{"title":"Newton, Spinoza, Stoics and Others: A Battle Line in Leibniz’s Wars of (Natural) Religion","authors":"M. Kulstad","doi":"10.5840/LEIBNIZ2008183","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Starting from Leibniz’s complaint that Newton’s views seem to make God the soul of the world, this paper examines Leibniz’s critical stance more generally towards God as the soul of the world and related theses. A preliminary task is determining what the related theses are. There are more of these than might have been thought. Once the relations are established, it becomes clear how pervasive the various guises of the issue of God as the soul of the world are in Leibniz’s thought and how central they are in his debates with contemporaries about the truths of natural religion and even more strictly philosophical issues. Leibniz’s arguments against God as the soul of the world are reconstructed and evaluated, and the difficult question of the exact meaning, or meanings, that Leibniz ascribes to the thesis that God is the soul of the world is taken up. The clearest core of meaning discussed in this paper is most directly relevant to Leibniz’s criticisms of Spinoza and the Stoics, as well as of Descartes. Less clear, but obviously important, are meanings relevant to Leibniz’s debates with the occasionalists and Newtonians. I begin with two of Leibniz’s criticisms of his contemporaries, one criticism fairly well known, the other not well known at all. The more familiar criticism appears in the Leibniz-Clarke correspondence of 1715-16. In that correspondence, Leibniz is, among other things, attempting to find a theological Achilles’ heel in the Newtonians’ world view, just as Clarke is attempting to do the same in connection with Leibniz’s. In this context Leibniz claims that Newton’s views seem to make of God the soul of the world, the anima mundi. Leibniz makes the point, with varying degrees of intensity, several times during the correspondence, and with reference to a diverse aspects of Newtonian theory.1 Here is one of the examples, drawn from Leibniz’s Fourth Paper: There is hardly any expression less proper upon this subject, than that which makes God to have a sensorium. It seems to make God the soul of the world. And it will be a hard matter to put a justifiable sense upon this word, according to the use Sir Isaac Newton makes of it. (LC 4, sec. 27; G VII 375)","PeriodicalId":137959,"journal":{"name":"The Leibniz Review","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Leibniz Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/LEIBNIZ2008183","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Starting from Leibniz’s complaint that Newton’s views seem to make God the soul of the world, this paper examines Leibniz’s critical stance more generally towards God as the soul of the world and related theses. A preliminary task is determining what the related theses are. There are more of these than might have been thought. Once the relations are established, it becomes clear how pervasive the various guises of the issue of God as the soul of the world are in Leibniz’s thought and how central they are in his debates with contemporaries about the truths of natural religion and even more strictly philosophical issues. Leibniz’s arguments against God as the soul of the world are reconstructed and evaluated, and the difficult question of the exact meaning, or meanings, that Leibniz ascribes to the thesis that God is the soul of the world is taken up. The clearest core of meaning discussed in this paper is most directly relevant to Leibniz’s criticisms of Spinoza and the Stoics, as well as of Descartes. Less clear, but obviously important, are meanings relevant to Leibniz’s debates with the occasionalists and Newtonians. I begin with two of Leibniz’s criticisms of his contemporaries, one criticism fairly well known, the other not well known at all. The more familiar criticism appears in the Leibniz-Clarke correspondence of 1715-16. In that correspondence, Leibniz is, among other things, attempting to find a theological Achilles’ heel in the Newtonians’ world view, just as Clarke is attempting to do the same in connection with Leibniz’s. In this context Leibniz claims that Newton’s views seem to make of God the soul of the world, the anima mundi. Leibniz makes the point, with varying degrees of intensity, several times during the correspondence, and with reference to a diverse aspects of Newtonian theory.1 Here is one of the examples, drawn from Leibniz’s Fourth Paper: There is hardly any expression less proper upon this subject, than that which makes God to have a sensorium. It seems to make God the soul of the world. And it will be a hard matter to put a justifiable sense upon this word, according to the use Sir Isaac Newton makes of it. (LC 4, sec. 27; G VII 375)
本文从莱布尼茨抱怨牛顿的观点似乎使上帝成为世界的灵魂开始,更广泛地考察了莱布尼茨对上帝作为世界灵魂的批判立场和相关论点。初步的任务是确定相关的论文是什么。它们的数量可能比我们想象的要多。一旦这些关系建立起来,我们就能清楚地看到,在莱布尼茨的思想中,上帝是世界灵魂这一问题的各种伪装是多么普遍,在他与同时代人关于自然宗教真理甚至更严格的哲学问题的辩论中,这一问题是多么重要。莱布尼茨反对上帝是世界灵魂的论点被重新构建和评估,莱布尼茨认为上帝是世界灵魂的论点,其确切意义的困难问题被重新审视。本文讨论的最清晰的意义核心与莱布尼茨对斯宾诺莎和斯多葛学派以及笛卡尔的批评最直接相关。莱布尼茨与偶然性论者和牛顿论者的争论的意义,虽然不太清楚,但显然很重要。我将从莱布尼茨对同时代人的两个批评开始,一个批评相当有名,另一个则不太出名。更熟悉的批评出现在1715-16年莱布尼茨-克拉克的通信中。在这些书信中,莱布尼茨试图在牛顿的世界观中找到神学上的阿喀琉斯之踵,就像克拉克试图在莱布尼茨的世界观中做同样的事情一样。在这种情况下,莱布尼茨声称牛顿的观点似乎使上帝成为世界的灵魂,即人类的灵魂。莱布尼茨在通信中多次以不同程度的强度提出了这一点,并参考了牛顿理论的不同方面这里有一个例子,摘自莱布尼茨的《第四篇论文》:在这个问题上,几乎没有比“上帝有感觉”更不恰当的表达了。它似乎使上帝成为世界的灵魂。根据艾萨克·牛顿爵士对这个词的用法,给它赋予正当的意义将是一件困难的事情。(LC 4,第27节;G vii 375)