Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz
Le monde est fait d’innombrables unités simples semblables à des esprits, rien n’arrive sans raison, et Dieu a choisi le meilleur des mondes possibles.
Repères
Polymathe : les monades, l’harmonie préétablie et le « meilleur des mondes possibles ».
Idées clés
- Monadologie
- Principe de raison suffisante
- Meilleur des mondes possibles
Ouvrir dans la carte stellaire
Influence
Influences reçues de 11
Confucius
influencé par ✓
Leibniz read Confucius in the Jesuit Latin version Confucius Sinarum Philosophus (1687) and in Novissima Sinica (1697) praised Chinese practical and civil philosophy. G. W. Leibniz, Novissima Sinica (1697), preface; P. Couplet et al., Confucius Sinarum Philosophus (1687); D. E. Mungello, Leibniz and Confucianism: The Search for Accord (1977)
Attestation: aussi dans Wikidata · Wikidata
Confucius › selon la tradition 551–479 av. J.-C.
Platon
influencé par ✓
Leibniz paraphrased Plato’s Phaedo and Theaetetus (1676) and, defending innate ideas against Locke, called his own system closer to Plato’s (New Essays, written 1704). G. W. Leibniz, paraphrases of Phaedo and Theaetetus (Paris, 1676; Akademie-Ausgabe VI.3); Nouveaux essais sur l’entendement humain (written 1704, publ. 1765), preface
Platon › 428–348 av. J.-C.
Aristote
influencé par ✓
Leibniz rehabilitated Aristotle’s substantial forms against the mechanists in the Discourse on Metaphysics (1686) and later called his simple substances ‘entelechies’ (Monadology, 1714). G. W. Leibniz, Discours de métaphysique (1686); Monadologie (1714); SEP “Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz”
Aristote › 384–322 av. J.-C.
Moïse Maïmonide
influencé par ✓
Leibniz excerpted and annotated Buxtorf’s Latin translation of Maimonides’ Guide, remarking that it was more philosophical than he had expected, and cited its reckoning of good and evil (Guide III.12) in the Theodicy (1710, §§262–263). Leibniz, notes on Doctor perplexorum (between 1677 and 1691), A VI 4, 2484–2497; Theodicy (1710), §§262–263; L. Strickland, Leibniz’ Anthology of Maimonides’ Guide (2022)
Moïse Maïmonide › 1138–1204
Thomas Hobbes
influencé par ✓
The young Leibniz wrote to Hobbes in 1670 and built his early physics on Hobbes’ conatus, the beginning of motion (Theory of Abstract Motion, 1671). G. W. Leibniz, letter to T. Hobbes (1670); Theoria motus abstracti (1671); SEP “Leibniz’s Philosophy of Physics”
Attestation: aussi dans Wikidata · Wikidata
Thomas Hobbes › 1588–1679
Nicolas Malebranche
influencé par ✓
Leibniz, who met Malebranche in Paris in 1675, agreed that created substances do not act on one another, but replaced occasional causes by pre-established harmony (New System, 1695). G. W. Leibniz, Système nouveau de la nature (Journal des savants, 1695); M. R. Antognazza, Leibniz: An Intellectual Biography (2009); SEP “Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz”
Attestation: aussi dans Wikidata · Wikidata
Nicolas Malebranche › 1638–1715
Tout afficher (11)Afficher moins
Zhu Xi
influencé par contesté
In his Discourse on the Natural Theology of the Chinese (1716) Leibniz likened Zhu Xi’s li to God; he knew it only from missionaries, and influence is disputed. G. W. Leibniz, Discours sur la théologie naturelle des Chinois (letter to N. Remond, 1716); N. Longobardi, Traité sur quelques points de la religion des Chinois (1701); D. E. Mungello, Leibniz and Confucianism (1977)
Attestation: brouillon IA
Zhu Xi › 1130–1200
Raymond Lulle
influencé par ✓
In the Dissertation on the Combinatorial Art (1666) Leibniz took up and generalised Llull’s art of combining basic concepts, aiming at an alphabet of human thoughts. G. W. Leibniz, Dissertatio de arte combinatoria (1666); SEP “Ramon Llull”
Raymond Lulle › v. 1232–1316
Lorenzo Valla
influencé par
At the end of the Theodicy (1710) Leibniz retold Valla’s dialogue On Free Will and continued its fable to reconcile divine foreknowledge with human freedom. G. W. Leibniz, Essais de Théodicée (1710); L. Valla, De libero arbitrio; SEP “Lorenzo Valla”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Lorenzo Valla › v. 1407–1457
Francisco Suárez
influencé par ✓
Leibniz recalled reading scholastics such as Suárez in his youth; his dissertation On the Principle of Individuation (1663) defended, with Suárez, individuation by the whole entity. G. W. Leibniz, Disputatio metaphysica de principio individui (1663); Vita Leibnitii a se ipso breviter delineata; SEP “Francisco Suárez”
Francisco Suárez › 1548–1617
Anne Conway
influencé par
Leibniz, who knew her Principles (1690) through van Helmont, wrote in 1697 that his views came ‘somewhat close’ to Conway’s; how far she shaped him is debated. G. W. Leibniz, letter to T. Burnett (1697); A. Conway, Principia philosophiae antiquissimae et recentissimae (1690); SEP “Anne Conway”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Anne Conway › 1631–1679
A influencé 14
Christian Wolff
a influencé ✓
Wolff built his German Metaphysics (1720) on Leibniz’s principles of contradiction and sufficient reason, but accepted pre-established harmony only as the most probable hypothesis. C. Wolff, Vernünfftige Gedancken von Gott, der Welt und der Seele des Menschen (1720); Leibniz–Wolff correspondence (1704–1716), ed. C. I. Gerhardt (1860); SEP “Christian Wolff”
Christian Wolff › 1679–1754
Émilie du Châtelet
a influencé ✓
In the Institutions de physique (1740) Du Châtelet grounded Newtonian physics on Leibniz’s principles of contradiction and sufficient reason and defended his measure of living force. É. Du Châtelet, Institutions de physique (1740; 2nd ed. 1742); SEP “Émilie Du Châtelet”
Attestation: aussi dans Wikidata · Wikidata
Émilie du Châtelet › 1706–1749
Moses Mendelssohn
a influencé ✓
Mendelssohn defended Leibniz’s metaphysics; in Pope a Metaphysician! (1755, with Lessing) he set Leibniz’s optimism apart from the poetic optimism of Pope’s Essay on Man. M. Mendelssohn and G. E. Lessing, Pope ein Metaphysiker! (1755); SEP “Moses Mendelssohn”
Attestation: aussi dans Wikidata · Wikidata
Moses Mendelssohn › 1729–1786
Bertrand Russell
a influencé ✓
Russell argued that Leibniz’s metaphysics follows from a few logical premises, above all the subject–predicate doctrine of propositions (A Critical Exposition of the Philosophy of Leibniz, 1900). B. Russell, A Critical Exposition of the Philosophy of Leibniz (1900); SEP “Bertrand Russell”; SEP “Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz”
Bertrand Russell › 1872–1970
Martin Heidegger
a influencé
Heidegger took Leibniz’s principle of sufficient reason as a guide to the question of ground, from his logic lectures of 1928 to Der Satz vom Grund (1957). M. Heidegger, Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Logik im Ausgang von Leibniz (lectures 1928, GA 26); Vom Wesen des Grundes (1929); Der Satz vom Grund (1957)
Attestation: aussi dans InPhO · InPhO
Martin Heidegger › 1889–1976
Gilles Deleuze
a influencé ✓
In The Fold (1988) Deleuze read Leibniz as the Baroque philosopher whose monads express the whole world from a point of view and whose matter is infinitely folded. G. Deleuze, Le pli. Leibniz et le baroque (1988); SEP “Gilles Deleuze”; SEP “Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz”
Attestation: aussi dans Wikidata · Wikidata
Gilles Deleuze › 1925–1995
Tout afficher (14)Afficher moins
Anton Wilhelm Amo
a influencé contesté
Amo grew up at the Wolfenbüttel court, whose library Leibniz directed until 1716; whether Leibniz shaped his De humanae mentis apatheia (1734) is disputed. A. W. Amo, De humanae mentis apatheia (1734); D. Menn and J. E. H. Smith (eds.), Anton Wilhelm Amo’s Philosophical Dissertations on Mind and Body (2020); J. E. H. Smith, Nature, Human Nature, and Human Difference (2015)
