Authors
Shane Duarte
University of Notre Dame
Abstract
According to Margaret Wilson, Leibniz is inconsistent when it comes to the question of whether one can have distinct ideas of sensible qualities, and this because he sometimes conceives of sensible qualities as sensations and sometimes conceives of them as complexes of primary qualities. When he conceives of them as sensations, he denies that we can have distinct ideas of sensible qualities; when he conceives of them as complexes of primary qualities, he asserts that we can. In this paper I argue that Wilson is wrong to think that Leibnizian ideas admit of various degrees of confusion or distinctness. I also argue that although Wilson's problem admits of being reformulated in a manner consistent with a correct understanding of Leibnizian perceptions and ideas, this reformulated version of the problem admits to a satisfactory interpretive solution.
Keywords Idea  Perception  Confused  Distinct  Primary  Secondary  Quality
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/09608780903135089
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
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

Monadology.Montgomery Furth - 1967 - Philosophical Review 76 (2):169-200.
Was Leibniz Confused About Confusion?Stephen M. Puryear - 2005 - The Leibniz Review 15:95-124.
Confused Ideas.Margaret D. Wilson - 1977 - Rice University Studies 63.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Leibniz on Sensation and the Limits of Reason.Walter Ott - 2016 - History of Philosophy Quarterly 33 (2):135-153.
Leibniz and the Molyneux Problem.Bridger Ehli - 2020 - Journal of Modern Philosophy 2 (1):8.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Was Leibniz Confused About Confusion?Stephen M. Puryear - 2005 - The Leibniz Review 15:95-124.
Two Kinds of Intentionality in Locke.Lionel Shapiro - 2010 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 91 (4):554-586.
Locke’s Resemblance Theses.Michael Jacovides - 1999 - Philosophical Review 108 (4):461-496.
Primary and Secondary Qualities.Robert A. Wilson - 2016 - In Matthew Stuart (ed.), A Companion to Locke. Blackwell. pp. 193-211.
Descartes on the Cognitive Structure of Sensory Experience.Alison Simmons - 2003 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 67 (3):549–579.
Locke on Primary and Secondary Qualities.Samuel C. Rickless - 1997 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 78 (3):297-319.
A Theory of Secondary Qualities.Robert Pasnau - 2006 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 73 (3):568-591.
Locke on the Propria of Body.Michael Jacovides - 2007 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 15 (3):485 – 511.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2010-09-02

Total views
227 ( #42,182 of 2,439,094 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
16 ( #43,038 of 2,439,094 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes