Reply to Yenter: Spinoza, Number, and Diversity

Barry, Galen

doi:10.1080/09608788.2015.1116433

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Notes1

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2019

Publication Types

Select...

Article1

Relationship

Self Cite1

Independent0

Authors

Journals

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…44.I have argued elsewhere that God’s indeterminate nature helps Spinoza avoid a different charge, leveled by Samuel Clarke and Tschirnhaus, that a multiplicity cannot follow from God’s definition. See Barry (2016). …”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spinoza and the problem of other substances

Barry

2019

Can. J. of Philosophy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most of Spinoza’s arguments for God’s existence do not rely on any special feature of God, but instead on merely general features of substance. This raises the following worry: those arguments prove the existence of non-divine substances just as much as they prove God’s existence, and yet there is not enough room in Spinoza’s system for all these substances. I argue that Spinoza attempts to solve this problem by using a principle of plenitude to rule out the existence of other substances and that the principle cannot be derived from the PSR, as many claim.Abbreviation: PSR: Principle of Sufficient Reason

show abstract

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%