Attestation: brouillon IA
Anton Wilhelm Amo › v. 1703–1759
Johann Gottfried von Herder
a influencé ✓
Herder took over Leibniz’s concept of living force and his doctrine of obscure perceptions, on which On the Cognition and Sensation of the Human Soul (1778) builds. J. G. Herder, Vom Erkennen und Empfinden der menschlichen Seele (1778); SEP “Johann Gottfried von Herder”
Attestation: aussi dans Wikidata · Wikidata
Johann Gottfried von Herder › 1744–1803
Bernard Bolzano
a influencé
Bolzano, called ‘the Bohemian Leibniz’ in his lifetime, developed a monadology of simple substances which, unlike Leibniz’s monads, have location in space (Athanasia, 1827). B. Bolzano, Athanasia oder Gründe für die Unsterblichkeit der Seele (1827); P. Simons, “Bolzano’s Monadology”; SEP “Bernard Bolzano”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Bernard Bolzano › 1781–1848
Gabriel Tarde
a influencé
Tarde renewed Leibniz’s monadology as a sociology: every thing is a society of small, numerous elements, and ‘to exist is to differ’ (‘Monadologie et sociologie’, 1893). G. Tarde, “Monadologie et sociologie” (1893), in Essais et mélanges sociologiques (1895); B. Latour, “Gabriel Tarde and the End of the Social” (2002); SEP “Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Gabriel Tarde › 1843–1904
Gottlob Frege
a influencé
Frege presented his Begriffsschrift (1879) as a step towards Leibniz’s universal characteristic and adopted Leibniz’s definition of identity as substitutability salva veritate (Grundlagen der Arithmetik, 1884). G. Frege, Begriffsschrift (1879), preface; Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik (1884); SEP “Leibniz’s Influence on 19th Century Logic”; SEP “Gottlob Frege”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Gottlob Frege › 1848–1925
Ernst Cassirer
a influencé
Cassirer’s first book reconstructed Leibniz’s system from its mathematical and scientific foundations (Leibniz’ System in seinen wissenschaftlichen Grundlagen, 1902); he also edited Leibniz’s main writings (1904–06). E. Cassirer, Leibniz’ System in seinen wissenschaftlichen Grundlagen (1902); G. W. Leibniz, Hauptschriften zur Grundlegung der Philosophie, ed. E. Cassirer (1904–06); SEP “Ernst Cassirer”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Ernst Cassirer › 1874–1945
Kurt Gödel
a influencé
Gödel studied Leibniz intensively and, like him, sought to show first that God is possible, in a modal ontological proof built on positive properties (notes 1970; publ. 1987). K. Gödel, “Ontological Proof” (1970), in Collected Works III (1995); J. H. Sobel, “Gödel’s Ontological Proof”, in J. J. Thomson (ed.), On Being and Saying (1987); SEP “Kurt Gödel”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Kurt Gödel › 1906–1978
David Lewis
a influencé
Lewis took up Leibniz’s possible worlds but as concrete, real worlds; his world-bound individuals with counterparts are often compared to Leibniz’s view (On the Plurality of Worlds, 1986). D. Lewis, “Counterpart Theory and Quantified Modal Logic”, Journal of Philosophy 65 (1968); On the Plurality of Worlds (1986); SEP “David Lewis”
Attestation: aussi dans InPhO · InPhO
David Lewis › 1941–2001
Critique
Critique réciproque 1
Pierre Bayle ⇄ réciproque
a critiqué
Leibniz’s Theodicy (1710) answered Bayle’s claim that reason cannot reconcile evil with a good God, arguing that faith and reason agree and this is the best possible world. G. W. Leibniz, Essais de Théodicée (1710), Discours préliminaire, Parts I–III; SEP “Leibniz on the Problem of Evil”
Attestation: brouillon IA
critiqué par
