März Forum zu Basic Instinct Vor allem das Ende. Douglas und Sharon Stone, die ein Katz-und-Maus-Spiel betreiben - bis zum offenen Ende!. Basic Instinct Tramell strahlt sie mit ihrem lustvollen und belustigten Spiel in jeder Szene gleichzeitig gefährlichen Sex-Appeal und berechnende Kälte aus. Basic Instinct Ein Film von Paul Verhoeven mit Michael Douglas, Sharon Stone, davon hätten doch gereicht! das ende hat mir dann sehr gut gefallen!.
Tellkamp lebte zeitweilig in München , Karlsruhe und Freiburg im Breisgau. Uwe Tellkamp veröffentlichte zahlreiche Beiträge in Literaturzeitschriften u.
Gelegentlich verfasst er auch Essays für Zeitungen. Weil sich und alle Abiturienten in Niedersachsen mit diesem Auszug im Fach Deutsch befassen mussten, rückte Tellkamp in den Rang eines Verfassers von Pflicht-Schullektüre auf.
Im Herbst erschien der Roman Der Turm. November wurde ihm für das Werk der mit September in Dresden uraufgeführt. Am Ende eines Interviews, das Uwe Tellkamp mit Daniela Weiland führte,  stellte er fest, dass er die Arbeit an dem Roman Der Schlaf in den Uhren , von dem seinerzeit Seiten geschrieben gewesen seien, zurückgestellt habe, er ihn aber nach der Arbeit am Turm beenden wolle.
Der Arbeitstitel dieses Romans sollte einem Plan vom September zufolge ursprünglich Lava lauten. Sie beruht auf einem bereits von Tellkamp veröffentlichten Essay.
Uwe Tellkamp selbst beschreibt in der Zeitschrift Bella triste sein literarisches Schaffen mit den Worten: Der Roman wurde im Juni gegen den erklärten Willen des Autors wieder aufgelegt.
Die Jury zeigte sich begeistert von diesem Auszug. Die zahlreichen Feuilleton -Artikel vom Juni über die Preisverleihung  zeigen ein uneinheitliches Bild, ebenso die später verfassten Rezensionen.
Gelobt wurde vor allem die virtuose Sprachbeherrschung Tellkamps, kritisiert wurde hingegen, dass der Auszug schwer verständlich und dass der Auftritt Tellkamps in Klagenfurt auf die Mentalität der Jury zugeschnitten gewesen sei.
Tellkamps veröffentlichter Roman Der Eisvogel  polarisierte das Feuilleton. April Tellkamp vor, er zeige in seinem Roman nicht genügend Distanz zu den Protagonisten, die für eine Konservative Revolution eintreten und die Demokratie ablehnen.
Das Werk sei von der Literaturkritik als politisches Pamphlet und nicht als Roman gelesen worden. Elmar Krekeler schrieb über Tellkamps politische Haltung: Oktober veröffentlicht wurde.
If, as Christians believe, the martyr was at the same time the Messiah, then his death has a cosmic importance. Through the teachings of Jesus, as well as through other channels, the Jewish moral message entered Christianity.
Thus the historical Jesus has served as a bridge between Judaism and Christianity , as well as one of the causes for their separation.
Thus, in his lifetime Jesus was called Jesus son of Joseph Luke 4: After his death, he came to be called Jesus Christ. Passages such as Acts of the Apostles 2: Jesus Christ or Christ Jesus Romans 1: Paul sometimes simply used Christ as Jesus' name e.
Summary of Jesus' life. According to Matthew and Luke, however, Joseph was only his father legally. Joseph is said to have been a carpenter Matthew As a young adult, he went to be baptized by the prophet John the Baptist and shortly thereafter became an itinerant preacher and healer Mark 1: In his mids, Jesus had a short public career, lasting perhaps less than one year, during which he attracted considerable attention.
While there he was arrested, tried, and executed. His disciples became convinced that he still lived and had appeared to them.
They converted others to belief in him, which eventually led to a new religion, Christianity. Life and Works [1: Spinoza became an outstanding student in the school of the Spanish-Portuguese community, probably studying with Morteira and Manasseh Ben Israel.
It has been traditionally claimed that he was led to his irreligious views by studying Latin with a freethinking ex-Jesuit, Van den Enden.
A generation earlier, Uriel da Costa had twice been expelled from the community for denying the immortality of the soul, and for contending that all extant religions were manmade.
Praeadamitae which had just been published in Amsterdam. Prado was forced to apologize for his views, and a few days later, on July 27, , Spinoza was excommunicated.
The rabbinical pronouncement, signed by Saul Levi Morteira and others, states: Not being able to find any remedy, but on the contrary receiving every day more information about the abominable heresies practiced and taught by him, and about the monstrous acts committed by him, having this from many trustworthy witnesses who have deposed and borne witness on all this in the presence of said Spinoza, who has been convicted; all this having been examined in the presence of the rabbis, the council decided, with the advice of the rabbis, that the said Spinoza should be excommunicated and cut off from the Nation of Israel.
The hostility of the Jewish community, extending, according to 17th-century reports, to an attempt to kill him, led Spinoza to write an apology for his views in Spanish.
The work, now lost, was apparently the basis for his later Tractatus Theologico-Politicus , his work on Bible criticism.
For editions and translations of Spinoza's works see bibliography. Around Spinoza left Amsterdam, changed his name to Benedictus the Latin equivalent of Baruch , became involved with some liberal Protestants, and settled in Rijnsburg where he earned his living grinding lenses.
He moved to Voorburg, a suburb of The Hague in , and to The Hague itself in , where he stayed until his death.
His correspondence indicates that he was developing his metaphysical system for discussion by a philosophical club in The work presents Descartes' philosophy in geometrical form, and indicates Spinoza's basic points of disagreement with Cartesianism.
His friend, Louis Meyer, published the work with an introduction and an appendix containing Spinoza's " Thoughts on Metaphysics. This rationalistic attack on religion caused a sensation, and was banned everywhere, and sold with false title pages.
Spinoza became notorious, and was constantly accused of being an atheist. To prevent attacks, Spinoza stopped the publication of a Dutch edition of the Tractatus.
In he sent a lengthy letter to the Jewish leader, Orobio de Castro , defending himself against the charges of atheism and irreligion.
Spinoza declined the post, saying that he preferred his quiet life of philosophical research to teaching, and that he could not control the occurrence of religious dissension.
Spinoza had been a friend of the political leader, Jan de Witt who had given him a small pension , and was profoundly agitated and disturbed when an angry mob , blaming De Witt and his brother for the catastrophe, turned on them and killed them.
He told Leibniz, who had come to visit him, that he had tried to put up a sign reading " Ultimi barbarorum, " but his landlord locked him in the house, lest he too be murdered.
Though they never met, other French officers told Spinoza that if he dedicated a work to Louis XIV, he would probably receive a pension.
Spinoza declined the offer, but on his return to The Hague, was accused of being a French agent. He tried in to have the work published only to find that theologians blocked this effort on the grounds that Spinoza was denying the existence of God.
Spinoza abandoned plans to have his book printed. He continued his simple quiet life, writing and discussing philosophy with Leibniz, among others, but making no efforts to convert people to his radical views.
He managed to live out his life without belonging to any sect or church. He died of consumption which may have been aggravated by his lens-grinding activities.
After his death his Opera Posthuma appeared, containing his Ethics , the unfinished On the Improvement of the Understanding , and the Political Treatise completed shortly before his death , a Hebrew grammar, and a selection of his letters.
His Hebrew grammar, Compendium Grammaticae Linguae Hebraeae , was undertaken at the request of Spinoza's friends some years before his death but remained unfinished.
It purported to be a self-tutor to Hebrew but in it Spinoza discussed many of the more complex philological problems of Hebrew grammar.
As he was writing mainly for his Christian friends he presented his grammar in the western Latin system, following Levita and Reuchlin. He used such terms as activum , passivum from Latin grammar and status absolutus.
He also divided the alphabet into gutturals, labials, dentals, and palatals, as in modern philological systems.
Ten years later, in , his one scientific work, the Treatise on the Rainbow , appeared. It was reissued along with the hitherto unknown work, the Short Treatise on God, Man and his Well-Being , and some letters in Van Vloten's edition, Ad Benedicti de Spinoza opera quae supersunt omnia supplementum Spinoza has usually been regarded as the modern philosopher whose life is most consonant with his theory.
Starting from the heterodox currents within the Amsterdam Jewish community, Spinoza developed a critique of Judaism and supernatural religion in the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus.
Insisting that religious tenets should be judged only on the basis of reason, Spinoza, using some of the ideas of Abraham ibn Ezra and La PeyrIre, rejected the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, and the possibility of genuine prophecy.
Spinoza then offered a rationalistic metaphysics within which supernatural events could not occur, and within which the Bible was to be examined as a human document expressing certain human developments of the past.
Insisting that miracles were impossible, Spinoza argued that nature is governed by eternal and necessary decrees of G-D.
Nothing can be contrary to natural laws. Its moral teachings are compatible with those of reason see below. Setting out to search for a good which would enable him to enjoy continuous, supreme, and unending happiness, he rejected fame, riches, and ordinary pleasures.
As a way to finding this good, he rejected hearsay or information gained by authority, sense information, and deductive conclusions based on incomplete or inadequate understanding.
True knowledge by which one could achieve genuine happiness is reached through perceiving things solely through their essences or proximate causes.
In this way one knows why something is what it is, why it has the nature it does, or what made it what it is.
When one possesses this kind of knowledge, scepticism or doubt is no longer possible. Scepticism is only the result of lack of understanding.
The Cartesian doubt based on the possibility that God may be a deceiver is dissipated as soon as one has a clear and distinct or adequate idea of G-D.
When we arrive at definitions of things that really explain their natures, and which have complete certainty which Spinoza found in mathematical knowledge , we can no longer express any doubts or questions.
Such a definition, when of a created thing, explains what causes it and allows for the deduction of all of its properties.
For an uncreated thing, the definition explains the thing, since it has no causes other than itself otherwise it would be created and leaves no room for doubting whether the thing exists or not.
Starting with definitions of terms like " G-D ," " substance ," " attribute ," and " mode ," which presumably meet his standards, and with a series of axioms spelling out the nature of causality and existence and including one that states "A true idea must correspond with its ideate or object," Spinoza unfolded his picture of the world in the form of demonstrations of propositions.
When challenged as to how he knew this philosophy was the best, he replied, "I do not presume that I have found the best philosophy, I know that I understand the true philosophy.
If you ask in what way I know it, I answer: G-D acts solely by the laws of his own nature. G-D is not a purposeful being.
There are no goals being achieved. He lacks nothing, needs nothing. He just is, and due to His being, everything happens, and happens of necessity.
Everything is in G-D. He is modified in terms of His two known attributes, thought and extension. The world of body and of mind are two aspects of G-D or Nature.
The mind and the body are essentially the same thing. The dualism of Descartes has been rejected, thereby supplying a new solution to the mind-body problem.
The mind is the idea of the body. The images are related mechanically rather than logically. Through the course of experience, we develop general ideas of what is going on, and through these a level of scientific understanding of the sequence of events taking place.
From these we come to adequate ideas which give us a logical and causal understanding, and eliminate our previous confusion and lack of clarity. The highest form of knowledge would be to have complete understanding, to see everything as a logical system from the aspect of eternity.
This intuitive knowledge is only completely and adequately possessed by G-D. Complete understanding would be to know the infinite idea of G-D, which we can only approach and thereby, to some extent, become G-D.
Starting from a Hobbesian view of man, we are driven toward self-preservation , constantly affected by the emotions in the form of pleasure and pain.
On this level we are in human bondage, moved by causes which we do not understand, since we only have confused ideas of our experiences.
As we reach understanding of what is going on in our lives, we achieve human freedom. We are no longer determined by external factors but by our own comprehension.
Freedom for Spinoza consists not in being uncaused, but in being determined by oneself alone. The passions no longer control us because we are now guided by the laws of our own nature.
When we understand why things are happening, and know they cannot be otherwise, we are liberated from bondage to emotion and ignorance, and are no longer driven aimlessly by feeling and events.
We are no longer captives of external events and of the pain they cause. As our ideas become more adequate, and as we reach rational understanding, our ideas become part of the infinite idea of G-D.
Thus the philosophical goal of complete wisdom becomes man's salvation. The wise man rises above the ordinary experience and ordinary cares.
In concentrating on G-D, the logical order of the universe, and in seeing everything as a necessary deducible aspect of G-D, the wise man achieves blessedness.
This requires civil peace which allows for free thought and discussion. A democracy ruled by men of property, like the Dutch Republic, is most likely to achieve this.
For unenlightened, ignorant people, as Spinoza considered the ancient Hebrews to be, the conveying of moral teachings by stories, alleged prophecy, threats, and promises can have an important social effect of making people behave well and of making them obey the laws.
The wise man needs only the religion of reason. When he sees the whole as a rational, necessary, scientific order he has arrived at the highest wisdom, morality, and insight.
His view, however, is the first modern one to provide a metaphysical basis for rejecting any form of portraying the human scene as a dramatic interplay of man and G-D.
The denial of any distinction between G-D and the world, the denial of the possibility of any supernatural event or providential action, and the denial of the possibility of any revelatory knowledge, eliminated the basic ingredients of a Jewish or Christian cosmology, and reinterpreted the basic written and oral traditions so that they no longer provided any essential data about man's relationship to G-D.
Wolfson has said that Spinoza's uniqueness lies in being the first person in the Judeo-Christian world after Philo to construct a world view involving no axioms or principles based on revelation.
As Wolfson put it, "Benedictus is the first of the moderns; Baruch is the last of the medievals. Of all of the critics of Judaism and Christianity in the 16th and 17th centuries, Spinoza alone seems to have taken the radical and revolutionary steps of replacing religious tradition completely by rational, scientific reasoning, of making human religion a subject for scientific study, and of presenting a way of describing man and the universe totally apart from historical religious conceptions.
Although Spinoza's views were immediately attacked, even by avant-garde thinkers like Bayle, he began to have an influence on biblical critics like Simon, on Deists, and on 18th-century French materialists and atheists.
His more important modern influence began with the revival of his works in the German Enlightenment, first by Lessing , and then his adoption as a central thinker by the German Romantics.
His ideas have since remained basic in naturalistic, atheistical thinking, and even been seen as precursors of Marxism. The image of Spinoza as one of the great heroes of free and modern thought, persecuted and fleeing from the reactionary synagogue, has become part of the hagiography of those who see a war between science and religion, in which the scientific side is the good one.
Orthodox Judaism has continued to see him as a threat; the Amsterdam Jewish community has refused to be associated with any celebrations or commemorations connected with Spinoza, and some have claimed that if he had had a better understanding of Judaism he would not have defected.
Many modern Jewish thinkers have seen in him the basis for a more universalistic modern philosophical view. He has provided one of the fundamental ideologies for the secular world.
In modern times David Ben-Gurion has recommended that the herem against Spinoza be repealed. Lehman College of the City of New York. His biblical criticism is closely connected with his philosophical system and political position.
Based on the knowledge of the Bible that he acquired in his childhood, and developing during long years of reflection, his critical views of the Bible were expressed in the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus , and also in a few letters and conversations.
In opposition to the many misuses of the Bible that he observed in Judaism and Christianity, Spinoza developed what he saw to be the true method of biblical interpretation.
Every person has the right to engage in biblical interpretation; it does not require supernatural illumination or special authority.
Spinoza's supreme principle, indefatigably repeated by him, is that the Bible must be interpreted on its own terms.
The method of the interpretation of the Bible is the same as the method of the interpretation of nature. Further it should inquire into the fate of each book: In accordance with this program, Spinoza analyzed the biblical writings in an attempt to determine their authors ibid.
He repeated the arguments on the strength of which Ibn Ezra had supposed that the Pentateuch did not derive in its entirety from Moses, and complemented them.
The Pentateuch, together with the books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings, form a single larger historical work, whose author, he conjectures, was Ezra.
Ezra was prevented by a premature death, or perhaps some other reason, from revising these books. They contain numerous repetitions and contradictions, e.
The Psalms were collected and divided into five books on the Second Temple period; Proverbs is from the same period or at the earliest from the time of Josiah.
The Prophets contain only fragments assembled from other books, but not in an order introduced by the prophets. Spinoza adopts Ibn Ezra's hypothesis concerning Job, according to which Job was translated from a gentile language; if this were the case it would mean that the gentiles also had holy books.
Daniel is authentic only from chapter 8 on ; the previous chapters presumably taken from Chaldean chronicles, are in any case an indication that books can be holy even though they are not written in Hebrew.
The Book of Daniel forms with the books of Ezra, Esther, and Nehemiah a work by a historian who wrote long after the restoration of the Temple by Judah Maccabee, using the official annals of the Second Temple in his work.
These theories lead to the conclusion that the canon could have originated only in the time of the Hasmoneans.
It is a work of the Pharisees, not Ezra, in whose time the Great Assembly was not yet in existence. Spinoza criticizes various decisions of the Pharisees, such as the inclusion of Chronicles in the canon and the rejection of the Wisdom of Solomon and Tobit, and he regrets "that holy and highest things should depend upon the choice of those people.
He concludes that God adapted his revelation in these matters to the individual prophet, and that philosophical knowledge is not to be found in these works.
The content of the revelation to the prophets is rather the right way of life ibid. The example of Balaam indicates that there were prophets not only among the Hebrews.
The election of the Hebrews should not be understood as an indication that they were different from other people in intellect and virtue; their election refers only to their kingdom and it ended with the latter's collapse ibid.
The ceremonies prescribed in the Bible, like the entire Mosaic law, were applicable only during this period and with the termination of the period no longer contributed to ultimate happiness and blessedness ibid.
According to Spinoza, stories in the Bible are not to be believed literally; they are intended to instruct the people, who could not comprehend abstract concepts, definitions, and deductions ibid.
Since nothing can happen that contradicts natural law, the biblical stories of miracles must be explained in a natural way. Spinoza admits that this one question is a conclusion drawn from his own philosophy and not from the Bible ibid.
Spinoza knows that precisely in the application of his method difficulties are encountered in the interpretation of the Bible, many parts of which cannot be solved since we have only an incomplete knowledge of Old Hebrew and of the circumstances of the composition of the biblical books, some of which namely in the New Testament do not exist in the language in which they were written ibid.
However, as Spinoza states emphatically, these difficulties do not touch the central content of faith: This faith is independent of philosophical thought and leaves complete freedom for it ibid.
In the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus Spinoza also presents a political program along with a description of the Hebrew theocracy, which he applies to the contemporary situation in Holland, hinting between the lines at other applications ibid.
From to he pursued rabbinic studies in Wolstein now Wolsztyn near Poznan. There Graetz taught himself French and Latin and avidly read general literature.
This brought him to a spiritual crisis, but reading S. Hirsch 's " Nineteen Letters on Judaism " in restored his faith. He accepted Hirsch 's invitation to continue his studies in the latter's home and under his guidance.
Eventually their relationship cooled; he left Oldenburg in and worked as a private tutor in Ostrow. In he obtained special permission to study at Breslau University.
As no Jew could obtain a Ph. This work was later published under the title Gnostizismus und Judentum By then Graetz had come under the influence of Z.
Frankel, and it was he who initiated a letter of congratulations to Frankel for leaving the second Rabbinical Conference Frankfort, in protest, after the majority had decided against prayers in Hebrew.
Graetz now became a contributor to Frankel's Zeitschrift fuer die religioesen Interessen des Judentums , in which, among others, he published his programmatic " Konstruktion der juedischen Geschichte " After obtaining a teaching diploma, he was appointed head teacher of the orthodox religious school of the Breslau community, and in , at Hirsch's recommendation, of the Jewish school of Lundenburg, Moravia.
As a result of intrigues within the local community, he left Lundenburg in for Berlin, where during the following winter he lectured on Jewish history to theological students.
He also completed the fourth volume dealing with the talmudic period and the first to be published of his Geschichte der Juden von den aeltesten Zeiten bis zur Gegenwart " History of the Jews In Graetz was appointed lecturer in Jewish history and Bible at the newly founded Jewish Theological Seminary of Breslau, and in was made honorary professor at the University of Breslau.
These Graetz postponed until he could see Erez Israel with his own eyes. This he did and on his return published a memorandum which was highly critical of the social and educational conditions and of the system of Halukkah in particular.
Graetz pleaded for a Jewish orphanage which was established at a later date, and continued to show an interest in the yishuv and its problems.
After the Kattowitz Conference he joined the Hovevei Zion, but he resigned when it appeared to him that their activities had assumed a political character.
As to biblical research, Graetz's approach to the Pentateuch was traditional, but in his studies on Prophets and Hagiographa he occasionally adopted radical views.
He asserted the existence of two Hoseas and three Zechariahs. His commentaries on Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes the latter written according to him in the time of Herod were published in and his commentary to Psalms in These were generally not favorably received, though by making use of the old Bible versions and of talmudic Hebrew he was able to obtain some valuable results.
Toward the end of his life it was Graetz's intention to publish a critical text of the Bible, but this project did not materialize.
In the nationalistic Prussian historian Treitschke violently attacked the 11th volume of the History of the Jews which dealt with recent times.
He accused Graetz of hatred of Christianity, Jewish nationalism, and the lack of desire for the integration of Jews within the German nation Ein Wort ueber unser Judentum , This led to a public debate in which both Jewish and non-Jewish writers participated.
While most of them rejected Treitschke's virulent anti-Semitism, even Jewish writers dissociated themselves, with few exceptions, from Graetz's Jewish nationalism.
Graetz in his reply in the press pointed out that in spite of their glorious past Jews had become interwoven in the life of Western Europe and that they were patriots in their respective countries.
He rejected the accusation of hatred of Christianity. In a further attack Treitschke claimed that Graetz sought to establish a mixed Jewish-German culture in Germany, that he was a German-speaking "oriental" and a stranger to European-German culture, etc.
Graetz retorted sharply, but assimilationist German Jewry showed its disapproval of Graetz by not inviting him to serve on the Jewish Historical Commission, set up in by the Union of Jewish Communities, with the purpose of publishing the sources for the history of the Jews in Germany.
But a wider Jewish public, and the world of Jewish scholarship in particular, honored Graetz on the occasion of his 70th birthday; and a jubilee volume was published to celebrate the event.
Graetz was invited to deliver the opening speech at the Anglo-Jewish Exhibition in London in , which was published under the title of Historic Parallels in Jewish History translated by J.
In he was elected honorary member of the history department of the Academy of Madrid, a special distinction for a historian who had described the misdeeds of the Spanish Inquisition.
Graetz's main work became the basis and the source for the study of Jewish history, and its influence is felt to this day. It was translated into many languages see below.
The Hebrew adaptation-translation of S. Hirsch and under the influence of his ideas concerning the great mission of the Jewish people.
In general, Graetz remained faithful to these ideas to the end of his days. Graetz had set out his concept of Jewish history in his Konstruktion der juedischen Geschichte , ; Heb.
Darkhei ha-Historyah ha-Yehudit, He started with a number of Hegelian definitions, but he considered the basic ideas of Judaism as eternal, changing only their external forms.
The ideal form is harmony of the political and religious elements. Therefore Graetz regarded Judaism as a unique politico-religious organism, "whose soul is the Torah and whose body is the Holy Land.
Graetz's ideas on the nature of Jewish history underwent further development. Lesser's Occident , ff. In this period s Graetz under the influence of M.
Hess' Rome and Jerusalem did not believe in the political revival of the Jews and in the possibility of the creation of a Jewish center in Erez Israel see letters to Hess and the conclusion of his pamphlet Briefwechsel einer englischen Dame ueber Judentum und Semitismus , which he published anonymously in ; also under the title Gedanken einer Juedin ueber das Judentum The rediscovery of Graetz's diary and correspondence with Hess reveals the extent of his national and messianic fervor.
He formulated the concept of the messianic people as the highest stage in the development of the messianic belief. From the Jewish people, endowed with special racial qualities of self-regeneration, will emerge the leadership for the final stage in universal history: But later he lost his original enthusiasm.
He saw the main importance of Judaism in the ethical values which it was its task to impart to the world. Judaism is the sole bearer of monotheism; it is the only rational religion.
Its preservation and the propagation of the sublime ethical truths to be found in Judaism, these are the tasks of the Jews in the world and this is the importance of Judaism for human culture.
Even though attempts had been made before him by both Christians Basnage and Jews Jost to write a Jewish history, the work of Graetz was the first comprehensive attempt to write the history of the Jews as the history of a living people and from a Jewish point of view.
With deep feeling, he describes the struggle of Jews and of Judaism for survival, their uniqueness, the sufferings of the Exile, and the courage of the martyrs, and in contrast, the cruelty of the enemies of Israel and its persecutors throughout the ages.
Out of his appreciation of Judaism and his reaction against all that Christianity had perpetrated against Judaism, Graetz pointed out the failure of Christianity as religion and ethics to serve as a basis for a healthy society.
He subjected its literary sources the Gospels and the Epistles of Paul to a radical, historical criticism. The writing of such a Jewish history in German for a public which in its vast majority identified itself with German nationalism and Christian culture was no easy task for a writer who did not have a very clear idea of the mission and the future of his nation.
Graetz erred more than once on the side of inconsistency, excessive sentimentalism, and apologetics. Graetz made use of a vast number of hitherto neglected sources in several languages, though these were mainly literary sources; there was hardly any archival material on Jewish history available in his days.
He adopted the philologic-critical method and succeeded in clarifying several obscure episodes in Jewish history. He described everything which appeared to him understandable and logical in the history of his people and emphasized the forces and the ideals which had assured its survival in periods of suffering and trial.
Having studied the works of outstanding personalities, especially those with whom he felt a spiritual affinity such as Maimonides , Graetz succeeded in painting a series of live historical portraits, stressing the role played by a particular figure in his epoch and in the history of the nation in general.
His intuition as a historian was astonishing. But Graetz the historiographer had his faults as well, among which was his excessive and rather naive rationalism.
He showed no understanding for mystical forces and movements such as Kabbalah and Hasidism, which he despised and considered malignant growths in the body of Judaism.
Graetz was not acquainted with and perhaps, subconsciously, not interested in the history of the Jews of Poland, Russia, and Turkey, and in his attachment to Haskalah expressed contempt bordering on hatred for "the fossilized Polish talmudists.
The social and economic aspect of history is neglected by Graetz, and even political and legal factors were used by him only as a foil for the description of sufferings or of the achievements of leading personalities " Leidens-und Gelehrtengeschichte ".
Graetz wrote in a lively and captivating though often over-rhetorical, and partisan, style. From the opposite direction came Geiger's verdict that the work contained "stories but not history" Juedische Zeitschrift, 4 , ff.
Graetz replied to his contemporary critics in periodicals and in subsequent volumes of his history. The various volumes were published in up to five editions until World War I.
Several volumes of the last edition 11 vols. The best known Hebrew translation is by S. On the occasion of Graetz's th birthday anniversary the Monatsschrift vol.
Ettinger and biography by R. From to he also served as professor at the Jewish Institute of Religion. Wolfson received many academic honors for his pioneering researches.
In he was awarded the prize of the American Council of Learned Societies. A bibliography, appearing in the Jubilee Volume Eng.
In the introduction pp. However, most of these commentaries existed only in manuscripts, and so Wolfson proposed the publication of a Corpus Commentarionum Averrois in Aristotelem in: This corpus was to consist of critical editions of the Arabic originals, and of the Hebrew and Latin translations; and it was to contain English translations and explanatory commentaries by the editors.
The Mediaeval Academy of America undertook to sponsor this project and Wolfson was appointed its editor in chief. By , nine volumes of the series had appeared.
Applying the "hypothetico-deductive" method, Wolfson undertook to unfold "the latent processes" of Spinoza's reasoning.
By the time he had completed his Spinoza, Wolfson had conceived the monumental task of investigating "the structure and growth of philosophic systems from Plato to Spinoza," working, as he put it, "forwards, sideways, and backwards.
His next book, Philo: Foundations of Religious Philosophy in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, appeared in two volumes in , Philo had until then been considered an eclectic or a philosophic preacher, but Wolfson undertook to show that behind the philosophic utterances scattered throughout Philo's writings there lay a philosophic system.
More than that, he held that Philo was the founder of religious philosophy in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, and that "Philonic" philosophy dominated European thought for 17 centuries until it was destroyed by Spinoza, "the last of the medievals and the first of the moderns.
However, he decided to publish only the first volume, which appeared in A Group of Essays. He detested the military discipline of the German schools and joined his parents, leaving school after they moved to Italy.
This position left him ample time to carry on his own research. In he published three brilliant scientific papers, one dealing with the "Brownian motion," the second one with the "photoelectric effect," and the third on the "Special theory of relativity.
Ironically, however, when he received the Nobel Prize for physics in it was for his explanation of the photoelectric effect. Immediately after the publication of that paper Einstein was offered a professorship at the University of Zurich which he at first refused, having become fond of his job at the patent office.
In he joined the German University in Prague, where he held the position of professor ordinarius in physics, the highest academic rank.
Despite his absorption in his scholarly pursuits he could not fail to notice the political strife and quarrels between the rival feelings of nationalism, and felt great sympathy for the Czechs and their aspirations.
In Einstein returned to Switzerland, where he taught at the Polytechnic, the same place to which he had come as a poor student in His friend and colleague, Max Planck, succeeded in obtaining for him a professorship at the Prussian Academy of Science in Berlin, a research institute where Einstein could devote all his time to research.
In , amid a world in the throes of World War I, Einstein made another fundamental contribution to science contained in Die Grundlagen der allgemeinen Relativitaetstheorie Relativity, the Special and the General Theory, a Popular Exposition, In this theory he generalized the principle of relativity to all motion, uniform or not.
The presence of large masses produces a gravitational field, which will result in a "warping" of the underlying four-dimensional space.
That field will act on objects, such as planets or light rays, which will be deflected from their paths. His prediction of the deflection of starlight by the gravitational field of the sun was borne out by the expedition at the time of a solar eclipse in He was offered, but refused, great sums of money for articles, pictures and advertisements as his fame mounted.
During the early years after World War I he worked for the League of Nations Intellectual Cooperation Organization and became a familiar figure on public platforms speaking on social problems as well as his Theory of Relativity.
He became more and more disappointed by the misuse of sciences in the hands of man. The possession of marvelous means of production has brought care and hunger instead of freedom.
By January , Hitler had come to power. Einstein promptly resigned from his position at the Royal Prussian Academy of Sciences and never returned to Germany.
Many positions were offered him but he finally accepted a professorship at the Institute for Advanced Studies in Princeton, New Jersey, and later became an American citizen.
Einstein, when approached by his friend Szilard, signed a letter to President Roosevelt pointing out the feasibility of atomic energy. It was that letter which sparked the Manhattan Project and future developments of atomic energy.
However, Einstein, was opposed to the use of the atomic bomb, as were many other scientists, and wrote another letter which, however, arrived only after Roosevelt's death.
In spite of his dislike for engaging in public affairs Einstein became chairman of the Emergency Committee of Atomic Scientists and urged the outlawing of the atomic and hydrogen bombs.
Despite his advanced age he continued to work on the "Unified Field Theory" which attempted as a first step to unify gravitation and electromagnetism into one theory.
It is impossible to assess whether he would have succeeded in this momentous task, since he died before its completion. He never forgot that he had been a refugee himself and lent a helping hand to the many who asked for his intervention.
The man who refused to write popular articles for his own benefit devoted hours to raising money for refugees and other worthwhile causes.
Einstein was a Jew not only by birth but also by belief and action. He took an active part in Jewish affairs, wrote extensively, and attended many functions in order to raise money for Jewish causes.
He was first introduced to Zionism during his stay in Prague, where Jewish intellectuals gathered in each other's homes talking about their dream of a Jewish Homeland.
In Weizmann asked Einstein to join him on a fund-raising tour of America to buy land in Palestine and seek aid for the Hebrew University.
Einstein readily agreed, since his interest in the University had been growing. The tour was highly successful. He visited Palestine and was greatly impressed by what he saw.
When the State of Israel was established he hailed the event as the fulfillment of an ancient dream, providing conditions in which the spiritual and cultural life of a Hebrew society could find free expression.
After Weizmann's death he was asked by Ben-Gurion to stand as a candidate for the presidency of the State of Israel, which he declined "being deeply touched by the offer but not suited for the position.
The notes were expanded into an article which is included in Einstein on Peace ed. Among his works are: Moszkowski, Conversations with Einstein first published, ; republished London, The Institute for Advanced Studies at Princeton proclaimed the year as the National Einstein Centennial Celebration, which opened with a six-day scientific symposium devoted to the historical context and present importance of Einstein's work.
An Einstein commemorative stamp was issued on the day of the centenary, March 14th. Spinoza had steeped himself in Descartes ' philosophy, and his first written work was a methodical exposition of it Metaphysical Thoughts.
But at a very early stage, and even before he wrote his exposition of it, he had rejected its conclusions and had proceeded in his own thought far beyond it, having discovered in Descartes what seemed to him radical incoherences; he saw, or thought he saw, demonstrable contradictions in Descartes' conceptions of Substance , of the relation of Thought and Extension, of the relation between G-D and the created universe, of Free-will and Necessity , of Error , and lastly, of the distinction between Intellect and the Imagination.
Descartes seemed to have stopped short in developing his own doctrines to their extreme logical conclusions, partly perhaps because he foresaw some at least of the uncomfortable moral and theological consequences which must ensue; he was a rationalist who not only remained undisturbed within the Catholic Church, but even provided the Church with new armour to protect its essential doctrines against page 23 the dangerous implications of the new mathematical physics and the new method in philosophy.
Descartes was not rigidly consistent in maintaining the distinction between Intellect and the Imagination, and even speaks of Imagination as essential to mathematical reasoning, though it is the source of confusion in metaphysics ; yet he urges the application of mathematical reasoning to metaphysics.
Perhaps his crucial hesitation is whether our idea of God can be purely intellectual or must be in part imaginative -- that is, whether G-D 's Nature can be in any sense understood unless we can describe his attributes in terms which derive their meaning from ordinary experience.
If the use of ordinary terms is essential to understanding, our conception of God must be, in part at least, an anthropomorphic one; but if all images and so all anthropomorphism are removed, the word ' God ' loses many of its traditional Christian connotations, and the believer is left, as Spinoza showed, with an utterly abstract and impersonal Deity.
Spinoza made the distinction between Intellect and Imagination , between pure logical thinking and the confused association of ideas, one of the foundations of his system; unlike Descartes, he throughout applied the distinction rigorously and accepted every consequence of it.
At every stage in the Ethics , and in reply to objections in his correspondence , he insists that his words, and particularly his words about G-D and his attributes , must never be understood in their vulgar and figurative sense, but only in the special sense given to them in his definitions.
He considered almost everything which page 24 had been written and said about G-D, and about his creation of the Universe, as meaningless, unphilosophical men being incapable of conceiving G-D clearly; for they are by training incapable of understanding what they cannot imagine.
Any image or mental picture must be a projection of our own sense-experience; we can only form a picture from elements of our experience.
Similarly, all the other terms which we use in our philosophical thinking, that is, in our attempt to understand the Universe as a whole, must be carefully examined to ensure that they really do represent to us clearly-defined intellectual conceptions, as opposed to confused images or pictures derived from our sense-experience.
Principally for this reason he wrote both his early exposition of Descartes' philosophy and his own great definitive work, the Ethics , in the geometrical manner, as a succession of propositions with supporting page 25 proofs , lemmas and corollaries.
He thus eliminated from the presentation of his philosophy the concealed means of persuasion and of engaging the imagination of the reader which are part of ordinary prose-writing; he wished the true philosophy to be presented in a form which was, as nearly as possible, as objective and as free from appeals to the imagination as is Euclid's Elements.
He wished to be entirely effaced as individual and author, being no more than the mouthpiece of pure Reason. But we can and must distinguish the all-pervasive features of the Universe, which can be immediately deduced from the nature of these attributes themselves, page 70 from those which cannot be so immediately deduced.
The modes or features of Reality which seem essential to the constitution of these two infinite and eternal attributes must themselves be infinite and eternal; they are therefore distinguished by Spinoza as the immediate infinite and eternal modes, the word ' mode ' being used for anything which is a state of substance.
The modes or states of substance can be graded in an order of logical dependence, beginning with the immediate infinite and eternal modes as necessary and universal features of the Universe, and descending to the finite modes which are limited, perishing and transitory differentiations of Nature.
The transitory, finite modes can only be understood, and their essence or nature deduced, as effects of the infinite and eternal modes , and they are in this sense dependent on the modes of higher order.
The infinite and eternal mode under the attribute of Extension is called Motion-and-Rest. To understand the significance of this phrase one must again refer to Descartes' unsolved metaphysical difficulties, which were always a deciding, influence in the formation of Spinoza's doctrines.
Descartes' conception of the physical world as Extension had left physical change or motion accounted for as the effect of the creator's will; God , who was transcendent and external to the world he had created, had implanted motion in it.
Spinoza, having rejected the notion of a creator external to his own creation as being self-contradictory, is once again in the situation of representing as a necessary feature of Nature , and as immanent in the system, what Descartes had represented as a fiat of God's page 71 will.
If the hypothesis of a transcendent God implanting motion in the system of extended bodies is impossible, then it will be an intrinsic characteristic of the extended or spatial world that everything within it is constituted of particular proportions of motion and rest; motion will be essential to, and i nsep ar able from, the nature and constitution of extended things.
The proportions of motion and rest within the system as a whole will be constant, since there can be no external cause to explain any change in the system; but within the subordinate parts of the system the proportions of motion and rest are constantly changing in the interaction of these parts among each other.
Spinoza's denial that an act of creation by a transcendent creator is logically possible could be translated as a denial of the possibility of energy entering into the system from outside; the physical world must be conceived as complete in itself, self-generating and self-maintaining.
Commentators have generally remarked that Spinoza, in making motion-and-rest the fundamental concept to be used in describing the spatial or physical world, in fact anticipated more closely page 72 than Descartes the future structure of mathematical physics ; he seems to have envisaged physical explanation as being necessarily dynamical in form, with physical things represented as ultimately no more than configurations of force and energy.
But it must be remembered that such interpretations, although incidentally illuminating, are not to be taken as direct and literal translations; for concepts such as force and energy, as they occur in modern physical theories, are not metaphysical concepts; they can ultimately be interpreted, however indirectly, in terms of equations verified by actual experiments and observations.
Spinoza is deducing the necessity of motion-and-rest as a primary characteristic of the extended world without any reference to convenience in summarizing actual experimental results; he is appealing only to the strictly logical implications of his prior notions of a self-creating substance conceived as an extended thing res extensa.
But the deductive system which is his metaphysics is so much the more worth studying if, following in its own logic, it results in a programme of scientific explanation which in outline accords with the actual methods of later science.
The word affectus , although it comes the nearest to the word ' emotion ' in the familiar sense, represents the whole modification of the person, mental page and physical.
I am active in so far as I am thinking logically, that is, in so far as the succession of ideas constituting my mind is a self-contained and self-generating series ; I am passive, in so far as my succession of ideas can only be explained in terms of ideas which are not members of the series constituting my mind; for in this latter case the ideas constituting my mind must be, at least in part, the effects of external causes.
My ordinary hates and loves , desires and aversions, succeed each other without any internal logical connexion between the ideas annexed to them.
If the idea annexed to the emotion is not deducible from a previous idea in my mind, it follows that the emotion or 'affection' must be the effect of an external cause, and that I am in this sense passive in respect of it.
As the ideas constituting my mind are the psychical equivalents of the modifications of my body, I can only have adequate knowledge of the causes of those of my 'affections' which are not the effects of external causes.
If the cause of the 'affection' is external to me, it follows that it involves an inadequate idea, and the converse must also be true; therefore, to say that the cause of the modification is external to me is equivalent to saying that it involves incomplete knowledge and an inadequate idea.
In so far as I am a free agent, unaffected by external causes , I necessarily have adequate or scientific knowledge, and the converse must also be true; only the intelligent man can logically be free, and only the free man can logically be intelligent.
But human beings, as finite modes , cannot in principle be completely free and unaffected by external causes; human freedom must be a matter of degree.
Spinoza's method in the last three parts of the Ethics is to contrast the actual and normal conditions of human servitude with the humanly unattainable ideal of permanent and perfect freedom.
Freud 's libido and Spinoza's conatus: Every person is held to dispose of a certain quantity of psychical energy, a counterpart for Spinoza at Ieast of his physical energy, and conscious pleasures and pains: Consequently, for Spinoza no less than for Freud, moral praise and blame of the objects of our particular desires and the sources of our pleasures, are irrelevent superstitions ; we can free ourselves only by an understanding of the true causes of our desires, page which must then change their direction.
Asceticism is only one expression among others of the depression of vitality and the frustration of the libido or conatus ; however we may deceive ourselves, our feelings and behaviour, even what we distinguish as self-denial, can always be explained as the effects of drives which are independent of our conscious will.
Consequently both Spinoza and Freud represent moral problems as essentially clinical problems, which can only be confused by the use of epithets of praise and blame , and by emotional attitudes of approval and disapproval.
There can in principle be only one way of achieving sanity and happiness; the way is to come to understand the causes of our own states of mind.
Vice, if the word is to be given a meaning, is that diseased state of the organism, in which neither mind nor body functions freely and efficiently.
Vice, in this sense, always betrays itself to the agent as that depression of vitality which is pain; vice and pain are necessarily connected, as are virtue and pleasure; this is another way of saying that, in Spinoza's sense of the word, ' virtue is its own reward '.
Pleasure, in this primary sense of the felt tone of efficiency of the organism, is distinguished by Spinoza from mere local stimulation, which he calls 'titillation' titillatio.
This contrast between a sense of total well-being and a mere temporary stimulation has a long philosophical history from Plato onwards; perhaps it corresponds to something in our experience which is reflected in the ordinary association of the words 'happiness' laetitia and 'pleasure' titillatio.
But I suspect that all such precise labelling and classifying is irrelevant for anyone who would really explore the varieties of human experience.
Neither crudely suggested that all men consciously pursue their own pleasure or deliberately seek to extend their own power; but both insisted that people must be studied scientifically, as organisms within Nature , and that only by such study could men be enabled to understand the causes of their own infirmity.
Lastly, there is a similarity, evident but more difficult to make precise, in the grave, prophetic, scrupulously, objective tone of voice in which they quietly undermine all the established prejudices of popular and religious morality: They have both provoked the hatred which visits anyone who would regard man as a natural object and not as a supernatural agent, an who is concerned impassively to understand the nature of human imbecility, rather than to condemn it.
In reading Spinoza it must not be forgotten that he was before all things concerned to point the way to human freedom through understanding and natural knowledge.
Never-the-less - From Book 32 ; Hampshire: But it is important to notice that in this popular use the epithets must not be interpreted as referring to the intrinsic properties of the things or persons called good or bad; they refer rather to the constitution and reactions of the persons applying the epithets.
But there is a natural extension of this popular use of the words 'good' and 'bad'. We naturally come to speak of 'normal' men and the 'normal' constitution of man; in talking of page I46 'man' in the abstract, we are led to form a universal notion, or vague composite image, of what a man should be, or of the type or model of a man.
We are then inclined to think of this type or ideal of a man as we think of an ideal house or an ideal theatre; objects which are created by human beings with a definite purpose, artifacts such as houses or theatres, can properly be said to conform more or less closely to a norm or ideal of what a house should be; we can judge how far any particular house satisfies the purposes for which houses in general are designed.
But we are led into confusion when, having formed an abstract universal notion of a natural kind, we come to think of this universal notion as representing the ideal or perfect specimen of the natural kind; we form in this way a general notion of what a man should be, as we form a general notion of what a house should be; and we think of men, as of houses, as more or less perfect in so far as they conform to the ideal.
The misleading implication in this way of thinking is that human beings, and other natural kinds, are designed with a purpose. To say of a house that it is imperfect in some respect is to make a statement to which a definite meaning can be attached by an objective test; the statement is tested by a comparison of the actual house with what was projected in the design of it.
In thinking of particular men as in some respect perfect or imperfect, or as in this sense good or bad specimens of their kind, we can only be comparing them with some abstract general notion, which has formed itself in our minds, of what a man should be; and this general notion has no objective significance, but arises only out of our own particular associations; it can be no more than an arbitrary projection of our own tastes, interests and experience.
Whenever we hear natural objects discussed as though they were artifacts, we have the most sure evidence of theological superstition ; Spinoza will not allow any mention of design or of final causes in the study Nature.
If we understood the necessary principles on which the individual nature of particular things depends, we would thereby understand the part that various things play in the whole system.
Philosophically speaking, all finite things within Nature are imperfect, simply in the sense that they are page finite things within Nature, which alone is complete and perfect; but they all fit perfectly into the system, and could not possibly be other than they are.
To understand the nature of anything is to fit it into the system of causes and effects of which it is a part; all qualitative classifications are subjective and arbitrary.
Repudiating the whole traditional logic of classification, and with it the Aristotelian search for the real essences of natural kinds, Spinoza must repudiate the conception of final causes , which was an integral part of this traditional logic.