Ignoring the Demon. Spinoza's Way With Doubt - Richard Mason

8/13/2019 Ignoring the Demon. Spinoza's Way With Doubt - Richard Mason

1/21

Ignoring the Demon? Spinoza's Way with Doubt

Richard Mason

Journal of the History of Philosophy, Volume 31, Number 4, October

1993, pp. 545-564 (Article)

Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press

DOI: 10.1353/hph.1993.0088

For additional information about this article

Access provided by PUC/RJ-Pontifcia Universidade Catlica do Rio de Janeiro (3 Sep 2013 18:34 GMT)

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hph/summary/v031/31.4mason.html
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hph/summary/v031/31.4mason.htmlhttp://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hph/summary/v031/31.4mason.html


2/21

Ign or ing the Dem on? Sp inoza sW ay wi th D oub t

R I C H A R D V . M A S O N

S PIN OZ A'S R ES PO NS ES T O T H E C a r t e s i a n m e t h o d o f d o u b t h a v e n o t i m p r e s s e dc o m m e n t a t o r s . R i c h a r d P o p k i n s t a t e d t h e c h a r g e w e ll :C o n s i d e r i n g h o w s e r i o u s ' la c r is e p y r r h o n n i e n e ' w as i n t h e m i d d l e o f t h e s e v e n t e e n t hcen t u ry , and e spec i a l l y how se r i ous i t was fo r Desca r t e s , it i s som ewh a t su rpr i s i ng t o s eehow ca l ml y S p i noza f ac ed i t, and how s i mpl e h e fou nd i t was to d i spose o f i t.U n l i k e D e s c a r te s , w h o h a d t o f i g h t h is w a y t h r o u g h s c e p ti c is m t o a r r i v e a t d o g m a t i ct r u t h , S p i n o z a s i m p l y b e g a n w i t h a n a s s u r a n c e t h a t h i s s y s te m w a s t r u e , a n d a n y o n ewho d i dn ' t s ee t h i s was e i t he r t r u t h -b l i nd ( l i ke co l o r -b l i nd) o r was an i gno ram us . '

T h e r e a s o n s f o r t h is a r e n o t h a r d t o s e e. I n b r ie f , S p i n o z a , w h o w a s e x -t r e m e l y w e l l - a c q u a i n t e d w i t h t h e w o r k o f D e s c a rt e s , d i s m i s s e d t h e d o u b t s o ft h e irst Meditation i n li tt le m o r e t h a n a f e w w o r d s . H i s o p i n i o n t h a t t r u t h is as t a n d a r d o f i t s e l f ( a n d o f f a l si t y ) l o o k s l i k e a n i n t u i t i o n i s m t h a t , t o a c r it i c a lr e a d e r , c a n a p p e a r a s d o g m a t i s m . E v e n a s y m p a t h e t i c c o m m e n t a t o r l ik eH u b b e l i n g t h o u g h t t h a t S p i n o z a h a d n o t r e a ll y s t r u g g le d w i t h d o u b t a s f o re x a m p l e D e s c a r t e s d i d . ' R e c e n t ly , s o m e a t t e m p t s h a v e b e e n m a d e t o a r g u eS p i n o z a ' s c a s e , b u t n o t , I s h a ll c l a im , a l o n g t h e m o s t e f f e c t i v e li n es .3

H i s t o r ic a l l y a n d p h i l o s o p h i c a l l y th i s m a t t e r s. T h e e p i s t e m o l o g y o f D e s-c a r te s p r e s e n t e d a c h a ll e n g e t o p h i l o s o p h e r s f o r t h r e e c e n t u r ie s . S p i n o z as e e m e d t o ig n o r e t h a t c h a l le n g e , o r a t l ea s t h e s e e m e d t o p r o d u c e n o i n t e r e st -i n g r e s p o n s e . T h i s m u s t h a v e b e e n o n e o f t h e m a i n f a c t o rs w h i c h p l ac e d h i mo u t s i d e th e m a i n s t r e a m o f t h e E u r o p e a n p h i lo s o p h i c al c a n o n .

' R . H . P o p k i n , The H istory of Scepticism rom Erasmus to Spinoza ( B e r k e l e y a n d L o s A n g e l e s :U n i v e rs i t y o f C a l i fo rn i a Pre s s , 1 9 7 9 ), 2 3 9 a n d 2 4 5 .2 H . G . H u b b e l i n g , Spinoza's Methodology (A sse n : V a n G o rc u m, 1 9 6 7 ) , 3 5 .

s S e e f o r e x a m p l e M . B . B o h o n , S p i n o z a o n C a r te s i a n D o u b t , N o ~ 1 9 / 3 (1 9 8 5 ) : 3 7 9 -9 5 ; D .G a r r e t t , T r u t h a n d I d e a s o f I m a g i n a t i o n i n t h e Tractatus de Intellectus Emen datione, Studia S pi-n o z an a 2 0 9 8 6 ) : 6 1 - 9 2 ; W . D o n e y , S p i n o z a o n P h il o s o p h ic a l S k e p t ic i s m , i n M . M a n d e l b a u ma n d E . F r e e m a n , e d s . Spinoza : Essays in Interpretation (La Sa l l e : O p e n C o u r t , 1 9 7 5 ), 1 3 9 -5 7 .

[5 5]


3/21

5 4 6 J O U R N A L O F T H E H I S T O R Y O F P H I L O S O P H Y 3 :4 O C T O B E R 1 9 9 3I n t h i s p a p e r I w a n t t o s h o w t h a t a r e s p o n s e t o C a r t e s i a n d o u b t o t h e r t h a n

d o g m a t i c i n t u i t i o n i s m w a s a v a il a b le to S p i n o z a . T h a t r e s p o n s e , I b e l ie v e , w a sa n d i s a n i n t e r e s t i n g o n e . A l o n g t h e w a y , I a l s o w a n t t o a r g u e , w i t h r a t h e r l e ssc e r t a i n t y , t h a t i t w a s a c t u a l l y a d o p t e d b y S p i n o z a , a s w e l l a s b e i n g a v a i l a b l e toh i m . H e r e , m y l a c k o f c e r t a in t y is a p r o d u c t o f S p i n o z a ' s t e r s e n e ss . W h a t h i sp o s i t i o n s e n t a i l e d o r p r e s u p p o s e d s e e m s s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d l o g ic a l ly . T h e s c h o l -a r s h i p r e q u i r e d t o d e t e r m i n e h o w f a r h e f o l l o w e d t h a t l o g i c i s n o t , I t h i n k ,c o n c l u s i v e . B u t t h e c a s e s h o u l d b e s t a t e d .

1

F i r s t , t h e c h a l l e n g e . H e r e i s o n e w a y to st a t e t h e t h i n k i n g o f D e s c a r t e s :( a) D e s c a r t e s c a n i m a g i n e w h a t is n o t a ct u a l: S u p p o s e t h e n t h a t I a m d r e a m i n g , a n dt h a t t h e s e p a r t i c u l a r s - - t h a t m y e ye s a r e o p e n , t h a t I a m m o v i n g m y h e a d a n d s t r e tc h -i n g o u t m y h a n d s - - a r e n o t t r u e. P e r h a p s , i n d e e d , I d o n o t e v e n h a v e s uc h h a n d s o rs u c h a b o d y a t a l l. 4( b) D e s c a r t e s c a n d i s t i n g u i s h h is i m a g i n a t i o n f r o m h i s p u r e u n d e r s t a n d i n g 5 o r h is

c l e a r a n d d i s t i n c t c o n c e p t i o n ( o r p e r c e p t i o n ) .( c) W h e n D e s c a r t e s c l e a r l y a n d d i s t i n c t l y c o n c e i v e s s o m e t h i n g , i t is n o t p o s s i b l e a t t h a tt i m e f o r h i m t o b e m i s t a k e n : S o l o n g as w e a t t e n d t o a t r u t h w h i c h w e p e r c e i v e v e r yc l e a r ly , w e c a n n o t d o u b t i t. ' 6( d) B u t u e v e n w h i l e p e r c e i v i n g a t r u t h - - D e s c a r t e s c a n p r e s e n t t o h i m s e l f t h e p o s si b il -i ty t h a t h e m i g h t b e m i s t ak e n . T h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f t h e d e m o n s h o w s t h is in t h e F irs tM ed i ta t i on . M o r e d i r e c t l y ( b u t p e r h a p s t h e s a m e i n p r a c t i c e ) , w e s e e t h e u s e o f a no m n i p o t e n t G o d w h o c r e a t e d us i n t h e P r i n c i p l e s o f P h i l o s o p h y : . . . w e d o n o t k n o ww h e t h e r h e m a y h a v e w i s h e d t o m a k e u s b e in g s o f t h e s o rt w h o a r e a l w ay s d e c e i v e de v e n i n t h o s e m a t t e r s w h i c h s e e m t o u s s u p r e m e l y e v i d e n t ; f o r s u c h c o n s t a n t d e c e p t i o ns e e m s n o l e ss a p o s s i b i li t y t h a n t h e o c c a s i o n a l d e c e p t i o n w h i c h , a s w e h a v e n o t i c e d o np r e v i o u s o c c a s i o n s , d o e s o c c u r . 7( e) T h e e x i s t e n c e o f G o d r u l e s o u t (d ) f o r D e s c a r t e s : . . . n o a c t o f a w a r e n e s s t h a t c a nb e r e n d e r e d d o u b t f u l s e e m s fi t t o b e c a l le d k n o w l e d g e . . , a n a t h e i s t . . , c a n n o t b ec e r t a i n t h a t h e i s n o t b e i n g d e c e i v e d o n m a t t e r s w h i c h s e e m t o h i m t o b e v e r y e v i-d e n t . . , a l t h o u g h t h is d o u b t m a y n o t o c c u r to h i m , i t c a n s ti ll c r o p u p i f s o m e o n e e l s er a i s es t h e p o i n t o r i f h e l o o k s i n t o t h e m a t t e r h i m s e l f . S o h e w i l l n e v e r b e f r e e o f t h isd o u b t u n t i l h e a c k n o w l e d g e s t h a t G o d e x i s t s. ' 8

4Descar tes , First Meditation, in The Philosophical Writings of Descartes ( h e r e a f t e r C S M K ) t r a n s . J .C o t t i n g h a m , R . S t o o t h o f f , D . M u r d o c h a n d A . K e n n y ( C a m b r i d g e : C a m b r i d g e U n i v e r s i ty P re s s ,1 9 84 a n d a 9 9 1 ), 2 : 1 3 ; C . A d a m a n d P . T a n n e r y , e d s . , Oettvres de Descartes( h e r e a f t e r A T ) ( P a r i s :Vr in , a964-76) , 7 : 19 -5Descar tes , Sixth Meditation, C SM K 2 : 5 o - 5 1 = A T 7 : 7 2 - 7 4 .SDescar tes , Seventh R epl ies, C S M K 2 : 3 o 9 = A T 7 : 4 6 0 .vDescar tes , Principles, I , 5 ; C S M K l : 1 94 = A T 8 A : 6 .SDescar tes , Second R epl ies, CSMK 2 : aoa = A T 7 : 141-


4/21

S P I N O Z A S W A Y W I T H D O U B T 547Descartes was well aware of the problems created by his thinking in thisarea, as we know fr om his responses to charges of circularity in the Object ionsa n d R e p l ie s and in his C onver sa ti on w i t h B u rm an . His attitude to those problems

is not the theme of this paper. It is relevant to note, thoug h, what Spinoza tookDescartes's attitude to be. In the P ro l egom enon to the Principles of Phi losophyD em ons t Ta t ed i n t he G eom e t r i ca l Manner he refers to Descartes's remarks aboutthe uncer taint y of memo ry: he represents Descartes as relying on the validityof immediate, continuous, clear perception: .. . although God's existencecannot come to be known t hro ugh itself, but only throu gh somet hing else, wewill be able to attain a certain knowledge of his existence so long as we attendvery accurately to all the premises f rom which we have infe rred it. See Princi-ples I, 13; Rep ly to Secondo Object ions , 3, and Meditation 5, at the end. 9

This, in effect, would be a reliance on point (c) to break the Cartesiancircle: an insistence that clear and distinct conception cannot be trumped oroutfl anked while it is being used, a position that Descartes himself suggestedat times, ~~ but a ha rd position to mai ntai n alongsid e (d), which was desig nedspecifically to get around it.

