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.)
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.