Interessanter is wellicht hierbij te vermelden dat van James Elliott het artikel zal verschijnen "Maimonides and Spinoza on the Knowledge of Good and Evil: A Reappraisal of W.Z. Harvey," forthcoming in: Iyyun: The Jerusalem Philosophical Quarterly [academia.edu]
Hij gaat daarin in op Warren Zev Harvey's intussen klassieke 1981- artikel "A Portrait of Spinoza as a Maimonidean" [in: Journal of the History of Philosophy 19: 151-172.
ABSTRACT: In an unsung yet excellent paper, W.Z. Harvey set out to explain how both Maimonides and Spinoza have similarly problematic views on the nature of the knowledge of good and evil. In it, he proposed an answer to solving the problem. In the many decades since, debates surrounding this topic have flourished. A recent paper by Joshua Parens, his conclusions mark a distinction between Spinoza and Maimonides that threaten to undermine Harvey’s solution to the problem. I will argue that, although Parens’ distinction forces us to revise Harvey’s contention, Harvey’s argument is still generally valid.
Cf. blog en blog