In Rodolfo Garau & Pietro Omodeo (eds.), Contingency and Natural Order in Early Modern Science. Springer Verlag. pp. 289-316 (2019)
Authors |
|
Abstract |
This paper focuses on Leibniz’s conception of modality and its application to the issue of natural laws. The core of Leibniz’s investigation of the modality of natural laws lays in the distinction between necessary, geometrical laws on the one hand, and contingent, physical laws of nature on the other. For Leibniz, the contingency of physical laws entailed the assumption of the existence of an additional form of causality beyond mechanical or efficient ones. While geometrical truths, being necessary, do not require the use of the principle of sufficient reason, physical laws are not strictly determined by geometry and therefore are logically distinct from geometrical laws. As a consequence, the set of laws that regulate the physical laws could have been created otherwise by God. However, in addition to this, the contingency of natural laws does not consist only in the fact that God has chosen them over other possible ones. On the contrary, Leibniz understood the status of natural laws as arising from the action internal to physical substances. Hence the actuality of physical laws results from a causal power that is inherent to substances rather than being the mere consequence of the way God arranged the relations between physical objects. Focusing on three instances of Leibniz’s treatment of contingency in physics, this paper argues that, in order to account for the contingency of physical laws, Leibniz maintained that final causes, in addition to efficient and mechanical ones, must operate in physical processes and operations.
|
Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
Buy the book |
Find it on Amazon.com
|
DOI | 10.1007/978-3-319-67378-3_14 |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
The Leibniz-de Volder Correspondence: With Selections From the Correspondence Between Leibniz and Johann Bernoulli.G. W. Leibniz - 2013 - Yale University Press.
Leibniz's Optics and Contingency in Nature.Jeffrey K. McDonough - 2010 - Perspectives on Science 18 (4):432-455.
View all 6 references / Add more references
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Leibniz's Optics and Contingency in Nature.Jeffrey K. McDonough - 2010 - Perspectives on Science 18 (4):432-455.
Mathematical Biology and the Existence of Biological Laws.Mauro Dorato - 2012 - In D. Dieks, S. Hartmann, T. Uebel & M. Weber (eds.), Probabilities, Laws and Structure. Springer.
Why Did Leibniz Fail to Complete His Dynamics?Stephen Howard - 2017 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 25 (1):22-40.
Leiniz's Dynamics and Contingency in Nature.Margaret D. Wilson - 1981 - In R. S. Woolhouse (ed.), Leibniz, Metaphysics and Philosophy of Science. Oxford University Press.
Leibniz on Teleology and the Intelligibility of Nature.James D. Madden - 2003 - Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 77:173-188.
Was Leibniz Entitled to Possible Worlds?Lynne Rudder Baker - 1985 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 15 (1):57-74.
Inherence and the Immanent Cause in Spinoza.Yitzhak Y. Melamed - 2006 - The Leibniz Review 16:43-52.
Leibniz: A Collection of Critical Essays.Harry G. Frankfurt - 1972 - University of Notre Dame Press.
CHAPTER 28. Leibniz's Dynamics and Contingency in Nature.Margaret Dauler Wilson - 1999 - In Ideas and Mechanism: Essays on Early Modern Philosophy. Princeton University Press. pp. 421-441.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2017-10-15
Total views
260 ( #41,165 of 2,499,260 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
39 ( #22,169 of 2,499,260 )
2017-10-15
Total views
260 ( #41,165 of 2,499,260 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
39 ( #22,169 of 2,499,260 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads