Question

Philosophy:

What was Spinoza’s basic argument against free will? What aspect of human consciousness did he regard as free?

Answer 1

• A philosopher named Spinoza who live in the 18th Century has given an argument on freewill.Spinoza said, there is only one reality called NATURE or GOD. This nature has infinite attributes but we humans being limited in knowledge and capability can only know two attributes of it i.e Matter and Mind.
• All the individual things in nature, man, animal, rock, mountain, moon, sun, etc are part of the one and only unity. This unity is the NATURE. These individual things are the modification of the unity. This modification gives them individuality.
• Since everything is NATURE and nature is EVERYTHING. All phenomenon, actions and events are determined by natural law. These Natural laws are certain. This may give a notion that there is no freewill in us because everything is determined by natural law and there is no alternative to anything.
  
• Furthermore, Spinoza claims that traditional ways of understanding free-will are erroneous, because it is not an independent faculty of the mind, rather it is a notion that assists one to persevere in their being, even if they are not fully aware of it.
• He believes that free-will is not an independent faculty of the mind because it is as equally as real as any other self-regarding concept one may form, and therefore, one cannot claim that it takes precedence over their other supposed mental faculties.
• Also, Spinoza claims, the illusion of free-will derives from one’s desire to maintain their being insofar as they understand it at that moment.In other words, free-will is a misnomer given to what one confusedly conceives of as being their ability to freely choose, because the illusion of free-will is an integral part for preserving who they are at any given time.
• Furthermore, because one naturally strives to continue to exists, it follows that freedom of the will is not only dependent on desire, it is also a drive that is linkedto what is good or bad relative to each person.
• To Spinoza, when one mistakenly thinks they are choosing to do something good, they are in fact just following what is conducive to maintaining who they are insofar as they understand themselves at that instant.
• Likewise, when one understands themselves as choosing what is regarded as bad, it is due to them mistakenly believing that their choice will assists them to persevere, when in actuality it is detrimental to their being.
• Hence, one errs when they believe themselves to be freely choosing, because, they are in fact not really choosing, since what is claimed to be good is actually just a fulfillment of a want one has to continue to exist, and what is claimed to be bad is the result of a mistaken notion that one thought would be beneficial to that continuity.
• Spinoza also addresses issues concerning knowledge and its relation to free-will. According to him, the more knowledge one has, the better is their understanding of themselves, and in turn, their ability to express God’s freedom in their own limited way is heightened.
• To Spinoza, this is human freedom, and though it is not totally free, it is nevertheless what people can use in order to align themselves with the will of God, as far as the knowledge of their own indefinite nature allows.
• Furthermore, though he claims freedom of the will is illusory, it can be the case that an increase in one’s knowledge of causes can help one to override, or to restrain the power affects have over them. In other words, through the cultivation of reason one can come to have a certain amount of authority over their lives insofar as they are people, and not the one uncompelled substance, or God.