Spinoza went on to mentio n, laconically, that this answer does not satisfysome people and gave an alternative. The disent angling of his own positionfrom his statem ent of Descartes's position can not be decisive; but his sugges-tion of an alternative arg ume nt was significant. ~ He recognized that i mmedi-ate, unsupported conception as a guarantee of knowledge d/d present prob-lems. He did not say that these were insoluble, but he did see a point inoffering another line of support. Why would he do this if he though that clearand distinct perception was the only way of dealing with doubt?

2

Spinoza, with some qualification, agreed emphatically with (a). Simply, this isthe t houg ht that our imaginations can be fairly free. A qualification has to beadde d because, apparently, he felt some empirical limit: . . . someone who isdreaming can think that he is awake, but no one who is awake can ever thinkthat he is dream ing. '~' This qualification seems, tho ugh, to be irrelevant to hismain thi nking: which is jus t as well, since it is plainly untr ue.

His adher ence to (b) was entirely along the lines of the distinction drawn at0 S p i n o z a , Principles of Philosophy, Prolegom enon ( h e r e a f t e r Prolegomenon n Collected Works, e d .a n d t r a n s . E . C u r l e y ( P r i n c e t o n : P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1 9 8 5) , l : 2 3 6 ; s e e S p i n o z a , Opera

( h e r e a f t e r G ) e d . C . G e b h a r d t ( H e i d e l b e r g : C a r l W i n t e r , 1 9 2 5 ), l : 1 4 7 .1o D e s c a r t e s , Fourth R eplies , C S M K 2 : 1 7 1 = A T 7 : 9 4 6; Seventh Replies, C S M K 9 : 3 o 9 = A T 7 :

4 6 o ; L e t t e r to R e g iu s , C S M K 3 : 1 4 7 = A T 3 : 6 4 - 6 5 .~ I w i ll r e t u r n t o t h is i m p o r t a n t p a s s a g e l a t e r .~lShort Treatise, I I , x v ; C u r i e y , l : 1 2 o = G 1 : 7 9.


5/21

5 8 J O U R N A L O F T H E H I S T O R Y O F P HIL OS OP HY 3 t : 4 0 C T O n E R X 9 9 3t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e Sixth Meditation, a l t h o u g h i t w a s s u p p o r t e d b y a w h o l lyn o n - C a r t e s i a n s u b s t r u c t u r e ( f o r e x a m p l e , i n Ethics I I , i 2 f f . ) a n d w a s u s e d t os u p p o r t w h o l l y n o n - C a r t e s i a n c o n s e q u e n c e s ( fo r e x a m p l e , i n Ethics I I , 4 9 C o t .Sch.) .

S i m i l a r ly , S p i n o z a ' s a s s e n t t o (c ) a p p e a r s t o d i f f e r f r o m D e s c a r t e s ' s o n l y i nits u n c o m p r o m i s i n g d o g m a t i s m : H e w h o h a s a t r u e i d e a a t t h e s a m e t i m ek n o w s t ha t h e h a s a t r u e i d ea , a n d c a n n o t d o u b t t h e t r u t h o f t h e t h in g . ~ O nw h i c h h e m a d e h is f a m o u s r e m a r k ( w h i c h h a s c a u s e d s o m u c h d i f f i c u lt y i n t h ei n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f h i s v ie w s ) : A s t h e l ig h t m a k e s b o t h i t s e l f a n d t h e d a r k n e s sp l a in , s o t r u t h i s t h e s t a n d a r d b o t h o f i ts e l f a n d o f t h e f a ls e . , 4

F r o m t h e r e i t is e a s y e n o u g h t o c o n s t r u c t a r e s p o n s e f o r S p i n o z a t o ( d ) a n d( e ) : ( d ) c a n n o t a r i s e b e c a u s e c l e a r a n d d i s t i n c t c o n c e p t i o n a l o n e i s e n o u g h t ov a l i d a t e t r u t h . I t c a n n o t b e o u t f l a n k e d b e c a u s e i t a l w a y s d o e s w o rl ~ r e l i a b l y . S o( e) is n o t n e e d e d t o b l o c k o r r u l e o u t ( d ).

T h i s i s e a s y a n d a p p e a l i n g b u t , I b e l ie v e , w r o n g . S p i n o z a , i t h a s t o b ea d m i t t e d , d i d l it tl e to d i s c o u r a g e t h is r e a d i n g . I t is a p p e a l i n g b e c a u s e , i n d i s p u t -a b ly , it d o e s r e p r e s e n t a c o n s e q u e n c e o f h is p o s it i o n: ( d ) w a s i n d e e d b l o c k e df o r h i m , a n d s o (e ) w a s s u p e r f l u o u s ; b u t t o t h r o w t h e w h o l e w e i g h t o f t h a tc o n s e q u e n c e o n t o (c ) a l o n e i s s u r e l y a m i st a k e . S p in o z a ' s t h e o r y o f k n o w l e d g e ,o n t h o s e l i n e s , c o u l d b e s u m m e d u p i n o n e s e n t e n c e w i t h o u t l o s s : o n c e w ed i s t in g u i s h c l e a r p e r c e p t i o n f r o m i m a g i n a t i o n , w h a t w e p e r c e i v e c l e a r ly h a s tob e t r u e . A n y o n e w h o t h o u g h t t h a t t h a t w a s h is v ie w c o u l d b e e x c u s e d f o rd i s m i s s i n g i t a s u n i n t e r e s t i n g .

T h e r e a r e s o m e g o o d r e a s o n s t o b e l i e v e t h a t th i s i s not w h a t S p i n o z a t h o u g h t .A b o v e a ll, t h e r e w a s h i s o t h e r w i s e s o u n d g ra s p~ s o f D e s c a r t e s . I t s c a r c e l ys e e m s c r e d i b le t h a t t h e a u t h o r o f th e Principles of Philosophy Dem onstrated in aGeometr ical Manner c o u l d h a v e m i s u n d e r s t o o d D e s c a r t e s s o b a d l y a s n o t t o b eh a v e se e n t h e f o r c e o f h y p e r b o l i c d o u b t . T h e p a g e s h e a d e d L i b e r a t io n f r o mA l l D o u b t s i n h i s Prolegomenon p o r t r a y t h e f o r c e o f D e s c a r t e s ' s p o i n t a ss t r o n g l y as a n y o n e c o u l d w i s h.

B u t w e s h o u l d p u t a s i d e a n y p r in c i p l e o f c h a r i t a b l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a n d l o o ka t t h e a r g u m e n t s . F o c u s s i n g f i r s t o n ( a ) t o ( e ) , i t i s w o r t h n o t i n g t h a t S p i n o z af e lt m u c h m o r e s t r o n g l y t h a n D e s c a r t e s a b o u t t h e f a ll ib i li ty o f t h e s e n s e s a n do f t h e im a g i n a t i o n . W h e r e a s D e s c a r t e s r a n t h r o u g h t h e f a c t u a l e v i d e n c e fa m i l -

sEthics I I , 4 3 ; s e e a l s o Princ iples I , 1 4 , w h i c h h e t o o k t o b e D e s c a r t e s ' s v e r s i o n .,4 Ib id . , S ch .l~ H e r e I d i f f e r f r o m C u r l e y ( i n h i s S p i n o z a as a n E x p o s i t o r o f D e s c a rt e s , i n Specu l umSpinozanum e d . S H e s s i n g [ L o n d o n : R o u t l e d g e & K e g a n P a u l , 1 9 7 7 ], 1 3 3 - 4 2 ) b u t n o t o n a n y

i m p o r t a n t d e t ai l s.


6/21

SPIN OZA S WAY WITH DOUBT 5 9i a r to a n y r e a d e r o f a n c i e n t sc e p t ic i sm , S p i n o z a p r o d u c e d a f u ll y w o r k e d - o u tp s y c h o l o g i ca l - p h y s io l o g i c a l t h e o r y t o e x p l a i n h o w s e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n a n d i m a g i -n a t i o n c o u l d f a i l . D e s c a r t e s ' s s u b s e q u e n t v i n d i c a t i o n o f s c i e n t i a t h r o u g h t h eb e n e f i c e n c e o f G o d l e av e s th e i r r e l i g io u s r e a d e r p u z z l e d a s to w h y G o d d i d n o tt r o u b l e t o f in i s h t h e j o b b y u n d e r w r i t i n g s e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n a n d i m a g i n a t i o n a sw e l l. D c s c a r t e s 's t h e o r y o f e r r o r , d e s i g n e d t o c o v e r t h i s r e g r e t t a b l e f a i l u r e b yG o d , r e s t ed o n a f li m s y a n d u n d e f e n d e d d i c h o t o m y b e t w e e n t h i ng s t a u g h t b yn a t u r e a n d o t h e r t h i n g s w h i c h in re a li t y I a cq u i r e d n o t f r o m n a t u r e b u t f r o ma h a b i t o f m a k i n g i l l - c o n s id e r e d j u d g m e n t s ; a n d i t is t h e r e f o r e q u i t e p o s s i b let h a t t h e s e a r e f a l s e . . . , , ~ 6

A c r i ti c a l f a c t o r i n S p i n o z a ' s a t t i t u d e t o d o u b t w a s h is a c c e p t a n c e o f t h es t a n d a r d s c e p t i c a l l i n e o n s e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n . F o r h i m , t h e t r a d i t i o n a l s c e p t i c a lp a r a p h e r n a l i a o f d r e a m s a n d i l l us io n s w e r e n o t t o b e p u t a s id e as u n f o r t u n a t ea b e r r a t i o n s . T h e y w e r e w e l c o m e d a s s u p p o r t i n h is s c o r n f o r e m p i r i ci s m . H eh a d n o w i s h t o i n s t a te g u a r a n t e e s ( d i v in e o r p h y s i o l og i c al ) f o r t h e a c c u r a c y o fw h a t w e s e e, h e a r , o r p i c t u r e t o o u r se l v e s . H e h a d n o t h o u g h t t h a t t h e d e l i v e r-a n c e s o f s e n s e - p c r c e p t i o n c o u l d h a v e b e e n t h e b as is f o r a c o h e r e n t , n o n c h a o t i cu n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e w o r l d . '7 I n t h i s s e n s e b e, n o t D e s c ar t e s, w a s p l u s s c e p ti q u eque l e s s cep t iques . B e c a u s e f o r h i m , s e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n w a s n o t w h e r e w e s h o u l ds t a r t f o r a k n o w l e d g e o f n a t u r e , ~s u n r e l i a b i l i t y in s e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n ( o r i ni m a g i n a t i o n , w h i c h i s l i n k e d t o i t) h a d l it t le s ig n i f i c a n c e . W e s e e t h i s i n t e r e s t-i n g l y i n t h e P r o l e g o m e n o n . A f t e r d e s c r i b i n g D e s c a r t e s ' s a r g u m e n t s f o r d o u b t -i n g h i s s e n s es , h e c o m m e n t s : F r o m a l l t h i s h e w a s a b l e t o c o n c l u d e t r u l y t h a tt h e s e n s es a r e n o t t h a t m o s t f i r m f o u n d a t i o n o n w h i c h e v e r y s c ie n c e s h o u l d b eb u i l t ( f o r t h e y c a n b e c a l l ed i n t o d o u b t ) , b u t t h a t c e r t a i n t y d e p e n d s o n o t h e rp r i n c ip l e s , o f w h i c h w e a r e m o r e c e r t ai n . ' 9 T r u l y h e r e , w i t h o u t d o u b t , i s i nt h e v o i c e o f S p i n o z a .

A n d t h is a p p l i e d a s m u c h t o t h e p o s si b le t h r e a t o f s y s t e m a t ic u n r e li a b i li t ya s i t d i d t o h a p h a z a r d e r r o r . S p i n o z a 's a p p a r e n t l a c k o f c o n c e r n t h a t h i s s e n se sm i g h t d e c e i v e h i m s y s t em a t i c a ll y d i d n o t j u s t c o m e f r o m h i s o w n i n a b i li t y t ot h i n k t h a t h e m i g h t b e d r e a m i n g w h i l e h e w a s a c t u a ll y a w a k e . H e m i g h t w e l lh a v e s a i d th a t s y s t e m a t i c f a i l u r e i n o u r p e r c e p t u a l p r o c e s s e s w o u l d b e i n c o n s i s-t e n t w i t h h i s b e li e f s a b o u t t h e p o s s i b il it y o f c o h e r e n t e x p l a n a t i o n ( t h e r u l e s o fg e o m e t r y , f o r i n s t a n c e ). W e c a n i m a g i n e s o m e s o r t o f r a ti o n a l is t r e s p o n s e t os c e p ti c is m a b o u t s e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n a l o n g t h e l i ne s t h a t a c o n s i s te n t ( c l e ar a n d

'6Descartes, Sixth Meditation,CS MK 2:56 = A T 7 : 8 2'~ This is no t to say tha t they could not befitted into a rational understanding of nature. See E.M. Curley, Experience in Spinoza's Theo ry of K nowledge, n M. Grene, ed. , Spinoza: A Collectionof C riticalEssays (Garden City, NY: Anchor-D oubleday, 1973), esp. 3o -4 o.'sSee Ethics II, lo Cor. Sch ., to be discussed later.g Prolegomenon,Curley, l: 2 3 2 = G l : 1 4 2


7/21

5 5 ~ J O U R N A L O F T H E H I S T O R Y O F P H I L O S O P H Y 3 : 4 O C T O B E R 1 9 9 3d i s ti n c t ) p i c t u r e o f p h y s i c a l r e a l i ty w o u l d n o t b e a v a i l a b l e - - w a l k i n g t h r o u g hw a l l s i n d r e a m s a n d b e n t s t i ck s in o p t i c a l i ll u s io n s m a y n o t f i t i n t o a c o n s i s t e n ta c c o u n t o f p h y s i c a l r e a l i t y . M a y b e i t i s s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t t h i s l i n e o f t h o u g h t i sn o t f o u n d i n S p i n o z a ( t h o u g h i t i s i n B e r k el e y '~ E t h i c s I I , 4 7 - - T h e h u m a nM i n d h a s a n a d e q u a t e k n o w l e d g e o f G o d 's e te r n a l a n d i n f i n it e e s s e n c e - - w a sp r o b a b l y m e a n t t o b e t h e b e d r o c k f o r o u r c o n f i d e n c e i n t h e n a t u r a l s c i e n ce s ;w e c a n th e n d e d u c e a g r e a t m a n y t h i ng s w h i c h w e k n o w a d e q u a t e l y . B u t t h ed e t a i l e d v i n d i c a t i o n o r r e v a l i d a t i o n o f s e n s e -p e r c e p t i o n d i d n o t m a t t e r t o h i m .A n d t h a t a tt i t u d e m u s t b e p a r t o f t he c a u se o f th e p o o r r e p u t a t i o n o f h ist h e o r y o f k n o w l e d g e . M a n y s u b s e q u e n t p h i l o so p h e r s w o r r i e d a b o u t s e n se -p e r c e p t i o n a lot .

S p i n o z a 's a t t i t u d e t o w a r d s e x t r e m e d o u b t a b o u t r a t i o n a l i t y l o o k s e v e nm o r e c a s u a l. T a k i n g (c ) a n d ( d ) o n c e m o r e , i t c a n s e e m a s t h o u g h h i s a p p r o a c hw a s t o a g r e e e n t h u s i a s ti c a l l y w i t h D e s c a r t e s a b o u t t h e e f f ic a c y o f c l e a r a n dd i st in c t c o n c e p d o n - - ( c ) - - b u t t h e n j u s t to ig n o r e D e s ca r te s 's s u g g e s d o n - -( d ) - - t h a t c l e a r a n d d i s t i n c t c o n c e p t i o n m i g h t b e l ia b le t o f a i l u r e - - o r o p e n t os u s p e n s i o n - - i n w a y s t h a t c o u l d n o t b e p o r t r a y e d . T h i s , I h a v e s ai d a l r e a d y , i sa n i n c o r r e c t r e a d i n g , b u t w e s h o u l d n o t t h i n k t h a t i t is a s u r p r i s i n g o n e .S p in o z a 's a t t i tu d e w a s n o t t h a t t h e p r o sp e c t p o s e d - - a s i n ( d ) - - b y e x t r e m ed o u b t n e e d e d a n a n sw e r . I n t h e E t h i c s h e s e e m e d t o b e li e v e t h a t t h e p r o s p e c tc o u l d n e v e r a r i s e, t h a t t h e r e w a s n o r e a l p r o b l e m t o b e a n s w e r e d . T h e v i ew o fK a n t t h a t s c e p t ic i s m m i g h t b e a r e s t in g - p l a c e f o r h u m a n r e a s o n , t o b e o v e r -c o m e b y s u b s e q u e n t a r g u m e n t s , w o u l d h a v e h a d n o a p p e al . E x t r e m es c e p t i c is m w a s , l i t er a l l y , a n u n a t t a i n a b l e p o s i t i o n .

W e n e e d t o s e e w h y t h i s w a s . S p i n o z a ' s o w n e x p l a n a t i o n s , i t h a s t o b e s a i d ,a r e n o t c o m p e l l i n g . W e s e e ( d) b l o c k e d , f o r e x a m p l e , a t E t h i c s I I , 4 9 C o t . S c h .w h e r e h e d e n i e d t h a t w e h a v e a f r e e p o w e r o f s u s p e n d i n g j u d g m e n t . F o rw h e n w e s ay t h a t s o m e o n e s u s p e n d s j u d g m e n t , w e a re s a y i n g n o t h i n g b u t t h a th e s e e s t h a t h e d o e s n o t p e r c e i v e t h e t h i n g a d e q u a t e l y . S u s p e n s i o n o f j u d g -m e n t , t h e r e f o r e , i s r e a l l y a p e r c e p t i o n , n o t [ a n a c t o f ] f r e e w i ll . '2 2 H i s o w ne x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h i s w a s s h o r t a n d n o t b y it s el f c o n v i n c i n g : W e c a n i m a g i n es o m e t h i n g n o n e x i s t e n t , b u t i f w e t r y t o c o n c e iv e i t c l e a rl y , o r e v e n t o t h i n kh a r d a b o u t i t a s i f i t d i d e x i s t , w e w i l l c o m e t o r e a l i z e t h a t o u r i d e a i s i n a d e -q u a t e ( o r m a y b e t h a t i t 's n o t r e a l l y a n i d e a a t al l) . V e r y s u r p r i s i n g l y , t h ee x a m p l e c h o s e n b y S p i n o z a w a s n o t a n i m p o s si b le o b j e c t (a s q u a r e c i rc l e o r a n

~Berkeley, Principles of Hum an Knowledge, l : 29-34-t~ Insofar as this applies to reason rath er than perception. Hu bbeling, Spinoza s Methodology,35, says righdy th at Spinoza commended doubt about perception. See Kant, Critique of PureReason, A761 = B 789.~'Curley, a: 488 = G 2: 134: Est igitur judicii suspensio rev er~ perceptio, & non iiberavoluntas.


8/21

SPIN OZA' S WAY WITH DOUBT 551E s c h e r - s ty l e n e v e r - e n d i n g s t a ir c a s e) b u t j u s t a n o b j e c t t h a t h a p p e n s n o t t oe x i s t a n d w h i c h i s n o t e v e n ( s o t o s p e a k ) b i o l o g i c a ll y i m p o s s i b l e , o r t o t a l l yu n l ik e l y : a w i n g e d h o r s e . N o l a w s o f n a t u r e t h a t S p i n o z a c o u l d h a v e i m a g i n e da t th a t t i m e a c t u a ll y r u l e d o u t w i n g e d h o r s e s , a n d h e c o u l d h a v e s e e n s t r a n g e rt h in g s t h r o u g h h is m i c r o s c o p e at a n y t im e . T h e f r e e p o w e r o f s u s p e n d i n gj u d g m e n t is o f v ir t u a ll y n o i n t e r e s t i n su c h e x a m p l e s . 's I t is p u z z l i n g t o t h i n kw h a t S p i n o z a b e l i e v e d t h i s e x a m p l e c o u l d s h o w .

T h r e e b e t t e r l i n e s o f r e a s o n i n g w e r e a v a i l a b l e t o h i m . I w i ll g o o v e r t h e m i nt h e n e x t s e c t io n o f th i s p a p e r , t h e n d i s c u s s h o w f a r t h e y c a n a c t u a l ly b e f o u n di n h i s w o r k .

(i) T h e u s e o f t h e d e m o n b y D e s c a r t e s , o r ( i ts v i r tu a l e q u i v a l e n t ) h is s u p p o s i -t io n o f t h e n o n b e n e v o l e n t a c t io n o f G o d , w a s e s s e n t i a l l y n o t i n c i d e n t a l l y , n o n -n a t u r a l o r s u p e r n a t u r a l . ( d ) s a y s t h a t D e s c a r t e s w a s u n a b l e t o p r e s e n t t o h i m -s e l f t h e p o s s ib i li ty t h a t h e w a s m i s t a k e n . I t w a s im p o s s i b l e b y n a t u r a l m e a n s ,b u t b y s u p p o s i n g a s u p e r n a t u r a l i n t e r v e n t i o n h e c o u l d s u g g e s t a p o s s ib i li tyt h a t it m i g h t h a v e b e e n p o s s ib l e . P u t t i n g h is p o i n t in e x t r e m e t e r m s m w h i c h iss u r e ly w h a t h e i n t e n d e d - - e v e r y o n e , u s i n g t h e m o s t c o n c e n t r a t e d c l e a r a n dd i s ti n c t p e r c e p t i o n a v a i la b l e to t h e m , m i g h t s e e s o m e t h i n g a s t r u e ; b u t i tw o u l d s till b e p o s s i b l e t o r e p r e s e n t t h e p o s s ib i li ty o f d e c e p t i o n b y t h e i n t e r v e n -t io n o f s o m e a g e n c y i n a w a y t h a t, e x h y p o t h e s i c o u l d n o t b e r e p r e s e n t e d .

T h i s s t a t e m e n t o f h is p o s i ti o n s h o u l d b e d i s ti n g u is h e d f r o m t w o w e a k e ro n e s s k e t c h e d i n t h e S e c o n d R e p l i e s .

F i r s t , D e s c a r t e s h a d n o i n t e r e s t i n t h e t h o u g h t t h a t c l e a r a n d d i s t i n c tp e r c e p t i o n s m t h e b e s t w e c a n m a n a g e , a s it w e r e ~ c o u l d b e s ys te m a t ic a ll y i ne r r o r ( t h e y m i g h t n e v e r b e r i g h t ), a n d t h a t t r u t h m i g h t b e re a l l y o n l y a c c e s s i b let o G o d o r to a n a n g e l . H i s a t t i t u d e - - t h e e v i d e n t c l a ri ty o f o u r p e r c e p t i o n sd o e s n o t a l lo w u s t o li s te n t o a n y o n e w h o m a k e s u p t h is k i n d o f s t o r y - - m i g h th a v e s t r u c k s o m e o f h is m e d i e v a l p r e d e c e s s o r s a s a l it tl e br is k.* 4

S e c o n d l y , t h e r e i s a p la i n d i f f e r e n c e f r o m D e s c a r t e s 's u n c o n v i n c i n g a p -p e a ls t o th e w e a k n e s s o f m e m o r y . T h e g e n u i n e ly p o w e r f u l l o g ic a l p o i n t w a st h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f p o s s ib l y p o s s i b l e e r r o r . T h e t h o u g h t t h a t w e m i g h t b es y s te m a t i c al ly o r r a n d o m l y f o r g e t t i n g s t e p s i n o u r a r g u m e n t s o r c a l c u la t i o ns

9 As Descartes saw, in the Conversation withBurman CSMK 3:3 43- 44 = A T 5: 16o. May I joi nthe notion of existence to the idea of a yeti roaming t hrough the Himalayas to get an adequateidea? How could it matter? This woul d be an easy way to discover the Loch Ness monster, but notperha ps a finally convinci ng one.

