Has anyone here ever read Leibniz's monadology? What did you think of it? I think that it is interesting that he thinks that the real atoms of the universe have no parts to them and essentially are like souls.
Has anyone here ever read Leibniz's monadology? What did you think of it? I think that it is interesting that he thinks that the real atoms of the universe have no parts to them and essentially are like souls.
I did my undergraduate thesis on Leibniz. He is one of the greatest geniuses to have ever lived, and his metaphysics, if read symbolically rather than scientifically, is compelling. He has very nice treatments of the problem of evil, of the balance of sin and grace, and of freedom of choice generally.
As for nomads being like souls, I would rather say they are like spirits. Their defining characteristic is self-determination and dynamism. They express only the present moment. Higher nomads also possess instinct and memory and can clearly express the past. Human persons for Leibniz are unique in being able to expect the future.
My favorite aspect of the monadology is that each monad in itself is a mirror of the entire universe. If we could see but one substance as God sees it, we would see the whole world (time and space inclusive). Again, humans differ from the rest of creation as mirrors differ from those who gaze into them.
It would be useless to read his monadology symbolically. Leibniz did not mean to write a poem of sorts, rather he wrote what he considered to be scientific work.
"As for nomads being like souls, I would rather say they are like spirits". Only if you consider the two to be different things.
"My favorite aspect of the monadology is that each monad in itself is a mirror of the entire universe". He basically discovered holography (i.e. the whole is in each part). I would have to agree with you that that is my favourite part of the monadology as well.
1) He wrote what he considered to be scientific work, but not what many 21st century thinkers would consider to be scientific work. It is an idealist philosophy, so it cannot be demonstrated empirically but only reasoned rationally. I meant "symbolic" in the sense of mathematics and metaphysics.
2) I do consider soul / spirit to be two different things. Whether you want to divide the names or not, the two ideas I have need to be differentiated. Soul, usually from the Greek psyche, has much more to do with mental states; whereas, spirit pneuma is more a principle of dynamism/movement. For Leibniz, every monad has spontaneity (spirit), but only higher forms more clearly express past and future states (soul). Admittedly, the soul / spirit language is mine, but I worry since English usually suffers from an uncritical use of those terms.
3) The definition of God as "that circle whose center is everywhere and whose circumference is nowhere" is ubiquitous and ancient. I think Leibniz goes further, but his is a development, not a discovery ex nihilo.
1) Ok since you cleared that up, I agree with you entirely.
2) Personally I consider both soul and spirit to be the same thing essentially. I can see how people can cut up the two terms though (i.e. check out Pythagoras tetraktys).
3) Don't quote me but I think that this quote comes from Socrates. Furthermore the image of a monad is actually a circle with a dot in the centre.
Great interview with Steve Cram - says Jakob has no chance of WRs this year
I’m a D2 female runner. Our coach explicitly told us not to visit LetsRun forums.
Guys between age of 45 and 55 do you think about death or does it seem far away
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
adizero Road to Records with Yomif Kejelcha, Agnes Ngetich, Hobbs Kessler & many more is Saturday
Article: Director of BU track and field, cross country steps down following abuse allegations