Narrow search


By category:

By publication type:

By language:

By journals:

By document type:


Displaying: 141-160 of 430 documents

0.045 sec

141. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 18
Anja Jauernig Leibniz on Motion and the Equivalence of Hypotheses
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Contrary to popular belief, I argue that Leibniz is not hopelessly confused about motion: Leibniz is indeed both a relativist and an absolutist about motion, as suggested by the textual evidence, but, appearances to the contrary, this is not a problem; Leibniz’s infamous doctrine of the equivalence of hypotheses is well-supported and well-integrated within Leibniz’s physical theory; Leibniz’s assertion that the simplest hypothesis of several equivalent hypotheses can be held to be true can be explicated in such a way that it makes good sense; the mere Galilean invariance of Leibniz’s conservation law does not compromise Leibniz’s relativism about motion; and Leibniz has a straightforward response to Newton’s challenge that the observable effects of the inertial forces of rotational motions empirically distinguish absolute from relative motions.
142. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 18
Acknowledgments, Abbreviations Used in Articles and Review
143. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 18
Patrick Riley Academy Edition: Reihe I, Band 20
144. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 18
Ohad Nachtomy Remarks on Possibilia in Leibniz, 1672-1676: Quod non omnia possibilia ad intelligentiam perveniant?
145. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 18
Herbert Breger News from the Leibniz-Gesellschaft
146. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 18
Samuel Levey Why Simples?: A Reply to Donald Rutherford
147. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 18
Lea F. Schweitz Leibniz on the Trinity and the Incarnation
148. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 18
Stefano Di Bella Possibility, Agency, and Individuality in Leibniz’s Metaphysics
149. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 18
Ohad Nachtomy Reply to Stefano Di Bella
150. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 18
Timothy Crockett Space and Time in Leibniz’s Early Metaphysics
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
In this paper I challenge the common view that early in his career (1679-1695) Leibniz held that space and time are well-founded phenomena, entities on an ontological par with bodies and their properties. I argue that the evidence Leibniz ever held that space and time are well-founded phenomena is extremely weak and that there is a great deal of evidence for thinking that in the 1680s he held a position much like the one scholars rightly attribute to him in his mature period, namely, that space and time are merely orders of existence and as such are purely abstract and occupy an ontological realm distinct from that of well-founded phenomena. In the course of arguing for this interpretation, I offer an account of the nature of Leibnizian phenomena which allows Leibniz to hold the view that space and time are phenomena, while at the same time thinking of them as abstract, ideal orders of existence.
151. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 18
Stefano Di Bella The Art of Controversies
152. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 18
Ursula Goldenbaum Leibniz’ Marginalia on the Back of the Title of Spinoza’s Tractatus Theologico-Politicus
153. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 18
Philip Beeley The Leibniz-Des Bosses Correspondence
154. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 18
Robert Merrihew Adams G. W Leibniz: Richerche generali sull’analisi delle nozioni e dell verità e altri scritti di logica
155. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 19
News from the Leibniz-Gesellschaft
156. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 19
Robert Merrihew Adams Leibniz: An Intellectual Biography
157. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 19
Edward Slowik Another Go-Around on Leibniz and Rotation
158. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 19
Maria Rosa Antognazza Leibniz lecteur de Spinoza: La genèse d’une opposition complexe
159. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 19
Recent Works on Leibniz
160. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 19
Massimo Mugnai “On extrinsic denominations” (LH IV, iii, 5a-e, Bl. 15): Transcription and English Translation