Đang chuẩn bị liên kết để tải về tài liệu:
The Oxford Companion to Philosophy Part 92

Không đóng trình duyệt đến khi xuất hiện nút TẢI XUỐNG Tải xuống

The Oxford Companion to Philosophy Part 92. The book is alphabetized by the whole headings of entries, as distinct from the first word of a heading. Hence, for example, abandonment comes before a priori and a posteriori. It is wise to look elsewhere if something seems to be missing. At the end of the book there is also a useful appendix on Logical Symbols as well as the appendices A Chronological Table of Philosophy and Maps of Philosophy. | 890 Spinoza Baruch i.e. a substance consisting of an infinity of attributes of which each one expresses an eternal and infinite essence. 2. After certain initial moves Spinoza proves proposition 5 In the universe there cannot be two or more substances of the same nature or attribute by considering what could possibly distinguish two such substances. It could not be their affections or modes because they must be different in order to have different affections just as two men could not be distinguished by the fact that one was angry and the other not for this possibility rests upon their being different men compare some recent arguments for bare particulars . However on the only alternative that they are distinguished by their natures or attributes they would not be instances of what is denied. Why Spinoza did not consider the apparently obvious objection noted by Leibniz that they might share one but not all their attributes has been debated. The solution recommended here is that since an attribute is simply a way of conceiving the essence or nature of a substance any shared attribute implies a shared essence which in turn implies the same set of attributes as ways of conceiving it. 3. The next crucial proposition part 1 proposition 11 affirms the necessary existence of God as we have seen him or it to say her would be wildly anachronistic defined. Spinoza s ontological argument for this is derived with peculiar abruptness from proposition 7 according to which existence appertains to the nature of substance and so must pertain to the divine substance this being derived in turn from the impossibility established in previous propositions of one substance producing another because such causation requires a community of nature that is impossible granted that two substances cannot share their nature . One might think that this only shows that if a substance exists at all then it must exist of its own nature and does not tell us which if any substances do exist. However .