Članek obravnava Leibnizev načrt filozofskega jezika, t. i. »univerzalno karakteristiko«. Najprej izpostavimo dejstvo, da Leibnizev načrt temelji na določenem semiotičnem vidiku matematike, ki v kontekstu novoveške ideje matematizacije vseh znanosti predstavlja novost. Kakorkoli ima Leibnizev drzen načrt resne pomanjkljivosti, ki so nedvomno botrovale temu, da ni nikoli zares začel z njeno izvedbo, pa Leibniz črpa optimizem iz strogo platonistične zasnove svoje epistemologije, v kateri je karakteristika utemeljena. Karakteristika je v sami teoretski zasnovi mogoča le pod pogojem, da se zaveže klasičnemu (...) realizmu in se odpove tisti metodi filozofije zavesti, ki sta jo ustoličila Descartes in Locke. Iz tega, kaj karakteristika obljublja, in iz njene zavezanosti platonizmu pa je videti, da se karakteristika kot jezik narave v ključnih potezah zgleduje po neki tradiciji mišljenja jezika, ki ima svoj začetek v Platonovem Kratilu in ima v Leibnizevem času še vedno svoje zagovornike. (shrink)

This article addresses a pertinent challenge to Scandinavian realism which follows from the widespread perception that the fundamental philosophical premises on which the movement relies, are no longer tenable. Focusing on Alf Ross’s version of Scandinavian realism which has often been at the centre of critical attention, the author argues that Ross’s theory can survive the fall of logical positivism through an exercise of philosophical reconstruction. More specifically, he claims that it is possible to dismount Ross’s realist legal theory almost (...) intact from its commitments to logical positivism and embed it into an alternative naturalist philosophical program that is currently very strong in contemporary philosophy. In so doing, the author applies a narrow Quinean conception of naturalism, also known as replacement naturalism, which differs from a broader inclusive conception which has been applied by other scholars in the field but which leaves the philosophical crisis of Scandinavian realism unsolved. (shrink)

Avtor oriše eno od oblik analitičnega pravnega realizma kor priredje treh osnovnih tez. Po prvi tezi so razlagalne izjave v pravnem govoru pripisovalne izjave brez spoznavne vloge. Po drugi tezi je pravo skupek vplivnih norm, tj. tistih norm, ki so bile dejansko uporabljene v preteklosti in jih bodo v prihodnosti verjetno uporabila pristojna telesa. Po tretji tezi se pravne znanosti kot spoznavne dejavnosti ne sme zamenjevati s pravno stroko. Čeprav se pravna stroka udejstvuje tudi v spoznavnih dejavnostih, njeno delo sestavljajo (...) predvsem nespoznavne dejavnosti, kakršni sta pravno razlaganje in pravotvorje. | Starejša različica tega članka je bila objavljena v Revusu 19 v italijanščini, francoščini in hrvaščini. (shrink)

Le terme « réalisme » en théorie du droit désigne une posture générale, mais demeure assez flou. En réalité, deux écoles de pensée assez radicalement éloignées, quoiqu'à peu près contemporaines, ont contribué à donner les bases du réalisme moderne et actuel : le réalisme américain et le réalisme scandinave. Cette présentation vise à caractériser ces deux écoles, individuellement et comparativement, en fonction de leur contexte d'apparition, de leur conception du réalisme ou du réductionnisme empirique, et en fonction des conséquences de (...) leur mobilisation. (shrink)

Arina Orіekhova's interview with Professor Sergii Secundant, devoted to Leibniz's concepts of time and space, the peculiarities of Michael Fatch's interpretation of those concepts, and various historico-philosophical approaches to understanding Leibniz's philosophy as a whole.

Leibniz’ Briefwechsel wird 1705/06 vor allem von den politischen und militärischen Großereignissen bestimmt, über deren Verlauf sich Leibniz informieren lässt und zu denen er eigene Einschätzungen an seine Korrespondenten weitergibt: Zum Spanischen Erbfolgekrieg, zum Nordischen Krieg und zu der Aussicht des Hauses Hannover auf die Thronfolge in England. Um letztere zu forcieren und eine Einladung der Kurfürstin Sophie nach England zu erzwingen, entwirft und publiziert er im Namen von Rowland Gwynne ein Pamphlet, das in London jedoch das genaue Gegenteil bewirkt (...) und im dortigen Parlament zum Skandal wird. Im Bereich der Philosophie greift Leibniz in die zwischen J. Le Clerc und P. Bayle geführte Diskussion um das Werk von R. Cudworth, The true intellectual system of the Universe, 1678, mit seiner Considération sur les principes de vie, et sur les natures plastiques, ein. Im August 1705 erreicht Leibniz’ Korrespondenz mit den China-Missionaren (J. Bouvet, J. de Fontaney, Ch. Le Gobien, A. Verjus, C. Visdelou) einen letzten Höhepunkt. Der Austausch mit dem Pariser Oratorianer J. Lelong widmet sich weiterhin nebeneinander Bibel-Bibliographie und dem Streit um die Anwendbarkeit des Differentialkalküls. (shrink)

In 1890 C. S. Peirce wrote a review of A. C. Fraser’s recent book on Locke, published to coincide with the bicentennial of Locke’s Essay. Peirce remarked that “Locke’s grand work was substantially this: Men must think for themselves, and genuine thought is an act of perception…. We cannot fail to acknowledge a superior element of truth in the practicality of Locke’s thought, which on the whole should place him nearly upon a level with Descartes.” This estimate of Locke was (...) not the common opinion in England during the nineteenth century. This opinion was reflected in Fraser’s book which, Peirce remarked, could not “be said to be a sympathetic account of [Locke]. The biographer seems to see no charm in his hero, and is perpetually speaking of his want of imagination; which only means he was not given to unpractical dreaming.” Locke had his knowledgeable critics and defenders—for instance Dugald Stewart and John Stuart Mill—but the common opinion ranged from extreme hostility and contempt to condescending criticism of isolated minor points. His style was deplored, his philosophy was called unoriginal and a mere unacknowledged plagiarism of Gassendi and Hobbes; he was said to have so thoroughly misunderstood Descartes that he had merely repeated him with new errors; he was said to owe his philosophical reputation entirely to his advocacy of the popular argument for political freedom or merely to the intellectual circumstances of his time; he was held accountable for Condillac’s rejection of reflection and reason; he was knocked down with a few bare sentences loosely drawn from Leibniz; he was said to have made the mind a puny, passive, mechanical thing. He was called a sensualist, a materialist, a sceptic, an atheist, and a utilitarian though at the same time—and not without contradiction—he was generally, especially by his critics, styled a “great lover of truth,” a plain and simple, well-meaning and religious man. To the nineteenth century Locke meant the Essay, and the history of the Essay was in large measure the history of modern thought, of the eighteenth century. Precisely for this reason there was something nearly sinister about him, in spite of his good personal character. “Locke, himself a clear, humble-minded, patient, reverent, nay, religious man,” said Carlyle, “had paved the way for banishing religion from the world.”. (shrink)

Paralogismen betreffs der Leibnizschen Prädikatlehre werden aufgezeigt und widerlegt. Enthaltensein heißt die Inverse von Ableitung; den zwei Arten von Ableitung, die Leibniz kennt, entsprechen zwei Arten von Enthaltensein. Die beiden Arten von Enthaltensein bieten Leibniz die Möglichkeit zu der logischen und irreduziblen Unterscheidung zwischen notwendigen und bedingten Wahrheiten. Die Unterscheidung zwischen einem Individuum und einer Eigenschaft wird mit mengentheoretischen Methoden und auch mit Hilfe von epistemologischen Begriffen untersucht. Die besondere kategorische Form des Aussagesatzes impliziert, daß es für alle Aussagesätze nur (...) eine einzige Tiefen-Grammatik gibt, welche wesentlich verschiedene Ausdruckweisen von kategorischen Aussagen umfaßt. (shrink)

In contrast to the enthusiastic reception of Kant and to Hegel, scholars in Bulgaria have traditionally not been interested in the philosophy of Leibniz. That is not to say that there has been no interest, for in 1898 the Monadology was translated into Bulgarian along with an introduction and notes. In 1920, I. A. Georgov published a book simply titled Leibniz that is an exposition of his philosophy. Recently there has been growing interest in Leibnizian thinking. Another book, by Y. (...) Pogrebsky, was published in 1973 and a translation of the New Essays on Human Understanding appeared the following year. (shrink)

L’article présente un texte inconnu de J. I. N. Baudouin de Courtenay, publié en 1872 à Poznañ, sous les initiales: „Dr. J. B.”, et intitulé: Du langage et des langues. Baudouin y introduit la distinction fondamentale du structuralisme: langue – langage – parole. Dans l’esprit de vulgarisation, après la lecture des Cours d’Oxford de Müller, il retrace l’histoire de la linguistique avec le comparatisme comme son achèvement et la figure majestueuse de Leibniz. Rejetant la recherche de la langue adamique, il (...) propose une classification des langues non selon leurs racines, mais d’après leurs structures: la structure d’une langue constitue sa „marque caractéristique”. Baudouin discute également le phénomène d’aphasie et se prononce contre la théorie des localisations cérébrales, tout comme Freud dans Zur Auffassung der Aphasien. Le rôle du „pont” entre leurs théories revient à Ernst von Brücke, maître de Freud, auteur des ouvrages traitant de la physiologie de la parole, très appréciés du linguiste. Dès ses premiers travaux de 1865, consacrés au physiologiste tchèque Purkyne, Baudouin se veut continuateur du programme linguistique de l’idéologue Volney, qui est tout simplement l’inverse du projet leibnizien. (shrink)

The relation between primitive and derivative forces may be the hardest problem about the relation between Leibniz's physics and his metaphysics. He holds that derivative forces are modifications of primitive forces, but also that physical forces, which he classifies as derivative forces, belong to bodies, which are aggregates, whereas primitive forces belong to unextended perceiving substances and constitute their essence. This chapter addresses this problem, arguing that a major part of it can be solved on the supposition that physical events (...) are only phenomena, and hence ultimately determined by modifications of the primitive forces of perceiving substances. (shrink)

Leibniz held that even if we had no proof of the possibility premise of the ontological argument, a presumption would justify accepting it. He had an extensive theory of presumptions, as a part of practical philosophy, originating in his jurisprudence. He even proposed a formal proof that presumption favors possibility. This chapter examines ways of trying to overcome the difficulty that in the case of a necessary being, where possibility of existence and possibility of nonexistence exclude each other, presumptions of (...) possibility seem to cancel each other out, but concludes that prospects of escape from the problem are not promising. (shrink)

These three impressive volumes seem likely to be for some time the standard collection of Leibniz’s writings in Italian translation. Replacing two volumes of 1967-68, with the same title and publisher, which were edited by Domenico Omero Bianca, the new translation by Massimo Mugnai and Enrico Pasini offers the Italian reader an outstandingly comprehensive selection of Leibniz’s works in a presentation richly though unobtrusively illuminated by the latest scholarship. My chief aim in this review will be to give scholars working (...) in English an idea of the lines of study suggested by this new product of Italian scholarship, and the resources available in it. (shrink)

These three impressive volumes seem likely to be for some time the standard collection of Leibniz’s writings in Italian translation. Replacing two volumes of 1967-68, with the same title and publisher, which were edited by Domenico Omero Bianca, the new translation by Massimo Mugnai and Enrico Pasini offers the Italian reader an outstandingly comprehensive selection of Leibniz’s works in a presentation richly though unobtrusively illuminated by the latest scholarship. My chief aim in this review will be to give scholars working (...) in English an idea of the lines of study suggested by this new product of Italian scholarship, and the resources available in it. (shrink)

Leibniz denied, famously, that any possible individual exists in more than one possible world, so that a man who in fact never marries could not have married and still been himself. He claimed that this follows from his thesis that the predicate of every true affirmative proposition is contained in some way in the concept of its subject and his associated thesis that the definitive concept of each individual substance is complete. This chapter argues that the purely formal aims of (...) logical theory involved in the predicate containment and complete concept theses do not in fact require the denial of counterfactual or transworld identity. (shrink)

Argues that Leibniz's denial of counterfactual or transworld identity is grounded in metaphysical considerations – specifically in his belief in a coalescence of conceptual connections and causal connections, which is marked by his revival and adaptation of the Scholastic Aristotelian notion of substantial form. Exploration of Leibniz's views about miracles and about perceptual relations leads to the conclusion that his denial of counterfactual identity does not claim intrinsic metaphysical necessity, but appeals to considerations of God's wisdom and goodness; and that (...) he can deny transworld identity only on the assumption that only aggregates of mutually harmonious substances count as worlds. (shrink)

This book brings together thirteen articles on the most discussed thinkers in the rationalist movement: Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, and Malebranche. These articles address the topics in metaphysics and epistemology that figure most prominently in contemporary work on these philosophers. The articles have all been produced since 1980, and their authors are among the most respected in the field.

The author's previous works on Descartes, Malebranche, and other rationalists, as well as her critical editions of the Méditations and De la Recherche de la Vérité have insured the rich documentation and the interpretative density of this little treatise. However, its main feature is not historical erudition because for this author, as for most contemporary first rank French commentators, Descartes is living still in contemporary work through the freshness and renewed relevance of many of his themes. The part of this (...) study devoted to Descartes is centered upon the Méditations though it offers frequent excursions into the methodical works. In many ways it is a scale model of the Méditations, showing the philosophical scope of this inexhaustible metaphysical masterpiece. The second part has chapters on Reason and Method, God, Man and World, and Human Freedom, with an enlightening parallel treatment of these topics in Spinoza, Malebranche, and Leibniz. A useful bibliography and a chronology of the principal works studied complete this compact volume.--A. M. (shrink)

Die folgende Untersuchung ist eine Antwort auf die Frage nach dem Ort des 'Irrationalisten' Johann Gottfried Herder innerhalb des Kontinuums der Aufklärung. Aus dem Inhalt: I. Ästhetik als Desiderat der Gnoseologie A. Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz B. Christian Wolff C. Alexander Gottlieb Baumgarten II. Herders Ästhetik-Kritik A. Herders Kritik der Philosophie der "Wortwelten" B. Herders Auseinandersetzung mit Baumgarten III. Herders Ästhetik-Entwurf A. Zum Konzept der Prägnanz B. Haptik und Skulptur, Optik und Malerei C. Poesie - Phantasie und Dichtungsvermögen IV. Herders Entwurf (...) einer Geschichtsphilosophie A. Der Status der Geschichtsphilosophie B. Aisthesis und Geschichte. (shrink)

Descartes's general rule that “whatever is clearly and distinctly perceived is true” has traditionally been criticized on two closely related grounds. As Leibniz, for example, puts it, clearness and distinctness are of no value as criteria of truth unless we have criteria of clearness and distinctness; but Descartes gives none. And consequently, the standards of judgment which the rule in fact evokes are purely subjective and psychological. There must hence be set up analytic, logical “marks” by means of which it (...) can infallibly and without arbitrariness be recognized whether any ideas or propositions are or are not clear and distinct. (shrink)

The Belnap–Dunn logic is a well-known and well-studied four-valued logic, but until recently little has been known about its extensions, i.e. stronger logics in the same language, called super-Belnap logics here. We give an overview of several results on these logics which have been proved in recent works by Přenosil and Rivieccio. We present Hilbert-style axiomatizations, describe reduced matrix models, and give a description of the lattice of super-Belnap logics and its connections with graph theory. We adopt the point of (...) view ofAlgebraic Logic, exploring applications of the general theory of algebraization of logics to the super-Belnap family. In this respect we establish a number of new results, including a description of the algebraic counterparts, Leibniz filters, and strong versions of super-Belnap logics, as well as the classification of these logics within the Leibniz and Frege hierarchies. (shrink)

This paper presents a unified framework that explains and extends the already successful applications of the Leibniz operator, the Suszko operator, and the Tarski operator in recent developments in abstract algebraic logic. To this end, we refine Czelakowski’s notion of an S-compatibility operator, and introduce the notion of coherent family of S-compatibility operators, for a sentential logic S. The notion of coherence is a restricted property of commutativity with inverse images by surjective homomorphisms, which is satisfied by both the Leibniz (...) and the Suszko operators. We generalize several constructions and results already existing for the mentioned operators; in particular, the well-known classes of algebras associated with a logic through each of them, and the notions of full generalized model of a logic and a special kind of S-filters. We obtain a General Correspondence Theorem, extending the well-known one from the theory of protoalgebraic logics to arbitrary logics and to more general operators, and strengthening its formulation. We apply the general results to the Leibniz and the Suszko operators, and obtain several characterizations of the main classes of logics in the Leibniz hierarchy by the form of their full generalized models, by old and new properties of the Leibniz operator, and by the behaviour of the Suszko operator. Some of these characterizations complete or extend known ones, for some classes in the hierarchy, thus offering an integrated approach to the Leibniz hierarchy that uncovers some new, nice symmetries. (shrink)

L'inédite que nous offrons ici, c'est un écrit de Leibniz où il fait mention des affirmations et problèmes qu'il a eu présent dans sa théorie de la continuité. Il est donc un inventaire détaillé des fonts leibniziennes avec rapport au continu. Nonobstant, plus que fermer les discussions autour de ce qu'on a coutume d'appeller les que Leibniz a reçu, cette édition peut ouvrir nouvelles lignes de recherche, à cause de la nature, quelque fois surprenant, des fonts cités.

La Consequence de l'Hypothese generalle écrit à l'entoure de 1673-1675 c'est un texte sur problèmes de pneumatique où Leibniz énonce par première fois sa. Malgré qu'on peut discuter si nous sommes, en parlant strictement, face à un cas de la loi de continuité, cette loi, oubliée par les spécialistes et, il semble, par Leibniz lui même, doit nous obliger à nous retracer en grand part l'interprétation traditionnelle sur le continu chez Leibniz.

Introduction -- Leibniz, historicism, and the plague of Islam -- Kant, Islam, and the preservation of boundaries -- Herder's Arab fantasies -- Keeping the Turks out of islam : Goethe's Ottoman plan -- Friedrich Schlegel and the emptying of Islam -- Hegel and the disappearance of Islam -- Marx the Moor -- Nietzsche's peace with Islam.

This concise overview of the perception of Islam in eight of the most important German thinkers of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries allows a new and fascinating investigation of how these thinkers, within their own bodies of work, often espoused contradicting ideas about Islam and their nearest Muslim neighbors. Exploring a variety of 'neat compartmentalizations' at work in the representations of Islam, as well as distinct vocabularies employed by these key intellectuals, Ian Almond parses these vocabularies to examine the importance (...) of Islam in the very history of German thought. Almond further demonstrates the ways in which German philosophers such as Hegel, Kant, and Marx repeatedly ignored information about the Muslim world that did not harmonize with the particular landscapes they were trying to paint – a fact which in turn makes us reflect on what it means when a society possesses 'knowledge' of a foreign culture. (shrink)

The twelve studies here are arranged in three distinct groups – Arabic and Judaeo-Arabic philosophy, Jewish mysticism, and modern philosophy. One theme that appears in various forms and from different angles in the first two sections is that of ‘Images of the Divine’. It figures not only in the account of mystical imagery but also in the discussion of the ‘Know thyself’ motif, and is closely allied to the subject-matter of the studies dealing with man’s ascent to the vision of (...) God and his ultimate felicity. In the third section three thinkers are discussed: the English Deist, William Wollaston, who is shown to be steeped in the medieval Jewish traditions of philosophy and mysticism; Moses Mendelssohn, the philosopher of eighteenth-century Enlightenment, whose thesis asserting Spinoza’s influence on Leibniz’s doctrine of the pre-established Harmony is investigated critically; and Franz Rosenzweig, the most brilliant religious philosopher in twentieth-century Jewry, whose notion of History is analysed. Originally published in 1969, this is an important work of Jewish philosophy. (shrink)

What could be more certain than the fact that 2 plus 2 equals 4? Since the time of the ancient Greeks mathematicians have believed there is little---if anything---as unequivocal as a proved theorem. In fact, mathematical statements that can be proved true have often been regarded as a more solid foundation for a system of thought than any maxim about morals or even physical objects. The 17th-century German mathematician and philosopher Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz even envisioned a ``calculus'' of reasoning such (...) that all disputes could one day be settled with the words ``Gentlemen, let us compute!'' By the beginning of this century symbolic logic had progressed to such an extent that the German mathematician David Hilbert declared that all mathematical questions are in principle decidable, and he confidently set out to codify once and for all the methods of mathematical reasoning. (shrink)

In popular opinion, Leibniz’s work on the problem of evil is thought to begin and end with the claim that this is the best of all possible worlds, as if this were all that Leibniz needed to defend the justice of God. In many places, however, Leibniz is concerned to remove from God the actual agency for the evils in the world. By examining Leibniz’s uses of the concept of divine permission, one might find a Leibniz for whom the best-possible-world (...) thesis answers only some of the difficulties regarding God’s relationship to the evils in the world. Leibniz introduces permission early in his career, in the manuscript dialogue, Confessio philosophi, written in the early 1670s. Two and a half decades later, Pierre Bayle offered a critique of traditional uses of permission in his Dictionnaire historique et critique. Though he certainly had not read Leibniz’s manuscript, the arguments against the use of permission in the Dictionnaire offer a useful foil for understanding the role permission plays in Leibniz’s early thought. Bayle’s objections will be discussed first. Once these are explained, they will be used to argue that Leibniz’s doctrine of permission, as presented in the Confessio philosophi, adds nothing to the best-possible-world thesis. As the reasons for this are explained, it will become obvious that this is not the case for the mature Leibniz of the Essais de Théodicée. Thus, there is a Leibniz for whom the best-possible-world thesis answers only some of the theological problems posed by evil, but that is not the Leibniz of the early Confessio philosophi. (shrink)

Se plantea la cuestión del papel de la armonía en la concepción de la racionalidad de Leibniz. Se sitúa esta noción en el marco de la metafísica de la individualidad sistémica, y aparece en dos lugares concretos. En primer lugar en el eje categorial uniformidad-diversi­dad, como principio de equilibrio entre ambos polos. Y en segundo lugar, aparece la noción de armonía en el nivel último de la racionalidad, concretamente en plano de la lógica de los principios. Este nivel se rige (...) por el principio general del orden, y precisamente este principio es explicado por Leibniz frecuentemente en relación con la armonía. (shrink)

Over the past decades a number of scholars have identified Johann Heinrich Bisterfeld as one of the most decisive early influences on Leibniz. In particular, the impressive similarity between their conceptions of universal harmony has been stressed. Since the issue of relations is at the heart of both Bisterfeld and Leibniz’s doctrines of universal harmony, the extent of the similarity between their doctrines will depend, however, on Bisterfeld and Leibniz’s respective theories of relations, and especially on their ontologies of relations. (...) This paper attempts to determine in more detail whether Bisterfeld’s ontology of relations contains at least the germ of the defining features of the ontology of relations later developed by Leibniz. It comes to the conclusion that, although Bisterfeld’s theory of relations is not as fully developed and explicit as that of Leibniz, it does contain all the key “ingredients” of it. (shrink)

Over the past decades a number of scholars have identified Johann Heinrich Bisterfeld as one of the most decisive early influences on Leibniz. In particular, the impressive similarity between their conceptions of universal harmony has been stressed. Since the issue of relations is at the heart of both Bisterfeld and Leibniz’s doctrines of universal harmony, the extent of the similarity between their doctrines will depend, however, on Bisterfeld and Leibniz’s respective theories of relations, and especially on their ontologies of relations. (...) This paper attempts to determine in more detail whether Bisterfeld’s ontology of relations contains at least the germ of the defining features of the ontology of relations later developed by Leibniz. It comes to the conclusion that, although Bisterfeld’s theory of relations is not as fully developed and explicit as that of Leibniz, it does contain all the key “ingredients” of it. (shrink)

Over the past decades a number of scholars have identified Johann Heinrich Bisterfeld as one of the most decisive early influences on Leibniz. In particular, the impressive similarity between their conceptions of universal harmony has been stressed. Since the issue of relations is at the heart of both Bisterfeld and Leibniz’s doctrines of universal harmony, the extent of the similarity between their doctrines will depend, however, on Bisterfeld and Leibniz’s respective theories of relations, and especially on their ontologies of relations. (...) This paper attempts to determine in more detail whether Bisterfeld’s ontology of relations contains at least the germ of the defining features of the ontology of relations later developed by Leibniz. It comes to the conclusion that, although Bisterfeld’s theory of relations is not as fully developed and explicit as that of Leibniz, it does contain all the key “ingredients” of it. (shrink)

As one might expect, throughout his life Leibniz assumed an attitude of religious toleration both ad intra (that is, toward Christians of other confessions) and ad extra (that is, toward non-Christians, notably Muslims). The aim of this paper is to uncover the philosophical and theological foundations of Leibniz’s views on this subject. Focusing in particular on his epistolary exchange with the French Catholic convert Paul Pellisson-Fontanier, I argue that neither toleration ad intra nor toleration ad extra is grounded for Leibniz (...) in indifference toward the content of revealed religion. On the contrary, Leibniz remained convinced of the objective truth of the Christian religion as it is handed down by the millennia-old tradition of the truly universal church. In his view, reasons internal to the very nature of salvation and to the conception of God and man explicitly contained in or, at least, in accord with this tradition present religious toleration as the only justifiable answer to the differences among religions. (shrink)

This paper employs the revised conception of Leibniz emerging from recent research to reassess critically the ‘radical spiritual revolution’ which, according to Alexandre Koyré’s landmark book, From the closed world to the infinite universe was precipitated in the seventeenth century by the revolutions in physics, astronomy, and cosmology. While conceding that the cosmological revolution necessitated a reassessment of the place of value-concepts within cosmology, it argues that this reassessment did not entail a spiritual revolution of the kind assumed by Koyré, (...) in which ‘value-concepts, such as perfection, harmony, meaning and aim’ were shed from the conception of the structure of the universe altogether. On the contrary, thanks to his pioneering intuition of the distinction between physical and metaphysical levels of explanation, Leibniz saw with great clarity that a scientific explanation of the universe which rejected the ‘closed world’ typical of Aristotelian cosmology did not necessarily require the abandonment of key metaphysical doctrines underlying the Aristotelian conception of the universe. Indeed the canon of value-concepts mentioned by Koyré—meaning, aim, perfection and harmony—reads like a list of the most important concepts underlying the Leibnizian conception of the metaphysical structure of the universe. Moreover, Leibniz’s universe, far from being a universe without God—because, as Clarke insinuated, it does not need intervention from God—is a universe which in its deepest ontological fabric is interwoven with the presence of God.Author Keywords: Leibniz; Koyré; Clarke; Universe; Cosmology; Harmony. (shrink)