Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'Probabilistic Causality', 'Dispositional Essentialism and the Laws of Nature' and 'Principles of Nature and Grace based on Reason'

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

---

7 ideas

7. Existence / A. Nature of Existence / 5. Reason for Existence

5062	First: there must be reasons; Second: why anything at all?; Third: why this? [Leibniz]
	Full Idea: We rise to metaphysics by saying 'nothing takes place without a reason', then asking 'why is there something rather than nothing?, and then 'why do things exist as they do?'
	From: Gottfried Leibniz (Principles of Nature and Grace based on Reason [1714], §7)
	A reaction: Wonderful. This is what we pay philosophers for - to attempt to go to the heart of the mystery, and then start formulating the appropriate questions. The question of 'why this?' is the sweetest question. The first one seems a little intractable.

7. Existence / C. Structure of Existence / 6. Fundamentals / c. Monads

19377	A monad and its body are living, so life is everywhere, and comes in infinite degrees [Leibniz]
	Full Idea: Each monad, together with a particular body, makes up a living substance. Thus, there is not only life everywhere, joined to limbs or organs, but there are also infinite degrees of life in the monads, some dominating more or less over others.
	From: Gottfried Leibniz (Principles of Nature and Grace based on Reason [1714], 4)
	A reaction: Two key ideas: that each monad is linked to a body (which is presumably passive), and the infinite degrees of life in monads. Thus rocks consist of monads, but at an exceedingly low degree of life. They are stubborn and responsive.

12. Knowledge Sources / B. Perception / 1. Perception

19353	'Perception' is basic internal representation, and 'apperception' is reflective knowledge of perception [Leibniz]
	Full Idea: We distinguish between 'perception', the internal state of the monad representing external things, and 'apperception', which is consciousness, or the reflective knowledge of this internal state, not given to all souls, nor at all times to a given soul.
	From: Gottfried Leibniz (Principles of Nature and Grace based on Reason [1714], §4)
	A reaction: The word 'apperception' is standard in Kant. I find it surprising that modern analytic philosophers don't seem to use it when they write about perception. It strikes me as useful, but maybe specialists have a reason for avoiding it.

15. Nature of Minds / A. Nature of Mind / 7. Animal Minds

5061	Animals are semi-rational because they connect facts, but they don't see causes [Leibniz]
	Full Idea: There is a connexion between the perceptions of animals, which bears some resemblance to reason: but it is based only on the memory of facts or effects, and not at all on the knowledge of causes.
	From: Gottfried Leibniz (Principles of Nature and Grace based on Reason [1714], §5)
	A reaction: This amounts to the view that animals can do Humean induction (where you see regularities), but not Leibnizian induction (where you see necessities). I say all minds perceive patterns, but only humans can think about the patterns they have perceived.

21. Aesthetics / B. Nature of Art / 8. The Arts / a. Music

5063	Music charms, although its beauty is the harmony of numbers [Leibniz]
	Full Idea: Music charms us although its beauty only consists in the harmony of numbers.
	From: Gottfried Leibniz (Principles of Nature and Grace based on Reason [1714], §17)
	A reaction: 'Only'! This is a super-pythagorean view of music, as you might expect from a great mathematician. Did he understand the horrible compromises that had just been made to achieve even-tempered tuning? Patterns are the key, as always.

26. Natural Theory / C. Causation / 8. Particular Causation / e. Probabilistic causation

8409	Probabilistic causal concepts are widely used in everyday life and in science [Salmon]
	Full Idea: Probabilistic causal concepts are used in innumerable contexts of everyday life and science. ...In causes of cancer, road accidents, or food poisoning, for example.
	From: Wesley Salmon (Probabilistic Causality [1980], p.137)
	A reaction: [Second half compresses his examples] This strikes me as rather a weak point. No one ever thought that a particular road accident was actually caused by the high probability of it at a particular location. Causes are in the mechanisms.

26. Natural Theory / D. Laws of Nature / 8. Scientific Essentialism / c. Essence and laws

17993	Laws are relations of kinds, quantities and qualities, supervening on the essences of a domain [Vetter]
	Full Idea: The laws of a domain are the fundamental, general explanatory relationships between kinds, quantities, and qualities of that domain, that supervene upon the essential natures of those things.
	From: Barbara Vetter (Dispositional Essentialism and the Laws of Nature [2012], 9.3)
	A reaction: Hm. How small can the domain be? Can it embrace the multiverse? Supervenience is a rather weak relationship. How about 'are necessitated/entailed by'? Are the relationships supposed to do the explaining? I would have thought the natures did that.