Leibniz on Corporeal Substance

Acta Baltica Historiae Et Philosophiae Scientiarum 4 (2):31-52 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

As an idealist, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz could not recognize anything corporeal as substantial. However, under the influence of Cartesian terminology, he devoted considerable effort to analysing the corporeal world, while not recognizing its real substantiality of course. Leibniz took the concept of substance from Plato, Aristotle and the scholastics, but developed it in two ways. It is a well-known fact that Leibniz introduced the term ‘corporeal substance’ in his letter to Antoine Arnauld dated to October 1687. In the letter, Leibniz understands an object of nature, like an animal or a plant, as ‘corporeal substance’. In the very same letter, Leibniz introduces the terms ‘indivisibility’ and ‘phenomenon’. Every corporeal substance can be real only as a unity, i.e. by being indivisible. Such entity must have a soul or at least an entelechy. In an opposite case, that entity would not be a real unity but just a phenomenon. No corporeal entity is indivisible and therefore not a substance. The paper aims at introducing Leibniz’s distinction between substances and phenomena and taking a closer look at the historicalphilosophical influences Leibniz experienced while developing his views of the corporeal world. Aristotle and Descartes will receive most of the attention, of course, as the concepts of ‘entelechy’ and ‘hylomorphism’ were introduced by the former, and the understanding of corporeal substance as determined by extension alone is part of the latter. The core of the original critique by Leibniz takes off from the properties of the continuum as well as the nature of shape, motion and extension. The case of continuum will receive special attention. It is analysed with the help of the novel approaches by Samuel Levey and Vassil Vidinsky. Leibniz was critical about our poor understanding of the continuum but his own interpretation of it was not fully consistent either. Although the new developments enable us to take a fresh look that has not been possible so far, the issue remains open for further study.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

On Unity and Simple Substance in Leibniz.Samuel Levey - 2007 - The Leibniz Review 17:61-106.
Leibniz on spermatozoa and immortality.Justin E. H. Smith - 2007 - Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 89 (3):264-282.
Leibniz's Anti-Cartesian Metaphysics of Body: A Study of the Correspondence Between Leibniz and de Volder.Paul Andrew Lodge - 1998 - Dissertation, Rutgers the State University of New Jersey - New Brunswick
Monads at the bottom, monads at the top, monads all over.Ohad Nachtomy - 2018 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 26 (1):197-207.
Leibniz and the Substance of the Vinculum Substantiale.Brandon Look - 2000 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 38 (2):203-220.
Leibniz to Arnauld: Platonic and Aristotelian Themes on Matter and Corporeal Substance.Martha Bolton - 2004 - In Paul Lodge (ed.), Leibniz and His Correspondents. Cambridge: Uk ;Cambridge University Press. pp. 97--122.
Daniel Garber, Leibniz: Body, Substance, Monad. [REVIEW]Stephen Puryear - 2010 - Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2010 (8).
Preestablished Harmony and Corporeal Substance in Leibniz.Jose R. Silva de Choudens - 1992 - Dissertation, University of Massachusetts Amherst
Leibniz and the Vinculum Substantiale.Brandon Charles Look - 1997 - Dissertation, The University of Chicago

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-12-16

Downloads
6 (#1,430,516)

6 months
4 (#790,687)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Peeter Müürsepp
Tallinn University of Technology

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations