discourse, such as "G-D," "salvation,"
              "faith," "miracles," "divine law," "help of G-D," "election of G-D," etc., but he twists them and gives them new,
              unorthodox meanings that are compatible with his own philosophy.

James—Cash Value: He would seek the meaning of 'true' by examining how the idea functioned in our lives.  
              A belief was true, he said, if in the long run it worked for all of us, and guided us expeditiously through our
              semihospitable world.  

James's—Free-will: Free-will thus has no meaning unless it be a doctrine of relief. As such, it takes its place with
              other religious doctrines. Between them, they build up the old wastes and repair the former desolations. 

Disclaimer—I believe speculations and metaphysics, should be pursued; although at times covertly; at times
              overtly. Religious hypotheses and knowledge constantly evolve to elegant simplicity. It is just that my major
              interest is studying the implications of Spinoza's thought.

Quibble—Speculation (conjectural) consideration of a matter. A contradiction with the speculation (hypothesis) of
              a transcendent G-D: By positing that the universe is not part of G-D, G-D's attributes are limited; thus His Power
              is limited—a contradiction. 

Rabbinic Judaism—Talmud and Miracles: Rabbinic Judaism very rarely, if ever, concerns itself with speculative
              matters. It concerns itself with the study of the law and its observance; much as a lawyer does today. It posits
              G-D as an axiom and goes on from there with no further metaphysical discussion. A citizen accepts his
              constitution as an axiom and goes on from there. 

Chancellor Schorsch—Spinoza: For my father, Spinoza represented the fullest and finest expression of Judaism's               historic quest to understand the endless diversity of existence in monotheistic terms. On many a Shabbat I was               treated to a discourse that eluded the grasp of my inattentive mind. I remember only the stirring intensity of his               fascination. Spinoza provided a haven in which the rational bent  of my father's mind and the religious hunger               of his heart could both find comfort.  

Uzgalis—Hobbes' Leviathan: Spinoza shares with Hobbes a powerful negative analysis of popular religion and the                view  that individuals operate in their own self-interest. Spinoza, however, gives this last doctrine a               remarkable twist. 

JBY—Sin: The Hebrew word translated as 'sin' is khate, Strong:2399—a crime, sin, fault. The root of khate is             khaw-taw', Strong:2398—to miss, to err from the mark (speaking of an archer), to sin, to stumble. Implied in this             etymology is that there should be "no praise—no  blame" ever; crime and scarlet fever are in the same              category. ....

JBY—Charity, Pity: The Hebrew word which is often mis-translated as charity, mercy, pity, etc., is tsed-aw-kaw',               Strong:6666—rightness, justice, virtue, piety. The root of tsed-aw-kaw' is tsaw-dak', Strong:6663—upright, just,              straight, innocent, true, sincere; (the same root as for righteousness). Based on this etymology, it is what one              lung does when the other collapses; it does double-duty, not out of altruism, but for its very own survival. .... 

JBY—Charity, Pity: The Hebrew word which is often mis-translated as pity (compassion, love, is better) is rakh'-am,               Strong:7355—to  fondle, love, cherish, affection.  A related word is rekh'em, Strong:7358 —the womb              (cherishing the foetus). Based on this etymology, the compassion, forgiveness, and °LOVE we should feel for              each other is like that of a mother for the issue of her womb, perhaps varying in degree but not in kind; it  is  in               no way altruistic. ....    An 'I-thee' Relation.


Spinozistic Ideas: Eons, Din Medinah Din, Din Medinah Din, Ridley's Altruism, Religious language—
              Paradigm Shift, Uriel da Costa,  synthesis, evolving, I-Thou and I-It, I-Thou Buber, I-thee Buber, I-Thou Hillel,               Divisible for study purposes, PcM, PcM—Lose an Arm, PcM—Lose an Arm, PcM, Peace of Mind (PcM)
              overcome emotions, nationalism, Menorah, Leap of Faith, Quarantine, Craig, Theistic / Spinozistic-Theistic,            Duck or Rabbit, Slavery, What is Religion?, Real Religion, Hierachies, Love is need, love-loved, Gene & Meme,               Parasitism & Symbiosis,

Robinson—Perpetuation & Survival: Now, what's the ultimate motive? Ah, well, the ultimate motive is survival. Not               the ancient Greek eudaimonia, not eternal salvation—except in the sense of eternal salvation is ultimate               survival. On the earthly plane, it is corporeal survival, freedom from pain and suffering. What approximates or               typically leads to survival is that which promotes good feelings, and what puts a distance between life and its               survival is anything that causes pain and injury.

Robinson—Perpetuation & Emotion:
              II:E. Reality is physical reality, material reality. If we are to have a scientific understanding of man, then man                      must be accepted as a material entity. 
              II:F. Society, composed of such entities, is then understood as a complex system made up of (human) matter in                      motion.

Wikipedia—Meme: The term "meme" (rhymes with "theme"), coined by Richard Dawkins, first came into popular use               with the publication of his book The Selfish Gene in 1976. Dawkins based the word on a shortening of the Greek               "mimeme" (something imitated), making it sound similar to "gene". Dawkins used the term to refer to any               cultural entity, for example a song, an idea, {technology}, a religion which an observer might consider a               replicator.

Blackmore—Meme: To summarize, there is a memetic solution to the mystery of human language origins. Once               imitation evolved, something like two and a half or three million years ago, a second replicator, the meme,               was born. As people began to copy each other the highest-quality memes did the best—that is those with high               fidelity, fecundity, and longevity.

Blackmore—Evolution of Memes: .... Human brains and minds are a combined product of genes and memes. As               Dennett puts it—'a human mind is itself an artifact created when memes restructure a human brain in order to               make it a better habitat for memes'. .... 

Blackmore—Power and Beauty of Memes: .... We once thought that design required foresight and a plan, but we               now know that natural selection can build creatures that look as though they were built to plan when in fact               there was none. If we take memetics seriously there is no room for anyone or anything to jump into the               evolutionary process and stop it, direct it, or do anything to it. There is just the evolutionary process of genes               and memes playing itself endlessly out—and no one watching. 

JBY—Our real religion is our constitution: The  single most important hypothesis that people make for their               peace-of-mind is their constitution—government. Without it, there is no army,  no police,  no fire department,               no schools, no water  no garbage collection,  etc., etc., etc.  In truth, our real religion is our government—for it               brings us the major part of our peace-of-mind. 

Dennett—Our real religion is our constitution:  .... Unless somebody publishes a study that surprises us all, we               take for granted that the common lore we get from our elders and others is correct. And we are wise to do so;               we need huge amounts of common knowledge to guide our way through life, and there is no time to sort               through all of it, testing every item for soundness. And so, in a tribal society {us} in which "everyone knows"               that you need to sacrifice a goat {go to an obstretician} in order to have a healthy baby, you make sure that               you sacrifice a goat {go to an obstretician}. Better safe than sorry.

JBY—Hypothesis: 1. a provisional theory set forth to explain some class of phenomena (say, like gravity), either               accepted as a guide to future investigation (working hypothesis) or assumed for the sake of  argument and               testing for its cash value—example; all things are in G-D, therefore everything is organically interdependent;               you know then that you cannot harm one part without eventually harming yourself or your progeny.

Popkin—Spinoza dispensed with any appeal to the supernatural to account for the world and how it operates.
              His brilliant system developed a complete picture of the world based solely on definitions and axioms and
              sought to explain everything in terms of the attributes of a non-supernatural G-D.  

Durant—Individualistic Rebels: Most men are at heart individualistic rebels against law or custom: the social
              instincts are later and weaker than the individualistic, and need reinforcement; man is not "good by nature,"
              as Rousseau was so disastrously to suppose. But through association, if even merely in the family, sympathy
              comes, a feeling of kind, and at last of kindness. We like what is like us; "we pity not only a thing we have
              loved, but also one which we judge similar to ourselves"; out of this comes an "imitation of emotions," and
              finally some degree of conscience.

Durant—Natural and the moral order: All political philosophy, Spinoza thinks, must grow out of a distinction
              between the natural and the moral order—that is, between existence before, and existence after, the
              formation of organized societies. Spinoza supposes that men once lived in comparative isolation, without
              law or social organization; there were then, he says, no conceptions of right and wrong, justice or injustice;
              might and right were one.

Hall—Organic Interdependence: There's another motivational package in there, I think. This is subtler, but I think
              it's there—I want us to keep our eye on it—that is, in the context of the religious stories, and I think particularly
              of stories in the Judeo-Christian tradition (they're the ones I'm most familiar with), but I'll bet they're there in
              the Muslim tradition as well, I just don't know firsthand. I think of those stories that talk to us again and again
              and again about how we are all God's children, we are all brothers and sisters, that we are all part of a family,
              and I underscore "all—{in G-D}." {'in G-D' says that ALL things are organically interdependent.}

JBY Endnotes:

Russell—Good-Bad Emotions: RUSSELL: You see, I feel that some things are good. and that other things are bad.
              I love the things that are good, that I think are good, and I hate the things that I think are bad. I don't say that
              these things are good because they participate in the Divine goodness.   COPLESTON: Yes, but what's your
              justification for distinguishing between good and bad or how do you view the distinction between them?

Hall—A More Perfect Hypothesis: Now assume that we have two concepts identical in all respects save one: one of
              them has a counterpart in reality, the other does not. Given this, It is claimed that the designatum of the
              former concept is fuller (more complete and substantial) than that of the latter. The latter may be perfect and
              perfectly real "in intellectu," but the other one has all of that plus existence "in re." So, point three, an
              arguable assumption: to be perfect and real in-the-mind-and-in-the-world is greater than to be (merely) perfect
              and real in-the-mind-alone. 

Rosenberg—World views Synthesized: Now the word 'dialectical' has had many uses in philosophy, from Plato to
              Marx. What I mean by it is not unrelated to these historical roots. A pair of world views stand in what I call
              dialectical opposition just in case they are incompatible but nevertheless are both  tempting—there's an
              initial pull toward each of them; both pivotal—they serve as centers for ordering and regrouping families of
              beliefs; and both reformulable—they are expressible by a variety of different specific claims or theses.
              Consider, for example, what we might call the theistic and the non-theistic world views.

Thomas Kuhn—Duck or Rabbit: The subject of a gestalt demonstration knows that his perception has shifted               because he can make it shift back and forth repeatedly while he holds the same book or piece of paper in his               hands. Aware that nothing in his environment has changed, he directs his attention increasingly not to the               figure (duck or rabbit) {G-D or God} but to the lines of the paper he is looking at. ....

Stewart—World View: .... Yet there is still no doubt that the city in question means something very different to each
              of your friends; that the two saw very different things in their travels. Now imagine that your friends are named               Leibniz and Spinoza, and that instead of a particular city they are discussing the nature of the universe. The               question then is: Do they share the same philosophy? Or, in other words, is philosophy about what you see               {objective}, or the way you see it {subjective; what brings you Peace-of-Mind}? 

Hall—God's Worship and the Problem of Evil: What I want to start in on today is an argument to the effect that we
              can know that Divine existence does not occur. We can know that there is nothing in, of, behind, about, over
              the world reality that is deserving of worship. 

Galbraith—Economics and Religion: In consequence, among the poor, only religion, with its promise of a later
              munificence for those who endure privation with patience, had been competitive with economic
              circumstance in shaping social attitudes.

Wolfson—Dictates of Reason.: Man, however, is not left unprotected against his own emotions any more than
              he is left unprotected against the physical forces of nature. Reason, and the knowledge which springs from
              reason, is a means whereby man can not only master the adverse forces of nature but can also overcome
              the assaults of his own emotions.  

Langer—Aesthetics: More naturalistically inclined critics often mediate the comparison between the forms of
               music and those of feeling, by assuming that music exhibits patterns of excitation occurring in the nervous
               tissues.

Langer—Aesthetic Emotion: Aesthetics is the Peace-of-Mind brought by symbolized beauty.

Langer—Hypothesis: If and only if these crucial propositions do correspond to facts, a working hypothesis,
              is ranked as "truth," its premises as "natural laws".

Durant—Herbert Spencer's Opinion on the Evolution to One World: The growth of planets out of nebulae; the
              formation of oceans and mountains on the earth; the metabolism of elements by plants, and of animal
              tissues by men; the development of the heart in the embryo, and the fusion of bones after birth; the
              unification of sensations and memories into knowledge and thought, and of knowledge into science and
              philosophy; the development of families into clans and gentes and cities and states and alliances and the
              "federation of the world": 

Caro—The Constitution, Webster said, is the fundamental law of a people—of one people—not of states.
              "We the People of the United States made this Constitution." UN is in an Analogous position.

Ridley—Altruism: If you are nice to people because it makes you feel better, then your compassion is selfish,
              not selfless.

Durant—One World: All political philosophy, Spinoza thinks, must grow out of a distinction between the natural
              and the moral order—that is, between existence before, and existence after, the formation of organized
              societies. Spinoza supposes that men once lived in comparative isolation, without law or social organization;
              there were then, he says, no conceptions of right and wrong, justice or injustice; might and right were one. 

Lederman and Hills—Oil: Many of the challenges of paramount importance that are facing our civilization
              today {2005} revolve around the subject of energy. The reason for this is simple: energy is the primary
              commodity that we consume. Thus the causes of many wars and conflicts {such as Iraq} in which we find
              ourselves continually immersed have a basis in the need for an abundant and convenient form of energy.
              In modern times, this has been oil.

Mark Twain & Spinoza: Hard Problem, Self-determining, Wegner's Free Will, Spinoza-Descartes,
              Desolate Doctrine, Inflexible Master, Gospel of Self-Approval, Misleading Names, An unfaced truth,
              self-sacrifices, Outside influence, Exterior influence, NeoDarwinism, Meme, God Gene, no praise/no blame,
              Free Will, Free Choice, Damasio's cosmic religious feeling, Genome, Gene. Pineal Gland, Pineal Gland 1,

JBY Endnotes: 

Ridley—Free Choice: The reason the equation of determinism with fatalism is a fallacy is as follows. Suppose you are               ill, but you reason that there is no point in calling the doctor because either you will recover, or you won't: in               either case, a doctor is superfluous. But this overlooks the possibility that your recovery or lack thereof could               be caused by your calling the doctor, or failure to do so. It follows that determinism implies nothing about what               you can or cannot do. Determinism looks backwards to the causes of the present state, not forward to the               consequences. 

Dawkins—Machines Created by our Genes: .... The argument of this book is that we, and all other animals, are
              machines created by our genes. Like successful Chicago gangsters, our genes have survived, in some cases for
              millions of years, in a highly competitive world. This entitles us to expect certain qualities in our genes. I shall
              argue that a predominant quality to be expected in a successful gene is ruthless selfishness. ....

Dawkins—Brains and Computers: Brains may be regarded as analogous in function to computers. 
              Statements like this worry literal-minded critics. They are right, of course, that brains differ in many respects
              from computers. Their internal methods of working, for instance, happen to be very different from the
              particular kind of computers that our technology has developed. This in no way reduces the truth of my
              statement about their being analogous in function. Functionally, the brain plays precisely the role of on-board
              computer—data processing, pattern recognition, short-term and long-term data storage, operation
              coordination, and so on.

Dawkins—[4] Cultural Evolution: Examples of memes are tunes, ideas, catch-phrases, clothes fashions, ways of
              making pots or of building arches. Just as genes propagate themselves in the gene pool by leaping from body
              to body via sperms or eggs {hardware}, so memes propagate themselves in the meme pool by leaping from
              brain to brain via a process which, in the broad sense, can be called imitation {software}.

Dawkins—Genes and Memes: .... Any island, if completely isolated, would exhibit some evolutionary change in its               language as time went by, and hence some divergence from the languages of other islands. Islands that are               near each other obviously have a higher rate of word flow between them, via canoe, than islands that are far               from each other. Their languages also have a more recent common ancestor than the languages of islands               that are far apart. These phenomena, which explain the observed pattern of resemblances between near and               distant islands, are closely analogous to the facts about finches on different islands of the Galapagos               Archipelago which originally inspired Charles Darwin. Genes island-hop in the bodies of birds, just as words               island-hop in canoes.  

Dawkins—Altuism: What is so special about humans that we have managed to overcome our antisocial instincts and               build roads that we all share? Oh, there is so much. No other species comes remotely close to a welfare state,               to an organisation that takes care of the old, that looks after the sick and the orphaned, that gives to charity.               On the face of it these things present a challenge to Darwinism , but this is not the place to go into that. We               have governments, police, taxation, public works to which we all subscribe whether we like it or not. ....

Dennett—Computer of Sorts: .... It turns out that the way to imagine this is to think of the brain as a computer of sorts.               The concepts of computer science provide the crutches of imagination we need if we are to stumble across the               terra incognita between our phenomenology as we know it by "introspection" and our brains as science               reveals them to us. By thinking of our brains as information-processing systems we can gradually dispel the fog               and pick our way across the great divide, discovering how it might be that our brains produce all the               phenomena. 

Robinson—Consciousness: There's a famous brief treatise by James on the question "Does consciousness exist?"               And, of course, the answer James serves up is "yes and no." It depends on what you mean by consciousness.

              Mind, however, is not going to be treated as some sort of Cartesian substance or entity. On James's account,               "consciousness" is not an entity, but a process. This is not to depreciate consciousness. Rather, it is a process               not only as real as anything else {a verb}, .... 

Sexton—Computer of Sorts: Just as a computer disk is essentially a long series of data split into different files, so a               single DNA molecule may have many functional genes encoded along its length. Unlike the binary system of               computers, however, in which every 'bit' of data is represented by a 0 or a 1, DNA uses four different chemical               compounds, called nucleotides. These are usually written A, T, C and G, using the first letters of their chemical               names. If you 'read' the sequence on a computer disk, you may get '10001001110', whereas a DNA sequence               would look like 'ATTCGATTCG'.

Ridley—Structure of DNA: .... they, {Watson and Crick,} had made possibly the greatest scientific discovery of all time,               the structure of DNA. Not even Archimedes leaping from his bath had been granted greater reason to boast, as               Francis Crick did in the Eagle pub on 28 February 1953, 'We've discovered the secret of life.' James Watson               was mortified; he still feared that they might have made a mistake. 

Dawkins—Electronic and Chemical Storage Mediums: ....The particular polymers used by living cells are called               polynucleotides. There are two main families of polynucleotides in living cells, called DNA and RNA for short.               Both are chains of small molecules called nucleotides. Both DNA and RNA are heterogeneous chains, with four               different kinds of nucleotides. This, of course, is where the opportunity for information storage lies. Instead of               just the two states 1 and 0, the information technology of living cells uses four states, which we may               conventionally represent as A, T, C and G. There is very little difference, in principle, between a two-state               binary information technology like ours, and a four-state information technology like that of the living cell. 

LeDoux—Functionalism: This is a philosophical position which proposes that mental functions (thinking,
              reasoning, planning, feeling are functional rather than physical states. When a person and a computer add 2
              to 5 and come up with 7, the similar outcome cannot be based on similar physical makeup, but instead must
              be due to a functional equivalence of the processes involved. As a result, it is possible to study mental
              processes using computer simulations. Cartoon.

Robinson—Functionalism and Problem Solving: Human beings just happen to be biological instantiations of              something that otherwise could be instantiated non-biologically; it can be instantiated by galenium sulfide              crystals, by popping diodes, printed circuits, all sorts of things made in the Silicon Valley and sold by Japanese              companies. ...  

             ... Now, one interesting consequence of this is that it's no longer necessary to reserve the domain of intelligent              life to the domain of brainy life, and so one thing I say that comes out of Turing's efforts here is what is              sometimes referred to as "machine functionalism within philosophy of mind."  

LeDoux—Neurons and Persons: A neuron (nerve cell) is composed of "dendrite—>cell—>axon". Neuron electrical              charges flow from dendrite to cell to axon terminal. An axon connects to the dendrite (or cell) of the next cell              down the line. Billions of axons connect to billions of dendrites.   Other analogies are the way knowledge is              propagated throughout the world;  hearing, reading, etc--->person--->talking, writing, etc. Thus billions of              people connect to billions of people.

LeDoux—Rom & Ram: In the spirit of viewing the mind in terms of computer-like operations, some
             cognitive scientists refer to executive functions as supervisory or operating system functions. A computer              operating system is responsible for controlling the flow of information processing, moving information from              permanent memory (ROM) to a central processing unit with active memory (RAM), scheduling tasks to be              preformed using the active memory, and so on. Similarly, executive functions are involved in the constant              updating of temporary memory, selecting which specialized systems to work with (pay attention to) at the              moment, and then moving relevant information into the workspace from long-storage by retrieving specific              memories or activating schemata pertinent to the immediate situation.

Dawkins—ROM & RAM: [2] DNA is ROM. It can be read millions of times over, but only written to once—when it is              first assembled at the birth of the cell in which it resides. The DNA in the cells of any individual is 'burned in',              and is never altered during that individual's lifetime, except by very rare random deterioration. It can be              copied, however. It is duplicated every time a cell divides. The pattern of A,T,C and G nucleotides is faithfully              copied into the DNA of each of the trillions of new cells that are made as a baby grows.

LeDoux—Brains and Other Parallel Computers: The brain is also sometimes described as a parallel computer,
             but it actually functions differently from an off-the-shelf connection machine.

Dennett—Language is Software: Looking at ourselves from the computer viewpoint, we cannot avoid seeing
             that natural language is our most important "programming language." This means that a vast portion of our              knowledge and activity is, for us, best communicated and understood in our natural language... One could say              that natural language was our first great original artifact and, since, as we increasingly realize, languages are              machines, so natural language, with our brains to run it, was our primal invention of the universal computer.

Wash. Post—Robot Rat: Scientists for the first time have managed to remotely direct the movements of rats by
              using implanted electrodes to control their behavior—in effect transforming living animal into robots.

Damasio—Robots: These distinctions are chronically glossed over whenever living organisms and intelligent
              machines, e.g., robots, are compared.

Robinson—Descartes' Error: 

I. Descartes drew a sharp distinction between himself as a thinking thing—res cogitans—and as an extended    thing—res extensa—drawing criticism from the likes of Thomas Hobbes and Pierre Gassendi. 

A. Both would surely have agreed with the broad scientific perspective according to which the physical     sciences are "complete." 

1. That term refers to the view that nothing in the domain of the "really real" falls outside the     realm of the "really physical," of physics. 
 
2. In other words, reality is not composed of two radically different kinds of stuff but of one kind     only—the physical. 

 Damasio—Descartes Error, Body and Mind Separation: This is Descartes' error: the abyssal separation
              between body and mind, between the sizable, dimensional, mechanically operated, infinitely divisible
              body stuff, on the one hand, and the unsizable, undimensioned, un-pushpullable, nondivisible mind stuff.

Stewart—Dualism - Descartes' Error: The mind-body problem manifested itself in other ways that kept                seventeenth-century thinkers awake at night. The strict Cartesian dualism left animals, for example, impaled                on the horns of dilemma: Do dogs, say, have minds like us or are they machines? To endow a dog with a                mind, according to Cartesian logic, was tantamount to giving it a place in heaven; so the Cartesians stuck to                the less theologically risky position that animals are indeed machines.

Robinson—Functionalism: .... What matters is that a given function is performed in such a manner as to yield               adaptive success. What matters not at all is the precise physical means by which the function is performed. If               the task is arithmetic, then, and only arithmetic, then a simple computer and a grade-school child will achieve               success with apparatus having nothing in common; one has a circuit board within which algorithms have been               programmed; the other has an evolved brain comprised chiefly of fat, protein, and water. 

Ryle—Descartes Error: One of the chief intellectual origins of what I have yet to prove to be the Cartesian
              category mistake seems to be this. When Galileo showed that his methods of scientific discovery were
              competent to provide a mechanical theory which should cover every occupant of space, Descartes found in
              himself two conflicting motives.

Ryle—No praise/no Blame: A second major crux points the same moral. Since, according to the doctrine minds
              belong to the same category as bodies and since bodies are rigidly governed by mechanical laws, it seemed
              to many theorists to follow that minds must be similarly governed by rigid non-mechanical laws.

Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy—Category mistake: the placing of an entity in the wrong category. In
              one of Ryle's examples, to place the activity of exhibiting team spirit in the same class with the activities of
              pitching, batting, and catching is to make a category mistake; exhibiting team spirit is not a special function
              like pitching or batting but instead a way those special functions are performed.

Tape 2—This second lecture moves from how the brain works on the level of a single neuron to how information
              moves across the synapse from one neuron to the next. 

Figure 2-4—Synaptic Transmission; communications between neurons: When a neural impulse reaches the end
              of an axon, tiny oval sacs, called synaptic vesicles, at the end of most axons release varying amounts of
              chemical substances called neurotransmitters. These substances travel across the synaptic space and affect
              the next neuron. 

Lederman and Hill—We living organisms are also engines. Our bodies are consuming energy to sustain our
              metabolism, ergo our lives. Here we measure energy in "food calories," usually designated with the upper-
              case  C, as in the word Calorie. A typical (lean) person in the United States eats about 2,000 Calories per day.
              ..... Therefore each of us, as living, functioning, metabolizing beings is approximately equivalent to a 100-watt
              light bulb in our metabolic power consumption.

Wash. Post—Consciousness: For centuries, philosophers have been bedeviled by this question: What makes
              people aware of themselves, and what gives rise to intention and free will? In other words, what
              is consciousness.

LeDoux—The Emotional Brain: However, it is not clear that consciousness is computable. Johnson-Laird reminds
             us that a computer simulation of the weather is not the same thing as rain or sunshine.

Mexico News—Music Appreciation: Sounds from the radio slip into a melody and suddenly your mind skips back
             to an evening of moonlight and romance and happy times. It happens to everybody, but until now
             science was unsure just why.

Wash. Post—Genome Project Completed: Thirteen years after its launch as the most ambitious biomedical
              research project ever undertaken, the Human Genome Project yesterday was declared officially
              complete, having revealed in exquisite detail the genetic blueprint underlying all life.

Ridley—Imagine that the genome is a book.
              There are twenty-three chapters, called CHROMOSOMES.
              Each chapter contains several thousand stories, called GENES.
              Each story is made up of paragraphs, called EXONS,
                    which are interrupted by advertisements called INTRONS.
              Each paragraph is made up of words, called CODONS.
              Each word is written in letters called BASES.  

JBY—Genome Dictionary.

Wash. Post—Genetic Error Causes Rapid-Aging Syndrome: Two teams of scientists reported yesterday that
              they had found a genetic mutation that causes children to die of old age, and said their research
              offered both a way to find a cure and insights into normal aging.

Wash. Post—Is the Capacity for Spirituality Determined by Brain Chemistry? Geneticist's Book "The God Gene"
              Is Disputed by Scientists, Embraced by Some Religious Leaders: Dean H. Hamer has received much criticism
              for the new book "The God Gene: How Faith is Hardwired Into Our Genes."

James—Religious Faith: Please observe, however, that I do not yet say that it is better  that the subconscious and
              non-rational should thus hold primacy in the religious realm. I confine myself to simply pointing out that they
              do so hold it as a matter of fact. 

Hall—Technological Advancement: Fundamental changes in dominant scientific {and religious} opinion are not
              the result of rational argument in the arena of demonstration, ..... 

Damasio—Pineal Gland: In its outline, the substance dualism view is the account that Descartes helped dignify
              and which is difficult to reconcile with his remarkable scientific achievements. Pineal gland. 

Damasio—'emotion' versus 'feelings': In the context of this book then, emotions are actions or movements, many
              of them public, visible to others as they occur in the face, in the voice, in specific behaviors. To be sure, some
              components of the emotion process are not visible to the naked eye but can be made "visible" with current
              scientific probes such as hormonal assays and electrophysiological wave patterns. Feelings, on the other hand,
              are always hidden, like all mental images necessarily are, unseen to anyone other than their rightful owner,
              the most private property of the organism in whose brain they occur.

NY Times—I Feel, Therefore I Am: In other words, feelings do not cause bodily symptoms but are caused by
              them: we do not tremble because we feel afraid; we feel afraid because we tremble.

Geiser—Why We Tremble: But Spinoza is objective: he starts from the world, and relfects it logistically in G-D's               infinite impersonal mind..... For Spinoza, we do not love G-D because it makes us happy; but rather, we               become happy because we love G-D. .... 

Harcourtbook Web Page—Damasio Interview:  Question: What value does understanding the difference
              between emotions and feelings have?  Answer: Understanding the difference between emotions and feelings
              removed a barrier to research on the nature of affect, and opened the way to elucidating the origin and
              content of feelings. 

