more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
Even if we grant impenetrability is added to extension, nothing complete is brought about, nothing from which a reason for motion, and especially the laws of motion, can be given.
Gist of Idea
Even if extension is impenetrable, this still offers no explanation for motion and its laws
Source
Gottfried Leibniz (Letters to Burcher De Volder [1706], 1704 or 1705)
Book Ref
Leibniz,Gottfried: 'Philosophical Essays', ed/tr. Arlew,R /Garber,D [Hackett 1989], p.183
A Reaction
When it comes to the reasons for the so-called 'laws of nature', scientists give up, because they've only got mathematical descriptions, whereas the philosopher won't give up (even though, embarassingly, the evidence is running a bit thin).
| 16687 | Bodies are three-dimensional substances [Aquinas] |
| 16684 | Impenetrability only belongs to the essence of extension [Descartes] |
| 16601 | Matter is not hard, heavy or coloured, but merely extended in space [Descartes] |
| 6518 | Matter can't just be Descartes's geometry, because a filler of the spaces is needed [Robinson,H on Descartes] |
| 13185 | Even if extension is impenetrable, this still offers no explanation for motion and its laws [Leibniz] |
| 16683 | Leibniz eventually said resistance, rather than extension, was the essence of body [Leibniz, by Pasnau] |
| 5615 | Extension and impenetrability together make the concept of matter [Kant] |
| 6519 | Locke's solidity is not matter, because that is impenetrability and hardness combined [Robinson,H] |