The Leibniz Review 28:97-101 (2018)

Authors
Richard T. W. Arthur
McMaster University
Abstract
This is a reply to Samuel Levey's fine review of my Monads, Composition and Force (Oxford UP, 2018) in the same issue of the Leibniz Review. In it I take up various difficulties raised by Levey that may be thought to collapse Leibniz's position into idealism after all, and attempt to provide convincing responses to them.
Keywords History of Philosophy  Major Philosophers
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 1524-1556
DOI 10.5840/leibniz2018287
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 65,587
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

What Kind of Idealist Was Leibniz?Michael K. Shim - 2005 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 13 (1):91 – 110.
Leibniz: Determinist, Theist, Idealist.Stephen Grover - 1996 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 34 (2):303-304.
Leibniz and the Fardella Memo.Shane Duarte - 2009 - Studia Leibnitiana 41 (1):67-87.
Was Leibniz an Idealist?Peter Loptson - 1999 - Philosophy 74 (3):361-385.
Rethinking Leibniz.G. H. R. Parkinson - 1996 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 4 (2):399 – 407.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2019-02-15

Total views
26 ( #426,706 of 2,461,920 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #298,784 of 2,461,920 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes