The political ideal that Spinoza promotes in the Theological-Political Treatise is a secular, democratic commonwealth, one that is free from meddling… - Benedictus de Spinoza

This monograph [George L. Kline's Spinoza in Soviet Philosophy] deals with one of the curiosities of contemporary philosophy. Spinoza is to this day highly regarded in the Soviet Union. The fact that he was a rationalist and, in some sense, an atheist in an age of religious intolerance, naturally endeared him to the Soviet authorities, particularly during their early period of militant atheism. But if these are the attributes which gain favour for thinkers one might have thought that others, Hobbes, for instance, or Gassendi, had rather better claims, as militant materialists not committed to the full-blown a priori rationalism of Spinoza. Spinoza's hitherto secure position in a Soviet Pantheon seems mainly due to the accidental fact that Plekhanov, who, by his superior learning and intellectual gifts, intimidated virtually all other Russian Marxists into some degree of conformity, took Spinoza under his special protection, and firmly laid it down that his notion of men as objects in nature made him the father of French materialism of the eighteenth century; that from his sprang Diderot, Helvétius, d'Holbach, etc. and therefore, in due course, also Feuerbach, Marx and Engels. This thesis, once enunciated, was mechanically repeated by later Russian Marxist historians of thought, none of whom seemed aware either that Diderot's essay on Spinoza is by no means an unqualified eulogy of his views, or of the vast differences between Spinoza's and Newton's universes.

Non ridere, non lugere, neque detestari, sed intelligere.

BUENO Y MALO (bonum-malum) Es bueno lo que favorece la relación de movimiento y reposo (M-R) que articula las partes del cuerpo humano (E3P39); lo que ayuda a acercarse al modelo ideal de naturaleza humana elegido como guía estratégica de la conducta (E4Praef.); lo que concuerda con la propia naturaleza, especialmente en términos racionales (E4P40); también lo es cuanto promueve el desarrollo de la racionalidad (E4P27 y A5); y, finalmente, todo lo que reporta con certeza alguna utilidad, mientras que es nocivo aquello que lo impide (E4Def1 y 2). Como es obvio, se llama malo a lo contrario en los cinco sentidos mencionados, toda vez que es algo derivado y está en función de lo bueno. No hay un bien o un mal absolutos, sino unas relaciones valorativas adaptadas a la situación (E4Praef.), lo que no supone un puro relativismo, sino una inteligencia flexible de lo que conviene.