Einstein's God--Prof. Nadler on Spinoza, pt 2

This is part two of Prof. Steven Nadler speaking on Spinoza at the Beyond Belief '06 conference.

Please pardon the text across the screen. This is my first attempt at this. I quickly downloaded a free format converter and video editor so I could upload this. I'll get better stuff in the near future.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Einstein
• God
• religion
• atheism
• deism
• pantheism
• nadler
• beyond
• belief

[ProfMTH]

I love Steven Nadler. Brilliant and engaging. Thanks for posting this, DFarmer.

[dfarmer1584]

Hey Prof!

I was thinking about attaching these two videos to your latest Einstein video, but I decided against it because 1) most people wouldn't be interested in 20 mins on Spinoza, 2) many others may not understand the connection between Einstein and Spinoza, and 3) that video converter ad is very annoying--I don't feel like reconverting it.

I am happy you enjoyed Nadler's talk!

[2bsirius]

He has an extreme, flawed and limited view of Spionoza's philosophy. He must have needed to publish very badly to hawk this swill.

[dfarmer1584]

I see. Well 2bsirius, perhaps you'll consider enlightening us. Perhaps you'll point out the Professor's errors. Perhaps, then, you'll publish a scholarly text the explains the TRUE nature of Spinoza.

I'd like to hear (read) your contribution. Perhaps you've published already? No?

I'd suspect not. After all, I did see your enlightening video on YT drama (scoff).

[JesuitFarmer]

The bible is a work of literature. Fiction. Fiction is powerful because it's the only art form where you can actually live inside someone else's head. Also, fiction presents a conflict and then the resolve of the conflict, with battles in between. The bible is probably the most powerful work of fiction there has ever been.

[mollie2810]

I never understand why people even try to claim that there would be no morality without religion when morality was already there long before Christianity. The great thinkers of the antiquity weren't Christians and in parts not even religious in any way.

[uninoculated]

Your explantion for why Spinoza was not a pantheist supports the argument that Einstein was, in fact, a Pantheist.

You must be an atheist, because you pose two common atheist arguments: that pantheists are really atheists or pantheists are pagans/wiccans.

I'm happy to hear you describe Spinoza as what I call pure atheists: completely apathetic to nature.

This is why there are pantheists. We consider nature "us" "home" "connected."

Atheist have no emotional connection, no purpose

[tatsumakisempyukaku]

@JesuitFarmer plus, functional descriptions do not equate to ontology. Science, as a method "works" irrespective of the ontological context of the conscious observer doing the science. that is, if we lived in a platonic world where a field or dimension of pure abstract forms exist or if we live in a materialistic universe, science works either way. a scientific description of our conscious experience does not tell us what the substance or isness of our reality.

[tatsumakisempyukaku]

@JesuitFarmer to be fair, science is a methodogy that gathers reoccuring data and tries to find the law that may be at work so as to describe and predict said occurrence. Ironically, if we apply this same method onto the conclusions of science we find that every scientific claim in the past has been wrong. So being good scientist we infer that every future scientific claim will also be wrong. if a claim of science "works" in practice, this does not make it true. plus functional descriptions

[alifeofreason]

2:22 Michael Shermer :)

[TheCrackbinge]

Spinoza is way better than this guy.

[omnissient]

Einstein claimed that eh was not an atheist. But he was. He denied the certainty of atheists and claimed that humans cant possibly know. He called himself an agnostic and didnt like being labeled an atheist. But in fact what he describes there is atheism and most atheists are agnostic. Einstein mixed up those words (due to christians twisting them around). He calls himself agnostic, but in fact he is an atheist.

[Spoonwood]

As an introduction this might do. But, it does mislead people in certain respects. Spinoza's Proposition 15 reads "Quicquid est in Deo est, et nihil sine Deo esse neque concipi potest." Which one might translate as "Whatever is in God is, and nothing can be conceived to be without God." On one reading that makes him a panentheist. Though, he might mean everything depends on the power of God. For Spinoza, from God infinitely things follow in infinite ways, and NO ONE can hate God=Nature.

[honjo294]

hes not an atheist if he believes in any type of god

[Kirkoification]

Niceness is reasom within Spioza