Abstract
Spinoza’s claim that self-preservation is the foundation of virtue makes for the point of departure of this philosophical investigation into what a Spinozistic model of moral education might look like. It is argued that Spinoza’s metaphysics places constraints on moral education insofar as an educational account would be affected by Spinoza’s denial of the objectivity of moral knowledge, his denial of the existence of free will, and of moral responsibility. This article discusses these challenges in some detail, seeking to construe a credible account of moral education based on the insight that self-preservation is not at odds with benevolence, but that the self-preservation of the teacher is instead conditioned by the intellectual deliberation of the students. However, it is also concluded that while benevolence retains an important place in Spinoza’s ethics, his causal determinism poses a severe threat to a convincing account of moral education insofar as moral education is commonly understood to involve an effort to influence the actions of students relative to some desirable goal.
Notes
Kisner (2011) argues that Spinoza’s robust notion of virtue and his largely eudaimonistic concept of the good life qualify him as a kind of virtue ethicist, even if his particular brand of virtue ethics comes across as being somewhat unorthodox in ways that will be discussed later in this paper.
Passages in Spinoza’s Ethics will be referred to using the following abbreviations: a(-xiom), c(-orollary), d(-emonstration), D(-efinition), p(-roposition), s(-cholium) and pref(-ace). DOA refers to D(-efinition) O(-f) the A(-ffects). Hence, 4p22c refers to the corollary of the 22nd proposition of part 4. All references to the Ethics are to Curley’s (Spinoza 1985) translation.
Unlike Descartes who reserves a special metaphysical position for humans as a kind of self-sustained substance—albeit one that is caused by God—thereby insuring that the doctrine of the immortality of the human soul is safeguarded.
References to Spinoza’s correspondence are to Shirley’s translation in Spinoza: Complete works (Spinoza 2002).
In order for this to make sense with regards to simpler body/minds it should be noted that the word striving, in this context, does not denote an intentional kind of striving but rather a tendency to persist in motion unless prevented to do so from without.
In fact, for me to preserve myself I will need to destroy other things/bodies, such as the different foods I need to consume in order to vitalize and strengthen my own body.
Accordingly, in 4p18s Spinoza writes: ‘For if, for example, two individuals of entirely the same nature are joined to one another, they compose an individual twice as powerful as each one. To man, then, there is nothing more useful to man. Man, I say, can wish for nothing more helpful than that all should so agree in all things that the minds and bodies of all would compose, as it were, one mind and one body; that all should strive together, as far as they can, to preserve their being; and that all, together, should seek for themselves the common advantage of all’.
In 3p9s Spinoza writes that ‘we neither strive for, nor will, neither want, nor desire anything because we judge it to be good; on the contrary, we judge something to be good because we strive for it, will it, want it, and desire it’.
References
Aloni, N. 2008. Spinoza as educator: From eudaimonistic ethics to an empowering and liberating pedagogy. Educational Philosophy and Theory 40: 531–544.
Bennett, J. 1984. A study of Spinoza’s ethics. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing.
Curley, E.M. 1969. Spinoza’s metaphysics: An essay in interpretation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Dahlbeck, J. 2016. Spinoza and education: Freedom, understanding and empowerment. London & New York: Routledge.
Deleuze, G. 1988. Spinoza: Practical philosophy. San Francisco, CA: City Lights Books.
Della Rocca, M. 1996a. Spinoza’s metaphysical psychology. In The Cambridge companion to Spinoza, ed. D. Garrett, 192–266. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Della Rocca, M. 1996b. Representation and the mind-body problem in Spinoza. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Della Rocca, M. 2008. Spinoza. London: Routledge.
Derry, J. 2006. The unity of intellect and will: Vygotsky and Spinoza. Educational Review 56: 113–120.
Garrett, D. 1996. Spinoza’s ethical theory. In The Cambridge companion to Spinoza, ed. D. Garrett, 267–314. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hübner, K. Forthcoming. Spinoza’s unorthodox metaphysics of the will. In The Oxford handbook on Spinoza, ed. M. Della Rocca, 1–41. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Israel, J. 2002. Radical enlightenment: Philosophy and the making of modernity 1650–1750. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jarrett, C. 2014. Spinozistic constructivism. In Essays on Spinoza’s ethical theory, ed. M.J. Kisner, and A. Youpa, 57–84. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kisner, M.J. 2011. Spinoza on human freedom: Reason, autonomy and the good life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kisner, M.J., and A. Youpa (eds.). 2014. Essays on Spinoza’s ethical theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kraut, R. 2014. Aristotle’s ethics. In The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, (Summer 2014 Edition), ed. Edward N. Zalta. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2014/entries/aristotle-ethics/.
Kristjánsson, K. 2007. Aristotle, emotions, and education. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Kristjánsson, K. 2015. Aristotelian character education. London: Routledge.
LeBuffe, M. 2010. From bondage to freedom: Spinoza on human excellence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
LeBuffe, M. 2014a. Spinoza’s psychological theory. In The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2014 Edition), ed. E.N. Zalta. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/spinoza-psychological/.
LeBuffe, M. 2014b. Necessity and the commands of reason in the Ethics. In Essays on Spinoza’s ethical theory, ed. M.J. Kisner, and A. Youpa, 197–220. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lloyd, G. 1996. Routledge philosophy guidebook to Spinoza and the Ethics. London: Routledge.
Lloyd, G. 1998. Spinoza and the education of the imagination. In Philosophers on education: New historical perspectives, ed. A.O. Rorty, 157–172. London & New York: Routledge.
Marshall, E. 2013. The spiritual automaton: Spinoza’s science of the mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Melamed, Y.Y. 2011. Spinoza’s anti-humanism: An outline. In The rationalists: Between tradition and innovation, ed. C. Fraenkel, D. Perinetti, and J.E.H. Smith, 147–166. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Melamed, Y.Y. 2013. Spinoza’s metaphysics: Substance and thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nadler, S. 2013. Baruch Spinoza. In The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Fall 2013 Edition), ed. Edward N. Zalta. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2013/entries/spinoza/.
Nadler, S. 2014. The lives of others: Spinoza on benevolence as a rational virtue. In Essays on Spinoza’s ethical theory, ed. M.J. Kisner, and A. Youpa, 41–56. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Puolimatka, T. 2001. Spinoza’s theory of teaching and indoctrination. Educational Philosophy and Theory 33: 397–410.
Ravven, H.M. 1990. Spinoza’s materialist ethics: The education of desire. International Studies in Philosophy 22: 59–78.
Ravven, H.M. 2013. The self beyond itself: An alternative history of ethics, the new brain sciences, and the myth of free will. New York: The New Press.
Sanderse, W. 2015. An aristotelian model of moral development. Journal of Philosophy of Education 49: 382–398.
Singer, B.A. 1988. Spinoza on returning hatred with love. Journal of Moral Education 17: 3–10.
Spinoza, B. 1985. Ethics. In The collected works of Spinoza, (ed. and trans) E. Curley, Vol. 1, 408–617. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Spinoza, B. 2002. The letters. In Spinoza: Complete works, eds. M.L. Morgan and S. Shirley (trans.), 755–959. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing.
Steinberg, J. 2014. Following a recta ratio vivendi: The practical utility of Spinoza’s dictates of reason. In Essays on Spinoza’s ethical theory, ed. M.J. Kisner, and A. Youpa, 178–196. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dahlbeck, J. A Spinozistic Model of Moral Education. Stud Philos Educ 36, 533–550 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-016-9530-7
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-016-9530-7