anomosmarxist

true, but also for some math isnt a model but a discoverable part of nature. depends on who is doing the philosophical arguing there. we dont know for sure, ironically because of godel? therefore its a true part of nature?

Godel is important, but his argument's extension to natural laws is a bit of a stretch, also that set of laws isnt really a logical axiomatic set. its more of a hodgepodge, an ever shifting discursive formation by which we are epistemological bound to in as much as we exist by it

here is a quote: "from the necessity of the divine nature must follow an infinite number of things in infinite ways-that is, all things which can fall within the sphere of infinite intellect"

here is a quote: "from the necessity of the divine nature must follow an infinite number of things in infinite ways-that is, all things which can fall within the sphere of infinite intellect"

so even this decent article is just a surface overview of a brilliant thinker and this reply chain continues such lack of attention towards careful reading and discussion of his text. instead we have everyone sounding off on their own conclusions about god, reality and religion. yet most of these comments are lacking. what exactly? they are lacking thorough, exacting, and critical thinking. sure, healthy opinions are couched in smart minds, but go a step further and read a book, then you can catch up beyond your clumsy, simple, internet level brains.

Ya, wtf. clearly this is a reply chain of intelligent people (?) but not a single post about the actual text. like tldr for spinoza, his writing is far beyond these grasping confusions which could be avoided if anyone cared to have an actual philosophical discussion