Spinoza and Republicanism

Prokhovnik, Raia

doi:10.1057/9780230000902

Cited by 43 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Rosenthal also argues that Spinoza’s politics pursues the republican aim of instilling citizens with virtue, specifically the virtue of toleration (‘Tolerance’). Consequently, West’s view is indirectly supported by those who take a critical stance toward such republican readings (Smith, Jewish Identity 164; Prokhovnik 209, 216).…”

Section: The Main Debate: Valuing Freedommentioning

confidence: 99%

Spinoza’s Liberalism

Kisner

2012

Philosophy Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While Spinoza’s political philosophy is often described as liberal, it is not always clear what this label means or whether it is warranted. Calling Spinoza ‘liberal’ implies that he belongs to a historical tradition of political philosophers, who formulated and defended claims, which later became identified as central to political liberalism. Consequently, clarifying how Spinoza is a liberal requires specifying precisely which liberal views he articulated and defended. This paper, first, examines the various ways that commentators have interpreted Spinoza as defending liberal commitments. This examination shows that most commentators describe Spinoza as liberal on the grounds that his politics defends the value of individual political freedom, specifically of speech and thought. The paper, second, considers whether he upholds a claim that is important to contemporary liberalism, what is sometimes called the fundamental liberal principle. The paper concludes that Spinoza does not, which suggests that he does not sit as easily in the liberal tradition as some scholars have suggested.

show abstract

Section: The Main Debate: Valuing Freedommentioning

confidence: 99%

Spinoza’s Liberalism

Kisner

2012

Philosophy Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…La resonancia de una tradición republicana es aquí clara. En particular, es el período de la República de las Provincias Unidas, un horizonte temporal que, como señala Prokhovnik (2004), se extiende imprecisamente desde fines del siglo XVI al siglo XVIII, el contexto en el que Spinoza emprendió su producción filosófica y teórica. Esta situación se encuentra ciertamente impactada por los debates intelectuales del concierto europeo.…”

unclassified

Thomas Hobbes y Baruch Spinoza en torno al miedo: la relación entre la política democrática y las pasiones

Rodríguez

Cernadas

2021

Torres Lucca

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

El presente artículo se propone indagar el estatuto del miedo y sus declinaciones políticas en los pensamientos de Thomas Hobbes y Baruch Spinoza para interpretar su impacto en la democracia como un problema teórico político. Cuando se comparan a Hobbes y Spinoza, las interpretaciones predominantes, incluso aquellas que identifican algunas coincidencias respecto de los sentidos y efectos políticos de miedo, tienden a poner en primer plano las diferencias entre ambos. Sin embargo, la problematización de esta emoción es un punto de partida para aproximarse a las teorías políticas de Hobbes y de Spinoza desde una óptica distinta. Con ese propósito, en una primera instancia, se repondrá, de manera sintética, la doctrina de los afectos de cada uno de los autores mencionados. Luego, se procederá a realizar una comparación entre dichas doctrinas, destacando un afecto en particular, el miedo. Finalmente, y es en esta sección donde se planteará el argumento central del artículo, se explotarán los corolarios de las conceptualizaciones del miedo de Hobbes y de Spinoza en relación con la política contemporánea.

show abstract

“…1414Close consideration of local historical context leads Prokhovnik (2004, pp. 175, 181) to claim that Spinoza's favored regime would be an aristocracy.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Political power and depoliticized acquiescence: Spinoza and aristocracy

Field

2020

Constellations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent times, political theorists have shown increased interest in Spinoza's political philosophy. The key feature of this philosophy is a non-juridical analysis of sovereignty. Sovereign power is not understood first of all as an authority but as a concrete capacity, a capacity to maintain the civil order, or in other words, to maintain the compliance of civil subjects. Sovereignty so conceived must concretely and continually be achieved from the very people over whom it is exercised. But this task is difficult: there is a limit to what people can be brought to do through repressive means, and correspondingly, sovereign power is vulnerable in the face of the recalcitrant power of the masses. One reason for interest in Spinoza's philosophy is that his non-juridical analysis of sovereignty appears to offer novel conceptual resources for contemporary democratic theory. It is commonly claimed that Spinoza's non-juridical analysis leads him to defend a fundamental privilege for democratic forms. In a democracy, conceived as a regime of political inclusion, the people to be ruled no longer stand opposed to the sovereign power, but instead are included as equal rulers within it. Democratic inclusion is used as a general lens through which to understand all of Spinoza's politics. In Mugnier-Pollet's words (1976, p. 238), the democratic state is "the truth of political life" 1 (see also Balibar,

show abstract

Spinoza and Republicanism

Cited by 43 publications

References 14 publications

Spinoza’s Liberalism

Spinoza’s Liberalism

Thomas Hobbes y Baruch Spinoza en torno al miedo: la relación entre la política democrática y las pasiones

Political power and depoliticized acquiescence: Spinoza and aristocracy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About