god is not a puppeteer

they sat silently for a long time. then sophie spoke, trying to get alberto's mind off what had happened.

"descartes must have been an odd kind of person. did he become famous?"

alberto breathed deeply for a couple of seconds before answering: "he had a great deal of significance. perhaps most of all for another great philosopher, ba-ruch spinoza, who lived from 1632 to 1677."

"are you going to tell me about him?"

"that was my intention. and we're not going to be stopped by military provocations."

"i'm all ears."

"spinoza belonged to the jewish community of amsterdam, but he was excommunicated for heresy. few philosophers in more recent times have been so blasphemed and so persecuted for their ideas as this man. it happened because he criticized the established religion. he believed that christianity and judaism were only kept alive by rigid dogma and outer ritual. he was the first to apply what we call a historico-critical interpretation of the bible."

"explanation, please."

"he denied that the bible was inspired by god down to the last letter. when we read the bible, he said, we must continually bear in mind the period it was written in. a 'critical' reading, such as the one he proposed, revealed a number of inconsistencies in the texts. but beneath the surface of the scriptures in the new testament is jesus, who could well be called god's mouthpiece. the teachings of jesus therefore represented a liberation from the orthodoxy of judaism. jesus preached a 'religion of reason' which valued love higher than all else. spinoza interpreted this as meaning both love of god and love of humanity. nevertheless, christianity had also become set in its own rigid dogmas and outer rituals."

"i don't suppose these ideas were easy to swallow, either for the church or the synagogue."

"when things got really tough, spinoza was even deserted by his own family. they tried to disinherit him on the grounds of his heresy. paradoxically enough, few have spoken out more powerfully in the cause of free speech and religious tolerance than spinoza. the opposition he was met with on all sides led him to pursue a quiet and secluded life devoted entirely to philosophy. he earned a meager living by polishing lenses, some of which have come into my possession."

"very impressive!"

"there is almost something symbolic in the fact that he lived by polishing lenses. a philosopher must help people to see life in a new perspective. one of the pillars of spinoza's philosophy was indeed to see things from the perspective of eternity."

"the perspective of eternity?"

"yes, sophie. do you think you can imagine your own life in a cosmic context? you'll have to try and imagine yourself and your life here and now ..."

"hm ... that's not so easy."

"remind yourself that you are only living a minuscule part of all nature's life. you are part of an enormous whole."

"i think i see what you mean ..."

"can you manage to feel it as well? can you perceive all of nature at one time--the whole universe, in fact-- at a single glance?"

"i doubt it. maybe i need some lenses."

"i don't mean only the infinity of space. i mean the eternity of time as well. once upon a time, thirty thousand years ago there lived a little boy in the rhine valley. he was a tiny part of nature, a tiny ripple on an endless sea. you too, sophie, you too are living a tiny part of nature's life. there is no difference between you and that boy."

"except that i'm alive now."

"yes, but that is precisely what i wanted you to try and imagine. who will you be in thirty thousand years?"

"was that the heresy?"

"not entirely ... spinoza didn't only say that everything is nature. he identified nature with god. he said god is all, and all is in god."

"so he was a pantheist."

"that's true. to spinoza, god did not create the world in order to stand outside it. no, god is the world. sometimes spinoza expresses it differently. he maintains that the world is in god. in this, he is quoting st. paul's speech to the athenians on the areopagos hill: 'in him we live and move and have our being.' but let us pursue spinoza's own reasoning. his most important book was his ethics geometrically demonstrated."

"ethics--geometrically demonstrated?"

"it may sound a bit strange to us. in philosophy, ethics means the study of moral conduct for living a good life. this is also what we mean when we speak of the ethics of socrates or aristotle, for example. it is only in our own time that ethics has more or less become reduced to a set of rules for living without treading on other people's toes."

"because thinking of yourself is supposed to be egoism?"

"something like that, yes. when spinoza uses the word ethics, he means both the art of living and moral conduct."

"but even so ... the art of living demonstrated geometrically?"

"the geometrical method refers to the terminology he used for his formulations. you may recall how descartes wished to use mathematical method for philosophical reflection. by this he meant a form of philosophic reflection that was constructed from strictly logical conclusions. spinoza was part of the same rationalistic tradition. he wanted his ethics to show that human life is subject to the universal laws of nature. we must therefore free ourselves from our feelings and our passions. only then will we find contentment and be happy, he believed."

"surely we are not ruled exclusively by the laws of nature?"

