Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Economy
In reply to the discussion: STOCK MARKET WATCH -- Tuesday, 7 February 2012 [View all]Demeter
(85,373 posts)18. Spinoza’s Vision of Freedom, and Ours By STEVEN NADLER
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/05/spinozas-vision-of-freedom-and-ours/
Baruch Spinoza, the 17th-century Dutch thinker, may be among the more enigmatic (and mythologized) philosophers in Western thought, but he also remains one of the most relevant, to his time and to ours. He was an eloquent proponent of a secular, democratic society, and was the strongest advocate for freedom and tolerance in the early modern period. The ultimate goal of his Theological-Political Treatise published anonymously to great alarm in 1670, when it was called by one of its many critics a book forged in hell by the devil himself is enshrined both in the books subtitle and in the argument of its final chapter: to show that the freedom of philosophizing not only can be granted without detriment to public peace, to piety, and to the right of the sovereign, but also that it must be granted if these are to be preserved.
Spinoza was incited to write the Treatise when he recognized that the Dutch Republic, and his own province of Holland in particular, was wavering from its uncommonly liberal and relatively tolerant traditions. He feared that with the rising political influence in the 1660s of the more orthodox and narrow-minded elements in the Dutch Reformed Church, and the willingness of civil authorities to placate the preachers by acting against works they deemed irreligious, licentious and subversive, the nearly two decades-long period of the True Freedom was coming to an end. The Treatise is both a personally angry book a friend of Spinozas, the author of a radical treatise, had recently been thrown in prison, where he soon died and a very public plea to the Dutch republic not to betray the political, legal and religious principles that made its flourishing possible.
In this work, Spinoza approaches the issue of individual liberty from several perspectives. To begin with, there is the question of belief, and especially the states tolerance of the beliefs of its citizens. Spinoza argues that all individuals are to be absolutely free and unimpeded in their beliefs, by right and in fact. It is impossible for the mind to be completely under anothers control; for no one is able to transfer to another his natural right or faculty to reason freely and to form his own judgment on any matters whatsoever, nor can he be compelled to do so.
For this reason, any effort on the governments part to rule over the beliefs and opinions of citizens is bound to fail, and will ultimately serve to undermine its own authority. A sovereign is certainly free to try and limit what people think, but the result of such a policy, Spinoza predicts, would be only to create resentment and opposition to its rule...It can be argued that the states tolerance of individual belief is not a difficult issue. As Spinoza points out, it is impossible for a persons mind to be under anothers control, and this is a necessary reality that any government must accept. The more difficult case, the true test of a regimes commitment to toleration, concerns the liberty of citizens to express those beliefs, either in speech or in writing. And here Spinoza goes further than anyone else of his time: Utter failure, he says, will attend any attempt in a commonwealth to force men to speak only as prescribed by the sovereign despite their different and opposing opinions The most tyrannical government will be one where the individual is denied the freedom to express and to communicate to others what he thinks, and a moderate government is one where this freedom is granted to every man.
Baruch Spinoza, the 17th-century Dutch thinker, may be among the more enigmatic (and mythologized) philosophers in Western thought, but he also remains one of the most relevant, to his time and to ours. He was an eloquent proponent of a secular, democratic society, and was the strongest advocate for freedom and tolerance in the early modern period. The ultimate goal of his Theological-Political Treatise published anonymously to great alarm in 1670, when it was called by one of its many critics a book forged in hell by the devil himself is enshrined both in the books subtitle and in the argument of its final chapter: to show that the freedom of philosophizing not only can be granted without detriment to public peace, to piety, and to the right of the sovereign, but also that it must be granted if these are to be preserved.
Spinoza was incited to write the Treatise when he recognized that the Dutch Republic, and his own province of Holland in particular, was wavering from its uncommonly liberal and relatively tolerant traditions. He feared that with the rising political influence in the 1660s of the more orthodox and narrow-minded elements in the Dutch Reformed Church, and the willingness of civil authorities to placate the preachers by acting against works they deemed irreligious, licentious and subversive, the nearly two decades-long period of the True Freedom was coming to an end. The Treatise is both a personally angry book a friend of Spinozas, the author of a radical treatise, had recently been thrown in prison, where he soon died and a very public plea to the Dutch republic not to betray the political, legal and religious principles that made its flourishing possible.
In this work, Spinoza approaches the issue of individual liberty from several perspectives. To begin with, there is the question of belief, and especially the states tolerance of the beliefs of its citizens. Spinoza argues that all individuals are to be absolutely free and unimpeded in their beliefs, by right and in fact. It is impossible for the mind to be completely under anothers control; for no one is able to transfer to another his natural right or faculty to reason freely and to form his own judgment on any matters whatsoever, nor can he be compelled to do so.
For this reason, any effort on the governments part to rule over the beliefs and opinions of citizens is bound to fail, and will ultimately serve to undermine its own authority. A sovereign is certainly free to try and limit what people think, but the result of such a policy, Spinoza predicts, would be only to create resentment and opposition to its rule...It can be argued that the states tolerance of individual belief is not a difficult issue. As Spinoza points out, it is impossible for a persons mind to be under anothers control, and this is a necessary reality that any government must accept. The more difficult case, the true test of a regimes commitment to toleration, concerns the liberty of citizens to express those beliefs, either in speech or in writing. And here Spinoza goes further than anyone else of his time: Utter failure, he says, will attend any attempt in a commonwealth to force men to speak only as prescribed by the sovereign despite their different and opposing opinions The most tyrannical government will be one where the individual is denied the freedom to express and to communicate to others what he thinks, and a moderate government is one where this freedom is granted to every man.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
51 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations