東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

The absurd in immanence: Expression ...

Selimotic, Sasha.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

The absurd in immanence: Expression and substantial immanence in Spinoza's "Ethics".

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	The absurd in immanence: Expression and substantial immanence in Spinoza's "Ethics"./
作者:	Selimotic, Sasha.
面頁冊數:	232 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-11(E), Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International76-11A(E).
標題:	Philosophy. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3707747
ISBN:	9781321824995

The absurd in immanence: Expression and substantial immanence in Spinoza's "Ethics".
Selimotic, Sasha.

The absurd in immanence: Expression and substantial immanence in Spinoza's "Ethics". - 232 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-11(E), Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--The New School, 2015.

I find that overlooking the importance of the role of expression in Spinoza leads to problematic theories of parallelism (even though Spinoza never used the term parallelism) and certain problematic preconceptions about truth in Spinoza. By criticizing the lack of inclusion of expression in analyzing Spinoza we can alleviate the problems of parallelism by disproving its basis. Consequently, a dual problem emerges regarding the relation between imagination, reason, and intuitive science, as well as how we make sense of acquiring knowledge by reason and intuitive science. This is also a problem regarding immanence. For, if we cannot explain the relation between imagination, reason, and intuitive science, then immanence would require an unexplained reason for this relation, i.e. an eminent explanation. It is my hypothesis that this problem can be solved by acknowledging the absurd in Spinoza's epistemology and ethics. I argue that the role of expression can be expanded to include the relation between ideas and ideas of ideas (etc.) to explain the relation between imagination, reason, and intuitive science. This shows that the absurd is not external to epistemology but is internal to these epistemic relations. However, Spinoza relies on a narrow conception of the absurd and only recognizes it as reductio ad absurdum. Some reason exterior to his thought is required to explain his epistemic relations. This reason is hidden within the idea of God as salvation; although this salvation returns us to reason, it still requires an exterior cathartic relation. The cathartic relation is a return, but it is a return to God and not to substance. Thus I argue that for Spinoza, substance is different than God when considering this return. Ultimately paradoxical because God and substance are supposed to be identical, we should not dismiss Spinoza's philosophy in light of this difference. Rather, we can rehabilitate what is powerful about immanence, its principle of reflexive incorporation of everything into itself, as conceiving of substance without God. We should incorporate the absurd into immanence and give up God. This is a substantial immanence that includes the absurd in the expressive nature of substance.

ISBN: 9781321824995Subjects--Topical Terms:

516511
Philosophy.

The absurd in immanence: Expression and substantial immanence in Spinoza's "Ethics".
LDR:03139nmm a2200289 4500 001 2074436
005 20161004114932.5
008 170521s2015 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781321824995
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI3707747
035 $a AAI3707747
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Selimotic, Sasha. $3 3189754
245 1 4 $a The absurd in immanence: Expression and substantial immanence in Spinoza's "Ethics".
300 $a 232 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-11(E), Section: A.
500 $a Adviser: Chiara Bottici.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--The New School, 2015.
520 $a I find that overlooking the importance of the role of expression in Spinoza leads to problematic theories of parallelism (even though Spinoza never used the term parallelism) and certain problematic preconceptions about truth in Spinoza. By criticizing the lack of inclusion of expression in analyzing Spinoza we can alleviate the problems of parallelism by disproving its basis. Consequently, a dual problem emerges regarding the relation between imagination, reason, and intuitive science, as well as how we make sense of acquiring knowledge by reason and intuitive science. This is also a problem regarding immanence. For, if we cannot explain the relation between imagination, reason, and intuitive science, then immanence would require an unexplained reason for this relation, i.e. an eminent explanation. It is my hypothesis that this problem can be solved by acknowledging the absurd in Spinoza's epistemology and ethics. I argue that the role of expression can be expanded to include the relation between ideas and ideas of ideas (etc.) to explain the relation between imagination, reason, and intuitive science. This shows that the absurd is not external to epistemology but is internal to these epistemic relations. However, Spinoza relies on a narrow conception of the absurd and only recognizes it as reductio ad absurdum. Some reason exterior to his thought is required to explain his epistemic relations. This reason is hidden within the idea of God as salvation; although this salvation returns us to reason, it still requires an exterior cathartic relation. The cathartic relation is a return, but it is a return to God and not to substance. Thus I argue that for Spinoza, substance is different than God when considering this return. Ultimately paradoxical because God and substance are supposed to be identical, we should not dismiss Spinoza's philosophy in light of this difference. Rather, we can rehabilitate what is powerful about immanence, its principle of reflexive incorporation of everything into itself, as conceiving of substance without God. We should incorporate the absurd into immanence and give up God. This is a substantial immanence that includes the absurd in the expressive nature of substance.
590 $a School code: 1700.
650 4 $a Philosophy. $3 516511
650 4 $a Metaphysics. $3 517082
650 4 $a Epistemology. $3 896969
690 $a 0422
690 $a 0396
690 $a 0393
710 2 $a The New School. $b Philosophy. $3 2101064
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 76-11A(E).
790 $a 1700
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2015
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3707747