What do you think?
Rate this book
Discourse on Metaphysics/Correspondence with Arnauld/Monadology
"I flatter myself that I have learned something by following in the tracks of Plato and others, and have reached, in one way at least, 'the serene temples erected by the teachings of the wise.' These temples are built on a foundation of general truths which do not depend on facts and yet, as I see it, form the key to the knowledge which passes judgement on facts…I have always striven to uncover the truth that lies buried under and dispersed among the various philosophical schools, and to bring it into harmony with itself."
293 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1902
3 people are currently reading
123 people want to read
About the author
Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz
1,249 books540 followersGerman philosopher and mathematician Baron Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz or Leibnitz invented differential and integral calculus independently of Isaac Newton and proposed an optimist metaphysical theory that included the notion that we live in "the best of all possible worlds."
Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz, a polymath, occupies a prominent place in the history. Most scholars think that Leibniz developed and published ever widely used notation. Only in the 20th century, his law of continuity and transcendental homogeneity found implementation in means of nonstandard analysis. He of the most prolific in the field of mechanical calculators. He worked on adding automatic multiplication and division to calculator of Blaise Pascal, meanwhile first described a pinwheel in 1685, and used it in the first mass-produced mechanical arithmometer. He also refined the binary number system, the foundation of virtually all digital computers.
Leibniz most concluded that God ably created our universe in a restricted sense, Voltaire often lampooned the idea. Leibniz alongside the great René Descartes and Baruch Spinoza advocated 17th-century rationalism. Applying reason of first principles or prior definitions, rather than empirical evidence, produced conclusions in the scholastic tradition, and the work of Leibniz anticipated modern analytic logic.
Leibniz made major contributions to technology, and anticipated that which surfaced much later in probability, biology, medicine, geology, psychology, linguistics, and computer science. He wrote works on politics, law, ethics, theology, history, and philology. Various learned journals, tens of thousands of letters, and unpublished manuscripts scattered contributions of Leibniz to this vast array of subjects. He wrote in several languages but primarily Latin and French. No one completely gathered the writings of Leibniz.
Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz, a polymath, occupies a prominent place in the history. Most scholars think that Leibniz developed and published ever widely used notation. Only in the 20th century, his law of continuity and transcendental homogeneity found implementation in means of nonstandard analysis. He of the most prolific in the field of mechanical calculators. He worked on adding automatic multiplication and division to calculator of Blaise Pascal, meanwhile first described a pinwheel in 1685, and used it in the first mass-produced mechanical arithmometer. He also refined the binary number system, the foundation of virtually all digital computers.
Leibniz most concluded that God ably created our universe in a restricted sense, Voltaire often lampooned the idea. Leibniz alongside the great René Descartes and Baruch Spinoza advocated 17th-century rationalism. Applying reason of first principles or prior definitions, rather than empirical evidence, produced conclusions in the scholastic tradition, and the work of Leibniz anticipated modern analytic logic.
Leibniz made major contributions to technology, and anticipated that which surfaced much later in probability, biology, medicine, geology, psychology, linguistics, and computer science. He wrote works on politics, law, ethics, theology, history, and philology. Various learned journals, tens of thousands of letters, and unpublished manuscripts scattered contributions of Leibniz to this vast array of subjects. He wrote in several languages but primarily Latin and French. No one completely gathered the writings of Leibniz.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
January 3, 2016
The thesis of the best of all possible worlds may seem trite, but Leibniz's intellect far outstripped that of Voltaire, or just about anyone else in the history of humanity. It's important to wrestle with the greatest thinkers, even if there's no guarantee of them actually being right about anything.
The last universal genius, he comes right at the end, before knowledge would become irrevocably divided and specialized.
