Search narrowed by:



Narrow search


By category:

By publication type:

By language:

By journals:

By document type:


Displaying: 61-80 of 412 documents

0.074 sec

61. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 13
Web Resources on Leibniz
62. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 13
Jack D. Davidson Leibniz on the Labyrinth of Freedom: Two Early Texts
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Leibniz devoted immense energy and thought to questions concerning moral responsibility and human freedom. This paper examines Leibniz’s views on freedom and sin in two important early texts - “Von der Allmacht Allmacht und Allwissenheit Gottes und der Freiheit des Menschen” and “Confessio Philosophi” - as a propaedeutic to a detailed examination of the development of Leibniz’s views on freedom and sin. In particular, my aim is to see if Leibniz’s early thinking on freedom and sin in these early writings was among those metaphysical topics about which he changed his mind. My focus is on human, not divine, freedom, and the young Leibniz’s metaphysical psychology, rather than his early efforts in theodicy. I conclude that Leibniz’s views on freedom and sin are in place as early as 1672/3, and remain relatively stable thereafter.
63. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 13
Concha Roldán News from the Spanish Leibniz Society
64. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 13
Patrick Riley Notice of G.W. Leibniz, Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe, Reihe IV (Politische Schriften), Band 5, Akademie Verlag, Berlin, forthcoming February 2004.
65. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 14
Andreas Blank Definitions, Sorites Arguments, and Leibniz’s Méditation sur la notion commune de la justice
66. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 14
News from the Spanish Leibniz Society
67. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 14
Catherine Wilson Report on the 2004 Montreal Nouveaux Essais Conference
68. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 14
Michael J. Murray Pre-Leibnizian Moral Necessity
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
The mature Leibniz frequently uses the phrase “moral necessity” in the context of discussing free choice. In this essay I provide a seventeenth century geneology of the phrase. I show that the doctrine of moral necessity was developed by scholastic philosophers who sought to retain a robust notion of freedom while purging bruteness from their systems. Two sorts of bruteness were special targets. The first is metaphysical bruteness, according to which contingent events or states of affairs occur without a sufficient explanation. The second is semantic bruteness according to which a proposition can be true without a truth maker. Denying eithersort of bruteness was thought by some to raise problems for freedom. Defenders of moral necessity thought the notion solved these problems without having to invoke bruteness.
69. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 14
Massimo Mugnai Substance and Individuation in Leibniz
70. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 14
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz On Estimating the Uncertain
71. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 14
Announcement from the Agudat Leibniz Israel
72. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 14
Herbert Breger News from the Leibniz-Gesellschaft
73. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 14
Nick Trakakis On Leibniz
74. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 14
Acknowledgments, Abbreviations Used in Articles and Reviews
75. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 14
Patrick Riley Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe, Vierte Reihe, Politische Schriften
76. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 14
Wolfgang David Cirilo de Melo, James Cussens Leibniz on Estimating the Uncertain: An English Translation of De incerti aestimatione with Commentary
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Leibniz’s De incerti aestimatione, which contains his solution to the division problem, has not received much attention, let alone much appreciation. This is surprising because it is in this work that the definition of probability in terms of equally possible cases appears for the first time. The division problem is used to establish and test probability theory; it can be stated as follows: if two players agree to play a game in which one has to win a certain number of rounds in order to win the pool, but if they break the game off before either of them has won the required number of rounds, how should the pool be distributed?Our article has two aims: it provides the readers with the first published English translation of De incerti aestimatione, and it also gives them a brief commentary that explains Leibniz’s philosophical and mathematical concepts necessary in order to understand this work. The translation is as literal as possible throughout; it shows how Leibniz struggled at times to find a solution to the division problem and how he approached it from different angles. The commentary discusses Leibniz’s views on four key concepts: fairness, hope, authority and possibility. The commentary then outlines how Leibniz attempted to solve the problem of division.
77. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 14
Marcelo Dascal Alter et etiam: Rejoinder to Schepers
78. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 14
Recent Works on Leibniz
79. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 14
Heinrich Schepers Non alter, sed etiam Leibnitius: Reply to Dascal’s Review Ex pluribus unum?
80. The Leibniz Review: Volume > 14
Dennis Plaisted Reply to Cover