Is there a point in reading Spinoza today or is he just a historical curiosity like how Alchemy used to be a legitimate...

>I only read people who are entirely correct
So you've never read anything?

The fact that you can say anything about anything doesn't mean your logic has any sort of merit orher then producing a bittersweat reaction of laughter and sadness for such a low standard of reasoning.

This. Spinoza: Practicale Philosophy is incredible, and an understanding of Spinoza is essential for when you finally grow up and read 1000 plateus

Ok you convinced me, I didn't know he was so relevant to Big Gilles

Spinoza is perhaps the most relevant philosopher right now. He is also one of the most influent of all time.
I don't know where you got the idea that he was just a historical curiosity, but you should definitivly read him.

What exactly was he wrong about?
As far as I care, he's still the gold standard of ethics

read deleuze

>I didn't know he was so relevant to Big Gilles
he is the most central thinker to deleuze, followed by bergson and nietzsche

Deleuze, Negri. Some smaller names like Lordon, Massumi

Spinoza is a proto-Locke, who really was the influential philosopher.

>Lordon
I love this guy, I wish he was more well known outside of France.

Lots of Spinoza love in here. I have had a copy of his Ethics/Improvement of the Understanding that I have been putting off reading. How difficult of a philosopher is he?

My experience with philosophy is Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Leibniz, Seneca, Aurelius.

(((Baruch Spinoza)))

One of the most difficult. Probably the most difficult of his era.

Excommunicated for not being kike enough

You might have a dissociative disorder, user.

Spinoza's Ethics is great for understanding the lead in to modern determinism and materialism. I haven't read anything else from him though.
>How difficult of a philosopher is he?
Not bad. He lays his points out very clearly and orderly.
If you read and understood Aristotle and Leibniz, then you'll have absolutely no trouble with Spinoza as he's much simpler and more straight forward than either of them.
What? Nothing he says is particularly dense or difficult to understand. He's pretty much based in a common sense understanding of materialistic causation.

Not that user but he can be pretty difficult because his definitions can be pretty vague. He's also talking about some obscure stuff

What definitions did you have trouble with?

I haven't read it in some time but substance and attribute gave me some trouble. I was reading a lot of modern philosophy at the time and they each use substance in such different subtle ways that it started to confuse me

He's essential if you have any interest in the Enlightenment.

The Tractatus Theologico-Politicus is just as important as the Ethics.

This article addresses precisely that issue
plato.stanford.edu/entries/continental-rationalism/

haven't gotten to into him. is Willing Slaves Of Capital good?

Nigger what? Spinozism was one of the hugely debated theologies during Kant's time, people basically tried to use his ideas to paint Kant as an atheist prompting him to further refine his critiques. Spinoza was huge

Alchemy is spiritual science (science meaning knowledge, bud), not proto-chemistry.
cf: Evola, Burckhardt, et al.

Was being the keyword

Lordon really is great in each of his books and i would recommend you the one where he links explicitely Marx with Spinoza, i do not know how it is translated in english but maybe it is this one. The most powerful thing in it is that he takes the marxist way of thinking into the era of globalization and neoliberalism. He's pretty much the new Marx but without the revolutionary theory

If anything, chemistry is a debased alchemy.

t. Guénon, Evola

He's one of these philosophers who wrote incomprehensible garbage (in latin for additional butthurt) and people hailed it as genius after interpreting their gibberish for themselves.

Negri is a big fan.

Rather for fraternizing with Christians too much, and when his Jewab excumunitated him in a a rather chilling way, he just shrugged his shoulders and went on to associate with Christians instead.

he's saying it about your stupid ideas about philosophy, not spinoza

>not understanding Spinoza
>call him out because «gibberish»
>«butthurt» because latin
I hope your one of those trolls who lurks on Veeky Forums to feel intelligent

>Rather for fraternizing with Christians too much, and when his Jewab excumunitated him in a a rather chilling way, he just shrugged his shoulders and went on to associate with Christians instead.
Christians hated him too, some priest even called him the "sinister ambassador of hell". Spinoza philosophy was very contreversial at the time, and in some way, it still is.

I get that Reddit and scientism are bad but I think we're taking this reactionary meme a little far guys...

>being this faggot