Behind the Geometrical Method

by Edwin M. Curley

This book is the fruit of twenty-five years of study of Spinoza by the editor and translator of a new and widely acclaimed edition of Spinoza's collected works. Based on three lectures delivered at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in 1984, the work provides a useful focal point for continued discussion of the relationship between Descartes and Spinoza, while also serving as a readable and relatively brief but substantial introduction to the Ethics for students. Behind the Geometrical Method is actually two books in one. The first is Edwin Curley's text, which explains Spinoza's masterwork to readers who have little background in philosophy. This text will prove a boon to those who have tried to read the Ethics, but have been baffled by the geometrical style in which it is written. Here Professor Curley undertakes to show how the central claims of the Ethics arose out of critical reflection on the philosophies of Spinoza's two great predecessors, Descartes and Hobbes.


The second book, whose argument is conducted in the notes to the text, attempts to support further the often controversial interpretations offered in the text and to carry on a dialogue with recent commentators on Spinoza. The author aligns himself with those who interpret Spinoza naturalistically and materialistically.

Genres: Philosophy, Metaphysics, Nonfiction

200 pages, Paperback

First published May 1, 1988

About the author

A specialist in the works of Baruch Spinoza, Edwin Curley is Professor Emeritus at the University of Michigan

Reviews

[Preston · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book helped clarify some of Spinoza's propositions, but I can't agree with his material monism interpretation of Spinoza. I believe Spinoza is clear when he differentiates God's attributes and I think presents a nearly platonic vision. Spinoza literally believes in a spiritual world, only that this spiritual (Thought) world is subject to the Essence of God, or, Laws of Nature, e.g as motion and rest are for the material (Extension) world, and these Laws flowing from the same God follow the same perfect reasoning and vision, resulting in something similar to Leibniz's preestablished harmony. E.g that the body and the spirit are the same thing, in so far as they are both the same point in God, expressed under His attributes of Extension and Thought respectively. They cannot affect one another because they are in different worlds so to speak, but they are perfectly harmonized since the chain of cause and effect are the same in each Attribute.
The author takes Spinoza's claim of the body and mind being the same thing to indicate materialism. I think it may have some of the same implications as materialism, but I don't believe Spinoza was ever denying the soul and firmly affirmed it.

[Genni]

When reading Spinoza’s “Ethics”, it was difficult not to see it as a wild syncretism of monism, determinism and other various philosophical and religious concepts. Curley pushes against this type of reading and, in “Great Conversation” fashion, seeks to put Spinoza in relief against Descartes and Hobbes. Secondarily, he seeks to argue against interpreters who attempt to make Spinoza a dualist. The main body is written to students, with a fuller development in the footnotes. For amateurs, one would be hard-pressed to find a more accessible and informative discussion.

[Markku · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent short introduction to Spinoza's thought which helpfully sets it to the context of Descartes and Hobbes.

[Marco · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read it. Will read again after reading Descartes principles of philosophy.

[Jaxen · Rating 4 out of 5]

What I appreciate most from this relatively short commentary is the challenges Curley gives Spinoza, not allowing some of his more problematic claims (such as the one-to-one correspondence of Thought to Extension) to be merely asserted. This aids in understanding the text in a much deeper way and it really lets you appreciate the genius of Spinoza and the breadth of Curley's knowledge in his text (and in the literature, with him consistently referencing Bennett's study).

While it is definitely worth reading carefully, I must agree with others that Curley's materialist interpretation is not convincing, mostly because it relies upon ignoring the latter part of book V (which he admits in a footnote he does not fully understand) and flattening God to refer solely to Nature when Spinoza claims, in letters, that he is not doing this. It finally gives almost no reference to the different kinds of knowledge that would demonstrate, I believe, that material bodies do not have primacy over ideas (the third kind of knowledge, 'scientia intuitiva,' clarifies why Spinoza believes some part of the mind is eternal, which Curley cannot account for).

[Nalanda · Rating 4 out of 5]

ดีตรงที่มีการเปรียบเทียบกับปรัชญาของเดคาร์ตส์กับโธมัส ฮอบควบคู่ไปด้วย

[Zelai Xu · Rating 3 out of 5]

More like an incomplete draft.... Spinoza and Descartes deserve better

[Luke Echo · Rating 3 out of 5]

I found this presentation of the Ethics quite interesting as it focusses particularly on placing Spinoza's ideas as a response and criticism to earlier Metaphysics, mostly that of Descartes Metaphysics.