Spinoza's statement of attributes -
as I understand it - his argument is
we perceive (the essence of substance as manifested
in the attributes of extension and mind) what is -
our perception of what is - is determined by what is -
(substance)
therefore
there is - on this level - no room for doubt -
o margin for error
what is - is what is perceived - by what is
(a mode thereof)
tight argument - like a puzzle clicking into place
existence determines what can be known - what can
be known (on this most fundamental level) is what
is known
end of story
how do you crack this code?
if you begin with Spinoza's premises - the conclusion
follows
the knower is a mode of substance
and the knower - can know - the essence -
the essence - as revealed (to the knower) is -
just what the knower is - extension /mind
the argument here is really about the status of
philosophical / metaphysical thinking - theories
if the argument cannot be faulted - is it therefore -
true
as in trivial -
as in unfalsifiable
no content -
here though it seems we are
moving into the realm of empirical theory
OK
but still the question
what value - a metaphysics - that cannot be challenged -
on its own grounds?
here it seems to me the only way to go is to say
OK - here is a world view that is well worked out
it's one of a number
the world is richer for this creation
the rational way to go in the face of such -
the range of such views - is to appreciate
to adopt if - if circumstances (philosophical
circumstances) suggest
but at the end of the day
as far as commitment goes -
suspend judgement
epoche
p.s.
the status of philosophical discourse -
itself suggests an overriding metaphysics
- a meta philosophy - if you like -
a domain of possibility
possible ways of knowing and understanding
this range exists because there is no definite -
one view
this fact itself is - or becomes - paradoxically -
the fundamental position
it is the position of choice
nothing is demanded
and reason for adoption?
itself a study in possibility
