Morality , Ethics and rationalists : Spinoza, Descartes,Leibnitz

Descartes (1596-1650) and Espinosa (1632-1677), along with Leibniz, are considered the most relevant rationalists. Its importance lies, among other things, the method which uses a model used hitherto.Mathematical reasoning must be, what it means in the context of the seventeenth century the use of geometry.We are going to pay more attention Espinosa, whose work bears the title chief ethics.Geometric order according demonstrated. DeCarta, in terms of moral and policy issues, not too complicated, ie not going to give some tips on how to live without complications, when he says that we must avoid trying to change the habits of people who is best adapted to them. On the other hand, fails to fall into the mechanism, which implies the lack of freedom and agree that man is free because it has a soul whose cogito is endorsed by God Somehow

(The God of the philosophers).

Espinosa, however, get to take as active part in contests of character politics, that the Jews it evicted from his community with some violence, as in his book Theologico Treaty POLITICAL conducts a frontal attack judah the theocracy. 25 His theory of knowledge conflicts with the Cartesian dualism, as conceived only tricky substance, which “shows”, say, under two modes of extensiny the thought. The laws of thought are the same as the laws of nature. But in the field politics, freedom is based on individual freedom, which is achieved through intelligence. The passions are not only inadequate knowledge of our affections. The free man is one who has a clear understanding of their feelings and so can dominate. The fundamental virtues are for Espinosa firmness, generosity and strength. Gustavo Bueno puts it this way: “The strength will be, the main virtue ethics. And using the terminology of the policy of Benito Espinosa (Part III, propositions 58 and 59, part IV, proposicin 30, &) diramos policy that supreme virtue of the strength (or strength) of the soul , appears as firmly when the action (or desire) of each individual strives to preserve his being (the firm considered policy prevents any action designed to make my body what I want, limiting the possibility policy of suicide), and manifests as generous at the time in which each individual strives to help others. The strength is therefore not just selfishness or altruism, because the only strength is firmly in that it is strength, as strength is only in virtue of generosity. A generous detached from the policy ceases to be strong and, although it may continue to be crucial in the moral sense, but can be bad

(Evil, evil) from the point of view tico: as we shall see, the moral virtues and practices relate to each s dialectic. ” 26

As for the topics about the foundation of natural law, in Espinosa found a different relation to natural law as proposed by Vitoria. Francisco de Vitoria, the line is an important reason of a natural law that transcends it. For Espinosa is not as, since the reason it is right. Secularizacin process is clear. The human reason goes to the fore as the generation of the right, the approach Spinoza. The state supreme goal is freedom. In Theologico Tractatus Politicus, chapter XVI, “the principles of community politics,” we read:

“For right or natural law institution just understand the rules of the real nature of each type, according to which we conceive of each as naturally determined to exist and act in a concrete way …In this regard we do not do any distinction between men and natural realities modems …Every author of any action, carried out under the laws of nature, has a sovereign right, then act according their natural Determination …But the natural right of every man is not determined by sound reason, but by the will and power, this is normal because nature has given them an alternative and effective faculty refused to live according the laws of a sane spirit …It follows that the law of natural institution, under which all men are born and in their majority, live, no action whatsoever to prohbe exception of those that no one wanted or may

achieve. ”

Published in: on March 20, 2011 at 4:33 pm  Leave a Comment  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s