|
Letter 2 (2)
[Spinoza defines "God", and "attribute" and sends definitions, axioms, and first four propositions of Book I. of Ethics. Some errors of Bacon and Descartes discussed.] Letter 4 (4) [Spinoza answers some of Oldenburg's questions and doubts, but has not time to reply to all, as he is just setting out for Amsterdam.] Letter 9 (13) [Spinoza informs Oldenburg that he has removed to Rhijnsburg, and has spent some time at Amsterdam for the purpose of publishing the "Principles of Cartesian Philosophy." He then replies to Boyle's objections.] Letter 15 (32). [Spinoza writes to his friend concerning the reasons which lead us to believe, that "every part of nature agrees with the whole, and is associated with all other parts." He also makes a few remarks about Huyghens.] Letter 19 (68). [Spinoza relates his journey to Amsterdam for the purpose of publishing his Ethics; he was deterred by the dissuasions of theologians and Cartesians. He hopes that Oldenburg will inform him of some of the objections to the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus, made by learned men, so that they may be answered in notes.] Letter 21 (73). [Spinoza answers questions on God and Nature, miracles, Christ] Letter 23 (75). [Spinoza expounds to Oldenburg his views on fate and necessity, discriminates between miracles and ignorance, takes the resurrection of Christ as spiritual, and deprecates attributing to the sacred writers Western modes of speech.] Letter 25 (78). [Spinoza again treats of fatalism. He repeats that he accepts Christ's passion, death, and burial literally, but His resurrection spiritually.] Letter 27 (9) [Spinoza deprecates his correspondent's jealousy of Albert Burgh; and answers that distinction must be made between different kinds of definitions. He explains his opinions more precisely.] Letter 28 (10) [Spinoza, in answer to a letter from De Vries now lost, speaks of the experience necessary for proving a definition, and also of eternal truths.] Letter 29 (12) [Spinoza answers question on the infinite and in answering briefly explains the terms substance, mode, eternity, and duration.] Letter 29a [Spinoza requests a few changes to the preface written by Meyer for Spinoza's "The Principles of Descartes' Philosophy"] Letter 30 (17) [Concerning omens and phantoms. The mind may have a confused presentiment of the future.] Letter 32 (19) [Spinoza answers with his usual courtesy the question propounded by Blyenbergh.] Letter 34 (21) [Spinoza complains that Blyenbergh has misunderstood him: he sets forth the true meaning.] Letter 36 (23) [Spinoza replies, that there is a difference between the theological and the philosophical way of speaking of God and things divine. He proceeds to discuss Blyenbergh's questions. (Voorburg, 13th March, 1665.)] Letter 38 (27) [Spinoza declines further correspondence with Blyenbergh, but says he will give explanations of certain points by word of mouth. (Voorburg, 3rd June, 1665.)]
PREV -
NEXT -
THIS -
UPPER -
TOP
Letter 39
Spinoza to [the Elwes translation shows this as Christian Huyghens, Shirley and others show it as John Hudde.][Treating of the Unity of God.] Letter 40 (35) [Further arguments for the unity of God] Letter 41 (36) [Further discussion concerning the unity of God. Spinoza asks for advice about polishing lenses. (Voorburg, May, 1666.)] Letter 41a [Spinoza urges his correspondent to be diligent in studying philosophy, promises to send part of the Ethics, and adds some personal details.] Letter 42 (37) [Concerning the best method, by which we may safely arrive at the knowledge of things.] Letter 49 [A defence of the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (The Hague, 1671.)] Letter 47 (44) [Spinoza begs his friend to stop the printing of the Dutch version of the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus. Some remarks on a pernicious pamphlet, "Homo Politicus," and on Thales of Miletus.] Letter 50 (50) [Of the difference between the political theories of Hobbes and Spinoza, of the Unity of God, of the notion of figure, of the book of a Utrecht professor against the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus.] Letter 52 (46) [Spinoza's answer to a letter on optics from Leibnitz.] Letter 54 (48) [In reply to a letter from Fabritus, under the order and in the name of the Elector Palatine, in which the post of Professor of Philosophy at Heidelberg is offered, under very liberal conditions; Spinoza thanks the Elector for his kind offer, but, owing to his unwillingness to teach in public, and other causes, humbly begs to be allowed time to consider it.] Letter 56 (52) [Spinoza answers that he does not know what ghosts are, and can gain no information from antiquity. (The Hague, Sept., 1674.)] Letter 58 (54) [Spinoza treats of the necessary creation of the world --he refutes his friend's arguments and quotations.] Letter 60 (56) [Spinoza again answers the argument in favour of ghosts. (The Hague, 1674).] Letter 62 (58) [Spinoza gives his opinions on liberty and necessity. (The Hague, October, 1674).] Letter 64 [The difference between a true and an adequate idea is merely extrinsic, &c. The Hague, Jan., 1675.] Letter 66 (64) [Spinoza answers by references to the first three books of the Ethics.] Letter 68 (66) [In this fragment of a letter Spinoza refers his friend to Ethics, I. x. and II. vii. note.] Letter 68b [Spinoza answers all the points in Schaller's letter, and hesitates to entrust his writings to Leibniitz.] Letter 70 (81) [Spinoza explains his view of the infinite.] Letter 72 (83) [Spinoza gives the required explanation. Mentions the treatise of Huet, &c.] Letter 74 (76) [Spinoza laments the step taken by his pupil, and answers his arguments. The Hague, end of 1675.] Letter 75 (69) [Of the proposed annotation of the "Tractatus Theologico-Politicus.] |
|
|
|
|
| Slack padding. |