Tractatus Theologico-Politicus Research Articles

KNOWLEDGE OF GOD, EMPOWERMENT OF THE MIND AND TRANSFORMATION OF THE SUBJECT IN SPINOZA

A central theme of Spinoza’s Ethica is the description of the individual’s exposition to the emergence of passions. Passions bring the individual to a condition of mental enslavement. Spinoza tries to find a way out of the passions: through the analysis of the structure of reality and through the inquiry into the structure of the individual’s mind, Spinoza shows that the development of knowledge of reality in the mind is the solution to the process of liberation of the mind. The possibility, for the individual, to reach an authentic power of mind consists in the acquisition of the knowledge of reality. This acquisition needs to be developed through the appropriate education. The knowledge of the whole reality increases the power of the individual’s mind, thus contemporarily diminishing the influence of passions on the individual’s mind. Through the knowledge the individual can emendate his mind: thereby the individual becomes able to eliminate in his mind the already present confused ideas on reality, on the one hand, and to oppose the formation of new confused ideas, on the other hand. The main text of our investigation will be Spinoza’s Ethica; we shall refer also to the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus and to the Tractatus Politicus.

The Notions of Miracle, Testimonial Knowledge, and Certainty

Spinoza devoted Chapter VI of the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus to the question of the miracle, which he considers illusory because it constitutes a purely natural phenomenon. However, he attributed to it a social and pedagogical function capable of preserving the power of the sovereign. I will analyze Spinoza’s theory of the miracle and then Hume’s theory, in order to compare them, and thus highlight the specific problems posed by their thesis. I will then analyze Hume’s probabilistic approach, by examining Bayses’ theorem. I will then examine the epistemological status of testimonial knowledge. Finally, I will confront the theories of Spinoza and Hume with R. Sa‘adyah G’aon’s notion of certainty and Maimonides’ conception of miracle

Passive Tolerance versus Political Engagement. Antistius Constans, Koerbagh, Van den Enden, and Spinoza

This article investigates the contribution of Spinoza and authors of his circle (Antistius Constans, Van den Enden and Koerbagh) on the modern conception of tolerance. In his Tractatus theologico-politicus (1670), Spinoza launches the libertas philosophandi-question integrating two kinds of freedom between which there is a tension: freedom of thought and speech and freedom of religious conscience. As freedom means living and acting in society in light of one’s own interests, tolerance becomes a political issue that depends from political perspectives and priorities. This insight leads Spinoza to bringing together the control of political authority on religious affairs and a political regime of religious plurality and toleration. These ideas seem to be reminiscent of texts published in his immediate circle: the anonymus De jure ecclesiasticorum (1665); the political pamphlets Kort verhael (1662) and Vrye Politijke Stellingen (1665) of his teacher Van den Enden; the subversive dictionary Een Bloemhof (1668) and the systematic philosophical Een Ligt (1668) of Koerbagh. In these texts the question of religion and religious authority shifts to the question of the nature and origin of political authority. The authors all criticize the abuse of power in light of the idea that there is no freedom without equality and no equality without freedom. Together with Spinoza’s Tractatus politicus (1677), they thereby form an anomaly within the anomaly of the Calvinist Low Countries that regards specifically this radical democratic view. They are not so much talking about tolerance but about everyone’s active participation in political life which is necessary for the rescue of the republic.

Spinoza’s Theological–Political Treatise (1670–2020). Commemorating a Long-Forgotten Masterpiece

In entitling this Special Issue of Philosophies, commemorating the publication of the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (hereafter TTP) 350 years ago, ‘a long-forgotten masterpiece’, we acknowledge our debt to Edwin Curley, who in the 1990s wrote two papers called ‘Notes on a Neglected Masterpiece’ [...]

