Spinoza & "entropies of lovable but scatterbrained Mother Nature . . ." (GR 324).

[Markekohut]

Yeah....dint understand Morris on this...it IS Mardi Gras, after all...



Sent from my iPad

On Feb 11, 2013, at 10:17 AM, Ian Livingston <igrlivingston at gmail.com> wrote:

> In Spinoza God and Nature are two terms for the same thing. If you have faith that Nature is what it says it is, you believe in God.
> 
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 7:19 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Mark! You are such an optimist.
>> 
>> Maybe that's from a belief in God?
>> 
>> Scatterbrained  requires a brain. All the questions, where, why, who, when, and who else, requires a brain.
>> 
>> Zen seems to be more open & fluid.
>> 
>> Sending Zen @ ya!
>> 
>> David
>> 
>> On Sunday, February 10, 2013, Markekohut wrote:
>>> Nice find.
>>> 
>>> I think one very arguable reading of Against the Day is that Nature, which may be scatter-brained
>>> ---infused with Chance?---must be loveable and is and may be God. #pantheism #panemtheism
>>> ala Spinoza's Ethics....
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>> 
>>> On Feb 10, 2013, at 8:43 AM, alice wellintown <alicewellintown at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> > In the appendix to the first book of Ethics, Spinoza states,
>>> >
>>> > "I have now sufficiently explained my first point. There is no need to
>>> > show at length, that nature has no particular goal in view, and that
>>> > final causes are mere human figments."
>>> >
>>> > http://www.faculty.umb.edu/gary_zabel/Courses/Spinoza/Texts/Spinoza/e1f.htm
>> w
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20130211/59448f94/attachment.html>