In the article ‘Rorarius’ of his Dictionnaire (1697; 2nd ed. 1702) Bayle questioned Leibniz’s pre-established harmony: how could a dog’s soul pass from pleasure to pain unprompted? P. Bayle, Dictionnaire historique et critique, art. “Rorarius”, remarks H and L; G. W. Leibniz, Éclaircissement (1698); SEP “Pierre Bayle”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Pierre Bayle › 1647–1706
Critiques reçues de 5
Antoine Arnauld influencé par
influencé par
Answering Arnauld’s objections in their correspondence (1686–1690), Leibniz clarified his distinction between hypothetical and absolute necessity and his hypothesis of the concomitance of substances. The Leibniz–Arnauld Correspondence (1686–1690), ed. and tr. S. Voss (2016); SEP “Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz”
Attestation: brouillon IA
critiqué par
Arnauld objected that Leibniz’s complete individual concept, containing all that will befall Adam, implies a ‘more than fatal’ necessity (letters on the Discourse on Metaphysics, 1686). Arnauld to Ernst von Hessen-Rheinfels, 13 Mar. 1686; Leibniz–Arnauld correspondence 1686–1690; SEP “Antoine Arnauld”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Antoine Arnauld › 1612–1694
Damaris Masham
critiqué par
In letters to Leibniz (1703–1705) Masham questioned his pre-established harmony and defended her father Cudworth’s plastic natures, having known his system from the Journal des savants (1695). Leibniz–Masham correspondence (1703–1705), in Die philosophischen Schriften, ed. C. I. Gerhardt, III; SEP “Lady Damaris Masham”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Damaris Masham › 1659–1708
Emanuel Swedenborg
critiqué par
In The Intercourse between the Soul and the Body (1769) Swedenborg rejected Leibniz’s pre-established harmony, as well as physical influx, in favour of a spiritual influx. E. Swedenborg, De commercio animae et corporis (1769)
Attestation: brouillon IA
Emanuel Swedenborg › 1688–1772
Voltaire
critiqué par
Voltaire mocked Leibnizian optimism through Pangloss, for whom all is for the best in the best of possible worlds (Candide, 1759; Poem on the Lisbon Disaster, 1756). Voltaire, Candide, ou l’Optimisme (1759); Poème sur le désastre de Lisbonne (1756)
Attestation: brouillon IA
Voltaire › 1694–1778
Emmanuel Kant a influencé
a influencé ✓
Kant’s early works, such as the New Elucidation (1755), argued within Leibniz’s principles, and in 1790 he called the Critique ‘the genuine apology for Leibniz’. I. Kant, Principiorum primorum cognitionis metaphysicae nova dilucidatio (1755); Über eine Entdeckung, nach der alle neue Kritik der reinen Vernunft durch eine ältere entbehrlich gemacht werden soll (1790); SEP “Leibniz’s Influence on Kant”
critiqué par
Kant held that Leibniz ‘intellectualised the appearances’, taking sensibility for confused thought, and so misapplied the identity of indiscernibles (Critique of Pure Reason, A 263–264, A 271). I. Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, Amphiboly of the Concepts of Reflection, A 260–289 / B 316–346
Attestation: brouillon IA
Emmanuel Kant › 1724–1804
Critiques adressées à 6
Averroès
a critiqué
Leibniz rejected the Averroist doctrine of a single intellect shared by all human beings in his “Considerations on the Doctrine of a Single Universal Spirit” (1702) and in the Preliminary Discourse of the Theodicy (1710). Leibniz, Considérations sur la doctrine d’un esprit universel unique (1702); Essais de Théodicée (1710), Discours préliminaire
Attestation: brouillon IA
Averroès › 1126–1198
René Descartes influencé par
influencé par ✓
In Meditations on Knowledge, Truth and Ideas (1684) Leibniz refined Descartes’ clear and distinct ideas and completed his ontological proof by requiring God’s possibility to be shown. G. W. Leibniz, Meditationes de cognitione, veritate et ideis (Acta Eruditorum, 1684); SEP “Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz”
a critiqué
