The article examines the evolution of divine infinity concepts in Western metaphysics, highlighting transformative implications.
This article examines how divine infinity in Western metaphysics is re-specified through transformations in the concept of ground. Traditional metaphysics usually understands God as the first principle of the world. Yet God can function as ground not merely because He is the first cause, but because He is understood as a being that in some manner exceeds finite beings. We argue that the meaning of divine infinity depends on how God is understood as ground. To show this, the article focuses on three philosophers—Scotus, Spinoza, and Deleuze—and traces the changing forms of divine infinity across three decisive stages. First, in Scotus, God is still understood as an infinite being transcending finite creatures, yet through the univocity of being, God and finite beings enter a common conceptual field. Second, in Spinoza, God no longer appears primarily as an infinite being transcending finite beings, but is determined as absolutely infinite substance and infinite power; correspondingly, ground is no longer the first being external to nature, but becomes a productive cause immanent to nature. Finally, in Deleuze, ground is no longer borne by any substance, but is understood as the plane of immanence constituted by relations of difference and intensity; divine infinity accordingly no longer appears as a property of some ultimate being, but is transformed into the plane’s own self-sufficiency and lack of exteriority. On this basis, the article argues that modern ontology is not a simple break with the theological tradition, but rather effects within theological problems themselves a metaphysical transformation of divine infinity: as the structure of ground changes, the relations between God and world, and between the infinite and the finite, are continually rewritten.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: