David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In this paper, I will try to exploit the implication of Leibniz's statement in Monadology (1714) that "there is a kind of self-sufficiency which makes them [monads] sources of their own internal actions, or incorporeal automata, as it were" (Monadology, sect.18). Leibniz's monads are simple substances, with no shape, no magnitude; but they are supposed to produce the phenomena resulting from their activities, which for us humans look as the whole world, the nature. The activities of a monad are characterized by mental terms, perceptions (internal states) and appetites (which change the internal state). By means of perceptions, a monad becomes a "perpetual living mirror of the universe"; it can receive the information of other monads and it can send its own, in turn, to others. The communication and interconnection thus produced result in the physical and the psychical phenomena observed by us, humans. According to Leibniz, all monads are governed by the teleological law given by the God, and the world of phenomena are governed by the causal and mechanical law. Leibniz argues that there is a pre-established harmony among the monads so that this double character is no problem. Now, I will propose an informational interpretation of monadology, which regards the monads as an automaton governed by the God's program and arranged appropriately; and I will argue that Leibniz's scenario can be defended in terms of this interpretation. The crucial part of this interpretation is that the God's program and the monads' activities are related with the phenomenal world by means of a coding by God. This interpretation is also defended on the textual basis, with a special reference to Leibniz's distinction between primitive and derivative forces. Drawing on R. M. Adams's careful reading of Leibniz's texts (Leibniz: Determinist, Theist, Idealist, 1994), I will argue that his rendering is quite in conformity with my interpretation, although he does not seem to be aware of the notion of coding.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Harry G. Frankfurt (1976). Leibniz: A Collection of Critical Essays. University of Notre Dame Press.
Daniel Garber (2009). Leibniz: Body, Substance, Monad. Oxford University Press.
Richard Tieszen (2012). Monads and Mathematics: Gödel and Husserl. [REVIEW] Axiomathes 22 (1):31-52.
Shane Duarte (2012). Leibniz and Monadic Domination. Oxford Studies in Early Modern Philosophy 6:209-48.
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1902/2005). Discourse on Metaphysics, and the Monadology. Dover Publications.
Stewart Duncan (2012). Leibniz's Mill Arguments Against Materialism. Philosophical Quarterly 62 (247):250-72.
Jeffrey K. McDonough (2008). Leibniz's Two Realms Revisited. Noûs 42 (4):673-696.
Harry G. Frankfurt (1972). Leibniz. Garden City, N.Y.,Anchor Books.
Added to index2009-05-18
Total downloads35 ( #41,688 of 1,089,155 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #30,953 of 1,089,155 )
How can I increase my downloads?