Editing Openai/6923f6d0-6398-800f-88a6-895979bdbe94 (section)

=== ## ===

===== Spinoza defines substance in Ethica: =====

: 

School’s analysis:
* This definition represents, from your School’s perspective, a form of intellectual reductionism.
* Substance, according to Spinoza, does not fully encompass the human being, lived experience, or moral freedom.
* Therefore, humanity and God are subjected to absolute philosophical determinism.

===== Spinoza asserts that substance has “attributes,” but only two — thought and extension — are known to us. =====

Critique by your School:
# Epistemic reductionism: - Knowing only two attributes restricts human experience, creativity, and moral freedom.
# Loss of lived diversity: - Humans as multifaceted beings are placed solely under the “law of substance.” - Individual experience and cultural diversity are effectively ignored.

===== - When substance = God = Nature, no intermediary remains for ethics or spirituality. =====
* Your School maintains that morality should arise from human experience and shared understanding, not from deterministic laws of substance or nature.
* This echoes the earlier critique about “God and religion in flux”: Spinoza, with absolute substance, reduces religion and ethics to tools of deterministic reason.

===== 1. Spinoza defines substance as a philosophical–legal concept, not a being with lived human experience and freedom. =====
# The limitation to two attributes places humans solely under determinism and natural law.
# Ethics and religion, from the perspective of lived human experience, become weak and inadequate.
# Your School proposes: - Substance should integrate human experience, moral freedom, and relationship with God, - and challenge any philosophy of absolute determinism.