Of Prophecy and Piety: Spinoza’s Tractatus Theologico-Politicus between al-Farabî and Erasmus

In this contribution, I discuss some less well-known premodern and early modern antecedents of Spinoza’s concepts and claims in the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus. On the one hand, I will argue, Spinoza’s notion of prophecy owes more to Moses Maimonides than to any Christian author; and through Maimonides, Spinoza may be linked to the discussion of prophecy in The Virtuous City by the tenth-century Islamic philosopher al-Farabî. Spinoza’s concern with prophecy as a popular formulation of the Divine Law may be fruitfully seen in the light of these two authors. On the other hand, Spinoza’s notion of pietas has arguably been shaped by a number of early modern authors from the Low Countries, including Thomas a Kempis and Erasmus: it does not consist in merely obeying the law, but also has a clear devotional and theist dimension of love for God and for one’s neighbors. As such, it may be associated with recent ideas on philosophy and spiritual exercises. These findings have a number of non-trivial implications for Spinoza’s place in the rise of modern, academic Western philosophy. I will discuss these implications in the context of Pierre Hadot’s influential views on philosophy as a way of life and Michel Foucault’s notion of spirituality.

From Reality without Mysteries to the Mystery of the World: Marilena Chaui’s Reading of Spinoza’s Tractatus Theologico-Politicus

This article offers an overview of Marilena Chaui’s reading of the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (TTP). Chaui has published numerous books and essays on Baruch Spinoza. Her two-volume study The Nerve of Reality is the culmination of a decades-long engagement with the Dutch philosopher, and her research has been a valuable resource for generations of Latin American scholars. From this extensive output, we focus on Chaui’s main texts on the theological-political, concentrating on her analysis of the concept of superstition and the philosophical language of the TTP, which Chaui calls a “counter-discourse”. Spinoza’s enduring relevance for the interpretation of contemporary phenomena is clarified by Chaui’s analysis of the TTP, which establishes a fundamentally political understanding of superstition.

Conspiracy Theories as Superstition: Today’s Mirror Image in Spinoza’s Tractatus Theologico-Politicus

The contention in this paper is that the theological-political disputes Spinoza was concerned with 350 years ago are similar to the conspiratorial disputes we experience today. The world in Spinoza’s Tractatus theologico-politicus, a political intervention in his time, serves as a “mirror image”, that is to say, it deals with the same problem we face today albeit in a different mode. Understanding our contemporary condition under the auspices of a Spinozist perspective, problems in countermeasures to the conspiratorial disputes come to light. Scholarly work and practice focus on the epistemological dimension of conspiracy theories, tying in the extent to which they are problematic to the degree in which they deal in untruth. However, the lesson from Spinoza’s analysis of the theological-political disputes is that such theories do not deal in truth, but, in affect, they do not spring from a lack of education but a lack of certainty. The work of Spinoza opens up a different approach, and if our aim is like that of the TTP, to defend political life against the threat of civil war, such a different approach is in order.

Spinoza in His Time: The 17th-Century Religious Context

In one of the last paragraphs of his Tractatus theologico-politicus (1670), Spinoza extolls the harmony between people of a diversity of faiths, maintained by the magistracy of Amsterdam. However, he also seems apprehensive about the possibility of the return of chaos, such as during the Arminian Controversies in the Dutch Republic in the 1610s and the English Civil War in the 1640s and 1650s. The so-called Wolzogen affair in 1668 probably rattled him. Spinoza’s fears would, however, prove groundless. Theological controversy in the public church was often fierce and bitter, but did not threaten the integrity of the State after 1619. Political and ecclesiastical authorities supported discussions and debate in which a new theological consensus could be hammered out. From the examples of Petrus de Witte’s Wederlegginge der Sociniaensche Dwaelingen and Romeyn de Hooghe’s Hieroglyphica, I will argue that such freedom was not limited to the universities, under the aegis of academic freedom, but that Spinoza’s call for free research and open debate was in fact everyday reality.

The Tractatus Theologico-Politicus and the Dutch: Spinoza’s Intervention in the Political-Religious Controversies of the Dutch Republic

This paper outlines the Dutch background of the Tractatus theologico-politicus (TTP) and aims to contribute to a deeper understanding of the Theological-Political Treatise. It reads Spinoza’s first main work published anonymously as an intervention in the many political-religious controversies, which began in 1579 and ravaged the Dutch Republic during the first century of its history. The three main topics of these controversies are also the focus of the TTP: I. the freedom to philosophize; II. the relation between Church and State, and III. the nature of public religion, which is defined by a minimal creed. These topics were familiar to the contemporary Dutch reader. The TTP appears to give a theoretical account of what theological-political practice was in the days of Spinoza.

The Coherence of Spinoza’s Theological-Political Treatise

Spinoza’s Tractatus Theologico-Politicus has been critiqued as contradictory and inconsistent. This is why I believe that the question with regard to Spinoza’s ‘neglected masterpiece’ should be: How to read the Treatise as a coherent philosophical work? I suggest that the reason why the Treatise seems contradictory is because of the complex juxtaposition of its two main foci: the relationship between theology and philosophy, and that of theology and politics. In this paper, I will argue against the claim of contradiction and pursue to demonstrate a close correlation and mutual interdependence of both relations. While the domains of theology and philosophy may be separate, there is no contradiction between the salvation of the ignorant and the salvation of the wise. Similarly, there is no contradiction between the theological part of the Treatise—which focuses on ‘piety’ and the defense of the freedom of ‘internal religion’—and the political part—which focuses on ‘peace’, and claims that the state should have absolute power over ‘external religion’.

Œuvres vol. IV: Ethica/Éthique by Baruch Spinoza

Reviewed by: Œuvres vol. IV: Ethica/Éthique by Baruch Spinoza Steven Nadler Baruch Spinoza. Œuvres, vol. IV: Ethica/Éthique. Texte établi par Fokke Akkerman et Piet Steenbakkers. Traduction par Pierre-François Moreau. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2020. Pp. 670. Paper, €29.00. The world of Spinoza scholarship has seen a number of remarkable achievements in the first two decades of the twenty-first century. There was the publication of an expanded, two-volume edition of Jakob Freudenthal's Die Lebensgeschichte Spinozas (1899) by Manfred Walther and Michael Czelinski in 2006, an indispensable resource for documents related to Spinoza's life and writings. Then there was the stunning discovery by Leen Spruit in 2010 of a manuscript of Spinoza's Ethics in the Vatican Library—the first (and so far only) extant copy. Most important of all, however, is the project under the general direction of Pierre-François Moreau and the auspices of the Groupe de Recherches Spinozistes, and published by the Presses Universitaires de France (PUF), of a new, truly critical edition of Spinoza's texts (accompanied by French translations on facing pages). The multivolume Œuvres de Spinoza is intended to supplant Carl Gebhardt's four-volume Spinoza Opera. Gebhardt's was the standard edition through the twentieth century, and remains so for Spinoza's works and correspondence not yet produced in the PUF series. Gebhardt's edition had its advantages over the earlier, mostly German editions in the nineteenth century (when the first complete Spinoza editions appeared), including those by Paulus (1802–3), Bruder (1843–46), and (the standard edition for forty years, until Gebhardt) Van Vloten and Land (1882–83). With all due respect to and appreciation for Gebhardt's accomplishment, however, his is not a true critical edition. Moreover, as scholars have long known, it has its flaws. Thus, the new PUF edition will, once completed, be the standard edition for generations. Until now, there were three volumes: I. Premiers Écrits (includes the Tractatus de intellectus emendatione [Treatise on the Emendation of the Intellect] and the Korte verhandeling van God, de mensch en deselvs welstand [Short Treatise on God, Man and His Well-Being]); III. Tractatus theologico-politicus (Theological-Political Treatise; TTP); and V. Tractatus politicus (Political Treatise). For quite some time, scholars have anticipated the volume in the PUF series devoted to the Ethica, Spinoza's most important philosophical work. The wait is now over, and I am happy to report that their patience has been amply rewarded with a magnificent critical edition. The Latin text is established by the late Fokke Akkerman and Piet Steenbakkers; the authoritative, thoughtful French translation is by Moreau. Spinoza published only two works in his lifetime: his presentation of parts 1 and 2 of Descartes's Principia philosophiae, accompanied by the Cogitata metaphysica (1663), and the TTP (1670, published anonymously). It was not until after—in fact, immediately after—Spinoza's death in February 1677 that his friends set to work preparing his unpublished writings for publication. From the manuscripts they inherited from the philosopher, including his autograph copy of the Ethica, they brought out, in late 1677, the Latin Opera posthuma (OP) and the Dutch De Nagelate Schriften (NS). There have been quite a few editions of the Latin Ethica since Gebhardt, many of which were based on his text. The problem with all of these editions, whether they took their lead from Gebhardt or went directly to the OP, is that their only source was that OP text, along with the Dutch translation in the NS. They did not have access to the Vatican manuscript, which Spruit and Pina Totaro published in 2011 (the only exception is the second edition of Paolo Cristofolini's bilingual, Latin/Italian Etica [2014]). As Moreau and Steenbakkers (M/S) note in their superb and thorough introduction to this volume, the Vatican copy is of the utmost importance in producing a critical edition of the Ethica, as is a proper understanding of the relationship between the Latin text in the OP and the Dutch version in the NS. Spinoza began the Ethica sometime between mid-1662 and early 1663. He put what was then a three-part work aside in...

A Baconian historiola mentis in Spinoza’s Method

Bacon’s influence on Spinoza’s thought is controversial, since this latter seems to underestimate the role of experience in achieving true knowledge. In this paper, I will investigate Spinoza’s reference in Letter 37** to a historiola mentis (little history of mind) a la Bacon as an empirical-historical method to distinguish between different kinds of perceptions. My aim is to explain why Spinoza considers Bacon’s little history of mind a useful tool to proceed towards the knowledge of the excellent things [praestantissimae res]. I will suggest that Spinoza could have been inspired by Bacon’s theory of idols and his historical method, since they help distinguish between different kinds of ideas with no previous knowledge of the first causes. Moreover, Spinoza’s method for interpreting the Scripture in his Tractatus Theologicopoliticus seems to be partially indebted to Bacon’s account of natural and civil history and aims to clarify the practical meaning of the Scripture. According to Spinoza, a historical and empirical method might play a pivotal role by transforming human praxis and behavior according to the order of the intellect. This method has in a strictly practical function and cannot be compared to the true knowledge of things through their first causes. However, it is a fundamental part of the process directing human beings to the knowledge of the most fundamental things.

Spinoza's not so quiet influence: the Theological-political treatise 350 years on

Abstract In this review essay I reflect on the centrality of Spinoza's thought to political modernity on the combined occasion of the 350th anniversary of the original publication of his first political treatise, the Tractatus theologico–politicus, and of the publication this year of George Eliot's English translation of Spinoza's Ethics, which had been lying in a drawer for almost a century and a half. His influence is both substantial and methodological. It owes to the singular way in which he calibrated the relationship between reason, or the natural human need to understand, and faith, or the need to believe. But, over a century before the social sciences were invented, Spinoza also laid the foundations for the interpretative methods that would become central to these sciences and to the study of international politics. He remains essential reading for understanding our world.

The Dutch Translation and Circulation of Spinoza’s Tractatus Theologico-Politicus in Manuscript and Print (1670-1694)

Abstract Benedictus de Spinoza became one of the few censored authors in the liberal publishing climate of the Dutch Republic. Twenty-three years passed before the first Dutch translation of his Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (1670) appeared in print, despite two interrupted attempts to bring out a vernacular version before 1693. This article compares the three oldest Dutch translations of Spinoza’s notorious treatise by combining digital sentence alignment with philological analysis. It describes the relationship between the variants, two printed versions and a manuscript, revealing a pattern of fragmentary similarity. This partial textual reuse can be explained using Harold Love’s notion of ‘scribal publication’: readers circulated handwritten copies as a strategy to avoid the censorship of Spinozism. As a result, medium and language not only conditioned the dissemination of Spinoza’s treatise in Dutch, but also affected its text in the versions published—either in manuscript or print—between 1670 and 1694.

Spinoza and Judaism in the French Context: The Case of Milner’s Le Sage Trompeur*

Abstract Jean-Claude Milner’s Le sage trompeur (2013), a controversial recent piece of French Spinoza literature, remains regrettably understudied in the English-speaking world. Adopting Leo Strauss’ esoteric reading method, Milner alleges that Spinoza dissimulates his genuine analysis of the causes of the persecution and survival of the Jewish people within a brief “manifesto” found at the end of the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (TTP), Chapter 3. According to Milner, Spinoza holds that the Jewish people themselves are responsible for the hatred of the Jewish people, and that the engine of their longevity is the hatred they engender. Additionally, claims Milner, Spinoza covertly insinuates that the solution to this persistent state of hatred consists in the mass apostasy of the Jewish people under the leadership of a Sabbatai Zevi-like figure. This article presents the Milner–Spinoza controversy to the English-speaking public along with the larger context of French-language scholarship on Spinoza’s relation to Judaism. While refuting Milner’s reading of Spinoza, I simultaneously clarify relevant elements of Spinoza’s discussions of Judaism in the TTP, such as Spinoza’s examination of Jewish identity and the nature of divine election, Spinoza’s understanding of the causes of national hatred, and Spinoza’s appeals to Portuguese, Spanish, Chinese, and Turkish political history.

Spinoza's Political Psychology: The Taming of Fortune and Fear by Justin Steinberg

Reviewed by: Spinoza's Political Psychology: The Taming of Fortune and Fear by Justin Steinberg Michael A. Rosenthal Justin Steinberg. Spinoza's Political Psychology: The Taming of Fortune and Fear. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018. Pp. xv + 235. Cloth, $105.00. In this ambitious and important book, Justin Steinberg attempts to explain the significance of the project for both contemporary political philosophy and the history of political thought. He argues that Spinoza offers a much-needed antidote against "ideal theory" in political philosophy. He also wants to expand our horizons concerning the context of Spinoza's political thought, primarily by noting the influence of Renaissance Civic Humanism. He argues for two main theses: the political works are continuous with the Ethics; and the role of the state is to help perfect the individual. The first chapter, "Metaphysical Psychology and Ingenia Formation," argues that (i) there is a human essence, which is nonetheless plastic, that is, can be formed within a range of possibilities depending on the circumstances in which this essence is instantiated; (ii) that this plastic essence constitutes the unique ingenium or genius of an individual or people; and (iii) that the state has a duty and interest to form this ingenium. In the second chapter, "Eliminating Juridical Constraints and Naturalizing Rights," Steinberg builds on earlier interpretations of Spinoza's political theory as republican and argues against John G. A. Pocock's view that Spinoza is essentially a natural law theorist. Steinberg's central claim in this chapter is that Spinoza adopts natural law only to undermine it. The main claim of the third chapter, "The Continuity Thesis and the Aim of Government," is that the aim of the state is to liberate or empower its citizens, not only physically but also intellectually and emotionally. In chapter four, "The Politics of Hope and Fear," the author convincingly shows how fear can be overcome through hope in Spinoza's politics. Steinberg raises several difficulties for his reading: the "inseparable counterparts challenge," the "equal constraints challenge," and the "equal willingness challenge." After discussing the nature of fear and hope, he shows how it is possible to respond to each of these challenges. The main point emphasized in conclusion is that "affective welfare is a very important dimension along which to measure civic success" (98). [End Page 614] In chapter five, "Statecraft and Taming Fortuna," the author emphasizes the importance of fortune in Spinoza's political philosophy. I found his distinction between two models of responding to fortune—the Stoic model of inner control and the Civic Humanist model of active engagement—very helpful. The second model is crucial to the broader claim that the state has an interest in and can actively shape the nature of individuals in the state, in its project of trying to master the vicissitudes of the external world. In chapter six, "From Superstition and Persecution to True Religion and Toleration," Steinberg draws from the now substantial literature on the political context of the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (TTP) to show that Spinoza's critique of Scripture aimed to undermine the authority of the clergy to bolster the more tolerant secular regime. In this way, a certain degree of religious freedom can be justified on prudential grounds, depending on the contingent nature (the ingenium) of the people governed. The most original and stimulating chapter, in my view, is chapter seven, "The Affective and Epistemic Case for Democracy." Some of Steinberg's best work has been on the "epistemic" case for democracy, and he does a nice job expanding it and then situating it in his broader argument. It supports some of his broader claims, like the continuity thesis and the case for perfectionism. He recognizes that some of his claims border on an idealization (section 7.3), though he is right to qualify that in light of his commitment to realism (see 177). One criticism is that it is not obvious that Spinoza's commitment to democracy in the TTP is "beyond dispute" (158). It certainly plays a role in his political theory, but he seems to discard it as an idealization. Steinberg argues for an interesting and controversial view in chapter eight, "Salvation, Eternity, and the State...

The reasonable republic? Statecraft, affects, and the highest good in Spinoza’s late Tractatus Politicus

ABSTRACTIn his final, incomplete Tractatus Politicus (1677), Spinoza’s account of human power and freedom shifts towards a new, teleological interest in the ‘highest good’ of the state in realising the freedom of its subjects. This development reflects, in part, the growing influence of Aristotle, Machiavelli, Dutch republicanism, and the Dutch post-Rampjaar context after 1672, with significant implications for his view of political power and freedom. It also reflects an expansion of his account of natural right to include independence of mind, a model of autonomy that in turn shapes the infamous sui juris exclusions of his unfinished account of democracy. This article focuses specifically on the Tractatus Politicus, a hitherto under-addressed work in Spinoza’s corpus and one too often considered indistinct from his earlier Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (1670). It argues for a reconsideration of its importance to early modern political thought, particularly regarding the role of the state in realising the freedom and harmony of its subjects through reasonable laws.

Frankenstein, Spinoza, and exemplarity

ABSTRACTThis paper reads Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, through the lens of three themes in Spinoza’s philosophy. First, the bondage of the passions; second, the importance of the imitation of affects as grounding sociability; and, finally, the problematic relationship between human normative life and the rest of nature, posed by Spinoza’s immanent ontology. Like Spinoza’s exemplars in the Ethics and in the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus, Shelley’s presentation of the modern Prometheus is intended to provide her readers with a vivid salutary lesson: hubris and narcissism engender disastrous forms of sociability. In contrast, the ars vivendi of the wise person centres on strength of character (fortitudo) which consists in achieving a balance between the care of one’s self (animositas) and the care of others (generositas).

The Apostle Paul in Spinoza and Badiou

This paper offers an analysis of the philosophical interpretations of the apostle Paul in Spinoza’s Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (1669) and Badiou's Saint Paul: La foundation de l'universalisme (1997). In addition, a brief description is offered on the difference between, on the one hand, the theological Paul, the Apostle of Faith, and, on the other hand, the historical Paul. Both Spinoza and Badiou offer complex philosophical readings of Paul that can be better understood when taking into consideration how they square with the image of Paul that has been constructed by the various theological traditions of Europe (i.e., the theological Paul), as well as the figure of Paul that is currently being reconstructed by historical-critical biblical scholarship (both New Perspective on Paul and postcolonial/empire-critical readings of Paul).

The First Orchestrated Attack on Spinoza: Johannes Melchioris and the Cartesian Network in Utrecht.

This article examines the immediate Dutch reception of the Tractatus theologico-politicus. Using newfound archival sources it demonstrates that the anti-Spinoza activity of the Cartesians in Utrecht extends far beyond the well-known writings of Lambertus van Velthuysen and Regnerus van Mansveld. Their Cartesian network not only produced the very first public refutation to appear, but also formed a center for coordinating much of the Dutch response to Spinoza. This engagement, it is argued in closing, must be accounted for in Spinoza reception history, and forms the background to the mysterious visit Spinoza paid to Utrecht in the summer of 1673.