This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1855 edition. Excerpt: ...it. We found this noteMoreThis historic book may have numerous typos and missing text.
Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1855 edition. Excerpt: ...it. We found this note in the hand of Leibnitz among some papers where we by no means expected to meet with them.
It is unpublished as well as the manuscript, which we publish at the end of this notice. Spinoza failed in criticism, and even in the absence of the manuscript note by Leibnitz, his works would furnish us with proofs of this. In his principles demonstrated in a geometrical manner, he blindly follows Descartes, nor does he always understand him. He evidently never comprehended the Cogito: ergo sum. In his letters to Oldenburg, he tries to criticise it, and fails lamentably.
Descartes lost sight of the first cause and the origin of all things. He was unacquainted with true human nature, and did not grasp the real cause of error: what can be more vague than such criticism? Later, when better informed, (in 1676, ) one year before his death, and three after the conversation with Leibnitz, in a letter to some unknown person, his tone changes, and Spinoza now points out the difficulty: You think that it is difficult, starting from the notion of space, such as Descartes conceives it, that is, as a quiescent mass, to prove the existence of bodies.
For my part, I not only say that it is difficult, I affirm it is impossible. We can see here that Spinoza had derived some advantage from his conversations with Leibnitz. Unfortunately he only half profited by them, and even, at this time, he is uncertain and vacillating. When he is questioned, he answers evasively, and death overtakes him announcing to his followers and admirers a general system of physics which he never completed, and the explanation of the real nature of motion, which might in vain be looked for in his works. The question being important, we will try to clear up this...