01/06/2026
One of the most interesting books to land in my reading lately was shared by a friend here on Facebook — the new Cambridge University Press study Spinoza on Free Will.
Spinoza is one of those philosophers who feels permanently contemporary. Born in Amsterdam in 1632 to a family of Portuguese Jewish exiles, excommunicated at twenty-three, dead at forty-four — he had just enough time to write one of the most radical and coherent philosophical systems ever constructed.
His central claim: free will, in the traditional sense, is a type of illusion born of ignorance about what entails having the Abilty for Free Will (Freedom), but not the Faculty of Free Will. Spinoza believed Humans to have the Ability for Free Will, but not the Faculty of Free Will (I do not necessarily agree with everything in this view, but Spinoza's arguments are powerful indeed, around the premise of necessitarian Causal Determinism) We are conscious of our desires but blind to their causes — which makes us exactly like a stone in flight that, if it could think, would believe it was choosing to move. But Humans can learn, understand and expand self-determination giving them the Ability of Freedom
But here is what most people miss about Spinoza: he didn't stop there. He went on to build a rigorous, demanding account of what real freedom looks like — and it turns out to be something far more interesting than the folk-psychological notion neuroscience keeps trying to debunk.
I've written the inaugural essay of the new Nature & Science series around this book. It connects Spinoza directly to today's debates — Sapolsky, neuroscience, moral responsibility — and I think it's one of the strongest pieces this publication has produced.
Free to read on Substack. I'd love to know what you think.
The Substack link for the full readership of the Article is in the comments below.
