Spinoza: 7 ½ Metaxiomatics

[1] Spinoza’s ethics consists of two transformations (alternately, passages or functors) in the three genres of cognition: [A] from the first to the second genre (inadequate to adequate ideas), and [B] from the second to the third genre (adequate commonality to singular Deum Amor).



[2] The transformations [A] [B] do not represent changes of state undergone by an otherwise continuous substance or subject. Rather, they elicit fractal-effects (immanent-abstractive, or transcendent) in/of the material.



[2.5] Bereshit Torah: God creates the heavens and the earth. Normally, two interpretations differ: [a] The demiourgos takes a rebellious, disordered decision (heresy) to make a mirror-print of what is above in what is below; or [b] an absolute creatio ex nihilo orders the self-distinguishing difference (of) God-world, indistinguishable perhaps from an absolute self-cleavage or self-Othering. The test of a gnosis (de) sans-, or non-Gnosticism beyond the revelatory critiques of ancient Gnosticism (Plotinus, Irenaeus) and modern/post-modern Gnostic political thought (Shestov, Florensky, Voegelin, Milbank) would be a thought of the identity X…ababababa…X in-the-last-instance.



[3] The world (Dehors/Dedans): customarily seismic rupture/reconciliation/reversal of and in transformation [A] – from inadequate imaginings to common indifference, from economies of adequation to delirious overturning. The reciprocally determinative endpoints of this dual transformation may be conceived (as) identical in-the-last-instance. The unilateral double [tropic latitude [A]-[B]] thus forms an ellipse with its own appropriately virtual lacuna-world, blocked by a now-focal sun (special case: circle).



[4] Mapped parabolically (gravity’s tragic rainbow), transformation [A] has a definite maximum/minimum, slope=0.



[5] At the zero-point of [A]’s parabola (indifference of indifference), linear transformation [B] takes place tangentially immanent to itself – not as a passage/escape from the orbital of [3], but as ipse Dei Amor, quo Deus se ipsum amat (Ethics V: proposition 36).



[6] A composition-map [C] of transformation [B] following [A] remains implicit (as) a purely dynamic intensity of the imaginary-(One)-itself.



[7] Esse sequitur agere.