9 CSMK ~: l o 4 = AT 7: 146. T he arg ume nt is discussed interestingly in S. Gaukroger ,Cartesian Logic (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989), 63-69.


9/21

5 5 2 , JO U R N A L O F T H E H I S T O R Y O F P H I L O S O P H Y 3 1 : 4 O C T O B E R 1993has the air of a desperate attempt to leap out of the Cartesian circle. We cansee from the Prolegomenon hat this type of argum ent did not impress Spinoza.

Now it is impor tant to see why the de mon has to be an essentially non nat u-ral device. The whole force of clear and distinct conception derives from thetho ught that it is the best we can do. Thi s itself is a belief that rests on factualassumptions about t he constitution of humanity: we are all made u p in r ough lythe same way, within reasonably well-appreciated limits. What the sense ofDescartes s ar gume nts suggests is a picture of the best- equipped, most clear-sighted min d, concent ratin g to its best ability in the most ideal circumstancesand in that way conceiving a truth to be true. Even then--we are asked tosupposewit can he conjectured that some other agency might be producingan error, although t here is no way for us to represent what that erro r mightbe. ( If we could, o f course, we would represent it.) The whole argu ment restson a notion of limited natural capacity and then the supposition of its nonnatu -ral suspension. Every philosophy student s first lesson is that the de mo n wasonly an artificial device introduced to make a point; but it is as well for thestudent to go on to ask two further questions: What was the point? and, Whydid Descartes need to resort to such bizarre means to make it?

For Spinoza there could be nothing beyond nature. Nonnatural or super-natural suppositions had no place. This principle had more force than acircular pseud oargu ment that nonna tural suppositions are excluded becausenatur e excludes them, an d a great deal more force than a crude willingness toignore what one cannot imagine. The burden of supposition was entirely onthe side of Descartes. Starting with the familiar notion of known capacities, heposited superhuman capacities that were by definition beyond our access. Atfirst sight this only seems open-mi ndedl y liberal. Maybe we can t t hink ofeverything; why not try the supposition that ther e are some things we can tconceive? Isn t it only dogmatism to deny that?

Part I of Spinoza s thicsremi nds us of the context. It offers a world in whichthe com prehensi veness of explan ation is taken seriously.~5 If the expla nato rypower o f God was to be taken seriously as well, Spinoza tho ught that G od had tobe identifi ed with that world. Thi s is not the place to debate those conclusions,and noth ing dep end s on t hem now; but we should see where Descartes s posi-tion took him: towards an assumption of some plane of sense or explanationthat was unintelligible or inaccessible by definition. This was more than themodest thought that reason could fail. It was the permanent possibility that,

, s S . H a m p s h i r e , S p / n oz a ( H a r m o n d s w o r t h : P e n g u i n , 1 9 5 1 ), 2 1 8: W h a t m u s t w e s u p p o s e i fN a t u r e a s a w h o l e i s t o b e r e g a r d e d a s c o m p l e t el y i n te l li g ib l e ? T h i s i s t h e q u e s t i o n f r o m w h i c hS p i n o z i s m b e g i n s .


10/21

S P I N O Z A S W A Y W I T D O U B T 5 5 3

h o w e v e r m u c h o u r n a t u r a l ca p a c i t i e s w c r c r e f i ne d , s o m e t h i n g b e y o n d m i g h to v e r r u l e o r i m p e d e t h e m . T h a t v i e w p r e s u p p o s e d , a s w e s h al l s e e s h o r t l y , ad e f i ni t e p o s i t io n o n t h e n a t u r e o f p o ss ib il it y. I t a l s o p r e s u p p o s e d o t h e r p o s i -t i o n s o n t h e i n c lu s i v e ne s s o f n a t u r e a n d o n t h e c o r n p l ct c n c s s o f e xp l a n a t io n .W h a t D e s c a r te s n e e d e d t o m a k e h is a r g u m e n t h o l d w a s a n a t u r a l o r d e r defineda s f i ni t e a n d a G o d b y d e f i n i t i o n n o t l i m i t e d b y a n y c a n o n s o f e x p l a n a t i o na c c e s si b l e t o u s . T h e r e a l p r o b l e m i s t h a t t h e a t t r i b u t i o n o f a n y f o r c e a t a ll t o t h ei d e a o f n o n n a t u r a l s u s p e n s i o n o f b e l i e f p l a c es a b u r d e n o f p r o o f o n a n y o n e w h ow a n t s t o s h o w w h y t h i s i s w o r t h c o n s i de r i n g , n o t w h y i t is n o t .

ii) S e c o n dl y , a c a s e c a n b e c o n s t r u c t e d f o r S p i n o z a a r o u n d t h e n o t i o n o fm o d a l i t y . T h e s u p p o s i t i o n i n d ) i s t h a t D e s c a r t e s c n p r e s e n t t o h i m s e l f t h ep o s s i b i l i t y t h a t e v e n h i s b e s t p e r c e p t i o n s m i g h t b e m i s t a k e n - - i t m ay n o t b e a c t u a l l y

p o s s i b l e but i t i s p o s s i b l y p o s s i b l e . H e r e w e h a v e a ri c h b r e w o f m o d a li t ie s . W h a tc a n w e m a k e o f t h e m ?T h e r e is o n e a r g u m e n t w h i c h a t f i r st si g h t l o o k s t o o s h o r t t o b e c o n v i n c i n g :W h a t is t h e s e n s e o f " D e s c ar t e s c a n p r e s e n t t o h i m s e l f " ?I f i t is " i m a g i n e " t h e n h e s h o u l d a t t a c h n o i m p o r t a n c e t o it .I f i t is "c l e a r l y a n d d i s t i n c tl y c o n c e i v e " t h e n i t is r u l e d o u t e x h y p o t h e s i .S o e i t h e r w a y D e s c a r t e s c a n ' t g e t a n y v a l u e f r o m w h a t h e c a n p r e s e n t t oh i m s e l f .T h i s c o m p r e s s e d d i l e m m a c o u l d b e s t a te d m o r e f u l l y , b u t t h e g e n e r a l

p o i n t m a d e b y i t s h o u l d b e f a t al f o r C a r t e s i a n t h i n k i n g . D e s c a r te s s u p p o s e dt h a t h e c o u l d s u s p e n d h i s j u d g m e n t . =6 S u p p o s i t i o n c o u l d c o n si s t o n l y o f s o m ef o r m o f p r e s e n t a t i o n t o h i m s e l f o f a p o s si b il it y . B u t w h a t r o o m f o r t h i s w a st h e r e i n h i s m e t a p h y s ic s , o r e v e n h i s p s y c h o l o g y ? H i s f a ll ib l e i m a g i n a t i o n h a da l r e a d y b e en t r u m p e d i n t h e m e t h o d o f d o u b t b y th e p r e s e n c e o f c l ea r a n dd i s t in c t p e r c e p t i o n s . T h o s e i n t u r n c o u l d n o t b e t r u m p e d a g a i n b y i m a g i n a -t i o n : t h a t w o u l d h a v e b e e n c i r c u l a r. O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , h i s s u p p o s i t i o n c o u l dn o t b e s t r e n g t h e n e d i n t o a c l e a r a n d d i s t i n c t c o n c e p t i o n . I t w a s, a f t e r a l l, a s ac o u n t e r f a c t u a l , f a l s e , a n d s h o u l d h a v e b e e n o b v i o u s a s s u c h . S o t h e s u p p o s i -t i o n s h o u l d h a v e b e e n r u l e d o u t o f c o u r t .

D e s p i t e t hi s, m a y b e D e s c a rt e s c o u l d m a k e u s e o f s o m e w h o l l y d i f f e r e n tf o r m o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , o u t s i d e t h e c o n f i n e s o f h i s m e t a p h y s ic s ? W e l l, y es ; b u tt h i s is a n o t h e r w a y o f s ta t i n g m y f o r m e r p o i n t , t h a t t h e d e m o n h a s t o b e a ne s s e n t ia l l y , n o t i n c i d e n t a l l y , n o n n a t u r a l d e v i c e. A c o n c e p t i o n t h a t is n o t p o s si -b l e n a t u r a l l y m i g h t b e p o s s i bl e n o n n a t u r a l l y . S u p e r fi c ia l ly , t h a t m i g h t n o t

9 He thought, too, of course, that he could conceive ideas clearly without making udg men tsabout them at all. Spinoza took a dim view of this: see below, p. 555.


11/21

5 5 4 J O U R N A L O F T H E H I S T O R Y O F P H I L O S O P H Y 3 1 : 4 O C T O B E R 1 9 9 3seem too bad an outcome. Nonna tura l possibility, viewed in a generous light,looks not too different from some later notions, like thoughts in the infinitemind of God, or tru th in all possible worlds. Having satisfied himself thattruth seemed to be available through the best natural apparatus--clear anddistinct conception--why c ou ldn t Descartes postulate nonnatural circum-stances in which that apparatus might fail? Quite apart from the problems Imentioned just now- - i)- -th at escape was barred.

To see this, we need to focus on the notion of possibility. For Descartes, asfor many philosophers, it was closely allied to a notion of representability orintelligibility.*7 This sense of possibility was an ances tor o f the late r logicalpossibility.) And possibility seen in these terms allows no access to higher-order, possible possibility. This can be seen in a recasting of the previousargument. How is the possibility of a higher-order possibility to be repre-sented? Not, obviously, in terms o f imagination. Imagina tion is no to uchsto nefor tr uths even at t he most basic level where clear and distinct perceptions aresupposed to work. I may, for example, be totally unable to im ag ine how thetheorem of Pythagoras could apply to some shapes of right-angled triangles;but I know that it does; or I may imagine the sun to be very close, even thoughI k n o w that it is very far away.*s

Nor, more seriously, will clear and distinct perception do what Descarteswould need. T he story he would need to tell would be that he c ou ld conceive ofGod possibly conceiving the possible falsity of somet hing he Descartes) him-self clearly conceived to be true. And this would not work.~0 The problemillustrates the weakness of any link between modality and repres entat ion and ,just as fundam enta lly , the diffi culty in dissociating clear and distinct percep-tion from visual imagination while at the same time making liberal use ofvisual metaphors to explain it.3o

Spinoza could be on firmer ground. But not, I think, because of the theoryabout affirmation or ju dgm ent which might look to be his overt response, and

9 F o r e x a m p l e : " I t s e e m s v e r y c le a r t o m e t h a t p o s s i b le e x is t e n c e is c o n t a i n e d i n e v e r y t h i n gw h i c h w e c le a r ly u n d e r s t a n d , b e c a u s e f r o m t h e f a c t t h a t w e c l ea r ly u n d e r s t a n d s o m e t h i n g i tf o l lo w s t h a t it c a n b e c r e a t e d b y G o d . " L e t t e r t o M e r s e n n e , 3 1 D e c e m b e r , 6 4 o , C S M K 3 : 1 6 6 =A T 3 : 2 7 4.~SEthics I I , 3 5 S c h .

,9 T h e i s s u e w a s w e l l - a i r e d i n D e s c a r t e s ' s l e t t e r to M e s l a n d o f 2 M a y 1 6 4 4 , C S M K 3 : 2 3 5 = A T4 : 1 1 8 - a 9 .

so A c o n t r a d i c t i o n m u c h e x p l o i t e d b y D e s c a r t e s. C o n t r a s t h i s l e tt e r t o M e r s e n n e o f J u l y x6 4 x ,C S M K 3 : 1 8 6 - - A T 3 : 3 95 : " w h a t e v e r w e c o n c ei v e w i t h o u t a n i m a g e i s a n i d e a o f t h e p u r e m i n d "w i t h , m o s t s t r i k i n g l y , R ule Nin e for the D ir ec tion o f the M ind: W e m u s t c o n ce n t r a te o u r m i n d ' se y e . . , t o a c q u i r e t h e h a b i t o f i n t u i t i n g t h e t r u t h c le a rl y a n d d is t in c t ly , " C S M K a : 3 3 = A T a o :4 o o , o r , m u c h l a t er , t o S il h o n , i n 1 6 4 8 , C S M K 3 : 3 3 a = A T 5 : 1 3 8 : t h e m i n d " s e e s , f e e ls a n dh a n d l e s . "


12/21

S P I ~ O Z ^ ' S W A Y W X a 'H D O U S a 5 5 5w h i c h s e e m s l i k e h i s f i rs t l in e o f d e f e n s e . H e s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e s u s p e n s i o n o fb e l ie f s is c o n t r a d i c t o r y w h e r e w e r e a l l y a f f i r m t h e m t o b e t r u e . T h i s is b e c a u s eo f h is v ie w th a t h o l d i n g a n i d e a i n c l u d e s m a k i n g s o m e j u d g m e n t o n i ts t ru th . s~W e c a n s e e w h a t h e m e a n s , a n d i t h a s s o m e v a l u e o f i ts o w n , b u t a l o n e i t i s n o tt h e m o s t p l a u s ib l e b u l w a r k a g a i n s t th e m a c h i n a t io n s o f th e d e m o n . T o s ay th a tI c a n ' t s u s p e n d m y b e l i e f i n a n i d e a b e c a u s e I h a v e t a k e n a n a t t i t u d e t o w a r d si ts t r u t h m a y w e l l b e r i g h t ; b u t i t i m m e d i a t e l y i n v i t e s q u e s t i o n s a b o u t h o w m ya t t i t u d e w a s f o r m e d , w h e t h e r i t c o u l d b e u n d e r m i n e d , a n d s o o n .

A d i f f e r e n t s t r a t e g y a sk s w h a t i s i m p l i e d b y t h i n k i n g t h a t I c a n t s u s p e n dm y b e l i e f . H o w e x a c t l y w o u l d t h a t b e i m p o s s i b l e ? S p i n o z a ' s vi e w s a b o u t p o s -s ib i li ty c o u l d h a v e h e l p e d h i m h e r e . H e d i d n o t t i e p o ss i b il it y at a ll to w h a tc o u l d b e i m a g i n e d o r c o n c e i v e d . W h a t w a s p o s si b l e f o r h i m w a s w h a t c o u l d

f o l l o w f r o m a s t a t e o f a ff a i rs , g i v e n t h e l a w s o f n a t u r e , i n c l u d i n g t h e r u l e so f m a t h e m a t i c s . T h e m o s t p l a u s i b l e w a y o f s e e i n g t h is is i n g e o m e t r i c a lt e rm s . T h e r e a r e a n i n fi n it e n u m b e r o f poss ib le c h o r d s o f a c i r c le ; i t i s n o tposs ib le t o t r is e c t a n a n g l e w i t h c o m p a s s e s a n d a r u l e r . T h i s v i e w o f p os s ib i l-i ty is m u c h n e a r e r t o a p r o s a i c vi e w o f w h a t i s a l l o w a b l e o r w h a t c a n h a p p e nt h a n a v ie w o f lo g i c a l p o s si b i li t y i n t e r m s o f w h a t c a n b e r e p r e s e n t e d . N a t u -r a l ly , it w a s n o t w i t h o u t i t s d i f f i c u l ti e s , b u t n e i t h e r w a s t h e m o r e u s u a l v i e wt a k e n b y D e s c a r t e s . s

I ts r e le v a n c e n o w s h o u l d b e p l a i n . W h a t a c t u a l ly h a p p e n s ( a n d w h a t i st r u e ) i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e l aw s o f n a t u r e a n d m a t h e m a t i c s w i ll b e c o n c e iv -a b l e b y c le a r a n d d i s t in c t p e r c e p ti o n . 3 3 W h a t i s p o s s ib l e ( w h a t c a n h a p p e n o rw h a t c a n b e t r u e ) w il l n o t b e d e t e r m i n a b l e b y t h e u s e o f o u r i m a g i n a ti o n , o r b yt h e u s e o f m e t a p h o r i c a l e x t e n s io n s f r o m o u r c o n c e p t i o n . I t w ill b e d e t e r m i n e db y c a lc u l at io n o r e x p e r i m e n t , i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e la w s o f n a t u r e a n d t h er u l e s o f m a th e m a t ic s .3 4 T h i s i s w h y t h e d e m o n c a n b e i g n o r e d . T h e p o s s ib i li typ r e s e n t e d b y it w o u l d b e a n i ll ic it o n e . T h e r e a s o n f o r n o t r a i s i n g t h e p o s si b il -i ty t h a t c le a r a n d d i s t in c t p e r c e p t i o n m i g h t i ts e lf b e t h r o w n i n t o d o u b t w a s n o tj u s t d o g m a t i s m . S p i n o z a c o u l d p l a c e a c o n s tr u c t i o n o n m i g h t - - o n t h e n a t u r eo f t hi s m o d a l i t y - - w h i c h w o u l d h a v e m a d e i t o f n o s i gn i fi c an t in t e re s t . I c a n o f

s,Ethics, II, 49 Cor. Sch., Curley, ~: 48 8-8 9 = G 2: 134.3, See Eth/cs II , 8 Sch., G 9 :9 I . I have discussed this fully in my Spinoza on M odali ty, ThePhilosophical Quarterly 36 (1986): 3 1 3 4 2 .ss Or, even m ore strongly, knourn adequately. B ut this point--lea ding to Spinoza's cri tique ofclear and dist inct con ception --is a separate point , n ot need ed for this argument. See G. Deleuze,Spinoza et le problkrae de l expression(Paris: s de Minuit , 1968), chaps. 9-1 o.s4 Th e contrast b etween w hat is determinable by imagination a nd by the intellect appearsinterestingly, if laconically, in the Theological-Political Tr eatise, chap. II , G 3: ~8: the prophetsimagined all sorts of things, but these were v ery differen t from the kind o f possibil it ies available inthe orde r of nature an d natural l aw.


13/21

5 5 6 J O U R N A L O F T H E H I S T O R Y O F P H I L O S O P H Y 3 1 : 4 O C T O B E R 1 9 9 3c o u r s e i raag i ne t h e d e m o n m a k i n g c h a o s o f ra t i on a l it y ; b u t t h e r e i s n o w o r t h -w h i l e li nk b e t w e e n t h a t s o rt o f i m a g i n i n g a n d w h a t c a n h a p p e n o r w h a t m i g h tb e t r u e .

S u c h a l in e o f t h i n k i n g n e e d n o t b e s e e n as a c o r o l l a r y o f e x p l a n a t o r yd e t e r m i n i s m , a n a s s e r t i o n t h a t t h e r e a r e r u l e s o f m a t h e m a t i c s o r p h y s i c s w h i c ha r e s o i m m u t a b l e t h a t w e c a n ' t e v e n s u s p e n d o u r b e l i e f i n t h e m f o r t h e s a k e o fa r g u m e n t . I t c a n b e s e e n m o r e c o n s tr u c ti v e ly as o f fe r i n g s o m e u n d e r s t a n d i n go f a n o t i o n o f p o s s ib i li ty o u t s i d e t h e c u l - d e- s a c o f f e r e d b y a n y a n a l o g y w i t hr e p r e s e n t a b i li t y . T o m a k e t h e d e m o n t h r e a t e n i n g , a n i n f e r e n c e i s n e e d e df r o m ' D e s c a r t e s c a n r e p r e s e n t t o h i m s e l f t h e o p e r a t i o n o f t h e d e m o n ' t o ' T h eo p e r a t i o n o f t h e d e m o n i s p o s s ib l e ', a n d D e s c a r t e s c o u l d h a v e n o s u p p o r t f o rt h a t i n f e r e n c e . s s S p i n o z a m i g h t h a v e h a d a c c e s s t o a v i e w o f p os s i b i li t y t h a tr u l e d i t o u t .

(ii i) T h i r d l y , a g e n e r a l c a s e c a n b e m a d e b y c o n s i d e r i n g t h e r e a s o n s f o rd o u b t i n D e s c a r t es ' s a r g u m e n t s . T h e m e t h o d o f d o u b t d i d n o t r e ly u p o n a us eo f e q u i p o l l e n c e f a m i l i a r i n a n c i e n t s c e p t ic i sm : s 6 t h e r e a r e r e a s o n s f o r A , r e a -s o n s a g a i n s t A ( o r f o r n o t - A , s o w e w o u l d d o w e ll to s u s p e n d o u r b e l i e f i n A( a n d n o t - A . F r o m t h e f ir s t p a g e o f th e F i r s t M e d i t a t io n , D e s c a r t e s u s e d t h es t r o n g p r i n c i p l e t h a t d o u b t is a dv i s a b l e w h e r e a n y p o s si b il i t y o f d o u b t c a n b ei n t r o d u c e d . P l a in l y, t hi s w as f a r s t r o n g e r t h a n t h e t h o u g h t t h a t w e s h o u l dd o u b t o n l y i f t h e r e a r e m o r e r e a s o n s t o d o u b t t h a n n o t t o d o u b t . A p p l i e d t os e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n , a n d t o th e j u d g m e n t s s a id t o b e d e r i v e d f r o m i t, t h i s s t r o n gp r i n c i p le c a n b e p e r s u a s i v e . T h e r e w il l s e l d o m b e m o r e r e a s o n s t o d o u b t m ys e n s es t h a n n o t t o d o u b t t h e m ; b u t t h e r e m a y o f t e n b e so m e r e a s o n t o d o u b tt h e m . H e n c e t h e a p p e a l o f hi s i m a g e o f t h e r o t t e n a p p l e s i n t h e b as ke t. a7

T h e r e i s n o n e e d t o c o m m e n t o n t h e u se o f t hi s li ne o f a r g u m e n t w i ths e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n . S p i n o z a s e e m s t o h a v e a c c e p t e d i t, in t h a t h i s c a u t i o n a b o u te m p i r i c a l k n o w l e d g e w e n t f a r b e y o n d D e s c a r t es . T h e p o i n t o f i n t e r e s t n o w ist h e a p p l i c a t i o n t o r a t i o n a l it y , o r t o c l e a r a n d d i s t in c t p e r c e p t i o n .

O b v i o u s l y, t o s a y t h e l e as t, t h e r e a r e n o t m o r e r e a s o n s f o r t h e l i k e l i ho o d o ft h e m a c h i n a t i o n s o f t h e d e m o n t h a n t h e r e a r e r e a s o n s a g a i n s t it . I f t h e i s su ew e r e a b a l a n c e o f p r ob a b i l it i e s t h e r e w o u l d b e n o p r o b l e m . T h e s u g g e s t i o n ist h a t a n y l i k e l i h o o d i s a t h r e a t . T h i s l o o k s l ik e a g o o d a r g u m e n t . U s i n g am o d e r n p a r a l l e l , I d o n o t n e e d a 5 o : 5 ~ po s s i bi l it y t h a t t h e r e i s a v i r u s in m y

s5 Its logic is exhibited plainly in the ar gum ent fo r the Real Distinction: " . . . the fact that I canclear ly and d is tinct ly u nders tand one th ing ap ar t f rom ano ther i s enough to m ake me cer ta in thatthe two things a re distinct, sinc e they are capable of being separa ted, at least by God" (S/xthMeditation, CSM K, 2 :54 = AT 7 : 78) 93SFor exam ple, see J. Annas and J. Barnes, eds. , The Modes of Scephci.~ (Cambridge: Cam-bridge U niversity Press, 1985), 24-25-sTDescartes, Seve nth Objections,C S M K 2 :3 2 4 = A T 7 :4 8 1 .


14/21

SPINOZA S WAY WITH DOUBT 557

computer before I get worried. Any possibility at all is bad news: I have tocheck to find out.But this does not work with reason itself. Clear and distinct perception

was presented by Descartes as the best natural means for the detection oftruth. Suspension of belief in it ought to be rational, in the minimal sense ofbeing persuasive for some reason, in the vaguest sense. Using my example, ifI am very worried about the fate of this paper on my word-processor, I maycheck my computer for viruses every day, in case someone has stolen intomy study to introduce one overnight. If I do this every hour, while continu-ously in the room with my (unnetworked) computer, my behavior is ill-supported to the point of neurosis: if someone asks for an explanation ofmy behavior I can t give it in any f orm that could be accepted. And thepoint about the demon is much stronger than that. Descartes gave everyreason to believe in his clear and disti nct perception. He would not intro-duce doubt there because of the possibility of occasional errors--in analogywith the doubt he had applied to sense-perception--since this, for him, wasruled out ex hypothesi. So doubt had to consist of the suspension of credencein the whole apparatus.

What was the supp ort for this? I have already argue d t h a t - - a c c o r d i n g to aline of thought available to Spinoza--Descartes had to appeal to nonnaturalreasons and to a notion of possibility for which he had no sound basis. Tomake credible his suspension of belief in his clear and distinct perception heneeded to offer some kind of persuasion to weigh in the balance against hisoverwhelming confidence in his rational apparatus. The criterion of persua-siveness to be applied was not evident, and was certainly less a priori thanDescartes hoped. Just as, factually, for instance, there are people for whomneithe r th e cogito nor the argu ment s f rom dreams will work at all,s8 so it mustbe a ma tte r of conte xt (not logic) to say what counts as adequat e persuasion.Popkin mentions the likely origin of the demon in the witch hunts of the163os.39 This is not ju st an irre levan t detail. To get some support for hissuspension of belief, Descartes had to have some form of explanatory context.N o reason at all would have had no persuasive power.

Readers of Spinoza s corr espond ence will know how little any appeal tosupernatural agencies would have had for him. Most of us would nowagree, to the extent that it is hard to envisage the mental world in whichDescartes s image could have had any influence. We may still try, thoug h,to modernize the explanatory context. Hypnosis, mental or neurological ill-

ss People not capable of the required level of rational reflection,for example.s9 Popkin,History of Scepticism x8o and note 38.


15/21

5 5 8 J O U R N A L O F T H E H I S T O R Y OF P H I L O S O P H Y 3 1 : 4 O C T O B E R ~ 9 9 3n e ss , p e r h a p s , m i g h t d e r a n g e m y r a t i o n a l it y at a n y t i m e ; p e r h a p s i t is d o i n gso now.4o

B u t t h e r e a r e t w o i m p o r t a n t t h i n g s w r o n g h e r e . F i r st , b o t h D e s c a r t es a n dS p i n o z a w o u l d a g r e e m a n d s o w o u l d w e, in a d i f f e r e n t i d i o m - - t h a t i f m yp r e s e n t c o n c e p t i o n is r a t i o n a ll y d i s o r d e r e d , t h e n e v e n i f I d o n ' t r e a l i z e th i s, i tc a n ' t b e c l e a r a n d d i s t i n c t. T h i s i s n o t s i m p l y a r e v e r s i o n t o c r u d e i n t u i t i o n i s m ,b u t a r e m i n d e r t h a t c l e a r a n d d i s ti n c t c o n c e p t i o n m u s t i n c o r p o r a t e s o m ea t t e n t i o n t o a m i n i m a l c o n s i s t e n c y o f b e li e fs . S u c h c o n s i s t e n c y m a y f a l l f a rs h o r t o f th e d e m a n d s o f a c o h e r e n c e t h e o r y o f tr u t h . T h e r e is a ls o t h e p o i n t ,w e ll a r g u e d a t l e n g t h b y B o l to n , 4 ' t h a t t h e e v i d e n c e o f t r u t h s c a n b e p r i o r t oa s s u r a n c e a b o u t t h e i r e p i s t e m i c c r e d e n t i a l s . N o o n e w a n t s to p o s i t t h e p o s si -b i li ty o f a ( d e l u d e d ) d e a r a n d d i s t in c t p e r c e p t i o n t h a t 3 + 2 = 6 . T h e w h o l ep o i n t a b o u t c l e a r a n d d i s t i n c t p e r c e p t i o n , a f t e r a ll , i s t h a t i t h a s passed a t e s t o fw h a t w e m i g h t c a ll s u p e r f i c i a l r a t i o n a li t y . 4 ,

S e c o n d l y , t h e r e i s t h e m u c h m o r e t e l l in g p o i n t t h a t t h e r o t t e n a p p l e s a r g u -m e n t w il l n o t p r o j e c t f r o m p e r c e p t i o n t o ra t io n a l it y . I t is n o t h a r d t o p e r s u a d em e - - i f I a m d u e t o b e a w it n es s in c ou r t , fo r e x a m p l e - - t h a t m y p e r c e p t u a lj u d g m e n t s m a y b e l es s t h a n 1o 0 % r e l i a b l e , a n d t h a t d o g m a t i s m a b o u t t h e m i si n a d v i s a b le . A n y d o u b t w i ll d o . I n C a r t e s i a n t e r m s , s u s p e n d i n g b e l i e f i n s en s e -p e r c e p t i o n s ti ll le a v es m e w i t h r a t i o n a l j u d g m e n t . S u s p e n d i n g b e l i e f i n r a -t i o na l j u d g m e n t l e a ve s m e w i t h n o t h i n g , t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t t h is s u s p e n s i o ni t se l f is n o t o p e r a t i n g r a t io n a l l y . A n d t h e n t h e f a c il e o b j e c t io n , B u t w h y n o ts u s p e n d j u d g m e n t i r r a ti o n a l ly ? b e t r a y s it s o w n m i s t a k e . T h e a n s w e r is : b e -c a u s e t h e r e i s n o r e a s o n t o d o so .4 s

T h e l o g ic h e r e - - a n d t h e l og i c a v a il a bl e t o S p i n o z a - - c a n b e m i s l e ad i n g . I ti s n o t p r a g m a t i c , i n t h e s e n s e t h a t b e i n g r a t i o n a l, o r j u s t c o n s i s t e n t , w o r k sb e t t e r t h a n b e i n g n o n r a t i o n a l . A n d i t i s n o t c i r cu l a r , in t h e s e n s e t h a t i t i sr a d o n a l t o b e ra t i o n al . T h e p o i n t , i n m i n i m a l t e r m s , is t h a t i f y o u p u r p o r t t o b er a t i o n a l a t al l, t h e n y o u n e e d s o m e r e a s o n s t o s u s p e n d t h a t r a t i o n al i ty . T h e yn e e d n o t b e d e m o n s t r a t i o n s o r e v e n r e a s o n e d a r g u m e n t s , b u t t h e y d o n e e d t ob e som e s o r t o f c o n s i d e r a t i o n s t h a t h a v e s o m e p o w e r t h a t i s p e r s u a si v e b yc r i te r i a y o u c l ai m t o a c c e p t. T h a t i s v e r y f ar f r o m r a t i o n a l i sm i n a p e j o r a t i v esense .

40 Peter Unger, for instance, thinks the dem on can be m odernized in muc h this way, replacingthe evil dem on by a m ad scientist (Ignorance [Oxford: Clarendon Press, t975], 7-8). BernardWilliams apparently agrees. See his Descartes (Harmondsworth: Penguin, x978 , 56.4, See Bolton, Spinoza on Cartesian D ou b t , 392 .4, Descartes's letter to Mesland (see no te 28 above) is relevant here.4s This is an ech o of the view attribu ted to D escartes by Harr y Fra nkfu rt. His argum ent is saidto be an attem pt to sho w that t here ar e n o goo d reasons for believing that reason is unreliable( Descartes' Validation o f Reason, American Philosophical Quarterly 2 [1965]: 155).


16/21

S P I N O Z A ' $ W A Y W I T H D O U B T 5 5 95

I h a v e i n d i c a t e d t h r e e l i n e s o f a r g u m e n t t h a t S p i n o z a m i g h t u s e t o b l o c kC a r t e s i a n d o u b t : f r o m t h e n o n n a t u r a l i s m o f e x t r e m e d o u b t , f r o m t h e t y p e o fm o d a l i t y it i m p l ie d , a n d f r o m c o n s i d e r a ti o n s a b o u t t h e r e a s o n s w h y d o u b ts h o u l d a r i s e. A ll t h r e e h a v e t h e s a m e t e n d e n c y : t o a r g u e n o t t h a t e x t r e m ed o u b t c a n b e a n s w e r e d , b u t t h a t i t c a n o r s h o u l d n e v e r o c c u r . I t is a l so p o s si b let o s tr e s s o t h e r t y p e s o f a r g u m e n t . B o l t o n , f o r i n s t a n c e , s a y s a l o t a b o u t S p i -n o z a' s a r g u m e n t a g a i n s t t h e n e e d f o r a c o r r e c t e p i st e m i c t h e o r y t o u n d e r -w r i t e k n o w l e d g e . A l t h o u g h t h i s i s j u s t i f i a b l e , I a m i n c l i n e d t o t h i n k i t s e c o n -d a r y i n t h e s e n s e t h a t S p i n o z a s a w e p i s t e m o l o g y a s s e c o n d a r y t o m e t a p h y s i c s .I n f a c t , t h e g r e a t s t r e n g t h o f h is r e s p o n s e t o d o u b t w a s t o d r a w i n t h e w i d e rm e t a p h y s i c a l a n d l o gi c al c o n t e x t i n s te a d o f re l y i n g o n e p i s t e m o l o g y a l o n e ( o re v e n s u b j e c ti v is t e p i s t e m o l o g y , i n t h e m a n n e r o f s o m a n y o f h i s su c c e s so r s ).

C a n w e f i n d t h e s e t h r e e l i n es o f a r g u m e n t i n S p i n o z a ? N o t , t o b e s u r e , int h e f o r m s d i s dU e d h e r e . H i s w r i t in g o n m o d a l i t y , f o r i n s ta n c e , t h o u g h o f g r e a ti n t e r e s t, w a s a n i n e x c u s a b l e j u m b l e i n t e r m s o f it s e x p os i ti o n. 4 4 T h e r e a r ea d d i t i o n a l d i f fi c u lt ie s . S o m e o f t h e a r g u m e n t s h e d /d u s e w e r e b o t h b a d a n dm i s l e ad i n g. I h a v e m e n t i o n e d t h a t h is a c c o u n t o f a f f i r m a t i o n - - a g a i n s t D e s -c a r t es ' s t h e o r y o f e r r o r - - t h o u g h o f v a lu e i n i ts o w n r i g h t d i d n o t h e l p h i s c a s ew h e r e i t w a s in t r o d u c e d . T h e r e is a l so th e i m p r e s s i o n , g r e a d y r e i n f o r c e d b y ar e a d i n g o f h is c o r r e s p o n d e n c e , o f u n h e l p f u l d o g m a t i s m .

D e s p i t e a ll t h is , t h e a r g u m e n t s d e s c r i b e d i n t hi s p a p e r a r e m o r e t h a n a no p t im i s t i c al l y s p e c u l a t iv e r e c o n s t r u c t i o n . W e n e e d t o p a y a t t e n t i o n t o t h r e et e x t s in p a r t i c u l a r : w 1 677 - 8 0 i n t h e Treatise, t h e Prolegomenon, a n d t o w a r d s t h ee n d o f P a r t I I o f t h e Ethics. ( A l i t t l e is s a i d i n t h e Short Treatise I I , x v , w1 6 7- 4 ,b u t i t a d d s n o t h i n g . )

T h e f i rs t p o i n t t o n o ti c e is w h a t s e e m s t o b e a n i n t e r e s t i n g d e v e l o p m e n t i nS p i n o z a ' s v i e w p o i n t. I n t h e Treatise, h e s e e m s u n c l e a r a b o u t t h e p o s si b il it y o fd o u b t . H e d i f f e re n t i a te s r e al d o u b t i n t h e m i n d vera dubitatione in mente) f r o m

w h a t w e c o m m o n l y s e e h a p p e n , w h e n s o m e o n e s ay s i n w o r d s t h a t h e d o u b t s ,a l t h o u g h h i s m i n d d o e s n o t d o u b t . B u t h e t h e n g o e s o n t o s a y t h a t a l l d o u b tis r e m o v e d w h e n w e s e e t h a t a n i d e a i s c l e a r a n d d i s ti n c t. I n p a r t i c u l a r ,k n o w l e d g e o f G o d , o f t h e k i n d t h a t w e h a v e o f t h e n a t u r e o f a tr i a n g le , i ss u f f i c ie n t t o r e m o v e e v e r y d o u b t w e c a n h a v e c o n c e r n i n g c l e a r a n d d i s t i n c ti de as . 4 5 W h a t h e m e a n s is p e r h a p s t h a t w e c a n believe w e c a n h a v e d o u b t sa b o u t c l e a r i d ea s , o r say t h is , b u t i f w e t h i n k a b o u t t h e m w e w i ll re a l i z e t h a t w e

It neve r seemed to occur to him, f or example, that i t might be a good idea to say how heunderstood logical terms befo re start ing to use them. Essence is the worst case, defined at th ebeginning o f Eth/cs II a fter copious use in P art I.4sTreatise, w Curley, x: 35 = G 2: 3o.


