Welcome to this course on Aspect of Western
Philosophy; Module 13, Lecture 13.
This
lecture is going to be on one very important
modern philosopher like Leibniz.
Leibniz is
quite well known outside the philosophical
circles as a mathematician, as a logician,
as a
diplomat, but more primarily as a mathematician.
So, this lecture would be covering the following
topics, will discuss a Leibniz
Monadology which is one of the central concepts
in his philosophy or one of the most
important theoretical contributions of Leibniz
to modern philosophy is, it is Monadology.
And with the after explaining this will try
to seen the mind body problem which lies at
the center of modern philosophy.
We have seen that this problem of mind body
dualism
or the relationship between the mind and the
body is at the center of all philosophical
contemplations right from Descartes.
Descartes has its theory, his version of or
account
of this relationship.
Then we had seen how Spinoza also encounters
this problem.
And now we see with this Monadology, how Leibniz
is going to encounter and give an
account of his views about the mind body relationship.
Then we will also see the concept
of God, which is another very important concept
with which almost all the modern
philosophers are preoccupied with.
And then the most important contribution or
rather I
would rather say that this concept, the concept
of pre-established harmony is probably
what makes Leibniz one of the very important
philosophers in modern period.
So, we will see a basic outline of his life
and career.
He is primarily as I already
mentioned primarily known as an outstanding
mathematician and born in July 1646 in
Leipzig, and 1675 he laid the foundation of
the differential or integral calculus.
Along
with Newton he is known as the one who has
laid the foundation of this differential
calculus.
And this period, 1772 to 6 he had visited
several places and also had much two
important philosophers; Malebranche and Spinoza.
Particularly Spinoza because it is Leibniz,
who succeeds Spinoza in the rationalistic
school of thought and Spinoza’s influence
on Leibniz philosophy is tremendous
phenomenal influence, Leibniz himself has
accepted it but at the same time Leibniz also
maintain a safe distance from Spinoza, who
felt very unorthodox use about God and God
world relationship.
We have already discussed this in the previous
lectures, I am not
going to elaborate all that aspect and he
died in November 14, 1716 in Hannover.
So, when we talk about the career influences
or Leibniz he had his early education in
Germany in a Neo-Scholastic Aristotelian philosophy.
It is very interesting to see the
journey from starting from a Neo-Scholastic
Aristotelian philosophy, when he went to
Paris was introduced to Cartesianism and the
materialism of Gassendi.
These two are again very important influences
on his philosophy but particularly
Descartes.
Descartes influence him a lot he was actually
attracted by Descartes
philosophy during this period.
And then he as I already mentioned Spinoza
in 1676, I
mean there are several times or locations
he met Spinoza and very important in his
career, but he refused to admit the significant
the tremendous influence Spinoza had on
his life and work, there are reasons for that.
Not clearly philosophical reasons, but mostly
political reasons for that.
And when we take a look at the overview of
Leibniz philosophy, he began with the
problem of substance like Descartes and Spinoza
like all his predecessors in the modern
philosophy.
It is with the problem of substance he also
began and as we have already
seen that this problem, the problem of substance
is something which the modern
philosophers have inherited from the scholastic
thinkers.
And we know that, you know
you have already seen in previous lectures
how his predecessors Descartes and Spinoza
have come up with their own accounts of this
substance.
Different accounts of mind body relationship
and the number of substances all these
were issues with which all the modern philosophers
and their followers and disciples
have been discussing and dealt with.
Wanted to reconcile the scholastic speculative
theology with rational modern philosophy and
science see, one important aspect about I
have already mentioned it very briefly in
the beginning.
One important aspect of Leibniz
philosophy is that or rather his life is that,
though he had a very promising sort of a
young scholar he was a very promising young
scholar in philosophy.
And he was offered several teaching positions,
he instead prefer to be diplomats have a
political career and prefer to be diplomat.
So, very interesting in that sense and again
this
very notion of a reconciliation which should
be there in the blood of a diplomat is there
in the blood of Leibniz.
So, in Leibniz philosophy is rather preoccupied
with this notion
of harmony harmonizing differences first of
all you accept differences there are different
things.
Leibniz philosophy is known as Monadology
which recognizes a plurality of
different substances monads each one is autonomous
each one is independent.
So, you have a plurality of substances you
recognize the differences not two monads are
alike are the same, but at the same time then
there is a craving from reconciling to bring
them together, because you cannot operate
with innumerable infinite number of discrete
unconnected substances you need to establish
a kind of unity.
But then once you separate
them, how do you unify them Spinoza had an
answer to this question he unified
everything with a concept of God, it a concept
of substance Spinoza was trying to bring
everything into one fort the concept of substance
God.
Every entity, every object in this
universe is a modification of that according
to Spinoza.
But Leibniz was not ready to accept this,
what is he wanted to maintain the differences
at
the same time he wants to unify and this unity
was brought in with the establishment of
or rather with the with the notion of a pre-established
harmony, and harmony which is
pre-established by God.
So, with the concept of God reconciliation
was made possible.
So, this is what he tries to be every field
he had this craving to reconcile theology
and the
one hand the scholastic theology on the one
hand and the modern science.
On the other
hand, apparently to opposing conflicting traditions
he held the view that the universe is a
harmonies whole governed by mathematical and
logical principles.
So, this universe the conception of a universe
as a harmonies whole that is again.
So, let
us go back to the original problem with regard
to the number of substances and here we
start with Descartes.
Descartes as we have seen maintains God as
the only independent
substance and mind and body are dependent
substances they depend on God and for
mind Descartes has attributed thinking as
it is attribute.
And for body extension is the
attribute, according to Descartes and they
remain separate.
They are separated from each
other though they depend on God they do not
mutually depend, they are mutually
independent, but they dependent on God.
But when you come to Spinoza there is only
one substance I have already explained this
extension and thinking are attributes of God
two among the infinite number of attributes
they are, and he proposes at kind of time
theistic view which we have already discussed
in the previous lecture.
Now let us see what Leibniz says about substance.
Descartes the extension is the
attributer of matter and thinking of mind
we have already seen this separation of mind
and body and Spinoza attempts to reestablish
unity both are attributes of God.
Leibniz’s concerns are he accepts Descartes
mechanistic explanation, see with this
dualism with this separation of mind from
body Descartes is achieved one thing what
is
it.
That you know, you can explain the workings
of this material universal independent of
and mental Asiatic word.
So, he could envisage that the world material
world is operated
or it is functioned on the basis of certain
mechanical loss it is a domain of it is all.
It is an
independent autonomous to me.
So, this is very useful for the development
of modern
science this philosophy of separate domain
for natural sciences independent of sciatic
and other domains.
And Leibniz too accepts this mechanistic explanation
of the physical world, but at the
same time he found that the underline dualism
do Descartes could establish this kind of
a
mechanic, mechanistic explanation he could
come up with this mechanistic explanation
on the basis of the dualism he maintain between
body and mind, by separating mind
from body.
And Leibniz found that this is inherently
problematic this need to be
reconciled, you cannot lie them separate.
So, he was unhappy with again when you come
to Spinoza who united them, but he was
unhappy with Spinoza who does not recognize
the reality of individuals.
So, Spinoza
does not recognize the reality of individuals,
he unifies everything, he makes everything
the aspect of God and mode of God or modification
of God.
So, this is also not
acceptable, and he was also opposes Spinoza
for rejecting teleology or purpose see as
we
have already seen in the previous lecture.
First Spinoza everything that happens
naturally, happens necessarily, the necessity
of God principles of God makes possible
everything happens.
So, there is no freedom of frill there is
no teleology or purpose;
everything happens as a matter of necessity
in Spinoza, this is something which was not
acceptable for Leibniz who says that, working
for ends is important in practical life.
So, when we do anything see particularly for
example, Leibniz was a diplomat and for
him the practical concern or doing things,
designing things or acting according to certain
purposes in mind is very important.
So, he was not very happy with this total
rejection of
teleology from the scheme of things written
by Spinoza.
Also found that the idea of
substance that is extended and unexpended
as a contradiction, see for example, in
Spinoza he would find that God, extension
and thinking are the attributes of God the
same one, one and the same substance.
So, something which is unexpended something
which is thinking is necessarily unexpended
and something which is extended can never
think.
So, when you attribute extension and thought
to the same substance according to
Leibniz this leads to a kind of contradiction.
So, this is another issue which Leibniz had
with Spinoza, and particularly when we come
to Descartes matter as extended substance;
it is passive and inert, it is not internally
inert
and receive motion from outside.
According to Leibniz extension cannot be an
attribute of substance extension involves
plurality hence only belong to an aggregate
of substances this is his view each single
substance must be unextended according to
him.
So, there is a kind of atomism which
Leibniz’s is trying to propose.
So, the three most important philosophers
are
philosophical theory which probably shaped
Leibnizian Monadology are number 1 Plato,
Plato’s idealism Plato’s motion that realities
eternal, so monads are eternal.
Number 2;
the mocking test atomism, there are innumerable
number of atoms realities constitute of
innumerable number of atoms and number 3 is
Aristotle we will come to that slightly
later.
Now here, he comes up with a very important
concept which is actually the central
notion of Monadology the concept of force
the doctrine of force, it begins with
Descartes.
Descartes says that, quantity of motion is
constant in this universe.
But Leibniz’s says that, what happens when
bodies come to rest and bodies begin to
move motion since to be lost and gained how
is it possible, how can motion will be lost
and gained.
Can we say that motion seems to be lost and
gained?
Then it violates the
principle of continuity.
The principle of continuity says that, nature
makes no leaps, so
that is not possible.
Then, what is it that should be a ground of
motion something more
fundamental than motion which Descartes talks
about.
What is that fundamental thing that is what
he calls force or conatus?
So, it is a force the
tendency of the body to move or to continue
it is motions and this force I repeat the
force
which is the tendency of a body to move or
to continue it is motion which is constant
in
quality quantity according to him, so some
motion to force.
And it is not extension, but force according
to Leibniz and every substance is an
expression of force.
So, it is with the motion of force Leibniz
would define the very
nature of substance every substance is an
expression of force.
Body or matter is equated with this force
an unextended center of force and everything
even body, even bodies or matter is equated
with the force and force is necessarily
unextended.
It is an unextended center of force matter
is not a mere passive lump of
extended substance, but is a force see I have
already mentioned about democritus.
Democritus talks about atoms, the atoms out
of which the universe is made up of, but
these atoms of Democritus are material in
nature, they are physical.
And for Descartes
even these atoms are unextended they are to
be understood in terms of force.
Everything the, whatever atoms exits are nothing,
but expressions of different ways in
which force get expressed.
So, atoms are expression sorry, this matter
whatever matter
whatever body we have they are nothing but
expressions of force.
So, not a mere lump of
passive lump of extended substance, but is
a force and force does not exist by virtue
of
extension, but extension exists by virtue
of body or force.
So, he reverses the entire thing
and extension is the phenomenal way in which
matter appears to us.
So, that is not something which constitutes
matter that is not something which is the
essence of matter as Descartes would assert,
but it is the phenomenal way in matter
appear to us and it is not extension, but
force is the essential attribute of matter.
And nothing substantial or primary principle
is made up of parts, see if something is
absolutely real if something is substantially
real, if something is primary then that object
should be simple.
There is a very well established logical theory
logical principle which
almost all philosophers accept including Spinoza
also talks about it and Leibniz also
accepts it.
True indivisible unit must be unextended if
that is the case, if the primary
substantial entity should not be made of a
part should be simple; then it must be
unextended.
Primary principle must be a simple indivisible
reality and Descartes says
that, existence of bodies presupposes extension;
Leibniz says that extension presupposes
the existences of the bodies.
Than what is force?
We are been talking about force, and we saw
that force lies at the
foundation of everything; it is the foundational
principles of matter it is the foundational
principle of everything that exits.
If that is the case the source or foundation
of the
mechanical world is to be understood as force
according to Leibniz.
It is the ground of
extension of the body; it is the extension
presupposes in the body an aspect that extends
itself.
So, it is as I have already mentioned it is
more primary to the extension which
Descartes part constitutes the essence of
body because extension presupposes in body
an
aspect that extends itself and that is force.
The nature of the body, it is the very nature
of
the body in that sense, ere sense that is
spreads itself out and continues itself.
So, something which enables the very nature
of that body to spread itself and continues
to exits is what the force is.
The property of the body earn to which the
body appears as
limited or as matter.
So, is the essential aspect, it is the essence,
it is a nature and it is
essential property.
Again we need to talk about reality of force
every unit of force is an indivisible union
of
soul and matter.
So, he makes another leap here, he has been
talking about atoms and the
force and all those things it appears to be
you know simple entities.
So, what is it?
So,
what does it constitute even he talks about
body and he says that, what lies at the
foundation of body is this force and what
is it.
So, he says that, in force the reality of
force; is constituting of what can be understood
as
an indivisible union of soul and matter.
