A brief meditation on ethics book 5
1)What do I look like from the position of a god whose essence only lies in creation?
2) As god creates we do not matter – that much is clear. God is no the kind of thing that he must create us.
3)However at another point it is of course the case that as God does create us here and now, then in creating as he creates then we matter.
4) Two problems immediately spilt at this point.
5)The first concerns if creation. Creation is essentially miss named. I is not the foundation of the new, but the eruption of the old. What was is suddenly odder than it was: we tumble therefore into being and taking up oddness. And other ness which starts in a me and leads…
6)On the other side there is the fact that this otherness is caught for me is my perception of others.
7)I am myself in others or by perceiving them. The to elements are then united within the single throw of a me as I can in an existence. The viability of this action is itself elsewhere and caught by other elements of what I am (it is in what it is to be a body).
8)There end up therefore being rather revolting difficult series of expositions at this point. What I am, is to be within another; But I am in that other as I am always caught up in being of another, and can be so only with yet another (a body):
9)Book five then assumes that these others are not necessarily other to each other.
10)That is it invents the algebra necessary for reckoning up the other I am within, the other I perceive and the others us to be with.
11) There is no synthetic here of course – merely a sequence of eruptions. That is of throws or jumps, lighting links and rainbow guises into which the pattern falls.
12)God therefore needless complicates our essence up with others and through others. We are the muddying in God’s waters. Our live concerns therefore about how to understand this fact.
13)That is how to grasp what it is o be caught be other minds and through other minds, which catch up what I am in the maze of other works, and reflected counter thoughts.
14)Me and…
15) To perceive is therefore to own a body in allowing others I: the question is what these others will then give one back; what they also allow to that mind, and where that allowance then takes one (and how). In this move the old order of tenses caught within a mind is lo. It goes forever, with the web, of inter connections. The world of memory is broken as memory (as things past, past pains and past joys) in enforced engages into a future.
16) That is my mind is jolted out of the mines of tense (place and time), as it endless fractures whatever where frozen in its won local parts, within dissolving canker of God.
17) God demands therefore or better unpicks the hard rind of a me, on the grounds I ought to just get on with everything.
18)But this last point one is immediately caught up within another problem if god does not care for us save as he can perplex and muddy what we are, the we are going to have to face the fact that what we are is never a check list of element. We are the muddying – the taking up (this was the dear old BwO).
19) We are therefore the sense that a God is token with perceptions and allows it. That is allows the sense that I am an my rain partially is through its ability to grasp others.
20) But here there is a double thought, as what his exchange I has both a forwards and a sideways.
21) Forwards ( the direction of truth) one might impose a strict line to a perception. If I is mine (and what allows me to e in others)
22) It is therefore merely an event in a temporal universe.
23)But I might go sideways (do can and does). Hat is God will not really divide out what is happening in a y with what is happening t a you. Be might be in this together. Both n the sense that there is an exchange (that covers the other meaning), but also in the sense that in sharing something, in being with each other be are caught up in the same feelings (or versions of the same). Thins in a me as in a you (or reflecting in a me as they reflect in a you. The meaning of what’s happen being is therefore between us (without being events.
24)that is god naturally forms n odd middle band between hides and perceptions: Events and being. In this middle band exactly how a think if effecting us s allowed for and complicated across our mutual reaction to it. On the one extreme lies minds that only are what they are because they install elements from outside within them. the be a child is to see childhood, and have it awakened in ones mind. To feel hate is to have another. Ones mind therefore becomes the Pointer in which other define ourselves, as they tumble into a nature. At the other I might abandon myself into other bodies. We all feel together 9 and God is not necessarily fastidious about where he draws the mine0. It is then less exchange and more partial merging. W simply assume. We do not really need to communicate 9it communication is between elements we do not know).
25) The contrary our minds reach out and share into others. They become as an other to us and through us. They feel in what we feel and trough what we are.
26)We do not have to exist, as long as we mange the demise of the self effectively.
27)What a promise
28) Spinoza is clear it can never be simply the case. Never simply the there. Selves (and the negativity that inspires them will always break through in).
29) But that is not the point. The promise ought to be enough: For ho wants to be themselves alone?