Spinoza's Ethics: II.P12: Perception

Spinoza is outlining how things occur objectively and are viewed subjectively. This challenge exists in psychology and psychiatry today within the so called mind-body problem. For example, the framework for dynamics between cognitive therapy and drug therapy elude scientists. Here Spinoza provides an outline of how the mind perceives. The first part is to articulate the nature of the idea that constitutes the mind. Here he provides an example with the body. He uses the term by necessity, which as I pointed out earlier, refers to a causal state that requires something. Clearly, for a mind to exist, the related body must exist. Thus, in Spinoza's terms, the mind is connected to the body by necessity. Further, when such a relationship exists, he shows that a change or affectus must be considered. I have discussed the critical role that this non-representational mode of thinking plays within Spinoza's framework.

Another example here is the role that accounting plays with its object as the actual business. Accounting attempts to capture business reality, but often misinterprets. Sometimes these misinterpretations impact the business reality - as in capital formation. At times, it appears that Spinoza's strict attributal distinction do not allow for causality of the mind on the body and vice versa. However, that is clearly only the case at the level of God, where completely adequate ideas accompany extending things. On a human level, a interactive dynamic like this accounting example does set up.

Quicquid in objecto ideæ humanam mentem constituentis contingit, id ab humana mente debet percipi sive ejus rei dabitur in mente necessario idea hoc est si objectum ideæ humanam mentem constituentis sit corpus, nihil in eo corpore poterit contingere quod a mente non percipiatur.

Translated as,

Whatever happens in the object of an idea constituting a human mind, that [occurrence] ought to be perceived by a human mind or the idea of that matter [occurrence] is given in the mind by necessity, that is, if the object of the idea constituting a human mind is a body, nothing is able to happen in this body which is not perceived by the mind.

DEMONSTRATIO: Quicquid enim in objecto cujuscunque ideæ contingit, ejus rei datur necessario in Deo cognitio (per corollarium propositionis 9 hujus) quatenus ejusdem objecti idea affectus consideratur hoc est (per propositionem 11 hujus) quatenus mentem alicujus rei constituit. Quicquid igitur in objecto ideæ humanam mentem constituentis contingit, ejus datur necessario in Deo cognitio quatenus naturam humanæ mentis constituit hoc est (per corollarium propositionis 11 hujus) ejus rei cognitio erit necessario in mente sive mens id percipit. Q.E.D.

Translated as,

For whatever happens in the object of whatsoever idea, an understanding of that matter [occurrence] is given in God by necessity (by IIP9C) insofar as through the idea of the same object, a change is considered, that is (by IIP11) insofar as it [idea] constitutes the mind of something. Thus, whatever happens in the object of the idea constituting a human mind, an understanding of that matter [occurrence] is given in God by necessity, that is (by IIP11C), the understanding of that thing will exist in the mind by necessity or the mind perceives it.

SCHOLIUM: Hæc propositio patet etiam et clarius intelligitur ex scholio propositionis 7 hujus, quod vide. 

Translated as,

This proposition is especially understood clearly from IIP7S, which you should view.