Encyclopedia of Early Modern Philosophy and the Sciences 2021
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-20791-9_453-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Spinoza and Science

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
0
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 10 publications
0
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Where Spinoza crucially differs from both, however, is in arguing that matter is inherently active and actual because it belongs to God's nature, God being inherently active and actual (IP17S, IP31S). For discussion of Spinoza's critique of Descartes's conception of Extension, see, e.g., Alison Peterman (2015) and Thaddeus S. Robinson (2009). Peterman is noteworthy because she argues that Spinoza also breaks with tradition by denying that length, breadth, and depth constitute the true nature of Extension.…”
Section: Mind and Body In Spinozamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Where Spinoza crucially differs from both, however, is in arguing that matter is inherently active and actual because it belongs to God's nature, God being inherently active and actual (IP17S, IP31S). For discussion of Spinoza's critique of Descartes's conception of Extension, see, e.g., Alison Peterman (2015) and Thaddeus S. Robinson (2009). Peterman is noteworthy because she argues that Spinoza also breaks with tradition by denying that length, breadth, and depth constitute the true nature of Extension.…”
Section: Mind and Body In Spinozamentioning
confidence: 99%