Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'fragments/reports', 'Practical Necessity' and 'Leibniz'

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these texts

---

4 ideas

10. Modality / A. Necessity / 10. Impossibility

23283	Necessity implies possibility, but in experience it matters which comes first [Williams,B]
	Full Idea: Any notion of necessity must carry with it a corresponding notion of impossibility, …but it can make a difference which one of them presents itself first and more naturally.
	From: Bernard Williams (Practical Necessity [1982], p.127)
	A reaction: I like this because it connects modality with experience, rather than with formal logic. It seems right that in life we immediately see either a necessity or an impossibility, and inferring the other case is an afterthought.

10. Modality / B. Possibility / 1. Possibility

19378	Early modern possibility is what occurs sometime; for Leibniz, it is what is not contradictory [Arthur,R]
	Full Idea: For Descartes, Hobbes and Spinoza, if a state of things is possible, it must occur at some time, whether past, present or future. For Leibniz possibility makes no reference to time; an individual is possible if its concept contains no contradiction.
	From: Richard T.W. Arthur (Leibniz [2014], 4 'Contingent')
	A reaction: It has always struck me as fallacious to say that anything that is possible must at some time occur. If '6' is possible on the die, what will constrain it to eventually come up when thrown? Mere non-contradiction doesn't imply possibility either.

17. Mind and Body / A. Mind-Body Dualism / 4. Occasionalism

19380	Occasionalism contradicts the Eucharist, which needs genuine changes of substance [Arthur,R]
	Full Idea: The Jesuits rejected occasionalism ... because it is incompatible with the Catholic interpretation of the Eucharist, which there is genuine change of substance of the bread into the substance of Christ (transubstantiation).
	From: Richard T.W. Arthur (Leibniz [2014], 5 'Substance')
	A reaction: Not sure I understand this, but I take it that the Eucharist needs a real relation across the substance-spirit boundary, and not just a co-ordination.

28. God / A. Divine Nature / 1. God

6011	There is a remote first god (the Good), and a second god who organises the material world [Numenius, by O'Meara]
	Full Idea: Numenius argues that material reality depends on intelligible being, which depends on a first god - the Good - which is difficult to grasp, but which inspires a second god to imitate it, turning to matter and organizing it as the world.
	From: report of Numenius (fragments/reports [c.160]) by Dominic J. O'Meara - Numenius
	A reaction: The interaction problem comes either between the two gods, or between the second god and the world. The argument may have failed to catch on for long when people scented an infinite regress lurking in the middle of it.