"well, spinoza is not an easy philosopher to grasp. let's take him bit by bit. you remember that descartes believed that reality consisted of two completely separate substances, namely thought and extension."

"how could i have forgotten it?"

"the word 'substance' can be interpreted as 'that which something consists of,' or that which something basically is or can be reduced to. descartes operated then with two of these substances. everything was either thought or extension.

"however, spinoza rejected this split. he believed that there was only one substance. everything that exists can be reduced to one single reality which he simply called substance. at times he calls it god or nature. thus spinoza does not have the dualistic view of reality that descartes had. we say he is a monist. that is, he reduces nature and the condition of all things to one single substance."

"they could hardly have disagreed more."

"ah, but the difference between descartes and spinoza is not as deep-seated as many have often claimed. descartes also pointed out that only god exists independently. it's only when spinoza identifies god with nature--or god and creation--that he distances himself a good way from both descartes and from the jewish and christian doctrines."

"so then nature is god, and that's that."

"but when spinoza uses the word 'nature,' he doesn't only mean extended nature. by substance, god, or nature, he means everything that exists, including all things spiritual."

"you mean both thought and extension."

"you said it! according to spinoza, we humans recognize two of god's qualities or manifestations. spinoza called these qualities god's attributes, and these two attributes are identical with descartes's 'thought' and 'extension.' god--or nature--manifests itself either as thought or as extension. it may well be that god has infinitely more attributes than 'thought' and 'extension,' but these are the only two that are known to man."

"fair enough, but what a complicated way of saying it."

"yes, one almost needs a hammer and chisel to get through spinoza's language. the reward is that in the end you dig out a thought as crystal clear as a diamond."

"i can hardly wait!"

"everything in nature, then, is either thought or extension. the various phenomena we come across in everyday life, such as a flower or a poem by wordsworth, are different modes of the attribute of thought or extension. a 'mode' is the particular manner which substance, god, or nature assumes. a flower is a mode of the attribute of extension, and a poem about the same flower is a mode of the attribute of thought. but both are basically the expression of substance, god, or nature."

"you could have fooled me!"

"but it's not as complicated as he makes it sound. beneath his stringent formulation lies a wonderful realization that is actually so simple that everyday language cannot accommodate it."

"i think i prefer everyday language, if it's all the same to you."

"right. then i'd better begin with you yourself. when you get a pain in your stomach, what is it that has a pain?"

"like you just said. it's me."

"fair enough. and when you later recollect that you once had a pain in your stomach, what is it that thinks?"

"that's me, too."

"so you are a single person that has a stomachache one minute and is in a thoughtful mood the next. spinoza maintained that all material things and things that happen around us are an expression of god or nature. so it follows that all thoughts that we think are also god's or nature's thoughts. for everything is one. there is only one god, one nature, or one substance."

"but listen, when i think something, i'm the one who's doing the thinking. when i move, i'm doing the moving. why do you have to mix god into it?"

"i like your involvement. but who are you? you are sophie amundsen, but you are also the expression of something infinitely bigger. you can, if you wish, say that you are thinking or that you are moving, but could you not also say that it is nature that is thinking your thoughts, or that it is nature that is moving through you? it's really just a question of which lenses you choose to look through."

"are you saying i cannot decide for myself?"

"yes and no. you may have the right to move your thumb any way you choose. but your thumb can only move according to its nature. it cannot jump off your hand and dance about the room. in the same way you also have your place in the structure of existence, my dear. you are sophie, but you are also a finger of god's body."

"so god decides everything i do?"

"or nature, or the laws of nature. spinoza believed that god--or the laws of nature--is the inner cause of everything that happens. he is not an outer cause, since god speaks through the laws of nature and only through them."

"i'm not sure i can see the difference."

"god is not a puppeteer who pulls all the strings, controlling everything that happens. a real puppet master controls the puppets from outside and is therefore the 'outer cause' of the puppet's movements. but that is not the way god controls the world. god controls the world through natural laws. so god--or nature--is the 'inner cause' of everything that happens. this means that everything in the material world happens through necessity. spinoza had a determinist view of the material, or natural, world."

"i think you said something like that before."

"you're probably thinking of the stoics. they also claimed that everything happens out of necessity. that was why it was important to meet every situation with 'stoicism.' man should not get carried away by his feelings. briefly, that was also spinoza's ethics."

"i see what you mean, but i still don't like the idea that i don't decide for myself."

