Suppose you became a philosophical dog with a penchant for Spinoza. We will leave aside how you may have undergone your conversion for moral attainments seldom survive autobiographical scrutiny, though if any man could explain it, it would be Jeffrey Masson. All I can say with any certainty is that like all sharp dogs, you will like your freedom, though in a companionable way. I was put in mind of this by a chance encounter with a stranger who admired my guide dog and suggested (while scratching her ears) that the world would be a better place if it was run by dogs.
Steven Nadler’s “Spinoza” piece in today’s NY Times (link above) speaks sweetly of the utilitarian benefits of freedom, a kind of “Spinoza meets Bentham” argument which Philosophy must invariably revisit every ten minutes, but leaving aside the freedom to invent or produce, Nadler is wonderful when summarizing the necessity for toleration as an a priori condition for freedom:
“Well before John Stuart Mill, Spinoza had the acuity to recognize that the unfettered freedom of expression is in the state’s own best interest. In this post-9/11 world, there is a temptation to believe that “homeland security” is better secured by the suppression of certain liberties than their free exercise. This includes a tendency by justices to interpret existing laws in restrictive ways and efforts by lawmakers to create new limitations, as well as a willingness among the populace, “for the sake of peace and security,” to acquiesce in this. We seem ready not only to engage in a higher degree of self-censorship, but also to accept a loosening of legal protections against prior restraint (whether in print publications or the dissemination of information via the Internet), unwarranted surveillance, unreasonable search and seizure, and other intrusive measures. [2]Spinoza, long ago, recognized the danger in such thinking, both for individuals and for the polity at large. He saw that there was no need to make a trade-off between political and social well-being and the freedom of expression; on the contrary, the former depends on the latter.”
That we’ve given away essential freedoms in the post 9-11 decade is obvious. Less obvious is the way in which these sacrifices of liberty will play out. A dog, of course, would give away nothing, for her affection is only pack-like to the extent the pack is worth a damn. As any philosopher dog can tell you.
Planet of the Blind 
If dogs ran the world, I probably would have had a career in hydrant monitoring assessment — not sure how fulfilling it would have been.
LikeLike