This makes Martin Lin look bad, but it makes the editor of the Cambridge Companion to Spinoza’s Ethics, Olli Koistinen, look even worse.pic.twitter.com/4uVIuHEs4z
-
Many such problems in Spinoza translations and scholarship. Perhaps the concept of “perfectus” having been translated as “perfect” is the worst.
Speaking of Spinny translations...have you seen the new Ethics translation from Cambridge?
-
-
I see that it uses the new critical edition of the Latin text. CUP certainly provides plenty to look over under the Contents tab.http://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/philosophy/philosophy-texts/spinoza-ethics-proved-geometrical-order?format=PB …
-
Here’s the Cambridge (on the left) side-by-side with the Hackett (which I have on hand). If nothing else, the Cambridge reads better than the Hackett.pic.twitter.com/Wwtv0CmdaO
-
Why the hell this passive construction “that which is self-caused” from “per causam sui”, a very strange choice?
-
Also they have both gone for “I mean”: “intelligo” should most certainly be “I understand” (to show its conception under the attribute of thought, while axiomatic there’s a consistency)
-
You’re complaining about the Hackett translation, not the Cambridge.
-
The intelligo is the same for both
-
Ah, you’re right.
-
The distinction is important, it’s not an attempt to express oneself “I mean,,,” but to adequate the idea, to sublimate it from the imagination to reason.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.