indicated "sorrow." From the religious point of view, however, there was a grave drawback to this
theory; and this brings me to the second characteristic of Cartesianism that I alluded to above.
In the whole theory of the material world, Cartesianism was rigidly deterministic. Living
organisms, just as much as dead matter, were governed by the laws of physics; there was no
longer need, as in the Aristotelian philosophy, of an entelechy or soul to explain the growth of
organisms and the movements of animals. Descartes himself allowed one small exception: a
human soul could, by volition, alter the direction though not the quantity of the motion of the
animal spirits. This, however, was contrary to the spirit of the system, and turned out to be
contrary to the laws of mechanics; it was therefore dropped. The consequence was that all the
movements of matter were determined by physical laws, and, owing to parallelism, mental events
must be equally determinate. Consequently Cartesians had difficulty about free will. And for those
who paid more attention to Descartes's science than to his theory of knowledge, it was not difficult
to extend the theory that animals are automata: why not say the same of man, and simplify the
system by making it a consistent materialism? This step was actually taken in the eighteenth
century.
There is in Descartes an unresolved dualism between what he learnt from contemporary science
and the scholasticism that he had been taught at La Flà ̈che. This led him into inconsistencies, but
it also made him more rich in fruitful ideas than any completely logical philosopher could have
been. Consistency might have made him merely the founder of a new scholasticism, whereas
inconsistency made him the source of two important but divergent schools of philosophy.
-568-CHAPTER X SpinozaSpinoza ( 1634-77) is the noblest and most lovable of the great philosophers. Intellectually, some
others have surpassed him, but ethically he is supreme. As a natural consequence, he was
considered, during his lifetime and for a century after his death, a man of appalling wickedness.
He was born a Jew, but the Jews excommunicated him. Christians abhorred him equally; although
his whole philosophy is dominated by the idea of God, the orthodox accused him of atheism.
Leibniz, who owed much to him, concealed his debt, and carefully abstained from saying a word
in his praise; he even went so far as to lie about the extent of his personal acquaintance with the
heretic Jew.
The life of Spinoza was very simple. His family had come to Holland from Spain, or perhaps
Portugal, to escape the Inquisition. He himself was educated in Jewish learning, but found it
impossible to remain orthodox. He was offered 1000 florins a year to conceal his doubts; when he
refused, an attempt was made to assassinate him; when this failed, he was cursed with all the
curses in Deuteronomy and with the curse that Elisha pronounced on the children who, in
consequence, were torn to pieces by the she-bears. But no she-bears attacked Spinoza. He lived
quietly, first at Amsterdam and then at the Hague, making his living by polishing lenses. His
wants were few and simple, and he showed throughout his life a rare indifference to money. The
few who knew him loved him, even if they disapproved of his principles. The Dutch government,
with its usual liberalism, tolerated his opinions on theological matters, though at one time he was
in bad odour politically because he sided with the De Witts against the House of Orange. At the
early age of forty-three he died of phthisis.
His chief work, the Ethics, was published posthumously. Before considering it, a few words must
be said about two of his other books,