A Beginner's History of Philosophy, Vol. 2: Modern PhilosophyCushman, Herbert Ernest
Philosophy
A Beginner's History of Philosophy, Vol. 2: Modern Philosophy
Cushman, Herbert Ernest
Philosophy -- History
=Leibnitz[33] as the Finisher of the Renaissance and the Forerunner
of the Enlightenment.= Leibnitz is the last of the remarkable group
of Rationalists of the Renaissance, who so fully represent the spirit
of its Natural Science epoch. But Leibnitz also carries us into
the next period of modern philosophy――the Enlightenment. He is the
transition philosopher. If the reader will examine the dates of his
life, he will observe that Leibnitz lived until twenty-five years
after the Enlightenment was ushered in by Locke’s _Essay on the Human
Understanding_ (1690). But as Leibnitz had already formed his own
philosophy by the year 1686, even so versatile a mind as his could
not then renounce the Rationalistic point of view for a new one. Some
of his writings, such as his _Correspondence with Clark and Bayle_,
his _Theodicy_, and his _New Essays_, show that he participated in the
new movement of the next period. Yet the majority of his philosophical
writings show him to be a Rationalist. Although he may be called
the “father of the Enlightenment,” the body of his thought belongs
to the Renaissance. His main motive was that which animated all
Rationalists――of stating theology in scientific terms. The immediate
occasion for his doing this was the political necessity of peace among
the religious bodies of Germany.
The effort of Leibnitz to restore the individual to his central place
in the universe was a _secondary motive_. It nevertheless makes him
the forerunner of the Enlightenment. Of the Rationalists, Leibnitz
speaks for the future, just as Spinoza for the past. Leibnitz unites
the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, just as Spinoza joins the
Renaissance and the Middle Ages. Spinoza is the Rationalist who
utters the final word of scholastic realism, while Leibnitz presages
the coming individualism. Spinoza’s philosophy is science buried in
traditionalism; Leibnitz’s is science breaking through traditionalism.
Spinoza harks back to universals and particulars, substance and forms;
Leibnitz points forward to vortex rings, energy, and dynamics. From
Leibnitz’s original purpose to rationalize theology, and to succeed
where Descartes and Spinoza had failed, there emerges a new motive. He
no longer lays the emphasis entirely upon the universal, but he shifts
it in part to the particular. The pantheism of Spinoza had systematized
the individual out of its reality. Leibnitz’s conception of the
individual as dynamic and his conception of the importance of the
infinitesimal redeem the individual and bring Leibnitz into more modern
times. To classify Leibnitz as a Rationalist is, therefore, not to
describe him fully.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account