Wie ‘zeventiende eeuw’ zegt, denkt al snel aan Rembrandt, Amalia van Solms, Huygens, Van Schurman, en Spinoza, aan de VOC en aan pompeuze grachtenpanden vol weelde en schatten. De Republiek der... Show moreWie ‘zeventiende eeuw’ zegt, denkt al snel aan Rembrandt, Amalia van Solms, Huygens, Van Schurman, en Spinoza, aan de VOC en aan pompeuze grachtenpanden vol weelde en schatten. De Republiek der Verenigde Nederlanden was in de zeventiende eeuw dan ook een politieke grootmacht, met wereldwijde handelsbelangen en een toonaangevend cultureel leven. Deze Nederlandse 'gouden eeuw' is vaak geroemd vanwege zijn religieuze tolerantie, artistieke creativiteit en economische innovatie. Tegelijkertijd is hij berucht vanwege betrokkenheid bij oorlogvoering, slavernij en militaire onderdrukking in Azië, Afrika en Amerika. Dit handboek biedt een rijk geïllustreerd en caleidoscopisch overzicht van dit veelbesproken tijdperk, geschreven door internationale experts. Een onmisbare gids voor iedereen die geïnteresseerd is in de mondiale geschiedenis en het dagelijks leven van de Nederlandse zeventiende eeuw. Show less
This study builds on the work of Juffermans who has shown that religion takes on three ‘different meanings’ in Spinoza’s works, namely 1.superstition; 2. faith; and 3. philosophical religion. In... Show moreThis study builds on the work of Juffermans who has shown that religion takes on three ‘different meanings’ in Spinoza’s works, namely 1.superstition; 2. faith; and 3. philosophical religion. In this way Spinoza has provided us with a nuanced normative theory that can help us to evaluate religions. Different from the Straussian view which considers this theory to be rife with contradictions, this study researches how the three perspectives on religion could exist side by side.Spinoza’s theory of religion, so it is argued, following Fraenkel, belongs to a tradition of philosophical religions. In this tradition the Divine is understood as the perfect exemplar of reasonableness, and historical religions are understood as pedagogical-didactical tools to lead the common people to a life of reason.Spinoza was not only a critic of religion and the Bible, he also endorsed them for individuals as well as for societies. Spinoza’s religious ideas were understood by Spinoza’s circle of friends as an example of ‘reasonable Christianity’. Spinoza was not in favor of the separation of Church and State. He was a proponent of a state-guided ‘public church’, guarding over the faith of the general population and fighting the superstitious beliefs that can divide society. Show less
Our view of the body as passive biological matter has been tested in the face of gene editing, stem cell research and tissue engineering. Now biotechnological research tells us that bodies may... Show moreOur view of the body as passive biological matter has been tested in the face of gene editing, stem cell research and tissue engineering. Now biotechnological research tells us that bodies may be dead and alive; they may be human and non-human; multiple and yet one. The way we think about bodies, and the way we practice them, marks a particular tension in the way biotechnology treats our bodies. This book explores the conditions of thinking and practicing bodies within affect. In order to grasp the continuity of thought and practice of bodies, I focus on the concept of affect at work in Gilles Deleuze’s philosophy, in particular, in his reading of Baruch Spinoza and Jakob von Uexküll. The notion of affect is used to understand the relational, contaminating materialities of our bodies, and the term “affect” confronts us with the actual implications of its practicing. I argue that affect, as a transformative relationality, is induced by bioartists and biodesigners who work with living bodies as an artistic medium. Therefore, looking closely at how artists use the relational capacities of bodies in their work, I search for the conditions for practicing bodies within affect. Show less
Politics and law are not in essence about knowledge,good sense and learning, but about wisdom. Good legislation requires wisdom andthe wise judge is also the ideal when it comes to good... Show morePolitics and law are not in essence about knowledge,good sense and learning, but about wisdom. Good legislation requires wisdom andthe wise judge is also the ideal when it comes to good adjudication. But whatis wisdom actually and who is the sage? To answer these important questions,this article departs from the views of the Stoa (of Seneca especially) whichhas been of fundamental significance for the development of law and which stillcontinues to influence it. It shows how the philosophical views of the Stoicsincluded an objective view of law and cultivated a subjective impassibility andapathy that were associated with steadfastness or constancy. Stoic wisdom was(and still is): virtuous obedience to the objective laws of nature. In modernStoics like Spinoza and Justus Lipsius we find these same elements. But inmodern times Stoicism is wrapped in the veil of a Christian vision of life,which (as such) serves as a seductive legitimation of its principles. In thisguise Stoicism has been of enormous significance in the history ofChristianity. However, their historical relationship is based on a major misunderstanding.In fact, Stoicism is Christianity’s most extreme alternative, as Erasmusalready pointed out. For the Stoic sage a theoretical and practical wisdomapplies that is not (in any way) in accordance with the courageousfoolishness of Christianity. It is through the prism of this foolishness thatwe come to appreciate that the eternal Stoic attitude is odious when it comesto law and politics. Stoicism is a recurring crisis phenomenon: a culturalsickness, for which the wisdom of Christianity still offers a very effectivemedicine. Show less
This thesis is a comparative study in the History of Modern Philosophy focused on the recourse to physiology on the part of two key figures, Spinoza and Nietzsche. This involves comparative... Show moreThis thesis is a comparative study in the History of Modern Philosophy focused on the recourse to physiology on the part of two key figures, Spinoza and Nietzsche. This involves comparative research into their emphatic appeal to the body as the key to solving fundamental philosophical problems. Both Spinoza and Nietzsche are thinkers of immanence and for both the turn to the body, which is part of their projects of naturalisation, is motivated by theoretical and practical goals. I argue that we can best understand the similarities and differences between their respective philosophical physiologies, and their broader philosophical positions, starting from their shared interest in power ontologies and their commitment to immanence and naturalism. Show less
