Leibniz and the elements of compound bodies<sup>1</sup>

Phemister, Pauline

doi:10.1080/09608789908571015

Cited by 11 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…One of the most stimulating claims in Phemister's article is that a simple substance qua possessor of primitive active and passive force is "coextensive" with a particular corporeal substance. 41 How close does this come to Leibniz's view of the relation between a simple substance and extension? This, of course, is a difficult question, and here it should only be asked with a view to Leibniz's response to Lamy.…”

Section: Primitive Active and Passive Forcesmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Pauline Phemister agrees that talk about the incompleteness of soul and body is always found together with a theory about the intell1al structure of simple substances. 7 She ascribes to Leibniz the view that a simple substance qua possessor of primitive active and passive force "is also, when created" a corporeal substance, because the extension of its organic body is, to a large extent, a modification of its primitive passive force. x In this sense, corporeal substances and simple substances qua having active and passive aspects can be "distinguished theoretically, in practice they can be regarded almost as one and the same.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Incomplete Entities, Natural Non-separability, and Leibniz’s Response to François Lamy’s De la Conoissance de soi-même

Blank¹

2003

Leibniz Society Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Robert M. Adams claims that Leibniz's rehahilitation of the doctrine of incomplete entities is the most sustained etlort to integrate a theory of corporeal substances into the theory of simple substances. I discuss alternative interpretations of the theory of incomplete entities suggested by Marleen Rozemond and Pauline Phemister. Against Rozemond, I argue that the scholastic doctrine of incomplete entities is not dependent on a hylnmorphic analysis of corporeal suhstances, and therefore can be adapted by Leibniz. Against Phemister, I claim that Leibniz did not reduce the passivity of corporeal substances to modifications of passive aspects of simple substances. Against Adams, I argue that Leibniz's theory of the incompleteness of the mind cannot be understood adequately without understanding the reasons for his assertion that matter is incomplete without minds. Composite substances are seen as requisites for the reality of the material world, and therefore cannot be eliminated from Leibniz's metaphysics.P or Leibniz, a simple substance such as a soul or a mind is a "complete being" in the sense that it is the origin of its own actions, and that it represents in a confused way all its previous states.] Indeed, what could be more complete than a simple substance with its causal independence and autonomy in the production of its own states'! Nevel1heless, in the Addition a l' Explication du systeme nouveau (1698), written as a response to an extended review of the first edition of ｆｲ｡ｮｾｯｩｳ＠ Lamy's De la C0l10iSSallce de soi-mcme," Leibniz embraces the Scholastic view that soul and body, in some sense, are incomplete entities. 3 Although the passages in which Leibniz takes up this thought in subsequent years are not very numerous, Robet1 M. Adams has suggested that it most fully expresses Leibniz's attempt to integrate a Scholastic theory of corporeal substance into his philosophy.4 Marleen Rozemond and Pauline Phemister have proposed interpretations that diverge markedly from Adams'. Rozemond objtcts that Leibniz cannot reproduce basic features of the Scholastic view within the framework of his own metaphysics. According to her interpretation, it is essential for the Scholastic theory that mind and body are related to each other as matter and form, which supplement each other as act and potency -a structure that the relations of mutual representation

show abstract

Section: Primitive Active and Passive Forcesmentioning

confidence: 97%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Incomplete Entities, Natural Non-separability, and Leibniz’s Response to François Lamy’s De la Conoissance de soi-même

Blank¹

2003

Leibniz Society Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cfr. Schneider [1985]; Pasini [1996Pasini [ ] e [2008; Duchesneau [1996Duchesneau [ ] e [1998; Ishiguro [1998Ishiguro [ ] e [2001; Smith [1998]; Fichant [2003Fichant [ ] e [2004; Phemister [1999Phemister [ ] e [2005; Look [2002]; Nunziante [2002Nunziante [ ] e [2004; Carvallo [2004]; Hartz -Wilson [2005]; Hartz [2007] 3 Cfr. Ishiguro [1998] Ci sono varie dottrine che qui si rincorrono: c'è l'emergere di una teoria dell'azione, c'è la connessione tra il concetto di azione e il concetto di "individuo" e c'è, naturalmente, un sostrato "dinamico" che sorregge ontologicamente la questione (nel senso che la capacità di agire propria della sostanza vivente ha un correlato fisico nella "forza" che la sostiene).…”

Section: La Substantia Vivens Negli Anni Ottantaunclassified

Continuity or Discontinuity? Some Remarks on Leibniz’s Concepts of “Substantia Vivens” and “Organism”

Nunziante

2010

Machines of Nature and Corporeal Substances in Leibniz

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…46 For some recent discussions concerning the status of idealism in Leibniz's later philosophy, see Garber (1985Garber ( , 1995, Sleigh (1990), Adams (1994), Rutherford (1990Rutherford ( , 1995, Hartz (1998), andPhemister (1999). 47 Cf.…”

Section: The Nature Of Motionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Interval of Motion in Leibniz's Pacidius Philalethi

Levey

2003

Nous

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Leibniz and the elements of compound bodies¹

Cited by 11 publications

References 4 publications

Incomplete Entities, Natural Non-separability, and Leibniz’s Response to François Lamy’s De la Conoissance de soi-même

Incomplete Entities, Natural Non-separability, and Leibniz’s Response to François Lamy’s De la Conoissance de soi-même

Continuity or Discontinuity? Some Remarks on Leibniz’s Concepts of “Substantia Vivens” and “Organism”

The Interval of Motion in Leibniz's Pacidius Philalethi

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Leibniz and the elements of compound bodies1

Cited by 11 publications

References 4 publications

Incomplete Entities, Natural Non-separability, and Leibniz’s Response to François Lamy’s De la Conoissance de soi-même

Incomplete Entities, Natural Non-separability, and Leibniz’s Response to François Lamy’s De la Conoissance de soi-même

Continuity or Discontinuity? Some Remarks on Leibniz’s Concepts of “Substantia Vivens” and “Organism”

The Interval of Motion in Leibniz's Pacidius Philalethi

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Leibniz and the elements of compound bodies¹