It is a union of activity and passivity mind
and
body in one sense we can say a union of activity
and passivity and organizing self
determining purpose is force and again it
limits itself it has the power of resistance.
So,
all these things qualify what is to be understood
as force.
And at the same time Leibniz says that unlike
his immediate predecessor Spinoza who
tries to unify everything under the concept
of substance by proclaiming that substance
and composes the entire world and entire universe.
Leibniz recognizes a plurality of
forces; there are infinite numbers of forces,
infinite number of particular individual
substances.
So, substance is not one homogeneous entity,
but infinite number of homogenous entity
we can say.
Infinite number of autonomous entities, so
each force is a substance and
there are innumerable numbers of forces.
Infinite number of dynamic units each unit
is
immaterial, unextended and simple.
Immaterial because, they are not constitute
eve of
matter in the sense that they are unextended
and then they are simple which means, they
cannot be divided further.
So, the principle of atomism is implicative
is it, but this atom
is a kind of metaphysical act it is not a
physical atom, it is a metaphysical atom.
Each substance is a union of matter and soul.
So, in one sense you can say that, you
know two principles which traditional philosophy
thinks are, so fundamental in
understanding that concept of being mind and
body, body and soul.
Leibniz is a trying to
accommodate, these fundamental principle into
one single entity known as substance or
monad, which is a union of matter and soul.
And it is a metaphysical point, not physical
or mathematical it is a metaphysical point.
Body is a plurality of simple forces and the
human soul is also such a metaphysical point.
So, it is very interesting here, Leibniz says
that, everything in this universe is composed
of or this entire universe is composed of
a plurality of infinite number of such forces
such metaphysical points such metaphysical
atoms.
If that is the case then, what about
the body and what about the soul, what about
things on this world what about mountains
and trees and stones and rocks and other things,
are they also having souls?
Yes,
apparently yes because everything that exists,
everything that is present here, is
constitutive of monads and each monad is a
union of body and soul.
If each monad is a
union of body and soul and it is out of monads
that everything is constituted everything
is constructed, then everything in this universe
should have body and soul very
interesting.
The mind body problem now comes back in a
very different fashion in Leibniz
philosophy, each monad is a union of matter
and soul each is a spiritual or psychic force,
what is true for one monad is true for all.
So, he responds to the craving for unity.
So,
what is true for one monad should be true
for all monads?
So, the entirety the entirety of
reality is brought in to this concept of monad.
The same principle that expresses itself in
the mind of man is active in body plant and
animal and everything in this universe.
So, it is a same principle.
So, harmonizing I mentioned earlier that,
this craving for
harmony is so central to all these philosophers,
and it is particularly more visible in
Leibniz and it very interesting in Leibniz
because, Leibniz on the one hand maintains
pluralism.
Pluralism of forces, pluralism of monads metaphysical
points and on the other
hand, he explains that there is a unity there
is a harmony all mater is animate.
And what is in mind opposes the traditional
notion that equates mind with consciousness,
it is quite commonsensical, it is a dominant
Cartesian view of conceiving mind as or
equating mind with consciousness as Descartes
says you know, every mind thinks mind
even thinks when it goes to sleep.
So, there is not a moment in which the mind
seizes to
think essentially, what Leibniz says is that
you know opposing all these accepted views
about mind and consciousness under relationship.
Leibniz asserts that, mind is essentially
unconscious, consists of perceptions and tendencies
and there are clear and obscure
perceptions clearness and distinctness in
different monads.
So, minds since every monads is a union of
soul and body every monad has this
perception the ability to perceive, but the
clarity the clearness and distinguish vary
from
monad to monad, that makes this difference
in the clarity and distinctiveness make one
monad different from another.
Every monad is capable of perception because
there is
mind and body in every monad.
Let us see a hierarchy.
So, it begins with the plants in the bottom.
So, the plants
everything is obscure and confused as if in
sleep a kind of comatose state.
But slightly
above you have animals, slightly above perception
with memory which is consciousness.
And in the case of humans, we go still above
there is clearer consciousness self
consciousness or apperception and knowledge
of the inner state all these things are
present the case of man, but fundamentally
all are constitutive of monads in the case
of
man the consciousness is clearer.
In the case of animals the consciousness is
not really
clear, but there is some consciousness is
present, but in the case of plants and it
is
completely in a dormant state or obscure and
confused.
And in this context Monadology is introduced
every monad has the power of perception
or representation because; every monad is
a union of mind and body.
So, the power of
perception or representation every monad perceives
or represents and expresses the
entire universe.
This is the beauty of leibnization system
he says that, every monad is a
universe in itself.
It is absolutely independent of other monad
and each monad represents
perceives the entire universe each is a world
in a miniature a microcosm and a living
mirror of the entire universe.
So, then everybody feels everything that occurs
in the entire universe.
So, there is the
fundamental unity and harmony is underlined,
every monad perceives and represents not
just what is in immediately around it, but
the entire universe.
So, on the one hand, it is
unique and distinct, but on the other hand
it is like all other monads addressing the
question of unity.
And here comes the pluralism, there are infinite
number of different monads.
What you
mean by infinite number of, in what sense
can you that one monad is different from
another.
On the one hand, Leibniz has stated that each
monad is a union of body and
mind body and soul is, that is the case in
what sense one monad is different from other.
Each monad represents the universe in it is
own way, so they represent the universe
differently.
As I mentioned the clearness the clarity and
the distinctiveness of perception and
representation vary from monad to monad, and
there is a gradation; there is a hierarchy
each from it is own point of view.
Different in terms of degrees of clearness,
the
perspective of each monad is limited, no two
monads mirror the universe in the same
way, if they do that than they are not true
they are one and the same the form of
hierarchy, and this as another very important
aspect of leibnization philosophy the
hierarchy of monads.
Monads differ in terms of clearness and perception
I have already explained this, from
the lowest to the highest monad in terms of
clearness or consciousness the lowest will
have the most obscure the dullest form of
perception and representation just above that
the level of consciousness, is slightly high
just above that further high and like that
it
goes it takes us to a gradation a kind of
hierarchy from lower to the from plants to
animals to man; a hierarchy of monads.
No lapse in nature it is continues line of
differences in clarity, there is no lapses
in between one after the other it goes up
and up
and up.
From this dullest piece of ignorant matter
to God and God is the highest the highest
monad the perfect monad the pure activity
which is the monad of all monads.
Again the entire universe is constituted of
an infinite number of individual existences
which are spiritual entities I have already
explained this, as I mentioned earlier I am
just
going to elaborate the little bit here that
we are like atoms of Democritus, infinite
in
number and homogenous Democritus says that,
there are infinite number of atoms each
one is homogenous like that the monads are
also independent of each other and
homogenous: but they are not material, but
metaphysical.
So, that is the way he is different from leibnization
monad is different from the
Democritus atom.
They are like eternal like Plato’s ideas,
but not outside of things
Plato’s ideas are outside they are transcendent,
but for him they are not they are here they
are here they are in things as proposed by
Aristotle.
And another very important aspect is monads
are windowless every monad is
windowless homogenous unit not determined
from without every monad is a unit a
universe in miniature as I have already mentioned
autonomous universe in miniature
which is not determine some without, but nothing
can enter inside it from outside.
And nothing can be in the monad which has
not always been there, so monad is a self
sufficient unit always.
Nothing can ever come into it that is not
in it now, and everything
it is to be is potential or implicit in it
this is what is called as a principle of continuity.
So,
at the monad is a self sufficient unit as
self sufficient universe and universe in miniature.
And now he talks about, evolution of monads
every monad the process of evolution.
There should be some theology, which Leibniz
was complaining about Spinoza.
Leibniz
complaint about Spinoza was that Spinoza system
would not leave any rule for any
purpose of theology though of course, spines
talks about some purpose human mind as a
purpose to know God be one with God, but again
you know he had a system which relies
more on the concept of necessity then on freedom.
But here, Leibniz would like to
accommodate this, the the notion of theology
every monad is in the
process of evolution in this process each
monad realizes it is nature.
This process is controlled with inner necessity:
and not externally, because each monad
is windowless.
Each monads passes through a series of stages
of evolution goes up and
up each stage an unfolding of what is implicit
in it.
So, this is very important because it
does not gain anything from outside as an
impetus for evolution, but every process of
evolution is nothing, but an unfolding of
what is already there inside each monad.
So, in
this through this process of unfolding of
it is own potentials unfolding of implicit
potentials monads will go up and up in the
scale of evolution.
And nothing in the monad is lost in this process,
nothing new is gained as well
everything that was there was preserved in
the later stages, future stages are
predetermined in the earlier ones and this
is called the doctrine of preformation.
Nothing is lost and nothing new is gained:
windowlessness.
Every monad Leibniz says
is, charged with the past and is big with
the future.
Charged with the past because
nothing is lost everything is preserved, nothing
is lost from the past everything is
preserved and nothing is gained in future,
but only unfolded in future what happens is
that it unfold what is already implicitly
present.
So, it is big with the future charged with
the past and big with the future and this
is called as the doctrine of preformation
or the
encasement theory.
Now, what about the organic and inorganic
bodies; I have already raised this issue we
are
talking about minds.
There are entities with mind, but there are
entities apparently which
do not have any minds for example, rocks chairs
tables what about them.
So, here says
that in organisms there is a central monad
or a queen monad which function like a
unifying force which function like a regulating
force, which is the purpose, so which
gives the direction for all other monads or
rather to put it in other words, which organizes
the monads.
Central monad is a soul; the central monad
represents the picture of the
entire body.
It is the guiding principles of the monads
surrounding it.
On other hand, in organic bodies are not centralized
by a queen monad there is no queen
monad to centralize it to organize it.
They consist of a mere mass or aggregation
of
monads, there is no union of monads and it
is in this sense now we come to the mind
body problem.
So, Leibniz would never accept interactionism,
because monads are windowless and they
cannot interact there is not acted upon from
without, everything that happens to a monad
is nothing, but only unfolding of what is
in currently present that cannot be a causal
interaction.
Because causal interaction is possible then
it violate the principle of autonomy of
monads, then it implies that an autonomous
monad is being caused to something is
caused on it from something out side of it
which is impossible.
The harmony between
mind and body it is here, Leibniz introduces
the most imported concept of his theoretical
frame work the pre-established harmony, to
explain this he has been talking about the
hierarchy of the monads.
He has been talking about mind and body problems,
now how
do you explain this apparent introduction
interaction between mind and body.
A problem which actually worried Descartes
a lot and his interactionism is not a very
satisfactory response or a reply to the problem
and you know Spinoza was trying to sort
of resolve it with his pointillism which was
also not acceptable for Leibniz, and many
others.
Now Leibniz comes up with a solution, which
an apparent solution to this
problem the harmony between mind and body
is pre-established by God.
So, the notion of pre-established harmony
to explain the relationship between mental
and
physical realms, God arranged the minds and
bodies from the very beginning in such a
way that they shall go together the soul and
body are in a relation of harmony a pre are
there they are not interrelated.
In the sense that one causes certain moments
in the other, see when want to move my
hand for example, when I want to raise my
hand my mind wants it and my body does it
my hand goes up, but this is where you know
I sort of have a tendency to ascribe a kind
of causal relationship, something which in
my mind a will in the mind causes a motion
in
the body.
This is in the normally interactionism which
is not acceptable for various
reasons for logical reason primarily and he
says that this is because of the harmony that
is pre-established which is there in the universe.
We will explain it harmony is established
by God and what is pre-established harmony
a
parallelism or concomitance between the mental
and physical states, they run parallel
there is a kind of concomitance one parallel
to the other; does not mean that they are
inter related.
So, whatever happens here there is a corresponding
thing happens here as
well.
But that does not mean that this has caused
this, they just happen together or they just
happen one after another and who make them
happen one and after another God that
harmony is pre-established.
The body is the material expression of the
soul
corresponding to the force in matter there
is conscious activity or will and again souls
act
according to the laws of final causes by means
of desire ends and means which are
psychic and bodies act according to the laws
of efficient causes or motions which are
mechanical.
So, one sense the capsicum dualism is maintained
which says that there are two different
principles or laws that regulate these two
domains, but then the same problem which
Descartes faced, if the two domains are regulated
and controlled by two different set of
norms and rules that how do they interact.
And Descartes faced lot of troubles in
explaining this and what Leibniz says is that,
the harmony between the two independent
autonomous domains is something which is pre-established
by God.
The picture of the universe is an organic
unity in an organism each part has it is function
all monads act together like the parts of
an organism, each monad has it is specific
function to perform every state in a monad
is a effect of the preceding state in it and
each
state of a monad acts in unison with the states
of all the other monads due to the preestablished
harmony.
So, with theory of with the doctrine of pre-established
harmony Leibniz results many of
these problems which his predecessors were
rather faced of course, he faces his own
problems.
So, the order of universe order that the universe
exhibits is explained with this, universe
exhibits an order and uniformity.
