Next Article in Journal
To What Inanimate Matter Are We Most Closely Related and Does the Origin of Life Harbor Meaning?
Next Article in Special Issue
Spinoza and the Possibility of a Philosophical Religion
Previous Article in Journal
AI Ethics and Value Alignment for Nonhuman Animals
Previous Article in Special Issue
Spinoza in His Time: The 17th-Century Religious Context
Article

Spinoza: A Baconian in the TTP, but Not in the Ethics?

1
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Utrecht University, 3512 BL Utrecht, The Netherlands
2
Department of Philosophy, University of Wisconsin at La Crosse, La Crosse, WI 54601, USA
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editors: Henri Krop and Pooyan Tamimi Arab
Philosophies 2021, 6(2), 32; https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies6020032
Received: 21 February 2021 / Revised: 29 March 2021 / Accepted: 1 April 2021 / Published: 15 April 2021
This paper resolves some puzzles regarding Spinoza’s appropriations and rejections of various aspects of Bacon’s methodology, and uses these solutions to resolve some long-standing puzzles concerning Spinoza’s modus operandi in the TTP. We argue first that, appearances to contrary, Spinoza takes a consistent line in his assessment of Bacon’s epistemic approach. We argue that Spinoza follows Bacon in grounding his overall epistemic method in a “historiola mentis” (a brief account or history of the mind), and that differences between Spinoza’s and Bacon’s respective historiola mentis can explain Spinoza’s embrace of this inductive method for his interpretation of Scripture in the TTP, as well as his general abandonment of Bacon’s inductive method in the metaphysical investigation of the Ethics. In short, we argue that the “historiola mentis” constructed by Bacon depicts the intellect as an error-prone faculty that needs be continuously restrained by observation and experimentation—a depiction which motivates Bacon’s reformed inductive empiricism. Spinoza accepts this depiction in regard to a subset of the mind’s ideas—the ideas of the imagination, and hence sees the inductive method as suitable for interpreting Scripture. But contra Bacon, Spinoza’s “historiola mentis” also shows that the human mind includes a subset of ideas that yield true, certain knowledge of things “infinite” and sub specie aeternitatis. Spinoza finds these “intellectual” ideas to be quite useful for systematic metaphysics, but of limited use for interpreting historical texts like Scripture. View Full-Text
Keywords: Spinoza; Bacon; historiola mentis; biblical hermeneutics; metaphysics Spinoza; Bacon; historiola mentis; biblical hermeneutics; metaphysics
MDPI and ACS Style

Van Cauter, J.; Schneider, D. Spinoza: A Baconian in the TTP, but Not in the Ethics? Philosophies 2021, 6, 32. https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies6020032

AMA Style

Van Cauter J, Schneider D. Spinoza: A Baconian in the TTP, but Not in the Ethics? Philosophies. 2021; 6(2):32. https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies6020032

Chicago/Turabian Style

Van Cauter, Jo, and Daniel Schneider. 2021. "Spinoza: A Baconian in the TTP, but Not in the Ethics?" Philosophies 6, no. 2: 32. https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies6020032

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop