Primary Sources

• References to Leibniz’s texts are to C.I. Gerhardt, ed., Die Philosophische Schriften von Leibniz, 7 vols., Hildesheim: Olms, 1965. (Scholar)
• Page references to the New Essays cited as “A” are to volume IV Reihe 6 of the still incomplete Academy edition of Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz: Sametliche Schriften und Briefe, ed. Akademie der Wissenschaften, Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1923–.
• References to Ariew and Garber are to G.W. Leibniz: Philosophical Essays, Roger Ariew and Daniel Garber (tr. and ed.), Indianapolis, Hackett, 1989.
• References to Riley are to Patrick Riley (tr. and ed.), Leibniz: Political Writings, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.
• References to Kant’s texts follow the Academy edition (Gesammelte Schriften, ed., Akademie der Wissenschaften, Berlin: Reimer, de Gruyter, 1900–) by volume and page. (Scholar)
• References to the Critique of Pure Reason (KRV) are to the first (A) and second (B) edition. Where the current English translation, tr. and ed. by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998, was directly cited, it is noted as CPR.

Secondary Sources

• Allison, Henry (ed.), 1973, The Kant-Eberhard Controversy, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. (Scholar)
• Beck, Lewis White, 1969, Early German Philosophy: Kant and his Predecessors, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. (Scholar)
• Brandt, Reinhard, 1999, Kommentar zu Kants “Anthropologie in pragmatischer Hinsicht”, Hamburg: Felix Meiner. (Scholar)
• Butts, Robert, 1984, Kant and the Double Government Methodology, Dordrecht: D. Reidel. (Scholar)
• Fonnesu, Luca, 2008, “The Problem of Theodicy,” in The Cambridge History of Eighteenth Century Philosophy (Volume 2), Knud Haakonssen (ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 749–778. (Scholar)
• Friedman, Michael, 2013, Kant’s Construction of Nature, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Scholar)
• Goldenbaum, Ursula, 2021, “How Kant was Never a Wolffian, or, Estimating Forces to Enforce Influxus Physicus,” in Brandon C. Look (ed.), Leibniz and Kant, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 27–56. (Scholar)
• Guyer, Paul, 2011, “Kantian Communities,” in Charlton Payne and Lucas Thorpe (eds.), Kant and the Concept of Community, Rochester: University of Rochester Press, 88–120. (Scholar)
• Hagengruber, Ruth, 2019, “Émilie Du Châtelet zwischen Leibniz und Kant,” in Ruthe Hagengruber and Hartmut Hecht (eds.), Emilie Du Châtelet und die deutsche Aufklärung. Springer VS, Wiesbaden, 173–195. (Scholar)
• Jauernig, Anja, 2008, “Kant’s Critique of the Leibnizian Philosophy: contra the Leibnizians, but pro Leibniz,” in Daniel Garber and Beatrice Longuenesse (eds.), Kant and the Early Moderns, Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 41–63. (Scholar)
• Kleingeld, Pauline, 2007, “Kant’s Second Thoughts on Race,” Philosophical Quarterly, 57: 573–92. (Scholar)
• Laywine, Alison, 2021, “Leibniz and the Transcendental Deduction,” in Brandon C. Look (ed.), Leibniz and Kant, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 112–141. (Scholar)
• Look, Brandon C., 2021, “Kant’s Leibniz: A Historical and Philosophical Study,” in Brandon C. Look (ed.), Leibniz and Kant, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1–26. (Scholar)
• Massimi, Michaela and Angela Breitenbach (eds.), 2017, Kant and the Laws of Nature, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Scholar)
• Menzer, Paul, 1911, Kants Lehre von der Entwicklung in Natur und Geschichte, Berlin: De Gruyter. (Scholar)
• Mittelstrass, Juergen, 1985, “Leibniz and Kant on Mathematical and Philosophical Knowledge,” in Kathleen Okruhlik and James Robert Brown (eds.), The Natural Philosophy of Leibniz, Dordrecht: Reidel, 227–262. (Scholar)
• Paull, R. Cranston, 1992, “Leibniz and the Miracle of Freedom,” Noûs, 26(2): 218–35. (Scholar)
• Rateau, Paul, 2009, L’Idee de Theodicee de Leibniz a Kant. Heritage, Transformations, Critiques, Wiesbaden: Steiner.
• Rescher, Nicholas, 2013, “Leibniz and the World’s Improvability,” in On Leibniz, Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press. (Scholar)
• Rumore, Paula, 2016, “Mechanism and Materialism in early Modern German Philosophy,” in Varieties of Early Modern Materialism, Falk Wunderlich and Patricia Springborg (eds.), British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 24(5): 917–39. (Scholar)
• Rusnock, Paul and George, Rolf, 1995, “A Last Shot at Kant and Incongruent Counterparts,” Kant-Studien, 86: 257–277. (Scholar)
• Sassen, Brigitte, 2015, “18th Century German Philosophy Prior to Kant,” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2015 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2015/entries/18thGerman-preKant/>. (Scholar)
• Schonrich, Gerhard, 1992, “Zahmung des Bosen? Uberlegungen zu Kant vor dem Hintergrund der Leibnizschen Theodizee,” Zeitschrift fuerphilosophische Forschung, 46: 205–223. (Scholar)
• Tonelli, Giorgio, 1974, “Leibniz on Innate Ideas and the Early Reactions to the Publication of the Nouveaux Essais [1765],” Journal of the History of Philosophy, 12: 437–54. (Scholar)
• Vanzo, Alberto, 2018, “Leibniz on Innate Ideas and Kant on the Origin of the Categories,” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie, 100(1): 19–45. (Scholar)
• Watkins, Eric, 2006, “On the Necessity and Nature of Simples: Leibniz, Wolff, Baumgarten, and the Pre-critical Kant,” Oxford Studies in Early Modern Philosophy, 3: 261–314. (Scholar)
• Wilson, Catherine, 2016, “Leibniz on War and Peace and the Common Good,” in Fuer unser Glueck und das Glueck anderer (6 volumes), Wenchao Li, Helena Iwasinski und Simona Noreik (eds.), Hildesheim: Olms, I, 33–62. (Scholar)
• Wunderlich, Falk, 2016, “Materialism in late Enlightenment Germany: A Neglected Tradition Reconsidered,” in Falk Wunderlich and Patricia Springborg (eds.), British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 24(5): 940–62. (Scholar)
• Zoeller, Guenter, 1989, “From Innate to ‘A priori,’: Kant’s Radical Transformation of a Cartesian-Leibnizian Legacy,” Monist, 72: 222–235. (Scholar)