Abstract
Spinoza foresees a state of nature among states, just like the one among human beings. Human beings, under this chaotic condition, are not bound by the contracts they have concluded, if these contracts have lost their utility. States, too, may cease to observe those international agreements, if obedience to these is not advantageous any more for the state concerned, or whenever there is a more advantageous alternative than those perks offered by the international agreement. These findings have led many scholars of International Relations and International Law to deem Spinoza as a thinker in the mold of Hobbes or the like, someone who allocates no place for morality in political affairs. Spinoza proves at times to be a stingier critic of morality than Hobbes, yet he still calls for cooperation on international fora. This he does by distancing himself from the rhetoric of natural law. International solidarity, according to him, will enable participating states to be more powerful and to enjoy more rights. Yet again, he does not set idealistic goals and just underlines the more advantageous state to be created owing to the establishment of such a peaceful cooperation.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Kaygı. Uludağ Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Felsefe Dergisi
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
