Abstract
In this article, I defend the thesis that Leibniz’s rational substances always have higher-order perceptions, even when they are, say, in a dreamless sleep. I argue that without this assumption, Leibniz’s conception of reflection would introduce discontinuities into his philosophy of mind which (given his Principle of Continuity) he cannot allow. This interpretation does not imply, however, that rational beings must be aware of these higher-order states at all times. In fact, these states are often unconscious or ‘small’ (analogous to Leibniz’s famous petites perceptions) and only count as reflections when they become distinct or heightened enough. Reflections thus arise out of ‘petites réflexions’ just as conscious perceptions arise out of petites perceptions. I argue, furthermore, that an analysis of some aspects of Leibniz’s theory of memory shows that he is not only committed to the thesis that rational beings always have higher-order states but that he also accepts it. I conclude by considering whether my interpretation is at odds with Leibniz’s doctrine of transcreation and also whether it has any consequences for which theory of consciousness we should ascribe to Leibniz.
Bender, S. 2013. “Von Menschen und Tieren – Leibniz über Apperzeption, Reflexion und conscientia”. Zeitschrift für Philosophische Forschung 67, 214–41.10.3196/004433013806915698Search in Google Scholar
–. 2016. “Reflection and Rationality in Leibniz”. In Subjectivity, Selfhood and Agency in the Arabic and Latin Traditions. Eds. J. Kaukua/T. Ekenberg. Dordrecht, 263–75.10.1007/978-3-319-26914-6_16Search in Google Scholar
Carlin, L. 2000. “Leibniz’s Great Chain of Being”. Studia Leibnitiana 32, 131–50.Search in Google Scholar
Crockett, T. 1999. “Continuity in Leibniz’s mature Metaphysics”. Philosophical Studies 94, 119–38.10.1023/A:1004407206530Search in Google Scholar
Gennaro, R. 1999. “Leibniz on Consciousness and Self-consciousness”. In New Essays on the Rationalists. Eds. R. Gennaro/C. Huenemann. New York, 353–71.10.1093/0195165411.003.0017Search in Google Scholar
Jorgensen, L. 2009. “The Principle of Continuity and Leibniz’s Theory of Consciousness”. Journal of the History of Philosophy 47, 223–48.10.1353/hph.0.0112Search in Google Scholar
–. 2011a. “Leibniz on Memory and Consciousness”. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 19, 887–916.10.1080/09608788.2011.599568Search in Google Scholar
–. 2011b. “Mind the Gap: Reflection and Consciousness in Leibniz”. Studia Leibnitiana 43, 179–95.10.25162/sl-2011-0013Search in Google Scholar
Kulstad, M. 1991. Leibniz on Apperception, Consciousness, and Reflection. München.Search in Google Scholar
McRae, R. 1976. Leibniz: Perception, Apperception, and Thought. Toronto.10.3138/9781487579777Search in Google Scholar
Rickless, S. 2007. “Locke’s Polemic against Nativism.” In The Cambridge Companion to Locke’s ‘Essay Concerning Human Understanding’. Ed. L. Newman. Cambridge, 33–66.10.1017/CCOL0521834333.003Search in Google Scholar
Rutherford, D. 1995. Leibniz and the Rational Order of Nature. Cambridge.10.1017/CBO9781139172776Search in Google Scholar
Simmons, A. 2001. “Changing the Cartesian Mind: Leibniz on Sensation, Representation and Consciousness”. The Philosophical Review 110, 31–75.10.1215/00318108-110-1-31Search in Google Scholar
–. 2011. “Leibnizian Consciousness Reconsidered”. Studia Leibnitiana 43, 196–215.10.25162/sl-2011-0014Search in Google Scholar
Swoyer, C. 1995. “Leibnizian Expression”. Journal of the History of Philosophy 33, 65–99.10.1353/hph.1995.0009Search in Google Scholar
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
