エチカ——第4部
- 言語:
- 英語
- 状態:
- 完全な作品
- 著者性:
- 著者自身による
- テキストの状態:
- スキャンのノイズは検出されていません (全文に対する自動測定で、人の目では確認していません)
- 分量:
- 約 22,500 語 · 107 節
この作品を引用
- APAバールーフ・デ・スピノザ. (n.d.). Ethics — Part 4 [エチカ——第4部]. Digital reproduction: SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/ja/works/baruch-spinoza/ethics-part-4
- MLAバールーフ・デ・スピノザ. Ethics — Part 4 [エチカ——第4部]. Digital reproduction, SigPhi, https://sigphiai.com/ja/works/baruch-spinoza/ethics-part-4.
- Chicagoバールーフ・デ・スピノザ. Ethics — Part 4 [エチカ——第4部]. Digital reproduction, SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/ja/works/baruch-spinoza/ethics-part-4.
SigPhi が再現している版の参照です。SigPhi はそのデジタル再現であり、出版者ではありません。版の刊行年はメタデータにないため「n.d.」とし、訳者は記録がある場合のみ記します。
何についての本か
神、精神、感情、自由——完全な体系を幾何学のように論証する。定義、公理、定理が積み重なり、「自由とは必然を理解することである」という思想へ至る。
背景と歴史
スピノザは1675年ごろ『エチカ』を完成させたが、生前の出版は断念した。「神即自然」——神と自然は同一のものである——のスキャンダルは、彼を葬り去っていただろう。書は1677年、死の数か月後に『遺稿集』の一部として世に出て、ほとんど即座に禁書となった。著者はハーグでレンズを磨いて暮らした人であり、二十三歳でアムステルダムのユダヤ人共同体から破門されていた。その破門状の苛烈さは、ついに取り消されることがなかった。一世紀のあいだ「スピノザ主義者」は罵倒の言葉だった。のちにドイツ観念論をはじめ多くの者にとって、あらゆる哲学が己を測るべき山となった。
これは編集上の背景であり、引用できる典拠ではありません。作品本文の一節とは異なり、これらの記述はコーパスで検証できません。
sees that it is carried through to the end, which its author had purposed for it. But if a man sees a work, the like whereof he has never seen before, and if he knows not the intention of the artificer, he plainly cannot know, whether that work be perfect or imperfect. Such seems to be the primary meaning of these terms. But, after men began to form general ideas, to think out types of houses, buildings, towers, &c., and to prefer certain types to others, it came about, that each man called perfect that which he saw agree with the general idea he had formed of the thing in question, and called imperfect that which he saw agree less with his own preconceived type, even though it had evidently been completed in accordance with the idea of its artificer. This seems to be the only reason for calling natural phenomena, which, indeed, are not made with human hands, perfect or imperfect: for men are wont to form general ideas of things natural, no less than of things artificial, and such ideas they hold as types, believing that Nature (who they think does nothing without an object) has them in view, and has set them as types before herself. Therefore, when they behold something in Nature, which does not wholly conform to the preconceived type which they have formed of the thing in question, they say that Nature has fallen short or has blundered, and has left her work incomplete. Thus we see that men are wont to style natural phenomena perfect or imperfect rather from their own prejudices, than from true knowledge of what they pronounce upon. Now we showed in the Appendix to Part I., that Nature does not work with an end in view. For the eternal and infinite Being, which we call God or Nature, acts by the same necessity as that whereby it exists. For we have shown, that by the same necessity of its nature, whereby it exists, it likewise works (I:xvi.).…