Customer Reviews

G. W. Leibniz's Monadology: An Edition for Students

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Leibniz' "Monadology" offers a deeply thought out alternative to the physicalist world view implicit in Galileo and the mechanistic side of Descartes. Leibniz outlines a fascinating and distinct view of the relationship of mind and body, the nature of organisms, and the nature of the universe. Rescher's edition is nothing short of spectacular, offering elaboration of each proposition in the "Monadology" with extensive quotes from Leibniz' other works, as well as his own commentary. This edition is one of the best available ways of becoming acquainted with Leibniz' thought and with the substantive issues involved. Readers who find this book interesting might also enjoy reading Heidegger's commentaries on Leibniz in his book "The Metaphysical Foundations of Logic." Here Heidegger is at his best, offering detailed textual exegesis and a sincere attempt to find the inner logic of Leibiz' thought.

What distinguishes this edition of the Monadology from all others is the extra material included by Rescher. Rescher has collected material from Leibniz's other writings which shed great light on the concepts in the Monadology. In addition, he had included his own commentary on each of the 90 sections.

If you read the bare Monadology, you will probably be confused since it is too brief. If you read this edition, you are actually reading Leibniz's own commentary on the Monadology, and your understanding will be greatly enhanced.

Leibniz was one of the most amazing polymaths of the European Renaissance. An expert in Law, Philosophy, History, Geology, Mathematics and Natural Science (Leibniz co-invented the calculus with Newton) he is rightly said to be one of the last 'universal geniuses' in Europe.

Not many know the great mathematician was also a great Philosopher, much like Descartes before him. Perhaps he is better known to many through Voltaire's satirical novel 'Candide', which ridicules a philosopher much like Leibniz who remains optimistic despite experiencing the worst series of disasters which could befall a man.

Leibniz was a rationalist, in the sense he believed the mind could gain access to transempirical truths through reason alone, above and beyond sense experience. He also set up a metaphysical schema of the universe which included God and entities called 'monads.' Monads are idealistic centers of awareness, varying in their capacity for growth. God is the creator of monads and also of the universe, though our universe is the best out of all possible universes God chose to make, a view which led to Voltaire crudely attacking him in satire. In some ways this view is somewhat like that of Origen and Evagrius of Pontus, who believed that God created various beings who fell from their contemplation of the logos and in doing so created our visible world.

This edition includes valuble study notes and commentary on the text, and references to additional sources.

Leibniz' "Monadology" offers a deeply thought out alternative to the physicalist world view implicit in Galileo and the mechanistic side of Descartes. Leibniz outlines a fascinating and distinct view of the relationship of mind and body, the nature of organisms, and the nature of the universe. Rescher's edition is nothing short of spectacular, offering elaboration of each proposition in the "Monadology" with extensive quotes from Leibniz' other works, as well as his own commentary. This edition is one of the best available ways of becoming acquainted with Leibniz' thought and with the substantive issues involved. Readers who find this book interesting might also enjoy reading Heidegger's commentaries on Leibniz in his book "The Metaphysical Foundations of Logic." Here Heidegger is at his best, offering detailed textual exegesis and a sincere attempt to find the inner logic of Leibiz' thought.

Leibniz was perhaps the seventeenth century's greatest metaphysician. The "Monadology" set out his metaphysical system. Rescher's comprehensive selection of texts sets "The Monadology" in context and Rescher's comments should be of help to the philosophy student.

Leibniz' Monadology is both an important and difficult philosophical work. It is generally viewed as a fair representation of Leibniz's mature philosophical views; however, when looked at in isolation its terse style can make it almost impenetrable to those unfamiliar with the author.

Rescher's Student Version is outstanding resource. Although it has limited original scholarship Rescher augments the Monadology on a point-by-point basis with excerpts from Leibniz' other works and letters, as well as his own helpful insights. From a physical perspective, the text is well laid-out and constructed.

Overall, I highly recommend Rescher's Monadology for students of modern philosophy or anyone interested in gaining greater insight into the work of Leibniz. It is the best text on the Monadology that I have come across.

This important book by Rescher translates and discusses the spiritual atoms (or monads) that were developed in the 17th century by Gottfried Leibniz. The monads are part of the thoughts that Leibniz was having on the least action principle, his famous infinitesimal calculus, his theory of minute perceptions, and his universal characteristics for science.

Leibniz expected to use his indivisible monads to challenge the divisible and physical atoms proposed by England's John Locke for Newton's mechanical universe. But, Locke died before the debate could take place. Leibniz eventually debated with Newton through Samuel Clarke in 1715-16. But Leibniz died in 1716 and the monads died with his death. Today, the monads are being offered as alternatives to the chemical atoms found in the Periodic Chart of chemistry books and the string theories being developed in the school of physics. The indivisible monads of Leibniz are being considered because the chemical atoms and strings are divisible objects and are thus not atoms.

Since the monads are indivisible, Leibniz can be connected to Nicholas of Cusa and Georg Cantor, who worked with indivisibles. Leonardo da Vinci and Galileo also worked with Cusa's indivisibles. I am writing a book on the unification of science and theology and will include Leibniz's monads in a new creation theory. Rescher's book is necessary reading for all godly scientists who reject the Big Bang theory, evolutionary theory, and string theories.

Leibniz remains surprisingly contemporary. Perhaps that is because thorough reasoning does not diminish in value over time. This book is a classic. It provides a concise summary of his metaphysics. Several things trouble me about his system, however...

1) If Monads have no extension and there is no vacuum how does space arise? I have trouble conceiving a plenum composed of Monads as Leibniz describes them.

2) How does efficient cause operate upon Monads if they are "windowless?"

3) If qualities are intrisic to Monads, how does a quantitative change engender a qualitative change (i.e. boiling water)?

Maybe another reviewer who understands Leibniz better than I do can answer my questions.

The monadology on the whole needs no introduction, but this book brings lucidity to some of the more peripheral problems facing Leibniz esp. the relativistic theory of space and time. Ensure you have read elementary logic in the form of Guttenplan or Hodges.

First of all, I want to tell you that if I were not a philosophy major student, I would not have touched this book. You really don't know what this guy talk about throughout the Monadology. He never makes clear what is a monad, how does it relate to the soul and body and physical universe and nonphysical universe. It is a complete intuition and hullucination, or just a difficult and boring hypothesis. All the life of Leibniz was spent on talking about that craps, and the idiotic subject is that he did not prove God exist before he talks about how God sustain the harmony between physical and nonphysical substances.

I hate METAPHYSICS, I hate all the Philosophy about mind and brain, physical substance v.s. non-physical substance. And the worst thing about those metaphysical stuffs is the you never are gonna prove anything from them. Perhaps not before the next comet devastate everything on the Earth.

What I want to say is that we need an anti-metaphysical hero such as A. J. Ayer to be in my school and get me out from that stuff. And the worst of worst is that we would start Immanuel Kant's A Critique of Pure Reason, the metaphysics of metaphysics, in this fall semester. God save the Genius from brain damage! END