Divine Obligations as Theodicy in Leibniz’s Jurisprudence and Metaphysical Theology

Religions Pub Date : 2024-07-23 DOI:10.3390/rel15080884
Charles Joshua Horn
{"title":"Divine Obligations as Theodicy in Leibniz’s Jurisprudence and Metaphysical Theology","authors":"Charles Joshua Horn","doi":"10.3390/rel15080884","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Leibniz’s jurisprudence and theory of natural law, which began development as early as the 1660s, has implications for his mature theodicy. In this essay, it is shown that based on an analysis of a few key jurisprudential texts, the Nova Methodus (1666), the Elementa Juris Naturalis (1670–1671), and the Codex Juris Gentium Diplomaticus (1693), Leibniz developed the legal term ‘obligatio’ from Roman Law and the Spanish Jesuit traditions, but that his usage shifted at different stages of his life. Nevertheless, these views are compatible and provide a grounding for his philosophical optimism. It is further shown that Leibniz took the concept of obligatio to provide something like legal standing (locus standi or klagebefugnis) so that rational minds can undergo the theodicean project, that is, because God has obligations to substances, they can seek an explanation for their suffering from God. And because human reason is analogous to divine reason, according to Leibniz, God provides the explanation that the actual world is the best possible world. The goal, then, is to prove that we should take Leibniz’s insights into jurisprudence more seriously, at least in part, because they help to explain his philosophical optimism.","PeriodicalId":505829,"journal":{"name":"Religions","volume":"128 24","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Religions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15080884","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Leibniz’s jurisprudence and theory of natural law, which began development as early as the 1660s, has implications for his mature theodicy. In this essay, it is shown that based on an analysis of a few key jurisprudential texts, the Nova Methodus (1666), the Elementa Juris Naturalis (1670–1671), and the Codex Juris Gentium Diplomaticus (1693), Leibniz developed the legal term ‘obligatio’ from Roman Law and the Spanish Jesuit traditions, but that his usage shifted at different stages of his life. Nevertheless, these views are compatible and provide a grounding for his philosophical optimism. It is further shown that Leibniz took the concept of obligatio to provide something like legal standing (locus standi or klagebefugnis) so that rational minds can undergo the theodicean project, that is, because God has obligations to substances, they can seek an explanation for their suffering from God. And because human reason is analogous to divine reason, according to Leibniz, God provides the explanation that the actual world is the best possible world. The goal, then, is to prove that we should take Leibniz’s insights into jurisprudence more seriously, at least in part, because they help to explain his philosophical optimism.
莱布尼茨法理学和形而上学神学中作为神学的神圣义务
莱布尼茨的法理学和自然法理论早在 16 世纪 60 年代就开始发展了,这对他成熟的神学具有影响。本文通过对《新方法论》(Nova Methodus,1666 年)、《自然法要素》(Elementa Juris Naturalis,1670-1671 年)和《外交法学法典》(Codex Juris Gentium Diplomaticus,1693 年)这几部重要法学著作的分析,说明莱布尼茨从罗马法和西班牙耶稣会传统中发展出了 "obligatio "这一法律术语,但在他一生的不同阶段,其用法有所变化。尽管如此,这些观点是一致的,并为他的乐观主义哲学提供了基础。研究进一步表明,莱布尼茨认为 "义务 "概念提供了类似于法律地位(locus standi 或 klagebefugnis)的东西,从而使理性思维可以进行神学计划,即由于上帝对物质负有义务,他们可以从上帝那里寻求对其痛苦的解释。莱布尼茨认为,由于人类理性类似于神圣理性,上帝提供了解释,即现实世界是可能的最佳世界。因此,我们的目标是证明,我们应该更认真地看待莱布尼茨对法理学的见解,至少部分原因是,这些见解有助于解释他的乐观主义哲学。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信