Comparison between Spinoza's Ethics and Dostoevsky's Notes from UndergroundPerhaps my choice of subject may seem eccentric to say the least. Appearing bizarre and extravagant, however, is not my intention, so I thought, as an introduction, to explain my choice. As far as I know, philosophy, or the search for truth, has too often been equated with certainty. This quality of certainty has been particularly amplified in the rationalist branch of philosophy. Starting from Descartes' vision of a philosophy with mathematical certainty, rationalists claimed to have grasped a rather large portion of reality, including the world, God, consciousness, and everything in between. As empiricists argued, much of this "knowledge" was in fact habit, as it had no representation in the real world. The infamous abstractness of the rationalists and their contempt for the apparent discrepancy between their demonstrations and the real world were the main reasons for the fearful opposition and caricature they faced: even Voltaire, although influenced to a large extent by the philosophy of Leibniz, he ridicules it in his masterpiece Candide in the form of the ridiculously optimistic Pangloss. . Kant, in particular, quite impressively dented the shell of rationalist philosophy, calling it dogmatic metaphysics. As he pointed out, rationalist philosophy ignores the sensory component of human perception when it embarks on its ill-fated quest to find a metaphysics with absolute knowledge. I find this criticism to be the most powerful, as it highlights the discrepancy between the real world and the abstract world of the rationalists. Spinoza's system stands at the forefront of rationalist thought, attempting to establish the certain, necessary and universal truths of reality and nature. reducing Descartes' philosophy to a set of axioms and definitions, as one would do with a geometry demonstration. Dostoevsky stands on the opposite side of the spectrum, exposing the flaws of reason with frightening realism. He, in my opinion, makes incredibly insightful arguments about this discrepancy between how things "should" be and how they are. Comparing the manifestos of these two thinkers, Spinoza's Ethics and Dostoevsky's Notes from Underground, one can easily see the difference in language. Spinoza's language is strictly mathematical. He doesn't worry about engaging the reader. His main concern is to present his idea with clarity and coherence. Dostoevsky's language differs due to the difference in his intentions.