Philosophical Survey In The Morality Of Spinoza In The Light Of His Evil And Good.

Philosophical Survey In The Morality Of Spinoza In The Light Of His Evil And Good.

Chapter One

General Introduction

The problem of good and evil in the world of ours has come questionable. Good and evil without mistrustfulness have constituted lots of discomfort, annihilation and other problems in mortal life. Accordingly, so numerous thinkers of different ages have contributed in one way or the other according to their own understanding, to unravel this dilemma. nonetheless, throughout the different ages starting from ancient period to contemporary period, the problem of good and evil have continued to enthrall the minds of proponents. Indeed at that, no agreement has been reached with regard to a result.

also, it may intrigue us to know that in this write up, we’re to substantiation how Spinoza rigorously didn’t claw into good and evil from the same perspective with others. His rigorous gests of the reconsideration on the former proponents on this content allured him to conceive good and evil as being private.

Hence, this solves the multitudinous problems of some questions people do ask whether there should be evil in the world created by all- important, each- knowing and each- merciful God. He therefore grounded his generality of good and evil on individual differences “ Everyone, thus, according to his particular feelings, judges or estimates what’s good and what’s evil. ” 1 This implies that what’s good for one person may be evil for another. In fact, the problem of good and evil in the morality of Spinoza can be epitomized with one of the popular dictums, which says, “ One man’s protein is another man’s bane ”. Hence, Spinoza’s good and wrong should give result to the aged problem of good and evil which when mentioned remains fresh as can be seen in the work of Joseph Eno Inah who said “ The problem of good and evil whenever mentioned, remains fresh and alive despite the fact that it started long agone . ” 2 The problem at stake has continued to remain a riddle as ever.

Purpose Of The Study

For the fact, that numerous proponents of different ages have dwelt on good and evil with different mindsets and came out with misconception of what good and evil are, Spinoza as against these views conceived the idea of good and evil in a different way.

still, the purpose of this work is to expose and estimate the generality of good and evil in the morality of Spinoza. To show how his generality of good and evil differs from that of other proponents.

Statement Of The Problem

Inspite of the early thinker’s view on this content, which are as progressed as humanity, the problem still lingers. The problem at stake feel to have confused its history with the history of humanity and have being the bone of contention among proponents, theologians and indeed among humanists of all seminaries and ages. Now, one may ask, what’s the result to this problem of good and evil, which has persistently continued to do? Alternately, has the problem come undoable or is there any stopgap of prostrating this problem? The below questions are applicable questions which when considered duly as exposed by Spinoza brings results to the innumerous questions proponents do ask about good and evil.

thus, this exploration is an attempt to find result to the questions above. We hope that our exposure to the generalizations of Spinoza about good and evil would help us to some extent in resolving the problematic notion of good and evil.

Compass Of Work

Man as it were from time old associates and dissociates himself with what’s good and evil independently. similar is man’s desire for good and aversion to evil “ Man by nature solicitations what’s good and averts to what’s evil. ” 3 As similar, his enquiries, reflections and studies on good and evil have been an outstanding issue from time immemorial until now. My work is a trip in hunt of what good and evil really are in the views of Spinoza

In addition, I pondered on some proponents generalizations about good and evil right from ancient period to contemporary period. It should be egregious that grasping of Spinoza’s tutoring about good and evil will quench the thirst that ultimately could lead to the misconception of the idea of good and evil, which leads to apportioning blames on the creator of the macrocosm.

Methodology

The system of exploration, which I applied in my work is both explanatory and appraisal. It’s explanatory in the sense that it shows in detail the workshop of Spinoza on good and evil. It’s also appraisal in the sense that his own generality of good and evil creates important room to ask good and to forestall wrong which when done, mortal race will turn from its evil ways of life to good ways of life.

DIVISION OF WORK

For easy understanding and grasping of this work, I divided this work into five chapters.

Chapter one is the general preface, purpose of the study, statement of the problem, compass of work, methodology, Division of work and a brief profile of Baruch de Spinoza.

Chapter two is the literature review of proponents on good and evil. Chapter three treats in detail the Spinozistic generality of good and evil. Chapter four is each about peculiar effects in Spinoza’s conception of good and evil. Eventually, chapter five is the evaluation and conclusion that ends this exploration.

A BRIEF PROFILE OF BENEDICTB. DE SPINOZA

Benedict Baruch de Spinoza was born in 1632 in Amsterdam as a son of Jewish Marrano emigrants from Portugal. He was educated as a Jew and excommunicated in the time 1656. He earned his livelihood first by commerce and latterly by grinding lenses.

He also learned Latin in the Franciscus Van den Enden where he conversed with a circle of Amsterdam collegiants, who were devoted to Cartessianism.

He lived in Rijnsburg near Leiden in 1660 – 1663, moved to Voorburg near the Hague in 1663- 1670 and eventually in Hague in 1670. Some of the workshop of Spinoza are Descarte’s principles of gospel in 1663 – Renati Descartes principiorum philosophiae, part 1et II.

The theological – Political Composition in 1670( Tractatus Theologico – Politicus)

He failed in 21 February 1677. also his musketeers published his other workshop.

1B Spinoza, transl. byR.H.M Elwes, Works of Spinoza, vol 11,( New York Dover publications, 1951),p. 156

2O.J. Eno Inah, Theses on the problem of wrong,( Bigard honorary Seminary, 1981),P. V111

3R.H.M Elwes, Works of Spinoza,Vol. 11,( New York Dover publications, 1951),P.205