Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz
Świat składa się z niezliczonych prostych jednostek podobnych do umysłów, nic nie dzieje się bez racji, a Bóg wybrał najlepszy z możliwych światów.
Umiejscowienie
Erudyta: monady, harmonia przedustawna i „najlepszy z możliwych światów”.
Kluczowe idee
- Monadologia
- Zasada racji dostatecznej
- Najlepszy z możliwych światów
Wpływ
Pod wpływem 11
Konfucjusz
pod wpływem ✓
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)
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Konfucjusz › według tradycji 551–479 p.n.e.
Platon
pod wpływem ✓
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 p.n.e.
Arystoteles
pod wpływem ✓
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”
Arystoteles › 384–322 p.n.e.
Majmonides
pod wpływem ✓
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)
Majmonides › 1138–1204
Thomas Hobbes
pod wpływem ✓
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”
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Thomas Hobbes › 1588–1679
Nicolas Malebranche
pod wpływem ✓
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”
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Nicolas Malebranche › 1638–1715
Pokaż wszystko (11)Pokaż mniej
Zhu Xi
pod wpływem sporne
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
Zhu Xi › 1130–1200
Rajmund Llull
pod wpływem ✓
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”
Rajmund Llull › ok. 1232–1316
Lorenzo Valla
pod wpływem
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”
Źródło: szkic AI
Lorenzo Valla › ok. 1407–1457
Franciszek Suárez
pod wpływem ✓
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”
Franciszek Suárez › 1548–1617
Anne Conway
pod wpływem
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”
Źródło: szkic AI
Anne Conway › 1631–1679
Wpływ na 14
Christian Wolff
wpływ na ✓
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
wpływ na ✓
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”
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Émilie du Châtelet › 1706–1749
Moses Mendelssohn
wpływ na ✓
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”
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Moses Mendelssohn › 1729–1786
Bertrand Russell
wpływ na ✓
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
wpływ na
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)
Źródło: także w InPhO · InPhO
Martin Heidegger › 1889–1976
Gilles Deleuze
wpływ na ✓
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”
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Gilles Deleuze › 1925–1995
Pokaż wszystko (14)Pokaż mniej
Anton Wilhelm Amo
wpływ na sporne
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
Anton Wilhelm Amo › ok. 1703–1759
Johann Gottfried Herder
wpływ na ✓
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”
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Johann Gottfried Herder › 1744–1803
Bernard Bolzano
wpływ na
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”
Źródło: szkic AI
Bernard Bolzano › 1781–1848
Gabriel Tarde
wpływ na
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”
Źródło: szkic AI
Gabriel Tarde › 1843–1904
Gottlob Frege
wpływ na
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”
Źródło: szkic AI
Gottlob Frege › 1848–1925
Ernst Cassirer
wpływ na
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”
Źródło: szkic AI
Ernst Cassirer › 1874–1945
Kurt Gödel
wpływ na
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”
Źródło: szkic AI
Kurt Gödel › 1906–1978
David Lewis
wpływ na
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”
Źródło: także w InPhO · InPhO
David Lewis › 1941–2001
Krytyka
Wzajemna krytyka 1
Pierre Bayle ⇄ wzajemnie
krytykuje
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”
Źródło: szkic AI
krytyka ze strony
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”
Źródło: szkic AI
Pierre Bayle › 1647–1706
Krytyka ze strony 5
Antoine Arnauld pod wpływem
pod wpływem
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”
Źródło: szkic AI
krytyka ze strony
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”
Źródło: szkic AI
Antoine Arnauld › 1612–1694
Damaris Masham
krytyka ze strony
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”
Źródło: szkic AI
Damaris Masham › 1659–1708
Emanuel Swedenborg
krytyka ze strony
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
Emanuel Swedenborg › 1688–1772
Voltaire
krytyka ze strony
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
Voltaire › 1694–1778
Immanuel Kant wpływ na
wpływ na ✓
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”
krytyka ze strony
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
Źródło: szkic AI
Immanuel Kant › 1724–1804
Krytykuje 6
Awerroes
krytykuje
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
Źródło: szkic AI
Awerroes › 1126–1198
Kartezjusz pod wpływem
pod wpływem ✓
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”
krytykuje
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
Źródło: szkic AI
Kartezjusz › 1596–1650
John Locke
krytykuje
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
Źródło: szkic AI
John Locke › 1632–1704
Baruch Spinoza pod wpływem
pod wpływem ✓
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”
krytykuje
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
Baruch Spinoza › 1632–1677
Isaac Newton
krytykuje
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
Źródło: szkic AI
Isaac Newton › 1643–1727
John Toland
krytykuje
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
John Toland › 1670–1722
Dzieła
Dialog odpowiadający na empiryzm Locke’a punkt po punkcie.
- 1710Teodycea
Dlaczego dobry Bóg dopuszcza zło: najlepszy z możliwych światów.
- 1714Monadologia
Świat jako monady bez okien w harmonii przedustawnej.
Stanowisko
Leibniz’s metaphysics starts from simple, indivisible substances: monads, centres of force and perception without “windows” to the outside. They do not act on each other; God has coordinated them from the outset in a pre-established harmony. Everything has a sufficient reason, and among infinitely many possible worlds God chose the best – which is why evil must be understood within the whole (theodicy). He distinguished truths of reason from truths of fact and dreamed of a universal symbolic language in which disputes could be settled by calculation. He developed the calculus independently of Newton, worked out binary arithmetic and shaped Wolff and Kant.
Życie i kontekst
Born in Leipzig in 1646, Leibniz studied law and philosophy and spent four formative years in Paris, where he developed the calculus. From 1676 he served the House of Brunswick in Hanover as librarian, historian and adviser, while corresponding with scholars across Europe. He was the first president of the Berlin Academy of Sciences. He died in Hanover in 1716, largely forgotten by his patrons.
Dalsze główne dzieła
- Discourse on Metaphysics (1686)
- New Essays on Human Understanding (1704)
- Theodicy (1710)
- Monadology (1714)
- Correspondence with Clarke (1715–1716)
Pojawia się w
- Podróż „Azja i Europa w dialogu” · Przystanek 4 z 11
- Debata „Leibniz i Clarke o przestrzeni, czasie i Bogu”
Stan na listopad 2026 · Źródła · Ulepsz tę stronę · Jak powstaje Agora