Spinoza's Ethics on the existence of God

Spinoza’s Ethics contains convincing proof of God’s existence. The Scholium in Proposition 11 only requires commitment to a basic understanding of the properties of the substance that makes up reality. Spinoza lays down some basic definitions that seem very reasonable and with these, builds up to an argument that proves the existence of God. The build up from the definitions involves many propositions and axioms, but all rely on basic commitments made earlier. When he arrives at P11, it is clearly similar to the earlier statements just this time the ideas are applied to God.

At the base of the argument lies the definitions. These are the commitments that must be made in order to follow the proof. The first important definitions are D1 and D3. These state that, substance is, “what is in itself and is conceived through itself” (408, 15) and that its nature involves existence (408, 5). This idea alone is critical to understand P11. When Spinoza says “substance” he isn’t referring to physical matter but a construct from which reality emerges and exists through. It’s an acceptable idea that, for anything to exist, there would have to be something underlying that doesn’t rely on anything else for its own existence.

After explaining the principles of substance, Spinoza moves to lay down an important claim about God. This is a major part of P11 and already begins building on the earlier definitions. D6 states that, God can be understood as an absolutely infinite being, a substance with infinite attributes (409, 25). The connection being made between God and substance is a major point of the proof. Eventually they are recognized as one and the same (P14).

These three definitions alone, D1. D3 and D6 are the extent of the commitment that needs to be made to follow Spinoza’s proof. Although they are explaining such an abstract idea that cannot be proven/disproven, there isn’t any problems with these definitions. From here, Spinoza moves to axioms to progress his proof yet only draws on previous statements which stem from the definitions.

A1 states that "Whatever is, is either in itself or in another” (410, 20). This is critical for P11 to be understood. Spinoza wants to make the distinction between things with external causes and things which only cause are themselves and their own nature. Only substance/God could be caused by itself as its nature involves it (D1, D3). The next related axiom is A4. This states that, “The knowledge of an effect depends on, and involves, the knowledge of its cause” (410, 25). This claims that everything exists for a reason and will reinforce that the reason anything exists at all, is because God’s nature involves necessary existence. As stated about substance in D1 and A1. The last critical axiom to P11, is A7 which states, “If a thing can be conceived as not existing, its essence does not involve existence” (410, 33). Because of A1’s explanation of causes, to conceive God as nonexistent would be “absurd” (417, 28) as there would need somewhere need to be something who’s cause isn’t external.

Based off the definitions, the axioms make perfect sense and are extremely compelling. Spinoza managed to build on his definitions so as long as commitment can be made to a few reasonable definitions, the entire rest of the ascent is very clear.

Next, the ascent to the notion of God in P11 involves other propositions beginning at P6 and P7. These are, “One substance cannot be produced by another substance” (411, 16) and that “It pertains to the nature of a substance to exist” (412, 3) respectively. These reinforce that substance was caused by itself, from its own nature. This point is major in P11 to explain God’s existence as necessary. Another point in the proofs in P11 deals with attributes.

Attributes are not essential to the Scholium Spinoza gives in P11 but they are important to the overall claim of the proposition. Spinoza states in D4 that, “By attribute I understand what the intellect perceives of a substance, as constituting its essence” (408, 17) meaning they are expressions of substance that exist. P9 goes on to say, “The more reality or being each thing has, the more attributes belong to it” (416, 24). This means that an infinite being would have infinite attributes which is a part of the P11 claim.

Now, with these propositions, axioms, and the definitions explained. Spinoza begins the very convincing Proposition 11 (417, 24). This states that,

“God, or a substance consisting of infinite attributes, each of which expresses eternal and infinite essence, necessarily exists.”

The Proposition itself is practically already proved, Spinoza just connects earlier proof with, P7, that substance necessarily exists and D6 that God is an infinite substance and P9 that the more reality the being has, the more attributes. This original proof is convincing, but the Scholium offers another perspective tying the proof of God’s existence directly back to the definitions that began the Ethics Book.

The Scholium begins by stating, “the more reality belongs to the nature of a thing, the more powers it has, of itself, to exist” (418, 6) and as we already know from the definitions, God is an infinite being so has infinite reality, so holds infinite power in itself to exist. The Scholium continues and if that wasn’t convincing, Spinoza explains very simply, what you’ll need to commit to in order to understand the existence. He says that you will not agree if you only contemplate things which flow from external cause (418,10). For this he drops what is the most convincing and easily followed statement of the sole belief in external causes. Making a statement about external causes, the text says, that,

“things that come to be from external causes—whether they consist of many parts or of few—owe all the perfection or reality they have to the power of the external cause; and therefore their existence arises only from the perfection of their external cause, and not from their own perfection. On the other hand, whatever perfection substance has is not owed to any external cause. So its existence must follow from its nature alone;” (419, 21)

Spinoza then makes a statement that wraps up his proof perfectly with, “there is nothing of whose existence we can be more certain than we are of the existence of an absolutely infinite, or perfect, Being, God” (419, 30).

Spinoza’s proof for the existence of God is very reasonable and believable. From the start, he lays out what’s required to follow his ascent to God simply and bluntly. On his build up, when explaining each axiom and proposition, he uses the definitions and previous statements to prove other statements and claims making it an even more compelling system, as it connects so well. By P11, the work is already done and he lays out the few connections left to make to see God’s existence. In the Scholium he takes it a step further and proves his existence with a simple idea built around the concept of external causes. There is not much more that Spinoza can do to prove God’s existence through thought alone. He has such minimal definitions that if agreed with, can build straight to God’s existence. Spinoza’s Ethics is a strong proof of the existence of God.

Work Cited

Spinoza, Benedictus de. Ethics I. Of God