#SPINOZA///Episode4:TheWorldof

AffectsorwhyAdamgotPoisonnedbythe
Apple

#SPINOZA///Episode4:TheWorldof
AffectsorwhyAdamgotPoisonnedby
theApple
(http://thefunambulist.net/2013/03/27/spinoza
episode4theworldofaffectsorwhyadam
March27,2013
gotpoisonnedbytheapple/)
Philosophy(http://thefunambulist.net/category/philosophy/)By:LopoldLambert

(http://thefunambulistdotnet.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/adamandeve.jpg)
Today is the fourth episode of the Spinoza week (which will last a bit longer than a week as you probably
alreadyunderstood)andthethirdarticlededicatedtotheexplorationofSpinozasconceptology.Todaystextwill
be (once again) very influenced by the interpretation that Gilles Deleuze makes of Spinozas writings. In this
regard, it might be important to observe that Deleuze spent the first part of his life by creating his own
philosophy through the interpretations of others (Hume, Nietzsche, Bergson etc.) and that each of those
interpretations he makes are very personal. There are therefore other way of approaching the philosophy of
SpinozabutIamnotasfamiliarwiththemasIamwiththeDeleuzianone.
During this week, we have not explored so much the concept of substance which is for Spinoza the only and
necessarilyperfectthingthatexistsandthatcanbeconsideredasawholeunderthenameGod.Expressedin
averysimpleway(maybetoomuch),andtosomehowborrowLeibnizsconceptofmonad,weneedtoseethe
worldasagiganticassemblageofinfinitelysmallpiecesofmatter(callingthematoms would be erroneous but
usefultomakeitunderstandable)thatareallinvolvedinmoreorlessfastmovement.Thesesmallelementsof
mattercomposesbodiesthatareperpetuallystriv[ing]topersevereinitsbeing(Ethics, part 3, prop. 6). This
propertyiscalledconatusandwewillexploreitinthefinalepisodeofthisweek.Thosebodiesarecontinuously

interacting with each other and thus systematically affect each other. What it means in a very simple way, is
thatwhenyoucutapieceofbutterwithaknife,ofcourse,theknifeaffectsthebuttersinceyoucanseethatthe
latter is being cut however, the knife as well is affected by the butter and has to resist the butters
characteristicsthatattempttomakeitperseveringinitsbeing.
Spinozadistinguishesseveraldegreesofknowledge(modesofperception)dependingonhowwe,asbodies,get
affected by other bodies (see my essay Architectures of Joy (http://thefunambulist.net/2010/12/18/philosophy
architecturesofjoyaspinozistreadingofparentvirilioandarakawagins%E2%80%99architecture/) for more on
that). Deleuze uses the example of the wave to make himself understood in his description of these three
degrees

(see

previous

article

with

the

translation

of

Deleuze

class

(http://thefunambulist.net/2010/12/17/philosophydeleuzeswaveaboutspinoza/)). Somebody who is said not to

be able to swim is someone who does not experience the wave in another way than a very passive one. The
water encounters her/his body as an obstacle to its flow and it results a violence between the two bodies
(wave/human).Theseconddegreeofknowledgeisexpressbysomeonewhoissaidtobeabletoswim.(S)he
positions her/his as a body in accordance with the flow of the wave and therefore composes harmonious
relationswiththewater.Whilethisseconddegreeisstrictlyempirical(onehastoexperiencethewave,adjust,
experience again, adjust again etc.), the third one is rational in its most powerful meaning. It consists in an
understanding tending (but probably never reaching) towards perfection of the ensemble of relations that are
operatinginthematter.Inotherwords(again,simplifyinginvolvesacertaindegreeofinaccuracybutitallowsa
first level of understanding), this degree of knowledge can be seen as a sort of visual (or tactile) layer
superimposed on ones vision which would bring such a resolution than one would be able to perceive the
infinitely small parts of matter and the various vectors of forces applied on it. This mode of perception is
thereforeonlyanhorizonandcannotreallybefullyacquiredbut,ifwekeepusingtheexampleofthewave,we
canprobablysaythatthebestsurfersareprobablyclosefromthisdegreeofknowledgeofthesea.
As fallible bodies, we cannot however compose harmonious relations with every body we come to encounter.
Suchtruthis,forSpinoza,theessenceoftheGenesismythicalmystery.Despitetheerahewaslivingin,the
philosophy Spinoza develops makes it impossible for us to think that he was creationist (calling him an
evolutionist would be however an absolute anachronism, he rarely thinks in terms of history actually). In his
famousepistolaryexchangewithBleyenberg,hehoweverplaythegametointerprettheBiblicalmythtounfold
his conceptual work. Spinoza accuses the three biblical religions to have told this story through a judgmental
approach:GodforbidsAdamtoeatthefruit,heeatsit,heispunished.Spinozaapproachesthesamenarrative
throughadifferentspectrum.Godtells(ofcourse,thepersonificationofGoddoesnotcorrespondtoanythingin
Spinozas philosophy) Adam that the apple is poisonous (in other words, Adam has the intuition or the instinct
that the apple is bad for him), he eats it anyway and become sick. The fruit was poisoned i.e. it could not
composeharmoniousrelationswithAdamsbody/stomach.TheresultofthisencounteristhatAdamissickor
should we say to use the Spinozist terminology, he lost a bit of his power (potential), he experiences a sad
affect. For each of these encounters between bodies, it results either an joyful affect that construct a sort of
third body for a moment, composed of the two original ones in the state of symbiosis, or a sad affect that
decomposestherelationsofbothbodies(notnecessarilyinasymmetricalmannerhowever).
ThelettersofSpinozawithBleyenbergareknownasthelettersaboutevil.Thisnotionofevil,andthereforeof
moralisforeigntothephilosophyofSpinoza.Thereisnogood/evilthatwouldbedictatedfromatranscendental
lawthatwouldcategorizedeacheventorbehaviorwithinthosetwocategoriestherecanbeonlygoodandbad
(we can say joyful and sad) within the context of each bodys ethics. The latter is not a voluntarily self
constructedsetofruleslikeweusuallymeanit(letsrecallthattherearenofreedomassuchforSpinoza)but
rather,theexperienceofeachaffectaspotentiallyandeffectivelyharmoniousanddisharmoniouswithourown
materialassemblagei.e.ourbodyi.e.us.