LA Times—Looking for Spinoza: If in the midst of an intense fight with your beloved, you find yourself crying,
              then be aware that you owe your feelings to a reaction triggered within the medial and ventral prefrontal
              region of the brain. If with this knowledge you laugh in relief, the reaction comes from the medial and dorsal
              prefrontal region. Which is one way of reading the hard-nosed implications of "Looking for Spinoza," 

Mark Twain—Temperaments: Circumstances do the planning for us all, no doubt, by help of our
               temperaments. I see no great difference between a man and a watch, except that the man is
               conscious and the watch isn't, and the man tries to plan things and the watch doesn't.

Mark Twain—Outside influences: The outside influences are always pouring in upon us, and we are always
               obeying their orders and accepting their verdicts. The Smiths like the new play; the Jones go see it,
               and they copy the Smith verdict. Morals, religions, politics, get their following from surrounding
               influences and atmospheres, almost entirely; not from study, not from thinking. 

Ridley—Free Will, Determinism, Sin: .... Christianity has wrestled with these issues for two millennia and                theologians of other stripes for much longer. God, almost by definition, seems to deny free will or He would                not be omnipotent. Yet Christianity in particular has striven to preserve a concept of free will because, without                it, human beings cannot be held accountable for their actions. Without accountability, sin is a mockery and                Hell a damnable injustice from a just God. The modern Christian consensus is that God has implanted free will                in us, so that we have a choice of living virtuously or in sin. 
 

Calculus: Slums, Sin's of the fathers,
 
 
JBY—Table 1: The key to understanding PERPETUATION, EMOTION, and FAITH.

JBY—Mull: Mulling notes to Figures 1-6 helps to understand human actions.

JBY—Temperament: The concavity of the Reality Curve depends on the person's temperament.

LeDoux—James's fear of extinction of the human species.

Daly & Cobb—For the Common Good: Redirecting the Economy Toward Community, the Environment, and
               a Sustainable Future.

Understanding 'dS/dt = V' in Table 1—For those not familiar with Calculus.
 

Elwes: Faith Vs Philosophy, Philosophy/Religion, Worm, Christianity, contingent, contingent, wheel-slums,
              excommunication, Feared Wrath of Calvinists, Jews, God and History, Leibnitz Letter Page, Mob's passion,
              Voorburg, Immutable laws, Sham- Ens, Common Notions, Universal Notions, speaks in the fashion of men,
              Descartes Free Will, Aben and overt, Satan, G-D intoxicated, Universal Religion+1+2+3,
              Spinoza, the First Secular Jew? by Yirmiyahu Yovel, scientific-metaphysical, 
  
 
Elwes—ONE: [37] The biography of the philosopher {Spinoza} supplies us in some sort with the genesis of his               system. His youth had been passed in the study of Hebrew learning, of metaphysical speculations on the nature               of the Deity. He was then confronted with the scientific aspect of the world asrevealed  by Descartes. At first the               two visions seemed antagonistic, but, as he gazed, their outlines blended and commingled, he found himself               in the presence not of  two, but of ONE; the  universe unfolded itself to  him as the necessary result of the               Perfect and Eternal G-D.

Harsch—Image of Opera Posthuma Title Page: published in November 1677. 

Pollock—on Eternity of the Mind: We are now on the threshold of the singular and difficult part of Spinoza's
              exposition. The human mind," says Spinoza, "cannot be wholly destroyed with the body, but somewhat of it
              remains, which is eternal."

Wolfson—on Eternity of the Mind: Thus also those who conceive immortality to accrue to the acquired intellect
              by reason of its being in possession of knowledge explain eternal bliss to consist in the pleasure
              experienced by the immortal souls in their continuous possession of perfect knowledge.

Colerus—Of the last Sickness, and Death of Spinosa.

Feuer—The spirits of revolution and resignation, of defiance and acquiescence dwelled side by side in Spinoza's
               thought.

Bakker—In Spinoza's Rijnsburg: For three years, from 1660 to 1663, Baruch de Spinoza stayed there at
               the house of the surgeon Herman Hoomans after having been expelled from. the Sephardi community in
               Amsterdam.

Endeavor Academy—The Excommunication of Baruch de Spinoza: After the judgment of the Angels, and
                with that of the Saints, we excommunicate, expel and curse and damn Baruch de Espinoza with the consent
                of God, Blessed be He, and with the consent of all the Holy Congregation .....

JBY—Three reasons for the excommunication of Spinoza.

Graetz—Censure of Spinoza: Could the representatives of Judaism allow unreproved, in their immediate
                  neighborhood, the promulgation of the idea that Judaism is merely an antiquated error?

Britannica—Early life and career: But the Jewish religious leaders in Amsterdam were fearful that heresies
                   (which were no less anti-Christian than anti-Jewish) might give offense in a country that did not yet
                   regard the Jews as citizens.

Hirsch—HirPent: Lev 19:18: "....but thou shalt love thy neighbour's well-being as t'were thine own: I am G-D."

Simpson—The facts and the processes of evolution are neither ethical nor unethical.
                 The question of good or bad are simply irrelevant to this field, with the important reservation that
                 evolution has produced a species, Homo sapiens, concerned with ethics.

De Dijn—Cartesian-based anthropocentric views: If we take all this into account, it is not surprising that the
                 metaphysical doctrine of Ethics I so "unscientifically" results in a vigorous attack on traditional and
                 Cartesian-based anthropocentric views.

Woodbridge—Deus sive Natura: Historically considered, Spinoza confronted the philosophical attitude which
                 had found an energizing spokesman in Descartes, with a distillation of scholastic theory, transformed
                 into a theory of nature. With him {Spinoza}, to consider G-D was to consider Nature and to consider
                 Nature was to consider G-D.

Hawking—Realm of Science: When most people believed in an essentially static and unchanging universe,
                 the question of whether or not it had a beginning was really one of metaphysics or theology.

L73 - Albert Burgh to Spinoza—Albert Burgh announces his reception into the Romish Church, and exhorts
                Spinoza to follow his example. The whole of this very long letter is not given here, but only such parts as
                seemed most characteristic, or are alluded to in Spinoza's reply.

L74 - Spinoza To Albert Burgh—Spinoza laments the step taken by his pupil, and answers his arguments.

JBY—Spinoza and Christianity: This purpose made it imperative to propound in the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus
                 theory concerning Jesus, whom Spinoza designates Christus. Do: Find link.

JBY—TTP Introduction by Brad S. Gregory: Elwes's translation has long been regarded as insufficient by
                 Spinoza scholars both for its misleading renderings of the Latin as well as its expedient omissions

JBY—Shirley's Foreword to His Translation of the TTP: The only complete English translation is that of R.H.M.
                 Elwes, 1883, and reprinted many times. This was made from the Bruder text, since superseded; and although
                 admirable in many respects, it contains a number of inaccuracies.

JBY—See photocopy of Title Page first edition of the TTP with sub-title omitted by Elwes.

Letter 01 - Oldenburg to Spinoza—Oldenburg, after complimenting Spinoza, asks him to enter into a
                           Philosophical correspondence.

Letter 02 - Spinoza to Oldenburg—Spinoza defines "G-D", and "attribute" and sends definitions, axioms, and first
                           four propositions of Book I of Ethics. Some errors of Bacon and Descartes discussed.

Letter 03 - Oldenburg to Spinoza—Oldenburg propounds several questions concerning G-D and His existence,
                           thought, and the axioms of Ethics I. He also informs Spinoza of a philosophical society, and promises
                           to send Boyle's book.

Letter 04 - Spinoza to Oldenburg—Spinoza answers some of Oldenburg's questions and doubts, but has not time
                           to reply to all, as he is just setting out for Amsterdam.

Letter 05 - Oldenburg to Spinoza—Oldenburg sends Boyle's book, and laments that Spinoza has not been able to
                          answer all his doubts.

Letter06 - Spinoza to Oldenburg—This letter refers to a question from Oldenburg in Letter  05 about the nexus by
                           which things depend on the first  cause.

Wolf—Common Notions: "Common Notions" is here used as the equivalent of what Oldenburg called
                 "indemonstrable Principles," that is, ultimate assumptions or axioms. It was the Stoics who first brought into
                 vogue the idea of common notions. These were held to be ideas implanted in all human beings by the
                 Universal Spirit, and therefore true.

Letter 15 - Spinoza to Oldenburg—Spinoza writes to his friend concerning the reasons which lead us to believe,
                           that "every part of nature agrees with the whole, and is associated with all other parts." He also makes
                           a few remarks about Huyghens. (This is the famous Letter of the Worm.)

Letter 19 - Spinoza to Oldenburg—Spinoza relates his journey to Amsterdam for the purpose of publishing his
                           Ethics; he was deterred by the dissuasions of theologians and Cartesians. He hopes that Oldenburg
                           will inform him of some of the objections to the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus, made by learned men,
                           so that they may be answered in notes.

Letter 20 - Oldenburg to Spinoza—Response to previous Letter 19.

Letter 21 - Spinoza to Oldenburg—Response to previous Letter 20.

Letter 22 - Oldenburg to Spinoza—Response to previous Letter 21.
                           Oldenburg wishes to be enlightened concerning the doctrine of fatalism, of which Spinoza has been
                           accused. He discourses on man's limited intelligence and on the incarnation of the Son of God.

Letter 23 - Spinoza to Oldenburg—Response to previous Letter 22.
                           Spinoza expounds to Oldenburg his views on fate and necessity, discriminates between miracles and
                           ignorance, takes the resurrection of Christ as spiritual, and deprecates attributing to the sacred writers
                           Western modes of speech.

Letter 24 - Oldenburg to Spinoza—Response to previous Letter 23.
                           Oldenburg returns to the questions of universal necessity, of miracles, and of the literal and
                           allegorical interpretation of Scripture.

Letter 25 - Spinoza to Oldenburg—Response to previous Letter 24.
                           Spinoza again treats of fatalism. He repeats that he accepts Christ's passion, death, and burial literally,
                           but His resurrection spiritually.

Letter25A - Oldenburg to Spinoza—Response to previous Letter 25.
                           Oldenburg adduces certain further objections against Spinoza's doctrine of necessity and miracles,
                           and exposes the inconsistency of a partial allegorization of Scripture.

Letter 42 - Spinoza to I. B.—Concerning the best method, by which we may safely arrive at the knowledge
                           of things.

Letter 49 - Spinoza to Isaac Orobio—A defense of the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus. 33

Shirley—Determinism: Oldenburg is interpreting Spinoza as a fatalist rather than as a determinist.

Nadler—Complaining that you are Clay: No one, he (Spinoza) argues can complain against G-D—that is, against
              the necessity of Nature—for having given him the character and nature he has received.

De Dijn—Clay: Even when we succeed in transcending our ordinary lives of passive emotions, we realize that we
              still are nothing but expressions of G-D's power. When this truth hits us, and when we accept
              it—accepting ourselves as being like "the clay in the hand of the potter''—we can come to a kind of
              religious experience. scientific-metaphysical,

Shirley—Freedom: Spinoza constantly inveighs against the confusion between external coercion and internal
              necessity. The libertarian notion of a freedom of indifference makes freedom into random activity or caprice.

JBY—The sins of the fathers: For I the Lord your G-D am an jealous G-D, visiting the guilt of the parents upon the
             children, upon the third and upon the fourth generations of those who hate Me; but showing kindness to the
             thousandth generation of those who love Me and keep My commandments.

JBY—Faith versus Philosophy: Oldenburg's defense of Christianity would not stand-up in a court, but that does not
             matter.

JBY—Clay: Like the clay in the hand of the potter –
             he expands it at will and contracts it at will –

JBY—Man is a Robot: The chief difference between a man and a robot is that a man endeavours to
             perpetuate itself, has an ego, and reproduces itself.
 
 

Dialectical Logic: Pineal Gland , esse est percipi, causal, wheel- slums , Technological, Hobbes-Uzgalis,  

Einstein Quotes—SLAVERY: Insofar as we may at all claim that slavery has been abolished today,
              we owe its abolition to the practical consequences of science. 
 
Philosophers Series—Einstein's Reply to Criticisms: What I dislike in this kind of argumentation is the basic
              positivistic attitude, which from my point of view is untenable.  

Kemerling—Dictionary of Philosophical Terms and Names.
            Thoemmes Press—Biographical and Bibliographical Database.  

Robinson—Dialectical Materialism: Marx and Engels dismissed the idealism, declaring Hegel to be "standing on his               head," and accepting for themselves the duty to place Hegel's feet back on terra firma. One begins by               abandoning that whole field of absolute egos and absolute ideas and attaching oneself to a dialectical               materialism in which the events of the social and political world are brought about by factors that are, at base,               not transcendent, but economic. Economic forces are not the sole determinants of social dynamics and               individual behavior, but they are the dominant forces. As biological entities, people are motivated, from the               first, by the needs of the body—not by philosophical or moral abstractions, but by the creature-needs that arise               from their very materiality. 

Rand—The Virtue of Selfishness: The title of this book may evoke the kind of question that I hear once in a
              while: "Why do you use the word 'selfishness' to denote virtuous qualities of character, when that word
              antagonizes so many people to whom it does not mean the things you mean?"

Branden—The Virtue of Selfishness: Those who assert that "everyone is selfish" commonly intend their statement
               as an expression of cynicism and contempt. But the truth is that their statement pays mankind a
               compliment it does not deserve. 

Britannica—Self-Interest: The first of these contrasts with Hobbes is Spinoza's attitude toward natural desires. As
              has been noted, Hobbes took self-interested desire for pleasure as an unchangeable fact about human
              nature and proceeded to build a moral and political system to cope with it. Spinoza did just the
              opposite. He saw natural desires as a form of bondage. We do not choose to have them of our own will.
              Our will cannot be free if it is subject to forces outside itself. Thus our real interests lie not in satisfying
              these desires but in transforming them by the application of reason. 

Feuer—Determinism: Among them no doubt, was the fact that the new method offered the hope of guidance
               in forming a social order in which human liberty and happiness would be achieved. Determinism was, as we
               have seen a guide to "the advantage of common society," "to the welfare of our social existence." It was the
               basis on which a science of psychology could be constructed to alleviate men's anxieties; it provided the
               foundation for social science.

Galbraith—Socialism: The failure in material performance was partly an accident of history. Perhaps it was
               the misfortune of socialism that it was first tried in Russia. Managing Russians may be even more difficult
               than managing Frenchmen. 

JBY—Organic: The intent of these paragraphs is to inculcate Spinoza's intuition—G-D (the organic interdependence
               of parts).
 

TEI:Ferguson-Subjective terms. created, uncreated, logical method, Foundation: 1D6 = ONE, WHY?, simple ideas,
              Clear and Distinct, Clear and distinct, Amy Howell, Examples: Joy, Love, Pre-ordainment, Meditation,
              Root of the matter, Martin Buber, Technology, Root Sources, Stone, Clear and distinct, Amy Howell,

Weinpahl—Correction of Understanding: The little work's revolutionary character hinges here on the small matter
              of the definite article: "the." When we understand BdS it is understanding that is to be emended, not the
              understanding or some faculty of the mind.

Curley—Emendation of the Intellect: The translation of this title is disputed. The Latin for the main title is Tractatus
              de Intellectus Emendatione, the Dutch Handeling van de Verbetering van't Verstant. Joachim (2, 1) argued that
              no English term could reproduce the exact implications of the Latin, but recommended "Purification of the
              Intellect" as rightly suggesting a project of restoring the intellect to its "natural perfection, by eliminating
              from it . . . ideas which are not its own but have come to it from an external source." 

Parkinson—Correction of the Intellect: The title of this work poses a problem. In the course of the treatise,
              Spinoza identifies the intellect with the truth, speaking of 'truth, or, the intellect' [68]. That being so,
              the intellect can hardly be corrected. Spinoza's treatise is rather an attempt to give guidance to the
              person who wants to think properly, by distinguishing between the intellect, which provides us with
              understanding, and inferior kinds of thought, which do not.

Parkinson—Paragraph Numbers: The Treatise on the Correction of the Intellect is printed in Spinoza's
              posthumous works as one piece of continuous prose. However, there are clear divisions within the
              work, and for the reader's convenience I distinguish these by means of sub-headings, placed within               
              square brackets to indicate that they are editorial additions. 

JBY—essentia formalis, essentia objectiva: Objectivus generally corresponds to the modern "subjective,''
              formalis to the modern "objective.''

Shirley—essentia formalis, essentia objectiva: These are difficult terms not only to translate but to understand.

Parkinson—essentia formalis, essentia objectiva: Spinoza is here using the scholastic terminology.

De Dijn—Anti-anthropomorphic: For Spinoza, real certainty seems connected with a kind of knowledge
              that not just provides unshakable scientific evidence but also transforms one's  life.

De Dijn—Peace of Mind, Salvation, Purpose: This coming into one's own will give real peace of mind.

Ferguson—Subjective terms: In TEI:[12], Spinoza reiterates the subjective nature of "good" and "bad"
              and says that the same applies to "perfect" and "imperfect".

L62 - Spinoza to Tschirnhausen—Spinoza gives his opinions on Liberty and necessity.

L64 - Spinoza to Tschirnhausen:—The difference between a true and an adequate idea is merely extrinsic, &c.

Dijn—Method in a Nutshell: Method in a Nutshell: What then is method itself? It is reflexive knowledge.

Parkinson—Our philosophy: Spinoza intended the Treatise to be the first part of a two-part work.

Parkinson—Why I have not: I  follow most editors in supplying the word 'non' here. Gebhardt argues for the
              retention of the original text, but his arguments are not  convincing.

Shirley—Fiction and fictitious idea: The reader needs to be warned that these terms are not really
              adequate to Spinoza's meaning, but I can devise no better.

De Dijn—Fiction is limited by fiction: Anticipating Freud, Spinoza tries to show that the life of dreaming,
              especially in the form of fictitious ideas, is not creative but rather is fundamentally passive.

De Dijn—Clear and distinct: Rousset repeats here the Cartesian definition of clearness and distinctness
              (from the Principes 1:45). "I call clear [the idea] that is present and manifest to an attentive mind"
              and "distinct that which is so precise and different from all the others that it comprehends in itself
              only what manifestly appears to everybody considering it in the proper way."

Amy Howell—Clear is defined as recognizable, present to the mind, and when the idea we have includes
              its essence. Distinct simply refers to the ability to separate the idea from other ideas or objects that
              surround it, and if nothing contradictory to the essence of the object is included in the idea.

Bombardi—How the Rationalists Construe "Clear and Distinct Ideas": Spinoza has a more active notion of ideas
              in general (they are for the most part coextensive with judgments, and are therefore not so much things
              the  mind has as things the mind does); he rejects the cartesian tendency to think of ideas as maps
              or pictures of objects.

De Dijn—What constitutes the reality of truth: In our reflection upon some given true idea, we discover
               what constitutes real intellectual thinking: the formation of objective essences, with their intrinsic
               characteristic of truth.

Curley—Primary Elements: Gueroult identifies the "first elements of the whole of Nature," which constitute the
                source and origin of Nature, with the attributes that constitute G-D or substance. I agree (Curley 3, 42) and
                infer that G-D is not to be identified with the whole of Nature, but only with Natura  naturans.       


E1: Good and bad—E1:Endnote AP:47, Cause in Itself, Conceived through itself, a posteriori, prejudices, Garden
                of Eden, idea of G-D, G-D's Will, Your Definition—Ens, Pious Name, Untenable, Term G-d, G-D is indifferent,
                Fatalistic, Fetus, Foetus, Skin, Motive, Simply Posit, Einstein—No Purpose in Nature, sanctuary of ignorance,
                refuge of ignorance, Simply Posit, Compelled, No ends / Only one purpose, Purpose, Mysticism, Humbly,
                Being - Popkin:71, Being, 1P33—chain, James' Bear, Albert Schweizer:79—Mysticism
 

Def. VI.—By G-D, I mean a Being absolutely infinite—that is, a substance consisting in infinite attributes, of which
                each expresses eternal and infinite essentiality: Compare ONE—equivalent foundation stone for Jewish 
                philosophy. 

Albert Schweizer {Edited by removing all Christological references. Spinozism takes divisive individual Religions                 and changes them to a Universal Religion.}—Mysticism: ....The important thing is that the idea is now alive in                 the common consciousness of those who have been prepared to receive it by its manifestation in sensible                 form, takes such complete possession, that for them the unity of {G-D} enters into the common consciousness                 and the "moments" reproduce themselves in them in a spiritual fashion." 

Stewart—Things Happen Necessarily: Spinoza deduces many things from his concept of G-D, but one in particilar                 deserves mention for its central role in subsequent controversies. In Spinoza's world, everything that                 happens, happens necessarily. One of the most notorious propositions of the Ethics is: "Things could not have                 been produced by G-D in any manner or in any order different from that which in fact exists."

Jammer—Einstein and Religion: Einstein never ceased to believe that there ought to exist an unified field heory. This                 belief may well have been rooted in his Spinozistic conviction in the unity of nature: "G-D is One, hence in                 the nature of things only one subtance is given. Spinoza taught that nature is divine and G-D is One, and the                 most fundamental maxim of Judaism, the "Shma' Israel." 

Einstein—Freedom: What I'm really interested in is whether G-D could have made the world in a different way;
               that if, whether the necessity of logical simplicity leaves any freedom at all.

Parkinson—Definitions: Spinoza's definitions are of the kind now commonly called 'stipulative'; that is, they tell
               the reader how Spinoza proposes to use certain words. 

De Dijn—Unified Nature: Spinoza does not feel compelled to argue for the presence of this idea in us:
               does not everybody accept this notion of G-D? 

Parkinson—Immanent: In the phrase, 'or, that of which' the word 'or' renders the Latin  'sive'; this may
               be called the 'alternative or', and rendered more clearly as 'or, in other words' cause of itself, 
               logical, inseparable. 

Wolfson—Talmud: "It was, however, generally agreed that attributes could not be taken in a sense which would
                imply plurality in the divine essence or a similarity between G-D and His creatures. It was therefore 
                commonly recognized that attributes are not to be taken in their literal sense. The Talmudic saying that
                "the Torah speaks according to the language of men" is quoted in this connection by the mediaeval
                Jewish philosophers. 

The Jewish Virtual Library—Talmud and Miracles: The spirit of the Talmudic process is expressed in a tale in
               tractate Baba Meziah. Rabbi Eliezer, a proponent of unchanging tradition—"a well-lined cistern that doesn't
               lose a drop," as his teacher characterized him—was engaged in a legal disputation with his colleagues. "He
               brought all the reasons in the world," but the majority would not accept his view. Said Rabbi Eliezer, "If the
               law is as I hold it to be, let this tree prove it," and the tree uprooted itself a hundred amma, but they said,
               "Proof cannot be brought from a tree."

Wienpahl—Being: Spinoza's "Grammar of the Hebrew Language" calls attention to another fact about that
               language which is of surpassing importance for understanding Spinoza. This is that all the words in the
               language (with a few exceptions made by later grammarians) were originally verbs. Thus all the words
               whether or not they are still used as verbs contain the verbal idea. 

Robinson—Being: There is a science which investigates being as being and attributes which belong to this in virtue                 of its own nature. This is not the same as any of the so-called special sciences, for none of these treats                 universaly of being as being. 

Wolfson—Immanent continued: The first ten propositions of the Ethics, which precede Spinoza's proofs of the
                existence of G-D, are a challenge to mediaeval philosophers. The starting point is the definition of G-D,
                placed by Spinoza near the beginning of his work, which, as we have already shown, is an exact
                reproduction of a definition found in a standard work of a popular mediaeval Jewish philosopher.
                Spinoza seems to address his imaginary opponents as follows: All you mediaevals, to whatever school
                of thought you may belong, have builded your philosophies on the conception of a God epitomized by
                you in a formal definition which contains four characteristic expressions. 

De Dijn—Real Definition: As Gueroult has rightly pointed out (Gueroult 1968, 38, 67.)," the central and only real
                definition of Ethics I is Definition 6, the definition of the object investigated in Ethics I, "De Deo." All the
                other definitions are of innate categories, which express fundamental properties of the only two sorts of
                objective essences of things that are conceivable. We discover this idea of G-D in us as the idea of the first
                ultimate cause, which everybody calls "the absolutely infinite Being." 

Wolfson—Evolution of Philosophy/Religion: As a skeleton framework to hold together and to unify
                the fragmentary pieces of the visible universe, this scheme of Spinoza is to be regarded as one of the
                stages, an advanced stage, to be sure, in the long development of similar schemes since man began to
                distinguish between the visible and the invisible and to discern behind phenomenal sporadic changes a
                certain unity and a certain causal connection.

De Dijn—G-D's Nature and Properties: The definitions and axioms of Ethics 1 serve as a basis to elucidate one
                "real" definition (Ethics I, Def. 6) and to draw conclusions from it that will be important for the rest of our
                investigation.

Parkinson—Free: As will become clear from the later propositions: this definition of freedom is of great
                importance in Spinoza's moral philosophy. freedom, necessity, constraint.

Parkinson—Eternity: In effect, eternity is necessary existence - or perhaps, it would be better to say, a certain
               feature of necessary existence. Such existence, Spinoza  says, cannot be explained in temporal terms,
               just as the truth that the interior angles of a triangle are equal to two right angles is a timeless truth. In
               short, the eternal is not the everlasting; it is the timeless."

Wolfson—Transcendent: Starting, therefore, with his own premise that G-D acts by necessity, he argues against
              the mediaevals that if God's nature be essentially different from the nature of the world, He could not be the
              cause of the world, for "if two things have nothing in common with one another, one cannot be the cause of
              the other." 

Hall—Symmetrical and Reciprocal Relation; Transcendent God or Immanent G-D:
              I. The general characteristics of relevance determine its use in everyday contexts.
                  A. Relevance and irrelevance are two-place, symmetrical, and reciprocal relations.
                      1. If X is relevant to Y, then Y is relevant to X
                      2. If Y is not relevant to X, then X is not relevant to Y.

Hall—Transcendence: Transcendence3 is the "transcendence of otherness." The only place in which this is commonly               said to be exemplified is in the "great gulf(s) fixed" between humans and God or between bodies and minds. 

Parkinson—True Idea: This axiom concerning the nature of truth may seem clear and simple, but in fact it is
              neither. Spinoza does not explain what he means by 'idea' in this axiom; this is not done until 2Def3. 

Damasio—Body, Mind, and Spinoza: This is the time to return to Spinoza and to consider the possible meaning
              of what he wrote on body and mind. Whatever interpretation we favor for the pronouncements he made
              on the issue, we can be certain Spinoza was changing the perspective he inherited from Descartes when
              he said, in The Ethics, Part I, that thought and extension, while distinguishable, are nonetheless attributes
              of the same substance, G-D or Nature.

Parkinson—Free Cause: Spinoza emphasizes that G-D's 'free causality' is not the ability to do things that he does
              not in fact do. (It becomes clear later, E1:35, that whatever G-D can do, G-D does.) G-D's freedom lies
              in the fact that, in his actions, G-D is self-determined."

Parkinson—Scholastic distinction: When Spinoza speaks of the 'formal essence' of something, he means the
              essence of that thing as it is in itself. On the other hand, to say that something exists ‘objectively in G-D's
              intellect' is to say (a) that its existence is mental and (b) that it is representative of something.

Shirley—Idea of G-D: The term 'idea of G-D' is ONE of the more difficult phrases in Spinoza's philosophical
              vocabulary, and it has occasioned a variety of interpretations amongst Spinoza's commentators.

JBY—Idolatry: The Cash Value the above is to be aware that your ideas (concerning any mode of any
             attribute—thought or extension) are subjective, finite—subject to error.

Yovel—2nd & 3rd Kind of Knowledge: The second kind of knowledge gives me only a partial account of reality.
             It draws the law-like ways in which transitive causes produce their effects in an endless chain. Thereby it
             serves as an adequate explication of 1P28, but not of the crucial 1P16. What it lacks, and the third kind of
             knowledge supplies, is the grasp of things according to their particular essences as they immanently issue
             from G-D. It is through part 5 of the Ethics that the student comes back again to part 1 and understands it in its
             true and deeper light.

JBY—Immediate: "Immediate" would be the (infinite) "proximate cause" of say—circulation in an organism.  The
             (finite) "remote cause" would be say—blood circulation, sap circulation in a leaf, and traffic circulation in
             a city.

Parkinson—Determinism: A clear statement of Spinoza's determinism. The phrase 'determined by the necessity
              of the divine nature' is particularly important. Spinoza's G-D is not a being who lays down, of his own
              free will, a plan which in some way determines everything that is to happen.

Parkinson—Nature: In speaking of 'active and passive nature' (nature Naturans and nature naturata) Spinoza
              is employing Scholastic terms which were used in Dutch text-books of his own epoch.

JBY—Conceived through itself: A cow gives suck to its calf; I conceive of the cow by saying "she needs a calf to
             give suck to; likewise I conceive of the calf by saying its needs the mother cow to give it suck. But if I say
             they are both a part (mode) of ONE organism, I conceive the ONE "only through itself."
             Popkin:80—Conceived through itself:

JBY—Analogy: Active (natura Naturans): analogous to the Person; past, present, and future; including forebearers
             and descendents, (infinite). Passive (natura naturata): analogous to the body, as at present (finite).

JBY—Intellect: Though thought is an attribute of G-D, and he is a thinking thing (2P1), he has neither intellect, nor
             will, desire nor love."

Parkinson—Contingent: In his note (E1:33,Note 1), Spinoza emphasizes that contingency is not a feature of the
              objective universe. To call a thing contingent—to say that it just happens to exist, or not to exist, or to
              have the nature that it has and not some other nature—is simply to indicate a deficiency in one's 
              own knowledge.

Parkinson—Prejudice: "The term 'prejudices' occurs often in this Appendix. Spinoza has to explain, how its that
              many people fail to grasp what is, to him, perfectly self-evident.

Einstein—No Purpose in Nature: I have never imputed to Nature a purpose or a goal, or anything that could be
              understood as anthropomorphic. What I see in Nature is a magnificent structure that we can comprehend
              only very imperfectly, and that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of humility. This is a genuinely
              religious feeling that has nothing to do with mysticism.


E2: Imagination, Reason, Intuition, Data Base, Col:Bk. 32—affectus, particular thing, E2:Bk.XV:27490—axiom,
               E2:Bk.XV:278111 & 112—Conatus: Spinoza's philosophy on man, Fourth Number, E2:Bk.XV:27597—True Idea,
               Pineal gland, picture on tablet, Einstein's cosmic religious feeling, Damasio's cosmic religious feeling
 
JBY NOTES:

Cosmides & Tooby—Mind / Body: Realizing that the function of the brain is information-processing has allowed              cognitive scientists to resolve (at least one version of) the mind/body problem. For cognitive scientists, brain              and mind are terms that refer to the same system, which can be described in two complementary ways—either              in terms of its physical properties (the brain), or in terms of its {unconscious and conscious}              information-processing operation (the mind). The physical organization of the brain evolved because that              physical organization brought about certain information-processing relationships—ones that were adaptive. 

De Dijn—On Man: Spinoza is not interested in the furthering of the new science as such. His purpose is the
             development of knowledge in the service of a specific aim: salvation. 

Wolfson—Analogy, Man and State: Had Spinoza written his Ethics after the manner of rabbis and Scholastics he
             would have started the Second Part with a statement somewhat as follows: Part II. Chapter 1. Wherein we
             shall discuss the nature of the human mind and its relation to body, showing that in man, the microcosm,
             mind and body, are related to each other after the analogy of the relation between thought and extension
             in G-D, the macrocosm, blessed be He."
 
JBY—Analogies to help understand G-D: I am as a G-d to my heart, lung, etc.—all parts of my body and ownings. If              they are all integrated (organically interdependent); I am well, even if individual cells of the parts of my body              are dying and new ones constantly being re-born. I have no emotions concerning the life and death of the cells;              but if the parts are not lntegrated I am sick and unhappy. .... 

Wolfson—Spinoza's Daring: To his predecessors God was thought only, without any admixture of materiality, or
             extension, as Spinoza prefers to call it. To Spinoza G-D is both extension and thought.

Jammer—Einstein and Religion: In 1930, Einstein was invited by the New York Times to contribute an essay on his              conception of the relation between science and religion. In this article, entitled "Religion and Science,                "Einstein used, apparently for the first time, the term "cosmic religious feeling" to describe the emotional state              that one experiences when one recognizes the "futility of human desires and the sublimity and marvelous              order which reveals itself both in nature and in world of thought."

Durant—Mind and Body: Neither is mind material, answers Spinoza, nor is matter mental; neither is the
              brain-process the cause, nor is it the effect, of thought; nor are the two processes independent and
              parallel. For there are not two processes, and there are not two entities; there is but one process, seen
              now inwardly as thought, and now outwardly as motion; there is but one entity, seen now inwardly as
              mind, now outwardly as matter, but in reality an inextricable mixture and unity of both. Mind and body do
              not act upon each other, because they are not other, they are one.

Wolfson—Inseparability: This must be considered the essential point in Spinoza's theory of the mind—its
              inseparability from the body. It runs counter to the entire trend of history down to his time.

Wolfson—Inadequate Knowledge: But let us work out these Propositions 2P24-32 in detail. To begin with, he says,
              the knowledge of the component parts of the human body is not adequate knowledge, that is to say, it is
              not a knowledge which is self-evident and clearly and distinctly understood, for all that the mind knows
              about them is their behavior, but not their nature; and their behavior, being the result of a complicated
              system of causes, cannot cannot be immediately known with clearness and distinctness. In fact, one must
              understand the entire order of Nature before one is able to understand the working of the component parts of
              the human body.

Wolfson—Mind's Limited Freedom: Furthermore, inasmuch as our thinking is a mode of G-D's attribute of thought,
              it follows, in Proposition XXXIII, that "in ideas there is nothing positive on account of which they are called
              false." What Spinoza is trying to deny by this proposition is the assumption that the mind has a certain
              freedom to conceive ideas arbitrarily. To assume this would be analogous to the assumption that the body
              has a certain freedom to act arbitrarily.

Wegner—Illusion of Free Will: The mind creates this continuous illusion; it really doesn't know what causes its own               actions. Whatever empirical will there is rumbling along in the engine room—an actual relation between               thought and action—might in fact be totally inscrutable to the driver of the machine (the mind). ....

Wolfson—2nd & 3rd Knowledge Difference: In conclusion Spinoza tries to show the difference between our
              knowledge of the common notions, which belongs to the second kind of knowledge, and our knowledge of
              G-D, which belongs to the third kind of knowledge. 

Parkinson—Transcendental Terms:  The 'transcendental' terms are so called because they transcend even the
              categories (traditionally: substance, quantity, quality, relation, place, time, posture, possession, activity,
              passivity), which were regarded as the highest, in the sense of being the widest, genera.

Shirley—Imagine: There is a wider, though closely allied meaning that Spinoza gives to "imaginatio". When 
              these images, whose mental counterparts are ideas, are activated, we are said to imagine (imaginari), 
              and the process is called "imagination" (imaginatio). Imagination is opposed to intellect, just as image is 
              opposed to idea. It is because the common conception of G-D is through imagination rather than through 
              intellect that the multitude is prone to think of G-D in an anthropomorphic way.

Robinson—Intuition: ... Let's just say that what Kant is referring to is a necessary precondition for something else to               come about. He refers to the pure intuitions as being —a priori, prior to any and every experience. So the a               priori, pure intuitions of time and space become the necessary preconditions for there to be experiences of just               the sort required by Hume's theory. Now, remember, a priori here is not just a matter of "prior in time." It is that               conceptually, logically, something must be for something else to take place. The concept of causation is not               simply a habit of the mind, then, based upon certain common experiences. The concept of causation must be               grounded in something more fundamental, and grounded in that which experience itself could not possibly               convey . You get the point. "Grounded in" as distinct from "arising from." 

Parkinson—Fourth Number: What Spinoza says about the third kind of knowledge, scientia intuitiva, is notoriously
              obscure, and scholars differ widely in their interpretations. However, the example of the discovery of a
              fourth proportional is of great help here.  

Parkinson—True Idea: At first sight, this proposition might seem to be false. It seems obvious that one can form a
              true judgment about something - e.g. that a certain team will win a certain match - and yet not know that
              the team will win. However, it emerges that Spinoza is not using the term 'true' in this way.

Parkinson—Conatus: This proposition which applies to absolutely all things, is central to Spinoza's philosophy of               man. The phrase 'in so far as it is in itself' (quantum in se est) is important. Spinoza is well aware of the fact               that some beings appear to be self-destructive, but his point is that such self-destruction does not come from               the beings as they are in themselves; it comes from some external cause. 

Jammer—Free Will: Einstein's insistence on an all-pervading unrestricted causal determinism was the main reason               that, in general, the clergy, regardless of denomination, rejected the philosophy of cosmic religion. For the               supreme reign of such a determinism denies not only the possibility of a divine interference—even if the               existence of a personal God were admitted—it also deprives man of his free will and, as a consequence, of his               moral responsibility.

Durant—Intellect and will: After so trying to melt away the distinction between body and mind, Spinoza goes on to               reduce to a question of degree the difference between intellect and will. There are no "faculties" in the mind,               no separate entities called intellect or will, much less imagination or memory; the mind is not an agency that               deals with ideas, but it is the ideas themselves in their process and concatenation.

JBY—Spinoza's Doctrine. Why does Spinoza make a big thing about his doctrine that there is no free-will and
             also equating will with understanding? The hypothesis that there is no free will, Spinoza's Doctrine, has
             great "cash value"—if I posit that my actions are based on my genes and experience (hardware and software),
             I will educate and train myself to be the best I can.

Stace—The Problem of Free Will: Thus we see that moral responsibility is not only consistent with determinism
              but requires it. The assumption on which punishment is based is that human behavior is causally determined.
              If pain could not be a cause of truth-telling-there would be no justification at all for punishing lies. 

JBY—All Things are Computerized Machines: Even a stone has a "computer"—its inertia.

Wolfson—Free Will: The fourth objection against free will is the famous argument from an ass perishing of
              hunger and thirst when placed at an equal distance from food and drink,

JBY—Peace-of-Mind: PcM is possible even if there is sorrow as long as you know 'why', or by a leap-of-faith.
             losing an arm, D2:2.20,
 

E3: Lines, planes, and solids, Triangles, kingdom within a kingdom, better and follow the worse, affectus,
          call good, Rubicon, Biology of Emotions—ANS, Neurotransmitters, Unconsciously, Mind/Body Functionalism,
          James' Bear, Sequence,
 
JBY Endnotes:

Wolfson—Summaries of Parts III, IV, and V:
              first, the emotions (Part III);                                    [a]  nature [Part III] and
              second, the so-called virtues and vices (Part IV);   [b]  strength [Part IV] of the emotions and
              third, final bliss (Part V).                                         [c]  the power of the mind over them [Part V]

Stewart—Free Will: Leibniz, of course, responds that the monads' ignorance of their own true nature requires that               they act as if they were free. That is, God knows Caesar will cross the Rubicon, but when Caesar stands on the               banks of the river, he faces a momentous decision. Thus, Caesar, like the rest of us, has free will. The best               reason to think that Leibniz's argument in favor of free will is as bad as it sounds is that it is indistinguishable               from Spinoza's argument against free will. .... 

De Dijn—Conatus: It is clear that Spinoza conceives conatus as a positive force, a force by which a thing, once it
              is functioning, continues to function, unless something opposes it (we are reminded here of the principle
              of inertia in Galileo's physics).

Wolfson—Conatus: Thus "conatus," "will," "appetite," and "desire" are all taken by Spinoza as related  terms.
              They all have in common, according to him, the general meaning of a striving for self-preservation and
              of a pursuance of the means to further the attainment of this self-preservation.

Wolfson—Virtue: But, argues Spinoza, if the freedom of the will is denied, the difference between emotions and
              virtues automatically disappears. Human actions, like human emotions, are inevitably determined by
              causes. They are not to be detested or scoffed at, but rather to be understood "by the universal laws and
              rules of nature"

Wolfson—Conatus: But increase and diminution imply a certain standard of measurement. The standard of
              measurement, he says, is the conatus (effort, impulse) by which each  thing  endeavors to persevere in
              its own being. This endeavor for self-preservation is the first law of human nature and is the basis of all
              our emotions.

Wolfson—Passive and Active Emotions: As active emotions, desire is the effort to self-preservation by the dictates
              of reason, and pleasure is the enjoyment experienced from the mind's contemplation of itself whenever
              it conceives a true or adequate idea.

Hampshire—Freedom and Morality: It is one of the first principles of his logic, throughout nominalistic, that
            definitions of the abstract, general terms of ordinary language cannot yield genuine knowledge; it is nonsense
            to talk of the essence of jealousy common to your jealousy and to mine.

JBY—I set down to highmindedness: Perhaps high-mindedness (enlightenedness) but it is not altruistic. He creates
             a better society of which, he as part, benefits.

Durant—The Story of Civilization-Spinoza: All our desires aim at pleasure or the avoidance of pain. "Pleasure is
            man's transition from a lesser state of perfection [completion, fulfillment].'' Pleasure accompanies any
            experience or feeling that enhances the bodily-mental processes of activity and self-advancement?

LeDoux—James' Bear: Why do we run away if we notice that we are in danger? Because we are afraid of what
             will happen if we don't. This obvious (and incorrect) answer to a seemingly trivial question has been the
             central concern of a century-old debate about the nature of our emotions. James proposed that the obvious
             answer, that we run because we are afraid, was wrong, and instead argued that we are afraid because we run.

JBY—Stimulus-to-feeling Sequence: 1. Stimulus: car bearing down on you—panic; you fall in love—elation.
              2. The mind instinctively, instantly, unconsciously, releases hormones: SNS, Adrenaline—for Sorrow; PNS,              Serotonin—for Pleasure. 3. The feelings (emotions) are the mind's reaction to these hormone flows in the body.              4. You run or you smile. 5. You are afraid—loss of peace-of-mind; you are serene—have peace-of-mind. 

Johnson and Delanney—The Biology of the Emotions The sympathetic and parasympathetic divisions of the              autonomic nervous system are: 
             (1) The sympathetic (SNS) division generally acts to arouse the body, preparing it for "fight or flight."
             (2) The parasympathetic (PSN) follows with messages to relax. .

Sapolsky—The Biology of the Emotions: This lecture examines the workings of the autonomic nervous system and its              subparts, the sympathetic nervous system and the parasympathetic nervous system. How the autonomic              nervous system regulates the organs of the body, how different levels of the brain activate the system, and how              the system is strengthened are also investigated. The lecture ends with a glimpse into ways that the autonomic              nervous system influences individual differences. 

Morris—Major neurotransmitters and their effects: Dopamine Inhibits wide range of behavior and emotions, including              pleasure. Implicated in schizophrenia and Parkinson's disease. 

Wegner—James' Bear and Free Will: The conclusion suggested by this research is that the experience of conscious              will kicks in at some point after  the brain has already started preparing for the action. Libet sums up these              observations by saying that "the initiation of the voluntary act appears to be an unconscious cerebral process.              Clearly, free will or free choice of whether to act now could not be the initiating agent, contrary to one widely              held view. .... 

