Prop 1 - Substance is by nature prior to its modificationsSubstance is prior to modificications (modes), this makes both logical and ontological sense, in that substance is that which is in in itself and is conceived through itself, in that it is a self sufficient, self caused entity that cannot be contingent upon anything external. Spinoza presents his proof through definitions 3 and 5 as it logically follows, however here I will give more context. This establishes substance as the ontological foundation of reality in that God is not the divine creator of the world, but rather that god is the world, within all that exists. In such substance which is infinite, eternal and indivisible. This rejects the classic view of god (maybe why he got kicked out of the jewish church) that god sits apart from the world. In this modes, or determinations of substance, are not substances in themselves but exist within the substance, in such they are dependent on its existence. In link to Axiom 1, “Everything that is, is either in itself or in another.” (pls read the other writing on axioms for clarification) which reaffirms the ontological priority of substance over its modes, modes are in substance but substance is not in any mode. This reflects Spinoza's claim that all that exists as finite expressions of the infinite attributes of god, this undermines the notion of a transcendent deity, in that Spinoza's god is positioned as necessary to the constitution of all being.
>>24951508How does it feel to be a human skinwalker?
>>24951508Very wrong. Read Spinoza
>>24951517There is literally nothing wrong in what OP presented.>>24951508Yes, I think this is very straightforwardly reasonable from what Spinoza posits regarding substance, God and his modes. I just think there are gaps in what it means from finite modes being derived from infinite modes and the chain of causation of both and between both being indeterminate/infinite. Now, regarding Spinoza's God, I beileve there is no conception of God deserving more hatred than his and I don't mean in any logical, scientific sense (perhaps this is debatable as it reminds me of Advaita Vendata's conception, although it is more naturalized and would be less inconsistent). If Spinoza's God is true, Marquis de Sade is our only true Christ.
>>24951508>i love spinoza even tho im a materialist!!Where lies the contradiction, exactly? Spinoza was a crypto-nihilist atheist jew.