17/21

5 6 0 J O U R N A L O F T H E H I S T O R Y O F P H I L O S O P H Y 3 : 4 O C T O B E R 1 9 9 3c a n n o t . B u t d o u b t c a n a t l e a st b e s u p p o s e d , i f o n l y in a n i l l u s o r y f o rm . 4 6 H i sp r e s e n t a t i o n o f D e s c a r te s 's a r g u m e n t i n th e P r o legomenon m a k e s i t h a r d t o se ew h e t h e r h e m a i n t a i n s t h a t v i e w t h er e .4 7 I n P a r t I I o f t h e E th ic s t h e p o s i t i o n w a sd i f f e r e n t : d o u b t c o u l d n o t a r i se b e c a u s e t h e s u s p e n s i o n o f c l e a r a n d d i s t in c ti d e a s is n o t a v a i l ab l e . S p i n o z a d e n i e d t h a t w e h a v e a f r e e p o w e r o f s u s p e n d -i n g j u d g m e n t . 4 s T h e d i f f e r e n c e is a f in e o n e , a m a t t e r o f c le a r i n g u p a na m b i g u i t y , b u t i t i s s i g n i f ic a n t . T h e i m p r e s s i o n i s t h a t e v e n a m i s t a k e n p o s s i b i l -i ty o f d o u b t is r e m o v e d . I t is a m i s t a k e t o th i n k W e c a n e v e n p r e t e n d t os u s p e n d b e l i e f i n c l e a r a n d d i s t in c t id e a s . I f a n i d e a is r e a l l y a p p r e h e n d e d ,t h e n i t is a p p r e h e n d e d a s c l e a r a n d d i st in c t. I f i t is a p p r e h e n d e d a s c l e ar a n dd i s t in c t , t h e n t h e s u p p o s i t i o n o f i ts p o s s i b l e fa l s it y i s n o t a v a i l a b le . S o t h e r e i sn o r o o m f o r d o u b t . W h a t S p i n o z a m a y h a v e b e e n d o i n g i s n o t r u l i n g o u td o u b t b y i n t e n s i f i e d d o g m a t i s m , b u t f o c u s s i n g hi s t h o u g h t i n t h e a r e a s I h a v em e n t i o n e d : H o w c o u l d h y p e r b o l i c d o u b t f i t i n to t h e v i ew o f n a t u r e h e h a dd e v e l o p e d ? W h a t c o u l d i ts p l a c e b e ? N o t i n n a t u r e ; s o , f o r S p i n o z a , n o w h e r e .T h i s is a n i m p o r t a n t c o n c e p t u a l p o i n t , I t h in k , i n d i sc u s s i n g t h e p o s s i b il it y o fd o u b t . G e w i r t h ' s e x c e l l e n t e a r l y a r t ic l e o n t h e C a r t e s i a n c i rc l e c l a i m e d t h a tD e s c a r t e s s h o w e d t h e l o g ic a l i m p o s s i b il i ty o f g e n e r a l d o u b t. 4 0 B u t i f d o u b tw a s lo g i c al ly i m p o s s i b le , h o w w a s D e s c a r t e s a b le t o m a k e u s e o f i t? A n d h o wc o u l d i t h a v e b e e n a t a ll t e m p t i n g ? I f s o m e t h i n g i s c o m p l e t e l y i m p o s s i b l e i ts h o u l d b e c o m p l e t e l y r u l e d o u t , n o t h a l f- d i s c u ss e d .

N e x t , w e s h o u l d c o n s i d e r t h e a r g u m e n t s u s e d f o r t h e L i b e r a t i o n f r o m A llD o u b t s i n t h e P r o legomenon . S p i n o z a s t at e s a p r o b l e m i n e n t i r e l y C a r t e s i a nt e rm s : S i n c e G o d ' s e x i s te n c e d o e s n o t b e c o m e k n o w n t o u s t h r o u g h i ts e lf , w es e e m u n a b l e t o b e e v e r c e r t a in o f a n y t h i n g ; n o r w il l w e e v e r c o m e t o k n o wG o d ' s e x i s t e n c e . F o r w e h a v e s a i d t h a t e v e r y t h i n g is u n c e r t a i n s o lo n g a s w e a r ei g n o r a n t o f o u r o r i g i n , a n d f r o m u n c e r t a i n p r e m i s e s , n o t h i n g c e r t a i n ca n b ei n f e rr e d . 5 o T o r e m o v e t h is d i f f ic u l t y , D e s c a r t e s m a k e s t h e f o l l o w i n g re p l y ,h e s a ys , a n d g o e s o n t o g iv e a fa i r a c c o u n t o f D e s c a r t es ' s u n h a p p y e v a s i o n sa b o u t t h e f a ll ib i li ty o f m e m o r y . A s I h a v e n o t e d , h e t h e n g i v es a n o t h e r r e p l y ,

s i n c e t h is a n s w e r d o e s n o t s a t is f y s o m e p e o p l e . C u r l e y c o m m e n t s t h a t S p i-n o z a ' s s u g g e s t e d r e p l y i s a t l e a s t c o n s i s t e n t w i t h C a r t e s i a n p r i n c i p l e s . I ne f f e c t , h e t r i e s t o s t a t e t h e C a r t e s i a n c a s e a s w e l l a s i t c a n b e p u t . A c l e a r a n d

46 H. H . Joachim's Commentary (Oxford: Clarendon , x94o), 195-97, rightly passed a hars hverdict on this view and implicit ly, I think, suggested a subsequent change from it in th e Ethics.47Although remarks at the end of his argument, about to be discussed, suggest that he ha dseen its weakn ess: Curley, l: 238 = G l : 149.4SEthics II , 49 Cor. Sch., Curley, 1:48 8 = G 2 : 134.49A. Gew irth, Th e Cartesian Circle, The PhilosophicalReview50 (194 x): 39 4. Gewirth wrotemuch more o n the circle, but his views on this point did not al ter, as far as I know.~~ Curley, 1:236 = G 1: 146.


18/21

S P I N O Z A ' S W A Y W I T H D O U B T 5 6 1d is t i n ct i d e a o f G o d - - n o t a k n o w l e d g e o f hi s e x i s t e n c e - - i s e n o u g h t o r e m o v et h e p o s s i b i li t y o f d o u b t . v

B u t t h e f i n a l l in e s o f t h i s s e c t i o n t a k e a j a r r i n g s t e p i n t 9 S p i n o z a ' s d i r e c ts p e e c h a n d t h e n s e e m s , to a d d a s i g n if i c a nt tu r n t o h is a r g u m e n t : . . . w e h a v ea c le a r d i st i nc t i d e a o f a T r i a n g l e , a l t h o u g h w e d o n o t k n o w w h e t h e r t h ea u t h o r o f o u r n a t u r e d e c e iv e s u s ; a n d p r o v i d e d w e h a v e s u c h a n id e a [ o f G o d ]( as I h a v e j u s t s h o w n a b u n d a n t l y ) , w e w i ll b e a b l e t o d o u b t n e i t h e r h i s e x i s -t e n c e , n o r a n y M a t h e m a t i c a l t r u t h. 5 3 T h e i d e a o f t h e t r i a n g l e , in c h a r a c t e r i s -t i d y S p i n o z i s t i c f a s h i o n , c a n b e a p r o x y o r e q u i v a l e n t f o r t h e i d e a o f G o d. 54T h e e x a c t s e n s e o f t h e se s e n t e n c e s is n o t c l ea r , a n d m a y b e w e s h o u l d n o t m a k et o o m u c h o f t h e m . N e v e r t h e l e s s, I d o t h i n k t h a t D o n e y m i s se s th is p o i n t i n h isi n s i s t e n c e t h a t i t i s t h e o r /g /n o f o u r c l e a r a n d d i s t in c t i d e a s t h a t m a t t e r s . H et h i n k s t h a t S p i n o z a i s s a t is f i ed o n c e h e h a s e s t a b l i s h e d t h e m t o b e G o d - g i v e n .B u t t h i s i s s u r e l y n o t ri g h t. T h e w h o l e n o t i o n o f G o d a s a s u p e r n a t u r a l g u a r a n -t o r s u p r e m e l y g o o d a n d v e r a c io u s is w h o l ly o u t o f k e e p i n g w i th S p in o z a ' sm e t a p h y s i c s . R a t h e r , t h e p o i n t o f S p i n o z a ' s a p p a r e n t a f t e r t h o u g h t t o h is e x p o -s i ti o n o f D e s c a r t e s m u s t h a v e b e e n t h a t k n o w l e d g e o f a n y c l e a r a n d d i s t in c ti d e a i s e n o u g h t o r e m o v e t h e p o s si b il i t y o f a g e n e r a l s u s p e n s i o n o f r e a s o n . F a rf r o m b e i n g c o n s i s t e n t w i t h D e s c a r t e s ' s o p i n i o n s , t h i s w o u l d b e i n c o n s i s t e n tw i t h t h e m ( o r a t le a s t w i t h s o m e o f t h e m , s i n c e i t w o u l d b e f l a t t e r i n g t o s u g g e s tt h a t t h e y a r e c o n s i s t e n t ) . S p i n o z a ' s t h o u g h t , I b e li e v e , w a s t h a t a r e a l u n d e r -s t a n d i n g o f a n y t h i n g , t h a t is , o f a ny p a r t o f n a t u r e - - g e o m e t r y , f o r e x a m p l e - -w i ll b e i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e k i n d o f a n o m a l i e s e n t a i l e d b y t h e s u p p o s i t i o n t h a t

t h e a u t h o r o f o u r n a t u r e d e c e i ve s us .T h i s a l o n e w i ll n o t b e c o n v i n c i n g , b e c a u s e t h e d i s e n t a n g l i n g o f S p i n o z a ' s

v i ew s f r o m h is e x p o s i ti o n o f D e s c a r t e s w ill a l w a y s r e m a i n o p e n f o r d e b a t e . W em u s t t u r n t o t h e E t h i c s f o r a b e t t e r p i c t u r e .

E v e n t h e r e , S p i n o z a ' s di s c u ss i o n s o f d o u b t c o u l d b e m o r e e x p li c it . T h eo r d e r o f h is t h i n k i n g o u g h t t o s t r ik e u s f i rs t. H i s e a r l i e r e x p o s i t i o n o f D e s -c a r t e s n o t o n l y o p e n e d i n a C a r t e s i a n s p i r i t , b u t h a d a p r e f a c e , w h o l l y s u p p l e -m e n t a r y t o t h e m a i n a r g u m e n t , d e a l i n g w i t h do u b t . I t s o p e n i n g w o r d s w e r e

s, Curley, l : 23 6, note 8 . Garrett , Tr uth an d Ideas of Imagination, 66- 67, suggests adiffer ent reading, stressing the origin of ideas.5. But not to Bolton, Spinoza on Cartesian D oubt, 584-8 6, who sees no discontinuity inSpinoza's arguments here, and hence believes that he thought Cartesian method did succeedagainst Cartesian dou bt.5sPrinc iples Curley , l : 238 = G 1 : 149 : Habem us en im daram , & d ist inctam ideamTriang uli, quamvis nesciamus, an nostr~e naturae autor nos decipiat; & m odo talem D ei ideam, u tmo do fuse ostendi, habeamus, nec de eius existentii, nec de ull~i veritate M athematica dubitarepoterim us. Curley does not translate Dei.% . . natu ra t r iangu li in natu ra d iv ina ab ~eterno con t inetu r . . . . fo r example, in theTheological-Poli tical Treatise chap. IV , G 3: 62. N ote V I to chap. V I is also relevant.


19/21

562 JOURN AL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY 3 :4 OCTOBER x 9 9 3d i r ec t : B e f o r e w e c o m e t o t h e P r o p o s i t i o n s th e m s e l v e s a n d t h e i r D e m o n s t r a -t io n s , it s e e m s d e s i r a b l e t o e x p l a i n c o n c i s e l y w h y D e s c a r t e s d o u b t e d e v e r y -t h i n g , h o w h e b r o u g h t t o l ig h t so l id f o u n d a t i o n s f o r t h e s c ie n c e s, a n d f in a l ly ,b y w h a t m e a n s h e f r e e d h i m s e l f f r o m a ll d o u b ts . 5 5 I t is h a r d t o b e l ie v e t h a tt h e s e w o r d s c o u l d h a v e b e e n w r i t t e n b y a n y o n e w h o h a d f a il e d t o s ee t h ei m p o r t a n c e o f p h i l o s o p h i c a l d o u b t . B u t t h e n , s p e a k i n g f o r h i m s e l f in t h eEthics S p i n o z a g e t s t o d o u b t o n l y a t th e e n d o f P a r t II . T h i s c a n o n l y m e a nt h a t h e d o e s n o t s h a r e t h e v ie w o f D e s c a r te s th a t d o u b t h a s t o b e r e m o v e db e f o r e p h i l o s o p h y c a n b e g i n .

H i s o w n v i e w s o n t h e o r d e r o f P h i l o s o p h i z i n g a r e g i v e n i n P a r t I I , l OC o r . S c h. T h e e r r o r o f s o m e p r e v i o u s p h i l o s o p h e r s ( w h o m u s t b e t a k e n t oi n c l u d e D e s c a r t e s ) , h e s ay s , is t h a t t h e y b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e d i v i n e n a t u r e w h i c ht h e y s h o u l d h a v e c o n t e m p l a t e d b e f o r e a ll e l se ( b e c a u s e it is p r i o r b o t h i nk n o w l e d g e a n d i n n a t u r e ) i s l as t i n th e o r d e r o f k n o w l e d g e , a n d t h a t th e t h i n g st h a t a r e c a l l e d o b j e c t s o f t h e s e n s e s a r e p r i o r t o a ll . T h i s v i ew is w e l l r e f l e c t e db y t h e o r d e r o f t h e Ethics 58 G o d o r n a t u r e c o m e s f ir st , t h e m i n d s e c o n d .D o u b t , f a r f r o m c o m i n g f i rs t, c a n n o t e v e n b e f i tt e d in t o n a t u r e . A s G a r r e t tp u t s it : . . . S p i n o z a ' s t r u e id e a o f G o d w ill p r e s u m a b l y b l o c k t h e h y p o t h e s i s o fd e c e p t i o n n o t i n v i r tu e o f G o d ' s b e n e v o l e n c e , b u t r a t h e r i n v i r tu e o f h i s la c k o fp e r s o n h o o d , a n d , m o r e g e n e ra l ly , th r o u g h a re s u lt in g u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h ef u n d a m e n t a l s t r u c tu r e o f t h e u n i ve r s e a n d t h e p la c e o f th e h u m a n m i n dwi t h i n i t . 57

N o w t h is l o o k s l ik e b e g g i n g t h e q u e s t i o n . T h e s t o r y to l d b y D e s c a r t e s w a st h a t h e c o u l d n o t k n o w a b o u t n a t u r e o u t s id e h is m i n d u n t i l h e k n e w a b o u th i m s e lf , a n d s o o n . I t se e m s a p o o r r e s p o n s e t o s u g g e st t h a t a n u n d e r s t a n d i n go f n a t u r e m a k e s s u c h a n a p p r o a c h , a t be s t, s e c o n d a r y . T h i s is n o t t h e p l a c e f o ra w i d e r d is c u s si o n o f t h e o r d e r o f p r i o ri t y b e t w e e n e p i s t e m o l o g y a n d m e t a -p h y s ic s . I o n l y w a n t t o s a y th a t t h e o r d e r o f S p i n o z a ' s e x p o s i t i o n i n t h e E th ic sl e n d s s u p p o r t t o m y r e a d i n g o f hi s r e s p o n s e t o C a r te s i a n d o u b t . T h e c r u c ia lp o i n t , l t h i n k , a g a i n , i s t h a t S p i n o z a i m p l i e s t h a t h y p e r b o l i c d o u b t h a s t o b eo u t s i d e t h e o r d e r o f n a t u r e m i n a se n s e a cc e p t a b le t o D e s c a rt e s, t o o ( a n d a l sot o u s , s o f a r a s w e r e t a i n t h e s e c o n c e p t s ) .

S p i n o z a ' s w r i t i n g o n p o s s ib i li ty c a n n o t b e c a l l e d c le a r , a n d t o t h a t e x t e n t ,t h e v i e w o f p o s s ib i li t y w h i c h I h a v e d e p l o y e d o n h i s b e h a l f is n o t e a s y t o a s c r i b et o h i m c o n c l u s i v e ly . A g a i n , t h e r e i s a n i n t e r e s t i n g c h a n g e o f p o s i t i o n f r o m h i s

55Prolegomenon Curley, 1:~3 a = G l : t41.# The correct order o f invest igat ion-- ra ther di f ferent - -was not s tressed in the Ethics as ithad been in the Treatise w if . . . someone had proceeded in this way in investigating Na-tu re . . , he would never have doubted the truth he possessed . . . . Cur ley, 1 e a = G 2: 17.5~Garrett , Tru th and Ideas of Imagination, 7 i . Doney suggests this similarly, in the open -ing words o f his paper.


20/21

S P INOZA S WAY WITH DOUBT 563ear ly work to what we t ake to be h i s cons idered v iew in the Ethics. I n t h eTreatise we f ind a l eng thy d i scussion o f the l imit s o f what we can fe ign /ingere).We f ind so me a p r io r i psycho logy : i f we th ink we can conceive someth ingimposs ib le we are rea l ly on ly assembl ing images ; so poss ib i l i ty bears somer e l a ti o n t o o u r p o w e r s o f c o n c e p t io n . T h e e a r l y Sp in o z a w o u l d h a v e h a d s o m es y mp a t h y w i th t h e r e ma r k o f th e e a r ly W i t tg e n s t e in t h a t w e c a n n o t t h i n kany th in g un log ica l, fo r o therwise we shou ld have to th ink un logica lly . s s

L a t e r , a ll th i s c h a n g e d - - o r s o w e mu s t a s s u me , b e c a u s e t h e r e i s n o t r a c e o fi t in the Ethics. On e prob lem wi th ty ing poss ib i l ity to represen tab i l i ty i s exac t lytha t i t opens the door fo r the demon. Whether o r no t th i s was h i s mot iva t ion ,o r even in h i s mind , Sp inoza 's f ina l accoun t o f modal i ty seems to have beenlog ica l o r geomet r i ca l , n o t psycho log ica l . He seems to have been aware h imse l ftha t h i s own expos i t ion in Ethics I I , 8 Sch . , which a t t em pts to exp la in the s t a tusof nonex i s t en t bu t p o ten t i a l o r poss ib le ob jec t s , i s hard ly sa t is fy ing . Ther e a re ,fo r ins t ance , in f in it e poss ib le geomet r i ca l cons t ruc t ions . His compre ssed e xpo-s i tion can bes t be expa nd ed by say ing tha t poss ib le cons t ruc t ions a re ava i l ab leb y th e l a w s o f n a t u r e e x h i b i te d i n t h e n a t u r e o f s p a c e a n d t h e r u l e s o f g e o me -try.~9 They are not exp la ined in t e rms o f wha t we (o r God) can conceive .Poss ib le doub t , on these l ines , is no t do ub t we can imagine : i t i s the po s tu la t ionon ly o f w hat i s a l lowable in na tu re .

6 .N o o n e s h o u l d u n d e r e s t i ma t e t h e p e r va s i v e p o w e r o f t h e d e m o n r e l e a s e d b yDescar t es in to European ph i losophy . Agains t tha t , i s there any va lue in thev iews I have ascr ibed to Sp inoza?

His approach to Car tes i an doub t con ta ins two s t eps . F i rs t i s the v iew con-c e r n i n g s e n s e - p e r c e p t io n . E r r o r a n d i ll u si o n th e r e d o n o t ma t t e r , b e c a u s e t h ep l a ce g i v e n t o j u d g me n t s b a s e d o n s e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n is s u b o r d i n a t e d t o t h ep l a c e g i v e n t o j u d g me n t s i n c o r p o r a t e d i n a r e a s o n e d a c c o u n t o f n a t u r e . Se c -ond: i t i s at that level that doubt does ma t t e r . A n d i t is t h e r e t h a t d o u b t c a n n o tbe ra i sed in the way tha t Descar t es sugges ted .

What I th ink we see in the Ethics is t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a f r a m e w o r k i nwhich ex t rem e dou b t wi l l no t f it. Tha t i s no t to say , implaus ib ly , tha t do ub t i sjus t de f ine d ou t o f ex i s tence . I t is tha t p ercep t ion , suppo s i t ion , imag ina t ion ,c o n c e p t i o n , a n d d o u b t h a v e t h e ir p l a c es in a n u n d e r s t o o d p i c t u r e o f n a t u r e ,bo th log ica l ly and psycho log ica l ly . What i s poss ib le i s seen as what can bere la ted to tha t p ic tu re . To wonder abou t imag ined poss ib i l i t i es i s therefo repo in t l es s , o r wi thou t con ten t .

ss Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 3.03-59 Thi s rela tes to th e role o f infinite modes.


21/21

5 6 4 J O U R N L O F T H E H I S T O R Y O F P H I L O S O P H Y 3 t : 4 O C TO B E R x 9 9 3B o t h s te p s a r e i m p o r t a n t a n d g o t o g e t h e r n o n c ir c u l a r ly . B e c a u s e d o u b ta b o u t s e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n c a n b e p u t i n i ts p l a ce s u p p o s e d d o u b t a b o u t c l e a r a n d

d i st in c t p e r c e p t i o n b e c o m e s t h e r e a l is s ue . B e c a u s e c l e a r a n d d i st i nc t p e r c e p -t io n is s a fe d o u b t s a b o u t i n d iv i d u a l s e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n s d o n o t m a t t e r .

C l e a r l y i n b o t h a h i s to r i c a l a n d a p h i l o s o p h i c a l s e n s e it m u s t b e p r o f i t l e s st o c l a im t h a t S p i n o z a w a s r i g h t w h e r e D e s c a r t e s w a s n o t . H o w f a r w e c a n s t e pb a c k f r o m t h e l a n g u a g e a n d t h e a s s u m p t i o n s o f t h e s e v e n t e e n t h c e n t u r y t oc o n s i d e r t h e s e q u e s t i o n s m o r e g e n e r a l l y i s d e b a t a b l e . A t l e a s t w e c a n l e a s tr e f l e c t t h a t w e d o n o t h a v e t o b e d o c t r i n a i r e r a t i o n a l is t s t o f i n d t h e s u s p e n s i o no f d o u b t a b o u t r a t i o n a l i t y t o b e u n r e a s o n a b l e . I f w e w a n t t o sa y t h a t i t isp o s si b le t h a t w e a r e m i s t a k e n

Date post:	04-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	camila-cabral
View:	221 times
Download:	1 times

Ignoring the Demon. Spinoza's Way With Doubt - Richard Mason

Documents