"okay, let's go back in time to the stone age boy who lived thirty thousand years ago. when he grew up, he cast spears after wild animals, loved a woman who became the mother of his children, and quite certainly worshipped the tribal gods. do you really think he decided all that for himself?"

"i don't know."

"or think of a lion in africa. do you think it makes up its mind to be a beast of prey? is that why it attacks a limping antelope? could it instead have made up its mind to be a vegetarian?"

"no, a lion obeys its nature."

"you mean, the laws of nature. so do you, sophie, because you are also part of nature. you could of course protest, with the support of descartes, that a lion is an animal and not a free human being with free mental faculties. but think of a newborn baby that screams and yells. if it doesn't get milk it sucks its thumb. does that baby have a free will?"

"i guess not."

"when does the child get its free will, then? at the age of two, she runs around and points at everything in sight. at the age of three she nags her mother, and at the age of four she suddenly gets afraid of the dark. where's the freedom, sophie?"

"i don't know."

"when she is fifteen, she sits in front of a mirror experimenting with makeup. is this the moment when she makes her own personal decisions and does what she likes?"

"i see what you're getting at."

"she is sophie amundsen, certainly. but she also lives according to the laws of nature. the point is that she doesn't realize it because there are so many complex reasons for everything she does."

"i don't think i want to hear any more."

"but you must just answer a last question. two equally old trees are growing in a large garden. one of the trees grows in a sunny spot and has plenty of good soil and water. the other tree grows in poor soil in a dark spot. which of the trees do you think is bigger? and which of them bears more fruit?"

"obviously the tree with the best conditions for growing."

"according to spinoza, this tree is free. it has its full freedom to develop its inherent abilities. but if it is an apple tree it will not have the ability to bear pears or plums. the same applies to us humans. we can be hindered in our development and our personal growth by political conditions, for instance. outer circumstances can constrain us. only when we are free to develop our innate abilities can we live as free beings. but we are just as much determined by inner potential and outer opportunities as the stone age boy on the rhine, the lion in africa, or the apple tree in the garden."

"okay, i give in, almost."

"spinoza emphasizes that there is only one being which is totally and utterly 'its own cause' and can act with complete freedom. only god or nature is the expression of such a free and 'nonaccidental' process. man can strive for freedom in order to live without outer con-straint, but he will never achieve 'free will.' we do not control everything that happens in our body--which is a mode of the attribute of extension. neither do we 'choose' our thinking. man therefore does not have a 'free soul'; it is more or less imprisoned in a mechanical body."

"that is rather hard to understand."

"spinoza said that it was our passions--such as ambition and lust--which prevent us from achieving true happiness and harmony, but that if we recognize that everything happens from necessity, we can achieve an intuitive understanding of nature as a whole. we can come to realize with crystal clarity that everything is related, even that everything is one. the goal is to comprehend everything that exists in an all-embracing perception. only then will we achieve true happiness and contentment. this was what spinoza called seeing everything 'sub specie aeternitatis.' "

"which means what?"

"to see everything from the perspective of eternity. wasn't that where we started?"

"it'll have to be where we end, too. i must get going."

alberto got up and fetched a large fruit dish from the book shelves. he set it on the coffee table.

"won't you at least have a piece of fruit before you go?"

sophie helped herself to a banana. alberto took a green apple.

she broke off the top of the banana and began to peel it.

"there's something written here," she said suddenly.

"where?"

"here--inside the banana peel. it looks as if it was written with an ink brush."

sophie leaned over and showed alberto the banana. he read aloud:

here i am again, hilde. i'm everywhere. happy birthday!

"very funny," said sophie.

"he gets more crafty all the time."

"but it's impossible ... isn't it? do you know if they grow bananas in lebanon?"

alberto shook his head.

"i'm certainly not going to eat that."

"leave it then. someone who writes birthday greetings to his daughter on the inside of an unpeeled banana must be mentally disturbed. but he must also be quite ingenious."

"yes, both."

"so shall we establish here and now that hilde has an ingenious father? in other words, he's not so stupid."

"that's what i've been telling you. and it could just as well be him that made you call me hilde last time i came here. maybe he's the one putting all the words in our mouths."

"nothing can be ruled out. but we should doubt everything."

"for all we know, our entire life could be a dream."

"but let's not jump to conclusions. there could be a simpler explanation."

"well whatever, i have to hurry home. my mom is waiting for me."

alberto saw her to the door. as she left, he said:

"we'll meet again, dear hilde."

then the door closed behind her.