Leibniz argued that Descartes’ law conserving quantity of motion is false: what is conserved is living force, mv² (Brevis demonstratio, 1686; Discourse on Metaphysics, §17). G. W. Leibniz, Brevis demonstratio erroris memorabilis Cartesii (Acta Eruditorum, 1686); Discours de métaphysique (1686), §17
Attestation: brouillon IA
René Descartes › 1596–1650
John Locke
a critiqué
In the New Essays (written 1704, published 1765) Leibniz defended innate ideas against Locke: the mind is not a blank tablet but like veined marble. G. W. Leibniz, Nouveaux essais sur l’entendement humain (1704; publ. 1765), Preface and Book I
Attestation: brouillon IA
John Locke › 1632–1704
Baruch Spinoza influencé par
influencé par ✓
In 1676 Leibniz visited Spinoza in The Hague, showed him a proof that a most perfect being is possible and later annotated the posthumously printed Ethics (1677). G. W. Leibniz, Quod ens perfectissimum existit (The Hague, 1676); M. R. Antognazza, Leibniz: An Intellectual Biography (2009); SEP “Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz”
a critiqué
Leibniz rejected Spinoza’s blind necessity, which leaves God neither choice nor goodness (Theodicy, 1710, §173), adding that Spinoza would be right were there no monads. G. W. Leibniz, Essais de Théodicée (1710), §§173–174; letter to Bourguet, Dec. 1714 (GP III 575)
Attestation: brouillon IA
Baruch Spinoza › 1632–1677
Isaac Newton
a critiqué
In his letters to Clarke (1715–16) Leibniz rejected Newton’s absolute space and a God who must mend his clockwork, and called gravitation without mechanism a perpetual miracle. Leibniz–Clarke Correspondence (1715–16), Leibniz’s letters 1–5
Attestation: brouillon IA
Isaac Newton › 1643–1727
John Toland
a critiqué
Leibniz annotated Toland’s Christianity not Mysterious (1701), defending mysteries above but not against reason, and argued against his materialism at the Berlin court (letter to Sophie Charlotte, 1702). G. W. Leibniz, Annotatiunculae subitaneae ad Tolandi librum De Christianismo mysteriis carente (1701); Lettre touchant ce qui est indépendant des sens et de la matière (1702)
Attestation: brouillon IA
John Toland › 1670–1722
Œuvres
Un dialogue qui répond point par point à l’empirisme de Locke.
Pourquoi un Dieu bon permet le mal : le meilleur des mondes possibles.
- 1714Monadologie
Le monde comme monades sans fenêtres en harmonie préétablie.
Position
La métaphysique de Leibniz part de substances simples et indivisibles : les monades, centres de force et de perception sans « fenêtres » sur l’extérieur. Elles n’agissent pas les unes sur les autres ; Dieu les a coordonnées dès l’origine dans une harmonie préétablie. Tout a une raison suffisante, et parmi une infinité de mondes possibles Dieu a choisi le meilleur – c’est pourquoi le mal doit être compris dans le tout (théodicée). Il distingua les vérités de raison des vérités de fait et rêva d’une langue symbolique universelle dans laquelle les différends pourraient être tranchés par le calcul. Il développa le calcul infinitésimal indépendamment de Newton, mit au point l’arithmétique binaire et marqua Wolff et Kant.
Vie et contexte
Né à Leipzig en 1646, Leibniz étudia le droit et la philosophie et passa à Paris quatre années formatrices, où il développa le calcul infinitésimal. À partir de 1676, il servit la maison de Brunswick à Hanovre comme bibliothécaire, historien et conseiller, tout en correspondant avec des savants de toute l’Europe. Il fut le premier président de l’Académie des sciences de Berlin. Il mourut à Hanovre en 1716, largement oublié de ses protecteurs.
Autres œuvres principales
- Discours de métaphysique (1686)
- Correspondance avec Clarke (1715–1716)
Apparaît dans
- Voyage « L’Asie et l’Europe en dialogue » · Étape 4 sur 11
- Débat « Leibniz et Clarke sur l’espace, le temps et Dieu »
État en novembre 2026 · Sources · Améliorer cette page · Comment Agora est faite