LeDoux—Most basic emotions theorists assume that there are also nonbasic emotions that are the result of blends
             or mixes of the more basic ones. Izard, for example, describes anxiety as the combination of fear and two
             additional emotions, which can be either guilt, interest, shame, anger, or distress. Plutchik has one of the
             better developed theories of emotion mixes. He has a circle of emotions, analogous to a circle of colors in
             which mixing of elementary colors gives new ones.

Robinson—James' Bear, ANS, Sapolsky, Neurotransmitters: What's the sense in which passion should rule reason?              Well, the sense is a Darwinian sense. You're in a dark forest, and you hear some growling, roaring sound, and              out of the corner of your eye some large striped thing seems to be looming large. Now, you could sit there and              with all of the arts and sciences of logic start doing an essential analysis of the à priori and à posteriori              probabilities associated with entities like that actually turning out to be hungry tigers—or you could, in a              manner of speaking, run like the wind. 

JBY—Accompanied by the idea: Accompanied means being aware of the "organic" idea.

JBY—Confused ideas: A paraphrase of the Alcoholics Anonymous creed:
                                            G-D give me the courage to change what I can change.
                                            Give me the {understanding or} faith to accept what I cannot change.
                                            Give me the wisdom to know the difference.
  

E4: Damasio—Biological, contingent, Martyr Laws, abuse, Difference between Common & Universal Notions,
               Right Way of Life, Others, Completion, Complete,

JBY Endnotes:
 

Parkinson—On Human Servitude: Although this part is entitled "On Human Servitude", only a part of it is
              concerned with such servitude—i.e. the power that the passions have over us. The rest of Part IV is
              concerned to establish what a life of freedom would be, if we could live it.

Hampshire—Philosophical Background: 'I do not presume to have discovered the best philosophy', Spinoza
              wrote, 'but I know that I understand the true one.' Spinoza is the most ambitious and uncompromising
              of all modern philosophers, and it is partly for this reason that he is supremely worth studying.

De Dijn—On Human Bondage: Since Spinoza rejects the notion of a free will, his ethics is not one of
              responsibility or duty but one of freedom in the sense of self-realization. For him, notions of good
              and evil do not refer to what is good or evil in itself but to what is known to be the means to reach
              real freedom. 

De Dijn—On Salvation: Nevertheless, one could say (with Victor Goldschmidt) that the science of good and evil is
              part of the weakness and servitude of rational man. 

De Dijn—Summary of Part IV: If we are capable of rational as well as intuitive knowledge and of the active
              emotions related to them, why did Spinoza not simply go straight to the discussion of the relation between
              intuitive knowledge and  blessedness (Ethics V). The reason is clearly that we are not born free, that even
              rational people are living in the real world, which is not there for the purpose of passions and suffer all sorts of
              setbacks (IV, Ax. 1).

Wolfsons—Summary of Part IV: Wherein we shall discuss the nature of what is known among the philosophers
              as virtues and vices, for having discussed in Part III the nature of the emotions, we deem it proper to discuss
              after that the nature of virtue and vice. We shall divide this Part into two main sections.

Wolfson—Virtues-Power-Strength: In the religion upon which Spinoza was brought up the course of human
              conduct was plotted out for men by a Law which was held to be of divine origin. The expression of an arbitrary
              will of God, that Law was regarded as an imposition as well as a restraint upon the natural impulses of men.
              Obedience to it was virtue; disobedience was vice. As man was believed to be free to choose between
              obedience and disobedience, he was to be rewarded or punished in accordance with his actions. 

Stewart—G-D or Nature: In Part IV of the Ethics he tosses off an enigmatic phrase that has since come to stand for the               whole of his philosophy: "G-D, or Nature"—which really means: "G-D, or what amounts to the same thing,               Nature." On the basis of this daring intuition, Spinoza constructs something that looks very much like a new               form of religion—what should perhaps count as the first religion of the modern era (although it would also be               true to say that in some sense it was the revival of an ancient and long forgotten one). 

Shirley—Perfect and Imperfect: The Latin term 'perfectus' which is crucial in this Preface, can mean both 'perfect'
              and 'completed.' For Spinoza the emphasis here is upon completion: that which has been finished or
              accomplished is perfect; contrarily, that which is not yet completed is imperfect. Spinoza will go on to say that
              we eventually learn to make evaluative judgments on the basis of what we have come to take as completed
              specimens of things. The latter now become normative models for further comparison and valuation.

De Dijn—Good, Bad, and Conatus: In the preface of Ethics IV, Spinoza will repeat that rational people know that
              things are neither good nor bad in and of themselves, neither perfect nor imperfect, and that these notions do
              not express anything real. Yet even rational people continue to form the notion of an ideal person, and with it
              the related ideas of good and bad that express our true knowledge of what promotes or hinders the coming
              about of this ideal. Why is this? Knowledge about the truth of determinism does not eliminate one's striving to
              persist in one's own being, one's conatus.

Wolfson—Good and Bad: Spinoza has said that 'we deem a thing good because we endeavour, will, seek or
              desire it'. This may suggest that nothing is objectively good, and therefore that the term 'good' has no place in
              a rigorous  account of human nature, of the kind that Spinoza wishes to provide. In the Preface to Part IV this
              may seem to be emphasized, when Spinoza says that 'good' and 'bad' are relative terms—the same thing can
              be good for one person and bad for another.

Durant—The Story of Civilization - Spinoza: An emotion becomes a passion when, through our confused and
              inadequate ideas of its origin and significance, its external cause dictates our feeling and response, as in
              hatred, anger, or fear. "The mind is more or less subject to passions according as it has more or less adequate
              ideas.'' A man with poor powers of perception and thought is especially subject to passion; it is such a life that
              Spinoza describes in his classic Book IV, "Of Human Bondage."

De Dijn—Useful: Common morality, for the majority, should be based, as the Tractatus Theologico-Politico shows,
              on a purified Judeo-Christian religion, on the religious precepts of obedience, justice, and charity, and on
              nonsuperstitious forms of other commonly advocated virtues.

De Dijn—Theologians: Many highlight his rejection of pity, humility, and repentance and stress his anti-asceticism
              and his condemnation of a superstition-based aversion to pleasure.

Hall—Problem of Evil, Praise and Blame, Spinoza's Dictum: Let me explore, just for a moment, the interplay
              between the notion of necessity and the notion of responsibility. Let me do it at a very mundane, human kind
              of level. There's an interesting argument that goes on among psychologists over whether or not people are
              responsible for the things that they do.

Parkinson—Human Virtue: Spinoza has shown what the free man's life would be; but have we the power to live
              such a life? This is the concern of Part V, which establishes what human virtue can do.

Feuer—Therapy: What, then, is the technique of therapy which Spinoza proposes to those who are slaves to
              forces of which they are unconscious? Spinoza proposes that the unconscious determinants of our behavior
              should be brought into clear consciousness; when we know the causes of our irrational behavior, the irrational
              motives themselves lose their force, and we can then act rationally in accordance with our desires as we now
              clearly apprehend them.

Smith—Reason: When we understand the causes of our desire, we can become in a sense liberated from them.
              Reason, then, could be said to be a therapy for desire. Only by understanding the causes of our desire do we
              gain power over them. This power in turn enhances our sense of  freedom.

Damasio—The Foundation of Virtue - Conatus: I wrote early in this book that my return to Spinoza came almost
              by chance as I tried to check the accuracy of a quote I kept on a yellowed paper, a link to the Spinoza I had
              illuminating. But I had never paused to analyze it in detail until it traveled from my memory to the page I was
              working on. 

E5: in G-D, literal sense, G-D has no emotion, Spinoza's Daring—Whats New, Returning man's love - 5P17- 17:3c,
               Omnipresent, Scientific Method—Religion, Fence, fences, Virtue is its own reward, Durant:647[3]—Emotion,
            Durant:647[6]—Emotion, Fire of Reason, PcM, PcM, Spinoza's Glory Salvation, in G-D—Schechinah,
               Wolfson—Possible Fifth Daring, Parkinson—Power of Intuition, PcM—acquiescence of spirit,  

Durant—Concluding paragraphs: With this solemn and hopeful note the Ethics ends. Seldom has one book
              enclosed so much thought, and fathered so much commentary, while yet remaining so bloody
              battleground for hostile interpretations. 
 
Endnotes:


Pollock—As difficult as they are rare: These are the last words of Spinoza's Ethics; words of gravity but not of
              discouragement. In their literal sense they are not quite consistent with what he has said in a former
              proposition; for we have there read that it is not difficult to pursue the life of reason and freedom: and such a
              life must lead ere long, on Spinoza's principles, to wisdom and true  knowledge. Perhaps he contemplated a
              practical standard of righteous living and happiness attainable by ordinary men with a good will, and a higher
              kind of satisfaction accessible only by strenuous thinking and the habit of contemplative  science. Spinoza/Stoic.

Smith—As difficult as they are rare: The intellectual love of G-D cannot be imposed on others but must be
              practiced by each individual according to his or her own abilities. Spinoza's is a deeply private or solitary
              idea of the philosophic life, for which the requirements of political rule are inappropriate. As the prophet of
              the newly liberated self, Spinoza exhorts his readers to rely on their own powers of reason and judgment for
              the attainment of this ideal.

Feuer—As difficult as they are rare: But the free society for which Spinoza worked still remained a dream hidden
              somewhere in the infinite understanding of {G-D}. Perhaps Spinoza would now add: Until the multitude are
              free, and free men the multitude, men cannot know G-D or love Him.

Wolfson's Ending—With this the Ethics ends. But the philosophy of Spinoza does not end here. The religion
              of reason based upon individual and social virtue to which almost the entire Ethics is a sort of philosophic
              preamble would have been an effective instrument of education only for a new-born race of men placed
              under the tutelage of philosophers like Spinoza. But the world in which Spinoza wanted to make the
              practical lesson of his philosophy effective was an old world in which rooted institutions and beliefs held
              sway and truths were embodied in writings which were regarded as sacred.

Wolfson—Spinoza's Daring: Novelty in philosophy is often a matter of daring rather than of invention. In thought,
              as in nature, there is no creation from absolute nothing, nor are there any leaps. Often what appears to be
              new and original is nothing but the establishment of a long-envisaged truth by the intrepidity of some one
              who dared to face the consequences of his reasoning.

Wolfson—Summary of what is New in Spinoza: Four acts of daring in establishing long-envisaged principle
             of unity of Nature by pressing old arguments to their logical conclusion:  

(a) Attribution of extension to G-D,
(b) Denial of design and purpose in G-D,
(c) Insistence upon the inseparability of soul from body:
     analysis of Spinoza's theory of the soul,
(d) Elimination of freedom of the will from human actions. 

Wolfson—Possible Fifth Daring: Spinoza broke away from the traditional theology and started a new kind
              of theology and a new kind of rationalization. Had this breaking away from tradition been deliberately
              intended as such by Spinoza it could have been regarded as a fifth act of daring on his part. But Spinoza
              seems to have been under the delusion that he was merely spinning on the traditions of religion and that
              he was only seeing in a truer light that which others before him had seen, to use his own expression, "as
              if through a mist." The true nature of his new theology, however, was more accurately understood by
              others than by himself.

Wolfson—What is New in Spinoza? Continued: Spinoza is represented by those who knew him as having lived a
              life of retirement, though one not devoid of friendship. We should like to agree with his biographers that he
              was guided into this mode of life by his philosophy, but unfortunately recluses are not made by philosophies,
              not even by philosophies which, unlike the philosophy of Spinoza, preach retirement from life as an ideal
              virtue; they are made, rather, by the inhospitableness of the social environment and by the ineptitude of
              their own ndividual selves.

Wolfson—What is New in Spinoza? continued: These observations on what is new in Spinoza may be finally
              clinched by a formal summary, complete though brief, of the philosophy of Spinoza as it unfolds itself in the
              pages of this work. Beginning with the traditional definition of "substance," Spinoza applies that term only to
              G-D, designating all the other so-called substances as well as all the so-called accidents by the term "mode,"
              under which he includes the physical world as a whole and the variety of individual things of which it consists.

Dawkins—in G-D/Nature: .... When we are talking about all the animals that have ever lived, not just those that are               living now, evolution tells us there are lines of gradual continuity linking literally every species to every other.               When we are talking history, even apparently discontinuous modern species like sheep and dogs are linked,               via their common ancestor, in unbroken lines of smooth continuity. .... 

JBY—What is New in Spinoza? Added to G-D by JBY: I make explicit {G-d at <100% °P} that which is implicit in the
              word "all". Perhaps Spinoza was too reticent to go that far; he was  sufficiently condemned as far as he did go.

Langer—What is new in Spinoza: The ethical work of Spinoza, for instance, appears to me of the very highest
               significance, but what is valuable in such a work is not any metaphysical theory as to the nature of the
               world to which it may give rise, nor indeed anything that can be proved or disproved by argument. What is
               valuable is the {cash value} indication of some new way of feeling toward life and the world.

Pollock—Power of the understanding: When we examine in detail what Spinoza has to say 'of the power of the
              understanding, or of Man's freedom,' we find that it consists of two independent  parts. The first (Part V. of
              Ethics to Prop. 20) is a consistent following out of the psychological method we have already become familiar 
              with. The condition of mastering the emotions is shown to be a clear and distinct understanding of their nature
              and causes; and the love of G-D—which is nothing else than the rational contemplation of the order of the
              world. Spinoza, then, proceeds to lay before us a theory of intellectual immortality, or rather eternity, the
              perfection whereof consists in an intellectual love of G-D which is likewise eternal, and 'is part of the infinite
              love wherewith G-D loves himself.' This exposition, which takes up the fifth Part of the Ethics from Prop. 21
              onwards, presents great difficulties.

De Dijn—On Human Freedom: The question remaining at the end of book 4 was, Can we go beyond the stage of
              ethical struggle, the stage of knowledge of good and evil, of trying to live up to the model of the free human
              being, with all the fluctuations and contradictions that go with it? A positive answer to these questions is given
              in book 5, "the remaining Part of the Ethics."

Deleuze—Of the Power of Understanding or of Human Freedom: There is in this respect no difference between
              the Ethics and the Correction of the Understanding. The object of Method is again the final end of
              Philosophy. Part Five of the Ethics describes this end not as the knowledge of some thing, but as the
              knowledge of our power of comprehension, of our understanding; from it are deduced the conditions of
              beatitude.

Wolfson—Fifth Part furthermore falls into three sections.

Parkinson—Free-will: Spinoza now launches into a long attack on Descartes's theory of mind-body relations.
              His reason for returning to the topic here, at the outset of his discussion of human freedom, is that he wants to
              emphasise that our physical actions are not free in the sense of being the physical effects of a mental act
              performed by a free will.

Wolfson—Not a Free Cause: We must bring ourselves to realize that no cause can be singled out as being solely
              responsible for whatever happens and that nothing happens but by the necessity of an infinite series of causes.

Wolfson—True Thoughts: While it is true that by definition love is caused by an "idea of an external cause," the
              idea of any particular cause which happens to evoke love is not essential to love itself, and the loss of that
              external cause, therefore, does not change the love into hatred and produce the fluctuations of the
              {peace of} mind out of the conflict of the two. The particular external cause in any experience of love is only
              accidental and can be replaced by some other cause, less troublesome {say the Love of G-D, the most
              immutable love}. We love and hate a person, he says elsewhere, because we think that he is the sole cause or
              the free cause of our pleasure or pain. The remedy for this, he adds now, is to be found in the knowledge that
              those we love or hate are neither the sole nor the free causes of pleasure or pain.

Wolfson—Fire of Our Reason: Finally, says Spinoza, all these remedies are more effective as preventive
              measures than as cures. In our moral economy as in the management of our worldly affairs we must always
              plan ahead. We must not allow ourselves to drift and to be caught unprepared. In fair weather we must
              prepare for rainy  days, and in time of peace of mind we must prepare for war on the emotions.

Parkinson—Right Way of Living: Spinoza here offers a remedy for the emotions which may be used by someone
              who does not have a 'perfect knowledge'—presumably, intuitive knowledge—of  them.

Pollock—Idea and Love of G-D: We are next introduced to the exercise of contemplative reason described as the
               love of G-D, which consists in the distinct understanding of one's own nature. There is no form or mode of
               knowledge which cannot be made to some extent clear and distinct; in other words, 'referred to the idea
               of G-D,' 5P11, since without G-D nothing exists or can be conceived.

JBY—Weak Analogy: Prop.18. No one can hate G-D. The analogy given in E5:Note10a is not completely
               applicable because G-D is infinite, C:4.4, and man is finite. Therefore we can speak of love or hate in man,
               but not in G-D.

JBY—Why Peace-of-Mind with Sorrow: The physical pain certainly persists; the mental pain can be mitigated if
              the mind is occupied with the understanding of why or by acceptance. Inevitably the limit of knowledge is
              reached—at that point there remains only a leap-of-faith that the understanding resides in the infinite intellect
              of G-D; and with that faith comes Peace-of-Mind. Any faith has great cash value.  Garden of Eden.

Parkinson—Duration of the Mind: This marks a transition in the argument. Spinoza says that he has concluded
              his account of what concerns 'this present life', and that he will now discuss what concerns 'the
              duration of the mind without relation to the body'. What follows (E5:XXI-XL:259) is an account of the
              eternity of the mind, and the 'intellectual love' of G-D.

Durant—Santayana on Duration of the Mind: The only immortality that will interest him is that which Spinoza
              describes. "He who lives in the ideal," says Santayana, "and leaves it expressed in society or in art enjoys a
              double immortality. The eternal has absorbed him while he lived, and when he is dead his influence brings
              others to the same absorption, making them, through that ideal identity with the best in him, reincarnations
              and perennial seats of all in him which he could rationally hope to rescue from destruction.

Curley—Duration of the Mind: The text is troublesome, partly, because it is difficult to see how Spinoza can,
             consistently with his general account of the of the relation of mind and body, conceive of the mind's having any
             kind of existence apart from the body, partly because here he ascribes duration to the mind, whereas he will
             soon argue that it (for the part of it which exists without the body) is eternal.

Safire—Bertrand Russell on immortality: To be happy in this world, especially when youth is past, it is necessary to               feel oneself not merely an isolated individual whose day will soon be over, but part of the stream of life               flowing on from the first germ to the remote and unknown future. 

De Dijn—Duration of the Mind: If the first part of (V, P. 1-20) is the object controversy, this is even more the case
              with the second part (V, P. 21-end). Here Spinoza discusses the eternity of the human mind as characterized by
             intuitive knowledge and the intellectual love of  G-D. Such a mind is eternal (V, P.31-33) and can be considered
             "without relation to the Body's existence" as "an eternal mode of  thinking" (V, P. 40, Sch.).

Cambridge—Duration of the Mind: A human being whose self-preservation mechanism is driven or distorted by
              external forces is said to be in bondage to the passions; in contrast, one who successfully pursues only what
              is truly advantageous, in consequence of genuine understanding of where that advantage properly lies, is free.
Hertz—Memorial Service: But God will redeem my soul from the grasp of the grave: for he will receive me.  My
              flesh and my heart faileth: but God is the strength of my heart and my portion for ever. And the dust returneth
              to the earth as it was, but the spirit returneth unto God who gave it.

Singer—Intellectual Love of G-D: It comforted Dr. Fischelson to think that although he was only a weak, puny man,
              a changing mode of the absolutely infinite Substance, he was nevertheless a part of the cosmos, made of the
              same matter as the celestial bodies; to the extent that he was a part of the Godhead, he knew he could not be
              destroyed. In such moments, Dr. Fischelson experienced the Amor Del Intellectualis  which is, according to the
              philosopher of Amsterdam, the highest perfection of the mind.

JBY—In G-D: Since Spinoza's G-D, unlike the traditional conception of Him, is material, the old conventional               analogies saying that all things are in G-D ceases to be a mere pious expression of praise and glorification and               assumes a meaning which corresponds exactly to the literal meaning of its words. ....

Einstein—Cosmic Religious: It is very difficult to elucidate this [cosmic religious] feeling to anyone who is entirely
              without it.... The religious geniuses of all ages have been distinguished by this kind of religious feeling, which
              knows no dogma and no God conceived in man's image;

Dennett—Cosmic Religious: The Tree of Life is neither perfect nor infinite in space or time, but it is actual, and if it is               not Anselm's "Being greater than which nothing can be conceived" it is surely a being that is greater than               anything any of us will ever conceive of in detail worthy of its detail. Is something sacred? Yes, say I with               Nietzsche. I could not pray to it, but I can stand in affirmation of its magnificence. The world is sacred. 

Durant—The Story of Civilization - Spinoza: Nevertheless Spinoza seems at times to flutter around the idea of
              immortality. His theory of mind and body as two aspects of the same reality committed him in logic to view
              their death as simultaneous. He affirms this quite clearly: "The present existence of the mind, and its power
              of imagining, are taken away as soon as the mind ceases to affirm the present existence of the body"
              {5P34:1-141}; and again: "The mind can imagine nothing, nor can it recollect anything that is past, except
              while the body exists. In Book V some hazy distinctions appear. "If we look at the common opinion of men,
              we shall see that they are indeed conscious of the eternity of their minds, but they confound this with duration,
              and attribute it to imagination and memory, which they believe remain after death'' {5P34n-143}. But insofar as
              the human mind conceives things in their eternal relationships as part of the universal and unchanging system
              of natural law, it sees things as in G-D; it becomes to that extent part of the divine eternal mind, and is eternal.

Parkinson—Duration of the Mind continued: Spinoza has explained (E2:Def.V:82) that by  'duration' he means
             'indefinite continuation of existing', but he does not explain in the Ethics what he means by 'time'. However, the
             phrase 'defined by time' (see also E5:XXIII(4)n:259) suggests that he is using the term as he did in earlier
             works—namely, to refer to a measure of duration.

Curley—Duration of the Mind continued: This sentence illustrates well the kind of difficulty characteristic of this
             part of the Ethics. On the face of it, Spinoza implies that we (who are here identified with parts of our minds;
             (cf. IIP13C) not only will exist after the body, but did exist before it.

Clark—Einstein Time: It is this "plain truth about the universe" which suggests the third and most important
             change that relativity has produced. Its epistemological implications are still hotly debated. Nevertheless, it is
             indisputable that while the theory has enabled man to describe his position in the universe with  greater
             accuracy it has also thrown into higher relief the limitations of his own personal experiences.

Feuer—Schechinah: It is especially significant that the magistrates cross-examined the unfortunate Koerbagh
             concerning the doctrine of the Schechinah, with which they tried to link Spinoza's name. The doctrine of the
             Schechinah is the Talmud's closest approximation to a theory of the immanence of G-D in the world.
             Schechinah literally means "dwelling"; its use connotes the presence of G-D everywhere.

McLuhan—Understanding Media: Edward T. Hall in "The Silent Language" discusses how "Time Talks: American
             Accents," contrasting our time-sense with that of the Hopi Indians. Time for them is not a uniform succession or
             duration, but a pluralism of many kinds of things co-existing. "It is what happens when the corn matures or a
             sheep grows up....  It is the natural process that takes place while living substance acts out its life drama."
             Therefore, as many  kinds of time exist for them as there are kinds of life. This, also, is the kind of time-sense
             held by the modern physicist and scientist. They no longer try to contain events in time, but think of each thing
             as making its own time and its own space.

Hawking—Time: This might suggest that the so-called imaginary time is really the realtime, and that what we
             call real time is just a figment of our imaginations. In real time, the universe has a beginning and an end at
             singularities that form a boundary to space-time and at which the laws of science break down. So it is
             meaningless to ask: which is real, "real" or "imaginary" time? It is simply a matter of which is the more useful
             description.

Letter29—Spinoza to Lewis Meyer - Famous "Letter on the Infinite: Spinoza answers question on the infinite and
             in answering briefly explains the terms substance, mode, eternity, and duration.

Wolf—The Correspondence of Spinoza - Crescas: The argument in question relied on the impossibility of an
             infinite regression from effects to their causes, and thence inferred the existence of a First Cause. Crescas
             challenged the alleged impossibility of such an infinite regression, and suggested a sounder proof of God's
             existence.

JBY—Analogy-Worm: It has only a limited time of existence, but you existed before it came and will exist after it
             will have gone. Skin.

Parkinson—Intellectual Love of G-D: The 'intellectual love of G-D' is one of Spinoza's best known concepts.
             Although it is a form of love, and therefore an emotion, it is not a passion; rather, it is a form of pleasure which
             is related to us in so far as we act.

Stewart—Knowledge and Intellectual Love of G-D: The intellectual love of G-D is the same thing as the knowledge of              G-D contained in the first part of the Ethics . Spinoza identifies it as "the third kind of knowledge," or "intuition,"              in order to distinguish it from sense experience ("the first kind") and the reflective knowledge that arises from              the analysis of experience ("the second kind").

Parkinson—G-D Loves Himself: The statement that G-D loves himself may seem strange. Spinoza's unease is due
             to the fact that pleasure is a transition from a lesser to a greater perfection; and such a transition is impossible
             in the case of G-D, the supremely perfect being. Perhaps the love of G-D (whether the human mind's love for
             G-D, or G-D's love for himself: is best defined, not in terms of pleasure, but in terms of 'blessedness', which is
             not a transition to a greater state of perfection, but is perfection itself.

Deleuze—Blessedness: Beatitude, Curley follows earlier translators in rendering Spinoza's Latin term beatitudo
             as "blessedness," but the word sits rather uneasily with Deleuze's presentation of Spinoza (he remarks that
             "blessed" seems to me a very unfortunate translation of beatus").

Stewart—Immortality: At this point, where we reach the long sought union of man and G-D (or Nature), Spinoza goes              on to say, we achieve a kind of immortaliry . Contrary to what he seems to imply in his philosophy of mind,              Spinoza now contends that "the human mind cannot be absolutely destroyed with the body." The eternal part              of the mind, it turns out, is the "intellect"—the faculty with which we grasp the eternal truths of philosophy. 

Hirsch—Glory: Kaw-vode' designates spiritual weight. Applied to G-D, kaw-vode' is the impression, the trail which
             His intervention in earthly affairs leaves behind it, from which one gets an intimation of His Presence and
             His Greatness.

Parkinson—Self-contentment: He now makes it clear that the highest form of self-contentment that we can  have
             is intimately related to the intellectual love of G-D.

Wolfson—Immortality: Thus Spinoza has arrived at the conclusion that the state of immortality, by whatever
             name it is called, salvation, blessedness (beatitudo), liberty, or regeneration consists in the reciprocal love of
             G-D and man.

Parkinson—Power of Intuition: This is an important passage, which throws light on the relations between the
             second and third kinds of knowledge. Spinoza notes that he has proved in Part I that all things depend on G-D
             (the reference is probably to E1:XV:55) and adds that this proof is 'perfectly legitimate'. However, knowledge of
             this kind (i.e. the second kind of knowledge) 'does not affect the mind in the same manner'—as when the
             conclusion is reached by way of the third kind of knowledge.

Clark—Unending Stream: Einstein on Death.

De Dijn—Intellectual Love of G-D: Spinoza's concept of the ethical importance of a meditative yet detached
             self-knowledge relates him to older, ethical-religious traditions. However, what is typical for Spinoza is that the
             meditative self-knowledge is closely linked to a scientific psychology modeled after the newly established study
             of nature. Isaac Bashevis Singer

Parkinson—Life of Reason: Spinoza seems to be aware that his theory of the mind's eternity may not carry
             conviction, and he therefore stresses that what he has said about the life of reason does not depend on
             that theory

Curley—Multitude: This, of course, is not only the creed of the multitude, but a belief often encouraged  by
             Scripture, as Spinoza well knows. These concluding portions of the Ethics can be read as a secular sermon
             against (a very natural reading of) the Sermon on the Mount. Cf. Matt. 5-7.

Wolfson—Revealed Religion: ..... he {Spinoza} proceeds to explain in the last two propositions of the Ethics his
             own conception of divine law as contrasted with that of revealed religion. 
             [1] Now, revealed religion is always of two types, that of the multitude and that of philosophers. 

Dennett—Virtue and Receiving Award: Like Santa, God "knows if you are sleeping, he knows if you're awake, he              knows if you've been bad or good" . . . The lyrics continue "so be good for goodness' sake." Catchy but a              logical solecism. In logic the song should have continued "so be good for the sake of the electronic equipment,              dolls, sports gear and other gifts you hope to get but will get only if the omniscient and just Santa judges you              worthy of receiving."

De Dijn—Blessedness: In this one thing consists man's highest happiness, or blessedness. Indeed, blessedness is
             nothing but that satisfaction of the mind that stems from the intuitive knowledge of G-D. But perfecting the
             intellect is nothing but understanding G-D.

