Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'Dthat', 'Spinoza's Ethics' and 'Letters to Varignon'

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these texts

---

4 ideas

1. Philosophy / B. History of Ideas / 5. Later European Thought

21855	Only in the 1780s did it become acceptable to read Spinoza [Lord]
	Full Idea: It was not until the 1780s that it became acceptable to read the works of Spinoza, and even then it was not without a frisson of danger.
	From: Beth Lord (Spinoza's Ethics [2010], Intro 'Who?')
	A reaction: Hence we hear of Wordsworth and Coleridge reading him with excitement. So did Kant read him?

15. Nature of Minds / C. Capacities of Minds / 10. Conatus/Striving

21866	Hobbes and Spinoza use 'conatus' to denote all endeavour for advantage in nature [Lord]
	Full Idea: 'Conatus' [translated as 'striving' by Curley] is used by early modern philosophers, including Thomas Hobbes (a major influence of Spinoza), to express the notion of a thing's endeavour for what is advantageous to it. It drives all things in nature.
	From: Beth Lord (Spinoza's Ethics [2010], p.88)
	A reaction: I think it is important to connect conatus to Nietzsche's talk of a plurality of 'drives', which are an expression of the universal will to power (which is seen even in the interactions of chemistry). Conatus is also in Leibniz.

19. Language / B. Reference / 3. Direct Reference / b. Causal reference

14080	Are causal descriptions part of the causal theory of reference, or are they just metasemantic? [Kaplan, by Schaffer,J]
	Full Idea: Kaplan notes that the causal theory of reference can be understood in two quite different ways, as part of the semantics (involving descriptions of causal processes), or as metasemantics, explaining why a term has the referent it does.
	From: report of David Kaplan (Dthat [1970]) by Jonathan Schaffer - Deflationary Metaontology of Thomasson 1
	A reaction: [Kaplan 'Afterthought' 1989] The theory tends to be labelled as 'direct' rather than as 'causal' these days, but causal chains are still at the heart of the story (even if more diffused socially). Nice question. Kaplan takes the meta- version as orthodox.

27. Natural Reality / G. Biology / 3. Evolution

19414	Men are related to animals, which are related to plants, then to fossils, and then to the apparently inert [Leibniz]
	Full Idea: Men are related to animals, these to plants, and the latter directly to fossils which will be linked in their turn to bodies which the senses and the imagination represent to us as perfectly dead and formless.
	From: Gottfried Leibniz (Letters to Varignon [1702], 1702)
	A reaction: Leibniz would be a bit surprised to find the way in which this has turned out to be largely true, since he is basing it on his picture of a hierarchy of monads. Nevertheless, the idea that we are all related wasn't invented in 1859.