Introduction
The initial problem of the philosophical worldview is the doctrine of being. In modern times, the search for unity and stability in the world has transformed into a solution to the problem of substance. Various philosophers recognized as such either one substance, two consciousness and matter, or many. Thus, it is necessary to create a discussion of material substance between Spinoza, Descartes, and me. Accordingly, it should be established that there is only one material substance.
Discussion
In Cartesian metaphysics, God appears as a primary and infinite spiritual substance. Descartes divided the world created by God into two substances, spiritual and material (Descartes, 2017, p. 51). He approached the treatment of these substances from the position of dualism. This means that he regarded these substances as coexisting, independent and completely independent of each other. Spiritual substance is not reducible to material substance, and, on the contrary, material substance is not reducible to spiritual substance. Material substance is the body; it is extended, divisible, and complex (Descartes, 2017, p. 51). The spiritual substance has no extension, it is one and indivisible, and its only attribute is thinking. It implies that the soul is always conscious, and an object possessing thinking as a property cannot be material.
Descartes identified material substance with nature and argued, on the basis of the science of his time, that all in it was subordinate to the laws of mechanics. He viewed the animal body as a complex system that worked mechanically. It, like any technical construction, does not need regulation by the soul (Urban, 2018, p. 230). Human actions in their involuntary, unconditioned reflexive form are similar to those of animals. However, unlike animals, man has reason and speech. Descartes explained these phenomena by the presence of the human soul, which is a thinking substance derived from God.
I do not agree with the assertion proposed by Descartes that there are two substances in the human body. I think that the human or animal body is not subject to the laws of mechanics, but to the guidance of the soul. At the same time, the philosopher’s arguments in two completely opposite substances created a psychophysical problem, for it is impossible to explain the coexistence in the whole man of a soul and a body independent of each other. In solving this problem, Descartes attempted to identify the center in which spiritual substance interacts with bodily substance (Urban, 2018, p. 228). In my view, there is a profound contradiction in the Cartesian system. On the one hand, Descartes laid the foundations of dualism, declaring the irreducibility of the two substances: the body cannot act on the soul and the soul on the body (Urban, 2018, p. 228). On the other hand, he could not refuse to resolve the question of the relation of the soul.
The rationalist tradition originating with Descartes was continued by Spinoza. Baruch Spinoza, like Descartes, sought to build philosophy on reliable foundations. Spinoza used geometry with its axioms as the form in which he set forth his major work, Ethics (De Spinoza, 2020, p. 43). The philosopher argued that only on the basis of intuitive and deductive knowledge could one construct a valid philosophy. Spinoza opposed Descartes’ dualism to monism, which, in my opinion, is fully justified (Heil, 2018, p. 314). The spiritual and the bodily, the ideal and the material merged into one infinite substance that needs nothing in order to exist.
Spinoza developed his doctrine of substance from a pantheistic approach. He described God as a being totally infinite and identified him with both substance and nature. Spinoza’s characterization of substance was based on such properties as indivisibility and eternity, that is, its changelessness and infinity in time and space, its immovability and invariability (De Spinoza, 2020, p. 43). The philosopher named the concrete things of nature as moduses; they differ from a substance by their dependence on an external cause and by such of their characteristics as finiteness and changeability. In the world of modusa of the infinite number of attributes of substance, the human mind finds only two, they are extension and thinking. Spinoza transformed Descartes’ two substances into two attributes of one substance. Like Descartes, extension meant for the Dutch philosopher closeness, and substance (Heil, 2018, p. 313). However, along with extension, matter, in his view, beginning with the stone and ending with the human brain, has the capacity to think, albeit in varying degrees.
Conclusion
Thus, it appears to me that the problem posed by Cartesianism of the relation between soul and body has received in Spinoza a valid resolution. That is, recognizing the soul, people know the body and, conversely, the soul and the body differently express the same essence of the one divine nature. Therefore, I maintain Spinoza’s philosophical spirit that there is only one material substance. It is also important to note that Spinoza continued to develop the doctrine of substance on the basis of Descartes’ philosophy, which is why he can be considered a follower of Descartes. Considering that Spinoza was attempting to find a solution to a problem that arose in Descartes’ philosophy, his teaching is more logical and developed. Hence, I support Spinoza’s arguments about one material substance.
References
Descartes, R. (2017). Descartes: Meditations on first philosophy: With selections from the objections and replies. Cambridge University Press.
De Spinoza, B. (2020). Spinoza’s Ethics. Princeton University Press.
Heil, J. (2018). Being of one substance. Religious Studies, 54(3), 313-324. Web.
Urban, E. (2018). On matters of mind and body: Regarding Descartes. Journal of Analytical Psychology, 63(2), 228-240. Web.