Stewart—Immortality and Blessedness: [1] The end point of Spinoza's philosophy—the intellectual love of  G-D, or              blessedness—transfigures all that precedes it. It can sometimes sound paradoxical and more than a little              mystical. It is the union of the individual and the cosmos, of freedom and necessity, of activity and passivity, of              mind and body, of self-interest and charity, of virtue and knowledge, and of happiness and virtue. .... 
 
             [3] That overweening ambition returns us to the paradox that first emerged in the consideration of the young Bento's unusual behavior in the context of his expulsion from the Jewish community. On the one hand, Spinoza's philosophy clearly represents a "transvaluation" of traditional values, to use a Nietzschean phrase. The dominant religion of Spinoza's time—and perhaps most religion, viewed in a general way—promises happinessi n exchange for an unhappy virtue. But Spinoza says that happiness is virtue. .... 

             [4].... Many commentators, beginning in the seventeenth century, have gone so far as to interpret Spinoza's work as the expression of a characteristically Jewish theological position. His monism {Elwes:37}, they say, may be traced to Deut 6:4 ("the Lord our G-D is One"); and his seemingly mystical tendencies link him to the Kabbalah. 

             [5] If indeed it is a religion—a very problematic possibility—then Spinoza's philosophy is in any case one of those religions that offers itself only to an elect few. The philosopher's last words on the highway to salvation are "all things excellent are as difficult as they are rare." ....

             [6] .... But his many beautiful words on the subject do not necessarily close a gap that some would say can be  crossed only with a leap-of-faith. In any case, there can be little doubt that the road he traveled was difficult and rare. 
  

Internet Sacred Text Archive CD-ROM 5.0
http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/jps/index.htm
http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/index.htm - kjv scroll down
TTP1: Noachide laws, Martyrs Law, Philosophy from Theology, Empire afresh, Constitution, Garden of Eden,
                God to G-d, Unlearned, Unlearned, No purpose in Nature, abstraction, seditions, superstition, prophecies,
                Moses and Jesus, Photocopy of Title Page, Fictitious printer in Hamburg, Wolf, Successful Dogmas,
              Chain of Natural Events, referred, Divine Law, Paul's doing, Scriptural Theology, G-D overcomes God,
                Neomodern Man, religion and philosophy,

Endnotes:
 

Cambridge—Introduction to the Theological-Political Treatise: In his Theological-Political Treatise, Spinoza also
                takes up popular religion, the interpretation of Scripture, and their bearing on the well-being of the state.
                He characterizes the Old Testament prophets as individuals whose vivid imaginations produced
                messages of political value for the ancient Hebrew state. Using a naturalistic out-look and historical
                hermeneutic methods that anticipate the later "higher criticism" of the bible, he seeks to show that
                Scriptural writers themselves consistently treat only justice and charity as essential to salvation, and
                hence that dogmatic doxastic requirements are not justified by Scripture. 

Hampshire—Purpose of the Theological-Political Treatise: In the Preface to the Theological-Political Treatise
                 Spinoza declares the main purpose of the book to be the defense of freedom of opinion; he will show  
                that public order is not only compatible with freedom of opinion, but that it is incompatible with anything
                 else. The argument is a now classical liberal argument, and is still invoked today. 'If deeds only could be
                 made the grounds of criminal charges, and words were always allowed to pass free, seditions would be
                 divested of every semblance of justification, and would be separated from mere controversies by a hard
                 and fast line.' If law 'enters the domain of speculative thought', it will not only destroy the possibility of the
                 free life for the individual, but generate those civil disorders which it is the function of law to avert.

Shirley—Religion and Philosophy: Spinoza is concerned with separating religion and philosophy and showing how                  both can coexist in a tolerant civil state. He refers to "distinguishing between faith and  philosophy" as "the                  main object of this entire treatise." He attempts to distinguish between "superstitious" and "purified" religion                  in order to uphold the latter as a means to salvation for those unable to attain it through philosophy. 

Spinoza—Chain of Natural Events: (3:13) By the help of G-D, I mean the fixed and unchangeable order of Nature or                  the chain of natural  events:  for I have said before and shown elsewhere that the universal laws of Nature,                  according to which all things exist and are determined, are only another name for the eternal decrees of                  G-D, which always involve eternal truth and necessity. 

Robinson—Civil Society: Thus, variation is to be expected here. Now, once you put these ingredients together, you                  begin to see the basis upon which we do enter into civil society. Why do we enter? Man is by nature a social                  animal, as Aristotle said? No. Hobbes, I think, would put it rather differently. Man is by nature a self-                  defending animal, a self-interested, and indeed, selfish animal, seeking to survive in a perilous world.                  Therefore, man enters into civil society in the interest of survival, ... 

Robinson—Righteous Government, Constitution: In fact, reward and punishment in the hands of the sovereign affect                  our actions in just the way that nerves affect the body. This, after all, is a material, physical kind of influence.                  It's not something transcendental. It's something quite immediate. Concord in the civil state is health. It's                  exactly what "health" refers to. The civic manifestation of the healthy body politic is concord. Sedition is                  sickness.  

ENDNOTES: Compare Ten Commandments; Exo 20:1, Deu 5:5,

1:49—Moses, Ezra, Jesus, Spinoza, and Einstein were "a light unto the nations" as charged:
                 NIV Isaiah 51:4  Listen to me, my people; hear me, my nation: The law will go out from me; my justice will
                                          become a light to the nations .
                 The dogmas of the later Christian Church were no doings of Christ. These dogmas (Resurrection, Virgin Mary,
                 etc.) were successful in that they provided pictures that were worth a thousand abstractions to the unlearned 
                 of the nations. These dogmas provide a Religion that successfully brings peace-of-mind to many. The learned
                 interpret the dogmas metaphorically or allegorically.

Popkin—1:111 - Prophets: For Spinoza, a beginning stage in understanding what religion and theology are about
                 is the analysis of the special knowledge that is contained in religious outlooks. Spinoza does this chiefly by
                 looking at the Bible, both what it says and what is said about it, and the prophetic knowledge that the Bible
                 is  supposed to tell us about, that is, knowledge that people called prophets have. But what can this be? 

Popkin—3:104 - Proto-Zionist: It is curious that some commentators often point to this passage as indicating that
                 Spinoza was a proto-Zionist, that he foresaw the possibility of there being a renewed Jewish state. However,
                 there is no indication that Spinoza anticipated any future developments within Jewish history. 

Smith—4:21 - Divine Law: Spinoza begins his treatment of the divine law with an account of law in its "absolute
                 sense:" The word law, [Legis], taken absolutely, means that according to which each individual, or all or
                 some members of the same species, act in one and the same certain and determinate manner. This
                 depends either on a necessity of nature or on a decision of men. A law which depends on a necessity of
                 nature is one which follows necessarily from the very nature or definition of a thing. One which depends on
                 a decision of men, and which is more properly called a rule of right, is one which men prescribe for
                 themselves and others, for the sake of living more safely and conveniently, or for some other reasons.''

Smith—Synthesis: But Spinoza does more than prepare the reader for the overcoming of Judaism by Christianity.
                 As I suggested earlier, he prepares the reader for the overcoming of both Judaism and Christianity by the
                 secular democratic state. After depicting Christ as the teacher of a universal rational morality (a kind of
                 Spinoza avant la lettre), he shows how Christianity did not possess the true moral teaching. In particular, he
                 shows that Christianity, not Judaism, became the cause of the persecution and intolerance to which the
                 Treatise takes itself to be the answer. In Spinoza's recasting of sacred history, if Christ takes the place that
                 Maimonides had accorded to Moses, Spinoza now assumes the place that had previously been accorded to
                 Christ. He {Spinoza} is the bringer of a new theologico-political dispensation every bit as far-reaching as the
                 historical religions that he claims to overcome. {JBY—I conjecture that the Judaic-Christian God will, in
                 millennium, be overcome by the United States of the World and Universal Religion (G-D). Scarcity (oil, for
                 example) causes most dysfunctional practices (war); it cannot be avoided until there will be sufficient
                 technological advancement and an effective United States of the World. In the meantime however, G-D as a
                 Religion is more efficacious (has more cash value) than God, in that 'G-D' stresses the organic
                 interdependence of all parts of the Universe.}

Shirley—Religion and philosophy: Spinoza is concerned with separating religion and philosophy and showing
                 how both can coexist in a tolerant civil state. He refers to "distinguishing between faith  and  philosophy"
                 as "the main object of this entire treatise." He attempts to distinguish between "superstitious" and "purified"
                 religion in order to uphold the latter as a means to salvation for those unable to attain it through philosophy.

Smith—Divine Law: In the preface to the Treatise he urges the strongest possible separation between truth or
                philosophy and faith or religion. A philosophical theology would seem to be premised on a fundamental
                confusion, a category mistake, as it were, between the realms of truth and obedience. On the basis of later
                statements, however, a new or at least different teaching emerges. What Spinoza means by the separation
                of religion and philosophy turns out to be the separation of philosophy from scriptural theology—literal
                biblical views of God. Only scriptural religion, not religion as such, is inimical {harmful} to truth. At the
                highest level, philosophy and religion, far from being incompatible, are identical.

Dimont—Jews, God and History - Logos: This human ability to conceive of divinity, said Philo, could be done in
               two ways: through the spirit of prophecy, or through inner mystic meditation. Judaism, in Philo's opinion,
               was the instrument which enabled man to achieve moral perfection, and the Torah was the path to union
               with G-D. It was on the allegorical concepts of Philo's Logos and the inner mystic contemplation of God
               that Paul built his Christology. The Jews used the opposite pole of Philo's philosophy—the spirit of
               prophecy. They built their Judaism by searching the Torah for new meanings.

Dimont—Jews, God and History - Logos—Note 1: We can see how this idea was taken directly by the Christians,
               for instance, in the Gospel According to Saint John, which begins: "In the beginning was the Word, and the
               Word was with God, and the Word was God". Ironically, this opening sentence in John is now more a
               Jewish doctrine than a Christian one. The Christians made the "Son of Man" equal to God, whereas it was
               the Jews {Christ and Spinoza} who followed John's junction and made "the Word," that is, the Torah, equal
               to G-D. It is to the Jews that "the Word is G-D."

 

TTP2—general  notions, Hebrew expression, superstition, pedagogy, miracles, biblical interpretation,  
                                G-D is without passion, Decalogue, Hebrew Bible, Hebrew Biblical Genius, Hebrew Biblical Mission,

Endnotes:

Note 6—Existence of G-D: We doubt of the existence of G-D, and consequently of all else, so long as we have no
                 clear and distinct idea of G-D, but only a confused one. For as he who knows not rightly the nature of a
                 triangle, knows not that its three angles are equal to two right angles, so he who conceives the Divine
                 nature confusedly, does not see that it pertains to the nature of G-D to exist.

Note 7—Scripture: "It is impossible to find a method which would enable us to gain a certain knowledge of all
                 the statements in Scripture." I mean impossible for us who have not the habitual use of the language, and
                 have lost the precise meaning of its phraseology.

Note 8—Conceivable: "Not things whereof the understanding can gain a clear and distinct idea, and which are
                 conceivable through themselves." By things conceivable I mean not only those which are rigidly proved,
                 but also those whereof we are morally certain, and are wont to hear without wonder, though they are
                 incapable of proof.

Note 9—Mount  Moriah: "Mount  Moriah is called the mount of God." That is by the historian, not by Abraham, for
                 he says that the place now called "In the mount of the Lord it shall be revealed," was called by Abraham,
                 "the Lord shall provide."

Britannica—Biblical literature: The Targum to the Prophets also originated in Palestine and received its final
                 editing in Babylonia. It is ascribed to Jonathan ben Uzziel, a pupil of Hillel, the famous 1st century
                 BCE–1st century CE rabbinic sage, though it is in fact a composite work of varying ages. In its present
                 form it discloses a dependence on Onkelos, though it is less literal.

9:92—Massoretes: A name given to a succession of scholars who laboured from about the 6th century to the tenth
                 century to produce an authoritative version of the Hebrew Bible. They introduced the vowel sounds.

9:108—Britannica: The first rabbinic Bible—i.e., the Hebrew text furnished with full vowel points and accents,
                 accompanied by the Aramaic Targums and the major medieval Jewish commentaries— was edited by Felix
                 Pratensis and published by Daniel Bomberg (Venice, 1516/17).

10:7—Judaeus  Philo: Also called Philo of Alexandria c. 15 B.C. - 45 A.D. was the most important representative
                 of Hellenic Judaism, and wrote widely on philosophy with Platonic leanings.

10:59—Sadducees: A conservative sect, belonging mainly to the upper class and associated with the priestly
                 families. On certain matters of doctrine they differed from the  Pharisees, who, according to Josephus,
                 'profess to be more religious than the rest and to explain the laws more precisely.'

10:87—R. Selomo: This is R. Selomo Yitzhaki, 1040 - 1105, better known by the abbreviation Rashi.
                 A French rabbinical scholar, whose commentary on the Bible won great fame.

Note 23—Sacred books: "Before the time of the Maccabees there was no canon of sacred books." The
                 synagogue styled "the great" did not begin before the subjugation of Asia by the Macedonians. The
                 contention of Maimonides, Rabbi Abraham, Ben-David, and others, that the presidents of this synagogue
                 were Ezra, Daniel, Nehemiah, Haggai, Zechariah, &c., is a pure fiction, resting only on rabbinical
                 tradition.

Kolatch—Why did the Masoretes sometimes include incomplete sentences in the Torah?: The Rabbis went to
                 great lengths to avoid the use of unsavory words and expressions in the Torah. They were also anxious to
                 avoid reporting fully, whenever possible, unseemly episodes that occasionally appear in the Torah and
                 other parts of the Bible.

Smith—Triflers: Spinoza's answer to the pervasive power of Scripture over human life is unexpected at first.
                 Not philosophy but historical philology is the antidote to the authority of Scripture and the key to humanity's
                 liberation from spiritual and ecclesiastical tutelage. The Treatise stands at the beginning of what would later
                 become known as the "higher criticism" of the Bible.

Kolatch—Marginal notes: Why does one find Hebrew words in small type around the perimeter of the text
                  in many editions of the Torah? In addition to introducing vowel-points and cantillation symbols, the
                  Masoretes inserted notations around the body of the Torah study text to explain the manner in which
                  specific words are to be spelled, pronounced, and accented {or to give the new meaning to obsolete
                  words}.