Everything in nature can be mechanically explained,
causal order between things the universe functions
like a causal chain everything is
causally related.
But causality Monadology rejects this causality,
the notion of causalities cannot be
accommodated it rejects the idea of external
cause: no cause from without causation
means concomitant changes.
So, some changes happens here corresponding
change
happens here as well, does not meant that
this has produced that they happens
concurrently.
Causation means a harmonious action of the
parts not that one causes the
other, but they act together the harmony is
due to the pre-established harmony which is
established by God.
And the God has arranged monads in such a
way that they work without any external
interference: from other monads or from God
even.
The order and design in the universe
presupposes a higher reason, this is how he
establishes the existence of God.
God is the
ultimate cause of all of occurrences the source
of mechanics lies in metaphysics.
So,
everything act ultimately everything will
be converged to this idea of God, everything
is
a made significant and meaningful with the
help of this guiding principle God.
Since all clocks keep time with each other
without any causal interaction there must
have
been a single outside course that regulated
all of them.
So, that regulation is the preestablished
harmony.
So, here mechanism is reconciled with teleology
harmony of religion and reason
harmony between the psychic physical kingdom
of nature and the moral kingdom of
grace the universal principles of physics
and mechanics presuppose a divine purpose,
which is the purpose of God the purpose is
to harmonize.
They are not like laws of logic or mathematics,
their existence depends on utility and
their ground is the wisdom of God and God
has chosen them as ways of realizing his
purpose.
This is primarily because there is a notion
of harmony, harmony between mans reason
and Gods reason between mans purpose and Gods
purpose between physical kingdom
and the kingdom of grace which I have already
explained, and between God the builder
of machine of the universe and God the monarch
of the divine spiritual state.
And God according to him as I already mentioned,
is a highest monad he is the monad of
monads.
The principle of continuity demands according
to Leibniz the principle of
continuity demands that, there should be highest
monads at the end of the series of forces
he is the cause of the monads.
And order and harmony of nature call for a
harmonizer
and that is God, the eternal and necessary
truths like the truths of logic and geometry
presuppose an eternal intellect in which to
exist.
And God is an individual monad person, also
transcends all monads the supernatural and
super rational monad, the most perfect and
the most real being hence no changes or
undergoes evolution.
Possesses perfect knowledge he sees all things
whole and at a
glance.
In one sense we can see that, Leibniz was
has succeeded in appeasing the church
appeasing the catholic church though his concept
of God, if you follow the logical
consequences is not really exactly as same
as the God of theologian, but at the same
time
he maintain some of this features by saying
that by being a monad like a person.
He is a person the personality is recognized,
but at the same time he transcends all other
monads is super natural and super rational.
A central concept Leibniz’s philosophy,
it is
an attempt to reconcile apriorism of rationalism
and empiricism which already the great
empiric tradition is already there by the
time of Leibniz.
And attempt to reconcile
rationalism which empiricism is continued
by Emmanuel Kant later we will see that.
And
one important feature which we have seen is
that, Leibniz in all his philosophy all his
career was pre occupied with this concept
this idea of harmony, and monads that are
windowless and God who regulate them present
a harmonious picture.
And here is something which Russell would
say about some problems with Monadology
if the monads never interact, how does anyone
of them know that there are any others
because he rejects interactionism, what seems
like mirroring the universe may be merely
a dream Leibniz has ascertained somehow that
all the monads have similar dreams at the
same time, but pre-established harmony this
of course, is fantastic Russell says and
would never have seemed credible, but for
the previous history of cartesianism.
And Russell makes another comment that he
when he concludes the discussion on
Leibniz philosophy says nevertheless Leibniz
remains a great man and his greatness is
more apparent now, than it was at any earlier
time.
Apart from his eminence as a
mathematician and as the inventor of the infinitesimal
calculus, he was a pioneer in
mathematical logic, of which he perceived
the importance when no one else did so.
And
his philosophical hypotheses, though fantastic,
are very clear, and capable of precise
expression.
Russell had reasons to admire Leibniz because
Russell was also a mathematician and a
musician.
And later when he Russell even wrote a book
on Leibniz and when he
developed his mathematical logic he acknowledges
the influence of Leibniz.
But for our
purpose Leibniz is definitely one of the most
important thinkers though as Russell
himself as a once observed though he was a
great thinker though he was not a great
human being as Spinoza was.
Thank you.