So far in my reading I am trying to focus on one particular aspect of his thought, the Monad as a model of subjectivity distinct from both Descartes and Spinoza. As I read the Ethics, Spinoza tries to solve dualism by simply doing away with one half of the problem. Philosophy becomes a course of therapy, as we cure ourselves of our individual consciousness in order to identify with the whole. This certainly appears consistent with modern forms of naturalism and materialism, and so Spinoza's enduring popularity is understandable. Nonetheless, I remain unsatisfied with this type of thinking. Even if Descartes's notion of mind was always problematic, I don't think subjectivity can be done away with entirely. This is where I think we could do well to meditate on Monads.
The last universal genius, he comes right at the end, before knowledge would become irrevocably divided and specialized.
So far in my reading I am trying to focus on one particular aspect of his thought, the Monad as a model of subjectivity distinct from both Descartes and Spinoza. As I read the Ethics, Spinoza tries to solve dualism by simply doing away with one half of the problem. Philosophy becomes a course of therapy, as we cure ourselves of our individual consciousness in order to identify with the whole. This certainly appears consistent with modern forms of naturalism and materialism, and so Spinoza's enduring popularity is understandable. Nonetheless, I remain unsatisfied with this type of thinking. Even if Descartes's notion of mind was always problematic, I don't think subjectivity can be done away with entirely. This is where I think we could do well to meditate on Monads.
August 3, 2017
Some interesting ideas presented in the most boring way imaginable. I cried "uncle!" after about twenty pages. Too bad, because the topics would probably be fascinating if handled by a better writer.
October 7, 2024
AN EXCELLENT COLLECTION OF THREE IMPORTANT WORKS BY ONE OF THE GREAT 17TH CENTURY "RATIONALISTS”
Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz (1646-1716) was a German mathematician and philosopher; he developed calculus independently of Isaac Newton.
In his Discourse on Metaphysics, he wrote, "Against those who think that God might have made things better than he has... It seems to me that the consequences of such an opinion are wholly inconsistent with the glory of God... To show that an architect could have done better is to find fault with his work. Furthermore this opinion is contrary to the Holy Scriptures when they assure us of the goodness of God's work." (Pg. 5-6)
After observing that "God does nothing which is not orderly," he adds, "I use these comparisons to picture a certain imperfect resemblance to the divine wisdom, and to point out that which may at least raise our minds to conceive in some sort what cannot otherwise be expressed. I do not pretend at all to explain thus the great mystery upon which depends the whole universe." (Pg. 10-11)
He argues, "certain philosophers... have constructed a demonstration of God that is extremely imperfect. It must be, they say, that I have an idea of God, or of a perfect being, since I think of him and we cannot think without having ideas; now the idea of this being includes all perfections and since existence is one of these perfections, it follows that he exists... it is when he is assured of the possibility of a thing, that one can boast of having an idea of it. Therefore, the aforesaid argument proves that God exists, if he is possible. This is in fact an excellent privilege of the divine nature, to have need only of a possibility or an essence in order to actually exist, and it is just this which is called ens a se [`being out of itself"]." (Pg. 40-41)
Of miracles, he says, "These are a part of the general order and conform to the principal purposes of God and consequently, are involved in the concept of this universe, which is a result of these designs. Just as the idea of a building results from the purposes or plans of him who undertakes it, so the idea or concept of this world is a result of the designs of God considered as possible." (Pg. 109)
In his Correspondence, he asserts, "I maintain that every substance involves in its present state all its past and future states and even expresses the whole universe according to its point of view, since nothing is so far from anything else that there is no relation between them." (Pg. 233)
In his Monadology, he begins with the statement, "The Monad, of which we will speak here, is nothing else than a simple substance, which goes to make up composites; by simple, we mean without parts... These Monads are the true Atoms of nature, and, in fact, the Elements of things." (Pg. 251)
He asserts, "Therefore God alone (or the Necessary Being) has this prerogative that if he must necessarily exist, and, as nothing is able to prevent the possibility of that which involves no bounds, no negation, and consequently, no contradiction, this alone is sufficient to establish a priori his existence. We have, therefore, proved his existence through the reality of eternal truths." (Pg. 260-261) Later, he adds, "Thus although each Monad represents the whole universe, it represents more distinctly the body which specifically pertains to it, and of which it constitutes the entelechy." (Pg. 265)
He states his famous "principle of Sufficient Reason, in virtue of which we believe that no fact can be real or existing and no statement true unless it has a sufficient reason why it should be thus and not otherwise. Most frequently, however, these reasons cannot be known by us." (Pg. 258)
Leibniz's philosophy (which, perhaps surprisingly, was treated very respectfully by the arch-rationalist Bertrand Russell) is less popular these days than his fellow rationalists Descartes and Spinoza; but some of this ideas (e.g., the Principle of Sufficient Reason) have had lasting influence; this is an excellent collection of his writings, and makes a useful introduction to his thought.
Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz (1646-1716) was a German mathematician and philosopher; he developed calculus independently of Isaac Newton.
In his Discourse on Metaphysics, he wrote, "Against those who think that God might have made things better than he has... It seems to me that the consequences of such an opinion are wholly inconsistent with the glory of God... To show that an architect could have done better is to find fault with his work. Furthermore this opinion is contrary to the Holy Scriptures when they assure us of the goodness of God's work." (Pg. 5-6)
After observing that "God does nothing which is not orderly," he adds, "I use these comparisons to picture a certain imperfect resemblance to the divine wisdom, and to point out that which may at least raise our minds to conceive in some sort what cannot otherwise be expressed. I do not pretend at all to explain thus the great mystery upon which depends the whole universe." (Pg. 10-11)
He argues, "certain philosophers... have constructed a demonstration of God that is extremely imperfect. It must be, they say, that I have an idea of God, or of a perfect being, since I think of him and we cannot think without having ideas; now the idea of this being includes all perfections and since existence is one of these perfections, it follows that he exists... it is when he is assured of the possibility of a thing, that one can boast of having an idea of it. Therefore, the aforesaid argument proves that God exists, if he is possible. This is in fact an excellent privilege of the divine nature, to have need only of a possibility or an essence in order to actually exist, and it is just this which is called ens a se [`being out of itself"]." (Pg. 40-41)
Of miracles, he says, "These are a part of the general order and conform to the principal purposes of God and consequently, are involved in the concept of this universe, which is a result of these designs. Just as the idea of a building results from the purposes or plans of him who undertakes it, so the idea or concept of this world is a result of the designs of God considered as possible." (Pg. 109)
In his Correspondence, he asserts, "I maintain that every substance involves in its present state all its past and future states and even expresses the whole universe according to its point of view, since nothing is so far from anything else that there is no relation between them." (Pg. 233)
In his Monadology, he begins with the statement, "The Monad, of which we will speak here, is nothing else than a simple substance, which goes to make up composites; by simple, we mean without parts... These Monads are the true Atoms of nature, and, in fact, the Elements of things." (Pg. 251)
He asserts, "Therefore God alone (or the Necessary Being) has this prerogative that if he must necessarily exist, and, as nothing is able to prevent the possibility of that which involves no bounds, no negation, and consequently, no contradiction, this alone is sufficient to establish a priori his existence. We have, therefore, proved his existence through the reality of eternal truths." (Pg. 260-261) Later, he adds, "Thus although each Monad represents the whole universe, it represents more distinctly the body which specifically pertains to it, and of which it constitutes the entelechy." (Pg. 265)
He states his famous "principle of Sufficient Reason, in virtue of which we believe that no fact can be real or existing and no statement true unless it has a sufficient reason why it should be thus and not otherwise. Most frequently, however, these reasons cannot be known by us." (Pg. 258)
Leibniz's philosophy (which, perhaps surprisingly, was treated very respectfully by the arch-rationalist Bertrand Russell) is less popular these days than his fellow rationalists Descartes and Spinoza; but some of this ideas (e.g., the Principle of Sufficient Reason) have had lasting influence; this is an excellent collection of his writings, and makes a useful introduction to his thought.
February 22, 2022
The correspondence drags but I recommend the monadology. A convincing and optimistic outlook
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews