Instructions
Due, as an attachment, via the “Assignments” tool on eCommons, by midnight
Tuesday, February 24.
Please choose one of the eight definitions or one of the seven axioms at the
beginning of the Ethics. Point out some way in which the axiom or definition is
odd or surprising — i.e., a way in which someone might argue that the
definition or axiom in question should be corrected — and explain briefly why
Spinoza would not be able to prove one of his key conclusions (either
Prop. 11 or Prop. 14) unless this definition or axiom were put the way it
is. (Note that the axiom or definition need not appear directly in the
proof of the proposition in question; it might be in the proof of one of the
earlier propositions. If so you need to explain both how Spinoza’s version is
necessary for the proof of the earlier proposition, and how that earlier
proposition is necessary for the proof of Prop. 11 or 14.) Finally, suggest
briefly how Spinoza might defend his version of the axiom or definition.
(Needless to say this should be your own original work.[1]If you have
any questions about policies on plagiarism and related issues, please see
http://www.ue.ucsc.edu/academic_integrity.)
Note that, as with the first assignment, this is not a full scale paper — you
need not, and should not, write an introduction and conclusion, summarize other
parts of the Ethics, etc.
You can find answers to some commonly asked questions about my
assignments and grading in my FAQ.